California Prop 19: Yes Vs. No
Joe | Aug 30, 2010 | Comments 7
The Christian Science Monitor posted an interesting piece on their website today, a “one-minute debate” on CA Proposition 19. Paul Armentano from NORML took the “yes” side, while Calvina Fay from the “Drug Free America Foundation” took the “no” side. It is her points I want to address.
We have already seen and paid for the effects that tobacco and alcohol have had on society. If we learn from past experiences, we can conclude that marijuana would follow down the same path.
Legalizing marijuana use would substantially increase its already formidable costs to society. That’s because the initiative would allow individuals to possess up to about 120 joints and cultivate 25 square feet of plants, capable of yielding up to 240,000 joints.
Everyone say it with me: cannabis is much safer than alcohol or tobacco. This theory that marijuana will lead to the same health problems as alcohol or tobacco is a fantasy that has been proven wrong.
I’m not sure where the figure of 240,000 joints comes from, but let’s use that number. I’m betting in the amount of time it takes someone to smoke that many joints (over 65 years at 10 joints a day), millions upon millions of people will die from alcohol and tobacco. There is no comparison, and to pretend otherwise is false and pure fear-mongering.
Filed Under: Activism • Best Of The Best • Exclusive Web Content • Politics • The War On Drugs
[...] California Prop 19: Yes Vs. NoThe 420 TimesThe Christian Science Monitor posted an interesting piece on their website today, a “one-minute debate” on CA Proposition 19. Paul Armentano from NORML took …Crazy Math From Anti-Pot Activist: 1 Ounce = 120 Joints?Opposing Viewsall 2 news articles » [...]
Ahh just pass it man, my dankweed.com is worth $50,000 if you do. Screw it
Let them eat marijuana brownies! Let them carry ounces!
What good is it being legal if you can’t leave the state and travel with it.It has to be accepted thru out the whole country.That and only then would it be the United states.Define United for me is it divided we stand together we fall. Or together we stand divided we fall.
I fully support the legalization of marijuana, but I’m concerned that it’s perhaps more worth doing right than rushing.
So far I’ve only seen one article from pro-cannabis people (I can’t remember the source, sorry) about the practical implications of this and why it might not be so great. The implications for the average person in California and who will benefit (financially) most from the initiative. I think maybe we should look at this a little closer and with less childish glee. Whenever the government gets involved in anything, there’s a crooked deal just around the corner.
Also, if I understand correctly, people may still be prosecuted for possession under this act, so it is by no means a full legalization.
why isn’t nicotine and alcohol placed on schedule 1 it they have a high tendency for abuse and have no accepted medical use hence alcoholisim and surgeon general warnings what proof do you need
Calvina told me once that she’d outlaw alcohol again if she could. She is inspired by the romantic notion that it is possible to stamp out a popular drug and, IMO, do it w/o serious collateral damage.
We BETTER vote for this! As we speak, right wingers in 2 states are trying to get rid of their medical marijuana laws, calling it all a “sham”.
Don’t take the freedom that you currently have for granted. There are those who might take those rights away if they possibly can.
Establish LEGAL Cannabis, then fix the law after that. If a better initiative shows up in 2012, vote for that, too, if it’s better than Prop. 19