Slashdot Mirror


Marijuana Legalized In Oregon, Alaska, and Washington DC

Robotron23 writes: Coinciding with the midterm elections yesterday were state ballots proposing the legalization of cannabis. All three territories where full legalization was tabled approved the measure, joining Washington state and Colorado. The narrowest vote was that of Alaska at a roughly 52% to 48% margin. Washington D.C. meanwhile saw the vote strongly tipped in favor of legalization, at about 69% to 31% opposed. Oregon passed its measure by a vote of 55% to 45%. Buoyed by the news, advocates of legal cannabis are already contemplating the next round of state ballots in 2016.

15 of 588 comments (clear)

  1. Wonderful by ravenswood1000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I never in my lifetime expected to see this. It's about time

  2. America is a RINO by TheNastyInThePasty · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yesterday's election was a message to Washington that America wants conservatives to represent them! Also, they want legalized pot, increased minimum wage, the right to have an abortion, insurance-provided contraception, and required paid time off at work!

    Wait, what?

    --
    The best thing about UDP jokes is I don't care if you get them or not
    1. Re:America is a RINO by gman003 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, yesterday's election message was "fuck Democrats", just as 2008's was "fuck Republicans". The system just doesn't really allow a message of "fuck BOTH of them", probably because the system was made by both of them.

    2. Re:America is a RINO by i+kan+reed · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's a little more complicated than that.

      The republicans gerrymandered the fuck out of the country in 2010. That's not to implicitly forgive any past gerrymanderings by democrats or anything, but the house doesn't even remotely represent the popular sentiment of the country. My states' 2012 elections were more than enough evidence of that. 51% of voters voted for democratic candidates, 9 out of 13 seats went to republicans, with another really close. Nothing has changed since then.

      The senate, on the other hand, has always leaned a little disproportionately republican, because low-population, rural-as-hell states are overrepresented by constitutional design. Democratic control of the body is more a fluke than not, even though the soft majority of total votes tends to lean democratic.

      The people of this country are more liberal than the government of this country. Not by a huge margin, but a bit.

    3. Re:America is a RINO by The+Ickle+Jones · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The system just doesn't really allow a message of "fuck BOTH of them"

      It does. It's just that voters are retarded.

    4. Re:America is a RINO by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The system just doesn't really allow a message of "fuck BOTH of them"

      It does. It's just that voters are retarded.

      And apathetic. There were only about 15 people at my polling place yesterday when I voted and I, at 51, was the youngest there. The rest were probably like my mother, voting Republican because they despise Obama and the Affordable Care Act, while enjoying their Medicare - which, ironically, I pay for - or their Tricare. Or, also like my mother, don't want to pay taxes anymore, even though those taxes pay for infrastructure (road) repairs, the Police and Fire departments, etc... (sigh)

      Democrats failed to inspire their base to give a fuck.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  3. Re:Well, let's criminalize Du Pont Nylon now. by CRCulver · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yawn. Everytime a story on marijuana comes up on a US-centric site, someone suggests that hemp is a miracle material, and it had to be banned so other industries wouldn't be threatened. If hemp is so great, then why is interest in it so relatively low in the many other industrialized countries around the world where industrial hemp has always been legal and easy to grow, even state-subdizied?

  4. Make up your damn minds by Sloppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let me guess: did the very same voters in these states also send people from the prohibition parties, to represent them in the federal government yet again? Right hand, you need to meet left hand some day.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  5. Re:Well, let's criminalize Du Pont Nylon now. by CRCulver · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If marijuana is such a threat to tree-based paper products, then why does paper continue to be so heavily used in many fields even in countries with hemp industries?

  6. Re:Well, let's criminalize Du Pont Nylon now. by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If hemp is so great, then why is interest in it so relatively low in the many other industrialized countries around the world where industrial hemp has always been legal and easy to grow, even state-subdizied?

    It's a chicken and egg problem.
    There isn't much hemp cultivation, so nobody is designing purpose built harvesting machinery.
    And since there isn't any purpose built harvesting machinery, it's much harder to grow hemp on a large scale.

