It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner signs marijuana decriminalization bill

page: 1
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 09:43 AM
link   
Illinois has passed a bill easing limits on mj possession and the penalties associated statewide.

Jail time is eliminated for 10 grams or less possession.

But money fines are in place that will increase government revenues while decreasing prosecution/jail costs.

Not bad for several reasons including the fact that Illinois is broke and needs extra income and effective spending reductions.

Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner signs marijuana decriminalization bill


Effective immediately, possession of up to 10 grams of marijuana in Illinois is punishable by a fine, instead of a misdemeanor with possible jail time.

Years after Chicago and other Illinois cities began to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana, the state of Illinois has changed its marijuana possession laws, too.

On July 29, Gov. Bruce Rauner signed Senate Bill 2228, which decriminalizes possession of small amounts of marijuana. Effective immediately, the new law makes possession of up to 10 grams of marijuana a civil offense punishable by a fine of between $100 and $200.

The bill also provides that law enforcement will automatically expunge the civil citation from the record of anyone charged with possessing 10 or fewer grams of marijuana. This would occur within six months after the resolution of the offense and would reduce the chance that possession of small amounts of marijuana will keep a person from finding employment and supporting himself.



edit on Jul-31-2016 by xuenchen because: grams not ounces




posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 09:48 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

It would have been better if they dropped the monetary fines as well. I agree that they are just looking for a quick money grab.

'De-criminalizing' to me means removing all aspects of illegality which would include the fine.



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 09:50 AM
link   
10 grams, NOT 10 ounces... reallllllllly big difference.

hahahaha.



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 09:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: rexsblues
10 grams, NOT 10 ounces... reallllllllly big difference.

hahahaha.

LOL

I almost fell over when I read that.

Here's my question: Will employers still disqualify job applicants based on the results of a urinalysis?



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: rexsblues
10 grams, NOT 10 ounces... reallllllllly big difference.

hahahaha.


LOL

I corrected the error.




posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 09:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Snarl
Here's my question: Will employers still disqualify job applicants based on the results of a urinalysis?


I believe they still can since they are private enterprises.



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Snarl

Yes they will. It's still an illegal substance.

Good job Governor, now move on to term limits like you promised.



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: xuenchen

It would have been better if they dropped the monetary fines as well. I agree that they are just looking for a quick money grab.

'De-criminalizing' to me means removing all aspects of illegality which would include the fine.



Sure that would be better, but at least they are moving in the right direction and in time provide our Federal government by being another example to emulate. Economically, this law will be beneficial to the citizens and the state of Illinois.



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Snarl

They will.
Even in states where it is legal,
employers still UA,
and can still turn you down for a positive mj result.



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: CynConcepts
Economically, this law will be beneficial to the citizens and the state of Illinois.


Partially due to confiscatory policy on a substance they should not be fining the citizenry for possessing.

'It's legal for you to have this, but we need $200.'



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen


Oh goodie! Now, lets watch the shooting and murder rate plummet in the African American communities of Chicago.



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I think they have to see if the baby step leads to more steps. When they realize how much more money they could make by simply allowing the stuff to be sold. Colorado is in very high cotton now because of their acceptance. It's stupid not to legalize and open the market up.

Growers making money, users spending money....and round and round the world goes.
More plants means cleaner air. Micro-growing means less pesticides and fungicides and chemicals. Legalization means no more crime based on pot distrubition and sales. Better for the climate, better for the soil, better for the users - better for the world. Period.

Old stodgy tea-totallers are going to die off eventually, and this will be an open society at last. I intend to live long enough to see it happen.

GO MILLENNIALS, GO!!!!!

(It is a cruel myth that Millennials are "self-absorbed special snowflakes," just in case anyone reading doesn't know that. It's a lie.)

edit on 7/31/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I think it's stupid of them to continue UA testing in places where it is not a criminal offense. They don't test people for alcohol or tobacco (well, most don't - some won't hire smokers just on principle). But it's asinine to refuse qualified, interested applicants based on a couple of tokes of an evening.

Retarded thinking.



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
I think they have to see if the baby step leads to more steps.


I personally do not think their heart is in this for the altruistic aspect of making it legal, I think they just want the fines. Illinois is broke and they probably see this as a win-win, less money spent processing 'criminals' coupled with a quick, high-dollar fine.



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


Wanna bet that the world-famous shootings in Chicago will now skyrocket even more?



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
I think it's stupid of them to continue UA testing in places where it is not a criminal offense. They don't test people for alcohol or tobacco (well, most don't - some won't hire smokers just on principle). But it's asinine to refuse qualified, interested applicants based on a couple of tokes of an evening.

Retarded thinking.


Well, their business, their rules. And as you pointed out, there are establishments that will not hirer smokers.



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aliensun
Wanna bet that the world-famous shootings in Chicago will now skyrocket even more?


Explain the mechanics.



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Aliensun

I think you're mistaken. I wouldn't take that bet.
When you relax the stupid laws, the criminals run out of reasons to be hostile.



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 10:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


Wanna bet that the world-famous shootings in Chicago will now skyrocket even more?



Why?

I disagree!

IF a crime were committed it would totally be robbing the store for food rather than shoot someone.



posted on Jul, 31 2016 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I know. There are also establishments that don't drug test.
Much more fun group. More productive, more cool, more educated, more desirable to work for.

I personally think the best policy is to only test people after there has been an incident requiring investigation (like injury, or pilfering, etc).
Then, if the person tests positive, they can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Either provide treatment or let them go.

It's not much different than driving over the speed limit. It only matters if you get caught.


edit on 7/31/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join