|
Devyl posted:Money is a hell of a thing. I think with CO and WA being pioneers, they're going to cash in on a lot of heightened tourism due to being legal. Once other medical states see this, they'll probably want to rake in some of that sweet sweet tourism money too. I can't imagine more than a handful of people would bother with the travel. Cannabis is available everywhere. Why would someone from say Cali leave the state for pot?? KingEup fucked around with this message at 04:32 on Jun 10, 2013 |
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 02:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 14:08 |
|
|
KingEup posted:I can't imagine more handful of people would bother with the travel. Cannabis is available everywhere. Why would someone from say Cali leave the state for pot?? I could see it enhancing a trip. Go to Colorado! Hike/ski some mountains! Gamble in casinos! Go to a weed bar! Sample a microbrew! Etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 02:58
|
|
|
Devyl posted:Money is a hell of a thing. I think with CO and WA being pioneers, they're going to cash in on a lot of heightened tourism due to being legal. Once other medical states see this, they'll probably want to rake in some of that sweet sweet tourism money too. Just wait until some really boring states legalize it and try to cash in. Come to Idaho! You can get high and... drat. You'll be really high though!
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 03:02
|
|
|
Well for one I wont have to play this loving: "This morning, totally this afternoon (today, for sure man) like; in three or four hours- at five. six. seven. eight. nine. Tomorrow morning for sure. It's definitely today dude. Tomorrow." The level of paranoia around the Colorado border areas has gotten insane. Most of the pot where I live comes from Colorado now. Locals might make some tiny amount completely covertly, but other than that it's totally pushed out every other source. Nobody here smokes shitweed anymore because everybody has Colorado weed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 03:23
|
|
|
Broken Machine posted:Just wait until some really boring states legalize it and try to cash in. Come to Idaho! You can get high and... drat. You'll be really high though! Idaho is about as appealing as Colorado in terms of natural beauty.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 03:39
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Idaho is about as appealing as Colorado in terms of natural beauty. Yeah and the resorts aren't full of douchey bros (same goes for CO really once you get outta summit.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 04:16
|
|
|
KingEup posted:I can't imagine more than a handful of people would bother with the travel. Cannabis is available everywhere. Why would someone from say Cali leave the state for pot?? I disagree. First off, having legal pot will be an added benefit for many people who are still undecided about their next vacation: if you were considering a ski trip for instance, I imagine that being able to smoke world-quality pot in a safe and relaxing environment would tip the scales in favor of Colorado over say, Utah or Montana, for many pot consumers. Secondly, there's a world of difference between being able to score pot and being in a place where it's legal(California is almost de facto legal, but not everyone lives in CA.) Most people can get pot, but they're limited to what their dealer happens to have in stock. Imagine only being able to get whatever bathtub liquor your bootlegger has on hand and then one day being able to walk into a full liquor store with 20 year aged scotches, fine Spanish wines and delicious Belgian ales. It's a completely different experience.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 17:54
|
|
|
FreshlyShaven posted:I disagree. First off, having legal pot will be an added benefit for many people who are still undecided about their next vacation: if you were considering a ski trip for instance, I imagine that being able to smoke world-quality pot in a safe and relaxing environment would tip the scales in favor of Colorado over say, Utah or Montana, for many pot consumers. I'll agree with the second, but for the first. When people want to go skiing, legality of pot is not really on the list of considerations. I love beer but when I'm going skiing I don't really care if Colorado has better micro-brews then Utah. I'm going to Steamboat Springs because they have a 100" base this year and 95% of their trails are open. Or I went to Vale last year, and want to try a different resort. If you really think that most recreational smokers give that much of a poo poo about the marginal quality difference of types weed I think you should re-examine your assumptions. Of course if you are specifically talking about a Weed-tour, then sure.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 18:22
|
|
|
No, what recreational smokers care about is being able to smoke without opening themselves up to the possibility of arrest. With Colorado, you can now fly there from anywhere in the world, drive up to your resort of choice, and pick up a bag of that good poo poo on the way. No calling around to friends that maybe live in the area seeing if they know where to get weed, no worrying about the TSA catching you with a nug in your pocket. Sure, skiiers go where the snow is, but the fact remains that colorado is far and away the most popular ski destination in the states, and it just got better. And I don't pretend to know the percentage of skiiers that smoke weed, but I know that it seems to be way higher than that of the general population. To use your beer comparison, you may not care that CO has better microbrews than UT, but if drinking beer were legal in CO and a felony in UT, it might play a part in your choice of destination. wilfredmerriweathr fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Jun 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 18:45
|
|
|
