# Prop 19 Loosing Major Ground!?



## Needofweed (Oct 31, 2010)

prop 19 seems to be loosing major grounds says this new poll realsed 10/31/2010.


http://www.sacbee.com/2010/10/31/3146298/prop-19-trailing-by-7-points-in.html


----------



## mr2shim (Oct 31, 2010)

Not saying it isn't true, but polls said Obama was losing major ground back in 08. I don't really believe in polls. It's only a few hundred people they are asking. That poll was 1,092. If California's population was that then I'd believe it.


----------



## NLNo5 (Oct 31, 2010)

Fuck the establishment, those bangers will do anything to keep us from gods greatest gift.


----------



## veggiegardener (Oct 31, 2010)

Misinformation from both sides has making a NO vote the only real option on this issue.

The YES crowd wrote an extremely flawed bill, and has chosen to refuse to recognize those flaws.

The opposition has been even worse, with ridiculous claims of disaster.

I voted NO because there is no benefit, and potentially a lot of harm to myself and my family.

And THAT'S always the bottom line for any voter.

How does a bill benefit YOU?


----------



## potroast (Oct 31, 2010)

Let's see what your family says when you get thrown in jail. 

Like I've said, the big picture is difficult to grasp, so don't feel badly.

Please vote YES.


----------



## Kindwoman (Oct 31, 2010)

mr2shim said:


> Not saying it isn't true, but polls said Obama was losing major ground back in 08. I don't really believe in polls. It's only a few hundred people they are asking. That poll was 1,092. If California's population was that then I'd believe it.


SOOOOO TRUE! Polls are extremely misleading (case in point - Obama's poll rating just prior to the 2008 election). Sometimes I think that the NO polls are trying to discourage the people - get them thinking "What's the point?" Don't fall for it. Get out there and vote!


----------



## veggiegardener (Oct 31, 2010)

potroast said:


> Let's see what your family says when you get thrown in jail.
> 
> Like I've said, the big picture is difficult to grasp, so don't feel badly.
> 
> Please vote YES.


I'm completely legal. If I go to jail, it will be for shooting you when you try to rob me. Of course, I'd get out the next day.

Without going into detail, the Feds know where I live, and how much I grow. They are also aware that they would lose in any court in California.


----------



## potroast (Oct 31, 2010)

Well, that just proves how delusional you are! I said the same thing 2 years ago, and last year they came for me and wiped me out. When they want to take you down, they will, "legal" or not. If you understood that, you would be voting yes.


If Prop 19 passes, it will be HUGE for the world!

I voted YES.


----------



## fdd2blk (Oct 31, 2010)

potroast said:


> Well, that just proves how delusional you are! I said the same thing 2 years ago, and last year they came for me and wiped me out. When they want to take you down, they will, "legal" or not. If you understood that, you would be voting yes.
> 
> 
> If Prop 19 passes, it will be HUGE for the world!
> ...



um, prop 19 is a STATE initiative. the feds will still come get you. 
it appears you don't understand that.

if you were compliant under 215 and you still took charges then how can you possibly feel prop 19 will help you? it makes no sense. you were compliant, weren't you?


----------



## fdd2blk (Oct 31, 2010)

drive-by poster.


----------



## desert dude (Oct 31, 2010)

veggiegardener said:


> I'm completely legal. If I go to jail, it will be for shooting you when you try to rob me. Of course, I'd get out the next day.
> 
> Without going into detail, the Feds know where I live, and how much I grow. They are also aware that they would lose in any court in California.


I am not so sure the feds would lose. If the feds charge you, they will try you in a federal court. The jury will not be allowed to hear anything about P215, or P19 if it passes because those pertain to CA law and are irrelevant to federal law. The jury will be forced to consider only federal law. If you are lucky, you will get one juror who is willing to nullify the feds case and wind up with a hung jury; most likely you won't be lucky.

By posting this I am not implying that I approve of federal, I do not.


----------



## Needofweed (Oct 31, 2010)

Kindwoman said:


> SOOOOO TRUE! Polls are extremely misleading (case in point - Obama's poll rating just prior to the 2008 election). Sometimes I think that the NO polls are trying to discourage the people - get them thinking "What's the point?" Don't fall for it. Get out there and vote!


well if I was a Yes voter I would rather see polls that show it winning 2 days from election day.But Im a No voter so Im happy to see this poll so close to the end.
I cant wait tell this is all over and we can all say P19 sucks.


