HighRoller74;1760768 wrote:Kids who want to get weed, can get it now, without much trouble.

It is not lawmakers job to make it easier. 90% of teens don't "get dope" because its illegal. Take that away and you are about to ruin half of this generation

Spock;1760778 wrote:It is not lawmakers job to make it easier. 90% of teens don't "get dope" because its illegal. Take that away and you are about to ruin half of this generation

It will still be equally illegal for teens.

90% eh? link?

What percentage don't drink before 21 because it's illegal?

Wake the fuck up.

1 will pass, 2 will pass, 3 will fail

It wasn't even close. I wonder if issue 3 would have passed if it was straight up legalization of marijuana. Would be interesting to see if they could get that on the ballot for the general election cycle.

Automatik;1760789 wrote:90% eh? link?

What percentage don't drink before 21 because it's illegal?

Wake the fuck up.

alcohol and weed aren't the same thing

Spock;1760799 wrote:alcohol and weed aren't the same thing

29,000 alcohol deaths per years versus zero weed deaths. You sir, are correct.

Too lazy to look it up, but I believe it's more than that.

Regardless, you can find statistics to back your claim compared to throwing out random numbers to fit your argument.

You're right. I saw a link say 29,000 but cdc has 88k

http://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/alcohol-use.htm


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Spock;1760799 wrote:alcohol and weed aren't the same thing

Yea Alcohol is so much safer than marijuana.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/a-group-of-middle-aged-american-whites-is-dying-at-a-startling-rate/2015/11/02/47a63098-8172-11e5-8ba6-cec48b74b2a7_story.html

Alcohol poisoning, chronic liver disease, cirrhosis of the liver and drug overdose(prescription). But go ahead and keep telling yourself getting drunk while watching Football games is so much safer.

Another fun stat, 90% of heroin users were white and 75% of those were introduced to heroin through prescription drugs

I am ok with issue 3 failing because the bill itself was not well thought out but I am not ok with hypocrites and people who ignore facts.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

queencitybuckeye;1760726 wrote:So you're saying you made up the earlier statistic.

No.

rydawg5;1760801 wrote:29,000 alcohol deaths per years versus zero weed deaths. You sir, are correct.

Yeah, no one ever got in a car crash while high..........

Wolves of Babylon;1760810 wrote:Yea Alcohol is so much safer than marijuana.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/a-group-of-middle-aged-american-whites-is-dying-at-a-startling-rate/2015/11/02/47a63098-8172-11e5-8ba6-cec48b74b2a7_story.html

Alcohol poisoning, chronic liver disease, cirrhosis of the liver and drug overdose(prescription). But go ahead and keep telling yourself getting drunk while watching Football games is so much safer.

Another fun stat, 90% of heroin users were white and 75% of those were introduced to heroin through prescription drugs

I am ok with issue 3 failing because the bill itself was not well thought out but I am not ok with hypocrites and people who ignore facts.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

There are no ill effects from dope; none at all; feed it to your kids.

QuakerOats;1760815 wrote:Yeah, no one ever got in a car crash while high..........

Tons of crashes. Most were 8 mph


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quaker thank you for saving me from myself. Please have more laws that assist me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So does issue 2 actually make weed legal or just change the ballot process? I voted against it because I didn't want to change the ballot process but I'm unclear if it passing makes weed legal or illegal or what.

QuakerOats;1760818 wrote:There are no ill effects from dope; none at all; feed it to your kids.

No I am just pointing out the blatant hypocrisy and lack of knowledge you posess. I would not "feed" dope to my kids just like I wouldn't provide them alcohol or go buy them a pack of cigarettes. I never stated it was good for you, just that there is zero evidence that marijuana is more harmful to society than Alcohol/Tobacco but I am glad you support keeping the drug cartels in business.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

FatHobbit;1760824 wrote:So does issue 2 actually make weed legal or just change the ballot process? I voted against it because I didn't want to change the ballot process but I'm unclear if it passing makes weed legal or illegal or what.

It changes the ballot process. The only thing Issue 2 could have done regarding weed was negate the passage of Issue 3.

Now that 2 passed, we have a system where the Ballot Board determines what constitutes a monopoly or oligopoly and will force people to answer two questions in order to pass an initiative. Basically, citizen driven initiatives are pretty much fucked going forward.

Automatik;1760776 wrote:There's an app for it here.

I'm not kidding.


Unreal how members of older generations are so out of touch with young people today.

Which is why I'm not confident it'll pass anytime soon.

Old people.

The worst.

sherm03;1760827 wrote:It changes the ballot process. The only thing Issue 2 could have done regarding weed was negate the passage of Issue 3.

Now that 2 passed, we have a system where the Ballot Board determines what constitutes a monopoly or oligopoly and will force people to answer two questions in order to pass an initiative. Basically, citizen driven initiatives are pretty much fucked going forward.

...and that is not a bad thing. our country and state function best as a representative democracy where our representatives thoughtfully take time to weigh an issue from all sides before passing law. Quite frankly, the use of ballaot initiatives make me quite uncomfortable, where simple majority of citizens making their mind up on an issue using 30 second sounds bites...never a good thing..

HitsRus;1760833 wrote:...and that is not a bad thing. our country and state function best as a representative democracy where our representatives thoughtfully take time to weigh an issue from all sides before passing law. Quite frankly, the use of ballaot initiatives make me quite uncomfortable, where simple majority of citizens making their mind up on an issue using 30 second sounds bites...never a good thing..

LOL at representatives "thoughtfully" taking time to weigh an issue from all sides.

And using your logic, how are you OK with people making up their mind on electing those representatives using 30 second sound bites? Never a good thing, right?

sherm03;1760837 wrote:LOL at representatives "thoughtfully" taking time to weigh an issue from all sides.

And using your logic, how are you OK with people making up their mind on electing those representatives using 30 second sound bites? Never a good thing, right?

Really? ... people are much closer to their state representatives and usually know what they stand for when they cast their ballot for them. Moreso, they are accountable directly to their electorate for their decision that they make for their constituents. That is not the case for big PAC's who fabricate misleading commercials to swing the election in their favor. In most cases, the people do not have the time, or do not take the time to study the pro's and cons and ramifications of an issue. How many people actually read the the full text of the state issues that were before us....and discussed them with others who also studied the isssues? I'd bet less than 10%, and that figure is probably generous. That is a terrible way to make law, and precisely the reason our state and country is set up as a representative democracy.

HitsRus;1760840 wrote:Really? ... people are much closer to their state representatives and usually know what they stand for when they cast their ballot for them. Moreso, they are accountable directly to their electorate for their decision that they make for their constituents. That is not the case for big PAC's who fabricate misleading commercials to swing the election in their favor. In most cases, the people do not have the time, or do not take the time to study the pro's and cons and ramifications of an issue. How many people actually read the the full text of the state issues that were before us....and discussed them with others who also studied the isssues? I'd bet less than 10%, and that figure is probably generous. That is a terrible way to make law, and precisely the reason our state and country is set up as a representative democracy.

People are much closer to their representative? I highly disagree. I'd be willing to bet a majority of people aren't even sure who their state senator or rep is. They go into the booth and vote for anyone with a D or an R next to their name and that's their only prerequisite.

But you can go right on ahead believing that people actually research when it comes to their rep, but not for issues. That just seems pretty ridiculous to me.

The point of it is that is your rep's job to research the issues and make decisions on your behalf, and he is ultimately accountable to you. Theoretically, at least, he is making informed decisions on law , as opposed to a generally uniformed mass of voters who make decisions on important issues without having done diligence. Most certainly, the people should retain the right for ballot issues, but it is my opinion, that it is used far too often to ram special interest legislation thru an unsuspecting public, and in general, is a terrible way to make law.