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

[zinfamous]

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.

I think you're way off on that. Most of the right-leaning, and plenty of left-leaning politicians in CA do not support it.

Right now prop19 is polling just over 50% among likely voters.

These are the numbers that I've heard.

 

[zinfamous]

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.

Yes, and going with what Boomer said, why not have regular drug tests to further reduce the incentive of such incidents at work? Also, if you're caught stoned once at work, you're fired on the spot? Stiffer penalties?

Maybe they already do this, I don't know. :\

 

[bfdd]

It is already legal for me to smoke marijuana. I'm voting yes on prop 19.

 

[zinfamous]

There's a huge difference between smelling of marijuana and having it "in your system" for 30 days. What about Prop 19 changes the ability of an employer to take action against someone who shows up to work clearly impaired?

What specifically in Prop 19 changes the way that cops have to deal with people driving stoned?

This is the strongest argument against Prop 19 IMO:

I still think those arguments are silly, as Prop 19 allows for individual CA communities to make their own decisions about MJ. We still have dry counties in this country. Again, like Alcohol, the treatment is essentially the same.

I don't understand how Prop 19 forces a private company to remove drug-free workzone restrictions. It just doesn't sound logical, to me, that you suddenly have this situation where an employer caught with a dime bag on his person is going to invoke prop 19 and somehow be protected from being canned?

You follow the company's rules. You don't like them, tough taco. Currently, you can't be hired at certain places if you are a medical marijuana user, iirc. And this is considered "protected." --I believe people have challenged that, and as I recall, they have lost these challenges?

 

[zinfamous]

What I don't understand in all the MADD opposition is how they're extrapolating enforcement when the bill itself is pretty silent on all of that. It's not like DUI/DWI doesn't already apply to intoxication by things other than alcohol, so I don't see what changes. They're extrapolating to sensationalize; none of what you're reading there would qualify as the most basic legal analysis I'd expect out of a 1L.

It does no one any good when we attempt to pass conjecture as fact. I don't live in CA, don't use pot, and wouldn't if it were legal, but if I did live in CA, I'd vote for this law just on that basis alone. MADD shouldn't be attempting to lie to people to push their agenda. Engage in debate, I'm sick of smear campaigns of any kind.

this, exactly. I think there are reasons to oppose it (lack of detail regarding regulation and structure to enforce selling, distribution, whatever), but assuming that legal enforcement will change from what is already in place is just fear-mongering. It's an evolution from the earlier morality arguments of the opposition crowd.

 

[bfdd]

I still think those arguments are silly, as Prop 19 allows for individual CA communities to make their own decisions about MJ. We still have dry counties in this country. Again, like Alcohol, the treatment is essentially the same.

I don't understand how Prop 19 forces a private company to remove drug-free workzone restrictions. It just doesn't sound logical, to me, that you suddenly have this situation where an employer caught with a dime bag on his person is going to invoke prop 19 and somehow be protected from being canned?

You follow the company's rules. You don't like them, tough taco. Currently, you can't be hired at certain places if you are a medical marijuana user, iirc. And this is considered "protected." --I believe people have challenged that, and as I recall, they have lost these challenges?

Yea seriously. A medical card makes it legal for you to smoke here, but if you show up to your job faded as fuck they can still fire your ass. Just as the employer could fire your ass if you were drunk. The argument makes no fucking sense what so ever.

 

[zinfamous]

Last time I checked
federal law > state law

except for in the Jim Crow south, apparently. It took a concerted effort to whip the Feds into action after many, many decades and show them that their federal laws were being ignored by 1/3 of the country.

I think CA, in some ways, likes to look at itself as an experimental pool. Perhaps, if this state can handle it, and if the rainbows and sunshine and massive tax revenue does occur (as the proponents hope), then Federal law will be in the backwater.

There is no reason to do nothing simply because the law says so. The only way to change an improper or unjust law is to challenge it.

 

[preslove]

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.

Actually, it is quite well written. Counties have to opt-in to allow legal marijuana sales and to write their own regulations. Basically, all the power is given to localities.

WTF is wrong with that?

 

[preslove]

I think you're way off on that. Most of the right-leaning, and plenty of left-leaning politicians in CA do not support it.




These are the numbers that I've heard.

Right now, it's polling around 51% yes and somewhere in the high 30% range for no, with the rest being undecided. That's a very, very promising outlook.

