Vote YES or NO on Prop 19

[vta]

“There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U. S. and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others.” - Harry Anslinger

 

[krunchbubble]

I would love to see his evidence. Why would undecided flock to No at say 50% but not at 60%? Doesn't make much sense to me.

the evidence is the guy who i original quoted from, a political-science professor at San Jose State, he has nothing to do with prop 19, its just how the history of voting goes.......

Wait how is this going to stop federal raids?

it wont, he's hoping.......

Hey! Glad to see you coming around, Krunch!

im not coming around! im saying "damn", you guys are not close.....

 

[vta]

PROP. 19 BATTLE SHIFTS TO TV, RADIO

Both Sides of the Marijuana Campaign Get New Infusions of Cash for the Final Week Before the Election.

The battle over Proposition 19 has shifted to television sets and radios for the final week of the campaign, as both sides benefit from recent support from major financial backers.

On Monday, George Soros, a multibillionaire investor who spent $3 million on earlier initiatives to change California's drug laws, endorsed the measure. "He plans to make a significant contribution," said Michael Vachon, an advisor to the philanthropist and hedge-fund chairman.

The campaign to legalize marijuana in California plans to launch cable television commercials Tuesday in the Los Angeles area. The ads feature Joseph D. McNamara, a retired San Jose police chief, saying his 35 years in law enforcement convinced him that the war on marijuana has failed.

The California Chamber of Commerce started to run radio ads last week in Los Angeles and San Diego saying the measure "would hurt California's economy, raise business costs and make it harder to create jobs." And the No on 19 campaign began running radio ads Saturday in Northern California.

Proposition 19 would allow adults 21 and older to grow and possess marijuana, and it would allow cities and counties to approve cultivation, sales and taxation.

In an essay posted online by the Wall Street Journal, Soros argues that marijuana should be regulated and taxed. "Proposition 19 already is a winner no matter what happens on election day," he writes. "The mere fact of its being on the ballot has elevated and legitimized public discourse about marijuana and marijuana policy in ways I could not have imagined a year ago."

Dan Newman, a spokesman, said the Yes on 19 campaign has paid $170,000 to run the McNamara ad through election day but hopes to raise more money. "We've got lots of contributions pouring in to keep it on the air and put it on other markets," he said.

In the 30-second spot, McNamara says, "Proposition 19 will tax and control marijuana just like alcohol. It will generate billions of dollars for local communities, allow police to focus on violent crimes and put drug cartels out of business."

The chamber maintains that the initiative would prevent employers from taking action against workers who show up high and has spent $250,000 on radio ads in Southern California. In the ad, a female narrator says, "Imagine coming out of surgery, and the nurse caring for you was high."

The No on 19 campaign has spent $10,000 to run a similar ad in Redding and Chico. "Prop. 19 would allow big-rig drivers and even school bus drivers to smoke marijuana right up until the moment they climb behind the wheel," says Assemblyman Jim Nielsen ( R-Gerber ).

Roger Salazar, a spokesman, said the No on 19 campaign has received extensive media coverage in most of the state, but not up north. "This helps us get our message across up there," he said.

 

[zenoonez]

People! you need to take steps towards legalization...not just decriminalization. It is wrong for the people in the cannabis business to be greedy and looking out for their own economic gain. If it doesn't pass I hope you all get busted by feds and thrown in jail, because you didn't stick up for what is right. Cannabis should be legal, taxed, and regulated. All of you not voting for prop 19 because you wanna "stick it to the man" and not pay taxes on it are also wrong. There needs to be steps to get to where we want to be and you pass bills and amend them later. That's how the law works. VOTE YES regardless of your circumstances. Because it will undoubtedly affect someone in your life someday.

Everything except the bolded makes sense, the fact that the bolded exists makes everything else you said invalid. Good day.

 

[vta]

The No on 19 campaign has spent $10,000 to run a similar ad in Redding and Chico. "Prop. 19 would allow big-rig drivers and even school bus drivers to smoke marijuana right up until the moment they climb behind the wheel," says Assemblyman Jim Nielsen ( R-Gerber ).

Since when does 19 allow us to drive stoned?? I just love how the NO side has to resort to all out lies because that's all they got. We got science and they got lies.

 

[Runner]

the evidence is the guy who i original quoted from, a political-science professor at San Jose State, he has nothing to do with prop 19, its just how the history of voting goes.......

I meant it would be nice to see this prof's evidence. It doesn't make much sense to me from psychological point of view that undecided would all swing to Yes if 60% support the bill, but would all swing No if it's 50%.

 

[krunchbubble]

Since when does 19 allow us to drive stoned?? I just love how the NO side has to resort to all out lies because that's all they got. We got science and they got lies.

thats funny, because all of the "yes" voters were saying how they will be able to drive and burn after prop 19 passes because there is no way to test for under the influence, and that cops can now do anything about it.....this was dozens of pages ago, maybe another thread on prop 19, SFC talked about this at legnth....

now that you saw this quote, all of a sudden its all bad because a no on 19 person said it, the irony.....

 

[vta]

thats funny, because all of the "yes" voters were saying how they will be able to drive and burn after prop 19 passes because there is no way to test for under the influence, and that cops can now do anything about it.....this was dozens of pages ago, maybe another thread on prop 19, SFC talked about this at legnth....

now that you saw this quote, all of a sudden its all bad because a no on 19 person said it, the irony.....

No irony...just a fact. This isn't about driving high. My point isn't weather or not I agree with smoking and driving(btw..if you can handle it then I have no issue) my point showed a perfect example how the no on 19 guys have to lie and stretch the truth to convince people....as there is no rational for keeping cannabis illegal...oh that is except to protect the profits of those that have a 'vested' interest in prohibition.

 

[krunchbubble]

my point showed a perfect example how the no on 19 guys have to lie and stretch the truth to convince people....

how were the NO on 19 campaign lying? according to you guys, you CAN smoke while driving after prop 19 passes. they were bringing up a good point IMHO....

just dont get it, you guys say it, its all good and the truth....

when we say it, we are liars......

pointing out facts.......

also notice that your mud slinging once again, nice.....

 

[dagnabit]

like bill maher said this is not a traditional initiative the independent negative trend will be overridden by the typically absent >30 crowd.
they statistically turn out @ 7% they are trending toward 20% turnout..

id like to take a poll..

who here has been polled?

 

[krunchbubble]

like bill maher said this is not a traditional initiative the independent negative trend will be overridden by the typically absent >30 crowd.
they statistically turn out @ 7% they are trending toward 20% turnout..

id like to take a poll..

who here has been polled?

interesting......

 

[Babbabud]

Vote Yes on Prop 19

 

[vta]

how were the NO on 19 campaign lying?

huh? the thing your were quoting me about for starters.

The No on 19 campaign has spent $10,000 to run a similar ad in Redding and Chico. "Prop. 19 would allow big-rig drivers and even school bus drivers to smoke marijuana right up until the moment they climb behind the wheel," says Assemblyman Jim Nielsen ( R-Gerber ).

That is a lie. 19 does not authorize driving under the influence.

according to you guys, you CAN smoke while driving after prop 19 passes. they were bringing up a good point IMHO....

just dont get it, you guys say it, its all good and the truth....

when we say it, we are liars......

pointing out facts.......

show me where I said that. The people that are voting yes do not share the same brain.

As far as driving...the game stays the same...almost. Pre and Post 19 you can get a DUI if you fail roadside tests. Pre 19...a positive drug test for cannabis equals impairment although use was weeks prior. Post 19, since those tests only show past use and not impairment, they cannot be used to show impairment, thus driving under the influence of cannabis will be treated the way it should. If you can't walk a line or follow his pen...you shouldn't drive.

Personally, If you have a high tolerance, like myself, then cannabis use really doesn't matter when driving. I am always medicated. I run a business and work my ass off and I drive a good part of the day. But that said...I know people, several, that should not and do not drive after smoking.

That's my feelings on the matter...not whatever you say we said or some bullshit.

also notice that your mud slinging once again, nice.....

hehehe...yes and no. I just call it like I see it. Speaking from the heart here...I honestly do not nor have not seen a valid reason not to legalize....other than one. That one would be from the guy whose entire income comes from growing. The growers, not the neighborhood pot dealers. After all these are the guys that have kept us green all these years and without their disregard for the law, marijuana would not be the most used illicit drug out there. So while I feel for these guys, I also am reminded of the human toll the war on cannabis has caused. And with that I say to those growers to convert and pay the tax...it's time to legalize.

 

[karmical]

who here has been polled?

I've never been polled in my 25yrs+ of voting, I used to take it personally until someone reminded me I never pick up the phone and I doubt those pollsters live a message for you to call them back.


this time next week Ca, actually the only other time I've really looked forward to voting was my first time. going to make a day out of it wake up early, go have a really good breakfast somewhere, then off to the polls.

if everybody drags a few slackers to the polls with them, I'm buying breakfast for a few of my slacker buds that I know wouldn't vote, but having them out early...well before 12p they will.

 

[mean mr.mustard]

Since when does 19 allow us to drive stoned?? I just love how the NO side has to resort to all out lies because that's all they got. We got science and they got lies.

:jawdrop:

I still don't know how I would vote, but this is just simply astounding to me!

How many people have me on ignore?

Do you really believe this to be true?

All "they" have is lies?

PLEASE don't drag this back out of the dungeon.

There is fear, common sense, science, and facts on all sides of the table.

To say there are only two ways to look at this is so far out there I wouldn't doubt you have ice on your eyebrows.

Look... this is all "us"...

Why is there division so much moreso than understanding... or is that some lost pie in the sky ideal as well?

 

[Herborizer]

thats funny, because all of the "yes" voters were saying how they will be able to drive and burn after prop 19 passes because there is no way to test for under the influence, and that cops can now do anything about it.....this was dozens of pages ago, maybe another thread on prop 19, SFC talked about this at legnth....

now that you saw this quote, all of a sudden its all bad because a no on 19 person said it, the irony.....

I never said this. I don't condone driving under the influence either. I don't care what someone does to their own bodies. I DO care if someone is under the influence of anything that would impair them, which in turn could cause harm to others (like driving, operating heavy equipment, etc).

 

[mean mr.mustard]

Remember that Herborizer is a medical ONLY patient.

Some patients still think high is bad.

The influence on driving cannabis has isn't harmful as it is helpful.

This is within reasonable influence however... if you ate four edibles...

 

[Herborizer]

Speaking from the heart here...I honestly do not nor have not seen a valid reason not to legalize....other than one. That one would be from the guy whose entire income comes from growing. The growers, not the neighborhood pot dealers. After all these are the guys that have kept us green all these years and without their disregard for the law, marijuana would not be the most used illicit drug out there. So while I feel for these guys, I also am reminded of the human toll the war on cannabis has caused. And with that I say to those growers to convert and pay the tax...it's time to legalize.

+Rep

 

[Herborizer]

Remember that Herborizer is a medical ONLY patient.

Some patients still think high is bad.

The influence on driving cannabis has isn't harmful as it is helpful.

This is within reasonable influence however... if you ate four edibles...

I understand your point, well made. Though, remember that I am concerned over impairment that would put "others" at risk. If it doesn't put people at risk, I am fine with it. As a matter of fact, if it doesn't put anyone at risk I would support allowing it as I believe people have a right to their own bodies.

I think further testing is in order. From my personal experience, I have found times where I was too impaired to drive. Other times, I felt like I would be fine to drive (not that I did).

I feel that the field sobriety test is a good solution. People that can handle driving under the influence of weed and pass the test, should be safe to drive. If they fail the sobriety test, they probably weren't good to drive.

This is what was used before the breathalyser and worked just fine. I remember when breathalysers were very rare and pretty much unheard of in California.

 

[dagnabit]

new tourism campaign 11-3-10​