Prop. 19 in California goes down

[Pliny]

I guess all the marijuana activists are crying in their beer. I don't see them here with any explanations regarding the defeat of Proposition 19. That was the right one, wasn't it? About the legalization of marijuana.

Anyway, I was certainly surprised at Californians on all fronts. They voted in democrats and turned down Prop. 19. Are these guys liberals or are they not? My black and white world has been shattered.

[maple_leafs182]

I guess all the marijuana activists are crying in their beer. I don't see them here with any explanations regarding the defeat of Proposition 19. That was the right one, wasn't it? About the legalization of marijuana.

Anyway, I was certainly surprised at Californians on all fronts. They voted in democrats and turned down Prop. 19. Are these guys liberals or are they not? My black and white world has been shattered.

I think it did quite well. They are already trying to get the prop on the ballet for the election in 2012. I think it will pass then.

[bush_cheney2004]

Even the dopers couldn't agree on this issue, one of several reasons it failed:

http://theweek.com/article/index/208909/why-did-prop-19-fail-6-theories

[AngusThermopyle]

Even the dopers couldn't agree on this issue, one of several reasons it failed:

Very true. A great many growers in the Emerald Triangle are opposed to it as it would drive market prices into the basement.

[Sir Bandelot]

Very true. A great many growers in the Emerald Triangle are opposed to it as it would drive market prices into the basement.

I read that many dopers didn't even show up to vote. They were smoking up

[Wild Bill]

I read that many dopers didn't even show up to vote. They were smoking up

:lol:

Seriously, it very nearly passed! The trend over the past few decades is obvious and the budget pressures on the California state government are not likely to get any better. The temptation to save billions in trivial court charges and costs will only grow.

California is not the only state considering a "Prop 19", as well.

I think it will happen sooner rather than later. However, if "repealing Prohibition" runs true to form and drastically reduces the price how will Canadian criminals be able to afford American guns, heroin and coke?

Where will the money come from to bribe our politicians?

[BubberMiley]

Legalizing weed would be a disaster. Removing the liquidity of the black market from the economy would bring it to a standstill. Applying taxes to the purchase of weed would bring a tremendous financial hardship to those who are already paying too much for an ounce. Making it just another legal drug would eliminate the coolness factor, and force teenagers who want to have an outlaw image among their peers to use drugs that are actually dangerous.

[dre]

Very true. A great many growers in the Emerald Triangle are opposed to it as it would drive market prices into the basement.

Absolutely... its main opponent was most likely criminals, trial lawyers, and social conservatives. A motley crew indeed.

[Robart]

:lol:

if "repealing Prohibition" runs true to form and drastically reduces the price how will Canadian criminals be able to afford American guns, heroin and coke?

Where will the money come from to bribe our politicians?

Not only that, but future coke and heroin dealers won't have the pot business to enter to learn the ropes and gain a stake in the drug business - as in any business, you got to start at the bottom and work your way up, and this was/is an easy bottom to enter

[BubberMiley]

...this was/is an easy bottom to enter

Sorry, for a second I thought this was one of those homoerotic Oleg/MrCanada posts.

[sharkman]

Legalizing weed would be a disaster. Removing the liquidity of the black market from the economy would bring it to a standstill. Applying taxes to the purchase of weed would bring a tremendous financial hardship to those who are already paying too much for an ounce. Making it just another legal drug would eliminate the coolness factor, and force teenagers who want to have an outlaw image among their peers to use drugs that are actually dangerous.

I'm trying to understand you're various positions on this issue. Earlier you a started a thread in which you applauded California's decriminalization of pot, now you suggest legalizing it would be a disaster. Below you use the old prohibition argument, saying that things were better when weed was legal.

n 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.

And weed was legal in the 1800s. It wasn't till they banned it that a wide proportion of the population became curious to try it.

Edited November 10, 2010 by sharkman

[punked]

I don't know what people are talking about Prop 19 did what it was suppose to do. I don't what you guys were watching election night but California was the only state in the nation that was a blue fortress, it didn't stop the bleeding but at least slowed it down. Democrats have found their gay marriage time to get it on every swing state ballot of the 2012 cycle.

[BubberMiley]

I'm trying to understand you're various positions on this issue.

I'm an anonymous Internet avatar, not a politician, man.

