I live where Cannabis is completely legal and towns decide whether to approve or deny retail locations. In my view the benefits of legalization have mostly to do with counteracting the various downsides of enforcing laws that prohibit it. E.g. arresting people, harassing people, and creating a taboo-mystique that makes and keeps young people interested.
What I don't see is any significant change in the way marijuana is perceived among adults. Few people will judge you harshly if you are a marijuana user, but it's not like people are now passing around joints at parties. In my group of friends I know a mom who is a bedtime stoner and a dad who eats a gummy most weekend days. I have a stash that I usually only break out when people are visiting from out of state - one $60 trip to the weed store easily lasts me a year.
The 'new market' for marijuana is basically about regular users, people who desire and can tolerate marijuana on a daily basis. The product in the recreational shops is all about highest-potency, maximum-impact and that's what is driving the retail side of things. I don't see the market growing, in fact I think it's a race to the bottom as supply greatly exceeds demand.
I used to think that over time marijuana would just wind up behind the counter at the gas station, but I now think it's most likely to remain roped off the way some US states only let special, single-purpose stores sell spirits.
I think cannabis should be legal but sold behind the counter with id checks to people over 18, with no advertising and no branding. You should not be allowed to smoke in public, only at home.
Basically the same as cigarettes in Australia.
Legal, cheap, available, but not commercial.
Having said that, I’d be surprised if any level of legality happened in Australia in the next ten years. This is an extremely conservative country.
Australia is not the example to hold up for ‘cheap’. Cigarette taxes are amongst the highest there of anywhere.
I also don’t share your pessimism with legalisation. It’s already tremendously easy to get a medical cannabis prescription, which is a route several of my mates have gone down. Moreover, look at the recent changes for MDMA and psilocybin therapy, in which Australia is a world leader.
I instead think the major laggard will be around roadside testing - that’s where Australia’s strict driving whilst intoxicated framework will run up against the fact that current tests will show a positive result far after any effects are gone.
To be honest, I don’t hate the smell but it is very pungent and dominates. Having been in several cities where marijuana is legalized, you can often only smell there smoke rather than getting to enjoy the smells of restaurants, food stands, and even just fresh laundry.
People smoking at home can be a lot more disruptive. I would get woken up at night because of the extreme pungency of my neighbour's weed. It can catch on the nose in a physical way beyond simply being smelly... although coming home to my house smelling of weedy cat urine was kind of miserable too.
Given the choice, I say anyone smoking it should have to sit in a grow tent with air scrubbers otherwise stick to edibles.
Legalization gives people non-smelly options. Edibles, concentrates, vapes all have no or very subtle smell. It’s really the burning plant matter that causes the smell
Same for cigars. This comes very close to "taste policing". If you can some ciggies on the street, then you can smoke all things (legal/decriminalized) on the street. Or it becomes whimsy.
This can be countered in many ways, and I presume you realize that 'home' is ventilated into exactly same open air as everything else, basically nobody has carbon filters that would make the smell actually disappear.
THC oil vapes don't have any typical smell, at least not the ones I've tried. They are superior to smoking plants in many ways, be it health effects, strength of effect or cost. You can have edibles (I don't like how they take very long to manifest but for medicinal use they should be better by principle).
I am not against ban in public per se, but lets be consistent - cigarettes, cigars etc should be handled exactly same, with same punishments.
It doesn't make any sense, law done by bureaucrats with no clue about the topic... I would expect country like Germany would leave this to actual neutral experts (ie not those running addiction clinics since they all keep telling everybody that all drugs should be banned completely forever... just like asking head of DEA in US how strict weed policies should be, well since its most of their work is cannabis no wonder it was handled for long time cca same as heroin).
Yeah that seems way low. In oregon you can have 4 plants and 8 ounces total (227g) at home, and can carry 1 oz (28g) on you at any time. Those are a lot more reasonable limits.
The proposal before that had a clarification by Lauterbach that the alive plant does not count to the 25g, so u shouldn't grow 3 plants at same stage of life
But even 25g from one plant is on the low side! So you could easily have the farcical situation where you can grow weed but can’t legally harvest all of it!
Correct :(, but smallest plants can only have 5-10g harvestable, having a big plant through lots of energy input which can have 100+g definitely is out of the scope of a Solo person consuming legally weed
Having 3 plants would make the weed buds stale/old until u get to consume it (for the average consumer that is) the laws are dumb, but good first step
Personal ownership, potentially edibles made from flower only (any kind of extraction but cbd is illegal), and any kind of food/tobacco /nicotine/other drugs is illegal in social Club law
The law is rather complex (as is German tradition), but basically it legalizes cannabis social clubs, personal use with limited possession, and limited personal production (3 flowering plants at a time).
You can thank the mighty United States of the A for it. In India my dad used to tell he went to government rationed cannabis stores to buy it. Then some stupid drug treaty made by the Greatest nation in the history of mankind came into effect making weed illegal overnight.
India is a bit beyond ridiculous and just shows when Asshole with properly big A (Nixon) is given enough power, he can fuck up most of mankind for few generations easily. Just to have more oppressive tools available against people not aligned with state (hippies, Mexicans). Also shows that people will generally show a big fat middle finger to government and keep doing what they want to do, but its a very useful tool for oppression and creates a lot of corruption surface.
As to why its such a ridiculous situation in India - as per my limited backpacker's experience marihuana is a sacred plant, used for thousands of years to celebrate god Shiva, one of main deities in Hindu pantheon. Seeing a sadhu (holy man) to smoke chillum is as regular sight as birds flying in the sky, I was once even given such a chillum within bigger group of sadhus on Ganges bank (I think in Haridwar).
Its like India becoming world dominating power and starts forcing every single christian country on the world to ban alcohol or using wine in religious ceremonies. And they actually implemented it for solid 6 decades so far, via United nations being a slave to US (and when its not, US presidents are quoted about kicking them out or simply ignoring its existence).
Rural population are also strongly opposed to homosexuality, gender nonconformity, queers, atheism, non-dominant religions, alcohol, metalheads, goths, emos, scene kids etc.
At least the amount of sundown towns have started to diminish.
There’s still absolutely no reason to extend this provincial bigotry to national legislation. When the insanity is locally contained, the people discriminated against can at least leave the shithole.
In italy the constitutional court blocked a referendum on the matter to be held (I suppose because they didn't want people to turn up and vote, and there were other questions about the legal system that they preferred failing due to insufficient quorum).
One of my biggest disappointments from Jacinda Ardern is that she hosted a referendum on legalisation, lost it 48/52, then instead of taking that as a mandate to at least decriminalise or whatever she did nothing.
I'd say a 48% vote to do something is a mandate to do a pared back version of it, yes. She was just incredibly cautious as a politician, and as a result hasn't really left much of a tangible legacy as far as policy impact goes.
It's also annoying to smell bad cologne liberally applied when walking around, or teenagers wearing a lot of Axe body spray, or body odor from non-showered people in the metro. Why can't they keep their smell in their homes?
As an externality, secondhand smoke tends to affect others. Those affected usually aren't happy about it.
There are many externalities that affect others... think of noise, smell, etc. Our parent chose smell as an example. I don't see what's wrong or inappropriate with that.
In the end, you have to find some middle ground, and then you have to manage that middle ground, which usually means keeping at bay those who want to ban externalities as well as those who simply want to make no concessions to those affected.
It's classic, really.
This specific German draft contains very specific ideas on where you can and where you can not smoke and is about to radically reduce the spaces where patients can use medical cannabis as well. We'll see whether parliament will change that.
They happen, and are legal. If weed is legal where you smell it then it's not much different and being annoyed by it won't change much, just like body odor, bad cologne, etc.
And you’re missing OP‘s point.
There is a lot of trashy behavior that is legal, that doesn’t make it right (ethically). Our societies have worked without putting everything into law, instead relying on public decency.
We don’t put into law how often and how you have to wash yourself, we just assume that most people will do it. But if everyone stopped washing themselves and public transport and the workplace became unbearable you would see legislature follow. Likewise if everyone overused deodorant.
I suggest that you consider Kant’s categorical imperative: “ Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law”.
What would our society be like if everyone smoked weed and did so everywhere? That would be unenjoyable even for weed smokers. “Others do it too” or “but not everyone does it” don’t make the actions of the few ethical.
I'm advocating not being an asshole, I never mentioned regulation. There is rightfully social stigma about stinking, littering, other antisocial behavior. Just because someone can be disgusting doesn't mean we should be cool with it.
In Canada this has gotten way worse since it's been legalized. I belive it should be legal, but I don't belive being an asshole and burning super smelly stuff in the park or street or apartment should be tolerated by society. I have no idea what the solution is. Our condo building prohibits it, which I'm fine with because I don't use it, but I suppose if that's widespread it makes people go outside with it.
Many things are super smelly. Some people apply an atrocious amount of perfume, but somehow we live with it. I also don't think weed smells that bad in an open area.
And some things like durian end up being restricted in places just for the smell. Places have so many scent policies now that it's been quite awhile since I really noticed a perfume on someone. Personally I think weed smell really lingers even outside, and can't stand it. I don't have an issue with it being legal though, but smell is a definite issue.
Cigarette smokers are by far the worst offenders for this here in Germany, stinking up everyone's apartments all summer long when we have to keep the windows open, sparking up on crowded train platforms without a care in the world...
They're as addicted as they come, to a first class drug; are you going to call them "junkies" too? What about people who drink alcohol and make it everyone else's problem?
Seriously, that language is offensive af, wisen up please.
Edit: can't help but notice quite a lot of similarities between Dudester230602 and veave accounts (profile age, topics commented on, use of language, generally rocking the boat...).
I see how this statement makes sense for some, but many people in Germany, especially in big cities, drive a car only a handful of times a year, if they even have a license.
There are many cars and many car owners and many car drivers in Germany, I think the stat is something like >3/4s Germans own cars. There happens to be public transport and bicycle infrastructure proportionate to the density of a region (ie more in cities), but lots of Germany is still rural, sparsely populated, and dominated by cars for getting around. If you aren't from/in Germany and visit it, you'll see how popular cars are here and that is unlikely to change soon.
Didn't assume it's rare, just if it's the majority. But yeah your numbers clearly point to a majority being drivers. I guess even most public transport users do have a car then for occasional use.
What I don't see is any significant change in the way marijuana is perceived among adults. Few people will judge you harshly if you are a marijuana user, but it's not like people are now passing around joints at parties. In my group of friends I know a mom who is a bedtime stoner and a dad who eats a gummy most weekend days. I have a stash that I usually only break out when people are visiting from out of state - one $60 trip to the weed store easily lasts me a year.
The 'new market' for marijuana is basically about regular users, people who desire and can tolerate marijuana on a daily basis. The product in the recreational shops is all about highest-potency, maximum-impact and that's what is driving the retail side of things. I don't see the market growing, in fact I think it's a race to the bottom as supply greatly exceeds demand.
I used to think that over time marijuana would just wind up behind the counter at the gas station, but I now think it's most likely to remain roped off the way some US states only let special, single-purpose stores sell spirits.