ICMAG Administration endorses The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010
- Thread starter JJScorpio
- Start date
- Status
For the last time. Stop messing up the thread. Use pm's to talk to people about non thread issues. Enough.
J
JackTheGrower
Yeah I'm such an asshole huh? I'm just some dick who would like to see the 215 used for its real intention so that people across this great country may have the opportunity to heal themselves without fear or arrest. I must be the worst person in the world....
Over blown reaction.
Some definitions
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=anal retentive
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anal
The closest to what I meant is the Urban Dictionary one.
Calling you an asshole is what you did to yourself. I didn't have a thing to do with that label
But it's funny. I corrected your spelling too.
Be well.. Try not to make fun of medical people and you won't get Medical people angry at you.
J
JackTheGrower
From what I have seen this year many of the large outdoor busts have been cartel related pot-busts
I would think our Law enforcement can focus on illegal imports and that means the Federal Government can employ the Military.
We may need to once the money starts to be reduced by State production.
Still there is Cocaine and Meth plus other stuff.
Still it's uncertain at best.
You see it your way, I see it my way...so you vote your way and I'll vote they way I want...we have different views and opinions of the matter as do a lot of folks..
all this bantering and tail feather ruffling doesn't do a damn thing for either side...its just human nature to fight for what we believe in...and nothing will ever change that...with that said I guess we will have to wait until Nov to see what the outcome is...
if it passes, great. and if it doesn't, well that's ok too...for the most part folks will continue to do what they've always done...grow and smoke cannabis.
Oh yeah, one more issue. you speak of drug dealers...well from what I've seen most dispensaries are nothing more then drug dealers...all ya have to do is sit there and watch their customers come and go...and it easy to see their true motive.
Last edited:
I guess I don't really understand the question. I think the southern border would see a little less illegal traffic because, hopefully, the cartels will be adversely affected. The northern border and eastern borders....as I said, I guess I don't understand the question.
localhero
Member
they remain as arbitrary man made lines that delineate boundaries between mexico, nevada, arizona and oregon.
if you mean will cali be able to export and import cannabis?
no california will not be able to violate federal transport laws as written in 19.--
(b) Nothing in this Act shall be construed or interpreted to permit interstate or international transportation of cannabis. This Act shall be construed to permit a person to transport cannabis in a safe and secure manner from a licensed premises in one city or county to a licensed premises in another city or county pursuant to any ordinances adopted in such cities or counties, notwithstanding any other state law or the lack of any such ordinance in the intervening cities or counties.
J
JackTheGrower
I am amazed any political forum action is allowed to be honest. This is not the norm.
Perhaps it is time to close the thread?
I am seeing a solid shift of the Conservative media to support Prop 19. This Sunday my Modesto Bee (McClatchey Papers) will run an article how Cannabis is a Cultural norm now.
This Prop 19 is being endorsed by those who traditionally have campaigned against Cannabis.
I think we will see a softening of the media towards supporting this Initiative.
I assume the Conservative support is in the realization that the next Initiative may be one they do not want.
It is the norm for the news section. The only place on IC it will be allowed in any form.
Thanks JJ..........I couldn't figure out who he was talking about, I'm not Admin lol I didn't see any Admin around so I thought, well, just thought he didn't know what the heck he was talking about!
Thanks JJ..........I couldn't figure out who he was talking about, I'm not Admin lol I didn't see any Admin around so I thought, well, just thought he didn't know what the heck he was talking about!
So it happened to you while there was no prop19. How will voting no change something they already do without it?
It will be interesting to see how things play out with workplace testing in CA once 19 passes. IMHO, the worst that happens is things stay the same as far as testing (I'm betting they get better).
Censorship is sooo cool. It is even better to delete what you claim are evil words before you pronounce banishment, that way none of us can verify your claims of bannable offenses, and we get to take your word that the now dead brother spoke wrong. And you are justified for killing him.
Must feel good to hold the rifle.
What was deleted? I deleted a private message Madds posted, That is not allowed. I did what I'm supposed to do. He accused me of making a death threat. That should be condoned???? Please don't be dramatic, nobody died. Sometimes, members do create their own problems. You can't blame everything on us. JJ deleted nothing.
yeah if it fails people will do what they always do. Grow, smoke and goto jail for doing so...
At least dispensaries pay taxes and rent buildings that would otherwise be vacant in this economy...
Grass I thought you told me that my post is what changed your mind to vote in favor of 19 and that meant alot to me...
What happened? What changed your mind back to voting no?
Well could what he quoted be interpreted as such? Saying some one threatened me shouldn't be an executable offence. Either what you said to him rose to that level or it did not, but should he be banned just for evaluating your language?
I have not seen the direct quote, so I can not form a full opinion; however he is getting BANNED for claiming he felt threatened. So now any victim who reports an abuse is subject to banishment; because as YOU have now established IMPROPER reporting of perceived threats is subject to BANISHMENT!
Please correct my flawed logic as I am drunk and stoned but still believe in freedom of speech.
I have not seen the direct quote, so I can not form a full opinion; however he is getting BANNED for claiming he felt threatened. So now any victim who reports an abuse is subject to banishment; because as YOU have now established IMPROPER reporting of perceived threats is subject to BANISHMENT!
Please correct my flawed logic as I am drunk and stoned but still believe in freedom of speech.
He posted a private message... it had the time, date and person name who sent it. It was clear as day. No one else here who saw it is disputing the fact it was a pm. Please, what do I have to gain from lying? Nothing. I don't know the guy. He was banned for vilationg the TOu and making up a lie. Every member knows you could get banned for violating the TOU. That's why it's a TOU. Wait? You didn't see the post? then I'm done here. I'm not arguing with someone who doesn't even know the whole story. As I said, you can try to blame us all the time, but members, most often create their own problems. And don't say maybe he didn't know the TOU....everyone is supposed to read it when signing up. If you don't, ignorance is not an excuse.
localhero
Member
by the way madds never donated money to that website. he was just trying to rile the troops and expose no votes. after i asked in this thread if his post was a joke, he pmed me later and admitted it was. i dunno he may be a weird guy with a weird aproach but since hes gone now, might aswell clear it up that he was not really a no vote.
I am not saying that copy pasting of a PM is correct, and I acknowledge that it may be against the TOU. I am not saying either you or he lied, but if he posted a direct quote and then interpreted the direct quote by saying what it meant to him, that is an opinion not something that can be truth or lie.
Your retreat from the debate by saying since we have deleted the evidence you are no longer qualified to evaluate the dispute is "PRICELESS"; you can "Argue" with whom you desire, but executing the accused is a time honored tradition of oppression. Post his direct quote and then ban him for it. Don't DELETE something and then BAN someone for what is DELETED. We are all adults if his WORDS were so offensive to be BANNABLE, don't you think we should read them as a warning? Instead of seeing NOTHING?
Your retreat from the debate by saying since we have deleted the evidence you are no longer qualified to evaluate the dispute is "PRICELESS"; you can "Argue" with whom you desire, but executing the accused is a time honored tradition of oppression. Post his direct quote and then ban him for it. Don't DELETE something and then BAN someone for what is DELETED. We are all adults if his WORDS were so offensive to be BANNABLE, don't you think we should read them as a warning? Instead of seeing NOTHING?
Get over it and quit going off topic. Many people saw the posts. None of them are saying I'm making anything up. Accept it--HE messed up and paid for it. I'm done here. If you don't already know that every TOU violation deleted, you haven't been paying attention around here. If we left em up, it would kinda defeat the purpose. Everyone else gets this. Quit trying to stir the pot. It's done and over and I will not comment further.
- Status
