NJ marijuana legalization
It seems Nj is very close to possibly legalizing adult use of pot. What do you think about this?
Are you for or against? Would you be o.k with stores in Hackettstown selling weed?
Marvin As long as they're properly run and regulated, yes, I'd be okay with a) it being legal in NJ and b) having a dispensary in town. I don't envy the people having to set it up, though, what with the security expenses they'll incur.
Harker Alcohol & cigarettes destroys many lives each year & it’s for sale 7 days a week, no limit how much you can buy!
What the hell is so scary about a little bit of marijuana?
Weedwacker 
Older Mom On one hand, I’d like to see us wait until we take humans out of the driving equation. “Oh but I drive better high!” No you don’t, and the only way to drive is sober. Legal weed means an increase in impaired motorists. That’s not a good thing.
Yet on the other hand, continuing to destroy peoples’ lives over possessing a plant seems asinine.
Tough call, especially since statistics regarding “Driving While High” could arguably be labeled invalid due to the way the tests are administered.
Guess this keyboard warrior leans more towards legalization by a slight margin.
SiaPWow - older mom and I agree on something. Pretty sure that'll never happen again.
SiaP - great point on the self driving cars.
100% against it. I think it's stupid and we should move to ban cigarettes. If it were possible we should ban alcohol but since practically it's not, we should have severe penalties for drunk drinking - punishments right now are a joke - and modifiers for committing any crime while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. I think 3X on all fines and prison time would get the message across.
That said, we should probably decriminalize simple possession. If you're sitting at home stoned you're not harming much - but you sure aren't contributing to society to your full potential.
I support rescheduling it so it can be studied for medical usage.
For medical usage, it is not currently being held to the same standards as other drugs. If it does have medical usage, like most plants the useful chemicals should be extracted or synthesized and put into forms like every other drug out there. Handing over a bunch of joints because someone says they have back pain is a bad idea.
alpha1beta There's also a number of major problems with legalization:
- Most people do not favor legalization, but often articles say they do because they combine decriminalization and/or medical use with recreational legalization ( https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/12/12/what-voters-really-mean-when-they-say-they-support-marijuana-legalization/?utm_term=.ccbedd23409c)
- Effects on people are unconfirmed scientifically and largely untested, and vary greatly.
- Adults at 21 are still developing and science does agree that it harms development.
- While most agree pot is not chemically addictive, there potential for addictive additives exists, and many users are "addicted" to the feeling(s) - they could quit but they don't want to. (Recent piece by the Atlantic covers this nicely: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2018/08/americas-invisible-pot-addicts/567886/)
- How do you test a person to determine if they're under the influence when a crime is committed? Is a field sobriety test for pot possible? How do you legally handle testing since it stays in your system longer and there doesn't seem to be a reasonable universal limit to say someone is over a legal limit?
- While people can smoke in private houses, how do you handle townhouses or apartments? Giving the landlords control is probably ideal - they could allow smoking in one or more buildings or units, potentially with an upcharge. Landlords who ban it entirely need the legal authority to enforce those rules. Legally, I also think apartment dwellers should be protected from any fees or costs associated with their landlord allowing smoking in their building. If my landlord allowed it and I had neighbors reeking up the place, I'd move - but why should I be out because the law has changed and has adversely affected my living conditions.
- Legalization should also mean letting people out of prison if their crimes would now not be a crime. This would mean dealers stay in prison, but very low level possession and paraphernalia would have a mass exodus from prison. While I don't agree with legalization, in that case the right thing to do would be to expunge those records.
- Sane rules for jobs to prevent even off the job marijuana usage. Certainly jobs like construction should be able to prevent workers from ever being high, but all jobs should be allowed to ask when hiring if they're a user, and deny jobs on that alone - without justification. I want the best person for the job, and if you're frying your brain cells at night - you're not it.
- NJ has a problem with money going into different pockets than it's supposed to. We must make sure that all tax dollars collected do not replace tax dollars required to run the state currently, as usage based taxes like this, or the gas tax are not predictable and lead to budget shortfalls. These tax dollars should go to funding research, the criminal justice system, and to extra projects that benefit all people, such as roads, parks, extra school funding - but we cannot replace the current tax revenue and leave these potentially underfunded!
Legal or not, it's also an expensive habit. I would argue welfare should be withheld from anyone with a alcohol or drug problem - enforced by survey, targeted testing when people seem under the influence, and random testing - but at a rate at which the cost of testing is outweighed by the savings on support. I'm not saying you should be a perfect human being to be on any state assistance, no matter how temporary, but if you have money or time for drugs or alcohol on a regular basis, you should not get assistance.
This Huffpost pieces handle a few myths and risks pretty well: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/04/marijuana-legalization-research_n_1850470.html
One plus in this would be it may help to reduce other crimes, such as illegal immigration, transporting drugs, gun crimes (dealers not needing to protect their turf) and may push people involved in dealing drugs illegally out of their "jobs" increasing tax revenue (on the employer side, not even usage taxes) and contributing to society (barely?). It may also reduce the strain on the criminal justice system and provide for a more fair criminal justice system based on accusations of racial disparity for pot arrests.
Older mom. Your name is fitting. No one calls merijuana dope anymore except old heads
Dope is heroine.
DH I agree the money will prevail. Too many dollars at stake for NJ not to do it.
CraftBeerBob I'm for it. And I've never tried it. But then, I'm for the legalization of drugs, if only to stop wasting millions of taxpayer dollars on the "war" on them (which was lost a long time ago.)
I don't see legalization as the state "condoning" the behavior, as it's not the state's place to tell you what you can and can't do, until it harms someone else, imo.
As to the vehicle issue- driving while impaired covers it. We already can't drive while intoxicated, we can't drive with a cell phone that does not have hands-free operation, frankly I'm shocked eating while driving hasn't had a law passed to prohibit it..... I have seen/read several articles over the years comparing "driving while stoned" to "driving while drunk" and "driving while TIRED." And in every article driving while TIRED was every bit as dangerous as the other two. But there's no law against that either.
But sure, tax it like everything else... it won't help, it won't help pay for Murphy's (or anyone else's) insane agenda because with more money flowing in, the agenda will just grow to meet it. Taxing pot (and ANY new taxes of any kind for that matter) NEVER actually help balance the budget; the budget just continues growing in response.
All that to say, much ado about nothing. It would be nice to have fewer people doing time for pot, and more people not being let loose for violent crimes because "there's no room at the inn." And it would also be nice for people to have access to a medicinal weed without having to go to the doctor for an rX for it.
Next up:
If pot is legalized, will you need a "pot ID card" to purchase it, and if you have an "pot ID card", how will that affect your other rights, such as firearms ownership? Will a pot ID card invalidate your NJ FID? With people like Murphy running the show, it wouldn't surprise me....
JeffersonRepub Absolutely! The revenue would be great for the state, all those little weed stocks, that we paid a dime for, will go to ten bucks a share, and the jails can make room for real criminals. I don’t drink. I don’t judge others for their choice of self medicating, as long as innocent lives are protected. Weed should have similar laws to alcohol, regarding driving, minors and public annoyance.
Now...anyone know the next “Amazon” of weed stocks? Canadian weed stocks are already crazy high (no pun intended), since they legalized weed.
Guilty-Remnant What makes people think that pot heads will buy legal weed?..they will probably keep their current tax free supplier
I think at this point we can look to other states to see the pro's n con's as well as the best-in-class processes to handle the surrounds needed.
When WA legalized I believe they under-planned many of the surround aspects including how to get the tax money from suppliers. Not a big problem except the volume made it a big problem....
When Amsterdam become the stoner world capital, residents complained because the Germans flooded in every weekend double-parking, adding congestion, basically overcrowding the area. Police responded...…..but everyone was happily not breaking any laws, very peaceable overcrowding.....
Point is there are many surround problems but I would gather most have been addressed by this time in WA, CO and other places.
I am pro legalization, keeping it illegal has many downsides and no upside of stopping the flow. Medicinal use is fine, those against it should be against so many other organic health supplements as well which seems silly.
Heck, HL web site is already taking the advertising dollars for supporting pot related businesses. Look at the surround ads as you read this......
I would like to see the tax dedicated to a purpose, at least for a timed interval to be re-assessed in the future. Personally, I say ---- pay down a debt ----- either bonds, pensions or both. But do not put it in the General Fund to be squandered on new programs --- please no.
Therefore, I vote NO because no only does Murphy and company just want to put the tax revenues in the General Fund, they have already incorporated a yuge increase in medicinal revenues and Murphy went ape-crap crazy that they didn't include recreational taxes before the law was even passed. If you support legalization, please write your representatives and tell them to earmark all or most of the tax to pay down some debt.
Some CO experience: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2016/04/21/what-the-world-can-learn-from-colorados-marijuana-experience/#1b5abefb5b94
strangerdanger Legalize it, tax it, put rules and stipulations on it, and keep the small criminals that sell weed out of our jail system. We put ourselves into more debt keeping these people in our jails. Not to mention - it might help relax everyone since we always bite off more then we can chew.
