Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 100

Thread: My endorsements for California propositions, November 2016

  1. #1
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,626
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65674241

    My endorsements for California propositions, November 2016

    FYI: When I write "Mixed" partisan support, I mean that it's not a partisan issue, and that many in both parties have opposing viewpoints

    -----


    Prop 51: $9 billion in school bonds
    NO
    Reason: More debt heaped upon California, which will undoubtedly be wasted and poorly supervised. Even Democrat Jerry Brown is against this, calling it a “wall of debt”.
    How important is this one to me? Moderate
    How likely to pass? Somewhat likely
    Partsan support: Mixed


    Prop 52: Medical Fee Charged to Hospitals (Extend current program)
    YES
    Reason: Almost everyone seems to be in support of this. Complicated proposition, but seems to be preventing legislature from diverting these dollars elsewhere.
    How important to me? Unimportant.
    How likely to pass? Very likely
    Partisan support: Both


    Prop 53: Require Voter Approval for Revenue Bonds to Be Issued or Sold
    YES
    Reason: Prevents state government from passing expensive state bonds programs over $2 billion without voters having a say
    How important to me? Moderate
    How likely to pass? Extremely likely
    Partisan support: Both, but stronger from Republicans


    Prop 54: Transparency – All legislature sessions recorded, except closed sessions, and all bills must be posted to internet for 72 hours before passing (except emergency ones)
    YES
    Reason: Prevents backdoor BS laws from being passed before public can find out about them, increases transparency
    How important to me? Moderate
    How likely to pass? Extremely likely
    Partisan support: Both, but stronger from Republicans


    Prop 55: 12 more years of higher taxes for people making $250k or more, supposedly to fund health care
    NO
    Reason: This extends a “temporary” tax passed 4 years ago, this time through 2028. CA has the highest top-bracket taxes in the nation. Time to lower it back down to more reasonable levels.
    How important to me? Very important
    How likely to pass? Likely
    Partisan support: Democrats


    Prop 56: Cigarette tax increase by $2/pack
    NO
    Reason: I see pros and cons. I don’t love huge tax increases on things like this, and I feel it will mainly punish the poor. It seems that most of the tax collected will go into supposed prevention programs, but I am not sure these are very effective. Also, much of this money will go to insurance companies related in some way to Medi-Cal, but the oversight of the usage of these funds seems poor and confusing. I just think this whole thing is a mess, and most of the money acquired seems like it will be wasted.
    How important to me? Unimportant
    How likely to pass? Likely
    Partisan support: Mixed, but more Democrats


    Prop 57 : Modifies (loosens) parole requirements
    NO
    Reason: Waters down previous tough-on-crime propositions passed, by allowing inmates to get parole much earlier. Written in a fashion to make it look like only “non violent” felons will be eligible, but it appears this is full of holes, and many violent felonies will also make the list as being eligible for early parole. Keep serious criminals locked up for as long as possible. With crime going back up, the last thing we need is for them to be back on the streets sooner.
    How important to me? Important
    How likely to pass? Extremely likely
    Partisan support: Democrats


    Prop 58: (Fake) English Proficiency Requirement for Public Schools
    NO
    Reason: I wrote “fake” because this misleading proposition repeals a 1998 proposition (227) which required classes to be taught in English. This was due to failures of the public school system where they would teach classes in Spanish to illegal immigrant children, and it would drag on for years without these kids ever learning English. The 1998 change was a success, and these children suddenly picked up English far quicker than before. This proposition claims to establish transition programs from Spanish to English, but seems to contain loopholes to basically go back to Spanish-only if the school chooses to have such classes, and is a direct assault on Prop 227 from 1998. Interestingly, focus groups studying voter response to this proposition showed that most voters are misled about it, and that support falls off a cliff if voters are told that it's actually a repeat to (mostly popular) prop 227. Sneaky!
    How important to me? Unimportant
    How likely to pass? Very likely
    Partisan support: Democrats


    Prop 59: Control political spending of corporations
    NO
    Reason: On the surface, this seems like a good idea. However, this is a terribly-written proposition which is all bark and no bite. It does nothing and means nothing. It basically states an opinion to Congress about how Californians feel about the matter. It changes no law, and has no binding elements. Opponents have accurately criticized this proposition as “clogging the ballot”, “misleading”, “useless”, and “wasting our money”. I agree. I don’t like voting for any proposition with a description of, “Asks whether California’s elected officials should...” Asks? Asks? Come on. Propositions should take action, not ask questions.
    How important to me? Unimportant.
    How likely to pass? Likely
    Partisan support: Mixed


    Prop 60: Require usage of condoms in porn films
    NO
    Reason: Opens up all kinds of new lawsuits (many frivolous) against any porn producer who doesn’t “comply” with a new list of requirements – including many which are difficult to prove (such as “injury” on the job). Whole premise is stupid. Government should not interfere with the production of pornography. It’s pretty clear that most porn actors/actresses aren’t likely living very healthy/safe lifestyles anyway, so who is this really protecting? Government doesn’t need to have its hands into everything.
    How important to me? Unimportant.
    How likely to pass? Likely
    Partisan support: Mixed


    Prop 61: Pricing Standards for Prescription Drugs
    NO
    Reason: This is a complicated and controversial proposition, which seems great on the surface, but appears very flawed. It attempts to prevent drug companies from jacking up the cost of prescription drugs to absurdly high levels, figuring that at the very least, certain taxpayer-funded programs can’t be charged these outrageous prices. However, it is flawed in so many ways. It arbitrarily picks and chooses a few groups of patients to protect, while not stopping this practice against Medi-Cal, private health insurance, or individual health insurance. The author of the measure has a conflict of interest, and wrote in an exemption for his own company. Whole thing seems like a giant mess, and quite misleading.
    How important to me? Unimportant.
    How likely to pass? Likely
    Partisan support: Mixed


    Prop 62: Repeal death penalty
    NO
    Reason: Death penalty in California is getting close to reform (see prop 66), where executions will come much faster. (People have been sitting on death row for decades, due to an unnecessarily long appeals process). This prop is sponsored by the usual death penalty opponents, who think it’s “cruel and unusual” punishment, no matter how awful the criminal. Death penalty also allows prosecutors to strike life-without-parole plea bargains with criminals, by simply taking death off the table. Without this bargaining chip, these criminals will sometimes roll the dice and win in court, or they will be able to plea down to non-life sentences.
    How important to me? Very important.
    How likely to pass? Somewhat unlikely
    Partisan support: Democrats


    Prop 63: Gun/Ammo Sales Law Reform
    NO
    Reason: Under the guise of stopping mass-murder attacks we’ve seen recently, these seem like a bunch of useless new laws which are easy to skirt if you’re not a law abiding citizen. Contains silly new laws such as “requires people to notify law enforcement if guns are stolen”, “requires dangerous criminals to sell their guns and ammo” (lol!), and “people convicted of gun theft won’t be allowed to own guns” (bigger lol!) Basically if you’re about to commit a terrorist act, you’re not going to give a crap about any of these lame statutes, and this proposition does little to prevent guns from getting into the hands of terrorists or dangerous criminals.
    How important to me? Moderate
    How likely to pass? Extremely likely
    Partisan support: Both, but more Democrats



    Prop 64: Legalization of marijuana
    NO
    Reason: Will worsen the drug problem in California, and will essentially be the gateway to pot smoking becoming as popular/common as alcohol use. I would actually be in favor of a decriminalization of use (but not for sale) of marijuana, as this just clogs our jails and courts, but not to outright legalize it and make it openly simple and easy for anyone of age to obtain pot for recreational use.
    How important to me? Moderate
    How likely to pass? Likely
    Partisan support: Mixed, but more Democrats


    Prop 65: Divert money collected from plastic bag sales at supermarkets to state environmental fund
    YES
    Reason: Some cities like Los Angeles already have the plastic bag law in place, forcing grocery store operators to charge 10c per bag, and to keep it for themselves. This would force the stores to ship that money to the state for environmental uses. Personally I’d like to see the plastic bag charging thing go away completely, but if it’s going to stay (or increase to the entire state), at least I want the money to be doing something useful, rather than further enriching the greedy grocery stores which lobbied for these bag laws in the first place!
    How important to me? Moderate
    How likely to pass? No data
    Partisan support: Mixed, but more Republicans


