Californians to Vote On Legalizing Marijuana

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/03/californians-to-vote-on-legalizing-pot-1/1

The initiative would allow adults 21 or older to buy, grow or possess up to an ounce of pot for personal consumption.

Buying My Plane Ticket right now.

I can't wait for the mormon-funded, highly irrational, and hate-filled attack ads.

Cool bro.

i hope the voter turnout is huge and it passes by a landslide so other states follow

The feds will arrest them all.

About to smoke this and listen to Oversteps cause I was expecting to hear it on vinyl today but alas package still in transit

Yay for weed!

OMG we never had access to weed until this possible new law was announced...! Dude we gotta move to California to smoke an ounce of pot!

  On 3/26/2010 at 12:12 AM, Enter a new display name said:

OMG we never had access to weed until this possible new law was announced...! Dude we gotta move to California to smoke an ounce of pot!

It may not effect us, but a lot of people tend to move away from weed even if they enjoy it because of their work and drug tests. Plus how fucking nice would it be to walk down to the jiffy store and buy a pack of joints

the pipe, i lol'd

  Quote

Californians will vote in November on whether they want to be the first Americans to legalize marijuana for personal use, plus generate some revenue for their cash-strapped state.

Haha. This sounds like my friends who need money so they decide to sell drugs.

  Quote

Opponents counter that legalization would increase use of marijuana and potentially other drugs, cause similar problems associated with alcohol and tobacco, and boost crime and add to police work.

How would legalization boost crime? I was under the impression that a great deal of crime related to illegal drugs had to do with organized crime exploiting the fact such substances are not protected by government regulations. Are opponents envisioning some sort of reefer madness descent into anti-social activity?

  On 3/26/2010 at 12:15 AM, chassis said:

the pipe, i lol'd

whats funny about the pipe?

  On 3/26/2010 at 12:16 AM, Wall Bird said:

 

 

  Quote

Opponents counter that legalization would increase use of marijuana and potentially other drugs, cause similar problems associated with alcohol and tobacco, and boost crime and add to police work.

 

How would legalization boost crime? I was under the impression that a great deal of crime related to illegal drugs had to do with organized crime exploiting the fact such substances are not protected by government regulations. Are opponents envisioning some sort of reefer madness descent into anti-social activity?

I think people are morons. 'Cause noooooooooooooooo oooooooooone was drinking during prohibition.

YES WE CAN!

DUDE, WE TOTALLY CAN.

packabowlpackabowlpackabowl

sweeeet, hope it passes to the left

  On 3/26/2010 at 12:20 AM, chassis said:

  On 3/26/2010 at 12:16 AM, Wall Bird said:

 

 

  Quote

Opponents counter that legalization would increase use of marijuana and potentially other drugs, cause similar problems associated with alcohol and tobacco, and boost crime and add to police work.

 

How would legalization boost crime? I was under the impression that a great deal of crime related to illegal drugs had to do with organized crime exploiting the fact such substances are not protected by government regulations. Are opponents envisioning some sort of reefer madness descent into anti-social activity?

 

I think people are morons. 'Cause noooooooooooooooo oooooooooone was drinking during prohibition.

Yeah, good point. But I think the more glaring evidence on their side is that organized crime declined significantly.

  On 3/26/2010 at 12:10 AM, karmakramer said:

About to smoke this and listen to Oversteps cause I was expecting to hear it on vinyl today but alas package still in transit

 

Yay for weed!

 

That photo is dumbass big

the local radiostation out here Kgo has been talking about this ballot measure for a whole week and jesus christ you guys should hear some of the abysmally ignorant people calling in

'if weed is legal i will be horrified because all thefar left in the CALIFORNIA STATE LEGISLATURE will all be stoned!'

i get a kick out of people who think weed is dangerous but that alcohol is ok in moderation, there are a lot of those calling in.

if anyone is genuinely interested in actual results of what happens when drugs are decriminalized look no further than Portugal around the year 2001, they have had full on decriminalization all drugs for the past 9 years.

check this out -

  Quote

n July 1, 2001, a nationwide law in Portugal took effect that decriminalized all drugs, including cocaine and heroin. Under the new legal framework, all drugs were "decriminalized," not "legalized." Thus, drug possession for personal use and drug usage itself are still legally prohibited, but violations of those prohibitions are deemed to be exclusively administrative violations and are removed completely from the criminal realm. Drug trafficking continues to be prosecuted as a criminal offense.

 

While other states in the European Union have developed various forms of de facto decriminalization — whereby substances perceived to be less serious (such as cannabis) rarely lead to criminal prosecution — Portugal remains the only EU member state with a law explicitly declaring drugs to be "decriminalized." Because more than seven years have now elapsed since enactment of Portugal's decriminalization system, there are ample data enabling its effects to be assessed.

 

Notably, decriminalization has become increasingly popular in Portugal since 2001. Except for some far-right politicians, very few domestic political factions are agitating for a repeal of the 2001 law. And while there is a widespread perception that bureaucratic changes need to be made to Portugal's decriminalization framework to make it more efficient and effective, there is no real debate about whether drugs should once again be criminalized. More significantly, none of the nightmare scenarios touted by preenactment decriminalization opponents — from rampant increases in drug usage among the young to the transformation of Lisbon into a haven for "drug tourists" — has occurred.

 

The political consensus in favor of decriminalization is unsurprising in light of the relevant empirical data. Those data indicate that decriminalization has had no adverse effect on drug usage rates in Portugal, which, in numerous categories, are now among the lowest in the EU, particularly when compared with states with stringent criminalization regimes. Although postdecriminalization usage rates have remained roughly the same or even decreased slightly when compared with other EU states, drug-related pathologies — such as sexually transmitted diseases and deaths due to drug usage — have decreased dramatically. Drug policy experts attribute those positive trends to the enhanced ability of the Portuguese government to offer treatment programs to its citizens — enhancements made possible, for numerous reasons, by decriminalization.

 

This report will begin with an examination of the Portuguese decriminalization framework as set forth in law and in terms of how it functions in practice. Also examined is the political climate in Portugal both pre- and postdecriminalization with regard to drug policy, and the impetus that led that nation to adopt decriminalization.

 

 

The report then assesses Portuguese drug policy in the context of the EU's approach to drugs. The varying legal frameworks, as well as the overall trend toward liberalization, are examined to enable a meaningful comparative assessment between Portuguese data and data from other EU states.

 

The report also sets forth the data concerning drug-related trends in Portugal both pre- and postdecriminalization. The effects of decriminalization in Portugal are examined both in absolute terms and in comparisons with other states that continue to criminalize drugs, particularly within the EU.

 

The data show that, judged by virtually every metric, the Portuguese decriminalization framework has been a resounding success. Within this success lie self-evident lessons that should guide drug policy debates around the world.

 

  On 3/26/2010 at 1:50 AM, joshuatxuk said:

  On 3/26/2010 at 12:20 AM, chassis said:

  On 3/26/2010 at 12:16 AM, Wall Bird said:

 

 

  Quote

Opponents counter that legalization would increase use of marijuana and potentially other drugs, cause similar problems associated with alcohol and tobacco, and boost crime and add to police work.

 

How would legalization boost crime? I was under the impression that a great deal of crime related to illegal drugs had to do with organized crime exploiting the fact such substances are not protected by government regulations. Are opponents envisioning some sort of reefer madness descent into anti-social activity?

 

I think people are morons. 'Cause noooooooooooooooo oooooooooone was drinking during prohibition.

 

Yeah, good point. But I think the more glaring evidence on their side is that organized crime declined significantly.

 

Here's the thing. If weed is only legal in california there will suddenly be a huge market for it, and it will probably be drastically cheaper than buying weed on the street (ie in the other 49 states). This means youre going to get a lot of people smuggling weed out of california and distributing it to the rest of the country, with that, you're going to have problems and an increase in crime because 1: smuggling weed out of the state will be illegal 2. You will probably get lots of tussles between these young entrepreneurs. 3. Bringing large quantities of weed into other states reiterating the two previous problems.

So not only will it cause some crime in cali, but it will bring it to other states which they will hate.

  On 3/26/2010 at 4:41 AM, 42Orange said:

Here's the thing. If weed is only legal in california there will suddenly be a huge market for it, and it will probably be drastically cheaper than buying weed on the street (ie in the other 49 states). This means youre going to get a lot of people smuggling weed out of california and distributing it to the rest of the country, with that, you're going to have problems and an increase in crime because 1: smuggling weed out of the state will be illegal 2. You will probably get lots of tussles between these young entrepreneurs. 3. Bringing large quantities of weed into other states reiterating the two previous problems.

So not only will it cause some crime in cali, but it will bring it to other states which they will hate.

this is essentially why the federal US govt claims they can ban weed -- because it constitues "interstate trade" if one state legalizes it. legally, the federal government has no right to involve itself in states' affairs UNLESS it effects one or more of the other 49.

half bullshit, half reality.