Visiting speaker, Beau Kilmer, Co-Director of the RAND Drug Policy Institute discusses the policy implications of marijuana legalization in California, nationally, and internationally. There has been a dramatic shift in drug policy in recent years. Ballot initiatives have been proposed at the state level, and municipalities are today grappling with how to regulate marijuana dispensaries and enforce existing drug laws. Kilmer brings his breadth of knowledge to bear on current drug policy trends.

25 Responses

  1. PullyElbow27

    @ps2os2 Why specifically are you against legalization? I don’t see any
    excuse for marijuana to be illegal. Even then, it’s not a matter if the
    substance is harmful or not; it boils down to a basic dispute of human
    rights: I own my body, not the government, and as such, I, not the
    government, will determine what I will put in my body.

    Reply
  2. rich2rock

    Underage kids won’t have as much access to it. One reason it really needs
    to be regulated and legalized. That many less people to count in the poll
    of projected use inclinations.

    Reply
  3. ps2os2

    The conspiricy people are out tonight. Police for the majority of times do
    not just arrest people on whim. Hey I don’t like the color of your eyes or
    whatever. They would be sued so much the city would have to fire the police
    officer. Get over your paranoid feelings or is that the drugs speaking?

    Reply
  4. theradioschizo

    @purplekirabunny I forgot where it was but his statement was a reference to
    a national survey asking school age children what was easier to obtain.
    Cannabis and other illegal drugs were always more attainable. Yes kids can
    get cigs and alcohol. I did when I was that young, but weed was A LOT
    easier to get. You can expect that with legalization and an age limit, kids
    will still be able to get it, but not nearly as easily as they do now.

    Reply
  5. ps2os2

    I agree with the others about the audio. I am against legalization but do
    like to hear both sides. One of the issues that I am seeing with trying to
    discuss this issue seems to be that the people that are for the
    legalization is that they cannot be coherent in any discussion. I hate to
    say this but the all seemed to be stoned. This is the only decent
    conversation I have seen (but not heard as the audio is extremely poor).

    Reply
  6. Mattx2go

    @PullyElbow27 I see an excuse for it to be illegal. You don’t have to pay
    taxes on it πŸ˜‰ Seriously, legalization sucks, look at what they did to
    alcohol. Prices are sky high compared to other countries. An old Chinese
    man told me In China you can’t drink the water, but it’s ok because beer is
    cheaper than water. πŸ˜‰ Decriminalization is where its at.

    Reply
  7. zookeeper220

    Another good reason NOT to go to California…to many pot heads and Nancy
    Pelosi has a Botox face that scares me.

    Reply
  8. ps2os2

    1. The longer it takes to get to a hospital the THC will decrease in the
    blood. So the blood draw will have to happen quickly. 2. The police
    (rightfully) should refuse to do a blood draw as that in itself could be
    “dangerous” (The person could get HIV or some other nasty disease and
    lawsuit time)

    Reply
  9. ps2os2

    3. A policeman would have to leave duty to escort the person to the
    hospital for the blood draw. Leaving duty it will put more pressure on the
    current active police. 4. AFAIK there aren’t any accepted guidelines for
    THC as to what is allowable for driving. Myself I would like to see
    something thing similar alcohol rating system

    Reply
  10. suedeslounge

    This guy is an idiot. When drugs are legalized consumption goes down. All
    his assumptions are garbage.

    Reply
  11. onymous

    @pimmhogeling I know it happened for portugal when they decriminalized all
    drugs. Also the dutch usage of marijuana is half what it is in america,
    though I’m not sure whether that’s down or up from whatever it was before
    they legalized it.

    Reply
  12. theradioschizo

    @ps2os2 I think this is easy to rectify. Normal intoxication effects. Even
    if you’re high, if you can pass one of the street intoxication tests, why
    should you go to jail. You’re obviously not impaired enough to be a danger
    on the road. Also, the presence of freshly used paraphernalia in your car
    could be another factor. You don’t have to know if they’ve consumed within
    the past hour to know if they are too intoxicated to drive.

    Reply
  13. Tradie Trev

    That was a very interesting insight to legalisation. It does seem like a
    feasible option on the surface, I’m interested to see how the proposal
    turns out. Good luck California!

    Reply
  14. ps2os2

    Probably the most issue I have with it is that there is essentially no way
    to test for it like with alcohol you can blow into an breathalyzer and get
    immediate results. However with put you have to take a blood test. Now, I
    am no expert here but common sense says the police will have to send the
    suspected person to a hospital to get a blood draw. There are several
    problems here:

    Reply

Join the Conversation