What's new

Woman gets 10 Years in Prison for Selling $30 Worth of Weed in Oklahoma

I certainly wouldn't be surprised. There's black markets for just about anything. Why wouldn't one continue in a market that has been entirely that way for quite some time?

You think drug dealers are gonna suddenly want to give up a percentage of their money to Uncle Sam? They've already shown they don't give **** about following the law...

Yeah, black market booze is really popular these days. Budweiser has a hell of a time fighting guys in their garages home brewing.

Who cares if drug dealers don't want it. Drug dealers have it made now because the economic system is entirely to their advantage. Take away the advantage and they can wish for whatever they want but the reality is they won't get it.

Take pot for example. As of now the current black market price is roughly $300 an ounce. For comparison, the most expensive food I can think of that's grown are white truffles, which sell at a high end for $2,000 a pound, or $125 an ounce. Now the reason truffles are expensive is pretty simple. They are a pain in the *** to grow and to find them in the wild you need like a pig or a dog or something.

But pot? It's not like it's some sort of rare plant. Or that it's difficult to grow. While it's not quite as simple as just throwing a seed out to get high quality (not just in terms of potency, but in appearance and other qualities) stuff it's simple enough to grow to the point that the average person who grows tomatoes in their backyard can accomplish it. The reason it's so expensive is that the average joe won't risk to grow it, as growing any amount is a felony offense in most states. So only those willing to break the law grow the stuff and artificially restrict the supply. The demand is still there, and as simple economics and logic tell us "reduced supply + increased demand = inflated price."

So all of a sudden pot becomes legal. Now instead of clandestine houses and fields in the middle of National Forests and other places there can be hundreds of thousands of acres of greenhouses and warehouses devoted to growing the stuff. All of a sudden supply vastly increases and the producers fight with each other to sell it until some baseline price is established, which will be well below $300 an ounce. Probably more like $50 an ounce. Now the drug dealer has an interesting proposition. Does he still continue to grow pot and sell it for a price that undercuts that one? If he does he's still risking some legal consequences. Even if I homebrew or grow my own tobacco I just can't go out and sell it to the public, that requires licensing and stuff. So If the dealer has to sell their stuff at even $45 an ounce but also has to factor in the cost of growing it, and let's say some sort of minimal cost of $5 an ounce, that's a net profit of $40 an ounce. So to make $4,000 the dealer would have to sell 100 ounces, or a little over 6 pounds. That's a lot of product to move, especially in an environment where the regular user would just rather go to the store and pick different varieties and not worry about buying from someone unlicensed.
 
Yeah, black market booze is really popular these days. Budweiser has a hell of a time fighting guys in their garages home brewing.

Who cares if drug dealers don't want it. Drug dealers have it made now because the economic system is entirely to their advantage. Take away the advantage and they can wish for whatever they want but the reality is they won't get it.

Take pot for example. As of now the current black market price is roughly $300 an ounce. For comparison, the most expensive food I can think of that's grown are white truffles, which sell at a high end for $2,000 a pound, or $125 an ounce. Now the reason truffles are expensive is pretty simple. They are a pain in the *** to grow and to find them in the wild you need like a pig or a dog or something.

But pot? It's not like it's some sort of rare plant. Or that it's difficult to grow. While it's not quite as simple as just throwing a seed out to get high quality (not just in terms of potency, but in appearance and other qualities) stuff it's simple enough to grow to the point that the average person who grows tomatoes in their backyard can accomplish it. The reason it's so expensive is that the average joe won't risk to grow it, as growing any amount is a felony offense in most states. So only those willing to break the law grow the stuff and artificially restrict the supply. The demand is still there, and as simple economics and logic tell us "reduced supply + increased demand = inflated price."

So all of a sudden pot becomes legal. Now instead of clandestine houses and fields in the middle of National Forests and other places there can be hundreds of thousands of acres of greenhouses and warehouses devoted to growing the stuff. All of a sudden supply vastly increases and the producers fight with each other to sell it until some baseline price is established, which will be well below $300 an ounce. Probably more like $50 an ounce. Now the drug dealer has an interesting proposition. Does he still continue to grow pot and sell it for a price that undercuts that one? If he does he's still risking some legal consequences. Even if I homebrew or grow my own tobacco I just can't go out and sell it to the public, that requires licensing and stuff. So If the dealer has to sell their stuff at even $45 an ounce but also has to factor in the cost of growing it, and let's say some sort of minimal cost of $5 an ounce, that's a net profit of $40 an ounce. So to make $4,000 the dealer would have to sell 100 ounces, or a little over 6 pounds. That's a lot of product to move, especially in an environment where the regular user would just rather go to the store and pick different varieties and not worry about buying from someone unlicensed.

This. I don't get why this is such a difficult concept.
 
You think drug dealers are gonna suddenly want to give up a percentage of their money to Uncle Sam? They've already shown they don't give **** about following the law...

Well, that's not really how it works - it's not a matter of the government taxing existing distribution. If you make it legal, those distribution channels change. It becomes like alcohol - when's the last time you had to knock on a basement door and know a password to buy a beer?
 
Well, that's not really how it works - it's not a matter of the government taxing existing distribution. If you make it legal, those distribution channels change. It becomes like alcohol - when's the last time you had to knock on a basement door and know a password to buy a beer?

never been to college?
 
LOL. So instead of explaining to me why you think I'm wrong, you throw out a random zing like that?

I'm more than happy to listen, if you'd care to explain yourself.

Oh relax. Was booze illegal for as long as pot has been? Maybe eventually it'll move towards a whiter? market...
sw50sw8sw578.gif
..but you would really be surprised if for awhile people who have already demonstrated the willingness to break the law won't continue to do so? I mean, it happens with stuff that has never been illegal to sell (DVDs).
 
Oh relax. Was booze illegal for as long as pot has been? Maybe eventually it'll move towards a whiter? market...
sw50sw8sw578.gif
..but you would really be surprised if for awhile people who have already demonstrated the willingness to break the law won't continue to do so? I mean, it happens with stuff that has never been illegal to sell (DVDs).
So we keep it illegal at great expense to the tax payer because post-legalization there may be a smaller black market for it? Is that the best argument in favor of keeping pot illegal (it might just be...)? Retarded.

DVDs are sold under the table because the cost of copying them is far less than the cost of producing the content on them. The cost of growing and distributing cannabis represent the whole cost. It's hard to compete with weed factories with a small basement grow, and with the likely price post-legalization, almost certainly not worth it for more than personal use. Regardless, even with some cheaters, tax revenues will be greater, and the great cost of arresting and prosecuting non-violent weed smokers eliminated entirely. It's a no-brainer.
 
So all of a sudden pot becomes legal. Now instead of clandestine houses and fields in the middle of National Forests and other places there can be hundreds of thousands of acres of greenhouses and warehouses devoted to growing the stuff. All of a sudden supply vastly increases and the producers fight with each other to sell it until some baseline price is established, which will be well below $300 an ounce. Probably more like $50 an ounce. Now the drug dealer has an interesting proposition. Does he still continue to grow pot and sell it for a price that undercuts that one? If he does he's still risking some legal consequences. Even if I homebrew or grow my own tobacco I just can't go out and sell it to the public, that requires licensing and stuff. So If the dealer has to sell their stuff at even $45 an ounce but also has to factor in the cost of growing it, and let's say some sort of minimal cost of $5 an ounce, that's a net profit of $40 an ounce. So to make $4,000 the dealer would have to sell 100 ounces, or a little over 6 pounds. That's a lot of product to move, especially in an environment where the regular user would just rather go to the store and pick different varieties and not worry about buying from someone unlicensed.
Perfect. The math is simple. Moving 6 pounds of weed illegally is no easy task, and certainly not worth it at a profit of $4000. Taxes would have to be pretty damn prohibitive to make it worthwhile, as no one is going to go out of their way to grow and sell 60 pounds of weed/year on their own just to make $40 000.

Also, the cost of electricity, lighting, ventilation, nutrients, etc. aren't insignificant. $5/ounce is a pretty conservative estimate. Consider also the time it takes to trim and cure the bud. It really wouldn't be worth it. A very large chunk of people currently in the industry, are in it mostly to provide themselves with bud and a little extra spending cash. These people generally have other work.
 
Last edited:
Warning, somewhat random post ahead.

Homebrewing beer has been mentioned a few times in regard to a possible black market for weed if it were legalized. I can tell you from my own homebrewing activities that I'd have a hell of a hard time selling my homebrew on the black market. In ingredients alone my beer costs me $0.40-$1.50 per 12oz of finished product. A batch (5-10gal per batch) takes more than 8hrs of labor, somewhat difficult labor that requires both physical exertion and technical knowledge. A 20# propane tank is good for about 3 batches and costs me about $15 to fill. I use a ton of water for both the actual beer and all the cleaning and sanitizing that has to be done. I'd say I probably use at least 30gal of water to produce 5gal of beer. The specialized sanitizer I use costs $24 for 32oz which is good for 20 batches or so. Maintaining the fermenting beer at the correct temperature isn't free, either. This weekend I'm buying a small chest freezer that I will modify to use as a fermentation chamber. I've spent a good chunk of change on beer making equipment, easily above $1k.

Anyway, to make it worth my while as a money making endeavor I'd have to charge around $3-$5 per 12 oz bottle. Meanwhile gas stations and grocery stores located within a half mile of almost everyone who might possibly buy my black market beer are selling beer by the case or even 30-pack for well under $1 per beer for the mass produced stuff and no more than $1.50 or so for the micro brew stuff.

I'd say there's not a lot of room for a black market in beer.

I'll go out on a limb and guess that the reality of producing and distributing black market weed would make just as little sense if it were legalized and regulated along the same lines as alcohol. Therefore, no matter how bad your local drug dealer wanted to stay in the game his customers wouldn't be very interested in playing along. Why buy his questionable product when your trusty grocery store will sell you a product that you know will be consistent and at whatever quality level you're willing to pay for? Why run the risk of getting caught when you don't have to break the law to get what you want? Why deal with thugs and criminals when you can just deal with a pretty lady at the checkout stand of your local grocery store.

I hope we can put this black market nonsense to rest, because it is irrelevant to this discussion.
 
Raise your hand if you know that you could get weed if you wanted to.

So currently the legality of weed isn't stopping anoyone who wants to use it from doing so. The big question is if we want to continue to imprison people for doing it or if we want to allow them to continue their otherwise productive lives, continue to raise their children, continue to work, continue to pay their taxes, etc.

I really can't imagine wanting to lock people in cages for making a decision that is no more harmful, and likely far less harmful, than a guy picking up a 30 pack of natural light at the gas station.
 
I imagine it would depend. Most grocery stores keep the cigarettes in a cage of some sort and you sometimes have to use a specific checkout to buy them. I'd guess if it were legalized federally each state could regulate it as they saw fit. Some would probably restrict its sale for medical use only. Others might just require stores take measures to keep kids from getting it.

One thing I can tell you is that the world wouldn't end, society wouldn't fall, and crime rates would most likely stay the same minus all the pot related "crime" that currently takes place.

I haven't cared about drug laws enough to think about or predict any consequences if they changed.

The bitter complaints about this woman's sentence are interesting to think about.

If it weren't the same people who want the government to take care of them in every other aspect of their lives I would probably have considered their complaints as worthy of caring about.
 
I haven't cared about drug laws enough to think about or predict any consequences if they changed.

The bitter complaints about this woman's sentence are interesting to think about.

If it weren't the same people who want the government to take care of them in every other aspect of their lives I would probably have considered their complaints as worthy of caring about.

OK, so I'm complaining about it and I'm a radical Libertarian. My complaint is very much about taking free people who aren't harming others and putting htem in a cage (prison) because we think they're hurting themselves. Makes no sense to me at all.

You do realize that a human being is now beind held in the name of the people of OK for 30 years in a prison cell because she possesed a substance LESS harmful than beer, right? That should be appaling to anyone in my opinion. That's big government if I've ever heard of it. I'd rather the government take more of my money than I think they deserve than take my freedom away and put me in a cell because they don't like my private activities that don't harm anyone.
 
OK, so I'm complaining about it and I'm a radical Libertarian. My complaint is very much about taking free people who aren't harming others and putting htem in a cage (prison) because we think they're hurting themselves. Makes no sense to me at all.

You do realize that a human being is now beind held in the name of the people of OK for 30 years in a prison cell because she possesed a substance LESS harmful than beer, right? That should be appaling to anyone in my opinion. That's big government if I've ever heard of it. I'd rather the government take more of my money than I think they deserve than take my freedom away and put me in a cell because they don't like my private activities that don't harm anyone.

Now I've lost some respect for your position because of how you framed this argument.

She wasn't simply in possession of the substance (she was selling it...on two separate occasions), which means she is most likely a regular dealer.

Did they put her in jail because they thought she was harming herself...no that isn't the reasoning.

Taking more of ones hard earned money is less freedom since money is equal to time...time you can't get back.
 
Chalk me up as one who thinks it should be legalized. At the same time, chalk me up as one who says, "Well, sucks to suck, nimrod. Probably shouldn't have been breaking the law." I have a hard time feeling bad for this chick. She knew what she was doing was wrong, she knew the consequences, and she did it anyway. I think 30 years is beyond stupid, but it is what it is.

LiarLiar.jpg


"STOP BREAKING THE LAW, *** HOLE!"
 
Chalk me up as one who thinks it should be legalized. At the same time, chalk me up as one who says, "Well, sucks to suck, nimrod. Probably shouldn't have been breaking the law." I have a hard time feeling bad for this chick. She knew what she was doing was wrong, she knew the consequences, and she did it anyway. I think 30 years is beyond stupid, but it is what it is.

LiarLiar.jpg


"STOP BREAKING THE LAW, *** HOLE!"

Probably where I fall as well.
 
Chalk me up as one who thinks it should be legalized. At the same time, chalk me up as one who says, "Well, sucks to suck, nimrod. Probably shouldn't have been breaking the law." I have a hard time feeling bad for this chick. She knew what she was doing was wrong, she knew the consequences, and she did it anyway. I think 30 years is beyond stupid, but it is what it is.
Wrong? Illegal, yes, but wrong?

And I think it's pretty damn important to consider whose actions are worse: The chick who sold a harmless substance to a consenting adult, or the law enforcement agent and court system that decided to lock her up at huge expense to the tax payer (and take away her kids at huge expense to the tax payer). The answer to that question is pretty damn obvious to anyone with half a brain. Taking your approach to life concedes all power to fascists and tyrants. If people aren't vigilant in protecting the civil liberties of those in their community (and abroad, if youre so inclined), those liberties will be gone in no time.

As always, Dave, you come off as fascist idiot. I guess Rosa Parks shouldn't have kept her seat...
 
Wrong? Illegal, yes, but wrong?

And I think it's pretty damn important to consider whose actions are worse: The chick who sold a harmless substance to a consenting adult, or the law enforcement agent and court system that decided to lock her up at huge expense to the tax payer (and take away her kids at huge expense to the tax payer). The answer to that question is pretty damn obvious to anyone with half a brain. Taking your approach to life concedes all power to fascists and tyrants. If people aren't vigilant in protecting the civil liberties of those in their community (and abroad, if youre so inclined), those liberties will be gone in no time.

As always, Dave, you come off as fascist idiot. I guess Rosa Parks shouldn't have kept her seat...

Let me rephrase: It is wrong in the eyes of the law. You know how I feel about weed, man, so get off my rim. As for fighting for my civil liberties, I am happy to do that. Very happy, actually. I hope to win the District 3 seat in the T-Ville city council this year because I feel like I/the citizens are being taken advantage of, and I want to be heard, dammit. I simply DON'T CARE about pot legislation like you do. I'm glad you're active, etc. but that doesn't change the fact that it is still a law at the moment, and breaking the law will get you thrown in jail. Boo F'ing Hoo for some stupid chick that can't even sell drugs properly.

I'm fine coming off as an idiot, that comes with just being me, but I am no fascist.
 
Back
Top