    Prop 66: Death Penalty Reform
    YES
    Reason: Speeds up entire death penalty process. Assigns defendant a special appeals lawyer immediately, which previously has taken years for no apparent reason. State appeals limited to 5 years, which previous have spanned decades. Death row inmates will lose various privileges they currently enjoy while awaiting their execution (which again, often takes decades), at least deceasing their quality of life after committing heinous crimes. State Supreme Court will be empowered to do more as far as expediting the appeals process while overseeing that it’s all done fairly. This is what we have needed for a long time.
    How important to me? Very important
    How likely to pass? Somewhat likely
    Partisan support: Republicans


    Prop 67: Plastic bag ban
    NO
    Reason: This is false environmentalism. Plastic bags will still be available, but they’ll cost 10 cents, and will be thicker plastic. How is that doing us any good environmentally? There will be E-Coli concerns with the reusable bags. Unless Prop 65 passes, the money collected ($300 million estimated) will all go into additional profits for grocery stores.
    How important to me? Very important
    How likely to pass? Somewhat likely
    Partisan support: Mixed, but more Democrats

     
    Comments
      
      FPS_Russia: Control political spending of corporations? NO
      
      Buck Nasty: Sweet Jesus that's a lot of props. LOL California.
      
      GrenadaRoger: i've never voter before, but i registered to vote, and will, just to vote YES on 64 (rec MJ legal) -- consider your vote offset Druff
      
      Henry: GOD
      
      drufdajewgod: My financial future rests on the future of legal weed. California is a massive domino globally if it goes through. Your wrong btw on this Druff.

  2. #2
    Platinum
    Reputation
    21
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    4,110
    Load Metric
    65674241
    Keep MJ illegal GTFO. When the brutal drug cartels in Mexico, private prisons, big pharma, and the booze industry come together and agree with you on an issue that should be a clue.
    I don't really like weed but there's no way anyone should be locked in a cage for it.
    Big pharma has medical MJ and legal mj in it's cross hairs. Will the feds start raiding medical MJ places under Hillary? Wouldn't surprise me.
    Last edited by FPS_Russia; 11-06-2016 at 08:02 AM.

  3. #3
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,626
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65674241
    Quote Originally Posted by FPS_Russia
    Control political spending of corporations? NO
    Read again what I wrote.

    I would like political spending to be reformed, but prop 59 does nothing. It changes no laws, it is not binding, and it has no effect on anything.

    It simply gives an opinion to the federal government. Dumb.

    I do not want to support any proposition which wastes time, money, and space on the ballot in such a fashion.

  4. #4
    Platinum herbertstemple's Avatar
    Reputation
    282
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,195
    Load Metric
    65674241
    WOW, that's a lot of propositions to vote on. Is it like that every election cycle in CA?

    You really are a conservative guy. This is how I would vote except for the Legalization of marijuana. You might have a streak of evangelical in you. You might as well throw in a vote for Trump while you are at it.

    Require usage of condoms in porn films. Jeez, what a silly thing to waste time on.

     
    Comments
      
      Muck Ficon: Propositions are scary!!!

  5. #5
    Diamond Hockey Guy's Avatar
    Reputation
    1233
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    7,629
    Load Metric
    65674241
    Wow, a lot of props:

    Name:  ANGTFT.gif
Views: 466
Size:  732.3 KB

     
    Comments
      
      herbertstemple: Cute.
    (•_•) ..
    ∫\ \___( •_•)
    _∫∫ _∫∫ɯ \ \

    Quote Originally Posted by Hockey Guy
    I'd say good luck in the freeroll but I'm pretty sure you'll go on a bender to self-sabotage yourself & miss it completely or use it as the excuse of why you didn't cash.

  6. #6
    One Percenter Pooh's Avatar
    Reputation
    1375
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,738
    Load Metric
    65674241
    I think you're overestimating how many of these things actually ever pass. Most just vote no without even reading them. That is a lot to vote on though. We have only four in Florida and the only one I am voting yes on is legalize marajuana and I don't smoke.

    We have some stupid solar bill. No.

    We have some first responders who have gotten injured to receive tax breaks. Thinking about this one but most likely no.

    We have one where old broke fucks who've lived in their house for a certain amount of time to get free property taxes. Nope. If you can't afford the taxes then move. We have a homestead rule in Florida that already reduces by 25k or 50k depending on marrital status. That's enough.

     
    Comments
      
      Henry:

  7. #7
    Platinum
    Reputation
    424
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    4,214
    Load Metric
    65674241
    I love when people like Druff cling to their little "theories" on certain things (weed is a gateway drug and it will make people smoke it more if it is legal!)when there is overwhelming empirical evidence showing otherwise.

    Continually amazes me how someone so smart can be so fucking stupid when they get their heels dug in.

    But guess what it aint gonna matter because it will pass. Better luck next time.

     
    Comments
      
      big dick: lot of truth in this post

  8. #8
    Inaugural Spring Classic Champion HoodedN's Avatar
    Reputation
    277
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,104
    Load Metric
    65674241
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post

    Prop 64: Legalization of marijuana
    NO
    Reason: Will worsen the drug problem in California, and will essentially be the gateway to pot smoking becoming as popular/common as alcohol use. I would actually be in favor of a decriminalization of use (but not for sale) of marijuana, as this just clogs our jails and courts, but not to outright legalize it and make it openly simple and easy for anyone of age to obtain pot for recreational use.
    How important to me? Moderate
    How likely to pass? Likely
    Partisan support: Mixed, but more Democrats
    what the actual fuck?

  9. #9
    Plutonium big dick's Avatar
    Reputation
    1328
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    fuck krypt
    Posts
    11,566
    Load Metric
    65674241
    Quote Originally Posted by HoodedN View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post

    Prop 64: Legalization of marijuana
    NO
    Reason: Will worsen the drug problem in California, and will essentially be the gateway to pot smoking becoming as popular/common as alcohol use. I would actually be in favor of a decriminalization of use (but not for sale) of marijuana, as this just clogs our jails and courts, but not to outright legalize it and make it openly simple and easy for anyone of age to obtain pot for recreational use.
    How important to me? Moderate
    How likely to pass? Likely
    Partisan support: Mixed, but more Democrats
    what the actual fuck?
    haha no shit. Druff you're a square

  10. #10
    Speedster Out of Clemson adamantium's Avatar
    Reputation
    890
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    3,397
    Load Metric
    65674241
    Slava Ukraini!

  11. #11
    Gold MrTickle's Avatar
    Reputation
    429
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    1,721
    Load Metric
    65674241
    I knew you were conservative but fuck me, you're really really right wing on a few of these.

  12. #12
    Diamond vegas1369's Avatar
    Reputation
    1439
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,185
    Load Metric
    65674241
    Very disappointed to see you are not for personal freedoms Druff and instead have a 'Big Brother needs to watch out for you' mentality.

    What blows me away even more is that you still buy into the reefer madness propaganda as opposed to forming an opinion based on sound logic and research.

     
    Comments
      
      Henry:
      
      gimmick:
      
      ToasterOven:
      
      Krypt:

  13. #13
    Diamond vegas1369's Avatar
    Reputation
    1439
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,185
    Load Metric
    65674241
    Druff, just two questions.

    1) How can you possibly be on the side of not legalizing a substance that has been proven time and time again to be MUCH less harmful than alcohol? If you've had even one drink in your life you are a giant hypocrite.

    2) Why do you think it's better to leave marijuana sales in the hands of criminals as opposed to highly regulated businesses paying taxes?

    Serious LOL at you thinking this will worsen the drug problem in CA. Anybody and their mother can already get weed 24 7 in your state with ease.

     
    Comments
      
      Henry:

  14. #14
    Plutonium sonatine's Avatar
    Reputation
    7369
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    33,371
    Load Metric
    65674241
    Quote Originally Posted by vegas1369 View Post
    Druff, just two questions.

    1) How can you possibly be on the side of not legalizing a substance that has been proven time and time again to be MUCH less harmful than alcohol? If you've had even one drink in your life you are a giant hypocrite.

    2) Why do you think it's better to leave marijuana sales in the hands of criminals as opposed to highly regulated businesses paying taxes?