    There's also a reality that even though hemp can be used in just about everything, it's not always the best (or currently the cheapest) option.
    This could change if hemp harvesting and processing ever catches up on the decades of R&D that synthetics and cotton have received.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  7. Re:But DC is different,no? by cogeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Obama has stated that this issue is not of major concern to him and will not be seeking prosecution.

    That's what he's stated, but not what he's done. They've raided several marijuana dispensaries and farms here in Colorado.

    How do you know when a politician is lying? When their lips are moving.

  8. Re:But DC is different,no? by hawguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Also remember many jobs will drug test you.

    This is already being tested in the courts. There's not yet (as far as I know) a test for marijuana intoxication, only detection that you've used marjuana at some point in the past few days/weeks, so there's little justification for testing for marijuana when it's already legal for recreational and/or medicinal use. It's particularly controversial when an employee uses marijuana medicinally -- cough medicine is going to affect employee performance much more than smoking pot over the weekend.

  9. Re:But DC is different,no? by BVis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What they're really doing when you get forced to take a pre-employment piss test is asserting their power over you, even before they start paying you. You're a criminal/drug addict until you provide a bodily fluid to "prove" otherwise (as urine tests have varying degrees of accuracy). With marijuana especially, they're asserting control over your body (as you could smoke on the first of the month and spike a positive for pot at the end of the month) even during the hours you're not working for them (although, if you're an "exempt" employee, there are no hours that are truly yours; being an "exempt" employee means that you trade having to punch a clock for a fixed salary, no overtime, and the possibility of being required to work 120 hours a week, all legal).

    It's time we stood up to our corporate masters and told them "It's none of your fucking business what's in my urine."

    --
    Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
  10. Re:Money by rahvin112 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Legalization motivations can't so easily be tied to one factor.

    There are many and people weigh them differently. There are just as people that think it's stupid to put people in jail for something that's less dangerous than alcohol as there are those that seek the tax revenue. There are other people that think laws shouldn't be intruding on what consenting adults want to do to themselves. There's another group that sees police resources wasn't policing cannabis use, not just in cost but time and the problems it causes with people respecting the law. And of course there is a group of people that just want to be able to smoke it. You just can't boil it down like you did.

    Very few people realize that the war on drugs costs $12 billion dollars a year in police and incarceration expenses (without including court and societal costs, particularly the damage civil forfeiture does to the economy). Stop that expenditure and collect tax revenue on the transaction along with bringing all production back stateside and the economic benefits are tremendous but almost no one realizes it or in the case of the "think of the children" people even care about the cost. The hope is the frontier states like Colorado will show that legalization is not only safe but sane.

    The counter weight is the media is doing their damndest to convince everyone kids are going to die BTW. How many times were you told on TV that marijuana edibles could be given out at Halloween and poison all the kids? Even though edibles have been available medically in many states for years now it's NEVER happened. You could even argue someone putting their $50 bag of THC gummies into some kids halloween bag is beyond reason, but the Media is playing this up for all it's worth. Think of the children damnit, cannabis is dangerous to them and some kid's going to end up dieing because cannabis is legal so we better hurry and ban it. Otherwise they might not have scary things to report about.

  11. Re:Two predictions by dubbreak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Humorous but true. Privileged members of society (such as members of Congress) don't need to worry about the legality of things such as recreational drugs. Whatever they were using before this law passed won't change because of it. No one is going to say, "Hey, marijuana is legal now, I'm gonna quit doing cocaine and smoke marijuana instead."

    I know plenty of professionals (lawyers, surgeons, anaesthetists etc) that use recreational drugs. The chances of them getting charged with anything if caught in procession are pretty much nil. Drug laws aren't for the protection of society in general, the purpose is to establish control over people that are viewed as "trouble makers". Upper society members that use 'responsibly' need not worry. If they make a public scene, yeah, they'll be some kind of slap on the wrist, but in general if you are rich enough or respected enough certain laws don't apply. They are for the people beneath you.

    --
    "If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill