Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(LA Times)   Prop 19 puffs, puffs, doesn't pass   (latimes.com ) divider line
    More: Sad, Drug Policy Alliance, drug crimes, San Francisco Bay Area, drug czar, exit polls, Gospel of Luke, Edison Research, California  
•       •       •

3795 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Nov 2010 at 7:16 AM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



369 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-11-03 04:15:33 AM  
45% support.

And some pro-pot folks either voted against or abstained because of the regulations that would be put in place.

I'd call that a great sign of progress, even if the prop itself didn't pass.
 
2010-11-03 04:21:06 AM  

Somaticasual: 45% support.

And some pro-pot folks either voted against or abstained because of the regulations that would be put in place.

I'd call that a great sign of progress, even if the prop itself didn't pass.


It's getting there. It's not quite there, but it's getting there. Crossing that magical 50% line is always tough, particularly with something as demonized as marijuana.
 
2010-11-03 04:36:41 AM  
We need to get the message out counter acting those of the people shouting, "OMG your nurse is going to be high and KILL YOU," or, "OMG the bus driver is going to be high and KILL YOUR KIDS," and the like.

The fact is, those example people would be high already. It's not as though California isn't a pot smoking state. It very much is. The populace just imagines that its legality will cause everyone and their dog to suddenly light up while doing open heart surgery.
 
2010-11-03 04:46:35 AM  

Ender's: The populace just imagines that its legality will cause everyone and their dog to suddenly light up while doing open heart surgery.


Michigan is like this. Just like in California, we have medical marijuana, and it's not hard to get a doctor to fill out the forms to get authorized to use/posses it. And whether or not people realize it, there are "health collectives" that sell medical marijuana all over the place. But straight legalization seems to bring those same fears.

We're moving in the right direction...
 
2010-11-03 05:13:42 AM  

ambassador_ahab: Michigan is like this. Just like in California, we have medical marijuana, and it's not hard to get a doctor to fill out the forms to get authorized to use/posses it. And whether or not people realize it, there are "health collectives" that sell medical marijuana all over the place. But straight legalization seems to bring those same fears.

We're moving in the right direction...


Totally. It's only a matter of time. I think we should hire Jerry Brown's campaign manager to do it hehe.
 
2010-11-03 05:46:32 AM  

Ender's: Totally. It's only a matter of time. I think we should hire Jerry Brown's campaign manager to do it hehe.


Truth, and funny, all at the same time ;)
 
2010-11-03 07:20:44 AM  
The 18-34 turnout was around 34% and that's what screwed us. If you promised free blow jobs and cash for voting people still won't show up. It's un-be-farking-leviable.
 
2010-11-03 07:23:27 AM  
It was a horribly written proposition. Do it right, and it will pass.
 
2010-11-03 07:24:10 AM  
Apparently there are still a lot of grandmothers in the state who're afraid of getting raped by sex-crazed marijuana addicts.

Just hurry up and die already.
 
2010-11-03 07:24:18 AM  
Too bad... Though, like legalized homosexual marriages, it'll happen eventually.

I'm happy with the decriminalization we have here in MA... certainly makes my monthly restocking less stressful, but eventually I'd like to see full legalization so I can just grow my own in addition to tomatoes, zucchini, cucumbers and herbs I already grow.
 
2010-11-03 07:26:14 AM  
Well, that is img1.fark.net.

Here's to better luck next time. *puffs*
 
2010-11-03 07:26:28 AM  

Somaticasual: 45% support.

And some pro-pot folks either voted against or abstained because of the regulations that would be put in place.

I'd call that a great sign of progress, even if the prop itself didn't pass.


What were the regulations that they were against? I don't even smoke, but I really was hoping this would pass.
 
2010-11-03 07:31:28 AM  

radioshack: Somaticasual: 45% support.

And some pro-pot folks either voted against or abstained because of the regulations that would be put in place.

I'd call that a great sign of progress, even if the prop itself didn't pass.

What were the regulations that they were against? I don't even smoke, but I really was hoping this would pass.


People were biatching about cities being able to set some of their own restrictions. Apparently this was worse than having it completely illegal as it is now.


/goddamnitsomuch *face palm*
 
2010-11-03 07:31:49 AM  
I will be the first person ever to admit that i submitted this article earlier, although subby's header is just pure win compared to even god.
 
2010-11-03 07:33:32 AM  
There's too much money in enforcement. It pays twice when it's illegal.
 
2010-11-03 07:33:58 AM  

radioshack: Somaticasual: 45% support.

And some pro-pot folks either voted against or abstained because of the regulations that would be put in place.

I'd call that a great sign of progress, even if the prop itself didn't pass.

