|
LucidLife FRO us
Cultivating Consciousness


Registered: 03/08/07
Posts: 187
Loc: Nexus
|
vote no on prop 19
#13285087 - 10/03/10 04:24 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Are you in Cali?
DO you want weed safe from corporate scum?
then vote no, read the bill and read between the lines...
I am surprised I havent seen one thing about this yet.
|
gkipz



Registered: 02/22/09
Posts: 238
Loc: Queens New york
Last seen: 2 years, 4 months
|
|
Get ready for the massive down rating lmao
....man who cares about that u can grow and not get arrested
|
fear.loathingSF
one toke over the line



Registered: 10/21/07
Posts: 1,014
Loc: San Francisco
Last seen: 10 years, 11 months
|
|
I can't find an the entire bill, only bullet points. What doesn't make sense is that they allow you to grow up to 25 sq ft., but it only allows possession of one ounce. WTF are you suposed to do with the rest of your harvest? I also can't find any info on how this bill treats concentrates.
|
dokunai
Cactus, Cannabis, Cubensis

Registered: 01/31/10
Posts: 1,878
Loc: Hyphal Heights, USA
Last seen: 7 years, 13 days
|
|
Vote yes on prop 19 because, while it is not the perfect law by any means, it gets things moving in the right direction. Baby steps. This shit has been illegal since 1937 after all.
|
Seanfu
Jesus Christ Tacos


Registered: 11/26/09
Posts: 2,131
Loc: Brazil
Last seen: 10 years, 11 months
|
Re: vote no on prop 19 [Re: dokunai]
#13285258 - 10/03/10 05:04 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
dokunai said: Vote yes on prop 19 because, while it is not the perfect law by any means, it gets things moving in the right direction. Baby steps. This shit has been illegal since 1937 after all.
Win.
-------------------- I am a chronic liar.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
|
This thread was moved from Political Discussion.
Reason: .
|
gkipz



Registered: 02/22/09
Posts: 238
Loc: Queens New york
Last seen: 2 years, 4 months
|
Re: vote no on prop 19 (moved) [Re: Prisoner#1]
#13285371 - 10/03/10 05:33 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
.
|
gkipz



Registered: 02/22/09
Posts: 238
Loc: Queens New york
Last seen: 2 years, 4 months
|
Re: vote no on prop 19 (moved) [Re: gkipz]
#13285402 - 10/03/10 05:39 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
....
|
LucidLife FRO us
Cultivating Consciousness


Registered: 03/08/07
Posts: 187
Loc: Nexus
|
Re: vote no on prop 19 (moved) [Re: gkipz]
#13285761 - 10/03/10 07:03 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Taxing marijuana is what got us into this mess in 1937..
|
LucidLife FRO us
Cultivating Consciousness


Registered: 03/08/07
Posts: 187
Loc: Nexus
|
|
Taxing marijuana is what got us into this mess in 1937..Quote:
fear.loathingSF said: I can't find an the entire bill, only bullet points. What doesn't make sense is that they allow you to grow up to 25 sq ft., but it only allows possession of one ounce. WTF are you suposed to do with the rest of your harvest? I also can't find any info on how this bill treats concentrates.
http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Text_of_Proposition_19,_the_%22Regulate,_Control_and_Tax_Cannabis_Act_of_2010%22_(California)
Whatever you harvest at home in your 25 sq ft garden, you can keep at home. Not just one ounce, the whole harvest. No time limit. If you harvest a pound every three months and have a stash of twelve pounds after four years, and you’re not selling, that pot is all yours and perfectly legit.
(b) “Personal consumption” shall include but is not limited to possession and consumption, in any form, of cannabis in a residence or other non-public place, and shall include licensed premises open to the public authorized to permit on-premises consumption of cannabis by a local government pursuant to section 11301.
“In any form” = hash, edibles, tinctures.
Also ... (a) only the active amount of the cannabis in an edible cannabis product shall be included;
|
fear.loathingSF
one toke over the line



Registered: 10/21/07
Posts: 1,014
Loc: San Francisco
Last seen: 10 years, 11 months
|
|
Thanks for the info tripps4
|
Green_T


Registered: 10/02/08
Posts: 4,042
Loc: UK
|
|
I have these in my sig:
How to debate a marijuana user opposed to prop 19
Prop 19 - a word for word analysis
This bill is not perfect, but if it doesn't pass a better one won't pass for a long, long time.
The reason this bill isn't perfect is because it barely has a chance of passing even with compromises. If this bill sets the age at 21, would moderates be willing to vote yes on a bill which sets the age at 18? How about if the tax incentives were lowered, or if more plants were allowed?
This bill may not make EVERYTHING legal, but at the same time it will provide a LOT of people with leeway in respect to the law.
--------------------
"I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man" - Thomas Jefferson Legalize Meth | Drug War Victims
Edited by Green_T (10/05/10 09:46 AM)
|
Remix
grammer natze


Registered: 08/05/10
Posts: 4,171
Last seen: 1 year, 5 months
|
|
Quote:
tripps4 said: Are you in Cali?
DO you want weed safe from corporate scum?
then vote no, read the bill and read between the lines...
I am surprised I havent seen one thing about this yet.
Keeping marijuana illegal just puts a different sort of scum in charge of it - IE - the drug lords. At least the "corporate scum" have to operate within some bounds of law.
Also, the current medical system that's in place still allows people to continue being arrested on the federal level for something that shouldn't even be a crime. Prop 19 is a foot in the door to ending the failure that is prohibition. If Cali passes a law on this level and shows benefits, then other states will follow and pressure the feds to changing the laws. Sorry but all this "corporations will ruin marijuana" stuff totally misses the point that marijuana becoming legal is better than it remaining illegal, period.
And, here, even in playing the devil's advocate and agreeing with the notion that "corporations ruin things", what bearing should this have on legalizing marijuana? They'll continue "ruining things" regardless of weather or not I'm eligible to be arrested for smoking a plant - Prop 19 gives no special privilege to corporations, I've read it a number of times.
"Corporations fucking things up" is a separate issue that is much more complex and totally separate than what to do about marijuana's legal standing. Go somewhere and campaign against corporations if you're so inclined, but don't try and pass it off as sound logic that their shittyness (the corporations') is reason to allow more shittyness (marijuana being illegal) to continue taking place.
--------------------
|
TNK
Pleasures of Africa



Registered: 01/30/10
Posts: 14,237
Loc: I AM THUNDERBOT
Last seen: 1 month, 17 days
|
Re: vote no on prop 19 [Re: Remix]
#13298696 - 10/06/10 01:17 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Remix said:
Quote:
tripps4 said: Are you in Cali?
DO you want weed safe from corporate scum?
then vote no, read the bill and read between the lines...
I am surprised I havent seen one thing about this yet.
Keeping marijuana illegal just puts a different sort of scum in charge of it - IE - the drug lords. At least the "corporate scum" have to operate within some bounds of law.
Also, the current medical system that's in place still allows people to continue being arrested on the federal level for something that shouldn't even be a crime. Prop 19 is a foot in the door to ending the failure that is prohibition. If Cali passes a law on this level and shows benefits, then other states will follow and pressure the feds to changing the laws. Sorry but all this "corporations will ruin marijuana" stuff totally misses the point that marijuana becoming legal is better than it remaining illegal, period.
And, here, even in playing the devil's advocate and agreeing with the notion that "corporations ruin things", what bearing should this have on legalizing marijuana? They'll continue "ruining things" regardless of weather or not I'm eligible to be arrested for smoking a plant - Prop 19 gives no special privilege to corporations, I've read it a number of times.
"Corporations fucking things up" is a separate issue that is much more complex and totally separate than what to do about marijuana's legal standing. Go somewhere and campaign against corporations if you're so inclined, but don't try and pass it off as sound logic that their shittyness (the corporations') is reason to allow more shittyness (marijuana being illegal) to continue taking place.
He just about summed it up right there. Yes for Prop-19
-------------------- Edited by TNK (02/22/22 22:22 PM)
|
geokills
∙∙∙∙☼ º¿° ☼∙∙∙∙


Registered: 05/08/01
Posts: 23,417
Loc: city of angels
Last seen: 2 hours, 8 minutes
|
|
The following article shares my thoughts on this matter:
Quote:
If People Oppose Prop 19, Are They Prohibitionists? by Rob Kampia October 4, 2010
The Marijuana Policy Project has largely sat out the campaign to end marijuana prohibition in California this election cycle, but the recent escalation of infighting among allies who claim to support marijuana legalization has inspired me to speak out, and firmly.
The best way to explain is to tell a true story about something that happened just across the border, in Nevada, in 2006.
MPP was in the midst of campaigning for our ballot initiative to tax and regulate marijuana like alcohol in Nevada. (Only six statewide initiatives to end marijuana prohibition have ever been voted on — one in California in 1972, one in Oregon in 1986, two in Alaska in 2000 and 2004, and two in Nevada in 2002 and 2006. The highest voter-getters were the 2004 Alaska initiative and the 2006 Nevada initiative; each received 44% of the vote.)
Surprisingly, one of the leading libertarians in Nevada — someone who had real access to mainstream media outlets — told me he was going to oppose our initiative. The reason? As a libertarian, he didn’t like taxes, and he didn’t like regulations.
I explained to him that it’s one thing to be disappointed with the exact wording of the initiative, but it’s another thing to actually oppose the initiative. He didn’t budge.
I then pointed out that if he opposed the initiative, he would also have to endorse making alcohol illegal. “How interesting,” he said, wondering what I meant.
I expounded that — by campaigning and voting against the marijuana initiative — he would be choosing to keep marijuana illegal instead of taxing and regulating it. So, if prohibition is somehow preferable to taxes and regulations, he should prefer alcohol prohibition over alcohol being taxed and sold in bars and restaurants.
I never heard from him again, even to this day. But, to his credit, he ended up not campaigning against the initiative, I think because he’s well known to be intellectually honest and consistent.
The same dilemma now faces anti-prohibitionists in California, except, unfortunately, some anti-prohibitionists are choosing to advocate for prohibition, because Prop. 19 isn’t “perfect enough,” they imply.
One need not be a lawyer to find something not to like about Prop. 19, if one looks hard enough. The initiative gives local governments the option to prohibit or legalize the sale of marijuana; perhaps you prefer not to give local governments any option at all? The initiative allows all adults to possess up to one ounce of marijuana; perhaps you prefer a pound or more? The initiative allows all adults to grow 25 square feet of marijuana; perhaps you prefer not allowing grow-your-own at all?
These kinds of debates are legitimate and — to be sure — it’s literally impossible to reach a consensus on any of these points before or even after a statewide initiative is drafted and qualified for the ballot. So the issue isn’t whether a consensus can be reached.
Rather, the issue is whether anti-prohibitionists really want their souls to be burdened with voting to prohibit marijuana — which is what they’d be doing by voting against Prop. 19 on November 2.
Have you ever heard a marijuana user say the following? “I don’t want marijuana to become legal, because it would take the fun out of it. It would make it less glamorous.”
I respond to such pea-brained declarations of adolescent rebellion by saying, “Oh, because you want to have more fun, you therefore want the government to continue arresting more than 800,000 people every year for what you, yourself, are doing? And you want to spend my tax money — and yours — to accomplish this?”
How selfish.
Of course, to be fair, people who say they like the glamour of being an outlaw don’t really want more than 800,000 of their brethren to be arrested every year for marijuana. It’s just that the glamour-seekers are losing sight of what’s really important: They’re choosing a public policy that resonates with them (keeping marijuana allegedly “cool” because it’s illegal), while inadvertently overlooking the horrible byproduct of that choice (arresting the equivalent of every man, woman, and child in the state of Montana every year, forever).
So, to bring it back to California, it’s important that opponents of Prop. 19 at least be intellectually honest: By opposing the initiative for whatever reasons one has, the tradeoff is that more than 60,000 people will continue to be cited for marijuana offenses every year in California. That’s not something that I’d want to have on my conscience.
Going back to the top of this column: Many people who remember the 1972 initiative in California, which lost with 34% of the vote, muse nostalgically about how great it would have been if that initiative had passed … how it would have changed the whole course of events, especially in the midst of President Nixon’s administration. But have you read that initiative? It was inferior to this year’s initiative in California.
And you know what? Coincidentally, they’re both labeled “Prop. 19.” The first Prop. 19 failed 38 years ago; do we really want to lose again, in just a few weeks?
It BLOWS MY MIND that everyday people who enjoy mind altering substances would vote against Proposition 19. It may not be great for the producers, but it's a BOON for the consumers, giving them legal safety and the freedom to grow their own!
--------------------
-------------------- ┼ ··∙ long live the shroomery ∙·· ┼ ...╬π╥ ╥π╬...
|
Urb
Last Man Standing



Registered: 03/20/03
Posts: 42,693
Loc: WhoDat Nation
|
Re: vote no on prop 19 [Re: geokills] 1
#13303433 - 10/07/10 11:23 AM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
It will still be illegal at the federal level . How can a corporation take it over. The DEA would have a field day with them.
-------------------- Texas Honey Badger said: I went to boys town in Nuevo Laredo when I was in my early ‘30s There was a bunch of trannys even way back then I paid probably $20 but I was so drunk I couldn’t get a hard on -Whenever you hear 5 blasts from the emergency horn that’s the signal for a 30 minute buttfucking break- Fiery said: I wish I was a young sexy woman so I could have awesome sexy adventures all the time[/quote] split_by_nine said: i did the man bun.[/quote] 1234go said: I don't have a dog. I can't stand em...They're needy animals for needy people.
Edited by Urb (10/07/10 11:31 AM)
|
Seanfu
Jesus Christ Tacos


Registered: 11/26/09
Posts: 2,131
Loc: Brazil
Last seen: 10 years, 11 months
|
Re: vote no on prop 19 [Re: Urb]
#13304964 - 10/07/10 05:04 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Urb said: It will still be illegal at the federal level . How can a corporation take it over. The DEA would have a field day with them.
Who cares about any of it if growing is legalfor personal consumption and as long as consumption is legal.
-------------------- I am a chronic liar.
|
LisonAlGaib


Registered: 05/15/10
Posts: 1,654
|
Re: vote no on prop 19 [Re: Urb]
#13310630 - 10/08/10 09:11 PM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I'm voting yes. Dealers and growers tell me to vote no, but fuck them. 25 sq. ft!!!!!! Do you know how much dank I can grow in that?!?!?!?
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
|
Quote:
LisonAlGaib said: I'm voting yes. Dealers and growers tell me to vote no, but fuck them. 25 sq. ft!!!!!! Do you know how much dank I can grow in that?!?!?!?
The current dealers and growers want to maintain the status quo because it stifles competition. For the most part they are inept losers who would never survive in a free market and they know it.
--------------------
|
LisonAlGaib


Registered: 05/15/10
Posts: 1,654
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: The current dealers and growers want to maintain the status quo because it stifles competition. For the most part they are inept losers who would never survive in a free market and they know it.
No shit. They're always telling me that the prices will go up. Like I honestly believe that opening the market will raise prices. Besides, if I'm growing my own, why am I buying it? I think in the end that's what everybody in opposition is afraid of. Now they're going to have to find real jobs.
|
Remix
grammer natze


Registered: 08/05/10
Posts: 4,171
Last seen: 1 year, 5 months
|
|
Quote:
LisonAlGaib said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said: The current dealers and growers want to maintain the status quo because it stifles competition. For the most part they are inept losers who would never survive in a free market and they know it.
No shit. They're always telling me that the prices will go up. Like I honestly believe that opening the market will raise prices. Besides, if I'm growing my own, why am I buying it? I think in the end that's what everybody in opposition is afraid of. Now they're going to have to find real jobs.
Not to mention, I'm sure just about anybody in jail for possession would gladly swap their circumstance for more expensive marijuana.
--------------------
|
Urb
Last Man Standing



Registered: 03/20/03
Posts: 42,693
Loc: WhoDat Nation
|
Re: vote no on prop 19 [Re: Remix]
#13319737 - 10/11/10 08:24 AM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
The demand for Mj will not rise significantly , due to legalization. The supply on the other hand will go through the roof , thus leading to a ~drop~ in price.
-------------------- Texas Honey Badger said: I went to boys town in Nuevo Laredo when I was in my early ‘30s There was a bunch of trannys even way back then I paid probably $20 but I was so drunk I couldn’t get a hard on -Whenever you hear 5 blasts from the emergency horn that’s the signal for a 30 minute buttfucking break- Fiery said: I wish I was a young sexy woman so I could have awesome sexy adventures all the time[/quote] split_by_nine said: i did the man bun.[/quote] 1234go said: I don't have a dog. I can't stand em...They're needy animals for needy people.
|
muddypotter
duke o fearl



Registered: 09/07/08
Posts: 786
Loc: shit land
Last seen: 5 years, 6 months
|
Re: vote no on prop 19 [Re: Seanfu]
#13319772 - 10/11/10 08:36 AM (13 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seanfu said:
Quote:
dokunai said: Vote yes on prop 19 because, while it is not the perfect law by any means, it gets things moving in the right direction. Baby steps. This shit has been illegal since 1937 after all.
Win.
If you guys in cali vote no>>>> Then fuck you for not helping the rest of the us who doesnt even have med mj legal. Dont be a dickhead worried about losing your income. Get a job . The one who need this med and have no legal access need you guys help . I feel once it is legal in cali it will spread east quicker. Please vote yes pn prop 19....please end the war and the prohibition era in the U.S
|
LisonAlGaib


Registered: 05/15/10
Posts: 1,654
|
|
Quote:
muddypotter said: If you guys in cali vote no>>>> Then fuck you for not helping the rest of the us who doesnt even have med mj legal. Dont be a dickhead worried about losing your income. Get a job . The one who need this med and have no legal access need you guys help . I feel once it is legal in cali it will spread east quicker. Please vote yes pn prop 19....please end the war and the prohibition era in the U.S
Using this logic, considering how long CA has had a medical initiative, then the rest of the country should have one already. We weren't even the first to have one. Sure Prop. 19 sets a precedent for other states, but that means nothing to you unless YOU do something about in your own home. Do you know how Prop. 215, and now Prop. 19, showed up on the ballot? People started one of the biggest petition drives ever seen in CA (and we've seen a lot!). In other words, people worked for it. We didn't sit there watching the news, waiting for others. We worked for it. Now its your turn. Shut the fuck up, and put in some work.
|
muddypotter
duke o fearl



Registered: 09/07/08
Posts: 786
Loc: shit land
Last seen: 5 years, 6 months
|
|
Quote:
LisonAlGaib said:
Quote:
muddypotter said: If you guys in cali vote no>>>> Then fuck you for not helping the rest of the us who doesnt even have med mj legal. Dont be a dickhead worried about losing your income. Get a job . The one who need this med and have no legal access need you guys help . I feel once it is legal in cali it will spread east quicker. Please vote yes pn prop 19....please end the war and the prohibition era in the U.S
Using this logic, considering how long CA has had a medical initiative, then the rest of the country should have one already. We weren't even the first to have one. Sure Prop. 19 sets a precedent for other states, but that means nothing to you unless YOU do something about in your own home. Do you know how Prop. 215, and now Prop. 19, showed up on the ballot? People started one of the biggest petition drives ever seen in CA (and we've seen a lot!). In other words, people worked for it. We didn't sit there watching the news, waiting for others. We worked for it. Now its your turn. Shut the fuck up, and put in some work.
Quote:
LisonAlGaib said:
Quote:
muddypotter said: If you guys in cali vote no>>>> Then fuck you for not helping the rest of the us who doesnt even have med mj legal. Dont be a dickhead worried about losing your income. Get a job . The one who need this med and have no legal access need you guys help . I feel once it is legal in cali it will spread east quicker. Please vote yes pn prop 19....please end the war and the prohibition era in the U.S
Using this logic, considering how long CA has had a medical initiative, then the rest of the country should have one already. We weren't even the first to have one. Sure Prop. 19 sets a precedent for other states, but that means nothing to you unless YOU do something about in your own home. Do you know how Prop. 215, and now Prop. 19, showed up on the ballot? People started one of the biggest petition drives ever seen in CA (and we've seen a lot!). In other words, people worked for it. We didn't sit there watching the news, waiting for others. We worked for it. Now its your turn. Shut the fuck up, and put in some work.
As i said we are working very hard for it . www.nccpn.org is teh main group in nc and they are working t heir asses off as am i .. I understand if you sit in the shadows youll never be in the light..So thanks for your kind words
|
|