So Prop. 19 didnt go through (the one about Legalizing Marijuana)

[Samurai Jim]

Snip

QFT
Anyone who believes that pot use is a "victimless crime" I direct you to the +30,000 Mexican civilians killed over the last few years in the drug wars, but that doesn't matter because they're all the way over there and you're here wanting weed.

 

[Lucifron]

Drugs should be illegal everywhere, altogether, no matter what kind it is.

Took the worlds right out of my mouth!

All the things that you enjoy doing without harming others should be illegal everywhere, altogether, no matter what it is.

 

[Agayek]

Okay ,think of it this way, when your country votes for a president, only HALF the people legal to vote actually do. lets say only half the voted on this as well. Suddenly you're not just one person anymore are you?

Only half the Americans that can vote do, then they ***** about the president. Get off your lazy ass and vote, or shut the fuck up about your apathetic decision to not make a difference

I'd just like yo take this opportunity to point out that the majority of people who don't vote do so for the very reason mentioned in that South Park episode. The choice is usually between a douche and a turd sandwich. There's really not a whole hell of a lot of difference.

On the topic of the Prop 19 though, I'm almost glad that it didn't pass. It was a very poorly thought out bill. There will almost certainly be another one, and it's got a good chance to be significantly better than 19.

 

[Agayek]

Drugs should be illegal everywhere, altogether, no matter what kind it is.

And this comes from a guy living in the Netherlands, where the dumbasses who actually get legal weed and such waste their time on the crap.

I'm quite curious on the rationale behind this idea. Why do you, or anyone for that matter, have the right to dictate what other people can ingest? It doesn't hurt anyone but the imbiber, so why can't people do it if they like?

 

[Hobonicus]

Anyone who believes that pot use is a "victimless crime" I direct you to the +30,000 Mexican civilians killed over the last few years in the drug wars, but that doesn't matter because they're all the way over there and you're here wanting weed.

If the drug wars in Mexico affect you to such a degree that legalizing the limited use of it in California would be detrimental to the health of you and your loved ones then sure, vote against it. Or is that just impossibly big picture thinking? Next time you eat a sandwich or buy some pretty jewelry for your girlfriend you'd better think about all the thousands+ impoverished and starving people in third world countries who die every year.

So yes, they're all the way over there so why would you expect me to give a fuck? I'm not going to pretend to, and unless you're actively aiding and stressing about the situation from somewhere that isn't your comfortable room, then you shouldn't either. Your World doesn't necessarily have to be The World, and even then when you try to make it that way you end up picking and choosing convenient morals to follow.

 

[Lucifron]

Snip

It's kind of funny how your wall of text crumbles if the 'stoners' you are chastising have the ultimate goal of bringing every currently illicit substance, except for the most extreme ones such as heroin and crystal meth, to the legal level of say, tobacco, and tax it in the same way. It's funny how it crumbles to dust.

 

[ClassicJokester]

Cool, There's really no reason for M

Drugs should be illegal everywhere, altogether, no matter what kind it is.

And this comes from a guy living in the Netherlands, where the dumbasses who actually get legal weed and such waste their time on the crap.

All drugs should be legal everywhere. Why do you care if someone wastes their time on that crap ? I surely not. They can die of overdose for all I care.

lol the world according to you. It's much more complicated than you make it out to be. You think that people doing the drugs will be the only people hurt in such a scenario?

And I still dont care. Everyone has a freedom of choice, and everyone faces consequences of their choices.

I agree with Dana here. Why should you be able to tell someone what they can or can't do to themselves, even if what they do has unintended consequences for others.

Actually, feel free to tell people not to do something. Just don't let the government do it for you. Frankly, it's none of their business. It's not about drugs being the right choice for everyone, it's about giving people the ability to choose what they believe to be right. Or even what they believe to be wrong.

I will say that Prop 19 wasn't drafted particularly well, but hopefully in 2012 there will be a better written version, and a better turnout of voters. Because really, it really doesn't take much time to vote, and it actually is pretty important.

This is because the people who would vote to legalize marijuana generally don't vote.

Supplementary: I have never understood the appeal of a weed high. Staring at the wall, eating all the cookies, and thinking that you're the greatest philosopher ever when you're talking nonsense? Wow. Sounds like a fun night.

Okay, I'm fine with you not understanding the appeal, but understand that the people that act that way when high are people who think that is what high folks should act like.

I have been known to partake of the devil lettuce on free days, and quite frankly, I prefer it to getting drunk. I don't get munchies unless I'd be hungry anyway, I enjoy the sense of "allrightness" (the feeling behind "One Love"), it provides a good opportunities for introspection and looking at the bigger picture of the universe and our insignificance, and it can really take my mind off of bad thoughts.

 

[Hobonicus]

You all hate how the governments control people's lives, you hate the sheep that follow what the man tells them to do, but you want nothing more for the Government to control your drug habbits and tell you that it's okay to smoke pot, we don't mind anymore. You want the government to control you, really. You want them to provide you with a substance that you enjoy and love to consume, but you aren't addicted to of course. Addiction is a nasty word. You want the Government to control how much you consume, how much you pay for it and how old you need to be to consume it, because that is freedom. Wanting the Government to control your drug usage is pathetic. It's pretty much saying "I don't mind if you fuck me sideways politicians, just give me what I like and then I'll shut up!" Anyone who puts freedom of choice in the same paragraph with government regulation is a moron and does not care about freedom of choice at all, they just want to get what they want easily. Hell, weed isn't that hard to get if you know the right people, and I'd be willing to bet all of you know the right people. Nah, what is is about (and always has been about) is convenience. Those voting to legalize probably just want to use the lowest amount of enegery possible to get high and they don't care about what they sacrifice on the way, which is pretty pathetic. It's better for smokers to keep it illegal. Sure you might have to run around like a criminal to get it, but at least you aren't being someones ***** to get a drug.

First off, I'm only commenting on this section, so don't go arguing that ignoring the other parts invalidates what I say. I like to play dress up psychologist as much as the next guy, but this is going too far. You're turning this into a moral issue when (like you said) it is just a matter of convenience. Yes, I get that the government regulating certain things can be restrictive, but "being someone's *****"? Really? We're not freedom fighters here, more convenience is better than less convenience. It's not very difficult to get weed now but does getting it easier make us less manly? Should all of our alcohol be bootlegged moonshine because the effort makes us less of somebody's *****? You really support complete restriction because marginal restriction isn't moral enough for you?

I do understand where you're getting this from and agree to some extent. When I hit 21 I didn't go binge drinking because I don't need the government to tell me when I can or cannot get plastered. I drank before 21 and I'll keep drinking after 21, but in no way would I call for total restriction just because the government currently controls how people drink.

Were this bill to pass, nothing would stop someone from continuing to get it the old way if they kept wanting to fight the man. It might not be ideal, but it's a step in the right direction. True freedom is almost impossible to get unless you go off and live in the woods, so you've gotta draw a line somewhere. Yeah, it's kind of restrictive but it's still better than complete denial. I'm not so naive that I'd moan about freedom until the government removes all restrictions like this is some sort of all or nothing situation.

No matter how enthusiastic (and arrogant) you make yourself sound, in the section I quoted you're still just picking and choosing convenient morals in order to sound passionate about your hypothetical freedom.

How about this: You let the government tax you and you're just basically bending over for them saying "hey, take my money, it's not like I earned it". Hell, just using money is playing by their rules, which is absolutely pathetic. A real man wouldn't give the government shit because then he'd be owned, he'd be their *****.

 

[ClassicJokester]

You never saw this. *Puts on sunglasses*

*FLASH*

 

[Taxicab Samurai]

Drugs should be illegal everywhere, altogether, no matter what kind it is.

Took the worlds right out of my mouth!

Lol have fun with no medicine.
Idiots.

Didn't pass for a couple reasons.
Poorly written.
Too many old/ignorant people banding together to stop the drugged up communists.
Just to name a few.

And the whole "adurrhurr people who smoke pot don't vote" is retarded.
Please stop being generalizing douches.
While some people were probably getting high during the voting period, doesn't mean every pothead didn't vote.
Also, what about the people who aren't potheads but see the way it could benefit the state through taxing?
Or even the infinite uses for HEMP, or marijuana for medicinal purposes.

I voted yes for it.
No I'm not a pothead.

 

[Treefingers]

Ehhh. You're partly at fault for not voting, really. Shame on you.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

Silly country, not having compulsory voting.

 

[FurinKazanNZ]

Ideas need representation, and if you don't resist the fools, then only fools vote, and your country goes to crap.

Holy crap I am struck dumb by the sheer amount of wisdom and genius behind that comment, no sarcasm. Where did you read that.

 

[QuantumT]

Abstaining from a vote is essentially voting. Carlin doesn't quite get that.

Moreover, Carlin is a public figure how can actually make a political statement that is bigger than a single vote by abstaining. But let me ask anyone who takes it seriously this (I might just be strawmanning this, but whatever):

Are you George Carlin?

If not, then you not voting doesn't make a political statement. It makes you look lazy.

A more effective method of protesting though is to vote, just vote for someone you think is actually qualified, even if they won't win. Heck, vote for something like Mickey Mouse or something. This way shows you are displeased with the choices you are given by the system, and not just some lazy bump on a log who couldn't be bothered to vote.

 

[Vrach]

So you didn't vote, but you're complaining about the outcome? You realize if you DID vote you could have made a difference, and I can guarantee the people who fall into the "I don't vote" category is huge. People who don't vote shouldn't complain about the outcome. You didn't do your part to make a difference, or even attempt to, so why should you be bothered about how it went?

Somewhat this.

That said, ignoring a 'minority' of 46.2% is quite stupid. But I suppose that's just another one of the places where democracy fails >.>

 

[Chrinik]

+1, democracy only really works when every voice is heard.

Then we should take the low vote turnout as an indication that democracy is FLAWED and the people DON´T TRUST THEIR POLITICIANS. So instead of bitching the people to go voting despite their obvious lack of interest, we should flail on the politicians.
Their response would probably be "MOAR CAMPAIGNING FOR TAX DOLLARS!!!" but still.
Because there are no "I don´t care!" and no "Kill em all off they suck!" options, real democracy is just temporarely deciding which asshole runs your country to shit next, and tries to sweettalk it to you.
Here, some stupid ***** got elected who promised no tax raises...actually the FIRST thing she did was raise the salestax to 19%! People are pissed. And they have every right to be. Because when those who don´t vote stop bitching and moaning, then this means that FREE SPEECH has finaly be supressed and only certain people are allowed to talk and voice their opinion.
Since not voting is an option, simply "Fuck all politicians, they are all greedy bastards!" or "No option suites me this legislative period!", they have all the right to complain. EVERYONE has the right to complain EVERYTIME! It is in the very constitution our countrys try to protect so much.
Also, I can ramble about a shit politician all I want, because he is still doing a lousy job...me not trying to prevent him from rising to power is NO VALID REASON to shut up and let him do their thing.
Think about if some crazy lunatic rises to power through a faked election, do you want every citizen who stayed home to sit down quietly and let him creat the forth reich?

Edit: On the "issue" of marijuana not being legal, it is not an issue for me. A: different country, B: no interest in pot.
The thing is that probably a LARGE percentage of people who voted marijuana legal smoke it anyway, so where is the point other then selfishness?