Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 127

Thread: Calif. voters to decide whether to legalize pot

  1. #51
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Calif. voters to decide whether to legalize pot

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Unfortunately...the mandate of the voters is in large part influenced by massive amounts of propoganda. Just look at prop 8. The measure was largely failing until the mormon church through million of dollars into a very deceitful campaign that scared and misled voters. I expect Mormons and evangelicals to do the same with this issue.
    I do wish there were some measure that could block out of state lobbies from injecting massive amounts of funds into a campaign to influence a state ballot measure.

    I think after what the mormon church did, they should lose all tax exempt status and be treated like any other political lobby.

  2. #52
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 03:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    6,763
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Calif. voters to decide whether to legalize pot

    Quote Originally Posted by Erod View Post
    Ah, legalize them, too. We have Obamacare to pay for rehab now!!!
    The cost of rehab may be less that the cost of the War of Drugs.

  3. #53
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,785

    Re: Calif. voters to decide whether to legalize pot

    Quote Originally Posted by Erod View Post
    Ah, legalize them, too. We have Obamacare to pay for rehab now!!!
    Didn't see that in the bill. Can you point it out to me?
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  4. #54
    don't panic
    marduc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    10-22-17 @ 04:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,301

    Re: Calif. voters to decide whether to legalize pot

    Quote Originally Posted by reefedjib View Post
    I agree with you that soft drugs (low addiction rates) should be legalized as well as production and distribution. I am still struggling with hard drugs (coke, crack, meth, heroin). I usually say to decriminalize them, treat users as having a health problem and get them into rehab. But that does nothing to eliminate the criminal distribution networks. So let's think about legalizing (and regulating) them.

    There are studies showing that the use of marijuana won't go up with legalization. Perhaps the same is true of hard drugs.

    Addiction is a disease and one way of treating it is to give a hit. Perhaps this is a way to view legalization.

    When you go to the DC (Drug Control) and buy your hits, you are automatically sent to rehab. You can do the hits, but they will be your last.

    What is more important and valuable, reducing the harm caused by criminal networks or reducing the harm caused by personal use? For pot, it is clearly the first. For other drugs?
    I am limited on time, but there are studies which look at this, and there are examples. Portugal has decriminalized all drugs (it does not address the supply chain, but there is a whole intl. treaty issue there).

    hard drug usage has decreased across the board, the key is education, and delaying the age of first use, getting it out of the hands of kids, and waiting until they are more mature and can make more reasoned decisions.

    Just because we legalize drugs does not mean that we are condoning them, we can still press the message home hard that these drugs are extremely dangerous, and we can take other steps to monitor usage, and offer treatment options without a stigma or intimidation factor that is present currently.

    After 9 years of decriminalization in Portugal, usage has gone down for every type of hard drug -most notably and significantly the decrease in hard drug usage is most pronounced in youth.

    Marijuana use has gone up slightly since decriminalization, but this trend is true in all countries in Europe, and the % of increase in usage is lower in Portugal and their lax laws than it is with its more restrictive neighbors.

    here is a link to a study on the results of Portugal's decriminalization of ALL drugs:

    Drug Decriminalization in Portugal: Lessons for Creating Fair and Successful Drug Policies | Glenn Greenwald | Cato Institute: White Paper

    Page 12 and 13 will have graphs which show usage has gone down across the board for school age children since 2001 when the policy was enacted.

    Also I mentioned that marijuana use did go up, not among school age kids, just among adults, and further we have this from the report:

    In almost every category of drug, and for drug usage overall, the lifetime prevalence rates in the predecriminalization era of the 1990's were higher than the post decriminalization rates
    It took me a while to warm up to the idea of legalizing everything, I was hesitant at first, but the positive results are a mere fraction of what they potentially can be unless you legalize everything, and then aggressively attack the problem from a medical, sociological, and educational standpoint.

