Richard Lee is a Patient. think about that

[Hash Zeppelin]

Richard Lee is not about to screw med patients. He is a patient. I am sure he knows, as well as many people here, that the feds already make busts on med patients even after Eric Holder said no. By passing this bill a flood of recreational growers will come about. The federal focus will turn to them. they only have so much resources to bust people, so this law will keep sick people out of jail by changing the focus of those limited resources. this is if the DEA even chooses to keep enforcing federal pot laws illegally. I have a feeling they are gonna lose this one though. they cant stop 99 percent of the growers already, so they have no chance in even making a small difference after this passes. they will be helpless.

Plus if this bill passes then people like Eddy Lepp will have a better chance at winning an appeal.

so please make the right choice and put your ego aside. vote yes on prop 19. lets get the job done, and polish it up later

 

[ReelBusy1]

VOTE YES ON PROP 19 and keep non-patient smokers out of jail.

Why should the sick be the only ones allowed to use cannabis?

 

[ocean_grown]

VOTE YES ON PROP 19 and keep non-patient smokers out of jail.

Why should the sick be the only ones allowed to use cannabis?

Prop 215 says that any use where the benefits outweigh the detriment of side effects is medicinal use. What are the side effects of pot again? Oh yea, hungry, happy, tired. Weed is already legal in CA, KEEP WEED UNREGULATED & UNTAXED, VOTE NO ON PROP 19.

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

^It is already taxed, and regulated to be limited to med card, so what you are saying makes no sense.

Every commodity in the country is regualted and taxed. that is the way it goes. get the fuck over it and take your tunnel vision glasses off.

All you are doing is getting mixed up n some personal bull shit between richard lee and dennis perron.

all a no vote does is screw you, and help dennis perrons ego because he wants to be the one to legalize first.

It is like if like Neil Armstrong, and Buzz Aldran were fighting over who gets to step on the moon first. who fucking cares? its the moon. NASA would tell them "get out of the fucking ship already and do your job before your oxygen runs out."

 

[Barnt]

So many people are uneducated on this subject. WEED IS NOT LEGAL IN CA!!!!!!

I will say it again. WEED IS NOT LEGAL IN CA!!!! Prop 215 makes this state way better than other states, however it is no where close to where we need to be. Legit medical patients are still getting caught up in this legal system and having their lives ruined.

I don't care how 'legal/legit' you are with a 215 script, I want to see what you say when the cops come to your house and start taking plants out in front of all your neighbors.

Prop 19 isn't perfect. No legalizing initiative will. What 19 will do is begin to change the tides. If this is voted down then everyone will say 'even California didn't legalize it'. On the other hand, if it passes, other states will have a much greater chance in changing their laws. Federal prohibition of pot will only change when individual states change their laws. Just look how alcohol prohibition was repealed.


For all those growers that say vote no, you are pussies! You are living in America--a capitalistic country. Why are you so afraid to compete with other businesses if this is legalized? With this mind set, its no wonder why we have monopolies.

For all your smokers that say vote no, I hope that some cops bang on your door before November to give you a good scare. No matter how bad 19 is wrote, it will protect us so much more than what we have right now (even if you have a 215). When 19 passes, it can be tweaked to make the bad stuff better. If it doesn't pass we will NEVER get that opportunity! And if it doesn't pass, do you have any idea how long it would take for this to come up again?

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

^ Your entire post is 100% correct weed is NOT legal in California, yet.

In fact my cousin out there was arrested in LA for having 6.3 grams on him. No med card can still equal jail very easily.

I also agree that many people are voting no because, they cant handle capitalism. All i can say is Adapt or dont. it's your choice, but looks what happens to all creatures in nature that cant adapt... or look at their fossils.

VOTE YES BECAUSE VOTING NO WILL WILL DELAY THE MOVEMENT BY A DECADE. at that point it might be too late

 

[mrdizzle]

you dont live in cali? so why does you care? Your happier with the FEDs going after non-med smokers? Your cousins going to jail for 6.3grams? did he also have a 6yr old girl in his trunk?
It funny how you all have the social and political ramifications already mapped out in your head. the truth is you all sound like fools and have no fucking clue what your talking about

 

[johnnyla]

if it limits medical growers but the cops are voting against it i dunno. i'm on the fence. there is still time but definately tought to see past the smoke and mirrors. i dunno if i can vote with cops thought. think about that. cops are against this one.

 

[Pythagllio]

Prop 19 does not in any way change or limit Prop 215.

 

[Tony Aroma]

they cant stop 99 percent of the growers already, so they have no chance in even making a small difference after this passes. they will be helpless.

They've never made even a small difference. So in that respect, nothing will change. Prohibition has never been about making a difference. If it was, then it's total failure would be obvious to all. Prohibition is about punishing people who use drugs that the government doesn't want them to. In that respect, it has been wildly successful. So if you think they will just give up because they cannot make a difference, then I respectfully disagree. The feds will continue to punish as many people as they can as long as they can. Which is until federal law is changed. The most prop 19 will accomplish as far as the feds are concerned is to create a lot of easy targets for them to go after. Much like prop 215 did, but more so.

 

[CaptainTrips]

^It is already taxed, and regulated to be limited to med card, so what you are saying makes no sense.

Every commodity in the country is regualted and taxed. that is the way it goes. get the fuck over it and take your tunnel vision glasses off.

No every commodity is not taxed, most products don't have a specific tax attached to them like what will happen to weed, you are taxed on income made selling such commodities. One exception would be booze, which is taxed at production at $13 a proof gallon. What fucking bullshit. Why should weed or booze be subject to such garbage?

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

you dont live in cali? so why does you care? Your happier with the FEDs going after non-med smokers? Your cousins going to jail for 6.3grams? did he also have a 6yr old girl in his trunk?
It funny how you all have the social and political ramifications already mapped out in your head. the truth is you all sound like fools and have no fucking clue what your talking about

just stfu, or change your tude. no negative bullshit in my thread please. if you are ready to have a civil conversation then your opinion is welcome. until then get lost please.

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

No every commodity is not taxed, most products don't have a specific tax attached to them like what will happen to weed, you are taxed on income made selling such commodities. One exception would be booze, which is taxed at production at $13 a proof gallon. What fucking bullshit. Why should weed or booze be subject to such garbage?

the tax on alcohol goes to the families of people who get killed by drunk drivers. It also goes to education about drinking and driving.

The weed tax goes to drug education in general, which is fine because education is the key. Having smart children prevents the need for having drug laws to begin with.

If kids are properly educated about drugs they will learn which ones to avoid. If weed is legalized then adults can stop lying to them about it. Kids will never believe us if we keep lying to them Let them see the truth. show them some nice pictures of heroin rotted out arms, and toothless crack whores, instead of talking about gateway drug bs.

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

They've never made even a small difference. So in that respect, nothing will change. Prohibition has never been about making a difference. If it was, then it's total failure would be obvious to all. Prohibition is about punishing people who use drugs that the government doesn't want them to. In that respect, it has been wildly successful. So if you think they will just give up because they cannot make a difference, then I respectfully disagree. The feds will continue to punish as many people as they can as long as they can. Which is until federal law is changed. The most prop 19 will accomplish as far as the feds are concerned is to create a lot of easy targets for them to go after. Much like prop 215 did, but more so.

but they don't have the resources to do it, and the pot will produce more revenue for the local counties then the federal aid, so the counties will tell the federal government to fuck off. It is all about money. with this law change pot growers can bring the advantage of money to our side for once.

Then if the federal government (DEA) fully dedicates to cali, then other states will be free to do as they want because there is no one around to stop them. did you notice how the busts in cali slowed down when the busts in colorado picked up?

over time it is apparent to the masses that the DEA is not as big as they want you to think.

to understand all of this you really have to look at the really big picture.
you have to understand cause and effect based on viewing people as complex animals that still are based on certain ground rules of the species.

 

[Cruzin]

Idiocrazy

Idiocrazy

Richard Lee is not about to screw med patients. He is a patient. I am sure he knows, as well as many people here, that the feds already make busts on med patients even after Eric Holder said no. By passing this bill a flood of recreational growers will come about. The federal focus will turn to them. they only have so much resources to bust people, so this law will keep sick people out of jail by changing the focus of those limited resources. this is if the DEA even chooses to keep enforcing federal pot laws illegally. I have a feeling they are gonna lose this one though. they cant stop 99 percent of the growers already, so they have no chance in even making a small difference after this passes. they will be helpless.

Plus if this bill passes then people like Eddy Lepp will have a better chance at winning an appeal.

so please make the right choice and put your ego aside. vote yes on prop 19. lets get the job done, and polish it up later

Right, "im sure" "Plus" all very strong words for someone reaching for a reason to justify Richard Lee.

Fuck you, fuck Richard Lee and Fuck Proposition 19!

We'll just polish it up later...umm yeah like the Patriot Act, Bailouts, Healthcare reform. Lets start this thing all fucked up and then attempt to make it better later.

 

[GanjaAL]

Sorry, He may be a patient but this prop 19 will screw over MMJ patient rights... like everyone says...people need to really read this bill.

Sorry but people need to read this bill like everyone tells us people who are voting NO.



MMJ patients will be loosing our rights if this passes.



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.

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

^All you did was post an article that has already been picked apart multiple times. that article is just leaves out the fact that other things are grandfathered in. it is a rubbish article all together.

 

[miltonchitlin]

the whole vote no campaign is based on rubbish. If you can't keep a civil mouth in your tongue don't reply to the thread. If all you have is name calling then stay out of the thread.

No one is losing more respect than Dennis Peron, not even Richard Lee.

 

[Rainman]

Funny how people who are not in the state or who have no clue about Richard Lee are the ones trying to push a very flawed and very destructive bill on the rest of us. As for capitalism and competetion, who out there can compete with the likes of RJ reynolds or big pharma? Those comments make for completely biased reading and dumbing down an issue that many obviously dont understand. Yes Richard Lee may be a patient but he does nothing that doesnt benefit himself first and second then everyone else later. You would know that if you had feet on the ground and knew his history. Lastly to try and bully those who are not on board with your views or voting the way you think they should only shows more ignorance. And I bet any amount of $ that no one got arrested in LA with just 6 grams without other factors like meth, underage girls, parole, or some other real crime. And until I see how this benefits me the regular guy and not big companiesd like Lee's and Cargil I will be voting no.

 

[Lazyman]

Prop 19 does not in any way change or limit Prop 215.

What about this article in the Examiner?

Oops nm, GanjaAl beat me to it. Removed in edit.