Growers are just saying NO to pot legalization
- Thread starter DIGITALHIPPY
- Start date
- Status
Wether that's the case or not doesn't matter, we all know the government has profited from all sorts of drug trafficking. The point is it's not in the public eye. Your average person would not believe the government is profiteering off a drug they made illegal.
That's why people like you are just as bad as the people who created these laws. You probably uinderstand the many uses and importance of cannabis but you are happy to exploit the people that use it.
You are happy profiting in the grey area you inhabit but dont have a second thought about the amount of good this bill will do for people not in your situation.
Why should people have to pretend to be sick to go and buy un-regulated cannabis at hugely inflated prices, so people like you can take their hard earned wages? Cannabis should be free for all.
Shame on you, you would throw away the chance to give at least some (maybe the bill ain't perfect but its a huge leap forward in what it stands for) freedom to all just to keep the profits higher for yourself.
Do you people not see that the astronomical profits people make from growing a plant are just a side effect of prohibition.
You guys are just pothead bootleggers, screw everyone else's rights and freedom, let's exploit this situation as long as we can.
I suppose if there was a vote to end prohibition in USA in the 20s/30s the bootleggers would've been voting no aswell.
Wong...that is if your saying that this new law will change the rights of med patients.
jealousy of someone's income and entrepreneur skills is not a good enough reason for anyone to vote no on this bill.
the only thing i have seen in relation to commercial growing is based on oakland. This is one city out of thousands. Whats to say what the rest of the state would want to do about selling and growing pot.
every industry is going to have a leader. every industry has to have someone that controls market share. this is how a capitalistic society works.
Thats not really needed. You see, the only way 215 can be modified is by a new prop that is specifically aimed to do such. In other words there would have to be a 'repeal prop215 prop' but on the ballot.
If this law passes..and your a med grower..and get popped....you will be using prop 215 as your defense and not prop 19.
Its so sad that these growers dont mind the rest of us going to jail to protect their dollars. These greedy ass dealers are the main reason I started growing my own years ago. When it is legalized I do beleive it will be the end of 100 quarters and the ridiculous $100-$180 10 packs of seeds but I still think growers with the premium genetics will still be able to make money still.
this is the 2ed time were re-implementing a cencering system???
i thought this was taken away before?
L
Lloyd_Christmas
I second that. And trust me, we would.
Gee, I'm sorry for wanting to preserve my livelihood here people. I guess someone looking out for their own interests is called "greedy". The medical marijuana system that cali currently has in place is working great last time I checked.... This law will straight up put mom and pop growers out of business in cali. I'm no violent thug, and I'm not going to be for something that hurts the pockets for me and my family.
You know, I could go the other direction and call you greedy for not wanting to pay a fair price for quality product (aka: you being to cheap to do so), and not having the brass to have a decent size grow yourself. See my point?
IF IT AIN'T BROKE DON'T FIX IT - AND IN CALI IT'S NOT BROKE RIGHT NOW
you don't even live here. prop 215 is as broke as it could be.
215forLife
Member
Duh,.. but its the case that the prosecution will be able to bring in front of a jury that makes prop 19 so dangerous. They can use the limit of 5X5 against med patients because prop 215 didn't directly address limits. Furthermore they will argue that it was the intent of the voters to "fix" 215 as you can see atleast one yes voter in California posting in this thread thinks its broken and needs to be fixed and is voting yes on 19 to fix prop 215.
215forLife
Member
I disagree but that's a whole other thread.
you are so wrong. Currently there are no limits for med patients. Key word MED. On one side of the coin you have medical cannabis and the laws that covers...on the other side you have recreational cannabis and those laws. Apples and oranges. 2 different laws!
lol...if there was going to be any intent to 'fix' prop215 then there would be a specific ballot initiative stating such a thing. Because that's the ONLY way they can override prop215.
Once again....this law does nothing to med patients
They dont seem to get that prop 215 and prop 19 are different bills laws. Like VTA said you guys are confused big time. Prop 215 is not part of this discussion or debate.
You guys that can grow AAA bud will have no problems making an honest living and then some. Mom and Pop stores will be the driving force for good cannabis.
Start worrying about you brother your mother your kids who will be incarcerated for cannabis cultivation and not weather you can get that nice 7 iron you have been wanting to get.
You guys that can grow AAA bud will have no problems making an honest living and then some. Mom and Pop stores will be the driving force for good cannabis.
Start worrying about you brother your mother your kids who will be incarcerated for cannabis cultivation and not weather you can get that nice 7 iron you have been wanting to get.
215forLife
Member
Chronjohn that's only if they decide NOT to regulate it. If they choose to regulate it they can do whatever they want good and bad.
VTA I'm well aware that there are currently no limits ffrom patients. What you forget to see is that the case law (people v kelly) was derived from the arguement against prop 215 that appeared on the official ballot statements. I'm pretty sure I understand the inner workings of prop 215 better than you as my friend wrote it. I worked on the original nonprofit coop farm.
If they decide not too. Remember that.
VTA I'm well aware that there are currently no limits ffrom patients. What you forget to see is that the case law (people v kelly) was derived from the arguement against prop 215 that appeared on the official ballot statements. I'm pretty sure I understand the inner workings of prop 215 better than you as my friend wrote it. I worked on the original nonprofit coop farm.
If they decide not too. Remember that.
But it says:
So this seems pretty clear. The city will have control over how and how much can be bought and sold, EXCEPT for interfering with the rights already obtained by current medicinal laws.
It's great that your buddy wrote the bill. But we're quoting the bill and saying "it seems to say this". Can you perhaps show somewhere else in the wording of the bill that makes this untrue? Or have your buddy do so?
I'm not going to get into the merits of this initiative with those of you who are complaining about it because you make a lot of good points. Alas, there were better initiatives out there but none of us were motivated enough to get the 600K signatures required to get them on the ballot. Rich Lee was motivated, however, and he put up $1M of his own money to pay professional signature-gathering companies to get the job done. If Prop 19 does not pass, I highly doubt if Rich will sign up to lose more money in 2012.
If we stoners do not vote yes on Prop 19 and it loses, then two things will happen: (1) we will have given the anti-pot forces yet another moral victory and (2) we will have proven that we are a shitty, unpredictable voting bloc and elected officials will continue not giving a crap if we end up in prison for smoking a damn flower.
Please reconsider sitting this one out.
If we stoners do not vote yes on Prop 19 and it loses, then two things will happen: (1) we will have given the anti-pot forces yet another moral victory and (2) we will have proven that we are a shitty, unpredictable voting bloc and elected officials will continue not giving a crap if we end up in prison for smoking a damn flower.
Please reconsider sitting this one out.
Last edited:
215forLife
Member
Then how in the hell is my city trying to add a tax to medical cannabis then. I just got back from a lengthy meeting with them and other stake holders. Its interesting how the are moving on the idea.
bigtopsfinn
Member
$100 for a quarter is not a fair price IMO. Maybe for the Godliest herb in the world but not for the typical stuff that was going around in South Florida when I lived there. Probably not as good as most Cali bud, but still some really good stuff there.
I think this whole thing could start a new precedent not just for the US but subsequently the whole world, since the US had a large part in worldwide cannabis prohibition in the first place. I'm sick of seeing people charge $20 a gram for weed in my country, where the minds of the majority of voters have long been polluted by the typical anti-cannabis propaganda still running stronger than ever today.
The thing that gets me the most is that people are still going to jail for this wonderful hobby/pastime/medical solution, and there's no exception for the cash-croppers here opposed to having their grows downsized and profits cut. You never know when it might be you sitting behind bars. People will always have differences in opinions, but in a democracy at least the majority of voters can be happy.
- Status
