Quote:Of course I never heard of pill farming - because there is no such thing. Pills are only made by scientists in labs.
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://myfloridalegal.com/pages.nsf/main/aa7aaf5caa22638d8525791b006a30c8'>http://myfloridalegal.com/pages.nsf/main/aa7aaf5caa22638d8525791b006a30c8</a>
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Content/getdoc/f617ed03-1c84-4cb4-9f65-c4ae020bb112/11-01--Doctor-Shopping-Statute.aspx'>http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Content/getdoc/f617ed03-1c84-4cb4-9f65-c4ae020bb112/11-01--Doctor-Shopping-Statute.aspx</a>
Some reading material about how the real world works.
I found a spelling error (moneys) in Amendment 1 and "the year 2000" in Amendment 3. Amendments 2 and 3 are redundant: I kept reading the same words over and over.
The idea of a constitutional amendment only being in effect 20 years is ridiculous. It looks like they are trying to put a raising taxes issue in the wrong document. Not a bad idea for a law, but terrible as part of the state Constitution IMO.
So if Amendment 3 is approved, voters will decide whether or not to let a to-be-disqualified judge remain qualified for retention? That is what it looks like to me. I don't know if that is good or bad.
Quote:I found a spelling error (moneys) in Amendment 1 and "the year 2000" in Amendment 3. Amendments 2 and 3 are redundant: I kept reading the same words over and over.
The idea of a constitutional amendment only being in effect 20 years is ridiculous. It looks like they are trying to put a raising taxes issue in the wrong document. Not a bad idea for a law, but terrible as part of the state Constitution IMO.
So if Amendment 3 is approved, voters will decide whether or not to let a to-be-disqualified judge remain qualified for retention? That is what it looks like to me. I don't know if that is good or bad.
Just stop we can't take you serous after the pill farm thing
Quote:Just stop we can't take you serous after the pill farm thing
I am always serious so you sure can.
Quote:Just stop we can't take you serous after the pill farm thing
It's taken you that long??????????
Worst. Just the absolute worst, you are.
Hmmm.....sometimes I just don't know what to say.
Yes on 2 and the rest left blank.
Quote:Yes on 2 and the rest left blank.
Why leave the others blank? If you understand what they are, you should have opinions about them.
Quote:Why leave the others blank? If you understand what they are, you should have opinions about them.
What if your opinion is that you don't care either way? Boom roasted.
Quote:What if your opinion is that you don't care either way? Boom roasted.
Good point.
I tend to vote NO on all amendments except the one a few years back that set a 60% standard for passing them... I did so again this year... I have read that #2 had a large support early on but is losing support down to a 50-50 split that will make it not pass... If the medical use is so valuable, then let it be passed by the legislature and be made a law... It may not be true life but Medical dope is abused left and right.
I do feel that it should all be legal without going through these kinds of steps and taxed like others have suggested... Taxing vices is one way the government stays out of pockets but it is an unreliable source of revenue... Look at Cig taxes... The states can raise them all they want but will all lose money since people will buy out of state or org crime buys in bulk in low taxed states
D
Quote:I tend to vote NO on all amendments except the one a few years back that set a 60% standard for passing them... I did so again this year... I have read that #2 had a large support early on but is losing support down to a 50-50 split that will make it not pass... If the medical use is so valuable, then let it be passed by the legislature and be made a law... It may not be true life but Medical dope is abused left and right.
I do feel that it should all be legal without going through these kinds of steps and taxed like others have suggested... Taxing vices is one way the government stays out of pockets but it is an unreliable source of revenue... Look at Cig taxes... The states can raise them all they want but will all lose money since people will buy out of state or org crime buys in bulk in low taxed states
I voted no on all of them too.
Question 1: Too much uncertainty about the end results.
Question 2: Medications don't belong in the Constitution.
Question 3: Not supported by the Democratic Party.
I don't even know if marijuana is valuable as a medication. People throw around the idea without explaining how it helps or why FDA-approved durgs are not just as good at treating the same problems. Until somebody shows me scientific studies that prove marijuana is the best, only, or safest treatment for certain medical conditions, I can't support the amendment proposal for a highly addictive recreational drug. But I will listen if any double-blind marijuana studies are published in peer-reviewed journals.
I don't know about you guys, but my ballot came with a sample for Amendment 2.
I voted, like, three times. B)
Quote:I voted no on all of them too.
Question 1: Too much uncertainty about the end results.
Question 2: Medications don't belong in the Constitution.
Question 3: Not supported by the Democratic Party.
I don't even know if marijuana is valuable as a medication. People throw around the idea without explaining how it helps or why FDA-approved durgs are not just as good at treating the same problems. Until somebody shows me scientific studies that prove marijuana is the best, only, or safest treatment for certain medical conditions, I can't support the amendment proposal for a highly addictive recreational drug. But I will listen if any double-blind marijuana studies are published in peer-reviewed journals.
Why do you care and what business is it of yours what other people put in their bodies?
No on all 3. The 2nd one I'm strongly against. That's a segway to legalizing it in FL. I base this on Washington/Colorado. Homelessness/welfare has increased bc of it. Many people left their states with jobs to smoke weed. The problem is they did it without a plan or a job, and they don't have money to support themselves. I realize I'm in the minority with this, but it's stupid to pay for bums with my taxes who just want to get high.
The medical marijuana they are legalizing is low grade THC which won't get people stoned. Good grief, do people not study an issue before forming an opinion? Never mind, I already know the answer.
Regards.....................the Chiefjag
1 passed
2 failed
3 failed
I voted yes on 1/2 and no on 3. I consider myself quite moderate politically. I believe that efforts do need to be made to protect the environment here. I lived in south Florida for 8 years and saw how rapidly the Miami-Dade metro area was expanding into previously protected areas. Ignoring the invasive snake population, we need to save that stuff.
Amendment 2 is obviously the hot button issue. I agree that the issue is more likely to be solved with legislation. Pass or fail, it won't even go into effect until next year, and it really won't effect most people. But I believe that it is a first step towards legalization in Florida. (It failed, so this is moot.) Regardless, I think that if enough people petition their local representatives, we can probably get something going. I feel like legalization and taxation is one of the best ways to cut government expenditures. I feel like decriminalization is what REALLY needs to be done, but it's a pipe dream for at least the next decade.
Amendment 3... We don't need governors to have more power over things. Let's be real...
Quote:No on all 3. The 2nd one I'm strongly against. That's a segway to legalizing it in FL. I base this on Washington/Colorado. Homelessness/welfare has increased bc of it. Many people left their states with jobs to smoke weed. The problem is they did it without a plan or a job, and they don't have money to support themselves. I realize I'm in the minority with this, but it's stupid to pay for bums with my taxes who just want to get high.
If there was an increase I'm doubting it's because stoners are flooding there to live on the streets. Most people who want to smoke pot are already smoking pot in the states they live. Probably other underlining issues being tossed on their legalization of it.