You are wrong, my friend--
They cannot be controlled any more than Cannabis can...
But...they do, however...have the $$ behind them...which means everything--
Donate to Prop 19--
Arnold signs SB 1449 into law.
- Thread starter apanihi
- Start date
You are wrong, my friend--
They cannot be controlled any more than Cannabis can...
But...they do, however...have the $$ behind them...which means everything--
Donate to Prop 19--
What a smart move IMO.
The state was loosing money also by making you take a day off work and dragging you into court all day to wait for your case. The state was taking it in the ass with the old law.
As far as prop 19, having 25 sq ft of legal grow space is acceptable for the recreational user. Only those banking on their money from illegal sales will be affected IMO.
The state was loosing money also by making you take a day off work and dragging you into court all day to wait for your case. The state was taking it in the ass with the old law.
As far as prop 19, having 25 sq ft of legal grow space is acceptable for the recreational user. Only those banking on their money from illegal sales will be affected IMO.
Be cynical; you should be here, IMO. In Ohio, we decriminalized marijuana a long, long time ago. And it's not an ounce, either. It's 100 grams! Yet anyone familiar with the system here will tell you this is one of the worst non-southern states in America to get busted in. Heres why:
A) There is no minimal amount required to prosecute for intent to distribute. They make it up as they go along. That's a felony, friends. If you have more than one bag, good luck if the officer wants to be a dick! (And when does that happen, am I right?)
B)Paraphernalia is still illegal. Don't carry a bong? OK. Do you smoke cigarettes? You were probably rolling your cigs up for joints, weren't you pothead? Paraphernalia charge. It's not that big a deal in CA from what I gather ( a small fine). However it's still something.
This is a move that, how coincidentally, came out just as credible organizations showed that prop 19 will probably pass. This is the conservative way of saying "see guys, we're reasonable about marijuana, too. But lets not get all craaaazy and go legalizing it. We still need to make money on weed cases."
A) There is no minimal amount required to prosecute for intent to distribute. They make it up as they go along. That's a felony, friends. If you have more than one bag, good luck if the officer wants to be a dick! (And when does that happen, am I right?)
B)Paraphernalia is still illegal. Don't carry a bong? OK. Do you smoke cigarettes? You were probably rolling your cigs up for joints, weren't you pothead? Paraphernalia charge. It's not that big a deal in CA from what I gather ( a small fine). However it's still something.
This is a move that, how coincidentally, came out just as credible organizations showed that prop 19 will probably pass. This is the conservative way of saying "see guys, we're reasonable about marijuana, too. But lets not get all craaaazy and go legalizing it. We still need to make money on weed cases."
twiztidbudsmoke
Active member
Ya good work cali, maybe some other states can follow
fred b
Member
sorry I am a foreigner and do not know the SB 1449 bill that was signed. but I am wondering if the police now would take the ounce and write you a 100$ fine or leave you with the ounce and just write you a 100$ fine ? I mean, as I see it the posession is still illegal and they would take your weed but it won't go into your record.
can someone maybe explain who's more familiar with the contents of the bill ?
greets
fred b
can someone maybe explain who's more familiar with the contents of the bill ?
greets
fred b
CA Downgrades Pot Possession to Infraction
CA Downgrades Pot Possession to Infraction
(10-01) 16:49 PDT Sacramento -- Citing the need to reduce spending on prosecution and courts, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a measure that makes marijuana possession an infraction, on par with traffic and littering tickets.
The Republican governor's unexpected support for the measure comes one month before voters decide whether to legalize adult recreational use of marijuana in California.
"In this time of drastic budget cuts, prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement and the courts cannot afford to expend limited resources prosecuting a crime that carries the same punishment as a traffic ticket," wrote Schwarzenegger, who opposes Proposition 19, the marijuana initiative.
The law, which takes effect immediately, reduces possession of up to an ounce of marijuana - enough for about 30 joints - from a misdemeanor to an infraction. Already, marijuana possession was the only misdemeanor under California law that didn't allow for jail time.
Changing perceptions
But the measure by state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, eliminates the need for police to book people caught with marijuana and for courts to hold jury trials on the matter. Those caught with the drug would not get a conviction on their criminal record.
Schwarzenegger, facing a $19 billion state budget deficit, also signed another bill this week intended to save the state money by keeping more people out of state prison. That measure raised the threshold for grand theft from $400 to $950.
The penalty for possessing less than an ounce of marijuana was already limited to a $100 fine and potential, court-mandated treatment. But the law's passage appears to reflect a gradual shift in the way Californians view marijuana and the drug's treatment under the law.
If voters approve Prop. 19 next month, it will be legal for adults older than 21 to possess and use the drug. Even if the ballot measure fails, the approval of SB1449 indicates a slight thawing in long-standing opposition to legalizing the drug, and recent polls have shown growing support for Prop. 19 over just a few months.
While many politicians and law enforcement officials still rail against marijuana publicly, Leno noted that Superior Court judges suggested SB1449 and that it was backed by prosecutors and the state court system.
"There is a significant shift occurring," said Leno, who has served in the state Legislature since 2002. "This bill has been brought to the Legislature at least four times since I've been there ... and the great success this year was because we not only had the defense bar in support but also the California District Attorneys Association and the Judicial Council. Everyone was of the same mind: This should be changed. ... The ball has moved down the field."
The chief executive officer of the district attorneys group, however, stressed that marijuana remains unlawful under SB1449.
"We've always supported (this measure) because it has an impact on district attorneys, who have to waste valuable resources sending people to court for a misdemeanor. For a $100 fine, it's just not worth it - it is a waste of prosecutors' time," Scott Thorpe said.
The bill was opposed by several police officers associations and passed both houses on largely party-line votes.
Prop. 19 foes split
Prop. 19 opponents had mixed reactions.
Tim Rosales, the campaign manager for No on Proposition 19, argued that the new law "takes away the last reason anyone would have to vote for Prop. 19," because it removes the argument by proponents that the state's marijuana laws cost too much to enforce and prosecute.
Brook Lowe, treasurer of Citizens Against Legalizing Marijuana, which is working against Prop. 19, worried about the new law's effect on children.
"It's really unfortunate," Lowe said. "It's going to allow kids, especially, to keep smoking pot and take away a chance to help them."
Surprise at signing
Oaksterdam University founder Richard Lee, who originated Prop. 19, said he was mildly surprised that Schwarzenegger signed the Leno bill but that it portends a larger trend. Supporters have also seized on costs and potential tax revenues to push the legalization measure.
"I think it's one more small victory," Lee said. "It's one more thing going our way that shows that what we're saying is right - it's a waste of law enforcement time and resources to go after people for cannabis."
Very interesting timing on this Action. Seems to subtly back prop 19 while simultaneously removing a major reason to vote on it.
CA Downgrades Pot Possession to Infraction
(10-01) 16:49 PDT Sacramento -- Citing the need to reduce spending on prosecution and courts, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a measure that makes marijuana possession an infraction, on par with traffic and littering tickets.
The Republican governor's unexpected support for the measure comes one month before voters decide whether to legalize adult recreational use of marijuana in California.
"In this time of drastic budget cuts, prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement and the courts cannot afford to expend limited resources prosecuting a crime that carries the same punishment as a traffic ticket," wrote Schwarzenegger, who opposes Proposition 19, the marijuana initiative.
The law, which takes effect immediately, reduces possession of up to an ounce of marijuana - enough for about 30 joints - from a misdemeanor to an infraction. Already, marijuana possession was the only misdemeanor under California law that didn't allow for jail time.
Changing perceptions
But the measure by state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, eliminates the need for police to book people caught with marijuana and for courts to hold jury trials on the matter. Those caught with the drug would not get a conviction on their criminal record.
Schwarzenegger, facing a $19 billion state budget deficit, also signed another bill this week intended to save the state money by keeping more people out of state prison. That measure raised the threshold for grand theft from $400 to $950.
