Related Articles
- 01 Jul 10 - June medical marijuana news wrap
- 21 Apr 10 - The Jack Herer Initiative post mortem
- 28 Mar 10 - NORML reaches out and slaps medical marijuana patients
- 27 Nov 09 - Medical marijuana and caregivers
- 30 Sep 09 - Peron announces opposition to Oakland's marijuana initiative
- 16 Aug 09 - Oakland's marijuana legalization initiative is still a Trojan Horse
- 10 Aug 09 -
California has three marijuana legalization initiatives
- 08 Aug 09 - Marijuana legalization and California initiatives
- 31 Jul 09 -
Comparing California cannabis/marijuana legalization initiatives
Proponents of California's Regulate Control and Tax Cannabis 2010 Initiative (Prop. 19) claim it will have no effect on California's medical marijuana laws, that it "explicitly upholds the rights of medical marijuana patients".
The language of the initiative says otherwise.
Yesterday, Russ Belville stated in a comment to his blog in The Huffington Post that "Prop 19 does nothing to change Prop 215 or your access to your current dispensary." Belville is NORML's Outreach Coordinator and Host of NORML Show Live.
Meanwhile, in an article that is causing quite a stir among proponents of ending marijuana prohibition, Dragonfly De La Luz lists 18 reasons "Pro-Pot Activists" oppose Prop. 19.
Regarding whether or not Prop. 19 will amend or supersede California's medical marijuana laws she had this to say:
While amendments were made ostensibly to prevent the initiative from affecting current medical marijuana law, a careful reading of the initiative reveals that this is not, in fact, the case. Certain medical marijuana laws are exempt from the prohibitions the initiative would enact, while others are glaringly absent.
Cultivation is one such law that is noticeably non-exempt.[17] In spite of the fact that the tax cannabis Web site says otherwise, the only medical marijuana exemptions that the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Initiative actually makes are with regard to possession, consumption and purchase limits, which only ensure that patients would still be allowed to buy medicine at dispensaries. The word “cultivate” is conspicuously absent. Whereas today a person with a doctor’s recommendation has the right to grow up to an unlimited number of plants, the initiative would drastically reduce that number to whatever can fit in a 5’x5’ footprint (around 3-6 plants—per property, not per person). This will force many patients to resort to buying instead of growing their own medicine, because of the inconvenience caused by producing multiple grows a year rather than growing a year’s supply of medicine at one time, as many patients currently do outdoors. And growing indoors—which typically requires special grow lights, an increase in hydro use, and a lot of time and attention—is a comparatively expensive endeavor.
The initiative would further impact medical marijuana patients by banning medicating in the privacy of their own homes if there are minors present, as well as in public (currently perfectly legal[18])—an invaluable liberty to those with painful diseases who would otherwise have to suffer until they got home to relieve their pain.
Finally, the medical marijuana laws that are exempted from this initiative apparently only apply to cities. For medical marijuana patients who live in an area that has county or local government jurisdiction, according to a strict reading of the initiative, medical marijuana laws are not exempt.[19]
The amendments she refers to were made after Comparing California cannabis/marijuana legalization initiatives was published 31 Jul 09 in Examiner.com. This article noted that the proponents of Proposition 19 had manged to get through 14 drafts without exempting medical marijuana patients from any of its provisions: not the unlimited taxes & licensing fees, not the possession & cultivation limits, not the prohibition on smoking in public or in sight of anyone under 18.
The amendments consisted of adding the phrase "except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9" to the end of Items 7 & 8 under Purposes.
The initiative mentions medical marijuana three times and omits mentioning it once.
The Mentions
The three mentions are Items 6, 7, and 8 in Section 2, B. Purposes.
6. Provide easier, safer access for patients who need cannabis for medical purposes.
The courts will determine that this means Prop. 19 is intended to amend and supersede California's medical marijuana laws; Proposition 215 (H&S 11362.5) and SB 420 (H&S 11362.7-H&S 11362.9).
7. Ensure that if a city decides not to tax and regulate the sale of cannabis, that buying and selling cannabis within that city’s limits remain illegal, but that the city’s citizens still have the right to possess and consume small amounts, except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.
