Prop 19

[Jason913]

Originally Posted by BustedS13

are you fucking serious?

This is the slide that explains the huge increase.

[upsdude]

once the baby boomers in congress die off maybe the leftover stigma from the early 50's and 60's about "reefer" will also wane. it's for the most part socially accepted...there's movies about it, songs, etc.

[BustedS13]

Originally Posted by Walperstyle

I like how random graphs are considered truthful sources of information.

Truth is, nobody really knows the stats on arrests. There is a difference between arrests, and being charged too.

the problem is that people are being arrested for possession.

Originally Posted by Jason913

This is the slide that explains the huge increase.

exactly. cops hand them out like candy because they're nice and easy, just like speeding tickets. i love when i drive down the highway and see jurisdiction after jurisdiction camped out, waiting for the easy ticket, instead of actually patrolling. don't we have highway patrol for a reason?
but the laziness of police officers is another topic.

Originally Posted by mau5trap

that's on them. were they allowed to carry or have weed on them legally?

you're unbelievable. i'm pointing out the problem for which prop 19 is the solution, and you're running the thread around in circles, jerking off to prop 215, and saying that everything's fine. i'm going to add you to my ignore list now.

Originally Posted by bb4_96

I feel like all the timeand effort going into the fight for/use of this substance could be doing something great.

yeah, and we could all replace jerking off with volunteering at an aids clinic. i know things look black and white from the back seat of mom's minivan, but they're not.

Originally Posted by ronmcdon

that graph looks at Marijuana arrests in the US overall, not CA specifically.

prop 19 would be the start of a domino effect for the rest of the nation. that's why national marijuana arrests are relevant, at least to me. i don't live in the garden of eden that is california. lots of people don't, and they're being arrested every day for something ridiculous.

i wish you guys could see beyond your state's border. you're part of a much larger country, and voting yes on 19 really could kickstart some much needed change for all of us.


if you really think marijuana is dangerous, more dangerous than what's already legal and available to us, vote no. but if you're voting no because you're 18-20 and can't wait a couple years, or you want to smoke with minors, or you want to keep cashing in on marijuana's legal status, fuck you.
if you all wait around for the perfect bill to come along, we're all going to be dead long before legalization.

[Walperstyle]

In all reality, smoking anything is not healthy. You guys should just quit.

I'm not some ninny either, I've smoked it a few times. Its pointless. Makes you slow and hungry.

[ViciousCesar!]

Originally Posted by I LUV MY S13

...It truely is a gateway drug....

no it's not. marijuana is only a gateway drug because we group it with other substances that it has nothing in common with, it is really nothing like coke, crack, heroin, meth or any of the rest. if we were to stop labeling it as a stepping stone to the others people would stop trying the others. it's something of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

as a matter of fact, the Netherlands has credited the drastic drops in use of hard drugs to it's decriminalization of marijuana.

[S14DB]

This is for discussing Prop 19. Not your Marijuana use experiences.

[supervenom]

A long-standing fear campaign has been in use to direct the opinion of the American public against marijuana. Initially, a film called "Reefer Madness" was produced to incite panic with-in the population. The film made the suggestion that marijuana was a drug used strictly by hispanics, jews, blacks, and musicians and threatened to permeate the very fabric of the American way of life. This film can be found on youtube. Just like the initial ban on opium was directed at control of an early Chinese population, anti-marijuana laws have been used to control certain segments of society. Marijuana is a drug that can not cause over-dose. It, in fact, has many beneficial elements and has been used through out the world and through out the ages for medicinal and recreational use. The taxation and control of marijuana will dawn a new age of enlightenment, openness, sincerity and compassion.

I say YES! on California Prop. 19.

[bb4_96]

I'm still on the fence about prop 19. I really can't foresee the outcome if it's intended effect is achieved. I think the last thing my generation needs is a new substance to use/abuse. I see two likely scenarios, Its going to become something of a cigarette type of effect where everyone uses it for a long time then its slowly becomes socially unacceptable and ovetaxed until it eventually dies out. Or it causes short term chaos that gets the legislation overturned and even heavier regulation than before.

About all the people that were convicted of ______ related offenses.... They broke the law. If you break the law your gambling with your criminal record. If I think it isn't a big deal to gun down people who piss me off in traffic should I do it? If it's a fucking law, grow up and obey it. Don't fucking run around doing what you want because you think your justified or the law is dated, your skirting anarchy and should be reprimanded. If you don't like the law go change it. But don't break it like a jackass because you think its wrong.

Maybe instead of getting high, and potentially busted, you should advance the campaign for legalization. Just a suggestion.

It looks pretty black and white from where I'm sitting... back seat of mom's van or not.

[ESmorz]

Originally Posted by supervenom

The taxation and control of marijuana will dawn a new age of enlightenment, openness, sincerity and compassion.

Hippie.

Nothing like taxing rebellion. Humans are Hot Topic.

420 4 lyfe

[Walperstyle]

RCMP just busted a grow about 10 houses away from mine. Glad to see it go. Don't want that in my neighborhood.

[ViciousCesar!]

Originally Posted by supervenom

A long-standing fear campaign has been in use to direct the opinion of the American public against marijuana. Initially, a film called "Reefer Madness" was produced to incite panic with-in the population. The film made the suggestion that marijuana was a drug used strictly by hispanics, jews, blacks, and musicians and threatened to permeate the very fabric of the American way of life. This film can be found on youtube. Just like the initial ban on opium was directed at control of an early Chinese population, anti-marijuana laws have been used to control certain segments of society. Marijuana is a drug that can not cause over-dose. It, in fact, has many beneficial elements and has been used through out the world and through out the ages for medicinal and recreational use. The taxation and control of marijuana will dawn a new age of enlightenment, openness, sincerity and compassion.

I say YES! on California Prop. 19.

fun fact about Reefer Madness:
this anti marijuana propaganda was the brain child of William Randolph Hearst (who felt that hemp was too much of a threat to the profit from his paper mills), the Dupont company (who wanted to get hemp out of the America so they could fill the gap with their newly found synthetic polymer, Nylon), and Harry Anslinger (known racist who claimed that that marijuana 'made Black people violent and insane, and encouraged race-mixing'. this man used non scientific bases to form all his anti marijuana claims, which much of the public still hold as truths even after being scientifically and socially disproved time and time again).

in fact, Anslinger was appointed to his post as head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics by Andrew Mellon, who just happened to be the prime financial backer of the Dupont Corporation.

[ronmcdon]

Originally Posted by BustedS13

prop 19 would be the start of a domino effect for the rest of the nation. that's why national marijuana arrests are relevant, at least to me. i don't live in the garden of eden that is california. lots of people don't, and they're being arrested every day for something ridiculous.

i wish you guys could see beyond your state's border. you're part of a much larger country, and voting yes on 19 really could kickstart some much needed change for all of us.

I can't say I'm convinced by that.

For instance, look at CA Prop 215, passed in 1996 (14 yrs ago).
That was the medical mj law.
Most, if not all, states haven't followed in our precedent.
If a state can't even accept mj for medical reasons, it's highly unlikely they'll accept it for recreation.

On a more positive note, look at CARB.
Thankfully not all states have to deal with our bullshit.

Now I agree, it would set a good precedent that CA makes a more progressive move towards legitimizing mj.
I just don't see prop 19 as the absolute best way of doing so.

For the most part, I'm really not a huge fan of CA politics.
Despite our politicians being Democrats, they're really more inclined to tell ppl what NOT to do, and tax everything.
It's not as progressive as many would make it out to.

BTW - I thought you hated CA?
I have mixed feelings about the state, but it sure as hell is no 'garden of eden' imo.

[drift freaq]

Originally Posted by upsdude

once the baby boomers in congress die off maybe the leftover stigma from the early 50's and 60's about "reefer" will also wane. it's for the most part socially accepted...there's movies about it, songs, etc.

