Proposition 19.

[CeLL]

So, everyone needs that to relax?

Since when isn't gaming relaxing anymore?

TBH I find relaxation in everything I do. May it be work, school, life, I always find a way to relax. Srsly, if you wanna relax do you REALLY need weed?

In that case, don't care but you can relax for a lot less.

do you need cigarettes? do we need fast food? do we need high fructose corn syrup? why isnt there a better way to fuel cars than fossil fuel?

[inky]

No, people don't need it to relax. It will make some people relaxed but not really a necessity. It's simply a matter of personal preference. It's not like the government will force you to smoke a joint if it becomes legal. Drinking relaxes me, but don't expect to see me chugging down a bottle of liquor every time I get anxious. People who want to smoke weed for recreational purposes will use it and people who prefer not to will stay away from it - same way certain members of the community avoid fast food, excess sodium, saturated fats, tobacco, alcohol, artificial sweeteners, industrial home cleaners, and a bunch of other things that contribute to developing health complications.

[Dimethyltryptamine]

So, everyone needs that to relax?

Since when isn't gaming relaxing anymore?

TBH I find relaxation in everything I do. May it be work, school, life, I always find a way to relax. Srsly, if you wanna relax do you REALLY need weed?

In that case, don't care but you can relax for a lot less.

I don't do much gaming anymore, but in the time I did, I never found it relaxing. I would spend all day grinding until my hand pretty much felt like it was going to fall off, only to go to PvP and have some idiot kill me - far from my idea of a relaxing afternoon.

That said, I don't smoke weed just to relax. For me, it's a social thing as I usually smoke with a few mates. We have a laugh, we chat, we go to the beach, we help pay 7/11's rent... etc.

If I didn't enjoy it, I wouldn't spend $100 a week on it, put it that way.

[Doron]

If I didn't enjoy it, I wouldn't spend $100 a week on it, put it that way.

Yeah now it all makes sense to me.

[inky]

Doron you're kind of ignoring the important points. But whatever. You stand by your opinion and that's that.

[Doron]

Doron you're kind of ignoring the important points. But whatever. You stand by your opinion and that's that.

I mean like, when you smoke weed you also smoke tabacco.(well, at least a the way most people smoke it in the NL)
So, why not just smoke tabacoo directly and save you a fuckload of money?

Oh well.

[CeLL]

Doron you're kind of ignoring the important points. But whatever. You stand by your opinion and that's that.

I mean like, when you smoke weed you also smoke tabacco.(well, at least a the way most people smoke it in the NL)
So, why not just smoke tabacoo directly and save you a fuckload of money?

Oh well.

thats kinda like saying that "all my friends drink coke with their jack daniels, so why not just drink coke and save a buttload of money?"

[Doron]

okay I lose goodbye.

[CeLL]

dont give up so easily doron.

[Doron]

No, I don't care nor use weed so therefore I know nothing about it and my statements are invalid.

+ It's a lot less fun to fight against companions rather than common enemies.

[CeLL]

why must it be a fight?

[Doron]

cuz I suck at normal discussions therefore I fall back to my quick wits and insults.

(I should become a dutch politician.)

[McLovin1t]

But seriously, why smoke weed? Even if you assert there are minimal health risks, it's still just a stupid habit in general, I mean, it's linked to cancer in the airways and it increases car accident risks and stuff. Why make it legal, even if you are responsible, why let hundreds of thousands of people who are irresponsible do it etc? It creates a bad example for younger generations as well. When the economy is brought up as the major proponent for the argument, people have to weigh this. What's more important, money in the state budget, or people's health? Also, it won't really help with drug cartels, but that's a whole 'nother story.

Let me repeat what I mentioned in my last 2 posts:

-It is a health concern. Then again, so is alcohol, fast food, saturated fats, microwave use, artificial sweeteners, etc.
-People will smoke it regardless if it is legal or not if they want to.
-Revenue will go to the state government instead of illegal drug suppliers.
-Less drug-related violence among drug dealers.
-It's the same as alcohol. Ever read your history textbook about the alcohol prohibition? We can simply manage it the same way we do with alcohol - apply the same rules that apply to the distribution and consumption of alcohol.