    Serious LOL at you thinking this will worsen the drug problem in CA. Anybody and their mother can already get weed 24 7 in your state with ease.

    Because poor people like to get high.
    "Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky

    "America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs

  15. #15
    Diamond vegas1369's Avatar
    Reputation
    1439
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,185
    Load Metric
    65674241
    I just can't get over the "will worsen the drug problem" line.

    Those damn stoners littering the streets, stoner babies, Weed whores... What a load of crap.

  16. #16
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,626
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65674241
    Quote Originally Posted by vegas1369 View Post
    I just can't get over the "will worsen the drug problem" line.

    Those damn stoners littering the streets, stoner babies, Weed whores... What a load of crap.
    There is a barrier of entry to smoking weed if you're not a regular user of it.

    If I wanted to get weed right now at this moment, I couldn't. I'm not saying I couldn't find someone eventually to hook me up, but I couldn't get it right at this moment. If I wanted alcohol right now, I could drive 1 mile to 7-11 and buy as much as I wanted.

    There's a huge difference between venturing to the point of buying weed from a drug dealer and buying it legally at a store.

    I've actually known many people who will smoke it if offered in a social setting, but don't wish to put the effort (and perceived risk) into getting a dealer for smoking it regularly.

    Sure, we can live in a dreamland and claim the old line of, "Anyone who wants it can get it", but that ignores the reality of the large number of people who only moderately want it, but don't want it enough to go through the hassle of regularly obtaining it.

    Comparing weed to alcohol is a false argument. This isn't a matter of choosing one of the other. It's a matter of adding yet another substance which can be abused for recreational purposes, which has proven negative long-term effects which go beyond physical health.

    I don't want weed users thrown in jail, which is why I would be in support of decriminalizing recreational use, while not making the sale of it legal.

    Look, I can respect the argument on why you feel weed isn't bad and should be legal, even if I don't agree with it. I cannot respect the argument that legalizing it will not lead to increased usage. It will.

    Here's a Newsweek article about the problems already seen in Colorado after their legalization measure:

    http://www.newsweek.com/unexpected-s...ng-weed-339931

    The wave of enthusiasm following the passage of Amendment 64 has given way to a drip, drip, drip of unintended consequences. Law-enforcement issues, such as marijuana-intoxicated driving and the illegal movement of vast amounts of cannabis product into other states, are the tip of the iceberg.

    Social and law-enforcement issues resulting from the Colorado interstate pot pipeline prompted Nebraska and Oklahoma to file lawsuits against the state, citing the fact that marijuana commerce violates federal law and increases the burdens of law enforcement in other states.

    Other symptoms of Colorado’s pot culture include increased use among teens, resulting in educational problems in middle schools and high schools, a spike in “edibles”-related emergency room visits, consumption by children and pets resulting in illness and death and regulatory confusion surrounding public consumption and enforcement.

    Colorado’s addiction to cannabis revenue may prove to be the most harmful implication of all. Towns such as De Beque, where cannabis is replacing coal and cattle as a means of income, imperil themselves by staking the future on a substance that is still illegal in most states and that half of Americans still regard as a social evil.

    In 2014 and 2015, nearly $6 million in pot revenues have been distributed to local governments. But the cost of increased law enforcement, drugged-driving incidents, fatal crashes, loss of productivity and a huge spike in gang-related crime bring into question the cost-benefit of those dollars.

     
    Comments
      
      Henry:
      
      BiffCo99:

  17. #17
    Plutonium sonatine's Avatar
    Reputation
    7369
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    33,371
    Load Metric
    65674241
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    There is a barrier of entry to smoking weed if you're not a regular user of it.

    If I wanted to get weed right now at this moment, I couldn't. I'm not saying I couldn't find someone eventually to hook me up, but I couldn't get it right at this moment. If I wanted alcohol right now, I could drive 1 mile to 7-11 and buy as much as I wanted.

    There's a huge difference between venturing to the point of buying weed from a drug dealer and buying it legally at a store.

    I've actually known many people who will smoke it if offered in a social setting, but don't wish to put the effort (and perceived risk) into getting a dealer for smoking it regularly.

    Sure, we can live in a dreamland and claim the old line of, "Anyone who wants it can get it", but that ignores the reality of the large number of people who only moderately want it, but don't want it enough to go through the hassle of regularly obtaining it.