Ah just had to speak up about this. Most of the baby boomers smoked dope and were hippies or flirted with the whole hippie thing. The baby boom started at the end of WWII I.E. late 1940's and ended in like 1962. That pretty much puts them coming of age in the early, mid and late 60's as well as the 70's. I.E. Hippies, rock music and pot smoking and drug taking.
Pretty much anyone who came of age as a teenager in that time period did smoke dope.




The stigma is left over from the boomers parents. Who grew up in the depression. Pot was viewed as way out of the box by these people regardless of reefer Madness and whatnot.
These people were church goers and law abiding citizens with strong work ethics. Pot smoking did not fit into that picture at all.

In fact most baby boomers are not against the decriminalization of pot, they are for it.

What most pot smokers sometimes fail to realize, is this country is large and has a large streak of conservative thinking running through it.
Not everyone views pot as a good thing. Nor can you expect them too. Its just not the way they were taught to live.

Given all that it could still get decriminalized for the sake of taxes and whatnot.
Not everyone wanted Alcohol to be legal either.

Though trying to blame a particular generation of people for being the reason its not legal? Well that is very short sighted and a generalized line of thinking.

Its more complicated than that.

I am all for the legalization of it. So it can be taxed and taking it out of the hands of the underground outside of the law element.

Less of my tax money being spent trying to eradicate the shit. LOL

[ronmcdon]

Yeah true, that seems a bit off to blame a generation in particular.
If anything, the 60's had a huge advancement in the civil rights movement.
We aren't as progressive as we'd like in all respects, but you can't dismiss the progress we've made in the past few decades.
I get the impression that some of the younger generation, and/or those who haven't lived in more conservative places of the world tend to take this for granted.

Honestly, I think it has more to do with the US as a whole being a moderately conservative nation
(or at least compared to Western Europe).
This is especially the case when it comes areas where the far right dominating in the mid-west/south, etc.
I feel that even if states like CA, or the Northwest and Northeast move on, those states will be still doing their own thing.
It's almost as if other states are entirely different countries.

[kingkilburn]

Originally Posted by ronmcdon

It's almost as if other states are entirely different countries.

Technically they are.

[ronmcdon]

states in the United States, geez
technically, the term 'state' alone might be ambiguous,
but here I think it's obvious given the context.

[Tarrell]

Originally Posted by J3123MY

So your against a proposition just because the federal government decides to force its "morals" upon its citizen? This is exactly what many of our founding fathers was against, too much federal power. Its gonna be a long time before uncle Sam says, "my bad.....We thought it was bad back in the day. Sorry for all the lives we have ruined over a plant." lol. And plus, the U.S. government is supplying medical marijuana to like a couple of people for the rest of their lives... whats up with that?

The only real reason the federal government is imposing this "moral" upon our citizens is because we, as U.S. citizens and registered voters, LET IT HAPPEN. It doesn't have to be "a long time before Uncle Sam says 'my bad..'" if we, as citizens, stand up and demand change. Think it can't happen? That's what I'm sure a lot of people said before they repealed the 18th Admendment. Or brought equality among blacks and minorities and ended discrimination. These things happened because people stood up and fought for what they believed in. Problem today is, not enough people get involved, they would rather sit back and "let someone else do it". But until that change takes place, I believe it's important we don't just ignore laws in place. Proposition 19, if passed, creates a "conflict" in our legal system. If a California police officer catches someone smoking marijuana, does he/she let the person go (becaue California says "it's legal") or do they make an arrest (because federal laws, which still make it illegal and officers are sworn to uphold, say "it's a crime")? If California can ignore this federal law, where does it stop? How soon is it before California starts ignoring other federal laws? How soon before California starts ignoring the U.S. Constitution and arrest people for say, voicing their opinions (1st admendment gaurantee), or start doing illegal searches? I've also heard opinions saying anti-pot laws are unconstitutional. If that's so, then petition the U.S. Supreme Court in an effort to have the anti-pot laws struck down. If this happens, then ALL states and "lower" governments must now repeal their anti-pot laws and make it legal, throughout the U.S. (of course that can have serious repercussions; it could mean underage people may have a right to consume it as well. After all, the Constitution also applies to them). I know a lot of you out there reading this say "Yea, right! The federal government is way too corrupt." But corruption must be exposed, challenged, and brought down. I know that seems impossible, but it's not. I'm sure that's what the corrupt officials in the city of Bell thought too. Like I've said before, I do believe the anti-pot laws need to be repealed; I'm proud that California citizens are standing up and demanding the repeal of these out-dated laws; I just feel they are going about it the wrong way. The repealing of these laws needs to start at the federal level first, otherwise this "conflict" of laws can create far more corruption and bog down our court systems even worse. Dispenseries can still be raided, people growing "legal" amounts of pot can still be arrested and charged at the federal level. In short, it could create more problems than it solves.

