OT - Initiative 65 and Initiative 65a

[Lord McBuckethead]

First, this is some weak ass flippin propositions. Weed should be legalized fully, first and foremost.
Next, 65A gives literally no direction on how it would be applied, when it would be applied, etc. The only thing we can do is vote yes to Initiative 65.

Let me be clear, the state legislature complete failure to do their job is a joke. We vote for them to represent us in passing legislation. From flags to this, do your damn job. Bring a bill to the floor and vote you chicken shits. You need to go on voting record so we can see who is the problem.

Why does CA, WA, IL, and damn near half the country have rights we do not. So dang short sighted by a bunch of pussies.

[Lance Harbor]

Mississippi is gonna Mississippi.

First, this is some weak ass flippin propositions. Weed should be legalized fully, first and foremost.
Next, 65A gives literally no direction on how it would be applied, when it would be applied, etc. The only thing we can do is vote yes to Initiative 65.

Let me be clear, the state legislature complete failure to do their job is a joke. We vote for them to represent us in passing legislation. From flags to this, do your damn job. Bring a bill to the floor and vote you chicken shits. You need to go on voting record so we can see who is the problem.

Why does CA, WA, IL, and damn near half the country have rights we do not. So dang short sighted by a bunch of pussies.

[Maroonthirteen]

Last time I was in LA. There were weed clinics in shopping centers. With employees spinning MJ leaves on the sidewalk to lure you in for a free medical exam.

Vote no to both.

Then 65A on the 2nd Q.

[Quaoarsking]

Last time I was in LA. There were weed clinics in shopping centers. With employees spinning MJ leaves on the sidewalk to lure you in for a free medical exam.

Vote no to both.

Then 65A on the 2nd Q.

Last time I was in Seattle, people were just walking around on the sidewalks smoking joints. It was annoying as hell honestly.

But it's destructive to families to fine or lock up people for minor things like that, so vote Yes, 65, and then gather signatures for full recreational legalization and vote Yes on that too. It's the pro-family thing to do.

[BeastMan]

Last time I was in LA. There were weed clinics in shopping centers. With employees spinning MJ leaves on the sidewalk to lure you in for a free medical exam.

Vote no to both.

Then 65A on the 2nd Q.

Uh big no there. 65a is a joke. Vote 65. It’s past damn time to give folks access to medical cannabis.

[defiantdog]

Not sure why the federal government doesn't treat it like alcohol.

[dawgoneyall]

Not sure why the federal government doesn't treat it like alcohol.

Being a Libertarian I don't think anything should be illegal as long as that "thing" doesn't adversely affect another against their will. Weed should not be made legal until a field test is available for high (drunk) drivers. They have to be made responsible for their actions. There is an on site field test for alcohol. Pretty sure dope heads who have accidents and kill people have violated my "against their will" part of my tenet.

Hell...if people want to use heroin and die....that is their choice...as long as it doesn't adversely affect another against their will.

[the_real_MSU_is_us]

Being a Libertarian I don't think anything should be illegal as long as that "thing" doesn't adversely affect another against their will. Weed should not be made legal until a field test is available for high (drunk) drivers. They have to be made responsible for their actions. There is an on site field test for alcohol. Pretty sure dope heads who have accidents and kill people have violated my "against their will" part of my tenet.

Hell...if people want to use heroin and die....that is their choice...as long as it doesn't adversely affect another against their will.

Exactly. Let people make decisions, stop micromanaging their life as if you know what's best for everyone. No it doesn't matter if weed is "annoying" to you- imagine if you had guns taken away because some people were "annoyed" at gunshots? I'm "annoyed" at smokers, it shouldn't be banned. I'm "annoyed" at drunk people, doesn't mean beer and bars should be illegal. I'm "annoyed" at loud trucks and motorcycles, doesn't mean it should be illegal.

The other thing about all this is it isn't even a choice of "allowing people to have weed or keep them from it"... because weed (and all drugs for that matter) are so damned easy to get, the question is "will I force people to be felons to have weed, or allow them to do it safely?". Nobody in this board is going "God bless Daddy Gov't for keeping meth illegal or I'd run down to the CVS right now and smoke it right there in the parking lot", so why are we so afraid of if drugs are legalized? Why do we think there's masses of people waiting to rush the weed store, but who aren't hitting up a local dealer already?

Alcohol is legal, cheap, easy to find, and addictive. If someone develops a problem with it we say it's their fault. We don't say "well that's why Gov't should have kept prohibition in place; to protect people like this". If you can't handle alcohol responsibly it's up to you to avoid it, don't take away our Saturday beer.

Before someone calls me biased, I've never done a drug in my life

[Jarius]

Being a Libertarian I don't think anything should be illegal as long as that "thing" doesn't adversely affect another against their will. Weed should not be made legal until a field test is available for high (drunk) drivers. They have to be made responsible for their actions. There is an on site field test for alcohol. Pretty sure dope heads who have accidents and kill people have violated my "against their will" part of my tenet.

Hell...if people want to use heroin and die....that is their choice...as long as it doesn't adversely affect another against their will.

This doesn't make any sense. Weed being legal would not make it legal to drive high. If they already are not able to test for it DUI wise, then what difference would it make for weed to be legal? It's not like you can't find weed extremely easily if you want it anyway.

[BeastMan]

Being a Libertarian I don't think anything should be illegal as long as that "thing" doesn't adversely affect another against their will. Weed should not be made legal until a field test is available for high (drunk) drivers. They have to be made responsible for their actions. There is an on site field test for alcohol. Pretty sure dope heads who have accidents and kill people have violated my "against their will" part of my tenet.

Hell...if people want to use heroin and die....that is their choice...as long as it doesn't adversely affect another against their will.

This is the absolute worst mj take you can possibly have. There are 2 types of DUI. Regular DUI and DUI other. DUI other covers every single substance not named alcohol including numerous legal substances including opioids & Xanax as well as your illegal drugs like cocaine, crack, meth, etc.... There are literally thousands upon thousands of DUIs given where drivers refuse the breathalyzer and field sobriety test. You know why? Cops are vigorously trained to identify impaired drivers. They do it every single day. DUI others, just like regular DUIs, do not have to have a roadside test. If you?ve ever been to a DUI trial you?ll see when they put the officer on the stand. 100% of the time you?re going to get testimony that says, Through ____ years of training and experience i could tell with my expert opinion the driver was impaired?. As long as there was no procedural loopholes its a closed case after that phrase 95% of the time.

When you know the current law, how it?s applied, and how it?s applied in court it?s impossible to have the take that they need a roadside test first. If you don?t think a cop can tell someone is barbecued behind the wheel, you have a police problem, not a lack of test problem.

Y?all keep these coming. There isn?t a single talking point that I can?t debunk but it?s easy when it?s propaganda.

[Extendedcab]

Uh big no there. 65a is a joke. Vote 65. It?s past damn time to give folks access to medical cannabis.

If doctors were prescribing cannabis under prop65, then possibly, but that is not the case. Prop65 is to create/open cannabis shops where all you need is a card to get in. This is the first step to legalizing marijuana in general. Follow the money!

Vote No!

[BeastMan]

If doctors were prescribing cannabis under prop65, then possibly, but that is not the case. Prop65 is to create/open cannabis shops where all you need is a card to get in. This is the first step to legalizing marijuana in general. Follow the money!

Vote No!

[Lord McBuckethead]

If doctors were prescribing cannabis under prop65, then possibly, but that is not the case. Prop65 is to create/open cannabis shops where all you need is a card to get in. This is the first step to legalizing marijuana in general. Follow the money!

Vote No!

Even if all of this is true, still vote yes. Nothing you said convinces me this shouldn't be legal in our United States of America. This should be legal in every single way, and taxed the shit out of it.

[Lord McBuckethead]

And I don't even smoke weed.

[parabrave]

Wrong Board for this crap/ Go to political board

[Lord McBuckethead]

Wrong Board for this crap/ Go to political board

Look bud, we have discussed this exact topic 20 times on this board. This isn't political. Discussions on legalization of anything, when the "politicians" refuse to tackle the issue directly makes it not political.

We need to have big boy conversations without it immediately dismissed as political. There are literally 100s of ways people can abide a chemical that changes either your state of mind or pain management. All legal ways. There is literally zero reasons why pot should be illegal. If anything, it could help everyone chill the hell out.

So yes to 65. No to 65A. This should be 100% legal for all over 21 years of age in MS.

[dawgoneyall]

Wrong Board for this crap/ Go to political board

This is not a political thread.

I am for medical use for legitimate reasons (that is a very controversial issue) ....only until a "high" driver can be made accountable for meeting me on a highway can recreational use be allowed (field test for level of intoxication ). If users would only use at home I am fine but only a DA would think that it would not be used or under the influence while driving.

[Maroonthirteen]

65 is to vague. Oklahoma has 2,000 "treatment centers" and 1 in 12 Oklahoma residents have a medical marijuana card.

These shops are popping up in Arkansas now.

These shops will be all over MS if 65 is passed.

Even if you're for marijuana use, 65A at least allows the state to set some boundaries. So our towns don't have treatments on the town square and corners.

[BeastMan]

65 is to vague. Oklahoma has 2,000 "treatment centers" and 1 in 12 Oklahoma residents have a medical marijuana card.

These shops are popping up in Arkansas now.

These shops will be all over MS if 65 is passed.

Even if you're for marijuana use, 65A at least allows the state to set some boundaries. So our towns don't have treatments on the town square and corners.

65 isn’t vague. You’ve bought in to the propaganda. Don’t be a sheep my brother. It absolutely will not be on every street corner. It will be like liquor stores but even less so b/c there would be significantly less prescribed users than drinkers. Even if you’re gonna play that card that they can’t be zoned, and they will, the market will not allow an over saturation of stores especially in a Covid economy. Econ 101

One thing I want everyone against it to think about.... All the opposition talking points, not a single one talks about the efficacy of the medicinal use. All fear tactics about crime and pot shops on every corner etc.... That tells you all you need to know. They think we’re dumb. I hope enough of us aren’t.

[Maroonthirteen]

I haven't bought into anything. I've seen it with my own eyes in other states.