Growers are just saying NO to pot legalization

[Travieso]

Look what happens when you push the bully into the corner he will cry mom and rat on you its been proven that there loosers of genetics this krunch dude has a thread on genetic drift on 1 of his beloved strains.. Soon as it was out performed/desise ridden from lack of growable knowledge IMHO these cats get on the next band waggon and its sad really.. I don't want to let these genetics he's on about get into the mainstream,,, but let him get caught with them in the USA,,

What does this have to do with this topic TROLL?????

 

[cannaboy]

So far there are two honest answers that I will chose from, unless I get more people giving their reasons to vote NO on Prop 19.

"marijuana is how pay my bills (and then some) and i don't know what tc2010 is going to mean for my lively-hood."

"If i pass a joint to my 20 year old friend i would go to jail for 6 months and have to pay a fine!"
(a bit stupid because if you pass a beer it is the same, illegal)

Reminds me of the joke,
The city outlawed convicted pedophiles from selling ice cream from trucks, to protect the kids.
But the kids all complained, where are we going to get free ice cream?


Come on people, lets hear more reasons to vote NO.....


krunchbubble,
So now you are a seed breeder also?
Are they made by you?

I would not grow anyones seeds that did not want Cannabis legalized.
I would boycott any business or person that says to vote NO on Prop 19.
Maybe then they might re-think their position and vote yes, but I doubt it.
But I refuse to support the NO voters, in any way.
They can sell their medical Cannabis to the rest of the NO voters.
Oops, most of the NO voters are LEO's and Prohibitionists, not such a big market, hey?
Oh well....

Anyone else think a boycott of NO business's is a good idea? I like it.

-SamS

I can't realy put this in a open forum,,

I know I may have sounded a prick before

Sam don't get told what to do with your pips,, from nobody.. there yours... don't think that scorpio and others woin't try cash in.. best to keep them or send some as prizes to the LGA cup on AUGUST the 21st 2010 we are devouted growers and would like to invite you to come along,, we are undertaking the processs of drysift so you can test it for us... And I would verry much piss of the entire community,, I never done nobody no wrongs,, belive what you will

But the LGA and your SK#1 won our first UK cup and we own the cup not some jerks with a company,,, It's a free uk week type thing like the hash legends I imagion is,, non profit except the LGA samples... you could be the Guest of honour,,,

your seeds are to be saved forever ,,,


Peace and unity one love,,,

 

[Smoke Buddy]

Imma give it to you one more time Sam. I am not asking for your seeds. I have more than I need now. So... The reason is that the economy is trashed here. Unemployment rates in norcal are typically around 15%. Every percentage point means thousands more people. Many of these people are keeping their families fed by growing medical cannabis. How insensitive many seem to be to the fact that THOUSANDS more people will become homeless with this power play by government. They are helped by you and your yes crowd that have a mistaken idea that this law represents some nirvana. Bolstered by this silly assertion that if it doesnt pass here now, it will be decades before it comes up again. Falacy. So its all about the recession which is extreme here and getting worse not better. This is a cottage industry holding up many thousands of families. Unintended consequences are obvious from my view but you guys are fine and have a job and could find another if needed aparently. We dont have that luxury.

 

[joaquin386]

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 9"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 9"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/USER%7E1.HOM/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msoclip1/01/clip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <woNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style> who the hell cares about the ills of alcohol in Spain. What about the social impact on Spains society since they have adjusted to laws regarding Cannabis?
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o></o>
“…the reason to say no to legalization. To avoid the danger of "smoking"…
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o></o>
I hate that mentality b/c that seems to be the most common rebuttal regarding Cannabis as Medicine. Its rooted in ignorance imo and to perpetuate that kind of propaganda doesn’t do anything for changing the laws and perception regarding Cannabis.
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o></o>
Educate yourself on ALL of the methods of using/ingesting Cannabis whether its for Medicinal or Recreational use.

"who the hell cares about the ills of alcohol in Spain."
A True habitant of the world nice answer ...... Is like me saying I dont care about the 3,000 live lost in the WTC, bravo to you.


Anyway right to the point.

If you can find me a single study (not funded by the tabaco corporations) that say that smoking is healthy and not danguerous I would do anything for you. ANYTHING!!!!.

