Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Facebook Billionaire Gives Money To Legalize Marijuana

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the may-not-represent-the-views-of dept.

Advertising 527

Aldenissin writes "Dustin Moskovitz confirmed that he has recently given (an additional) $50,000 in support of Proposition 19, which is seeking to legalize marijuana in California this November. He had previously donated $20,000 to supporters of the act, which would allow people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate or transport cannabis for personal use and would permit local governments to regulate and tax commercial production and sale of the substance. Asked for a comment as to why he's backing the legalization of marijuana, Moskovitz just sent this statement: 'More than any other initiative out there, Prop 19 will stabilize our national security and bolster our state economy. It will alleviate unnecessary overcrowding of non-violent offenders in our state jails, which in turn will help California residents.' An irony here is that about a month ago, Facebook refused to take FireDogLake's 'Just Say Now' pro-cannabis law reform ads."

cancel ×

527 comments

So *that* is how it works... (5, Funny)

Jedi Alec (258881) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844538)

1. Rip off you friends
2. Make massive piles of cash (that would be profit!)
3. Buy legislation
3. Woaahhh, dude, munchies!

Re:So *that* is how it works... (4, Funny)

Seriousity (1441391) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844620)

1. Rip off you friends
2. Make massive piles of cash (that would be profit!)
3. Buy legislation
3. Woaahhh, dude, munchies!

4. Remember that you were thinking about buying legislation
4. Duuude look at that squirrel... Playing with his nuts, hahahaha... LETS GO HOME AND EAT PEANUT BUTTER STRAIGHT OUT OF THE JAR!!!

Re:So *that* is how it works... (1)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844636)

3. Buy legislation

Exactly. I can barely believe we allow systems like this to exist, much less to be the systems that govern our society. Also, I'm not in favor of promoting marijuana use, but legalising its use is a very different thing, so I don't care too much, and think it might be slightly better than criminalising it.

The one good thing I can see in this is that the guy chose this route, rather than:

1.Rip off you friends
2. Make massive piles of cash (that would be profit!)
3. Do drugs, living above the legislation by virtue of having a pile of cash

Re:So *that* is how it works... (4, Insightful)

skids (119237) | more than 3 years ago | (#33845018)

Well, I'd submit an admittedly naive idea:

If everyone voted in 100% of elections, cared enough to research every candidate and initiative, had access to solid information on the issues and candidates, and was educated enough to navigate through FUD when finding that information, then it would not be possible to "buy" a seat or referendum, because any money used creating FUD would just be poured down a hole and any money spent on GOTV would be useless.

In other words, the only reason we have a system where you can buy victory at the polls is because the citizenry is some combination of uncaring/too-busy-to-deal-with-it and there's little money in honest journalism anymore.

We need smarter, more dedicated voters and objectively assembled, well reported journalism.

Sure, there's a cost for signature gathering to qualify something or someone for the ballot, but that is chump change compared to what is dumped into emotional manipulation and outright deception of voters

There should be campaign finance laws, of course, but the law is a blunt instrument. The problem has to be attacked at its root. Not all is lost -- even with our current electorate and media, FUD creation is a very inefficient prospect. The less efficient it gets, the less influence money has over politics. I worry about the demise of high school civics classes, though.

WTF? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844556)

"Prop 19 will stabilize our national security"?

This is what pot does to your brain.

Re:WTF? (5, Insightful)

zhong-guo (1872764) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844692)

Go to google news. Search for: mexico drug war
it was nice defeating you, I'm sorry you couldn't be a more worthy opponent.

Re:WTF? (1)

biryokumaru (822262) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844710)

Really? What are you, high?

Oh, now I see what you mean by "this." Irony, got it.

Re:WTF? (2, Informative)

Forty Two Tenfold (1134125) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844714)

Your [youtube.com] answers [youtube.com] are [youtube.com] here [www.leap.cc] .

Re:WTF? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844728)

I'm just guessing, but this may refer to Mexico border security. The drug trade's pretty violent right now, and the theory is that legalizing marijuana will undercut the cartels, forcing them to calm down and act like legitimate businesspeople instead of terrorists.

I have my doubts about this theory (it's not like the 21st Amendment magically got rid of organized crime in the U.S.), but it's not WTF-worthy.

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844836)

I have my doubts about this theory (it's not like the 21st Amendment magically got rid of organized crime in the U.S.), but it's not WTF-worthy.

It didn't kill organize crime, but they sure as hell stopped running hooch from Canada in a hurry.

Re:WTF? (1)

Ozlanthos (1172125) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844804)

What, makes you speak as though you are thinking more than 2 years in advance? Yeah I made a lot of good calls when it came to stocks while I was smoking weed.....Just too bad I'd already blown my investment capital on weed!

-Oz

Re:WTF? (3, Informative)

HeLLFiRe1151 (743468) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844838)

Apparently, you don't have illegal aliens living in your nearby forests dumping pesticides, trashing the place, poaching and running around with AK's. Well, it exists here in Northern California and we don't like it.

At first I wondered... (4, Funny)

petrus4 (213815) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844570)

...how pot legalisation could stabilise national security, as TFA claimed; but then it came to me.

Get all the terrorists stoned, and they'll most likely be far too demotivated and/or tranquilised to carry out terrorist acts. It's actually brilliant. If someone from the Pentagon is reading this, I trust that it will be implemented immediately.

Re:At first I wondered... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844590)

"how pot legalisation could stabilise national security"

By cutting off a massive stream of easy money to organised crime. Growing pot has to be the easiest illegal drug to produce.

Re:At first I wondered... (1)

stealth_finger (1809752) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844878)

"how pot legalisation could stabilise national security"

By cutting off a massive stream of easy money to organised crime. Growing pot has to be the easiest illegal drug to produce.

They should go the whole hog and legalise everything, up to and including heroin. The people who wanna do it are gunna do it regardless and where do the taliban in Afghanistan get the lions share of their cash? Well they dont just grow all those Poppies because they're pretty. Plus you get the added benefit of knowing it's not cut with brickdust or bleach or anything else to make it nastier than it already is AND with government sanctioned 'shooting alley' they're not gunna be in the parks or allies or wherever dropping dirty needles and sucking cocks. Just imagine if all the profits made from heroin went to helping the addicts instead of up a big criminal chain. As an added bonus the gov can now tax it and help with the massive deficit/debt issue. It's win all around if you ask me.

Re:At first I wondered... (5, Insightful)

bunratty (545641) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844664)

Making goods or services illegal generally doesn't make it stop happening. It creates a black market that is unregulated and spurs of whole economy of crime. That is what happened with prohibition. That is what happened when abortions were illegal. That's what is happening now that marijuana is illegal. It's also happening with prostitution. Legalize it and regulate it, and you've actually cut crime.

Re:At first I wondered... (5, Insightful)

Ozlanthos (1172125) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844832)

Yeah it's just too bad hardly anyone knows that the real reason for making it illegal did'nt have any6thing trying to stop people from smoking it...

-Oz

Re:At first I wondered... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844906)

Are you advocating the legalisation of every goods and services like child labor? After all, that would stop the black market in child sweatshops and you can have regulated child sweatshops.

Re:At first I wondered... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844940)

Don't forget to do your chores and your homework dear.

Re:At first I wondered... (1)

ConaxConax (1886430) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844668)

Get all the terrorists stoned, and they'll most likely be far too demotivated and/or tranquilised to carry out terrorist acts.

I don't know, the Hashshashins (at least in legend,) took plenty of the stuff and still managed to kill plenty of people!

Re:At first I wondered... (5, Insightful)

boommboomm (1918538) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844700)

Pot generates more than 60% of cartel profits. Legalization takes that money from the cartels and puts it in the hands of governments and legitimate businesses. That in of itself is a boost to national security

Re:At first I wondered... (4, Interesting)

couchslug (175151) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844898)

Prohibition made the Mob massive amounts of money.

It also taught total disrespect for the law because the Volstead Act was unworthy of a free people. The laws against and campaign against marijuana are similarly the product of Puritanical nonsense and worthy of even more contempt since cannabis is vastly less socially toxic than alcohol.
(Booze-related domestic violence is common, while weed-related violence is quite rare even with tens of millions of smokers in the US alone.)

it free up cops / courts / the prison system for r (2, Insightful)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844764)

it free up cops / courts / the prison system for real crime and not tieing them up with your dime bag buyer. Also thing of the tax money from pot as well.

Re:At first I wondered... (1)

Kozz (7764) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844822)

Get all the terrorists stoned, and they'll most likely be far too demotivated and/or tranquilised to carry out terrorist acts.

That's right. They may not carry out terrorist acts, but they'll think about it a lot.

Legalize Pot - Take Power and Money from Criminals (3, Insightful)

gadlaw (562280) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844956)

Prohibition - ever heard of it? It was the great idea of making something illegal that could be made in your bathtub. -Pot, making something illegal that grows in your backyard, your basement, your National Forest - easy to grow, easy to sell. Millions and billions in Court costs, incarceration costs, police costs and power to criminals - all for something you can't stop and is no worse than booze. So simple, so hard for people to understand.

OMG (1, Insightful)

gutnor (872759) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844582)

OMG, a billionaire gives 70.000 $ to an association - that is indeed a very strong backing. With all that money they will be able to lobby for a good week at least.

Re:OMG (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844658)

OMG, a billionaire gives 70.000 $ to an association - that is indeed a very strong baking.

FTFY

Re:OMG (2, Insightful)

diskofish (1037768) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844662)

So what? I am glad someone is doing something. If this passes in California the prohibitionists won't really have a leg to stand on when all hell doesn't break loose and crime rates remain stable or even decline as some predict.

Re:OMG (3, Insightful)

Threni (635302) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844746)

All hell didn't break lose in Holland, and that's not changed anything elsewhere. Well, people witter out about 'drug tourism' but of course that doesn't happen if people can buy it anywhere. And again, we HAVE drug tourism in the UK, because people go to (mainland) Europe to stock up on cheaper alcohol/tobacco.

Re:OMG (1)

vidnet (580068) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844706)

a billionaire gives 70.000 $ to an association

And as a side note, that is all this is: a guy giving money to an association. This is not Facebook supporting weed. There is no irony in that "Facebook refused to take FireDogLake's 'Just Say Now' pro-cannabis law reform ads."

Re:OMG (1)

tchdab1 (164848) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844750)

"OMG - I already gave them $20,000? I completely forgot! Pass the pretzels."

Re:OMG (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844762)

> This is not Facebook supporting weed.

Especially as neither of them work for Facebook.

democracy (1)

bigato (1909404) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844584)

One political action is not taken because it will be good to society, but because it will bring more votes in the short run. That's why it's called political. This is not the case with marijuana. Anyone supporting this will be easy target.

This is good (5, Insightful)

Lanteran (1883836) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844588)

We need to drop this 'war on drugs' mentality that's cost us so many billions and given us one of the highest imprisonment rates in the world. Marijuana is less addictive and damaging than both alcohol and tobacco, and actually has plenty of acceptable medical uses. Its also rather interesting that a state is testing its powers against the federal government by downright defying a federal law, I wonder how that's going to turn out.

Re:This is good (2, Funny)

skywatcher2501 (1608209) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844628)

So assuming we don't blow ourselves up, us Californians just have to worry about California breaking off from the US. To go hang with Hawaii. Alaska can come too. THE END!

Re:This is good (1)

hvm2hvm (1208954) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844768)

Yep, I thought of that clip too immediately. Oh, how I long for the internets of old, such simpler times...

Re:This is good (3, Informative)

rawket.scientist (812855) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844644)

California already does defy federal law by allowing medical marijuana by prescription. Technically, all the producers and consumers could be busted on federal charges, state legal or no. But as a practical matter, the Feds rarely if ever prosecute "legal" users.

* IAN Your Lawyer. Do not take legal advice from strangers on the Internet.

Re:This is good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844694)

Its also rather interesting that a state is testing its powers against the federal government by downright defying a federal law, I wonder how that's going to turn out.

I'd say a lot hangs in the balance of how the elections go next month. Amusingly enough, if the "state's rights" group takes over, they'll try to put an end to it, while if the more "Federalist" group stays in power, they'll let the state get away with it. That right there shows just how fucked up politics in the US really is.

Re:This is good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844718)

We need to drop this 'war on drugs' mentality that's cost us so many billions and given us one of the highest imprisonment rates in the world. Marijuana is less addictive and damaging than both alcohol and tobacco, and actually has plenty of acceptable medical uses. Its also rather interesting that a state is testing its powers against the federal government by downright defying a federal law, I wonder how that's going to turn out.

Reminds me of Mass. and the whole gay marriage thing.

Re:This is good (1, Troll)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844774)

Americans are not good at self control. That is why we have problems with Alcohol and Tobacco, but it is too difficult to stop those, Alcohol proven by prohibition. But opening the door to
Marijuana is actually quite stupid. We want to improve citizens productivity and their willingness to work. The debates go back and forth giving hypnotically advantage and disadvantages to prove each side.

The real question is if Marijuana was legal what will be the increase in use... Now how will that effect the productivity and profitability the the US Economy. Is the gain from less jail and a additional non-black market greater then the loss of a percentage of Americans taking a mind altering drug that decreases their ambitions. And perhaps creates a higher level of parasitic jobless (the ones who can work, could find it, but choose not to, and take our resources) rate. Cause decrease in overall Tax Revenue and having a larger population of Poor jobless people where to bread more saver crime.

In terms of smoking, Most Americans measure their smoking on packs of percentage of packs of cigarettes a day. Other countries measure it in terms of cigarettes per day.

In terms of drinking where it is common they will have a few drinks over the day and not get drunk. Americans when they drink they will get drunk, very drunk.

