Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!
|
 whatever123
Whatever I did, I'm sorry
 
Registered: 04/07/05
Posts: 2,613
Loc: San Diego, CA
Last seen: 2 years, 2 months
|
 [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization 
#13211011 - 09/17/10 08:44 PM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/BPnews.asp?ID=33706
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (BP)--The battle for Congress may be in the political spotlight, but California is competing for attention with a ballot initiative that would make the state the first in the nation to legalize the growth, sale and recreational use of marijuana.
Although California, 13 other states and the District of Columbia already allow marijuana to be used for medicinal purposes, the California initiative -- known as Prop 19 -- would go much further, allowing people 21 and older to possess and use up to one ounce of marijuana for any reason. Businesses would be able to sell marijuana, and individuals would be allowed to grow their own marijuana in an area not larger than 25 square feet.
Prop 19 supporters are hailing it as a way to raise taxes and reprioritize police resources toward harder crimes, and they hope California serves as a model for the rest of the nation. But critics say it would only increase the number of marijuana and drug users -- particularly among young adults and teens -- and actually would lead to an uptick in crime. They also say any tax revenues -- which the initiative would require go to local governments and not to the state -- would be dwarfed by the social costs of its legalization.
Polls show voters are split on Prop 19, with some polls showing it slightly leading but under 50 percent. The election is Nov. 2.
Marijuana has been illegal on the federal level since 1937.
"If you legalize marijuana, you have another behavior-controlling substance that kids are now going to see as being normal," said Chris Clark, pastor of East Clairemont Southern Baptist Church in San Diego. Clark opposes Prop 19. "It is only going to take two to three generations before that becomes widely accepted and that anybody who smokes marijuana is just part of the mainstream.
"Once it's legalized, it becomes acceptable in the eyes of many. But just because something is legal doesn't mean it's morally right."
The initiative has resulted in an odd coalition on both sides that does not follow the normal political and ideological divide. The opposition has had more high-profile endorsements. Opposing Prop 19 are both Democratic U.S. senators (Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein), the Democratic state attorney general (Jerry Brown), the Republican and Democratic candidates for governor, several major newspapers including the San Francisco Chronicle and the Contra Costa Times, the California Association of Highway Patrolmen, the California District Attorneys Association and the California Police Chiefs Association. Supporting it is the Service Employees International Union, which is a large statewide union, along with the California NAACP and former San Jose Police Chief Joseph McNamara.
"You can only do one thing with recreational marijuana, and that's get high," Ron Allen, president of the International Faith-Based Coalition, told Baptist Press. Allen, a minister, opposes Prop 19 and is a leading critic in the state. "To think about the consequences that will cost, in drugged driving, in health costs, is humongous. Why would anybody want to legalize an illicit drug?"
The No on Prop 19 campaign says passage of the initiative would lead to a host of consequences not addressed by Prop 19 supporters, such as:
-- banning pre-employment marijuana testing, which could impact the public by affecting bus companies, airlines and other public transportation. The text of Prop 19 says employers can take action on employees only if it can be proven an individual's pot smoking "impairs job performance."
-- allowing workplace marijuana smoking breaks.
-- allowing residents to grow marijuana plants in their back or front yards, all with the protection of state law.
-- increasing the number of drugged drivers on the road. Prop 19 forbids the consumption of marijuana by drivers while the car "is being operated" but permits marijuana consumption before a person drives. There is no alcohol-type breathalyzer test for marijuana. Also, passengers would be allowed to smoke pot while the car is moving.
-- increasing drug trafficking elsewhere, especially into other states where marijuana is not legal.
-- increasing the amount of in-state crime and necessary law enforcement. Police officers opposed to Prop 19 say that as the number of marijuana users increases, crime by those under the influence will increase. They also say they will be required to enforce new laws: whether an individual possesses more than one ounce and whether an individual's marijuana crop falls within state limits, for instance.