The short mentality is yours. Why smoking? If it causes lung cancer (is your father a doctor mine is and I have been there and seen it) why use these method?. I am trying to tell you smoking is BAD!!! It doen't give you any benefits.

GM Pharmaceuticals got out a spray that actually acts as fast as smoking cannabis. Then what do you prefer "smoking" (can give you lung cancer) or inhale it that actaully doesn't have side effects?
Same questions as .... what do you prefer driving a motorbike with a helmet or without, knowing beforehand that you are going to have an accident.

You can use cannabis in thousand different ways not just smoking there IS NOT one only way. And I am not saying that I will say NO to legalization, I am saying that I would say NO to smoking cannabis, if you eat it, chew it, drink it, etc, I would vote YES.

 

[vta]

"who the hell cares about the ills of alcohol in Spain."
A True habitant of the world nice answer ...... Is like me saying I dont care about the 3,000 live lost in the WTC, bravo to you.


Anyway right to the point.

If you can find me a single study (not funded by the tabaco corporations) that say that smoking is healthy and not danguerous I would do anything for you. ANYTHING!!!!.

The short mentality is yours. Why smoking? If it causes lung cancer (is your father a doctor mine is and I have been there and seen it) why use these method?. I am trying to tell you smoking is BAD!!! It doen't give you any benefits.

GM Pharmaceuticals got out a spray that actually acts as fast as smoking cannabis. Then what do you prefer "smoking" (can give you lung cancer) or inhale it that actaully doesn't have side effects?
Same questions as .... what do you prefer driving a motorbike with a helmet or without, knowing beforehand that you are going to have an accident.

You can use cannabis in thousand different ways not just smoking there IS NOT one only way. And I am not saying that I will say NO to legalization, I am saying that I would say NO to smoking cannabis, if you eat it, chew it, drink it, etc, I would vote YES.

I'm not saying smoking anything is ok but......

By Marc Kaufman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 26, 2006

The largest study of its kind has unexpectedly concluded that smoking marijuana, even regularly and heavily, does not lead to lung cancer.

The new findings "were against our expectations," said Donald Tashkin of the University of California at Los Angeles, a pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years.

"We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use," he said. "What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect."

Federal health and drug enforcement officials have widely used Tashkin's previous work on marijuana to make the case that the drug is dangerous. Tashkin said that while he still believes marijuana is potentially harmful, its cancer-causing effects appear to be of less concern than previously thought.

Earlier work established that marijuana does contain cancer-causing chemicals as potentially harmful as those in tobacco, he said. However, marijuana also contains the chemical THC, which he said may kill aging cells and keep them from becoming cancerous.


Tashkin's study, funded by the National Institutes of Health's National Institute on Drug Abuse, involved 1,200 people in Los Angeles who had lung, neck or head cancer and an additional 1,040 people without cancer matched by age, sex and neighborhood.

They were all asked about their lifetime use of marijuana, tobacco and alcohol. The heaviest marijuana smokers had lighted up more than 22,000 times, while moderately heavy usage was defined as smoking 11,000 to 22,000 marijuana cigarettes. Tashkin found that even the very heavy marijuana smokers showed no increased incidence of the three cancers studied.

"This is the largest case-control study ever done, and everyone had to fill out a very extensive questionnaire about marijuana use," he said. "Bias can creep into any research, but we controlled for as many confounding factors as we could, and so I believe these results have real meaning."

Tashkin's group at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA had hypothesized that marijuana would raise the risk of cancer on the basis of earlier small human studies, lab studies of animals, and the fact that marijuana users inhale more deeply and generally hold smoke in their lungs longer than tobacco smokers -- exposing them to the dangerous chemicals for a longer time. In addition, Tashkin said, previous studies found that marijuana tar has 50 percent higher concentrations of chemicals linked to cancer than tobacco cigarette tar.

While no association between marijuana smoking and cancer was found, the study findings, presented to the American Thoracic Society International Conference this week, did find a 20-fold increase in lung cancer among people who smoked two or more packs of cigarettes a day.

The study was limited to people younger than 60 because those older than that were generally not exposed to marijuana in their youth, when it is most often tried.

 

[johnnyla]

ok, IF prop19 doesnt pass the grey area remains but does anyone see that the ease that Dr's issue Medical Recomendations may be at jeporady?

the DEA puts pressure on doctors that write too many prescriptions for drugs like Oxycontin so whos to say that they wont pressure Cali lawmakers to reevaluate the ease with which they issue Recomendations of Cannabis. if they clamp down on issuing the Med Rec then ALOT of those hiding behind a medical excuse may no longer qualify for Medical Cannabis.

i bet if this occured then those left out in the cold would be begging for Mr Lee's legalization bill.

a real pot doc could just not have a DEA license and hence not be subject to their review or jurisdiction since they aren't prescribing controled substances so they can't lose their license. Probably worth it to work part time and make half a mil to a mil a year in cash and not worry about malpractice.

 

[Guest 88950]

"who the hell cares about the ills of alcohol in Spain."
A True habitant of the world nice answer ...... Is like me saying I dont care about the 3,000 live lost in the WTC, bravo to you.


Anyway right to the point.

If you can find me a single study (not funded by the tabaco corporations) that say that smoking is healthy and not danguerous I would do anything for you. ANYTHING!!!!.

The short mentality is yours. Why smoking? If it causes lung cancer (is your father a doctor mine is and I have been there and seen it) why use these method?. I am trying to tell you smoking is BAD!!! It doen't give you any benefits.

GM Pharmaceuticals got out a spray that actually acts as fast as smoking cannabis. Then what do you prefer "smoking" (can give you lung cancer) or inhale it that actaully doesn't have side effects?
Same questions as .... what do you prefer driving a motorbike with a helmet or without, knowing beforehand that you are going to have an accident.

You can use cannabis in thousand different ways not just smoking there IS NOT one only way. And I am not saying that I will say NO to legalization, I am saying that I would say NO to smoking cannabis, if you eat it, chew it, drink it, etc, I would vote YES.

dude, re read my post.

im not defending or advocating smoking so i dont think i need to provide any research.

my response was in response to your statment, "<link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/USER%7E1.HOM/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msoclip1/01/clip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <woNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style>These is the reason to say no to legalization. To avoid the danger of "smoking".

bad grammar and all.

to avoid the dangers of smoking, vote NO on prop19. thats just rediculous.
just b/c your father is a doctor doesnt mean you comphrend what you read. get your brain out of your pipe and come up with a better response. one that comphrends what i post.

its called Sativex and good luck getting that in the USA. ive tried. have you.


and i smoke Cannabis ONLY b/c i cant afford to buy enough Cannabis to make edibles and im still learning how to maximize my harvest.

i have never smoked cigarettes and i dont like smoking Cannabis b/c im an athlete and it has reduced my endurance but right now i dont have an option.


if i repost what VTA posted would you exit this conversation until you can articulate a better response that shows you comprehend what your commenting on?
[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

 

[Guest 88950]

a real pot doc could just not have a DEA license and hence not be subject to their review or jurisdiction since they aren't prescribing controled substances so they can't lose their license. Probably worth it to work part time and make half a mil to a mil a year in cash and not worry about malpractice.

you and joaquin have reading comprehension problems.

i asked whats going to happen when the DEA pressures CALI LAWMAKERS to clamp down on the ease that Medical Cannabis Recommendations are issued.

its difficult to carry on an articulated debate/conversation with some of you.

 

[White-rhino]

i doubt you ask where your bootleg cigs come from. come on, smuggle cigs from overseas. are you serious? do you really think someone's going to be able to smuggle Legally Bought cigs into the USA and then going to be able to sell them cheaper than the store at $5-8 per pack. so are they smuggling a 20' container into the USA b/c i can tell you that from Import expierence that its not cheap to ship a container or partial container and pass customs. Customs CANT check every container entering the Port of LA so illegal goods DO make it into the USA but piggy-backing illegal goods in a container of Legal goods makes it hardly worth the effort b/c smuggling 20-50 cases of cigs isnt profitable unless they were STOLEN in the country of origin.

They can and do get past customs. Its a huge business, and you wouldn't even know to ask. You buy a pack of Marlboro Lights, you don't know they were made in a North Korean countefeiting factory producing milions of packs a year, or in West Virginia. A pack of cigarettes that sells for $7 in New York, and costs 10 cents to make leaves a huge profit margin.

 

[krunchbubble]

Look what happens when you push the bully into the corner he will cry mom and rat on you

wtf? your saying im a rat? holy shit, your funny.......now say that to my face, double dog dare ya.....

cannaboy - its been proven that there loosers of genetics this krunch dude has a thread on genetic drift on 1 of his beloved strains.. Soon as it was out performed/desise ridden from lack of growable knowledge IMHO these cats get on the next band waggon and its sad really.. I don't want to let these genetics he's on about get into the mainstream,,, but let him get caught with them in the USA,,

lack of knowledge? your pretty new on here, huh?

really dude, your talking out of your ass, you dont have the slightest clue what your talking about.....

why are you even in this thread? your from the UK, your trolling serves no purpose here in this California legalization discussion.....

and go swing on skunkman's balls a little more there not sore enough.......

 

[Guest 88950]

They can and do get past customs. Its a huge business, and you wouldn't even know to ask. You buy a pack of Marlboro Lights, you don't know they were made in a North Korean countefeiting factory producing milions of packs a year, or in West Virginia. A pack of cigarettes that sells for $7 in New York, and costs 10 cents to make leaves a huge profit margin.

i know they get past customs. never said customs is fool proof, in fact they are way under staffed.

its not about legalization so lets get back to the real topic.

 

[CaptainTrips]

you and joaquin have reading comprehension problems.

i asked whats going to happen when the DEA pressures CALI LAWMAKERS to clamp down on the ease that Medical Cannabis Recommendations are issued.

its difficult to carry on an articulated debate/conversation with some of you.

Recs are passed out like candy because prop 215 allows for it. Prop 215 cannot be changed by lawmakers, only by another voter init. What do you think lawmakers are going to do? And recs have been passed out like candy for going on 14 years now, if the dea was going to do something like that they would have by now...

 

[215forLife]

The United States Supreme court has ruled that California mmj doc's are protected under the first ammendment to the constitution. Niether the DEA or California law makers can do shit.

 

[Guest 88950]

it obvious that im no expert on my rights outlined in the constitution so i WIKI'ed 1st Ammendment to the Constitution and whats being protected?

freedom of speech?


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"First Amendment" redirects here. For other uses, see First Amendment (disambiguation).
This article is semi-protected until July 28, 2010 due to vandalism.
United States of America
Great Seal of the United States

This article is part of the series:
United States Constitution
Original text of the Constitution
Preamble

Articles of the Constitution
I · II · III · IV · V · VI · VII
Amendments to the Constitution
Bill of Rights
I · II · III · IV · V
VI · VII · VIII · IX · X

Subsequent Amendments
XI · XII · XIII · XIV · XV
XVI · XVII · XVIII · XIX · XX
XXI · XXII · XXIII · XXIV · XXV
XXVI · XXVII

Other countries · Law Portal
view • talk • edit
The Bill of Rights in the National Archives.

The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law "respecting an establishment of religion", impeding the free exercise of religion, infringing on the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

Originally, the First Amendment only applied to the Congress. However, starting with Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925), the Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies the First Amendment to each state, including any local government.

 

[Guest 88950]

Recs are passed out like candy because prop 215 allows for it. Prop 215 cannot be changed by lawmakers, only by another voter init. What do you think lawmakers are going to do? And recs have been passed out like candy for going on 14 years now, if the dea was going to do something like that they would have by now...

are you positive that the issuance of Medical Cannabis Recommendation can only be changed by a vote?

if so then thats awsome.

 

[THE PABLOS]

A contest....ya I gotta post!!!!!

A contest....ya I gotta post!!!!!

How about about voting NO out of the principles for rebellion?

No man or governing body should have the right to tell an individual what plants he may grow.

By voting for legalization(regulation) you are effectively acknowledging that the government has exactly that power. You are conceding to the government's use of prison as a fear tactic to help you forget....that they shouldn't really have that power in the first place. Herb is gift.....resin its message. Blessed it be....the burning bush.

YES vote= Yes.... I acknowledge and accept the government's right to regulate and/or outlaw a plant

NO vote= No thanx.....I don't acknowledge the power of government to regulate and/or outlaw the plant. It is a principle of higher law....and I'm in protest and absolute rebellion of your conceit and lies. I will not forgive you until all the laws and regulations are erased from the books. Shame on you.


Boy....I can tell you first hand...that I've given in to the same fears as you legalize guys have and learned my lesson....caved in to medical...but no more....I'll martyr for the good of my fellow plant lovers and shout out..."No! Don't be like me!! Don't give in to what is fundamentally evil and will only allow them to further indenture you!"

Give them your plants....give them your guns...give them your principles...give them your intelligence....give them your trust....they'll take good care of you all....they are really great folks.

That's my true NO vote....less importantly....but still worth a mention:
I want to continue my lavish lifestyle and my latest pieces of tail cost me a fortune.

Sam....If I win the contest....don't bother about the beans...I wouldn't know what to do with Old Skool foundation genetics....or beans in general.....I grow only real Kush down here....the latest and greatest "clone only"

Yo to the Hos.....I love a contest

 

[markscastle]

So far there are two honest answers that I will chose from, unless I get more people giving their reasons to vote NO on Prop 19.

"marijuana is how pay my bills (and then some) and i don't know what tc2010 is going to mean for my lively-hood."

"If i pass a joint to my 20 year old friend i would go to jail for 6 months and have to pay a fine!"
(a bit stupid because if you pass a beer it is the same, illegal)

Reminds me of the joke,
The city outlawed convicted pedophiles from selling ice cream from trucks, to protect the kids.
But the kids all complained, where are we going to get free ice cream?


Come on people, lets hear more reasons to vote NO.....


krunchbubble,
So now you are a seed breeder also?
Are they made by you?

I would not grow anyones seeds that did not want Cannabis legalized.
I would boycott any business or person that says to vote NO on Prop 19.
Maybe then they might re-think their position and vote yes, but I doubt it.
But I refuse to support the NO voters, in any way.
They can sell their medical Cannabis to the rest of the NO voters.
Oops, most of the NO voters are LEO's and Prohibitionists, not such a big market, hey?
Oh well....

Anyone else think a boycott of NO business's is a good idea? I like it.

-SamS

I feel the same way about sniches from the seventies who get busted and turn on there friends to get out of trouble! Don`t want there seeds!

 

[White-rhino]

its not about legalization so lets get back to the real topic.

Sorry I was thrown off by the subject of the thread:

Growers are just saying NO to pot legalization

-
Anyway, the argument that originated my reply was the marxist fear inherent in the thread that those "evil corporations" would take over the industry. They won't. Taxes will be too high for them to compete with the small grower who chooses not to abide by those high taxes.

Yeas, it will cost $x/lb to produce. The cost will be the same or roughly the same for the small grower and the evil corporation, especially when you add in the cost of labor for evil corporation.

Then - evil corporation will have to conduct business on the books, paying all taxes and duties, and small grower will sell direct, avoiding taxes and duties. Profit margin for small grower won't be much different under legalization than it is now. Maybe even higher, depending on how much they tax, and how much it increases over time.

No need to fear! Evil corporation won't prevail!

And just a side note to all those arguing that they will vote no because it will allow evil corporations to make a profit - the argument is infantile, and sickening. You suck for having a brain that is wired like that. Move to Cuba. Its a fucking paradise for you. Already built and in place, running flawlessly! Quit hanging around here, mooching off of the evil capitalism that you hate.

 

[CaptainTrips]

are you positive that the issuance of Medical Cannabis Recommendation can only be changed by a vote?

if so then thats awsome.

I am positive prop 215 which gives every californian access to the right of a medical cannabis recommendation cannot be changed by a simple legislative measure. That would be seen as an attempt to limit prop 215 which cannot be done, although the legislature can expand upon a ballot init. such as was done with SB420...

 

[Super_Silver]

This prop215 is nothing but a corporate ploy setup by mr.corporate cannabis himself, Rich Lee.

Look it up, there are all sorts of restrictions on personal growing paired with huge loopholes and giveaways for large corporate growers like Agra-med and Rich Lee.

You will be able to grow up to 25 SQUARE FEET, thats a 5x5x5 area that you can grow for your personal use in.....While the corporate growers will be using 100,000 light warehouses to grow their crappy weed. You are worried about substandard herb from 'shady' growers with 'no quality control'? Wait till you see the crap these Mcgrowers will be churning out. Wait until their 'quality control' consists of merely controlling production and keeping production up with little attention paid to real quality that you or I would expect from our herb.

Their 'quality control' methods will vary greatly from what small growers' quality control methods in that they will most likely be using fungicides, insecticides and chemicals in a fashion that large agra-business currently uses them for instead of actually avoiding the problems associated with corporate farming like the small growers already do.

Vote no on this flawed bill that criminalizes small growers and hands the industry over to corporate interests.