8. Ensure that if a city decides it does want to tax and regulate the buying and selling of cannabis (to and from adults only), that a strictly controlled legal system is implemented to oversee and regulate cultivation, distribution, and sales, and that the city will have control over how and how much cannabis can be bought and sold, except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.
The first thing to note about these sections is that they are specific to cities. Nowhere does the word "county" appear.
In Item 7, "city" is specified 3 times, every way they know how: "if a city", "that city's limits", "the city's citizens". The rule of thumb is if you say something three times you mean exactly what you said.
This item exempts medical marijuana patients only in cities, and only with regard to how much they may possess and consume. It makes it legal to ban medical marijuana dispensaries, collectives, and delivery services. Unless the city enacts a sin tax, any buying and selling will be illegal.
The Omission
Section C, Intents, has two items.
Item 1 is a list of the laws Prop. 19 is "intended to limit the application and enforcement of". The inclusion of the phrase "including but not limited to the following, whether now existing or adopted in the future" opens the door for the argument to be made that Prop. 19 may (and most likely will) be interpreted to "limit" the "application and enforcement" of the now existing medical marijuana laws.
This interpretation is reinforced by Item 2 under this section, a list of state laws Prop. 19 "is not intended to affect the application or enforcement of".
Note that Item 2 is not open-ended. There is no "including but not limited to" modifier for this Item.
Conspicuously absent from either list are California's medical marijuana laws: Health & Safety Code Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7-11362.9.
These mentions and omissions occur in the 'preamble' of the initiative, titled Findings, Intent and Purposes. Concerns have been expressed regarding how legally binding these sections are and that nowhere in the sections to be added to California's legal code is there any mention of medical marijuana or any exemption for medical marijuana patients and providers.
Exploiting pain and suffering
Nowhere does the initiative exempt medical marijuana cultivators or distributors from the tax.
Proponents of Prop. 19 often argue that everything is taxed. This is not true. Illinois is the only state that taxes prescription pharmaceuticals, and that tax is 1%.
Proponents of Prop. 19 claim they want to tax and regulate marijuana like alcohol. It costs $450 to license a pharmacy in California and between $340-$580 to license a retail alcohol establishment. Long Beach claims 85 medical marijuana dispensaries and charges $14,742 for a license. Oakland has a limit of 4 dispensaries and charges them $30,000 for a license.
Proponents of Prop. 19 argue that it is illegal to consume alcohol in sight of anyone under 21 or in public. California is littered with sidewalk cafes and pizza parlors that serve beer, wine, and mixed drinks in public and in the sight of children.
To date the cities of Oakland (the home or Proposition 19), Sacramento (The State Capital), Long Beach, and Berkeley have announced proposals to tax medical marijuana in order to keep their medical marijuana dispensaries from being shut down should Proposition 19 pass.
The most liberal of these is Berkeley, where medical marijuana patients will pay 7.5% less tax than recreational users, and it will only cost them 2.5% more than the 9.75% in sales tax they're already paying.
Sacramento is proposing a sin tax of between 5% and 10% for recreational users and 2% to 4% for the sick and dying. "We're trying to get ahead of the process," said councilmember Sandy Sheedy, who proposed the ordinance.
Medical marijuana patients use considerably more than recreational users. Irv Rosenfeld receives 11 ounces per month from the federal government. Maine recently determined that it's medical marijuana patients would use 5 ounces per month, on average. The tax on medicine, besides being ethically inconsistent, falls most heavily on the sickest, who tend to be the poorest.
At $400 per ounce, a medical marijuana patient who needs 3 ounces a month will pay $138.60 tax per month in Oakland.
Meanwhile, no city or county in California has reversed itself on a ban or moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries since Oakland (home of Prop. 19) passed Measure F, the first medical marijuana tax.
Meanwhile, several cases are working through the courts challenging medical marijuana bans, moratoriums, and regulations which are de facto bans, as discriminatory and in violation of California's medical marijuana laws. Passage of Prop 19 will remove any legal basis for these cases.
Taking the 'medical' out of 'marijuana'
Prop. 19 adds five sections to California's Health & Safety Code, §§ 11300-11304.
§11300 is titled Personal Regulation and Controls. Item a) begins with the phrase "Notwithstanding any other provision of law".
This section makes possession of more than an ounce or by anyone under 21 illegal. It also limits non-licensed cultivation to 25 square feet per residence or parcel, not per person.
If the authors of Prop. 19 wanted to protect medical marijuana patients, why did they say "notwithstanding any other provision of law"?
§11301 is titled Commercial Regulations and Controls. It begins with the phrase "Notwithstanding any other provision of state or local law". It prohibits sales to anyone under 21. Nowhere in this section is there any exemption for medical marijuana patients, cultivators, or distributors.
In addition to allowing cities and counties to ban commercial cultivation and sales (including medical marijuana collectives and dispensaries) it states the following:
(g) prohibit and punish through civil fines or other remedies the possession, sale, possession for sale, cultivation, processing, or transportation of cannabis that was not obtained lawfully from a person pursuant to this section or section 11300;
This means that the taxes and fees paid by the licensed commercial cultivators and distributors will be used to eliminate the competition. For example, Oakland (the home of Prop. 19) is in the process of licensing four cultivators to supply the approximately 6,000 pounds per year sold by the four licensed dispensaries. Bay Citizen put it this way:
Growing marijuana can be lucrative, but the city’s proposed new rules would eliminate small-timers. It would cost $5,000 just to apply for a cultivation permit, and a regulatory fee of $211,000 for the lucky winners. If one has the cash, it’s a small price to pay for the right to produce a crop with an estimated retail value of $7 million. The fee pays for regulating cultivation in Oakland, which will include enforcement against the guys with grow lights in their garages and backyard sheds.
The New York times reports that the leading contender for one of these cultivation permits is Jeff Wilcox, a member of the Proposition 19 steering committee. "Mr. Wilcox estimated that AgraMed would cost $20 million to develop."
Reasonable Accommodation
Current California medical marijuana law does not prohibit smoking in public. It is not currently illegal for medical marijuana patients to smoke in public or in sight of anyone under 18:
11362.79. Nothing in this article shall authorize a qualified patient or person with an identification card to engage in the smoking of medical marijuana under any of the following circumstances:
(a) In any place where smoking is prohibited by law.
(b) In or within 1,000 feet of the grounds of a school, recreation center, or
youth center, unless the medical use occurs within a residence.
(c) On a schoolbus.
(d) While in a motor vehicle that is being operated.
(e) While operating a boat.
While debating Keith Kimber on Time4Hemp Chris Conrad stated Prop. 19 would have to win by a wider margin than Prop. 215 in order to supersede it. He reiterated this in an email that was passed around Facebook.
Even if it did conflict with or amend the medical marijuana laws, which it repeatedly does not do, Prop 19 would still have to pass by more than 56% to have any effect on Prop 215, which is highly unlikely.
Conrad is in error. The California Initiative Guide states the following:
If the provisions of two or more measures approved at the same election conflict, those of the measure receiving the highest affirmative vote shall prevail (Cal. Const., art. II, Section 10(b)).
This is not a case of two or more measures in the same election.
