Pot Lounges?
Hell YES!*

Big comfy chairs, a few fireplaces, pool tables, great Music -- what else would one really need?*

*what they need is an Awesome shuttle system
'cause whotf's gonna Drive after they Imbibe?
[maybe they could tow your rig home]....

plus: Taxes!

They could also be located Outside one's establishment
or annexed to one's home? 'Private' clubs?

Terrible, terrible article.

"Having a license to run a pot lounge, where people can buy and smoke weed inside a café-like setting, is almost a guaranteed moneymaker thanks to massive demand for this service."

Seriously, any editor should have killed this article right there.

Secondly, all "equitability programs" will be unsuccessful: Limiting investment into the industry is essentially redlining for pot cafes. Redlining massively harmed not only black potential homebuyers, but black actual homeowners who were unable to sell their homes, making them effectively worthless.

This is shame-on-you dumb. Learn an ounce > smoke an ounce.

How about tobacco lounges too then?

Like,
You know what's in even more demand than pot?
Alcohol! And we know bars never close, right? Even though regulation is less stringent, permitting is less stringent, the product is cheaper and sells at a higher margin, the labor pool is nearly infinite, and they don't need to cater to "renters and homeless" - and they STILL go out of business all the time. Like this entire article is offensively stupid.

The photo and cutline — as well as Lester's piece from May, which the cutline links to — give readers the incorrect impression that cannabis cafés (and cannabis itself) are legal in Spain.

Just for the record, they are not. The situation is akin to the early days of West Coast medical dispensaries, which were illegal at all levels of government, but tolerated at the city level. The pioneer was Dennis Peron's Cannabis Buyers' Club in San Francisco, which was only shut down by the city after it grew too big and got out of control. Other clubs sprang up there in its wake and flourished before a series of Federal raids.

In Spain, to enter a cannabis café/club you first need a recommendation from an existing member. It's easy enough to find recommendation brokers online if you don't know someone. They don't charge for this service, though they probably get some sort of consideration from the clubs in return.

The broker will make an intake appointment for you at the club of their choice. You'll have to pay a membership fee (probably €40-60) which is good for one year. You'll also need to provide a local address, which can't be a commercial establishment like a hotel. An Airbnb is fine; they won't check, or communicate with you by mail there. Probably you can just use any residential address in the city, even one you have no connection to.

Once you're admitted, you can buy some product. Technically, you're not really "buying" it; your membership contract is actually an agreement with the club to grow it for you, which they don't do onsite. You still pay each time for whatever amount you get, but the prices are pretty cheap.

"Buying" and leaving immediately after is discouraged. In that way it's different from, say, Amsterdam, where you can buy and take away or also stay and smoke. (There, of course, it's actually legal; Spanish clubs don't want the police potentially seeing people enter and then leave a few minutes later.) The norm is to spend at least 30 minutes or so rolling, smoking and hanging out.

They may suggest that you leave your "purchase" behind at the club, but most people don't really do that. When you do leave with product, you're strongly encouraged to stuff it in your underwear since the police can't legally search there. If you're busted with it and you tell the police where you got it, theoretically it could lead to the club being shut down.

@4 Do you suppose that has something to do with the abundance of competition? There are nearly 11,000 on-sale liquor licenses issued in the state — more than 4000 in King County alone. I doubt anyone's expecting there would be more than a fraction of that number of cannabis consumption lounges.

Now I may be just a simple country stoner, but it seems like there would be other factors that would favor pot lounges over bars in terms of operating expenses. While Kirby's bill would require them to have specific air filtration devices, they would require no other special equipment like walk-in/reach-in coolers, beer taps, warewashers etc. which can be expensive to buy, install and run. Less shrinkage, since cannabis sellers are legally required to account for their inventory in a way saloonkeepers aren't. No multitudes of broken glassware needing constant replacement. And I doubt their insurance bills would be as large, due to fewer concerns about overserving or violence from intoxicated patrons.

I do not consume marijuana or even alcohol. That said, I voted for legalization and strongly favour preserving it.

In fact, I would go so far as to make the marijuana bud the official state flower. Mostly, I want to do this to piss off the assclowns in DC.

@7 You know who else voted for legalization? A majority of voters in the District of Columbia. I'm one of them. So cannabis is legal there also. But we can't buy it legally because Congress continues to block funding for the implementation of regulations for the sale of it.

Kindly quit using "DC" as shorthand for elements of the Federal government that you don't like. Most of the 600,000 or so residents of the place don't like them either. Since we can't elect our own senators or Congress members (that have actual voting rights, at least) we can't be blamed for putting any of them in office.

Meanwhile, plenty of the same people who voted for cannabis legalization in the State of Washington continue to inflict Cathy fucking McMorris Rodgers on us eight months out of every year.

Will there be rap music and regular gun fights?

This is obviously an article to push a specific agenda hidden behind "social equity" for personal gain. Its unfortunate but let the games begin...