Growers are just saying NO to pot legalization

[SeniorBuzz]

bad press is bad press

mmj dispensaries running roughshod over county regulations

all over CA;

that and the promise of increased crime

with growers multiplying

in anticipation of legalization

bad press is bad press

the failure of 215 to protect cities from being overrun with mmj dispensaries

TC2010 does not provide for state enforced consistent regulations

I, as a citizen, will vote against it

things are already going to hell in a hand basket

with our crushing national, and state, debts

no reason to add to the list of growing problems

 

[kmk420kali]

Any grower who is against legalization is against for the same reason as the gov't - MONEY MONEY MONEY... I understand the argument about not wanting the gov't to control supply/quality/etc, but that can easily be worked out.

Those greedy fuck bags need to look at the big picture and not just their wallets. They must feel pretty damn good about seeing someone's door kicked in, house seized, kids put into "protective custody", cars auctioned off, etc... Sick fucks.

I don't care how the bill is written, so long as it addresses people not going to jail or being fined for pot.

Sorry bro, but that is bullshit-- Saying that "any" grower against this is a greedy fuck...that is as bad as "them" saying, "all" med patients are bullshitting!!
As far as the getting doors kicked in, kids taken, house seized....
Do you really think that anybody in Cali has them things happening...if they have under an oz of weed...or a small (under 5x5) grow?? I don't--
I am not against legalization, and not even against all of this Initiative....but this isn't really giving us much we don't have...unless you are a Corp, with deep pockets--
Actually, "Greed" is more of a reason for many to be FOR this--
This is like discussing Immigration Reform...anybody who is for it, is labeled a "Racist"...no matter what other points they make make--

 

[AmsterdamAndy]

There are benefits and relief in the bill, that I can't argue. Pro's of the bill -
1) Anyone can have an oz. in their possession without fear of arrest or even a ticket. As it is now, non mmj smokers will get a ticket and $100 fine.
2) Any person can grow in their residence, a 5x5 plot. Plant count is irrelevant. Any amount you can harvest from the plot, is allowed to be stored on the premises of the plot.
3) It allows for research. Awesome!
4) The biggest pro to the bill imo - It promotes an active hemp industry. This is huge. This will mean a lot of jobs and money.
5) The bill does allow for amendments by statewide vote.
6) I read that the laws would be retro active, and anyone currently in jail for mj that met this bills requirements would be released. I can not find that language in the current version of the bill however.

Useless brings up a lot of good points. BUT:
2) No matter if there are 1, 2, 3, 4 or more adults are living at the same residence, only a 25 sq ft area is allowed for all to share.
4) In this proposed initiative, Hemp growing will only be allowed if the local government approves. Why should local governments have any say in Hemp growing?
5) Look at my previous posts.
6) Not only does this initiative NOT free anyone in jail for marijuana offences, it creates THREE NEW marijuana offences that you can go to jail for.

 

[SeniorBuzz]

Oakland (Oaksterdam) is not exactly a model city,
or area, that you want on a poster
promoting, underwriting, TC2010

The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010
http://www.taxcannabis.org/index.php/pages/initiative/

TC2010 may make good sense for Oakland
and Richard Lee

but TC2010 fails to protect the rest of us
who, perhaps are used to safer places than
the Oakland Richmond area

and don't see the need to invite crime,
or risk, into their neighborhoods

no, I don't want a mmj dispensary in my neighborhood

mmj dispensaries shouldn't be in the middle of downtown
the product will draw the traffic to it
so why not put the mmj dispensary right on the front
of the employee-owned, and operated,
not-for-profit, large production-line, indoor-grow,
outside of town

no middleman,
leading the market pricing lower
while helping the community
and growing respect

 

[AmsterdamAndy]

