11-04-2015, 09:49 AM
I voted YES on 2 & NO on 3.
Why YES on 2? Because companies were backing initiatives specifically written to help their businesses gain a monopoly. This is wrong, IMO, and basically perpetuates a carrot with a stick policy between businesses and voters. It's a very sneaky way to gain a lawful closed market while wooing desperate voters who want something so bad they would do anything to have it regardless of legal or capital consequence.
- As far as the 5 person panel is concerned, they only come into effect if the amendment proposed is a potential monopoly and the panel needs to vote to allow it. If something looks to be a good idea and only one or two companies can actually implement the idea, then they can make that happen and push it through to the ballot in spite of it being a monopoly.
Why NO on 3? I have a serious fundamental problem with people's growing desire to chemically change the way they feel. I look at drug use (and alcohol abuse) as a selfish act that removes someone from their real world responsibilities and life. We as a society have enough forms of recreation to be distracted or waste time. To add another that physically/chemically impairs is just ludicrous to me.
I have seen so many friends and people I grew up with become infatuated with getting high that it dominates a lot of their thoughts or activities and, in some cases, it has limited their life's potential. One of my life long best friends started smoking occasionally a few years ago. Now, at 35, he can't go anywhere other than work without being bored or wanting to smoke. He is habitually/mentally addicted. I can't, in good conscience, vote to give that the go ahead as a way of regular life for upcoming generations.
Side note: I find it funny that people even need to have weed legalized at this point. CLEARLY... CLEARLY people who want it have very little problem getting their hands on weed. Legalizing seems more like validation or confirmation of the psyche of drug users more than it is about health, wellness, taxes, or availability. Almost as if users need society to tell them it's ok to get F'd up or that we all feel the same pain or struggle with boredom and the desire to feel different.
Why YES on 2? Because companies were backing initiatives specifically written to help their businesses gain a monopoly. This is wrong, IMO, and basically perpetuates a carrot with a stick policy between businesses and voters. It's a very sneaky way to gain a lawful closed market while wooing desperate voters who want something so bad they would do anything to have it regardless of legal or capital consequence.
- As far as the 5 person panel is concerned, they only come into effect if the amendment proposed is a potential monopoly and the panel needs to vote to allow it. If something looks to be a good idea and only one or two companies can actually implement the idea, then they can make that happen and push it through to the ballot in spite of it being a monopoly.
Why NO on 3? I have a serious fundamental problem with people's growing desire to chemically change the way they feel. I look at drug use (and alcohol abuse) as a selfish act that removes someone from their real world responsibilities and life. We as a society have enough forms of recreation to be distracted or waste time. To add another that physically/chemically impairs is just ludicrous to me.
I have seen so many friends and people I grew up with become infatuated with getting high that it dominates a lot of their thoughts or activities and, in some cases, it has limited their life's potential. One of my life long best friends started smoking occasionally a few years ago. Now, at 35, he can't go anywhere other than work without being bored or wanting to smoke. He is habitually/mentally addicted. I can't, in good conscience, vote to give that the go ahead as a way of regular life for upcoming generations.
Side note: I find it funny that people even need to have weed legalized at this point. CLEARLY... CLEARLY people who want it have very little problem getting their hands on weed. Legalizing seems more like validation or confirmation of the psyche of drug users more than it is about health, wellness, taxes, or availability. Almost as if users need society to tell them it's ok to get F'd up or that we all feel the same pain or struggle with boredom and the desire to feel different.