wilfredmerriweathr posted:And I don't pretend to know the percentage of skiiers that smoke weed, but I know that it seems to be way higher than that of the general population. As a Colorado native and avid skier, I can tell you that at least among the 30-and-younger crowd, this is more true than you can possibly imagine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
There are plenty of folks who go on winery tours/vacations. Why wouldn't the same hold for MJ?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 18:56
|
|
|
redshirt posted:There are plenty of folks who go on winery tours/vacations. Why wouldn't the same hold for MJ?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
wilfredmerriweathr posted:No, what recreational smokers care about is being able to smoke without opening themselves up to the possibility of arrest. With Colorado, you can now fly there from anywhere in the world, drive up to your resort of choice, and pick up a bag of that good poo poo on the way. No calling around to friends that maybe live in the area seeing if they know where to get weed, no worrying about the TSA catching you with a nug in your pocket. Honestly it wouldn't, just as weed doesn't define my life, neither does beer. When you travel abroad in say Japan, weed and drugs in general are felonies. So rather than going some place else, I just go without for a week or so. Remember at the end of the day it's a recreational drug not a lifestyle. It isn't that big of a deal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 19:02
|
|
|
Kurt_Cobain posted:These are lifestyle stoners, they are to be ignored. Nah, lifestyle smokers are smoking already, regardless of where they're located. Any tourism, and I suspect there will be a bit, will be older people who want to smoke weed without worrying about the legal issues or having to bug some high schoolers for a connect. Amsterdam has way more vice going on of course but I suspect that some of their tourism is simply people who want to smoke weed without consequence.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 19:02
|
|
|
redshirt posted:There are plenty of folks who go on winery tours/vacations. Why wouldn't the same hold for MJ? This is an obvious exception and I'm not going to speculate on how many people would do this, or how much money it would bring in etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 19:04
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:Honestly it wouldn't, just as weed doesn't define my life, neither does beer. When you travel abroad in say Japan, weed and drugs in general are felonies. So rather than going some place else, I just go without for a week or so. Remember at the end of the day it's a recreational drug not a lifestyle. It isn't that big of a deal. OK, but you probably aren't the target demographic for most resorts. The target demographic is rich people looking for a luxurious ski vacation (on piste of course) and those folks will undoubtedly notice that in CO they have the opportunity to do something that they could previously only do in Amsterdam. The percentage of skiiers that are, you know, actually good, is pretty small. Take the rest of my family, for example. My Dad's idea of a "good ski vacation" is taking 4 runs down the greens or easy blues and then grabbing a beer and checking out the stores. That's the majority of ski resort visitors (resort =!= ski area of course).
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
Speaking of tourism, what are the implications for tourists who go to, say, Colorado, and then come back to their state and end up facing a drug test? Since THC can be detectable for quite some time, this either puts unlucky souls in a poo poo situation or provides a convenient out when a person tests positive. I'm assuming there will be more instances of the former than the latter, though, and that's concerning to me, from both a privacy perspective and an economic perspective. Finally, if marijuana is legalized in most, if not all places, how will that affect drug testing? I could definitely see it being the case that employers will still test employees and use test results as a reason to fire or not hire people. To give this some context, I live in Kansas, and it is entirely legal for an employer to dismiss an employee if the employer discovers their employee is gay. Should we expect to see a similar situation with legalized marijuana? I'm inclined to say yes, especially when it comes to employers trying to find reasons not to hire minorities.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 19:22
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:I'll agree with the second, but for the first. When people want to go skiing, legality of pot is not really on the list of considerations. I love beer but when I'm going skiing I don't really care if Colorado has better micro-brews then Utah. I'm going to Steamboat Springs because they have a 100" base this year and 95% of their trails are open. Or I went to Vale last year, and want to try a different resort. People keep saying "when people want to go skiing" but they should be thinking "when people go snowboarding"... 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 19:26
|
|
|
LuciferMorningstar posted:Finally, if marijuana is legalized in most, if not all places, how will that affect drug testing? I could definitely see it being the case that employers will still test employees and use test results as a reason to fire or not hire people. To give this some context, I live in Kansas, and it is entirely legal for an employer to dismiss an employee if the employer discovers their employee is gay. Should we expect to see a similar situation with legalized marijuana? I'm inclined to say yes, especially when it comes to employers trying to find reasons not to hire minorities. Yes, although if it actually is legal most places this will eventually get challenged in court. But that is a long, long time off. It would have to be legalized on a federal level first I would imagine. Also: as somone from a pretty chill blue state, I have to say that that is super hosed up, but also completely expected from a place like Kansas.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 19:28
