California Passes Landmark Marijuana Tax

Vim Fuego

So, as we make blasphemy illegal, other countries are getting on with some progressive legislation:

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/22/california.pot.tax/

Oakland's bid to become the first U.S. city to tax proceeds on medical marijuana passed Tuesday by a landslide vote.

About 80 percent of voters chose to impose the tax on Oakland's medical marijuana facilities, according to the Alameda County Registrar of Voters.

If the yanks can do it..... :pac: In all seriousness, it is looking like it's just a matter of time until full decriminalisation.

Considering all the recent drug threads in here recently, thought it was worth bringing it to your attention. Sorry if this has been posted elsewhere.

Edit: spelling error, couldn't let it go...

bleg

I knew a girl who got medicinal marijuana so easily over in California. Just went into the doctor, said she had been self prescribing it to herself and was getting panic attacks without it. The doctor wrote her a prescription there and then. All she had to do was ring a number and it would be delivered from Hollywood, direct to her door, any time of the day or night.

thelordofcheese

bleg wrote: »

I knew a girl who got medicinal marijuana so easily over in California. Just went into the doctor, said she had been self prescribing it to herself and was getting panic attacks without it. The doctor wrote her a prescription there and then. All she had to do was ring a number and it would be delivered from Hollywood, direct to her door, any time of the day or night.

what a time to be alive.....

Vim Fuego

Yes, their medical system does appear to be abused. However, it could also be seen as a backdoor to legalisation. They could easily crack down on it but haven't, despite reports of such abuse for years.

The issue at hand is the taxation element, finally making medical marijuana legit and stopping the federal raids on dispensaries.

Leixlip_Red

bleg wrote: »

I knew a girl who got medicinal marijuana so easily over in California. Just went into the doctor, said she had been self prescribing it to herself and was getting panic attacks without it. The doctor wrote her a prescription there and then. All she had to do was ring a number and it would be delivered from Hollywood, direct to her door, any time of the day or night.

I never thought it would be that easy... I thought they would have been more strict about it.

Run_to_da_hills

The might legalese it yet, the Government will be scraping the bottom of the barrel for funds in the next budget.

Wertz

Ministers will be getting pushed around in wheel barrows instead of S class mercs before they legalise it here, tax or no tax.

Great news for the rest of the world though...

anti chris-t

Personally i can never see it getting legalised in ireland. While the catholic church is not as powerful in this country as it was the fuss they and other ultra conservatives we have in ireland would cause would kill it.

genericguy

anti chris-t wrote: »

Personally i can never see it getting legalised in ireland. While the catholic church is not as powerful in this country as it was the fuss they and other ultra conservatives we have in ireland would cause would kill it.

In fairness, I think that although the church's influence has died off (more or less), we still have the sons and daughters of people who were that way inclined running the country. I'd say it'll be another generation, but it'll eventually get through. Personally though, I'd love it, but the Irish have such a tendency towards excess that I wouldn't trust them with it.

Napoli

anti chris-t wrote: »

Personally i can never see it getting legalised in ireland. While the catholic church is not as powerful in this country as it was the fuss they and other ultra conservatives we have in ireland would cause would kill it.

I wouldn't be so sure.

I reckon as soon as the current generation of mass-going auld wuns die off, we can get on with a bit of social progress in this country without the incessant calls to Joe Duffy. Irish youth are very open minded and I predict major changes in the next 25 years, which could potentially include marijuana legalisation.

Wazdakka

Wertz wrote: »

Ministers will be getting pushed around in wheel barrows instead of S class mercs before they legalise it here, tax or no tax.

I agree,
Don't see why tho.

Same kinda thing as abortion IMO
Legalizing it isn't going to change the amount of people doing it..
Just make it safer and easier for those who do..

The whines of the few outweigh the wants of the many..
God Isn't Irish Politics great.

Vim Fuego

The abortion issue is a valid comparison point.

Not only could we do ourselves a favour socially (Freakonomics assessment that legalising abortion reduces the crime rate) but we'd save a lot of people a lot of pain. I've known a few people who have 'taken the boat'. It's not particularly nice to think that your own country disapproves of your actions.

