Arizonans are discovering that by purchasing a license and some tax stamps, it might be possible for them to legally possess and sell marijuana.

A law passed in 1983 in the Arizona Senate allows the Arizona Department of Revenue to sell licenses for $100. With a license, one may purchase tax stamps based on the weight of the cannabis in that person's possession, said Arizona Rep. Scott Bundgaard, R-Phoenix.

The bill was intended to act as a financial deterrent for drug pushers in the state, as well as to raise tax revenue money for the state, he said.

"When the bill was passed, it was expected to raise revenues, but it hasn't been effective," Bundgaard said. "In the past 13 years, only $327,008 has been raised."

The fact that the bill levies a luxury tax on marijuana and technically allows anybody to purchase a license has sent mixed messages to the marijuana dealer and user community.

"They can't make us pay taxes on something that wasn't legal anyway," said Jacqueline Casey, president of the Libertarian Students group, which sponsored speakers from the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws last Wednesday night. About 50 people attended the meeting.

Waving a plant and his license to possess and sell marijuana in a room smelling of stale marijuana smoke, Peter Wilson, chairman of the Arizona chapter of the organization, told the mostly student audience that the tax was imposed "so the IRS makes money when people are busted."

Wilson, a 37-year-old Phoenix resident, was arrested for possession of marijuana, but the charges against him were dismissed when a Phoenix judge ruled that prosecuting him would constitute a case of double jeopardy. He had already paid taxes on the substance, so he could not be financially penalized again.

It was an interesting ruling because according to the minutes of the committee on finance from March 1983, Ian McPherson, from the Attorney General's office, said the bill would not prejudice or jeopardize any criminal statute involving controlled substances. He found no other statutes that would be imperiled by the bill's enactment.

Wilson's case is a prime example of why the licensing law is not doing what it was intended to. He got off, and is now sending a message to others that the law allows for legal marijuana use and sale.

He encouraged students to apply for a license and to buy the stamps, because they too might get off if caught using marijuana.

"I'm actively dealing as sort of a political statement, as much to make money at it," Wilson told The Wall Street Journal in February.

He said the the judge's ruling is "opening the door to legalized marijuana."

"I'm hoping that other people follow my footsteps and become licensed dealers and pay the tax and treat it as a legal business."

Wilson's stance is exactly the wrong message being inadvertently sent by the bill, Bundgaard said. He recently introduced a bill into the Arizona Senate that will repeal the state luxury taxes on cannabis and will remove the licensing requirements for the possession or sale of cannabis by Oct. 1.

"Some people are under the impression that (the law) is a tool for them to use and deal marijuana," Bundgaard said. "People are moving here because of it.

"The law is sending a conflicting message. We need to enforce that drug use in this state is illegal and unacceptable and that it won't be tolerated."