Why Pro-Pot Stoners Oppose The 2010 Tax Cannabis Initiative - Dragonfly De La Luz | 10 Jul 2010
War breaks out within the marijuana legalization movement - Examiner.com | 26 Sep 09
Cities that have proposals to tax medical marijuana:
Legalized marijuana is a profitable venture, report says - The Contra Costa Times | 24 May 10
Huge, Legal Cannabis Farm Study Surprises Industry, Officials - East Bay Express | 25 May 10
The Legal but Largely Unregulated World of Pot Merchants - The New York Times | 5 Jun 10
Oakland City Council Considers New Cannabis Rules - The Bay Citizen | 5 Jul 10
Taxing marijuana will face legal hurdles - The Press-Telegram | 7 Jul 10
Oakland to Force Small-Time Marijuana Growers Out of Business - Stuff Stoners Like | 12 Jul 10
Medical marijuana: factory produced or home grown - OaklandSeen | 13 Jul 10
Oakland considers limiting and licensing marijuana growers - SF Bay Guardian | 13 Jul 10
Oakland pot expansion a step closer - The San Jose Mercury News | 13 Jul 10
Let the Marijuana Money Grab Begin - NBC Bay Area | 14 Jul 10
Sacramento ballot measure would allow pot tax - The Sacramento Bee | 15 Jul 10
The Latest Fiscal Buzz? Medical Marijuana - Bloomberg | 15 Jul 10
Lawsuits that will have no legal basis under Prop. 19:
Pot growers file class action lawsuit against Tehama County - Colusa Sun-Herald | 8 Jun 10
Group challenges Tehama pot law - The Record Searchlight | 10 Jun 10
Medical Marijuana Dispensary Hails Court Ruling as Victory - Orange County Weekly | 5 Jul 10
2 Lake Forest Dispensaries Reopen - Orange County Weekly | 9 Jul 10
Blind woman's medical pot suit thrown out - Press Telegram | 14 Jul 10
Upland medical marijuana cases may hinge on Anaheim case - Contra Costa Times | 15 Jul 10
Debates regarding Prop. 19 on Time4Hemp
Pro: Jodie Emery, Con: Bruce Caine - 25 Jun 10
Pro: Lynette Shaw, Con: Dennis Peron - 2 Jul 10
Pro: Chris Conrad, Con: Keith Kimber - 9 Jul 10
Pro: Paul Stanford, Con: J. Craig Canada - 12 Jul 10
Comments
Proposition 19 is directed at recreational marijuana use. Why would you assume that the laws being implemented for recreational use are negating laws that are for medical use?
Ha! Legalization would drop prices so low, they're going to have to tax it to the moon to upset medical patients, and if things were to turn out that way I'm sure the law would be amended.
It's a BS smokescreen. They don't want the prices to plummet (and they will absolutely plummet), because then they couldn't charge AIDS and cancer patients $50 per 1/8 ounce (unfriendly street dealer prices) for their "medicine."
Don't buy into the opposition to the law by the medical marijuana growers and dispensaries, they're just terrified they're about to lose their little grey market niche (they are) and will stop making obscene profits (they will).
None of them want real market principles to apply because then their black / grey market profits disappear (and everybody wins, except for them of course).
For possession (Item 7), and sales (Item 8), in the preamble, the following text closes each item:
"except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9."
This means that the text of those Health and Safety codes will still stand, for both possession and sales. Prop 19 will control the sale and posession, "except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.", in other words, the current medical marijuana laws.
In the future, run your article by a lawyer before you publish it.
Oakland will create a monopoly of huge medical marijuana growers, and you should expect outrage from medical marijuana patients, collectives, and small medicine growers. Oakland's plan does not allow adequate cultivation space for legal collectives, yet grants cultivation permits to four handpicked millionaires, allowing them to grow as much marijuana as they want, and they can sell their inferior product to any dispensary in California. The author of Prop. 19 (who surely will receive a permit) will reap millions $$$. Jack Herer was right: Cannabusiness is a far greater threat than we realized. November is just a few months away. You can choose between poor, mom-and-pop gardeners versus rich, corporate opportunists. This is just a taste of what you might expect with Prop 19. Vote NO on Proposition 19.
Also, for the record, you only cite the state health code that medical patients can grow as many plants as they'd like... unfortunately almost every county in California has their own restrictions, so your point is moot.
safeaccessnow.net/countyguidelines.htm
The F'ing world is starting to come apart at the seams and Calif Clones are concerned about "MaryJane" laws. No wonder that whole state has become a laughing stock....you are all narcissistic navel gazers who've never grown beyond adolescence.
Your major export now is Illegal Aliens and misery....pretty much sums up your cultural contributions as well.
I'm wondering that if this proposition is passed other states will be forced to follow. After all, if its legal to acquire marijuana in Cali won't all those in the West coast have access to it as well? Are they gonna inspect state borders for weed? Also, will other states pass up the opportunity for extra funding from the selling of recreational marijuana when Cali will take all the procedes? Also, how will tobacco firms respond to this? Since marijuana is healthier to smoke than cigarettes, and does not have any of the recreational effects except for the jitters. How will the advertise? Will price be enough to lure tobacco clients? Will cigarette use decrease? Will they not even be supplements and coexists peacefully in the marketplace? It'll be interesting to see the economics of how this will work out on a larger scale if its passed.
All I know is I'm from NY. The only reason this concerns me is that I'll be in Cali for that week. Csn't wait to see history in the making!
I have begun a direct response to Miss Dragonfly in my blog:
prop19myths.blogspot.com/2010/07/stoners-against-tax-cannabis-initiative.html
Marc Emery has written a brilliant defense of Prop 19 and a scathing attack on those who would defeat it for their own selfish ends. Don't fall for the pro-"medical" industry's misleading "legal" analyses.
www.cannabisculture.com/v2/content/2010/06/05/Why-You-Should-Vote-YES-California-Control-Tax-Cannabis-Initiative
The people of Oakland gone get paid. Rest of the local governments will be tryna figure out a meeting agenda on what tax to do while Oakland will already be steady blowing up the spot producing hella dank and hella jobs. All them medical patients ain't got to be scared, they can buy that Oaklandish sativa and them Mary Grapes.
215, Measure Z, and now Prop. 19 all working to collect all y'all money and take it back to The Town.
To learn more about The Hemp Network and to participate in daily conference calls which discuss the pay plan, products, upcoming events and exchange of ideas, call 218-339-3600 PIN: 321677, or listen to the recorded calls 24/7 at: 951-262-3496. www.the-hemp-network.com/rtuinier
Prices will not "plummet" and here is why, straight from the mouth of Richard Lee:
Why would the prices decrease? If consumers have already proven that they will pay $1 for water, even if it only costs me 10 cents to make it, I know I can still charge $1.
"Though Soares says she does not smoke weed herself, she's part of a group of fringe cannabis activists, growers, dispensary owners, and casual stoners who have aligned with cops, big business, and anti-gay marriage conservatives to denounce the most sweeping attempt at legalizing marijuana in California in thirty years."
Taken from a blog at
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/gyrobase/stoners-against-legalization/Cont...
I get my water from the tap.
That doesn't apply here, because
1) You could always grow your own "water" and it would be much cheaper, and
2) As long as there isn't a monopoly on the production of "water" then the free market will ensure that price will go down as more firms provide their own supply. Its basic economics. You can't make money if you're not competitive with your prices.
3) If "water" isn't illegal anymore then you don't have the very specialized market where you have to go and track down a dealer. Now, you'll be able to look up the nearest "water supplier" online and compare prices. Dealers know they can charge a premium because most people don't have a long list of dealers to compare prices.
And there can't be a monopoly, because everyone and their mother is going to grow pot in their own home!
What a bunch of whiny inside baseball bullshit. Is the law perfect? He'll no, no law is. Is it a monumental step in the right direction? Of course. I know plenty of mm patients who herald prop19. Anyone who really knows about the consequences of the war on drugs(read hippies and brown ppl) can't wait for this to pass.
"At $400 per ounce, a medical marijuana patient who needs 3 ounces a month will pay $138.60 tax per month in Oakland"
Yeah, the problem is the tax NOT the $400.00 an ounce highway robbery of sick and dying persons! Mexicans grow dope for $5.00 an ounce in Mexico but we should continue to allow these criminals to steal from the weakest in society?
Marijuana cultivation that is illuminated by artifical light only is ersatz marijuana, as is the marijuana grown in greenhouses that use a covering that blocks the UVB photon, such as corrugated fiberglas and other horticultural coverings that block the UVB photon. Google MARIJUANA OPTICS for the truth of the matter.
Bottom line is this. If prop 19 passes or it fails, patients in California will still have easy and safe access to their medicine.