The whines of the few outweigh the wants of the many..
God Isn't Irish Politics great.

+1

Terrifying to think that this is the case

whadabouchasir

I can't see it being legalised in Ireland (although I think it should be).The reason for this is that most of my Parents generation would oppose it vigorously without even considering the benefits.

thelordofcheese

Vim Fuego wrote: »

The abortion issue is a valid comparison point.

Not only could we do ourselves a favour socially (Freakonomics assessment that legalising abortion reduces the crime rate)

To be fair, that claim (like a lot of stuff in freakonomics) is dubious at best.

Irishcrx

This is great news, to be fair alot of the lads who I grew up with and are friends with have or do smoke weed and none are scumbags or bad people, all hard working lads who just enjoy it on the weekends and don't want to be shelling out €50 for a bag of ground down, sand or god knows what.

Where as if they bought seeds for €50 and grew top quality pure stuff they would make up a supply for themselfs for a whole year of top quality weed. Unfortunatly due to legality people can't do this without running a risk of being branded a criminal and jailed.

What a world. Blame the evil plant.

Manic Moran

Before you all start jumping to conclusions as to how this is a great leap forward for legalisation...

Vim Fuego wrote: »

The issue at hand is the taxation element, finally making medical marijuana legit and stopping the federal raids on dispensaries.

The one has nothing to do with the other.

California, and several other States, have licensed marijuana and dispensaries solely for medical purposes for some time. The Federal Government has never officially sanctioned these medical dispensaries, or marijuana use for any reason whatsoever*, but has unofficially had a policy of leaving 'legitimate' ones which operate with state approval alone. However, it has always kept an eye on them, and has raided a few which had a turnover greater than that which could reasonably be justified by prescription use. Oakland's move is simply a way of making some money off the current State legal status, and has no effect on the legality of MJ use in either California or the United States, and certainly is not a move to legalise casual use. I'm actually very surprised that no local government has taxed this potential revenue source before now. CA's budget is in a woeful state.

NTM

*It is to be noted that you will still be barred from federal employment for MJ use if detected during a drug test, even if prescribed and issued under State law.

Rented Mule

This will still remain a Federal Government vs The States issue.

eirebhoy

I don't smoke it myself as it doesn't make me feel too good but it's very easy to get marijana in LA. People are trying to get you into the shops to buy it and as far as I know all you need is a certain card which are no problem to get.

Overheal

Leixlip_Red wrote: »

I never thought it would be that easy... I thought they would have been more strict about it.

California is bankrupt.

Im not surprised in the least they'd find a new way to tax something.

ScumLord

bleg wrote: »

I knew a girl who got medicinal marijuana so easily over in California. Just went into the doctor, said she had been self prescribing it to herself and was getting panic attacks without it. The doctor wrote her a prescription there and then. All she had to do was ring a number and it would be delivered from Hollywood, direct to her door, any time of the day or night.

I saw a documentary (posted in one of the other cannabis threads) with a cannabis doctor (as he called himself) in California, he said in most cases he will prescribed cannabis because that's what he does. You don't go to a physio and expect to get a new pair of glasses.

CPT. SURF

I can see the state vs federal issue escalating here.

It seems, and is in my opinion, ridiculous that a person can be locked up in prison for years for possessing a minuscule amount of cannabis, yet in the same country there is a city which taxes growers who operate within the state's laws. Huge disparity.

I know every state is almost like its own country but I believe there should be some homogenization on marijuana laws from a federal source. In some states the jails and prisons are full of stoners, while other states tax stoners for revenue. Ridiculous.

thomond2006

I'm sure Ms. Doyle will be exporting her cocaine micro-cakes to California pretty soon.

KnifeWRENCH

Vim Fuego wrote: »

So, as we make blasphemy illegal, other countries are getting on with some progressive legislation:

And yet this town is in the same California that voted YES to Proposition 8? Not exactly what I'd call progressive.

Manic Moran

I know every state is almost like its own country but I believe there should be some homogenization on marijuana laws from a federal source

There is. It's illegal to use, and that's the viewpoint of all federal agencies in all fifty States plus the District and territories. The States took the Feds to court in 2005 (Gonzalez vs Raich), and lost. The Feds have no power, however, to make or enforce State law, so what the States want to do on their own is up to them, unless there is some sort of related 'leash' that the Feds can put on them, such as, for example, withholding federal highway funds from States which didn't apply a 21-year-old minimum drinking age. But if States want to run the risk of having dispensaries to be raided, that's their choice.

In some states the jails and prisons are full of stoners, while other states tax stoners for revenue. Ridiculous.

This is common. That's the whole point of States, they can have whatever laws they like, as long as they don't affect other States. Two days ago in Louisiana a 10-year-old, home alone with his 9-year old sister, shot three burglars when he grabbed mom's gun from the closet. Baton Rouge PD consider it a good shoot, and have charged the two survivors. Here in California, under California law the parents would be sent to prison for child endagerment as it is unlawful to leave a firearm where a child may access it. There is no end of difference in laws between the States. Do you really want all the laws in the EU to be the same throughout all the countries?

NTM

CPT. SURF

Yeah I know all that. But it does not mean that the level of disparity on this issue is not a joke.

Considering that taxation is collected off it's production in some areas, I think it unjust that such harsh prison sentences are inflicted in other areas of the same country for mere personal possession. I know this is technically legal, I said so in my first post, so there is no need to explain it again. I just think that this level of disparity will not hold, something has gotta give. Especially considering how popular the plant is among US citizenry.

lostexpectation

thisis hardly a good thing for pot lovers...

Manic Moran

CPT. SURF wrote: »

I just think that this level of disparity will not hold, something has gotta give. Especially considering how popular the plant is among US citizenry.

It will hold for as long as majority of citizens of one State have one opinion, and the majority citizens of another State have another opinion. Marijuana is far from the only issue which the States see differently on in terms of criminal law, I see no reason why the disparity for that subject should be any more likely to be resolved than for any other.

If pot use is really that important, the two options available to an American are to either have the laws in their State changed, or move to a State with what they consider to be more ammendable laws. Simple.

NTM

ScumLord

lostexpectation wrote: »

thisis hardly a good thing for pot lovers...

I don't know about that. Money and taxes are very important if cannabis is contributing to the state it's users will enjoy more benefits and it becomes harder to ban it again as you'd have to let go of the money it generates too.

It may raise the price slightly but you get allot in return IMO.

ChocolateSauce

1.8%? God damn, they don't know the meaning of taxation!

CPT. SURF

Manic Moran wrote: »

It will hold for as long as majority of citizens of one State have one opinion, and the majority citizens of another State have another opinion.
NTM

Really? When was the last time the people of North Carolina were polled on whether they would support the decriminalization of marijuana? Representative democracy, propose an amendment, etc and all that blah blah blah; I get it. The truth is that the government would never ask the citizenry because they know the answer they would get.

I see no reason why the disparity for that subject should be any more likely to be resolved than for any other.

The plant's popularity. I believe I mentioned that

Overheal

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

1.8%? God damn, they don't know the meaning of taxation!

Trying to avoid The Boston Weed Party

Manic Moran

CPT. SURF wrote: »

The plant's popularity. I believe I mentioned that

So? Americans are hugely fond of their guns. State laws vary wildly. I would get a mandatory ten years in California (A State with a pretty big gun-toting population, despite the reputation) for doing something which is Constitutionally protected in Pennsylvania. This disparity exists even with the right to arms being explicitly written in the Federal Constitution, and I don't recall anything in the Constitution about a right to smoke weed.

That's far from the only such difference. Look at the distinction in, for example, immigration law. You have 'sanctuary cities' in California, whilst the Feds and some states like Arizona are trying to stem the tide of illigal immigrants. Absolutely no sign of that disparity being solved either, and it's far higher on the political 'things to do' list than marijuana.

NTM

TPD

Overheal wrote: »

Trying to avoid The Boston Weed Party

I'll be in the harbour in scuba gear with a giant ziploc baggie if that happens.

CPT. SURF

Manic Moran wrote: »

Absolutely no sign of that disparity being solved either, and it's far higher on the political 'things to do' list than marijuana.

NTM

For politicians maybe. I understand the state/federal legal independence issues. Quit explaining it.