The California NAACP supports Prop 19 because of what it says is a disparity of blacks arrested for marijuana possession. Allen, who is African American, said marijuana legalization will only hurt blacks.
"How in the world can we legalize a drug and say, 'Let everyone stay high' and believe they're not going to get arrested for something else?" he asked. "It will cause more carnage, more devastation, more crime, more burglary in that community or in any other community. It doesn't make sense. How can you educate an intoxicated mind? You can't. It doesn't make any sense."
Allen added, "If Martin Luther King could hear something like that, he would turn over in his grave, knowing that our greatest civil rights organization is talking about legalizing a drug and calling that civil rights."
Alaska currently has the nation's most liberal policy on marijuana, and it may serve as a warning for California. After a 1975 state Supreme Court ruling legalized in-home possession -- pot still couldn't be used outside the home or sold -- teen marijuana use skyrocketed to more than twice the national average, according to a 1988 study. Alaskans recriminalized marijuana at the ballot in 1990, although that law was overturned by a 2003 court ruling.
The vote on Prop 19 comes at a time when adult and teen drug use apparently is on the rise, according to the federal government's annual National Survey of Drug Use and Health. It showed that in 2009, 7.3 percent of teens (ages 12-17) had used marijuana in the past month, compared to 6.7 percent in 2008. Usage of all illicit drugs (including marijuana) also increased among teens, from 9.3 percent in 2008 to 10 percent in 2009. Among all adults and teens, drug usage also increased, from 8 percent in 2008 to 8.7 percent in 2009. The report said the overall trend was driven largely by an increase in marijuana usage, and it argued that pot is a gateway drug.
Although Prop 19 is being championed as an economic boon for the state, the initiative explicitly says any taxes would go to local governments and not the state. Additionally, its passage could harm the state in another significant way: The Federal Drug Free Workplace Act of 1988 requires that employers who receive $100,000 or more in federal money maintain a drug-free environment. Prop 19 opponents say billions of dollars are at stake.
The nation has roughly 46 million cigarette smokers nationwide and an estimated 15 million recreation marijuana users. Prop 19 opponents say that latter number is bound to increase if the initiative passes.
"Why are there more cigarette users?" Allen asked. "Tobacco is legal. If you legalize marijuana, we're going to see an increase in that number," he said, adding there would be big consequences. "People want to say that marijuana is not a gateway drug, but marijuana breaks the seal to addiction. If they do not start in the first place, that seal will stay intact and they won't have the craving for other drugs. It's the beginning of breaking the seal to the mind, to the body, and allow the effects of drugs to come in. Don't smoke marijuana -- don't get started -- and you won't have to worry about a drug addiction problem."
--30--
Michael Foust is an assistant editor of Baptist Press. Learn about the No on Prop 19 campaign at www.noonproposition19.com.
--------------------
Koala Koolio said:
there should be a 3 month waiting period between registration and posting. 
|
ChronicCluster
Lord Cephalopod is Reborn!
Registered: 04/28/10
Posts: 1,348
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
 Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: whatever123]
#13211104 - 09/17/10 09:02 PM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I cna only hope that it does, that way.... ROAD TRIP!
--------------------
This site needs some submissions. You should probably help out...
NawMean?
|
 ToiletDuk
Give me Librium or give me Meth!
Registered: 05/17/03
Posts: 81,283
Loc: Earthfarm 1
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: ChronicCluster]
#13211178 - 09/17/10 09:22 PM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
This is great! I hope it passes too. This could be real precedence setting for the rest of the country. If it's gonna happen, it'll be in Cali. first.
--------------------
|
anunnakian
Registered: 07/16/10
Posts: 12,797
Loc: State of Jefferson
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: ToiletDuk]
#13211570 - 09/17/10 10:54 PM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
wtf is this.. "-- allowing workplace marijuana smoking breaks."
I want my workplace beer break. I feel like I have been cheated.
|
ToiletDuk
Give me Librium or give me Meth!
Registered: 05/17/03
Posts: 81,283
Loc: Earthfarm 1
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: anunnakian]
#13211583 - 09/17/10 10:57 PM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
More old-guard propaganda, it sounds like. I wish those fucksticks would retire or something and go away. 
--------------------
|
whatever123
Whatever I did, I'm sorry
Registered: 04/07/05
Posts: 2,613
Loc: San Diego, CA
Last seen: 2 years, 2 months
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: ToiletDuk]
#13211652 - 09/17/10 11:14 PM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Thought I'd take a moment to address some things that popped out at me initially, as a proponent of and volunteer for Prop 19.
Quote:
Baptist Press:
But critics say it would only increase the number of marijuana and drug users -- particularly among young adults and teens -- and actually would lead to an uptick in crime.
You're absolutely right: critics are saying those things. But the facts aren't on their side. Studies have shown no correlation between the severity of punishment for marijuana and the incidence of use. In addition, countries that have decriminalized drugs have reported decreases in use.
Quote:
They also say any tax revenues -- which the initiative would require go to local governments and not to the state -- would be dwarfed by the social costs of its legalization.
I'm not even sure how this rumor came up, but I've heard it on a couple occasions now. In case you were wondering, the state will have full ability to tax cannabis, the same as they can with any other commodity.
Quote:
Polls show voters are split on Prop 19, with some polls showing it slightly leading but under 50 percent. The election is Nov. 2.
Yeah, and some polls show it winning with a majority and a ten point lead. Pretty selective reporting, buddy.
Quote:
"It is only going to take two to three generations before that becomes widely accepted and that anybody who smokes marijuana is just part of the mainstream.
40% of our state's population admits to lighting up, it's our number one cash crop, and you're worried about pot going mainstream?
Quote:
"Once it's legalized, it becomes acceptable in the eyes of many. But just because something is legal doesn't mean it's morally right."
Yup. You're absolutely right. So please stop using the law to impose your flawed morality on others.
Quote:
"To think about the consequences that will cost, in drugged driving, in health costs, is humongous. Why would anybody want to legalize an illicit drug?"
Drugged driving is not what is being legalized. That is going to be as bad a problem as ever, but how do you see it increasing? I mean, if people weren't smoking pot before because it was illegal, then why would the same people choose to drive under the influence, a much more serious offense?
Quote:
The No on Prop 19 campaign says passage of the initiative would lead to a host of consequences not addressed by Prop 19 supporters
Alright, let's see what you've got more me.
Quote:
-- banning pre-employment marijuana testing, which could impact the public by affecting bus companies, airlines and other public transportation. The text of Prop 19 says employers can take action on employees only if it can be proven an individual's pot smoking "impairs job performance."
This one is tricky, and I have no doubt it's going to come down to a judge's interpretation of the law (the same way that pretty much every proposition ends up working out). I'm going to quote the Proposition directly, first, so everyone gets the context.
From Section 11304: Effect of Act and Definitions: (c)No person shall be punished, fined, discriminated against, or be denied any right or privilege for lawfully engaging in any conduct permitted by this Act or authorized pursuant to Section 11301 of this Act. Provided however, that the existing right of an employer to address consumption that actually impairs job performance by an employee shall not be affected.
So if your employee is messed up on the job, fire his ass.
Quote:
-- allowing workplace marijuana smoking breaks.
Absolutely ridiculous. It would make sense if we forced employers to allow their employees to drink on their breaks, but since that's not allowed, I don't think that joint breaks are in the immediate future for California.
Quote:
-- allowing residents to grow marijuana plants in their back or front yards, all with the protection of state law.
And this has no negative impact on anything, so what's your point?
Quote:
-- increasing the number of drugged drivers on the road. Prop 19 forbids the consumption of marijuana by drivers while the car "is being operated" but permits marijuana consumption before a person drives. There is no alcohol-type breathalyzer test for marijuana. Also, passengers would be allowed to smoke pot while the car is moving.
I'm trying to figure out why they're assuming more people will be driving high, and I think it's because they feel more people will be smoking. But if someone is only now starting to smoke because marijuana is legal, why would they then break the law by driving high?
Regardless, already arrest plenty of people for drug DUI's without needing a breathalyzer test. The field sobriety test is used to investigate for signs of any type of intoxication. Let's call this myth busted.
Quote:
-- increasing drug trafficking elsewhere, especially into other states where marijuana is not legal.
Great. I'd love it if the rest of the country bought MJ from California as opposed to the Mexican drug cartels. That'd be peachy.
Quote:
-- increasing the amount of in-state crime and necessary law enforcement. Police officers opposed to Prop 19 say that as the number of marijuana users increases, crime by those under the influence will increase.
Here we go again with the "more marijuana users" assumption. Because there are so many people on the sidelines thinking "Gosh golly, I sure do wanna try marijuana. But it's illegal, and unavailable around me. I can't wait until it's legal so I can be a stoner."
Quote:
They also say they will be required to enforce new laws
Awww, poor things. Well I don't wanna make em do more work! Actually, because they won't spend time busting people for pot anymore, it will still end up as less work for them.
Quote:
"How in the world can we legalize a drug and say, 'Let everyone stay high' and believe they're not going to get arrested for something else?" he asked. "It will cause more carnage, more devastation, more crime, more burglary in that community or in any other community. It doesn't make sense. How can you educate an intoxicated mind? You can't. It doesn't make any sense."
I am 95% sure this guy just used the Chewbacca defense on us.
Allen added, "If Martin Luther King could hear something like that, he would turn over in his grave, knowing that our greatest civil rights organization is talking about legalizing a drug and calling that civil rights."
Objection! Speculation.
The vote on Prop 19 comes at a time when adult and teen drug use apparently is on the rise
A sure sign that prohibition is working. Stay the course!
Although Prop 19 is being championed as an economic boon for the state, the initiative explicitly says any taxes would go to local governments and not the state.
Really? Because I've read through it a few times and have yet to come across anything that even hints at that.
Additionally, its passage could harm the state in another significant way: The Federal Drug Free Workplace Act of 1988 requires that employers who receive $100,000 or more in federal money maintain a drug-free environment. Prop 19 opponents say billions of dollars are at stake.
People were saying the same thing back in 96 in regards to medical marijuana. And we see how that devastated the country.
The nation has roughly 46 million cigarette smokers nationwide and an estimated 15 million recreation marijuana users. Prop 19 opponents say that latter number is bound to increase if the initiative passes. "Why are there more cigarette users?" Allen asked. "Tobacco is legal. If you legalize marijuana, we're going to see an increase in that number," he said, adding there would be big consequences.
Again, assuming people are just waiting around for pot to be legal so they can start smoking. I've met one person like that in my life. How about you all? Anyone expecting a huge surge in regular users?
"People want to say that marijuana is not a gateway drug, but marijuana breaks the seal to addiction. If they do not start in the first place, that seal will stay intact and they won't have the craving for other drugs. It's the beginning of breaking the seal to the mind, to the body, and allow the effects of drugs to come in. Don't smoke marijuana -- don't get started -- and you won't have to worry about a drug addiction problem."
I'll drink to that.
(edit: the difference is readability)
--------------------
Koala Koolio said:
there should be a 3 month waiting period between registration and posting.
Edited by whatever123 (09/17/10 11:17 PM)
|
Annapurna1
liberal pussy
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,582
Loc: innsmouth..MA
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: whatever123]
#13211735 - 09/17/10 11:32 PM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
but if you vote for prop19 OT1H.. and then vote for whitman and fiorina OTOH.. then isnt that like one vote for and two votes against??...
|
SuperD
Lophophiend
Registered: 10/05/03
Posts: 5,754
Loc: My stash box
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: whatever123]
#13211736 - 09/17/10 11:32 PM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Excellent breakdown and rebuttal. It's the same old tired propaganda being regurgitated for the mindless masses. You'd think they could at least come up with some new bullshit to feed everybody by now.
