Legalize MJ ! Really? No I mean REALLY?

[dagnabit]

Eat. Several. Dicks.

Thank you, drive through.

his arguments are weak so he has to attack dont let him get to you.

notice he wont even comment on my post about how TC2010 is actually LESS regulation for the individual.

that is much more in line with the OP than his myriad of juvenile insults.

btw inhalers are cheaper in mexico..they are cheaper in china as well...go buy some lead and shit based inhalers from china and see why...

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

All laws have effects beyond the original intent. This was never a pass this law/not pass this law. It was about the unintended consequences of government regulations. you fucking moron. Go to another thread where the OP is yes or no on the current bill.

It's government regulation that makes an asthma inhaler $40 in the US while in Mexico the same product is $20. In Italy when I was there last, the cost was $5. All due to government.

I am in favor of the legalization of all drugs All of them. If the user can't figure it out, then too fucking bad for them. I want the government out of my life. I don't want MORE regulation just so I can smoke a joint. And that is the bigger picture. I, unlike you, don't have my tongue hanging out and up the crack of a simpleton politician just because they want to regulate and tax a simple weed, which is THE assault on freedoms.... more regulations and a departure from the free market. I live in the free market. The product I produce is strictly subject to supply & demand, once the PRODUCTION of that product abides by a mountain of regulation.

Oh! And why the fuck are you still here? You don't even live in Cali, you don't vote in Cali and on top of that, you still can't keep up with the topic.

Start your own thread titled "I don't live in Cali but I want to tell others there how to vote". In case you can't comprehend well, I haven't advocated how to vote on this bill one way or another.

BTW - I never said pot wasn't important. But let me say this slowly for you. F r e e d o m s b e i n g l os t a r e m o r e i m p o r t an t. You remind me of Nero. Just as long as you can smoke your joint (can't be bothered to get a script) you don't give a fuck that Rome is burning. All the while watching as large dispensaries are angling to lock out their competition.

there are good points here, but your product, if you are talking about weed, and not grapes. weed is NOT just based on supply and demand. It s based on a black market which drives prices to the highest points possible.

The reason the value of pot has been made so high is because the biggest regulation of all is ALREADY IN PLACE. it is called a BAN. weed is federally illegal, and the tax you pay is fines and prison time, not to mention all the horrible shit that goes on in prisons.

you will get fined thousands of dollars on top of the prison time for your so called "crime". Then when you get out you have to pay the parole officer for several years. then you have a felony record, and cant get a decent job. this will cost you far more in the long run than the taxes on a commercial grow op in cali. also you have to pay a good lawyer if you don't want to get totally screwed.

So the REAL BIG PICTURE still comes down to passing this bill to move the national debate forward. When other states pass legalization bills as a result then you can move to them, if cali hasn't amended the prop 19 by that time.

also if you look back at cali in 96 when 215 passed and now, you will see 215 has become more relaxed vs. stricter because people have seen it isnt bad, I think the same will happen with prop 19.

so really voting yes on prop 19 is what you should do, even though it goes against what you are traditionally used too, because in it's current state of complete illegality it is impossible to increase regulation, you can only decrease it from here.

 

[StoneElemental]

I kinda like sitting back watching grapeman come up with futile arguements getting shot down like planes at midway. Prop 19 is a gateway for us all not just californians. To us all this is like seeing some of the "pearly gates" without having a near death experience in the process. Less government is great I like that idea myself however that idea seems pretty far fetched. That being said some government interference is good thats undeniable unless you literally want anarchy. Limit and challenge government at every turn and prop 19 seems like the best way to start. Despite how much I myself at least try to agree on some points with grapeman, he still lashes out in hostility. We've considered his points and rebutted with our own and he can't bother to act civil as it seems too "tiresome" for him. I think his priority should be to smoke a joint chill out. Anyone think MMJ is good for anger management? I do because I used to have a far worse temper. Smoking has helped me center myself in ways I think the rastas see as religious. Acting like thats a bad thing? especially on here? hah like someone else said find another forum... for grapes possibly, there you go be a wine guru at a winery or something I don't care. I haven't smoked in nearly 2 months and in this ridiculous economy and age I'm making sure my priorities are straight yet I'm cool under the pressure.

Sorry for the needless ramble sometimes it's nice to lighten the load on your chest.

-S.E.

 

[grapeman]

I kinda like sitting back watching grapeman come up with futile arguements getting shot down like planes at midway. Prop 19 is a gateway for us all not just californians. To us all this is like seeing some of the "pearly gates" without having a near death experience in the process. Less government is great I like that idea myself however that idea seems pretty far fetched. That being said some government interference is good thats undeniable unless you literally want anarchy. Limit and challenge government at every turn and prop 19 seems like the best way to start. Despite how much I myself at least try to agree on some points with grapeman, he still lashes out in hostility. We've considered his points and rebutted with our own and he can't bother to act civil as it seems too "tiresome" for him. I think his priority should be to smoke a joint chill out. Anyone think MMJ is good for anger management? I do because I used to have a far worse temper. Smoking has helped me center myself in ways I think the rastas see as religious. Acting like thats a bad thing? especially on here? hah like someone else said find another forum... for grapes possibly, there you go be a wine guru at a winery or something I don't care. I haven't smoked in nearly 2 months and in this ridiculous economy and age I'm making sure my priorities are straight yet I'm cool under the pressure.

Sorry for the needless ramble sometimes it's nice to lighten the load on your chest.

-S.E.

Oh shut up. You don't even understand some of my points.

 

[binaryfission]

Oh shut up. You don't even understand some of my points.

lmfao. good one grapeman. I love it.

 

[gkn]

Please Cali voters...don't be blinded by selfishness...watch the biggest picture possible, this might be the start for the WORLDWIDE LEGALIZATION of the plant we love. The U.S governs like half of the world, and if you change things and make cannabis accepted by the government, other governments will be able to follow.

I agree completely with you, that government shouldn't tax a weed, for me government shouldn't even exist (i'm anarchist if you like), but as hash_zeppelin says the hardest regulation possible is now being applied to cannabis, and governments are a bit far from not existance (altough the real governments are the banks and big corps.)

Then, with cannabis legalized, you can still figure out ways to grow it and avoid paying taxes if you like to, and i think if you get caught its better to face a tax-evasion trial than one against public health as it is now.

I think the only bad thing growing weed has, is the chance of going to jail, if you take that out then would be nothing bad about it and would take things to a whole new level, and i'm talking more about the western world's collective psyche than economics.

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

Grapeman must be a republican right winger and probably a tea bag fanatic. There is no use talking to these people as they will not accept or attempt to understand any other talking points or views but their own. It's like telling someone 2+2=4 yet they are convinced the final answer is 5. It's more than obvious prop 19 has a significantly larger group of supporters than nay-sayers. Grape can vote however he likes, but with clowns like him on that side of the argument only strengthens favor for prop 19 to pass. We WILL legalize this, don't any of you worry...

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

^actually grapeman is a really nice guy. I talk with him in pm's in a personal debate over this subject, and there is no cussing or insulting involved.

we respect each others opinions even though they are different.

in his pm's to me he makes some good points. he doesnt have to waste lines of text defending himself against insults.

He knows I still thinks he should vote yes on prop 19 but he doesnt hate me for it, and i dont hate him for his opinion either.

in the end we all just want legalization. this thread is more about how governemt will try to screw up prop 19 like it does pretty much everything else. that I cant disagree with. they will screw it up.

our difference in opinion comes in, where i think we should still go for it because we can all make it work even with the government fucking us around, and he thinks we should be more patient because the government will screw it up more than we can fix.

 

[OMountainMix]

More to the point, grapeman has a lot of grow knowledge that he is happy to share. Not only that, but he's kind and gracious rather than condescending, when people ask questions. I don't have to agree with everything he says, but he was one of the first people to be kind to me here. Being that I was left with a grow and on my own and a newbie here, I will always be really grateful that he was so nice to me. Sometimes, newbies aren't treated all that well here. Although sometimes it's hard to understand what people are saying or asking, so that's part of it. Still, he was NICE.

 

[dagnabit]

Grapeman must be a republican right winger and probably a tea bag fanatic. There is no use talking to these people as they will not accept or attempt to understand any other talking points or views but their own. It's like telling someone 2+2=4 yet they are convinced the final answer is 5.

you mean just like the lefty obama bot libturds who cant be reasoned with?

 

[OMountainMix]

Most of them are pissed at Obama anyhow . . . . . . All that's left is the Chicago political machine insiders. They want to try their tricks in Washington, and he's their meal ticket. . . .

 

[Anti]

^actually grapeman is a really nice guy. I talk with him in pm's in a personal debate over this subject, and there is no cussing or insulting involved.

Well, you can go back and read it. Grapeman insulted me and several other peoples before I bothered to poke (gently) back at him. So... nice guy? Maybe. Asshole? Definitely.

in the end we all just want legalization. this thread is more about how governemt will try to screw up prop 19 like it does pretty much everything else. that I cant disagree with. they will screw it up.

I also agree here.

our difference in opinion comes in, where i think we should still go for it because we can all make it work even with the government fucking us around, and he thinks we should be more patient because the government will screw it up more than we can fix.

It's a shame he can't say it that way without resorting to attacking other people's intelligence, background or career in order to prop up his position.

 

[ksmokey]

2 more cents:

if we were all sitting around a table, this would be the time to pass around a packed bong, blunt, j, or all of the above.

i definitely understand the fear of unequal govt regulation, and the propensity for those in positions of power to take advantage of these kinds of political changes (i.e. Richard Lee) but I wonder if no step forward would really be better than nothing at all?

I've posed this question elsewhere but I dont think I got much of a response back:

how hard is it to amend legislation once it has been enacted? I don't have the time to personally research the ca. leg. rules at the moment but i will (in a few weeks) if no one else can/will/wants to. i think this should be factual point that people should focus on. if there is a low barrier to amendment then there's no reason why we shouldn't take this first step fwd. but if its hard to change these laws once they're implemented ... then i'd be hesitant - which is not to say that this factor is dispositive.

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

If the bill passes, and cant be amended, after a while then at least a legal market has been created where people can just vote on a new bill. It will be much easier to get a new bill if pot has been proven to be safe to the masses. The small growers out number the big ones as well, and in california all it takes is numbers on a petition to get on the ballot. Cali can get people together on social political issues like no other state can.

 

[StoneElemental]

I'm sorry but it's pretty difficult not to as you keep repeating what little and weak points you do have. Aside of that your attitude thus far has been just poor at best. Just cut it out please I came here to converse not watch a grown man's tantrum unfold in the form of text.

Oh shut up. You don't even understand some of my points.

Back to the subject, Thankyou HashZeppelin for even pointing that out! If somehow it just doen't get amended a new bill can be put thru. All of which can happen in much less time than waiting. I'm going to try and help in my own state as much as possible to help pass some more MMJ bills/laws in the midwest. Take care and stay safe guys.

-S.E.

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

ya its all about forward progression, and gaining momentum. that is how the civil rights movement worked. they based their arguments on morals, and peace, and didnt let the momentum slow down, and didnt take no for an answer.

that was the power of the bill of rights and the people of America in action.

 

[bearded1]

I havent posted in a while im new here and not from cali. i have fisited there several times nice place to vist, but like the old saying i wouldn't want to live there. To much big gov, to many regulations, and yet med MJ lives not by a thread etiher. I think it has a strong foot hold and is a great start to the battle for leagle weed everywhere. Big gov usualy falls on its ass after a while you just have to be patient and vote no on tax increases that don't benefit the people. the big gov machine in cali is falling min wage for a lot of gov workers. just the law of nature. cant spend what you ain't got.

no regs on pot sounds RJR speeking they did more to tobaco than you could ever imagine. There are those that see regs as a way of controlling there lives but some see them as protection for those who dont want to grow there on. i just burried my mother last week she was something gave up collage to get married and raise a family addited to cigeretts for 60 years because of additives in tabaco. it took alzhimers for her to quit. i will grow my on organic MJ just because i wouldn't trust the corp grower. $$$ is all they see not that cripples like me just don't want to live behind closed doors and hide.

I dream of a day whey we can walk down the street with a little stash in my pocket, and could light one up. oh what a beautiful day.

 

[Frozenguy]

Prop19 wont really save many people from going to jail in California. It just wont. In fact it has language to put people in prison longer then rapists and vehicular manslaughterists, aggravated assaulters, armed robbers.... I can't imagine supporting that.


This isn't about taking a step for the world. This is about taking a step for California and the movement to legalize and free cannabis from the clutches of government.

This movement has been in the works for essentially decades, and in the last fifteen years we have claimed some monumental victories.

Now that the rest of the country/world has heard of Richard Lee's regulation plan on cannabis, they WANT IT NOW. NOW NOW NOW. Regardless of its language.

I assume more then 90% of you would vote yes if it said no one could grow.

A lot of the people that dont live in Ca dont care what KIND of language is in the bill, just as long as its legalized because they know in their state they will have an easier time to get their language right because California paved the way.

If you're going to count on us to continue to pave the way for you/the world, then let us be and let us do our thing.

Dont call us selfish when you're then ones pushing us and back seat driving our movement in our backyard just because you want a piece and want to join the hayride.

 

[Anti]

I assume more then 90% of you would vote yes if it said no one could grow.

You know what they say about assumptions, right?

I think you're either a big fat liar or completely out of your mind if you think 90% of us want this thing without the right to grow.

It's the right to grow without submitting to a doctor's authority that is the major benefit of this bill! The ability for all of us to grow our own in peace.

I won't be one of the people buying Marlboro-weed. The reason is because I will be growing my own in a 25 sq ft parcel and smoking more than I have ever needed or wanted to smoke, while also sharing freely with any friend who comes into my house.

A lot of the people that dont live in Ca dont care what KIND of language is in the bill, just as long as its legalized because they know in their state they will have an easier time to get their language right because California paved the way.

What kind of language is it that is bothering you? I'm willing to bet that 90% of what you don't like is your misinterpretation of the bill. Be clear and precise, and post up exactly what is written in the bill itself that you are uneasy about.

If you're going to push us to continue to pave the way for you/the world, then let us be and let us do our thing.

If we're going to push you we should let you be?

Dont call us selfish when you're then ones pushing us and back seat driving our movement in our backyard just because you want a piece and want to join the hayride.

We're not calling californians selfish. We're calling the blackmarket dealers who are fighting this legislation selfish because they care more about ludicrous profit margin than they do about the cannabis movement. They don't want to compete on a level playing field, so they're fighting against their own movement!

If that isn't selfish... what is?

 

[Frozenguy]

You know what they say about assumptions, right?

I think you're either a big fat liar or completely out of your mind if you think 90% of us want this thing without the right to grow.


It's the right to grow without submitting to a doctor's authority that is the major benefit of this bill! The ability for all of us to grow our own in peace.

I won't be one of the people buying Marlboro-weed. The reason is because I will be growing my own in a 25 sq ft parcel and smoking more than I have ever needed or wanted to smoke, while also sharing freely with any friend who comes into my house.

Well where do you cut the line? Are you ecstatic with 25sqft? Or are you content?
Would you be happy with 15sqft? What about 10? You realize that you only get 25sqft per residence (per home, not per person). So if you live alone, that is one thing, but if you live with roommates who want to grow, you have to share or split up your 25sqft.

How much do you smoke? We all smoke different amounts. Why do you, Anti, think what is good for you must be good for the rest of the people? Do you realize others have needs that may far exceed yours? Or maybe they have less needs, we are all different.

How much do I smoke Anti? How much will my 25sqft organic soil grow yield? Do you know? Can you tell me?

Also, Ive seen your posts/recommendations on configurations for growing in that 25sqft. No where did you show where you keep your mothers, clones, harvest/drying plants, or dried bud over an ounce. That all has to be kept in the 25sqft.

What kind of language is it that is bothering you? I'm willing to bet that 90% of what you don't like is your misinterpretation of the bill. Be clear and precise, and post up exactly what is written in the bill itself that you are uneasy about.

I have not misinterpreted the bill. I initially read it word for word twice a day for about two weeks (almost religiously). I've done this before and I'll do it again.

NOT in any particular order:

“Personal consumption” shall not include, and nothing in this Act shall permit cannabis:
(ii) consumption in public or in a public place;
(iv) smoking cannabis in any space while minors are present.

I have a problem with this because cigarettes that cause cancer and a list of other ailments can be smoked on public streets/ in your own home with your kid on the couch.

With this prop19, you CANNOT smoke on your driveway on a hot August night, you CANNOT smoke during a bbq or any other event when minors (kids under 18) are around.
Not a biggy, but it does peave me.

Prohibition on Furnishing Marijuana to Minors
(a) Every person 18 years of age or over who hires, employs, or uses a minor in transporting, carrying, selling, giving away, preparing for sale, or peddling any marijuana, who unlawfully sells, or offers to sell, any marijuana to a minor, or who furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer, or give any marijuana to a minor under 14 years of age, or who induces a minor to use marijuana in violation of law shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a period of three, five, or seven years.
(b) Every person 18 years of age or over who furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer, or give, any marijuana to a minor 14 years of age or older shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a period of three, four, or five yearsthree, four, or five years.
(c) Every person 21 years of age or over who knowingly furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer or give, any marijuana to a person aged 18 years or older, but younger than 21 years of age, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of up to six months and be fined up to $1,000 for each offense.
(d) In addition to the penalties above, any person who is licensed, permitted or authorized to perform any act pursuant to Section 11301, who while so licensed, permitted or authorized, negligently furnishes, administers, gives or sells, or offers to furnish, administer, give or sell, any marijuana to any person younger than 21 years of age shall not be permitted to own, operate, be employed by, assist or enter any licensed premises authorized under Section 11301 for a period of one year.

This can be a thread of its own.
Wow so rapists and vehicular manslaughterists get less time then some of these "criminals"? A "crime" in which NO PARTY CAN CLAIM INJURY, warrants the imprisonment of an individual for up to seven years? Give me a break. Prop19 does not save people from cruel and unusual imprisonment. It simply does not.

I agree that these people need to be held responsible, but not for the prison terms that are written. And what about the parents? WHAT ABOUT the individual (15, 16, 17 year old kid) that actually smoked! Why doesn't he get a prison term?

This just teaches to shift blame and personal responsibility onto someone else, as well as over-punishing others.

To avoid argument, I wont forget to say that I do agree that they need to be punished, but so do the parents and kids, and NO ONE should get a prison term for smoking or letting someone CHOOSE to smoke cannabis. We should be held accountable for our own actions, and taught to do so at a young age.

Section 3: Lawful Activities
Article 5 of Chapter 5 of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code, commencing with section 11300 is added to read:
Section 11300: Personal Regulation and Controls
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, it is lawful and shall not be a public offense under California law for any person 21 years of age or older to:
(i) Personally possess, process, share, or transport not more than one ounce of cannabis, solely for that individual’s personal consumption, and not for sale.
(ii) Cultivate, on private property by the owner, lawful occupant, or other lawful resident or guest of the private property owner or lawful occupant, cannabis plants for personal consumption only, in an area of not more than twenty-five square feet per private residence or, in the absence of any residence, the parcel. Cultivation on leased or rented property may be subject to approval from the owner of the property. Provided that, nothing in this section shall permit unlawful or unlicensed cultivation of cannabis on any public lands.
(iii) Possess on the premises where grown the living and harvested plants and results of any harvest and processing of plants lawfully cultivated pursuant to section 11300(a)(ii), for personal consumption.

I dont like this because you only get 25sqft if you live/grow alone. If you have a roomate that wants to grow, you each get 12.5 sqft or have to share your grow (styles, strains, equipment, everything!!).

Not everyone can grow enough in 25sqft, either because of skill or simply because of a connoisseur strain.

One has to keep mothers, vegging plants, flowering plants, clones, harvested/drying plants, AND harvest bud over an ounce within the 25sqft.

Its just bogus and I dont want to have to worry about going to prison because of grow size guidelines.


My fingers/brain are tired, so I'll stop there and post this up, grab a bowl and proof read to see if I forgot anything/need to change something.

If we're going to push you we should let you be?

YES!!! lol no, jk, I rambled a bit. I guess I meant to say
"If you're going to count on us..."

We're not calling californians selfish. We're calling the blackmarket dealers who are fighting this legislation selfish because they care more about ludicrous profit margin than they do about the cannabis movement. They don't want to compete on a level playing field, so they're fighting against their own movement!

If that isn't selfish... what is?

Well I think that is a relative concept in this case, but I do feel its selfish from that basis. It also shows how ignorant and lazy they are.

If I was still a commercial grower, I wouldnt be worried about legalization right now on any level in terms of profit, considering I could still sell my product. I grew a premium product (still grow it, but just for me now, for personal meds) which carried a premium price.

Think Sauza : Don Julio..

The reason I bring up the "dont call us selfish" is because that is what I hear from everyone that is pro prop19. That the anti prop19'ers are selfish.

Well I'm tired of that because a lot of the people arguing with legitimate concerns are being labeled as "black market protectors" when in fact a lot of the people aren't even commercially growing. Its like the valid concerns get mixed up with the "invalid" ones.