Quick! Someone tell these animals they are sinners! smh…
Category Archives: Savvy Activism
US States Pass Legislation to Censor Free Speech on the Internet!! Freedom of speech no longer valid ya’ll. Please don’t take our freedoms away 😦
In this newly altered bill HR 2471, federal and local law enforcement agencies including Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Reserve, the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Maritime Commission, the Federal Postal Regulatory Commission, the National Labor Relations Board, the Mine Enforcement Safety and Health Review Commission and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will be empowered to obtain any US citizens:
• Private email
• Google Docs
• Facebook posts
• Twitter posts
California will be voting on Tuesday, Nov 2 on whether to legalize the use of marijuana by all people over the age of 21. If it passes, it will be a stunning achievement for individual liberties and states’ rights in defiance of overbearing and ineffective Federal drug laws.
But beyond the ideological and political reasons, here are some more practical reasons to vote for the proposition-
NO on prop 19
1) IT will be even easier for teens to consume it
2) Probably a Tax increase
3)you are voting for new cannabis crimes
4)The walmartization’ of cannabis by large corporations.
How will Prop 19 affect you?
• Are you age 18-20? You will not be allowed to consume cannabis legally under Prop 19. Currently, all you need is a medical recommendation to do so.
• Do you interact with anyone under age of 21? You will be looking at up to 6 months in jail for passing them a joint. (If the person is under 18 you will be looking at up to 7 years in prison.)
• Do you live in the same “space” and a minor? (Space could mean anything from the same house to an entire apartment complex.) You will not be allowed to consume cannabis.
• Do you rent your home? Prop 19 will only allow you to grow cannabis if you have permission from your landlord. Due to the risks involved, many (if not most) California landlords do not allow it. How is this legalization?
• Do you grow cannabis with a doctor recommendation? Prop 19 will likely be interpreted by law enforcement and judges to limit your grow space to 5′x5′.
• Do you provide your extra medical cannabis to dispensaries? It will be a crime to do so if Prop 19 passes. In addition, large Oakland growers and tobacco companies will take control of the market and push you out.
• Do you currently have to use your medical cannabis anywhere but home? Prop 19 will prevent patients from using their medicine anywhere in pubic. Which for many people with illnesses is not always possible.
• Do you sell your extra medical cannabis to other medical patients? Prop 19 will make this practice illegal. Even if you are only selling it to cover your growing cost.
• Do you currently enjoy the use of cannabis free from Government interference? Not only will the Government impose excessive taxes under Prop 19, but the federal government will likely respond with unprecedented action against California cannabis users. “The federal Controlled Substances Act makes it a felony to grow or sell cannabis. California can repeal its own marijuana laws, leaving enforcement to the feds. But it can’t legalize a federal felony. Therefore, any grower or seller paying California taxes on marijuana sales or filing pot-related California regulatory paperwork would be confessing, in writing, to multiple federal crimes.”
Would create potential state revenue?
Um, probably not, according to the prop description which states, “Allows people 21 yrs old and older to possess, cultivate, and transport marijuana for personal use.” This means, by my interpretation, that government is basically saying, “Law enforcement has hands off of cracking down on weed as a criminal offense.” This means that the average Joe (your neighbor perhaps) now has the freedom to grow his own “plants” in his backyard and make his stuff for his own personal use.
How does the government have the ability to regulate that! There was no clarity on licensing, and it doesn’t matter. There is no real way of knowing who’s growing the stuff and who isn’t. Therefore, if government can’t regulate, government can’t tax!
Medicinal? According to the OEHHA Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity, marijuana smoke is known to cause cancer.
I would personally like to know, If it’s not addictive, why is it habitual? My logic: Anything regularly inhaled into the lungs is bad for human beings, whether it be debris, candle smoke, tobacco, Sharpie permanent markers, glue, brush fire ash and smoke, or weed. And not natural as it is not necessary.
Solve or reduce drug cartel problems? Not so much.
The problem is not that by voting NO on Prop 19, the violent drug lords will be inflamed and cause more violence, as the proponents of Prop 19 argue (who are we to fear them, by the way?). They believe that legalizing marijuana will reduce the drug problems through unbeatable competition?
No, I’m going on a tangent, but here the solution lies in real border security and militant force (helps solve immigration problems too), something that the U.S. government has failed to effectively enforce, fund, support. Remember Former Border Patrol Agent Ignacio Ramos, the man convicted of shooting a drug smuggler? Fishy stuff. And then Obama passes funds to a useless allocation to strengthen security and sends a few troops here and there? Yet the troops can’t shoot anyone unless it’s really self-defense? Basically, the U.S. government does not find drug cartels a priority and may secretly be “dealing” with them in a different way.
Yes on prop 19
A british study on marijuana and driving published last month showed that even people that are EXTREMELY stoned (consumed 5 to 10 joints) are only as impaired as someone with a BAC 0.04, and drivers that consumed less then a joint drove better then sober people, these result are further compounded by the fact that stoned drivers drive slower.
Also, not only has marijuana alone never been linked to any form of cancer, it is one of the most promising substances is a such for a cure. Studies have shown that when tumors are injected with THC most of them go into remission.
And your comparison of prohibition and rape, just plain idiotic, one is a victimless crime whereas the other is one of the most horrible offenses a person can commit.
The war on drugs has, far from helping people, actually only created a hug black market, increased use of hard and soft drugs, created a beachhead for government tyranny, created a bunch of bad precedent in courts, and made drugs easier for both addicts and youth to get. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO REASON FOR PROHIBITION.
-The Federal “war on drugs” has already failed, especially in regards to marijuana. People are going to get weed anyway, so why not let them get it from legitimate growers and sellers rather than from shady drug dealers? This also has the added benefit of taking marijuana profits away from dangerous gangs and Mexican drug cartels that control the market today, much in the way that 1920’s era gangsters were put out of business when alcohol was re-legalized.
-Legalization means new legitimate jobs for the California economy. It also means profits will be taxed resulting in increased revenue for the state. Taxation from marijuana sales is predicted to be in the hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars.
– Marijuana users, growers, and sellers will no longer be arrested or jailed, which will reduce police , court, and prison operations costs.
-Marijuana is scientifically deemed to be safer than alcohol and tobacco. Unlike other drugs ,it’s virtually impossible to overdose on pot, and it’s not physically addictive.
-There are industrial benefits to cannabis production as well. Hemp (marijuana fiber) can be used to produce textiles, plastics, and other products. Some products are of superior quality when produced with hemp than with the standard materials used today.
Here is the current poll for Brown vs. Whitman:
Born and raised in California it’s difficult for me to believe that California voters can’t put two and two together! Arnold is a Republican acting like a Democrat, and while he is certainly liked he has been unable to clean up the mess left by several Democratic Governors of the state, most likely due to the embedded US Senators and Congressional legislatures, but he has to take the blame himself as: like I said, he does act like a Liberal a lot.
The above being said I think Brown will not be able to solve the states huge financial crisis, eventually begging the Federal government to pick up the pieces (if they don’t have another major quake). If O is still in office when California is officially designated a loss he will no doubt bail them out.
For the answer that said Brown was not a big spender, you don’t have to be labeled a big spender to spend on the wrong things. California’s problem has a lot to do with housing and business tax and regulation, which Brown is definitely a part of.They didn’t call him Governor Moon Bean for no reason.
Whitman is a billionaire business exec with no previous political or government experience and has only advanced because she has spent $80 million on TV ads. She has not yet had a press conference and refuses to answer questions. Arnold did not show up for a forum with other candidates because it was not viewed on TV in prime time. She is conservative Republican.
Meg Whitman is politics as usual and wants to buy her way into the governorship. She wants the position and the power but could care less about the people. It will never happen.
Meg Whitman is for smaller government and letting the tax payers of the state keep their hard earned money. Less governmental control over the private lives.
Meg Whitman is the lesser of the two.
Meg Whitman: billionaire who used her own money to fund her campaign due to a lack of donations from common people.
Meg Whitman is a self made businesswomen who care enough about the state to fund her campain with her own money, lessening the chances she has been bought off
Whitman worked for Goldman Sachs and did insider trading which is illegal. She was CEO at Ebay and made her billions and then laid off people. A CEO does not make an effective governor, as we have witnessed with Arnold for 7 years. He failed totally. He had no political experience. She did not even vote for 28 years. She had people working for her who got paid. It is a different problem to have the responsibility of 37,000,000 people’s lives on your hands. She has no proven record of helping people, of any public service or any actions that indicate she would know what to do for the state. She cannot help people find jobs. That is not the Governor’s purvue. She would lower taxes but that would not help hiring and roll back environmental rules.
Jerry Brown http://www.jerrybrown.org/about
Jerry Brown… washed up, but highly successful politician.
Jerry brown is a washed up politician who is running on the “im a super liberal” plat form.
Jerry Brown is the grandfather of California politics and a liberal Democrat but with age has developed more centrist views. He was the Governor in the 70s, then he was mayor of Oakland and currently is the Attorney General.
Jerry Brown had a bad run as Governor many years ago during a different time. Since then, he has had a successful term as the Mayor for Oakland and Attorney General for the state, He has a deep commitment to the state of California and her people.
Jerry Browns answer to everything it tax tax and more tax. Bigger government and more government taking from everyone. Ran the state already and almost caused it to go bankrupt. He should be told to retire and not come back!