Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next
- Introduced by Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson, (D-Seattle) (D) on January 25, 2011, eliminates criminal penalties for possession and consumption of marijuana. This act sets up specific regulations for the production, distribution, sale, and taxation of marijuana. This act also creates licensing for marijuana growers. This act allows cities to allow voters to make a determination regarding the sale of marijuana within their boundaries during a general election. This act also makes technical changes throughout state law to accommodate the legalization of marijuana. This act takes effect July 1, 2011. (Companion: SB 5598).
- Referred to the House Public Safety & Emergency Preparedness Committee on January 25, 2011.
Comments
1) Re: 2011 House Bill 1550 (Regulating the production, distribution, and sale of marijuana) by M_DragonKnight on April 21, 2012[quote user="LunaAzule"]Patent # 6630507[/quote]
Not sure why you would quote that patent number since the patent office does not list it, so I am assuming that is a mistake on your part... Here is a more relevent patent: 8,034,843 http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=2&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=85&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=cannabinoids&OS=cannabinoids&RS=cannabinoids
But I am sure you will see what is wrong with your argument anyway. Cannabinoids is a drug compound which can be taken in pill form and does not need to be inhaled (smoked). So let's throw away your argument that legalized marajuan has medicinal purposes and throw away your patent number. Any inhalation is not an issue because they could make inhalers that will deliver the drug if it is.
It is funny that to say that all of what is good in marajuana can be taken in pill form falls on deaf ears.
What is interesting is the everyone who argues for the legalization of marajuana mentions the founding fathers and the fact that they grew pot. What is considered to be fact is that yes they grew the plant for the fiber as it was easier to grow than cotton and had a better tensil strength, what isn't proven that they smoked it, or even prefered it over tobacco, which was also grown by them. The rest is speculation.
But this is not about medicinal marajuna. This is about legalization of marajuana. Never mind the same arguments that have been use in cigarettes about lung cancer, secondary smoke issues etc. etc.
But, say that you want to legalzie marajuna. That you want to have be sold it stores.... That you want it to be regulated and taxed just like cigarettes or liquor... Are you willing to have LE arrest you for having an unregulated pot plant in your house or backyard? Are you willing to have the state consficate your property what is now considered a misdemeanor? Are you willing to have the state regulate anything?
But since that you are, and the state just lost their monopoly on liquor stores, I guess it is good for the state to legalize and regulate pot since they NOW have all those empty buildings that used to be liquor stores and need to fill them them with something.
Just remember you've been warned.
Maybe you are getting carried away with the candy. What about cafeine? The reason for it is for artifical energy. I know some people are just hateful when they need their fix of coffee or cola. Really. We are suppose to learn from history, and hopefully don't repeat the bad parts. We haven't. When we had prohibition this country produced more and newer crime than anytime in history. Hell, we started the American Mafia. We got alot of the same factors with weed, it is not going anywhere, it will always be here. We have supported all the allied crimes directly or indirectly with keeping weed illegal. Can't we now get together and petition that we can now get this on a general election? When one lists all the pros and cons of alcohol and weed, side by side, there are some things similar. But the biggest difference to me is the difference of someone whom smokes and someone that drinks alot. Who is more likely to go crazy? Who is more likely to hurt someone? I think we have the numbers in this country now if people we realize it and just stand up and stop this nonsense. Let's lessen the burden of taxes on our prisons, let's tax this industry and lessen the tax burden. We rave about our forefathers, which many smoked weed daily, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and Patrick Henry. Are we now better than these guys?
Interesting...you are comparing killing children with smoking weed....hummm.... smoke a joint, kill a child...same thing?
No wonder you don't want pot to be legal, you think it's the most evil thing in the world lol
The only reason that it is "bad" is because it feels good. Candy is bad for you too right? Look what happens when you eat too much of it! Your teeth fall out. When the sugar is all out of your system it could lead to depression. It can be very addictive maybe more so then MaryJane......the government should take control of the situation and put candies under their thumb! We all should create a new organization...The CEA (candy enforcement administration). So if you are caught with a bag of reeses the cops can bust down the door to your home drag you out in hand cuffs and put you in jail. Take you to court then make you pay fines and give you a criminal record.
A comparison of candy and Marijuana is a lot more realistic then comparing the killing of children and marijuana. If you would research the other side of this you would see how foolish it is to keep it under prohibition.
Your new comments should be made in the box below.