Vote YES or NO on Prop 19

[kmk420kali]

um, ya! the majority of consumers((smokers) are saying they are going to vote "NO" at a pot expo, thats pretty big......

who do you think would vote yes for the initiative? marijuana consumers or straight's? but the consumers are not, at least according to the interviews.....

polls are skewed to begin with, any one who votes knows this.....one station will have something ahead by 10% and another station ahead by 3% and another poll behind by 2%, so i dont really go by the polls....

on another note, the people on this forum do not represent the majority of voters, people here love the plant, grow the plant, smoke the plant...

90% of the voters dont.......

Straights will decide this Vote-- Do not be fooled!!
Weed smokers do not make up the necessary percentage to pass this--
But there are many, who are non-tokers...that believe a person has the Right to do what they want with a benign substance like Cannabis--
The percentage shown in Polls..could not possibly be Tokers alone--

 

[Herborizer]

Straights will decide this Vote-- Do not be fooled!!
Weed smokers do not make up the necessary percentage to pass this--
But there are many, who are non-tokers...that believe a person has the Right to do what they want with a benign substance like Cannabis--
The percentage shown in Polls..could not possibly be Tokers alone--

Most of the people I know don't toke. So far 100% of them have said they will vote yes to Prop 19. I would say 9/10 of those people say that California needs the money. 100% have said that we need to take the money away from the cartels.

People are fed up with our Government. For some, Prop 19 is about the people telling the government that we want things to make sense.

 

[krunchbubble]

Straights will decide this Vote-- Do not be fooled!!
Weed smokers do not make up the necessary percentage to pass this--
But there are many, who are non-tokers...that believe a person has the Right to do what they want with a benign substance like Cannabis--
The percentage shown in Polls..could not possibly be Tokers alone--

ok, ok......

if i was a straight and saw this bill up for vote, i would vote NO, for the simple fact that i dont want a whole bunch of people under the influence operating vehicles on the highway or streets......

even though we do or have done it, you are under the influence and it does impair your judgment.....

not to stereotypical, but we all know the races who can not drive to begin with.....imagine them under the influence.......

as a person who burns, i dont want people under the influence driving around me or operating machinery......

 

[kmk420kali]

ok, ok......

if i was a straight and saw this bill up for vote, i would vote NO, for the simple fact that i dont want a whole bunch of people under the influence operating vehicles on the highway or streets......

even though we do or have done it, you are under the influence and it does impair your judgment.....

not to stereotypical, but we all know the races who can not drive to begin with.....imagine them under the influence.......

as a person who burns, i dont want people under the influence driving around me or operating machinery......

Yeah bro...you might have brought me back to the Anti side with that one....
Except...if ppl are willing to risk the Law and the Moral argument about driving under the influence...they are going to do it after Marijuana is Legal...since they already are now, anyways--

 

[Herborizer]

ok, ok......

if i was a straight and saw this bill up for vote, i would vote NO, for the simple fact that i dont want a whole bunch of people under the influence operating vehicles on the highway or streets......

even though we do or have done it, you are under the influence and it does impair your judgment.....

not to stereotypical, but we all know the races who can not drive to begin with.....imagine them under the influence.......

as a person who burns, i dont want people under the influence driving around me or operating machinery......

I understand that point of view, but then wouldn't we need to outlaw Nyquil (cold medicine), Vicodine, Energy Drinks, and even cigars? All of those can cause a much more debilitating affect.

I think its good of people to consider road safety. Though, I don't believe it's anymore concern then what is already out there.

 

[rives]

ok, ok......

if i was a straight and saw this bill up for vote, i would vote NO, for the simple fact that i dont want a whole bunch of people under the influence operating vehicles on the highway or streets......

even though we do or have done it, you are under the influence and it does impair your judgment.....

not to stereotypical, but we all know the races who can not drive to begin with.....imagine them under the influence.......

as a person who burns, i dont want people under the influence driving around me or operating machinery......

It doesn't make driving under the influence legal, it maintains current penalties. Certainly there will be a little more of it, but it will be illegal just like drunk driving. Most straights that I know are voting for it for the reasons I listed above, plus a bunch more (cartels out of control is a big one).

 

[krunchbubble]

Yeah bro...you might have brought me back to the Anti side with that one....
Except...if ppl are willing to risk the Law and the Moral argument about driving under the influence...they are going to do it after Marijuana is Legal...since they already are now, anyways--

true, true.....

but, imagine the amount of DUI's that are going to happen......

i have 4 friends who have DUI's for burning in there car, its the exact same consequences as alcohol.....

here in the bay, we have checkpoints up almost every day of the week trying to bust people for alcohol, imagine these checkpoints springing up everywhere for pot as well.

then its going to look bad when the news says last night in the city of ..... a dui checkpoint netted 16 people under the influence, 2 people for alcohol and the rest for pot.......

when ever i get pulled over and i have been burning, i tell them i burned in my vehicle last night before i went to sleep. i cant burn in my house and dont want my neighbors to smell it, so i burn in my car, works every time.....

 

[Herborizer]

Eventually there could be less pot-smoking drivers. Considering, some company is going to be rushing to develop a REAL test for drivers under the influence. Once we have one that works, and the "legal" level is established (hopefully reasonable), then I bet a lot of people will be more afraid to drive stoned.

Just about every stoner I know drives baked. Most even light up in the car while driving! They all say they will never get busted, no test.

 

[krunchbubble]

Eventually there could be less pot-smoking drivers. Considering, some company is going to be rushing to develop a REAL test for drivers under the influence. Once we have one that works, and the "legal" level is established (hopefully reasonable), then I bet a lot of people will be more afraid to drive stoned.

Just about every stoner I know drives baked. Most even light up in the car while driving! They all say they will never get busted, no test.

as far as i know it already in the works. i watched something on the news, saying the law enforcement is developing a method of knowing the amount of whatever to be under the influence....

 

[krunchbubble]

It doesn't make driving under the influence legal, it maintains current penalties. Certainly there will be a little more of it, but it will be illegal just like drunk driving. Most straights that I know are voting for it for the reasons I listed above, plus a bunch more (cartels out of control is a big one).

i realize that there is nothing in prop 19 about it. what im saying is that dui's for pot will increase, as well as crashes. it not going to look good for people who burn . and i see it as straights not wanting people under the influence driving, is going to cause a lot of NO votes......

cartels out of control is just a scare tactic by you YES voters. the problems with them are in Mexico, Arizona and New Mexico, not here.....

dont get me wrong, they are here and growing big, but they are not causing any problems, besides getting caught outdoors in the mountains......

as a matter of fact the cartels who are doing it here, are doing very well indoors, they know there stuff. they grow different then normal indoor growers, they yield very well and have very decent product......

 

[rives]

cartels out of control is just a scare tactic by you YES voters. the problems with them are in Mexico, Arizona and New Mexico, not here.....

dont get me wrong, they are here and growing big, but they are not causing any problems, besides getting caught outdoors in the mountains......

Krunch, not everyone lives in the Bay. I happen to live in the mountains where they are very active, and while they normally bolt on discovery, it makes for a damn scary situation if you are fishing, hunting, cruising timber or whatever. By the way, I don't think I have ever used a scare tactic.

 

[kmk420kali]

i realize that there is nothing in prop 19 about it. what im saying is that dui's for pot will increase, as well as crashes. it not going to look good for people who burn . and i see it as straights not wanting people under the influence driving, is going to cause a lot of NO votes......

Really bro?? Really?? That is enough to Vote No on the only Legalization Prop to come up in almost 40 years??
You know I am a rational person...and I ask you...what is the sole reason you oppose this Prop??

 

[Hammerhead]

he oppose any prop Krunch does not want Cannabis legalized in any fashion he has said this. It would not matter what bill was on the ballot he would vote no.

 

[vta]

Well I guess after decades of brain washing propaganda, one would think that legalizing the devil weed {you know, the stuff that turns men into rapists and women into whores} with it's mind altering abilities would turn the highways into something from a MadMax movie.

The NO campaign is using this as one of their big points.

It's all about tolerance. I medicate all time. I also am a great driver who has never caused an accident. Now if 19 passes, usage will go up a bit I'm sure...but it's not going to be like a wave of new smokers.

Let me ask you...are the roads filled with crazy high drivers? We have millions of people smoking it already. Do you think they don't drive high now? And 19 changes this? I promise you there will be no epidemic of pot related crashes.

Cannabis doesn't effect the motor skills like alcohol.

Marijuana and Driving: A Review of the Scientific Evidence


It is well established that alcohol increases accident risk. Evidence of marijuana’s culpability in on-road driving accidents is much less convincing.

Although cannabis intoxication has been shown to mildly impair psychomotor skills, this impairment does not appear to be severe or long lasting. In driving simulator tests, this impairment is typically manifested by subjects decreasing their driving speed and requiring greater time to respond to emergency situations.

Nevertheless, this impairment does not appear to play a significant role in on-road traffic accidents. A 2002 review of seven separate studies involving 7,934 drivers reported, “Crash culpability studies have failed to demonstrate that drivers with cannabinoids in the blood are significantly more likely than drug-free drivers to be culpable in road crashes.” This result is likely because subject under the influence of marijuana are aware of their impairment and compensate for it accordingly, such as by slowing down and by focusing their attention when they know a response will be required. This reaction is just the opposite of that exhibited by drivers under the influence of alcohol, who tend to drive in a more risky manner proportional to their intoxication.

Today, a large body of research exists exploring the impact of marijuana on psychomotor skills and actual driving performance. This research consists of driving simulator studies, on-road performance studies, crash culpability studies, and summary reviews of the existing evidence. To date, the result of this research is fairly consistent: Marijuana has a measurable yet relatively mild effect on psychomotor skills, yet it does not appear to play a significant role in vehicle crashes, particularly when compared to alcohol.

The first, conducted by Britain's Transport Research Laboratory, found that volunteers performed better on a driving simulator under the influence of pot than they did after consuming alcohol. According to the study, marijuana only adversely impacted subjects' ability to maintain a constant speed and control while driving around a figure-eight loop. Reaction time and all other measures of driving performance remained unaffected. Researchers also noted that the subjects who had smoked marijuana - unlike alcohol users - were aware of their impairment and attempted to compensate for it by driving more cautiously.

Similar results were also reported in March by a South Australian team at the Department of Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology at the University of Adelaide. Their epidemiological review of automobile accidents found that alcohol "overwhelmingly plays the greatest role in road crashes ... [and] conversely, ... marijuana has a negligible impact on culpability." The study was a follow up to a 1998 analysis of 2,500 injured drivers that previously determined cannabis to have "no significant effect" on drivers' culpability in motor vehicle accidents.

In fact, most marijuana and driving experiments give pot a relatively clean bill of health, particularly when compared to alcohol. A review of two-decades worth of driving simulator and on-road studies by Alison Smiley for Toronto's Centre for Addiction and Mental Health concluded that although marijuana temporarily impairs driving behavior, "this impairment is mitigated in that subjects under marijuana treatment appear to perceive that they are indeed impaired [and] where they can compensate, they do."


With respect to comparisons between the effects of alcohol versus marijuana, the author asserted, "In contrast to the compensatory behavior exhibited by subjects under marijuana treatment, subjects who have received alcohol tend to drive in a more risky manner." Smiley's assessment concludes, "The more cautious behavior of subjects who have received marijuana decreases the impact of the drug on performance, whereas the opposite holds true for alcohol."

Transportation data says likewise. A 1997 examination of motor vehicle injuries by the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute concluded that alcohol is "the major drug associated with injury," and found no evidence to support the accusation that illicit drugs are a major factor in auto crashes. An earlier analysis published by the U.S. National Highway Transportation Safety Administration of 1,882 drivers killed in motor vehicle accidents also determined that alcohol, not pot, was the "dominant problem" in drug-related traffic accidents.

So...my personal thoughts are this. Who gives a fuck? People should be aware of their abilities and act accordingly. Booze impacts your ability to reason, Cannabis doesn't. If you smoke pot and get all giggly, then maybe wait 15 min or so. But even if that newb drives, studies show that he will realize this and compensate accordingly. If your worried, when you see one driving...as you pass him, tell him to slow down some more.

Stoned drivers is such a non issue but the Anti's try to plant that Fear in the minds of those uneducated on the subject. I must say it does work well for them.

 

[kmk420kali]

Well I guess after decades of brain washing propaganda, one would think that legalizing the devil weed {you know, the stuff that turns men into rapists and women into whores} with it's mind altering abilities would turn the highways into something from a MadMax movie.

The NO campaign is using this as one of their big points.

It's all about tolerance. I medicate all time. I also am a great driver who has never caused an accident. Now if 19 passes, usage will go up a bit I'm sure...but it's not going to be like a wave of new smokers.

Let me ask you...are the roads filled with crazy high drivers? We have millions of people smoking it already. Do you think they don't drive high now? And 19 changes this? I promise you there will be no epidemic of pot related crashes.

Cannabis doesn't effect the motor skills like alcohol.





So...my personal thoughts are this. Who gives a fuck? People should be aware of their abilities and act accordingly. Booze impacts your ability to reason, Cannabis doesn't. If you smoke pot and get all giggly, then maybe wait 15 min or so. But even if that newb drives, studies show that he will realize this and compensate accordingly. If your worried, when you see one driving...as you pass him, tell him to slow down some more.

Stoned drivers is such a non issue but the Anti's try to plant that Fear in the minds of those uneducated on the subject. I must say it does work well for them.

No Officer...I have not been drinking...therefore could not have possibly been swerving!!

 

[vta]

Another thought...IF...and that's a big IF...If the regulation pans out the way it should, you will see a reduction in teen usage. That right there will take the number of 'risky' ones down a bit. it's hard to tell..the black market may be around for a bit...but after say a few years, this might make the roads even safer I know...I'm high.

 

[krunchbubble]

Really bro?? Really?? That is enough to Vote No on the only Legalization Prop to come up in almost 40 years??
You know I am a rational person...and I ask you...what is the sole reason you oppose this Prop??

im saying its a point that straights may pivot to the NO side for, im not saying this is the reason why i do.....

the prop is majorly flawed, to even give restrictions on how much to grow or posses is utter bullshit, and thats to begin with.....

 

[krunchbubble]

he oppose any prop Krunch does not want Cannabis legalized in any fashion he has said this. It would not matter what bill was on the ballot he would vote no.

not true! even though it says what it says in my signature, i made it many months before prop 19 was even a proposition.......

 

[krunchbubble]

and to even call it legalization is complete BULLSHIT!!!!!!

whats legalization with major restrictions? bullshit.....

im certain many people who are going to vote YES thinks this is the real deal legalization, fields of pot and blowing while walking down the street...

there going to be really disappointed and pissed when they find out they were taken by the word legalization...

 

[kmk420kali]

im saying its a point that straights may pivot to the NO side for, im not saying this is the reason why i do.....

the prop is majorly flawed, to even give restrictions on how much to grow or posses is utter bullshit, and thats to begin with.....

Do you think it would have a chance in Hell of passing, if it had all the things you want in it?? From a Public that will be at the most...20% smokers (I guessed at this, some smart person pls correct me if'n I'm wrong--)??
There is no other Prop on the books at this time...all the "I want's" and "I wish's"...don't mean shit now-- This is it for the next 2 years--