*quality *doublepromote

That's how I feel about it.

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by JiggaJonson.

Double-Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Monday, October 4th, 2010 3:51pm PDT - doublepromote requested by JiggaJonson.

Life by a thousand cuts.

I hate to sound the cynic (and I'm high right now) but this is just to take the steam out of Prop 19, which would make it LEGAL for personal use and allows small plots of personal marijuana gardens to be grown.

Don't be fooled by this sweat-nervous steroidal hypocrite, California! Vote YES on 19!

Jaw drops

>> ^quantumushroom:

I hate to sound the cynic (and I'm high right now) but this is just to take the steam out of Prop 19, which would make it LEGAL for personal use and allows small plots of personal marijuana gardens to be grown.
Don't be fooled by this sweat-nervous steroidal hypocrite, California! Vote YES on 19!

>> ^quantumushroom:

I hate to sound the cynic (and I'm high right now) but this is just to take the steam out of Prop 19, which would make it LEGAL for personal use and allows small plots of personal marijuana gardens to be grown.
Don't be fooled by this sweat-nervous steroidal hypocrite, California! Vote YES on 19!


... I.... I just can't find how he's spinning this. Has hell frozen over?

Arnold is numero uno!

a really telling comment in there; law enforcement opposes, and district attorneys endorse.

more proof that the mentality of today's beat cops is almost unanimously about fund raising, with no qualms about the safety and well-being of citizens.

>> ^Golgi:
a really telling comment in there; law enforcement opposes, and district attorneys endorse.
more proof that the mentality of today's beat cops is almost unanimously about fund raising, with no qualms about the safety and well-being of citizens.


"Police associations," not law enforcement itself (Which includes everyone in the law enforcement field...) I guess associations could mean the top wigs or unions (Which I assume they mean unions.) Of course unions are in it for money, and the top brass need to be "tough on crime" for the mostly stupid voters (That is how they are elected.)

So law enforcement is not against decriminalization, but a very, very select few are... Kind of like the state itself?

I can't tell if QM was being serious or not, but I upvoted and agree with his statement. While decriminalizing marijuana is a big step in the right direction, legalizing it would be the best bet. Lets all hope that the marijuana users remember to vote in November!

>> ^quantumushroom:

I hate to sound the cynic (and I'm high right now) but this is just to take the steam out of Prop 19, which would make it LEGAL for personal use and allows small plots of personal marijuana gardens to be grown.
Don't be fooled by this sweat-nervous steroidal hypocrite, California! Vote YES on 19!


Who are you and what have you done with QM?

I don't understand the people who are amazed at qm's stand on this issue. He (or she; I don't know) has always stated his Libertarian stance, therefore he has always been against the intrusion of government into our private lives (e.g. Gay marriage and the Drug Wars).

That is where he and I agree; when you get to the absolutely craziness of the Libertarian stance on taxes, and cutting Social Security and Medicare, is where we part ways.

*nochannel *1sttube *politics *drugs *news *law

This video has been removed from all channels (History, 1sttube, Politics, Drugs, News, Law, Equality) due to invalid channel assignment - nochannel invoked by xxovercastxx. Please review the FAQ to learn about appropriate channel assignments.

Adding video to channels (1sttube, Drugs, Law, News, Politics) - requested by xxovercastxx.

So wait, now that pot is decriminalized, do they have to let a whole bunch of people out of prison? How does that work?

Not "decriminalized"; description should say:
'Penalty for carrying up to 1 ounce of pot reduced from misdemeanor to infraction; continues a maximum fine of $100, but with no jury trial'

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20018327-503544.html
"The new law does not change the penalties for possession. Currently, carrying up to an ounce of marijuana is punishable by a fine of up to $100; no jail time or probation can be ordered. One key difference, however, is that until now a defendant has been entitled to a jury trial and a defense attorney. By downgrading possession to an infraction, that will no longer be the case.

