Voters Leaning Toward Legalizing Marijuana

function share_this(num) {
 tit=encodeURIComponent('Voters Leaning Toward Legalizing Marijuana');
 site = new Array(5);
 return false;

  Voters Leaning Toward Legalizing Marijuana

Posted by CN Staff on September 26, 2010 at 06:15:25 PT
By Peter Hecht, Sacramento Bee 
Source: Sacramento Bee  

Sacramento, CA -- California voters are leaning toward making the Golden State the first state in the nation to legalize marijuana for recreational use. In a new Field Poll of likely voters for the Nov. 2 election, the Proposition 19 marijuana initiative leads by a 49 percent to 42 percent margin.The measure holds heavy majorities among voters who are younger than 40 and those who live in the populous San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles. The measure, largely favored by Democrats, trails decidedly among Republicans and is losing by a nearly 2-1 margin in the Central Valley.
The Sept. 14-21 Field Poll of 599 likely voters has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.1 percentage points.However, the new poll shows an increase in support for Proposition 19 since a Field Poll in July had the measure losing, 48 percent to 44 percent.Matthew Hostler, 30, a Sacramento project manager for an online video games company, is solidly in the Yes on 19 camp.Hostler thinks it was mistake for the United States to make marijuana illegal in the first place. Now, he says, "What better way than to have California make the change."But other voters are less sure about the initiative, which would expand legal marijuana use in California beyond the medical use approved under Proposition 215 in 1996. Snipped   Complete Article: Sacramento Bee (CA)Author: Peter Hecht, Sacramento BeePublished: September 26, 2010Copyright: 2010 The Sacramento BeeContact: opinion sacbee.comWebsite: -- Cannabis Archives

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help    

Comment #11 posted by FoM on September 28, 2010 at 10:01:45 PT
I would never vote for him. It's easy to say you are for marijuana when you don't stand a chance at getting elected. I fear the Conservatives because of how moralistic they are.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by JoeCitizen on September 28, 2010 at 09:09:46 PT

GCW - Don't be a one issue voter
GCWI have to protest the call to vote for Tancredo. Sure, he says the right thing about the one issue we all care about in common here, cannabis. But he is a raging xenophobe who hates immigrants and brown people.We should not forget that cannabis is illegal in America today because of racists like Harry Anslinger (1st head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, predecessor to today's DEA). Anslinger used to refer to Mexicans as "Ginger-colored niggers." He and William Randolph Hearst whipped up fear of Mexicans and blacks in order to get cannabis made illegal in the 30s.Tancredo and Anslinger would disagree about cannabis, but would otherwise be bestest buddies in hating on brown people.One of the foundations of Cannabis Prohibition is racism. We need to shatter that base with our knowledge, tolerance and understanding. They want to divide us, make us hate each other so they can control us. We must remain united, in our minds and in our hearts.Don't vote for hatred, ever. Even if you think you're getting something out of the the deal, just don't do it.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by FoM on September 27, 2010 at 08:41:54 PT

I agree. We need to get as much done while Democrats are in power because once conservatives are back in power everything will go backwards again. The moral majority or christian fundamentalists whatever they are called really do pull strings when conservative republicans are in power.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by dongenero on September 27, 2010 at 08:20:46 PT

but not freedom loving conservatives?
 "The measure, largely favored by Democrats, trails decidedly among Republicans and is losing by a nearly 2-1 margin in the Central Valley."Makes one wonder what all the "Constitutional liberty" and "government intrusion" rhetoric from the conservative right is really about. If you're crowing about "freedom" and overbearing government and you're not behind this bill, I suggest that your liberty cries are dishonest and disingenuous.Just wait until conservatives regain power and ramp up the culture wars again. Then we'll see how they really view government and "freedom".

[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by Sinsemilla Jones on September 26, 2010 at 23:52:30 PT

Ah, The Bee was eating LA Times honey -
Snuff Out Pot Measure - LA TimesJust say no to legalizing pot - Modesto BeeCalifornians cannot legalize marijuana....under federal law marijuana will remain a Schedule I drug - LTCalifornia would be in direct conflict with federal law - MBWhether marijuana should be legal is a valid subject for discussion....But Proposition 19 is so poorly thought out, badly crafted and replete with loopholes and contradictions... - LTRegardless of where you are on the issue of marijuana in general, Proposition 19 is poorly drafted and deeply flawed, filled with loopholes and ambiguities... - MBEmployers would no longer have the right to screen for marijuana use or discipline a worker for being high...a drug-free environment is crucial at too many workplaces to name — schools, hospitals, emergency response and public safety agencies, among others. - LTProposition 19 would saddle businesses with even more legal murkiness in trying to keep marijuana- impaired employees out of the workplace, especially from behind the wheel of school buses or other jobs that could affect public safety. - MB...the proposition is in fact an invitation to chaos. It would permit each of California's 478 cities and 58 counties to create local regulations regarding the cultivation, possession and distribution of marijuana. - LT..the measure grants too much leeway to local governments...A mishmash of rules would inevitably result...pot laws must be uniform across the state... - MB
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by Sinsemilla Jones on September 26, 2010 at 22:55:53 PT

FoM 1 - Hey, I could write for The Bee!
"Just say no to legalizing pot""What were they smoking when they came up with Proposition 19?"How about -Bee doesn't like buzzBee against flowersOnly hangovers in Bee's hiveBee prefers poison over pollenProp 19 stings BeeorWhat kind of honey were they eating when they wrote this editorial?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by runruff on September 26, 2010 at 08:38:08 PT

An interesting dichotomy.
Carry A. Nation []Before Coca Cola was "de-coked" it was made with cocaine prior to the Harrison Act. Carry and her friends used to meet in a home parlor and get hyped up on Coke [cocaine] and go smashing up the town with axes and busting up the beer halls!Today the DEA goes into Columbia and Peru where they smash up cocaine operations then go out and celebrate by getting &hi# faced drunk on beer!I wish I could live to see what they will say about the DEA in a more enlightened society 100 years from now? 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by HempWorld on September 26, 2010 at 08:16:18 PT

What prohibition wrought:
In Congressional testimony, Mrs. Sabin complained that “In preprohibition days, mothers had little fear in regard to the saloon as far as their children were concerned. A saloon-keeper’s license was revoked if he was caught selling liquor to minors. Today in any speakeasy in the United States you can find boys and girls in their teens drinking liquor and this situation has become so acute that the mothers of the country feel something must be done to protect their children.”But then ...Neo-Prohibitionism and Neo-Prohibitionists
Neo-prohibitionism (also spelled neoprohibitionism and neo-Prohibitionism) is the belief that the per capita consumption of alcoholic beverages should be reduced by legislation that further restricts its sale and consumption and also by changing social norms to reduce the acceptability of drinking.Neo-prohibitionists tend to assume that•The substance of alcohol is, in itself, the cause of drinking problems,
•The availability of alcohol leads people to drink,
•The amount of alcohol consumed (rather than the speed with which it is consumed, the purpose for which it is consumed, the social environment in which it is consumed, etc.) determines the extent of drinking problems, and
•Alcohol education and policy should focus on the problems that excessive alcohol consumption can cause and should promote abstinence.
These beliefs lead to the call for such measures as:•Increasing the taxes on alcohol beverages,
•Limiting or reducing the number of sales outlets,
•Limiting the alcohol content (proof) of drinks,
•Prohibiting or censoring alcohol advertising,
•Requiring warning messages with all alcohol advertisements,
•Expanding the warning labels on all alcohol beverage containers,
•Expanding the display of warning signs were alcohol is sold,
•Limiting the days or hours during which alcohol beverages can be sold or served,
•Increasing server liability for any problems that occur after alcohol consumption, •Decreasing the legal blood alcohol concentration (BAC) level for driving vehicles or other activities, and
•Eliminating the tax deductibility of alcohol beverages as a business expense.Neo-Prohibitionists tend to place primary responsibility on the cultural environment rather than the drinker for alcohol abuse. The analogy is that we don’t blame fish for dying in a polluted stream. The belief that the environment is polluted with ads for alcohol, positive attitudes toward alcohol, the availability of alcohol, and the social acceptability of drinking.Because prohibition in the United States and elsewhere has been a dramatically unsuccessful experiment in the past and is unpopular today, there are no major organizations in the United States that claim to be neo-prohibitionist. However, Candy Lightner, the founder of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), eventually left the organization and since has gone on to criticize it as neo-prohibitionist, stating that MADD "has become far more neo-prohibitionist than I had ever wanted or envisioned … I didn't start MADD to deal with alcohol. I started MADD to deal with the issue of drunk driving." 2 Similarly, The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is often described as neo-prohibitionist. 
Repeal of Prohibition
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by runruff on September 26, 2010 at 07:33:22 PT

..first state in the nation to legalize marijuana"
Oregon re-legalized it twice!It has never been completely illegal in Alaska!Sheez, some accuracy in reporting please!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by The GCW on September 26, 2010 at 07:23:26 PT

Vote 4 Tancredo in Colorado
In Colorado,Tom Tancredo today called for the legalization of marijuana. left the Republican party. Joined the American Constitution Party and is running 4 governor...Democrat John Hickenlooper said He oppose legalization of marijuana-0-So I guess that means I oppose beer baron, Hickenlooper.This issue is likely to come to the election ballot in the near future and it would be very good to have a governor who supports it...-0-I like reading the info above about Cali leading.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by FoM on September 26, 2010 at 06:33:48 PT

Bee Editorial: Just Say No To Legalizing Pot
September 26, 2010URL:
[ Post Comment ]

  Post Comment