Humboldt14
Well-Known Member
most of us up here in the mountains of Humboldt County Ca. are campagning Vote No!
Whats your opinion?
Whats your opinion?
NO! On Prop 19
- Thread starter Humboldt14
- Start date
LsdgotAholdofMe
Member
i want to smoke my dried plant flowers and not be deemed a criminal , If this bill helps me obtain that goal. I and others would have to vote yes imo
mikhail chalecki
Member
this is what the prop says you can and cannot do, and contrary to popular belief none of this part is allowed to be taxed or forced to be licensed,(aka your 25 square ft plot) and will be illegal to do so. there is also a part that forbids police from seizing any amount of pot lawfully aquired. the taxes only apply commercial transfers, transactions and commercial licenses. i will post the tax info too. the commercial laws are too long but read the whole thing here http://yeson19.com/node/6 . simply put, if you want to grow and sell pot as a buisness, theyre gonna tread it like one. and for your medical rights, whatever your doctor says is your limits, are your limits, the minimums are for regular ppl. this bill establishes the term personal consumption a new right for citizens, and 215 is strictly for people with illnesses, so ofourse they will be given special treatment. the same way oxy is illegal unless prescribed 215 patients will be able to carry more and grow however many plants ther doctor rec says
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.
the section here is on commercial regulations and is very long
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 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.
the section here is on commercial regulations and is very long
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.
mikhail chalecki
Member
feel free to vote yes or no, just read the bill a few times
Voting against California's Prop 19 would "keep everything as it is now" - recreational use would continue to be illegal and consequently the price (of pot) would remain sky high.
Anybody that profits from this "Black Market" setup would, likely, vote no on Prop 19 so they could continue to line their pockets with money. That's the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth - so help me God!
For the "Small Time" personal grower - who just wants to "grow & smoke his own", there is absolutely no good reason to vote against Prop 19. It's all about personal greed and typical, bullshit, misleading tactics.
For "Medical Users" nothing would change, except that the price paid at thier local dispensary would hit "Rock Bottom". If thier "Script" calls for a 1/2 acre garden, then they would still be allowed a 1/2 acre garden (of course this only applies to registered MMJ cardholders).
reggaerican
Well-Known Member
VOTE NO!!! i think there is just to many restrictions with his prop or "crock of shit" i should say.. if pot is to be leagal it must be @ a federal level...
Of course there are restrictions built in to Prop 19, let's be reasonable! Under prop 19 pot would be considered much like alchohol, and subject to similar restrictions - I, for one, think that is realistic and unavoidable.
Have you ever heard of "State's Rights?". There is already a great controversy over how the Federal Government will react to the passage of Prop 19. The truth is - that remains to be seen!
You are quick to call Prop 19 "A crock of shit", but fail to say what it is that is so bad about it! Prop 19 will allow me (and anyone else who is 21 in California) to buy, use, or grow my own pot for recreational purposes. I think that's a hell of a lot better then the way things are now. Why don't you want that? This is just the next step on the way to "Complete Legalization". First, "Baby Steps", then "Learn to walk", then "Learn to run".
KuLong
Well-Known Member
Dang it, I am getting sucked into it...
FACT: Most people do not want Marijuana to be legal.
1. The war on drugs gets a huge budget cut and the gov doesn't want that obviously.
2. The "medicinal" users will have to get a real job because they will not be able to make any money on the side (every medical user I know makes more than the law allows and sells)!
Personally I do not have to worry about that because in my country, it is going to be illegal for a very long time, even if the states or Canada make it legal in their countries.
See? You made me talk about politics. Now everyone is going to hate me.
FACT: Most people do not want Marijuana to be legal.
1. The war on drugs gets a huge budget cut and the gov doesn't want that obviously.
2. The "medicinal" users will have to get a real job because they will not be able to make any money on the side (every medical user I know makes more than the law allows and sells)!
Personally I do not have to worry about that because in my country, it is going to be illegal for a very long time, even if the states or Canada make it legal in their countries.
See? You made me talk about politics. Now everyone is going to hate me.
Humboldt14
Well-Known Member
everybody i know is voting NO
Nocturnal1
Active Member
Not if your city decides otherwise. First post! Woot! (More to come, just need to get my cam back so I can start a thread about my bubblelicious grow)
Nocturnal1
Active Member
And I am voting NO. Like someone mentioned, not till its on a fed level...
tc1
Well-Known Member
You live in the emerald triangle ....
Everyone around there is profiting from prohibition. Of course they're going to vote no.
tc1
Well-Known Member
It will never get to the federal level until enough states have successfully ended prohibition.
Just like we'll need another 10 more states to get medical before the feds start to reconsider re-scheduling.
MJSkywalker
Member
It seems like a lot of people can't see the wood for the trees. Proposition 19 is a watershed that will have far reaching effects not just in the US but worldwide. Surely it's better to get it passed into law then build on the platform from there rather than allowing it to fail at the first hurdle? Considering the many decades of persecution and propaganda against the sacred herb and those who use it I find it very sad indeed that some members of the community ignore the big picture and choose to focus on their own self-interests.
Hayduke
Well-Known Member
VOTE KNOW!!!!!!!!!!
This POS prop is written solely to attempt to make the writer (Dick) very wealthy. This poorly written (on purpose?) prop will be tied up in courts in most counties for a LONG time. Dick will make plenty more in Alameda county and beyond.
Why did Dick make it 25sqft??? why not 10, or 100 or 37.325??? Sure this is more than is legal know if you are too cheap to pay the canna doc 12 bucks a month to c.y.a...but it will force us to continue to hide indoors with expensive hid's to grow 365 or grow one fooking plant outdoors in the free sun (then pay the Dick for his commercial KwikiMart bud). This is NOT legalization it is merely decriminalization.
I want to grow outdoors...if I live on 40 acres with a few like minded people...we are restricted to 25 sq ft...If you rent, you need the land lord to ok your grow...does he have to Ok tomatoes and squash??? Is there a law on the books that can only be changed by a vote of the people ($$$) restricting the space where I grow my veggies...essentially regulating supply???...Of course not. This is not even about legalization.
It will destroy the possibility for the right prop in 2012...while setting the precedence for the rest of the country that it is a calamity even in California. Plus all other states will be more prohibited.
But the absolute worst part about this prop for me is the creation of new Canna Crimes...
Casually smoking a toke here and there as needed whether or not my 15 year old is in the area as I have always done would now be a felony!
...And smoking with a 20 year old friend or family member mandates jail and a fine!!
Why did Dick do this????? Vote Know!
This POS prop is written solely to attempt to make the writer (Dick) very wealthy. This poorly written (on purpose?) prop will be tied up in courts in most counties for a LONG time. Dick will make plenty more in Alameda county and beyond.
Why did Dick make it 25sqft??? why not 10, or 100 or 37.325??? Sure this is more than is legal know if you are too cheap to pay the canna doc 12 bucks a month to c.y.a...but it will force us to continue to hide indoors with expensive hid's to grow 365 or grow one fooking plant outdoors in the free sun (then pay the Dick for his commercial KwikiMart bud). This is NOT legalization it is merely decriminalization.
I want to grow outdoors...if I live on 40 acres with a few like minded people...we are restricted to 25 sq ft...If you rent, you need the land lord to ok your grow...does he have to Ok tomatoes and squash??? Is there a law on the books that can only be changed by a vote of the people ($$$) restricting the space where I grow my veggies...essentially regulating supply???...Of course not. This is not even about legalization.
It will destroy the possibility for the right prop in 2012...while setting the precedence for the rest of the country that it is a calamity even in California. Plus all other states will be more prohibited.
But the absolute worst part about this prop for me is the creation of new Canna Crimes...
Casually smoking a toke here and there as needed whether or not my 15 year old is in the area as I have always done would now be a felony!
...And smoking with a 20 year old friend or family member mandates jail and a fine!!Why did Dick do this????? Vote Know!
... I like many believe legalization needs to take place on a federal level,... after all even if your state says yes whats to stop the feds from busting in and say hey you ,.. you doin bad or wrong ,... bye bye ...
if they made it federal,.. they could
a- make you buy a permit
b-make it so you can only grow enough for personal consumtion,..( which should be tax exempt if grown privately)
c-police it the way county health inspectors do resteraunts
d- generate plenty of revenue enforcing stipulations
e- have variations of permits such as for persons who may grow for sale and profit
...(which could generate revenue in taxation and fines from violators)
............ why do they make this difficult???? it isn't rocket science,.... it could be americas newest industry,...
you wouldnt have to worry about outsourcing .... its already grown every where else.........
if they made it federal,.. they could
a- make you buy a permit
b-make it so you can only grow enough for personal consumtion,..( which should be tax exempt if grown privately)
c-police it the way county health inspectors do resteraunts
d- generate plenty of revenue enforcing stipulations
e- have variations of permits such as for persons who may grow for sale and profit
...(which could generate revenue in taxation and fines from violators)
............ why do they make this difficult???? it isn't rocket science,.... it could be americas newest industry,...
you wouldnt have to worry about outsourcing .... its already grown every where else.........
MJSkywalker
Member
I think it's overly optimistic to say the least to hope for a federal law to be passed first before legalisation on a state level. If legalisation is ever going to happen it will be a step by step process. The establishment obviously has a very ingrained bias against cannabis and a lot of vested interests against changing the status quo.