i had no idea that trees made an echo. i thought that was canyons and empty houses and whatnot...^^^^ It's like talking to a fucking tree..... the only thing you will ever here is an echo
Sounds accurate. It has popular support in all the coastal areas of California except San Diego. Other than Sacto it's opposed in all the Eastern parts of northern and central california. Inland empire, who knows...The interesting thing was the poll the news took of Central San Joaquin Valley residents (where I live). The results were 55%No, 41%Yes, and 4% undecided. I don't know how large the poll was, but it should be interesting!
barely. they were one of the more liberal counties in 2008, going for obama 55%-44%.The Central Valley is known as the Conservative heart of the state. LOTS of Republican representation.
if you would bother to look at the links i provided, those are based on a conservative-leaning estimate specifically correlated with their vote on this issue. that is how i came up with numbers such as 3:7, 4:1, and 11:9.Wow UncleBuck! That's a LOT of numbers. Very well laid out I might add! I totally agree that California is an overall liberal state, but I'm not sure that everyone votes liberal on all matters.
I know this an older post but holy shit don't ever think this is true!Yeah, juries make bad decisions, witness lie, cops set people up, etc. But I assure you the basis for our legal system is innocent until proven guilty.
Dude, that's deep. Thank you for your wise words.Prop 19 will pass. The first ever legalization of pot for adults. There will most likely be a backlash by conservative idiots, but it will remain the law of the land in Ca.
Here at RIU, we actually have some growers exactly like that. The Doctor knows best right? After all, some allergies need a 99 plant grow...I noticed in a summary of the poll results for yes/no on Prop 19 than since October 13 all of the polls have shown more favorably towards the No. Some of the polls are from large media companies. I'm wondering if we're getting some late influence from the "establishment" to vote no. I'm not even sure if we can believe polls from CNN, LA Times or the Public Policy Institute.
The other thing that I was thinking is if the law does pass we better make it right by Lady MJ and follow the rules and keep everything kosher. I can see a situation where a few bad apples really sway public opinion on the weed thing. For example if more minors start smoking it. Or if someone grows an acre when he only needs 16 sqft.
this post is full of so much win. best post i've seen in a long time.i'm not quite sure what this little tantrum was all about, but i've gotten quite used to such outbursts. you may find it useful to pick selected statements from my post and back away from them, but you miss the point of the whole by doing so. that point is that much of the medical community is quite content to sit back on their collective ass and pat themselves on the back for the wonderful strides they think they have accomplished. they've gotten theirs and see no point to going further. that the majority of the legalization movement was firmly behind them seems to have been forgotten, now that they have what we all deserve. that "first step", as false as it may be, would never have come about if millions of advocates who did not qualify for those magic cards hadn't paved the way for the few. now that a "real" first step is at hand, the fear and selfishness of those few are playing a part in denying the access that we all deserve. the dim possibility that they may lose some small bit of their advantage seems to be enough that they would sacrifice the rights of the rest of the community.
you've also confused me with this garbage about getting stuff for free from the government and bringing the fed into this whole thing. in case you've forgotten, this is a state-wide proposition. we all know that the federal clowns will do everything in their power to quash 19 if it is passed and that even local governments will balk at allowing its measures to be implemented. we saw it with 215 and there is no reason to believe things will be different this time around. "medical backing" certainly had little effect on the raids and confiscations. we have all watched as the dea has insisted on enforcing their own brand of law in the sovereign state of california and as a number of entrepreneurs have seen their enterprises damaged and destroyed. in this respect, any corporate backing for 19 may be a bit of a savior. joe schmo may have little defense against the forces of the federal government, but the resources of big business will certainly have more luck in combating those federal thugs. that will be the greatest price paid for attempting to regain the right to the ownership over our own bodies, the cost of battling the intrusive nanny-state and their near psychotic need for control.
weed ain't no cure-all. it is moderately effective in a variety of cases and certainly a better alternative than the poisons pumped out by the pharmaceutical companies, but it isn't some grand panacea. it does not contain the secrets of the universe or expand the consciousness beyond any normal awareness. it merely allows us to look at the world with slightly different eyes and occasionally find some answers that we didn't know we already had. it isn't holy, any more than an ear of corn or a blade of grass is holy. it allows relaxation, enjoyment of the simple things in life and a meager escape from the pains and woes of what we experience every day.
That's silly, that failure to yield could have caused a major accident. I believe that part should be upheld. Some people can't drive for shit while stoned because they are idiots to begin with.However, I feel that marijuana must be dealt with in a less severe degree than alcohol as it is not as harmful. I believe that the act of driving while under the influence of marijuana itself should not be a criminal act, but should carry additional penalty for traffic violations (IOW your 150.00 "failure to yield" ticket is now 200.00 because you're bloodshot-eyed, stoned as a mofo, obviously cognitively impaired.).