3 ms·

It would be rare to find someone who wanted to smoke pot and couldn't find some to buy. But, it must be said that legalization would increase bith the number

by brc 14y ago

It would be rare to find someone who wanted to smoke pot and couldn't find some to buy. But, it must be said that legalization would increase bith the number of users as well as the total amount. It legalization in some states is to be enacted, I would think that an accompanying set of regulations about where and how much can be used. The first problem is driving under influence, but then there is also the need for employers to be able to enforce drag-free workplaces ( current drug tests measure any usage, not just a current level of intoxication). then there's acceptable places of use - like cigarettes, most people won't want to eat a meal with someone taking up at the table next to them. Finally, on the issue of taxation and importation - if you want to get the economic benefits then you need to get all protective and prevent imports,a nd you need to have a framework of regulating the strength so that people can get a consistent dose, in the same way you know how much two beers is going to affect you. Ultimately prohibition isn't really working, but lurching to the other extreme quickly could have a lot of issues as well, which would be more likely to bring back the regulations? A gradual decriminlisation, accompanied with regulations on consumption and funding of education and health programs from the taxation revenue would be the best way to go.

drivebyacct2 14y ago
>But, it must be said that legalization would increase bith the number of users as well as the total amount. Again, that has not been the case when decriminalization of drugs has happened in other places. Also, at least in the case of Washington, all of these issues are already accounted for (due to medical use laws, or new legislation) or are going to be accounted for by the board setup to oversee cannabis sales. (For brevity, instead of me listing them, just check the Wikipedia page and the bill itself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Initiative_502#Provisions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Initiative_502#Provi... >you need to have a framework of regulating the strength so that people can get a consistent dose, in the same way you know how much two beers is going to affect you. Heh, I think the customers and providers will be wanting that as much as the government does. Ultimately though, I think it will vary because it's not like alcohol. Various types of alcohols have slightly different buzzes, but cannabis has a lot more components that vary more from type to type.
- brc 14y ago
  >Again, that has not been the case when decriminalization of drugs has happened in other places. I doubt this to be true. Illegality has some effect on the amount and number of users. Personally, I don't touch the stuff for a variety of reasons, of which one is illegality which leads to having to deal with drug dealers. If it were legal (or decriminalised), it would increase the chances of me coming across it at a party or similar. At the margin this would have some effect on usage. The problem with trying to do before/after studies is the patchy data, usually filled in by statistical sampling which leads to error margins. It's pretty easy to determine how much alcohol is consumed per year, because of the status of the industry you can work it out from the sales (the amount of home-brewed hooch wouldn't even been a rounding error). In any case like this, with very large data sizes (ie, a big chunk of the adult population), any change in the legal status will have an effect at the margins. Hard-core and even regular users will not be affected by the legal status - but on the margin there will be plenty of people who might be inclined to take the occasional puff but don't because of constricted supply and the fact that it is illegal. Remove this and usage will go up - the degree is unknown and probably unknowable - but it will be there. Any change in the law changes the future, and especially so in this case. I'm not really arguing for or against here, just pointing out that usage will go up, and nobody knows exactly what that will mean.

by brc 14y ago

drivebyacct2 14y ago

>But, it must be said that legalization would increase bith the number of users as well as the total amount. Again, that has not been the case when decriminalization of drugs has happened in other places. Also, at least in the case of Washington, all of these issues are already accounted for (due to medical use laws, or new legislation) or are going to be accounted for by the board setup to oversee cannabis sales. (For brevity, instead of me listing them, just check the Wikipedia page and the bill itself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Initiative_502#Provisions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Initiative_502#Provi... >you need to have a framework of regulating the strength so that people can get a consistent dose, in the same way you know how much two beers is going to affect you. Heh, I think the customers and providers will be wanting that as much as the government does. Ultimately though, I think it will vary because it's not like alcohol. Various types of alcohols have slightly different buzzes, but cannabis has a lot more components that vary more from type to type.

brc 14y ago
>Again, that has not been the case when decriminalization of drugs has happened in other places. I doubt this to be true. Illegality has some effect on the amount and number of users. Personally, I don't touch the stuff for a variety of reasons, of which one is illegality which leads to having to deal with drug dealers. If it were legal (or decriminalised), it would increase the chances of me coming across it at a party or similar. At the margin this would have some effect on usage. The problem with trying to do before/after studies is the patchy data, usually filled in by statistical sampling which leads to error margins. It's pretty easy to determine how much alcohol is consumed per year, because of the status of the industry you can work it out from the sales (the amount of home-brewed hooch wouldn't even been a rounding error). In any case like this, with very large data sizes (ie, a big chunk of the adult population), any change in the legal status will have an effect at the margins. Hard-core and even regular users will not be affected by the legal status - but on the margin there will be plenty of people who might be inclined to take the occasional puff but don't because of constricted supply and the fact that it is illegal. Remove this and usage will go up - the degree is unknown and probably unknowable - but it will be there. Any change in the law changes the future, and especially so in this case. I'm not really arguing for or against here, just pointing out that usage will go up, and nobody knows exactly what that will mean.