Doing research on marijuana is quite a “trip”; while finding videos to post that are “G” rated on the subject is near impossible! Venice Beach, California is a place where medical pot is found aplenty and pushing for legalization is on every corner. Business cards are distributed by Hashbar.TV to visitors of the Venice boardwalk and even minors are handed the propaganda.

Californians will be voting on the legalization of marijuana this November. To argue with the proponents of legalized marijuana is like arguing with idiots, yet the issue is now on the ballot and therefore the discussion must be had. Most of the arguments for legalized pot, use play on the sentiment that those who need it medically, can obtain it more easily, if it were legal for all; or that legalization will cut down on the Mexican drug war and destroy the black market, allowing bankrupt California to tax the product, putting dollars back into her coffers.

The “Yes on 19” webpage states that  Proposition 19 will:

Control cannabis like alcohol.

Put our police priorities where they belong.

Generate billions of dollars in revenue.

The proponents claim that because California has a failed policy “causing massive harm”,  it should be replaced with a “legal, controlled market, all while eliminating enforcement costs and bringing in new tax revenue.”

Yet the language of the proposition “may be the worst drafted legislation since 1996…” according to the San Diego Union-Tribune.

The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010

Legalizes marijuana under California but not federal law.  Permits local governments to regulate and tax commercial production, distribution, and sale of marijuana.

• Allows people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use.
• Permits local governments to regulate and tax commercial production, distribution, and sale of marijuana to people 21 years old or older.
• Prohibits people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using in public, or smoking it while minors are present.
• Maintains prohibitions against driving while impaired.
• Limits employers’ ability to address marijuana use to situations where job performance is actually impaired.
Summary of Legislative Analyst’s Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact:
• The fiscal effects of this measure could vary substantially depending on: (1) the extent to which the federal government continues to enforce federal marijuana laws and (2) whether the state and local governments choose to authorize, regulate, and tax various marijuana-related activities.
• Savings of potentially several tens of millions of dollars annually to the state and local governments on the costs of incarcerating and supervising certain marijuana offenders.
• Increase in state and local government tax and fee revenues, potentially in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

 

Recent polling shows most Californians oppose Proposition 19.  The statewide Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted October 2-4 shows California voters rejecting Prop. 19 with 53% voting “No” and 43% voting “Yes.”

When one visits a place where medical marijuana is prevalent and the users of the drug wander the boulevard stoned, one must ask, “Is this what all streets of California will look like if all may freely partake?”    When Democrats are even voicing “Vote no”, one must realize that this proposition is bad business.  Democratic pollster Pat Caddell made a brilliant and humorous point on Hannity’s Great American Panel stating, “California has made smoking a capitol offense, yet they want to legalize pot.”  Even Richard Eastman an activist who was instrumental in opening  one of the first medical marijuana buyers clubs in California says to vote no on Prop. 19.

What begins on this left coast ends up wafting into the rest of America. What say you America? Are you ready for Cannabis on every corner?

31 comments
  1. Your poll means nothing. WHY is the legalization movement bad? Why is weed seen as worse than alcohol even though alcohol is much more damaging to the body. And intoxicates at a very fast rate. I see huge claims with very little warrant. I would like to see more evidence backing up the fact that this is a stupid proposition, other than you just saying its stupid.

    1. Prohibition has failed. Will we not learn from our mistakes.. You don’t see news reports about some guy smoking a joint and beating the *&^% out of his wife or a college kid binge smoking and dying at a frat party. Its so funny that you can go home and take some xanax or zoloft, smoke some cigarettes and or drink some alcohol to wind down from your day but dare to say I should not smoke marijuana to wind down from mine.
      As far as taxes on marijuana itself goes a lot of people are missing the bigger picture. Don’t forget the mass amounts of clothing, paper and oil we can create, sell and tax with hemp. My god… The jobs that we would create alone in California since we would in most cases be the only state able to do it. Also, we would save some trees.. go green.. pun intended.
      When we get into the problem with children there’s so much Bs flying around its ridiculous. When kids get busted with alcohol its a slap on the wrist and a fine. When they get busted for marijuana it’s a criminal action that usually turns in to a misdemeanor and part of there probation and or sentence requires them to do “rehab” driving up the statistical number. Weed is so easy to get for youths in California because we are so close to the border. Alcohol is so hard to get because it is controlled, you don’t see many dealers dealing bottles of vodka to kids.. The risk/profit factor is just not there. Ask any kid what’s easier for them to get liquor or weed, and then ask yourself why kids may turn to weed first. You want to know what the top gateway drug is… its whatever the kids get their hands on first. You want kids to stop using drugs? Then it doesn’t start with prohibition.. It starts with good parenting and better education.

