Prop 19: Rejected by voters

I am actually surprised. :o

More surprised than I've been in a long while.

[QUOTE="dkdk999"]

If kidnapping thousands of people for having a vegetation in their pocket isn't immoral i don't know what is.

Pixel-Pirate

To be fair, some vegetation can be quite dangerous.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]

Guess what? Drugs are already a part of everyday life, alcohol included. They're all under the same umbrella.

Nearly half of the population of the US has tried Pot, and that number is significantly higher in more frequent generations. It isn't some "fringe" group of society. It's a large chunk of the US population.

Your point on Alcohol being embedded in our culture is irrelevant. Prohibition is prohibition, no matter the population penetration of said drug. The same consequences of alcohol prohibition can be seen in every drug we wage "war" on now.

Stanley09

Not directed at me but (and this is about California, not the country as a whole)

Raised number of users.

Raised number of impaired drivers.

More debt for the state as it fights off lawsuits from the feds.

Low revenue due to enforcing new laws

Increased amount of people going to jail for Marijuana

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="dkdk999"]

If kidnapping thousands of people for having a vegetation in their pocket isn't immoral i don't know what is.

Stanley09

To be fair, some vegetation can be quite dangerous.

Everything is part of this universe. You basically are saying nothing should be illegal :|

If someones walking around with a plant that could be highly toxic to someone, I wouldn't want them walking around with it. I'd rather people not walk around with things that equal to potassium cyanide.

[QUOTE="Stanley09"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Actually that stat is misleading. When talking drug policy it's important to gauge habitual smokers...not someone that had one hit in their lifetime. That is a disingenuous statistic. Habitual users are much much less....around 4% of the population if I remember the stat correctly. It's certainly not almost half. No prohibition is not prohibition. There is a major difference between taking something away from society IN GENERAL and something a very small minority uses.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Stanley09"][QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

To be fair, some vegetation can be quite dangerous.

Pixel-Pirate

Everything is part of this universe. You basically are saying nothing should be illegal :|

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Stanley09"] I must ask again; what bad effects do you really think would happen because of legalization? All I see are positivesStanley09

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="Stanley09"] I still dont think we should try and eliminate something as much of this universe as we areStanley09

Everything is part of this universe. You basically are saying nothing should be illegal :|

And all other hazardous materials in existance?

Do you believe the average joe should legally be able to obtain and handle plutonium or highly radioactive materials?

[QUOTE="Stanley09"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Actually that stat is misleading. When talking drug policy it's important to gauge habitual smokers...not someone that had one hit in their lifetime. That is a disingenuous statistic. Habitual users are much much less....around 4% of the population if I remember the stat correctly. It's certainly not almost half. No prohibition is not prohibition. There is a major difference between taking something away from society IN GENERAL and something a very small minority uses.

Pixel-Pirate

Not directed at me but (and this is about California, not the country as a whole)

Raised number of users.

Raised number of impaired drivers.

More debt for the state as it fights off lawsuits from the feds.

Low revenue due to enforcing new laws

Increased amount of people going to jail for Marijuana

[QUOTE="Stanley09"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Increased consumption equals increased medical costs.....I do hope you are not for government health care then.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Stanley09"][QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

Everything is part of this universe. You basically are saying nothing should be illegal :|

Pixel-Pirate

And all other hazardous materials in existance?

Do you believe the average joe should legally be able to obtain and handle plutonium or highly radioactive materials?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Stanley09"] Im not for gov health care- and what do you mean by increased medical costs? Weed does not cause any kind of cancer or anything

Stanley09

Here's more for you....

Marijuana contains more than 400 chemicals, including most of the harmful substances found in tobacco smoke. Smoking one marijuana cigarette deposits about four times more tar into the lungs than a filtered tobacco cigarette.

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="Stanley09"] I still dont think we should try and eliminate something as much of this universe as we areStanley09

Everything is part of this universe. You basically are saying nothing should be illegal :|

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Stanley09"] Im not for gov health care- and what do you mean by increased medical costs? Weed does not cause any kind of cancer or anything

Stanley09

This is exactly what the tobacco lobby says about tobacco too. The fact is that tar is a carcinogen. When you inhale smoke, you're putting yourself at risk of cancer.

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="Stanley09"] I must ask again; what bad effects do you really think would happen because of legalization? All I see are positivesStanley09

Not directed at me but (and this is about California, not the country as a whole)

Raised number of users.

Raised number of impaired drivers.

More debt for the state as it fights off lawsuits from the feds.

Low revenue due to enforcing new laws

Increased amount of people going to jail for Marijuana

It already isn't jail time for that in CA. So nothing would change there.

However the following would now be jailtime and require the cops to actively enforce it as oppossed to ignoring it like they do now.

Growing outside of a 5x5 space shared by all occupants in a building.

Giving any to minors.

Smoking in public.

Selling without a license.

Having more than a rather small amount.

Wake up from the fantasy. Prop 19 was not going to make CA a Marijuana paradise or give you freedom with marijuana. It had ALOT of really bad regulations in there that WOULD put people in jail. NO ONE GOES TO JAIL IN CA FOR SMALL AMOUNTS.

And the people who drive high now should be arrested and charged with a DUI as it is. I'd rather not see that number quintuple.

[QUOTE="Stanley09"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Are you sure about that?....Quote There are also many long-term health consequences of marijuana use. According to the National Institutes of Health, studies show that someone who smokes five joints per week may be taking in as many cancer-causing chemicals as someone who smokes a full pack of cigarettes every day. Unquote.LJS9502_basic

Here's more for you....

Marijuana contains more than 400 chemicals, including most of the harmful substances found in tobacco smoke. Smoking one marijuana cigarette deposits about four times more tar into the lungs than a filtered tobacco cigarette.

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="Stanley09"] um ya pretty much actually. Im for the legalization of all drugsStanley09

And all other hazardous materials in existance?

Do you believe the average joe should legally be able to obtain and handle plutonium or highly radioactive materials?

Plutonium is a part of the universe so why make it illegal?

This is no loss for me. I don't smoke anything now and never will.

[QUOTE="Stanley09"][QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

Not directed at me but (and this is about California, not the country as a whole)

Raised number of users.

Raised number of impaired drivers.

More debt for the state as it fights off lawsuits from the feds.

Low revenue due to enforcing new laws

Increased amount of people going to jail for Marijuana

Pixel-Pirate

It already isn't jail time for that in CA. So nothing would change there.

However the following would now be jailtime and require the cops to actively enforce it as oppossed to ignoring it like they do now.

Growing outside of a 5x5 space shared by all occupants in a building.

Giving any to minors.

Smoking in public.

Selling without a license.

Having more than a rather small amount.

Wake up from the fantasy. Prop 19 was not going to make CA a Marijuana paradise or give you freedom with marijuana. It had ALOT of really bad regulations in there that WOULD put people in jail. NO ONE GOES TO JAIL IN CA FOR SMALL AMOUNTS.

And the people who drive high now should be arrested and charged with a DUI as it is. I'd rather not see that number quintuple.

This is no loss for me. I don't smoke anything now and never will.

GTbiking4life

[QUOTE="Stanley09"][QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

Everything is part of this universe. You basically are saying nothing should be illegal :|

Strider_91

I'll never get people who think all drugs should be legal. For me it isn't even th addictive or self destructive qualities. I'd just rather not have groups of people roaming the street or driving cars who are hallucinating that people are monsters out to get them and that the trees are 500 foot tall sharks.

Basically I don't want groups of people suffering psychotic episodes roaming the streets.

Actually that stat is misleading. When talking drug policy it's important to gauge habitual smokers...not someone that had one hit in their lifetime. That is a disingenuous statistic. Habitual users are much much less....around 4% of the population if I remember the stat correctly. It's certainly not almost half. No prohibition is not prohibition. There is a major difference between taking something away from society IN GENERAL and something a very small minority uses.

LJS9502_basic

When you outlaw pot, quality declines, prices rise, and gang related violence rises.

Both scenarios have played out exactly the same LJ, the only difference is that we repealed alcohol prohibition and instituted another one. All you have to do is look at history. Both prohibition and the war on drugs are colossal failures, and for the same reasons.

