Growers are just saying NO to pot legalization

[krunchbubble]

The math says there are more smokers and personal growers than commercial growers. The greatest good for the largest majority is legalization. Those that are accustomed to getting by by shirking the system can find some other way to shirk it... or they can start transporting their herb to cities that still lock smokers up for being smokers.

It'll be years before major corporations get into the game (need it to be 100% fed legal to avoid jeopardizing their corporate protections.) and it'll likely be years before it is federally legal. That means plenty of money being made selling your stuff in places like Akron or Austin or Tulsa.

Try and remember why you started smoking herb in the first place and what led you to growing. Legalization is a GOOD thing. If you don't like being regulated, stay off the radar and do what you're ALREADY DOING, but with less inherent risk.

hmmmmm., cant believe i saying this, but good post.........

still don't completely agree, but good post........

 

[Anti]

Anheuser Busch is the #1 beer seller in the united states, hands down.

But in the very town that Budweiser is brewed and bottled in there are several microbreweries that somehow manage to stay profitable and grow their business, even without the massive ad budgets, massive breweries, bottling plants, distribution centers, fleets, etc.


There's a Sam Adams commercial that's been running recently where they go around and ask people in bars what kind of market share they imagine that Sam Adams has based on its reputation and ads and whatnot. People are guessing anywhere from 10-30% but then they tell you the shocking truth... sam adams supplies less than 0.9% of the beer that Americans drink... and yet they still make enough money to run commercials 24/7 and stock their beers all over the world.

Where there is a will, there is a way.

 

[markscastle]

Sorry won`t be voting for Prop 19 in November cause it is tyrany plain and simple!

 

[Yes4Prop215]

um...just saw on the news today, the spokeswoman for YES on 19 said her self..."you will need licenses and if you are found going over the limit you have your license revoked and prosecution.."

then she said some stuff about it being about taxing and regulating, etc.....

why is the spokeswoman for YES making it sound like this will over ride prop 215

 

[jump /injack]

Just saw this on the front page of the Oakland Tribune,

"July 07–Legalizing marijuana could cause the drug’s price to plummet while increasing use by an uncertain amount, according to a new study from a respected public-policy think tank. RAND Corp. researchers say known production costs and surveys of marijuana’s current price suggest the untaxed retail price of high-quality marijuana could drop to as low as $38 per ounce, compared with about $375 per ounce now." http://hot-news-update.info/legalizing-pot-would-lower-prices-raise-use-study-says/ Apparently Berkley is going to open up also with some huge grow areas, if Rand is right about the prices won't leave anything for the small guy, he'll have to sell with competition at $560 per pound and when he/she pays rent, gas and electric, licenses, insurance and surety bonds plus inspection fee's there won't be much left, he'd have to sell 4 pounds of good weed to make lousy $2200 a month 'gross' before expenses. One of the provisions in the bill is that you have to get the owners permission to grow you weed to be legal, would be a bitch to even find a place. If you stay in the business you'd have to leave the State or become a smuggler to other states that has an artificial price or is still illegal and thats intrastate smuggling, FED.

 

[Hammerhead]

First of all they are not talking about Richard Lee's Tax and Regulate bill, they are talking about California Assembly Bill 2254—often referred to as the Ammiano bill.

I read the whole paper and can say they have it all wrong.
They say:
(2) filling most of a 1,500-square-foot residential house with intensive hydroponic production (with artificial lights, best practices, and so on); for their $38 an ounce price.

But outdoors will cost a small fraction of that to produce, less then a dollar an Oz. They have no idea of what they speak of...
They even admit it in their paper that they have no idea of the costs of legal Cannabis because there are no legal markets to make an estimate from.
They predict legal growing under lights, what a fucking joke...

-SamS

Ya on page 23

 

[vta]

um...just saw on the news today, the spokeswoman for YES on 19 said her self..."you will need licenses and if you are found going over the limit you have your license revoked and prosecution.."

then she said some stuff about it being about taxing and regulating, etc.....

why is the spokeswoman for YES making it sound like this will over ride prop 215

By what you posted, I don't see anything about prop215. Sounds like maybe related to the commercial side?

Did she say anything or any word related to medical?

Remember, there is nothing 'hidden' in the law. We have that proposal avail for all to see in black and white. If it passes, we know what that law will be. And that is a law separate from Prop215.

 

[vta]

Just saw this on the front page of the Oakland Tribune,

"July 07–Legalizing marijuana could cause the drug’s price to plummet while increasing use by an uncertain amount, according to a new study from a respected public-policy think tank. RAND Corp. researchers say known production costs and surveys of marijuana’s current price suggest the untaxed retail price of high-quality marijuana could drop to as low as $38 per ounce, compared with about $375 per ounce now." http://hot-news-update.info/legalizing-pot-would-lower-prices-raise-use-study-says/ Apparently Berkley is going to open up also with some huge grow areas, if Rand is right about the prices won't leave anything for the small guy, he'll have to sell with competition at $560 per pound and when he/she pays rent, gas and electric, licenses, insurance and surety bonds plus inspection fee's there won't be much left, he'd have to sell 4 pounds of good weed to make lousy $2200 a month 'gross' before expenses. One of the provisions in the bill is that you have to get the owners permission to grow you weed to be legal, would be a bitch to even find a place. If you stay in the business you'd have to leave the State or become a smuggler to other states that has an artificial price or is still illegal and thats intrastate smuggling, FED.

Remember...RAND is funded by....wait for it.....The Department of Defense.

 

[jump /injack]

um...just saw on the news today, the spokeswoman for YES on 19 said her self..."you will need licenses and if you are found going over the limit you have your license revoked and prosecution.."

then she said some stuff about it being about taxing and regulating, etc.....

why is the spokeswoman for YES making it sound like this will over ride prop 215

I have a prescription not a license, don't think that pertained to medical use, or did she say something else? That license will be expensive, if its like the liquor license that goes by country, the cost could be over $100,000 but they are already thinking about taxing ounces $50 according to the Oakland Tribune I posted below. Don't think I would want to be a grower with this coming down.

 

[Hammerhead]

dont you mean commercial grower? There's no tax for A personal grow

 

[markscastle]

An assembly bill cannot over turn prop 215 which was voted by the people.Kelly vs the people of California

The prop 19 is by vote of the people and courts could deside that grow limits and amounts could apply to medical growers as well as non medical growers as prop 215 simply doesn`t say anything about limits so it would not be over turning any of what prop 215 does say. Prop 19 also doesn`t say that medical growers would be exempt from the limits. It would end up in court and who knows what the judges would deside on that issue.Prop 19 is very poorly written regardless of your views on the messure.

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

An assembly bill cannot over turn prop 215 which was voted by the people.Kelly vs the people of California

The prop 19 is by vote of the people and courts could deside that grow limits and amounts could apply to medical growers as well as non medical growers as prop 215 simply doesn`t say anything about limits so it would not be over turning any of what prop 215 does say. Prop 19 also doesn`t say that medical growers would be exempt from the limits. It would end up in court and who knows what the judges would deside on that issue.Prop 19 is very poorly written regardless of your views on the messure.

Funny I thought both prop 215 and prop 19 were initiatives, do you even understand how an initiative works, you don't seem to.
And if you read Prop 19 it is very clear it does not over ride 215 or take any rights away from medical users, you are just plain wrong, wise up. Try reading the full initiative.

-SamS

 

[Anti]

um...just saw on the news today, the spokeswoman for YES on 19 said her self..."you will need licenses and if you are found going over the limit you have your license revoked and prosecution.."

then she said some stuff about it being about taxing and regulating, etc.....

why is the spokeswoman for YES making it sound like this will over ride prop 215

I see nothing in what you've just presented that suggests that this will override 215.

 

[Yes4Prop215]

^well i was just relaying what i saw on CBS news last night and the spokeswoman for 19 was making it sound pretty strict.

and i know how initiatives work...and there is still a possibility that it can override 215....what makes you guys think 215 is so invincible.

say 19 gets implemented, and then in 2012 they drop another iniative to repeal 215 since 19 is working for the government? they might say shit like "215 is outdated and protects criminal enterprise blah blah blah...since 19 is in place we dont need 215"

and then wwhat....the only way certain people are supporting this is because people keep claiming that 215 will remain intact...BUT HOW SURE???

not starting shit here..i just want more clarification than "You have no idea how shit works...215 and 19 are seperate..take my word because i know for sure 215 is safe"

I see nothing in what you've just presented that suggests that this will override 215.

im not suggesting it will override 215 for sure its all speculation..i want proof from yall on just how invincible 215 is. other way around...whats to say RIchard Lee doesnt have a sneaky bill around the corner, out of print, that will eventually override 215, and hes keeping it safe and sound for now because he knows if it gets out there will be for sure alot more NO votes...

 

[Anti]

say 19 gets implemented, and then in 2012 they drop another iniative to repeal 215 since 19 is working for the government? they might say shit like "215 is outdated and protects criminal enterprise blah blah blah...since 19 is in place we dont need 215"

Won't that require a vote?

Won't you be just as paranoid then about protecting your newly won freedom as you are now about potentially getting that freedom?

 

[markscastle]

Funny I thought both prop 215 and prop 19 were initiatives, do you even understand how an initiative works, you don't seem to.
And if you read Prop 19 it is very clear it does not over ride 215 or take any rights away from medical users, you are just plain wrong, wise up. Try reading the full initiative.

-SamS

I understand how they work just fine and never said it would over ride each other but the People vs.Kelly was desided because the state tried to put limits that didn`t exist in 215 and it was determined the the state can not do that. How ever prop19 is also of a vote of the people and does have limits to one oz and 5x5 area.It would not be a strech to see the courts desiding to apply those limits to both prop19 and 215 medical if prop 19 passes! And many other parts of Prop 19 could also be imposed on medical growers such as transport,minors being near,ect.

 

[jump /injack]

Funny I thought both prop 215 and prop 19 were initiatives, do you even understand how an initiative works, you don't seem to.
And if you read Prop 19 it is very clear it does not over ride 215 or take any rights away from medical users, you are just plain wrong, wise up. Try reading the full initiative.

-SamS

It doesn't come out and actually say it doesn't over ride 215 BUT it doesn't say it doesn't. It leaves the wiggle room that lawyers and courts love, why didn't it just come out and say, "this shall not effect 215 in any way, this is for the commercial growing of cannabis only and does not pertain to or for medically grown medically grown cannabis." 215 took 20 years of work to get in finally, Prop 19 is trying to piggy back in for commercial growers that wrote a very loose proposition that can cause havoc.

 

[Anti]

How ever prop19 is also of a vote of the people and does have limits to one oz and 5x5 area.

Dude... for the umpteenth time....

you can CARRY AN OUNCE ON YOUR PERSON IN PUBLIC.

If this passes, you can have whatever you are able to grow in your 25sq ft. (Doesn't have to be 5x5. Could be 1x25 or 2x12.5.) But when you go out the door you can carry 1oz on your person. Leave your 30 lbs in your curing jars and bring an ounce along with you to smoke with consenting adults away from children.

This is draconian?

I know that I'm capable of pulling 3 oz out of TWO SQUARE FEET (plus another 2 square feet for veg and clone, mind you) every 2 months if I don't run perp and a bit more than that if I do!

I'm doing that under 252w of CFL for fucks sake!

What do you think i could do with more than 5times the space and 5k+ of HPS, CO2, etc?

I'm willing to bet I could supply everybody I know and still smoke from dusk til dawn.

What are you worried about?

 

[markscastle]

By the way if you are `Sam the Skunkman` from the Seventies I know you and have smoked with you nearly 40 yrs ago. If you are that same person.

 

[markscastle]

Yes but there isn`t an oz limit today for medical users. And because of the People vs.Kelly, there is also no size or amount of set area to grow for medical users. That`s only because 215 didn`t set any limits.prop 19 would and the courts may deside it and other measures not included in 215 could apply to medical users as well. About anythig not covered in 215 would be open to the court to deside on as for limits and conduct,ect.So you see even though prop 19 doesn`t change anything in215 some presidents could be applyed to medical users if the court so deemed.Prop19 would effect medical users alike.