There are some people out there who wan't to scare people into thinking that somehow if marijuana is legalized it will hurt those who use it medically.
This is an argument coming from people who have hundreds of thousands or millions invested into the sale of medical marijuana and they are simply scared that they will lose some of their profits once it's more readily available to the public.
Basically, the only pro marijuana people who are afraid of marijuana becoming illegal, are the people who enjoy huge profits by it being illegal. They really don't care about the medical aspect of it like they claim, they just care about their profits and nothing more.
Prices will not "plummet" and here is why, straight from the mouth of Richard Lee:
Why would the prices decrease? If consumers have already proven that they will pay $1 for water, even if it only costs me 10 cents to make it, I know I can still charge $1.
"Though Soares says she does not smoke weed herself, she's part of a group of fringe cannabis activists, growers, dispensary owners, and casual stoners who have aligned with cops, big business, and anti-gay marriage conservatives to denounce the most sweeping attempt at legalizing marijuana in California in thirty years."
Taken from a blog at
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/gyrobase/stoners-against-legalization/Cont...
Soares represents medical marijuana dispensary owners in Southern California
I don't see the issue here. To be honest, I don't think Dragonfly De La Luz understands how laws work. The addition of new freedoms does not supercede previous rights/protections. I think she's misunderstanding the situation - you would be able to grow 5'x5' for recreational use AND keep your medical rights. To say otherwise is just scare propaganda.
These types of scare tactics are exactly what I have expected out of the existing dispensary owners. Prices will drop and the dispensary owners will have to evolve their business model or shut down.
For more articles on medical marijuana see veritasgroundzero.blogspot.com/
It is true medical laws will still apply by my reading but the point of mulit million dollar companies having all the control is where the attention should be. If it is about free market than drop the limits and let people compete like in the wine market. Even the beer market has its competitors. There are fine wines and micro brews still making people plenty. Those in the state who started farming 30 yrs ago and risked there freedoms should be given the same opportunitites as these pretenders like Richard Lee.
Richard Lee, I am ashamed of you.
You claim to be a cripple fighting for the good of the sick and dying yet you have gone corporate and will make millions of dollars if prop 19 passes.
Shame, shame, shame, you hypocrite.
I for one will not be attending any more Oaksterdam classes and will pass the word about your corrupt and insidious scheme to get rich to any one that will listen.
I thought you were one of the good guys.
Greedy, Greedy, Greedy.
Prices will drop for locals in California who can share their "5x5" harvest more freely, however, prices will RISE for those who fly in from out of state or out of country to come here and buy grass. That's where the real money is going to come from, anyone that thinks this is about the local freedoms here is missing the big picture: this is all about Californians cashing in on pot-tourism.
Medical marijuana has been backdoor legalization, riding on the backs of the small minority of registered card carrying users who are actually ill. This facade has thus far limited DEA interest. Passage of the initiative will remove all pretense as we socially sanction significantly increased consumption of a risk laden drug for recreational purposes. It will also significantly diminish the medicinal argument for those who do gain benefit. In voiding the existing laws, the certain Federal response to throw out the new law will take MJ advocates back thirty years. Consider the impact of California voting to legalize Vicodin for recreational use. Same thing. This initiative is the biggest fraud ever perpetuated on California, backed by greedy entrepreneurs seeking to consolidate the sales and production. Vote NO!
Shame on ALL those who support the continued persecution of millions of innocent Americans who consume marijuana!
The best analysis of this "controversy" is by Russ Bellville found at the NORML Daily Audio Stash. Click on "California’s Prop 19: A word-for-word analysis," when it comes around at the top flashing headlines.