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="Stanley09"] I was talking about regulating it throughout the country like beer or cigs but whatever. People already drive high, it really is not a huge problem. And prop 19 would have been better than nothing. Increased jails? It would be the opposite. No longer would it be a crime for simple possession of a personal amount if you are of ageStanley09

It already isn't jail time for that in CA. So nothing would change there.

However the following would now be jailtime and require the cops to actively enforce it as oppossed to ignoring it like they do now.

Growing outside of a 5x5 space shared by all occupants in a building.

Giving any to minors.

Smoking in public.

Selling without a license.

Having more than a rather small amount.

Wake up from the fantasy. Prop 19 was not going to make CA a Marijuana paradise or give you freedom with marijuana. It had ALOT of really bad regulations in there that WOULD put people in jail. NO ONE GOES TO JAIL IN CA FOR SMALL AMOUNTS.

And the people who drive high now should be arrested and charged with a DUI as it is. I'd rather not see that number quintuple.

I don't agree at all. No law is better than a bad one.

And no, most wouldn't of followed that. 5x5 space to grow? You can't grow in that small of a space and thats shared by the entire building not per person.

People buy alcohol and cigarettes for minors. People would of bought weed for minors, got caught, and spent 5 years in prison for it.

I've talked to several who stated they'd start smoking in public.

Dealers were NOT going to dissapear and they won't have a license.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Actually that stat is misleading. When talking drug policy it's important to gauge habitual smokers...not someone that had one hit in their lifetime. That is a disingenuous statistic. Habitual users are much much less....around 4% of the population if I remember the stat correctly. It's certainly not almost half. No prohibition is not prohibition. There is a major difference between taking something away from society IN GENERAL and something a very small minority uses.

HoolaHoopMan

When you outlaw pot, quality declines, prices rise, and gang related violence rises.

Both scenarios have played out exactly the same LJ, the only difference is that we repealed alcohol prohibition and instituted another one. All you have to do is look at history. Both prohibition and the war on drugs are colossal failures, and for the same reasons.

I'd say quality would decline if marijuana was legalized. Making alcoholic drinks is not the same as growing a rather easy to grow plant.

Most companies however will want to make growing it even easier and cheaper. Enjoy your pesticides, chemicals, and artifical additives.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Stanley09"] not to mention there has never been a single case of cancer related soley to marijuana, everStanley09

Here's more for you....

Marijuana contains more than 400 chemicals, including most of the harmful substances found in tobacco smoke. Smoking one marijuana cigarette deposits about four times more tar into the lungs than a filtered tobacco cigarette.

[QUOTE="Strider_91"][QUOTE="Stanley09"] um ya pretty much actually. Im for the legalization of all drugsPixel-Pirate

I'll never get people who think all drugs should be legal. For me it isn't even th addictive or self destructive qualities. I'd just rather not have groups of people roaming the street or driving cars who are hallucinating that people are monsters out to get them and that the trees are 500 foot tall sharks.

Basically I don't want groups of people suffering psychotic episodes roaming the streets.

It wouldn't matter if it passed. It would be struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court anyway. A state can't pass a law in direct violation of federal law.

And while they were waiting for a Supreme Court decision, the proposition would be suspended, because the law in violation is considered non-existent until the Supreme Court rules the federal law unconstitutional, which of course will not happen. So, it would never become legal.

[QUOTE="Stanley09"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]A pro marijuana site is NOT going to be unbiased. I gave you a quote from the National Instittute on Health...you can also find the same reports from other countries that state much the same information.

Here's more for you....

Marijuana contains more than 400 chemicals, including most of the harmful substances found in tobacco smoke. Smoking one marijuana cigarette deposits about four times more tar into the lungs than a filtered tobacco cigarette.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Actually that stat is misleading. When talking drug policy it's important to gauge habitual smokers...not someone that had one hit in their lifetime. That is a disingenuous statistic. Habitual users are much much less....around 4% of the population if I remember the stat correctly. It's certainly not almost half. No prohibition is not prohibition. There is a major difference between taking something away from society IN GENERAL and something a very small minority uses.

HoolaHoopMan

When you outlaw pot, quality declines, prices rise, and gang related violence rises.

Both scenarios have played out exactly the same LJ, the only difference is that we repealed alcohol prohibition and instituted another one. All you have to do is look at history. Both prohibition and the war on drugs are colossal failures, and for the same reasons.

[QUOTE="GTbiking4life"]

This is no loss for me. I don't smoke anything now and never will.

Stanley09

I'll have to pay taxes anyway. I'm still doing fine.

No. Most people do not smoke marijuana...they don't care that it's illegal. Alcohol has very much been a social activity. You are missing the point about the commonality actually. And the voting down of Prop 19 shows how little acceptance marijuana has. Do you think they'd have voted to outlaw alcohol? I'd say not....LJS9502_basic

Actually address what I'm typing in my posts LJ, I'm talking about the failures of prohibition and the war on drugs. I'm going to drop the usage amount simply because you'd find any excuse to snub your nose at any numbers I find regardless of the source and prevalence of marijuana in our society.

Please do tell me how the war on drugs, which is prohibition, has been successful in any way.

A drug site is never unbiased. They DO have an agenda...LJS9502_basic

As does the government which classifies Pot in the same group as heroin and cocaine.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]No. Most people do not smoke marijuana...they don't care that it's illegal. Alcohol has very much been a social activity. You are missing the point about the commonality actually. And the voting down of Prop 19 shows how little acceptance marijuana has. Do you think they'd have voted to outlaw alcohol? I'd say not....HoolaHoopMan

Actually address what I'm typing in my posts LJ, I'm talking about the failures of prohibition and the war on drugs. I'm going to drop the usage amount simply because you'd find any excuse to snub your nose at any numbers I find regardless of the source and prevalence of marijuana in our society.

Please do tell me how the war on drugs, which is prohibition, has been successful in any way.

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="Strider_91"] All drugs? A lot of drugs just cause problems. They destroy people and i can't see why you'd want them legalised? I don't know of any positive effects, not that it'd make legalising all drugs right.. there is no convincing argument i can think ofStanley09

I'll never get people who think all drugs should be legal. For me it isn't even th addictive or self destructive qualities. I'd just rather not have groups of people roaming the street or driving cars who are hallucinating that people are monsters out to get them and that the trees are 500 foot tall sharks.

Basically I don't want groups of people suffering psychotic episodes roaming the streets.

The war on drugs could certainly be curtailed if we stopped the flow in from Mexico. I get the feeling the government is only halfheartedly dealing with that so called war. Still doesn't mean we should legalize it anyway. That would mean the Mexican cartels...dealers etc would just find other illegal activities to generate funds as they do in Mexico. LJS9502_basic

You didn't answer my question, quit dodging everything that comes your way.

"Please do tell me how the war on drugs, which is prohibition, has been successful in any way."

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]The war on drugs could certainly be curtailed if we stopped the flow in from Mexico. I get the feeling the government is only halfheartedly dealing with that so called war. Still doesn't mean we should legalize it anyway. That would mean the Mexican cartels...dealers etc would just find other illegal activities to generate funds as they do in Mexico. HoolaHoopMan

You didn't answer my question, quit dodging everything that comes your way.

"Please do tell me how the war on drugs, which is prohibition, has been successful in any way."

It keeps people from using the drug. Believe it or not...some people DON'T use it because it's illegal. I'd rather not increase the consumption. I don't see the positive in that....LJS9502_basic

It keeps people from using the drug? Is that why usage rates have skyrocketed since it's inception for EVERY drug? That's a pretty good prevention program the government seems to be running there.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] It keeps people from using the drug. Believe it or not...some people DON'T use it because it's illegal. I'd rather not increase the consumption. I don't see the positive in that....HoolaHoopMan

It keeps people from using the drug? Is that why usage rates have skyrocketed since it's inception for EVERY drug? That's a pretty good prevention program the government seems to be running there.

Im glad it wasnt legalized, could you imagine how many pot heads would be talking about weed...even more than usual. I think i would die.

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] It keeps people from using the drug. Believe it or not...some people DON'T use it because it's illegal. I'd rather not increase the consumption. I don't see the positive in that....LJS9502_basic

It keeps people from using the drug? Is that why usage rates have skyrocketed since it's inception for EVERY drug? That's a pretty good prevention program the government seems to be running there.

I didn't really care about it. People will still do it either way.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]

It keeps people from using the drug? Is that why usage rates have skyrocketed since it's inception for EVERY drug? That's a pretty good prevention program the government seems to be running there.

HoolaHoopMan

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="Strider_91"] All drugs? A lot of drugs just cause problems. They destroy people and i can't see why you'd want them legalised? I don't know of any positive effects, not that it'd make legalising all drugs right.. there is no convincing argument i can think ofStanley09

I'll never get people who think all drugs should be legal. For me it isn't even th addictive or self destructive qualities. I'd just rather not have groups of people roaming the street or driving cars who are hallucinating that people are monsters out to get them and that the trees are 500 foot tall sharks.

Basically I don't want groups of people suffering psychotic episodes roaming the streets.

Everyone reacts differently. Some people have very bad trips from LSD and mushrooms. Nightshade is said to give a VERY unpleasent trip as well.

I don't want those people behind cars. NO ONE who is hallucinating should be able to drive.

It wouldn't matter if it passed. It would be struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court anyway. A state can't pass a law in direct violation of federal law.

And while they were waiting for a Supreme Court decision, the proposition would be suspended, because the law in violation is considered non-existent until the Supreme Court rules the federal law unconstitutional, which of course will not happen. So, it would never become legal.

Communistik

I simply assume the vast majority of stoners don't know how US law works.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]

It keeps people from using the drug? Is that why usage rates have skyrocketed since it's inception for EVERY drug? That's a pretty good prevention program the government seems to be running there.

HoolaHoopMan

But this war on drugs which apparently boosted abuse rates (I won't say that's anything to do with the invasion of Afghanistan) is not the same as prohibiting a drug; it was just a poorly implemented bundle of vote winning policies. Ending the war on drugs =/= legalising pot.

And as I said a few posts ago.....the government is not actually trying to stop. So it's not a war on drugs. That's a catch phrase. If the government got serious...they COULD drastically cut the drug usage. But if you read my other post...you'd have known I said that already.

LJS9502_basic

Please, the government has it's hands tied behind it's back for this fight against drugs. Not trying? We've spent 1 trillion dollars combating it and even have entire agencies created around it.

They COULD cut usage apparently, they just happen to be doing to opposite while wasting our money. :lol: Delusional.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

And as I said a few posts ago.....the government is not actually trying to stop. So it's not a war on drugs. That's a catch phrase. If the government got serious...they COULD drastically cut the drug usage. But if you read my other post...you'd have known I said that already.

HoolaHoopMan

Please, the government has it's hands tied behind it's back for this fight against drugs. Not trying? We've spent 1 trillion dollars combating it and even have entire agencies created around it.

They COULD cut usage apparently, they just happen to be doing to opposite while wasting our money. :lol: Delusional.

But this war on drugs which apparently boosted abuse rates (I won't say that's anything to do with the invasion of Afghanistan) is not the same as prohibiting a drug; it was just a poorly implemented bundle of vote winning policies. Ending the war on drugs =/= legalising pot.

jimmyjammer69

I'm aware that ending the war on drugs =/= legalizing pot. What exactly are you trying to say with this post?

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

And as I said a few posts ago.....the government is not actually trying to stop. So it's not a war on drugs. That's a catch phrase. If the government got serious...they COULD drastically cut the drug usage. But if you read my other post...you'd have known I said that already.

LJS9502_basic

Please, the government has it's hands tied behind it's back for this fight against drugs. Not trying? We've spent 1 trillion dollars combating it and even have entire agencies created around it.

They COULD cut usage apparently, they just happen to be doing to opposite while wasting our money. :lol: Delusional.

How aren't they trying? 1 trillion dollars and agencies have been created to combat it. Hell they even have DARE programs aimed at kids.

How is that not trying?