Question 7 on the ballot in Nevada, what do you think?

9

9mmsnoopy

New member
Question 7 on the ballot Nov. 7 in Nevada would legalize possesion of up to one ounce of marijuana for adults 21 and over and allow for it to be sold in licensed shops and of course properly taxed.

While i dont think this has a snowballs chance in south Texas of passing, i think it makes alot of sense. Even if it does pass, the feds will never stand by and allow these places to sell it.

Simply treating it like alcohol would immediately put all of the street dealers out of business and free up funds and manpower towards getting the hardcore crap off the streets.

It will never happen though, it makes too much sense.
 
If I lived in Nevada I would certainly vote for this. I've been encouraging every friend I have in that state to vote and to pay close attention to this.

Much like New Hampshire and Alaska have it right on CCW, Nevada is closer to getting it right on drugs and prostitution. This falls under the kinds of freedoms that the RKBA is intended to protect.
 
I have always said that "pot" should be legal so long as age requiremnts are enforced. Then agian it doesn't stop under age smoking. But it looks good to the opponents to be able to say we are doing something. IMO the banning of pot has cost far more lives then it has saved. It obviusly hasn't stopped people from getting it. I have considered the taxation argument. In all honesty it is rather hard to tax something that grows wild in the road ditches. My attitude is if a person wants to smoke pot they should be allowed to.
 
I'd like to see some States legalize pot. It's getting to where the feds make every State have the same laws, and people get to thinking there is only one way to go ... but the intent was for the States to be free to experiment, and if some States legalized pot and others didn't, we would then be in a position to learn something.
 
I'd vote for it in a heartbeat. Just because I think way too much time, money, and manpower is used on something that is far less harmful in our society than other more important things that don't get enough attention. Haven't done it myself in over a decade now, but it's been my experience that the only thing in danger by a pot smoker is a few bags of chips and a big jar of salsa.

The problem I can see with it "being sold in licensed stored and properly taxed" is that any half-brained monkey can grow it for themselves. So do we issue a "grower's license" too, or treat it like home-brewing in that you can grow X-amount on your own before haveing to be I licenced commercial grower? Or do you go down to a state office and buy a "pot permit" for x-number of plants?

Away, I think it's heading in the right direction. Much better than the Felony you'd get here in Utah for having a seed. End the back-door pot dealers and start focusing more on the drugs that we really need off the street.
 
Not good enough for reasons that you point out, but it is a step in the right direction.

Completely legalize it and tax it, like alcohol. Re-Legitimize it, I say. That'll force a whole class of gangsters, thugs and such out of business, just like the repeal of prohibition did in an earlier generation.

I have considered the taxation argument. In all honesty it is rather hard to tax something that grows wild in the road ditches.
Click to expand...

Yes, but the stuff that grows in the ditches isn't very high quality at all. Tax the importation of it, and the commercial cultivation of it. Make the private cultivation of it in non-commercial quantities for personal consumption legal and untaxed, in a similar manner to what is done with wine and beer.
 
Completely legalize it and tax it, like alcohol. Re-Legitimize it, I say. That'll force a whole class of gangsters, thugs and such out of business, just like the repeal of prohibition did in an earlier generation.
Click to expand...

And then it will be in the same class as tobacco...which is to say, highly regulated and illegal to partake of in most public places.

(At least I'd hope so. I'm so highly allergic to the stuff that I could find myself in the ER if I had to walk to the same amount of happy smoke as I do cigarette smoke at the entrances of malls, stores, etc. :( )

But in your own home? Your own business, IMO.

Springmom
 
And then it will be in the same class as tobacco...which is to say, highly regulated and illegal to partake of in most public places.
Click to expand...
Actually, I had in mind more a combination of restrictions, sort of a blend of tobacco (for the reasons you bring forth -- people who choose not to partake or have allergies shouldn't have to be exposed to 3rd hand smoke) and alcohol (from a public safety standpoint). DUI is DUI.
 
Actually, I had in mind more a combination of restrictions, sort of a blend of tobacco (for the reasons you bring forth -- people who choose not to partake or have allergies shouldn't have to be exposed to 3rd hand smoke) and alcohol (from a public safety standpoint). DUI is DUI.
Click to expand...

You're meaning something more the lines of the current public smoking ordinances combined with a public intoxication/open container type restriction? I could see that as very reasonable.
 
Just as long as I don't have to end up on oxygen and epinephrine in the back of an ambulance from somebody toking outside Pappasito's..... :eek: :barf: :(

Springmom
 
Just as long as I don't have to end up on oxygen and epinephrine in the back of an ambulance from somebody toking outside Pappasito's...
Click to expand...
A> I know what you mean. SWMBO is deathly allergic (anaphylaxia) to all forms of seafood, even to point of reacting to the fumes/steam that comes off of it when hot. She has to carry an epi-pen with her at all times. Sad thing is that she can't eat it or be around it, and I'm under doctor's orders to eat it as often as possible. She doesn't advocate restricting other people from eating seafood, however.
B> Pappasito's. Yum. I really miss having all of those Pappasito's and Pappadeaux's around, being from Houston. At least there are 2 Pappasito's and one Pappadeaux's here in the 'Lanna area, that I know of.
 
Just as long as I don't have to end up on oxygen and epinephrine in the back of an ambulance from somebody toking outside Pappasito's.....

Springmom
Click to expand...
While I certainly don't want to see you or anyone else have a nasty allergic reaction I really don't see how it's the average pothead's responsibility to make sure you're not affected.

Let's say Mr Pothead is sitting at a table outside of this restaurant smoking either a cigarette or a joint. Unless he blows it in your face I don't see how'd you'd inhale enough smoke to cause a problem. If you see him smoking, steer clear. But I don't think he should be told he can't smoke because a small percentage of the population could possibly have an allergic reaction.

I'm not really a fan against public drinking or smoking laws. Until someone directly affects someone else I don't see how a crime has been commited.
 
True enough, Redworm. I was sort of commenting on the way people adhere to the letter of the "no smoking" ordinances for insides of buildings by standing as close as humanly possible to the entrances and puffing away ;)

If somebody's out of the way and I can get past 'em without walking through it, they can puff away until they fall over for all I care. As with most things, mutual courtesy goes a looooooong way :D

Springmom
 
True enough, Redworm. I was sort of commenting on the way people adhere to the letter of the "no smoking" ordinances for insides of buildings by standing as close as humanly possible to the entrances and puffing away

If somebody's out of the way and I can get past 'em without walking through it, they can puff away until they fall over for all I care. As with most things, mutual courtesy goes a looooooong way

Springmom
Click to expand...
Yeah, that is certainly a rude thing to do. Courtesy is certainly a big thing. Again, I would hate to see anyone get hurt because of an allergic reaction to smoke and were I a restaurant owner I would certainly make sure that people were not smoking right next to the entrance. It's simply rude.

But then again if I owned a bar I would be :mad: beyond belief at a law saying I can't let my customers smoke inside. :o
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top