BY MANSI MOTWANI
LOS ANGELES, CA - On November 8, 2016, California voters took to the ballot and voted for Proposition 64. Also known as the Adult Use of Marijuana Act it made the recreational usage of marijuana legal for persons 21 and older beginning January 1, 2018. Under Prop. 64, adults over 21 may smoke or ingest marijuana only in private homes...
LOS ANGELES, CA - On November 8, 2016, California voters took to the ballot and voted for Proposition 64. Also known as the Adult Use of Marijuana Act it made the recreational usage of marijuana legal for persons 21 and older beginning January 1, 2018. Under Prop. 64, adults over 21 may smoke or ingest marijuana only in private homes...
or at business sites licensed for on-site marijuana consumption. It is illegal to smoke marijuana in public places, while driving a vehicle and in places where tobacco is illegal. While the Proposition makes it legal for anybody older than 21 to possess up to 1 ounce (28.5 grams) of cannabis, the same becomes illegal within a 1,000 feet of a school, day care center or a youth center in the presence of children. Individuals are also permitted to grow up to six marijuana plants within the premises of a private home. The area where the plants are grown must be locked and hidden from public view.
The first day of the New Year began with people lining outside stores licensed to sell cannabis. Lines were formed long before opening hours, as early as before dawn. The gradual rolling out of the Proposition confined the number of retail marijuana outlets to a mere handful of cities across the state among which were Berkeley, Oakland, San Diego, San Jose and Santa Ana. Municipalities of Los Angeles and San Francisco are expected to start issuing licenses for businesses this month itself.
IJ reached out to a cross section of Indian- Americans residing in Southern California to ask them about their views on this largely debated legislation. 17-year-old Gurveer Singh, a senior at Fairmont Private High School supports Proposition 64. He says, “I am of the opinion that if people want to do something, they should be able to. The law also lays down specific guidelines like you’re not supposed to drive when you’re high, if you do, you will be subjected to a DUI. That’s what I like about the legislation- it treats marijuana like alcohol, and allows only those over 21 to use it.”
Hansjeet Duggal, a 27-year-old animation scientist holds the same belief. “Smoking marijuana is like drinking alcohol. Students under the age of 21 still do it. The selling of cannabis legally should curb its black market to some extent. The age limit according to me is pretty rational, as a person’s thinking process starts to change around the age of 20-21,” he says. He also thinks that the legalization of recreational marijuana will be fiscally healthy for California. “As per my knowledge, the legislation is expected to increase the state’s revenue by up to four billion dollars through taxes. I also read somewhere that the cannabis industry is likely to create thousands of opportunities for employment.” 30 and 29-year-old Kunal and Swati Gupte respectively are software engineers residing in Irvine. The couple shares contrasting points of view on the topic. “I think by 21, people are adult enough to decide whether they want to do something or not,” says Kunal. “Furthermore, the regulations imposed by the state will ensure that the public is completely aware of what they are consuming. Someone I know had an emergency situation once because of smoking marijuana that came from an unaccounted source. If it is anyway being consumed, it’s better off being regulated by the government. The legislation surely makes cannabis as easily available as tobacco and alcohol, which would make it somewhat easy for the underage crowd to gain access to it-but the same case could also be made against smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol. People can abuse anything, including painkillers. Personally, I think the Proposition has more positive aspects than negative,” he adds. His wife, Swati, did not completely agree. She shares, “In America, most young adults already abuse cigarettes and alcohol on a great scale. By legalizing marijuana for recreational purposes, the legislation has given leeway to yet another mind-altering substance. According to me, the age limit of 25 years would have been a better benchmark. With this legislation, the state has added cannabis on the list of many legal vices.”
Most middle-aged residents favored the legislation. Aarti Jain Cadin, a scientist working in the Department of Medicine at a public university in Irvine says, “I voted for Prop 64. Personally, I am not interested in its intake but as a scientist I can say that cannabis is in fact less dangerous than alcohol and tobacco; it has medicinal benefits. There was a need to legalize it in order to curtail its black market.” A couple in their early forties, Rashmi and Sachin Garg from Orange County add, “Legalizing marijuana for recreational purposes makes it similar to tobacco and alcohol. When used in moderation, there would be no major repercussions. There is nothing particularly wrong with it. The public was already using it before it became legal, only fearfully and in hiding. Once something becomes legal, different attitudes are adopted. The key to avoid negative consequences lies in educating the people and controlling the flow.” Sachin elaborates, “Smoking cigarettes is more harmful than smoking cannabis. Moreover, prisons not only in California but all over the US are full of people charged with minor crimes like marijuana possession. Once released, even those that weren’t criminals transition into hardened criminals because of their environment. Legalizing it surely has more benefits than downsides for the society.”
Neelam* (name changed) , a marketing professional working for a semiconductor company based in Orange County voted for the legislation, yet has her apprehensions about the same. “I believe there is a lack of awareness about marijuana and that concerns me. I have a 20-year-old daughter and I’m certain I cannot stop her if she wants to try cannabis after 21, but I would want her to be aware of what she’s doing. As of now, there are no public infomercials and the guidance on educating young minds about marijuana is missing. After all, it is a psychotropic substance! Also, the law states that one cannot sell marijuana but who’s monitoring this? It can be passed on to the underage crowd commercially without coming on the radar. A 21-year-old may buy it and then use it with younger people. I voted for the legislation keeping in mind the medicinal uses of marijuana but the law absolutely has its share of downsides.”
The first day of the New Year began with people lining outside stores licensed to sell cannabis. Lines were formed long before opening hours, as early as before dawn. The gradual rolling out of the Proposition confined the number of retail marijuana outlets to a mere handful of cities across the state among which were Berkeley, Oakland, San Diego, San Jose and Santa Ana. Municipalities of Los Angeles and San Francisco are expected to start issuing licenses for businesses this month itself.
IJ reached out to a cross section of Indian- Americans residing in Southern California to ask them about their views on this largely debated legislation. 17-year-old Gurveer Singh, a senior at Fairmont Private High School supports Proposition 64. He says, “I am of the opinion that if people want to do something, they should be able to. The law also lays down specific guidelines like you’re not supposed to drive when you’re high, if you do, you will be subjected to a DUI. That’s what I like about the legislation- it treats marijuana like alcohol, and allows only those over 21 to use it.”
Hansjeet Duggal, a 27-year-old animation scientist holds the same belief. “Smoking marijuana is like drinking alcohol. Students under the age of 21 still do it. The selling of cannabis legally should curb its black market to some extent. The age limit according to me is pretty rational, as a person’s thinking process starts to change around the age of 20-21,” he says. He also thinks that the legalization of recreational marijuana will be fiscally healthy for California. “As per my knowledge, the legislation is expected to increase the state’s revenue by up to four billion dollars through taxes. I also read somewhere that the cannabis industry is likely to create thousands of opportunities for employment.” 30 and 29-year-old Kunal and Swati Gupte respectively are software engineers residing in Irvine. The couple shares contrasting points of view on the topic. “I think by 21, people are adult enough to decide whether they want to do something or not,” says Kunal. “Furthermore, the regulations imposed by the state will ensure that the public is completely aware of what they are consuming. Someone I know had an emergency situation once because of smoking marijuana that came from an unaccounted source. If it is anyway being consumed, it’s better off being regulated by the government. The legislation surely makes cannabis as easily available as tobacco and alcohol, which would make it somewhat easy for the underage crowd to gain access to it-but the same case could also be made against smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol. People can abuse anything, including painkillers. Personally, I think the Proposition has more positive aspects than negative,” he adds. His wife, Swati, did not completely agree. She shares, “In America, most young adults already abuse cigarettes and alcohol on a great scale. By legalizing marijuana for recreational purposes, the legislation has given leeway to yet another mind-altering substance. According to me, the age limit of 25 years would have been a better benchmark. With this legislation, the state has added cannabis on the list of many legal vices.”
Most middle-aged residents favored the legislation. Aarti Jain Cadin, a scientist working in the Department of Medicine at a public university in Irvine says, “I voted for Prop 64. Personally, I am not interested in its intake but as a scientist I can say that cannabis is in fact less dangerous than alcohol and tobacco; it has medicinal benefits. There was a need to legalize it in order to curtail its black market.” A couple in their early forties, Rashmi and Sachin Garg from Orange County add, “Legalizing marijuana for recreational purposes makes it similar to tobacco and alcohol. When used in moderation, there would be no major repercussions. There is nothing particularly wrong with it. The public was already using it before it became legal, only fearfully and in hiding. Once something becomes legal, different attitudes are adopted. The key to avoid negative consequences lies in educating the people and controlling the flow.” Sachin elaborates, “Smoking cigarettes is more harmful than smoking cannabis. Moreover, prisons not only in California but all over the US are full of people charged with minor crimes like marijuana possession. Once released, even those that weren’t criminals transition into hardened criminals because of their environment. Legalizing it surely has more benefits than downsides for the society.”
Neelam* (name changed) , a marketing professional working for a semiconductor company based in Orange County voted for the legislation, yet has her apprehensions about the same. “I believe there is a lack of awareness about marijuana and that concerns me. I have a 20-year-old daughter and I’m certain I cannot stop her if she wants to try cannabis after 21, but I would want her to be aware of what she’s doing. As of now, there are no public infomercials and the guidance on educating young minds about marijuana is missing. After all, it is a psychotropic substance! Also, the law states that one cannot sell marijuana but who’s monitoring this? It can be passed on to the underage crowd commercially without coming on the radar. A 21-year-old may buy it and then use it with younger people. I voted for the legislation keeping in mind the medicinal uses of marijuana but the law absolutely has its share of downsides.”
RSS Feed
