M3, yea or nay?

[bigbrad123]

I don't mind the legalization of MJ, but I will vote no because of the wording that expunges a person's prior record for a marijuana offense. That's the dumbest thing I've heard. You automatically earn an expungement because of a new law?? When has that ever happened before? Hey, you chose to break the law when it was illegal. Don't cry to me about your record not being able to get you a job. Take out that part and I might be convinced it's worth voting for.

 

[Glass]

I don't mind the legalization of MJ, but I will vote no because of the wording that expunges a person's prior record for a marijuana offense. That's the dumbest thing I've heard. You automatically earn an expungement because of a new law?? When has that ever happened before? Hey, you chose to break the law when it was illegal. Don't cry to me about your record not being able to get you a job. Take out that part and I might be convinced it's worth voting for.

Washington just did this, Massachusetts is working on it. Pennsylvania will vote on legalization in November like us, they also have the expungement on written into their measure. That little mark on your record can stop a person from becoming a valued member of society. Think about how many people got MIP when they were 18 or 19. If that stopped them from getting a job because they got caught drinking a beer wouldn't it be good to not have that on their record so they could get a job in a career rather then just a job? The expungement of past non violent weed records will have positive repercussions for ND in my option.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/25/health/seattle-vacates-weed-charges-trnd/index.html
https://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2018/10/massachusetts_national_day_of.html
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/sep/25/recreational-marijuana-bill-introduced-pennsylvani/

 

[JayKay]

Yep I wouldn't trust a guide who is on something that may slow his judgement/reaction of a charging brown bear!!

So Alaska is larger than most countries in the world and marijuana has been legal for a very long time there. Wouldn’t that be the ultimate case study to show the data of what happens to a society where possession and use of marijuana are legal?[/QUOTE]

That's a purty silly statement. Alaska has more square miles, therefore they're smarter?

(low whistle)

Alaska has a low population density. Ask 100 or 1000 people in Alaska, if there are problems with addiction. You may be surprised at the answers. Of course, pot isn't the only drug of choice, and many others (booze for instance) are perfectly legal.

But the addiction aspect is real. It's there.

I will vote no, simply because I do not believe that recreational use of marijuana will improve anyone's life. Making it legal, more readily available, more socially acceptable, and taxable, does not make the life of the average man better. I just don't believe it.

- - - Updated - - -

I hate to deliver the bad news but........drs, lawyers, other professionals are already doing what they want to do. Measure 3 has nothing to do with that. Look at construction......I've never met a framing crew that didn't have tokers on it. Every trade, people smoke. It's a really bad deal that people's opinions are based around shit they've been told or heard but yet never experienced in their life. They'd feel border line retarded after they smoked a doob and then realized the wool has been pulled over their eyes for 60 years.

Having smoked a doob, or three, or thirty, or more - I've felt this retarded feeling you're talking about.

Can you honestly say that you can function just as well - equally as well, after smoking pot, as if you didn't?

Consider something serious for instance. You need to visit a lawyer about the reading of a will - or maybe you need to visit a doctor about the diagnosis or a loved one - or maybe signing papers on the house you just bought. Things that we could all agree are relatively serious things.

You think that you'd smoke a doob before doing these things, and you are just the same as if you're sober?

Dude. If you really are, then you are about ready to graduate to something stronger.

 

[Obi-Wan]

Will the three guys that are not voting step forward and explain why you are not voting

 

[Lycanthrope]

Someones 1st hand Colorado legalization experience, copied from elsewhere...

