California Decriminalizes Marijuana

[BubberMiley]

In recognition of the fact it was ridiculously expensive to tie up the courts with insignificant misdemeanors. California has decriminalized weed and made possession on par with a traffic ticket.

I guess economics trumps virtue once again.

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2010/oct/01/california_governor_signs_mariju

Now what was Stephen Harper's reason for killing a similar bill in Canada? That the U.S. would never forgive us?

Edited October 2, 2010 by BubberMiley

[Smallc]

It's only a matter of time before this spreads, I think. A good thing.

[Topaz]

Of course, its a good thing if you want o smoke dope and the Gov. did his share in the 60's. If this keeps up and spread across the US it will be know as a nation of pot heads and its will be easy for any terrorist group to invade the country. Just look how many military personnel are on drugs? There is a downside to this.

[Smallc]

Of course, its a good thing if you want o smoke dope

I don't want to smoke dope. It's still a good thing.

[GostHacked]

Of course, its a good thing if you want o smoke dope and the Gov. did his share in the 60's. If this keeps up and spread across the US it will be know as a nation of pot heads and its will be easy for any terrorist group to invade the country. Just look how many military personnel are on drugs? There is a downside to this.

There might be, but there is also a problem with legalized alcohol as well. But that never seems to get factored in.

It's about time that this movement is making some progress. Decriminalizing it will solve many short term issues and some long term ones as well. The money not spend on charging/prosecuting/jailing these people can be used for many other important things that will make a difference.

If pot was the enemy we would have imploded in the 60s. Or acid would have imploded us in the 70s, or cocain in the 80s, or meth in the 90s or crack in the 2000s. .......

This is a positive step in the right direction.. You'd be surprised how many people you know that smoke pot. If you looked into it, the numbers would floor you.

[bush_cheney2004]

Of course, its a good thing if you want o smoke dope and the Gov. did his share in the 60's. If this keeps up and spread across the US it will be know as a nation of pot heads and its will be easy for any terrorist group to invade the country. Just look how many military personnel are on drugs? There is a downside to this.

Can't be that bad, or Canada would be already be a lost cause. The UN claims that Canada is already the world's biggest pot smoking country by population.

http://www.beersteak.com/breaking-news/canada-worlds-biggest-pot-smoking-country/

[GostHacked]

Can't be that bad, or Canada would be already be a lost cause. The UN claims that Canada is already the world's biggest pot smoking country by population.

http://www.beersteak.com/breaking-news/canada-worlds-biggest-pot-smoking-country/

I would agree. And it has not caused any issues from what I can tell.

[eyeball]

The fine will remain at $100...

"Gov. Schwarzenegger deserves credit for sparing the state's taxpayers the cost of prosecuting minor pot offenders," said California NORML director Dale Gieringer. "Californians increasingly recognize that the war on marijuana is a waste of law enforcement resources."

What a crock of shit, the war is obviously still just as on as it ever was.

[Shady]

Now what was Stephen Harper's reason for killing a similar bill in Canada? That the U.S. would never forgive us?

You seem to be mixing apples and oranges. Comparing what an individual state does to that of an entire country is ridiculous. Instead, you should be asking why Barack Obama isn't insisting that all 50 states decriminalize marijuana. Not why Stephen Harper isn't forcing all of Canada's provinces and territories to follow the action of one American governor.

[BubberMiley]

Instead, you should be asking why Barack Obama isn't insisting that all 50 states decriminalize marijuana. Not why Stephen Harper isn't forcing all of Canada's provinces and territories to follow the action of one American governor.

I agree Obama should work towards federal decriminalization, but why should I not ask why Harper struck down attempts to do that?

[Shady]

I agree Obama should work towards federal decriminalization, but why should I not ask why Harper struck down attempts to do that?

Because he obviously doesn't agree with the idea. It's not rocket science. If you don't like it, don't vote for him. That's what elections are for.

[bush_cheney2004]

..... Not why Stephen Harper isn't forcing all of Canada's provinces and territories to follow the action of one American governor.

LOL! You can't make this love 'em - hate 'em stuff up. Those crazy Americans!

[BubberMiley]

Because he obviously doesn't agree with the idea. It's not rocket science. If you don't like it, don't vote for him. That's what elections are for.

So no one should question the decisions of an elected leader?

Lord knows you would never question Obama's decisions, despite the fact he won the election.

It may not be rocket science, but sometimes even the basic premises of democracy are a bit much for you to understand.

[Shady]

So no one should question the decisions of an elected leader?

Nobody's said that. But you asked why Harper isn't following the lead of California. I thought it was fairly obvious.

[BubberMiley]

Nobody's said that.

You just did, but then you realized it was a stupid thing to say so you denied it.

...same-old same-old. (yawn)

[Shady]

You just did, but then you realized it was a stupid thing to say so you denied it.

...same-old same-old. (yawn)

Nope, I said no such thing. All I did was point out that comparing what a leader of a whole country does, to that of a leader of a small part of another country doesn't make much sense. I'd be like asking why Obama hasn't done something because the Premier of BC has.

[sharkman]

Geez Bubber, you very clearly compared the actions of a governor and a prime minister. Question Harper all you want, but at least have the intellectual integrity to admit it is a apples to oranges comparison.

[Shady]

Geez Bubber, you very clearly compared the actions of a governor and a prime minister. Question Harper all you want, but at least have the intellectual integrity to admit it is a apples to oranges comparison.

Exactly. Hey Bubbles, McGuinty just legalized MMA. Why won't Obama do the same?

[BubberMiley]

Question Harper all you want, but at least have the intellectual integrity to admit it is a apples to oranges comparison.

No. It's the same policy and in Canada it's under federal jurisdiction. You're just trying to divert attention from Harper's policy because you know it's wrong-headed, unpopular, and a fiscal albatross.

[Smallc]

Yes, lets not compare one jurisdiction with just over 35M people that has control of the criminal law to another with just under 35M people that has control of the criminal law.....

If Chretien would have waited a few more months to leave, Canada would have done this forever ago.

Edited October 2, 2010 by Smallc

[GostHacked]

Because he obviously doesn't agree with the idea. It's not rocket science. If you don't like it, don't vote for him. That's what elections are for.

What about the others that had NOT voted for Harper? And in Canada, we don't vote for the person, we vote for the party with a leader the party elected. Being a Canadian, you'd think you'd at least understand that much.

No. It's the same policy and in Canada it's under federal jurisdiction. You're just trying to divert attention from Harper's policy because you know it's wrong-headed, unpopular, and a fiscal albatross.

That is what I understand it. It is a federal offence in which the federal government has ruling over. I am not sure if there is a federal drug law in the US that covers all of the states.

Anyways, it's a good step in the right direction.

[dre]

Seems like a good step to me. The important thing though is to decriminalize the production and distribution, so that honest, regulated, tax paying businessment can compete for that market instead of just organized criminals.

[maple_leafs182]

California is yet to vote on Prop 19 which would legalize small amounts of marijuana. I think they are having the vote November 2nd.

Legalization is far superior to decriminalization.

[wyly]

In recognition of the fact it was ridiculously expensive to tie up the courts with insignificant misdemeanors. California has decriminalized weed and made possession on par with a traffic ticket.

I guess economics trumps virtue once again.

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2010/oct/01/california_governor_signs_mariju

Now what was Stephen Harper's reason for killing a similar bill in Canada? That the U.S. would never forgive us?

Arnold is the rare Republican that has a brain...

[punked]

Arnold is the rare Republican that has a brain...

He really isn't. California has been run into the ground. He is just trying to save his own ass in the history books.