I think a lot more people would switch to weed if:
1) You couldn't get a DUI at T+1-2 days after smoking. Many states including my own, merely need to show marijuana metabolites in your blood to convict for DUI.
2) Gun rights. You're staring down the barrel of 5+ years in jail of the feds find you in possession of weed with a firearm, even if pot is legal in your state.
Until those two things are fixed, anyone who depends on driving to keep their job or a firearm to protect their family should have some serious reservations about trading the bar for the dispensary.
While those are of course valid concerns, I don't think it even enters into the decision making process for most when considering booze vs weed in a state with legal dispensaries. The likelihood of either of these happening in states like CA or WA is just so incredibly low that I don't think either of them is stopping all that many who might consider it today. I think there are far stronger cultural forces at play in terms of why people drink or smoke weed rather than concerns about the above.
You also still can't buy and consume weed in a bar/cafe style setting as you can booze either anywhere in the US AFAIK, which will also play a large part in this. Drinking alcohol can be a social activity in a bar, and of course booze can be bought in supermarkets etc etc.
I wonder how open and shut those DUI cases really are. In Michigan, they’ve recently discovered their THC test would return positive with the presence of CBD.
1 is only an issue because moral panic gave legislators a blank check to write DUI laws that are so immensely broad they would be opposed in any other context.
2 is only an issue because drugs were a moral panic and people hated weed enough to not argue much when it got tied to their gun rights
Everyone loses when we cater to lemmings going off half cocked about the moral panic of the minute.
It’s even worse cops can arrest you if they think you are impaired. There are specially trained “drug whisperers”. She was sober, no drugs in her system. But she was still arrested.
Before you look at the article, take a wild guess what color she was…
You just lie when filling that form out. Nobody will do anything because if it got turned into a case that made it to the Supreme Court, it would most likely be the end of a large bit of that background check. A lot of that stuff has very questionable constitutionality.
And before the downvotes or flames… let’s be completely honest here. Anybody in a recreational state who owns a gun and filled out that forum lied. I mean technically you aren’t supposed to smoke pot in federal land like a national park or forest yet it happens all the time and nobody cares. Not all laws get enforced.
Let’s say you got pulled over for “fitting the description” or because you “looked suspicious” and let’s say that it’s one of the cops “specially trained to detect being under the influence” [1]. Let’s also say that you are legally allowed to carry.
Do you really think there is a non zero chance that cops won’t use any excuse to make an arrest seem legit?
I think you give the government too much credit still. In Florida for instance, ex-convicts registered to vote at the county office and were told they could based on a new law. The county clerks gave them bad information and they were still arrested.
Yeah... I'm saying the documentation that you have a medical marijuana make it more likely they would target you, because it's not that difficult to cross-reference various government lists (marijuana database and NICS).
Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?
Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized
for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.
> A registered qualifying patient or registered designated
caregiver shall not be denied the right to own, purchase or
possess a firearm, firearm accessory or ammunition based solely on his or her status as a registered qualifying patient or registered designated caregiver. No state or local agency, municipal or county governing authority shall restrict, revoke, suspend or otherwise infringe upon the right of a person to own, purchase or possess a firearm, firearm accessory or ammunition or any related firearms license or certification based solely on his or her status as a registered qualifying patient or registered designated caregiver.
Edit: By enforcement, I mean that it's not going to be the FBI or the ATF that knocks on your door if it's discovered you have purchased a firearm with a medical marijuana card but the state, county, or municipal police. The feds might go after the store, though.
"I was under the impression you can buy firearms legally without background checks at all in much of the USA"
I'm not sure if this is legitimate or if you're trolling. The regulations on background checks can vary depending on the state. Even in states where private sales are legal, you would still be prohibited.
Granted enforcing that prohibition comes down to people following the laws, and there's nothing physically forcing them to do so (whether requiring a background check or not), merely punishment after the fact.
If you buy person-to-person, yes, in most states. However, just because a felon (or a marijuana user, both are prohibited from owning guns) can buy a gun like that, doesn't mean they won't get in trouble for it if they ever get caught.
Edit: form 4473 question 11e asks if you are an unlawful user of drugs such as marijuana and reminds you that it is still federally illegal. You will fill out this form if you purchase a gun from a licensed dealer. Lying on this form is itself a felony.
Interesting, thanks for the additional information. I assume it will take 60 votes in the US Senate to get moving on #2, so alcohol businesses have no reason to worry.
I know several who switched from social alcohol usage to hallucinogenic mushrooms instead and reported positive health outcomes. The legality issue is probably worse not better. But my understanding is that the testing situation is less of a concern.
You're correct about the testing not being a concern. Testing for psilocybin is very expensive and unreliable. Really only one major drug testing lab in the country will even try to test for psilocybin, and that's because you can, for the right price, try to get them to test for just about anything in a mass spec sample. I won't go so far as to say that nobody can ever successfully test you for psilocybin, but it's about as close to never as you can get.
I wouldn't paint with such a broad brush. I'm in favor regulating access to firearms just as we regulate access to driving, but it depends a lot on your circumstances. A lot of people who buy a gun to protect their family are probably protecting their own egos more than anything else. But there are circumstances where responsible ownership of a firearm for self defense is perfectly reasonable.
Of course, none of this has anything to do with cannabis. It makes no sense say possession of firearms and alcohol is okay, but firearms and cannabis isn't.
I’m far away from a gun nut. I don’t see the need to carry and I am more worried about getting shot by the police because I both “fit the description” and “don’t look like I belong” in my own neighborhood than I am a criminal shooting me. But I very much believe in gun ownership in the home - especially properly secured.
If someone breaks into my home, they prima facie mean me harm. They will get shot without a second thought or ounce of remorse. What am I suppose to do? Wait on the police to show up?
Breaking in followed by violence are mostly an imaginary problem anyway. You are far more likely to mistakenly shoot someone who incorrectly thought was breaking in than ever having to defend yourself.
So I’m suppose to ask someone who broke in my house “do you mean me harm”? There are only two other people who should come in my house unannounced and as soon as they come in the alarm will sound and they know how to turn it off. One of those people sleep next to me.
What exactly should I do when an armed invader come into my house while I’m there? Are the police going to get there in time? Is the person just going to say “my bad” and peacefully leave? Are we going to sit down and have a beer together?
Is it actually the case for major coastal cities/states?
I accept that this might be true, but living in Seattle it surely doesn't feel like it (as long as you count fentanyl as an opioid, because it is one).
Not sure that is entirely true. A hell of a lot of cities on the west coast have absolutely massive opioid addiction problems. Street Fentanyl is doing a number on people.
I really don’t understand fentanyl addiction either. Ain’t that the shit they give you when you have surgery and stuff? All I know is that stuff knocks me the hell out when I had it for some wisdom tooth operation.
Plus the difference between an appropriate dose and an serious overdose is razor thin (from my understanding).
On top of that, this is speculative correlation - they're studying that that stock dropped 1-2% after a legalization event because traders are speculating that there will be lower returns.
