Palo Alto's marijuana measure goes down in defeat Palo Alto Issues, posted by Editor, Palo Alto Online, on Nov 6, 2012 at 8:59 pm
Marijuana laws may remain hazy in California but Palo Alto residents made their position clear on Election Day when they stubbed out a proposition that would have allowed up to three pot shops to operate within city borders.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Tuesday, November 6, 2012, 8:49 PM
Posted by Anymouse, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2012 at 9:50 pm
And, from paragraph 2: :"The results were based on information from eight out of 37 precints."
I agree, typical shoddy reporting, along with the Palo Altans finding out only through a local Palo Altan having to provide a link FROM the LA TIMES, regarding Charles Munger and Mandy Lowell, opposing Prop 30, giving over 35 million against that proposition.
Posted by Greenman, a resident of the Green Acres neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2012 at 10:15 pm
This news story stinks more than medical cannabis. I strongly dislike when people use the term "pot". They used "pot clubs" (in quotes) in their opposing arguments!! Why couldn't they use proper terms for a substance that has medical benefits!
Posted by WOW, a resident of another community, on Nov 6, 2012 at 11:04 pm
The above comments are hilarious because the Medicinal Marijuana just passed by over 60%. The voters have spoken. It is a good fiscal and medcial proposition. Now the task is for those who voted to hold council and the taxes (MILLIONS) generated for taxpayer purposes accountable, and NOT to just give management raises or hire more managers which absorb WAY TOO much in fringe benefits.
Medicinal Marijuana can also positively help balance the medical and pharmecutical industries' existing imbalance. Congratulations to the Palo Alto citizens for speaking up. Stay strong! Keep an eye on those taxes generated/spent.
Posted by WOW, a resident of another community, on Nov 6, 2012 at 11:19 pm
"@Idontknow - No you provided the CORRECT link , though NBC BAY AREA has written Measure C as "Palo Alto Measure C Marijuanna Dispensaries -- 63% YES, 37% NO !!"
Ok folks. I am laughing my rear off. I am not crazy. I am not high. LOLOL. The news WAS reported wrongly as shown in a post above by @Idontknow. Whew. See, you can't always believe what the news says. (That may explain the confusion for posts being taken down, and 'which poll do I believe."
Posted by bru, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 12:58 am bru is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
At least Coloradoans(?) are honest ... apparently Colorado is the first state to vote to make recreational use of marijuana legal. I think that is a good idea and Palo Alto is being kind of silly. We've got to stop rivers of money going to drug kingpins who murder people and take over Mexico ... and the flip side is that people in America might be a bit happier ??? so what is there to think about except ... "Reefer Madness" ... are you kidding?
Posted by Anon., a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 10:35 am
Having actually been in ... or rather got to look in to a pot dispensary, most of the people there look like pot smokers and all that connotes. There was certainly no clinical atmosphere, which is probably the reason they are so adamant and secure about blocking the door and not allowing anyone else to enter the premises. Face it, these are places for people who want to smoke pot "legally" to purchase it.
I wonder who is really behind most of these places, but still, it's better than shipping tons of money south of the border to criminals or having drug gangs rule certain neighborhoods.
I'd have to say I don't think it's in the cards for Colorado or anywhere else to legalize other drugs - that's just fear mongering.
Posted by neighbor, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 10:49 am
Every once in awhile we hear about the dramatically failed war on drugs by the Feds - trillions spent on gun-toting agents in helicopters, etc. I am against hard drugs however I have come around to the view that legalization of small quantities (or growing) of marijuana for those 18 and older makes sense and gets the real criminals out of the picture.
Posted by Anon., a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 11:22 am
Crescent Park Dad, there is always a perspective that makes anything in life a joke. So what if people smoke pot in a manner that is regulated and legal? I think it's an improvement. Those people will smoke pot anyway. So it's a joke, but what do you think of the status quo as regards marijuana prohibition ... is that not just as bad of a joke, and it costs us much more money and human capital.
I am sure that there must be some people who buy cannabis for clinical reasons.
I think it's a good idea to remove at least a little bit of hypocrisy from our society. You disagree I suppose?
Posted by KP, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 11:48 am
1st - I am not a user of drugs of any kind (well, I do drink alcohol)
@ Drug-Legalization-Next? - What a stupid statement! REALLY!?! BTW-coke was already legal in the past. hmmm.
Next, regardless of what they are called, the clubs do not create users and marijuana is not a gateway drug.
People are responsible for themselves and what they decide to use (or not). When society puts the responsibility back on themselves and stops blaming others for their "problems" which "lead to drug use" (whatever), only then will people stop having excuses for poor behavior, ie; drug use, spousal abuse, child abuse and alcohol abuse. EVERYONE has had some sort of issue in their life -
Take on your own responsibilities, so society doesn't have to.
