California Marijuana: How will you vote?

[Shotgun 1]

This is the initiative that will be on the November ballot:

Quote

Changes California Law to Legalize Marijuana and Allow It to Be Regulated and Taxed.

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 and sale of marijuana to people 21 years old or older. Prohibits people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using it in public, smoking it while minors are present, or providing it to anyone under 21 years old. Maintains current prohibitions against driving while impaired. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Savings of up to several tens of millions of dollars annually to state and local governments on the costs of incarcerating and supervising certain marijuana offenders. Unknown but potentially major tax, fee, and benefit assessment revenues to state and local government related to the production and sale of marijuana products.

Full text here.

Personally, I am strongly for legalization. It is a recreational drug that *all things considered* is safer than alcohol, so we are sending many wrong messages by having it illegal while alcohol is legal. I just can't see how the personal use of it (by an adult and in a manner not affecting minors) should be a crime. Not saying it's a harmless drug, but I can't find any justification for keeping it illegal and spending money to fight this "crime."

[Hjeada 0]

If I lived in CA I would vote to legalize it. There are many arguments on both sides, but as stated above, all things considered I beleive it to have less of a detrimental effect than alcohol.

Dudeist Skydiver #0511

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Marijuana is not harmless. I know from years of personal experience what it can do to you when you abuse it. But it is one of the easier addictions to kick if you feel you need to and want to. Once again I am speaking from personal experience here. I am clean right now, I would pass a drug test if I was given one this very second. But the same could not be said a few short years ago.

I say legalize it and treat it in a similar manner to how tobacco and alcohol are treated. But stop there. Up here in Canada there are some people (they are in the extreme minority) who want drugs such as cocaine and other chemicals legalized.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[kelpdiver 2]

Ultimately my vote will depend not on the concept, but how the bill is actually written. We have a history of propositions that are vague, are misdirection (like the upcoming vote on car insurance, funded by Mercury Insurance), or that overreach.

If it has a major defect, I'll vote no, and let them get it right next time. We don't have to accept the first option we have. But if they get it right, let the experiment continue. The recent history of "medical" marijuana here doesn't seem to support ongoing federal ban.

[champu 1]

Quote

...like the upcoming vote on car insurance, funded by Mercury Insurance

Prop 17 actually made me laugh when I first read about it. It reminds me of "advertised prices reflect cash discount" and the argument that technically that's not the same as charging a fee to use a credit card.

[winsor 236]

Quote

This is the initiative that will be on the November ballot:

Quote

Changes California Law to Legalize Marijuana and Allow It to Be Regulated and Taxed.

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 and sale of marijuana to people 21 years old or older. Prohibits people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using it in public, smoking it while minors are present, or providing it to anyone under 21 years old. Maintains current prohibitions against driving while impaired. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Savings of up to several tens of millions of dollars annually to state and local governments on the costs of incarcerating and supervising certain marijuana offenders. Unknown but potentially major tax, fee, and benefit assessment revenues to state and local government related to the production and sale of marijuana products.

Full text here.

Personally, I am strongly for legalization. It is a recreational drug that *all things considered* is safer than alcohol, so we are sending many wrong messages by having it illegal while alcohol is legal. I just can't see how the personal use of it (by an adult and in a manner not affecting minors) should be a crime. Not saying it's a harmless drug, but I can't find any justification for keeping it illegal and spending money to fight this "crime."

Harmless? Humbug!

It has been PROVEN that Marihuana makes your babies get born NAKED!

Think of the children!


Blue skies/red eyes,

Winsor

[Nightingale 0]

I'm for legalization. Banning it has been an epic failure, and we might as well get the tax dollars. Perhaps it will impact the drug cartels as well. While the proposition is probably in conflict with federal law, it will make a statement and perhaps allow California to lead the way in making important changes. I am all for giving people more freedoms rather than less, and against laws to protect people from their own stupidity.

[ScaryBox 0]

I don't see why we shouldn't legalize it. The decriminalization of it not only saves the money we use to hunt down the drug rings, but the money we use to keep those persons in jail. Plus we benefit from the taxes etc..

This was done in Norway. ( I forget when) and there was a study done afterwards where the actual amount of marijuana used decreased along with crime rates..

[skybill 22]

Hi Kris,
Yup, the "New" Cal. MJ initiative...where were you in '72?? I was just out of the Navy and going to San Diego Mesa College. "Prop 19!!" was the big deal. Prop 19 stickers and flyers were all over the campus, everywhere for that matter!! To make a long story short, WE LOST!! Just being pro the prop. is not good enough, ya' gotta VOTE!! There were enough pro people in that election to win it but they didn't go to the polls!! Dig up an old copy of "Feds n' Heads" Comix, if you can find one. 'Still have some Prop. 19 buttons and "Paraphernalia" in my archives somewhere!!

SCR-2034, SCS-680

III%,
Deli-out

[nipp1e_boy 2]

Marijuana is an important part of the safety culture in skydiving. I dont care if its legal or illegal in California because I will break the law if it means being a safer skydiver. Liek a hungry man stealing a loaf of bread. Hmmm hungry now.

Nipple Boy
A-19820

"Safety First! Fun Forever!"

[Belgian_Draft 0]

If I lived in Cali I would vote to legalize. Might as well get the tax dollars.

I would then invest heavily in Frito-Lay and Taco Bell stock.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

If I lived in Cali I would vote to legalize. Might as well get the tax dollars.

I would then invest heavily in Frito-Lay and Taco Bell stock.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

I'm for legalization. Banning it has been an epic failure, and we might as well get the tax dollars. Perhaps it will impact the drug cartels as well. While the proposition is probably in conflict with federal law, it will make a statement and perhaps allow California to lead the way in making important changes. I am all for giving people more freedoms rather than less, and against laws to protect people from their own stupidity.