 

[Heller]

nice tags lol

 

[Ns1]

I'm not going to lie...I'll be pretty bummed if this doesn't pass because it's going to set a precedent and will quickly have gone from helping the cause to grossly impairing it.

only if it tanks like 10-15%

If it's 35-45% I think it means that it's inevitable.

 

[xanis]

I've only smoked pot twice in my life, back in my early (and stupid) college days. I don't smoke anymore though.

I think it should be legalized, if for no other reason than to set a precedent. Marijuana, IMO, seems no more or less dangerous than alcohol, which IS legal. People who want to smoke it already do and will continue to regardless of its legality, so why not make it legal and tax it?

 

[schneiderguy]

Last time I checked
federal law > state law

Fuck the federal government. California should secede and become it's own country. Cuz we're more awesome than the other 49 states combined.

 

[Glitchny]

I'm hoping it passes however I'm not sure if it will make my trips back into Nevada more or less stressful... hmmm

 

[Eli]

I don't think it's going to pass..... 🙁

 

[Corporate Thug]

Last time I checked
federal law > state law

This is true...but the feds are not going to be prosecuting simple possession cases...in California...where the jury knows it's legal.

 

[Nik]

Yes, and going with what Boomer said, why not have regular drug tests to further reduce the incentive of such incidents at work? Also, if you're caught stoned once at work, you're fired on the spot? Stiffer penalties?

Maybe they already do this, I don't know. :\

If you fail a drug test, you're fired. Well, in most situations you are.

The problem is, how do you tell if someone's stoned or if the THC molecule is simply built up in their system because they smoked 2 days ago or something? That's problem. You can't.

 

[BoomerD]

If you fail a drug test, you're fired. Well, in most situations you are.

The problem is, how do you tell if someone's stoned or if the THC molecule is simply built up in their system because they smoked 2 days ago or something? That's problem. You can't.

IMO, that's something that needs to be addressed before pot is legalized. As it stands now, if you're tested, you're just as guilty for the joint you smoked last weekend in the comfort of your living room as you are for the joint you smoked 10 minutes ago...Drug testing needs to be more accurate...they need to be able to differentiate between the two.

This applies more for DUI scenarios than for work settings though. IMO, if an employer wants a "drug-free workplace" they should be able to do so. While perhaps not all jobs have a need for "drug-free" situations, all employers have the right to not hire stoners.

 

[Nik]

I don't think THC should be included in a drug test for employment. If there's an incident where someone gets hurt or lots of $$$ is wasted or company property is destroyed or something, THEN test for drugs including THC and fire them if they're dirty.

 

[BoomerD]

I don't think THC should be included in a drug test for employment. If there's an incident where someone gets hurt or lots of $$$ is wasted or company property is destroyed or something, THEN test for drugs including THC and fire them if they're dirty.

Why should a company leave themselves open for a lawsuit because a stoner got hurt...or hurt someone else? Why should a company have to wait until a stoner fucked something up before testing?

Fuck that. If a company wants a drug-free workplace, they should be able to have one. Don't want to be drug-free? Work somewhere else.

 

[AznAnarchy99]

I don't think it's going to pass..... 🙁

I highly doubt its going to pass as well. How many people from the 18-24 age range who blaze are actually gonna go out and vote? Out of my friends I'd say none and the majority of them smoke.

 

[Saint Nick]

I highly doubt its going to pass as well. How many people from the 18-24 age range who blaze are actually gonna go out and vote? Out of my friends I'd say none and the majority of them smoke.

This is the problem.

I think the Proposition 19 crew should have made an incentive for voting. If you voted, you get 25% at some head shop next time you visit, or something.

 

[Saint Nick]

I guess it will be fun for everyone turning 21 on November 3rd. Go out and toke and drink as part of the celebration!

Also, sounds like the guy who co-founded Facebook and Napster donated $100,000 to the proposition. Nice.

 

[BoberFett]

Fuck the federal government. California should secede and become it's own country. Cuz we're more awesome than the other 49 states combined.

States rights! Yeeeeehaaaaaaw! The west will rise again!!!!!!

If it passes I hope the feds crucify CA over it. Let the leftists get exactly what they want with their massive federal bureaucracy. Maybe then they'll start to understand what us limited government types are talking about.

 

[hellotyler]

Watch as California becomes the #1 tourist destination in the USA...