--------------------
  
Manoa said:
I need to stop spending all my money on plants and take up a cheaper hobby, like heroin.
|
whatever123
Whatever I did, I'm sorry
Registered: 04/07/05
Posts: 2,613
Loc: San Diego, CA
Last seen: 2 years, 2 months
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: Annapurna1]
#13211768 - 09/17/10 11:39 PM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Annapurna1 said:
but if you vote for prop19 OT1H.. and then vote for whitman and fiorina OTOH.. then isnt that like one vote for and two votes against??...
Nope. That's one vote to end marijuana prohibition and two votes for people who you agree with on most policy but have differing opinions with on this issue.
--------------------
Koala Koolio said:
there should be a 3 month waiting period between registration and posting.
|
TryptamineDream
Stranger
Registered: 07/22/09
Posts: 194
Last seen: 4 months, 4 days
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: ToiletDuk]
#13212073 - 09/18/10 12:36 AM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
This article is an excellent exhibition of the misleading arguments, fear-mongering tactics, and flat-out lies being bandied about by opponents of Proposition 19. Few, if any, of the points presented in the article against Proposition 19 (which are far more numerous than the points presented in favor) stand up to further scrutiny; unfortunately, few Americans actually apply any such scrutiny to the information they receive nowadays, and these points all sound very compelling to an otherwise ignorant person who takes them at face-value.
I raised my eyebrows when the article listed the endorsements for and against Prop 19. They did mention Joseph McNamara, but they didn't mention the huge and influential organization of police officers of which he is a member (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) which also fully endorses Prop 19. They whittle down the legitimacy of the pro-Prop 19 stance by making it seem as if its supporters are few and far between - it would be much harder to overlook the fact that there are hundreds of police officers and criminal justice officials endorsing Prop 19! (In fact, the actual number is probably in the thousands, except many law enforcement/criminal justice officials are under pressure and cannot publicly endorse Prop 19.) They also didn't mention UFCW, which is a major international (US and Canada) labor union that has endorsed Prop 19. There are many other endorsements besides, including from religious figures/organizations such as the California Council of Churches, and so on.
Whatever123 did a great job picking apart the rest of the points raised in the article. The truth is, anyone who has done even a modest amount of research into the matter will discover how the facts align easily enough. When it comes down to it - when all the bullshit is stripped away and the core of the issue is laid bare - the anti-Prop 19 campaign's argument really boils down to: "We don't approve of marijuana use, so we don't want to see it legalized." And that is really all you need to convince many American voters. So much for living in a free country, eh?
|
ToiletDuk
Give me Librium or give me Meth!
Registered: 05/17/03
Posts: 81,283
Loc: Earthfarm 1
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: TryptamineDream]
#13212115 - 09/18/10 12:43 AM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Indeed. But you know, pass or fail, at least this issue is going to the voters there. The times they are a-changing.
--------------------
|
shiitakeman
Registered: 09/16/10
Posts: 123
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: ToiletDuk]
#13212238 - 09/18/10 01:06 AM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Great breakdown whatever123 
I wish I lived in California 
--------------------
ANY INFO I POST IS PURELY ABOUT THE SHIITAKE MUSHROOM SPECIES.
LISTEN TO RR
|
whatever123
Whatever I did, I'm sorry
Registered: 04/07/05
Posts: 2,613
Loc: San Diego, CA
Last seen: 2 years, 2 months
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: shiitakeman]
#13212265 - 09/18/10 01:11 AM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Haha, well Cali is a great place to go for the summer. Next year it'll be even better!
--------------------
Koala Koolio said:
there should be a 3 month waiting period between registration and posting.
|
ShroomyJohn
Stranger
Registered: 09/14/10
Posts: 1,085
Last seen: 8 months, 21 hours
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: anunnakian]
#13212578 - 09/18/10 02:57 AM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
"If you legalize marijuana, you have another behavior-controlling substance that kids are now going to see as being normal,"
As though they don't already?
|
Cap Stemson
Stranger
Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 70
Last seen: 2 years, 1 month
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: ShroomyJohn]
#13213756 - 09/18/10 01:50 PM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
break the seal of addiction and cause more crime? This idiot is using the old propaganda from the 50s and 60s. Anyone who has any scientific knowledge or first hand experience knows that those statements are complete lies. These people forget that it was only made illegal in the first place to crack down on mexicans and open up markets for american businesses. Anyone who supports prohibition in regards to marijuana is an opponent of the constitution and a good friend of the violet cartels. Fear mongering is out-dated, find something relevant to bitch about.
|
Annapurna1
liberal pussy
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,582
Loc: innsmouth..MA
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: whatever123]
#13213931 - 09/18/10 02:46 PM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
whatever123 said:
Quote:
Annapurna1 said:
but if you vote for prop19 OT1H.. and then vote for whitman and fiorina OTOH.. then isnt that like one vote for and two votes against??...
Nope. That's one vote to end marijuana prohibition and two votes for people who you agree with on most policy but have differing opinions with on this issue.
that might work on paper..but in the real world..the said candidates have openly promised to run govt the same way they ran their companies.. only this time its more than just your job thats at stake if you smoke marijuana...
--------------------
"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...
|
whatever123
Whatever I did, I'm sorry
Registered: 04/07/05
Posts: 2,613
Loc: San Diego, CA
Last seen: 2 years, 2 months
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: Annapurna1]
#13214374 - 09/18/10 04:42 PM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
What are you implying? That they're going to begin drug testing citizens in California?
--------------------
Koala Koolio said:
there should be a 3 month waiting period between registration and posting.
|
lucydforme
Lord Of The Socks
Registered: 01/22/09
Posts: 240
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 15 days, 9 hours
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: whatever123]
#13214586 - 09/18/10 05:30 PM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I liked the cigarette statement: "The nation has roughly 46 million cigarette smokers nationwide and an estimated 15 million recreation marijuana users. Prop 19 opponents say that latter number is bound to increase if the initiative passes. "Why are there more cigarette users?" Allen asked. "Tobacco is legal. If you legalize marijuana, we're going to see an increase in that number," he said, adding there would be big consequences."
It shows that the tobacco companies are shitting themselves that their deadly product is going to be whittled away and marijuana is going to be taking its place, good progress in my book.
--------------------
Funny story, this whole "world" that we know everything about, well, that's all good and well, but we know nothing about the rest of that vast everything we call the universe.
Everything I say is heresay. All fiction for a fictional character.
Rule yourself, let no one else rule you. Down with government, and up with responsibility.
|
shopdropper
Professional Psychonaut
Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 1,414
Loc: Sailing the sea of cheese
Last seen: 15 days, 12 hours
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: lucydforme]
#13214941 - 09/18/10 07:03 PM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
i would love it if Prop 19 passed, but i dont think it is going to. ou all know those sneaky fuckers at the CIA are going to rig it. The will make it look like it was close but just didnt make it.
--------------------
DON'T TRY THIS AT HOME: no guarantees can be made about the accuracy of the information herein. The information dicussed in these posts is purely hypothetical, and for intelectual purposes only. Any similarity between internet chat and real life is pure coincidence.
|
auronlives69
psychedelic monk
Registered: 04/19/09
Posts: 645
Last seen: 5 days, 7 hours
|
Re: [CA] ELECTION '10: Calif. voters to decide marijuana legalization [Re: whatever123]
#13215017 - 09/18/10 07:22 PM (2 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
shit i can imagine how these people think in there heads how stoned people look like, falling on the floor uncontrolably, talking to animals laughing so much they suffocate, its just fucking weed people
| |
|
|
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Alan Rockefeller
1,776 topic views. 0 members, 31 guests and 0 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic ]
| | |
|
|
|
Images only 
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Shop for: 
Edit 
Reply 
