Legalization May Not Be What You Think....

more than half of all their arrests are for marijuana.. about 80% of their budget is for anti-pot.. stop the war on marijuana and their ranks will fall in number..
not so many people use hard drugs.. 15,000,000 americans use pot regularly - there are maybe half as many users of all other drugs combined..

Hey all you CA residents, how many of you voting YES actually read AB2254?

AB2254 is not what CA is excited about - it was left in the shadow of http://www.taxcannabis2010.org/

The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010

Title and Summary:
Changes California Law to Legalize Marijuana and Allow It to Be Regulated and Taxed. Initiative Statute.
Allows people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use. Permits local governments to regulate and tax commercial production and sale of marijuana to people 21 years old or older. Prohibits people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using it in public, smoking it while minors are present, or providing it to anyone under 21 years old. Maintains current prohibitions against driving while impaired. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Savings of up to several tens of millions of dollars annually to state and local governments on the costs of incarcerating and supervising certain marijuana offenders. Unknown but potentially major tax, fee, and benefit assessment revenues to state and local government related to the production and sale of marijuana products.
Section 1: Name
This Act shall be known as the “Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010.”
Section 2: Findings, Intent and Purposes
This Act, adopted by the People of the State of California, makes the following Findings and Statement of Intent and Purpose:
A. Findings
1. California’s laws criminalizing cannabis (marijuana) have failed and need to be reformed. Despite spending decades arresting millions of non-violent cannabis consumers, we have failed to control cannabis or reduce its availability.
2. According to surveys, roughly 100 million Americans (around 1/3 of the country’s population) acknowledge that they have used cannabis, 15 million of those Americans having consumed cannabis in the last month. Cannabis consumption is simply a fact of life for a large percentage of Americans.
3. Despite having some of the strictest cannabis laws in the world, the United States has the largest number of cannabis consumers. The percentage of our citizens who consume cannabis is double that of the percentage of people who consume cannabis in the Netherlands, a country where the selling and adult possession of cannabis is allowed.
4. According to The National Research Council’s recent study of the 11 U.S. states where cannabis is currently decriminalized, there is little apparent relationship between severity of sanctions and the rate of consumption.
5. Cannabis has fewer harmful effects than either alcohol or cigarettes, which are both legal for adult consumption. Cannabis is not physically addictive, does not have long term toxic effects on the body, and does not cause its consumers to become violent.
6. There is an estimated $15 billion in illegal cannabis transactions in California each year. Taxing and regulating cannabis, like we do with alcohol and cigarettes, will generate billions of dollars in annual revenues for California to fund what matters most to Californians: jobs, health care, schools and libraries, roads, and more.
7. California wastes millions of dollars a year targeting, arresting, trying, convicting, and imprisoning non-violent citizens for cannabis related offenses. This money would be better used to combat violent crimes and gangs.
8. The illegality of cannabis enables for the continuation of an out-of-control criminal market, which in turn spawns other illegal and often violent activities. Establishing legal, regulated sales outlets would put dangerous street dealers out of business.
B. Purposes
1. Reform California’s cannabis laws in a way that will benefit our state.
2. Regulate cannabis like we do alcohol: Allow adults to possess and consume small amounts of cannabis.
3. Implement a legal regulatory framework to give California more control over the cultivation, processing, transportation, distribution, and sales of cannabis.
4. Implement a legal regulatory framework to better police and prevent access to and consumption of cannabis by minors in California.
5. Put dangerous, underground street dealers out of business, so their influence in our communities will fade.
6. Provide easier, safer access for patients who need cannabis for medical purposes.
7. Ensure that if a city decides not to tax and regulate the sale of cannabis, that buying and selling cannabis within that city’s limits remain illegal, but that the city’s citizens still have the right to possess and consume small amounts, except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.
8. Ensure that if a city decides it does want to tax and regulate the buying and selling of cannabis (to and from adults only), that a strictly controlled legal system is implemented to oversee and regulate cultivation, distribution, and sales, and that the city will have control over how and how much cannabis can be bought and sold, except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.
9. Tax and regulate cannabis to generate billions of dollars for our state and local governments to fund what matters most: jobs, healthcare, schools and libraries, parks, roads, transportation, and more.
10. Stop arresting thousands of non-violent cannabis consumers, freeing up police resources and saving millions of dollars each year, which could be used for apprehending truly dangerous criminals and keeping them locked up, and for other essential state needs that lack funding.
11. Allow the Legislature to adopt a statewide regulatory system for a commercial cannabis industry.
12. Make cannabis available for scientific, medical, industrial, and research purposes.
13. Permit California to fulfill the state’s obligations under the United States Constitution to enact laws concerning health, morals, public welfare and safety within the State.
14. Permit the cultivation of small amounts of cannabis for personal consumption.
C. Intent
1. This Act is intended to limit the application and enforcement of state and local laws relating to possession, transportation, cultivation, consumption and sale of cannabis, including but not limited to the following, whether now existing or adopted in the future: Health and Safety Code sections 11014.5 and 11364.5 [relating to drug paraphernalia]; 11054 [relating to cannabis or tetrahydrocannabinols]; 11357 [relating to possession]; 11358 [relating to cultivation]; 11359 [possession for sale]; 11360 [relating to transportation and sales]; 11366 [relating to maintenance of places]; 11366.5 [relating to use of property]; 11370 [relating to punishment]; 11470 [relating to forfeiture]; 11479 [relating to seizure and destruction]; 11703 [relating to definitions regarding illegal substances]; 11705 [actions for use of illegal controlled substance]; Vehicle Code sections 23222 and 40000.15 [relating to possession].
2. This Act is not intended to affect the application or enforcement of the following state laws relating to public health and safety or protection of children and others: Health and Safety Code sections 11357 [relating to possession on school grounds]; 11361 [relating to minors as amended herein]; 11379.6 [relating to chemical production]; 11532 [relating to loitering to commit a crime or acts not authorized by law]; Vehicle Code section 23152 [relating to driving while under the influence]; Penal Code section 272 [relating to contributing to the delinquency of a minor]; nor any law prohibiting use of controlled substances in the workplace or by specific persons whose jobs involve public safety.
Section 3: Lawful Activities
Article 5 of Chapter 5 of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code, commencing with section 11300 is added to read:
Section 11300: Personal Regulation and Controls
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, it is lawful and shall not be a public offense under California law for any person 21 years of age or older to:
(i) Personally possess, process, share, or transport not more than one ounce of cannabis, solely for that individual’s personal consumption, and not for sale.
(ii) Cultivate, on private property by the owner, lawful occupant, or other lawful resident or guest of the private property owner or lawful occupant, cannabis plants for personal consumption only, in an area of not more than twenty-five square feet per private residence or, in the absence of any residence, the parcel. Cultivation on leased or rented property may be subject to approval from the owner of the property. Provided that, nothing in this section shall permit unlawful or unlicensed cultivation of cannabis on any public lands.
(iii) Possess on the premises where grown the living and harvested plants and results of any harvest and processing of plants lawfully cultivated pursuant to section 11300(a)(ii), for personal consumption.
(iv) Possess objects, items, tools, equipment, products and materials associated with activities permitted under this subsection.
(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.
(c) “Personal consumption” shall not include, and nothing in this Act shall permit cannabis:
(i) possession for sale regardless of amount, except by a person who is licensed or permitted to do so under the terms of an ordinance adopted pursuant to section 11301;
(ii) consumption in public or in a public place;
(iii) consumption by the operator of any vehicle, boat or aircraft while it is being operated, or that impairs the operator;
(iv) smoking cannabis in any space while minors are present.
Section 11301: Commercial Regulations and Controls
Notwithstanding any other provision of state or local law, a local government may adopt ordinances, regulations, or other acts having the force of law to control, license, regulate, permit or otherwise authorize, with conditions, the following:
(a) cultivation, processing, distribution, the safe and secure transportation, sale and possession for sale of cannabis, but only by persons and in amounts lawfully authorized;
(b) retail sale of not more than one ounce per transaction, in licensed premises, to persons 21 years or older, for personal consumption and not for resale;
(c) appropriate controls on cultivation, transportation, sales, and consumption of cannabis to strictly prohibit access to cannabis by persons under the age of 21;
(d) age limits and controls to ensure that all persons present in, employed by, or in any way involved in the operation of, any such licensed premises are 21 or older;
(e) consumption of cannabis within licensed premises;
(f) safe and secure transportation of cannabis from a licensed premises for cultivation or processing, to a licensed premises for sale or on-premises consumption of cannabis;
(g) prohibit and punish through civil fines or other remedies the possession, sale, possession for sale, cultivation, processing, or transportation of cannabis that was not obtained lawfully from a person pursuant to this section or section 11300;
(h) appropriate controls on licensed premises for sale, cultivation, processing, or sale and on-premises consumption, of cannabis, including limits on zoning and land use, locations, size, hours of operation, occupancy, protection of adjoining and nearby properties and persons from unwanted exposure, advertising, signs and displays, and other controls necessary for protection of the public health and welfare;
(i) appropriate environmental and public health controls to ensure that any licensed premises minimizes any harm to the environment, adjoining and nearby landowners, and persons passing by;
(j) appropriate controls to restrict public displays, or public consumption of cannabis;
(k) appropriate taxes or fees pursuant to section 11302;
(l) such larger amounts as the local authority deems appropriate and proper under local circumstances, than those established under section 11300(a) for personal possession and cultivation, or under this section for commercial cultivation, processing, transportation and sale by persons authorized to do so under this section;
(m) any other appropriate controls necessary for protection of the public health and welfare.
Section 11302: Imposition and Collection of Taxes and Fees
(a) Any ordinance, regulation or other act adopted pursuant to section 11301 may include imposition of appropriate general, special or excise, transfer or transaction taxes, benefit assessments, or fees, on any activity authorized pursuant to such enactment, in order to permit the local government to raise revenue, or to recoup any direct or indirect costs associated with the authorized activity, or the permitting or licensing scheme, including without limitation: administration; applications and issuance of licenses or permits; inspection of licensed premises and other enforcement of ordinances adopted under section 11301, including enforcement against unauthorized activities.
(b) Any licensed premises shall be responsible for paying all federal, state and local taxes, fees, fines, penalties or other financial responsibility imposed on all or similarly situated businesses, facilities or premises, including without limitation income taxes, business taxes, license fees, and property taxes, without regard to or identification of the business or items or services sold.
Section 11303: Seizure
(a) Notwithstanding sections 11470 and 11479 of the Health and Safety Code or any other provision of law, no state or local law enforcement agency or official shall attempt to, threaten to, or in fact seize or destroy any cannabis plant, cannabis seeds or cannabis that is lawfully cultivated, processed, transported, possessed, possessed for sale, sold or used in compliance with this Act or any local government ordinance, law or regulation adopted pursuant to this Act.
Section 11304: Effect of Act and Definitions
(a) This Act shall not be construed to affect, limit or amend any statute that forbids impairment while engaging in dangerous activities such as driving, or that penalizes bringing cannabis to a school enrolling pupils in any grade from kindergarten through 12, inclusive.
(b) Nothing in this Act shall be construed or interpreted to permit interstate or international transportation of cannabis. This Act shall be construed to permit a person to transport cannabis in a safe and secure manner from a licensed premises in one city or county to a licensed premises in another city or county pursuant to any ordinances adopted in such cities or counties, notwithstanding any other state law or the lack of any such ordinance in the intervening cities or counties.
(c) No person shall be punished, fined, discriminated against, or be denied any right or privilege for lawfully engaging in any conduct permitted by this Act or authorized pursuant to Section 11301 of this Act. Provided however, that the existing right of an employer to address consumption that actually impairs job performance by an employee shall not be affected.
(d) Definitions
For purposes of this Act:
(i) “Marijuana” and “cannabis” are interchangeable terms that mean all parts of the plant Genus Cannabis, whether growing or not; the resin extracted from any part of the plant; concentrated cannabis; edible products containing same; and every active compound, manufacture, derivative, or preparation of the plant, or resin.
(ii) “One ounce” means 28.5 grams.
(iii) For purposes of section 11300(a)(ii) “cannabis plant” means all parts of a living Cannabis plant.
(iv) In determining whether an amount of cannabis is or is not in excess of the amounts permitted by this Act, the following shall apply:
(a) only the active amount of the cannabis in an edible cannabis product shall be included;
(b) living and harvested cannabis plants shall be assessed by square footage, not by weight in determining the amounts set forth in section 11300(a);
(c) in a criminal proceeding a person accused of violating a limitation in this Act shall have the right to an affirmative defense that the cannabis was reasonably related to his or her personal consumption.
(v) “residence” means a dwelling or structure, whether permanent or temporary, on private or public property, intended for occupation by a person or persons for residential purposes, and includes that portion of any structure intended for both commercial and residential purposes.
(vi) “local government” means a city, county, or city and county.
(vii) “licensed premises” is any commercial business, facility, building, land or area that has a license, permit or is otherwise authorized to cultivate, process, transport, sell, or permit on-premises consumption, of cannabis pursuant to any ordinance or regulation adopted by a local government pursuant to section 11301, or any subsequently enacted state statute or regulation.
Section 4: Prohibition on Furnishing Marijuana to Minors
Section 11361 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to read:
Prohibition on Furnishing Marijuana to Minors
(a) Every person 18 years of age or over who hires, employs, or uses a minor in transporting, carrying, selling, giving away, preparing for sale, or peddling any marijuana, who unlawfully sells, or offers to sell, any marijuana to a minor, or who furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer, or give any marijuana to a minor under 14 years of age, or who induces a minor to use marijuana in violation of law shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a period of three, five, or seven years.
(b) Every person 18 years of age or over who furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer, or give, any marijuana to a minor 14 years of age or older shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a period of three, four, or five years.
(c) Every person 21 years of age or over who knowingly furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer or give, any marijuana to a person aged 18 years or older, but younger than 21 years of age, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of up to six months and be fined up to $1,000 for each offense. (d) In addition to the penalties above, any person who is licensed, permitted or authorized to perform any act pursuant to Section 11301, who while so licensed, permitted or authorized, negligently furnishes, administers, gives or sells, or offers to furnish, administer, give or sell, any marijuana to any person younger than 21 years of age shall not be permitted to own, operate, be employed by, assist or enter any licensed premises authorized under Section 11301 for a period of one year.
Section 5: Amendment
Pursuant to Article 2, section 10(c) of the California Constitution, this Act may be amended either by a subsequent measure submitted to a vote of the People at a statewide election; or by statute validly passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor, but only to further the purposes of the Act. Such permitted amendments include but are not limited to:
(a) Amendments to the limitations in section 11300, which limitations are minimum thresholds and the Legislature may adopt less restrictive limitations.
(b) Statutes and authorize regulations to further the purposes of the Act to establish a statewide regulatory system for a commercial cannabis industry that addresses some or all of the items referenced in Sections 11301 and 11302.
(c) Laws to authorize the production of hemp or non-active cannabis for horticultural and industrial purposes.
Section 6: Severability
If any provision of this measure or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the measure that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this measure are severable.

The initiative is what we're asking for. If you look at the language it's pretty vague. This is what the citizens of CA submitted to lawmakers to put it on the ballot this November. They got the required signatures and so the initiative will be voted on. AB 2254 is the "strings attatched" legality should the initiative pass. The initiative is just the front facade of Marijuana legalization. Notice how it just states what will happen BUT NOT HOW. It's not just legalization without a quandary of rules and regulations you know. AB2254 was re-introduced in February this year by Tom Ammiano. Here's a quick definition in a nutshell. An Act is a statute, Law, or a decision by a legislative or judicial body such as an Act of Congress. A Bill is a legislative proposal offered for debate before its enactment. A statute in draft before it becomes the law. Thanks for posting the initiative but that's just a fragment of the issue. Here: AB2254

as far as i know AB2254 is completely separate from the initiative.. they have conflicting regulations.. one is a bill and the other is an initiative.. AB2254 could pass before november..

What a troll (thread starter).

DEA agents will lose their jobs - boohoo! It's a position that never should have been in place anyway. Anyone that makes a living off the illegality of marijuana SHOULD lose their job and the income in brings in. Now maybe after they transition they can get themselves a job doing something productive for society rather than needlessly using up money and resources without contributing a damn thing.

DryIsADirtyWord said:

Just out of curiosity - why does everyone seem to think that the DEA would lose their jobs? They have a perfectly legit purpose and job - coke, crack, heroine, crystal meth ... they'll still have plenty of work to do. Mary Jane should not be in the crosshairs though.

Semper Fi

Click to expand...

They spend such a significant portion of their man power and money hunting for, eradicating, and busting growers/sellers of marijuana that if it were suddenly legal they would have nothing to do. Unless you are suggesting they take all those resources and refocus them on the harder drugs. I have a feeling they already focus as much as they want on those drugs though. What is the guy that flies a helicopter around looking for fields of pot going to do when it's legal?

imo the prices will not drop drastically at all. people are damn comfortable paying 300 an ounce of the good stuff(many places over 500 for the primo). and im sorry it is NOT easy to grow top of the line. the competition will not come from cutting prices but from increasing quality. you will NEVER get the really good shit from huge outdoor farms(this area will be left for industrial/textiles/oils/etc). the cost of indoor and/or hydro production will remain moderate and so will the price. demind will stay constant as users will use regardless of any law. the market has no where to go but up because the market exists. legalization will only help those willing to put the time and effort to make quality crop and benefit those who use.

i implore you to read these articles

NORMLLAS VEGAS -- The Las Vegas Metro police detective who shot a 21-year-old man during a drug raid was identified Monday as Brian Yant.Yant, 34, is a 10-year veteran of the police department who is assigned to Metro’s narcotics division.During the raid Friday, police said Yant was confronted in a bathroom by 21-year-old Trevon Cole. Yant fired a single shot, saying Cole moved toward him.Cole’s girlfriend, Sequoia Pearce, was hiding in a bedroom closet during the raid. She was questioned by police and released.Yant and his fellow officers were searching the house for marijuana, according to a search warrant.Pearce spoke to FOX5 Sunday, admitting that her boyfriend used drugs but saying that he was not a threat.“Trevon was a recreational smoker. He smoked weed, marijuana. That’s what he did,” she said. “They didn’t have to kill him.”Pearce, 20, is nine months pregnant with the couple’s child."We were supposed to get married next year, plan a black and white affair,” she said. “He was all I ever knew, we were gonna make it."



first notice the poor quality of fox's research and presentation, noting how before they speak of the innocent victims, they tell you more about our hero of the day "10-year veteran of the police department" Brian Yant.

"police said Yant was confronted in a bathroom by 21-year-old Trevon Cole"

tell me how the officer was in their bathroom, i assume taking a piss, when the homeowner broke in and assaulted the officer, and how he fired a SINGLE SHOT killing Trevon... (headshot for pot? or no medical assistance? or what? imo 1st degree murder, negligent homicide. stack up as many charges as you can against the entire district and what ever judge was responsible for allowing this "narcotics unit" (marijuana is NOT a narcotic) to unabashedly assualt this families 4th amendment right leading to their great loss. imo give them the life in prison or the death sentence.

im sorry for my sarcasm.. this situation disgusts me, and anybody who would rather have innocents murdered in cold blood by "officers of the law" and make a quick buck than have our constitutional and god given liberties reinstated, should be on the receiving end of this deal


LEGALIZE IT YOUR VOTE MIGHT ACTUALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE

hockey4848 said:

It is a step I would not feel comfortable taking. I am extremely well read on the topic and I could sit all day and explain to you how legalization will fail miserably at state levels. If you are a california resident, do not vote yes on it being fully legalized because you think mj is a non lethal plant, that has potential to raise your struggling state some tax money. Vote no because you enjoy the schools/hospitals/parks/libraries/roads you currently have. If the republicans ever get back into office (who hate marijuana) will simply pull all federal aid from cali.

I could go deep into the economics of it but the tax revenue people are saying could be raised from legalization is false. The governments estimates on how big the MJ business really is, is 10-120 billion a year. A very arguably number. A number devised from seizures and things like that. But who really knows. So one would automatically think, "wow put a 30% tax on it and the gov can raise easily in the billions." This is however wrong because these money #'s are drawn from current black market pricing, which is high due the risk involved for the manufactures/dealers/transporters etc. Frankly there is already a large tax on marijuana, the tax of getting caught. You take that illegal aspect away from it and it is just like any other plant. And any other legal consumable plant we have in our lives is rather cheap. A head of lettuce is maybe a pound and it costs $2.99. And unfortunately marijuana users do not use all that much product compared to other heavily taxed items. A heavy smoker may smoke 20-40 cigarettes a day. A heavy MJ user will smoke a fraction of this amount. The "100 billion dollar" marijuana industry people in favor of legalization for tax generating purposes are dreaming, this is the illegal market of $3-5,000 a pound marijuana. When legalized this number will automatically drop drastically.

My point is, heavy taxes will have to be applied to marijuana for it to make any real money. Which will in turn drive the black market farther underground and ultimately thrive.

Click to expand...

So I take it you are more than likely one of the CA medical caregivers who stands to lose mucho dolares when everyone can grow their own plants in Cali legally...I see, it WOULD really hurt your business to see it drop down to, oh, say $150 an OZ, when you Cali caregivers are charging as much as street level for product right now...

Russ Bellville of the NORML blog (Radical Russ) has already brought it to everyone's attention that 2 big time caregivers (Canna Care in Sacto is one of them) that these big dispensary owners are donating big money to have the Nov. ballot initiative to legalize marijuana for recreational use defeated, and has asked people to boycott said dispensary's.

We know ALL about you Cali caregivers out here in MT. Two of the biggest in our state (who came out here from Cali, by the way to make BIG money are on the MT. state legislative advisory committee; and have pretty much convinced the legislature and Governor Schweitzer that:

"Things are out of hand, out of control here in MT" and "There should only be perhaps 6 regional caregivers for the whole state under the direct regulation of the state"; that:
"marijuana is serious medecine for serious illness", also: "patients cannot be entrusted to grow their own medecine; so it should only be legal for large, state licensed and regulated caregivers to grow; as otherwise medical marijuana will end up on the black market"...

Fuck them. They want to be the only ones legally allowed to grow it (the big boys from Cali who came out here w/ big money to make big money).

They will have a monopoly on the MM market here in MT if this shit goes through next Feb.; and patients who cannot afford these fuckers $400 an OZ weed will be criminals and thrown in jail just for a few fucking plants; as it will be illegal for patients to grow.

Thanks to these greedy caregiver assholes who moved out here from Cali to make a buck off us after Obama called off the Feds.

I can think of one; and only one reason WHY you would be against legalization in Cali...Your a DISPENERY OWNER/ CAREGIVER WHO LIVES IN CALI!

I notice you only have two posts here; I'll bet your going to every 420 forum on the web and spewing this shit...

Everyone in Cali., ignore this guy and PLEASE VOTE FOR LEGALIZATION! NORML AND MPP RECCOMENDS ALL CALI RESIDENTS DO VOTE YES ON LEGALIZATION! Other states will fall after people see that marijuana is NOT a weed with roots in hell and is much, much safer than alcohol.

thank you all, and good night.

By the way, top grade medical marijuana is down to $200 an oz here; before Obama called off the feds it was $400.

When Obama was elected there were only 2000 MM cardholders in MT., we are swiftly approaching 20,000 cardholders at this point in time. Estimates are that there will be 35,000 cardholders by the time the Legislature meets next Feb. for:
"Much needed changes to our MM law" (what Gov. Schcweitzer says)...We do not want more restrictions added to our law such as those suggested by the 'state MM advisory council' and WE WILL BE MARCHING ON THE STATE HOUSE IN FEBRUARY! Fuck them.

yep indeed. i was watching the news the other night and they were saying that they were receiving something like 1000 applications a month. to give schweizer some credit though, hes been putting it off for a long time. there are dickheads in this state that have been pushing for changes since it passed, because they are stuck in the past. welcome to MT. hillbillies, mullets, and a bunch of close minded republicans (i use the term republicans here, not conservatives) that are stuck in their train of thought because just like the rest of America, they have been brainwashed by the government, media, and hell even their parents.

-edit- at least we still have Knievel Days! woot!

People going to prison for a simple non-harmful plant..that is enough of a reason to legalize it. the only people not wanting it legalized are the lie-mongers and dealers. I say eff your living get a new job.

your right about the inflated #'s .. but it will make a lot of money through legalization because now people would go buy this stuff freely ... most growers would probably get lazy and buy it from the supermarket instead of going through the pain of growing ....and if we had companies perfecting it then we would have some many strains available to choose from we would be in smoke heaven yes it would destroy the black market but who cares .. im tired of paying inflated prices for it any way ... the point u make about lettuce is the reason why it is not a drug but a controlled substance ... by labeling it a control substance they could now make it illegal ..... just think the government could actually say its illegal to eat tomatoes , or apples ,

kamonra said:

your right about the inflated #'s .. but it will make a lot of money through legalization because now people would go buy this stuff freely ... most growers would probably get lazy and buy it from the supermarket instead of going through the pain of growing ....and if we had companies perfecting it then we would have some many strains available to choose from we would be in smoke heaven yes it would destroy the black market but who cares .. im tired of paying inflated prices for it any way ... the point u make about lettuce is the reason why it is not a drug but a controlled substance ... by labeling it a control substance they could now make it illegal ..... just think the government could actually say its illegal to eat tomatoes , or apples ,

Click to expand...

Who are these companies you speak of? Do you honestly think a FEDERALLY controlled company is going to move into california and break federal law? You ever thought to consider why they don't have pre-rolled pre-packaged cigarettes in Amsterdam or the like? Maybe that has something to do with "joint sized" Capri cigarettes and the machine patents to make them? If you wan't prerolled cigarettes they'll be coming to you mixed with tobacco, and on old slow machines with little production ability.

If you EVER want to see this commercialized North Carolina has to get behind it. The tobacco companies aren't going to move to roll a few joints. The market share isn't there and California can't afford to offer them incentives. Now if they can grow it, roll it, and sell it in the south where it's agriculturally and economically feasible, you'll see that day a lot sooner.