What were the regulations that they were against? I don't even smoke, but I really was hoping this would pass.


I heard something on the radio (NPR maybe) where they were interviewing some of the growers in the state. I can't remember the details because I wasn't listening closely, but basically, if I recall correctly, after everything was said and done, passage would have meant it was going to cut into their profits enough that they would have had to find another source of income.
 
2010-11-03 07:34:43 AM  
I wonder if the tobacco companies have trademarked any pot brand names for future use.
 
2010-11-03 07:35:52 AM  

keylock71: Too bad... Though, like legalized homosexual marriages, it'll happen eventually.



we should do it like last time, after voting for the ban on said acts, go back and call it unconstitutional to ban this and force our will upon the lands!

/those fertile, fertile lands.
 
2010-11-03 07:37:09 AM  
Homos are encouraged to come out of the closet but the dopers have to stay there. Nice.
 
2010-11-03 07:38:07 AM  

radioshack: What were the regulations that they were against? I don't even smoke, but I really was hoping this would pass.


Things like limitations on garden size (current medical law either revolves around plant count, what type of recommendation, or the sky is the limit, depending on what precedent holds this week) or 'inventory' size, etc.

Frankly, most of the complaints about 19 from those making money from 215 came down to being short sighted greedypants. There was a considerable amount of FUD (Richard Lee playing the role of George Soros - George Soros also plaid the role of George Soros, oddly enough, conjurations of tax men breaking down your door to charge you for your grow [while ignoring that it's the SWAT team doing it currently], etc) tossed about, but brass tacks - it's only worth what it's worth because there's a risk in producing it. If that risk is negated/lessened, so is the paycheck for doing it.
 
2010-11-03 07:38:10 AM  

SBinRR: I can't remember the details because I wasn't listening closely, but basically, if I recall correctly, after everything was said and done, passage would have meant it was going to cut into their profits enough that they would have had to find another source of income.



My cousin is a grower like you mentioned, she said the same thing. she was hoping it wouldn't pass. I called her a selfish twat.
 
2010-11-03 07:40:00 AM  

Debriefer X: SBinRR: I can't remember the details because I wasn't listening closely, but basically, if I recall correctly, after everything was said and done, passage would have meant it was going to cut into their profits enough that they would have had to find another source of income.


My cousin is a grower like you mentioned, she said the same thing. she was hoping it wouldn't pass. I called her a selfish twat.


Whether it be petroleum fuel manufacturers or marijuana growers...people really are not very different are they...sad.
 
2010-11-03 07:41:15 AM  
That said, to take away that growers/producers/etc were the death knell of this wouldn't be right either.

not really a demographic that moves mountains. bales, yes. mountains, no.
 
2010-11-03 07:41:34 AM  
Does this mean that dope smoking homos are going to be confused whether they should come out of the closet or stay in it? LULZ
 
2010-11-03 07:44:56 AM  
And we continue to fund the corruption in Mexico!!
 
2010-11-03 07:45:13 AM  
haha stoners, GTFO :D
 
2010-11-03 07:46:38 AM  

Debriefer X: SBinRR: I can't remember the details because I wasn't listening closely, but basically, if I recall correctly, after everything was said and done, passage would have meant it was going to cut into their profits enough that they would have had to find another source of income.


My cousin is a grower like you mentioned, she said the same thing. she was hoping it wouldn't pass. I called her a selfish twat.


So have the growers write an initiative and see if it passes.
 
2010-11-03 07:47:03 AM  

Astralwand: And we continue to fund the corruption in Mexico!!


And Sacramento
 
2010-11-03 07:48:00 AM  

Somaticasual: 45% support.

And some pro-pot folks either voted against or abstained because of the regulations that would be put in place.

I'd call that a great sign of progress, even if the prop itself didn't pass.


I realise that the pot advocates werent' quite happy with the prop yet, but doesn't it make more sense to get your foot in the door first, rather than hold your breath until they give in to your demands?
 
2010-11-03 07:49:52 AM  

meowgret thatcher: I realise that the pot advocates werent' quite happy with the prop yet, but doesn't it make more sense to get your foot in the door first, rather than hold your breath until they give in to your demands?


Yeah, but were talking about Californians here. They're morons.
 
2010-11-03 07:50:55 AM  
content9.flixster.com

California, you're farking up the rotation
 
2010-11-03 07:52:32 AM  

Kazan: haha stoners, GTFO :D


drunks, ce careful of stones that you throw.
 
2010-11-03 07:53:22 AM  
Dudes will be marrying turtles long before we legalize marijuana in this country...
 