The penalty for possessing less than an ounce of marijuana was already limited to a $100 fine and potential, court-mandated treatment. But the law's passage appears to reflect a gradual shift in the way Californians view marijuana and the drug's treatment under the law.
If voters approve Prop. 19 next month, it will be legal for adults older than 21 to possess and use the drug. Even if the ballot measure fails, the approval of SB1449 indicates a slight thawing in long-standing opposition to legalizing the drug, and recent polls have shown growing support for Prop. 19 over just a few months.
While many politicians and law enforcement officials still rail against marijuana publicly, Leno noted that Superior Court judges suggested SB1449 and that it was backed by prosecutors and the state court system.
"There is a significant shift occurring," said Leno, who has served in the state Legislature since 2002. "This bill has been brought to the Legislature at least four times since I've been there ... and the great success this year was because we not only had the defense bar in support but also the California District Attorneys Association and the Judicial Council. Everyone was of the same mind: This should be changed. ... The ball has moved down the field."
The chief executive officer of the district attorneys group, however, stressed that marijuana remains unlawful under SB1449.
"We've always supported (this measure) because it has an impact on district attorneys, who have to waste valuable resources sending people to court for a misdemeanor. For a $100 fine, it's just not worth it - it is a waste of prosecutors' time," Scott Thorpe said.
The bill was opposed by several police officers associations and passed both houses on largely party-line votes.
Prop. 19 foes split
Prop. 19 opponents had mixed reactions.
Tim Rosales, the campaign manager for No on Proposition 19, argued that the new law "takes away the last reason anyone would have to vote for Prop. 19," because it removes the argument by proponents that the state's marijuana laws cost too much to enforce and prosecute.
Brook Lowe, treasurer of Citizens Against Legalizing Marijuana, which is working against Prop. 19, worried about the new law's effect on children.
"It's really unfortunate," Lowe said. "It's going to allow kids, especially, to keep smoking pot and take away a chance to help them."
Surprise at signing
Oaksterdam University founder Richard Lee, who originated Prop. 19, said he was mildly surprised that Schwarzenegger signed the Leno bill but that it portends a larger trend. Supporters have also seized on costs and potential tax revenues to push the legalization measure.
"I think it's one more small victory," Lee said. "It's one more thing going our way that shows that what we're saying is right - it's a waste of law enforcement time and resources to go after people for cannabis."
Very interesting timing on this Action. Seems to subtly back prop 19 while simultaneously removing a major reason to vote on it.
Bill To Decriminalize Minor Pot Possession Signed By Cailfornia Governor
Bill To Decriminalize Minor Pot Possession Signed By Cailfornia Governor
Sacramento, Sept 30th: A bill to downgrade the possession of one ounce or less of marijuana
from a misdemeanor to an infraction was signed into law by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
http://www.canorml.org/news/1449signed.html
Bill To Decriminalize Minor Pot Possession Signed By Cailfornia Governor
Sacramento, Sept 30th: A bill to downgrade the possession of one ounce or less of marijuana
from a misdemeanor to an infraction was signed into law by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
http://www.canorml.org/news/1449signed.html
binaryfission
Member
Things are moving in cali but the feds laws supersede any state laws so we need to change goverment laws and start making up ways to decriminalize cannabis laws across the entire united states then we will break free from always feeling like criminals and share the love & peace and puff puff pass the entire usa
the individual states act as labratory's for federal law. not trying to be a dick but you should take a look at Federalism and think about it. A huge part of the USA's uniqueness, IMO.
Your second post is more correct.
This is all about money. Wasting huge government dollars to bring someone who smokes pot to court. It costs the city something like 5X the $ amount on the ticket to just try someone. Even more if the person actually goes to trial or resets their court date. Hugely inefficient. Just get em to send in their $100's and be done with it. Efficiency goes up and the government looks to be using its dollars better.
Don't look too hard at it. It's economics. and if anything it a Liberal Talking Point.
"The Republican governor already agrees that money is wasted on prosecuting victimless crimes involving cannabis. He has legislated responsible use for adults, why not know provide rules for the production, sales, and taxation of cannabis?"