It's going to happen if not here first then NY. Too much money to be made and a changing attitude towards it. For those worried about people driving high, guess what? They already do. Just like drunks, those that are irresponsible won't change because they're irresponsible.
Just look at the stock market and the marijuana companies that have flourished. I for one bought tons of stock in a particular company back when it was $6. Now it's $40. I'm sitting so pretty it isn't funny. Canada has legalized marijuana this year as a free nation. Billion and billions in revenue. And the US tax man can't touch it. That's the best part. The US has actually screwed itself out of being the for-runner. Keeping it schedule 1 also shows the ignorance of our government. That is of course if Big Pharma hasn't reached deep into the crotch of their constituents.
So legal or not it's out there being used every day by millions of people. Don't you think our boys in blue have better things to do. Now mind you one soft arrest will be filled by another, because that's how they do.
Funny too how most opposed wash their problems and worries away over a beer or glass of wine. Hypocrisy is what the US is all about.. Let freedom ring.
Don Bug3 I'm pretty sure people who choose to use cannabis don't want to called "pot heads" no more than you'd like to be called a "drunk" just because you enjoyed craft beer. What makes users of alcohol free from similar criticism? Because it's legal? Alcohol has no health issues? What do we do with all the crazy drunks on the road? What about all the drinking that breaks up family and leads to wife beatings and child beatings? How do we tolerate this GATEWAY DRUG?? Hypocrite.
Alcohol has caused more deaths than marijuana. Fact. Just because you old people have some sort of stigma against weed doesn't mean it's deadly...people brainwashed still from that movie Reefer Madness
Getagrip 
MB To the one upthread that said construction workers should be tested to never be high - I have yet to meet a sober iron worker.
Everyone get off your high horses. Pot should have never been illegal. It's an hour long buzz, if that.
RonJohn I'm for the legalization and the decriminalization of marijuana. It was never my thing but I believe there are more benefits to the legalization of it than negatives. Marijuana has many proven medicinal benefits. Alcohol has absolutely none. Nicotine has absolutely none. Any yet they are legal. Every prescription I've ever taken home comes with a lengthy list of side effects that do not appeal to me and some are life altering. With the legalization of Marijuana comes the dispensaries that can offer different types of product to appeal to what someone may be looking for including product without the thc and just the cbd (the good, real cbd that is regulated). So maybe you want to just get high or you want to relax or you need something for anxiety. You can smoke it, vape it or eat it. I would rather use marijuana rather than a pharmaceutical if I had that option.
I certainly hope that Hackettstown isn't one of those silly towns who is going to ban it. That would be sad waste of guaranteed revenue.
Walking Girl The citizens of a town that were adamantly against a brand new CVS pharmacy taking the place of a literal abandoned factory are most certainly going to have an issue with a dispensary.
Reasonable I think when people smell the green the attitudes will change. Most dispensarys I've seen look amazing clean and modern. Kind of like the tattoo place on Main St. arguably has one of the nicest store fronts. It just goes to show how well the Nancy Reagan "don't say no" campaign worked. People are afraid because of all the lies told. People who have tried it realize those lies. They also realize it's not as bad as alcohol. You can thank Nixon. Another fear mongering, egotistical and paranoid president of the united states.
The town will be discussing this matter at the September 13th council meeting. 7pm Municipal building.
Jim L One of the issues has been that banks are protected by the Federal government and dispensary owners have no place to take their cash, even if it's legal in the state. Seems like they need a very good safe!
hktownie JeffersonRepub.. there is a tired driving law...
Maggie's Law states that a sleep-deprived driver qualifies as a reckless driver who can be convicted of vehicular homicide. It's named in honor of a 20-year-old college student, Maggie McDonnell, who was killed when a driver -- who admitted he hadn't slept for 30 hours and had been using drugs -- crossed three lanes of traffic and struck her car head-on in 1997.
When the case went to trial, the jury was deadlocked. In a second trial, the defense argued that because there was no law against falling asleep at the wheel in New Jersey, the driver did nothing wrong. The judge accepted this argument, and the driver received only a suspended jail sentence and a $200 fine.
That decision prompted Maggie's mother, Carole McDonnell, to lobby for a law to punish drowsy drivers in New Jersey. Maggie's Law defines fatigue as being without sleep for more than 24 consecutive hours and makes driving while fatigued a criminal offense.
" Maggie's Law defines fatigue as being without sleep for more than 24 consecutive hours and makes driving while fatigued a criminal offense."
That's a stupid definition that will be difficult to prove in court. I would define fatigue as being tired enough to fall asleep at the wheel.
ianimal This will bring back the Volkswagen bus x10 if you know what i mean. I don't care what happens, but I've got plenty of high school buddies 15 years later still smoking and it sure does seem like they've burnt up brain cells from it.
Forcefed4door I see no earmarking for the 25% tax Murphy wants to put on top of the sales tax that will be there too. We know where the sales tax will go, and it will be a booming number.
But what of the "sin-tax," where is that ear-marked to go. This is going to be a tax gift, money-from-smoke, a blue bird, and to put it in the general fund is just plain wrong, and stupid.
If Murphy and company don't earmark the lion's share to either our debt, the pension debt or both, it is a sin.
Honestly, write your representatives and tell them to ear mark, at least for a proscribed period of time before legislative review, to the debt or pension debt. We should not waste a taxation blue bird on existing or expanding programs, we should cover our HUGE IOUs.
htownguy Don....that stock you were talking about....was it called Canopy? I’m kicking myself over that one. MJNA is still a dime...up from .04 , when I bought it. 60% upswing isn’t bad, though. It equates to only a few bucks. Now if I put 100k into that one, I would have hit the jackpot. Like they say “money goes to money”, and unless one has lots of it, (I don’t fall in that category) can’t really make money without lots of dumb luck. I used old fashion fundamentals to pick my stocks and a lot of them tanked, yet some of the very overpriced tech stocks are still zooming. Every time I say “too late, already too high...it beats that! It’s a lot like picking the winning slot machine. Fundamentals don’t seem to matter, anymore. Everyone is too stoned. When’s my turn? LOL
If pot is legalized in NJ, people need to make smart choices. Some employers do random testing, and will fire a user, legally used or not.
maja2 Maja...I was wondering about that, also. I’m thinking if a company’s headquarters are based in a weed friendly state, maybe they let them slide? Since Federal overrides state laws, they can still shut down this entire progression. The drug test is expensive and I think a lot of companies don’t test as much anymore, unless they’re looking for a reason for firing a person or it’s a dangerous job. Not sure. When I was hired in the 90s, everyone had to submit to a drug test. I passed “with flying colors” :)
".I was wondering about that, also. I’m thinking if a company’s headquarters are based in a weed friendly state, maybe they let them slide? "
It'll be interesting.... if you show up DRUNK for work, repeatedly, you get fired. But they don't test for blood alcohol levels. With pot, I imagine it'll be the same thing even if it's legal: you could probably show up with it in your blood, but if you start showing up BAKED (wake-and-bake), that's going to get you fired just like showing up drunk would. there is no legal recourse.
Yes the stock is Canopy Grown (CGC), there is also Tilray both based out of Canada (a free country). Constellation Brands distributor of Corona and other lethal alcoholic beverages put $4.2 billion into the company.
And in case anyone missed it, they just announced that there is NO safe amount of alcohol to consume. NO SAFE AMOJNT. I imagine this thread will now be consumed with a resounding amount of cries to make alcohol illegal. So I'll sit back and wait for those hypocrites to chime in.
So once again tell me how stoner's get on? Just laying around watchin TV and playing XBOX. Yeah I do those things when i'm not earning a six figure income and making money and taking care of my family.
Keep watching Fox news on the daily bungles of an orange clown game show host while sipping your Merlot.
That makes sense. Anything that interferes with job duties needs to be corrected. If I was the boss, I wouldn’t approve of “wake and bake” (that made me chuckle), employees. What they do on their own time is up to them, as long as the integrity and credibility of the company are not affected. The social media addicted employees need to be careful with photos and the internet. They think it’s funny showing themselves in pot photos ....until they lose their job. Yes...this is going to be an interesting undertaking.
There is no undertaking. Just replace the word "pot" with "alcohol". Do you worry now how many people wake up and take a drink to "get right"? Do you care how many men go home have a drink then "tune up" their spouses? Nobody seems to worry about how many alcoholics are in the workplace. In fact as long as you show up (not drunk) and do your job nobody cares what you go home and do. So much so that no employer will give a test to determine whether an employee is a drinker. Why because alcohol is legal. Hypocrisy at it's best.
If you test for weed you should test for alcohol, after all there is NO SAFE AMOUNT of alcohol this cancer causing beverage. So again where is the rally to abolish alcohol?
Hey Don, where you been?
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/leisure/drinks/a18566645/90-plus-alcohol-health-study/
http://time.com/5166514/moderate-drinking-live-longer-study/
https://www.newsweek.com/drinking-alcohol-tied-long-life-new-study-813013
One can state the same about cannabis use- it also increases the risk of cancer just as alcohol increases the risk of cancer. There are scores and scores of studies on this.
The fact is 1 in 2 American men will deal with cancer in their lifetime and 1 in three American women will also deal with cancer. Trying to limit certain risk factors may be important but clearly makes no truly quantifiable difference in who may or may not be afflicted with the greatest killer of man in history.
As an aside, I'm all for the legalization of cannabis. It is ridiculous for it not to be.
Greg https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alcohol-and-health-no-safe-level-of-drinking-major-new-study-concludes/
Today's news Jefferson not February's news. Obviously a drinker. Blackouts can sometimes occur and the user often forgets large amounts of time or events that occurred during said blackout.
Again, I say legalize. But it seems we will just spend the tax on current and new programs rather that ear marking it to paying down existing IOUs. If we treat this tax blue bird as just some more money rather than putting our finances in better order, that's what should be made criminal.
Write your representatives, tell them to ear mark the lion's share of these NEW tax receipts to the debt and the pension debt. Don't squander a blue bird.
"Today's news Jefferson not February's news"
LOL wait a couple of months, it'll change again. It always does.
"Obviously a drinker. Blackouts can sometimes occur and the user often forgets large amounts of time or events that occurred during said blackout."
ROFL now you're trying to be insulting? You need more practice.
I'd be real curious to do a survey of support vs users on HL. I know y'all didn't like google forms even if it was 100% anonymous, so If I find a better option, would you all want to see aggregated data of support/userage and maybe even layered on with political affiliations and some demographic data like age range?
It's literally a plant that grows out of the dirt. And unlike tobacco, it can grow everywhere since it doent have high nutrient requirements. Why is it even illegal at all? It's like making tomatoes illegal. Wtf?
Common Sense That would be interesting alphabeta.
If it were possible to have data from just Hackettstown residents, that would be important for the council to review prior to taking action, if any, related to having a dispensary here in town. I'm not sure what local information (if any) a decision like that would be based on currently. It's not feasible to have all the residents present at a council meeting(s) to voice opinions as there are 9,500 registered residents in town. I would gather an accurate poll or petition would be a start. There does not seem to be a town ordinance that directly addresses a dispensary at the moment hence the upcoming discussion in September.
With that said for the purposes of a cursory survey of HL readers it would be fun to learn the results.
The issue is the law has changed drafts so many times. When it was first drafted can buy in a store but not smoke it in store/streets. Newer drafts came out that there can be lounges where you can smoke it in the stores. Towns need to opt out prior to the law being passed or you are automatically opted in for 5years. But towns are still not clear what final draft will look like and if you wait to see what they actually pass you don't have the choice once it's passed to decided if you want to follow it or not.
It's also still Federally illegal so businesses have a uphill battle to get bank loans or open bank accounts with FDIC insured banks. Handling money from drug proceed is still considered money laundering under federal law. Credit card companies have to follow federal laws too so pot businesses most likely won't be able to accept credit card as payment for purchases.. I don't see local or even national banks lining up to finance or open accounts for these types of businesses.
So towns are unaware of how the final law will look like and what exactly the financial benefit, impact will be. Not to mention the federal aspect. So many question marks at this point. In theory it makes sense, its the execution that will be hairy
I have been following the drafts here in NJ as well Jim. It as many bills do has changed a bit and seems impossible to know what will finally become law. I would think if NJ mirrored a law from one the other states where it has passed, it could give local governments the information needed to make a decision based on facts. However that is an unknown. To that end, I find it a bit like putting the cart before the horse when towns decide to ban such a business prior to the final draft of the law being released-not withstanding the mandatory opt in portion. If that criteria is part of the draft bill then who knows if that will actually stay in the final draft as well. Of course if a town's governing body has made up their mind regardless of what the law would be then the various changes become moot.
It's a tough decision for sure.
It should be legal to grow on your own and consume on your own, it's a personal choice and ought to be respected
You don't have to agree with other's decisions about their lives and how they live them but we do need to respect individual differences in others, allow them to live and let live.
Go in peace
GreyHawk I have no dog in this fight, couldnt care the slightest bit either way, but people blatantly disregard basic common sense to defend their side...to the point of absurdity.
"Its just a plant" is not a valid argument. Most plants dont contain components that will get you high.
"Just an hour long buzz" Ronjohn, you are obviously the kid buying weed mixed with oregano if that's all you think it is.
"Alcohol this and that"...one major difference is people can and do drink alcohol without becoming impaired. I can certainly go out for 2 hours, drink 2 beers and drive safely and legally. I cannot do the same if I go out and smoke a joint or 2.
Like I said, I care none at all about this issue...but please stop using arguments that insult very base level common sense. My personal point of view is simply that smoking pot has never made anyone brighter, that's for sure.
Localchef Why would you compare two beers to two joints? Talk about absurdity. A joint is equivalent to a case of beer, more or less, in that it can get 4-6 people intoxicated.
No absurdity there...the point is, there's no real way to quantify limits on smoking weed. Some people get absolutely wrecked off a weak hit...trying to quantify 1 joint as a case of beer is just silly.
Lol. My wife gets wrecked off half a glass of wine. What's your point? It's obvious you have no idea what you're talking about.
Marijuana for all! If we gave out weed like we give out benzos, adderal, ritalin, norcos, ETC. then the world would be a much better place!! Can't wait until my children live in a society where this RIDICULOUS prohibition is over. Only thing I'm worried about? Marijuana companies getting big. Big Pharma = CANCER! Big Tobacco = CANCER! Big Weed?? We'll see.............. wait till they start spraying the marijuana crops with glyophosphate --- then we're all doomed. IN CONCLUSION - anyone who opposes marijuana legalization is DULL. The same people who say marijuana should be illegal are the same ones feeding their 12 year old kid ritalin (legal meth) a NARCOTIC!
Mantis Tobaggan MD "most plants don't contain components that will get you high"
-localchef
First, why is being high in itself bad? Is being drunk bad? Is being doped up on 'scripts bad? This argument is flawed from the outset.
Second: several foods we eat contain chemicals that react with the brain (sugar comes to mind) and several others are flat out poisonous when prepared improperly.
This is ignorance wrapped in fear and lack of experience. You have absolutely no argument against legalization besides "its illegal now" which is a prime example of circular logic.
I actually appreciate GreyGawk's stance (on this; he's a bit radical on other issues, no offense). Just butt out of someone else's business if you're not involved or affected.
It should be legalized , but I don't get the idiotic pols who want it only to used in something called consumption lounges . Wouldn't that encourage driving stoned to allegedly protect children living in projects where people are already using drugs much worse than pot ? If you can't mellow out in the privacy of your own home why bother ?
https://www.nj.com/marijuana/2018/06/controversial_new_nj_weed_bill_more_than_200_dispe.html
97XBAM My overall take on it is..the government should not have any interference concerning any type of substance that people choose. Whether it's harmful or not.
People have a right a choice to live a healthy life or not such a healthy life.
Big brother needs to step away. Enough already.
positive As a veteran and diagnosed PTSD sufferer, among a variety of other injuries from my service, and I can tell you and show you plenty of proper research done into its effects on patients with symptoms like mine, and the results are very positive. Instead of shoving a dozen pills down my throat, putting a couple drops of oil under my tongue a few times a day is all I need. Legalizing weed is a must, especially to counteract the opiate epidemic across the United States. Not to mention trying to get access here to the medicine I need is currently impossible, so I am resigned to not sleep a wink.
That being said, there are laws against driving high to all those concerned about it, same with alcohol or any other mind-altering substance. If you are so concerned with this issue, I HIGHLY recommend you go to the legislature write to the governor or go to a open forum and demand that state laws, along with legalization, be made much more stringent on the issue of someone driving under the influence of Marijuana, or simply ask them to make the laws more stringent across the board for all substances.
Lastly, to those who talked about the idea that we don't know the long term / health risks associated with Marijuana. They recently did a long term study on changes in brain chemistry for habitual and occasional cannabis smokers, and occasional and habitual drinkers. In both cases over time with the drinkers there was visible changes and degradation in brain chemistry, while amongst the Marijuana smokers they found none. I can also link any number of long term studies on the effects of alcohol vs Marijuana, not to mention the article that just came out saying just 2 drinks a day raises your risk of an early death by 7 percent.
TLDR: Cannabis is 100% better than most of the pharmaceutical drugs we have out there for treating any number of maladies, it should be legal, it should be regulated, and laws need to be strict enough to prevent the valid concerns of people on the forum.
SoldierOfZion " . . . . wait till they start spraying the marijuana crops with glyophosphate --- then we're all doomed. . . . "
agreed, which is why it should be legal to grow at home on your own,
Solder...great post. Greyhawk and Mantis....I didn’t even think about pesticide usage. Yuck!
Humans have cannabis receptors in our brains, spine and intestines. Designed by God, evolution or whatever one believes in. Point is, they exist. Just like eucalyptus trees just happen to be where koala bears live. Similar principle. Let’s embrace Mother Nature. It’s 2018, for crying out loud! We’ve used hemp for thousands of years....for all kinds of things. It’s a weed...literally, yet functional on many different levels. I believe NORML (National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws), a
Non-profit organization, is still around, in case anyone wants to read up on the subject.
A couple laughs:
Q: What is the difference between a drunk and a stoner at a stop sign?
A: The drunk guy runs it and the stoner waits for it to turn green!
Q: What do you call a potato that smokes weed?
A: A baked potato.
Q: Why is the roach clip called a roach clip?
A: Because pot holder was taken.
Why would someone spray their marijuana crops with herbicide? I can see the DEA doing it, but they typically prefer the slash and burn method.
NJ is working on making it legal but nly from state approved growing facilities, I think average everyday citizens ought to be able to grow it at home on their own for their own personal use, just we can brew beer, make a small amount of our own wine, whiskey, etc.
I prefer stash and burn....
Bug issues for pot plants? That's like saying "save the dandelions!"
SOZ -- ty for your service, sorry about the lingering remains. I think most of the issues noted, re: driving, cash sales, etc. have probably been addressed adequately by the 9 legal states, 13 decriminalized states, and 31 medically legal states.
Chances are NJ will not be crossing new chasms there.
Our 25% proposed tax is middle of the road: https://taxfoundation.org/state-marijuana-taxes-2018/
It's hard to find out whether states have earmarked these funds: appears CO for example targets much of the tax to schools. Cool.
In OR, state school fund gets 40 percent, mental health, alcoholism and drug services get 20 percent, Oregon State Police get 15 percent, and the Oregon Health Authority gets 5 percent. They have a formula.
Hopefully NJ will earmark as well but NOT at the cost of normal General Funding OR in replacement of current General Fund formulas. And hopefully ---- the freaking Bond Debt and Pension Debt will be NUMERO UNO in the formula.
We are talking the better part of $1B a year in an approximate $38B budget although since our brilliant law makers have made the blue bird budget reality BEFORE it has passed legality, the concept of earmarking may already be a lost cause.
Again ---- just google your rep, the email will be on their site and tell them "ear mark most of this tax blue bird, for a timed interval before mandatory review, to paying done the NJ bond debt and pension debt BEFORE you spend it on existing or new programs." Feel fee to cut, edit, and paste. Start with the GOV.
There will still be plenty of opportunity for illegal dealers if pot is legalized. The government can't dot things right. Canada government warehouses are low on stock.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46200873
The medical component of marijuana is available in pill form and can be prescribed by a doctor, for what ails you. Seems to be much less of a problem than dispensaries selling bags of buds for recreational use. Besides, I already feel I take my life in my hands when I drive on roads with drivers distracted by cell phones. Now the fear is driving beside drivers feeling a bit 'too good' while they are on their phones. Honestly, I can't drive to the Gap without someone sliding into my lane because they are on their phones. BUT having said all that...Gov, Murphy's entire budget is based on the money he sees coming into the state coffers. As a former resident of PA, money was the allure for the fracking boom. Beautiful vistas are now dotted with massive well platforms or pipeline rightaways. Money always corrupts.
USAfirst One of Murphy's promises was to legalize pot his first year in office.
I just heard on NJ12 that "a vote on the legalization of marijuana is not expected through 2019"
Guess that makes Murphy a LIAR, right SD?
Did he really promise to do it by year's end.
Got source?
Got reliable source"?
Did you check it twice?
All I know is I bought my pot stock and it's been going higher, heh heh.....
Let us know when you have the facts.
BC It's going to be a bumpy start, but overall this is a good thing. Marijuana is so stigmatized. Weed just becomes like alcohol. So no smoking and driving and you have to be a certain age to buy it. Let be honest everyone is doing it.. Well not everyone, but so many people, and they break the law to do it... For what? Something that is better than beer? The number of drunk drivers in out state is crazy...
Also this opens up more taxation, more small businesses. More employment and it will decriminalize it which will lower incarceration rates.
From the birth of this country until the 1930s people were smoking it.
Ser positivo I researched CO legalizing recreational pot, and it's a mixed bag. I read articles from both sides, and there's good AND BAD that comes with it. It's going to be one of those things that we won't know how it will really affect NJ until we know, and that'll take years. And at that point, it'll be so normalized it won't be able to be repealed IF that is something that seems necessary.
it's a mixed bag. My only real problem with it is, there should be no other constitutional restrictions involved. Meaning, if you use recreational (or medical) pot, it should not invalidate your 2nd amendment rights. Other than that, I'm libertarian on the issue.