|
|
|
LuciferMorningstar posted:Speaking of tourism, what are the implications for tourists who go to, say, Colorado, and then come back to their state and end up facing a drug test? Since THC can be detectable for quite some time, this either puts unlucky souls in a poo poo situation or provides a convenient out when a person tests positive. You are deluding yourself if you think that just because it is legal to use, it won't disqualify you from employment, parole violation, or any of the other bullshit stuff drug tests are used for. The solution isn't to keep MJ illegal of course, but drug tests are another facet that I'd love to see addressed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 19:33
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:You are deluding yourself if you think that just because it is legal to use, it won't disqualify you from employment, parole violation, or any of the other bullshit stuff drug tests are used for. If the official policy in question simply prohibits "illegal drugs" without naming names (which I suspect it would fairly often, if not most of the time), then marijuana no longer being illegal would mean that having THC in one's urine is no longer a violation of said policy. If whoever's in charge were to change the policy to specifically prohibit marijuana, that would be another matter altogether. Cockmaster fucked around with this message at 19:58 on Jun 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 19:54
|
|
Powercrazy posted:You are deluding yourself if you think that just because it is legal to use, it won't disqualify you from employment, parole violation, or any of the other bullshit stuff drug tests are used for. This is exactly the problem, though. As has been recently mentioned, medical marijuana is basically legalization for those who can afford and arrange for a medical marijuana license, while continuing to allow the powers that be to harass and prosecute the economically disadvantaged and non-whites. However, even if marijuana is legalized, as you've pointed out, it will still be possible to harass people because of a decision that is arguably private and personal. It is interesting to me how well this parallels with gay marriage in the sense that proponents of both are inordinately focused on simply legalizing the championed activity, naively assuming that legalization will solve all the problems. In both cases, unless legislation exists that prevents individuals from being denied employment and other benefits based on personal decisions, this stuff will continue to be terribly problematic. Edit: I guess the solution is to curtail the power of right-to-work laws/at-will employment, but fat chance of that happening. LuciferMorningstar fucked around with this message at 20:10 on Jun 10, 2013 |
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 19:55
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:You are deluding yourself if you think that just because it is legal to use, it won't disqualify you from employment, parole violation, or any of the other bullshit stuff drug tests are used for. Good luck with that. Workplaces are free to add pretty much any condition they want to your terms of employment. As it stands, some employers require testing for nicotine despite the fac tthat it's completely legal. That should obviously be changed but good luck getting the business community to give up at-will employment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 20:02
|
|
|
LuciferMorningstar posted:Finally, if marijuana is legalized in most, if not all places, how will that affect drug testing? I could definitely see it being the case that employers will still test employees and use test results as a reason to fire or not hire people. To give this some context, I live in Kansas, and it is entirely legal for an employer to dismiss an employee if the employer discovers their employee is gay. Should we expect to see a similar situation with legalized marijuana? I'm inclined to say yes, especially when it comes to employers trying to find reasons not to hire minorities. I expect it to be a lot like tattoos. In the past having a tattoo would pretty much guarantee that outside of a few fields no one would higher you. If you had one in a place that usually isn't visible and your boss found out you'd still be fired just for what having a tattoo was thought to say about your character. Over the past couple of decades tattoos have become a lot more common which de-stigmatizes it a bit and more importantly means you're cutting out a significant portion of the labor pool if you have a hardline policy. Most places will hire you as long as your tattoos are unobtrusive and a few of the businesses more concerned with an air of professionalism will require they be completely out of sight. Only a rare handful will still outright not hirer you or fire you if they find out you have a non-visible tattoo. This kind of attitude towards recreational marijuana use will probably take a few decades to develop though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 20:10
|
|
|
Kurt_Cobain posted:These are lifestyle stoners, they are to be ignored. "These are the heaviest users and therefore the most affected group of all and also a huge portion of all users. They are to be ignored completely. Also, my opinions are worthless and retarded"
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 20:57
|
|
|
I don't know what a  lifestyle stoner is, but as someone who smokes weed every day I am excited as hell to take my next ski trip in Colorado. The idea of just walking into a store and getting to pick whatever bud I want out from behind glass without having to hassle with dealers sounds absolutely amazing.Edit:VV I know. Miltank fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Jun 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 22:18
|
|
|
