Skip to main content









Donation Heart Ribbon

Comments made by Cann_Do

US, Mexican Authorities Say Prop. 19 Won't Squelch Drug Cartel Violence

From the article:
"But, David Shirk who directs the Transborder Institute at the University of San Diego, doubts that losing the California market would hurt the drug gangs that much. “The reality is that you would probably have to legalize consumption of marijuana throughout the United States, or in several significantly sized states, to have any kind of reverberations here in Mexico,” says Shirk."

Yes. Of course. And PROP 19 is the BEST way to get this process going. This is an argument in favor of PROP 19, not against it. ___________

California must lead the rest of the states to a rational policy for cannabis, so that we can get to where David Shirk says we need to be! PASS PROP 19, so we can end cartel violence, like David Shirk says! _____________

Also- from the article:
"Joe Garcia, a special agent with Immigration and Customs Enforcement says regardless, pot isn’t cartels’ meal ticket anymore. "

This is false. Both Mexican and American authorities estimate that ~60% of cartel income is derived specifically from marijuana sales and smuggling. Eliminating over HALF of the cartel's income by legalizing cannabis is a wonderful way to knock them down. There is no other single action that can devastate the cartels to the same degree as PASSING PROP 19. ____________

Also, Agent Joe is deliberately misleading you when he says that much of the marijuana isn't coming from Mexico anymore. That's true... BUT now its being grwon on US public lands by cartels, smuggled within the US by cartels and sold by cartels in the US. It's STILL cartel violence and devastating our public forests, even though its not coming from Mexico. PASSING PROP 19 will put an immediate stop to this as well. ___________

We do not have cartels growing grapes for wine and hops for beer in our national forests. A YES on PROP 19 vote will end the destruciton of public lands.

October 11, 2010 at 6:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Would Legalizing Marijuana Cut Law Enforcement Costs?

This article is completely misleading. _____________

Maybe users will not go to jail now with the the Governator signing the decriminalization, but that is not enough: We need full legalization! ________________

Where do you expect the millions of Californians to GET their decriminalized cannabis. __________________

Effectively legalizing USE, while simultaneously criminalizing methods of production, storage, transportation and sales is ludicrous. ______________

So, now, even more users will be free to carry and use cannabis, but they CANNOT buy it? In this situation, the Mexican Cartels get even stronger!

October 8, 2010 at 6:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Would Legalizing Marijuana Cut Law Enforcement Costs?

This article by Kyla Calvert has blatantly NEGLECTED to inform the reader that a major research report has JUST come out in the past two weeks that clearly describes the law enforcement costs of Cannabis Prohibition at the state and federal level.

Did Kyla Calvert tell you about the renowned study out of the Cato Institute done by an MIT-trained Harvard Economist? NO!

Why didn't Kyla Calvert tell you, dear reader, about the reputable study done which predicts BILLIONS of dollars of savings fro California if we pass Prop 19?

Does Kyla Calvert have an agenda to support prohibition? Otherwise, why would she cover up the truth of a MAJOR, published report that got much news coverage? Why would she only report law enforcement's pro-prohibition viewpoint?

It is shameful that Public Broadcasting Service would publish one-sided prohibitionist propaganda. Here is the other side that Kyla Calvert covered up with yellow journalism.

The Harvard economist, Dr. Jeffrey Miron, drew VERY different conclusions about the budgetary consequences of California's Cannabis Prohibition than did Kyla Calvert. Look at Kyla Calvert's qualifications on the issue, then look at the economist's:

"Jeffrey A. Miron is a senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University and a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. Professor Miron earned his Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and chaired the economics department at Boston University prior to joining the Harvard faculty."

Hmmm... ok. So who do we believe? Here are the conclusions of the Cato Institute's extensive analysis... something that Kyla Calvert's few phone calls to local cops could never replicate.

Abstract: "This report estimates that legalizing drugs would save roughly $41.3 billion per year in government expenditure on enforcement of prohibition. Of these savings, $25.7 billion would accrue to state and local governments, while $15.6 billion would accrue to the federal government. Approximately $8.7 billion of the savings would result from legalization of marijuana and $32.6 billion from legalization of other drugs. The report also estimates that drug legalization would yield tax revenue of $46.7 billion annually, assuming legal drugs were taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and tobacco. Approximately $8.7 billion of this revenue would result from legalization of marijuana and $38.0 billion from legalization of other drugs."

Do not buy Kyla Calvert's spin. Trust the experts.

October 8, 2010 at 6:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal )