ICMAG Administration endorses The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010

[blancorasta]

because someone else didn't want to become part of the med program.

.

you said it JJ!,
because they dont want to, its their choice. the liberties are there. if they dont exercise their rights, ist their fault.

passing prop 19 does a couple things.

allows people to cultivate a very small mj garden. but if you have a small illegal grow in cali, you would have to be advertising that shit to get busted. ive had and known many people that have had small grows like the ones prop 19 allows without any fear, paranoia, or tangible risk.

it does keep the cannabis movement full of momentum.

but. has anyone ever thought of the the war against drugs (prohibition) like the war against the native americans.

the indians were at war with the govt over land, we are at "war" with the govt over rights.

for years the two sides battled back and forth, each one standing their ground. we have battled back and forth from the days of the sixties and seventies to the just say no generation to today with medical cannabis, and thats the ground we now stand on to fight.

in this context i see a likeness between prop 19 and the treaty that took away the native americans land and forced them onto reservations under the pretense of peace.

under the pretense of legalization we get a prop that doesnt do much for the cannabis scene in california. we have a prop that does give power to govt and big business while limiting the land we can use.

i think if we just accept this prop for how it is marketed which is legalization, we may be forfeiting some of what we've already fought for while possibly painting ourselves in a corner. by the average user thinking "its legal now" and becoming complacent, and resting on the laurels that others have worked for and stop fighting.

i dont know how this thing would turn out, i just dont want to see it stop with prop 19. if were are going to pass 19 to keep pro cannabis support going, we must imediatly begin working on new props to fix the obvious flaws in 19

im not trying to start any stupid argument, im wondering if anyone else see's any parrallels.

my two cents,
peace

 

[blancorasta]

from the no votes ive seen here, their beef with 19 is this:


1- 19 is not a more liberal or in any way a better law than 215, and in fact is just a corporate grab.

2- they dont absolutely need 19, they can exist under 215 and wait for a better prop.

the way i see it, some yes people see this and it makes them crazy. there really is no way to argue that stance, ive tried ive asked it in this forum. so the last resort is to personal attack med use.

exactly, plus unfair "sin" tax.

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

you said it JJ!,
because they dont want to, its their choice. the liberties are there. if they dont exercise their rights, ist their fault.

passing prop 19 does a couple things.

allows people to cultivate a very small mj garden. but if you have a small illegal grow in cali, you would have to be advertising that shit to get busted. ive had and known many people that have had small grows like the ones prop 19 allows without any fear, paranoia, or tangible risk.

it does keep the cannabis movement full of momentum.

but. has anyone ever thought of the the war against drugs (prohibition) like the war against the native americans.

the indians were at war with the govt over land, we are at "war" with the govt over rights.

for years the two sides battled back and forth, each one standing their ground. we have battled back and forth from the days of the sixties and seventies to the just say no generation to today with medical cannabis, and thats the ground we now stand on to fight.

in this context i see a likeness between prop 19 and the treaty that took away the native americans land and forced them onto reservations under the pretense of peace.

under the pretense of legalization we get a prop that doesnt do much for the cannabis scene in california. we have a prop that does give power to govt and big business while limiting the land we can use.

i think if we just accept this prop for how it is marketed which is legalization, we may be forfeiting some of what we've already fought for while possibly painting ourselves in a corner. by the average user thinking "its legal now" and becoming complacent, and resting on the laurels that others have worked for and stop fighting.

i dont know how this thing would turn out, i just dont want to see it stop with prop 19. if were are going to pass 19 to keep support going we must imediatly begin working on new props to fix the obvious flaws in 19

im not trying to start any stupid argument, im wondering if anyone else see's any parrallels.

my two cents,
peace

I've yet to see any "fighting" or "overgrowing the gov." all I see is mostly non violent people getting arrested for growing. The native Americans were faced with genocide and the loss of their home and fought many bloody battles to work to stop these abominations. Let's not belittle our native brothers by trying to say we are fighting a parallel fight...


