# Vote yes on Prop 19



## rikuumi (Nov 2, 2010)

Vote yes on prop 19 if you're caligurl or boi!

http://blog.norml.org/2010/11/01/we-are-le...-in-california/


----------



## The Catboy (Nov 2, 2010)

Ummm. no, just no.


----------



## Slyakin (Nov 2, 2010)

Why would I? Marijuana... pretty stupid.


Maybe this belongs in the EOF.


----------



## Goli (Nov 2, 2010)

Slyakin said:
			
		

> Why would I? Marijuana... pretty stupid.
> 
> 
> Maybe this belongs in the EOF.


Agreed. 
I don't even live in the US but if I did and lived on California I'd vote no.


----------



## Rydian (Nov 2, 2010)

I'm no druggie (I don't even drink), *but I am a facts person.*

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=20038


			
				QUOTE said:
			
		

> A new study by London's Imperial College's chair of neuropsychopharmacology, David Nutt, claims that the three most dangerous drugs in the world are alcohol, heroin, and cocaine -- in that order.
> 
> [...]
> 
> After alcohol, heroin, and crack cocaine, the next worse drugs were crystal methamphetamine and powder cocaine.  Then comes tobacco -- another legal drug.  In seventh place is amphetamine/speed.  Marijuana -- which is the subject of legalization controversy in the U.S. -- is deemed the eighth most harmful.


I took a Drugs and Narcotics class (given as part of the justice program at my college) last year, and *I learned that a lot of what people think they know about drugs is totally false.*

Anybody here with prejudice about one drug over another (tobacco and alcohol included), I suggest you go read some recent studies and facts before you post.


----------



## omgpwn666 (Nov 2, 2010)

People are dumb enough, we don't need enhancers.


----------



## shadowkillerdrag (Nov 2, 2010)

thats just ridiculous =.=
Im definitely voting no


----------



## Rydian (Nov 2, 2010)

omgpwn666 said:
			
		

> People are dumb enough, we don't need enhancers.


Alcohol does more to damage your brain than pot.

I sure would like it if alcohol were to vanish, but nope, gotta' blame pot.


----------



## Goli (Nov 2, 2010)

Rydian said:
			
		

> I'm no druggie (I don't even drink), *but I am a facts person.*
> 
> http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=20038
> 
> ...


The fact is that all drugs, legal or not, do more harm than good in the long run.
Which is why I'm an anti-drugs person!
This includes drugs used for medical purposes.


----------



## rikuumi (Nov 2, 2010)

If alcohol or tobacco were invented today they would never ever become legal..

*Posts merged*



			
				Goli said:
			
		

> Rydian said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So you don't even drink sodas or coffee that includes caffeine? Because you know, caffeine is a drug too.


----------



## omgpwn666 (Nov 2, 2010)

Rydian said:
			
		

> omgpwn666 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



They're both stupidity enhancers.


----------



## Paarish (Nov 2, 2010)

Rydian said:
			
		

> I'm no druggie (I don't even drink), *but I am a facts person.*
> 
> http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=20038
> 
> ...



I was gonna say something similar...


----------



## Goli (Nov 2, 2010)

rikuumi said:
			
		

> If alcohol or tobacco were invented today they would never ever become legal..
> 
> *Posts merged*
> 
> ...


Nope, I mostly drink *insertsomefruithere* natural juice and tea, though tea does have caffeine, but in much smaller doses.


----------



## Rydian (Nov 2, 2010)

Goli said:
			
		

> The fact is that all drugs, legal or not, do more harm than good in the long run.
> Which is why I'm an anti-drugs person!
> This includes drugs used for medical purposes.Ah, that's not my stance, though.
> 
> ...


It's not a mind-altering drug (like pot/alcohol), and doesn't have lasting detrimental effects (like tobacco smoke does).


----------



## Hanafuda (Nov 2, 2010)

I would if I lived there, and I'm 43 years old. It's not about whether marijuana is 'stupid' as Slyakin suggests ... perhaps it is. But even if it is, the government shouldn't be protecting me from my own stupidity, unless it poses a substantial risk of harm to others. Like cigarettes, hang gliding, and loud headphones, smoking marijuana may annoy those around you but the case for causing actual harm to others is too slim to justify its prohibition. This doesn't mean you can be obnoxiously annoying with something just because it's legal, so I'm okay with no smoking signs in restaurants, and shushing people in libraries whose headphones can be heard. But with marijuana the consequences of keeping it illegal far outweigh the consequences of returning it to legality (it hasn't ALWAYS been illegal, ya know). With marijuana illegal, you've got law enforcement semi-miliatarized by the 'war on drugs', you've got dudes who just want to catch a buzz and watch sportscenter sitting in a jail cell no different than if they were violent thugs, and you've got a gigantic criminal underground profiting from it all and not even paying taxes on it. Probably worst of all, there is nothing in that underground economy preventing the sale of the stuff to minors. 

It's a free country. If you live in California, act like it and vote yes.

(okay, i'm done.)


----------



## Rydian (Nov 2, 2010)

The government doesn't want to legalize pot because then you'll have all the crackheads and meth users saying "They legalized pot, why not (insert body-wrecking substance here)!?!"


----------



## Pliskron (Nov 2, 2010)

Pot heads suck. I'll vote yes as long as they all move to California


----------



## rikuumi (Nov 2, 2010)

Rydian said:
			
		

> The government doesn't want to legalize pot because then you'll have all the crackheads and meth users saying "They legalized pot, why not (insert body-wrecking substance here)!?!"


Meth can't be even compared to pot..


----------



## referencer (Nov 2, 2010)

It's kind of amusing how most people here are pirates, yet they'll immediately assume marijuana use is unforgivable just because it's against the law at the moment.

If I'm free to booze myself incomprehensible and in the process become a very real risk to others around me, why shouldn't I be free to light something up that can only hurt myself?


----------



## Rydian (Nov 2, 2010)

rikuumi said:
			
		

> Rydian said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


People with an addiction to something like meth generally won't think perfectly straight if there's a chance on increasing their supply of it.


----------



## The Catboy (Nov 2, 2010)

At this point there really is no point to legalizing pot. Pot has lost it's true medical value and must people just want it legal so they can smoke themself stupid.
Being that this is America and America has the idea that if it's worth doing, it's worth overdoing.


----------



## Ethevion (Nov 2, 2010)

I don't use it, but I think voting yes makes sense. In Canada, it's illegal to drink alcohol outside. So if they keep the pot inside, I'm fine by that.


----------



## Hanafuda (Nov 2, 2010)

Rydian said:
			
		

> The government doesn't want to legalize pot because then you'll have all the crackheads and meth users saying "They legalized pot, why not (insert body-wrecking substance here)!?!"



No, the government doesn't want to legalize pot because the politicians are all being paid off by the alcohol industry to prevent it, and because the 'war on drugs' gives the government an excuse to employ tens of thousands of heavily armed soldier-policemen nationwide to keep their thumb on our heads.

As for your suggestion, I actually support ending all these ridiculous drug prohibitions so I wouldn't mind a bit if crack and meth were legal. I'm a libertarian - I believe in liberty, and consequences. I am against laws that enable the government to dictate 'what's good for me.'


----------



## BlueStar (Nov 2, 2010)

Rydian said:
			
		

> The government doesn't want to legalize pot because then you'll have all the crackheads and meth users saying "They legalized pot, why not (insert body-wrecking substance here)!?!"



At the moment people point to the damage alcohol does and say "If that's legal, why can't weed be legal' so I guess by that argument prohibition should never have been ended.


----------



## Hanafuda (Nov 2, 2010)

I have to say, I'm really surprised at how many of you guys are comfortable with the idea of big government dictating behavior. Are you likewise in favor of the government regulating the content of video games? Cuz there's no difference.


----------



## Rydian (Nov 2, 2010)

Hanafuda said:
			
		

> Rydian said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Go read up on prohibition and see all the bad stuff it caused and why it was repealed.


