marijuana on the ballot in california (in Debates)

http://feeds.reuters.com/%7Er/reuters/topNews/%7E3/yKSctolBd18/idUSTRE62O08U20100325

should it pass?

I'm what most people would call conservative, but I'm beginning to think why the hell not...

I say yes. I still have yet to see a reason why it shouldn't be, considering many of the things that ARE legal... For example, everyone's favorite, alcohol, (along with a list of like a hundred other things I'd rather not mention here)...

I'm in favor of legalizing marijuana, but I definitely think the people of each state should decide that.

Legalize and tax. Best overall solution for everybody.

You remember the ATF raids of medicinal pot suppliers? It will still be illegal at the federal level. But if this passes, I might finally get around to visiting my brother in LA.

If and when this passes, I wonder if CA will lose a bunch of federal funding, like how states got "forced" to up the drinking age.

Legalize but make sure to have it well under control and use adequate regulations.

(The following is purely from my personal point of view)
Make sure the legal age for use is 21yo, as much fun marijuana can be it can stunt learning way too much. Of course this is with longterm and frequent use, but that's still a serious danger. I know for a fact that my short term memory ain't worth much now.

Likely so. I would normally expect CA to just deal with the budget cuts, but I think they've taken a beating in the past couple of years.

Yeah, the fed would be kicking them while their down. Good thing they have the Terminator.

they're* ; sorry bast

The question will be can the taxes, reduced enforcement and jail cost, and possibly increased tourism be enough to make up for the loss of Federal Dollars. Right now, Cali is having serious budgetary problems

no way it would make up for that loss.

Reduced enforcement and jail cost wouldn't come into play that much. Without seeing the costs, I doubt CA is spending much hunting down those carrying under 1 ounce of pot. Remember that that amount is a misdemeanor. Most of those catches probably come from probation violations or traffic stops, and the majority of the latter likely end in citizens being taken in for processing, fines, and then released. I doubt there's much being spent on additional police force just for those, and I doubt there's much overhead needed for it. The loss of revenue from fines may be greater than the cost of enforcement.

While tourism and tax would certainly spike, federal funding is huge. I can't even guess how many millions could disappear if Uncle Sam decided to strip road maintenance funding to punish CA for having at-risk drivers.

well concidering over 30% of All inmates nation wide are in jail for some kind of marijuana charge, id say it would help with the overpopulation/congestion that the penal system has been dealing with for decades.. Instead of letting out child-molesters to make room for more pot-heads, which i might add happens frequently.

Yes 21 should be the standard age as long as they pass some kind of legislation stating kids cant enlist till they are 21.. If they can currently die at 18 in a war they didnt ask for, then they should be allowed all rights an adult 21 and over gets.



I found this funny:

Of course this is with longterm and frequent use, but that's still a serious danger. I know for a fact that my short term memory ain't worth much now.

calling memory loss a serious issue..pff..

Heck yes!

I have no desire to smoke marijuana, or be around anyone who is smoking it. But so long as it is kept in the privacy of your own home, I'm 100% in favor of legalization.

I don't use myself but I would say legalize it, free some jail space, court room clutter and many casual users could live a little easyier.

Besides Ranger point is also correct. When you consider the deaths that Alcohol has caused (not just by drunk driving) it far outwieghs the evil of pot vs Alcohol, also many people consider pot to be a gateway drug. More propaganda. What about booze as a gateway? or even cigarettes. If it was legal the revenue from tax and jobs it create could be a nice boost to the economy.

sorry not rangers point...Hatchetmans*

"Some kind of marijuana charge" is too vague for me. You'd have to remove the probation violations that wouldn't change due to this becoming law as well as the arrests that were unrelated to pot (but were included because the violator was in possession of pot).


The revolving door is a major problem, but how many child molesters were actually set free just due to overcrowding of misdemeanors (whom this law would affect)? Probably none.

and demi. you really are clueless as to how many people have been jailed in CA for pot arent you... id suggest you do some research first before spouting anything you dont have a clue about.. Just because of CA's recent turn around about weed doesnt mean any of those arrested before all this got freed. Most states spend more time looking for potfields then they do meth labs. "Why?", you may ask. Because its an easier target. they are easier to find, thus easier for the police forces to get recognised in the press... so later they can say "Hey this war on drugs is workin"

All the while pablo's switched up his game from mainly coke production to being more Meth production motivated. If you havent been paying attention to all the drug war actions going on right across the border, you must not read the paper or watch TV.

I think taking the focus off "Weed" would allow more police to actually do thier jobs, by concentrating on the heavy drugs and the crime caused because of them.

As long as hc drugs are illegal, the border's still going to be a problem. Making the drugs illegal leads to an increase in price, so as long as they're illegal, there will be drug cartels.

What the hell are you talking about? No one's talking about grandfather clauses or pot fields. This bill would only change the game for under 1 ounce of possession.

If someone decides to load up six acres of land with pot, then they deserve to get arrested. The focus is solely on misdemeanors amounts becoming legal (which I support).

tell ya what demi. i charge you to watch "Reefer madness" then tell me what the government was about on that movie. I could do a whole clinic on how the government demonized marijuana to try to curb an illegal immigrant issue after WWII.

" this just in "... "Man, hopped up on pot, attacks family and then goes on a highspeed chase. More at 10"


Sorry, you'll never see that, concidering that if their "Hopped up" on weed. they probably dont have enough motivation for any of that..

every seen a stoned speeder..Or hear of a weed related driving fatality. probably not.

If someone decides to load up six acres of land with pot, then they deserve to get arrested. The focus is solely on misdemeanors amounts becoming legal (which I support).

If someone loads up six acres of land with plants, they deserve a medal. and yes they are talking small amounts.. and that is a start.....

Spart, quit smoking weed and listen. This will not help the drug war at all, literally, very very little. Only misdemeanors would even be legal, not to mention, this would only increase the production of other drugs. Also, calm down.

Considering that the DEA and US federal gov't can lean heavily enough on the Canadian gov't to scrap a decriminalization plan I am not optimistic that they won't do the same in Cali.

Back in 2003:
"Prime Minister Jean Chretien told a Liberal fundraising dinner Tuesday night to expect legislation soon on the decriminalizing of possession of small amounts of pot. He said he wanted to prevent casual users from building a criminal record."

That plan is right now buried somewhere, maybe in one of Jimmy Hoffa's pockets.

I agree Loch, it'd have to be a national movement, and don't expect it soon.

Sparticus, while I agree with the legalization of small amounts. I have 3 friends in 2 separate marijuana caused accidents. Yes, they happen! I have only lost (very luckily) 1 to Alcohol related accidents. DUI is very dangerous regardless of the drug.

Well i currently have 3 friends who grow medical marijuana in Washington. 2 of those friends grow for their respective parents who both have cancer. I really dont think they can pass anything fast enough at this point.

And at this point legalizing it, or keeping it illegal, makes no differance other then in the courts.. People have been self-medicating since the beginning of human existance. They will continue to do so until humanity doesnt exist any more.

and count. your 2 or 3 friends were probably also drinking(there lying if they say they werent). so dont try grouping weed in there unless your willing to account for the "Mixing" of drugs. Which ofcourse is never good.

No, they were not drinking! One of them had 'good' stuff and would not mix it with alcohol. The others were asked my several times for Alcohol, since they did not have any. They then went off to get some food.

Do not assume that you know the situations of others!

Lol, drugs cause accident, don't use your denial to accuse Count's friends. I'm not saying it happens often, it happens. If you've been high, then you know, it does affect some of your judgment.

Actually, Idiots cause accidents. drugs are but 1 factor.

Spartacus, the same could be said for Alcohol, Smoking, Food and any other user related death.

If you think that drugs, including marijuana, can not cause accidents and death, then you are very naive or a fool. I agree that they do not cause as many as alcohol, but they do cause them.

I haven't read through all the posts. But I'm just trying to imagine how those inmates who spent time or even years behind bars would react if the reason they're in jail is now legal. I see this as more problematic than beneficial.

It's all about the money to me. I've no idea what the prices will be if it becomes legal, but if it's more than 50 bucks an eighth, I'll still be buying my marijuana illegally thank you very much.

probably how the rum runners felt after prohibition ended...

... which is to say watch for a spike in tommy gun sales (also a spike in Tommy Boy sales if there is an uptick in stonerism)

No count. Your friends are idiots. Ive been perma baked for a few decades now, and I think the last ticket I got was 8 years ago (82 in a 75). My last dui was in 95 and that was alcohol related. And I know what Good is. So dont blame it on the weed. All my RL friends are laughing thier butts off at the notion that your friends got "Stoned" and wrecked. Purely inattentive driving, coupled with the fact that people who already have low IQ's shouldn't smoke weed or drink alcohol. Just makes everyone else look bad.

BF, basic economic ideas lean towards the prices of it greatly decreasing.

Barring a massive sin tax, which is a possibility.

Sparticus,

Yes, they were idiots. Anyone who drives under the influence of any drug (Marijuana, alcohol, pain pills, even sinus pills for some) is an idiot.

You can not, however, isolate out drugs when you include alcohol for the cause of accidents, which it appears that you are trying to do. You can not say that there are many alcohol related driving deaths (which there are and they are all preventable) and there are no marijuana related driving deaths, as it just is not true. You can not say that Alcohol causes wrecks, but all drug related one are due to poor or inattentive driving.

http://ehealthforum.com/health/topic124688.html

i think sparty is trying to make a case for himself because he drives stoned all the time...still, no reason to be so sour about it all Sparty, sheesh...on a lighter note, marijuana rocks and should be legal everywhere IMO :)

Sshh Dinh... we don't want the politicians know we LIKE it. We have to wrap it up in pretty ideas like lowering the prison population or generating revenue.

I think the three words "It's my body" are more than a sufficient argument for the legalization of marijuana for personal, private consumption.

As I have stated in this thread, I have nothing against the legalization of it. I think it would be the best plan at the current time. My only argument was that it can cause accidents and sometimes deaths, as can alcohol.

Yes.

It sounds like the majority of vocal CBers support it. What about the argument of WILL it pass?

Typically, the voting demographic is skewed to the older, more conservative generation, while polls (which cannot help but be biased) may consist of a more random sample. From that stance, the success of this bill already has a strike against it. However, it's pretty obvious that this bill will have a lot of publicity leading up to the election. It's a safe bet that there will be large get-out-and-vote push in the stoner community, but of course there will also be a push (of unknown size) from the conservative side as well.

Also, most of the stoners will probably be too baked to remember to vote. Keep that in mind.

Oh slayer, just because people smoke doesn't mean they forget everything... How could you say that?... wait... what did you say again?

=D

Yes, it should. Michigan Next Please!

Given some of the recent ballot results - Medicinal marijuana, same-sex marriage etc. I would think that it has a good chance of passage.

The wild card at the moment is that it will also be mid-term elections and there are large number of conservatives that are upset at the health care passage and could possibly come out in droves. They probably would right now, but 8 months is a long time to keep a crowds anger up.

Just give it all to me, ill handle it with loving care

Should it pass? Yes.

Given that marijuana usage is prevalent already, I can't see this causing more people to use it assuming a tax keeps the price about the same.


Will it pass? I kind of doubt it.

Though, I won't rule it out for within the next decade.

BUMP. tahaha this topic is fun to talk about

Legalize, regulate and tax.
Win-win scenario.

This is likely one area LB and I completely agree.

I believe in personal freedom and as long as one does not smoke and drive or smoke and do something that could effect another person, there is no problem being able to use marijuana.

It should have the same restrictions as alcohol in the no smoking/driving, no smoking/heavy machinery etc....

The "drug war" is an utter failure. Legalizing marijuana is not the answer but it will help states with some increased revenue.

The major discussion I read and hear from those against legalizing it is that is it a "Gateway Drug". It very well could be but not conclusively proven to be one. If someone wants to move on to cocaine or heroin, they will regardless of whether pot is legal.

But the next question should be: If we legalize pot do we move on to legalize the harder drugs such as cocaine, PCP, LSD etc...?

Back to using hemp for paper instead of trees, all the tax money that wouldn't be waisted to continuly try and stop something they have made no progess with. Redirect it to better use.

All the jobs that could be created from new farms, refineries and factories to process the plant, Plus all the tax income that would be created from all the new farms,factories and refineries not mention the tax income of sales.

It hurts us more to keep it illegal. So yes no question it should be regrouped in the law books with alcohol, tobacco, and other OTC products. As of now they have it grouped with heroin,crystal meth, crack, etc...

Almost forgot that gateway drug excuse is complete garbage.
If you are to label something as a gateway drug it should be food.

Why cause that is the first thing we are exposed to as people that causes a chemical reaction that makes us feel better. Same as any drug does. So should we make food illegal?

I don't really believe in the Gateway Drug argument either. See, I've never moved past pot as far as my own drug experiences go, but the thing that has tempted me to try something harder the most is the decreasing effect CAFEINE has on me. (Up to 2L a day now...) Yet they serve that horrible substance in pretty much every work place you can think of.

*CAFFEINE takes two f's :P

Whenever I hear the phrase gateway drug I have to laugh. Complete myth that it leads to harder drugs in my experience, and I've never heard of anybody else going down that path because they inhaled either.

There are people who will take or use anything, but they generally don't need any gateway to get there.

A documentary I recently watched had a take on it that made a lot of sense. In terms of a gateway drug, their reasoning is that not that marijuana leads to drugs biologically, but it can act as a 'gateway' socially because it's illegal.

For example, if it's illegal, you need connections to acquire it, which makes it easier to obtain harder drugs as dealers often carry other drugs as well. This makes it easier to jump from pot to something else. However, if it becomes legal, dealers will no longer be necessary and that would kill the gateway aspect of it.

I'm not saying that's necessarily true, but it seemed to make a lot of sense to me.

The other thing they brought up that was very interesting was the fact that most dealers are actually against legalization. Mostly because they'd lose their business and their lifestyle. Which, I think is a good thing. There are growers pulling in as much as 100k a year with just a few plants in their basement.

Here's the documentary
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9077214414651731007#

From the LA Times:

"The initiative would also allow adults to grow up to 25 square feet of marijuana per residence or parcel."

"polls [show] that a slim majority of voters support legalization"

Advocates expect to have more funding and will try to appeal to the undecided voters, specifically mothers. However, the opposition will include police organizations. (paraphrased)

@Ranger

It's tough to say where to draw the line. I see no problem legalizing mind expanding drugs such as LSD, DMT, Ayahuasca, and Psilocin//Psilocybin OR "Psychedelics" in general.

I've never in my life heard of someone getting addicted to a psychedelic in the same way someone would get addicted to ... lets say, heroin or meth... It just doesn't happen because the chemicals themselves aren't addictive...

It blows my MIND that chemicals like the aforementioned are illegal to begin with. Most people know what they are about to ingest, are experienced // familiar with what's going on, and can usually control themselves, if they can even get off the couch. (Maybe legal @ 18+ or something)

I've ingested most, and I see absolutely no problem with recreational Psychedelics. In fact, I recommend DMT to absolutely everyone. If you can get it, do it. Period. It will make your life better, and it's the only chemical I've ever ingested that will actually make you feel BETTER once it's all said and done (think the opposite of a hangover). Only downside is that it tastes kind of funky.

Most people that "experiment" with LSD // DMT // Hallucinogens in general are going to do it regardless of legality. Period. So the legal status of them doesn't really change very much in the scheme of things.

It just makes me sad in this day and age where there are 50,000,000,000 different sub-genres for everything. (I mean as a race we feel the need to categorize EVERYTHING) Yet hallucinogens are still bunched up into "Hard drugs" with amphetamines like heroin/meth/coke/etc...

A hint. They aren't. These chemicals (well some of them, again speaking in general terms) have been used throughout all of human history with a long linage of shamanism and spiritualism, and yet in the past 60 years﾿ It's suddenly NOT ok to ingest such things, it's suddenly DANGEROUS, and HORRIBLE to put such things into your body... (again obviously some synthetics//semi-synthetics (like LSD) weren't discovered until recently (1940﾿) but I'm talking more so about mushrooms and other compounds that humans have been ingesting for thousands of years.) What a joke.

Anything can be dangerous in the hands of an idiot. Hallucinogens have a bad rap due to fear of what can't be explained, combined with idiots.

I've seen some idiots do mushrooms, go somewhere public, and lose it... it happens... but then again I've seen "normal" people go see a movie on mushrooms, have a blast, go home (designated driver) and have a great night. The same can be said for almost ANYTHING, look at guns, I've seen some people who know how to handle them, and then again some idiots. It's going to be hit or miss regardless.

I would be more for semi-legalization of certain substances, where it's legal for you to have/grow/make/buy/sell/whatever, it's just illegal to do it under certain circumstances, like driving a car, heavy machinery, etc etc.

At the end of the day, I'm a firm believer that what you do under your own roof is nobody's business ever. For any reason. I don't care about trivial things such as legality, and I'm sure >95% of other people who have taken such substances feel the same way.

Live your life how you see fit, as long as you're not hurting anyone else, that's your given right, and personally I don't think ingesting a hallucinogen and tripping out in a basement or outside in a forest for half a day would qualify as hurting / endangering others.

.02

@ Cube

Easily. 30 plants will net you about 65,000 (on the low end) every 60-75 days. Minus give or take about $1,000 for costs.

There are people who have 5-6 houses full of hundreds of plants each. ZzZz.

Also, the gateway thing is garbage, 9 out of 10 people who sell pot don't even sell other drugs.

Out of the 20 or so local people that I know who grow/sell, none of them sell anything else. It's just a different scene, but most people wouldn't know that unless they actually KNEW. Which again, most people don't.

=)

I completely disagree with the idea of legalizing LSD, but I agree with the Netherlands calling Psilocybin (shrooms) a "soft" drug.

Isn't Shade from Holland? I'd like to hear his two cents.

Time for personal examples!

Only gateway I've ever found was to the munchies aisle or some booth in a restaurant... As a minor I ran into some legal trouble (had nothing to do with pot... I went after one of my mother's exes...) that gave me the choice of quitting, or spending 12-18 months in a juvenile detention facility... At no point did I get a "craving" for the stuff even 1/10th as fierce as I do for a cigarette when I haven't had one in more than 4 hours... Far as knowledge and retention go, most who know me can tell you that isn't a problem (in my particular case). My short-term memory is dodgy at times, thanks to the stuff I believe, but if I'll remember it 5 minutes from now, I'll remember it 5 years from now (Anyone wanna know the names of the kids that sat next to me on my first day in kindergarten or what outfits they were wearing?)

My mother smoked from the time she was 15 years old until she was 19 and got pregnant with me. At that point, she stopped "cold turkey" and claims it wasn't even difficult to do. Over the course of the fifteen years after she quit, she took a grand total of 4 puffs (2 puffs on 2 seperate occasions)... Aside from that, her only "substance abuse" is the two or three times a year she has a couple drinks (as in like 2 or 3 drinks, I still have yet to see her hammered)...

My father on the other hand has been an alcoholic since 19. When threatened by a judge that he would lose all visitation rights to me and my sister back when they were going through their divorce, he still couldn't stay away from alcohol long enough to have fresh breath *in court*... And even though he couldn't afford to pay my mother child support while she drove a cab for 70+ hours a week, he somehow had money to go to the bar at lunch and after work every day before going home to a case in the fridge... Even as recently as last Monday when he was going with my mother to visit my sister in jail, where he got turned away and denied visitation because he wreaked of beer and was obviously drunk... He stands as the primary reason I don't drink often, and I won't drink at all when I'm upset or angry. I refuse to allow my body or psyche to see alcohol as a coping mechanism or anything other than a party thing.

While I have known people that have moved from pot onto harder stuff, let's just say there ain't a person her who would be surprised if they had met any of these people beforehand.

I hate politics because people are so blind.

They spring things like marijuana and gay marriage so you will vote for other things and then they make a huge deal over them to distract you from other important issues.

For instance, the experience that a Muslim politician posing as a black man has.

BOOM. The noob just blew your mind. My opinion is that only the extremely gifted and well informed should have a right to vote so it doesn't matter because I'm neither. It is much better than having ignorant liberals voting illogically.

You guys and the gays were used to create new voters (which he was credited for, wth?) for the president because you were all more likely to vote for each other. Congratz.

Kingslaughter... wow. Just.... wow.

wow... "For instance, the experience that a Muslim politician posing as a black man has." and "ignorant liberals" in the same reply...

1) Obama isn't a Muslim... If he ever was, he gave that up by denying such. You cannot call yourself one of faith if you will simply renounce it every time it's convenient.

2) Let's say, for the sake of argument, that he is a Muslim... Hell, let's say he's Allah's biggest fan... That has WHAT to do with anything? Muslim doesn't equal terrorist or anti-American... Care to take a guess how many Muslim Americans are stationed overseas right now with our military. They aren't "fighting alongside our men and women", they ARE "our men and women" along with every other Christian, Jew, Atheist, Scientologist, and everything in between.

3) You're not helping your party any with such stupid un-thought-out statements and just went against your own point. I don't blame anybody for seeing lack of experience on Obama's end as an issue, but your little quote has distracted everyone from that point with utter garbage, hasn't it?

BOOM! The noob just got served.

"They spring things like marijuana and gay marriage so you will vote for other things"

This bit of legislature was started and funded by a medicinal pot grower to either support his cause, further his profits, or both. It's not a sneaky conspiracy.

I think the real conspiracy is peeps like Kingslaughter there. Designed to make people want to stay away from the internet.

"Noob"? You've got like 16 accounts on here....

I already did an IP search on him and came up with nothing unusual. If he has tons of accounts, I'm sure some of them are sharing IPs (no one would go through that much trouble). I wonder what I did wrong.

Nope, no matching IP.

I met someone that does last week, so it didn't seem that farfetched. Still I doubt it's a big effect, and as I said legalizing it would kill that form of 'gateway' anyway. It's kind of this rational: If so many people do something illegal, then why follow the law.

It just makes the government seem less credible. Though, I kind of consider that a good thing because it makes people think.

Demi: it's been said a thousand times... ip is but one factor.

I don't mulitple. Got better things to do that that. I'm certain I have gone through a ton of IP adresses. BTW. Dont IP adresses change whenever you restart your computer?

-------------------------

Oh, obama is an arab or something on the border of africa. You got me there.

I can't say for certain weed legislation is logical, I havn't seen any numbers. Send me a link and I will read it. The imidiate benefit would have to be quite large to offset the longterm deficits it might have.

Pure logic should prevail and you shouldn't vote based on your wants and emotions.

P.S. You verified that obamas experience was an issue, thanks, you also verified that people get distracted from important issues.

-------------------------

What I meant by spring is that it was just a stepping stool. I don't believe in coincidence in a world as competitive in the one we live in. We are entirely capable of being controlled by influence.

------------------------

I get pretty excited when I start talking about politics so I'm just going to bow out now, lol.. It is already looking quite ugly.

But the next question should be: If we legalize pot do we move on to legalize the harder drugs such as cocaine, PCP, LSD etc...?

well Ranger the thing is marijuana does not make a person crazy like those drugs. Not only that but as cliche as this may sound, unlike those drugs marijuana is a natural herb.

This. Autonomy>all

"unlike those drugs marijuana is a natural herb"

I'm not sure you can count the varieties that have been bred and cross bred in hydroponics. Skunk certainly isn't a natural variety - that's pretty much man-made.

Hydroponics just means for the plant to not be rooted in soil and fed by a water system instead. Has nothing to do with spieces/breed of a plant. If you have ever eaten produce at Disney World you have eaten hydroponic veggies and fruits. They grow theirs in a hydroponics system. My neighbor grows his veggies in a hydro system too.

As for the other drugs being legalized as untouchable mentioned. Those should stay where they are at. Those drugs have to be refined and chemical altered to be turned into a drug for use. Not a natural occuring thing you can just pick right out of the ground and ingest.

I'm so amazingly sick of this response. Do you think it's safe to consume hemlock?

While I have not followed the entire previous conversations, I'd like to comment on it.

The only reason Marihuana is such a debatable topic right now lies in the fact that the tabacco plant was discovered by the Western World before it.

They should legalize marijuana just so that we can start farming hemp on a larger commercial scale.
Hemp clothing is as good as cotton, with a much less pesticide-intense production process. Hemp seeds a good (and fairly high protein) food source. Hemp makes as good of a material source for paper as wood does.

Legalizing marijuana is the environmentally responsible thing to do...

More reference material can be found in the movie Bio-dome. ;p

Still.. while poisonous, I don't think it's illegal to possess hemlock though I could be wrong.