"In this time of drastic budget cuts, prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement, and the courts cannot afford to expend limited resources prosecuting a crime that carries the same punishment as a traffic ticket," Schwarzenegger wrote in a signing statement.
"

So its all about not spending money on trials and attorneys when folks have small amounts of pot. Not a lot has changed. Hope that clears things up a little.

>> ^bamdrew:
Not "decriminalized"; description should say:
'Penalty for carrying up to 1 ounce of pot reduced from misdemeanor to infraction; continues a maximum fine of $100, but with no jury trial'
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20018327-503544.html
"The new law does not change the penalties for possession. Currently, carrying up to an ounce of marijuana is punishable by a fine of up to $100; no jail time or probation can be ordered. One key difference, however, is that until now a defendant has been entitled to a jury trial and a defense attorney. By downgrading possession to an infraction, that will no longer be the case.
"In this time of drastic budget cuts, prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement, and the courts cannot afford to expend limited resources prosecuting a crime that carries the same punishment as a traffic ticket," Schwarzenegger wrote in a signing statement.
"
So its all about not spending money on trials and attorneys when folks have small amounts of pot. Not a lot has changed. Hope that clears things up a little.


Another thing you may consider is the cost they no longer have to pay to keep someone in jail after convicting them of that misdemeanor. The amount of money that this measure will save is staggering.

I don't smoke. Never have. But I really can't wait for the day were weed is completely decriminalized. Not only do we spend WAY too much money fighting it, but Mexican drug violence has been spilling over the border. Legal weed in US = more people growing it here = less cartels trying to cart it across the border = less violence.

>> ^MarineGunrock:

I don't smoke. Never have. But I really can't wait for the day were weed is completely decriminalized. Not only do we spend WAY too much money fighting it, but Mexican drug violence has been spilling over the border. Legal weed in US = more people growing it here = less cartels trying to cart it across the border = less violence.


It is so fucking fun to grow, the hobbies people will have when that purple hazed sunset bestows itself on us, it will be a fine day.

Like @MarineGunrock I don't smoke either, never really have (aside from a few choice parties) and I'm also looking forward to it being legal. Prohibition doesn't work as long as the drug is relatively harmless.

The pros are way bigger than the cons. Just legalize it already.

Consider hard narcotics next, to cut down the narcotics related crime.

Thank you.

From the video: "The governor opposes a proposition on the November ballot that would decriminalize Marijuana."

This is not decriminalization.>> ^bamdrew:

Not "decriminalized"; description should say:
'Penalty for carrying up to 1 ounce of pot reduced from misdemeanor to infraction; continues a maximum fine of $100, but with no jury trial'
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20018327-503544.html
"The new law does not change the penalties for possession. Currently, carrying up to an ounce of marijuana is punishable by a fine of up to $100; no jail time or probation can be ordered. One key difference, however, is that until now a defendant has been entitled to a jury trial and a defense attorney. By downgrading possession to an infraction, that will no longer be the case.
"In this time of drastic budget cuts, prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement, and the courts cannot afford to expend limited resources prosecuting a crime that carries the same punishment as a traffic ticket," Schwarzenegger wrote in a signing statement."
So its all about not spending money on trials and attorneys when folks have small amounts of pot. Not a lot has changed. Hope that clears things up a little.

Further proof that the real STATED purpose of law enforcement nowadays is to provide product price supports for criminal organisations.

No. If you break the law and later the law changes, you still broke the law.

There's a good chance you'll be out early or have your sentence lightened, especially in a case like this where one of the primary arguments is, "it's ridiculous that we put people in prison over shit like this", but they have no obligation to release you or give you a break or anything else.

>> ^djsunkid:

So wait, now that pot is decriminalized, do they have to let a whole bunch of people out of prison? How does that work?

I'm gonna start carrying pot in my car in California now just for the fuck of it. Also, some Terminator memorabilia.

Imagine my surprise when I misread the title as "Schwarzenegger signs California bill decriminalizing Cannibals".