OpenGov - Open Government Brainstorm

i feel if your 21 or older u should have control of what u do. that is if u want to smoke something u should be able to smoke it. people drink and that is worst than any weed. you don't lose control of your self when u smoke weed like u do with beer or wine or other drinks. u might want a sandwich or laugh to much. what is the harm in that. marijuana should be legal for all adults now. i am 52 years old i would rather smoke a joint but i can't because it is illegal. but i can get roaring drunk and that is perfectly fine. what is wrong with this picture.

Well sir, also consider the fact that by regulating the sell of marijuana, criminal drug cartels lose power as a direct result. Marijuana could be regulated the exact same as alcohol. Think of Al Capone, the only reason he was able to be a big time criminal is because of alcohol prohibition. Not to mention by regulating marijuana you can better control who is able to purchase it which means it would be harder for kids to get marijuana. It is easier for teenagers to get weed than it is beer. I know, I was a teen not long ago. Remember, there is no proof what-so-ever that marijuana is as dangerous as it is rumored to be. It is WAY safer than nicotine and alcohol (both legal) by a long shot. I don't even want to go into the necessity for hemp products which was totally whipped out by Dupot who's production methods sickens the earth little by little, closer to death with its harmful pollution....

Prohibition is a violation of the 9th amendment.

I wish people would stop asking government to legalize what they have no genuine authority to prohibit. You give the laws faith and credit they do not possess.

Tell government to stop violating your 9th amendment rights, and remove all faulty legislation from our faces.

Are you saying only that no one has died of an overdose of marijuana? I have witnessed traffic accident deaths caused by drivers using marijuana

jwelborn, I said a DIRECT RESULT. Car wrecks do not count. The car wreck is what killed them. It does not matter if marijuana was found in their system because the same can be said about having caffeine in there system. Caffeine is just as likely to have caused to accident as the weed. Weed slows you down, caffeine speeds you up. If you can find one death, show the evidence otherwise remain silent. As a matter of fact, cough up evidence that it actually impairs your driving skills.

As for sobi, I totally agree with you.

I've had to scrape too many people off the pavement thanks to drunks and drug users to have to prove anything. Driving with any sort of depressant in your system, legal or illegal, will eventually cause a wreck. I don't care what you do, but stay home to do it!

As I stated before, marijuana would be treated the same as alcohol. I'm sorry, but you aren't going to prevent having to scrape up drunks off the road by criminalizing anything. The same can also be said about eating while driving, messing with a cell phone, fiddling with the GPS. Anything can cause a car wreck. They key preventing wrecks is called mindfulness.

What ever happened to "WE THE PEOPLE", it seems as if that matters anymore. If your laughing at the internet audience than you are laughing at least half the world. This is not a freakin joke. People are dieing everyday and all they want is a little release from the pain they are dealing with day after day. Its not about "WHAT WILL LEGALIZING LEAD TO, MORE DRUGS, NO!!!!!!!!! That is where the PARENTS come in. Please do whats right for the spirit of the world.

I never said I apposed legalization. My assertion is that ANY sort of intoxicated driving should be a felony on the first offense. Causing the death or dismemberment of another do to intoxicated driving should be a capitol offense. Let people do what they want, so long as they are held accountable is they injure others in the process.

I concur.

Please search "Seattle Police Chief Norm Stamper on Ending the Drug War" and watch. Here is a part of the interview:

"Over 100 million people have smoked marijuana at least once… we’ve got an admission from (Obama), we had one from the previous President who, although he didn’t inhale, admitted to putting it to his mouth and breaking the law.

I think it’s just time that we recognize that we’re just being very very foolish and we’re spending huge sums of money on law enforcement in general but on marijuana in particular.

If we really want to take care of the drug problem, we will regulate the drug. We will legalize it so that we can regulate it and then we can control it. We can’t do that otherwise. We have spent one trillion dollars prosecuting the drug war since Richard Nixon declared war on drugs in 1971. Another 69 billion dollars a year down the rathole, and what do we have to show for it? Drugs are more readily available today, at lower prices and higher levels of potency than in the history of the drug war.

So the longest running war in the history of the United States, armed conflict, I dare say, has been an abysmal failure. I call it the most destructive and damning social policy since slavery.

… By the way, I’ve talked to an awful lot of police chiefs and other elected officials who whisper their support for the legalization approach but who are – for a variety of reasons, many of which are obvious – reluctant or fearful to speak out.

[Talking to another police chief,] How many people under the influence of marijuana turn violent on you… in your career as a cop?

“None.”

I’ve asked that question over and over and over in the last 2 or 3 years… not one police officer, NOT ONE has said ‘I remember I had this pothead who swung on me…’ and so on.

Then I’ll ask, “How ’bout drunks, how ’bout people under the influence of alcohol?”

It’s laughable. You work almost any beat in almost any city in almost any country – you’re going to be dealing with belligerent drunks. Some of them become extremely violent, and some of them become extremely dangerous to the safety of not only the police officer but to the other folks around or themselves.

So one other thing that’s very clear is this dichotomy between a drug that demonstrably does not produce that behavior, in fact sort of the opposite behavior, and a drug that does… the drug that does produce that behavior, more belligerence, more violence, more health problems, more financial problems for our country, more family and community problems for our country than all other drugs combined… is legal.

There’s something wrong with that picture.

[A Seattle initiative I-75, in 2003] was a message from the community to the police department and the prosecutor’s office that we believe that simple adult possession of marijuana ought to be the lowest enforcement priority, lower indeed than jaywalking. And it is.

[There are many inspiring stories about what police have done to help people]… many many many years ago. But what we’ve been doing since the declaration of the war on drugs is pitting the police against young people, people of color, wildly disproportionate numbers of whom are going to prison behind simple possession cases. They are loosing their federal financing for their education. They’re losing subsidized housing in some cases. They are developing that permanent, lifelong record, possibly the result of the possession of a joint.

Commit the crime of rape, commit the crime of murder, be convicted, be sentenced, serve time, get back out… you can go right back into public housing, you can get that federal financing of your education. But you can’t if you’re caught with any amount of any illegal drug.

Who opposes the end to the drug war? Well, the drug warriors certainly do because we have seen huge sums of money come in to local jurisdictions in the form of grants and assistance, the creation of task forces, ceased and forfeited assets – is feeding this… this beast – this incredible economic system.

Speaking personally, I believe that this body is mine. That it is sovereign. I believe in taking care of it, but if I didn’t it would still be my right to inject, ingest or inhale anything into this body that I chose. and that would include a bullet. That’s my personal belief about individual liberty."

Take it from a cop.

Thank you

LOL I love how you tagged "devil's lettuce".

Wait, wait, wait. Legalize marijuana if you want but can we please all agree to stop using "LOL", especially in spoken conversations?

LOL is one of the few shorthand words that I think deserve full merit.

It beats the traditional smiley face, ;) which is my habit.

I agree not to use it in spoken conversations where laughing expresses it better. Until messages can giggle politely, I think LOL is excellent.

Thanks sobi! LOL ;)

...just kidding.

Bud Goodman Yes, it should have never been classified as schedule 1 in the first place.Cannabis,[Hemp] is a plant it is not a drug,it comes from a seed. It was used for medcinal purposes long before it was made illegal in early American history. I don't think it should regulated by the medical industies either. There's to much beuacracy involed with who's sick enough or who gets to grow it and how much you can grow and how many people you can grow for. Oh then there's Fee's and permits,to much B. S. Rescheduel it and then LEGALIZE IT regulate and tax it like acohol. Put the FARMERS back to work with a decent cash crop. Create thousands of new jobs in bio-fuel hard plastics that are biodegradible virtually indestuctable car bodyparts the lists just go on and on. Don't put the distabution into Tobaco Industries hands let some small businesses get rich for change we can believe in. It should be for responsible adult use for everyone that chooses,not just for the sick and dying. Freedom of choice, stand up America get active let your voice be heard.

Yes! Legalize it and and tax it for all it's worth.Be done with this issue once and for all and forever.If all it does is to generate countless billions of tax dollars and potentially reduce hard drug and alcohol consumption in this country,then future generations will praise this one for having courage.

