2012 Legalization Effort Starts

[Thomkal Vwalaa]

Current as of June 8th, 2005.

Saw one number putting it at over 200k in 2009.
Used Oregon as a proxy.
Think it is probably higher, though.
Colorado is about 100k.

Dang CO! Coming up in the world. I love it. I found '09 data 5 seconds. Anyone find a number more recent than my 2009: 200+K number? maybe closer to a million... because "everyone I know has a med rec"...oh wait. That's not true at all! I know lots of folks without, even growers. The dumb ones, lol.

 

[mean mr.mustard]

Thom trust me man... you don't want to be a martyr

These dogs need blood.

I was up on a cross in October...

My faith is already slipping.

I took shelter in my community of good hearted potheads.

I realized it isn't necessarily such a welcoming bunch anymore.

If I was more narrowly minded, and perhaps rabidly driven I would have felt at home again.

I'm not a victim.

I'm a crime in and of myself.

If I wouldn't have said anything I could have just seen all the smiling Californian faces lining up at the polls and worried about sheep to the slaughter.

Instead I opened my mouth. Now I worry about ever doing it again.

 

[Rednick]

ICmagers can't make you a Martyr,
just a frustrated stoner!

P.S. I love the line "They're counting on Jah to pass this one."

 

[mean mr.mustard]

You'd be suprised

 

[Thomkal Vwalaa]

ICmagers can't make you a Martyr,
just a frustrated stoner!

P.S. I love the line "They're counting on Jah to pass this one."

I hope so to the first part.
And thanks. Gotta slip a joke in there sometimes.

 

[mean mr.mustard]

I was seriously considering hanging up my hat... really was.

There was a point at which I didn't want to see another joint fearing it represented narrow minded bull driven culture.

Then someone reminded me we didn't even have a culture or community anymore.

Then I looked at a joint... then decided not to hang up my hat.

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

I think at this point in CA lives will no longer be ruined in CA over possession.

I'm talking the producers and distributors, not Joe everybody who got hit on a few gram possession. people who are spending years in jail and their possessions confiscated in debt with lawyer and court costs. Peoples family's broken up for growing a plant. This isthe disconnect many of you seem not to understand it care about. Ya it's so fucking cool you can make some money in a black market but until you have something if this magnitude happend to you, I guess you'll just never understand or feel the way I do towards mj prohibition.

 

[Thomkal Vwalaa]

I'm talking the producers and distributors, not Joe everybody who got hit on a few gram possession. people who are spending years in jail and their possessions confiscated in debt with lawyer and court costs. Peoples family's broken up for growing a plant. This isthe disconnect many of you seem not to understand it care about. Ya it's so fucking cool you can make some money in a black market but until you have something if this magnitude happend to you, I guess you'll just never understand or feel the way I do towards mj prohibition.

Okay, that's true. These "producers and distributors" include many I know. And those who are in trouble were pushing it. I also expect to be searched due to my participation here and elsewhere. I do not think more than 1% of these "producers and distributors" in CA were going to be legalized by 19. More likely further criminalized as many are making and/or moving real weight. These producers and distributors would mainly stay black market, and the many farms working with dispensaries would be forced back to more lucrative "out of state" options.

We feel similarly with regards to prohibition, maybe we disagree on commercial cannabis in CA before the fed reschedules. We disagree over how to get to a better future for everyone. But we can all agree... to keep pushing for a better canna future. We need to stop pushing each other and push legislators instead.

If you go here you can read about CCHH 2012.
http://www.youthfederation.com/cchhi2012.html
And here is the contact page, please be respectful:
http://www.youthfederation.com/contactus.html

Does anyone have a draft from the other group?
CCHH2012 vvvvvv ... needs a million signatures as Mr. Scorpio so aptly alluded.

PROPOSED WORDING AS OF 05/13/2010:
California Cannabis Hemp & Health Initiative 2012

California Cannabis Hemp & Health Initiative 2012

AN ACT TO AMEND THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE OF CALIFORNIA:

I. Add Section 11362.6 to the Health and Safety Code of California, any laws or policies to the contrary notwithstanding:

1. No person, individual, or corporate entity shall be arrested or prosecuted, be denied any right or privilege, nor be subject to any criminal or civil penalties for the possession, cultivation, transportation, distribution, or consumption of cannabis hemp marijuana, including:

(a) Cannabis hemp industrial products.

(b) Cannabis hemp medicinal preparations.

(c) Cannabis hemp nutritional products.

(c) Cannabis hemp religious and spiritual products.

(d) Cannabis hemp recreational and euphoric use and products.

2. Definition of terms:

(a) The terms "cannabis hemp" and “cannabis hemp marijuana” mean the natural, non-genetically modified plant hemp, cannabis, marihuana, marijuana, cannabis sativa L, cannabis Americana, cannabis chinensis, cannabis indica, cannabis ruderalis, cannabis sativa, or any variety of cannabis, including any derivative, concentrate, extract, flower, leaf, particle, preparation, resin, root, salt, seed, stalk, stem, or any product thereof.

(b) The term "cannabis hemp industrial products" means all products made from cannabis hemp that are not designed or intended for human consumption, including, but not limited to: clothing, building materials, paper, fiber, fuel, lubricants, plastics, paint, seed for cultivation, animal feed, veterinary medicine, oil, or any other product that is not designed for internal human consumption; as well as cannabis hemp plants used for crop rotation, erosion control, pest control, weed control, or any other horticultural or environmental purposes, for example, the reversal of the Greenhouse Effect and toxic soil reclamation.

(c) The term "cannabis hemp medicinal preparations" means all products made from cannabis hemp that are designed, intended, or used for human consumption for the treatment of any human disease or condition, for pain relief, or for any healing purpose, including but not limited to the treatment or relief of: Alzheimer's and pre-Alzheimer's disease, stroke, arthritis, asthma, cramps, epilepsy, glaucoma, migraine, multiple sclerosis, nausea, premenstrual syndrome, side effects of cancer chemotherapy, fibromyalgia, sickle cell anemia, spasticity, spinal injury, stress, easement of post-traumatic stress disorder, Tourette syndrome, attention deficit disorder, immunodeficiency, wasting syndrome from AIDS or anorexia; use as an antibiotic, antibacterial, anti-viral, or anti-emetic; as a healing agent, or as an adjunct to any medical or herbal treatment. Mental conditions not limited to bipolar, depression, attention deficit disorder, or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, shall be conditions considered for medical use.

(d) The term "cannabis hemp nutritional products" means cannabis hemp for consumption by humans and animals as food, including but not limited to: seed, seed protein, seed oil, essential fatty acids, seed cake, dietary fiber, or any preparation or extract thereof.

(e) The term "cannabis hemp euphoric products" means cannabis hemp intended for personal recreational or religious use, other than cannabis hemp industrial products, cannabis hemp medicinal preparations, or cannabis hemp nutritional products.

(f) The term "personal use" means the internal consumption of cannabis hemp by people 21 years of age or older for any relaxational, meditative, religious, spiritual, recreational, or other purpose other than sale.

(g) The term "commercial production" means the production of cannabis hemp products for sale or profit under the conditions of these provisions.

3. Industrial cannabis hemp farmers, manufacturers, processors, and distributors shall not be subject to any special zoning requirement, licensing fee, or tax that is excessive, discriminatory, or prohibitive.

4. Cannabis hemp medicinal preparations are hereby restored to the list of available medicines in California. Licensed physicians shall not be penalized for, nor restricted from, prescribing or recommending cannabis hemp for medical purposes to any patient, regardless of age. No tax shall be applied to prescribed cannabis hemp medicinal preparations. Medical research shall be encouraged. No recommending physician shall be subject to any professional licensing review or hearing as a result of recommending or approving medical use of cannabis hemp marijuana.

5. Personal use of cannabis hemp euphoric products.

(a) No permit, license, or tax shall be required for the non-commercial cultivation, transportation, distribution, or consumption of cannabis hemp.

(b) Testing for inactive and/or inert residual cannabis metabolites shall not be required for employment or insurance, nor be considered in determining employment, other impairment, or intoxication.

(c) When a person falls within the conditions of these exceptions, the offense laws do not apply and only the exception laws apply.

6. Use of cannabis hemp products for religious or spiritual purposes shall be considered an inalienable right; and shall be protected by the full force of the State and Federal Constitutions.

7. Commerce in cannabis hemp euphoric products shall be limited to adults, 21 years of age and older, and shall be regulated in a manner analogous to California's wine industry model. For the purpose of distinguishing personal from commercial production, 99 flowering female plants and 12 pounds of dried, cured cannabis hemp flowers, bud, not leaf, produced per adult, 21 years of age and older, per year shall be considered as being for personal use.

8. The manufacture, marketing, distribution, or sales between adults of equipment or accessories designed to assist in the planting, cultivation, harvesting, curing, processing, packaging, storage, analysis, consumption, or transportation of cannabis hemp plants, industrial cannabis hemp products, cannabis hemp medicinal preparations, cannabis hemp nutritional products, cannabis hemp euphoric products, or any cannabis hemp product shall not be prohibited.

9. No California law enforcement personnel or funds shall be used to assist or aid and abet in the enforcement of Federal cannabis hemp marijuana laws involving acts which are hereby no longer illegal in the State of California.

10. Any person who threatens the enjoyment of these provisions is guilty of a misdemeanor. The maximum penalties and fines of a misdemeanor may be imposed.

II. Repeal, delete, and expunge any and all existing statutory laws that conflict with the provisions of this initiative.

1. Enactment of this initiative shall include: amnesty, immediate release from prison, jail, parole, and probation, and clearing, expungement, and deletion of all criminal records for all persons currently charged with, or convicted of any non-violent cannabis hemp marijuana offenses included in this initiative which are hereby no longer illegal in the State of California. People who fall within this category that triggered an original sentence are included within this provision.

2. Within 60 days of the passage of this Act, the Attorney General shall develop and distribute a one-page application, providing for the destruction of all cannabis hemp marijuana criminal records in California for any such offense covered by this Act. Such forms shall be distributed to district and city attorneys and made available at all police departments in the State to persons hereby affected. Upon filing such form with any Superior Court and a payment of a fee of $10.00, the Court shall liberally construe these provisions to benefit the defendant in furtherance of the amnesty and dismissal provision of this section. Upon the Court's ruling under this provision the arrest record shall be set aside and be destroyed. Such persons may then truthfully state that they have never been arrested or convicted of any cannabis hemp marijuana related offense which is hereby no longer illegal in the State of California. This shall be deemed to be a finding of factual innocence under California Penal Code Section 851.8 et seq.

III. The legislature is authorized upon thorough investigation, to enact legislation using reasonable standards to:

1. License concessionary establishments to distribute cannabis hemp euphoric products in a manner analogous to California's wine industry model. Sufficient community outlets shall be licensed to provide reasonable commercial access to persons of legal age, so as to discourage and prevent the misuse of, and illicit traffic in, such products. Any license or permit fee required by the State for commercial production, distribution or use shall not exceed $1,000.00.

2. Place an excise tax on commercial sale of cannabis hemp euphoric products, analogous to California's wine industry model, so long as no excise tax or combination of excise taxes shall exceed $10.00 per ounce.

3. Determine an acceptable and uniform standard of impairment based on performance testing, to restrict persons impaired by cannabis hemp euphoric products from operating a motor vehicle or heavy machinery, or otherwise engaging in conduct that may affect public safety.

4. Regulate the personal use of cannabis hemp euphoric products in enclosed and/or restricted public places.

IV. Pursuant to the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, the people of California hereby repudiate and challenge Federal cannabis hemp marijuana prohibitions that conflict with this act.

V. Severability: If any provision of this Act, or the application of any such provision to any person or circumstance, shall be held invalid by any court, the remainder of this Act, to the extent it can be given effect, or the application of such provisions to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid, shall not be affected thereby, and to this end the provisions of this Act are severable.

VI. Construction: If any rival or conflicting initiative regulating any matter addressed by this act receives the higher affirmative vote, then all non-conflicting parts shall become operative.

VII. Purpose of Act: This Act is an exercise of the police powers of the State for the protection of the safety, welfare, health, and peace of the people and the environment of the State, to protect the industrial and medicinal uses of cannabis hemp, to eliminate the unlicensed and unlawful cultivation, selling, and dispensing of cannabis hemp; and to encourage temperance in the consumption of cannabis hemp euphoric products. It is hereby declared that the subject matter of this Act involves, in the highest degree, the ecological, economic, social, and moral well-being and safety of the State and of all its people. All provisions of this Act shall be liberally construed for the accomplishment of these purposes: to respect human rights, to promote tolerance, and to end cannabis hemp prohibition.

Eddy Lepp

George Clayton Johnson

Michael S. Jolson

 

[kmk420kali]

Bullshit.

Here it is... even simpler...



A prop that is voted in by the people that within states the legislators and governor may do as they please... REGARDLESS OF PEOPLES' VOTES AFTER THE PASSING OF THE PROP is total and unadulterated BULLSHIT.... but it was in the wording of 19.

Paranoia substantiated.

Education... more like masturbation...

Do you really want to start this debate....you have bullshit, and I can show you 100% how I am right...really man?? You really want to go here??
I hate to use an old adage...but you should check yourself...before you wreck yourself--

It cannot be "Limited"...SCOTUS Decision-- sorry bro, I didn't make this shit up...it is "Fact"--
You are, and will be shown a fool...if you pursue this--

EDIT-- I'm going to bed-- Think about your stance bro--

 

[mean mr.mustard]

Don't go away mad.

I'm stressing they don't have to improve (and let's face it: it needed improvement) a damn thing.

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

CCHH has and always will be a failed and flawed iniative that will never receive the funding necessary to run a successful campaign, it's unfortunate, but true.

 

[legalizeDK]

We want to let big biz in to normalize the trade.
Sure medical is great for the growers, but what about the majority of smokers that are not medical users? Do we just throw them in jail? Or make them pretend to be patients to protect the growers income?
Anyone that thinks Cannabis should be kept illegal so they can continue to make money is not a friend of any Cannabis patient/smoker.
I look forward to full taxed and regulated Cannabis, and I know the price will drop dramatically when it happens. Cannabis can be grown for the same costs as other agricultural crops, name any that sell for over $1000 a pound? Legal Cannabis will be a few hundred dollars a pound un-manicured, at the most.
Anyone that says illegal Cannabis is better, is a self serving person that most likely cares more about money then people, I say shame!
Not that they care, as long as they are all OK.
I am not accusing anyone of being a self serving person, you know if you are or not.

-SamS

and that´s the truth

 

[mtbazz]

Do you really think everyone is so ignorant to believe your ludacris scenario in which phillip morris is going to turn out dirt weed and all of a sudden everyone is going to quit caring about quality and just smoke mass produced low quality commercial weed?

Mexico supplies hundreds of thousands of pounds of marijuana every year and that hasn't seemed to make a difference in the price per pound here in california. So your far fetched idea that they would produce so much low quality marijuana that it would plummet prices is beyond idiotic. If anything it would create a bigger demand for connoisseur grade cannabis.

I know that regardless of what happends, I can adapt. I have the experience, the capital and the ingenuity to succeed. Even if I didn't, I would still vote to legalize because I know far too many friends and family that have had their life destroyed over something as harmless as cannabis. I too have seen the consequences of the prohibition of marijuana.

All the anti's that seem to be against it seem to share similar qualities, mostly being young and having never faced the consequences of marijuana prohibition. You turn out a few pounds and all of a sudden your ready to throw anybody under the bus. Well people like me and KMK are turning out far more then what you are and we are still willing to risk our livlihood for the improvement of our industry and society as a whole.

While were at it, why would you believe that Phillip Morris would even bother with marijuana. They pull in over 100 billion dollars annually in cigarette sales, why would they want to produce a product that is harder to produce and doesn't have half the amount of users that tobacco does?

Why is it a ludicrous scenario and what makes you think that the likes of PM will not want to capitalize on cannabis legalization?

Cigarette sales have been steadily declining over the past decade thanks to an increase in taxes and smoking bans in public places.
Also, it doesnt matter how much PM is making (by the way, you do know there is a difference in how much they make in sales and how much they make in profit don't you ?), it is the mission of any large corporation to find ways to increase profit, and it makes sense to me that if legalization were to occur it would only be natural for the tobacco companies to jump on that band wagon. Like I said, they have infrastructure already in place to produce, transport and bring to market large qauntities of buds.

ALso, I never said they would produce mexican quality weed. It would probably be something equivalent to canadian or california beasters, mid quality stuff.

If you think people would still pay op dollar for primo buds with tons of middies available for cheap think again, aside from some connoisseurs (who are in the minority) most people would be more than happy paying less for mid grade, mass produced buds. I see it every day. I know people who should know better, but if you throw a bag of 500 an ounce primo bud like OG kush in front of them, along with a bag of 300 an ounce beasters they will go for the beasters. I once grew out a beautiful plant that was 100% sativa with beautiful, delciate and graceful buds, probably some of the best herb I ever smoked, but everyone I showed it to was not interested because they were not fat nugs.

Heck, I will even go further and say that if legalization at the federal level occurs, you will see headhunters from the tobacco companies scouring Norther California for the best and most knowledgable growers to head up their new "cannabis cultivation department".
When the bottom drops on ganja prices because this is no longer a mainly black market item, how many growers (many of whom Im sure post on here saying "its not about the money dude") will refuse a 300k a year salary + benefits and bonuses to run a research/cultivation department?

Anyway, like I said I am all for legal med use, and decriminalization , but I really think those that wish for legalization at the federal level are really not thinking this all the way through.

 

[budlover123]

We all appreciate the work growers do in getting us bud on the black market, but this is 2011, we practically all know the truth about marijuana, so why not get a little closer to tomato or pepper prices for weed? We got underpaid Mexicans harvesting our green beans so they can sell them at $1.09 a pound or whatever, Imagine if the horribly underpaid Mexican farm workers were growing your weed, that'd be cheap, around dollar a pound sounds perfect.

I wish we were paying our food farmers more and our weed farmers way less, after all, if they are not risking their freedom because of some bullshit laws then they don't need to be so hi paid and they can grow other crops as well.

IMO anyone who wants weed to stay illegal is a short sighted tool less interested in progressing humanity than progressing their own bull shit agendas and get rich quick schemes.

 

[THE PABLOS]

We all appreciate the work growers do in getting us bud on the black market, but this is 2011, we practically all know the truth about marijuana, so why not get a little closer to tomato or pepper prices for weed? We got underpaid Mexicans harvesting our green beans so they can sell them at $1.09 a pound or whatever, Imagine if the horribly underpaid Mexican farm workers were growing your weed, that'd be cheap, around dollar a pound sounds perfect.

I wish we were paying our food farmers more and our weed farmers way less, after all, if they are not risking their freedom because of some bullshit laws then they don't need to be so hi paid and they can grow other crops as well.

IMO anyone who wants weed to stay illegal is a short sighted tool less interested in progressing humanity than progressing their own bull shit agendas and get rich quick schemes.

yup...it would be cheap shit. Just like the veggies they send to market....complete shit. You are what you eat....or smoke.

I wish we would do away with the corporate farm circle...but we won't....so every man for himself.

The truth is....compared to Mexico....the migrants are making a much better living. Not saying that they shouldn't be paid more....they should. If the price of food went up due to production cost....maybe folks would be more willing to support smaller organic farms.

