Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Should California legalize marijuana for everybody not just medical patients?
Pot legalization gains momentum in California
(AP) SAN FRANCISCO - Marijuana advocates are gathering signatures to get at least three pot-legalization measures on the ballot in 2010 in California, setting up what could be a groundbreaking clash with the federal government over U.S. drug policy.
At least one poll shows voters would support lifting the pot prohibition, which would make the state of 40 million the first in the nation to legalize marijuana.
Such action would also send the state into a headlong conflict with the U.S. government while raising questions about how federal law enforcement could enforce its drug laws in the face of a massive government-sanctioned pot industry.
The state already has a thriving marijuana trade, thanks to a first-of-its-kind 1996 ballot measure that allowed people to smoke pot for medical purposes. But full legalization could turn medical marijuana dispensaries into all-purpose pot stores, and the open sale of joints could become commonplace on mom-and-pop liquor store counters in liberal locales like Oakland and Santa Cruz.
Read the rest here-- http://kstp.com/news/stories/S976228.shtml?cat=1
21 Answers
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer
They should. They'd make more money off taxing it, and spend less pretending trying to stop it.
Same way as cigarettes, cellophane pre-packaged amounts with a "tax" stamp to lessen smuggling.
Growers would have to sell to an auction house, and then to a distribution center, then to public stores.
Plenty of gravy for everybody.
edit:
Same rules as alcohol, age limit, no at school, work, driving (no open containers)... same/same.
- 1 decade ago
If any state should legalize it, it should be California. I hope they succeed and getting a bill in place for 2010. The California border has been a hot bed of violence for years and it is getting worse.
Not even safe to go to Baja anymore due to so much anger and senseless blood shed over the marijuana trade. There are far more important issues for law enforcement to be concerned with than marijuana possession and distribution which should for all sakes and purposes be legalized and sales and marketing regulated by states.
Obama should leave the legalization of it up to the states.
Marijuana and health care reform are two issues which seem to scare certain factors of our society mainly the pharmaceutical industry and insurance companies. Why? Well, for one thing, marijuana is a threat to the drug industry as it stands today and health reform is a threat to insurance companies. Why can't we give marijuana a chance and why can't we give the public option a chance?
If left up to the American people, they would be voted in a heart beat, no hands down.
Do we really have a democracy or are the insurance companies and big pharm going to rule out world forever? Do the American people really have a say in the matter? It does not seem so. More legislative power should be given to the states if Washington cannot get their act together to make appropriates decisions that will help the American people.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
They need it. California's tanking economically. Their state needs money. The people need money. The majority of California's population classifies themselves as "habitual or social users of marijuana" anyway. Might as well allow the citizens to profit from their plants in a legal way & allow the state to collect the taxes it needs to balance out their deficit.
They've clashed with the fed before, they're used to it. The DEA shut down many licensed legal medical marijuana distributors but they just set up shop elsewhere. The federal government needs to relax on this topic... especially once a state has seen fit to legalize a substance. They should, at that point, stay hands off.
- ?Lv 71 decade ago
No, absolutely not. Driving while high is even worse than yakking on a cell phone or eating or listening to music too loud or putting on makeup. You can instantly stop doing all of those things and drive, but you can't stop being high or drunk in an instant. Drinking and driving kills, plenty of evidence for that and pot is no different. There are so many just plain bad drivers out there without being high too. Tax money is no excuse for killing innocent people out on the highway.
Source(s): Personal experience. Driving high is a mistake and a problem for everyone else. - How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Anonymous5 years ago
It totally should be. I smoke the reefer all the time, and the only problems I get are eating healthy, going to sleep on time, excersizing, keeping up with school work, and chilling. But if it were to be legalized, there would have to be fair laws to accompany the safe use of weed -not smoking and driving, setting an age limit, and designated places to toke up-, and government regulation on those who sell it.
- 1 decade ago
Okay, so coming from someone who has never touched the stuff, what are the effects of it? Kinda like alcohol from what I have heard from the research performed as far as slowed reactions. Anybody care to find out how many people died in alcohol related accidents last year? Funny how the stuff is so much like alcohol when you talk about how legalizing it. But then it is called harmless as alcohol.
People are too high to think straight.
- 1 decade ago
Medical marijuana is vital to some patients. Whatever civil action occurs should not put the current availability at risk, although of course, there are probably cheaters in the system. Here are some good videos on medical marijuana.
http://www.san-diego-medical-marijuana.info/san-di...
More info:
- NLv 71 decade ago
They should legalize it.
From a business stand point, you're looking at a market potentially as large and profitable as the tobacco or alcohol industries.
From a social stand point, you're looking ending victimless crime and criminals.
From a financial stand point, less criminals means less inmates, less inmates means prison funding, less funding means less tax.
Less criminals also means less enforcement (ei. DEA & drug task forces), which means even lower taxes.
Everbody wins.
- 1 decade ago
I don't see why not. After the Jerkinator got done with the state, that's the only joy the people have left in life.
- 1 decade ago
I say that we set it under gov't control and tax the hell out of it. i mean, the gov't could use the money, and we could get a little tax reduction