Dudes, I was mocking the earlier debate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 22:27
|
|
|
Amendment 64 has it specifically written in that employers still have the right to drug test and fire people for marijuana use. CO is a right to work state which means an employer can terminate anyone for any reason, you only get in trouble if you admit it was for race/creed/sex/etc. The fight for better employee protection and acceptance of drug use is still a long uphill battle. Now everyone sit back and watch this doc: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhTYI3DeNgA
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2013 00:33
|
|
|
Miltank posted:I don't know what a I know exactly how you feel. I've got a Colorado/Washington trip to take later this year. Been planning it for a few years now to visit places I lived as a kid. I am extremely excited at the fact that I can not only walk into a store and purchase cannabis like a grown adult, but enjoy it and not have to worry about poo poo from the police for doing something that is practically harmless.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2013 04:33
|
|
|
If y'all are planning on visiting Colorado later this year, don't plan it around being able to buy legal weed. Applications for retail licenses won't even be accepted until October 1st, and whoever handles that is allowed to take up to 90 days to approve the license. Seeing how quickly our legislature has responded to this issue I'd like to think that the first few licenses will be approved within weeks, but realistically, it could take until December or January for retail pot to be A Thing. It may help that the only places allowed to apply for a retail license for the first six months are existing MMJ dispensaries, so when they get their license they can pretty much fling the doors open right away.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2013 06:00
|
|
|
Edit: Oops, nothing to see here, posted without refreshing the thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2013 08:39
|
|
|
New York has a law forbidding firing someone on the basis of legal product use or hobby/recreational activity, and I believe some Southern states have similar laws to protect the tobacco industry. If it becomes a problem, and if a large marijuana user/seller lobby emerges, I could see them pressing for laws of this kind in CO.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2013 12:53
|
|
|
von Metternich posted:New York has a law forbidding firing someone on the basis of legal product use or hobby/recreational activity, and I believe some Southern states have similar laws to protect the tobacco industry. If it becomes a problem, and if a large marijuana user/seller lobby emerges, I could see them pressing for laws of this kind in CO. So they'll just switch to "this person was not a team player".
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2013 13:12
|
|
|
von Metternich posted:New York has a law forbidding firing someone on the basis of legal product use or hobby/recreational activity, and I believe some Southern states have similar laws to protect the tobacco industry. If it becomes a problem, and if a large marijuana user/seller lobby emerges, I could see them pressing for laws of this kind in CO. I know for a fact when I graduated in 2001 it was perfectly legal for a company to fire you for tobacco. One of the companies I interviewed for banned tobacco use because they provided insurance. In Texas. That company was also very close to being a cult. As in the type of place that you must show up for every work function.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2013 15:08
|
|
|
veedubfreak posted:I know for a fact when I graduated in 2001 it was perfectly legal for a company to fire you for tobacco. One of the companies I interviewed for banned tobacco use because they provided insurance. In Texas. That company was also very close to being a cult. As in the type of place that you must show up for every work function. Please, please tell me it was chick-fil-a. Also, companies can fire you for alcohol too, no? Why should marijuana get special treatment?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2013 15:29
|
|
|
KernelSlanders posted:Please, please tell me it was chick-fil-a. Drinking on site? yeah that's an irresponsible thing to do and if your boss isn't a crazy power-hungry madman you wouldn't be fired for one incident of it, unless you work with heavy machinery or Ebola or something. But you shouldn't be fired if you drink at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2013 15:35
|
|
|
KernelSlanders posted:Please, please tell me it was chick-fil-a. Nah it was some weird programming company that basically sold most of the software for car dealerships in the country.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2013 19:14
|
|
|
Jesus, how did this thread turn into Employment Law 101? This poo poo varies so much by state. The only Federally protected classes are age/race/sex/creed, some states have designated tobacco users a Protected Class to afford them the same protection as the Federally protected classes. Fat chance of that happening in our Right to Work state though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2013 19:24
|
|
|
veedubfreak posted:Nah it was some weird programming company that basically sold most of the software for car dealerships in the country. Oh yeah, Reynolds & Reynolds. I have some friends who work(ed) there. Sort of a weird place.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2013 21:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 14:08 |
|
|
So possession arrests are down. According to a well respected (not by me) drug policy expert, Obama deserves the credit: http://www.samefacts.com/2013/06/drug-policy/marijuana-possession-enforcement-is-down-dramatically-under-president-obama/ Does this argument strike anyone as being a tad silly? KingEup fucked around with this message at 01:42 on Jun 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 01:40
|
|