A report released by RAND Corp. ( a non-partisan research institute) showed that "Californians, who make up one-seventh of the U.S. marijuana market, already are farming marijuana at a much higher rate than in neighboring states and tend to buy domestic rather than smuggled marijuana". Therefore, legalizing marijuana in California will not curtail Mexican drug cartels, as some proponents of Prop. 19 believe. Mexican drug cartels collect approximately $18-35 Billion a year in profits from the US ( estimated by federal authorities). The new research shows that marijuana sale in the US accounts for only $2 billion of the profit. California only accounts for about $180 million (~3% of the total profit). The research also shows that if Prop. 19 is to be passed, the price of marijuana will fall by an estimated 80%.
However, if California was to pass Prop.19 and smuggle the legalized weed across the country, it would replace most marijuana sales by the drug cartels and cut deeper into the revenue gained by cartels. But this is unlikely, as marijuana is illegal by federal law. (Reminder: this would result in a 10% cut in drug cartel revenue versus 3%) .
-- Should marijuana be legalized? And will legalizing marijuana benefit or hurt the state//Are we going to just end up with a state full of potheads? With one of the main arguments for legalizing marijuana proven wrong, the outcome seems iffy. With marijuana only making such a small percentage of the revenue gained from cartels, won't that just shift their priorities to other drugs instead? (Which would result in Prop.19 basically having little to no affect on drug cartels overall.)
Some other random arguments for the legalization of Prop.19:
- Improves the economy through tax ( like alcohol and cigarettes).
- Marijuana prohibition is costly, and pretty much obviously ineffective. (And violators often just get a slap on the wrist)
- Chemically less addictive than alcohol, and even caffeine.
10 comments:
I don't think that legalizing marijuana will help the state of California. I think that a lot of students throughout the state believe that the legalization of marijuana would be something good for the state because it would be good to tax another good in society to boost the economy, but I think they say this because they are the ones who are actually consuming the drug and want an easier way to be able to obtain the drug. I really hope the legalization of marijuana does not occur because I don't want to see people getting high 24/7 and become addicted to such a horrible drug.
@Ariana Sacchi
Actually most of the students that I've spoken too that use weed don't want this law to be passed because it will cost more for them to obtain it and its already easily to obtain. Its ironic how pot users are opposed to a pot law.
@Cris Madrigal
Correct me if I'm wrong..
But actually shouldn't legalizing marijuana lower prices? Because Prop.19 will allow people to grow marijuana on their own (I'm not sure of the restrictions and details). But growing more, means more supply. And with more supply, the prices can be lowered. Especially due to competetive prices from the buyers.
@Nicole
Its going to be taxed like crazy, and it can only be grown for personal usage not for selling it to other people. And it wont be competitive because the underage buyers would still be buying from drug cartel members due to it being cheaper. And the people that use it that are older will be able grow their own.
McDragon's partially right. Passing the law would make it harder and cost more to obtain FOR PEOPLE YOUNGER THAN 21. It's been proven that marijuana is easier to obtain than alcohol for teenagers. Why? Alcohol is legal and there really isn't a reason to carry it around when 21 year olds can get it from stores, so teenage dealers don't really bother buying and selling alcohol since someone's older sister could just get it for retail price. But marijuana on the other hand is illegal. No one can really just get it unlike alcohol. Therefore, dealers can make profit because you can't get it off the counters. There's more sense to buy and sell marijuana unlike alcohol. Therefore, there are more people with marijuana in their possession. It's really quite ironic. You'd expect marijuana to be harder to get than alcohol for teenagers, but it's not. So if marijuana's laws were equalized with alcohol's, it would be harder to obtain marijuana for people under 21.
Moving on, cartels are generally associated with the word "illegal". If marijuana was legalized, there would be absolutely no reason to call them "cartels" anymore. A better term if the legalization were to pass would be "pharmacist". IF I was a drug dealer, there would be absolutely no point in selling marijuana. My business would burn down in flames as I watch Walgreens distribute small baggies to 21 year olds. What I would do, as Nicole said, is to move to different drugs. I would sell other illegal drugs instead of marijuana. Legalizing marijuana would definitely pack a punch to drug cartels, but it would also open up a new gateway of other drugs, drugs that are more dangerous.
California just might "end up with a state full of potheads" after the legalization. But in addition. an increase in the usage of other drugs would definitely arise, which is definitely not good for this state.
So overall, I would oppose the legalization because 20 years from now, I wouldn't want my to catch my kids snorting cocaine...
@Immanuel
Since Marijuana would still be illegal under federal law, the cartels would still be associated with illegal. I don't think legalizing marijuana will make California a pothead state. Its easy enough right now to get a medical marijuana card so making it legal for everyone wouldn't change much. As for legalizing it would make it harder for under 21 to get it, i disagree. I don't think it will change it at all because it more profitable to sell it illegally. I think the real problem with the law is that if it passes, California is going to lose millions in federal funding. With the current defecit, California can't afford to lose the funding.
There are several valid points being made here. First off, Prop. 19 isn't written too well. Actually, that's an understatement. It's written pretty badly. One example, but a pretty important one, would be that they forgot to put a standard for being under the influence! Even worse, its rules about workplace use are terribly loose and extremely less strict than that of alcohol use. If it's going to be legal like alcohol, it should at least be treated the same way.
It's important to know that a couple of years ago, California was responsible for about a third of all of the marijuana produced in the United States. I don't think much has changed and I think it's safe to say that California won't become a pothead state. It already is.
I believe Prop. 19 will have absolutely no effect on how available marijuana is either. If you think about it, how many people under 21 grow their own weed anyway? You can't say very many. If I were to make an educated guess, I would say that most growers are 21 or older.
Also, with the new craze of JWH-018 and other legal synthetics, getting high is super easy. Especially when those synthetics are readily available for purchase at your local smoke shop. And yes, you only have to 18 years old.
And now for my main point and possibly the most important.. if Prop 19 is passed, California loses LOTS of money. And by lots, I mean about $40 BILLION!! Why? Prop. 19 conflicts with the Federal Drug-Free Workplace Act. Complying with that act allows California to be eligible for its $9.4 billion K-12 education grants and its $30 billion on federal defense contracts with California businesses. I want my state to have money!
I suppose this can be considered a "gateway" proposition in that it will undoubtedly bring California into world of trouble. Although, i don't want to leave the impression that a new cocaine or heroin industry will arise. I doubt it would. But leaving things as they are is the best choice.
@Nakamura
You make a lot of interesting points there and I have suddenly come to realize that making it legal would actually not lead to a dramatic boost in the economy. So 21 year olds can buy and grow weed right? And the boost in the economy was expected to come from the taxing on the product, correct? Well if all these 21 year olds grew their own weed and sold them, which one of them would actually sell them with tax? Would their sales even be reported? I'm sure that people who buy their own weed would come to the point of growing their own crops instead of actually buying it from the local store over and over again. (the difference between alcohol and marijuana are highlighted here. marijuana can be grown easily while alcohol cannot) In addition, they would get the idea of SELLING to people who have unavailable access to the product (teenagers). Upon passage of the legalization, there would be a short boost in the economy, but shortly after the sales of marijuana would drop and private distributors would begin to do their thing.
Although I am against the passage of prop 19, I would like to comment on the idea that people would start to grow their own weed. If marijuana was legalized, I do not believe that people would start to grow their own weed; most people would still buy it from someone/somewhere else. This is similar to the idea that people can grow their own fruits and vegetables because it would be cheaper that way, but most people don't actually grow all their food; they buy it.
i totally agree with Nicole said. In my opion i think that it would actually increase the Mexican drug cartels profits. I believe that the Mexican cartels would take advantage of the situation and become a suppier to commercial merchants, or even commercializing it themselves. I know what i just said might be somewhat unbelievable, but i think it could possibly happen. The Mexican cartels are smart people.
Post a Comment