Fuck off, L.A. Times.
One year into legal pot sales California doesn’t have expected bustling industry
131–140 of 170 posts
Re: One year into legal pot sales California doesn’t have expected bustling industry
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
In Washington you have to show ID to prove you’re over 21, but nothing is scanned.
The law doesn't require retailers to scan IDs, but many of them do, in my experience.
Yep, these scans are a forcing function to prevent underage sales, many POS have this feature, maybe even tied to a loyalty program
Re: One year into legal pot sales California doesn’t have expected bustling industry
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
"A lot of the concern is essentially about the precedent it sets. If you start questioning the logic of criminalizing cannabis, what's next on the list?" Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. It's ironic that for so many Americans the idea that people should be allowed to make their own choices would be such a tough sell...
"It's ironic that for so many Americans the idea that people should be allowed to make their own choices would be such a tough sell..." Good point, if you are not allowed to put something into your own body do you really have freedom?
It’s much like reproductive freedom. Someone gets a moral high horse that not everyone shares and decides that your life is not yours to control.
Re: One year into legal pot sales California doesn’t have expected bustling industry
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
tell me about it. I openly smoke marijuana in public places. Why? It's a LOT LESS HARMFUL THAN SECOND HAND TOBACCO. I see uninformed parents scowling at me for blowing marijuana smoke away from them while they are smoking cigarettes infront of their kids. Anyways, if you see a guy smoking weed around Robson square, that's me.
> It's a LOT LESS HARMFUL THAN SECOND HAND TOBACCO. Do you have a source to confirm that? I'd think it would be roughly similar: smoke of burning leaves.
Tobacco causes cancer through Tobacco-specific nitrosamines generated during curing and burning. It’s not simply a matter of burning leaves.
Re: One year into legal pot sales California doesn’t have expected bustling industry
#135Maybe this article overstated things and someone will clear it up in the comments but that was painful to read. I live in Vancouver and weed's been officially legal throughout the Canada for several weeks now. It's still relatively new but nothing noticeable has changed aside from fewer people discussing such a frivilous and previously mishandled issue. It's not perfect but far, far, far better than strict prohibitio…
tell me about it. I openly smoke marijuana in public places. Why? It's a LOT LESS HARMFUL THAN SECOND HAND TOBACCO. I see uninformed parents scowling at me for blowing marijuana smoke away from them while they are smoking cigarettes infront of their kids. Anyways, if you see a guy smoking weed around Robson square, that's me.
What if I don't want any kind of smoke in public places?
I know I'm well into the minority on this one, but I think it's antisocial behavior to smoke anything where the general public will catch so much as a whiff of it and the people who knowingly do it are jerks, but for some reason this is very normalized behavior. I'm not anti-drug though; smoke whatever you want cloistered away from the public.
Re: One year into legal pot sales California doesn’t have expected bustling industry
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm personally fine with local control, and despite the negative tone of this article, it all sounds pretty normal to me. I live in SF, where there are a variety of shops. The ones I walk by all seem clean, orderly, and well run. Certainly more so than some liquor stores I can think of. So I'm happy to have them as neighbors. That said, I understand why other cities would have been more reluctant to license. Not ever…
[IANAL] if my city and all the others around prohibit such stores it is de-facto equivalent to Prohibition in that area while the state level amendment granted that right to all the people in the state, and no local government has the power to exclude it own particular local area from the amendment. The same principle as with for example right to vote with no voting place in N (for sufficiently large N) miles radius.
I went to college in a dry county. You could not purchase take home alcohol in the county, but you could still possess it and drink it there. You just had to drive a little further to get it. It was a limit on convenience only.
Re: One year into legal pot sales California doesn’t have expected bustling industry
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
"It's ironic that for so many Americans the idea that people should be allowed to make their own choices would be such a tough sell..." Good point, if you are not allowed to put something into your own body do you really have freedom?
It’s much like reproductive freedom. Someone gets a moral high horse that not everyone shares and decides that your life is not yours to control.
Once there is a viable life form inside of you, it's no longer just about you controlling your life when you decide to kill it.
Re: One year into legal pot sales California doesn’t have expected bustling industry
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s much like reproductive freedom. Someone gets a moral high horse that not everyone shares and decides that your life is not yours to control.
Once there is a viable life form inside of you, it's no longer just about you controlling your life when you decide to kill it.
Should a bacterial infection have the same rights? It's a perfectly viable life form.
Re: One year into legal pot sales California doesn’t have expected bustling industry
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
Once there is a viable life form inside of you, it's no longer just about you controlling your life when you decide to kill it.
Should a bacterial infection have the same rights? It's a perfectly viable life form.
There is no law against killing bacterial infections living outside of the human body, so it does have the same rights as it does if it lives inside the body.
There are laws against killing human babies when they are living outside of a body. Why should it be so different the day before when they are in a woman's body vs the day after when they are outside?
Re: One year into legal pot sales California doesn’t have expected bustling industry
#140It all comes down to local control of licensing. To even operate a 100% mobile business, you have to be licensed out of a specific city. This involves all the associated cronyism, NIMBYism, and the like which goes along with local politics, and grinds the whole system to a halt. We need to adopt a statewide system like Oregon or there will be no room for smaller distributors left and we will be stuck with monopolized…
>It all comes down to local control of licensing. To even operate a 100% mobile business, you have to be licensed out of a specific city
Why would it take the ability to have a "100% mobile business" to make it a booming market?