Minnesota going 420? (taxes, costs, law)

[my54ford]

We had this discussion at work and we're all pretty right wing.....None of us to a man can understand why not???....It's the 21st century for cripes sake let folks get high if they want.......Tax it and make money!

[Cruz Azul Guy]

Originally Posted by Glenfield

There are legitimate concerns about the health effects of long term, chronic use. Studies show that it may be addictive and permanently impair cognitive functions. Alcohol might be worse but the feeling is why create another problem?

I am surprised that advocates of recreational marijuana use seem ignorant of the science on the topic. Is the argument that most people will use it responsibly so don’t worry about the potential abusers?

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/menta...ts-say-n924441

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...uana-the-brain

Are you suggesting that legalization is the only thing holding people back from abusing marijiuana? In all the places that have legalized, where has there been evidence this was the case? By legalizing I’m not condoning use, but if people want to get high, they’ve already been able to access it illegally in unlimited quantities. I would argue that illegality is the largest problem as it then becomes a business run by gangs and cartels and leads to violence. There is also no way to know what is in the product so it becomes a safety issue. At least by regulating it there is some oversight to ensure safe production and distribution....and some tax revenue which can be used toward long-term scientific studies, education and addiction treatment.

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by Cruz Azul Guy

Are you suggesting that legalization is the only thing holding people back from abusing marijiuana? In all the places that have legalized, where has there been evidence this was the case? By legalizing I’m not condoning use, but if people want to get high, they’ve already been able to access it illegally in unlimited quantities. I would argue that illegality is the largest problem as it then becomes a business run by gangs and cartels and leads to violence. There is also no way to know what is in the product so it becomes a safety issue. At least by regulating it there is some oversight to ensure safe production and distribution....and some tax revenue which can be used toward long-term scientific studies, education and addiction treatment.

I am simply responding to your request for an argument against legalization. You may not find it persuasive but there are legitimate health concerns, and we ban other things for health reasons, even if people can access those things illegally.

Personally, I couldn’t care less if you get high but don’t want the increased health care costs to society that might accompany legalization.

[Cruz Azul Guy]

Originally Posted by Glenfield

I am simply responding to your request for an argument against legalization. You may not find it persuasive but there are legitimate health concerns, and we ban other things for health reasons, even if people can access those things illegally.

Personally, I couldn’t care less if you get high but don’t want the increased health care costs to society that might accompany legalization.

If you can point me to data showing that legalization results in increased use and consquently higher healthcare costs I’d certainly consider that in the overall equation. I haven’t found that to be the case or at least in the long-term, as evidenced by places like Amsterdam.

Also, for the record, I’m not a user and will be doing what I can to steer my kids away from it...along with opioids, tobacco, binge drinking, etc.

[slamont61]

Because they can't keep Doritos on the shelf in Colorado. Something to that effect.

We are still in the process of learning from those states that are ahead of the curve. One would think a Tax Happy state like MN would be dead set on grabbing that golden ring. One would be wrong.

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by Cruz Azul Guy

If you can point me to data showing that legalization results in increased use and consquently higher healthcare costs I’d certainly consider that in the overall equation. I haven’t found that to be the case or at least in the long-term, as evidenced by places like Amsterdam.

Also, for the record, I’m not a user and will be doing what I can to steer my kids away from it...along with opioids, tobacco, binge drinking, etc.

Obviously, that is hard to do because there would be no good data on illegal use. However, studies have shown that legalization has led to higher incidences of car crashes. If increased use isn’t the cause of that, I can’t imagine what would be.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ow/1693567002/

I acknowledge there are benefits to legalization, primarily through taking the issue out of the criminal justice system, but I also acknowledge there are risks as not sufficiently convinced that the benefits outweigh the risks.

[Thedosius]

It might be wiser to set general criteria about what public impacts ought to cause a substance to be banned, then measure that criteria against marijuana and other substances. The current legal landscape on what is and isn't banned is irrational- so much is based on bygone cultural wars and/or interest group pressure. Consistently relying on the most current scientific knowledge from this issue to climate change, vaccinations, GMOs, for example, makes us appear so much less like phony partisans who adopt positions out of tribal loyalty.

[Cruz Azul Guy]

Originally Posted by Glenfield

Obviously, that is hard to do because there would be no good data on illegal use. However, studies have shown that legalization has led to higher incidences of car crashes. If increased use isn’t the cause of that, I can’t imagine what would be.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ow/1693567002/

I acknowledge there are benefits to legalization, primarily through taking the issue out of the criminal justice system, but I also acknowledge there are risks as not sufficiently convinced that the benefits outweigh the risks.

To your point I think it would be prudent to commit some of the marijuana-related tax revenues to off-set any increase in healthcare costs. Once the technology becomes available it would also be good to develop a THC test that could be quickly administered by law enforcement on drivers suspected for driving under the influence.

[unxpctd]

The problem is quantifying it. They may be able to come up with a test...but at what level is someone impaired? The other issue is that THC doesn't get out of the system in the same way alcohol does. So if someone goes on a THC bender 2 days later their level could still be high...and if they're pulled over...are they impaired enough to be arrested?



I'm not necessarily for or against legalization. It doesn't really affect me...I can see the pros and cons of each argument. Just throwing it out there on the quantification.


It will affect crash rates...are we willing to trade higher crash rates for extra tax income...thats the question.

[demtion35]

Originally Posted by unxpctd

The problem is quantifying it. They may be able to come up with a test...but at what level is someone impaired? The other issue is that THC doesn't get out of the system in the same way alcohol does. So if someone goes on a THC bender 2 days later their level could still be high...and if they're pulled over...are they impaired enough to be arrested?



I'm not necessarily for or against legalization. It doesn't really affect me...I can see the pros and cons of each argument. Just throwing it out there on the quantification.


It will affect crash rates...are we willing to trade higher crash rates for extra tax income...thats the question.

I would agree. The weed that was around in the early to mid 80's is what was known as Hawaiian, columbian/ hatian gold, cense, sp? and some other stuff called home grown. Bud, and others was pretty potent.

When drinking, it was common to have 2 or 4 beers and go out back or in someones car and smoke a joint. Going on back inside drinking some more. Another 4 or 6 more beers, and more smoking hits or joints. An individual would get pretty wasted. Staggering drunk, combine that with getting high.

The combination was really devastating in many many consumers. Back then it was not lawful. It is not lawful now, making it legal for recreational use would for sure cause many more crashes.