 

Re:This is good (5, Informative)

germansausage (682057) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844882)

Much as we all like to look down on Americans, you are way off the mark here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_alcohol_consumption [wikipedia.org] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_cigarette_consumption_per_capita [wikipedia.org] . Other countries drink twice as much and smoke 3 times as much as the USA. If you want to know what de-criminalizing does to pot use look at the Netherlands. About 45% of Americans (where it is illegal) have smoked weed and in the Netherlands (where it is not illegal) only 18% have smoked it.

Re:This is good (1)

j0nb0y (107699) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844910)

Not all Americans get drunk every time they drink.

You are right about cigarettes though. Those who smoke, smoke a lot. The percentage of the population that smokes has been going down for the last few decades though.

I don't think that there would be a big increase in marijuana consumption after legalization. It's already available pretty much everywhere. Where I live, there is a huge drug bust every six months or so. They'll bust a truck just completely filled with marijuana. And my thought is always exactly the same. The drug cartels wouldn't send truck loads of marijuana if most of them didn't get through without a problem.

I personally don't smoke marijuana, but it's not hard to look around and see that prohibition is a failed policy.

Re:This is good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844920)

Ahh, the "People Ain't No Good" argument. Kudos to you. Everybody else but YOU is going to be stoned and jobless because YOU'RE the ONLY responsible person on the planet...bravo, bravo. Oh man, I think I just shit my pants!

Re:This is good (1)

supersloshy (1273442) | more than 3 years ago | (#33845004)

You forgot to mention how we should have the right to harm ourselves, thus being able to take in knowingly-harmful drugs. All of these substances, illegal or not, are absolutely awful IMO, and I wouldn't even touch them with a ten-foot pole. However, why would that mean that hurting yourself and nobody else with these substances should be illegal? Exactly why would it be criminally punishable to harm yourself in any way (including killing yourself; wow, sure is helpful to the family who lost someone due to suicide when you tell them it's illegal)? Legality != moral approval; it's aggravating how often people think that allowing something to be legal means you think it's "okay"...

An 'Irony'? (1)

alfrin (858861) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844608)

An irony here is that about a month ago, Facebook refused to take FireDogLake's 'Just Say Now' pro-cannabis law reform ads."
Why is that an irony? Facebook as an entity has much more to lose in political backlash if it even hints at supporting such a, albeit unnecessarily, hot topic such as marijuana legalization. Very few people give a damn what a single person does with their own money.

Re:An 'Irony'? (1)

MokuMokuRyoushi (1701196) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844760)

Please read here [theoatmeal.com] .

Mixed messages (1, Insightful)

suso (153703) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844610)

How do you think kids feel now. On one hand you have the government, parents and everyone saying that marijuana is not good for you. And on the other hand you have a Facebook founder telling them its ok and should be legal. I'm afraid that if the proposition isn't passed that it will just make it all the much harder for the people against it to gain ground.

Re:Mixed messages (5, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844690)

How do you think kids feel now.

Just like I did when I was a kid. I didn't give a shit about drugs until high school. Once I got there and observed the effects of marijuana had on people I realized they were lying to me all along. If anything the "War on Drugs" and "Just Say No" campaigns made me distrust government far more than anything else.

So perhaps if marijuana consumption was permitted kids would be less distrustful of government when they came around to being of voting age.

Re:Mixed messages (1)

MokuMokuRyoushi (1701196) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844780)

Wait, wait, hold up - you're saying you watched your friends consume marijuana, and that watching them actually improved your view on the drug? That observing it dispelled any negative thoughts on the subject? I'm asking an honest question, not trying to be sarcastic mate.

Re:Mixed messages (2, Informative)

cduffy (652) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844852)

Wait, wait, hold up - you're saying you watched your friends consume marijuana, and that watching them actually improved your view on the drug? That observing it dispelled any negative thoughts on the subject?

I can't speak for the parent, but my experience was not dissimilar -- realizing that one of the smartest and most productive people I knew was a recreational pot smoker certainly changed my viewpoint on the drug. It's not something I engage in myself, but I no longer jump to immediate conclusions about people on learning that they make light/recreational use.

Re:Mixed messages (1)

Brian Feldman (350) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844908)

Yep.

Re:Mixed messages (1)

Psyborgue (699890) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844948)

Different strains of pot do different things. Sativa dominant strains with a high THC:CBD ratio (favoring thc) act as a sort of stimulant. Indica dominant strains, on the other hand, with a high concentration of CBD, tend to lock people to the couch. When people say "weed" they're actually talking about two different plants and their hybrids in between. Yes, weed *can* improve a person's functioning if it's the right strain. Sativa strains are used to treat ADHD in medical states. The catch is that while it's illegal, it's very difficult in most places to buy a specific strain and even the dealers generally don't know what you're talking about when you mention strains (or they'll lie). If cannabis were legal, people would be able to better specify what they're looking for.

Re:Mixed messages (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844952)

It certainly improved MY view, and I thereafter learned not to trust the lying Bible Thumpers who promoted laws against chemical pleasure.

I smoked heavily, as did my friends, for years. In the 1970s, "head shops" were common and smoking wasn't considered a problem be most folk.

I dropped it to join the military, and that took no effort ("addictive", my happy arse!). Some people smoked a bit much, but were much better off (and more agreeable socially!) then had they been drunks instead.

A joint in the evening after work is no different than a beer or several. When I was smoking, I partied at night and felt fine the next day. Beats the shit out of a hangover.

I don't smoke anymore because of the potential legal hassles, but that also leaves me free to advocate for freedom of choice.

Re:Mixed messages (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844968)

If you're been told your entire life that pot turns people into total stoners and losers then seeing some normal people smoking pot could dispel that.

OTOH, correlation isn't causation. Smoking pot definitely won't make you any smarter.

Re:Mixed messages (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844972)

Almost the exact same thing happened here. D.A.R.E. is 90% lies & 10% peer pressure.

I smoke recreationally, did well in school, pay my taxes & have held down a job since the day I graduated. I also personally know *several* millionaire entrepreneurs that smoke occasionally as well.

Re:Mixed messages (1)

cerberusss (660701) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844786)

How do you think kids feel now. On one hand you have the government, parents and everyone saying that marijuana is not good for you..

They will be utterly confused. An issue that isn't black-or-white? Horrible, how will they manage?!?

Re:Mixed messages (1)

Ozlanthos (1172125) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844854)

In a word...GOOD! We've been doing it the prohibitionista way for the last 8 decades and gotten NOWHERE. It's about time we do something smart for a change and legalize it.

-Oz

Re:Mixed messages (1)

just_another_sean (919159) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844934)

On one hand you have the government, parents and everyone saying that marijuana is not good for you.

No, "everyone" is not saying that. As with most political subjects in the US right now a very vocal minority is saying
it's bad and a very vocal minority is saying it should be legal. In this case however there are plenty of facts to back
up what those who want it legal are advocating. The side that wants to continue prohibition are the same shrill minority
that claim gay people are going to hell for their sins. Hell, even many conservative politicians are starting to see the
wisdom in legalization ( less crime, taxes, less resources spent on imprisoning citizens for non-violent crimes, etc).

To name a few:
Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Gary Johnson [youtube.com]
Tom Tancredo [coloradoindependent.com]

Re:Mixed messages (1)

newcastlejon (1483695) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844938)

I don't know about you, but my parents never had a bad word on Mary J, in fact my mum and I still enjoy a joint or two on bonfire night - pretty lights! The only advice they gave was to exercise a little self control and to stay away from the car if I ever indulged and indeed my first stash came from my mum because she "didn't want me getting ripped off by some crook". As for the government we have a PM that has admitted to using and I hear that your Obama has done the same, so it seems the only political barrier to legalisation is a craven legislature, Mail-reading types, lobbyists or more likely all three.

Count yourselves lucky that you don't have whitecoats getting sacked for expressing any dissent against the idea that All Drugs are Bad*. It seems to me that a prohibitionist gov't is even worse when they ignore their own advice.

*Except the heavily taxed booze and fags, of course!

Good for him (4, Insightful)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844612)

However, America needs to
  1. LEGALIZE all drugs for use at your own private RESIDENCE. i.e. no private business and no parties. If caught outside of RESIDENCE under influence then some minimum
  2. for 15 years, Allow private business to provide medical mmj (they must grow it and sell it at one location; no buying from elsewhere). In addition, allow farmers to grow mmj, but only sell to gov.\.
  3. for 15 years, the feds provide all recreational drugs, available ONLY at a gov. control stores similar to what Utah has for liquor.
  4. NO exporting OR importing of recreational drugs. Steep penalties (first time offender has free housing for 5 years; second time 20 years; and 3'rd, for life).
  5. provide increased money to police gangs and treat addicts.

Absolutely, do NOT decriminalize the drugs. Legalize them. And do not allow production to every go into gang hands or to be imported/exported. THis is purely about getting control of our borders and ending drug use. Gangs push more drugs than anything else because it is HIGHLY profitable. Stop the profit incentive and you kill the gangs and imported drugs from Mexico and China.

Re:Good for him (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844672)

provide increased money to police gangs

Why would you fund police gangs? Isn't there enough police brutality already?