2010-11-03 07:57:46 AM  
Well shiat, now nobody is going to able to get weed.
 
2010-11-03 08:00:34 AM  
Brownie points for trying though.
 
2010-11-03 08:03:03 AM  

PonceAlyosha: So have the growers write an initiative and see if it passes.


this was drafted by a grower - Richard Lee.
 
2010-11-03 08:05:18 AM  
All in time, all in time. Specifically, the time when the boomer generation dies off and the American demographic swings wildly. That time.
 
2010-11-03 08:06:37 AM  
Majority of voters still have less common sense than potheads. Sounds about right for Merka.
 
2010-11-03 08:10:36 AM  

LasersHurt: All in time, all in time. Specifically, the time when the boomer generation dies off and the American demographic swings wildly. That time.


ohpleaseohpleaseohplease...
 
2010-11-03 08:10:43 AM  

radioshack: Somaticasual: 45% support.

And some pro-pot folks either voted against or abstained because of the regulations that would be put in place.

I'd call that a great sign of progress, even if the prop itself didn't pass.

What were the regulations that they were against? I don't even smoke, but I really was hoping this would pass.


About the only thing I could find out from the election thread is that people are pissed that a) Big Business will come in and sell weed and b) they wouldn't be able to sell weed to children.

One person brought up the point that the penalties were somewhat draconian. They were, but the penalties for selling weed are still draconian, anyways, and this proposition would have ended that, assuming the federal government wouldn't have flipped out and dropped the hammer.
 
2010-11-03 08:11:05 AM  

LasersHurt: All in time, all in time. Specifically, the time when the boomer generation dies off and the American demographic swings wildly. That time.


Right, and that Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal is right around the corner, and some day, SOME DAY we'll get off foreign oil, probably when we get out of Afghanistan, right around that time that gay marriage is legal.

I'm done waiting on the cro-magnons to walk upright.
 
2010-11-03 08:15:19 AM  
I'm high at work so I'm getting a kick out of these replies.
 
2010-11-03 08:16:32 AM  
Dealers 1, dopers 0
 
2010-11-03 08:17:33 AM  
FTA: The measure drew strong support from voters younger than 25, as the campaign had hoped, but those voters did not turn out in unusually high numbers

They didn't turn out to vote because a number were usually high.
 
2010-11-03 08:17:53 AM  

LasersHurt: All in time, all in time. Specifically, the time when the boomer generation dies off and the American demographic swings wildly. That time.


Which is why I support killing everyone in our country over 50 and turning their corpses into some sort of fossil fuel. They deserve it for getting us to where we are, and their rightful demise will solve the social security+medicare problems, along with getting a greedy self entitled bunch of pricks with no foresight who drove a once great nation into the ground their comeuppance.
 
2010-11-03 08:17:57 AM  
But if they legalize pot how else are we supposed to arrest minority youth and use them for slave labor in private, for-profit prisons?
 
2010-11-03 08:20:02 AM  

lilplatinum: LasersHurt: All in time, all in time. Specifically, the time when the boomer generation dies off and the American demographic swings wildly. That time.

Which is why I support killing everyone in our country over 50 and turning their corpses into some sort of fossil fuel. They deserve it for getting us to where we are, and their rightful demise will solve the social security+medicare problems, along with getting a greedy self entitled bunch of pricks with no foresight who drove a once great nation into the ground their comeuppance.


Wow, you're a smart one aren't you? Go smoke some more pot and philosophize some more moron.
 
2010-11-03 08:20:28 AM  

Fail in Human Form: The 18-34 turnout was around 34% and that's what screwed us. If you promised free blow jobs and cash for voting people still won't show up. It's un-be-farking-leviable.


That's the problem. Younger people don't seem to realize they actually need to go down and vote if they want their agenda to pass. The geriatrics know this which is why so many of our policies are still cold war era thinking.
 
2010-11-03 08:21:49 AM  
blogs.citypages.com

The Beer Lobby thanks you for your compliance!
 
2010-11-03 08:22:04 AM  

Bigdogdaddy: lilplatinum: LasersHurt: All in time, all in time. Specifically, the time when the boomer generation dies off and the American demographic swings wildly. That time.

Which is why I support killing everyone in our country over 50 and turning their corpses into some sort of fossil fuel. They deserve it for getting us to where we are, and their rightful demise will solve the social security+medicare problems, along with getting a greedy self entitled bunch of pricks with no foresight who drove a once great nation into the ground their comeuppance.

Wow, you're a smart one aren't you? Go smoke some more pot and philosophize some more moron.


You sound old. QUARTER HIM, YOUTH BRIGADE!
 
Displayed 50 of 369 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report