If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(laist)   Initiative is in the works to put pot-legalization law on November ballot in California. Buy your stock in Frito-Lay now, folks   (laist.com) divider line 284
    More: Cool  
•       •       •

6011 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Jul 2008 at 2:54 PM (6 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



284 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-07-01 04:52:16 PM
In my day, we smoked to get HIGH. None of this helped me get along with relatives bullshiat. The peer group you're referring to is "Stoners." And that is fine, just realize that is the truth.

/Love pot, Haven't smoked in years due to my job.
//Starting again soon as I just lost the job :)
 
2008-07-01 04:52:21 PM
SpectroBoy:grizzlyjohnson:
Sure there is. Quit

I got 1-2 years at a time without smoking sometimes. I am a middle aged white guy (ie look like a cop) and finding a dealer ain't exactly easy.

And I will freely admit, I LIKE THE WAY IT MAKES ME FEEL. Since I get positive long term effects, occasional insights, AND I LIKE IT I see no reason not to do it once and a while. It is no more in control of my life than reading, web surfing, or traveling. They are just things I like to do that also teach me something once and a while.

I think maybe your fear of weed is a little irrational. Sure SOME people have a problem with it. Some people go bankrupt at casinos. Some people drink themselves to death. The common element is "some people". If it was possible some people would masturbate to death.


You're completely missing the point of what I was saying. I said very clearly that I have NO problem with folks smoking pot. Used to do it myself and quit because I wanted to, not because I had to. I was saying to that person that if you quit and the beneficial effects are still there and you're not hooked then you really did get the beneficial effects you think you did. Go right on back to smoking it. But if you can't quit or the beneficial effects don't stay, then you're fooling yourself. If you want, go right back to smoking it knowing full well you're fooling yourself if you're cool with that. I don't really care. I got my own issues to deal with.

Marijuana is wonderful, it makes you feel good. It's better for you than alcohol and I have no idea from a logical standpoint why it's illegal and alcohol isn't. A lot of things are addictive. Running, lifting weights, coffee, jacking off, nose picking. If something is running your life for you, you might not be living up to your potential, but then again, you might. I'm just saying...
 
2008-07-01 04:53:58 PM
dudemanbro:I'll be doing the same as soon as I get home; I'm at the Puerto Vallarta airport waiting for my flight to SFO. Happy toking.

Back atcha, dude...man...bro.

Whoa.
 
2008-07-01 04:53:59 PM
I'm really on the fence about this, I mean, I'm all for the legalization of it, but this law doesn't state restrictions on where it could be smoked. I for one hate the smell and taste of it, and I do NOT want to be breathing in the second hand smoke while in public. Regular smoke is bad enough without being drugged/intoxicated against my will. It should be legal in your home or in marijuana bars. Not regular bars either, because once again, that would be intoxicating everyone in the room.

Semi-related, people really need to think about the fact that Driving under the influence of marijuana is still DUI.
 
2008-07-01 04:55:04 PM
grizzlyjohnson:tedbundee:If the weed is legal and the sheriff is Californian, how exactly will he confiscate it if "it suits them"? It'd be no different from said sheriff confiscating a bottle of Chardonay or Grey Goose.

The weed is NOT legal. It can't be legal within the borders of the United State while it's still a schedule 1 substance. Federal law applies no matter what laws California passes.


I think we all get that, but let's say that California does legalize it. This would at the very least mean that only Federal Law Enforcement agents could enforce the Federal Law.

So any guy walking around with a 1/4 ounce in his pocket has nothing to fear from the local law enforcement. And we both know the Feds don't have it in them to go busting down every door of every person they suspect of having a spliff in their house.
 
2008-07-01 04:56:02 PM
TheStaffAce:In my day, we smoked to get HIGH.


Exactly. There is a difference between people who smoke pot just like there are different types of drinkers.

See the amateurs on St. Patrick's Day, the sloppy drunks, the obnoxious assholes, and then there's me; sitting in a booth or on a bar stool enjoying my pint and talking to my friends. I won't be puking in the Men's room later...
 
2008-07-01 04:56:53 PM
JamesDeSimas:I'm really on the fence about this, I mean, I'm all for the legalization of it, but this law doesn't state restrictions on where it could be smoked. I for one hate the smell and taste of it, and I do NOT want to be breathing in the second hand smoke while in public. Regular smoke is bad enough without being drugged/intoxicated against my will. It should be legal in your home or in marijuana bars. Not regular bars either, because once again, that would be intoxicating everyone in the room.

Semi-related, people really need to think about the fact that Driving under the influence of marijuana is still DUI.


You're talking about Holland, and about cigars in this country.

Most places won't just let you light up a cigar, unless it's a cigar bar.
 
2008-07-01 04:58:52 PM
JohnJacobJingleheimerSchmidt:I think we all get that, but let's say that California does legalize it. This would at the very least mean that only Federal Law Enforcement agents could enforce the Federal Law.

So any guy walking around with a 1/4 ounce in his pocket has nothing to fear from the local law enforcement. And we both know the Feds don't have it in them to go busting down every door of every person they suspect of having a spliff in their house.


Not true. The locals still have jurisdiction to bust you on the federal law. However, in California, that's probably not going to happen because it's a liberal state. Here in Utah it would definately happen. But you are right that the DEA will only target operations that are big enough to be worthy of their attentions. And that has more to do with political and publicity considerations than the amount of pot being moved. So if you're the mayor's son, you are probably still in danger of getting busted by the feds even if you're only carrying a quarter ounce.
 
2008-07-01 04:58:55 PM
www.cusd.chico.k12.ca.us

these things are going to be like $8 a bag if this happens.
 
2008-07-01 05:02:25 PM
JohnJacobJingleheimerSchmidt:Most places won't just let you light up a cigar, unless it's a cigar bar.


Your farkname makes me want to punch Barney...
 
2008-07-01 05:04:15 PM
Why is it that the people so intent on legalizing pot and using "personal freedoms" as their argument are the same people who want to criminalize everything else in society? Yeah, I'm talking to you liberals.
 
2008-07-01 05:07:04 PM
redcup27:Yeah, I'm talking to you liberals.


*looks around*


Don't ask me. All I see are Republicans who are wiping their asses with the Constitution, trying to legislate morality (abortion, gay marriage), and bending over backwards to suck fundy cack (stem cell research)...
 
2008-07-01 05:07:04 PM
redcup27:Why is it that the people so intent on legalizing pot and using "personal freedoms" as their argument are the same people who want to criminalize everything else in society? Yeah, I'm talking to you liberals.

"Everything else", as in...?
Most of my stoner friends and I don't really want anything else criminalized, unless somebody raises the price of tacos at Jack in the Box. Then some kneecaps might get broken.
 
2008-07-01 05:10:16 PM
Heamer:Then some kneecaps might get broken.


*high five*
 
2008-07-01 05:11:01 PM
I think that Marijuana is a bad thing. I am convinced that many of its advocates are fundamentally retarded. I have never smoked it, and have no intentions of trying it.

I also think that it is not nearly as bad as certain laws make it out to be, and that on the whole, it is probably no more dangerous than Tobacco or Alcohol, and on that basis alone, it should probably be legal.

It would be interesting to see what would happen if such a law did go through, especially in a state as influential as California.

END COMMUNICATION
 
2008-07-01 05:11:28 PM
JamesDeSimas:I'm really on the fence about this, I mean, I'm all for the legalization of it, but this law doesn't state restrictions on where it could be smoked. I for one hate the smell and taste of it, and I do NOT want to be breathing in the second hand smoke while in public. Regular smoke is bad enough without being drugged/intoxicated against my will. It should be legal in your home or in marijuana bars. Not regular bars either, because once again, that would be intoxicating everyone in the room.

Semi-related, people really need to think about the fact that Driving under the influence of marijuana is still DUI.


Anyone who thinks they will get high from being around pot smoke has either never been around weed, or at least never been around it without actually partaking. You could be in a greenhoused car and still pass a drug test.
 
2008-07-01 05:12:09 PM
LavenderWolf:This thread just gave me the munchies.

(Rushes in breathlessly, with popcorn.) "Did I miss anything?"
 
2008-07-01 05:14:45 PM
thisisntnamtherearerules:You could be in a greenhoused car and still pass a drug test.


We had this conversation in the last pot thread.

You can get a minimal contact high and yes it will show up on your drug test. It tends to show up very minutely and most testers will not count it unless it is over a certain amount.

Just sayin'
 
2008-07-01 05:15:09 PM
mccallcl:grizzlyjohnson:Yeah, yeah, I know. You already know everything just like all my grandkids. Have fun with your omniscience while it lasts.

It's not perceived omniscience, I understand your ideas, they're all just flawed and boring. The effects pot had on you, personally, you're now trying to apply to everyone that uses pot. The value of not having a "crutch" is one you're assuming has some importance in the lives of others. The reality of being independent is one you have manufactured for yourself, since it's pretty likely you have your own set of crutches, they just consist of media consumption, some kind of athletics or other diversion, or ingestion of one chemical or another. Put this all together, and on top of being wrong or misapplying your own value structures, you're spouting a message that anyone who participates in modern society has heard over and over.

To summarize: you're wrong and boring. I'm in my thirties and have accumulated enough life experience to know that my stance on your position is not going to change.


And you're harshing our buzz.

/I'm sorry, is that not helping?
 
2008-07-01 05:17:43 PM
thisisntnamtherearerules:If it weren't for the fascist gun laws in Cali I would consider living there. At least the rest of the country can see what has happened there and hopefully realize that prohibition does not work, whether it be guns, weed, or alcohol.

Please don't call it Cali. As far as the gun laws go, you can't have an assault rifle and it's harder to get a carry permit. If this is all takes to keep yokels like you from moving to California, then I'm all for them.
 
2008-07-01 05:17:46 PM
eqtworld

Awesome, my piece has been named Obanga for about nine months. Now it has a logo!
 
2008-07-01 05:17:58 PM
The $50 flat tax on plants (regardless of size) is retarded. other than that, w00t.
 
2008-07-01 05:18:00 PM
Fact Man:
I'll agree that guns have no place in the argument, but marijuana being less dangerous than alcohol is not a valid point because you're using the flawed "bad behavior to justify other bad behavior" argument.


That's not the argument. Pot prohibition is justified on the basis that it is evil and harmful and that therefore we must ruin the lives of those who use it. Well, why doesn't that same rationale apply to a substance that is demonstrably more evil and more harmful? Alcohol users get regulation and pure product and prices set by the real market. Why are consumers of other drugs not entitled to the same protections?

In other words, it's an equal protection argument, not a "bad behavior" argument.
 
2008-07-01 05:18:30 PM
Morton_toes:I'm sorry, is that not helping?


Don't know. I'm really really legally drunk right now and trying not to burn myself with my cigarette while I get this stupid child-proof cap off of my Oxycontin without dropping any of the pills into my coffee...
 
2008-07-01 05:19:59 PM
Frank N Stein:Yes, this is exactly what California needs. It'll be a great time when the social fabric devolves into immoral decadence. Oh, and it'll be a blast when the emergency rooms get packed full of ODing potheads!

Fun for all!


Can you even OD on pot? I've given it my best in the past and never managed it. About the worst that's ever happened to me is getting into a thoroughly unenthusiastic girl fight over doritos and chocolate chip cookie dough.

/ One time I thought it would be funny to bathe the cat while I was stoned. Five minutes and a ripped up forearm later, I changed my mind.

// But for that five minutes, it was farking hilarious!

/// The cat was named B*tch for a reason
 
2008-07-01 05:22:02 PM
natas6.0:My problem is
like with homosexual marriages,
California has already taken a vote on the subject.
Why on Earth should we have another?

Pot takes away yer motivation, so if we're gonna make it legal (again)
regulate the hell out of it. Make it like alcohol.
We already have far too many 17 year olds who have suddenly developed glaucoma, and subside on what has been dubbed
government cheese.
We in California already have so many goddamn problems....


Pot is not really one of them. Unmotivated people don't need pot to demotivate them, they started out that way.

Anyway, once the state starts raking in all that sweet sweet green produced by taxing the shiat out of it, any faded memory of the morality issues with pot smoking will quickly be buried by piles of cash.
 
2008-07-01 05:22:10 PM
The federal government's laws being over the state's is untrue as far as I know except for things which violate the Constitution.

For example, if California for some reason decided to enact slavery again, the federal government would crack down (and rightfully so) just like they did in Alabama during the civil rights era.

Now for Marijuana legalization they wouldn't have any leverage to do so. States are generally autonomous from the federal government. Look at gay marriage currently. Is the federal government gonna raid the SF courthouse now and abolish all the weddings? No.

Are these weddings legal in states that don't recognize the law. No.

Now with mj, what is going to happen is generally the same. If you cross over into Nevada with an ounce on you and get pulled over, you're prolly gonna go to jail. It's not legal in NV, but it is in CA.

This, also, is where the Federal Government CAN step in because you are attempting to transfer something the federal government considers illegal accross state lines, making it a federal case. Much like once a kidnapping is believed to have crossed state lines, it goes from being a police matter to an FBI matter.

I need to read up more on the dispensory raids in California by the DEA, though, to find out what their jurisdiction was and how it over rode the state's law enforcement.
 
2008-07-01 05:22:54 PM
Where the hell do I sign?

Ye gods, could we use the cash injection into our economy, the gay marriage tourist industry shouldn't have to shoulder the whole burden...

/californian stoner farkette FTW
 
2008-07-01 05:24:22 PM
Lord Zardoz:I think that Marijuana is a bad thing. I am convinced that many of its advocates are fundamentally retarded. I have never smoked it, and have no intentions of trying it.

I also think that it is not nearly as bad as certain laws make it out to be, and that on the whole, it is probably no more dangerous than Tobacco or Alcohol, and on that basis alone, it should probably be legal.

It would be interesting to see what would happen if such a law did go through, especially in a state as influential as California.

END COMMUNICATION


I cannot believe you take yourself seriously.
 
2008-07-01 05:26:27 PM
hopefully once this gets into the news I'll see a petition booth somewhere around here.
 
2008-07-01 05:28:09 PM
pwhp_67:JohnJacobJingleheimerSchmidt:Most places won't just let you light up a cigar, unless it's a cigar bar.


Your farkname makes me want to punch Barney...


Or Bruce Willis' younger self from The Kid.
 
2008-07-01 05:28:28 PM
Ender's:The federal government's laws being over the state's is untrue as far as I know except for things which violate the Constitution.


I think you're wrong. I remember when states put medical marijuana and assisted suicide on their ballots and the voters approved them. Ashcroft said he and the DEA would still prosecute every person involved no matter what the state said or how legal the state thought it was...
 
2008-07-01 05:30:59 PM
spammuncher:thisisntnamtherearerules:If it weren't for the fascist gun laws in Cali I would consider living there. At least the rest of the country can see what has happened there and hopefully realize that prohibition does not work, whether it be guns, weed, or alcohol.

Please don't call it Cali. As far as the gun laws go, you can't have an assault rifle and it's harder to get a carry permit. If this is all takes to keep yokels like you from moving to California, then I'm all for them.


The difference is that in Florida, I can have any gun I want while at the same time be looking at only a fine and possibly community service for personal use weed.

In Kali, I can have any weed I want, but go to prison for having a pistol grip on a rifle.

/But I am a backwards yokel because this does not make sense to me
 
2008-07-01 05:32:43 PM
Afroman -Because I got High
 
2008-07-01 05:32:51 PM
JamesDeSimas:I'm really on the fence about this, I mean, I'm all for the legalization of it, but this law doesn't state restrictions on where it could be smoked. I for one hate the smell and taste of it, and I do NOT want to be breathing in the second hand smoke while in public. Regular smoke is bad enough without being drugged/intoxicated against my will. It should be legal in your home or in marijuana bars. Not regular bars either, because once again, that would be intoxicating everyone in the room.

Semi-related, people really need to think about the fact that Driving under the influence of marijuana is still DUI.


Went over this last time too. You won't likely see any more pot smoking than you do now. You won't be able to smoke a joint in the library or anywhere else there is a NO SMOKING sign. Already have laws to cover just these types of problems. Same with the DUI thing. Influence being the key word here. It's already illegal.

/nothing to see here, move along...
 
2008-07-01 05:34:58 PM
pwhp_67:Morton_toes:I'm sorry, is that not helping?


Don't know. I'm really really legally drunk right now and trying not to burn myself with my cigarette while I get this stupid child-proof cap off of my Oxycontin without dropping any of the pills into my coffee...


Just toss those Oxy's right in that cup, stir vigorously... TA-DA Oxy-cocktail!
 
2008-07-01 05:38:48 PM
asdfbeau:hopefully once this gets into the news I'll see a petition booth somewhere around here.



Look for all the haze and tie-dye...
 
2008-07-01 05:39:10 PM
mccallcl:grizzlyjohnson:Yeah, yeah, I know. You already know everything just like all my grandkids. Have fun with your omniscience while it lasts.

It's not perceived omniscience, I understand your ideas, they're all just flawed and boring. The effects pot had on you, personally, you're now trying to apply to everyone that uses pot. The value of not having a "crutch" is one you're assuming has some importance in the lives of others. The reality of being independent is one you have manufactured for yourself, since it's pretty likely you have your own set of crutches, they just consist of media consumption, some kind of athletics or other diversion, or ingestion of one chemical or another. Put this all together, and on top of being wrong or misapplying your own value structures, you're spouting a message that anyone who participates in modern society has heard over and over.

To summarize: you're wrong and boring. I'm in my thirties and have accumulated enough life experience to know that my stance on your position is not going to change.


For not knowing everything, you profess to know a lot about me based on a few posts on fark.com. For instance, I come out heavily against crutches and yet you tell me I must have several. Why? Because you do?

This is what I'm talking about. You evaluate things based on your limited experience and they fall into neat little categories of right and wrong. That's an ailment of youth but you don't have to be young to be sheltered and inexperienced. Life usually beats that out of you pretty quick but some of us manage to make our cocoons last well into adulthood if we can find some sort of way to stave off reality (like, oh, pot, maybe?)

Me, the older I get the less I know for sure. Most of my assumptions have been shattered and I find that holding on to them just amounts to wishful thinking and self delusion. I'm just sharing my experience but for some reason you think I'm telling you how to live your life. I think you're getting upset because I'm hitting a little too close to home. That's usually the effect I have on people and I know what it looks like.
 
2008-07-01 05:46:10 PM
trappedspirit:Afroman -Because I got High

I hate that song.
 
2008-07-01 05:47:08 PM
grizzlyjohnson:I think you're getting upset because I'm hitting a little too close to home. That's usually the effect I have on people and I know what it

No. The effect you're having in this thread is you're tossing out lame statements like, "Avoiding what life has for you by means of escape quickly becomes a crutch."

If you already know that many pot smokers smoke recreationally and are not using it as a crutch, just as not all beer drinkers are alcoholics, then making that statement is dumb and boring.

That's all anyone in here said...
 
2008-07-01 05:49:09 PM
So is your crutch telling other people their philosophies in the anonymous forum of teh interwebs? You either seem really sure of yourself, which is fine as long as you acknowledge you can't be sure for anyone else, or you just don't care what anyone else thinks of you opinions (doubtful, or you wouldn't say them).

Doing something over and over again because you enjoy it isn't a crutch. I could quit breathing and find out if the beneficial effects would last, but I'm happy doing it and I don't really care to see the other side.
 
2008-07-01 05:50:16 PM
I love the anti-cannabis crowd that comes in to these threads and tries, once again, and unsuccessfully, to tell us how stupid we are for smoking. If we're so goddamn stupid, what makes you think we're intelligent enough to understand your arguments? If all we do is toke up, waste our lives, and sit around eating nachos, then how can you possibly get through to us? Clearly, you're wasting your time, and your pedastal is too high for us poor, stupid little potheads to hear you anyhow.

Go away. You're not helping, and you're not convincing. We're too stupid, remember?
 
2008-07-01 05:50:43 PM
Savage Belief:Don't leagalize, de-criminalize.

/It'd be better that way.


No. Fail.
 
2008-07-01 05:52:30 PM
Heamer:If all we do is toke up,


I only made it that far and then I lost my train of thought...


*hic*
 
2008-07-01 05:53:18 PM
skabbo:trappedspirit:Afroman -Because I got High

I hate that song.


It's a tribute to the fact that there is no correspondence between apathetic behavior and marijuana use.

/or i was high and got that backward
 
2008-07-01 05:54:57 PM
Heamer:I love the anti-cannabis crowd that comes in to these threads and tries, once again, and unsuccessfully, to tell us how stupid we are for smoking. If we're so goddamn stupid, what makes you think we're intelligent enough to understand your arguments? If all we do is toke up, waste our lives, and sit around eating nachos, then how can you possibly get through to us? Clearly, you're wasting your time, and your pedastal is too high for us poor, stupid little potheads to hear you anyhow.

Go away. You're not helping, and you're not convincing. We're too stupid, remember?


Oh yeah, and if you do come back, bring some funyuns.

/dammit. and kit-kats.
 
2008-07-01 05:57:06 PM
grizzlyjohnson:The quote in bold face has nothing to do with that. It's talking about the States not being able to take to themselves rights denied to them by the constitution.

For such a smug little feller, you seem almost comically ignorant about the Constitution. Maybe you should back up and go read it.

Maybe you could point out one of those rights denied to the States by the Constitution. Be specific and show your work.
 
2008-07-01 05:57:15 PM
grizzlyjohnson:I think you're getting upset because I'm hitting a little too close to home. That's usually the effect I have on people and I know what it looks like.

When it's not maddeningly frustrating, it's wickedly entertaining, isn't it?
 
2008-07-01 05:57:31 PM
trappedspirit:skabbo:trappedspirit:Afroman -Because I got High

I hate that song.

It's a tribute to the fact that there is no correspondence between apathetic behavior and marijuana use.

/or i was high and got that backward


Are you trying to tell me marijuana does not, in fact, write letters to apathetic behavior?

/or did I get that backwards?
 
2008-07-01 05:58:08 PM
What I'd love to see now is an Obonga photoshop contest.

Additionally, maybe one on umm, Mcsame as well (to even things out?)
 
Displayed 50 of 284 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report