I have battled against this idiot on the message boards on Facebook. He has ties to a collective, his dispensary is at risk, more importantly his profits are at RISK! People lets look at the facts here. But first here is a question that all medical marijuana profiteers needs to be asked and they need to answer. Why are street prices and collective prices the same? Although we have seen a drop in price at the per LB level, eitghers, quarters, Halfer, ozers all maintain a price I can get from the local black market dealer! With the current system of only allowing medicinal use of marijuana there is still much risk involved and more importantly GREED. although prop 19 is crafted that will best serve those who crafted it, will bring a competition that will no longer justify and allow collective owners and those employed and involved the ability to maintain there overprice for medication! How are these people any better who they vehemently put down (Richard Lee)? At least Mr Lee
With all of the MEXICAN pot that floods into the U.S. as it has for fifty years, at a current wholesale price of around $30.OZ, how will anyone be able to sell taxable pot? The quality will have to be better of course, but if the taxed price is too HIGH folks will still go to the streets for their pot or just grow it. And the RAND report speculates that there could be a large increase in consumption under prop19....I believe that pretty much evabody who wanna smoke it aready smoke it....it is NOT hard to get cheap pot.
I predict, that after re-legalization, average quality cannabis will sell for 50 dollars an ounce with about 30 dollars taxes added on. That fairly compensates the growers and vendors, handsomely rewards communities, and is a boon to consumers.
Those who want it free will grow it.
Jeeezuz,
What a bunch of losers !! This is what the People's Republic of Kalifornia has to offer the world...LOL.
Are some people actually crying about not being able to grow more than 3-6 pot plants? And there also complaining about not being able to smoke around minors or in the public. I think that is pretty pathetic. I hope prop 19 does pass. California will be rich. I'm from a small town and know some people who will fly down there just to smoke. Every other state in this country is gonna be angry that they missed out. I think the only people complaining are the Medical Marijuana dispensers because they arent going to be able to control the market anymore. Its stupid that i can go to a random drug dealer and be charged the same amount illegally as i would if i had a gegistered card and went to the store. Pretty pathetic if you ask me. GO CALIFORNIA IM ROOTING FOR YOU AND SO ARE MANY PEOPLE DONT LET US DOWN
Believe me. Many other states look at Calif with discust, and hope the the "Trash" stays behind the sierra nevada mountains.
Hey Hotshot it is spelled disgust. Have another beer...
Hey Hotshot it is spelled disgust. Have another beer...
Hey hot shot it is spelled disgust. Have another beer...
Hey hot shot it is spelled disgust. Have another beer...
Texan
>>>"Many other states look at Calif with discust, and hope the the "Trash" stays behind the sierra nevada mountains."
Those are the same states that looked at repealing alcohol prohibition with disgust. They'll come along too, just like they did with alcohol, once they smell the money.
The "trash" you are referring to is our freedom. It's amazing how many Americans have forgotten it's value.
The gist of this argument is "I Gots Mine - Don't Mess With It!"
"I gots my Prop 215 card, I gots my right to smoke in front of kids, I gots my right to grow a marijuana forest, and, most important, I gots my income coming from the status quo - Don't Mess With It!"
So, Craig, you say I shouldn't vote for Prop 19?
"Yeah, it will destroy all the rights we have under Prop 215!"
I don't have a medical marijuana recommendation. I'm not really losing any rights.
"You don't? Go down to the doctor and get your recommendation!"
Uh, there's a problem: I'm perfectly healthy!
"Prop 215! 'For any condition' and all that! You have no excuse... Doesn't smoking a bowl help you sleep? Tell him it's for insomnia. Or anxiety. Do you get headaches?"
No, no, and no. I smoke pot because I enjoy it and I am not comfortable lying to doctors. It's this "wink-wink" at "medical" that makes it so hard for the truly sick outside California to get medical marijuana.
Canada also gazes in the crystal ball to determine that California Courts will supersede Prop 215. He notes Purpose #6 as the key and also notes Purposes #7 & #8.
So let me get this straight:
#6 = "Provide easier, safer access for patients who need cannabis for medical purposes." = REPEAL PROP 215
#7 = You can have a small amount, with an exception for those of you under PROP 215.
#8 = If a city licenses sales, you can buy a small amount, with an exception for those of you under PROP 215.
Got that? #7 & #8 are giving you an exception to something based on a statute that Canada says #6 repeals. Courts would have to decide that the people carved out special rights for medical users based on existing law, and in doing so, meant to remove special rights for medical users by superseding that very law.
