My thoughts on Proposition 19

[kaysho]

October in California is the start of two seasons: the rainy season and the proposition season.  The first is a result of Mother Nature.  The second is a result of our penchant to want to vote on everything.  I happen to think both are pretty much all wet, but that's another story.

At the top of the ballot this year will be Proposition 19, which

Comments

[rattuskid]

All the fun votes happen in California. Allow weed to be rolled into cigars and you'll have Ahnuald behind it too!

[kaysho]

Nah, cuz he wouldn't be able to drive his Hummer afterwards! :)

[mystee]

You know I started to skim your post and stopped when I read "October in California is the start of two seasons: the rainy season and the prostitution season. "

I thought wow I wonder where he lives in CA.

As for legalizing marijuana I'm on your side. Go for it but prop 19 might not be the best way to do that.

[kaysho]

No, I think that other one is pretty much year-round but fairly localised, kind of like a micro-climate. :)

[bohor]

Imagine how difficult it would be to park your car if a red kerb meant "don't park here" in San Jose but "it's OK for red cars to park here" in Fremont and "20 minute parking" in Santa Clara.

We kind of already have that with regards to carpool lanes. I am strongly in favor of Prop. 19 even though (contrary to my appearance) I don't use the stuff. This article covers most of the reasons I support it. But even more than that, I think we send a very bad, very hypocritical message in having tobacco and alcohol as legal substances while prohibiting marijuana. Add in the variety of energy drinks and "nutritional supplements" that are virtually unregulated, and marijuana prohibition makes even less sense. Unlike drugs like crack, meth, or heroin, it's entirely reasonable to make this drug available and expect people to be capable of exercising personal responsibility around it

[kaysho]

That is one thing that's always struck me as funny about the argument that marijuana is a "gateway" drug to worse things, and that therefore legalising it is bad. It has that role, to the extent that it does, only because a) it's illegal, and b) it's "mild" enough that it might make people think, "Hey, if pot is illegal but was pretty nice, maybe X isn't so bad, either!", where X is coke or heroin or something nasty.

Make weed legal, and you might actually cut the demand for the truly nasty stuff by making sure all the things on the far side of the "gateway" are honestly don't-go-there nasty.

[bohor]

Exactly. The reason the hypocrisy is so dangerous is that we lose credibility if the laws and warnings don't correspond to the reality of the effects. If you throw out an accurate perspective of the effect of these drugs, you throw out your credibility with it.

[kaysho]

Oh, and to your other point, indeed, that is the basis of my first "yes" thought: grab this bull by the horns, because a no vote quite probably means no later chances to vote on something that I might like better. :)

[direwolf23]

My opinion would be to vote for it, and use future ballot measures or state legislature to fill in the gaps. I think the days of demonizing marijuana are coming to an end.

[kaysho]

Although I must say, Cheba Hut will be less giggly fun if pot is legal. :)

[luphinus]

Being regulated by the federal government personally as a commercial driver I cannot take advantage of the legalization if it happens. (No green card, and a BAC of only 0.04% even in a non-commercial vehicle) But I have to think about friends who enjoy such vices as this, as I myself did once upon a time.

The Federal government doesn't do a lot of policing on the individual level, that's up to the state and local police with little or no guidance from the feds. Will legalizing it here bring down the wrath of the DEA? Will the Congressional Appropriations Committee over in D.C. retaliate at the insistence of the DEA? Personally, I think the answer is no.

The more important question I have for myself is do I want my friends doing something legal or illegal? The answer to that is of course I want them to do legal things.

[kaysho]

One thing I'm going to be curious about, if this passes, is how long it will take the technology to come up with a reliable, simple test for active marijuana intoxication. We have it right now for alcohol intoxication (the breathalyser), and we have an agreed standard for what constitutes alcohol intoxication for vehicle operation (0.08%) ... but with marijuana the only tests that we have test for previous usage and not for active intoxication. Those were, of course, perfectly adequate when the only need was to test for any kind of usage (since it was illegal), but aren't adequate for public protection against intoxicated drivers if pot is legal. I wonder how long it will be before we have a roadside test and a THC-parts-per-million standard? And what will we do in the meantime?