Oregon needs YOU to vote Measure 91

Discussion in 'Marijuana Legalization' started by wdizz, Oct 26, 2014.

  1. Guys! Measure 91 is on the ballot for legalization of marijuana in the good ol' state Oregon.
    This measure is incredibly well put together, and we have learned a lot from Colorado and particularly Washington's mistakes.
    http://www.weedlore.com/oregon-marijuana-legalization-91/ details the measure if your interested.
    If you are in Oregon, and registed to vote, you NEEEED to get your ballot in ASAP! If you have a friend/relative in Oregon urge them to vote yes!
    Spread the word!

  2. Great site! I feel like there is a strong possability of this passing... thoughts?
    I'm confident Oregon, Alaska, and the others are all going to do well.
  4. Ha!  Vote YES on 91?!  Hell no!  I don't vote, but I am making my one and only exception ever on this measure 91 B.S.  VOTE NO ON 91!  I own a bar in Portland, and have bartended a a few Portland bars over the years, and if I know one thing it is that the OLCC are a bunch of stazi extortionists. To put the OLCC in charge of weed is one of the stupidest ways to go about legalizing weed.  The OLCC should be abolished not given more power!  NO ON 91!
  5. Who do you propose would regulate liquor and marijuana sales then?
  6. #7 brybry12345, Oct 26, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 27, 2014
     Why not just treat it like any other consumed plant?  Setting up a giant bureauocracy to regulate a harmless plant is silly loony toon land stuff.  I get that no one thinks it would be legalized without a bunch of nutty rules regulating every aspect of its production, sales and usage, but appeasing a bunch of morons by making more stupid laws is unacceptable.
    And liquor is different than weed, but it is over regulated as well... but liquor is actually really bad for your body and decision making, weed is not.  Let police deal with the problems alcohol creates, cause they already do.  The olcc is just an extortion racket, they do no good in the world, period.
  7. Unfortunately we live in the real world. We do not live in a utopia where this would be possible. Also, voting no on 91 will not abolish the OLCC, rather it will send the message that you want to keep marijuana distribution illegal.  Marijuana WILL eventually become legal, and its inevitable that it would have to be regulated by the OLCC.
    I certainly want regulation. Regulation creates safe access, and can help regulate quality of distributed marijuana. If it were entierely unregulated, and treated "any other consumed plant", then a 12 year old could walk into a store and purchase weed just as they could parsley for example.
    We need to create laws that are realistic, and work within our established system because unfortunately a radical change in government is not realistic. 
    lol.  Utter BS.  It is not inevitable it has to be regulated by the OLCC.  It doesn't need to be regulated in such a way at all.  That is just dumn, and I assume you have never dealt with the OLCC if you think they can serve any useful purpose whatsoever.
    2nd.  You don't need a bureauocracy to make the purchase of a product illegal for a minor.  The OLCC has nothing to do with this.
    3rd.  My vision is realistic in anything but a dystopian future ruled by corporate sectors and crooked politics... which is what we may well be on the cusp of if not already in...  and in that case I'm fine keeping it illegal.  No utopia argument, just plain simple common sense.  I believe The argument that it wont be legalized without a ton of oversight and restrictions is wrong.  I think most people realize how harmless it is and would legalize it without said oversight in a few years anyways with some common sense rules intead of appointing a bunch of extortionists to "deal with it."  cause once you let a group like the OLCC take hold you will never get it away from them, so let's just wait for a good proposition instead of rushing in.
  9. I'm from Oregon. Rogue Valley. I'm voting no on this too. It should be called "socialized weed act". It'll make weed seedy. It'll allow anyone to grow hemp which is low THC, and that'll pollinate all the other plant making them seedy and their seeds will be a lot weaker. Everywhere where weed grows wild is only because it's super seedy.
    I'm only voting no because I love weed. It'll become like tobacco, where there really is no competition. When it should be like tea or coffee, not government regulated. I think it should be legal. Just not socialized.
  10. Jesus they wanna make pot legal and all you can say is it'll make weed seedy??

    I'm voting yes on this

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Grasscity Forum mobile app
  11. People are really not thinking realistically here. What a shame. Certainly I would like marijuana to be treated differently, not as a controlled substance. But I will say it again, we live in the real world, and need to work with others who don't share our love of the plant. Such a shame that marijuana lovers are voting no on this measure. This is a STEP in the right direction, we need to make progress. If this doesn't pass, we will have made no progress in the right direction.
  12. No it's not a step in the right direction.  Its already decriminalized, cheap as poop and available everywhere.  I see no upside to this proposal.  It expands an already overtly corrupt orginizations authority and that is a step backward.
  13.  Okay, this obviously isn't going anywhere. The OLCC obviously wronged you, and your pissed about it. Sorry to hear that. Thank you for your opinion on the matter.
  14. They never wronged me, I deal with their BS.  That said, they are cocksuckers and anyone who thinks this prop is good doesn't know what they are talking about and doesn't understand the big picture.
  15. #16 brybry12345, Oct 27, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 27, 2014
    and if you do see the big picture, and still agree than you are a cocksucker too.  just saying.  This is a small battle, but one that needs squelching.  More nanny state, more taxes on people who actually work, less small buisness and an overall higher reliance on the corrupt ass government is what is at stake in the big picture.  This is a small thing in that picture, but I love weed and don't want it to fund their BS, which is what this measure does.  What is it 10% or 20% of the tax revenue goes to police even though they will be doing less policing?  what a joke.... Well should be doing less policing I should say.
    Decriminalized does not mean consequence free. There are still fines to consider, do you have a grand to shell out if you get caught with an ounce of weed? Because I don't. A lot of people don't. 
    Legalization the way we want it will not happen in one fell swoop. We let OLCC control it now, maybe people start to see how harmless legalization is and regulations can improve in the future. But if we don't start somewhere, we won't get anywhere at all. 
  17. the more I think abou it the stupider this proposal sounds.  Because also, why are we giving such a big chunk to police departments?  We are making their job easier.  According to their own site 58% of drug arrests and citations are for pot smoking.  Is it to appease the corrupt ass political fucks at the top that a projecting a drop in their corrupt ass revenue?  Not as many tickets, less reasons to put people in jail?  That is one theory.
    Another is that for some reason Oregon police need more recources for drug prevention and such, but this is BS,
    My personal guess is they just want more officers to write more traffic tickets and arrest more people on their other petty charges... Cause trust me, there is no shortage of police funding anywhere in the Portland metro area.
  18. Just like we could have got rid of the OLCC after a few years of prohibition had been lifted?  Ha.  A good foundation is key.  This foundation is mad of mud.
    Can you honestly tell me you would rather liquor be illegal than handled by the OLCC? Because I sure wouldn't. OLCC can be pretty fucking stupid but I'd much rather be able to buy my liquor in a store than have to find a shitty street dealer to buy from, much rather be able to possess it without worrying about getting fined, much rather not have the people who manufacture it risking felonies and jail time. 
    Your attitude toward this is ridiculously selfish. 

Share This Page