[kingkilburn]

No city policeman, county sheriff, or state trooper has the authority to arrest you for a federal law.

The conflict you speak of is the heart of American government and political theory. State's rights baby. The best thing CA could do for itself is pass it and make a HUGE deal out of it when the feds do try to enforce their laws.

[bb4_96]

I think its half a conservative and half mixed bag reasons why the nation is against it. Alot of very liberal people are against it. Financially pot isn't a very wise hobby, plenty of jobs still random drug test, alot of people have tried it and don't like the sensation, i know several people who work to much to take time out for it, there is a large group of elitists who like to place themselves above substance use and associated stigmatism, and there is people who can't stand the loss of productivity associated(I've never witnessed anyone do anything truly productive why high). people who dislike the negative effects it has on their athletic performance. I think I've heard just as many valid reasons for people to dislike as to support.

I don't think coservatives are the biggest issue. I think the biggest hurdle of this bill will be convincing recession time working class people that legalizing a relatively expensive liesure time drug is a worthy agenda. When some people are losing there jobs/homes/cars/lives they really don't want to hear about what others can afford to do in their leisure time.

[ronmcdon]

When I said the US is a relatively conservative nation, I wasn't singling out Republicans per say.
If I had to guess, it's ppl with families who are afraid their kids have easier access to the drug.
I think that's why CA prop 19 instills such stringent penalties for distributing pot to those under 21, esp minors.
Many, if not most Democrats don't advocate it.
I recall several CA politicians are against, including the likely next governor Jerry Brown.

I'm not so sure you can say pot really is more or less an expensive hobby.
Probably debatable compared to say alcohol and smoking.
(personally I never smoked, but spent more $ than I cared to admit on drinking)
Based on my acquaintances in the past who have used the drug for recreation purposes, my casual impression is that there's little correlation between social class and mj use.
For medical use, I'd imagine it's cheaper than prescription pain-killers and the like.
If anything, it's probably accessible to a wider group of peoples.

[ViciousCesar!]

Originally Posted by bb4_96

...people who dislike the negative effects it has on their athletic performance...

i think these guys would disagree...

Originally Posted by bb4_96

there is people who can't stand the loss of productivity associated(I've never witnessed anyone do anything truly productive why high)

so would these guys...
The 10 Most Successful Potheads on the Planet… Cool Enough to Admit It : COED Magazine

[ViciousCesar!]

by the way it's funny to see people trying so hard to justify keeping marijuana illegal, yet i don't see them trying to get get rid of alcohol, which has way more detrimental effects on society and individual welfare.

[jdhariwal]

It should NOT be legalized! People love it because its illegal. It gives them a sort of excitement, "oh shit, this is illegal and i dont give a fuck!". if you legalize it, people will eventually stop smoking it, and I can guarantee that within a year, their will be some new drug thats hella hyped that everyone is doing. If cigarettes were illegal, I'm pretty sure thats what everybody would be doing. Plus, how are the hard working people on the street supossed to make money!? They work day and night to supply us with the best ganga on the street! AMERICANS WILL LOSE JOBS! NO ON PROP 19!

[ViciousCesar!]