I guess my point is that the disparity is BS, despite its legality; and I do see a rising tide on this issue, people are getting fed up I think. That's it I guess, just a personal hunch (somewhat supported by this new taxation legislation).

Oh yeah I almost forgot; guns and stuff.

Manic Moran

I understand the state/federal legal independence issues. Quit explaining it.

I guess my point is that the disparity is BS, despite its legality

?!

But that's the entire point. It is that way because it's supposed to be. Fifty Separate but Equal States. You may not like NC's MJ laws, I may not like CA's firearms laws and someone from AR may not like CT's gay marriage laws. But the ability to have such a disparity whilst remaining one country is one of the US's biggest strengths.

(somewhat supported by this new taxation legislation

You're reaching there. As the councilwoman was quoted in the OP's article: "This is already something which is legal in California, why shouldn't the city make some money off it?" It's a simple money grab, Oakland's budget is currently running a deficit.

NTM

CPT. SURF

Manic Moran wrote: »

?!

But that's the entire point. It is that way because it's supposed to be. Fifty Separate but Equal States. You may not like NC's MJ laws, I may not like CA's firearms laws and someone from AR may not like CT's gay marriage laws. But the ability to have such a disparity whilst remaining one country is one of the US's biggest strengths.

NTM

So whats up with the raids in California then? Before you start off on a tangent... I understand the jurisdiction issues. But its not like the federal government goes breaking up gay marriage ceremonies in Massachusetts now is it? Its bull****

You're reaching there. As the councilwoman was quoted in the OP's article: "This is already something which is legal in California, why shouldn't the city make some money off it?" It's a simple money grab, Oakland's budget is currently running a deficit.

If I am, I am barely reaching. This "simple money grab" may have far-reaching implications on this issue. It is hard to maintain the law's legitimacy if you lock someone up for possession of a substance when a city in the same country uses taxation of that substance for municipal expenditures. It is a joke. Again, I understand the state/federal framework at play here. Just pointing out the absurdity, and the fact that I believe this absurdity will lead to new and more reasoned legislation. In either direction by the way.

Manic Moran

CPT. SURF wrote: »

So whats up with the raids in California then?

As I said, the Feds are enforcing federal law. It's their job. I see no difference between the dispensary raids in California and the INS raids on immigrants in California.

But its not like the federal government goes breaking up gay marriage ceremonies in Massachusetts now is it?

Is there a federal law relating to gay marriage?

It is hard to maintain the law's legitimacy if you lock someone up for possession of a substance when a city in the same country uses taxation of that substance for municipal expenditures.

If the Supreme Court has said it's valid, I'm not sure how much more legitimacy you want.

Again, I understand the state/federal framework at play here. Just pointing out the absurdity, and the fact that I believe this absurdity will lead to new and more reasoned legislation. In either direction by the way.

I don't see it as absurdity. I see it as States having the rights to make their own laws, subject only to the Federal Constitution if applicable. This was important enough a subject that the US had a civil war over the issue, I don't see the States willingly submitting to purely Federal oversight. Even if the Feds do change their mind, legalise MJ and stop all raids in California, you will still have, as you put it in post #21, "In some states the jails and prisons are full of stoners, while other states tax stoners for revenue" until the representatives in the various States choose to change their laws accordingly, or until the citizenry decide to make a referendum out of it, such as in the case of the aforementioned Prop 8 in California.

NTM

kraggy

Wazdakka wrote: »

I agree,
Don't see why tho.

Same kinda thing as abortion IMO
Legalizing it isn't going to change the amount of people doing it..
Just make it safer and easier for those who do..

The whines of the few outweigh the wants of the many..
God Isn't Irish Politics great.

Don't agree with you.

More people will have abortions here if it abortion is legalised. The normalisation of seeing abortion clinics around the place and people seeing their friends having abortions locally will make the practice more acceptable, less taboo.

I've know of cases of girls in Scotland using it as a pseudo-contraceptive in that, feck it, I won't use normal contraception, if anything happens I'll get if fixed. I've know people over there with this attitude.

No the normalisation would definitely see an increase in the numbers of people from this country having an abortion.