Senator Barbara Boxer Opposes Legalizing Marijuana in California
- Thread starter Skip
- Start date
fuck dude, for once i agree with the bitch..
this legalization initiative is flawed at best, at worst it opens the gates for "corporate cannabis". i'm sure those guys up in oakland would love to open a 1000KW warehouse grow or two, and just smash any competition from people like me and you.
but fuck cops though.. we should cut their funding regardless.
why tax and regulate a weed?
peace.
this legalization initiative is flawed at best, at worst it opens the gates for "corporate cannabis". i'm sure those guys up in oakland would love to open a 1000KW warehouse grow or two, and just smash any competition from people like me and you.
but fuck cops though.. we should cut their funding regardless.
why tax and regulate a weed?
peace.
you must really be dense?
you prefer innocent ppl to go to jail rather than have "corporations" growing weed?
first off there will be no large corp. growing in cali just because they legalize...
you have not read the bill have you?
its gonna create a huge underground market where people will take "legal" cali weed and move it to the other 49 states where MJ is still illegal and high priced. it already happens now but its gonna get crazy...i honestly dont see MJ being legalized theres too much grey area and no ability to regulate any of it which the government dont like..you're gonna have half the country driving to Cali to buy weed and send it back to their dry towns...its a cool idea but the government hates not being able to control everything...
hasn't the DEA and federal government already shown a disregard for california voters? enforcing federal law in contradiction to state law?
what we're all wanting and needing to happen is to have cannabis removed from the list of narcotics at the federal level. imho, we should drop the quest for medical marijuana and join together in having cannabis made legal for any use an individual chooses.
where i live, they sell cold beer at the checkout counter at gas stations. how can the feds look someone in the eyes and argue the dangers of marijuana? there are approximately 30,000 alcohol related deaths on american highways every year, yet they sell beer at gas stations.....legally.
as a libertarian, i do not have a problem with this, and would argue in defense of the beer sales. but how can the federal government justify their position on marijuana prohibition in face of the above facts? maybe they are more "concerned" about us in a paternal way than the highway victims? why would they want to protect us from marijuana use while allowing the thousands of alcohol deaths to occur every year? and when you consider that there has not been a single case of death as direct cause of marijuana use, it seems even more unreasonable. let's see...30,000 dead every year compared to 0 deaths ever from marijuana use. i'm sure there may be dangers in smoking anything for long periods of time...but wait! hey, tobacco has been a proven carsinogenic and killer, yet it is legal too. they must like us more than alcohol and tobacco users, right? they want to protect us more than these other groups?
oh yeah, the gateway theory: that being the belief that marijuana use will ultimately lead to the use and addiction of more dangerous drugs. the truth is that alcohol and tobacco are usually first introduced to children by their parents and family members, not some drug dealer in a black coat and hat on the corner. what parent hasn't let a kid take a puff on their cigar, cigarette, or pipe at some time or other; or allow the kids to have a sip of wine at the dinner table? what if alcohol and tobacco are the gateway drugs and parents are the ones responsible for their kid's first experience?
why do we have an entire federal enforcement agency in the united states where the first two words in their name are alcohol and tobacco? of course i'm speaking about the ATF...(alcohol, tobacco, and firearms). these are listed ahead of firearms. does that mean alcohol and tobacco are considered more dangerous than guns? or just as dangerous? or almost as dangerous?
ever notice how marijuana is always included in what was confiscated during a drug raid? they tend to use this fact to prove that marijuana should be associated with dangerous drugs. this is an error in logic and is used regardless to demonize marijuana. when marijuana becomes legal, as i'm sure it will, it will not be found in commercial amounts during drug raids. as it moves further and further away from the black market it will be found in smaller and smaller amounts in possession of drug dealers. take it away from the drug dealers by legalizing it. then people can acquire their marijuana without ever coming into contact with drug dealers, without being influenced by them.
good luck to us all......
what we're all wanting and needing to happen is to have cannabis removed from the list of narcotics at the federal level. imho, we should drop the quest for medical marijuana and join together in having cannabis made legal for any use an individual chooses.
where i live, they sell cold beer at the checkout counter at gas stations. how can the feds look someone in the eyes and argue the dangers of marijuana? there are approximately 30,000 alcohol related deaths on american highways every year, yet they sell beer at gas stations.....legally.
as a libertarian, i do not have a problem with this, and would argue in defense of the beer sales. but how can the federal government justify their position on marijuana prohibition in face of the above facts? maybe they are more "concerned" about us in a paternal way than the highway victims? why would they want to protect us from marijuana use while allowing the thousands of alcohol deaths to occur every year? and when you consider that there has not been a single case of death as direct cause of marijuana use, it seems even more unreasonable. let's see...30,000 dead every year compared to 0 deaths ever from marijuana use. i'm sure there may be dangers in smoking anything for long periods of time...but wait! hey, tobacco has been a proven carsinogenic and killer, yet it is legal too. they must like us more than alcohol and tobacco users, right? they want to protect us more than these other groups?
oh yeah, the gateway theory: that being the belief that marijuana use will ultimately lead to the use and addiction of more dangerous drugs. the truth is that alcohol and tobacco are usually first introduced to children by their parents and family members, not some drug dealer in a black coat and hat on the corner. what parent hasn't let a kid take a puff on their cigar, cigarette, or pipe at some time or other; or allow the kids to have a sip of wine at the dinner table? what if alcohol and tobacco are the gateway drugs and parents are the ones responsible for their kid's first experience?
why do we have an entire federal enforcement agency in the united states where the first two words in their name are alcohol and tobacco? of course i'm speaking about the ATF...(alcohol, tobacco, and firearms). these are listed ahead of firearms. does that mean alcohol and tobacco are considered more dangerous than guns? or just as dangerous? or almost as dangerous?
ever notice how marijuana is always included in what was confiscated during a drug raid? they tend to use this fact to prove that marijuana should be associated with dangerous drugs. this is an error in logic and is used regardless to demonize marijuana. when marijuana becomes legal, as i'm sure it will, it will not be found in commercial amounts during drug raids. as it moves further and further away from the black market it will be found in smaller and smaller amounts in possession of drug dealers. take it away from the drug dealers by legalizing it. then people can acquire their marijuana without ever coming into contact with drug dealers, without being influenced by them.
good luck to us all......
Yes but this flawed asshole bill makes it ILLEGAL to have a garden over 25sq'. We need to cut the funding to the pigs and fight the corporatist who think they are free to have warehouse and storm troopers kicking in our doors.
If I were in CA I'd vote NO because they are rigging the game for the bill's authors, but that being said if it passes the limits will fall to our fight soon enough.
Peace,
DevilsReject
Member
I do believe she needs a huge big fat joint in her mouth to shut her ass up and start sucking down some long fat joints and maybe that will relieve some of her built up stress and once she's relieved she will relax and change her decision.
Thiers always some assholes who rain on your parade!!!
Thiers always some assholes who rain on your parade!!!
fuck the god damn LEOs and all who support them or are with them....i really see them as enemys of the people...just thinkin about power trippin cops make my blood pressure rise..but theres almost nothing we can do....try to stand up against them and get labeled a domestic terrorist and the whole world comes falling down...try to take them to fight legally (votes) and they will always use scare tactics to convince the sheeple they need to be protected and saved from "pothead drivers"
fucking unbelievable...i drive high and if anything it makes me drive safer...but alcohol which causes deaths every 30 seconds is legal because they get paid! and pharmas which cause deaths every day is legal because the gov gets paid!! no one mentions driving on OOCs or half the other pharmas.
fuck them all...if they wanna keep it illegal fuck it! just grow grow grow and sell sell sell and dont give the fucking state one penny in taxes.....
fucking unbelievable...i drive high and if anything it makes me drive safer...but alcohol which causes deaths every 30 seconds is legal because they get paid! and pharmas which cause deaths every day is legal because the gov gets paid!! no one mentions driving on OOCs or half the other pharmas.
fuck them all...if they wanna keep it illegal fuck it! just grow grow grow and sell sell sell and dont give the fucking state one penny in taxes.....
Uncool calling someone dense, especially when you contradict the truth in that same post.
If you have read the bill then you would know that gardens over 25sq' are illegal. So who is it that really wants to keep people out of jail?
Peace,
this is really just plain funny/sad
very few mainstream politicians are ever going to have a good thing to say about MJ legalization
sad part is this pretty plainly the result of the same old LE/government bureaucratic lobby, this is their livelihood, never going to change
the funny part is she thinks this will help her in any way, she's irrelevant on this issue, there's way too much other stuff going on
i don't know if it will pass this time, but the momentum looks unstoppable
very few mainstream politicians are ever going to have a good thing to say about MJ legalization
sad part is this pretty plainly the result of the same old LE/government bureaucratic lobby, this is their livelihood, never going to change
the funny part is she thinks this will help her in any way, she's irrelevant on this issue, there's way too much other stuff going on
i don't know if it will pass this time, but the momentum looks unstoppable
Yes, this legalization bill has some really screwed up things in it. Yes, it could possibly result in MORE busts of grows that are over the 5'x5' limit. But what I can't understand is why there is a two-tiered system, allowing for huge commercial grows but only very small personal grows. That rule is there ONLY to protect big business like the Gang of Four in Oakland who dreamed this bill up.
Plus this bill does make a number of things illegal that might not be now.
However it IS legalization, which is progress down the right path. We knew that legalization would carry with it some new penalties, such as for smoking in or near a school for instance, an age requirement, etc.
I don't recall this bill setting any new penalties for breaking the rules it sets. So it would probably follow existing laws for possession and sale of cannabis if this new law is broken in some way.
It's too bad that the more liberal initiatives never got on the ballot because they were superior to this one.
But I will vote for it in lieu of those initiatives that didn't make it to the ballot.
Plus this bill does make a number of things illegal that might not be now.
However it IS legalization, which is progress down the right path. We knew that legalization would carry with it some new penalties, such as for smoking in or near a school for instance, an age requirement, etc.
I don't recall this bill setting any new penalties for breaking the rules it sets. So it would probably follow existing laws for possession and sale of cannabis if this new law is broken in some way.
It's too bad that the more liberal initiatives never got on the ballot because they were superior to this one.
But I will vote for it in lieu of those initiatives that didn't make it to the ballot.
You need to gang up with your Bay Area Senator. He was on the right track.
Good luck Cali!
Uncool calling someone dense, especially when you contradict the truth in that same post.
If you have read the bill then you would know that gardens over 25sq' are illegal. So who is it that really wants to keep people out of jail?
Peace,
i have read the bill..
and if you take the time to cross reference the other legislation it mentions you will realize that it in fact does NOT effect medical gardens!
it applies to "recreational" possession and cultivation not medicinal..
when reading legislation you must take the extra time to read the referenced existing bills and check to see if it strikes or adds to those bills...
if it does not specifically say that it nullifies or changes existing law than it does not.
stop knee jerking
as for calling someone dense...
if you prefer prohibition to legalization.....dense is stating your mental state nicely!
FUCKING DIPSHIT RETARDED or GODDAMN EVIL PIECE OF HUMAN WASTE
would be more accurate
i really dont get all this fear mongering, what kinda little mayberry towns do you guys live in? legal/illegal the show will go on just as always. the only thing making it legal will do is take the money out of the hands of the gangs and cartels. and if its legal who the fuck cares what some corporation does, you can grow it too, you know just like how you all are fucking doing right now. dont wanna buy marlboro greens, then fucking grow your own just like you've done the whole time it was illegal. now when it will be legal you wont have to be paranoid all the fucking time and worrying about ending up in a showershanking dont drop the goddamn soap assraping prison for it.
and 25 sq ft is too little space? for outdoors? indoors? do you have a tape measure? can you go measure out 25 sqft and tell me how thats worse than the current 0 sqft allowed by federal law?
you guys are letting the little shit blind you. no laws are set in stone as the supreme court has been slowly proving since around sept 12th 2001. its 25sqft now, but in a few years when crime goes down and the whole world doesnt turn into a smoldering fire pit and jesus and his 4 horsemen havent descended we can change the laws and make it legal decriminalized, whatever.
***im not singling you out pro215*** im speaking in generalities in regards to what you said that has been shared sentiment among others in this thread.
also am i crazy?
25 feet, SQUARED is 25 x 25 feet no? not 5x5 which would be 5 foot squared. lemme consult a math book.
maybe i am crazy. according to the internet 1ftx1ft = 1 square foot, but if i take 25 of these and arrange them into a square its 625 square feet? lol how does that work?
If they kick my door in and measure my garden, how is that legalization?
Tomatoes are legal in CA so are strawberries, not 25sq' of tomatoes.
This is just a fucking power grab by corporatist. You are quite upset and if you want to imprison someone for having 26sq', who is the evil one?
Hmmmm, my garden is 250sq' under a hundred plants and I live in a state where possession is a misdemeanor and there is NO, ZERO, ZILCH, NADA laws about cultivation. Just as there are no laws prohibiting tomato growing in my state.
So why would you vote to make a criminal out of a farmer? Is it because that is the right and moral thing to do? It must be because you are smart enough to know who is human waste.
I personally would not vote for an immoral law that would make felons of my neighbors for growing weed if that is what they chose. I am only a small soldier in this fight with 250sq'
If you prefer version B of slavery over version A then you are still approving slavery. I am free and I think freely, I will continue to grow freely, and I will learn on ICmag (even if not from your posts).
Peace,
that sums it up very well.
Barbara is just in for the money, obviously.
people should file criminal charges against her for wanting to continue the black market that results from this idiotic prohibition.
I know it sounds odd but when you examine it more closely:
25 1ftx1ft squares arranged in a square would equal 25 feet squared. 625 sq ft. is 625 1ftx 1ft squares or a larger square measuring 25ft x 25ft which is comprised of 625 of the 1ft x 1ft squares.
If you are looking to find the measurements for a 25 sq. ft. space you would find the square root of 25, which is 5.
I think this is right anyways, you got me thinking lol.
What state is it that has no anti-cultivation laws?
