Proposition 19: Yes or no?
Tomorrow is election day, and Californians will be voting on the controversial “prop 19” which will legalize marijuana in the state of California. Will you be voting yes or no?
Related Posts
Illinois Senate Approves Medical Marijuana
Medical Marijuana is advancing in Illinois. Check out the latest story from NY Times: SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — The... Read More »
Kansas appeals court addresses medical marijuana issue for travelers
Kansas appeals court addresses medical marijuana issue for travelers March 15. By TONY RIZZO. The Kansas City Star.... Read More »
Foxborough Needs to Establish Medical Marijuana District Following AG's Ruling
Foxborough Needs to Establish Medical Marijuana District Following AG's Ruling “Unless somebody can articulate something specific I think... Read More »
The Latest from My MMJ
-
Best Vapes at the Best Prices
-
I wish i could vote but if i could…..Y.
Live in the UK, but a spiritual “Yes”
Although I dont live in CA, if I could (and I encourage those that can) I would vote yes! I smoke marijuana regularly, and by that I mean multiple times per day, as do most of my friends and even some family. Many people belive that marijuana is some big bad drug that makes you lazy and unmotivated.. I personally work 40 or more hours a week, my home is clean, and I live a very normal life, as do all the other people I know who smoke pot. I live in NY and legalizing marijuana in CA will bring potheads my way one step closer to legalization.. Marijuana will also give CA economy a good boost, because lets face it half or more of CA is stoned, and hopefully things like deaths due to harder drugs will decrease, along with the overflowing population of people in jails due to marijuana related arrests. Im crossing my fingers on this one and hoping that all the stoners get out there and vote tomorrow!
dont live in california, but i have been watching the issue with great interest. i hope it passes. i would vote yes if i could.
and i hope obama grows a pair and takes it off the schedule 1 drug list. a simple first step to at the very least acknowledge that it might have medical uses and allow research.
YES.
I’m voting yes. Although the actual effects of this proposition will be pretty small, hopefully it will be a step towards lifting the national ban that costs us hundreds of millions of dollars a year.
The criminalization of youth, massive use of laws to benefit big pharma through ideology and racism, and ready availability make the odious existing prohibition untenable.
That is a California voter encouraging yes votes.
NO.
Would create potential state revenue?
Um, probably not, according to the prop description which states, “Allows people 21 yrs old and older to possess, cultivate, and transport marijuana for personal use.” This means, by my interpretation, that government is basically saying, “Law enforcement has hands off of cracking down on weed as a criminal offense.” This means that the average Joe (your neighbor perhaps) now has the freedom to grow his own “plants” in his backyard and make his stuff for his own personal use.
How does the government have the ability to regulate that! There was no clarity on licensing, and it doesn’t matter. There is no real way of knowing who’s growing the stuff and who isn’t. Therefore, if government can’t regulate, government can’t tax!
Medicinal? According to the OEHHA Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity, marijuana smoke is known to cause cancer.
See http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/files/P65single100810.pdf
Solve or reduce drug cartel problems? Not so much.
The problem is not that by voting NO on Prop 19, the violent drug lords will be inflamed and cause more violence, as the proponents of Prop 19 argue (who are we to fear them, by the way?). They believe that legalizing marijuana will reduce the drug problems through unbeatable competition?
No, the solution lies in real border security and militant force (helps solve immigration problems too), something that the U.S. government has failed to effectively enforce, fund, support. Remember Former Border Patrol Agent Ignacio Ramos, the man convicted of shooting a drug smuggler? Fishy stuff. And then Obama passes funds to a useless allocation to strengthen security and sends a few troops here and there? Yet the troops can’t shoot anyone unless it’s really self-defense?