Read a reasonable analysis of Prop 19: blog.norml.org/2010/07/19/californias-prop-19-a-word-for-word-analysis/
No Sir. The "Trash" to which I refer is that sector of the Calif. Population that is more concerned with legitimizing their personal Drug Habits than with the vital issues facing our nation.
You use "freedom" to wrap your vice into some kind of patriot platform. You are self-centered and sophmoric. So I repeat; The best possible outcome would be for you all to stay in your trash-heap...happy in your new found Legal high. And leave the rest of the country to adults.
In other words....please stay home.
Texan
>>>"The "Trash" to which I refer is that sector of the Calif. Population that is more concerned with legitimizing their personal Drug Habits than with the vital issues facing our nation."
You've got which-came-first problem. Mankind has been consuming marijuana for at least 3,000 years with no problems. ALL the problems came the fradulent marijuana prohibition in 1937. Please quit referring to marijuana as "drugs." Lumping marijuana in with the hard drugs is a prohibitionist deception. Since every major government study has shown marijuana is less "addictive" than coffee, and FAR less harmful than alcohol, doing the right thing and re-legalizing marijuana will improve the lives of everyone who switches from alcohol to marijuana. Please don't speak to me of "vices." That is an outmoded concept, and should be filed away with the 20th Century.
I wonder what you would do if some politicians threatened to prohibit beer - again.
Texan
There is NO more vital issue in the U.S. than to stop the persecution of millions of innocent Americans.
>>>"You use "freedom" to wrap your vice into some kind of patriot platform."
No. You are ignoring the meaning of freedom. If freedom is not the right to do whatever we please as long as it harms no other person or their property, then what the heck IS freedom? Do you have a clue?
You can also save the insults. I realize that is the last resort of people who are out of arguments, but do a little solid research, and you'll feel better about yourself.
Hi, Russ. Thanks for dropping by! Your analysis of Prop 19 is the best I've seen. Keep up all the great work you do with NORML!
All who want to stay well-informed on this issue should catch Russ Belville's Daily Audio Stash at the NORML website.
People from Texas adults..? That is more of a joke than the trickery in this bill...Texan...there is less hope for the country if anymore people from your state continue to breed...
When the going gets tough, you will pray for the strength that is Texas and Texans. It is the good moral fiber here and in other parts of working honest America that will pull her through. You are all just the do nothing social baggage that have to be carried by the capable.
I lived in your toilet state for 22 years. I know it well, what it is and what it is not. The ONLY thing Calif is a bellweather for anymore is social deterioration, moray decay and financial catastrophe.
What is it Y'all liked to say as a substitute for social interaction...."have a nice day !"
texan
>>>"It is the good moral fiber here and in other parts of working honest America that will pull her through."
Good moral fiber. Is that what you get in All Bran? 8^) And if people who consume a non-addictive plant FAR less harmful than alcohol are lacking in this "moral fiber," how much MORE lacking must be those who consume addictive, extremely harmful alcohol?
>>>"You are all just the do nothing social baggage that have to be carried by the capable."
Whoo boy! There's that big streak of bigotry! -- More than 100 million Americans haved consumed marijuana. That's near HALF the of-age population. There are an estimated 30 million current consumers. Of course, the vast majority are hard-working, respected members of their communities, from all walks of life, loved by the families they support. SHAME on you for engaging in the demonization of good Americans!
texan
>>>"Calif is a bellweather for anymore is social deterioration, moray decay and financial catastrophe."
That's what retro-neanderthals like you want to believe. The truth is, California has always been on the vanguard of progress and improvement of the human condition. Now go have another deteriorating, morally decadent, catastrophic mug of Budweiser.
Alcohol directly kills more than 100 thousand Americans each year. Hundreds of thousands more are killed or maimed by alcohol-zonked drivers and by alcohol-fueled violence. NO ONE has ever died from marijuana consumption, and it doesn't cause the highway carnage and problems with violence that does alcohol.
History will note marijuana consumers were on much higher ground than alcohol swillers. Or in antiquated terms, much more "moral."
Pages
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!