.
Now, here are some negatives or at least questionable points -
1) The bill states it does not override Prop215. Great. BUT, Prop215 has no plant guidelines in it. The new bill has a 5x5 plot limit. Even though the bill states it does not change anything with Prop215, it also says "Notwithstanding any other statute or current law" (Notwithstanding - in spite of. regardless of) therefore, does this mean the new bill will limit mmj patients to a 5x5 plot? It certainly seems like an argument could be made to that effect since Prop 215 does not discuss plant limits or quantity of medicine. This is my primary concern with the bill.
2) It does not allow anyone under 21 to smoke. That is wrong imo. If you are 18, you can buy cigs, go to war etc. If someone is old enough to fight for our country, they should be allowed to smoke as well. Your 19 y/o soldier nephew can kill people, but can't smoke a J.
3) If you go over the 5x5 plot size, go to jail. (??) This isn't so bad for the casual smoker. But heavy smokers like me can burn through a 5x5 area of OG Kush (small small yields) before the next crop finishes. This will effect outdoor growers far more than indoor. If you can only grow a 5x5' plant outdoors once a year, that isn't going to last even the casual smoker until the next years harvest.
4) It requires a license and zoning permits similar to alcohol. Now, the actual cost of an alcohol license in my area is about $15-25K, and up to $50K USD, depending on location. I know a lot of bar owners and managers, and all have told me it took $100-$150K to get the license, after greasing the right hands. This seems to tip the law in favor of corporate America, not the individual smoker.
5) Considering Richard Lee's current monopoly in Oakland with cannabis clubs it seems to solidify that monopoly. IMO, RL is a douche and is out solely for $$$$, not for patients or smokers or even the plant. But, that is a personal opinion, and not necessarily a wise argument to pursue, so I won't. Just rubs me the wrong way.
6) You can't purchase more than oz. It has to be purchased through a retailer. Your buddy with the 5x5' plot can't sell it to you. He can give it to you, but how many people are going to give away ounces when they can only grow in a 5'x5'?
7) There is supposed to be a $50 per oz tax. That means, if selling retail it's $800 per Lb. in tax. It is extremely difficult to speculate on a non regulated market, so attempting to guess what prices will to is pointless. Again, can not find this language in the current version. If we aren't going to impose a tax, what good is this bill?
8) If local authorities are left to regulate the industry, then people in the Bay, NoCal, and LA are golden, but really the rest of the state is screwed. San Diego is still fighting prop 215. They are not going to allow commercial operations, neither will San Berdoo, Marin, or any other hard liner county. The state needs to set the rules here.

7) No $50 per oz tax. All taxes will be assessed by local governments at whatever rate they choose! See: Section 11302: Imposition and Collection of Taxes and Fees

 

[SeniorBuzz]

As a Californian, I can't even begin to imagine

the chaos that will be created if TC2010 should pass

taxes and enforcement by local governments

who, in the hell, in their right mind,

would ever vote for this?

it's a recipe for fraud and corruption

by an instant order of magnitude

it's a thumbs down in November

 

[SpacedCWBY]

Sorry bro, but that is bullshit-- Saying that "any" grower against this is a greedy fuck...that is as bad as "them" saying, "all" med patients are bullshitting!!

I should have phrased that better and not been so absolute, my apologies. Commercial growers, better?

 

[SpacedCWBY]

As a Californian, I can't even begin to imagine


it's a recipe for fraud and corruption

You do have a point...

Oh, and obviously my op doesn't count anyhow seeing as I'm far far away from that side of the island. I just like to talk about it.

 

[mSeTxOiNcEaRn]

Yes its bound to not pass either way. The way it is now is fine in many ways because ...honestly its not that hard at all to get a med card, if you grow and don't have one then you just don't see the big picture, or you're a felon(sorry) im talking about Cali of course.

The biggest loss that will come from this bill not passing will not be the fact that a lot of people who would benefit from the bill will not, but a bill like this might NEVER get the chance again because the government will do whatever it takes to keep this FLUKE from happening again imho.

Lets hope im wrong.

 

[Kootenay]

I have yet to see where it says that it will be past at a Federal level?

Peace
Koot.

 

[grapeman]

I'll vote no. Just because folks want so bad to have this product legalized is NO reason to vote for a poorly written bill that favors big business (in this case big dispensaries).

 

[Toyot4]

i think most people have problems with the dispensaries because they see how pathetic of a system prop 215 has allowed. People needing to go to a doctor to get a "recommendation" for medical marijuana is a complete joke and a failure in California. I do however agree that there are medicinal properties of marijuana but that does not discount the fact that the majority of marijuana sold in California is to people who just wanna get high.

California needs to change something, whether it be to legalize it and collect taxes on it or need to change up whats going on in the "medical" scene. We certainly are not helping others help pass their medical marijuana laws, only showing those states what not to do when they do decide to pass a medical marijuana initiative.

California is pretty outta control right now, bring on the chaos of legalization.

Most of what is found in these threads is all speculation of how things are going to play out. The only way you guys can figure out what will actually happen is to vote yes.

 

[Toyot4]

I'll vote no. Just because folks want so bad to have this product legalized is NO reason to vote for a poorly written bill that favors big business (in this case big dispensaries).

this bill favors people with money. How come so many people that are involved in producing the #1 cash crop in america dont have the money to drop on legal business entities?

There are outdoor grows on this site that yield hundreds of lbs of quality product that if they even sold it at $1000/lb should have some cash laying around to invest into some legal businesses if this initiative were to pass in November.

This bill supports entrepreneurs and it just so happens Richard Lee beat most of you guys to it.

 

[Herborizer]

I am voting for this. I think it's the most important step toward abolishing the madness and stigma that has kept this harmless plant out of the hands of the people, and put countless people in jail. Yes, I agree it's restrictive. Though, something less restrictive won't pass in this day. Let's vote to pass this one, in a couple of years a massive abollishishment of the false negativities of cannabis will take place, and replaced with a reputation of what it really is. A miracle plant. At that point we can vote a new law into place that is more acceptable.

Let's do it!

 

[SeniorBuzz]

I'll vote no. Just because folks want so bad to have this product legalized is NO reason to vote for a poorly written bill that favors big business (in this case big dispensaries).

I agree gm, TC2010 is poorly written

The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010
http://www.taxcannabis.org/index.php/pages/initiative/

and with the growing number of negative news articles

"the public" isn't going to buy into it

 

[mSeTxOiNcEaRn]

How many of you are have written a bill? Please prove your point about exactly how this bill is so unfair or "poorly written"

Please reference the actual bill, if you have actually read it.

 

[Neo 420]

How many of you are have written a bill? Please prove your point about exactly how this bill is so unfair or "poorly written"

Please reference the actual bill, if you have actually read it.

The bill is most undoubtedly poorly written in the sense :

It has no standards for the framework. (Cities are allowed to create the framework.)

Weight limits are too low for chronic users, hash makers and food creators.

No limits or set amounts on obtaining licenses for cultivators, wholesalers, and distributors. (It is possible to set the licenses so high only, well funded business or corps will be able to afford it basically cutting out all the lower to middle seller who want to go legal.

No smoke for 18 to 20 years old people (You can buy cigs if your 18 but not pot???? Also you can go fight in a war at 18. I agree 0 - 18 should not be indulging)

No quality control guidelines. (This could be a huge money pit for the businessmen in the game. Imagine a city wanting it tested for mold, thc levels, cbc levels, etc etc.....)

Shall I go on? I have read the bill and understand 95 % of it. (thanks to me legal type people) But with all that said........I have to say I still support it for the one reason :

The amount of people that will be locked up for MJ will decrease exponentially..That is good enough for me.

 

[Leon Brooks]

isnt it you can have an oz on you(out and about) AND whatever you can harvest from 5x5?

so if you pull "x"pounds you can take an oz of that where ever you want but leave the rest at home.

also, arent we prop 215 patients un-affected? i feel the less ppl who dilute the med system the better it is in the publics eyes.

 

[Neo 420]

isnt it you can have an oz on you(out and about) AND whatever you can harvest from 5x5?

so if you pull "x"pounds you can take an oz of that where ever you want but leave the rest at home.

also, arent we prop 215 patients un-affected? i feel the less ppl who dilute the med system the better it is in the publics eyes.

True true, and true.

 

[JackTheGrower]

Gosh I hand my limited multi-choice crown over..

Don't y'all all get it? It was only extremely profitable for the little guy dealing or growing when it was really hard-case illegal.

There is no, "yes" market do this or "no" market do that.

The Net result already obvious is as we get closer to a form of legalization known as decriminalization the Cannabis Market is joining the rest of the world in the economic down-turn.
There are a lot of producers and the schools are cranking them out like soldiers.
Web sites are elevated to the level of Churches and everyone is shining up their image and jostling for their rightful place in the pecking order.

It should be a wonderful time for Hippies but the bitter end starts in November here in the USA as we are seeing a signalling of the end of Federal unemployment aid.
The down turn becomes a black hole for many without secure income.

The Price for me to buy weed is too high even at $50 an ounce. Well if it's special I will make an exception maybe.

So, if I won't buy and we all are growing more than ever plus it becomes legal to buy.. Oh boy..

Well in California if the Tax2010 passes there will be counties where you can have a canna-business and counties you can't so collective large scale production may happen in some places and destitution and small gardens will happen in others.

It's a funky-dance that looks like True Legalization.


There are multi-dimensions to this situation. We must learn to think over time in dynamic ways.

Oh and I am looking for a job. Preferably a canna-job but I will mow yards.

------

I Like Tiki jo!