Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

paraplegic_T_Rex t1_j0vc9ce wrote

Can someone explain why the governor would veto this?

10

Connalds_Peter t1_j0vjmcn wrote

Because he is a conservative republican, so he hates change almost as much as he hates freedom

33

whoisdizzle t1_j0vujcr wrote

I assume your on the side of taking guns away and forcing vaccines Mr. Freedom?

−23

sirspidermonkey t1_j0w9tri wrote

I love you how you go right to sarcastic name calling with all but the briefest stop at whataboutism.

13

whoisdizzle t1_j0xli03 wrote

“Hates freedom” on the side that truly hates freedom. Not a Republican btw but I do find it comical when liberals go after conservatives on any issue of freedom

−8

sirspidermonkey t1_j0zc1al wrote

>“Hates freedom” on the side that truly hates freedom

That is certainly a position. Things those freedom hating left has given us:

  • Gave us work place safety laws so you are free not to be exposed to toxic chemicals
  • Gave us child labor laws so your children are free not to have to go to work 16 hour days
  • Gave us a civiil liberties so you can't be imprisoned because of who you love.

Just because you have guns doesn't make you free.

3

ChuckBosworth t1_j0vdpbp wrote

Because it's still illegal federally and NH would likely want to sell cannabis products at the state run liquor stores to control it. This isn't something they can do while it's still illegal.

28

paraplegic_T_Rex t1_j0vezqf wrote

Why not, who’s stopping them? The federal government doesn’t give a shit about weed.

−3

pitamandan t1_j0vi4af wrote

.. the federal law is stopping them. What don’t you understand? NO states are selling it, only private companies within a state are.

You also can’t legally protect the money made from sales of federally illegal drugs. Google “pot banks”, they are private banks, that are illegally knowingly accepting money made from a federally illegal good. They take a margin to store this money and protect it. They don’t have FDIC backing, which is to say if someone robs that bank, or it goes out of business, the entity storing money within it does not have insurance of getting their money back.

Until the feds legalize it, no state can sell it, or finance it.

Then my personal opinion, being someone that totally supports the whole pot movement and hates that it’s illegal here.. I like that we’re holding out. For every pot store there are 5-10 more shitty vape/bong stores that are basically useless and primarily selling tobacco and vape juice, which is what a goddamn gas station can/should be doing. That retail space should be growing the town and culture, not housing the cheapest shittiest crap on the market. Once it’s legal federally (and cmon it will be eventually), it’ll be great to have it all centrally located near highways like we do with liqueur. Imagine a NH liqueur store with half of it being pot. It’ll be a weed-topia.

15

CatMoreTofu t1_j0vxujr wrote

I just do not understand why we should want/allow the NH Government to have total control over an entirely new industry. We've already seen an explosion of nano/micro breweries with the loosening of the restrictions on them, why do we continue to insist that NH Liquor store model is even appealing? Half of the reason it works is that our border states charge sales tax and we're accessible, both are things which would be unlikely to motivate additional marijuana sales. The people of NH have overwhelmingly supported legalization for a long time and yet Governors have been vetoing legalization measures since at least John Lynch's time in office, this is just fundamentally not how things ought to function even if they have supposedly well intentioned plans for the future.

4

pitamandan t1_j0wcq35 wrote

So NH doesn’t have a “total control over alcohol”. Every store sells it, Gary’s liqueur in Portsmouth is one of my fave pickup spots. No one is advocating for “total control”.

We seem to be a very goal/task oriented state. When we do something, we do it with purpose, or not at all, but we also limit “chaos”. Ie saying “sure let everyone do whatever and we’ll deal with the fallout”. Lots of states have that, and if you’ve been to those states (I’m looking at you Massachusetts, Florida, and North Carolina), and it’s like a checkerboard of desirable/undesirable. Pot barn and vape shop, high end shopping, run down housing, millionaire condos.

NH, at least in my view, seems to prefer a more tempered approach to idealism. Like picture apple products. Are they first with everything? No. Do they execute well when a clear need, and value to it, exists? Yes.

My man, I would love to have a dispensary here. But for now, I’ll like our limitations to keep extreme stores to a minimum, and drive an extra 12 minutes to ME or MA for pot.

1

Own_Pollution24 t1_j0xf7qi wrote

Gary's closed like a year ago

1

pitamandan t1_j0xpmvj wrote

Technically it moved to route 1, if you take the roundabout toward Maine, then the first right, it’s right there. It sold to tobacco bev, but same store.

1

CatMoreTofu t1_j0xfvbp wrote

Its an entire new industry paying above average wages and happy to be taxed at 20% rate. An industry that is already legally operating on the other aide of all our borders and without any of the benefits coming to NH. I am really unsure any of the types of issues you are describing experiencing in other states can be directly attributed to legalization. I also disagree with your assessment of the NH approach to governance, we have an atypically large legislature which insures more compromise and consequently tends to slow the speed of the process. At a time when NH needs to both retain and recruit young and working age people it seems senseless to sit on the sidelines while our neighboring state’s allow this industry to develop. The longer NH continues to sit out the less potential benefits we will see from this new industry as NH will be further behind in tools and know how. None of this bothers the Governor etc because those that see the issue through the liquor store lens only see that revenue stream and not the dozens of other economic impacts this has. Want to rejuvenate the North country while improving our roads and schools? Want to just lower taxes? Or how about just doing something the majority of residents say they want?

1

pitamandan t1_j0xpfqc wrote

Your idealist “NH would benefit, why don’t we?” Is both childish and obvious. Like I tell my 4yo, I would love to just “have” money. But unfortunately, it’s a bit more complicated.

Should we? Sure. Would it be awesome? Yes. Could we benefit? Hell yes.

BUT ARE WE GOING TO, AND DOES YOUR SINGULAR OPINION MATTER? FUCK NO IT DOES NOT.

I feel like I’m arguing with an entitled teenager. I get it, from your perspective, life would be so much cooler or accessible. Unfortunately, the adults have to work it all out before you can have your cookie.

−3

CatMoreTofu t1_j0z9j0u wrote

I'm not sure why you had to reduce the conversation to name calling and insults. All I am saying is that I see a lot of potential benefits, the majority of NH residents want legalization, and the benefits of waiting until it can be run through the State Liquor stores makes little to no sense. The part where you said: "Should we? Sure. Would it be awesome? Yes. Could we benefit? Hell yes." is the whole argument, why waste time defending NH politicians who are actively blocking popular legislation which would undoubtedly increase tax revenues? My point this whole time has simply been that waiting for it to be Federally Legal so the state can Monopolize the marketplace via the Liquor Store model seems ill-conceived and in my opinion actually less desirable than the alternatives.

3

anarchir t1_j0xx4i2 wrote

NH State does have near total control over hard liquor sales. Restaurants cannot even buy direct from a distillery!

1

ElisabetSobeckPhD t1_j0ywse3 wrote

> it’s like a checkerboard of desirable/undesirable. Pot barn and vape shop, high end shopping, run down housing, millionaire condos. >

honestly you are describing Seabrook right now (minus the pot barn obviously)

1

paraplegic_T_Rex t1_j0vkq3j wrote

There are already shitty vape stores all over the state now. How would legalization change that?

2

Timzawesome t1_j0vsxxz wrote

The DEA may not care about a single store in Massachusetts breaking federal law. They will sure as hell care about an entire state ignoring the law. The revenue generated by a state monopoly would be astronomical, and too hard for them to ignore. The liquor commission did $786 Million in revenue in 2021. You can't ignore their track record of not enforcing laws in legal states, but I truly believe it is different when you're talking state monopolies.

I can't say I disagree with waiting until federal legalization. When it is, add a weed section to the liquor stores! The state profits heavily on the sale of marijuana while keeping costs low for citizens and stealing revenue from neighboring states. Same as we have with liquor. Currently, possession of marijuana is decriminalized. The smell of marijuana is not probable cause to search your vehicle/property. At most you're slapped with a fine, and that is if a police officer is having a bad day. NH residents could theoretically visit any other state in new england to purchase weed until then*

*this is not legal advice. Crossing state lines with a federally controlled substance is no bueno. That being said, the feds are not posted up along the border of MA/NH to make traffic stops, and I seriously doubt they ever will be.

3

CatMoreTofu t1_j0vwkup wrote

Why wait? So we can keep sending that tax revenue to MA,ME, and VT? NH wants to control it at the state level, that much is clear, but why should we let them do it that way? It would likely create more jobs, entrepreneurship, and innovation if the states only involvement was via taxation. The last thing NH needs is a larger portion of its funding being tied to a single department of the government.

3

SheeEttin t1_j0wel47 wrote

Tell your reps, then. With enough reps on board they can override Sununu's veto.

6

GodMike t1_j0xu8pa wrote

Since it’s not federally legal they can’t use banks because banks are afraid of losing their federal protection on funds in case of bankruptcy. The state probably doesn’t want to have to keep that much cash on hand.

1

Ok_Nobody4967 t1_j0x0t3s wrote

Despite him saying so, sununu is a typical trumpnazi who believes marijuana is a gateway drug, just like Nancy Reagan.

7

ryanpm40 t1_j0xqa15 wrote

Because he thinks weed leads to heroin use

6

Qbncgr t1_j0vt4xb wrote

He says it’s a gateway drug.

5

SenexMedicum t1_j13boyy wrote

The governor will veto this because he is a Republican. All Republican legislators are dinosaurs who believe one puff of weed will turn you into a heroin addict. The DEA still (incorrectly) classified MJ as Schedule I meaning it has a high potential for abuse and no currently accepted medical use.

3

PiermontVillage t1_j0vuuac wrote

Because he owns a ski area. The thought of any of his employees getting high drives him wild. Any accidents that were caused by stoned workers would make his sky high insurance coverage dicey and he might have to pay out of pocket. (This is pure conjecture. What do you think?)

2

Matty121619 t1_j0w39y8 wrote

Have you ever been to a ski area though? Lol there's tons of pot heads that work at those.

17

Few-Cable5130 t1_j0wq6z1 wrote

Ya that's cute to think that ski mountain employees are mostly sober.

12