No dog racing but you can have an ounce of Pot in MA - Page 2

MizKerri · 11-05-2008, 12:21 PM

For me, dog racing was less about gambling problems and more about mistreatment of/cruelty to dogs. That's the main reason I'm glad to see it banned.

Also, glad to hear that most sellers of pot are not likely to be big time drug dealers. I really have no issue with it even being legalized, but I'd want to see it regulated the same way alcohol is.

A_la_Nap-tural · 11-05-2008, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mycolorfulheart

To me pot is about the same level as alcohol. It just smells worse, lol.

Depends on what kind you're smokin..... (te he he

)

A_la_Nap-tural · 11-05-2008, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichelleBFT

I suppose I can see what you're saying, I just view it differently. In my experience, marijuana doesn't really come with a really sketchy element. It comes with video games.

And random runs to the nearest white castle... think harold and kumar! Good times!

southrncurls · 11-05-2008, 01:38 PM

In my opinion they are both bad. But what do I know I'm a non-pot smoking animal rights advocate.

ursula · 11-06-2008, 12:32 PM

Well, I voted for both (the decriminalization question and the banning-dog-races question). Like others have said, I voted for the former because I don't want to see taxpayers' money--especially with the economy as it is now--wasted on prosecuting and jailing those caught with one ounce of pot, and the latter because I don't support cruelty against animals. I really don't understand what's weird about this, and I was very glad to see both questions pass. In fact, all three questions went exactly as I hoped.

Believe me, anyone caught driving while intoxicated--by either alcohol or marijuana--will get in trouble. That's an entirely separate issue.

Josephine · 11-06-2008, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mycolorfulheart

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichelleBFT

Quote:

Originally Posted by xcptnl

I understand. But it's still not the element of people you want as someone was saying that gambling brings in an element you don't want. As I noted - there is bad to both sides so it just one of those things that made me go hmmmm. No dogs but pot is OK.

I suppose I can see what you're saying, I just view it differently. In my experience, marijuana doesn't really come with a really sketchy element. It comes with video games.

To me pot is about the same level as alcohol. It just smells worse, lol.

I agree, but I like the smell

.

A_la_Nap-tural · 11-06-2008, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Josephine

I agree, but I like the smell

.

Here here Josephine!

yagottaloveyacurls · 11-06-2008, 05:05 PM

Weed shouldn't be illegal.
and that's all I'm going to say about that.

mailgirl · 11-06-2008, 05:52 PM

After reading some of the other political posts I feel like going to MA to smoke some pot!!!!!

Oregano (formerly babywavy) · 11-06-2008, 06:08 PM

WHOA.

FIRST of all, it is not LEGAL to have an ounce of pot in Massachusetts. The law has been voted to decriminalize anything under an ounce. What this means is that rather than hauling someone off to jail, into the court system, and having them forever carry a criminal record for getting caught with a joint on them - the cop writes a ticket, and the money goes to the state. Thank you very much. I assure you that on average, someone carrying under an ounce of pot is not planning on distributing it.

I would also like to state that even countries where marijuana is legal, it is not legal to SELL it. Thereby omitting the legality of slinging to kids on the street.

MOST people do not hang around on the street looking for little kids to pawn off pot on. People who sell marijuana do not have a hard time looking for buyers. If they do, I will gladly give out my number.

I would also like to point out that many studies have been done on the effect of marijuana versus the effect of alcohol, and the effects of alcohol are not only worse, but more dangerous.

The Rastafarian culture is filled with people who smoke marijuana as much as some people smoke cigarettes.

People do not hold interventions for pot smokers.

Please do not listen to the government propaganda about marijuana. They are persuading you for strictly political reasons.

CurlyGina2 · 11-06-2008, 06:14 PM

Why doesn't something like that come up in my state

ursula · 11-06-2008, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by babywavy

WHOA.

FIRST of all, it is not LEGAL to have an ounce of pot in Massachusetts. The law has been voted to decriminalize anything under an ounce. What this means is that rather than hauling someone off to jail, into the court system, and having them forever carry a criminal record for getting caught with a joint on them - the cop writes a ticket, and the money goes to the state. Thank you very much. I assure you that on average, someone carrying under an ounce of pot is not planning on distributing it.

I would also like to state that even countries where marijuana is legal, it is not legal to SELL it. Thereby omitting the legality of slinging to kids on the street.

MOST people do not hang around on the street looking for little kids to pawn off pot on. People who sell marijuana do not have a hard time looking for buyers. If they do, I will gladly give out my number.

I would also like to point out that many studies have been done on the effect of marijuana versus the effect of alcohol, and the effects of alcohol are not only worse, but more dangerous.

The Rastafarian culture is filled with people who smoke marijuana as much as some people smoke cigarettes.

People do not hold interventions for pot smokers.

Please do not listen to the government propaganda about marijuana. They are persuading you for strictly political reasons.

THANK YOU. I've taken to calling it the "decriminalization of pot" question, but that leads some people to think we've voted to make it perfectly fine to walk around with an ounce of pot. You would be FINED. It's still not legal. I don't anticipate that the legalization of pot will happen in this country any time soon.

And, like babywavy said, people carrying less than an ounce are probably not big-time drug dealers bringing a "bad element" into your neighborhood! I'd be much more worried about a college-student bar in my neighborhood.

Suburbanbushbabe · 11-06-2008, 09:26 PM

I voted for civil only fines for < 1oz of pot and to end dog racing. You can tell MA has its priorities a little skewed. But ending greyhound racing is a good thing. The folks at Raynham and the other dog tracks are complaining about the 1000 jobs that will be lost.

ursula · 11-06-2008, 09:37 PM

But I still don't see what's "skewed" about it. Do you mean that ending dog racing is not an important enough issue for the ballot?

xcptnl · 11-07-2008, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suburbanbushbabe

I voted for civil only fines for < 1oz of pot and to end dog racing. You can tell MA has its priorities a little skewed. But ending greyhound racing is a good thing. The folks at Raynham and the other dog tracks are complaining about the 1000 jobs that will be lost.

It won't be right away will it? That does suck for them.

In regards to the question as to why it is skewed - it just seems contradictory and I was thinking more the gambling side of the dog issue to pass that law but allow under an ounce of pot. It's not a big deal either way to me - it just seemed odd in my head but like I said I was thinking of the gambling aspect of dog racing.

Oregano (formerly babywavy) · 11-07-2008, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xcptnl

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suburbanbushbabe

I voted for civil only fines for < 1oz of pot and to end dog racing. You can tell MA has its priorities a little skewed. But ending greyhound racing is a good thing. The folks at Raynham and the other dog tracks are complaining about the 1000 jobs that will be lost.

It won't be right away will it? That does suck for them.

In regards to the question as to why it is skewed - it just seems contradictory and I was thinking more the gambling side of the dog issue to pass that law but allow under an ounce of pot. It's not a big deal either way to me - it just seemed odd in my head but like I said I was thinking of the gambling aspect of dog racing.

No, it doesn't have to do with the gambling aspect, it has to do with the argument of cruelty to the animals.

Let's also keep in mind that smoking pot isn't going to hurt anyone but the SMOKER.

I fully believe that we should allow people to do things personally to themselves, regardless if we find them harmful or not.

And I refuse to take the selling of drugs to kids, or the gateway drug comment, as a valid argument.

Teach your kids not to gamble if you don't believe in gambling, not to smoke if you don't want them to smoke, not to drink if you don't want them to drink - and at a certain age you let them go and hope they follow what you taught them.

Laws need to be implemented to protect innocent people and animals from being hurt by others. You should be able to hurt yourself as much as you damn want.

xcptnl · 11-07-2008, 10:59 AM

I was not passing judgment on either one. Like I said - it was just my weird way of thinking - ok to pot, no to dogs (and like I said I was thinking of the gambling aspect - I knew the question was on the ballot due for the cruelty issue). I wonder when they will outlaw horse racing.

I don't smoke pot but I do like to gamble but not on dogs. So I really didn't care about either of these items but voted yes to both questions.