• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Official "Marijuana is legal in CA" Countdown Thread ***UPDATE: California Sucks***

108_l.jpg
 
DaTT said:
legal? or just not criminal to carry a "certain" amount?
Click to expand...

IIRC, legal to possess up to one ounce for personal consumption, and/or to grow up to 25 square feet of crop.

The law is pretty poorly written. I'm still not sure how I'm gonna vote, but quite possibly, I'll vote NO.

Re-write the law and bring it back...I'm NOT against the idea...but I do think the law needs to be better.
 
BoomerD said:
IIRC, legal to possess up to one ounce for personal consumption, and/or to grow up to 25 square feet of crop.

The law is pretty poorly written. I'm still not sure how I'm gonna vote, but quite possibly, I'll vote NO.

Re-write the law and bring it back...I'm NOT against the idea...but I do think the law needs to be better.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the bill is lacking a shit-load of details. ...but that isn't anything new. 😀
 
They should allow sales and tax the shit out of it. It would help California's crippled economy.
 
http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/pdf/english/19-title-summ-analysis.pdf


"LEGALIZES MARIJUANA UNDER CALIFORNIA BUT NOT FEDERAL LAW. PERMITS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
TO REGULATE AND TAX COMMERCIAL PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION, AND SALE OF MARIJUANA.
INITIATIVE STATUTE.
• Allows people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use.
• Permits local governments to regulate and tax commercial production, distribution, and sale of marijuana to people 21 years old or older.
• Prohibits people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using in public, or smoking it while minors are present.
• Maintains prohibitions against driving while impaired.
• Limits employers’ ability to address marijuana use to situations where job performance is actually impaired."
 
BoomerD said:
http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/pdf/english/19-title-summ-analysis.pdf


"LEGALIZES MARIJUANA UNDER CALIFORNIA BUT NOT FEDERAL LAW. PERMITS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
TO REGULATE AND TAX COMMERCIAL PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION, AND SALE OF MARIJUANA.
INITIATIVE STATUTE.
• Allows people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use.
• Permits local governments to regulate and tax commercial production, distribution, and sale of marijuana to people 21 years old or older.
• Prohibits people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using in public, or smoking it while minors are present.
• Maintains prohibitions against driving while impaired.
• Limits employers’ ability to address marijuana use to situations where job performance is actually impaired."
Click to expand...

I was reading the ballot bulletin the other day, the details of the bill, the arguments for and against, and the "against" argument made me lol.

Of course, it was the M.A.D.D. people, and their argument was that prop 19 would prevent companies from being able to keep their employees un-stoned while driving (bus drivers, delivery, etc).

I mean....did they take the time to think about the stupidity of that argument?
😀



and a mild lol at thread tag
 
Last edited:
Ns1 said:
never gonna happen


maybe in 10-20 years
Click to expand...

you don't think it'll pass?

I think it will be very, very close. There's a lot of people against this....but I'm thinking it will sneak through. There has been essentially zero media (political ads) regarding this on either side, unlike during the vote for medical MJ. The attitude seems to have changed a good bit since then (the argument has focused more on revenue, much less on morality).

Still, I certainly wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't pass. Many in this country still seem to be surprised over how conservative CA actually is--prop 8, anyone?
 
I'm 98% sure it will pass. The great thing about MJ legalization is that this is not an issue like gay rights or abortion. There are people from both sides of the isle that support this proposition. Surprisingly a ton of right wing judges and even churches support Prop 19.
 
JulesMaximus said:
As if making it legal will somehow change the number of users. 🙄

I don't use it now and I wouldn't use it if it were legal...and it practically is now.
Click to expand...

That's not the point. The point is it'll keep stupid cops from enforcing a stupid law and for no reason other than it being law.

Fucking pigs need to go bust some real criminals, the pussies.
 
zinfamous said:
I was reading the ballot bulletin the other day, the details of the bill, the arguments for and against, and the "against" argument made me lol.

Of course, it was the M.A.D.D. people, and their argument was that prop 19 would prevent companies from being able to keep their employees un-stoned while driving (bus drivers, delivery, etc).

I mean....did they take the time to think about the stupidity of that argument?
😀



and a mild lol at thread tag
Click to expand...

The biggest problem is testing for it. How do you test for it? How do you know that someone's under the influence? A habitual smoker who wakes up sober and gets into his car to get some breakfast will pee 4000-6000+ on a pee test.

This is going to be the biggest point of contention.
 
Nik said:
The biggest problem is testing for it. How do you test for it? How do you know that someone's under the influence? A habitual smoker who wakes up sober and gets into his car to get some breakfast will pee 4000-6000+ on a pee test.

This is going to be the biggest point of contention.
Click to expand...

I agree...and so do many other people.

http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/pdf/english/19-arg-rebuttals.pdf

"Proponents claim, “Proposition 19 maintains strict criminal penalties for driving under the influence.” That statement is false. In fact, Proposition 19 gives drivers the “right” to use marijuana right up to the point when they climb behind the wheel, but unlike as with drunk driving, Proposition 19 fails to provide the Highway Patrol with any tests or objective standards for determining what constitutes “driving under the influence.’’ That’s why Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) strongly opposes Proposition 19.
Proponents claim Proposition 19 is “preserving the right of employers to maintain a drug-free workplace.” This is also false. According to the California Chamber of Commerce, the facts are that Proposition 19 creates special rights for employees to possess marijuana on the job, and that means no company in California can meet federal drug-free workplace standards, or qualify for federal contracts. The California State Firefighters Association warns this one drafting mistake alone could cost thousands of Californians to lose their jobs.
Again, contrary to what proponents say, the statewide organizations representing police, sheriffs and drug court judges are all urging you to vote “No” on Proposition 19. Passage of Proposition 19 seriously compromises the safety of our communities, roadways, and workplaces."


"Even if you support legalization of recreational marijuana, you should vote “No” on Proposition 19.
Why? Because the authors made several huge mistakes in writing this initiative which will have severe, unintended consequences.
For example, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) strongly opposes Proposition 19 because it will prevent bus and trucking companies from requiring their drivers to be drug-free. Companies won’t be able to take action against a “stoned” driver until after he or she has a wreck, not before.
School districts may currently require school bus drivers to be drug-free, but if Proposition 19 passes, their hands will be tied—until after tragedy strikes. A school bus driver would be forbidden to smoke marijuana on schools grounds or while actually behind the wheel, but could arrive for work with marijuana in his or her system.
Public school superintendent John Snavely, Ed.D. warns that Proposition 19 could cost our K–12 schools as much as $9.4 billion in lost federal funding. Another error could potentially cost schools hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grants for our colleges and universities. Our schools have already experienced severe budget cuts due to the state budget crisis.
The California Chamber of Commerce found that “if passed, this initiative could result in employers losing public contracts and grants because they could no longer effectively enforce the drug-free workplace requirements outlined by the federal government.”"


"Under current law, if a worker shows up smelling of alcohol or marijuana, an employer may remove the employee from a dangerous or sensitive job, such as running medical lab tests in a hospital, or operating heavy equipment. But if Proposition 19 passes, the worker with marijuana in his or her system may not be removed from the job until after an accident occurs.
The California Police Chiefs Association opposes Proposition 19 because proponents “forgot” to include a standard for what constitutes “driving under the influence.” Under Proposition 19, a driver may legally drive even if a blood test shows they have marijuana in their system."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top