A Change of Heart: Prop 19

[Bigrick31]

I've been looking around for any federal reaction to this and haven't found anything. could you please post a link to where you read this or is this just conjecture?
Jed

I dont recall where I originally read the article might have been the NY times but let me see what I can find.

"Even though California already collects some $100 million in sales taxes on legal medical marijuana operations, Bonner said no one in their right mind would pay pot taxes if state voters legalize recreational marijuana. He said doing so would be a tacit admission of violating federal drug laws."

http://calpotnews.com/marijuana-law...-head-prop-19-sends-terrible-signal-to-world/


Prop. 19 passage could spark U.S.-California legal war over pot

Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/10/08/3088861/prop-19-passage-could-spark-us.html#ixzz12M2yqZUL
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/10/08/3088861/prop-19-passage-could-spark-us.html

The things that I wish were in this prop are included in ABX6-9 the only problem is the lack of guarantee that abx6-9 will pass if 19 does. Were those two put together and sent for voter approval I would be voting yes. My only concern is losing freedoms I currently enjoy today maybe this analogy will help people see where im coming from.

Im sure everyone here has watched Charlie brown and is quite familiar with the skit in which Lucy holds the football and every time Charlie goes to kick the ball Lucy moves the ball causing Charlie to fall on his butt. In this analogy I am Charlie the football is Pot and the Government is Lucy. Lucy has tempted me with many footballs in the past and always moves the football at the last minute. This time Lucy is holding the pot football and im thinking to myself I know shes going to move it again if I attempt to kick it that is why this time I ask for one of those football holders so she can step back and this time im guaranteed not to fall because ive taken Lucy out of the equation. The same goes for prop 19 im looking for that way to get what I want while removing any possibility of trickery.

 

[zen_trikester]

I dont recall where I originally read the article might have been the NY times but let me see what I can find.

"Even though California already collects some $100 million in sales taxes on legal medical marijuana operations, Bonner said no one in their right mind would pay pot taxes if state voters legalize recreational marijuana. He said doing so would be a tacit admission of violating federal drug laws."

http://calpotnews.com/marijuana-law...-head-prop-19-sends-terrible-signal-to-world/


Prop. 19 passage could spark U.S.-California legal war over pot

Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/10/08/3088861/prop-19-passage-could-spark-us.html#ixzz12M2yqZUL
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/10/08/3088861/prop-19-passage-could-spark-us.html

The things that I wish were in this prop are included in ABX6-9 the only problem is the lack of guarantee that abx6-9 will pass if 19 does. Were those two put together and sent for voter approval I would be voting yes. My only concern is losing freedoms I currently enjoy today maybe this analogy will help people see where im coming from.

Im sure everyone here has watched Charlie brown and is quite familiar with the skit in which Lucy holds the football and every time Charlie goes to kick the ball Lucy moves the ball causing Charlie to fall on his butt. In this analogy I am Charlie the football is Pot and the Government is Lucy. Lucy has tempted me with many footballs in the past and always moves the football at the last minute. This time Lucy is holding the pot football and im thinking to myself I know shes going to move it again if I attempt to kick it that is why this time I ask for one of those football holders so she can step back and this time im guaranteed not to fall because ive taken Lucy out of the equation. The same goes for prop 19 im looking for that way to get what I want while removing any possibility of trickery.

Both of those articles are just a bunch of "what if's" AKA conjecture. I'm looking for something official from current government. If they aren't saying anything now to try and stop this you have to wonder why.

As for your analogy... I like it. Breaks my heart to see Chuck on the bench though. I have a feeling he will be riding the pine for a long time if he is waiting for the ball holder on a silver platter. But fuck Lucy... there is another option. We could say fuck Lucy and her prohibition! Ending prohibition would be a at least a wounding blow if not a one shot kill.

"Charlie there is drawing a gun
Right there in the square he's sketched Lucy on the run
Aims his eye, cocks his head
In a cloud of dust, dear old Lucy's gone"
("C. Brown" by WSP)

If this ends up being a no-go, I hope that the message from California saying that they don't want to legalize pot is not inspiration for more crackdown and more raids and less freedoms. I hope that all of the separation amongst users and growers and med and recreational doesn't put a spoiled taste in the non-users mouths for even wanting to mess with it... When it comes down to it most people just want to smoke and grow some pot and this prop will protect Californians for that with actual state legality. Unfortunately it is the money that is getting in the way on both sides of the prohibition front. You seem like a smart guy Rick, I hope you find a way to reconsider.

Jed

 

[SCF]

Both of those articles are just a bunch of "what if's" AKA conjecture. I'm looking for something official from current government. If they aren't saying anything now to try and stop this you have to wonder why.

As for your analogy... I like it. Breaks my heart to see Chuck on the bench though. I have a feeling he will be riding the pine for a long time if he is waiting for the ball holder on a silver platter. But fuck Lucy... there is another option. We could say fuck Lucy and her prohibition! Ending prohibition would be a at least a wounding blow if not a one shot kill.

"Charlie there is drawing a gun
Right there in the square he's sketched Lucy on the run
Aims his eye, cocks his head
In a cloud of dust, dear old Lucy's gone"
("C. Brown" by WSP)

If this ends up being a no-go, I hope that the message from California saying that they don't want to legalize pot is not inspiration for more crackdown and more raids and less freedoms. I hope that all of the separation amongst users and growers and med and recreational doesn't put a spoiled taste in the non-users mouths for even wanting to mess with it... When it comes down to it most people just want to smoke and grow some pot and this prop will protect Californians for that with actual state legality. Unfortunately it is the money that is getting in the way on both sides of the prohibition front. You seem like a smart guy Rick, I hope you find a way to reconsider.

Jed

it will be taken as, California doesn't want pot legalized, period....

no room for interpretation, as everything is black and white in the Media. And the rest of the world will be highly discouraged at ever seeing this drug freed.

but if it does passes, expect many other states to follow suit,

and you better believe, the more bills that get written in other states, the more defined, and better trimmed and organized they will be. As we are the tester state.

As with 215, every state has different laws pertaining to medical marijuana, and caregivers.


Yes on prop 19, make Hash, hash oil, and edibles legal, and Medical marijuana Tax Free as it should be like all medication in the US.

SCF

 

[simos]

it will be taken as, California doesn't want pot legalized, period....

no room for interpretation, as everything is black and white in the Media.

but if it does passes, expect many other states to follow suit,
SCF

That's the bottom line, and is the basis on which we should all be making our decision.

It's a flawed proposition, no doubt, but it has a real chance of passing, and will be another large step in the right direction. I would love to be voting on a perfect proposition, but this is the real world, not the land of coulda and shoulda.

Make no mistake, if 19 passes it will be huge positive news the world over. If it fails, how long will it be until another such measure is on the ballot? Quite a few years, I'd think.

Should the voters reject prop 19, I think you'll see over-zealous government officials and LEOs interpreting it as an appeal from the population for more arrests, and much stricter AG guidelines. A rejection of this initiative can only hurt the protections we currently enjoy.

Along those lines, if Cooley is elected you can bet he'll do everything in his power to make everyone in the medical industry suffer, be they legitimate patients/caregivers/non-profit collectives or profiteers hiding behind compassion.

There is absolutely nothing to lose here, only a great deal to gain. We'll only have more freedoms, anyone espousing beliefs contrary to that reality is either paranoid, delusional, or purposefully facetious.

A few people who have been making exorbitant profits running small time operations may lose out a bit, but those growers with true skills will only see more opportunities open up with taxation and regulation.

I also think it would be, for many people, a greatly needed validation that what they have been doing has not been a crime, that they have been unjustly stigmatized. Growers will be able to come out of the shadows and be proud of what they do. For many I think it will be a relief, a weight off their shoulders, and a welcome opportunity to contribute directly to the society/state whose protections and bounties they enjoy.

Grow a pair everyone, and show some real compassion rather than fearful self-interest. Let's take Cannabis out of our kids' hands, put some desperately-needed money in state coffers, open the door for the return of commercial hemp, and once again show the world the power of "the California Effect."

End of rant. simos out

 

[stonedstoner]

I have had a change of heart as well. I will be voting YES in november. I was against prop 19 at first because i thought it was too restrictive but now i see that it's just conservative so that it can be passed and then we can expand the limitations later. and i realize that it does not effect medicinal patients. i really do not have enough reasons to vote no on it. but i have plenty of good reasons to vote YES.

 

[Bobby Stainless]

Is it a 5 x 5 section per household? Per person?

If it's per person, would that mean 2 people would have a 5x10 rectangle?

Because there is no Open Container law with Pot--
If you got pulled over...and the cop seen a gun under your jacket...and you have a Permit to carry it...they cannot just search the rest of your car...to see if there are more guns--
They must follow Protocol--

If you have a carry permit, you must surrender all handguns upon the request of law enforcement.

If they want to see your guns, you have to show them.

 

[kmk420kali]

Is it a 5 x 5 section per household? Per person?

If it's per person, would that mean 2 people would have a 5x10 rectangle?






If you have a carry permit, you must surrender all handguns upon the request of law enforcement.

If they want to see your guns, you have to show them.

The 5x5 is per residence--
Also, the gun thing...yes, you have to tell them about it, but after you do, they cannot search the rest of your vehicle, simply because of that-- They do this with cannabis--

 

[Bobby Stainless]

Yeah.

I misunderstood you. They can't search your vehicle, if you are lawfully carrying a handgun, which they probably wouldnt anyways.

 

[kmk420kali]

Yeah.

I misunderstood you. They can't search your vehicle, if you are lawfully carrying a handgun, which they probably wouldnt anyways.

Exactly!! But when they find somebody with cannabis...even with a 215 Rec...they routinely search your vehicle anyway--
Prop 19 would end this practice--

 

[TruthOrLie]

Exactly!! But when they find somebody with cannabis...even with a 215 Rec...they routinely search your vehicle anyway--
Prop 19 would end this practice--

Which explains perfectly why LEO and DEA are so against this Prop.

Now, when they question you and you smell or tell you have weed, they can't just automatically get to searching for guns and other drugs.

Plus, now, you can say you have weed in your car and the drug dogs which alert on your vehicle are picking up that smell.

Who is to say you don't have kilos of cocaine or heroin stuffed into the linings of your car seats... and the recreational MJ ounce in your possession isn't just a cover up?

 

[TruthOrLie]

But then again you could say medical dispensaries are cover ups for heroin and cocaine processing labs and meth/ecstasy cooking.

 

[CaptainTrips]

Exactly!! But when they find somebody with cannabis...even with a 215 Rec...they routinely search your vehicle anyway--
Prop 19 would end this practice--

How do you know? An officer could still search you, you could have a few pounds in your car that you are in the process of illegally selling...

 

[whiteberrieS]

i think i heard a trumpet.

 

[SCF]

How do you know? An officer could still search you, you could have a few pounds in your car that you are in the process of illegally selling...

because probable cause will no longer be in effect. If they smell marijuana, all they can try to do, is determined if you are to inebriated to drive. And maybe have you do some sobriety test. If you are carrying weight, its best you dont smoke before.... Ya know? But i've been pulled over with weight, and stoned, CHP in cali has a hands off policy for Medical Users. You dont even have to show them your recommendation. As all your doctor has to do is give you a verbal recommendation, and have it on paper in the office. SO those loosely written laws for prop 215 have saved many peoples asses..... As i predict this law will too. Thats why feds are going ape shit right now...


SCF