Vote NO to legalize cannabis....Or else

[monsoon]

I was one of the signature collectors in the fist 2 attempts to get MMJ on the ballot here and I also collected sigs for SAFER to get the legalization effort rolling. None of us knew at the time WHAT the laws would say when crafted, we only knew we wanted less to no penalties for growing and possession. The retail side came to be because SAFER realized that there just aren't enough folks out there who would vote FOR legalization alone...and the inclusion of TAX DOLLARS...earmarked for schools... were what sent it over the top. Without those taxes, it NEVER would have flown at all.

The same will go for the rest of the states. Anyone who thinks "legal" means unregulated and a free-for-all is way the fuck off base/has no clue. Ain't gonna happen. Too much TAX money to be had...and EVERY state is hurting for tax money right now.

Lastly....it should be noted exactly WHERE the sales model we emulated in this retail model came from...oh California.

I hope yer garden is doing well. I know mine sure is! No worries!! Such a good feeling that no one cares anymore what we do in our homes.

As far as the original intent of this thread... nope...legalization isn't gonna affect your garden...unless...that is...you are trying to make a living off everyone else through your garden. Here in CO we are protected, constitutionally" with the right to grow our own. Rights that can't be changed without a majority vote of the People no matter how badly the Chicken little's yell "The sky is falling..the sky is falling".

 

[shaggyballs]

I was one of the signature collectors in the fist 2 attempts to get MMJ on the ballot here and I also collected sigs for SAFER to get the legalization effort rolling. None of us knew at the time WHAT the laws would say when crafted, we only knew we wanted less to no penalties for growing and possession. The retail side came to be because SAFER realized that there just aren't enough folks out there who would vote FOR legalization alone...and the inclusion of TAX DOLLARS...earmarked for schools... were what sent it over the top. Without those taxes, it NEVER would have flown at all.

The same will go for the rest of the states. Anyone who thinks "legal" means unregulated and a free-for-all is way the fuck off base/has no clue. Ain't gonna happen. Too much TAX money to be had...and EVERY state is hurting for tax money right now.

Lastly....it should be noted exactly WHERE the sales model we emulated in this retail model came from...oh California.

I hope yer garden is doing well. I know mine sure is! No worries!! Such a good feeling that no one cares anymore what we do in our homes.

As far as the original intent of this thread... nope...legalization isn't gonna affect your garden...unless...that is...you are trying to make a living off everyone else through your garden.
How can you say this with a straight face(keyboard)LOL
You say legalization will not effect my garden like you know the future?
I can not even grow vegetables in my garden legaly!

Here in CO we are protected, constitutionally" with the right to grow our own. Rights that can't be changed without a majority vote of the People no matter how badly the Chicken little's yell "The sky is falling..the sky is falling"

Man, you state this as a matter of fact???
So are you saying that if I show you that even 1 law was changed without the will/vote of the people.....Will you then admit the same could happen with cannabis laws???

Oh ya! what about amending the constitution, they can not do that ....can they???
Do you really think the people are in full control?
shag

 

[Jhhnn]

I was one of the signature collectors in the fist 2 attempts to get MMJ on the ballot here and I also collected sigs for SAFER to get the legalization effort rolling. None of us knew at the time WHAT the laws would say when crafted, we only knew we wanted less to no penalties for growing and possession. The retail side came to be because SAFER realized that there just aren't enough folks out there who would vote FOR legalization alone...and the inclusion of TAX DOLLARS...earmarked for schools... were what sent it over the top. Without those taxes, it NEVER would have flown at all.

The same will go for the rest of the states. Anyone who thinks "legal" means unregulated and a free-for-all is way the fuck off base/has no clue. Ain't gonna happen. Too much TAX money to be had...and EVERY state is hurting for tax money right now.

Lastly....it should be noted exactly WHERE the sales model we emulated in this retail model came from...oh California.

I hope yer garden is doing well. I know mine sure is! No worries!! Such a good feeling that no one cares anymore what we do in our homes.

As far as the original intent of this thread... nope...legalization isn't gonna affect your garden...unless...that is...you are trying to make a living off everyone else through your garden. Here in CO we are protected, constitutionally" with the right to grow our own. Rights that can't be changed without a majority vote of the People no matter how badly the Chicken little's yell "The sky is falling..the sky is falling".

Well said. Even if the State never collects as much in taxes as they'd hoped, we're still over the hump with our rights embedded in the State Constitution. Might as well be written in stone, with letters 50 ft high like Mt Rushmore.

As you say, the key to it all is to eschew growing as a money making venture. It's perfect irony to use Nancy Reagan's "Just say No" slogan in that context. If you're not selling, plant counts aren't a big concern for some people because there's no way for the authorities to get their hooks into you unless they have reason to enter otherwise. Domestic violence. Child abuse. Fire. In Denver, anyway, they're not even looking.

We observe plant count limitations entirely because risk is reduced to zero & the yield is entirely adequate for our purposes.

Worst case scenario?

Me, growing marijuana, officer? Let me give you the tour!

It'll very likely never come to that, anyway.

 

[monsoon]

We don't worry about counts because we make bubble hash out of the majority of what we produce and that eats up the bud in a huge way. And like you say, there's no reason for "them" to come unless "they" are given a reason to come so we do what we please in our own home/don't use any of it as a way to make a living/etc as so many here who just aren't happy with merely "growing their own" seem to wanna do. Best of luck to em - we aren't selling and we aren't buying any of what they have to offer. However, like you, we are giving weed to our friends to keep them out of the retail/tax machine as well.

 

[Jhhnn]

We don't worry about counts because we make bubble hash out of the majority of what we produce and that eats up the bud in a huge way. And like you say, there's no reason for "them" to come unless "they" are given a reason to come so we do what we please in our own home/don't use any of it as a way to make a living/etc as so many here who just aren't happy with merely "growing their own" seem to wanna do. Best of luck to em - we aren't selling and we aren't buying any of what they have to offer. However, like you, we are giving weed to our friends to keep them out of the retail/tax machine as well.

To each their own, of course.

I confess to buying retail on rare occasion. Never did the med card thing. I get to try more kinds than I can grow. I discovered that I hate the taste of SLH & that somebody knows how to grow a rather nice Blue Dream. I want to try Golden Goat in particular, it being a very famous CO clone only. I'll get a bug up my ass & go buy some, eventually.

 

[shaggyballs]

Well said. Even if the State never collects as much in taxes as they'd hoped, we're still over the hump with our rights embedded in the State Constitution. Might as well be written in stone, with letters 50 ft high like Mt Rushmore.

Unfortunately no thing on person is untouchable!
Even Mt.Rushmore would come crashing down for the right reason!
I thought denial was in Egypt,now it is running through CO.

As you say, the key to it all is to eschew growing as a money making venture. It's perfect irony to use Nancy Reagan's "Just say No" slogan in that context. If you're not selling, plant counts aren't a big concern for some people because there's no way for the authorities to get their hooks into you unless they have reason to enter otherwise. Domestic violence. Child abuse. Fire. In Denver, anyway, they're not even looking.

We observe plant count limitations entirely because risk is reduced to zero & the yield is entirely adequate for our purposes.

Worst case scenario?

Me, growing marijuana, officer? Let me give you the tour!

It'll very likely never come to that, anyway.

Meanwhile I go to jail for my vegetable garden.
Your perfect world works for the bubble your in.
Outside that bubble, it is not so warm and fuzzy!
I guess I need to move to CO. the land where once a law is written it can never be changed???

shag

 

[Jhhnn]

Meanwhile I go to jail for my vegetable garden.
Your perfect world works for the bubble your in.
Outside that bubble, it is not so warm and fuzzy!
I guess I need to move to CO. the land where once a law is written it can never be changed???

shag

Please avoid raving in a deliberately obtuse way.

Read about what it takes to amend the CO State Constitution here, article XIX-

http://tornado.state.co.us/gov_dir/leg_dir/olls/constitution_print.htm

In all instances, a vote of the people is required. On their own, the legislature can't touch it. We just voted *for* Amendment 64 in 2012 & public opinion is moving more in our favor every day. WTF makes you imagine that CO residents will be turning that around anytime RSN? Or do you even comprehend that there's a fundamental difference between a law passed by the legislature & a constitutional amendment voted in by the people?

If you can't consider all the facts available when forming an opinion, perhaps the opinions you already hold are getting in your way.

Might want to check your headset & the ideology driving it, too.

 

[LSWM]

Please avoid raving in a deliberately obtuse way.

Read about what it takes to amend the CO State Constitution here, article XIX-

http://tornado.state.co.us/gov_dir/leg_dir/olls/constitution_print.htm

In all instances, a vote of the people is required. On their own, the legislature can't touch it. We just voted *for* Amendment 64 in 2012 & public opinion is moving more in our favor every day. WTF makes you imagine that CO residents will be turning that around anytime RSN? Or do you even comprehend that there's a fundamental difference between a law passed by the legislature & a constitutional amendment voted in by the people?

If you can't consider all the facts available when forming an opinion, perhaps the opinions you already hold are getting in your way.

Might want to check your headset & the ideology driving it, too.

This is the same situation in CA. We voted to amend the Constitution by popular vote via prop 215. The senate then "restricted" the amendment without voter approval, via SB 420.

SB 420 places a restriction on plant counts and quantities you may posess. These restrictions are now null and void and a medical patient is allowed to cultivate and posess, "as much as is necessary for their medical condition" as defined in Prop 215.

 

[LSWM]

Under what "legalization" scheme can I grow marijuana for raw food and medicinal effects, by eating the flowers raw, via juicing, and without the psychoactive effects?

Certainly not under CO regulation. I'd need many more than 6 flowering plants at a time, no matter how you swing it. 3lbs per dry still wouldnt keep up with daily smoothies...

EDIT: And the 6 flowering plants is per household, no?

 

[Jhhnn]

This is the same situation in CA. We voted to amend the Constitution by popular vote via prop 215. The senate then "restricted" the amendment without voter approval, via SB 420.

SB 420 places a restriction on plant counts and quantities you may posess. These restrictions are now null and void and a medical patient is allowed to cultivate and posess, "as much as is necessary for their medical condition" as defined in Prop 215.

I take it that prop 215 did not give specific numbers, allowing the legislature some wiggle room, correct?

A64 allows 6 plants per adult with only 3 in flower at a time, thus allowing no "interpretation". Denver has a zoning ordinance allowing only 12/6 per household which will likely fold if ever challenged.

 

[Jhhnn]

Under what "legalization" scheme can I grow marijuana for raw food and medicinal effects, by eating the flowers raw, via juicing, and without the psychoactive effects?

Certainly not under CO regulation. I'd need many more than 6 flowering plants at a time, no matter how you swing it. 3lbs per dry still wouldnt keep up with daily smoothies...

EDIT: And the 6 flowering plants is per household, no?

Well, you'd have to be growing hemp to have no psychoactive effect which is covered in a different section of A64. I don't know much about it, but the whole thing is available on line.

At this point, you're just trying to piss down my leg & tell me it's raining, anyway. Are you trying to tell me that you can juice up a nice fresh cola of drug strain cannabis, drink it down for no psychoactive effect? Puh-leeze.

 

[LSWM]

I take it that prop 215 did not give specific numbers, allowing the legislature some wiggle room, correct?

A64 allows 6 plants per adult with only 3 in flower at a time, thus allowing no "interpretation". Denver has an ordinance allowing only 12/6 per household which will likely fold if ever challenged.

215 says as much as is necessary for your medical condition. It leaves determination of guilt up to the state, and mere plant ccounts don't matter when you have a doctor on the stand testifying to the need for them.

This is why Congress stepped in with SB 420, lack of regulation and no clear standard for police. Of course the supreme court determined that was an unconstitutional restriction to a voter approved proposition without voter approval.

The attourney general says those limits are now mere "guidelines" and to avoid police harassment one should stay below those limits. Fact is the cops can do what they want and you can argue it in court, or more than likely wont have to go to court. The police are supposed to leave you alone if they believe you are rightfully claiming protection under 215.

It could be much better but i have been pulled over for speeding on two occasions where the cop smelled marijuana and asked me about it. One time I just got done helping a friend take down a crop, and I REEKED. Neither time did they attempt a sobriety test, or check my medical reccomendation, they simply asked if i was a patient. Nor did they search the car. In fact both times the cops gave me reduced speed on the ticket as well. Neither time was I intoxicated, and the cops were clearly aware of this. I was also dead honest when confronted about the marijuana smell. I was committing no crime.

 

[LSWM]

Well, you'd have to be growing hemp to have no psychoactive effect which is covered in a different section of A64. I don't know much about it, but the whole thing is available on line.

At this point, you're just trying to piss down my leg & tell me it's raining, anyway. Are you trying to tell me that you can juice up a nice fresh cola of drug strain cannabis, drink it down for no psychoactive effect? Puh-leeze.

Freshly picked marijuana contains primarily thca and/or cbda both of which are not psychoactive, or have vary limited oral psychoactivity.

When decarboxylated to thc and cbd they have psychoactive properties.

There are many other cannabinoid receptors outside of the brain my friend.

EDIT:I'm high, had to change thcv to thca.

 

[kmk420kali]

I am seeing the same tired arguments we seen with Prop 19 here in Cali-- "They don't let us grow enough!!"
But, most Voter Initiatives start at the bottom, as it is easy to Amend as long as you are not hindering or restricting-- In other words, Legislators can raise the plant count, but they cannot lower it without another vote--

 

[LSWM]

Jhnnn, i just wanted to add that it is this kind of ignorance and demonization of the plant that has led to it becoming illegal and staying that way. It is much more than a psychoactive drug. It is a miracle plant. Really and truly.

 

[hush]

I am seeing the same tired arguments we seen with Prop 19 here in Cali-- "They don't let us grow enough!!"
But, most Voter Initiatives start at the bottom, as it is easy to Amend as long as you are not hindering or restricting-- In other words, Legislators can raise the plant count, but they cannot lower it without another vote--

You are making way too much sense for most of the people posting in this thread. Those people can't understand such logic. It just doesn't compute to them, so it creates a cognitive dissonance that shuts down the brain, causing them to react with the same line, over and over again, about how legalization is bad because it's not perfect right away, immediately, so therefore it should stay illegal. It's tiresome.

 

[Jhhnn]

Freshly picked marijuana contains primarily thca and/or cbda both of which are not psychoactive, or have vary limited oral psychoactivity.

When decarboxylated to thc and cbd they have psychoactive properties.

There are many other cannabinoid receptors outside of the brain my friend.

EDIT:I'm high, had to change thcv to thca.

So you've shifted the goalposts from "no psychoactive effect" to "very limited psychoactive effect" (nudge-nudge, wink-wink, Know what I mean? Know what I mean?)

Jhnnn, i just wanted to add that it is this kind of ignorance and demonization of the plant that has led to it becoming illegal and staying that way. It is much more than a psychoactive drug. It is a miracle plant. Really and truly.

Spare me the false attribution & demonization of what you claim I said.

 

[Jhhnn]

You are making way too much sense for most of the people posting in this thread. Those people can't understand such logic. It just doesn't compute to them, so it creates a cognitive dissonance that shuts down the brain, causing them to react with the same line, over and over again, about how legalization is bad because it's not perfect right away, immediately, so therefore it should stay illegal. It's tiresome.

And tedious.

It's pouting over the pony they didn't get & probably financial self interest wrapped in faux righteousness.

 

[shaggyballs]

Please avoid raving in a deliberately obtuse way.

Read about what it takes to amend the CO State Constitution here, article XIX-

http://tornado.state.co.us/gov_dir/leg_dir/olls/constitution_print.htm

In all instances, a vote of the people is required. On their own, the legislature can't touch it. We just voted *for* Amendment 64 in 2012 & public opinion is moving more in our favor every day. WTF makes you imagine that CO residents will be turning that around anytime RSN? Or do you even comprehend that there's a fundamental difference between a law passed by the legislature & a constitutional amendment voted in by the people?

If you can't consider all the facts available when forming an opinion, perhaps the opinions you already hold are getting in your way.

Might want to check your headset & the ideology driving it, too.

You keep avoiding my all questions, when they are directed at you and claim that I am raving....Why?( to justify you not answering them)

I tell you about real legal issues real people are facing right now and you seen to be completely unsympathetic.
I tell you they took away my right to have a vegetable garden you turn your head the other way and seem to say (can't happen to me).

And then have the nerve to refer to my larger than life legal issues as nothing but ravings.
I am I wrong to assume that you are unsympathetic to the legal issues others face as long as CO. is currently in a situation that you approve of?

Have you ever seen a law overturned against the will of the people?
If so could that same thing happen in CO.?

You say no......but is seems to happen everywhere else I just wonder what make CO. immune to such action?

What if the new Prez. puts the federal Kibosh on CO's plans?

 

[LSWM]

So you've shifted the goalposts from "no psychoactive effect" to "very limited psychoactive effect" (nudge-nudge, wink-wink, Know what I mean? Know what I mean?)

Alcohol has an incredibly strong effect and while 1 ml of pure ethanol is certainly psychoactive, the user will not notice cognitive changes. Both alcohol and marijuana are toxic, and even deadly, at certain levels, but i hardly think either would be readily considered "toxins" at medicinal or recreational levels. Why would you apply that logic to raw marijuana?

If, instead of deflecting the notion that raw marijuana is in fact medicinal and NOT psychoactive, you took a moment to read about the substances in question you would certainly retract your statement.

A psychoactive drug, psychopharmaceutical, or psychotropic is a chemical substance that crosses the blood–brain barrier and acts primarily upon the central nervous system where it affects brain function, resulting in alterations in perception, mood, consciousness, cognition, and behavior.

-Taken from Wikipedia

THCA does not cross the blood brain barrier readily or in any significant amount. Nor does the body metabolize any significant amount to THC. This by definition means it is not psychoactive.

Raw fresh marijuana contains little to no THC, and only THCA, which has been shown to have anti-mutagenic and neurprotective properties. This means raw marijuana is not psychoactive. Try eating a gram or two of scissor hash or even some bloned crumble. I can promise you will feel little to nothing but will have ingested a great amount of cannabinoids in the process.