Legalize MJ ! Really? No I mean REALLY?

[dagnabit]

The state could remove said law. Lol. Prop 19 allows for a market, but that doesn't mean there will be one in most of california. Prop 19 does not remove any law regarding trade as far as I know, unless your county supports cannabis sales, it will still be illegal.

but cultivation and possession will.
if you go to the next county and buy it your county looses the revenue.

of course that is one of the great parts of 19. it does not impose a one size fits all regulation on a population as diverse as california.
it leaves it where it should be in the hands of the communities (as opposed to a central state government)
how much easier is it to effect change at a local level?
ive said it before in smaller counties millages and resolutions pass by ONE VOTE at times!
city council members and county commissioners are outed with a well organized local campaign as opposed to well funded by lobbyists state bureaucrat fat cats who are entrenched.

shit you can take a councilman's seat for a few grand!

 

[Phedrosbenny]

And what we have here is what happens to all alternative type lifestyles here in the U.S.....It gets watered down with YUPPYS.

 

[CaptainTrips]

Look the way so many local govs deal with MMJ, they will be more hostile to prop 19...I think thats why prop 19 was left it up to local govs, because Oakland will be all over it, while if it was left to sacramento most likely nothing would get done.

 

[grapeman]

grapey has been trying real hard in this thread but his suppositions are based of a flawed premise of the status quo being "unregulated" whereas the truth is the status quo is prohibition.
prohibition ruins free market principles by creating an element of risk thereby artificially inflating prices.
a true small government libertarian would understand that allowing an individual to grow his own smoke without involving the state whatsoever (registering under 215 for "protection") or some fucking QUACK doctor is a lessening of government intrusion into our lives.
but pride is a motherfucker!!

and some folks would rather argue that absolute prohibition is not government interference in our lives than to admit they may have been wrong.

we all understand putting yourself on a government database and paying extortion to the state are usurpations of our rights but grapey argues that 19 is somehow more restrictive?

It gets tougher and tougher to debate with you. You are a moving target. I've stated from the beginning that laws bring regulations. Serious growers will need to comply. You have no idea what they are. If you just want to grow a few plants, you can do that now and even have in your possession more then you would need for a good time.

But you are a dumb ass, and can't help changing your argument (as you realize your statements are weak at best). You fail to see that you will be regulated even if/when this new law passes. But any new law, short of full legalization is just more and different regulations. While my has been consistent. I am for NO regulations. If you would've been in this thread since the beginning, you might stop arguing with yourself just because you think you are making a point.

While that may confuse you, I remain consistent.
New laws WILL bring new and more regulations. Black markets are ALWAYS created by government regulations. This law will NOT eliminate the black market. These are economic truths. You still have not finished your assignment to read "Free to Choose", where you would (unless your IQ really is as low as your changing arguments indicate) understand what free markets do, how they operate and how governments create ALL black markets. Oh, and how the passage of this bill will NOT make mj less expensive, eliminate black markets or make you any freer then you are today (if you had the intelligence to get a med card).

I've said it before and I'll say it again. It's folks like you that look to the government for answers that brought us the worst government in the last 50 years. yes, worse then Carter.


Me? I still want less government. This bill is NOT less government. You mention libertarians (of which I am one) but have No clue as to what the word even means.
Carry on.

 

[dagnabit]

ill say it again..you have been brainwashed into believing prohibition is somehow LESS government intrusion in your life than 19...

i cant overcome that level of self imposed ignorance...

the rest is just more of your obfuscation by way of ad hominem and assumption..

oh and your tried and true "your off topic" that weak gambit NEVER gets old from you...lol..

i have not swayed in my position however you have jumped from federal to state regulation right up until you realized you were wrong about federal then said you were predicting the distant future....

but the most important question you WONT answer..

But any new law, short of full legalization is just more and different regulations.

are you young or retarded enough to believe marijuana will ever be a complete free for all with ZERO regulation?

if you reply yes ill never bother posting in this thread again as you are without hope.

 

[ds0110]

My vote goes to full on legalization. Regulation is not legalization. All citizens over 18 can grow/smoke/sell/give as many as they want, without any form of registration, or threat of any kind from law enforcement. No taxing. No forms. No doctors. Its safer than coffee.

 

[dagnabit]

My vote goes to full on legalization. Regulation is not legalization. All citizens over 18 can grow/smoke/sell/give as many as they want, without any form of registration, or threat of any kind from law enforcement. No taxing. No forms. No doctors. Its safer than coffee.

i want beautiful naked big tittied women to rain down from heaven.

 

[grapeman]

ill say it again..you have been brainwashed into believing prohibition is somehow LESS government intrusion in your life than 19...

i cant overcome that level of self imposed ignorance...

the rest is just more of your obfuscation by way of ad hominem and assumption..

oh and your tried and true "your off topic" that weak gambit NEVER gets old from you...lol..

i have not swayed in my position however you have jumped from federal to state regulation right up until you realized you were wrong about federal then said you were predicting the distant future....

but the most important question you WONT answer..



are you young or retarded enough to believe marijuana will ever be a complete free for all with ZERO regulation?

if you reply yes ill never bother posting in this thread again as you are without hope.

You are hopelessly stupid. I used to think ignorant (that can be overcome) but it is obvious that it is stupidity.

More laws equals More regulations. Sorry you can't understand that. You never address the FACT that you can grow your needs now, free of fear of being busted.

And yes, large growers WILL be subject to the same federal laws ALL farmers are in the future. And that is and has been the point of the thread. Go back and research the op instead of posting like a child and claiming that that you know better then I about growing crops under government scrutiny.

Oh and BTW, if you know the definition of "ad hominem" arguments, you would stop using what you obviously think is such a clever saying as it is you that keeps making those arguments.

Only a complete moron would keep posting that more laws = less government regulations. Typical union mind think.

You want a cause? De-Criminalize MJ. But even then, growers will be subject to the rules and laws that all farmers are subject to all the time. Which was the topic of the OP.

It was you that turned this into a campaign for a bill based on false assumptions, such as laws = more freedoms. There are other threads devoted to THAT topic. As if any bill still limiting production and possession is freedom.

 

[dagnabit]

You are hopelessly stupid. I used to think ignorant (that can be overcome) but it is obvious that it is stupidity.

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument toward the person" or "argument against the person"), is an argument which links the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise. ...

More laws equals More regulations. Sorry you can't understand that. You never address the FACT that you can grow your needs now, free of fear of being busted.

but i have to register with the state and pay a fucking quack.

19 allows me not to register with or pay anyone for anything
but its somehow more restrictive?

And yes, large growers WILL be subject to the same federal laws ALL farmers are in the future. And that is and has been the point of the thread. Go back and research the op instead of posting like a child and claiming that that you know better then I about growing crops under government scrutiny.

please point out where i said they would not be subject to those regulations?
i think your ability to comprehend words has been compromised.

Oh and BTW, if you know the definition of "ad hominem" arguments, you would stop using what you obviously think is such a clever saying as it is you that keeps making those arguments.

handled earlier..all you have is ad hominem and assumptions

Only a complete moron would keep posting that more laws less government regulations. Typical union mind think.

so stop posting it?

19 lessens existing regulation.

it

1. This Act is intended to limit the application and enforcement of state and local laws relating to possession, transportation, cultivation, consumption and sale of cannabis

but like i said its hard for someone so obviously emotional to admit they are wrong....

que sera...

like i told you
i dont want to register my

guns
dogs
tv
table
chair
aspirin
or
grow

under current law i am subject to extensive regulation and i MUST register to receive the states "protection" from arrest under 215/420

19 allows me to grow without placing my federally felonious activity on a government database...

but its more restrictive?

sorry grape but your lost...

 

[dagnabit]

More laws equals More regulations. Sorry you can't understand that. You never address the FACT that you can grow your needs now, free of fear of being busted.

would you oppose a bill that "limits enforcement and implementation of the healthcare act of 2010"

by your logic it would be new regulation.

i guess you would have to campaign against it right?

technically it would be regulating the healthcare bill so its "regulation" in the same way 19 limits enforcement of prohibition laws...

 

[Hazelnuts]

It gets tougher and tougher to debate with you. You are a moving target. I've stated from the beginning that laws bring regulations. Serious growers will need to comply. You have no idea what they are. If you just want to grow a few plants, you can do that now and even have in your possession more then you would need for a good time.

But you are a dumb ass, and can't help changing your argument (as you realize your statements are weak at best). You fail to see that you will be regulated even if/when this new law passes. But any new law, short of full legalization is just more and different regulations. While my has been consistent. I am for NO regulations. If you would've been in this thread since the beginning, you might stop arguing with yourself just because you think you are making a point.

While that may confuse you, I remain consistent.
New laws WILL bring new and more regulations. Black markets are ALWAYS created by government regulations. This law will NOT eliminate the black market. These are economic truths. You still have not finished your assignment to read "Free to Choose", where you would (unless your IQ really is as low as your changing arguments indicate) understand what free markets do, how they operate and how governments create ALL black markets. Oh, and how the passage of this bill will NOT make mj less expensive, eliminate black markets or make you any freer then you are today (if you had the intelligence to get a med card).

I've said it before and I'll say it again. It's folks like you that look to the government for answers that brought us the worst government in the last 50 years. yes, worse then Carter.


Me? I still want less government. This bill is NOT less government. You mention libertarians (of which I am one) but have No clue as to what the word even means.
Carry on.

Think of the following: If prop 19 gets passed, and to be a "serious" grower you'd have to follow a lot of regulations to stay legal (I'm talking about commercial scale stuff here, as your personal 5x5 bears no regulations at all except for the area), let's assume you don't want to follow those rules and still want to grow a lot of weed. Why not just do it? It'll still be illegal, but it'll probably be less dangerous than it is today, and according to that change in danger to your personal safety, the price you'll be getting will also be a bit lower. But I'm convinced that while prices will drop, an oz of really good indoor weed won't cost less than $150 (Which is pretty awesome compared to today's levels in SoCal from what I hear, can't say it first hand though) the legal way, as there's a $50 tax added. So why don't you just sell your weed for $140 an oz or something like that? If you're gonna tell me it won't be worth it, all I can say is that you're a greedy fuck. It does not cost more than $30 to grow an ounce or so of really good weed if you do it on your own, with equipment costs distributed across a couple of grows, as you can reuse most of the expensive stuff such as fans etc. That means you get $110 profit for every oz you sell, which is almost 400% (and even if the prices go lower yet, you're still making a good amount because you don't pay the tax) profit. I'm really not seeing your point. Also, you still haven't explained to me yet how weed can magically work different from any other product and completely turn the laws of the (more or less, in this case) free market upside down by staying at the same (fucking overinflated) price as it is today.

 

[OMountainMix]

I think if you have fine genetics, and you grow, dry, trim, and cure correctly, that you will be able to charge more for your weed . . . .

 

[Hazelnuts]

Meh, I'm not sure if the competition won't just be too big. Because obviously, you have a lot of experience, but you also have to consider that those companies will have a lot of money to invest. And I doubt they're gonna invest it in growing massive amounts of schwag. I can't say for sure though.

 

[prefersativas]

i want beautiful naked big tittied women to rain down from heaven.

Lets's hope that they don't land very hard.


Vote Yes, Please.

 

[grapeman]

ill say it again..you have been brainwashed into believing prohibition is somehow LESS government intrusion in your life than 19...

i cant overcome that level of self imposed ignorance...

the rest is just more of your obfuscation by way of ad hominem and assumption..

oh and your tried and true "your off topic" that weak gambit NEVER gets old from you...lol..

i have not swayed in my position however you have jumped from federal to state regulation right up until you realized you were wrong about federal then said you were predicting the distant future....

but the most important question you WONT answer..



are you young or retarded enough to believe marijuana will ever be a complete free for all with ZERO regulation?

if you reply yes ill never bother posting in this thread again as you are without hope.

You're just plain stupid that's all. You attribute your ignorance to me because you don't have the capacity to grasp the fact that when the government passes laws it does NOT decrease regulations.

Government laws = more regulations. I blame your parents for not teaching you critical teaching skills. You remind me of an old record player that is stuck. Problem is, by repeating your stupidity over and over again it seems the only person that you are convincing is your self. By repeating shit to yourself over and over again, you now believe that more government laws means less regulations.

Which btw was the topic of this thread. You seem to think by posting shit that you can turn this into a thread in support of the bill. That was never the intent. Nor was it the intent to oppose the bill.

It was about increased regulations in our lives. You're a fucking idiot that has too much time to think while you deliver my mail.

 

[1TokeRedeux]

California law has what to do with the rest of the country again? How has any California law helped us in the past?

We still have dry counties and towns where rock 'n roll and dancing in public are illegal, passing something in Cali helps us how?

California voters decide their own fate, always have and always will. Never affected anything anywhere else, never has and never will. Any non resident needs to back up and let the people of California decide their own fate, it's not our concern.

Southern baptist politicians could care less what happens in California.

(Sorry for the vent - I feel better now)

 

[dagnabit]

You're just plain stupid that's all. You attribute your ignorance to me because you don't have the capacity to grasp the fact that when the government passes laws it does NOT decrease regulations.

Government laws = more regulations. I blame your parents for not teaching you critical teaching skills. You remind me of an old record player that is stuck. Problem is, by repeating your stupidity over and over again it seems the only person that you are convincing is your self. By repeating shit to yourself over and over again, you now believe that more government laws means less regulations.

Which btw was the topic of this thread. You seem to think by posting shit that you can turn this into a thread in support of the bill. That was never the intent. Nor was it the intent to oppose the bill.

It was about increased regulations in our lives. You're a fucking idiot that has too much time to think while you deliver my mail.

this is simple really you just dont want to get it..

(btw as far as ad hominem..ill ignore them like always)

it is my contention that there is no stronger regulation than prohibition.

simple question please answer.

do you believe prohibition to be regulation or not?

 

[dagnabit]

would you oppose a bill that "limits enforcement and implementation of the healthcare act of 2010"

by your logic it would be new regulation.

i guess you would have to campaign against it right?

technically it would be regulating the healthcare bill so its "regulation" in the same way 19 limits enforcement of prohibition laws...

why wont you tackle this one?

 

[dagnabit]

deliver my mail.

deliver your mail?


no no no....
i take your land

 

[Thundurkel]

Also, you still haven't explained to me yet how weed can magically work different from any other product and completely turn the laws of the (more or less, in this case) free market upside down by staying at the same (fucking overinflated) price as it is today.

All this talk about price drop is annoying cuz folks feared shit was gonna drop after Obama said the Feds wont fuck with MMJ growers and dispensaries anymore but guess what? I've watched prices go UP! My buddy RIP used to let lbs of good indoor go for 2500-2800 and oz for 200-220 but yet with less risk the prices are 3600-4500 a lb and 350 or more a per oz in the clubs. How it went up like that I have no clue but that was the main thing I noticed...

Another thing that was a shock to me is how many average California residents don't know Marijuana is ALREADY TAXED RIGHT NOW!!! People I was talking with yesterday were in disbelief wondering where all that tax money is being spent cuz that's a good chunk of change in the millions every year...