I can hear the cries now! "$100 buks a pack for weed! It was cheaper when it was illegal!" The tax man gets everyone eventually

Imagine though, all the jobs that would be created for those who must sift through and eliminate seeds.

Picking through the prime stuff.

Where do I apply?

If you have ever been arrested for posession or losing your job due to a drug test,then you would understand that %100 for a pack of joint's is a small price to pay.

Legalization would not prohibit your employer from using a drug test as a condition of employment. There are companies that regulate use of legal substances by employees now.

Well marijuana drug tests are bogus anyways. It does not count the amount of THC in your system it only counts the metabolites the THC turns into. You can get metabolites just by eating hemp products. Not to mention drugs test go against our right to no illegal searches and seizures. And marijuana would actually be cheaper than it is on the street if it were regulated it would have to be.

I truly hope and pray that the government is paying attention to all these pro-legalization comments.I believe that they have been slowly testing the political waters ever since Bill Clinton said that he smoked but didn't inhale.Now 18 years later we have a Black president who inhaled several times.Big KUDOS Mr.President!

Now more and more citizens are voicing their opinions on this issue and we can thank this to the inter-net as being the voice of a new generation.If president Obama doesn't make some serious head way in the direction toward's legalization within his term,then every pot smoker and people who support legalization should vote him out of office.I know that he's having to deal the president of Iran Amadinajab as well as North Korea pointing nukes at us and our allies.But 20,000,000 marijuana arrest is no trivial issue to the voters of this country.

Search and seizure does not apply to job related drug screenings because they are voluntary. You do not have to take the test if you choose not to work for that company. No one will hold you down and take a sample from you. You start telling people tomorrow that they have to submit to a drug test to enter your home. If they don't like it, they don't have to go in.

There used to be better resistance to adhesive contracts such as volunteer for drug testing or forget job.

It should be improper for an employer to demand you abandon your constitutional rights at the application process.

I think private companies aught to be able to base hiring on anything they want to. If the owner of a company does not want to pay someone to work for him/her beacuse that potential employee has a silly haircut, it is the owner's business. Why does anyone have a right to tell the owner of a business who they must give their money to?

Take it a step further. Should there be a law saying that companies have to hire every qualified applicant, even if that company cannot afford another employee?

I get what you are saying jwelborn, the companies should have the freedom to hire based oh whatever they are looking for, that's their right. But let me ask, why is marijuana even subject to drug testing? What effect does it really have on job performance? It's a valid question. I do not mean going to work high as hell and that is perfectly ok, that is obviously ridiculous. I know some companies do test for alcohol but not that often, a lot people drink. Marijuana should be treated the same if not less strict than alcohol and more along the lines of caffeine. Too much of ANYTHING is a bad thing. A casual pot smoker shouldn't be that much of a concern in my opinion. But that is up to the company, and pot being illegal does have an effect on what that companies policy is.

government needs to stop treating us like children.

legalize and turn the lie of "America the Free" to a truth.

any organization that drug tests for weed better be drug testing for alcohol as well - those damn hypocrits would let an alcoholic who can't take care of his body have the job, but not a healthy potsmoker? please, let's fix this bogus issue.

Brianp, 1withtheforce got my point but it looks like you did not. What right do you or anyone else have to tell someone what they may and may not consider when hiring? If you own a company and only want to hire left handed people named Bob, it's your choice.

1withtheforce.I can see that you aren't 100% clear on the federal drug testing laws that the government implemented way back in the 1980's.Most of the high paying job's perform some form of drug testing and they always will,regardless if marijuana becomes legal or not.Until a test is developed to detect whether a person has smoked,eaten or even has had THC in their mouths within a time window of 10-12 hours has not been developed.So even after legalization,people will still be losing their job's for using it.Legalizing marijuana is only half the battle.The next war will be against workplace discrimination against marijuana user's.I keep reading all these comment's about how the government nor employers should have the right to drug test anyone for marijuana.I don't care how much public support for marijuana legalization grows.It's not going to happen unless on a nation wide basis unless a drug test is developed that can guarantee with 100% accuracy recent pot use.In addition to all this,you have to realize that if marijuana does become legal,every elementary and high school student in this country will be forced to undergo drug testing.That's the main argument against legalization,and that is keeping it out of the hand's of children of any age.There is no way that the government is going let adult's have the right to buy,sell and use marijuana without some sort of testing to see if they are giving it to their children or some elses.

That argument is not the final argument by any means.

Prohibition is doomed.

That makes no sense. What is the logic be hind testing to see if they will give to children? Do they do the same for alcohol or tobacco? I might add that both of these legal drugs sickens and kills people everyday, but that not the case with marijuana. Prove me wrong.

I know all about the Bureau of vital statistics and the fact that it's humanly impossible to achieve a lethal dose of THC.What I'm saying is that no one,,absolutely no one under the age of 18-21 has any buisness drinking alcohol,using tobacco or using marijuana.I've wittness firsthand the damage cause by parents who allow their teenager's to smoke and drink.I know that there's a big difference between alcohol and marijuana,and if my children were to ever seek to experiment with either one of the two,I'd much rather see them use marijuana any day of the week.A close friend of mine was going through a tough time with his girfriend and her father back in 1988,and he drank a whole case of beer and shot his brains out.His parents had been letting him drink at home for years.He was only 20.A year later,another friend of mine was hanging out at a hot dog stand in a Wal Mart parking lot after work,and he and another friend of mine were hit by a car driven by a 17 yeard old boy who was drinking and smoking pot.My friend Terry Pepper was dragged over a mile under that car and he died an excruciating death.He was 19 years old.Those two examples were tragedies,but the worst case I ever knew,was a family of 7.This woman named Carla who had 4 children lived with her mother who was named Carla also.Everyone called her granny Carla.She was a old hippie,and she loved to smoke pot and tell stories about the 60's.Her daughter Carla had a big meth problem and her brother Marshall was into meth and crack,and yes they had started using pot before they were 13,because their hippie mother had given it to them.The younger Carla's two oldest children were 13 and 12 and they both smoked as well.Marshall killed a guy in a coke deal that went wrong back in 1992,and he's serving 33 years for murder and arson and he had to serve 10 years flat,day for day for a federal fire arms charge.He was 25 when he went to prison and he will be 60 when he's finally released.Granny Carla passed away 2 years ago.Her daughter Carla was caught on a surveilance camera digging for food in a garbage dumpster.Both of her two older children are both on meth and their lives are really messed up.Life experience,both from my own life as well as from other's has shown me that children have no buisness using any mind altering substances,,,period.I'm convinced that if the school system had been allowed to test those children back in the 80's and early 90's ,that they would have been removed from the situation and maybe,just maybe their lives would be 180 degrees different as a result.Legalize marijuana? Yes!But for adults only.

No I agree. It definitely should be kept out of the hands of minors that is why regulation and legalization is a good thing. Being regulated you better control who gets theirs hands on it. This is a public health issue not a legal issue in my opinion. I think it will do things a lot better taking the criminal element out of an already dangerous situation with all drugs.

The two star wars fans and jwelborn are smart, well spoken people and I applaud your open, information-based debate! Allow me to weigh in, as far as the $100.00 a pack of weed goes, well there is a good point, but not as you intended jwelborn. Wine, whiskey, vodka, cigars...they are ALL subject to quality and so is marijuana. Therefore the price of pot will vary by brand like five o'clock vodka vs. Grey Goose for example. I know you're probably thinking most of the cost will be set by the tax, but if pot were legalized, it would be in the primary interest of making money, not limiting the income potential.

As far as workplace testing goes, I agree that a company reserves the right to hire whomever they chose, provided that there is valid merit for disqualifying a potential employee. But just because someone whom is not intoxicated with pot at the time of the interview, chose to smoke the day before, should not make them unfavorable to employment. I personally can't wait to see the hypocrisy of some companies turned on its head when a good worker or potential worker is terminated due to pot in their system, but not necessarily intoxicated with it at the time of altercation. As far as the sad stories jedidaddy told, I agree that all must be done to prohibit children from using anything such as alcohol, tobacco, pot or any mind altering substance! That being said, if a 18 yr. old decides to puff the herb before shipping off to Iraq, or after acing an exam at college...more power to him, but he/she better be ready to deal with the consequences of being a minor in possession just like all of us who scored beer before 21 had to.