Slashdot Mirror
Sean Parker Contributes $9 Million As States Push To Legalize Marijuana (gazettenet.com)
Sean Parker has now donated nearly $9 million in his effort to legalize marijuana in California. An anonymous Slashdot reader quotes Billboard:
Whether it's founding Napster, guiding Facebook or investing in Spotify, Sean Parker has developed a reputation for pushing change forward, and now he's at the forefront of California's marijuana legalization movement... [A] competing proposal from the Coalition for Cannabis Policy Reform was folded into Parker's, making his the leading ballot measure, by default, for 2016 in a state with the largest medical marijuana market in the country.
The U.S currently has a hodgepodge of legislation, with marijuana entirely legal only in Colorado, Washington, Oregon and Alaska, as well as in the District of Columbia, and in individual cities in Michigan and Maine. But with five more states now voting on legalization, pro-marijuana campaign ads are being broadcast in Massachusetts, Maine, Nevada, California and Arizona. ("You decide who wins -- criminals and cartels, or Arizona schools?") And meanwhile, Slashdot reader schwit1 has identified one voter who's definitely opposing police efforts to hunt down marijuana growers: All that remains of the solitary marijuana plant an 81-year-old grandmother had been growing behind her South Amherst home is a stump and a ragged hole in the ground... Tucked away in a raspberry patch and separated by a fence from any neighbors, the [medicinal] plant was nearly ready for harvest when a military-style helicopter and police descended on Sept. 21...
The U.S currently has a hodgepodge of legislation, with marijuana entirely legal only in Colorado, Washington, Oregon and Alaska, as well as in the District of Columbia, and in individual cities in Michigan and Maine. But with five more states now voting on legalization, pro-marijuana campaign ads are being broadcast in Massachusetts, Maine, Nevada, California and Arizona. ("You decide who wins -- criminals and cartels, or Arizona schools?") And meanwhile, Slashdot reader schwit1 has identified one voter who's definitely opposing police efforts to hunt down marijuana growers: All that remains of the solitary marijuana plant an 81-year-old grandmother had been growing behind her South Amherst home is a stump and a ragged hole in the ground... Tucked away in a raspberry patch and separated by a fence from any neighbors, the [medicinal] plant was nearly ready for harvest when a military-style helicopter and police descended on Sept. 21...
^^ found the guinea pig! ^^
As my username suggests, this news be dank! The sooner we take a leg out of the narco/DEA racket the better.
How is this related to slashdot? There's not even a cursory connection to tech/science.
Oh wait.. nevermind, we like his position. Money in politics is good again.
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
If he has $9 million to piss away, surely he can pay off my student loan while he's at it.
I am all for legalizing it.The issue I have is that people buy the laws. Because that way you end up in a pissing contest where only the rich decide what becomes law.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
When we were growing up, it was all dope to our parents and probably misleadingly associated with the same risk assessment. It seems clear, even to the opponents of legalization, that this is not the case.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
If you look at who is against it - it's mostly law enforcement and people who want to keep the broken system going.
I doubt it will pass, but if it does, it should be interesting to see what the DEA does when people can legally grow X amount of plants but still not allowed at the federal level.
Federal law is being selectively enforced (for now), but Federal law makes it is illegal everywhere. State laws legalizing it do not trump Federal Laws that criminalize it.
If the will of the people is for it to be legal politicians would run on that, get elected, and change the laws. It's a brilliant system, when it's allowed to work. One citizen, one vote works. Once citizen spending $9 Million to get his way is how we got into this situation.
I don't care what people do as long as I don't have to pay for it. My primary objection is that I find many people to be adequately stupid without chemically exacerbating the situation.
Nobody knows who Sean Parker is.
Nobody even remembers what Napster is anymore. C'mon. One sentence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
He's putting his money where his mouth is.
However I would be more sympathetic to the pot movement in general if they were at least demonstrably more honest than the people who want to keep it outlawed. The notion that schools will benefit immensely seems to be a slightly more realistic version of the old claim that legalized sale of pot would generate $599 godzillion in tax revenue per picosecond to the end of eternity. The problem with either claim is that it assumes that legalization would cause people to want to buy at retail what they and their friends could grow in their backyard.
(there are other dishonest claims from the pro-pot camp but this one directly ties to the summary)
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Fucking stupid millennials think they are important and the only people alive.
Your ignorant meme notwithstanding, a vast number of the most successful folks out know under seventy (obviously a generational thing) smoke weed at least occasionally. I'm not at all surprised that you're unaware of this.
If you read it without the "out now," it makes more sense... :)
Hahaha, disregard that, I suck cocks!!!
Wake me up when a state actually means legalize when they say legalize, as in you could grow it yourself. From everything I've seen what they mean when they say legalize is to decriminalize it's use and build/protect an industry. I'm OK with the first part the second part is really kinda disgusting.
