Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


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!

Shop: Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals, CBD Capsules   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
InvisibleGreen_T
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/02/08
Posts: 4,042
Loc: UK Flag
Simple question...
    #13230498 - 09/22/10 09:10 AM (13 years, 4 months ago)

Gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman claims:

Quote:

"she is opposed to the legalization of marijuana. This is a gateway drug whose use would expand greatly among our children if it were to be legalized"


http://www.megwhitman.com/platform_topic.php?type=crime&page=3

What exactly in her power can she do to affect this? For example, if prop 19 were passed could she veto it?

I am thinking about sending a letter explaining why supporting the legalization of marijuana makes sense from a republican standpoint, in terms of generating revenue and creating jobs (imagine if vegetables were banned twice over in CA), freeing prison space, personal freedom and responsibility, reduced police spending, and less government interference on private life.

This seems like a drop in the bucket for other issues which face California, but still...

EDIT: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/7/9/882945/-CA-Republicans-favor-pot-legalization-as-states-rights-issue


--------------------

"I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man" - Thomas Jefferson

Legalize Meth | Drug War Victims


Edited by Green_T (09/22/10 09:26 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: Simple question... [Re: Green_T]
    #13230732 - 09/22/10 10:41 AM (13 years, 4 months ago)

One thing I never understood is why these people say this gateway crap and never explain why that leads to their position.  Ignoring the fact that the gateway theory boils down to vague correlations that have no legitimate evidence for the issue of causation, the fact remains that they assume everyone must agree and understand that since she claims children will start doing the drug, this means it is bad.


Well, so what?  Why do I care if kids start smoking pot in greater numbers?  How is this my problem?  I don't have kids, and the reason is that I don't have the resources to be an effective, responsible parent and raise my children well.  How the hell has it now become my responsibility to deal with other people's children who were not as responsible and decided to have children they couldn't raise themselves?  I refuse to be the nanny of kids that aren't mine and who are the basis for ever-increasing encroachments on my liberty and resources, and the day I decide to have kids is the day I've decided I, myself, have the resources and ability to raise my children responsibly.

Quote:

This is a gateway drug whose use would expand greatly among our children if it were to be legalized"





How have we arrived at a place in society where this consequence is taken as a matter of course to mean the canddiate opposes this?  I'm sorry, but when it comes down to people being caged at great taxpayer expense and great personal harm, the fact that some kids may voluntarily decide to smoke grass is not even close to a sufficient counterargument. 



Meg Whitman- "To save the children I will convict them of criminal offenses and jail them- for their own good"


Quote:

For example, if prop 19 were passed could she veto it?




I do not believe this would be possible.  Art 4 sec. 10 of the Cali Constitution only grants veto power to legislature-passed bills, and the very first section of the legislative section of the constitution explicitly reserves the power to pass initiatives to the people, so I can't believe any veto or act by the legislature could be constiuttional:

Art. 4 sec 1

Quote:

The legislative power of this State is vested in the
California Legislature which consists of the Senate and Assembly, but
the people reserve to themselves the powers of initiative and
referendum.






Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery

Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: Simple question... [Re: johnm214]
    #13230899 - 09/22/10 11:27 AM (13 years, 4 months ago)

first of all.. i dont live in CA..so i dont have a clue as to why californians are letting that evil bitch buy out the governorship...i could understand this happening in TX.. but i always thought CA was smarter than that...apparently i was wrong...nor do i believe that ppl that would vote for a raving fascist like whitman or fiorina would vote to legalize marijuana either...

Quote:

What exactly in her power can she do to affect this? For example, if prop 19 were passed could she veto it?




to answer your question.. two(2) things that come to mind are ..a) restrict the definition of "legal marijuana" to industrial hemp.. and b) collect the tax in the form of nonexistent stamps..as is done in several states to enhance criminal penalties...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGreen_T
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/02/08
Posts: 4,042
Loc: UK Flag
Re: Simple question... [Re: Annapurna1]
    #13231105 - 09/22/10 12:15 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

^^^ Thanks for the responses guys. So basically if prop 19 passes, there isn't much she can do? I dont think she could get away with redefining it as industrial hemp, since the prop says "cannabis" - which would presumably mean all species. Unless she bans THC-containing hemp or something...

I don't think she could get away with tax stamps, the way they do in other states.

On the same page where she says she opposes the legalization of marijuana, she says she also supports building new prisons instead of letting people out early. Whatever happened to reducing the amount of criminals by legalizing marijuana?!

Not sure what will happen if she gets through, but it would probably be worse for marijuana than if Jerry Brown wins.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 19 days
Re: Simple question... [Re: Annapurna1]
    #13231816 - 09/22/10 03:06 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

> but i always thought CA was smarter than that.

One word... Pelosi.

> One thing I never understood is why these people say this gateway crap and never explain why that leads to their position.

It is a convincing fallacy, thus they use it.

> Why do I care if kids start smoking pot in greater numbers?

Even better... my younger brother smoked cannabis in high school, but seldom drank alcohol.  I asked him why.  His answer, "It is easy to get cannabis, but almost impossible to get alcohol."  Go figure.  The legal drug is difficult for children to get because it is so well regulated.  The illegal drug is trivial for children to get because it is not regulated, therefore easy to find on the black market.

Even better... anybody that wants to use an illegal drug seems to have no problem finding illegal drugs.  Why then, do people feel that usage will increase when something is made legal?  Studies done in countries that have legalized "illegal" drugs have shown that there is no increase, and often a decrease, in drug usage after drugs are legalized.  Go figure...

Gah, I hate the nanny state that Pelosi and her ilk have decided to impose upon us.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDoc_T
Random Dude
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/06/09
Posts: 42,395
Loc: Colorado Flag
Re: Simple question... [Re: Seuss]
    #13231843 - 09/22/10 03:13 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

Even better... anybody that wants to use an illegal drug seems to have no problem finding illegal drugs.  Why then, do people feel that usage will increase when something is made legal?




I always wonder about this.
I do know one person IRL who probably would have tried pot (and not really liked it, same as with alcohol) if it were legal.
Other than that, I can't really think of anybody that is saying no just because of the law.


--------------------
You make it all possible. Doesn't it feel good?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Shop: Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals, CBD Capsules   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Supreme Court rules against medical marijuana Agent Cooper 4,423 12 09/10/12 08:36 PM
by MEEZIE
* LEAP newsletter July 2009 Alan RockefellerM 866 0 07/12/09 05:16 PM
by Alan Rockefeller
* Presence Of THC Metabolite Alone Not Evidence Of Driver Impairment, Court Says Baby_Hitler 1,733 5 08/28/05 10:35 PM
by LSDempire
* National Drug Threat Assessment 2009 Green_T 1,110 1 01/21/09 06:13 PM
by Minstrel
* Police Chief tells Pres. Obama to legalize marijuana! emjay 1,882 8 01/27/09 04:49 PM
by emjay
* Take Action for Marijuana!
( 1 2 3 all )
geokillsA 7,211 50 03/30/09 08:35 PM
by potatonet
* A solution to the "War on Drugs"
( 1 2 all )
niteowl 7,934 34 11/06/05 10:38 PM
by philtrick
* Bill to punish Selling of Salvia Libertarian 3,081 18 10/24/05 10:24 PM
by S8N

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Entire Staff
1,030 topic views. 0 members, 1 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.024 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 12 queries.