Originally Posted by jdhariwal

It should NOT be legalized! People love it because its illegal. It gives them a sort of excitement, "oh shit, this is illegal and i dont give a fuck!". if you legalize it, people will eventually stop smoking it, and I can guarantee that within a year, their will be some new drug thats hella hyped that everyone is doing. If cigarettes were illegal, I'm pretty sure thats what everybody would be doing. Plus, how are the hard working people on the street supossed to make money!? They work day and night to supply us with the best ganga on the street! AMERICANS WILL LOSE JOBS! NO ON PROP 19!

Age: 17

nuff' said

[kingkilburn]

jdhariwal

LOL +111111111111111111

[bb4_96]

It's irrational to try to keep pot illegal. There is just a right way and a wrong way to legalize it. With the economy the way it is I don't think there is enough money to enforce legalization. When pot is legalized there will be a time period of hype where many people go crazy with the new freedoms granted. But if you don't have any law enforement out there there will be tragic consequences. Its not so much would you smoke and ____ insert risk activity, its would some random jackass have sense enough not to.

Don't compare alcohol to pot. What is the proof equivalent of brand x of pot grown in someones facility? How much of it can you smoke before you're legally intoxicated? Whats your retort when you get slapped with a huge ass fine and lose your ____ priveledges?

I bet there's no adverse effects to 1300deg air repeatedly being drawn through your esophagus into your lungs. It will be no time before commercial manufacturers take over joint industry and nobody is going to grow there own or roll ther own any more than people still roll cigarettes(maybe 1%). People are just too fuckin lazy. That means all the bullshit qualms people have with tobacco additives in cigarettes are more than likely to make there way into joints. Hello cancerous joints and more slowly dying smokers for my kids tax dollars to support.

[BustedS13]

see bold:

Originally Posted by ronmcdon

I can't say I'm convinced by that.

For instance, look at CA Prop 215, passed in 1996 (14 yrs ago).
That was the medical mj law.
Most, if not all, states haven't followed in our precedent.
If a state can't even accept mj for medical reasons, it's highly unlikely they'll accept it for recreation.

Public perception is just starting to turn. critical mass brah. and 14 states plus DC have medical marijuana, with more voting this year.

"Cannabis remains illegal throughout the United States and is not approved for prescription as medicine, although 14 states - Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, New Jersey, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington - approve and regulate its medical use."
Medical cannabis in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On a more positive note, look at CARB.
Thankfully not all states have to deal with our bullshit.
thank god.

BTW - I thought you hated CA?
great place to visit.
I have mixed feelings about the state, but it sure as hell is no 'garden of eden' imo.
it was a joke, i could have done better. i like norcal, but i definitely wouldn't want to live there.

Originally Posted by supervenom

A long-standing fear campaign has been in use to direct the opinion of the American public against marijuana. Initially, a film called "Reefer Madness" was produced to incite panic with-in the population. The film made the suggestion that marijuana was a drug used strictly by hispanics, jews, blacks, and musicians and threatened to permeate the very fabric of the American way of life.

i can't think of a single non-white person in Reefer Madness. as i recall it's just a room full of white middle class teenagers, then one gets shot accidentally by the white dealer. also somebody gets run over by a stoned white teenager. it's a silly movie with a great name.

Originally Posted by bb4_96

About all the people that were convicted of ______ related offenses.... They broke the law. If you break the law your gambling with your criminal record. If I think it isn't a big deal to gun down people who piss me off in traffic should I do it? If it's a fucking law, grow up and obey it. Don't fucking run around doing what you want because you think your justified or the law is dated, your skirting anarchy and should be reprimanded. If you don't like the law go change it. But don't break it like a jackass because you think its wrong.

Originally Posted by drift freaq

What most pot smokers sometimes fail to realize, is this country is large and has a large streak of conservative thinking running through it.
Not everyone views pot as a good thing. Nor can you expect them too. Its just not the way they were taught to live.

Given all that it could still get decriminalized for the sake of taxes and whatnot.
Not everyone wanted Alcohol to be legal either.