"Let's talk about crime and Measure 3. I was a Colorado bail bondsman before, during, and after Colorado legalized cannabis so I have a very unique experience and perspective.
First, if you are unfamiliar with Bail Bondsmen, we are licensed Officers of the Courts. We work in the jails and in the courthouses. We work closely with the judges, the prosecution, the defense, jails and law enforcement agencies. In layman's terms we are "Private Sheriffs" who can release almost any defendant from jail into our recognizance (control) that we choose and believe in. Prior to that work in Colorado, I was a Bail Enforcement Agent for over a decade in North Dakota and Minnesota. On top of that I was a licensed private detective and did many criminal defense cases.
In short I've spent more time in jails and courthouses than even most criminals.
I've had contact with thousands and thousands of people who were in the criminal justice system as defendants.
Now that you have some understanding of my background please hear me about Measure 3.
I absolutely support the passage of Measure 3 for my home state of North Dakota. The benefits that the future holds for North Dakota once Measure 3 passes far far outweigh the perceived risks.
I say perceived risks because I heard all the same contrived arguments bantered about in Colorado before we voted. It was baseless fear mongering that never came to be. The streets didn't run red with blood, the Mexican cartels didn't take over the schools, children were not found passed out on the playground with joints in their hands and Satan didn't start walking the streets.
Rather, businesses sprung up everywhere. Specifically many businesses rose up out of blighted areas and caused entire communities to experience economic growth that hadn't been seen there for decades.
With these businesses came jobs. Tens of thousands of people who were marginalized because of their marijuana backgrounds before became the most popular employees in the state.
The opposition uses the term Black Market. Obviously and admittedly there is a black market. BUT they dont speak about all of the former illicit funds that came into the daylight via taxes that rebuilt the schools. Some of those schools before those funds had leaking roofs and only escaped being condemned because they were owned by the government that would have issued that order.
So let's quickly recap this before I continue. Thousands of new businesses, tens of thousands of new jobs and millions of dollars that directly contributed to the education of the entire state's youth.
Also ignored or avoided by the opposition is the ancillary funds that flowed into the state. People from all over the world came there. That money flowed into hotels, restaurants and every other business imaginable.
Some say "the numbers of homeless people exploded..." so let's speak to that. Listen, those people were there before. Did some more arrive? Sure.
BUT! Something changed. Where once it used to be used needles and other heavy drug paraphernalia on the ground, that started to go away. Heroin use, crack cocaine and meth use all declined significantly. Those homeless people were using the legal weed to GET OFF THE OTHER DRUGS!!! The opposition will absolutely not tell you about that because it doesn't serve their fear mongering agendas.
What else do they NOT tell you? Tons.
Remember, I dealt with the criminals who were arrested. So what about that which the opposition is hiding from you?
The amount of outstanding warrants started to decrease significantly. Since cannabis was no longer an easy thing to hunt anymore the law enforcement agencies HAD to chase down the "real" criminals. On top of that enforcement of other laws increased.
When they say DUIs increased, well? Duh! Read the above paragraph again. Because they didn't have marijuana prohibition they had time to pursue all the other crimes they "didn't have time for before". Imagine that.
Let's talk about the schools again. Rather let's talk about the youths.
Cannabis use among youths DROPPED SHARPLY!!!
Why? It was legal and lost a ton of it's cool factor.
I am sure that I have missed some of their fake disingenuous arguments. If I missed it and you ask I will address it in the comments.
In closing Colorado reaped many more good things because of legalization than the opposite. And North Dakota will also gain way more than it loses with legalization.
Vote YES on Measure 3!"

 

[guywhofishes]

ha ha ha - come on!

"I say perceived risks because I heard all the same contrived arguments bantered about in Colorado before we voted. It was baseless fear mongering that never came to be. The streets didn't run red with blood, the Mexican cartels didn't take over the schools, children were not found passed out on the playground with joints in their hands and Satan didn't start walking the streets.
Rather, businesses sprung up everywhere. Specifically many businesses rose up out of blighted areas and caused entire communities to experience economic growth that hadn't been seen there for decades.
With these businesses came jobs. Tens of thousands of people who were marginalized because of their marijuana backgrounds before became the most popular employees in the state. "





- - - Updated - - -

"Specifically many businesses rose up out of blighted areas and caused entire communities to experience economic growth that hadn't been seen there for decades."

My what a Godsend for those communities! Good gravy.

- - - Updated - - -

I just realized this is a chance for economic recovery for blighted small towns in ND. I'm voting YES!

:;:smokin

 

[Enslow]

Same old story people will be against this until they can profit from it. Lots of money in that plant.

 

[Davey Crockett]

Same old story people will be against this until they can profit from it. Lots of money in that plant.

Yup, You nailed it. It would be fun to go back and revisit that old hemp topic , Same old story different day.

 

[Enslow]

I bet there Isn’t one person working at the state of Colorado who makes budget decisions that would be in support of Colorado reversing their marijuana laws.

 

[JayKay]

Yes, I can't wait for the economic boom to happen, when headshops are everywhere. Think of all the productive input into the blighted communities. All those people put back to work!

Guys!! It's gonna be awesome!!

HEAVY sarcasm here...

Furthermore...

"Same old story people will be against this until they can profit from it. Lots of money in that plant."


Perhaps agriculturally, or even medically, but if anybody tries to tell me that legalizing weed for recreational use is going to profit ME.. well, hahaha!