    Comparing weed to alcohol is a false argument. This isn't a matter of choosing one of the other. It's a matter of adding yet another substance which can be abused for recreational purposes, which has proven negative long-term effects which go beyond physical health.

    I don't want weed users thrown in jail, which is why I would be in support of decriminalizing recreational use, while not making the sale of it legal.

    Look, I can respect the argument on why you feel weed isn't bad and should be legal, even if I don't agree with it. I cannot respect the argument that legalizing it will not lead to increased usage. It will.

    Here's a Newsweek article about the problems already seen in Colorado after their legalization measure:

    http://www.newsweek.com/unexpected-s...ng-weed-339931

    The wave of enthusiasm following the passage of Amendment 64 has given way to a drip, drip, drip of unintended consequences. Law-enforcement issues, such as marijuana-intoxicated driving and the illegal movement of vast amounts of cannabis product into other states, are the tip of the iceberg.

    Social and law-enforcement issues resulting from the Colorado interstate pot pipeline prompted Nebraska and Oklahoma to file lawsuits against the state, citing the fact that marijuana commerce violates federal law and increases the burdens of law enforcement in other states.

    Other symptoms of Colorado’s pot culture include increased use among teens, resulting in educational problems in middle schools and high schools, a spike in “edibles”-related emergency room visits, consumption by children and pets resulting in illness and death and regulatory confusion surrounding public consumption and enforcement.

    Colorado’s addiction to cannabis revenue may prove to be the most harmful implication of all. Towns such as De Beque, where cannabis is replacing coal and cattle as a means of income, imperil themselves by staking the future on a substance that is still illegal in most states and that half of Americans still regard as a social evil.

    In 2014 and 2015, nearly $6 million in pot revenues have been distributed to local governments. But the cost of increased law enforcement, drugged-driving incidents, fatal crashes, loss of productivity and a huge spike in gang-related crime bring into question the cost-benefit of those dollars.


    Name:  Screen Shot 2016-11-04 at 9.05.16 PM.png
Views: 543
Size:  628.5 KB


    Name:  Screen Shot 2016-11-04 at 9.05.00 PM.png
Views: 533
Size:  903.9 KB



    thats cool tho, that you let conservative mormon opinion pieces justify you dictating how other people live their lives.

     
    Comments
      
      gimmick:
    "Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky

    "America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs

  18. #18
    Plutonium sonatine's Avatar
    Reputation
    7369
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    33,371
    Load Metric
    65674241
    its not like the mormon church isnt behind every conservative ballot item in california or anything, and managed to single handedly swing the vote against gay marriage by leading conservatives around by the nose.
    "Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky

    "America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs

  19. #19
    Plutonium sonatine's Avatar
    Reputation
    7369
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    33,371
    Load Metric
    65674241
    her hilaribias is so pronounced that they couldnt even call it an article, they had to label it 'opinion'.
    "Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky

    "America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs

  20. #20
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,626
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65674241
    Okay, how about a Yahoo News article, which mentions the good and the bad news about pot legalization in Colorado?

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/colorado-...001321532.html

    Since becoming the first state to legalize recreational marijuana, in 2014, ER visits related to pot use have increased by nearly 30 percent in Colorado, the study found. From 2014 to mid-2015, 956 out of every 100,000 ER visits (roughly one out of every 1,000) were related to marijuana use, compared to 739 per 100,000 from 2010 through 2013.

    Similarly, hospitalizations related to cannabis use increased from 803 per 100,000 (from 2001 to 2009) to 2,413 per 100,000 from January 2014 through June 2015.

     
    Comments
      
      BiffCo99:

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-22-2016, 01:19 AM
  2. Online poker in California legalized in 2016 with/without PokerStars?
    By JohnCommode in forum Poker Community Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-07-2016, 07:58 PM
  3. November 26th. This day in history
    By son of lockman in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-26-2014, 11:49 PM
  4. California Propositions voting suggestions
    By Dan Druff in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-23-2014, 07:10 AM
  5. From November 21: Murder in Marlyand home game
    By Dan Druff in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-15-2013, 01:19 PM