It is a slave system...economics replace the steel chains.

 

[Rednick]

The specific targeting of 'cooperative' is troubling in my state. Not sure what proposals the differing teams will come up with, but the fact that it has to be changed from (under HB-1284): Product to Monetary Value to Product again, is troubling.

I.E. no hippy communes trading #'s for tractors, livestock and manufactured goods. How can one tax that, or approximate the value of traded services accurately.

The state is definately trying to do the right thing, by taking cannabis into Public's percieved eye of what's right and wrong...
"it is okay if we tax it and the DOR is in charge." The Public. (trust me, I hear this argumnt all the time when I query people "just fucking legalize it, and tax the shit outta it like tabbacco and alcohol.") This coming from people in my generation.
http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/Revenue-Main/XRM/1222943467539

A good question to ask is..."Why should a plant be taxed?"
Is it because this one has Value?
How do we define the Value of this plant?
What constitutes Value?
How do you valuate the associated social impacts/costs of said herb?



I think everyone is so keen to pass some legislation that makes them feel better, that they forget the bigger picture.

Will MJ end up like tobacco or alcohol? Just because it has psycoactive properties?

A wise man once said "once they learn to tax it, it will be legal."
An Englishman in Amsterdam once told me "How can they tax it? It is not like Tobacco, where you need to grow and entire field of it." Then passed the J. One of the few Euros that wasn't afraid to smoke an American doobie, no tobaccy, just the whacky.

 

[Thomkal Vwalaa]

woo hoo, still no warehouses!

woo hoo, still no warehouses!

(02-01) 21:28 PST OAKLAND -- The Oakland City Council postponed a discussion of whether to license marijuana farms in the city Tuesday night, a move that could reshape the cannabis industry for the entire state.

A proposal by Councilwoman Desley Brooks would create a new city farming permit to allow the holder to operate both a medical marijuana dispensary and an off-site pot farm up to 50,000 square feet within city limits. The plan calls for the city to issue five of those permits.

Currently, the city has four permitted medical marijuana dispensaries. The proposal does not specify whether those dispensaries can add farming to their businesses.

But others questioned whether the issue needed to be rushed onto the agenda, and Brooks agreed to let it be vetted by the council's Public Safety Committee next week. City Attorney John Russo is expected to introduce his own plan within the next week.

By tying farming permits to dispensaries and their patients, Brooks hopes the plan will line up with Proposition 215, the 1996 proposition that legalized medical marijuana use.

That's critical because the city's previous pot farm plan, approved by the council in July, died because it did not abide by Prop. 215.

Prop. 215 authorizes only patients and "primary caregivers" to cultivate marijuana, according to an opinion written by Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O'Malley.

A primary caregiver is someone who has "consistently assumed responsibility for the housing, health or safety of that person," according to O'Malley's legal opinion. The city's previous plan would have allowed pot farmers to act independently of dispensaries and sell pot to whichever dispensary they chose.

Councilwoman Rebecca Kaplan, who wrote the July plan, had said it would have been legal regardless of the outcome of Proposition 19, a November ballot initiative that would have legalized recreational use of marijuana. Voters rejected Prop. 19, however, and O'Malley issued her opinion suggesting the farm plan was not legal. She warned that city officials might face criminal prosecution if they pressed on with it.

The city's plans have stalled since then. O'Malley has declined to comment on Brooks' plan.

In 2009, Oakland's four dispensaries sold 6,000 pounds of pot, which would have required 45,000 square feet of growing area, according to a city staff report.

The nine prospective farm dispensaries could provide more than a fifth of the total state demand for medical marijuana if they grew the maximum allowed, according to a city analysis.

Brooks has said that prospective pot farmers have told her that the size is important given the high cost of starting a pot farm.

The dispensaries would be required to supply at least 70 percent of their patients' medical marijuana needs, giving less room for the small growers who currently are the bulk of farmers in Oakland.

Small growers typically cultivate farms of less than 96 square feet, because of state law and a perception of the limits of federal prosecution. Others worry the move will force small growers to sell into the nondispensary illegal market.

Stephen DeAngelo, owner of the Harborside Health Center dispensary, has said he worries that the outsize nature of the farms will force existing small growers into the black market.

E-mail Matthai Kuruvila at mkuruvila@sfchronicle.com.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/02/01/BAE31HHEV9.DTL

 

[Thomkal Vwalaa]

More protections for MMJ patients!

More protections for MMJ patients!

I think we can all agree on this one.

(01-30) 15:54 PST Sacramento, Calif. (AP) --

A state lawmaker this week introduced a bill that would prohibit employers from firing qualified medical marijuana users who consume pot when they're not on the job.

The bill, proposed by Democratic state Sen. Mark Leno, also would make it illegal for employers not to hire someone solely because they use marijuana for medical reasons.

Leno, who represents Marin and parts of San Francisco and Sonoma counties, proposed a similar bill in 2007 that was passed by the legislature, but vetoed by then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

"The bill simply establishes a medical cannabis patient's right to work," Leno told the San Francisco Chronicle. "It astounds me that there would be any controversy around it."

The California Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that nothing in the state's current medical marijuana laws bars an employer from firing medical marijuana users who test positive for pot.

Californians approved a landmark ballot measure in 1996 that legalized the use of marijuana for medical purposes. Leno said voters never intended for the measure to apply only to unemployed state residents.

Leno's bill would exempt from protection workers such as doctors, nurses, school bus drivers and heavy equipment operators who hold so-called safety sensitive jobs. The term refers to work that would be directly affected if an employee was impaired.

Workers still could not use marijuana at work or during work hours, and employers could fire workers for being under the influence of marijuana at work, according to a legislative summary of the bill.

The California Chamber of Commerce opposed Leno's 2007 bill, but a spokeswoman told the Chronicle they had not yet examined the current bill.

The Chamber was one of the most vocal opponents of last year's statewide ballot measure that would have legalized marijuana for recreational use. The group said at the time that they believed Proposition 19 would have prevented employers from firing workers who smoked pot or were under its influence even at work.

The measure's supporters disputed that claim.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/01/30/financial/f155458S15.DTL

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

I have read many posts here that state that mass-produced commercial weed will be shwag, like poor quality Mexican, or anyway inferior.
I am wondering why people feel this way, it is because they can't do it or they have tried and failed or is it just conjecture?
I am wondering at what point is highest quality impossible according to the people that feel this way? I guess I am saying that you can produce tons of the highest quality if you make no compromises in your selection of growing materials, growing methods, drying, curing, storage, etc, etc.
What is the cutoff point, 10 Lbs, 100 Lbs, 1000 Lbs, 10,000 Lbs 100,000 Lbs?
I know it an be done, I have seen it with my own eyes. I know quality.
I do understand why so many people think it is somehow impossible for big biz, big agriculture, to do what they are doing, but believe me they can if they desire to, it is just a matter of scale and no compromises, with unlimited land, labor, and capital and an expert advising them. Organic is no problem.
Does anyone remember Thai sticks from the early 70's? Produced outdoors by farmers, tons of perfect seedless, almost leafless, incredible sticky buds, until the police and DEA stopped the cultivation in Thailand and it moved to Laos to be grown.
If you think the best qualities of Cannabis can't be mass produced then what about Dom Perignon Champagne?
A couple of million bottles a year, is that mass produced? For sure it is. Is it high quality, ask the consumers, they seem to think so...
Legal Cannabis is going to change everything starting with the prices, they will be lower...

-SamS

 

[dagnabit]

Why is it a ludicrous scenario and what makes you think that the likes of PM will not want to capitalize on cannabis legalization?

because the very small amount of money to be made is not enough to convince the board members the ROI is there for committing to an ongoing federal felonious enterprise.
do you really think a multinational corporation would risk rico prosecution with a proven anti business executive branch for the chump change available in if cali passes a recreational prop?
you cant be that naive...