My answer is still no. ​

 

[guywhofishes]

Vote No!... or the the streets will run red with blood, the Mexican cartels will take over the schools, children will be found passed out on the playground with joints in their hands and Satan will start walking the streets.

Said nobody ever, in CO or ND.

- - - Updated - - -

Are we done posting hyperbole yet?

 

[Enslow]

Yes, I can't wait for the economic boom to happen, when headshops are everywhere. Think of all the productive input into the blighted communities. All those people put back to work!

Guys!! It's gonna be awesome!!

HEAVY sarcasm here...

Furthermore...

"Same old story people will be against this until they can profit from it. Lots of money in that plant."


Perhaps agriculturally, or even medically, but if anybody tries to tell me that legalizing weed for recreational use is going to profit ME.. well, hahaha!

My answer is still no. ​

[/

umm it’s called the stock market.

 

[Davey Crockett]

"Same old story people will be against this until they can profit from it. Lots of money in that plant."


Perhaps agriculturally, or even medically, but if anybody tries to tell me that legalizing weed for recreational use is going to profit ME.. well, hahaha!

​

I just might make that claim but not on a knee jerk. I need to try and estimate the tax base and the prison expenses , Without going out on a limb I'll say that as it stands there should be a taxpayer benefit but there is a big BUT...... I need to take some time to focus on all the money that the opposition of M3 says it will cost to legalize it . Not sure if they are just blowing smoke or not on the financial end, I know they are blowing smoke in every other direction so I wouldn't be surprised. So I won't flat out say it will benefit you quite yet but but don't be surprised if I do later on. I realize that it won't change your mind and I'm fine with that , I just like a challenge.

 

[guywhofishes]

But Enslow - buying pot stocks means profiting off the devil's lettuce.

A rather unsavory move for some of us "old-fashioned" guys.

 

[AaronJ]

When someone can come up with roadside testing that provides a quantifiable level in someone's system (ie: breathalyzer) that can go with the subjective (ie: sobriety testing) I will vote yes. Until then it is a NO for me.

 

[Enslow]

But Enslow - buying pot stocks means profiting off the devil's lettuce.

A rather unsavory move for some of us "old-fashioned" guys.

I would guess you own mutual funds that own shares of drug companies already that sell opioids.

- - - Updated - - -

When someone can come up with roadside testing that provides a quantifiable level in someone's system (ie: breathalyzer) that can go with the subjective (ie: sobriety testing) I will vote yes. Until then it is a NO for me.

Wouldn’t it be nice if that type of breathalyzer was available for opioids now? All of the concerns everyone is bringing up are very valid but moot when we have a country with millions of drivers addicted to synthetic opium.

 

[AaronJ]

I would guess you own mutual funds that own shares of drug companies already that sell opioids.

- - - Updated - - -



Wouldn’t it be nice if that type of breathalyzer was available for opioids now? All of the concerns everyone is bringing up are very valid but moot when we have a country with millions of drivers addicted to synthetic opium.

Yes it would.

However, I wouldn't say the points are moot. They are just as valid; but there are points in a discussion that has many of great points. Oddly enough from all sides.

 

[Davey Crockett]

When someone can come up with roadside testing that provides a quantifiable level in someone's system (ie: breathalyzer) that can go with the subjective (ie: sobriety testing) I will vote yes. Until then it is a NO for me.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/cann...actually-work/




[video=youtube;3dlA_e7ZGHE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=3dlA_e7ZGHE[/video]

 

[espringers]

you can be charged and found guilty of Driving Under the Influence of drugs without a breath test. you fail field sobriety tests, get arrested, search warrant for your blood based on PC, drugs turn up in your system... combine the erratic driving, failed FST and drug(s) in your system and its a good case for DUI (drugs/narcotics). not brain surgery and it happens every day. before refusal became a crime, folks were charged and convicted of DUI (alcohol related) every day without a breath test. now the refusal itself is a crime. so, its become less of an issue.

 

[Enslow]

you can be charged and found guilty of Driving Under the Influence of drugs without a breath test. you fail field sobriety tests, get arrested, search warrant for your blood based on PC, drugs turn up in your system... combine the erratic driving, failed FST and drug(s) in your system and its a good case for DUI (drugs/narcotics). not brain surgery and it happens every day. before refusal became a crime, folks were charged and convicted of DUI (alcohol related) every day without a breath test. now the refusal itself is a crime. so, its become less of an issueD.

It is really hard to convict someone who has a prescription.