Arnold just gave us a huge foothold to push ourselves over the top.
ocean_grown
Member
Wait, what?
Wait, what?
Some people here locally have been saying some things which are confusing me on the whole legal status of Ganja in California. The gist of what people are saying is that Governor Schwarzenegger signed some kind of law which made posession of up to an ounce only an "infraction" rather than a misdemeanor, so that cannabis is essentially decriminalized in California.
If this is the case I say fuck Prop 19, I would not want to put the regulation of sales and taxes up to my local jurisdiction because my local jurisdiction fucking sucks ass (bible belt motherfuckers).
So ya, is there any truth to this or is it some kind of rumor being spread?
Wait, what?
Some people here locally have been saying some things which are confusing me on the whole legal status of Ganja in California. The gist of what people are saying is that Governor Schwarzenegger signed some kind of law which made posession of up to an ounce only an "infraction" rather than a misdemeanor, so that cannabis is essentially decriminalized in California.
If this is the case I say fuck Prop 19, I would not want to put the regulation of sales and taxes up to my local jurisdiction because my local jurisdiction fucking sucks ass (bible belt motherfuckers).
So ya, is there any truth to this or is it some kind of rumor being spread?
D
danimarie193
Its very true.
It actually was decriminalized already.
It was punishable by a $100 fine.
Now it is punishable by a $100 fine, but you can't request any legal proceedings regarding it.
It was punishable by a $100 fine.
Now it is punishable by a $100 fine, but you can't request any legal proceedings regarding it.
CaptainTrips
Active member
Thats because its an infraction rather than a misdemeanor. Before you had a $100 fine, plus pay for court fees(couple hundred I think), plus a record. Now you just pay a fine.
apanihi
Member
You are wrong, my friend--
They cannot be controlled any more than Cannabis can...
But...they do, however...have the $$ behind them...which means everything--
Donate to Prop 19--
I wasn't trying to say they can be controlled more, just saying the big players that control tobacco and alcohol are already in place, maybe they want to figure out who wants to jump in and control cannabis.
I was pointing out the same thing you are.
Facts are facts.
Facts are facts.
ocean_grown
Member
Absolutely no reason I can see to leave regulations up to local (corrupt) jurisdictions. Long live marijuana the unregulated commodity 
Last edited:
CaptainTrips
Active member
I was pointing out the same thing you are.
Facts are facts.
Ya, was just saying now as long as you arn't charged with distribution, there will be no arrest record. And the fine is less in reality since you won't be paying court costs.
Decriminalization is NOT the same as legalization. The new law really didn't change anything, except that people who are arrested (over 60,000 last year) will not have to appear in court. If CA is anything like NY, this new law may actually result in MORE arrests.
So if you were going to vote yes for prop 19, this new law should not affect your decision. Only legalization (not decriminalization) will eliminate or drastically reduce the black market. Only legalization will help keep cannabis out of the hands of children. Only legalization will produce revenue (i.e., taxes) for the state. Only legalization will stop the arrests.
I think the timing of the governor signing this new law is no coincidence. I think he was hoping that people who don't really understand the difference between prop 19 and further decriminalization will think that prop 19 is no longer necessary. Based on the responses to this thread, that appears to be what is happening. Don't be fooled. Decriminalization is NOT the same as legalization.
So if you were going to vote yes for prop 19, this new law should not affect your decision. Only legalization (not decriminalization) will eliminate or drastically reduce the black market. Only legalization will help keep cannabis out of the hands of children. Only legalization will produce revenue (i.e., taxes) for the state. Only legalization will stop the arrests.
I think the timing of the governor signing this new law is no coincidence. I think he was hoping that people who don't really understand the difference between prop 19 and further decriminalization will think that prop 19 is no longer necessary. Based on the responses to this thread, that appears to be what is happening. Don't be fooled. Decriminalization is NOT the same as legalization.
I totally agree with this--
What do some of you mean there is no reason now for Prop 19??
They can still search you and your home for weed--
They can still fine you for it--
You still lose your shit--
Smell of weed is Probable Cause for search--
Vote Yes on 19--
