War breaks out within the marijuana legalization movement

[Koroz]

I will agree to that, second point. I hope your right on the first point about the Fed falling to Cali.

I think you missed my point. Federal law will never change at this rate. At least not until every state has legalized Cannabis and they have no choice left. I think you are mistaken that we as a movement "aren't pushing for federal legalization, instead of wasting our time doing it 50x over from state to state".

We of course would LOVE to see the fed's legalize Cannabis. We also would love them to stop raiding Medical store fronts. We would love them to stop getting into foreign wars, and we would LOVE for them to stop raising taxes every year...

but the reality is they aren't going to. So instead we have to do it the only way we have the ability to, and that is from state to state. We are up to what? 13 Medical states now? (my numbers are off, I am going off the top of my head), and yet the US federal government still hasn't changed it from Schedule I to II or III? Why do you think that if we pushed for full legalization it would work, when over 80% of the US thinks we should legalize it for Medical use and they haven't done anything about it.

In the end, we are better off not wasting our time trying to move a giant when we can move a midget. In the grand scheme of things until each state has passed laws for legalization, the government won't be hard pressed to push for anything but the same ol' same ol'.

 

[StrillaGuy]

I think you missed my point. Federal law will never change at this rate. At least not until every state has legalized Cannabis and they have no choice left.

In the end, we are better off not wasting our time trying to move a giant when we can move a midget. .

I did not miss your point, I just do not agree with it. Remember David and Goliath.

 

[Koroz]

I did not miss your point, I just do not agree with it. Remember David and Goliath.

If you don't agree, then explain to me why the Federal government hasn't fully legalized medicinal use of Cannabis? Explain your point.

Why is full legalization going to work because we push for it, yet something even more simple and has more backing across the US like moving Cannabis to Schedule III where it can be studied has been a failure?

I love your happy go lucky personality, its a breathe of fresh air.. but some of us live in reality and would like to stop prohibition in a way that will actually work.

 

[StrillaGuy]

If you don't agree, then explain to me why the Federal government hasn't fully legalized medicinal use of Cannabis? Explain your point.

Why is full legalization going to work because we push for it, yet something even more simple and has more backing across the US like moving Cannabis to Schedule III where it can be studied has been a failure?

I love your happy go lucky personality, its a breathe of fresh air.. but some of us live in reality and would like to stop prohibition in a way that will actually work.

I dont know why they havent, many speculate its about greed and the spread of prior lies, but I do not know for a fact why. Maybe someone should just ask them...Hey Uncle Sam what do you say!?

I concede to your point "something even more simple....has been a failure" You have more knowledge of how reform has been attempted in the past and thanks for sharing your knowledge.

I live in reality too but have different priorities, thats why I never fought for reform untill I began to consider it a civil rights violation rather than a drug law reform. I live in reality and would like to stop civil rights violations in a way that will actually work. The way to go about reforming a drug law may be your approach but to reform discriminating legislation would require a different approach. On your side of this we will have to prove that there is not a connection to mj and hard drug use as this is a lynch pin of prohibiton.

I am saying its discrimination not prohibition.

 

[johnnyla]

there are only 13 people in America who are not breaking any laws by smoking and possessing cannabis. the ones who get it from the NIH.

anyways, my point is that the best law is the one with least restrictions on everyone. it's a plant. i can grow as many tomatoes as i want in my backyard. same should be true for cannabis.

 

[fatigues]

I dont know why they havent, many speculate its about greed and the spread of prior lies, but I do not know for a fact why. Maybe someone should just ask them...Hey Uncle Sam what do you say!?

That one's easy. Politicians in power do not perceive there being any political bonus to do it - and a whole world of endless political hurt should they try to or even be seen to be sympathetic to it. No political donations to win if you come out in support, either. Sure, there are some entrenched interests who would like to see prohibition continue - and there are some that would like to see it end, too. But nobody stepping up with a chequebook or the promise of new votes. Nothing but harm.