Re:Good for him (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844862)

Not against the gangs.

Re:Good for him (1)

newcastlejon (1483695) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844962)

LEGALIZE all drugs for use at your own private RESIDENCE. i.e. no private business and no parties. If caught outside of RESIDENCE under influence then some minimum

So you're saying one couldn't have a few friends round to smoke a bowl and watch a movie? Being able to smoke in a private home seems to be an meaningless liberty when there's a limit on who is there. There's always the argument that there should be laws against giving it to children but, like alcohol, I would think that's already covered by child welfare laws.

Marijuana/cannabis (5, Informative)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844624)

According to an extensive research article published in The Lancet (highest impact factor medical journal), cannabis is both less damaging AND less addictive than either tobacco or alcohol.

Re:Marijuana/cannabis (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844738)

According to an extensive research article published in The Lancet (highest impact factor medical journal), cannabis is both less damaging AND less addictive than either tobacco or alcohol.[citation needed]

There. Fixed for ya.

Re:Marijuana/cannabis (1)

everithe (915847) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844922)

Hm no but seriously, could someone please direct me to this article?

New Gold Rush (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844670)

If you think this is a great idea, there is something seriously messed up in your head.

For one, mrs. j is a known drug. Legalizing this one may very well open the door to other "not so bad" drugs, and so on. However, my main concern would be the impending flood of stoners. There is nothing like a rush of incoming losers to boost the economy! Imagine all the welfare they will need, housing to live in, ect.. that you and I will need to pay for!

Slashdot broken (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844684)

I cannot view my slashdot account, I get the following error:

HTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2010 13:16:34 GMT Server: Apache/1.3.41 (Unix) mod_perl/1.31-rc4 Connection: close Transfer-Encoding: chunked Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
OK
The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.
Please contact the server administrator, admin@slashdot.org and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.

More information about this error may be available in the server error log.

Apache/1.3.41 Server at slashdot.org Port 80

Re:Slashdot broken (1)

skids (119237) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844816)

Really? I got:

Error 420: Wait... What?

live & let live notion kicking in? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844698)

don't bet on it. although, spontaneous gestures of goodwill & spirituality are part of our potential, & may increase during times of uncertainty (fear) (every day now), & mass destruction.

what's running against all things good? lemming sea, add immeasurable amounts of MISinformation, & there you have IT? that's US? thou shalt not... oh forget it. fake weather (censored?), fake money, fake god(s), what's next? seeing as we (have been told) came from monkeys, the only possible clue we would have to anything being out of order, we would get from the weather.

the search continues;
google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=weather+manipulation

google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=bush+cheney+wolfowitz+rumsfeld+wmd+oil+freemason+blair+obama+weather+authors

meanwhile (as it may take a while longer to finish wrecking this place); the corepirate nazi illuminati (remember, we came from monkeys, & 'they' believe they DIDN'T, & continue to demand that we learn to live on less/nothing while they continue to consume/waste/destroy immeasurable amounts of stuf/life, & feast on nubile virgins with their friend morgion) is always hunting that patch of red on almost everyones' neck. if they cannot find yours (greed, fear ego etc...) then you can go starve. that's their (slippery/slimy) 'platform' now. see also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

never a better time to consult with/trust in our creators. the lights are coming up rapidly all over now. see you there?

greed, fear & ego (in any order) are unprecedented evile's primary weapons. those, along with deception & coercion, helps most of us remain (unwittingly?) dependent on its' life0cidal hired goons' agenda. most of our dwindling resources are being squandered on the 'wars', & continuation of the billionerrors stock markup FraUD/pyramid schemes. nobody ever mentions the real long term costs of those debacles in both life & any notion of prosperity for us, or our children. not to mention the abuse of the consciences of those of us who still have one, & the terminal damage to our atmosphere (see also: manufactured 'weather', hot etc...). see you on the other side of it? the lights are coming up all over now. the fairytail is winding down now. let your conscience be your guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. we now have some choices. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on your brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

"The current rate of extinction is around 10 to 100 times the usual background level, and has been elevated above the background level since the Pleistocene. The current extinction rate is more rapid than in any other extinction event in earth history, and 50% of species could be extinct by the end of this century. While the role of humans is unclear in the longer-term extinction pattern, it is clear that factors such as deforestation, habitat destruction, hunting, the introduction of non-native species, pollution and climate change have reduced biodiversity profoundly.' (wiki)

"I think the bottom line is, what kind of a world do you want to leave for your children," Andrew Smith, a professor in the Arizona State University School of Life Sciences, said in a telephone interview. "How impoverished we would be if we lost 25 percent of the world's mammals," said Smith, one of more than 100 co-authors of the report. "Within our lifetime hundreds of species could be lost as a result of our own actions, a frightening sign of what is happening to the ecosystems where they live," added Julia Marton-Lefevre, IUCN director general. "We must now set clear targets for the future to reverse this trend to ensure that our enduring legacy is not to wipe out many of our closest relatives."--

"The wealth of the universe is for me. Every thing is explicable and practical for me .... I am defeated all the time; yet to victory I am born." --emerson

no need to confuse 'religion' with being a spiritual being. our soul purpose here is to care for one another. failing that, we're simply passing through (excess baggage) being distracted/consumed by the guaranteed to fail illusionary trappings of man'kind'. & recently (about 10,000 years ago) it was determined that hoarding & excess by a few, resulted in negative consequences for all.

consult with/trust in your creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land." )one does not need to agree whois in charge to grasp the notion that there may be some assistance available to us(

boeing, boeing, gone.

Decriminalize not legalize (1, Flamebait)

drgregoryhouse (1909704) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844704)

I don't mind people smoking pot but do not want my children to buy a pack on the streets.

Re:Decriminalize not legalize (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844730)

If and when your children decide to buy pot, because they will whether you like it or not, would you rather they buy it from some anonymous dealer that may have laced it with who knows what, or would you rather them buy it from a licensed, inspected, and regulated store?

Re:Decriminalize not legalize (1, Insightful)

drgregoryhouse (1909704) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844740)

If my children are that stupid, it is my failure as a parent.

Re:Decriminalize not legalize (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844978)

EXACTLY. So please explain how decriminilizing will improve things? It will not. It will encourage buyers (increased demand), which will lead to increased price, which will be supplied by? What? GANGS. LOADS AND LOADS of GANGS will be in your school. Under NO circumstance decriminalize drugs. EVER. Legalize it, or crack down harder (which will pretty much only work if you execute and all who are involved in any way with drugs; basically it will not work).

Re:Decriminalize not legalize (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844736)

Like they can now? Black market dealers don't care how old you are. Legit dealers do.

Re:Decriminalize not legalize (3, Insightful)

maxume (22995) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844754)

Do you frequently catch them with alcohol and tobacco?

If you do frequently catch them with alcohol and tobacco, do you really think it is entirely the responsibility of the state to deal with that?

WRONG; LEGALIZE IT. (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844888)

Decriminalize is EXACTLY what causes your kids to buy it from the street. In addition, it feeds the gangs money. LOTS OF MONEY. Instead, legalize it, and control it via gov. controlled stores like Utah does. Likewise, allow pot to be farmed, but it must go to gov. controlled stores only. MOST IMPORTANTLY, crack down HARD on ANYBODY selling it or transporting it. Basically, break the gangs and the importers/exporters. Western wealth is at the heart of the world wide drug system. We need to stop it all production. But you can not unless you control it.

Kids can't buy pot on the streets...? (4, Informative)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844980)

Boy, are you out of touch.... your chidren can buy pot any time they choose. Today.

Re:Decriminalize not legalize (1)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844996)

Then why did you even have children in the first place?

Was he getting jealous of Zuckerburg's attention? (1)

judolphin (1158895) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844720)

But seriously, legalizing pot might actually have a better effect on the country than implementing teacher pay based on student test scores like Zuckerburg's trying to do with his Newark donation. Test scores have much, much more to do with with the quality of home life than the quality of teaching.

Re:Was he getting jealous of Zuckerburg's attentio (0, Troll)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 3 years ago | (#33845006)

Charlie Crist realized that as governor of Florida & is getting crucified by his former party for vetoing a very similar bill. The Republicans honestly think they know more about teaching children than our educators do.

I don't buy the tax argument (1, Insightful)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844732)

People claim that legalizing pot will bring gazillions of dollars into the government coffers by taxing the product.

However they don't explain why we should believe that current dealers would be willing to start collecting and submitting taxes to the government. They already have a product that they are selling tax-free, what is the incentive for the dealers to start charging more for the same product?

Re:I don't buy the tax argument (1)

oiron (697563) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844758)

Oh, I don't know... The possibility of no jail time might mean something - if not to the suppliers, maybe to the buyers.

Same as with alcohol after prohibition was lifted, really...

Re:I don't buy the tax argument (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844770)

Why the hell would you go to some underground dealer when you could go to the local gas station or convenience mart and get name brand pot with a company behind it. There wouldn't be off chances they are selling cut product, or laced product, and you wouldn't be dealing with criminals in back alleys or hidden places. ... so yeah. your "i don't buy the tax argument" argument sucks.

Re:I don't buy the tax argument (1)

Allnighte (1794642) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844796)

The theory is that it will be cheaper to buy from a shop than from a dealer - more suppliers. Plus you'd be able to grow your own. So the dealers getting it illegally from over the border or some local illegal grower would just be put out of business essentially.

Re:I don't buy the tax argument (2, Informative)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844808)

The current dealers will just go out of business.

If legalized it can be easily grown locally in mass commercial negotiations, packaged and distributed like any other product. Without losses due to law enforcement, the need to spend large amounts of money on keeping it hidden and so on, it will be much cheaper.

And who is going to buy from some shady dealer when you can just walk into a shop and get it much easier, cheaper, of a probably better quality, and guaranteed that it's not mixed with anything funny?

What's the last time you saw a shady guy in an alley selling tobacco?

Re:I don't buy the tax argument (1)

misexistentialist (1537887) | more than 3 years ago | (#33845000)

High taxes did result a modest underground cigarette market. But I agree that dealers will move on...resold prescription drugs are already almost as popular as marijuana.

Re:I don't buy the tax argument (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844818)

Who said the current dealers would be the legal dealers?

Re:I don't buy the tax argument (4, Insightful)

Arthur Grumbine (1086397) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844824)

From Slashdot, circa 1932:
People claim that legalizing alcohol will bring gazillions of dollars into the government coffers by taxing the product. However they don't explain why we should believe that current bootleggers would be willing to start collecting and submitting taxes to the government. They already have a product that they are selling tax-free, what is the incentive for the dealers to start charging more for the same product?

Re:I don't buy the tax argument (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844830)

If legalized, it will be dirt cheap due to the lack of payoffs to the cops and judges who currently look the other way while the stuff is brought in. How much do you pay for dried herbs for your kitchen? $10/ounce, maybe? I don't think your neighborhood pot dealer will beat that price.

Re:I don't buy the tax argument (1)

kaptink (699820) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844876)

It wouldnt be sold by dealers if it were legal (I assume this is part of the point). It would be sold just like any other product of this nature such as alcohol and tobacco. How many black market booze dealers do you know? The point is that it would no longer be sold by underground groups (or rather it would no longer be proffitable) therefor cutting off the cash flow to the bad guys connected with the harder drugs such as crack, ice and heroin. One of the problems with the way things are currently is that those selling pot are also usually selling other drugs such as ice, crack, meth, heroin. And when people go to buy pot from them they are pushed the other drugs leading to the bad life. I've seen it happen so many times. Hence the term gateway drug. So if you make pot legal it would then hopefully make it not worth while to sell for the poly drug dealers.

ABSOLUTELY NONE, UNLESS (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844918)

First, make for step prison time for selling or buying illegal drugs.
Second, make the price for legal stuff LOW at first.
If buyers can get it cheaper and safer from the gov, than buying it from drug dealers, AND they know that they will go to prison IF they buy from a deal, then dealers will quit.

Re:I don't buy the tax argument (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844924)

My guess is that the majority of consumers would prefer legal purchasing channels if they exist (why risk jail or fines if a legal alternative is right down the street, even if it's slightly more expensive?). The illegal dealers would not have any incentive to provide less supply, but the demand for illegal mj would go down.

Where are the big Ag companies in all this? (1)

RevWaldo (1186281) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844744)

I always wondered what will happen when marijuana becomes legalized and the likes of Altria née Phillip Morris and Monsanto eventually get into it - New Marlboro White Widow! Roundup-Ready PPP! What's keeping them from (albeit quietly and behind the scenes) promoting legalization and creating new markets for themselves?

.

Re:Where are the big Ag companies in all this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844926)

i seem to remember reading some years ago that phillip morris had trademarked "marley" in advance of legalization

Goverments do not like pot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844776)

For a gov't, a nation is a bit like a machine which they redesign and tune to get the best performance.

For them, pot makes most stoners demotivated (less invention), lazy (less rpm), sadly similar to each other (wasteful redundancy), and, after years, possibly depressed (moves the gov't to a lower position in the international highest score list). So, the gov't hates pot like you hate water in the gas you buy for your car.

Asana is hiring.. (1)

nanospook (521118) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844810)

Sounds like the dream job for the facebook "wish I had been there" wannabee :) http://asana.com/jobs#Engineer [asana.com]

Status: WASTED! (1)

Trip6 (1184883) | more than 3 years ago | (#33844912)

He just wants to be able to set this status and not get arrested.

Good thing no assholes are fighting them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33844966)

It's great that no hyperconservative born-again fundie puritan Christians are donating money to skew the political process by fighting the proposition.

Because now the ordinary average guy who supports it can have a chance at winning.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...