    There are solid models, and sound proposals and ideas out there that we can base our drug policy on that would be effective, it would discourage new users from even starting and/or becoming addicted, and it would give present addicts, and those who may still become addicts despite our best efforts the one thing that they need most to overcome their problem, and that is hope.
    Last edited by marduc; 03-25-10 at 07:35 PM.
    Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
    Drugs are bad, prohibition is worse

  5. #55
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,144

    Re: Calif. voters to decide whether to legalize pot

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    If this passes I wonder how much of the percentage of prescriptions for so called medical marijuana will drop?
    You wouldn't need it. So I would expect they would disappear. Seriously, do people get prescriptions for aspirin?
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  6. #56
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,144

    Re: Calif. voters to decide whether to legalize pot

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    That's quite convenient. You can make all the sweeping and unsupported statements about "right-wingers" that you want, and then whenever you're called out on it you just redefine the group to mean "not all of them, just the bad ones."
    I've never redefined the group. I said right-wingers...someone else said something about lumping in all Republicans. I said no...not all Republicans are right-wingers. There are moderates in the Republican party and there are some conservatives who are not right-wingers.

    To me a "conservative" is someone who believes in small government and does not want a lot of governmental regulation.
    "right-wingers" differ from "conservatives" because right-wingers talk about small government, but when it comes down to it, they advocate for very large governmental involvement in the social arena, be it gay rights, reproductive freedom, drugs, etc.

    Does that clarify it at all?
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  7. #57
    don't panic
    marduc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    10-22-17 @ 04:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,301

    Re: Calif. voters to decide whether to legalize pot

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    While I most whole heartily agree with you. They will evoke interstate commerce or some other BS thing to make sure they keep the power. The federal government isn't so keen on reducing its power; even the crap it just took.
    This will not go unchallenged, hopefully immediately upon passage it will fall under the current policy of not using resources in cases where Federal and state laws conflict (current medical MJ federal policy). What happens when we get a new president is another story.

    There will be challenges, and this will hinge on the 10th.. but there is actually a case that hopefully will make it to the SC prior to the MJ laws which will have bearing on this issue, it is Montana and the challenge presented by their recently enacted Gun legislation, where if the Gun is made in Montana, and is sold in Montana it is not "commerce... ...among the several states", and therefore the Fed cannot regulate it. There are other hurdles, the commerce clause has been seriously weakened, and there are rulings that have set precedent otherwise (cannot recall off the top of my head, but there is a specific case that is a sizeable hurdle).

    States' Gun Rights: The Next Constitutional Battlefield - TIME <-- Montana gun rights challenge, it is a story from last may, but the legal path is a slow one, it is still in the works, and several other states have passed similar laws (off the top of my head Wyoming?? nevada??, and I know Ohio has).

    In the text of the proposed Mj law there is a section that specifically defines it as intrastate, and separates it from interstate, this is to give it a leg to stand on for 10th challenges.
    Last edited by marduc; 03-25-10 at 07:40 PM.
    Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
    Drugs are bad, prohibition is worse

  8. #58
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:03 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,983

    Re: Calif. voters to decide whether to legalize pot

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    I've never redefined the group. I said right-wingers...someone else said something about lumping in all Republicans. I said no...not all Republicans are right-wingers. There are moderates in the Republican party and there are some conservatives who are not right-wingers.

    To me a "conservative" is someone who believes in small government and does not want a lot of governmental regulation.
    "right-wingers" differ from "conservatives" because right-wingers talk about small government, but when it comes down to it, they advocate for very large governmental involvement in the social arena, be it gay rights, reproductive freedom, drugs, etc.

    Does that clarify it at all?
    Those would be social conservatives. And it's not about expanding government, it's about morals and not legalizing or giving rights to what many believe are immoral.

  9. #59
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,144

    Re: Calif. voters to decide whether to legalize pot

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Those would be social conservatives. And it's not about expanding government, it's about morals and not legalizing or giving rights to what many believe are immoral.
    You can try to define it anyway you like, but it absolutely is about expanding government. It is about huge government regulation and involvement into things that the government really has no business in at all. Its about expanding the government to legislate morality.

    THAT is not a "conservative" principle. That is why "Social Conservative" actually makes little to no sense.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  10. #60
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:03 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,983

    Re: Calif. voters to decide whether to legalize pot

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    You can try to define it anyway you like, but it absolutely is about expanding government. It is about huge government regulation and involvement into things that the government really has no business in at all. Its about expanding the government to legislate morality.

    THAT is not a "conservative" principle. That is why "Social Conservative" actually makes little to no sense.
    It's not regulation to say something is illegal or not marriage. How is government any bigger due to criminalized drugs and homosexual marriages not being legal? By your reasoning are all laws for big government? So should all who support limited government also support anarchy and a lawless society? We have laws because of morality, so should murder and rape be legal to shrink government influence?

Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •