Ha! Just like in Colorado and Washington, here in Oregon we’ve reverted to hunting and gathering since weed was legalized… well, hunting, gathering and Pokemon Go…
It’s going to be on the ballot in 4 other states this year: NV, AZ, MA, and ME. It’ll probably pass in all of them.
After Mike Pence was selected as VP candidate, I checked up on his position on legalization. Based on that, I predict that Indiana will be one of the last, if not the very last state to legalize it.
There’s rumors going around that it may be moved from Schedule I to Schedule II some time this summer. But that will nat make the medical mj dispensaries currently existing legal, since they don’t have pharmacists.
So basically damn everybody elses liberty and continue the wasteful war on marijuana, just cause your neighbour may or may not be an ass? You support not banning it if it were legal now, but since it is presently illegal it should stay illegal beause reasons? Don’t want the benefits of a new and lucrative tax because some guy blew some smoke into your precious little world? How sad. When it comes time for my country to vote on this, I can only hope that such opinions as yours can be reasoned with in advance, because it really is that important.
I’m currently a Colorado resident but will be moving to California in a week. Seeing all of the great things that legal weed has done for Colorado I’ll vote yes this fall. Since I’m moving for my wife’s job and will be looking for work myself maybe I’ll start a pot shop after it passes.
Well, I’d be really pissed if my neighbor were blowing smoke into my house, whether that smoke was from cannabis or tobacco. I don’t see that as a reason to outlaw either, but I’m not going to belittle someone else’s discomfort with that.
I do think that ought to be an issue among neighbors (and perhaps the landlord has a role), not for state law, though.
Using tobacco rarely interferes with a person’s ability to hold a job or care for his family. It can cause premature death, yes, but generally not until one is old enough that the kids can fend for themselves. The increased risk can be mitigated with a moderately increased cost for life insurance.
And pot is much less addictive than either tobacco or heroin. People routinely quit pot, and my friends who have done so have not found it very hard to quit. I’ve never heard of newborns needing treatment for cannabis withdrawal. (Perhaps a doctor will correct me on this point, or confirm.) Babies need careful medical treatment if their mothers were taking opioids. Babies aren’t treated medically for nicotine withdrawal, but I’m told that every maternity ward employee knows which newborns suffer from it, because they cry far more than other newborns.
We already saw 2008 where California voted for Obama and Prop 8, banning same-sex marriage.
But I don’t think Trump has any chance of winning California. The Republican party here shot themselves in the head years ago with their anti-immigrant rhetoric and are kinda-sorta trying to recover. Trump is going to shoot them in the other head, just make sure the party is really dead.
If I were still a CA resident, however, I would vote against this proposition, because I don’t believe the state has the authority to overrule the federal government in terms of drug policy and that legalization needs to happen on the federal level.
It’s not being overruled at the federal level. It’s being made legal at the state level. If Obama changed his mind, the DEA could shut it all down in no time.
He’s simply choosing to not enforce the laws as far as person and medical use are concerned.
And it’s that non-enforcement that encouraged the move to state legal pot, not the other way around.
Acknowledging that medical marijuana has been tolerated for a while now.
That’s the problem. We need action at the federal level, because this increasing trend of states acting on their own is creating a house of cards that could fall apart any second if the sitting president decides to change course.
Your survey is missing the option of abstaining, which I will be doing.
I say this because - it is a principle of mine that I will only vote yes on a ballot initiatives if I believe that doing so will help “put out a fire”. Otherwise, I vote no or abstain from voting on ballot initiatives. I fundamentally object to the ballot initiative process. (Brexit anyone?)
While I certainly agree that it needs to be legalized at the federal level, I’m not sure that would ever happen if it weren’t for the open defiance on the part of the states that has been going on for a long time. Long before the first states legalized recreational, CA was the first state to legalize medical way back in '96 - 20 years ago. And the federal government still hasn’t bothered to reclassify it from a Schedule I substance (i.e. one with ‘no medicinal value’).
Defiance on the part of the states is going to force the federal government to reassess it eventually. Unless the next president essentially decides they are willing to start Civil War 2 over goddamn weed. And I don’t think anyone (yes, even Trump) is ridiculous enough to let it come to that.
I’m voting yes. I have a number of friends in the MMJ industry and severalof them are going to vote no because they’re convinced it will undercut their business to unsustainable levels. I’m up in the Sierra foothills (Nevada county) - one of the largest growing regions outside of the Triangle (Humboldt/Mendocino/Trinity counties)
Personally, I think that this is nonsense, it’s only going to kill the low end of the market and those (most cartel/gang) growers who are operating illegally on federal or state land.
We’re just going to see the commercial market fragment into a number of niches based on quality, price point and brand specialization/marketing.
Just because I can make wine at home doesn’t mean there aren’t thousands of fantastic vineyards all around - from tiny boutiques to massive commercial operations.