Who else voted against weed legalization for rec use in MD?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My young adult kids wanted me to vote for weed legalization because they felt that Black people are convicted more for weed use due to racist reasons. I however voted against it. I do not want Black or White or any other race to be using weed. Period. I am Asian.

What is wrong with you? You don't want anyone using marijuana so you vote to prosecute and incarcerate them? Super lame.

Remove your head from your rear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My young adult kids wanted me to vote for weed legalization because they felt that Black people are convicted more for weed use due to racist reasons. I however voted against it. I do not want Black or White or any other race to be using weed. Period. I am Asian.

What is wrong with you? You don't want anyone using marijuana so you vote to prosecute and incarcerate them? Super lame.

Remove your head from your rear.

“Super lame?” You sound like a stoner.

We will continue to vote against it at every opportunity. The only rectocranial inversion here is yours. DP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not that poster, but I hope rental property management companies, condo associations, and home owners associations restrict it in their leases and covenants. And I hope they fine and evict people who don't comply, and put liens on their houses.

Eviction seems a little bit extreme, but what do I know?

It's not, and those lease provisions already exist throughout the nation regarding cigarettes/tobacco. The smell is damaging -- to quality of life, to health, to property value. You lose about 10% of your car's trade in value for the smell of weed because it's so hard to eradicate. You lose about 30% on home sale value due to cigarette odors. Can't imagine what the residual smell of weed will do. That hurts one house, but if there are enough in a community, it devalues the entire neighborhood. And HOAs will care about that a great deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not that poster, but I hope rental property management companies, condo associations, and home owners associations restrict it in their leases and covenants. And I hope they fine and evict people who don't comply, and put liens on their houses.

Eviction seems a little bit extreme, but what do I know?

It's not, and those lease provisions already exist throughout the nation regarding cigarettes/tobacco. The smell is damaging -- to quality of life, to health, to property value. You lose about 10% of your car's trade in value for the smell of weed because it's so hard to eradicate. You lose about 30% on home sale value due to cigarette odors. Can't imagine what the residual smell of weed will do. That hurts one house, but if there are enough in a community, it devalues the entire neighborhood. And HOAs will care about that a great deal.

Not to mention that for apartment buildings, anything that includes increased fire risk will have an impact on insurance premiums. The free market demands that there is no smoking tobacco or marijuana or use of candles in apartments and it is so serious that the consequence is and can only be eviction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, next we should ban drinking because prohibition was a great success!

Why stop with weed! We should legalize heroin while we are at it!

Not even comparable. You could just let people grow their one plant and ban most public smoking like with tobacco. DC is a dump already so banning weed isn't going to dress anything up, but will free up law enforcement to deal with your violent crime and property theft problems.

Ha. Hahaha. Hahahahahahaha.Hahahahahahahahaha.

+1. Police in MoCo basically have basically been ignoring weed for years.

[Anonymous]

A friend of mine in law enforcement says LEO rapid testing can't tell the difference between legal cannabis (less that .3% THC) and marijuana anyway, so in general they're not bothering that much with possession.

[Anonymous]

Possession has been decriminalized for years. The concern is driving under the influence. Doesn't matter if it's legal or not. But police need to be able (allowed by politicians) to stop someone for that, test, and the test has to hold up in court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Possession has been decriminalized for years. The concern is driving under the influence. Doesn't matter if it's legal or not. But police need to be able (allowed by politicians) to stop someone for that, test, and the test has to hold up in court.

The problem is the law, it's the science. There's no test for cannabis impairment comparable to what exists for alcohol. Blood alcohol level is a reliable enough indicator of impairment that most states now accept it as prima facie proof. Blood alcohol level correlates strongly enough to breath alcohol and urine alcohol levels that a breath test or urine test is accepted as evidence. Nothing of the kind exists with cannabis. And blood levels of cannabis can remain high long after impairment passes.

[Anonymous]

*isn't* the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted against it. The impact further down the road is going to be a huge burden.

health care, impaired driving, addiction, but hey, more tax money coming in to spend on programs that aren't helping.

+1

Agree 100%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ha ha. The kids on my daughters school bus don’t know it only applies to 18 years+
That’s right! Kids smoking weed on a school bus and all the driver did was tell them to put it out.
Way to go Montgomery county!!

Kids were smoking in Magruder today to celebrate

The stupidity of the progressives is shown once again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ha ha. The kids on my daughters school bus don’t know it only applies to 18 years+
That’s right! Kids smoking weed on a school bus and all the driver did was tell them to put it out.
Way to go Montgomery county!!

Kids were smoking in Magruder today to celebrate

The stupidity of the progressives is shown once again.

Kids were probably acting out to buck their conservative parents.

[Anonymous]

I voted against it. I also knew that it will get legalized.

I am against all kinds of drugs, vaping etc for health reason. So I will continue to vote against it.

My adult kids voted for it because they saw it as a vote towards racial equity. They are idiots. No one should have access to drugs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: No one should have access to drugs.

Join us in reality some time

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[
It's not, and those lease provisions already exist throughout the nation regarding cigarettes/tobacco. The smell is damaging -- to quality of life, to health, to property value. You lose about 10% of your car's trade in value for the smell of weed because it's so hard to eradicate. You lose about 30% on home sale value due to cigarette odors. Can't imagine what the residual smell of weed will do. That hurts one house, but if there are enough in a community, it devalues the entire neighborhood. And HOAs will care about that a great deal.

Oh god, more sky is falling nonsense. MJ smoke isn't nearly as damaging as tobacco smoke. There's fewer toxins and the smell doesn't bind to furniture, close, the walls, etc.

Then again, you'd know that if you knew what the hell you are talking about. But continue lying.