      Oh and I don’t use marijuana. Im sober in every sense. Just wanted to give you the idea I was just another stoner so you could not take what I have seriously because you thought I was biased like you are shane and risensontransfer

  2. I smoke pot, I will continue to smoke pot if it’s legalized or not. Why not stop wasting my and others tax dollars trying to stop me.

    See I toke up, get super stone, and sit and watch TV. People who drink go out, get in fights, vandalize properties, drive drunk, yet every stinking one of them have the legal right to consume the poison that have rotted this country’s social values and morals more then pot ever will.

      1. So you real opposition to freedom is your job security?! Wow, do you have nerve.

        If you ever tire of being a Nazi Monster, you should try becoming a human being.

        “And when there aren’t enough criminals, we’ll pass more laws to create new ones”

      2. No, the kids here aren’t typically here on drug charges, but they are drug involved.

        I’m just saying your contention that pot doesn’t influence behavior is just false.

        Hey love the Nazi reference, how tolerant of you.

      3. I’ve never said it doesn’t influence behavior, but it is minuscule and benign compared to Alcohol.

        It’s arguments like your that give logic a bad name. I am sure people that play Bingo break laws, should we outlaw Bingo?

        I call you a Nazi because you think like one. The freedom to do only the the government approves of is NOT freedom..they had that in Nazi Germany. Your whole approach is to substitute the will of the collective for the free-will of man the individual. You are too drunk on power lust (given your profession and viewpoints) to see it Shane.

        Hopefully one day you will disavow you Totalitarian views and De-Nazify yourself.

      4. Enough of the Nazi stuff already. Certain drugs have been illegal in this country most of the history of our nation and it has not led to a dictatorship. I hear the same thing about the killing of unborn children and laws protecting marriage, that somehow these laws lead to an American Taliban or a theocracy. The idea is baloney. We had laws against these things since the beginning and they did not lead where you say. It has only been since the move to legalize these things that government has grown bigger.

      5. Just because almost all criminals are pot heads, doesn’t mean all pot heads are criminals. If you have ever took a standardized test, you problem got that type of logic question wrong, which would explain why you have such a crappy job.

        Also the reason it doesn’t list marijuana in the constitution is because all the founding fathers grew it, used it, and would of laugh there heads off at the concept of it being made illegal, after all they promised us a land of Freedom.

        On a personal note, I hope you die.

      6. In 1980 at the start of the “war on Drugs” (some people just LOVE War) there were about 500,000 people in American Prisons and Jails – today there are 2,500,000 – most of the increase being for non-violent obsession of Drugs – That makes america the country with the LARGEST population of people incarcerated in the world. What is YOUR solution – to Jail the TENS of MILLIONS of Americans who smoke Pot?

      7. My SPELL CHECK turned Possession into Obsession isn’t that Freudian for How America created this Boogeyman out of a Plant that George Washington grew as his PRIMARY crop and people have used around the world for Millennia.

      8. Shane, i wonder if the Smoking of Marijuana is not necessarily the cause of the problem, but a manifestation of it. Could it be possible that people start using at early age because it is such a cool thing to do? I believe alcohol shared and still shares the same popularity amongst teens as Marijuana.

  3. That “poll” is only one out of TEN and it’s the only one that shows Prop 19 losing. It’s obviously an outlier, and that is exactly how it’s being seen by most of the reputable new agencies. Also, IPSOS largest customer is… wait for it… Big Pharma. Not exactly impartial.. Way to be “fair and unbiased”. It’s obvious the author of this article is pushing his own agenda and clearly is in favor on continuing the failed war on Marijuana.

    Prop 19 is going to win on November 2nd. People know the truth now and once the truth is out there it’s hard to stop it. Marijuana is a far safer drug than Alcohol and adults should have a legal option to that poison. We are wasting tax dollars in the trillions, and our Police are putting their lives at risk enforcing a law most people never wanted. Prohibition is a racist lie put in place by corrupt Politicians and opportunists. Read the history of Marijuana and you will be disgusted that we ever bought into the obvious propaganda.

    The Author needs to removee his head from the sand and wake up to the reality that millions of people already use Cannabis to relax and for medical purposes. Making if officially legal (let’s face it, it’s almost legal now) will not cause any more problems than Cannabis users cause now. Which is to say, almost none.

    Yes on Prop 19.

  4. That “poll” is only one out of TEN and it’s the only one that shows Prop 19 losing. It’s obviously an outlier, and that is exactly how it’s being seen by most of the reputable new agencies. Also, IPSOS largest customer is… wait for it… Big Pharma. Not exactly impartial.. Way to be “fair and unbiased”. It’s obvious the author of this article is pushing his own agenda and clearly is in favor on continuing the failed war on Marijuana.

    Prop 19 is going to win on November 2nd. People know the truth now and once the truth is out there it’s hard to stop it. Marijuana is a far safer drug than Alcohol and adults should have a legal option to that poison. We are wasting tax dollars in the trillions, and our Police are putting their lives at risk enforcing a law most people never wanted. Prohibition is a racist lie put in place by corrupt Politicians and opportunists. Read the history of Marijuana and you will be disgusted that we ever bought into the obvious propaganda.

    The Author needs to removee his head from the sand and wake up to the reality that millions of people already use Cannabis to relax and for medical purposes. Making if officially legal (let’s face it, it’s almost legal now) will not cause any more problems than Cannabis users cause now. Which is to say, almost none.

    Yes on Prop 19.

    1. You must have lit up a blunt or something, check the byline… It would be removing her head, her head.

      This is democracy Barry and last time I checked the Constitution it didn’t say anything about having a legal right to smoke weed.

      If Prop 19 wins, well… California is already a pretty messed up place so I guess that is federalism at work and California can yet again try another social experiment.

      I’m sure Arizona and Nevada will welcome more people fleeing California as they already have been doing with outrageous taxes and an insurmountable debt.

      1. Actually we DON’T live in a democracy! We live in a representative republic. Democracy is mob rule last time I checked you idiot.

        Also, I addition to checking the Constitution, you should have checked the Declaration of Independence which is the moral basis of our constitution. If you had, you would have stumbled across something called inalienable rights.

        So when mob rule is substituted for inalienable rights in thought and practice you get the disgusting mess called America. Illegal drugs is just one symbol of the governments war on freedom.

        Legalizing Marijuana would be long over due step in the right direction.

      2. You are right, a Democratic Republic, amendments to state constitutions require a vote of the people. Federal constitutional amendments can be ratified by Legislatures of 3/4 of the states or by conventions in 3/4 of the states… convention proceedings I’m sure vary state by state.

        Because the Federal Constitution is set up that way for amendment votes doesn’t mean states have to do it that way. Who would then ratify? Counties? No it makes sense that it is the people who make such decisions. You don’t want State Legislatures to pass constitutional amendments without some sort ratification system.

        Inalienable rights – life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness… by what you are considering an inalienable right a whole host of things could be considered which would be anarchy as well.

        You also seem to have a problem with the constitutionality of the vote that is taking place, but the California Constitution requires it in accordance with the provisions of Article II, Section 8, of the California Constitution.

        So it isn’t mob rule, it’s a constitutional process.

      3. “Inalienable rights – life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness… by what you are considering an inalienable right a whole host of things could be considered which would be anarchy as well. ”

        To be clear, people having a right to their OWN life is anarchy? And YOUR right to SOMEONE ELSE’ life is NOT anarchy but wholesome and pure?

  5. ITS REALLY NOT a question of Cannabis on every street corner – that already exists – its a question of, “Do you want it sold to minors with profits going to Mexican Drug Cartels – or do you want it sold where Clerks ask for ID and it is TAXED to help Budget Deficits?” – it’s Tens of MILLIONS of users already make it a mult-BILLION Dollar business in America

    1. Would the government responsibly spend the tax dollars to help with budget deficits? Are you high?

  6. • Allows people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use.
    Personal Use will not remain personal, but will spill over into the society of friends with whom that person associates. Who will regulate this and will this not create a new type of criminal?

    • States that you cannot use marijuana while driving, but makes it completely permissible to use marijuana just prior to getting behind the wheel. No driver over 21, including bus, taxi, light rail train operators, or everyday commuters can be required to be drug-free while operating a vehicle under Proposition 19.

    [Expressly omits any definition of what constitutes being “under the influence” of marijuana. Proponents did not include a standard for “driving under the influence,” and there are no correlative tests between marijuana and driving skills as there are for alcohol. Therefore, a driver may legally drive even if a blood test shows they have marijuana in their system.

    States that you cannot use marijuana while driving, but makes it completely permissible to use marijuana just prior to getting behind the wheel. No driver over 21, including bus, taxi, light rail train operators, or everyday commuters can be required to be drug-free while operating a vehicle under Proposition 19.
    Prevents employers who operate transportation companies or have company vehicles from requiring employees operating these vehicles be drug free. Companies won’t be able to take action against a “stoned” driver until after he or she has a wreck, not before, opening up a tremendous liability question for employers.

    Does not regulate marijuana like alcohol or tobacco. Rather, Proposition 19 leaves to cities and counties the task of individually regulating marijuana within their own borders. This approach will limit, not enhance, California’s ability to control marijuana.

    Would not eliminate the need for illicit marijuana dealers as a large segment of marijuana users are under the age of 21 and therefore will still not be able to legally purchase marijuana.

    Would place hundreds of employers, including public schools, at risk of violating the Federal Workplace Act of 1988 which mandates the necessity of a drug-free workplace, causing California as much as $9.4 billion in lost federal funding.]

    • Permits local governments to regulate and tax commercial production, distribution, and sale of marijuana to people 21 years old or older.

    New Bureaucracy’s will suck up the tax $ generated and since when (as has been already argued) has the government ever done it’s job well?
    • Prohibits people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using in public, or smoking it while minors are present.
    DUH. And yet, this is a problem now and legalizing it will not fix the current issue.
    [Would place hundreds of employers, including public schools, at risk of violating the Federal Workplace Act of 1988 which mandates the necessity of a drug-free workplace. This is why public school superintendent John Snavely, Ed.D. warns that Proposition 19 could cost our K-12 schools as much as $9.4 billion in lost federal funding as well as the loss of millions of dollars in federal grants for our state colleges and universities.

    If passed, would allow licensed marijuana dealers to advertise without restriction, near schools, libraries and parks, just like cigarette companies. This is made possible by a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2001 entitled Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly (US Sup. Ct., Opinion per O’Connor) which struck down as unconstitutional a Massachusetts statute which banned tobacco ads within 1000 feet of a school or playground.

    Would forbid school bus drivers from smoking marijuana on schools grounds or while actually behind the wheel, but a bus driver could arrive for work with marijuana in his or her system, thereby placing hundreds of school children at risk on a daily basis.]

    • Limits employers’ ability to address marijuana use to situations where job performance is actually impaired.
    HUMMMM…..operating heavy equipment, while under the influence?

    [Is opposed by the CalChamber because the passage of Proposition 19 could result in employers losing public contracts and grants because they could no longer effectively enforce the drug-free workplace requirements outlined by the federal government.
    Would create a separate and higher standard for marijuana use beyond the current law, which allows employers to discipline employees who are “under the influence” of drugs or alcohol. Proposition 19 would require the employer to prove that the employee is “actually impaired” from performing his or her job duties as a result of drug use.

    Will not allow California employers to: “screen job applicants for marijuana use; regulate any employee conduct related to the use, transportation or cultivation of marijuana unless the employer can prove job impairment; or choose to maintain a drug-free workplace consistent with federal law”, according to an analysis released by the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s office.

    Will force California employers that allow employees cigarette smoking breaks and/or certain areas in which cigarette smoking is allowed to also allow marijuana smoking as well.

    Would prohibit bus, trucking and transit companies from requiring employees to be drug-free. If passed, Proposition 19 promises to be a legal quagmire for California businesses, raising significant liability issues.]

    Spivester1: Does this help clear the fog?

    1. “Will force California employers that allow employees cigarette smoking breaks and/or certain areas in which cigarette smoking is allowed to also allow marijuana smoking as well.

      Would prohibit bus, trucking and transit companies from requiring employees to be drug-free. ”

      That would be a very bad aspect of the law and should not be in it. Employers should have a right to set their own policies on employee drug use. …especially in the area of public safety when Employers want to set safety standards higher than required be law.

  7. So Shane, tell me why society should impose criminal penalties on a substance that does far less harm than alcohol and tobacco? Tobacco kills hundreds of thousands of people every year, and alcohol is a direct factor in a majority of rapes and 20% of all violent crime, and also directly kills thousands from acute overdose or DUIs. Oh, and the two legal drugs are also capable of producing a physical addiction. Why don’t you base your opinion based on more than just your personal experiences? Correlation is not causation, people who smoke pot rarely become involved in criminal activity.

Comments are closed.

Get CT In Your Inbox!

Don't miss a single update.

You May Also Like

Judicial Tyrant Overrules Voters on California’s Prop 8

We have reached a crossroads.  Now lone unelected, unaccountable judges think they…

To Defund or Not to Defund Obamacare?

That is the question.  Charles Krauthammer on Fox News said that he…

Common Sense Health Care Reforms

And no, it isn’t using taxpayer money to pay for abortions.  This…

Ruth Graham (1920-2007)

Our loss, her gain.  I rejoice that she is in the presence…