Marijuana Legalization Makes Police Poorer

[Katashi_itto]

[blackspade]

1. Maybe the cops should buy fewer tanks?

[RC]

3. Also the police should never have been given the power to seize anything on their own say so.

Charges need to be brought and guilty verdicts need to be rendered, before anything can be seized and kept by the law enforcement.
The way things are now the police departments are financed with grand theft from those they are supposed to serve and protect. All they have to do is say, without much or often any proof, are that drugs were suspected to be involved. That's it. And their victim, their mark, is not charged, or are proven innocent, but they lose their properly anyway.
Isn't that Racketeering?

[blackspade]

7. Completely agree

The Drug War has turned into a money making enterprise for the cops.
It's a blatant conflict of interest.

[elzenmahn]

9. Indeed...

...several police organizations' underpants were twisted into Melvins when they heard about the "reduced priority" that Mary Jane was getting at the federal level (nevermind the recent raids, probably designed to placate same organizations).

The Drug "War" has indeed become a racket - for the cops. Nobody should be profiting off of it - and I mean nobody.

[Major Nikon]

2. It also stands to reason that some individual cops will lose money

...from not being able to shake down pot dealers.

[CFLDem]

4. Good

Maybe they'll keep the same squad cars for a few years instead of constantly buying new ones.

[Hulk]

5. Perhaps some of the tax revenue can fill the gap?

There was probably tons wrong with the former practice, but it's behind us now. Having assets go directly to the agency in charge of arresting suspects was probably not such a smart idea?

[Dustlawyer]

6. I work with cops here in Texas and do my pro bono work for them.

I am their resident Democrat which they tolerate for the good works that I do. There is a myth that these agencies are rolling in the drug money that is not true. The money gets siphoned away and they run bare bones operations (not talking big city police departments). Last time fuel went way up many departments had to dramatically cut patrols because they couldn't afford the fuel.
I can remember one cop lamenting that his police dog "Kilo" was responsible for over 4 million in money seized, and the department wouldn't pay him to clean the dog crap out of his yard and take care of the animal on his own time (FLSA issue).
The drug war needs to go and we need to find legitimate funding for our police protection. Right now cities and counties use police as a revenue source. It got so bad in Texas at one point that they had to put limits on what percentage of city budgets could come from traffic stops!
The bigger picture is that all government agencies are starved for money. The Republicans have made good on their promise. It is ironic and hypocritical to see John Boner stand up and blame Obama for Freedom Enterprises lack of inspection since 1991. There is no money spent on inspection and enforcement. When a company is cited for a violation and a fine imposed, a $10,000 fine becomes $500! It is cheaper to pay the fines when they are finally inspected than to correct the problems.

[elzenmahn]

8. A perfect phrase befits my reaction to the cops for this...

...and while it's admittedly from one of the slimiest bloggers on the Web, Talkin' Michelle Malkin, it fits...

"BOO

FREAKING

HOO!!!!!"

Fewer tanks and military tactics, and a little less general assholery from the Finest, would go a long way in my book...

[paleotn]

10. But in a few years....

....pot production and distribution will be corporatized and that's when the real money will be made. Of course there will be those who state that inhaling the products of combustion are extremely detrimental to ones health. Numerous lung cancer deaths over the years and eventually pot ends up as vilified as tobacco. Hey, just saying.

[KurtNYC]

11. Colorado started by making cultivation for personal consumption legal. No money exchanged.

Prohibitions on smoking in public places have lead many in Colorado to buy the edible products, brownies for example, which one could consume at a movie theater, concert or other public place. No smoke, no second hand smoke. No cancer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Colorado#Recreational

[Gary 50]

12. Nope.

Studies have been done which show that cigarette smokers who also smoke pot have a lower incidence of lung cancer than those who don't smoke pot. Marijuana has anti-carcinogenic properties.