Though trying to blame a particular generation of people for being the reason its not legal? Well that is very short sighted and a generalized line of thinking.

Its more complicated than that.

I am all for the legalization of it. So it can be taxed and taking it out of the hands of the underground outside of the law element.

Less of my tax money being spent trying to eradicate the shit. LOL

well said.
it must be a cold day in hell

[ViciousCesar!]

Originally Posted by bb4_96

It's irrational to try to keep pot illegal. There is just a right way and a wrong way to legalize it. With the economy the way it is I don't think there is enough money to enforce legalization. When pot is legalized there will be a time period of hype where many people go crazy with the new freedoms granted. But if you don't have any law enforement out there there will be tragic consequences. Its not so much would you smoke and ____ insert risk activity, its would some random jackass have sense enough not to.

Don't compare alcohol to pot. What is the proof equivalent of brand x of pot grown in someones facility? How much of it can you smoke before you're legally intoxicated? Whats your retort when you get slapped with a huge ass fine and lose your ____ priveledges?

I bet there's no adverse effects to 1300deg air repeatedly being drawn through your esophagus into your lungs. It will be no time before commercial manufacturers take over joint industry and nobody is going to grow there own or roll ther own any more than people still roll cigarettes(maybe 1%). People are just too fuckin lazy. That means all the bullshit qualms people have with tobacco additives in cigarettes are more than likely to make there way into joints. Hello cancerous joints and more slowly dying smokers for my kids tax dollars to support.

i hate to break it to you but people who wanna smoke, are already smoking. it's not gonna be some huge invisible border being torn down. sure there'll be a few new people who will want to try it out. but that's why we need to stop thinking of marijuana as such a 'useless drug' and educate people on it's actual benefits and proper usage... you also say we don't have enough money to support legalization. but do we really have enough money to keep it illegal?

don't worry i don't compare alcohol to pot, i've already done my research and made my choice. =)

if you don't wanna risk losing your ____ priveledges, then don't smoke marijuana before performing ____ priveledges. it's as simple as that.

and again with the hypothetical 'what if big business takes over cannabis', sure everybody who enjoys tasty potent clean buds is just gonna say fuck it and start smoking marlboro brand right? lol. don't be silly. the only people who will consider buying that stuff will be the people who are smoking low quality cartel grown dirt weed. but then that would be money taken away from criminal organizations and that would be bad, right? but since we fear what the tobacco industry will do to cannabis, we should keep going after the smoker instead of going after the guy that we think will try to poison it's consumers.

[kingkilburn]

Originally Posted by bb4_96

I bet there's no adverse effects to 1300deg air repeatedly being drawn through your esophagus into your lungs. It will be no time before commercial manufacturers take over joint industry and nobody is going to grow there own or roll ther own any more than people still roll cigarettes(maybe 1%). People are just too fuckin lazy. That means all the bullshit qualms people have with tobacco additives in cigarettes are more than likely to make there way into joints. Hello cancerous joints and more slowly dying smokers for my kids tax dollars to support.

I think you need to do some serious research on cannabis culture and how you actually smoke it.

No one is inhaling air hot enough to melt aluminum.

[Tarrell]

Originally Posted by kingkilburn

No city policeman, county sheriff, or state trooper has the authority to arrest you for a federal law.

Sorry, but that's not quite correct. While it's true some federal laws are enforced only by a federal agency (only the IRS enforces federal tax laws, only the FCC enforces radio and TV station broadcasts, etc.), state and local police officers do enforce federal laws all the time. Bank robbery is a federal crime but if a bank in any state is robbed the local police respond and have the authority to arrest the bank robbers. Can you imagine what would happen if FBI agents showed up and were told that the criminals were there with the police but they had no authority to enforce federal laws by arresting them so they let them go? Kidnapping is a federal crime but state and local police respond to that crime as well. I know you may think, "But these are only because we have laws on California's books too." But not all states have these laws on their books and they are still enforced at the local level. This has been the basis for Arizona's cracking down on illegal immigrants, they are enforcing federal laws in place.