What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

SB 374 Will prevent Nevadans from growing their own!

Griz66

New member
I wonder if it passes if there will be clauses like. "You can grow if you live 20 miles away from a dispensary." I know in Northern Nevada we are only getting like 1 dispensary per county. And who knows how long it will take them to open also. I assume as long as one isn't open in MY county I can grow.. ?
 

Hydrosun

I love my life
Veteran
There are only two counties in NV, that are too large for CONSTITUTIONAL Whore Houses.

Here come the NEW WHORE HOUSES where the STATE FUCKS sick patients for profit. Pretty sure most of the brothels will be around Vegas and Reno, but I am sure your local sheriff can fuck you if you live in a rural county ;)

Wouldn't it be awesome if there was a NO FUCKING YOUR WIFE law IF you lived within 20 miles of a brothel. It would save a lot of resentment and fighting among couples. Sexual frustration is a great cause of domestic disputes and a burden on police resources, metro should be all over a wife fucking prohibition, and get those Clark County brothels open :D
 

MangoCat

Member
Beautiful analogy! lol
It might not be that difficult to get voters to pass full legalization. A lot of people would be down for that. Wouldn't it be great to pull the rug out from under this greedy shit about the time the first disp opens. Petition drive anyone?
 

Anteah

Member
The funniest thing is even if it was legalized tomorrow dispos would still make plenty of money. Not everyone by far would jump at an opportunity to grow, and even if they would only a small percentage of those would actually stay growing and be good enough that they wouldnt be trying to buy. They act like they just not gonna have any business if people are allowed to grow, and it is far from the truth.
 

HUGE

Active member
Veteran
Sen. Pete Goicoechea, R-Eureka, backed the bill but said he was concerned about removal of the grow-your-own language. He said some or his constituents cannot afford the expected $400-an-ounce cost.
 

resinryder

Rubbing my glands together
Veteran
Sen. Pete Goicoechea, R-Eureka, backed the bill but said he was concerned about removal of the grow-your-own language. He said some or his constituents cannot afford the expected $400-an-ounce cost.

Not concerned enough to vote against it
 

MangoCat

Member
Something is fishy about all this. If the senate was all hot about passing this bill, why did they let it sit in Finance for six weeks. There was nothing controversial for Finance to decide at all, just that little funding amendment...no big deal. If they wanted to grease it through the senate, they certainly could have, based on the final vote. Maybe they wanted it to die all along.

Could this bill just be a ruse to pacify both the ACLU by saying "we tried, please don't sue us" and Leo by "addressing their issues," while actually not doing anything at all, just like they've done the last twelve years?

It seems that all this delay and then last minute shuffle might maybe be accidentally on purpose....? Either that or we're probably fucked...
 

MIway

Registered User
Veteran
Something is fishy about all this. If the senate was all hot about passing this bill, why did they let it sit in Finance for six weeks. There was nothing controversial for Finance to decide at all, just that little funding amendment...no big deal. If they wanted to grease it through the senate, they certainly could have, based on the final vote. Maybe they wanted it to die all along.

Could this bill just be a ruse to pacify both the ACLU by saying "we tried, please don't sue us" and Leo by "addressing their issues," while actually not doing anything at all, just like they've done the last twelve years?

It seems that all this delay and then last minute shuffle might maybe be accidentally on purpose....? Either that or we're probably fucked...


dont forget the lobbyist that likely took 40-60k to get the bill sponsored, amended & discussed... and the contributions to each members campaign that sponsored/supported... they have to do something to justify the money... and then they can sell it again in two years. if they can get the money w/o actually doing anything while offering no guarantee...? ezmoney, which the dip guys paid, so at least u have someone to laugh at, until they actually pay enough to get it passed next time, but still funny how the system works.
 

Griz66

New member
Its being discused in room 3138 this morning. As of 8:11 am they have not started. Ill try to post something as soon as I hear something :)
 

Griz66

New member
Tick confirmed they have an amendment that will allow people with medical cards as of July 1st this year will be grandfathered in until March 31st 2016. They said page 40 section 26 sub section 5.

They also said if u live 25 miles or more from a dispensary or are unable to drive or make it to one. They also hinted at the grandfathering in will allow people to grow until the next leg session in hopes of future amendments.

I mean I can deal with that I guess and lets hope it gets further amended.

They also mentioned due to metro if u have any more then 12 plants it is a class E felony.
 

Hydrosun

I love my life
Veteran
Griz,

How can you deal with a rule that would allow you something and deny it to your neighbor? ANY person denied the right to grow their own cannabis is a victim. I can't deal with the devil or pigs even if they would let me be and only torture the other guy.

There can be no compromise between food and poison. Please don't lose resolve and let the dark side grow.

:joint:
 

HUGE

Active member
Veteran
I guess my biggest question in all this is why does metro have a say in the legislature. The legislature was hired by the people ro creat law that makes tue society run better. Metro is hired by the state to enforce the laws it writes. So metro is in there telling their employer how to do their job so that metro can make more money. On what planet does rhis logic fly?
 

Hydrosun

I love my life
Veteran
That logic is the highest form of intellect in the United Fascist States of AmeriKa. The pigs want it easier to identify the riffraff and the law is passed that we will wear yellow stars or pink triangles. All is good for the pigs and their masters. See how easy that is?

Now just shut your fucking mouth, keep your eyes lowered and pin a large 5 pointed green leaf to your lapel, you subhuman scum.
 

Griz66

New member
Honestly the issue of home growth was almost laughed about and was only brought up as a side comment it seemed. That's what pisses me off. They have spent 25 minutes talking about the appearance of the dispensaries. I don't think anyone ells is going to touch on it :(
 

HUGE

Active member
Veteran
I mean they actually used the words "to keep metro happy" why is our state legislature worried about keeping metro happy? Isn't metro supposed to enforce the law not crrate it? Don't you always heat the cops say look we don't write the laws we just enforce them. Well aparentlybthey write them aswell. In a way that lets them put more people in cages in order to make more money. Well how about them apples.
 

Griz66

New member
They did also say counties have the right to limit or ban dispensaries. So for the smaller counties that only are given 1 or 2 dispensaries could push them out all together. Which in turn would allow people In those counties with no dispensaries to grow. They just said that's in the law. So get on your local government and make sure they know we don't want dispensaries to open and muck up our community :)

They did just say some crap like u will be limited to how much u can purchase in a set amount of time and you will only be able to go to one dispensary in a 30 day period.
 

Anteah

Member
I am reading it and kind of confused, because in this proposed amendment there are seems to be two versions of the subsection (or whatever its called) 22.3 where we are grandfathred. One up top includes grandfathering one (parallel one) just below it proposes to remove it (the paragraph is strikes out). Does anyone know what that means?
 
Top