[Moonlight Graham]

Making it just another legal drug would eliminate the coolness factor, and force teenagers who want to have an outlaw image among their peers to use drugs that are actually dangerous.

Bah! The vast majority of people don't smoke because its "dangerous", they smoke cuz its makes them feel good. Peer presure does play a part, but peer pressure is the same for legal drugs such as cigarettes and alcohol.

[BubberMiley]

Bah! The vast majority of people don't smoke because its "dangerous", they smoke cuz its makes them feel good. Peer presure does play a part, but peer pressure is the same for legal drugs such as cigarettes and alcohol.

You missed my point.

[Sir Bandelot]

Bah! The vast majority of people don't smoke because its "dangerous", they smoke cuz its makes them feel good. Peer presure does play a part, but peer pressure is the same for legal drugs such as cigarettes and alcohol.

Yeah but what about the "gateway theory". If teenagers see that pot is now legal, and it used to be illegal therefor the state was wrond in criminalizing this drug. So it follows, it mught be wrong to criminalize heroin too. Maybe heroin is not as bad as they say it is...

[maple_leafs182]

legalize all drugs. Its a matter of personal liberty more then anything.

There is no good reason why any drug should be illegal or at least I haven't heard one.

I would rather take my chances with the dangers of the world then have liberties taken away from me on the grounds that it will make me safe, which is not true to begin with.

[bush_cheney2004]

legalize all drugs. Its a matter of personal liberty more then anything.

Most drugs are legal...just get a prescription....enjoy your liberty at the pharmacy!

[BubberMiley]

That's very bad advice. Prescription drugs are dangerous, and you can get addicted and overdose.

[Wild Bill]

Yeah but what about the "gateway theory". If teenagers see that pot is now legal, and it used to be illegal therefor the state was wrond in criminalizing this drug. So it follows, it mught be wrong to criminalize heroin too. Maybe heroin is not as bad as they say it is...

The 'Gateway' argument is a logical fallacy. Just because a heroin user may have started smoking pot doesn't follow both ways, i.e. a pot smoker must become a heroin user.

That heroin user may also have started off with Aspirin. Or alcohol. Does that make Molson's a gateway drug to heroin?

When I was a young hippy kid, I did a lot of 'soft' drugs. In that generation the vast majority did. We all knew the difference between pot and heroin, or mescaline and amphetamines. If there was anything teenagers knew about back then it was drugs. We all could have passed a pharmacist's exam!

There were of course some other kids we knew who went on to harder drugs. There always were and there always will be. I don't believe that the percentages of addicts were any different then than they are today. Except for those drugs that actually cause a nearly immediate physical addiction, most folks can take or leave recreational drugs, just as they can take or leave alcohol. That includes cocaine! If everyone who had done cocaine in the 80's had become an addict half of the North American population would still be in rehab clinics right now.

There is always a small percentage of human beings that 'have a hole inside' that they need to fill with some kind of addiction. I'm not sure if its genetic, psychological or what but we've all known such people. They do something and they plunge in whole hog till they are addicted. It could be heroin, pot, alcohol, gambling - these folks will find something! In fact, if you get them clean of one substance or behaviour they invariably find something else. If you watch those "Dr. Phil's Sober House for Celebrity Losers" shows note how many of the recovering addicts always have a cigarette in their mouths.

Most of my hippy generation haven't touched those recreational drugs in decades. Why weren't we all 'gated' to heroin? Hell, for the past 10-20 years I'm lucky if my alcohol intake amounts to a case of beer per year! And that would be a case of 12! With our crowd drugs of any kind were always a social thing. As you get older you and your friends tend to move apart. Your lifestyles are so varied that they preclude much common time for old friends to spend together. It's like drinking alone - most people just don't, unless they have a problem.

Sorry, Sir B. but it would appear you BELIEVED that "Reefer Madness" movie! One toke of pot and you're hooked on heroin! Next thing you know, you're engaging in promiscuous, indiscrimate sex, diving out a window thinking you can fly and finally, thinking that wind power will LOWER your monthly electricity bill!

Edited November 10, 2010 by Wild Bill

[Pliny]

Sorry, Sir B. but it would appear you BELIEVED that "Reefer Madness" movie! One toke of pot and you're hooked on heroin! Next thing you know, you're engaging in promiscuous, indiscrimate sex, diving out a window thinking you can fly and finally, thinking that wind power will LOWER your monthly electricity bill!