I’m all for it! It will definitely lower my spending on liquor. These are stressful times LOL
Friendly Mc face Ironic that they took the one item that was always available curbside sold by people who desired to be contactless and move it indoors, with id checks and closer contact. Ironic.
legalization in NJ means we can look at life from both sides now...question is, do we need them both, and by how much?
zentravl The private market will continue to exist. Taxes and regulation will make sure of it.
Masks Fortheugly 
For reals JR - on the medical marijuana program as it currently stands, patients cannot purchase firearms. I had to choose between my health and my desire to own a gun in the future. Hopefully this will change down the road.
SD - I know you’re making a joke but the medical dispensaries switched to curbside pick up (still have extensive ID checks) back in March because so many patients are immunocompromised.
Kat It would be a great business to get into if it weren’t the Inconvenient reality that pot is still federally illegal. Not saying it would happen but the feds could shut down your business and you’d be SOL.
Not only the Fed’s make it hard. Banks make it hard to do biz with them if the money comes from weed.
Roywhite 
freedom25 Federal level only affects federal courts...states can still make it illegal at the state level
If it is going to be decriminalized on a federal level than the DEA must change it drug category and class right now it is a controlled substance Class 1. meaning it has no medical benefit and highly additive.
Just found out that “ As such, being a medical or recreational marijuana user disqualifies you from buying, having, or owning a gun or ammunition. You are part of a prohibited class by law. Overall, when it comes to prohibiting medical marijuana users from owning guns, New Jersey follows federal law on that issue.”
At least, I can still buy 200 proof alcohol. Why? I don’t get it. Booze is safer than weed, around guns? From my life experiences, booze made people more angry. Pot, more peaceful. Just a generalization. I know there’s always variables that can change a situation.
Just pay cash for it or get someone else to buy it for you that doesn't care to own a firearm . I don't see how they can keep track of every single customer . The state wants the tax revenue, but wants to tell people they can't own a gun to go hunting anymore if they buy recreational pot ? Sound like a law that can't be enforced or more likely is just flat out ignored .
The dispensary scans the buyer’s drivers license for every order, as there’s a limit, medical or recreational. Hopefully, you’re right, BAM, about NJ wanting the revenue more than the expenses of locking me up. But…we all know how government likes to waste money, also. Hmmm…decisions, decisions, decisions.
You all realize you can legally buy delta 9 THC edibles anywhere, doesn't need to be bought at dispensaries. There's a legal limit in terms of %THC per edible (gummy, etc), but it's stupid because you can eat 2 or 3 of them. I believe this is how the government is slowly making it legal to sell anywhere.
Guilty-Remnant,
I believe the law you state is from 1968. Back then, Marijuana was classified as a different grade of drug, a different class of controlled dangerous substance. It was illegal in all 50 states. Now that it is legal in a several states, that law is nearly impossible to enforce. As literally millions of responsible firearm owners likely have purchased and used a marijuana product legally here in the US. It's one of those soon to be changed or deemed unenforceable laws. It would require a tremendous amount of money and resources to keep track of, let alone enforce.
In addition, firearm owners are restricted from 'using' marijuana, not 'purchasing' it legally. It is legal to purchase and/or give legal marijuana products to others above the age of 21. Just because you enter a dispensary, doesn't mean you're a user or even purchased anything for your own use. This is another reason the out dated law is unenforceable. They'd literally need to prove recent usage through a test etc. All types of roadblocks to obtain the permission for this too.
Furthermore, I'm told that NJ dispensaries scan drivers licenses to validate the license is real and that you're of age. In addition, they scan for their 'internal' daily count as per the legal limit one person can buy within 24 hours. They don't scan to report that you gained entry, nor to report any specific products purchased to a government agency.
Over the last 6 months it's possible that literally hundreds of thousands of people have entered a single dispensary alone in NJ. I'm confident a decent percentage of these people legally own a firearm and were just unaware of the outdated law. Not hearing about any doors being kicked down over this.
It's a dated law. Likely not being enforced because even the government recognizes the challenges in doing so. Unless you're applying for an initial firearms card and have a medical use card, I wouldn't worry about it.
I'm not a user, but I'd be more worried about someone that drinks a 5th of vodka daily than a cancer patient, or 60 year old poet smoking marijuana.
Is it true that the old Wells Fargo bank across from Mars will be an official dispensary?
D-ManPV Very eye-opening, RubyRed. I was thinking about reliving some good college times and partaking but I think I’ll pass.
Leave a Reply
To comment on this topic, fill out the form below. If you would like to comment directly to one person, you may click on the envelope next to the posters name if they provided their email.