----------



## Hanafuda (Nov 2, 2010)

Rydian said:
			
		

> Hanafuda said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




It'll take you all of two seconds on google to see how the alcohol industry is pumping huge dollars into fighting marijuana legalization. As for greasing palms, where there's smoke there's fire.


http://leisureguy.wordpress.com/2010/09/17...a-legalization/
http://murphreport.com/2010/09/19/alcohol-...strial-complex/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/21/t...e_n_732901.html
http://stopthedrugwar.org/trenches/2010/se...ms_law_enforcem
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2010/09...000_to_no_o.php
http://jonathanturley.org/2010/09/18/kettl...ation-campaign/


----------



## Rydian (Nov 2, 2010)

Well hot damn, proof given.


----------



## injected11 (Nov 2, 2010)

If only prop 19 mattered... Marijuana's criminalization is a Federal law, so even if this passes, they can enforce the law and punish offenders. Keep in mind Scharzenegger de-criminalized it in Cullyfawnya awhile back, yet that also seems to have done nothing.

Anyway, I'd vote yes.


----------



## TLSS_N (Nov 2, 2010)

F*** you prop 19, f*** you!

why would someone want to get cancer?

or Psychosis?

what about insomnia?

and anyone who says it isn't addictive and does not lead to violence, read this article, they obviously needed there fix.

I hope prop 19 goes down hard!


----------



## murkurie (Nov 2, 2010)

I'm going to vote in few hours, and I have decided to vote no. I don't think drugs should be legalized, and it doesn't if it passes, because it still a federal law.


----------



## MFDC12 (Nov 2, 2010)

The Living Shadow said:
			
		

> and anyone who says it isn't addictive and does not lead to violence, read this article, they obviously needed there fix.



not for pot or anything... but that would not have happened if pot was legal 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




also, it is not addictive physically but it can be addictive psychologically.


----------



## BlueStar (Nov 2, 2010)

The Living Shadow said:
			
		

> F*** you prop 19, f*** you!
> 
> why would someone want to get cancer?
> 
> ...



What absolute rubbish.  It was a robbery for something of value.  People have been killed in robberies targeting games stores as well, should video games be banned?


----------



## TrolleyDave (Nov 2, 2010)

I've smoked pot for 20 years now and never suffered any of the things being pushed forward here.  I've never robbed anyone, never stolen to buy it, I can go weeks and months without smoking it without turning into a clucking mess, I've never snapped and shot up a McDonalds.  As for insomnia, I've suffered it my whole life.  When I was younger I'd go 2 or 3 days at a time without being able to sleep.  When smoking a couple of bongs/joints a night I sleep deeply, regularly and always feel refreshed in the morning.  As for it giving you cancer, living in modern society is more damaging to your lungs and genetics.  Ever seen someone die from sitting in a room full of pot smoke?  Now what would happen if you sat in a garage with the car running?

It hasn't made me stupid, it hasn't made me lazy and I'm definitely not dependent.  Hell, I've met people more hooked on Facebook than me or my mates have ever been on pot.  If you have an addictive or co-dependent personality it doesn't matter what the trigger, it could be Pokemon games, cheeseburgers, crack or even an abusive partner, it's the personality type that's at fault.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Nov 2, 2010)

Pretty disappointing how uninformed most people are. Even worse is how desperately they wish to control the victimless activities of other adults through the force of law.


----------



## Sonicslasher (Nov 2, 2010)

People shouldn't be treated as adults and make their own decisions about what to put in their bodies. No sir, they should adhere to strict rules. Who would want such a silly thing as civil liberties and personal freedoms? Certainly our safety should come first.  

Fear is a medicine that is best served in high doses on a regular bases to keep the masses in their place.


----------



## _Chaz_ (Nov 2, 2010)

Doesn't affect me, so if they want to risk it, why not?


----------



## Blood Fetish (Nov 2, 2010)

The most tragic part of all this is that we are causing far more violence and death by keeping cannabis illegal.


----------



## _Chaz_ (Nov 2, 2010)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> The most tragic part of all this is that we are causing far more violence and death by keeping cannabis illegal.


Same with all other drugs (if you can call cannabis a drug). That doesn't mean that we should legalize them.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Nov 2, 2010)

If you thought making something illegal would result in more violence, more fear, and more death then why would you support outlawing it?

Is not the point of law to protect the public?


----------



## Demonbart (Nov 2, 2010)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> I've smoked pot for 20 years now and never suffered any of the things being pushed forward here.  I've never robbed anyone, never stolen to buy it, I can go weeks and months without smoking it without turning into a clucking mess, I've never snapped and shot up a McDonalds.  As for insomnia, I've suffered it my whole life.  When I was younger I'd go 2 or 3 days at a time without being able to sleep.  When smoking a couple of bongs/joints a night I sleep deeply, regularly and always feel refreshed in the morning.  As for it giving you cancer, living in modern society is more damaging to your lungs and genetics.  Ever seen someone die from sitting in a room full of pot smoke?  Now what would happen if you sat in a garage with the car running?
> 
> It hasn't made me stupid, it hasn't made me lazy and I'm definitely not dependent.  Hell, I've met people more hooked on Facebook than me or my mates have ever been on pot.  If you have an addictive or co-dependent personality it doesn't matter what the trigger, it could be Pokemon games, cheeseburgers, crack or even an abusive partner, it's the personality type that's at fault.


Agreed, though I haven't used pot as long as you have, I definitely haven't noticed any of the negative effects that were mentioned by the other tempers.
As for pot causing insomnia, that's the purest dose of bullshit I've heard in my life. Everyone I know who smoes pot says they sleep better after smoking it.
And the cancer thing too, petrol fumes and cigarette smoke are more harmful than pot smoke.


----------



## ThatDudeWithTheFood (Nov 2, 2010)

This would fix the economy I don't live in Cali but I would vote yes.

I once read somewhere tobacco is worse than marajuana.



			
				injected11 said:
			
		

> If only prop 19 mattered... Marijuana's criminalization is a Federal law, so even if this passes, they can enforce the law and punish offenders. Keep in mind Scharzenegger de-criminalized it in Cullyfawnya awhile back, yet that also seems to have done nothing.
> 
> Anyway, I'd vote yes.



I don't get your post Prop 19 only matter to California its a state law so he never decriminalized it becuase there in the process right now.


----------



## Devin (Nov 2, 2010)

So does it mean that Drug Dealers can start taxing people?


----------



## Blood Fetish (Nov 2, 2010)

RoxasIsSora said:
			
		

> So does it mean that Drug Dealers can start taxing people?


Why would you use a "drug dealer" when you can just go down to the corner store and buy what you need for lower prices?


----------



## TrolleyDave (Nov 2, 2010)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> The most tragic part of all this is that we are causing far more violence and death by keeping cannabis illegal.
> QUOTE(ThatDudeWithTheFood @ Nov 2 2010, 08:34 PM) This would fix the economy I don't live in Cali but I would vote yes.



Totally agree with both these statements.  All drugs should be legalised and controlled by the government (not pharmaceutical companies).  From creation to distribution and sale.  They should be licensed in a similar manner to alcohol.  While they're illegal they're controlled by gangs, thugs and criminals.  These guys kill to protect their profits, not just other gang members and criminals either.  Innocent people die in the fight over their profits.  It would also take away power from cartels, the mafia, triads and the like.  Millions each year leaves the economy of countries like the US and the UK that doesn't return.  At least if it's government controlled that money stays in the economy and can be used towards things that would make a difference.  People are going to use them no matter how hard you try to prohibit it, so why not turn it into something positive.  Plus taking away the "rebelliousness" of it would stop a proportion of those that take it up because it's "cool".


----------



## Demonbart (Nov 2, 2010)

Spoiler











'Nuff said.
America should be more like Holland


----------



## trumpet-205 (Nov 2, 2010)

I voted yes on Prop 19. It is kinda like alcohol. Legalizing it will actually give government more control over it.

We knew how banning alcohol goes in the past.


----------



## nando (Nov 2, 2010)

i would, but i'm a wetback. 

kinda off topic.

jerry brown seems to have allocated the oakland fox theatre down the street from my office for his victory ceremony. i don't know how to feel about him. being an oakland resident for over 13 years now i feel like he fucked us very nicely and i really hate how oakland is ran. the government in this town has so many scams in place to screw us over left and right. from parking scams to administration fees that cost more than the service to pretty-much-illegal-property taxes called "parcel tax"

it's total bullshit and between him and that ebay bitch i think california is in for a ride.


----------



## Zetta_x (Nov 2, 2010)

I like Dave's points. Even if smoking pot/alcohol/extreme_drugs reduced life expectancy, that may actually be good for society. Do you know how much money is spent to keep some people a year older?

If someone has a drink of alcohol, then gets into an accident, what is the probability that this person got into an accident not from the alcohol?


----------



## Goli (Nov 2, 2010)

Zetta_x said:
			
		

> I like Dave's points. Even if smoking pot/alcohol/extreme_drugs reduced life expectancy, that may actually be good for society. Do you know how much money is spent to keep some people a year older?
> 
> If someone has a drink of alcohol, then gets into an accident, what is the probability that this person got into an accident not from the alcohol?


Only a lot of people end up in a bad condition and thus costing lots of money exactly due to legal/illegal drugs. Which in turn makes them depend on medical drugs. It's a vicious circle.


----------



## Zetta_x (Nov 2, 2010)

Heh, you are right. I think we should, as human beings, learn to accept death naturally and quit buffing out the human population. There is a reason why survival of the fittest is necessary to maintain a stable species. If someone dies from smoking pot, it may actually be better overall as a society in the future.

Another thing is that organizations like the government like to pretend what is best for us as humans. For one, this whole sense of morality is taken way out of hand. When there is a time where overpopulation is too much for current resources, what are we going to do without killing people off?


----------



## dinofan01 (Nov 2, 2010)

A lot of naive people in here. Surprised people think this is actually a health or citizen issue. This is an economic issue. As we stand right now, California is in a horrible economic state. We were formally the eight largest economy and now we can barely fund our famous education system without cutting back millions of dollars from each school. If we can legalize something thats negative impact has been vastly exaggerated, why not? Not to mention this would definitely help solve the drug trafficking issue with Mexico.


----------



## nando (Nov 2, 2010)

dinofan01 said:
			
		

> A lot of naive people in here. Surprised people think this is actually a health or citizen issue. This is an economic issue. As we stand right now, California is in a horrible economic state. We were formally the eight largest economy and now we can barely fund our famous education system without cutting back millions of dollars from each school. If we can legalize something thats negative impact has been vastly exaggerated, why not? Not to mention this would definitely help solve the drug trafficking issue with Mexico.



drug trafficking is very complex and i don't think this would solve it. i am for legalizing marijuana but the trafficking issue would only be helped if the law takes effect in the whole country. legalizing only in california would simply bring the trafficking issues from mexico=>USA to CA+mexico=> the rest of the USA. 

trafficers will simply want of the california action. 

i think legalizing marijuana will help considerably with our economic issues. a lot less people in jail for possession = a lot less money spent on prosecuting and prison maintenance. but you can't expect those terrible traffickers to go away


----------



## TrolleyDave (Nov 3, 2010)

dinofan01 said:
			
		

> A lot of naive people in here. Surprised people think this is actually a health or citizen issue. This is an economic issue. As we stand right now, California is in a horrible economic state. We were formally the eight largest economy and now we can barely fund our famous education system without cutting back millions of dollars from each school. If we can legalize something thats negative impact has been vastly exaggerated, why not? Not to mention this would definitely help solve the drug trafficking issue with Mexico.
> 
> I agree with everything except it solving smuggling from Mexico.  Mexico is responsible for alot of heroin being imported into the USA.  Not sure about them being the top importer or anything but it's a sizable amount for sure.  Legalising would solve alot of economic problems.  It'd have to be carefully regulated of course, same as alcohol, but I don't see it damaging society.  Most people who would be buying it would already be smokers anyway!  Why not take that money out of drug dealers hands and put it to good use.
> 
> ...



Totally agree about the drug trafficking from Mexico.  Alot of heroin comes from there as well.  As long as there's an illegal substance someone will smuggle it.  The money's too good not too. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  I don't see it working if just one state does it though.  Like you say, it'll add to trafficking problems to other states.


----------



## Shakraka (Nov 3, 2010)

.


----------



## Deleted User (Nov 3, 2010)

Shakraka said:
			
		

> 420 smoke weed errday
> 
> all i do is smoke weed all day i dont give a FUCK


I love this kid.


----------



## Shakraka (Nov 3, 2010)

.


----------



## Ossot (Nov 3, 2010)

So everyone that says "no" to this, i'm sure has never smoked pot. And I'm sure the reason they've never smoked pot is only because it's illegal. Because, honestly, that's why people don't do drugs. Because they're illegal. If I had a dollar for every time I've wanted a meth addiction -- if only it wasn't illegal. 

People that smoke pot smoke pot. People that don't, don't. The legal status of pot wont effect either. People that are going to smoke pot will still smoke pot. People that don't wont go out and ruin their lives spending all their income on little debbie brownies if it's legalized. The difference is one outcome gets billions of tax revenue and drug dealers of the street, and the other makes some hyper-(and uninformed)-conservatives feel good that jesus will hi5 them.


----------



## dinofan01 (Nov 3, 2010)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> dinofan01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Oh no. i definitely dont think it would solve the entire problem. I was speaking more specifically about California. Marijunia is a huge part of the trafficking problem. The tijuana border is a scary place to be for most people. This could definitely put a huge dent in the problem. But you do have a point in it being a problem for other states. Especially texas. Im not sure what to really say to that other then california needs to calm the situation on their front. Id hate to see us throw our problem on someone else but it might be what happens.


----------



## Deleted User (Nov 3, 2010)

I would say no!!!!!!!


----------



## TrolleyDave (Nov 3, 2010)

dinofan01 said:
			
		

> Oh no. i definitely dont think it would solve the entire problem. I was speaking more specifically about California. Marijunia is a huge part of the trafficking problem. The tijuana border is a scary place to be for most people. This could definitely put a huge dent in the problem. But you do have a point in it being a problem for other states. Especially texas. Im not sure what to really say to that other then california needs to calm the situation on their front. Id hate to see us throw our problem on someone else but it might be what happens.



Ah my mistake mate.  I don't actually know that much about the pot smuggling in California, just know that black tar plays a big part as well.  The only thing I really know about Tijuana is what you see on telly and in films.  I just always assumed it was mostly cut together for entertainment purposes. lol  To solve the smuggling problem other states could enforce stricter smuggling sentences if they get caught coming from California, but it kind of defeats the whole keeping more people out of jail perk. lol


----------



## ChuckBartowski (Nov 3, 2010)

Anyone who would vote no either has had a personal, emotional, or family problem that makes them biased against it. Not saying that anyone voting yes isnt biased either, but they have quite a bit more positives than negatives. Frankly, it makes no sense to vote no. Its going to happen either way, and legalizing it would only give us money, save us money, and take money out of the hands of criminals in drug cartels. It would also make it safer to acquire, and less dangerous, as the US government would have to approve it for sale. No getting anything that is laced or whatever by accident. The only improbable negatives are an increase in use, which i highly doubt would be that big of an issue. anyone who really wants to doesnt care whether its legal or not, and do it anyway. As for health risk, like previously mentioned, marijuana is safer than both tobacco and regular alcohol. Also, OT but funny: Whoever tests this stuff at a government center must have quite a fun "Job". hehe.


----------



## dinofan01 (Nov 3, 2010)

TrolleyDave said:
			
		

> Ah my mistake mate.  I don't actually know that much about the pot smuggling in California, just know that black tar plays a big part as well.  The only thing I really know about Tijuana is what you see on telly and in films.  I just always assumed it was mostly cut together for entertainment purposes. lol  To solve the smuggling problem other states could enforce stricter smuggling sentences if they get caught coming from California, but it kind of defeats the whole keeping more people out of jail perk. lol


Naw I should have been more specific 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Yep heroines are part too. Although I have no specific numbers I would wager marijuana is a bigger import just based on the news and media I'll see daily. But then again it is the media soooo.... hahab yeah I dont know the simplest way to solve it. I guess thats why I'm no politician just a sane individual. haha


----------



## Rydian (Nov 3, 2010)

ChuckBartowski said:
			
		

> Anyone who would vote no either has had a personal, emotional, or family problem that makes them biased against it.


My dad's like 56 or 57, and when he smokes he gets kinda' weird... but it's just the "his attitude is different" weird.  He's definitely not scary or anything (he's a chill guy), but the fact that his attitude temporarily changes from what I've known my entire life is the creepy part.  I'm sure lots of people have seen this and been creeped out not by anything the smoker did, but just from the fact that they seemed different while high.


----------



## Hanafuda (Nov 3, 2010)

Rydian said:
			
		

> ChuckBartowski said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




He's intoxicated. Has he ever gotten shitfaced drunk in front of you? I mean drunk enough to vomit until he dry heaves, or bawl like a baby in front of you, or piss his own pants (or all three at once)??? There's an attitude change for ya. And yet, perfectly legal while weed is not.


----------



## worlok375 (Nov 3, 2010)

I'm saying no because that shit will fuck you up.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Nov 3, 2010)

worlok375 said:
			
		

> I'm saying no because that shit will fuck you up.


What will?

Ah! Same sig!!


----------



## Blood Fetish (Nov 3, 2010)

Rydian said:
			
		

> ChuckBartowski said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So does alcohol. So do cigarettes. So does sugar. So does caffeine. All of those drugs alter mood. Hell, not getting enough sleep will alter a person from "what you've known your entire life". What does that have to do with forcing other people to do what you want or be thrown in jail?


----------



## Blood Fetish (Nov 3, 2010)

worlok375 said:
			
		

> I'm saying no because that shit will fuck you up.


Then you, as an adult (you are an adult, right?) can choose not to partake in cannabis. That doesn't give you any right to arrest other adults who choose to.


----------



## Vidboy10 (Nov 3, 2010)

imma marc emery supporter so i would vote yes.


----------



## Rydian (Nov 3, 2010)

I think you guys are reading more to my post than is actually in my post. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




I'm just saying why most people seem scared of drugs.


----------



## DeMoN (Nov 3, 2010)

It's too late anyways.  Prop 19 got shot down.  
Wouldn't have mattered much to me because marijuana's still illegal at college whether or not the proposition is passed.


----------



## ChuckBartowski (Nov 3, 2010)

Rydian said:
			
		

> I think you guys are reading more to my post than is actually in my post.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well there are some drugs to be legitimately afraid of... well not afraid, but dislike. Especially things like meth and cocaine. You dont see mild meth users. its either all out or none with those insane people. And thats part of the problem. People see marijuana as this sort of "gateway drug", and instantly mark it for bad. Admittedly, sometimes it may be. But only for idiots. Its just like alcohol. Some people drink recreationaly, but they dont support idiot alcoholics. I think that i works the same with marijuana.


----------



## dinofan01 (Nov 3, 2010)

DeMoN said:
			
		

> It's too late anyways.  Prop 19 got shot down.
> Wouldn't have mattered much to me because marijuana's still illegal at college whether or not the proposition is passed.


wait what!? *turns his head to his roommate* dude throw that shit out! this guy on the internet says its illegal. I dont care what Steve said! I aint getting busted.......huh?


----------



## gamefreak94 (Nov 3, 2010)

If this was passed then all the pot heads would move to california, then i would have to find some other place to live.


----------



## dinofan01 (Nov 3, 2010)

gamefreak94 said:
			
		

> If this was passed then all the pot heads would move to california, then i would have to find some other place to live.


...... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 you do realize there already here? and even if they did come in droves the FDA would bust the farms so bad there wouldnt be any reason to come here just for that. The fact that you think "pot heads" would just show up tells me you are vastly unaware of California's counter culture. We already have a well known marijuana scene, a huge rave scene that brings with it all the chemical heads, and every thing else you can think of. If your not seeing that now, your not gonna see it if it passed.


----------



## tatripp (Nov 3, 2010)

I voted yes buttttt....... it is still going to be illegal if it passes. It will be illegal by federal law and the federal govt will step in pretty soon and put an end to it. I won't ever smoke it but i think we could tax it and it is far less harmful than alcohol.


----------