Posted by Paly Parent, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 12:02 pm
If you have a high school kid, they will tell you that the majority of the pot floating around school and parties is either medical marijuana or home grown, we don't need to make this move available to our kids. Opening pot dispensaries and legalizing pot are two different topics.
Posted by Andy, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 12:13 pm
@PalyParent, I agree. I live near an elementary school and often see the little baggies left over from the dispensary in Mtn. View, with dumb names of the types on them. I'm sure its really easy for an 18 year old to get an "RX" for it, then sell or give it to younger siblings/friends.
Maybe its not a huge deal that they smoke it but they DO drive to and from the school yard to smoke it, and they often leave behind trash. So, unsafe driving and littering is my main problem. What brain cells they kill is their own problem.
Posted by Embarrassed, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 12:27 pm
Think for one second how much easier it is for a 17-year-old to buy pot than it is to buy alcohol or cigarettes. Dispensaries require ID and a doctors note; the guy who is selling your kid weed right now just wants $40.
It's not a surprise that people in PA are too stuck-up to allow cannabis clubs to operate here("marijuana" was coined by yellow journalists to scare parents, so thanks pa online). To see the same tired propaganda about no health effects and clubs making access to kids easier trotted out here is embarrassing. I didn't know Palo Alto was also full of ignorant parents who would rather deny patients medicine than talk to their kids.
If the city council supported violating state law because we think we're better than San Jose or specifics in the text they should have said just that. It is really a shock to see how uneducated people even in PA are about the drug war.
Posted by Anon., a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 1:16 pm
It's bad enough that Hollywood has ripped off Phillip K. Dick, now many years dead and with conflicting ideas on drugs ... which is not even in the category of marijuana, taking one quote out of context of the man's life is really acceptable.
The drug was has been used to continue to justify American hegemony in Colombia as a way to put military down there and keep "order" ... American order.
Most of the countries in South America now just seem to want the US out since we have lied and abused whatever welcome we had.
We've made a shameful mess of Mexico, and supported systemic violence in Central and South America for generations.
Why can't the political remnants of we white people start to live up the promise of America and do the right thing as regards letting people have freedom and opportunity. We seem to think the end of the conversation is making Mexico so desperately poor and corrupt that they lead like fish out of an aquarium over here so that we can use them for the slave labor we no longer want to admit we need to prop up this corrupt order?
As we decline and perhaps fall do we really want all the people in other countries cheering and clapping?
As Winston Churchill said, America always does the right thing, once all the other alternatives have been exhausted ... isn't it time to do better?
We have now and will have in the future a huge shortage of jobs, and until we learn to educate our people thoroughly and well it's going to get worse. If some slackers want to relax with a joint, or if some losers want to smoke pot, or some sick people want to ease their pain, it's a net plus for everyone that we not attack what we think is a problem by the most expensive and least productive means available - ie. the criminal justice system. Did we learn nothing by turning 911 into a 3rd world war costing over 2 trillion dollars? My God!
Taking care of the outcasts is a cost of doing business, if we really were so pragmatic and rationally oriented we'd realize that learn to do the job cheaply and efficiently, and find a track to moving towards eliminating it in the future. If we get the upper hand on this problem by making people happier and more interested in positive things we will see the whole problem evaporate within our lifetimes perhaps instead of drag on for centuries.
Posted by Ducatigirl, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 1:17 pm
Embarrassed: you have mde a very valid point. When we hear the word "marijuana", we have a hysterical knee-jerk reaction and think of hippie bacchanals. "Cannabis" tends to conjure up more logic in trms of medicine and science.
Better the stuff is regulated, since it will always be here, regardless. Where there is a demand, there is always a supply.
Posted by disappointed, a resident of the Fairmeadow neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 1:25 pm
the fact that measure c was able to get as far as it did (almost 38% approval) with the little support given to it should show you something about whats going to happen and now that cannabis is legal in Colorado and Washington its only a matter of time before the issue is brought up in the supreme court so fight it all you want but the times they are a changin
Posted by HUTCH 7.62, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Nov 7, 2012 at 7:05 pm HUTCH 7.62 is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
Hopefully with the legalization of MJ in Washington and Colorado this state will be rid of a large portion of it's druggies. Allowing for more housing for hard working Americans.
Honestly giving the ill informed Democrat leg-hounds in this state I surely thought this would of passed. And again, with all honesty having a bunch of head shops selling illegal drugs in town would have helped make Palo Alto more affordable for the alleged 99%
Posted by JuliusS, a resident of the Evergreen Park neighborhood, on Nov 9, 2012 at 10:45 pm JuliusS is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
I am hoping for the best.We are all aware that voters in the states of Washington and Colorado recently took bold strides, granting weed decriminalization regulations. Though critics were quick to begin grumbling, those states are poised to reap substantial economic benefits from doing so. Pay for your medicine with Web Link