Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana, do you wanna?)

Please limit discussion in this area to local and state politics.

How are you voting?

Yes
11
79%
No
3
21%
 
Total votes: 14

snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 15264
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 10:42 pm

Re: Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana)

Postby snoqueen » Wed Oct 17, 2018 6:29 pm

I voted yes because the more we waste resources on the unenforceable and widely disregarded prohibition on marijuana, the more resources we have for more worthwhile expenditures. In addition, if we as a state can make a little money with a reasonable tax on marijuana and its products, what's the harm?

I agree the beer distribution system is ridiculous, and the tavern league helps nobody but the tavern league. It's not like any of this is new. We can deal with the problems raised by marijuana legalization too, though nobody will love the regulatory arrangements we come up with. That's a foregone conclusion.

A law nobody respects does harm to the whole system of laws, which basically rely upon the general public accepting and respecting them to some degree. The more really dumb laws we pass, the more people quietly agree it's fine to cheat the system as a whole. This is not a trend in the right direction.

As far as smoky stink goes -- would places that forbid indoors tobacco smoking forbid indoors pot smoking? (Probably yes.) Would places that forbid vaping include vaping marijuana products? (Probably yes.) I think this is a non issue, given that we're already used to smoking and nonsmoking locations. If there are places you won't go because of the smoke or the oily vape stink, you probably won't change your behavior a lot once marijuana is legalized. And if people want to use candy or foods with THC before some event so they can go while high, what's the difference to the rest of us?

gargantua
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 11035
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2002 1:30 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana)

Postby gargantua » Wed Oct 17, 2018 10:16 pm

snoqueen wrote: And if people want to use candy or foods with THC before some event so they can go while high, what's the difference to the rest of us?

This goes to one of Donald's points that I agreed with. It is possible to get too high to drive, and it's not always possible to know when that might happen. Of course, this can happen whether it's legal or not. And if it's legal, you have a better chance of knowing what you're getting in terms of potency. But there are never any guarantees when one ingests any mind-altering substance.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 27814
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana, do you wanna?)

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Oct 18, 2018 7:18 am

It isn't just Dane County voting on the legalization of pot.

A total of 16 counties -- including Dane, Rock, Marquette and Sauk -- and two cities -- Waukesha and Racine -- will ask about the issue in November.

nonyuppie
Forum Addict
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 9:09 am

Re: Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana, do you wanna?)

Postby nonyuppie » Thu Oct 18, 2018 9:09 am

I expect to vote yes for many of the good reasons mentioned in this thread and because I am a fairly regular user of small amounts of marijuana. I am curious about what problems people have with current alcohol regulations. I'm not saying I disagree. Just curious.

People shouldn't be allowed to drive stoned. Deregulation would have come sooner if there was an easy test for THC like there is for alcohol.

gargantua
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 11035
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2002 1:30 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana, do you wanna?)

Postby gargantua » Thu Oct 18, 2018 10:21 am

nonyuppie wrote:I expect to vote yes for many of the good reasons mentioned in this thread and because I am a fairly regular user of small amounts of marijuana. I am curious about what problems people have with current alcohol regulations. I'm not saying I disagree. Just curious.

People shouldn't be allowed to drive stoned. Deregulation would have come sooner if there was an easy test for THC like there is for alcohol.

For me, it's a tangle of related issues. By law, the sale and distribution of most alcohol is required to go through a 3 tiered system. One tier is the producer: a brewery, winery or distillery. Other than onsite, they don't get to sell directly to end consumers. They must instead sell to a distributor, such as General Beverage or Specialty Beverage. That's your second tier. The third tier is the retail outlets...liquor stores.
All 3 tiers need to make a profit, which adds costs. The suppliers are at the mercy of distributors, who have a lot of sway over product placement. All three tiers have lobbying groups, who fight over their pieces of the pie at each and every legislative session. And they band together to oppose taxes on alcohol, and stricter drunken driving rules.
If I were starting from scratch, as a consumer, I wouldn't build a system like that.

penquin
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3060
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:19 pm
Contact:

Re: Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana, do you wanna?)

Postby penquin » Thu Oct 18, 2018 12:32 pm

While it is true that the 3-tiered system used for booze in our state is a bad way of doing things, it would still be a massive improvement over the way marijuana is currently distributed. People can get shot by the cops for having pot; robbed by a someone while trying to buy pot; put in jail or prison for having pot; possibly die from smoking synthetic pot; and face a federal death penalty if they grow too much pot. Unfortunately, too many people (in both Major political parties) beleive that marijuana is extremely dangerous and addictive...more-so than cocaine even...and thus they support the current laws which harshly punishes those who smoke, sell, and/or grow this all-natural herb.

Regarding "driving while stoned" - a saliva test can determine if marijuana was used in the past 3-6 hours, which I beleive is a reasonable amount of time to stop smoking before driving. That said, various studies and collected data seems to show that driving after toking isn't nearly as dangerous as many people beleive it is - unfortunately the "reefer madness" mentality is still very prevalent in our country and it's hard for most folks to shake their long-held misconceptions and bigotry.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 27814
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana, do you wanna?)

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Oct 18, 2018 12:53 pm

Canada uses the saliva test.

Some states (for booze) control purchases through state owned ABC (Alcohol Control Boards) stores. They are set up something like a post office station, where you order over a counter and they pull your purchase from back shelves.

nonyuppie
Forum Addict
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 9:09 am

Re: Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana, do you wanna?)

Postby nonyuppie » Fri Oct 19, 2018 10:11 am

penquin wrote:a saliva test can determine if marijuana was used in the past 3-6 hours

That must be a fairly recent development.

penquin
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3060
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:19 pm
Contact:

Re: Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana, do you wanna?)

Postby penquin » Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:42 am

nonyuppie wrote:That must be a fairly recent development.


Wiki says it was in widespread use since at least 2009, and I can recall preaching/speaking about it in the mid-late 90's.

I beleive urine testing is still popular because of those who are more focused on controlling lifestyle rather than concerned about impairment...but there probably is a cost-factor involved as well.

nonyuppie
Forum Addict
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 9:09 am

Re: Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana, do you wanna?)

Postby nonyuppie » Thu Oct 25, 2018 7:50 pm

penquin wrote:
nonyuppie wrote:That must be a fairly recent development.


Wiki says it was in widespread use since at least 2009, and I can recall preaching/speaking about it in the mid-late 90's.

I beleive urine testing is still popular because of those who are more focused on controlling lifestyle rather than concerned about impairment...but there probably is a cost-factor involved as well.

By the standards of an old guy like me 20 years ago is fairly recently.

There is no cannabis test that is as easy as the breathalyzer test that they can do for alcohol. As far as I know saliva tests have to be sent to a lab for analysis. Maybe they could do an Elisa test on site but they have a 5% false positive rate under the best of circumstances and a cop doing the analysis along the side of the road would probably not be the best of circumstances.

Cadfael
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3626
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 11:46 am

Re: Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana, do you wanna?)

Postby Cadfael » Thu Oct 25, 2018 8:03 pm

nonyuppie wrote:As far as I know saliva tests have to be sent to a lab for analysis. Maybe they could do an Elisa test on site but they have a 5% false positive rate under the best of circumstances and a cop doing the analysis along the side of the road would probably not be the best of circumstances.

Is this an Elisa test?
Type : Saliva test
Manufacturer : NarcoCheck®
Results in : 10-12 minutes
Time of detection : 4 to 6 hours after last smoke
Cut-off : 25 ng/ml
Packaging : Bags of 10 tests
Format : Plastic case + collection swab

It seems there is at least one test that can be done on site.

Although it also seems like one might be able to beat this one with a toothbrush.

nonyuppie
Forum Addict
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 9:09 am

Re: Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana, do you wanna?)

Postby nonyuppie » Thu Oct 25, 2018 10:43 pm

Cadfael wrote:Is this an Elisa test?
It seems there is at least one test that can be done on site.

Although it also seems like one might be able to beat this one with a toothbrush.

Can't tell. Their literature mentions immunoassay tests so it's related (ELISA stands for Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorption Assay). It's a screening test so it needs to be confirmed by a more rigorous method. It probably couldn't be used as evidence in court by itself. If it could they'd say so prominently in their ad.

A toothbrush would help as long as you brushed your teeth, gums, tongue, the roof of your mouth and the inside of your cheeks. Mouthwash would probably help as well but that may lead to a positive result for alcohol.

Cadfael
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3626
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 11:46 am

Re: Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana, do you wanna?)

Postby Cadfael » Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:38 pm

nonyuppie wrote:A toothbrush would help as long as you brushed your teeth, gums, tongue, the roof of your mouth and the inside of your cheeks.

So if we brushed our teeth pretty much they way we're supposed to brush our teeth anyway, there's a decent chance we could beat the test.
nonyuppie wrote:Mouthwash would probably help as well but that may lead to a positive result for alcohol.

I do not believe there yet exits a way to simultaneously check for pot and alcohol. I suspect the officer would test for the substance most likely to be present, not for both.

We'll be hearing more about that process in the next year or so, I reckon.

I'm also picturing cops dreaming about a star trek test where they wave a warbling electronic thingee at the suspect and it gives them a detailed report of all drugs in the bloodstream.

Beaver
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 5439
Joined: Fri May 04, 2001 9:57 am
Location: Building a dam in the river
Contact:

Re: Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana, do you wanna?)

Postby Beaver » Wed Nov 07, 2018 9:07 am

High times.

Yes 221,668 76%
No 68,557 24%
Total 290,225

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 27814
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: Dane County Referendum - Question II (marijuana, do you wanna?)

Postby Henry Vilas » Wed Nov 07, 2018 9:18 am

Similar results in more conservative Marquette County. But will it influence the Wisconsin Legislature to change the law?


Return to “Local Politics & Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests