B
blancorasta
haha... post 19 that might not be a bad idea, but what large op's are gonna sign up for guided tours? the feds would probably like that ride lol
peace
ICMAG Administration endorses The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010
- Thread starter JJScorpio
- Start date
- Status
haha... post 19 that might not be a bad idea, but what large op's are gonna sign up for guided tours? the feds would probably like that ride lol
peace
Would it not be absolutely marvelous if one day soon we could all not have to worry about some stormtrooper and his gang of officers knocking on... or knocking down our doors, frightening the children, shooting the dog and shipping us all off to some gulag....for what?
.....for a plant....that's what!.....silly isn't it?..
...Yes....very silly indeed.....and seriously frightening in reality to millions of cannabis users...
One day, hopefully within my lifetime we can see this dream become a reality...
Prop 19....as many have said is not the complete solution.....that can be worked on, in the years to come....but for now, in California it's the best chance they have (and in time we could all have).....of moving prohibition away from us.....and giving us all the potential chance of peace from the paranoia.......to grow and toke without the mantle of fear.....
.....for a plant....that's what!.....silly isn't it?..
...Yes....very silly indeed.....and seriously frightening in reality to millions of cannabis users...
One day, hopefully within my lifetime we can see this dream become a reality...
Prop 19....as many have said is not the complete solution.....that can be worked on, in the years to come....but for now, in California it's the best chance they have (and in time we could all have).....of moving prohibition away from us.....and giving us all the potential chance of peace from the paranoia.......to grow and toke without the mantle of fear.....
BigBudBill
Member
Hmm. I think I will start with a Vape Lounge and Dispensary Tour first, maybe touring some small low key "exhibition" ops with low plant numbers while we test the water with Prop 19 ventures. Think those establishments might like a busload of customers pulling up? I know the Denny's I cooked at sure as hell did.....
B
blancorasta
now thats not a bad idea really!
you need a double decker bus and vince vaughn to guid the tours lol
but for real when its legal in cali its not even gonna be a question where people are gonna want to go on their vacations. there will be a large flood of people that would have otherwise been going to other states. with everything cali has to offer then top it off with a lively CannaMarket, a literal pot paradise, who wouldn't come here instead? and i think the lose of tourism revenue alone would cause other states to consider rec cannabis aswell.
peace
Medical Cannabis Patients FAQ
Q: Does Proposition 19 change medical cannabis laws in California?
A: No, Proposition 19 will not change or affect current medical cannabis laws or protections offered to qualified patients. Patients will still be able to possess what is needed for medical use, and patients, caregivers and medical cannabis collectives and cooperatives will retain all existing rights under Proposition 215 and SB 420 (codified at California Health & Safety Code 11362.5; 11362.7 - 11362.9). Section 2.B of Proposition 19 expressly lists as one of the initiative’s purposes: “Provide easier, safer access for patients who need cannabis for medical purposes.” Section 2.B also expressly notes that existing medical cannabis statutes will remain the law after passage of Proposition 19. Finally, none of the provisions in Proposition 19 conflict with Proposition 215 or SB 420. As a result, even in the absence of the provisions in Section 2.B of Proposition 19, Proposition 19 could not possibly provide any legal basis for limiting existing medical cannabis law.
Q: If proposition 19 passes, would patients be limited to possessing one ounce or less of cannabis?
A: No, qualified patients will not be subject to the one-ounce quantity limitation for recreational cannabis in Proposition 19. As stated above, patients will retain all of their rights under Proposition 215 and SB 420, including the right to possess any amount of cannabis that is reasonably related to the patient’s current medical needs. Section 3 of Proposition 19 provides in part that “it is lawful and shall not be a public offense under California law for any person 21 years of age or older to” possess one ounce or less of cannabis. Nothing in this provision, or any other provision of Proposition 19, makes it unlawful for qualified patients (including qualified patients under the age of 21) to possess more than one ounce of cannabis.
Q: How will Proposition 19 affect patients who grow medical cannabis? Will patients be limited to cultivating cannabis in an area of not more than twenty-five square feet per private residence?
A: Proposition 19 will not affect patients who grow medical cannabis. Patient gardens will remain legal, and protections will remain unchanged for patients who choose to grow their own medicine. As with all of its provisions, the “twenty-five square feet” provision does not affect or limit the rights of qualified patients under Proposition 215 and SB 420.
Q: How will Proposition 19 affect collective and cooperative cultivation?
A: Proposition 19 will not affect the provision of California law that recognizes medical cannabis collectives and cooperatives (California Health & Safety Code § 11362.775). These collectives and cooperatives will remain lawful throughout the state, regardless of whether or not a locality chooses to control and tax the cultivation and distribution of cannabis for non-medical purposes.
While Proposition 19 does not affect existing medical cannabis law, it will allow for greater protection for collectives and cooperatives in storefront locations. City and county governments that choose to control and tax the cultivation and distribution of cannabis under Proposition 19 will now have the clearly established ability to regulate collective and/or commercial growing.
Q: If Proposition 19 passes, will non-medical patients have the same (or more) rights than patients?
A: No, qualified patients will continue to have all of the rights under Proposition 215 and SB 420 and will therefore have more rights than non-medical cannabis consumers. Adults 21 and over who are not qualified patients will be able to possess up to one ounce of cannabis outside of the home. Adults who are not qualified patients may only grow in a 5’x5’ area, and will have an affirmative defense to possess what they grow for personal use in that area. Patients, caregivers, and/or collectives will still be able to possess and cultivate the amount needed for their medical use and will retain all other rights under Proposition 215 and SB 420.
Q: Will Proposition 19 result in more taxes on medical cannabis?
A: No. Localities already have the ability to tax medical cannabis. In 2008, for example, Oakland voters passed such a tax. Because Proposition 19 will allow localities to control and tax the non-medical cultivation and distribution of cannabis, it is likely to lower the potential tax burden on medical cannabis patients and collectives.
Q: Will Proposition 19 make it more difficult to become a medical patient?
A: No, being a medical cannabis patient will still remain private between you and your doctor.
Q: Will Proposition 19 attract big business and cut out the little guys, and the cottage industry they have worked so hard to create?
A: No. Because cannabis will remain illegal under federal law, interstate corporations (such as tobacco corporations and others) will not be attracted to the cannabis industry. Local groups can work with local governments to help determine regulations and licensing for cultivation and sales. Proposition 19 is also significant in that it gives adults throughout the state the right to personal cultivation of cannabis.
Q: I have heard that, despite the information above and the plain language of the initiative, Proposition 19 will limit the rights of medical cannabis patients. Should I be concerned?
A: Anyone who claims that Proposition 19 will limit or overturn Proposition 215 or SB 420 in any way is either misinformed or misrepresenting the truth. As discussed above, Proposition 19 will not affect any of the legal rights granted to patients, caregivers, doctors, collectives/cooperatives, etc. under California’s existing medical cannabis laws. California’s current medical cannabis laws will remain intact and unchanged by Proposition 19. Nevertheless, a small group of people who benefit financially from the current illegal status of cannabis may be tempted to spread (or to believe) misinformation about Proposition 19 due to self-interest. Unfortunately, some value their personal wealth more than the lives of the over 60,000 Californians who are arrested each year for cannabis offenses and who would no longer be criminalized if Proposition 19 becomes law. The text of Proposition 19 could not be any clearer, however: Proposition 19 will not limit in any way the rights of patients, caregivers, doctors, or collectives/cooperatives.
Q: Does Proposition 19 change medical cannabis laws in California?
A: No, Proposition 19 will not change or affect current medical cannabis laws or protections offered to qualified patients. Patients will still be able to possess what is needed for medical use, and patients, caregivers and medical cannabis collectives and cooperatives will retain all existing rights under Proposition 215 and SB 420 (codified at California Health & Safety Code 11362.5; 11362.7 - 11362.9). Section 2.B of Proposition 19 expressly lists as one of the initiative’s purposes: “Provide easier, safer access for patients who need cannabis for medical purposes.” Section 2.B also expressly notes that existing medical cannabis statutes will remain the law after passage of Proposition 19. Finally, none of the provisions in Proposition 19 conflict with Proposition 215 or SB 420. As a result, even in the absence of the provisions in Section 2.B of Proposition 19, Proposition 19 could not possibly provide any legal basis for limiting existing medical cannabis law.
Q: If proposition 19 passes, would patients be limited to possessing one ounce or less of cannabis?
A: No, qualified patients will not be subject to the one-ounce quantity limitation for recreational cannabis in Proposition 19. As stated above, patients will retain all of their rights under Proposition 215 and SB 420, including the right to possess any amount of cannabis that is reasonably related to the patient’s current medical needs. Section 3 of Proposition 19 provides in part that “it is lawful and shall not be a public offense under California law for any person 21 years of age or older to” possess one ounce or less of cannabis. Nothing in this provision, or any other provision of Proposition 19, makes it unlawful for qualified patients (including qualified patients under the age of 21) to possess more than one ounce of cannabis.
Q: How will Proposition 19 affect patients who grow medical cannabis? Will patients be limited to cultivating cannabis in an area of not more than twenty-five square feet per private residence?
A: Proposition 19 will not affect patients who grow medical cannabis. Patient gardens will remain legal, and protections will remain unchanged for patients who choose to grow their own medicine. As with all of its provisions, the “twenty-five square feet” provision does not affect or limit the rights of qualified patients under Proposition 215 and SB 420.
Q: How will Proposition 19 affect collective and cooperative cultivation?
A: Proposition 19 will not affect the provision of California law that recognizes medical cannabis collectives and cooperatives (California Health & Safety Code § 11362.775). These collectives and cooperatives will remain lawful throughout the state, regardless of whether or not a locality chooses to control and tax the cultivation and distribution of cannabis for non-medical purposes.
While Proposition 19 does not affect existing medical cannabis law, it will allow for greater protection for collectives and cooperatives in storefront locations. City and county governments that choose to control and tax the cultivation and distribution of cannabis under Proposition 19 will now have the clearly established ability to regulate collective and/or commercial growing.
Q: If Proposition 19 passes, will non-medical patients have the same (or more) rights than patients?
A: No, qualified patients will continue to have all of the rights under Proposition 215 and SB 420 and will therefore have more rights than non-medical cannabis consumers. Adults 21 and over who are not qualified patients will be able to possess up to one ounce of cannabis outside of the home. Adults who are not qualified patients may only grow in a 5’x5’ area, and will have an affirmative defense to possess what they grow for personal use in that area. Patients, caregivers, and/or collectives will still be able to possess and cultivate the amount needed for their medical use and will retain all other rights under Proposition 215 and SB 420.
Q: Will Proposition 19 result in more taxes on medical cannabis?
A: No. Localities already have the ability to tax medical cannabis. In 2008, for example, Oakland voters passed such a tax. Because Proposition 19 will allow localities to control and tax the non-medical cultivation and distribution of cannabis, it is likely to lower the potential tax burden on medical cannabis patients and collectives.
Q: Will Proposition 19 make it more difficult to become a medical patient?
A: No, being a medical cannabis patient will still remain private between you and your doctor.
Q: Will Proposition 19 attract big business and cut out the little guys, and the cottage industry they have worked so hard to create?
A: No. Because cannabis will remain illegal under federal law, interstate corporations (such as tobacco corporations and others) will not be attracted to the cannabis industry. Local groups can work with local governments to help determine regulations and licensing for cultivation and sales. Proposition 19 is also significant in that it gives adults throughout the state the right to personal cultivation of cannabis.
Q: I have heard that, despite the information above and the plain language of the initiative, Proposition 19 will limit the rights of medical cannabis patients. Should I be concerned?
A: Anyone who claims that Proposition 19 will limit or overturn Proposition 215 or SB 420 in any way is either misinformed or misrepresenting the truth. As discussed above, Proposition 19 will not affect any of the legal rights granted to patients, caregivers, doctors, collectives/cooperatives, etc. under California’s existing medical cannabis laws. California’s current medical cannabis laws will remain intact and unchanged by Proposition 19. Nevertheless, a small group of people who benefit financially from the current illegal status of cannabis may be tempted to spread (or to believe) misinformation about Proposition 19 due to self-interest. Unfortunately, some value their personal wealth more than the lives of the over 60,000 Californians who are arrested each year for cannabis offenses and who would no longer be criminalized if Proposition 19 becomes law. The text of Proposition 19 could not be any clearer, however: Proposition 19 will not limit in any way the rights of patients, caregivers, doctors, or collectives/cooperatives.
Last edited:
J
JackTheGrower
Worker rights is the next big push.
No being fired solely because someone fails a pee test.
I am sad Prop 19 didn't make a clear rule on worker protections. Well that and it requires a property owner to be involved with cultivation on some level.
The War is not over even after Prop 19.
Show us where it says 19 "requires" landlords to be involved in cultivation!!
Nowhere does it say you need permission from your landlord to grow. Nowhere. All it says is that if your landlord doesn't want you to grow pot, then you MAY not be able to. But hey...you already know this...for some reason you keep on and on about it.
Also you are sad that they didn't protect workers enough? Sounds to me they did a pretty damn good job of protecting us. It leaves the burden of proof on the employer to prove impairment. No longer does a dirty piss test allow them to fire you. If they would of said, "All pot use is OK at work, forklift drivers can take bong hits between loading stuff, construction workers may smoke pot in designated smoking areas, it's cool if a brain surgeon rips a hit of BHO from a skillet before an operation." hummm Don't think the voters would go for that jack. how about this, "maybe if we say that the employee can smoke on personal time and that a test of metabolites doesn't prove current use or impairment, and that an employee would have to be intoxicated, then the voters may go for it." humm reasonable. Remember most voters do not smoke pot.
I just don't get why you harp so much on trivial BS. Yes it is trivial, compared to what we have to gain. I am surprised you don't get that. Sadly I fell you know that this prop is a forward step but you have something to loose if it passes. You say your on the fence...I'm not buying it.
I don't know what you are talking about here. The employer having to show "actual impairment" is huge. It takes care of exactly what you are saying here. This is what I was writing about last night. What are you talking about?
BigBudBill
Member
Jack..please, please please..stop lying. This is what is making you look like a TRUE BELIEVER. You take a truth and twist it and distort it ever so slightly thinking nobody will call you on it:
Cultivation on leased or rented property may be subject to approval from the owner of the property
Now.....How is MAY BE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL read as requires a property owner to be involved???????
Not as cleaver as changing the definition of decrim to fit your argument, but none the less, it makes you look like a Bush-Newt-Faldwell bullshitter and gives each argument less effect.
These twists of language by you are not going un-noticed. Please stop as it is the SAME as an all out lie.
binaryfission
Member
i have started to see Jack as the Glenn Beck of this thread. He is more than your average "wordsmith" lacking conscience; he seems to enjoy distorting the truth. They both play the martyr and savior cards with finesse, IMO.
sorry to go off topic a bit here but what about the Obama-Pelosi-Reid bullshitters who are currently feeding us so much bullshit most of us are choking on it?
i'll take Glenn Beck over that fuck Obama any day!
I'm glad we got Obama rather than the mavericks
Last edited:
BigBudBill
Member
Just another head of the same beast.....He isnt using their 'choke on bullshit' tactic though, he's using TRUE BELIEVER tactics. Not going to get into a GOP vs. Dem debate here, just pointing out that he is using tatics LEO and the likes use. I'm just wondering if he is going to start Anslinger-Hearst smears next!
StoneElemental
Member
Aside of the legal document to be voted on... with all manageable respect to you Jack, you yourself seem to be very confused on a number of things mostly legalisation and decriminalization. You I believe are the one who said only recently learned the difference between the two. Sorry but I think youre still misinformed. As for voting I'm not unamerican and pushy enough to tell you to be "obedient" and vote yes. I think you should vote yes however if you vote no I'll just be disappointed you're one out of millions. If there is another voter initiative or bill better than this one coming I would encourage you to vote yes on that one aswell even if 19 passes. Prop 19 could be done away with as our first step and the next could be even better. Our legal system included but more than that, this is how we get things done modernly. I won't insult nor demean you purposefully. However I think you along with a few other anti prop 19 folks have an extremist and very unrational view of how you think this should work. Remember the constitution wasn't written in one draft even so later it was amended.
-S.E.
-S.E.
binaryfission
Member
focusing solely on cannabis issues, solely cannabis related:
do you think Beck or anyone else would have done more for us in the first year? They are just words but we know that they have had impact on people the same way Bernanke's words can affect the market.
Beck, Palin, Angle, McCain, all have some states rights/libertarian themes they like to employ, but do you think they will alienate their religious base in order to make the Libertarians happy?
Like Bill said I'm not trying to open a can of worms on this thread, but i think this specific issue could be a classic "wedge" that is used to divide voting blocks.
I think Ron Paul could/would do more. But i don't think the country is ready for a strict libertarian president.
again not trying to divide the thread, not wanting to focus on anything but cannabis related issues. DO any of you really believe someone else would have done more for this site's constituency?
beck has called for taxation and regulation on his radio and television program.
obama laughs at the question as if it were a joke that america has more prisoners than any other nation.
so yes i think a "right winger" would have done better than to laugh at us like we are cute stupid children.
BigBudBill
Member
I know huh? At least with Bush he was upfront about being a True Believer. Obama is playing both sides of the fence in this game and it is going to cost him. Would almost have more respect for him if he were one of THEM.
i was ok with obama just another incompetent politician...
then his ineptitude ruined our home...
If you don't like politicians to play politics, start a grass-roots program that eliminates political advertisements and makes contributing to an election campaign illegal.
As long as big companies and special interests are helping to elect the candidates of their choice, you won't see anything but trivial changes no matter WHO you elect.
That's the state of our Corporatocracy.
- Status