Phase two after decriminalization never seems to be legalization, what it ends up being is a bunch of people swooping in to corner the grow/supply market and once they are in place they tend to lobby for laws that make it that much harder for competition to move in. Even if that perceived competition is the average citizen growing their own marijuana for personal use.
You know, I sort of hope you don't smoke weed, because otherwise you're not doing your argument any favors. You wrote a sentence that made no sense, then your correction isn't even correct. You didn't write "out now", you wrote "out know".
Haha...well played sir. I see the dawning of a new age of AC retractions is upon us.
to legislate against stupid. Marijuana is for burnouts.
Yeah, so the obvious thing to do would be to put them in prison and ruin their lives.
We wouldn't want them wasting their lives, now would we?
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
I think that marijuana is going to be the sequel to tobacco. Smoking different stuff isn't healthier. Around the 2030s we will probably see lung cancer and throat cancer go up again along with everything else as the second anti-smoking campaign begins. Or, you know, we could just try to stop it now.
How is it not a violation of the Possee Commitatus Act to use National Guard units for policing actions?
There won't be any real progress till it's decriminalized at the federal level. Till then, banks won't get involved fearing account forfeitures and asset freezing - which can happen any time. Once it it's decriminalized however, there will be enormous and swift changes. Big tobacco will swoop in with billions and develop the supply chain, profit and squeeze out or buy up local growers and dispensaries.
So now asking that police follow the law is "escalating"?
The schedule I status needs to go. Certain chemicals in marijuana have shown themselves to be the best treatment for specific kinds of seizures, far better than anything currently available, to say nothing of the myriad of other uses. The evidence it has some medical value is insurmountable and being schedule I prevents much of the research that could be helping people while ensuring that grandma gets the full swat experience.
Getting a realistic categorization based on facts and not propaganda will help to pave the way for legalizing it on the federal level.
Hyperbole much?
Many people don't know who Sean Parker is.
Some people don't even remember what Napster is anymore. C'mon. One sentence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
FTFY.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Charley Bowdre: Hey, Chavez, how come they ain't killing us?
"Dirty Steve" Stephens: Because we're in the spirit world, asshole. They can't see us.
You know, I sort of hope you don't smoke weed, because otherwise you're not doing your argument any favors. You wrote a sentence that made no sense, then your correction isn't even correct. You didn't write "out now", you wrote "out know".
.... he's obviously had one joint two many ... oh weight
This is exactly how the new "people for the people" democracy works: Wealthy people or corporations use money in bribes to influence legislature bypassing unbiased education and disclosures of facts for voters.
The alcohol lobby does not want the recreational use competing against their alcohol sales and the pharmaceutical lobby does not want the medicinal use competing against their drug sales.
So much for a free market.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
When we were growing up, it was all dope to our parents...
Correction: when you were growing up, the government told your parents what they wanted them to believe, and your parents believed it.
Let's not beat around the bush here. The very concept of "drug prohibition" was concocted by the ruling class, for the ruling class.
That crap fucking stinks. Like we hadn't enough stink from the tobacco smokers already.
anyone who modded this bullshit up is a straight up dipshit.
I don't see anyone reaching for willow bark when they have a headache.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
However I would be more sympathetic to the pot movement in general if they were at least demonstrably more honest than the people who want to keep it outlawed.
Agreed. My beef with them is the whole "medical marijuana" movement. I don't have a problem with people smoking pot as long as no one gets hurt. I think it is a stupid thing to do but it's clearly less harmful than lots of other perfectly legal activities. I also don't have a problem with people using pot to treat legitimate medical conditions provided there is actual scientific (not anecdotal) trials evidence of efficacy for the condition. There seems to be clear evidence that pot can be a useful treatment in some rare cases. Key word there is "rare".
What I have a problem with is people falsely claiming medical conditions in vast numbers in order to get legal cover to use pot when they clearly have no actual medical condition. This describes the VAST majority of pot users. I have a huge problem with making policy based on lies. That's how pot got illegal in the first place. It irritates me that pot proponents think I'm stupid enough to believe transparently false stories that only pot can cure whatever made up ailment they have. They want to get high and they should own that fact. I see it as no worse (and probably safer) than someone drinking beer to get a buzz. If someone wants to get high and can do so responsibly without hurting anyone else I don't see that as a problem. Just don't pretend I'm dumb enough to believe that most pot users happen to suffer from rare medical conditions that only pot can treat. Go ahead and get it legalized and drop the ridiculous "medical marijuana" nonsense.
> five more states now voting on legalization
So, Arkansas doesn't exist?
Or, you know, I had just woken up moments before and my eyes were too blurry with sleep to navigate the stupid-ass autocorrect on my phone... ;)
Oh, and for what it's worth: I am neither the stoner-type nor am I all that successful; I'm not sure what that implies... :)
You know what's cooler than donating 9 million dollars? Donating 9 billion.
In a world where the majority of people have tried or at least smoke occasionally it's easy to expect a subset of people to also have a majority whether it's successful people or unsuccessful people. Don't reach for straws.
Thomas Jefferson planted that bell and let it ring for personal use. I'd bet Jesus indulged too.
Cookie buds don't make the idiot. Appeal the prohibition!
And while they're in prison they're exempt from the 13th amendment barring slavery. There are actually more legal slaves in the USA now than there were when slavery was abolished in the 1800s.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
You wish. Thats just a number you plucked out your backside to justify your sad little habit.
And even if it were true, I suspect a similar number of people would happily see lynching brought back. It doesn't necessarily make it right.
You do realize that even being "all over it" wouldn't get them the same margins as the drug and alcohol sales they would lose, as pot doesn't just add to all sales, it replaces some sales?
You do realize that pot is an easily-grown weed, and a lot easier and less complicated to grow on your sun-porch than making something like beer or wine is?
You do realize that anyone having a few plants in the house or garden would be a lot less likely to buy "professionally produced" pot?
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I don't understand why people don't see that trying to curtail the supply of drugs and locking people up doesn't work. You're never going to convince people who use drugs that they shouldn't. Look how hard it is to get the hardcore cigarette smokers to quit -- our state has the highest tobacco tax in the country, and you basically can't smoke anywhere anymore, and there is still a cohort of people who will do it until they die. It's way less than it was in, say, the 50s where absolutely everyone smoked, but it's there and keeps the cigarette makers employed.
I think the entire war on drugs should just be dropped. I've never done anything in my life (OK, alcohol, but that's legal.) And even though I'm not a user, I think the overall cost of drugs in society would go way down if everyone had easy access to safe, cheap sources with no questions asked. Imagine being able to go into a pharmacy to get painkillers -- people wouldn't have to resort to heroin. Overdose incidents would also go way down because users would know what they're getting -- this is a major driver to the "opioid crisis" where inexperienced users OD because they were given a dose they weren't used to...it's not like dealers are testing the concentration of their product.
If enforcement just stopped, and supply were regulated and made available to everyone who wanted it, the crime surrounding drug use would drop to zero, which is what most people who don't have a moral problem with it are upset about. The other thing I think this would help is the upcoming mass-unemployment event that's going to come from automation of all jobs. As a society, do we really want 90% of the population unemployed with nothing to do, or should we give them something to do that's cheap and keeps them out of trouble if they choose?
In Washington DC you can legally use marijuana in the home only. You can grow 2 plants (I think it's 2), but no one can buy or sell because the Federal Government shut down regulation making on this topic before the city could come up with guidelines. So you can smoke it, but you can't buy it.
what you're saying is so flagrantly at odds with reality that making sense of it requires invention. Private citizens are not competition for large growing operations
That invention is so old its patent has expired several times over. Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942).
Getting money out of politics might (might) enable us to have laws based on science and reasoning, rather than propaganda and hysteria
Replace "propaganda and hysteria" with self-interest, and the picture becomes perfectly clear. The problem is that the laws are based on self-interest.
This is stoopid, why is this on /.
Out of interest, do you think drinking alcohol is a stupid thing to do?
Without putting too fine a point on it, as a general proposition yes I do think drinking alcohol is a stupid thing to do. Usually harmless but not rational or a smart thing to do. There are some pretty tragic downsides to drinking recreationally and the only meaningful up side is that it apparently makes people feel good. I don't really see much benefit in taking drugs that make you stupid, clumsy, and potentially a danger to others no matter how good they taste or how good they make you feel. If people could be trusted to drink only occasionally and in moderation and only when safe then it would be a harmless non-issue but that's not the reality we live in. Same thing with pot. If people wanted to smoke a joint now and then on their own time to blow off some steam nobody should care. Under those conditions it's dumb but relatively harmless. If someone wants to have a single glass of wine with dinner and doesn't have to drive anywhere who cares? Again dumb but harmless.
Why do you care so much about what other people do to themselves? Is your life so devoid of direction and meaning that you need to spend your time trying to wreck other people's lives?
I'd rather be around "burnouts" than busybody cocksuckers like you.
Pain is pain, and when you can mediate it people live a bit better with it. Unless of course you believe that 'pain' is a 'nonsense medical condition', but I can tell you the medical community doesn't think so based upon how many people are being medicated for it.
There are numerous and demonstrably effective treatments for pain which are perfectly legal. The use of pot "to treat pain" is a really nice way to pretend you have a condition when you don't since it isn't provable with current technology. I have seen no evidence that most if not all pot users would not be equally or better treated with other medicines if they genuinely are experiencing physical pain. Let's be frank. The number of people with medical marijuana cards hugely exceeds the number of people who reasonably could be likely to have genuine medical conditions requiring treatment with pot smoking even under the most generous of assumptions. It's a transparent white lie to get around the legal system. Nothing more.