1. If it's a health concern, why legalize it. Illegalizing then legalizing is different than leaving it to be illegal.
2. Worst argument I have heard in my entire life. If it is legal many more people will smoke it, sets horrible examples for future generations, and so many more adverse repercussions.
3. Taxes are going to be through the roof -> undercutting by drug dealers, same problem, but cheaper because they can grow it safely.
4. Again untrue, if you have any knowledge of Hispanic drug cartels or even drug dealers, the main point of most dealings is social status, not the weed, and they again can undercut the majorly taxed weed.
5. Prohibition =/= remaining illegalized, failed analogy.

[Doron]

But seriously, why smoke weed? Even if you assert there are minimal health risks, it's still just a stupid habit in general, I mean, it's linked to cancer in the airways and it increases car accident risks and stuff. Why make it legal, even if you are responsible, why let hundreds of thousands of people who are irresponsible do it etc? It creates a bad example for younger generations as well. When the economy is brought up as the major proponent for the argument, people have to weigh this. What's more important, money in the state budget, or people's health? Also, it won't really help with drug cartels, but that's a whole 'nother story.

Let me repeat what I mentioned in my last 2 posts:

-It is a health concern. Then again, so is alcohol, fast food, saturated fats, microwave use, artificial sweeteners, etc.
-People will smoke it regardless if it is legal or not if they want to.
-Revenue will go to the state government instead of illegal drug suppliers.
-Less drug-related violence among drug dealers.
-It's the same as alcohol. Ever read your history textbook about the alcohol prohibition? We can simply manage it the same way we do with alcohol - apply the same rules that apply to the distribution and consumption of alcohol.

1. If it's a health concern, why legalize it. Illegalizing then legalizing is different than leaving it to be illegal.
2. Worst argument I have heard in my entire life. If it is legal many more people will smoke it, sets horrible examples for future generations, and so many more adverse repercussions.
3. Taxes are going to be through the roof -> undercutting by drug dealers, same problem, but cheaper because they can grow it safely.
4. Again untrue, if you have any knowledge of Hispanic drug cartels or even drug dealers, the main point of most dealings is social status, not the weed, and they again can undercut the majorly taxed weed.
5. Prohibition =/= remaining illegalized, failed analogy.

Best way for Cali to handle right now is make a phonecall with the NL and inquire about the rules on softdrugs. We've been doing well for all these years so why can't that be the same for Cali?

[EvGa]

1. If it's a health concern, why legalize it. Illegalizing then legalizing is different than leaving it to be illegal.
2. Worst argument I have heard in my entire life. If it is legal many more people will smoke it, sets horrible examples for future generations, and so many more adverse repercussions.
3. Taxes are going to be through the roof -> undercutting by drug dealers, same problem, but cheaper because they can grow it safely.
4. Again untrue, if you have any knowledge of Hispanic drug cartels or even drug dealers, the main point of most dealings is social status, not the weed, and they again can undercut the majorly taxed weed.
5. Prohibition =/= remaining illegalized, failed analogy.

Thanks for telling me what I can and cannot put in my body, big brother.

1. Because you have no right to tell someone what they can do with their body. If I want to get shit face drunk, I can. If I want to smoke 3 packs of cigs a day I can. If I want to eat sweets until I throw up, I can. If I want to eat fast food until I have a heart attack, I can. If I want to fucking smoke a harmless, naturally growing plant, I should be able to. Just like all the other retarded things we humans like to consume for pleasure.

2. Yes, because those who want to smoke it now don't because of the law. Naive, you are. It's not hard to get. But thanks for feeling morally superior to those who smoke weed. Potheads will be potheads regardless if it is legal or illegal. You obviously don't understand that. This would simply make it safer for everyone else to get. Sending people to jail over a harmless plant is borderline retarded.

3. Stats to back this? Taxes will be through the roof? It could be taxed like cigs and still undercut the drug cartels smuggling it in from down under.

4. No, they can't.

5. Being legal/illegal before is irrelevant. How is it a failed analogy, did you look over the paragraph I edited for you?

[Shomari]

For those that are feeling TL;DR
"Your opinion is wrong, I'm right"

[EvGa]

For those that are feeling TL;DR
"Your opinion is wrong, I'm right"

Nice counter!!

Do you feel like people should be allowed to smoke cigs and drink alcohol and not smoke weed, where is the justification?

[Shomari]

I meant for the whole thread not your post.
I saw your post and was like wtf TL;DR

---

As far as I'm concerned people can do whatever the fark they want.

[Ganja]

I meant for the whole thread not your post.
I saw your post and was like wtf TL;DR

---

As far as I'm concerned people can do whatever the fark they want.

Well I do feel like raping churches and burning women tonight

[kontroversy]

Best way for Cali to handle right now is make a phonecall with the NL and inquire about the rules on softdrugs. We've been doing well for all these years so why can't that be the same for Cali?

We are doing just fine already. It is practically legal at present. Nearly anyone can walk into a "doctors" office drop $45 and walk into a co-op and legally (under Californian law) buy weed. This would just make it legal for everyone who has the decency not to take advantage of the current laws.

Your "back hurts"? You are "anxious"? You have no "appetite"? You "cant sleep"? Well then you are in luck out here! You can legally posses marijuana!

Also if you dont have one (Dr's recommendation) and you are given a citation for possession its just a paper ticket and some court fees. You wont go to jail out here unless you have an illegal garden, intent to distribute, or an obscene amount on your persons.

[Blindfire]

1. If it's a health concern, why legalize it.

Reality is a health concern.

There is a 100% mortality rate in humans.

[TheDrop]

anyone who generalizes is either ignorant and/or bigoted

...but he was speaking in a specific manner which in context makes a lot of sense. However if you were to list out why you oppose then we would be having a conversation.

but why should I bother, when he has already stated i would be a bigot/ignorant regardless of my argument if i oppose it?

[McLovin1t]

1. If it's a health concern, why legalize it. Illegalizing then legalizing is different than leaving it to be illegal.
2. Worst argument I have heard in my entire life. If it is legal many more people will smoke it, sets horrible examples for future generations, and so many more adverse repercussions.
3. Taxes are going to be through the roof -> undercutting by drug dealers, same problem, but cheaper because they can grow it safely.
4. Again untrue, if you have any knowledge of Hispanic drug cartels or even drug dealers, the main point of most dealings is social status, not the weed, and they again can undercut the majorly taxed weed.
5. Prohibition =/= remaining illegalized, failed analogy.

Thanks for telling me what I can and cannot put in my body, big brother.

1. Because you have no right to tell someone what they can do with their body. If I want to get shit face drunk, I can. If I want to smoke 3 packs of cigs a day I can. If I want to eat sweets until I throw up, I can. If I want to eat fast food until I have a heart attack, I can. If I want to fucking smoke a harmless, naturally growing plant, I should be able to. Just like all the other retarded things we humans like to consume for pleasure.

2. Yes, because those who want to smoke it now don't because of the law. Naive, you are. It's not hard to get. But thanks for feeling morally superior to those who smoke weed. Potheads will be potheads regardless if it is legal or illegal. You obviously don't understand that. This would simply make it safer for everyone else to get. Sending people to jail over a harmless plant is borderline retarded.

3. Stats to back this? Taxes will be through the roof? It could be taxed like cigs and still undercut the drug cartels smuggling it in from down under.

4. No, they can't.

5. Being legal/illegal before is irrelevant. How is it a failed analogy, did you look over the paragraph I edited for you?

Major
Try answering the arguments instead of saying "no."
Good try though

Edit: I'll just address the one argument you made about we should be able to hurt ourselves. The only reason cigs are legal is because of the huge impact the industry has on our nation. Suicide is technically illegal, but I won't get into that. Also, of course they can get it easily now, it doesn't make it any more legal or right. When you legalize it, people who don't want to break the law won't be stopped anymore. Clearly you don't understand that the law is a deciding factor for people who don't want to smoke. But seriously, epic fail for attacking my "moral superiority."

[Hostage]

but why should I bother, when he has already stated i would be a bigot/ignorant regardless of my argument if i oppose it?

Well because other wise you're just diluting the purpose of a forum if all you did was bother enough to comment on a thread but than choose not expand on your stance--regardless of what the opposition says. You could have just as easily said "I know you are but what am I?".

Unless you're saying you've succumb to EvGa and forfeit your own opinion, admitting defeat.

So I quote;

Are you for or against prop 19?

[ZaKnighT]

making weed legal will be a huge boost $$ to the state.. whats the difference between alcohol and weed ? if you smoke and going against this your sure dumb as hell.. cig is much more addictive than weed. yes im free to take any shit i want to my body.. as long as im not hurting or affecting any one else.. making weed legal will help a lot of medical researches as it was a big no touching them in any lab. how the hell can this relate to medicine. look at any cancer patient mainly he is in pain and he cant eat . weed makes prevent from feeling this pain and would make him hungry making his body stronger against it (if you smoked it before you would understand). **moving to cali as soon its legal** and go green !!

[Shomari]

making weed legal will be a huge boost $$ to the state.. whats the difference between alcohol and weed ? if you smoke and going against this your sure dumb as hell.. cig is much more addictive than weed. yes im free to take any shit i want to my body.. as long as im not hurting or affecting any one else.. making weed legal will help a lot of medical researches as it was a big no touching them in any lab. how the hell can this relate to medicine. look at any cancer patient mainly he is in pain and he cant eat . weed makes prevent from feeling this pain and would make him hungry making his body stronger against it (if you smoked it before you would understand). **moving to cali as soon its legal** and go green !!

Still illegal under federal law nub.

[EvGa]

Major
Try answering the arguments instead of saying "no."
Good try though

Edit: I'll just address the one argument you made about we should be able to hurt ourselves. The only reason cigs are legal is because of the huge impact the industry has on our nation. Suicide is technically illegal, but I won't get into that. Also, of course they can get it easily now, it doesn't make it any more legal or right. When you legalize it, people who don't want to break the law won't be stopped anymore. Clearly you don't understand that the law is a deciding factor for people who don't want to smoke. But seriously, epic fail for attacking my "moral superiority."

You think you and/or the government have the authority to tell my what I can put in MY body. So apparently, you think you are morally superior, you know what is right and wrong for everyone and want to police that. That is what I meant by 'morally superior'.

Again, so what if more people choose to smoke it? Show me how harmful it is?

Example: I have some friends coming over. We want to have a good time and will either:

A. Get drunk/buzzed on alcohol.
B. Smoke some weed, get a nice little high going.

There is no difference. Except I could argue inhaling marijuana smoke is significantly safer than ingesting alcohol (a poison). Why do you think alcohol gives you hangovers? It's poisonous... weed, not so much.

You keep parading around about how bad weed is, show me. Tell me why you think this.

[Love]

EvGa I feel you are validating the arguments of captain win there by simply replying to his nonsense, self ownership is not something that is debatable and pretending it is has certain implications that don't do well to the concept of freedom. In short screw you captain win, spend 2 seconds analyzing shit before making such terrible assertions.

[EvGa]

The compulsion to reply is strong.

[*BlackFox]

As far as I'm concerned people can do whatever the fark they want.

Well, we are all free to do what we want to do, as long as we don't hurt somebody else
"Just follow the law". Otherwise it would lead to chaos.. Isn't that so? lulz