In the end, with the vast majority of politicians, it's fear of losing votes and spending political capital they don't need to spend. Moreover, nobody really knows how this one will play out. Will American voters care? Is it an issue to them that matters? They simply don't know. Way too much risk.

Uncertainty, little to gain, lots to lose? All set against a backdrop where the problem was not one of your making -- whereas the proposal to end prohibition will be hung around your neck and provide a feast day to the political opposition? Talking heads everywhere assuring persuadable voters that the dire predictions were true all along: the liberals in Washington have finally shown their true colors and are climbing into bed with the drug dealers?

Add in religion, base politics, social conservatism - it just gets worse and worse. And let's not even start on the issue of drugs and race. It's the elephant in the room nobody will mention in detail on TV - but they'll be talking about it on Talk Radio - that's for sure.

So what do you do? Risk all that when there is no pressing need to make any decision at all? Hell, even the Obama administration's dropping the phrase "war on drugs" was seen as NEWS.

Take that risk and wade in? Not a chance. Instead, that's a recipe for "steady as she goes". And that's why it's been like that for nearly 50 years. Nothing to win, lots to lose, nobody making it an issue that needs to be decided and all sorts of other things on their plate that seem more important.

Simply put: Nobody has ever made the "end prohibition" argument loud enough for it to ever even register with the voters as something that "needs doing". Squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Medical marijuana has succeeded in changing the discussion, in part. That trades the face of the drug dealers - and above all - the drug user - from television villains and anti-war protesters and stoners -- to sick and dying victims. Morally, then it's not about pleasure - it's about pain, and the Christian Right has a hard time getting traction there with the base. Change happens. Even still - it's usually a fight with the Right.

And when you spin all that and slap it on top of somebody in a wheelchair on the evening news or a MS patient spasming before the camera? Wise politicians get the hell out of the way of that issue.

Still, as we have seen, many governors tend to veto unless the state legislators over-ride it. If they do veto, few of the people who would ever vote against such a governor because of it were ever going to vote for him in the first place. The reverse, however, is not true. So the veto math tends to work in only one direction.

That's why it's so important to get an initiative out of California that wins. Because that WILL be something that Washington will have to deal with. If you are a Democrat who has to run for office again? (Clinton never had to run again when Prop 215 was approved)

Big trouble for Obama.

It places him in a very difficult situation. Ignore the popular will of the people in the largest state in the country? Votes you absolutely will need to win the Presidency again? Or do you risk losing other swing states if you support it?

Obama will sure as hell prefer that he never has to decide on that and that it just goes away as an issue. Only way to win that game is not to play. There's lots to lose and nothing to gain.

But he doesn't get that choice if an initiative to legalize marijuana succeeds in November 2010, because then it is on the public agenda. Then it will have to be dealt with. No choice then. Legalization will provoke media and legislative attention and it's a sexy story. A gift that keeps on giving.

Some federal politicians will want that attention and will choose to support it. Some will do so sincerely -- others will just want the spotlight. Doesn't matter much as long as they do support it, I suppose. Many more will come out against it. The political crisis continues.

And with a ballot initiative, there is nobody to negotiate with. An initiative is binding law. Done deal. No concessions are possible. It's done. A crisis is created where the other side is utterly unable to "back down". From a political perspective, it doesn't get much better than that.

If there is a way to avoid dealing with it at all and try to leave it "to the courts" to sort out until after the election in 2012 - they'll try that. I don't think the courts have left enough wiggle room for that to fly though.

My bet - is that Obama will talk sternly against it, say that he personally believes it's the wrong way to go, but that he is troubled when voters in a democracy can't even agree on whether something is a crime or not. When they can't agree on something that basic? There's trouble. Voters and ballot initiatives have a right to be heard too.

Then it's about numbers and the national polls in swing states. If they are close, he may choose to have his cake and eat it too. If so, he'll punt, and kick it back to the individual States; just like he has done with gay marriage.

And that is as good as it will ever get at this stage.

So maybe, just maybe, something will get done out of all of that ensuing political mess. Best shot the movement has ever had at this. Ever.

But none of that happens if an initiative fails to win. If it loses? Steady as she goes. Guaranteed.

 

[karmical]

That one's easy. Politicians in power do not perceive there being any political bonus to do it - and a whole world of endless political hurt should they try to or even be seen to be sympathetic to it. No political donations to win if you come out in support, either. Sure, there are some entrenched interests who would like to see prohibition continue - and there are some that would like to see it end, too. But nobody stepping up with a chequebook or the promise of new votes. Nothing but harm.

you make some very valid points, however this is one of the best points to come out in this conversation.

you can get 1000's of people to travel to Amsterdam for a cannabis cup, but how many of those same people make it out to political fundraisers for their local government officials.

I don't want to get too far off the track of this discussion but it has to be said, we wouldn't be fighting this fight now if money that has been buried for years had been filtered into the political system, but its been that legalization without taxation not paying their taxes hippy mentality, that has us where we are now...

Simply put: Nobody has ever made the "end prohibition" argument loud enough for it to ever even register with the voters as something that "needs doing". Squeaky wheel gets the grease.

 

[bass ackwards]

Pythagliomade the best point so far when he said that the cannabis community as a whole has not stepped up to the plate in support of legalization or decriminalization. His point is well made,with the amount of money he suggests as possible behind our cause reform would come quickly.
I support MPP and NORML at the national level,and while I am reviewing my support of these organizations at that level I may replace that support in favor of support at the local level. Picking my fights,so to speak. I am not a resident of California but contributing to CCI is appealing to me since I believe the best chance to make a change lies there.
Undoubtedly,some of you also support these organizations,many do not. Those of you who do not,I urge you to choose an organization and contribute financially. Next time and every time you smoke a joint with a friend urge him to do the same. Only through active support will change occur.

Respect bass

 

[fatigues]

Pythaglio made the best point so far when he said that the cannabis community as a whole has not stepped up to the plate in support of legalization or decriminalization. His point is well made,with the amount of money he suggests as possible behind our cause reform would come quickly.

Well - if you can persuade people to pony up a few dollars each over the Net with a credible plan as Obama did? Might well be doable. Raising money like that, once it gets going, is an irresitible money raising machine a la World of Warcraft. But getting there isn't easy. In the context of marijuana, it has a major inherent problem too.

Biggest problem is the practical issue of having to get the names, addresses and phone numbers of people who make such a political contribution. A lot of dope smokers would be intimidated by having to directly "out" themselves by making such a political contribution. Add in the fear that it simply provides the police with a public list of names, addresses and phone numbers of "where all the dopefiends are" and ... perhaps not so easily done in practice as you might think.

I do agree with you that if you can overcome that, it's the best way to raise money for a huge-ass campaign and achieve real progress. That sort of grass-roots effort needs a jump-start of credibility to persuade MJ users that "we are the ones we've been waiting for", to borrow a famous phrase. Doable - but not easy.

And that sort of money campaign would need a persuasive and charismatic spokesperson to front it, too. Not sure we're there yet. But if a California initiative can't find a well positioned Hollywood actor to run with that banner, they are not trying hard enough.

If an initiative gathers enough signatures for ballot approval? That would be the perfect opportunity to see if, indeed, now is the time to raise money on an Obama internet style grass-roots basis.

If you could do so and pull it off? The Powers That Be would certainly bolt the hell upright in a wide-eyed moment of political surprise. The screams of shock and fear from the Christian Right would be entertaining as hell to watch, that's for sure

 

[Pythagllio]

sure they do.

they put limits on my growing canopy. they take away my right and grant me a privilege.

like your Drivers License is a privilege that can be taken away. You can lose that license by violating your contractual obligations.

i have a right under California Law to smoke and grow cannabis medicinally.

This is incorrect. This is just plain FUD. If any of the props on the table pass Prop 215 will still apply to those with cards. Perhaps I am mistaken, and you can show me the language that overturns Prop 215. hey, if you're just going to post back insisting that you're right don't bother. Insisting something is true doesn't make it so.

I agree with NORML who has been around before all of these other "Activist" Organizations. I'll wait till 2012 to pass a law in CA or never. It's already legal in California if you pay $100-$150 to get a doctors note you can grow 6 plants and never fear arrest.

I don't know that I agree that waiting until 2012 would have been a better idea, unless the current props get spanked at the polls. Exit polling and other data collected will help tweak the prop in 2012 giving it a better chance of passing.

So if you don't live in California then but out of this CA process. If you do live here what is your motivation to pass a bad law?

Now that's a great example of a loaded question. When did I stop beating my wife, lol. Anyway, I live in CA, and I also was born here, though I have no clue what the fuck that has to do with anything. CA isn't such a special case, inhabited by people that are so different than other people that those who don't live here can't see and understand what is going on. Fatigues has demonstrated a thorough understanding of the reality and the issues, while plenty o' Californians have posted utter lala land fantasies about the Lee prop and show a complete and utter disregard for political reality. I can't answer your bullshit question, because I fucking disagree with you that TC2010 is a 'bad law'. It would be if it were anything close to what the extremists portray it as, but the portrayal is bullshit on its face. Forget 2012 if you can't figure out that you have to compromise, because it won't happen then either. It is totally arrogant to presume that 5 or 6% of the voters can dictate extreme legalization with no taxation. 5 or 6%, that's us. Without finding enough sympathetic voters to join our bandwagon why the fuck would it happen? The extremists here are blind. Open your fucking eyes, and step into reality.

 

[Koroz]

The extremists here are blind. Open your fucking eyes, and step into reality.

Says the poster with the ASA emblem for his Avatar.

How about instead of being a smart ass, you recognize that some people just don't have the same views as you, that doesn't make them close minded it just makes them have differing opinions.

I would argue its more close minded of you to call people extremists and tell them they are not in reality just because they don't think what you do is the "correct" way of thinking.

 

[Mist]

Well I can't let this one pass without sticking my 2 cents worth in.

I can see several aspects of the push for legalization in either an all out form where everyone can possess cannabis or even with the medical marijuana end of it. And much of that is because of the people who are representing this movement. By this I mean whenever there is a march in Austin where I live it looks one of the hippy marches that I saw as a child in Washington DC during the vietnam war. Tie-die and white boys with dreadlocks does not play well with the mainstream voting populace. If we want to be taken seriously they (the people who don't smoke, but are not sure how to vote) need to see the normal everyday people who are using cannabis. The mainstream, hard working, community contributing people that most of us are is the image that we should be trying to promote.
Don't get me wrong, I don't care how you wear your hair or how many piercings you have, but the primary voter base does. And with the older voter base of people in their late 50's to late 60's, the baby boomers, which are the largest and stongest voter base in this country. The hippy image brings back many bad memories of a bad time in this country's history. I know that most of you youngsters see it as some happy go lucky party time, but it wasn't and there was a lot of hurt that came from it and is still lingering.

My second issue is some of the dumb ass shit that the people writing these innitiatives and bills are putting into them. Take for example the bill for legalization in Alaska several years back where one of the things in their bill was for the people who had been arrested during the time that it was illegal be released from prison because what they had done was nolonger illegal. LOL, well it was illegal when they did it. They knew it was illegal and broke the law anyway. So why should they be let out. It was ridiculous. The voters read the bill and voted a resounding NO. Which takes me to another thing that really bothers me about much of the legislation that is being written sounds like it was written by a bunch of pipe dreaming potheads and that is because it is being written by a bunch of pipe dreaming potheads.

The last thing that bothers me is this push for no taxation on a product that will be sold. This doesn't apply to someone who grows their own of course. But the idea that you can grow a product and sell it for a profit and not pay any takes on said product is just stupid. I bred boas and pythons for years and when I sold at shows I had to pay sales tax just like anyone that is selling a product has to do. So if they are selling cannabis at a dispensary of course they should be paying taxes. If you grow it at home and sell it to people and make your income on it. You should pay taxes. You think those people at your local farmers market who are selling their produce don't pay taxes? Well they do.
If you want to grow your own weed and smoke your own weed or give it to friends and patients to smoke then you woud have no need to pay taxes.

These are my opinions so please don't go pissing on them as you don't want the government pissing you your rights and opinions.



Happy Growing.

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

Says the poster with the ASA emblem for his Avatar.

How about instead of being a smart ass, you recognize that some people just don't have the same views as you, that doesn't make them close minded it just makes them have differing opinions.

I would argue its more close minded of you to call people extremists and tell them they are not in reality just because they don't think what you do is the "correct" way of thinking.

They are extremists because they would rather see no law go forward than see a law that is a mutual comprimise. Their lacking to comprimise also constitutes the continuation of the people who are serving jail sentances for something that should not be a crime. You legalization people who scream no jail for weed are the same ones who advocate their very sentancing by not willing to cooperate for a greater good like freeing the weed.

Now the legalization movement is chanting the rantings of an elderly fellow who is still living in a 70s era mindset. The problem with Jack Herer's ideology is he is talking in a world of SHOULD BE. Unfortunatly, we dont live in the the land of shouldbe, we live in america. Alcohol is taxed. Wine is taxed. Tobacco is taxed. All of which are completly available for any of you to produce in your own homes without paying any taxes. Cannabis should be available for retail sales in which it is taxed, and at the same time available to citizens to produce at their own for no tax cost associated.

We all need to realize that no one should be jailed for its consumption or production or distribution. Why cant we come together to win that battle? There is no amount of money in the world makes me see this a different way. Would any of you trade your freedom not to pay taxes on certain items, I sure know I dont like to pay taxes, but I sure as hell dislike jail much more than taxes....

How many of you advocating no taxes for weed will pay your state and federals by april ?

Well, those of you who arent still making this legalization or nothing argument from your mom's house in your underwear....

 

[PharmaCan]

The oaksterdam initiative is not a compromise, it's one man's effort to make mj quasi-legal according to his terms and for his financial benefit. I'll never vote for that piece of shit, even if it's the only initiative on the ballot!

Marijuana is legal enough in California right now. If we have to wait two years for decent legislation, so be it. If growers/users in the other 49 states don't like it, I'd suggest you start writing checks to the CCI folks to make sure that that initiative has a better chance. But, please, don't expect those of us here to saddle ourselves with bullshit laws just so that mj is quasi-legal here.

PC

 

[SantaCruzMtns]

So Much Info To Take In

So Much Info To Take In

I went from wanting to open a dispensary, to loathing all dispensaries and their owners in a matter of moments. Well I guess the solution is to open a dispensary
and follow the true intent of the law. It is these For Profit Dispensaries that are messing up the whole program. You could pay yourself and your staff handsome salaries. Charge half the price or less and still donate the profits back towards helping low income patients. Or using the money to help to pass legislation that will further the cause. Maybe offer other services to the public at no charge. There are plenty of ways to put that money to good use. It seems to me that the people who own these dispensaries are just dope dealers who think they have taken some sort of step towards legitimacy. The only one I have been to that does not feel like some sort underground dope deal is Harborside in Oakland. They have a wide range of services available to the public at no cost. Still they must find other things to do with there money because they were raking it in the times I have been there. I think it should be legal for all adults just as booze and cigs are now. But until then I think that these dispensaries had better find a way to be more patient friendly and less worried about stuffing there pockets with the hard earned dollars of people in need. They need to realize that when marijuana becomes legal for all adults who want it, and it WILL HAPPEN that they would be first in line to profit from it. They could turn their "Reputable Dispensaries" into Specialty Shops Like tobacco stores Or Bev Mor for that matter. They could become "Coffee Shops". They could become suppliers of strains, growing supplies and equipment. My point is it seems the owners would want to build a reputation for Quality, Price, and Service. Maybe develop some sort of niche that puts you apart from the rest. So when the day comes to transition to a world where it is as legal as cigs and booze they could profit from there position, instead of going out of business clutching onto the Dope Dealer Model!!!!!!

 

[MrGreen]

Marijuana should be subject to standard sales and income tax laws, that is all.

Any additional tax is admitting in principle that marijuana is harmful.

 

[Koroz]

They are extremists because they would rather see no law go forward than see a law that is a mutual comprimise. Their lacking to comprimise also constitutes the continuation of the people who are serving jail sentances for something that should not be a crime. You legalization people who scream no jail for weed are the same ones who advocate their very sentancing by not willing to cooperate for a greater good like freeing the weed.

Now the legalization movement is chanting the rantings of an elderly fellow who is still living in a 70s era mindset. The problem with Jack Herer's ideology is he is talking in a world of SHOULD BE. Unfortunatly, we dont live in the the land of shouldbe, we live in america. Alcohol is taxed. Wine is taxed. Tobacco is taxed. All of which are completly available for any of you to produce in your own homes without paying any taxes. Cannabis should be available for retail sales in which it is taxed, and at the same time available to citizens to produce at their own for no tax cost associated.

We all need to realize that no one should be jailed for its consumption or production or distribution. Why cant we come together to win that battle? There is no amount of money in the world makes me see this a different way. Would any of you trade your freedom not to pay taxes on certain items, I sure know I dont like to pay taxes, but I sure as hell dislike jail much more than taxes....

How many of you advocating no taxes for weed will pay your state and federals by april ?

Herb the problem is, to him extremists aren't the ones backing CCI, he is calling anyone who doesn't want to back Tax Cann 2010 an Extremist because we don't agree with the fact that the initiative keeps prohibition going while allowing it to end only in a few select counties where they are pot friendly like Oakland.

I agree, those people who are voting no on both because they don't want Cannabis taxed are a bit overboard. Everything is taxed, our Cannabis will be taxed too. Voting no on either of these initiatives won't change that. But I REFUSE to vote yes on an initiative that makes sure I will continue to look over my shoulder in San Diego just because Richard Lee wants to get rich funneling business his way.

 

[Mist]

Marijuana should be subject to standard sales and income tax laws, that is all.

Any additional tax is admitting in principle that marijuana is harmful.

I don't see an additional tax like they have on alchohol to be an admitance that marijuana is harmfull. The government is always putting an extra tax on things that they see as recreational or a luxury. Just the other day I saw on the news that Ca. was talking about putting a tax on Soda pop in the name of making people healthier. Do you think people are going to stop drinking cokes because of an extra 5 cents per can? Hell no! And neither are they going to notice if there is an extra few dollars per ounce of weed. They are going to get their little piece of the action and then some in the end.

 

[PharmaCan]

We all need to realize that no one should be jailed for its consumption or production or distribution. Why cant we come together to win that battle? There is no amount of money in the world makes me see this a different way.

If this conversation were taking place a year from now, you might have a valid point. Right now the debate is about which initiative would be better, and which one should make it to the ballot. You seem to be incapable of making that distinction.

The process in California is that an initiative is proposed, then signatures are gathered. If enough valid signatures are gathered, the initiative is placed on the ballot. We are in the signature gathering stage, which is entirely different from the "get out the vote" stage. Now is the time for this kind of discussion. Once the initiative(s) make it to the ballot, then it's a whole different ball game. Right now you are just wasting a lot of bluster on issues that don't even exist.

PC

 

[MrGreen]

I don't see an additional tax like they have on alchohol to be an admitance that marijuana is harmfull. The government is always putting an extra tax on things that they see as recreational or a luxury. Just the other day I saw on the news that Ca. was talking about putting a tax on Soda pop in the name of making people healthier. Do you think people are going to stop drinking cokes because of an extra 5 cents per can? Hell no! And neither are they going to notice if there is an extra few dollars per ounce of weed. They are going to get their little piece of the action and then some in the end.

Exactly! There are "sin" taxes on these things because they are bad for our society. WHY should more taxes be paid on cannabis than cereal?