People want to smoke pot because they like how it makes them feel. They are willing to bend some laws to facilitate this. Let's not pretend that most pot smokers are in any way, shape, or form using the drug to treat real medical conditions. I don't care if they do smoke pot so long as it doesn't harm anyone but don't pretend I'm dumb enough to believe such nonsensical arguments.
FYI, for all you stupid potheads, it's still a Federal crime, Federal law trumps state law. You can still be arrested for felony drug trafficing, and posession. Dispensaries can and will still be shut down by the FBI.
Nothing new for us Alaskans. Been legal for decades... aka statehood ...
I do not respond to trolls (AKA Anonymous Cowards)
And while they're in prison they're exempt from the 13th amendment barring slavery. There are actually more legal slaves in the USA now than there were when slavery was abolished in the 1800s.
The above is utter bullshit.
Unlike YOU, I've done time in prison, and a large percentage of the people in prison are there because they did things which were illegal and they were caught and prosecuted. If you think the people who are incarcerated are a bunch of poor innocent victims who are being exploited you are mistaken. The bad things I refer to range from shootings, stabbings, beatings with a deadly weapon, burglaries, robberies, rapes, and other violent crimes that no one who is a decent member of society would find acceptable. These people belong in prison, and society cannot allow such people to run around loose and continue to perpetrate their crimes.
I'm sure this post will be modded down, but that will be proof of the idiocy of those who modded it down rather than any sort of refutation of what I wrote.
Yeah, it's just that when somebody makes a post like that you have to be certain that you get it right or the cruel gods of irony will punish you. Since I was posting on how you screwed up writing, I read it over for like 5 minutes before hitting submit for fear of being punished by the same cruel gods. I'm honestly somewhat surprised it didn't happen. I was sort of expecting to come back with responses about how I screwed up as well.
Had to break it to the dope-smoking wasters, but marijuana IS NOT LEGAL anywhere in the US, period. It is still a Schedule I narcotic, and a Federal crime to possess it.
One two many? Lol, looks like someone had one too many
... oh wait
Let me smoke another bowel
The above is utter bullshit.
That may well be true but none of the hot air you followed with even remotely backs-up your claim. Parent: 1; You: zilch
I should add, though, that it clearly depends on the individual and the reason(s) why they smoke (and a ton of other factors as well). All of those people I mentioned were highly intelligent but I can't speculate as to whether or not pot use might be a good idea for someone whose brain doesn't function that well to begin with, or for those who've been conditioned to believe that "pot is bad" and "it leads to even more destructive behavior" which is obviously a self-fulfilling prophecy for many...
What straws am I grasping at? I only offer my subjective observation, which is to say that while I don't dispute that a majority of "pot heads" are likely unsuccessful (and perhaps even dysfunctional, although I'd argue that also applies to most people in general), an overwhelming majority of the relatively successful and/or productive people I've known from do consume the stuff and I'm sure there are many others who've observed the same.
I offer no explanations, pr0fessor; that's clearly for "geniuses" like yourself. ;)
Everyone I know who is successful also wear blue jeans at least on occasion but you can't attribute success or lack of success to the wearing of blue jeans or to an argument that blue jeans cause a lack of success. Same with smoking...
You sound like you've been hitting the D.A.R.E. pipe pretty hard.
Brilliant! :)
Freedom to fear. Freedom from thought. Freedom to kill.
I guess the War on Terror really is about freedom!
well when the right wing sells to death the idea that marijuana is a killer, doing anything meaningful while using marijuana is worth mentioning
Now you can stay in California! *grumpily shakes fist* "Stay my lawn you kids!"
You should consider following post prohibition and NOT Colorado's model. Colorado allows for retailers to grow the plant locally. Basically, it is creating localized monopolies that grew relatively small amounts of weed, so to increase sales, they sell to out of state or sell the store to those with drug-lords/gang connections. And yes, Colorado has that.
BUT, if you require a clean separation of wholesaler vs retailer, you avoid the local monopoly of better weed, AND will likely see competition drive down prices quickly. In addition, if you only monitor say 300 wholesalers vs 2000 stores, it is easier and cheaper.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Until all states have legalized it AND are growing their own, it makes little sense to do schedule 1. Once schedule 1 is changed, then anybody can sell their pot to America. China and Drug lords WILL DUMP on America.
And to be fair, the pot that Colorado grows is top notch. So, if they wish to remain that way AND to have lots of future business, they need to allow legalization at state level only, but stop it at the federal level. Can't export out of the state, BUT, neither can it be legally imported.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.