I generally enjoy reading your posts Wild Bill and and this was no exception. The last phrase here gave me a thought.

I know some have criticized you for being anecdotal in expressing your views and for those critics "science" is the only acceptable criteria to understanding. So I thought, well; we learn from education AND experience. The scary part is that the difference between yourself and those critics is they offer no experience as though they do not experience anything. Therefore they rely totally on their education and no one's experience including themselves.

What does that tell you about being sheep?

[Wild Bill]

I generally enjoy reading your posts Wild Bill and and this was no exception. The last phrase here gave me a thought.

I know some have criticized you for being anecdotal in expressing your views and for those critics "science" is the only acceptable criteria to understanding. So I thought, well; we learn from education AND experience. The scary part is that the difference between yourself and those critics is they offer no experience as though they do not experience anything. Therefore they rely totally on their education and no one's experience including themselves.

What does that tell you about being sheep?

Oh, I definitely believe that there is considerable effort being expended to make us a society of sheep!

I hadn't thought about the emphasis on education being coupled with a lack of experience before. Thanks for the new meme! It's triggering a host of new ideas in my brain!

It explains some things much better than I had thought before. I have been well aware for years that there is a belief out there that unless you have passed an accredited course you can't possibly know about something. Job interviews often are little more than presenting the appropriate diploma as some kind of 'passport'. If you have a wealth of experience it is ignored. If you have freshly graduated from an appropriate course you are considered for the job.

It's a great system if you're a teacher! Sadly, a sidebar to this premise is that it is impossible to learn on your own and that talent is not a factor.

We now seem to have a course for virtually everything! Back in the 30's, 40's, 50's and even 60's you were expected to attain a minimum education, unless you wanted to be a doctor or an engineer. University was for those who wanted to advance and perhaps discover new knowledge, or at least teach it to new generations. Now it seems often to be a "job factory".

Consider journalism! There was a time when a kid showed some moxey and was hired as a cub reporter. He worked his way up and eventually might become a war correspondent like Ernie Pyle. Today, the chances of being hired without a degree in journalism are slim to none.

There was a time when most people did their own plumbing repairs, unless it was a REALLY big problem! When I was growing up kids still built their own hifi amplifiers and speaker cabinets and built their own hot rod cars. This was direct experience that often lead to a future job. Now the diploma is everything. The kid may be a total butterfingers with a wrench but if he has an honour degree in auto mechanics he gets the job.

This might be worth a thread of its own. There's something deeper here that we might ferret out. The denial of experience implies that experience is unnecessary to be considered an expert. An academic with enough letters after his name outranks someone who might actually have DONE the task! Someone has no need to go out and challenge the world. They can simply spend another year at University and be considered just as capable.

It also might have a tie-in to that old socialist shibboleth that "all workers are equal - it's just a matter of training and education". That premise is an obvious crock! Train me all you want but you're a fool to let someone like me be your cook!

Thanks again, Pliny! I'll be chewing on this one for a while!

[eyeball]

Oh, I definitely believe that there is considerable effort being expended to make us a society of sheep!

Can't they just add a drug to our water supplies to do that? Remember the movie Wild in the Streets where the hippies take over the government and lace DC's water supply with acid?

I do have to say I'm amazed at just how conservative things are in spite of the sixties and the hippie movement. Perhaps the next generations or so will be a lot more liberal in spite of our uptight attitudes but I fear that increasingly tougher economic times; shrinking water holes and meaner animals could preclude that from happening; being mean and being conservative seem to go together like peas and carrots and things like Prop. 19 could be amongst the last examples of real liberalism we'll ever see.

[Moonlight Graham]

You missed my point.

thats impossible. i never make mistakes.

[maple_leafs182]

Can't they just add a drug to our water supplies to do that? Remember the movie Wild in the Streets where the hippies take over the government and lace DC's water supply with acid?

I do have to say I'm amazed at just how conservative things are in spite of the sixties and the hippie movement. Perhaps the next generations or so will be a lot more liberal in spite of our uptight attitudes but I fear that increasingly tougher economic times; shrinking water holes and meaner animals could preclude that from happening; being mean and being conservative seem to go together like peas and carrots and things like Prop. 19 could be amongst the last examples of real liberalism we'll ever see.

I'm gonna watch that movie tonight...

And have you been listening to Ron Paul at all?

He is a true libertarian who has the potential of becoming the next president in America.