PS how did it work out for them? Let's end the abuse on mj users with passing 19 to give way for a national legalization. Even if 19 isnt legalization, your right that is how it's being marketed. If you truly want to legalize, 19 has to pads or it will become such a large obstacle for the movement it will take years, if not decades to overcome. And unforynatly it seems many here on IC would welcome that long drawn out obstacle. It's scary what money can do to people....

 

[zen_trikester]

Wow guys... I still just don't get it.

Med recs are great. You can say to yourself that 215 was designed to be:
A. a way to allow anyone to smoke.
B. a way for growers to sell under the table and make money


You can say that and you can think that, but that is not what was intended. That is what it has become, yes, but not the original intent. MMJ was and is a way for people who have no other options or only more dangerous options, to find relief from serious illnesses. To say that this law was intended to be an aspirin substitute is preposterous! If MJ helps you avoid opiates, or if it gives you relief from symptoms such as HIV/Chemo nausea, or Parkinson tremors, or MS. This is a need. To relieve a headache, or feel relaxed is a choice because there are other safe options. You do, per 215, have that choice as has been said. The "or any other condition" was there to allow for new critical uses of MMJ, or to not dis-include diseases/conditions that would otherwise be unlisted due to obscurity. MMJ in Cali is on the verge of being out of control and that is why dispensaries are being closed and that is why the DEA is still jumping up in peoples shit. That is why other states that have seriously ill patients are having a hard time getting MMJ laws passed! This is all fact. Everyone is aware of this.

If you REALLY care about MMJ, then you should be able to see the separation that I am talking about, and you should be able to see how the way that 215 is being abused is HARMING SERIOUSLY ILL PATIENTS in other states. It is pushing critically ill MMJ patients into a hole, and now may be a good time to think about them as you are swinging your MMJ flag.

With 19, you can bet that the number of recs will go way down. I'm guessing down to less than 1/4 of what it is now in only a couple of years. Separating recreational or non-critical use from actual medical need will be the best thing for the Nationwide MMJ plight, and eventually it will most likely lead the way for global legalization.

Tobacco can be grown at home. There are many varieties of tobacco and there are enthusiasts just like there are for MJ. Less, yes but there are. Same with Alcohol and beer/wine enthusiasts. The only reason that you can't legally make liquor at home is because a still is a pretty dangerous thing... light a fire under a vat of grain alcohol? Yeah, most people don't have the ability to do that safely!!! Beer and wine don't blow up!!! Short of running a still, nobody is ever busted for brewing or growing tobacco. Maybe if they tried to sell or market, but it isn't an issue in todays society because it has gotten to the point that it is simply not abused. MJ will get there too if we can get past the initial hurtles.

So lets stop fighting about how great 215 is for the non-critically ill. It is a great option if there are no others, but it now isn't the only option. This is a chance to do the right thing for the MMJ cause, and for the plant in general.


Jed

 

[blancorasta]

hey big h3rb,
the native american thing, you didnt see it the way i do, and thats fine i was just trying to propose a new view point.

PS how did it work out for them?....

thats my point exactly. this prop doesnt do much, its being passed under a false precident that you acknowledge below.

Even if 19 isnt legalization, your right that is how it's being marketed. If you truly want to legalize, 19 has to pads or it will become such a large obstacle for the movement it will take years, if not decades to overcome. And unforynatly it seems many here on IC would welcome that long drawn out obstacle. It's scary what money can do to people....

4 sure i understand, thats the only positive i see in this whole mess and is why i included this in my last post \/

i dont know how this thing would turn out, i just dont want to see it stop with prop 19. if were are going to pass 19 to keep support going, we must imediatly begin working on new props to fix the obvious flaws in 19

if i were confident that the average user wasnt going to see this the way it is marketed, as legalization. and stop pushing for something better. than i could give you my 100% full support.
but thats not the case.

again im on the fence

peace

 

[localhero]

With 19, you can bet that the number of recs will go way down. I'm guessing down to less than 1/4 of what it is now in only a couple of years. Separating recreational or non-critical use from actual medical need will be the best thing for the Nationwide MMJ plight, and eventually it will most likely lead the way for global legalization.


Jed

jed, i just dont see that happening. alot more people than you think will still need their med. mostly it will be good for tourists and people living in the few counties that allow it.how many cities will allow non med retail?

ok so maybe maybe some european countries will follow suit, im skeptical though, i mean amsterdam has existed for a long time. if you want to look at the long term, then its even more important to get legalization off on the right track. 19 passing should only be a 2 to 4 year event before we can put in a true legalization prop.

there is the possibility that 19 creates apathy and acceptance and more status quo 215 use than ever before. more of this "abuse" you rail on about and other states pointing again to cali that see, people are using med to avoid taxing.

even worse, if people still need 215 to get their bud, the tax revenues wont ever be realized. states will point to cali and say - see? wheres the money in legalization? it was supposed to be this big cash cow and it didnt do shit. wheres the motivation to legalize in that scenario?

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

Being from Santa Cruz myself, I have known Valarie for many many years, she is the real MMJ movement, not the growers or sellers making money hand over foot. Notice she supports Prop 19 because she hopes it will help drive down the prices of both recreational and medical Cannabis.
I hope so also.
Vote YES on Prop 19.

-SamS


http://blogs.sacbee.com/weed-wars/2...ing-collective-decries-pot-shop-industry.html


Medical marijuana pioneer protests cash cow pot stores
One of protagonists of the modern marijuana movement in California charges that the burgeoning dispensary trade has become a cash cow aloof from the people it is meant to serve.

Valarie Corral filed the state's first known "medical necessity" defense when she challenged her arrest for cultivating five marijuana plants, arguing she had a right to use cannabis to treat seizures resulting from a car accident.
After prosecutors threw out the charges in 1993, Corral co-founded the Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana, a Santa Cruz pot-growing collective renowned for serving the terminally ill. She later worked to pass the California's Proposition 215 Compassionate Use Act legalizing medical use.

But these days, she is fed up with the growth of California's contemporary marijuana "collectives" - namely pot-distributing dispensaries with thousands of registered members and millions of dollars in annual marijuana transactions.

"Something has happened to our movement, something that is dark and denigrates the issue," Corral said recently at the HempCon medical marijuana convention in San Jose. "It (the movement) did not happen so people can get rich."

Dispensaries under California law must operate as non-profits. But Corral decried an evolution of a massive medical marijuana industry she says is characterized by generous salaries and an entrepreneurial spirit that overshadows the core purpose of helping and comforting people in need.

WAMM members, including AIDS and cancer patients, directly cultivate and share medical marijuana rather than ringing up cash register transactions at a pot shop. Members hold Tuesday night meetings to distribute the marijuana based on medical needs and ability to pay.

After Prop 215's passage in 1996, Corral hoped the WAMM model - with small groups of growers and medical users working together -- would become the standard.

"I thought the WAMM consciousness would take off," she said. "It didn't. The dispensaries did."

Yet WAMM remains a cultural icon in the marijuana movement. In 2002, federal agents stirred a political backlash by raiding the marijuana garden, confiscating the crop and arresting Corral and her husband, WAMM co-founder Mike Corral.
The city and county of Santa Cruz joined in lawsuits against the federal government. In 2004, A U.S. District Judge, Jeremy Fogel, issued an injunction barring future raids of the WAMM site. Last year, U.S. Attorney Eric Holder announced he won't target medical marijuana in states where it is legal.

Since the WAMM was founded in 1993, 223 members of the collective have died. Seventeen are buried near its marijuana garden. Others are commemorated on painted stones.

"It's difficult to watch your friends die," Corral said. "It's difficult to watch people suffer. It can be very unnerving and put us face to face with our own mortality."

California voters are to decide in November whether to legalize marijuana for recreational use for adults over 21. Corral says she supports Proposition 19 as a civil libertarian and because she hopes it will drive the price of marijuana far below what is currently being charged in most dispensaries.

Regardless of the outcome, she said WAMM will continue operating as a purely medical collective.

"I'm in this for the liberty. I'm in it for the social justice," Corral said. "I'm in it not only for the healing but for the profundity of the healing."

 

[localhero]

i guess i never thought of that, if cities dissallow the non med dispensaries, then the big super grows will have to use med dispensaries to dump their product. thats also an easy way to avoid being taxed, and stay competitive. kind of against the spirit of the prop - taxation. but you cant blame them really. unless cities see that tax shelter and tax med in retalliation.

does that mean these big grows will still have to be med? or will a non med grow be legally able to supply a med dispensary? i wonder.

it will be interesting to see how it all pans out.

 

[Guest 88950]

from the no votes ive seen here, their beef with 19 is this:


1- 19 is not a more liberal or in any way a better law than 215, and in fact is just a corporate grab.

2- they dont absolutely need 19, they can exist under 215 and wait for a better prop.

prop19 is for those NOT covered by prop215 so its liberal for the masses in Cali.

if your covered by prop215 then how liberal prop19 is/isnt is irrelevant.

since they dont NEED prop19 then WHY deny those who would benefit from this prop?

if your 2 points are correct in why some vote NO then they are worthless pos'.

 

[mSeTxOiNcEaRn]

How will prop 19 really affect the black market?

I was pondering the other day about how the big commercial growers might feel that big corps are going to put them out of business and if they really have something to worry about.

On one hand i dont know if the big companies will focus on producing high quality connoseur grade bud and if they will really be able to compete with the diverse market already in place.

On the other hand the cartel continues to sell a lot of crappy weed for dirt cheap!
"The Drug Enforcement Administration says that 60 percent of the Mexican (drug) cartels' profits come from marijuana. If we start with that, it's a big chunk,"

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/02/02/us.mexico.marijuana/index.html

Im wondering, who keeps buying this shitty weed??

The answer is broke ass people and hustlers tryng to make a dime.

So i asked myself this question; If MJ becomes legal to grow, will we (USA) ever be able to compete with these dirt cheap prices, will we ever be able to offer weed for less than 50$ an oz? Because if we can't then the only ones in the position to be able to compete with the black market are big tobbacco and other big companies, wich i am guessing is who they are planning to compete against primarily.

So my point is that perhaps the local ma & pa shops will be minimally affected by the bill, as far as competition goes, this bill will enable big companies and pharma to help take out big profits out of the hands of the black market. Im not saying that there will be absolutely no competition, or that they wont be tryng to compete, but from a big business perspective is makes a lot more sense that they would target the market of people who buy dirt cheap mass produced weed for under 50 an oz. How many of you sell oz for less than 50 bucks?

Any thoughts?

 

[localhero]

prop19 is for those NOT covered by prop215 so its liberal for the masses in Cali.

if your covered by prop215 then how liberal prop19 is/isnt is irrelevant.

since they dont NEED prop19 then WHY deny those who would benefit from this prop?

if your 2 points are correct in why some vote NO then they are worthless pos'.

well ill play devils advocate then,

215 is worded so that it would cover anyone who wanted to get it, so who isnt covered by 215? under 19, no one under 21 is covered. point of fact, one could argue 215 covers more people than 19.

 

[Guest 88950]

yes, filter these threads for SamtheSkunkman's post and you will get an idea of the cost to produce kilos.

*edit
LocalHero

show me devils advocate in responding to your generalization regarding why those dont like prop19.

nice sidestep and switch topic.

 

[TruthOrLie]

MAN.

People used to pass doobies down the line of people waiting to get into a movie.

Shit used to be close to free.

Now its all about dollar signs.

 

[localhero]

huh? sidestep? that was a response to your claim that anyone not supporting 19 for the reasons i stated is a pos.

the point you made was that no on 19 people are selfish to not want something that would cover more people, offer more freedoms. so i said i would devils advocate that statement by saying, 215 can cover anyone who wants it, even those under 21 years old - which is more than 19.

i dont see the sidestep or change up or whatever.

and honestly i dont see eye to eye with your quote of sam. growers arent the ones getting filthy rich off 215, its the dispensaries. im sure there are some rich growers, but come on, the real price gougers out there are the dispensaries who buy cheap outdoor at like 1500 to 2000 a p and then retail it at 55 an 8th. growers dont like 19 because it ELIMINATES them, not by outcompeting them, but by kicking them out of the game.

 

[Guest 88950]

no, my point was that THOSE who oppose 19 for the 2 reasons you listed are pos', not all who oppose fall into the pos catagory.

where in my short response did i communicate that the no on 19'ers are... "selfish to not want something that would cover more people, offer more freedoms"...*EDIT...YOU said what's in the quote not me.

you read my short post and some how got things that were not even said or insinuated.

if your covered by 215 then why do you care how liberal 19 is/isnt?

*EDIT
i dont need to add another post responding to your below post but WHY vote NO and try and get a more liberal prop passed when the un-intended consequence could be MOMENTUM for those opposed to Cannabis.

dont you think that passing prop19 and then improve it is the way to go.

dont answer me, just yourself.

 

[localhero]

no, my point was that THOSE who oppose 19 for the 2 reasons you listed are pos', not all who oppose fall into the pos catagory.

where in my short response did i communicate that the no on 19'ers are... "selfish to not want something that would cover more people, offer more freedoms"...

you read my short post and some how got things that were not even said or insinuated.

if your covered by 215 then why do you care how liberal 19 is/isnt?

yes and then i said -

well ill play devils advocate then,

215 is worded so that it would cover anyone who wanted to get it, so who isnt covered by 215? under 19, no one under 21 is covered. point of fact, one could argue 215 covers more people than 19.

are you trying to make me crazy? that was my response. that saying 19 covers more people isnt true.

poeple who are covered by 215, which could be everyone and anyone, may not like 19 because its not a solid legalization prop, shit man everyone here, myself included have laid out the many faults of 19. no one has ever claimed its the dogs balls. so maybe a no voter would rather wait for a better legalization prop? something that wasnt a corporate hand out? maybe something that didnt set such an ambiguous tax scheme? maybe something that completely decriminalized it? maybe something that created larger, more realistic floors for growing and possesing? maybe something that clearly defined what "space" meant? maybe something that didnt allow legislative amendments? maybe?

in reality, 19 is a corporate handout with very little teeth, and alot of room for shenanigans. its a clever move by corporate interests who have manufactured a misconception among the average folk that 19 is legalization. it tossed us a few verry small bones and put us all in a situation where we have to vote yes or it will be seen as a referendum on pot.

thats all it is. just another bogus prop.

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

How will prop 19 really affect the black market?

I was pondering the other day about how the big commercial growers might feel that big corps are going to put them out of business and if they really have something to worry about.

On one hand i dont know if the big companies will focus on producing high quality connoseur grade bud and if they will really be able to compete with the diverse market already in place.

On the other hand the cartel continues to sell a lot of crappy weed for dirt cheap!
"The Drug Enforcement Administration says that 60 percent of the Mexican (drug) cartels' profits come from marijuana. If we start with that, it's a big chunk,"

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/02/02/us.mexico.marijuana/index.html

Im wondering, who keeps buying this shitty weed??

The answer is broke ass people and hustlers tryng to make a dime.

So i asked myself this question; If MJ becomes legal to grow, will we (USA) ever be able to compete with these dirt cheap prices, will we ever be able to offer weed for less than 50$ an oz? Because if we can't then the only ones in the position to be able to compete with the black market are big tobbacco and other big companies, wich i am guessing is who they are planning to compete against primarily.

So my point is that perhaps the local ma & pa shops will be minimally affected by the bill, as far as competition goes, this bill will enable big companies and pharma to help take out big profits out of the hands of the black market. Im not saying that there will be absolutely no competition, or that they wont be tryng to compete, but from a big business perspective is makes a lot more sense that they would target the market of people who buy dirt cheap mass produced weed for under 50 an oz. How many of you sell oz for less than 50 bucks?

Any thoughts?

and you believe cartels make billions of dollars on weed that sells for 100-200 / lb ? You can't reallybe THAT naive...

Big biz / big tobacco won't fuck with mj. They make way too much to jeopordize federal charges.

 

[dagnabit]

how the hell did

"i dont want to pay an unemployable quack,mail the toilet paper he gives me to the state,perjure myself on their form,register my federal felony with the state,beg the state for permission and pay their EXTORTION for "protection" from LEO"

turn into
"i hate all med patients"

you prohibitionists are reaching.

we dont "hate on medical patients" we "hate on cowards who hide behind them and support continued prohibition."

from the no votes ive seen here, their beef with 19 is this:


1- 19 is not a more liberal or in any way a better law than 215, and in fact is just a corporate grab.

2- they dont absolutely need 19, they can exist under 215 and wait for a better prop.

3- Richard Lee is going to produce 1000 tons of the very best pot on the planet a day and i cant keep profits up against his gear

4- 19 will shut down 215 entirely and r.lee will transmute into a canna demi god and spread gmo killer walmart hemp pollen across every closet grow in the world.

but. has anyone ever thought of the the war against drugs (prohibition) like the war against the native americans.

are you fucking serious?!?!?


my people were offered death or the reservation. how does that choice compare to the choice between prohibition and 19?


please "white dread" dont cheapen my culture by this fallacious comparison.

legal possession,legal consumption,legal cultivation and a path to legal dealing but....

in reality, 19 is a corporate handout with very little teeth, and alot of room for shenanigans. its a clever move by corporate interests who have manufactured a misconception among the average folk that 19 is legalization.

so define legalization?

exactly, plus unfair "sin" tax.

bullshit.
it is a voluntary consumption tax.
no one HAS to pay the tax.

215 imposes unfair taxation by REQUIRING you to pay for protection (extortion) per annum and pay a worthless unemployable quack per annum.

this is an unfair tax but you dont seem unhappy about it?

 

[BigBudBill]

how the hell did

"i dont want to pay an unemployable quack,mail the toilet paper he gives me to the state,perjure myself on their form,register my federal felony with the state,beg the state for permission and pay their EXTORTION for "protection" from LEO"

turn into
"i hate all med patients"

you prohibitionists are reaching.

we dont "hate on medical patients" we "hate on cowards who hide behind them and support continued prohibition."






are you fucking serious?!?!?


my people were offered death or the reservation. how does that choice compare to the choice between prohibition and 19?


please "white dread" dont cheapen my culture by this fallacious comparison.

legal possession,legal consumption,legal cultivation and a path to legal dealing but....



so define legalization?




bullshit.
it is a voluntary consumption tax.
no one HAS to pay the tax.

215 imposes unfair taxation by REQUIRING you to pay for protection (extortion) per annum and pay a worthless unemployable quack per annum.

this is an unfair tax but you dont seem unhappy about it?

DAG:
Ok. 215 didn't require that. The doctors involved started requiring that to make the feds back off somewhat back in the early days of 215. I don't pay anything annually as far as 215 is concerned.

When you visited me I did not have mine "renewed" because, as I told you at the time, it is not required under 215:

(2008): The Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District held that the trial court improperly denied a medical marijuana defense to the defendant. The court held that the defendant's medical marijuana recommendation did not expire, even though the doctor who issued it required yearly evaluations. The court further held that patients are not bound by the quantities specified in SB 420, but may possess an amount of marijuana that is consistent with their personal medical use. Click here to view the ruling.


Yes, I had a CHP pull me(OCT 09ish) over and I had about a g out. He started to try to talk shit and I showed him an expired rec. He said"you are out of compliance" I said not according to the courts. He told me I should get it renewed to be in compliance and left it at that. I wasn't going to argue, just wanted him to realize he needed to brush up on law.


The ones perpetuating annual renewals are dispensaries and the quacks themselves. I do know many people that wont be getting renewed if 19 passes. It gives them what they need. Plus they have 215 for life as I see that case reads.

 

[dagnabit]

bill.

thats where you are..

a few pages back (for me i have my settings so this thread is 74 pgs long) i posted the AG guidelines for arrest (from waaaaay back) but if you look at the southern counties AAG guidelines for procedure they get nasty and arrest certain types (read minorities) and make them go through the affirmative defense bullshit.
personally i like MI marijuana law setup.

and some folks were hating on insomniacs wake and baking...
i am a diagnosed "delayed sleep" insomniac who wakes and bakes..for chronic pain

i just wanted to do that.

i realize with 214/420 you are 75% protected from arrest w/o a card if you are up north and white...99%? but can we not all agree if you want the fullest extent of protection you will get your card?

whereas with 19 to receive the fullest protection.....plant your seed.