Hmmm
I agree with the general direction of your point. Hard to argue with.

I will sit back and ponder your proposition.

Thanks for the perspective

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[skybill 22]

Quote

Marijuana is an important part of the safety culture in skydiving. I dont care if its legal or illegal in California because I will break the law if it means being a safer skydiver. Liek a hungry man stealing a loaf of bread. Hmmm hungry now.

Nipple Boy
A-19820

Hi A-19820,
Circle Vans in the parking lot there'll be a "Safety Meeting" before the Big Blot!!!

SCR-2034, SCS-680

III%,
Deli-out

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Marijuana is an important part of the safety culture in skydiving. I dont care if its legal or illegal in California because I will break the law if it means being a safer skydiver. Liek a hungry man stealing a loaf of bread. Hmmm hungry now.

How do you see it making skydiving safer?

Even if CA (or the entire country) legalizes it, don't expect the rules at the DZ to change. Alcohol is legal, yet not tolerated before takeoff. But the beer light may now get a green led companion.

[Hjeada 0]

Quote

Quote

Marijuana is an important part of the safety culture in skydiving. I dont care if its legal or illegal in California because I will break the law if it means being a safer skydiver. Liek a hungry man stealing a loaf of bread. Hmmm hungry now.

How do you see it making skydiving safer?

Even if CA (or the entire country) legalizes it, don't expect the rules at the DZ to change. Alcohol is legal, yet not tolerated before takeoff. But the beer light may now get a green led companion.

Kinda missed the point there...

Dudeist Skydiver #0511

[dzdaveu47 0]

It should be treated just like alcohol. After the sunset
load lifts off, so will I. Wash it back with a cold beer.
I only skydive sober! I don't want to jump with drunks or stoners in my airspace. But when I'm done for the day, I want my jay.

Read icculus, the helping freindly book.

[masterblaster72 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Marijuana is an important part of the safety culture in skydiving. I dont care if its legal or illegal in California because I will break the law if it means being a safer skydiver. Liek a hungry man stealing a loaf of bread. Hmmm hungry now.

How do you see it making skydiving safer?

Even if CA (or the entire country) legalizes it, don't expect the rules at the DZ to change. Alcohol is legal, yet not tolerated before takeoff. But the beer light may now get a green led companion.

Kinda missed the point there...

He probably hasn't heard the alternative definition of "safety meeting."

Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up.

[DJL 235]

I would love to see this taxed and that money used to for a good purpose like providing stability to children with parents addicted to real drugs.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[AndyBoyd 0]

If I lived in Cal., I would vote in favor of decriminalization. Here is a good op-ed piece about the issue from the Chicago Sun-Times.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/huntley/2129118,CST-EDT-HUNT30.article

For those not inclined to read the whole article, the author argues that (1) taxing marijuana could bring approximately $1.4 billion (with "B", folks) into Cal.'s bankrupt state coffers, (2) legalization would "be a body blow to the drug cartels" in that legal access to pot would put the smugglers out of business (at least the pot smugglers), (3) prosecuting simple marijuana possession cases does nothing to lower the crime rate, and (4) pot is less harmful that tobacco and alcohol.

These seem like pretty solid arguments to me.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Kinda missed the point there...

He probably hasn't heard the alternative definition of "safety meeting."

Indeed. If measured by the current legal state of morality, I'm pretty strait laced, since getting shitfaced is perfectly acceptable behavior outside of Utah.

If it passes in Nov and is still considered a success in the first few years (defined as contributing tax revenue and not having a spike in crime), then it will quickly be adopted by other states, starting with the larger ones I suspect. Thou if Obama loses in 2012 and the GOP goes back to strict enforcement, it will be quite the clash, with a lot of citizens caught in the crossfire.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

If it passes in Nov and is still considered a success in the first few years (defined as contributing tax revenue and not having a spike in crime), then it will quickly be adopted by other states, starting with the larger ones I suspect. Thou if Obama loses in 2012 and the GOP goes back to strict enforcement, it will be quite the clash, with a lot of citizens caught in the crossfire.

If it passes (and I doubt that it will), I do wonder what issues may arise from having it legal here but not in other states. I would prefer to see it legalized at the federal level, but at least if we pass it here then it will send a pretty strong message.

Edit: I'm also curious to hear from those who think it should remain illegal. What is the reason?

[SamWhite 0]

Legalize it....

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

If it passes (and I doubt that it will), I do wonder what issues may arise from having it legal here but not in other states. I would prefer to see it legalized at the federal level, but at least if we pass it here then it will send a pretty strong message.

Is polling negative? I would expect it to have a pretty good chance of going through, getting votes from the same people who supported medical use several years ago.

The issues will be much like that for alcohol. Laws are set by state. Californians will not expect to be able to possess or smoke it outside our borders. They still will face possible reprisals at work for their usage if they test positive (though it seems like many know how to handles those tests in my parts).

It really should be settled at the federal level for consistency, but this is going to be like gay marriage. Only when enough states say enough of the religious nonsense will the country's standard change as well.

[Shotgun 1]

I think the polls are fairly even. I guess I'm just cynical, but hopefully I am wrong.

As for the work situation, I think this section covers that (perhaps somewhat vaguely):

Quote

(c) No person shall be punished, fined, discriminated against, or be denied any right or privilege for lawfully engaging in any conduct permitted by this Act or authorized pursuant to Section 11301 of this Act. Provided however, that the existing right of an employer to address consumption that actually impairs job performance by an employee shall not be affected.