Jᴀᴄᴜʀᴜᴛᴜ - Tʜᴇ Cᴀsᴛ Oᴜᴛ

D Pope wrote:Does this change drug test requirements?
How're they going to tax these sales?

I'd say that should logically change the requirements to make them equivalent to alcohol, as for taxes well the best way to enforce them is to be the seller.



Right on...

From what I've been able to read about it today, not only is it (re)legalized and regulated (taxed) the law also provides for cultivation. It will be regulated the same way alcohol and tobacco are. A percentage of the revenue from it will go to schools. This is for people over 21, btw.

At least in CO, I've not read anything about WA yet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Amendment_64_(2012" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

Personal Use

New liberties of Amendment 64 apply to people twenty-one or older. People can grow up to six mature marijuana plants privately in a locked space, legally possess up to one ounce of marijuana, and give as a gift up to one ounce to other citizens twenty-one years of age or older. Consumption is permitted in a manner similar to alcohol, with equivalent offenses proscribed for driving. The new policies take effect when the Governor ratifies the ballots, which will happen within 30 days.

Commercial RegulationThe new legislation does not apply to industrial hemp or medical marijuana.

The new amendment provides for licensing of cultivation facilities, product manufacturing facilities, testing facilities, and retail stores. Local governments can now regulate or prohibit such facilities. This amendment requires the general assembly to enact an excise tax to be levied upon wholesale sales of marijuana, requiring that the first $40 million in revenue raised annually by such tax be credited to the public school capital construction assistance fund.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Initiative_502" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ballot measure summary

As described by the Secretary of State's office, the measure shall "license and regulate marijuana production, distribution, and possession for persons over twenty-one; remove state-law criminal and civil penalties for activities that it authorizes; tax marijuana sales; and earmark marijuana-related revenues."

This measure removes state-law prohibitions against producing, processing, and selling marijuana, subject to licensing and regulation by the liquor control board; allow limited possession of marijuana by persons aged twenty-one and over; and impose 25% excise taxes on wholesale and retail sales of marijuana, earmarking revenue for purposes that include substance-abuse prevention, research, education, and healthcare. Laws prohibiting driving under the influence would be amended to include maximum thresholds for THC blood concentration.

Provisions

After approval, Initiative 502 implements over a period of a year or more. Legal possession limits go into effect on December 6, 2012, and the state has until December 1, 2013, to establish other key rules.[6]

The initiative shall legalize use of marijuana products purchased from state authorized sources for adults 21 and over and focus law enforcement resources on DUI prosecution as well as violent and property crimes. Unlicensed cannabis will still be illegal, including personal "grows" in one's own home, except for medical cannabis as regulated under RCW 69.51A.

Part I identifies the goal of the initiative and authorizes the Washington State Liquor Control Board "to regulate and tax marijuana for persons twenty-one years of age and older, and add a new threshold for driving under the influence of marijuana."

Part II establishes various definitions, including one which distinguishes "marijuana" from hemp and other parts of the cannabis plant based on its THC content.

Part III establishes a license system for marijuana producers, processors and retailers. Initial licenses shall be $250 with an annual renewal fee of $1000. Rules prohibit producers and processors from having any financial interest in retailers, much like the three-tier system for hard liquor in control states. This section also makes it clear that selling or distributing unlicensed marijuana remains illegal, setting limits on the maximum amount one may possess. Adults 21 years or older may possess up to "one ounce of useable marijuana," 16 ounces of marijuana-infused product in solid form, 72 ounces of marijuana-infused product in liquid form or "any combination" of all three.

Part IV establishes a "dedicated marijuana fund" for all revenue received by the liquor control board, and explicitly earmarks any surplus from this new revenue for health care (55%), drug abuse treatment and education (25%), with 1% for marijuana-related research at University of Washington and Washington State University, most of the remainder going to the state general fund. A March 2012 analysis by the state Office of Financial Management estimated annual revenues above $560 million for the first full year, rising thereafter.[7] February 2011 analysis of the similar Washington House Bill 1550 estimated annual state and county law-enforcement savings of approximately $22 million.[8][9] OFM's final, official analysis did not include law-enforcement savings, but estimated five year revenues at approximately $1.9 billion from an assumed retail price of $12 per gram.[10][11][12] Proponents of I-502 have posted a pie chart showing annual dollar-per-purpose earmarks, based on these projections.[13]

Part V on "driving under the influence of marijuana" sets a per se DUI limit of active blood THC levels at greater than or equal to 5 nanograms per milliliter. Some medical cannabis advocates are concerned that this will lead to DUI convictions for medicinal cannabis users, who are driving with blood THC levels greater than or equal to 5 nanograms per milliliter

Freakzilla wrote:Some medical cannabis advocates are concerned that this will lead to DUI convictions for medicinal cannabis users, who are driving with blood THC levels greater than or equal to 5 nanograms per milliliter

That's just ridiculous. If we can't drive wasted on hydrocodone or valium, the same should apply to medical marijuana.

"I know I'm over the limit, officer, but the alcohol helps dull the pain of my miserable and pointless life."

"Very good, sir, Drive on."

Incidentally, these legalization laws seems eminently reasonable. Treating it more or less like alcohol seems right on the money. Presumably there's an open container / lit spliff law (no toking while driving)?

I dOnt see any text on transporting out if state. Presumably CO and WA could buy/sell the stuff to/from each other. And what about importing from Overseas?

HBJ

lotek wrote:I find it quite ironic that the country from which originated the prohibition style approach to cannabis would be the one passing the most open and pragmatic laws in the world.

This is because that same country's state department has been extremely forward about pushing the prohibition style approach on the rest of the world.

There are a large number of small countries (like the caribbean nations) that could probably quadruple their gross domestic product in a year if they legalized recreational drugs like marijuana and cocaine for American tourists. There's a reason they don't take that obvious and very lucrative route; the US federal government would come after them with a big stick(*) if they did.

Maybe we'll see a change in attitude now. And just maybe we'll see the US use that stick on its own constituent states.


(*) comprised of sanctions, tariffs, or perhaps even unnecessarily stringent customs inspections, not military force.

Naïve mind wrote:

lotek wrote:I find it quite ironic that the country from which originated the prohibition style approach to cannabis would be the one passing the most open and pragmatic laws in the world.

This is because that same country's state department has been extremely forward about pushing the prohibition style approach on the rest of the world.

yeah I know I live in the rest of the world ^^

Naïve mind wrote:...not military force.

Why not, they do it in South America?

It might not be the official military but it's armed federal agents.

There are drugs in South America ?

Hunchback Jack wrote:Presumably there's an open container / lit spliff law (no toking while driving)?

I would assume so. I believe at least one of those laws said the DUI laws themselves would need to be modified to accomodate this new law.

lotek wrote:There are drugs in South America ?

Not as good as the ones in California and Colorado.

Freakzilla wrote:

lotek wrote:There are drugs in South America ?

Not as good as the ones in California and Colorado.

Is that why the US is at war with Mexico ?

lotek wrote:

Freakzilla wrote:

lotek wrote:There are drugs in South America ?

Not as good as the ones in California and Colorado.

Is that why the US is at war with Mexico ?

Mexico is in North America.

I think the real interesting thing that will come out of all this is the way
the Federal Government is going to run the fuck over these State Laws ....

You've probably all seen this before, but it seemed appropriate somehow.



HBJ

Freakzilla wrote:

lotek wrote:

Freakzilla wrote:

lotek wrote:There are drugs in South America ?

Not as good as the ones in California and Colorado.

Is that why the US is at war with Mexico ?

Mexico is in North America.

So where are the drugs then?

Damn geopolitics is complicated stuff.

SandRider wrote:I think the real interesting thing that will come out of all this is the way
the Federal Government is going to run the fuck over these State Laws ....

They COULD but I'm curious to see if they will. They don't seem to be cracking down too hard on the "medical" dispensories in other states.

lotek wrote:

Freakzilla wrote:

lotek wrote:

Freakzilla wrote:

lotek wrote:There are drugs in South America ?

Not as good as the ones in California and Colorado.

Is that why the US is at war with Mexico ?

Mexico is in North America.

So where are the drugs then?

Damn geopolitics is complicated stuff.

(A lot of meth comes from Mexico.)


Cocaine comes from South America. We can't grow that here. If we could, we would, I'm sure.

I heard on the news that Mexican officials were saying they would be reconsidering their policies on stopping trafficing... like we really want their dirt-weed. The stuff grown in the American NW is far superior.

Or so I'm told

Freakzilla wrote:

SandRider wrote:I think the real interesting thing that will come out of all this is the way
the Federal Government is going to run the fuck over these State Laws ....

They COULD but I'm curious to see if they will. They don't seem to be cracking down too hard on the "medical" dispensories in other states.

"medical marijuana" & "recreational use" are two very different issues ....

SandRider wrote:

Freakzilla wrote:

SandRider wrote:I think the real interesting thing that will come out of all this is the way
the Federal Government is going to run the fuck over these State Laws ....

They COULD but I'm curious to see if they will. They don't seem to be cracking down too hard on the "medical" dispensories in other states.

"medical marijuana" & "recreational use" are two very different issues ....

But aren't both still illegal under federal law?

fuck if I know .... I stopped paying attention to
Federal Laws along time ago ....

looks like more and more states are doing the same!

Freakzilla wrote:

SandRider wrote:"medical marijuana" & "recreational use" are two very different issues ....

But aren't both still illegal under federal law?

Yep.

HBJ