California: 2010 Elections - Page 4 - VeggieBoards
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#91 Old 11-09-2010, 07:53 PM
Beginner
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by luvourmother View Post

lets be clear here, you are defending 1% of the population, of which i already pointed out to you that alcohol has much worse effects on than marijuana does. please look at the connections between alcohol abuse and schizophrenia to accurately assess marijuana use in the same group of people.

1% of the 36,961,000 Californians, which is about 369,000 people give or take. There are also their family who also have genetic risk and should watch out. Drug companies will not put out a drug if they knew that it would affect people for far less than 1% because they knew that it could affects hundreds of thousands and probably sue their ass out of business.

Quote:
also i would luv to hear why you think marijuana was made illegal in the first place, and why we should uphold these racist laws? (which is what everyone against legalization, prop 19 and marijuana in general will blatantly ignore....!!!!)

You don't get it do you? Lot of people who voted against prop 19 people not against legalization of marijuana itself but against prop 19 for various reasons such as it being poorly written, which LA Times made it clear as to why they came out against it along with tons of other major California newspapers, to in my case, not doing anything to protect people at risk.


And btw just out of pure curiosity , what the hell is with the arbitrary 21 and over rule? Why discriminate against the 18 to 20 age group?
GhostUser is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#92 Old 11-09-2010, 09:07 PM
Super Moderator
 
danakscully64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 33,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by luvourmother View Post

use went down when cannabis cafes were made legal in Amsterdam...
also some south american countries are considering legalizing drugs in order to keep the horrible problems associated with illegal traffic/death/disease under control.

See, I don't understand that. I could see the use staying the same or going up, but not down. Everyone I know who smokes are going to continue doing it, legal or not.
danakscully64 is offline  
#93 Old 11-10-2010, 03:58 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malcontent View Post

Suppose I'm stuck with an employer who does not care to make such rules or like to smoke pot himself/herself and I'm stuck in a small town with very little job opportunity, how is one to go around addressing this? Quit?


The same exact way that you deal with an employer that is an alcoholic, or that smokes tobacco.
luvourmother is offline  
#94 Old 11-10-2010, 04:10 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malcontent View Post


You don't get it do you? Lot of people who voted against prop 19 people not against legalization of marijuana itself but against prop 19 for various reasons such as it being poorly written, which LA Times made it clear as to why they came out against it along with tons of other major California newspapers, to in my case, not doing anything to protect people at risk.


And btw just out of pure curiosity , what the hell is with the arbitrary 21 and over rule? Why discriminate against the 18 to 20 age group?

i will send you information about schizophrenia and marijuana use compared to alcohol abuse because you seem to not understand that alcohol is MUCH worse and frequently abused by schizophrenics (and those with a pre-disposition, because that is all that we are talking about, it has been proven that marijuana does NOT cause schizophrenia.)

as for Prop 19, first you say you are against it bc of the schizophrenic studies, then because of the workplace drug testing confusion, and now because it was "poorly written". can you think for yourself at all? you basically sputtered out most of the hysteria created by the Times and various other media outlets word for word. why would you believe everything you read in the LA Times? it is widely known that they distort the truth and have outside interests since they got bought out.

im really curious what was poorly written about prop 19?
we have already discussed why the drug testing fears are unfounded, what else you got?

why is alcohol age limit 21 and over? same reasons for legalization.

i just don't understand how anyone can be on the same side as anslinger and the others that caused marijuana to be illegal, and why people wouldn't jump at any opportunity given to repeal these horrible laws. did you know that one of the reasons marijuana was made illegal was becuause it created competition for paper production from trees. If marijuana was kept legal, we wouldn't have had to clear down acres of forests for paper like we did in such a short amount of time...(many many many more horrible reasons prohibition was wrong, do your research please)

having a 21 age limit and is a lame reason to keep prohibition laws
luvourmother is offline  
#95 Old 11-10-2010, 05:23 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by danakscully64 View Post

See, I don't understand that. I could see the use staying the same or going up, but not down. Everyone I know who smokes are going to continue doing it, legal or not.

http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=3383

Portugal is a good example of what happens when drugs are decriminalized :

http://www.time.com/time/health/arti...893946,00.html
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...riminalization
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10080

When considering marijuana specifically Netherlands deserves a look too:
http://www.drugpolicy.org/news/05_04_04dutchdecrim.cfm
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2010/09/03/...ear-mongering/

Analyzing the RAND study...http://stopthedrugwar.org/speakeasy/...ijuana_legaliz
luvourmother is offline  
#96 Old 11-10-2010, 07:40 AM
Super Moderator
 
danakscully64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 33,866
Lets legalize it here, I would like to see if my stoner friends give it up
danakscully64 is offline  
#97 Old 11-10-2010, 07:56 AM
Beginner
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by luvourmother View Post

i will send you information about schizophrenia and marijuana use compared to alcohol abuse because you seem to not understand that alcohol is MUCH worse and frequently abused by schizophrenics (and those with a pre-disposition, because that is all that we are talking about, it has been proven that marijuana does NOT cause schizophrenia.)

And I've yet to see anybody here advocating that alcohol is not bad for schizophrenia. Stop trying to pull a red herring.

Quote:
as for Prop 19, first you say you are against it bc of the schizophrenic studies, then because of the workplace drug testing confusion, and now because it was "poorly written". can you think for yourself at all? you basically sputtered out most of the hysteria created by the Times and various other media outlets word for word. why would you believe everything you read in the LA Times? it is widely known that they distort the truth and have outside interests since they got bought out.

I already stated originally I was going to the ballot blank before I found out that it is not cover under the smoke free workplace. Like I said, I had reservations about opening marijuana being made more easily accessible because that is another catalyst that will place them at risk but I was going to leave the prop alone anyway until I realize that second hand smoke could place them at risk through no fault of their own.

As for prop 19 being "poorly written", that's reason of LA Times. Stop putting words in my mouth.

Quote:
why is alcohol age limit 21 and over? same reasons for legalization.

The point of having the 21 and over limit was to reduce consumption of alcohol among young people. Is there any particular reason why we should reduce the consumption of marijuana in young people between 18 to 20 because it looks nice on the initiative? Particularly when you're giving me the idea here that there is no "negative side effects" and that popular reason, "they could get it anyway"?

It's funny that you're pulling out all these inane guilty by association reasons to try to persuade others go over to your side. Being on the same side as anslinger. The ban being a racist law when you yourself claimed that Planned Parenthood had help you in another thread, which anti-abortionists would argue that it is a racist organization.
GhostUser is offline  
#98 Old 11-10-2010, 08:02 AM
Beginner
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by luvourmother View Post

The same exact way that you deal with an employer that is an alcoholic, or that smokes tobacco.

I could report an employer smoking tobacco to Cal/OSHA for breaking the law. Whatever made you think that they could do anything about marijuana?
GhostUser is offline  
#99 Old 11-10-2010, 09:51 AM
Beginner
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by luvourmother View Post

Analyzing the RAND study...http://stopthedrugwar.org/speakeasy/...ijuana_legaliz

I checked out the link and walked away with 1. It's all just speculations then and 2. "RAND tries to pretend that it’s a nonpartisan and unbiased research center, but as long as it employs people like Rosalie Pacula, who has acted time and again like the RAND Drug Policy Research Center is her own personal tool for opposing legalization, it is an organization with absolutely no credibility" from the link they provided, which is really another smear and guilty by association argument. That's basically the same refutation that Richard Lee used in the Fora video and I don't find it convincing at all.

Ben Kilmer raised the point that legalization of marijuana would

1. take away the stigma of it, which could increase consumption.
2. Allow advertising of it, which could increase consumption
3. allow the growing and production of marijuana legally (this is currently NOT the case in Netherlands. They "tolerate" the use of it, but growing and supplying it remains illegal, which is why the price remains high due to the legal risk of bringing to the market.) and making the cost of producing go down and this will be reflected in the price the consumer will pay.

Maybe they should start attacking the actual points being made.

I'll check out the rest of the sites you provided later.
GhostUser is offline  
#100 Old 11-10-2010, 02:38 PM
Beginner
 
hollywoodveg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,583
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wTaw_zoY2I
hollywoodveg is offline  
#101 Old 11-11-2010, 05:34 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malcontent View Post

And I've yet to see anybody here advocating that alcohol is not bad for schizophrenia. Stop trying to pull a red herring.


As for prop 19 being "poorly written", that's reason of LA Times. Stop putting words in my mouth.
It's funny that you're pulling out all these inane guilty by association reasons to try to persuade others go over to your side. Being on the same side as anslinger. The ban being a racist law when you yourself claimed that Planned Parenthood had help you in another thread, which anti-abortionists would argue that it is a racist organization.

Nice! you STILL failed to address why we should keep racist and greedy laws prohibiting marijuana....

The reason i mention alcohol when talking about schizophrenia and marijuana use is because in order to understand substance abuse with this disease and its effects you have to look at the whole picture. When compared to marijuana alcohol is much worse and frequently abused by schizophrenics than marijuana. If we made decisions based on what is best for schizophrenics we should be fighting hard to prohibit alcohol. The whole point you are missing is that the association between schizophrenia and marijuana use is not basis for keeping this plant illegal.

As for linking the LA Times reasons against 19, you are a parrot and it is sad that you believe(and many other Californians) these blatant lies.

finally why the HELL would you need to bring up Planned Parenthood in this conversation at all? FYI me getting birth control at planned parenthood has NOTHING to do with the prohibition of marijuana, prop 19 or legalization of drugs at all. (btw an organization can not be compared to a law, FAIL)
This is the most evidence that you are absolutely clueless about prohibition of marijuana and are once again drawing at straws for anything you can grab onto to defend your support of prohibition. (the prohibition that began because it "drives mexicans and blacks to commit crimes"...and other horrible non-supported reasons).

Im finished discussing this with you malcontent. We will have legalization in California and eventually the entire USA, sorry that you can't understand why.
luvourmother is offline  
#102 Old 11-11-2010, 06:59 PM
Beginner
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by luvourmother View Post

The reason i mention alcohol when talking about schizophrenia and marijuana use is because in order to understand substance abuse with this disease and its effects you have to look at the whole picture. When compared to marijuana alcohol is much worse and frequently abused by schizophrenics than marijuana. If we made decisions based on what is best for schizophrenics we should be fighting hard to prohibit alcohol. The whole point you are missing is that the association between schizophrenia and marijuana use is not basis for keeping this plant illegal.

You really ought to stop feeding me all those red herrings, they're really not vegetarian.

The fact alcohol is more harmful to schizophrenics does not mean that 1. marijuana is not harmful to them, 2. you weren't telling others harmful misinformation that could jeopardize somebody's health for sakes something used for recreation and 3. both alcohol and marijuana should be legal. Or illegal. It at most means that our drug policies toward marijuana and alcohol are inconsistent. I'm afraid I don't spend that much time worrying about alcohol but I guess if they're ever going to consider banning alcohol, I will listen to the arguments of the proponents of the ban with an open mind. I can't say I'm happy to add another drug to the existing legal mix.

But that you've convinced me of the evils of the bottle...

Quote:
As for linking the LA Times reasons against 19, you are a parrot and it is sad that you believe(and many other Californians) these blatant lies.

Uh, you were accusing me of believing their reasons for their oppositions to be my own. I didn't read anything about how it would affects the workplace (more like from the California Chamber of Commerce) or extensive details on the effects of marijuana of schizophrenics. But then I'm only subscribed to their weekend papers... If you're really that easily confused, maybe you should consider laying off something...

Quote:
finally why the HELL would you need to bring up Planned Parenthood in this conversation at all? FYI me getting birth control at planned parenthood has NOTHING to do with the prohibition of marijuana, prop 19 or legalization of drugs at all. (btw an organization can not be compared to a law, FAIL)

I pointed it out because as anyone had spent time arguing with anti-abortionists extensively probably knows, that's one of the arguments they like to come up with. From the silly ones anyway. And nobody who is prochoice cares.

I don't give a rat's ass that Margaret Sanger used PP to advance her racist eugenics agenda when the organization is doing tons to help disadvantaged women and their children many of which are blacks get low cost and free health care just like I don't give a rat's ass that the original intent of the ban was racist when it works toward my ends.


Quote:
We will have legalization in California and eventually the entire USA, sorry that you can't understand why.

All the reasons for me to donate to the opposition the next time around.
GhostUser is offline  
#103 Old 11-11-2010, 07:22 PM
Beginner
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
By the way, using the Netherlands and Portugal as examples to show that we should legalize marijuana is kind of a bad argument because their drug policies are not good parellels to what the proponents are trying to do with Prop 19, which would make California a place with the most liberal marijuana policy in the modern industrialized world.

*Both countries decriminalized marijuana. Neither of them legalized it. Decriminalization does not mean legalization. And as people probably knows, it has been decriminalized already as of Oct 1st.
* It's still illegal to grow marijuana in a large scale in both countries so the Rand Corp study's still holds. In fact, the Dutch are getting tough on cracking down on the plantations.
* Portugal still legally discourage people from smoking marijuana but fining them or by sending them to rehabilitation programs.


The lowest marijuana user rates in the world are actually in Asia, where strict marijuana laws are still in place (1.5% in Japan, 0.3% in China and 3.6% in HK). Maybe the Dutch and the Portuguese are doing something right and their approaches are worth a look. But saying that liberal policies automatically means fewer drug uses is a hasty conclusion considering that there are countries with strict policies and even lower drug user rates.
GhostUser is offline  
#104 Old 11-12-2010, 05:52 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,587
starting a thread in the heap to have others join in on this discussion...
luvourmother is offline  
#105 Old 11-23-2010, 06:12 PM
Beginner
 
Amy SF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Southern California
Posts: 20,217
The LA Weekly says: It's all over but for Steve Cooley's concession speech.

http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2...oley_loses.php

It seems Kamala Harris's victory as the state's new attorney general is pretty much in the bag.

*this space not for sale*
Amy SF is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off