NO! On Prop 19

Hayduke said:

Or serve 3 years in the state penitentiaryYeah I'm gonna vote for that!


Driving on the freeway with the windows down posses more of a health risk.

I smoke very little very good marijuana...it's not like it is tobacco...the amount I smoke a day is ~1-2 cigarette(s)...and besides it is not even an infraction to smoke all the tobacco you want in the presence of minors...but a felony for cannabis??? WTF is that about???

How is a mother supposed to tell her kids that she smokes Cannbis, and it's ok, cuz it totally legal...but you can not be in here right now or mommy will go to prison...be out in a sec! Kids are not stupid.

Click to expand...

Second hand tobacco smoke isn't psychoactive ... second hand marijuana smoke is. You don't have to put a joint between your lips and inhale to get high. Hence terms such as "contact high" and "hotboxing". Just because YOU want to get high, doesn't give you the right to intentionally or unintentionally expose someone else ... especially children.

How does a mom answer that question? The same way she tells her kids why mommy can have a glass of wine and they can't. The same way mommy tells the kids they can't come in when mommy and daddy are nude wrestling.

I'd hope marijuana using parents would educate their kids on marijuana, its uses, and the laws. Inform your children of the truth and you don't have to hide anything, nor feel ashamed when you step outside the room to take a toke.

veggiegardener said:

Where does it mention grow AREA? Until I see language that SPECIFICALLY mentions the area allowed to MMJ growers, I believe you are wrong.

Show me specifics, not assumptions.

Click to expand...

Show me where Prop 19 states it will override Prop 215's cultivation laws. Overriding laws have to be expressed, not applied. (as ruled by the supreme court) Prop 19 states nowhere that 11362.5 cultivation laws will be changed under new law.

Both are separate bills providing separate rights.

mikhail chalecki said:

you know damn well why cigarettes arent a crime to smoke in front of kids. it most definitely should be imo. thats just not gonna be possible. second, marijuana is a schedule 1 substance under federal law and therefore has to be regulated and restricted. caffein alcohol and tobacco arent even on the list and theres probably quite a few reasons why

Click to expand...

I can not believe in the same breath you are touting the scheduling of MJ and wanting to legalize it. It is scheduled wrong...that's the whole damn point...There are recorded deaths every year from Alcohol and caffeine...Never ..not ever even one from MJ...I agree about cigarette smoke. And Fuck federal law...duh!

Juicy Fruit said:

In Ontario its illeagel to smoke at/on school property and parks, infact alot of places where minors are it's not allowed...

Click to expand...

Of course it is illegal to smoke on school property I am talking about the privacy of my own home. We are not loyal subjects!

luvourmother said:

first of all:
It is an infraction to smoke tobacco in the car with minors.
Mom's and Dad's can smoke mj responsibly the same as they drink alcohol responsibly, dont give it to kids or there will be consequences.

Im glad you brought up kids, because this is a very good reason to vote YES on 19. A lot of stupid, dumb, irresponsible parents think it is ok to give marijuana to kids, so far science points to many reasons this is not a good idea (i.e. brain development...) The front page of this website has a great example of such a parent. Kids shouldn't smoke weed, plain and simple and if you want to smoke weed with kids than you have some major problems...

Click to expand...

Who said anything about giving weed to my kids???? My 15 year old is proudly drug free.

tc1 said:

Second hand tobacco smoke isn't psychoactive ... second hand marijuana smoke is. You don't have to put a joint between your lips and inhale to get high. Hence terms such as "contact high" and "hotboxing". Just because YOU want to get high, doesn't give you the right to intentionally or unintentionally expose someone else ... especially children.

How does a mom answer that question? The same way she tells her kids why mommy can have a glass of wine and they can't. The same way mommy tells the kids they can't come in when mommy and daddy are nude wrestling.

I'd hope marijuana using parents would educate their kids on marijuana, its uses, and the laws. Inform your children of the truth and you don't have to hide anything, nor feel ashamed when you step outside the room to take a toke.

Click to expand...

I have never...not once in 40 years gotten high off being in a room...that's nasty. If someone is hotboxing the car with the kids that is contributing to delinquency for teens and abuse for the little ones.

Of course we educate our kids about pot...they know it is not bad...hiding it sends a very different message...now you are a liar...this does not work for raising kids that feel they can trust you.

I am not hiding...I am not doing anything wrong...If I was...then it should not be legal!!!!!

I am shocked that people who ought to know how non-toxic mj is think this way. That means that you guys want mJ legalized so you can legally go get all fooked up...Frat boys??? I have been smoking since '83...it is not about getting f'd up...smoking and the eventual legalization of a simple plant is about freedom.

Humboldt14 said:

everybody i know is voting NO

Click to expand...

Me too... there are more people voting no that you would think... especially people that you would expect to vote yes... are voting no... it will be close...

Nocturnal1 said:

Yes, not all. Of course not...my dad and uncles are baby boomers and they smoke more than I do. But, I like to think 65% of baby boomers are conservative pricks. Maybe it's me just being young, but I see a lot of older people who are conformists, and so easily persuaded by propaganda.

(Religion has a big part in this)

Click to expand...

your right. all the churches in cali. plus all the growers like myself that will vote no. this prop has no chance.

nathenking said:

Me too... there are more people voting no that you would think... especially people that you would expect to vote yes... are voting no... it will be close...

Click to expand...

cool im glad that my friend nathenking is voting no. gud to hear it brotha

not to mention all the people that will be afraid of there kids being introduced to cannabis. there will definitly be more of it around if it passes

veggiegardener said:

Where does it mention grow AREA? Until I see language that SPECIFICALLY mentions the area allowed to MMJ growers, I believe you are wrong.

Show me specifics, not assumptions.

Click to expand...

read the quoted part please. that is a section striaght from prop 19. it doesnt matter if grow area is stated or not. people who are permitted for marijuana use under 215 are exempt from any and all regulations of 19. plain and simple sb 420 doesnt mention a confined grow area therefore you are not confined. you will be in accordance with the laws under the cau act, not 19. theres a clear definition between the two

Hayduke said:

I can not believe in the same breath you are touting the scheduling of MJ and wanting to legalize it. It is scheduled wrong...that's the whole damn point...There are recorded deaths every year from Alcohol and caffeine...Never ..not ever even one from MJ...I agree about cigarette smoke. And Fuck federal law...duh!

Click to expand...

apparently you missed my point entirely. it doesnt matter what we think, public opinion and laws are what count. if we can prove stoners are responsible human beings think of the benefits. caffeine and nicotine are easily as bad as pot, much worse considering the dependancy effects and addiction. but the government will never see it our way if we keep bitching about wanting full legalization. its not gonna happen just like cigarettes being outlawed cant ever happen. a prop like this has to happen, with minimum limits to prove to everyone the main point. every stoner in the country is looking at us to see if this passes. they are so ashamed of the stoners agains 19, its really not funny. comprende? or is simple social economics and logic too complicated?

Actually, therein lies a problem. SB 420 includes limits that were ruled unconstitutional in court since they weren't introduced as part of a voter initiative. Limits which suddenly become quite enforceable under the authority of Prop. 19, since it IS a voter initiative.

I cant wait tell this prop is shot down. I never thought anything political would ever effect me. I have never voted but im voting this year. and I am giving weed to people to vote no. trust me im not going to sit by and watch this scam go thru. im doing my part

MrStickyScissors said:

I cant wait tell this prop is shot down. I never thought anything political would ever effect me. I have never voted but im voting this year. and I am giving weed to people to vote no. trust me im not going to sit by and watch this scam go thru. im doing my part

Click to expand...

LOL!

If I were them, I'd just take your weed and vote YES in the privacy of the voting booth.
BTW ... what you are suggesting is a FELONY so you might want to be careful.

tardis said:

May all the children who die in gang violence from Mexican drug cartels who make money off marijuana be illegal be only children of people who vote No. Just so the world is fair and in balance.

Click to expand...

yeah right, so as soon as we vote yes, everybody stops fighting.... that is propaganda at its fullest...

mikhail chalecki said:

read the quoted part please. that is a section striaght from prop 19. it doesnt matter if grow area is stated or not. people who are permitted for marijuana use under 215 are exempt from any and all regulations of 19. plain and simple sb 420 doesnt mention a confined grow area therefore you are not confined. you will be in accordance with the laws under the cau act, not 19. theres a clear definition between the two

Click to expand...

Some very good lawyers disagree with you.

Once the 25 sq. ft. limit is in place, it will be applied to everybody because THERE IS NO SPECIFIC EXCLUSION.

tokinpodpilot said:

actually, therein lies a problem. Sb 420 includes limits that were ruled unconstitutional in court since they weren't introduced as part of a voter initiative. Limits which suddenly become quite enforceable under the authority of prop. 19, since it is a voter initiative.

Click to expand...

thank you!

veggiegardener said:

Some very good lawyers disagree with you.

Click to expand...

Citations please. I posted a link to a very well respected lawyer who debunks the notion that 215 rights are affected by 19. Did you read it? He's backed by NORML. Do you think NORML is out to screw you?

http://sjcbc.org/2010/09/11/an-open-letter-on-prop-19/

NORML has a word-for-word analysis:

http://blog.norml.org/2010/07/19/californias-prop-19-a-word-for-word-analysis/

---

Marc Emery, Ed Rosenthal, Drug Policy Alliance, Marijuana Policy Project, Students for Sensible Drug Policy.. All supporters of 19.

DAs, police, politicians, religious groups... All opposed to 19.

Who are you going to trust?

---

As far as the new felony of smoking around children - it's pretty fucked up and it's sad to see Tc1 try to defend it. However, in my humblest of opinions, you have no fucking chance to pass a measure that doesn't throw a bone to the soccer moms who dominate politics. The good news is that CA is so fucking broke that they won't have the resources to enforce it. Further, if we can all pull together in 2012 after we've had 2 years of regulated weed, maybe we can repeal it.

Finally... "me and all my stoner friends and some churchgoers are going to vote no so 19 is fucked"... HAHA seriously - look at the polls dude. The only one that shows 19 won't pass is one that won't release their methodology.

TokinPodPilot said:

Actually, therein lies a problem. SB 420 includes limits that were ruled unconstitutional in court since they weren't introduced as part of a voter initiative. Limits which suddenly become quite enforceable under the authority of Prop. 19, since it IS a voter initiative.

Click to expand...

actually the fact that our state supreme court deemed setting limits on medical patients unconstitutional gives even more support to that 215 is exempt from 19

mikhail chalecki said:

actually the fact that our state supreme court deemed setting limits on medical patients unconstitutional gives even more support to that 215 is exempt from 19

Click to expand...

No - that's not true. What they said was that SB420 couldn't impose limits because only voter props can limit voter props. 19 is a voter prop and could theoretically limit 215 but doesn't.

mrFancyPlants said:

No - that's not true. What they said was that SB420 couldn't impose limits because only voter props can limit voter props. 19 is a voter prop and could theoretically limit 215 but doesn't.

Click to expand...

19 has three exclusions for MMJ.. The actual statute number and section is listed by article and section number, in 19, sections 6, 7, and 8.

mrFancyPlants said:

No - that's not true. What they said was that SB420 couldn't impose limits because only voter props can limit voter props. 19 is a voter prop and could theoretically limit 215 but doesn't.

Click to expand...

hmmm fair enough than. yeah, i am aware of what can happen. but as it stands it does not. its a shame people are being deceived.

its kinda off topic but the lies the dispensaries are spreading is kinda awful. one person i talked to was telling people that it forcibly restricts personal mmj grows to 5 sq ft... yes FIVE. not 25. blatant misinformation.