So I've heard both the bad (obvious) & the good on this one, so I'm just curious on your take on it: are you voting yes or no on it? I'm voting yes because I think taxing & regulating it will be beneficial for the state & let's face it, the cops have much bigger fish to fry than pot offenders...
There is no bad to it, the only people opposed to it aside from those already opposed to marijuana in general are those who are making money off the current system.
I'm voting yes. There will be some big time growers that would probably prefer to leave well enough alone... but how can you believe it's not a "drug", and believe you shouldn't serve time for possessing, or face losing your property for growing, then vote no??????
I voted yes on it absentee two weeks ago and even some of my seventy year old friends voted yes. Hell it's one of the few sources of new revenue for the state that won't cost people their jobs.
It's not generally the 'big time' growers... it's more like the very small-time growers who will lose their only source of income in an area with no jobs and will either have to uproot their families or go on welfare. But I am worrying about how the feds are going to come down hard on medical marijuana if prop 19 goes through, as they have said that they are going to do. I just think we should wait until it is more generally accepted because making it legal so that things like that don't happen. That is my opinion, so hate all you want.
Oh and I DO think it is medical, which to me means that you should get a prescription for it just like for many other medicines. The people who will buy it at their local gas station, are not buying it to get medicinal relief.
The problem with "medical" is that most docs still don't think it's medicine, no matter what the AMA says, so they're not going to prescribe it no matter how well it could treat your illness. My doc says, if it makes you feel good/better then it's good medicine. Even if the improvement is purely psychological/mental. For many patients that's enough to get them to eat better and enjoy life more. You don't have to prove any physical improvements so long as the patient "feels better". In other words cannabis has holistic effects that medical science will never recognize. So why bother making it necessary to involve a doc when so many people (millions) already agree it has many benefits for them personally. Since in some ways cannabis can replace alcohol as a recreational drug of choice, right there it can improve the health of millions of people who use alcohol as a crutch or just to relax. And it is that RELAXATION potential, and the ability to replace alcohol (which is now considered more dangerous and damaging to society than heroin and crack cocaine) that shows how BENEFICIAL cannabis can be to society. So to limit it to medical applications denies the potential of cannabis to help humanity in so many other ways!
I think change motivates people. I don't think people should wait till it's generally more accepted because I don't think that will happen until it's legalized.
I never expected it to pass...even if the votes were really there, there is no fucking way "the powers that be" will ever let such a mind expanding substance be legalized. For fucksake, more and more people might try smoking weed for pleasure, the collective expansion of minds could reach such a peak point where mass compassion could take hold, people start sharing, not buying as much stuff, begin considering the environment, helping their neighbors and so forth... ...that would not be good for the economy. ZW
But it IS happening. More and more states are getting medical marijuana and it is generally becoming more and more accepted. Besides, it is so ridiculously easy to get a medical card here, it basically is legal anyway. It is not that hard to go see a doctor and then go to a club and buy weed. A lot of progress has been made and will still be made. I still think a major change like making it legal in one state and having the federal government come down hard on that state would be detrimental to the cause. You are free to disagree obviously. Personally I am disappointed by the fact the Oregon voted against legalizing the sale of medical marijuana. It would have been nice if they could've been where California is now.
Though I guess it might not be so easy to get weed in other places in California. Like most people on the North Coast I have a tendency to forget that I live in a weird bubble world... :blush5:
As I posted in the related thread in California, I saw holes, big, crippling holes, in the proposition as written. With regulating municipalities able to limit how much MJ could be taxed, and therefore on the legal market, a market control, based on taxes could be created city by city, town by town. Which would not stop an illegal market, arrests (but now on taxes- again an economic disparity as incarcerations are now) or the associated costs. Taxes collected would have gone only to the administration of the taxing itself: no bucks for city services, health care, education, job training/ creation, any of the things we need.