----------



## potroast (Oct 31, 2010)

fdd2blk said:


> um, prop 19 is a STATE initiative. the feds will still come get you.
> it appears you don't understand that.
> 
> if you were compliant under 215 and you still took charges then how can you possibly feel prop 19 will help you? it makes no sense. you were compliant, weren't you?



Yes, I am compliant with all of our laws. It was STATE pigs that were in the swat team. Obviously there's something about it that YOU don't understand.

Ask my friend Jovan Jackson who was just found guilty in STATE court for operating a dispensary. Prosecuted under STATE law, by STATE pigs, and found guilty in a STATE court. The DA convinced the judge to not allow his medical defense, in STATE court. If you need me to explain it in more detail, don't ask.


If Prop 19 passes, it will be HUGE for the world!


----------



## The Ruiner (Oct 31, 2010)

potroast said:


> Yes, I am compliant with all of our laws. It was STATE pigs that were in the swat team. Obviously there's something about it that YOU don't understand.
> 
> Ask my friend Jovan Jackson who was just found guilty in STATE court for operating a dispensary. Prosecuted under STATE law, by STATE pigs, and found guilty in a STATE court. The DA convinced the judge to not allow his medical defense, in STATE court. If you need me to explain it in more detail, don't ask.
> 
> ...


I'd rather know who your attorney was...just so no one else hires them.


----------



## fdd2blk (Oct 31, 2010)

potroast said:


> Yes, I am compliant with all of our laws. It was STATE pigs that were in the swat team. Obviously there's something about it that YOU don't understand.
> 
> Ask my friend Jovan Jackson who was just found guilty in STATE court for operating a dispensary. Prosecuted under STATE law, by STATE pigs, and found guilty in a STATE court. The DA convinced the judge to not allow his medical defense, in STATE court. If you need me to explain it in more detail, don't ask.
> 
> ...


how would prop 19 be any different then 215? 

you got arrested under 215, a state prop.

why wouldn't you get arrested under 19?

am i missing something?


----------



## sm0keyrich510 (Oct 31, 2010)

ive been hearing for awhile now that prop 19's support is falling down more and more as the days near to the election. 

im honestly not shocked when i read this in the article:
The reversal in attitudes comes after U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced his opposition to the measure and said the Justice Department would "vigorously enforce" federal marijuana laws in California if voters approved it. 

​this is what i figured would happen even if it were to pass. the voters in california (and all over the u.s. for that matter but idk y those out of state are trying to tell us how to vote...) seem to forget that when trying to pass something like this (which DIRECTLY conflicts federal law) that the government is going to get the last word in. if not there are plenty of ways to punish california should it pass and california refuses to stop it from going through...they can withhold grant money which would be a touchy subject in california given the budget crisis. 

i think legalization is what we need. i truly do...but i think prop 19 is the wrong road to legalization. the measure is severely flawed with too many loopholes and to be honest if legalization has a chance it must be on a federal level...

pass or fail on the ballots on tuesday its still going to ultimately FAIL. 

remember california is apart of the u.s.a....not the other way around. california (honestly) doesn't have the authority to legalize a "drug" that the federal government clearly indicates as illegal. medical marijuana is different than legalization...thats why obama has said they will not target those with medical cards who follow the rules...

besides when you get down to the meat and potatoes of prop 19 you soon realize it was truly written up for the biggest/baddest growers to profit and the rest of us to give up our $$$. prop 19 creates a monopoly of sorts to the rich bastards (like richard lee and his businesses). 

HOPEFULLY this doesn't pass and in 2 years they come up with a much better bill that truly does benefit EVERYONE (not just big business or recreational users...but everyone!)


----------



## sm0keyrich510 (Oct 31, 2010)

Needofweed said:


> well if I was a Yes voter I would rather see polls that show it winning 2 days from election day.But Im a No voter so Im happy to see this poll so close to the end.
> I cant wait tell this is all over and we can all say P19 sucks.


amen. 

i really think a good majority of prop 19 supporters either:
A) don't know EXACTLY what they are voting for..

OR

B) they dont care and wont admit to others the bill sucks because they "think" (or are just lying and know its not true) a bill can be amended once its passed (this is not true).

prop 19 only benefits the biggest growers and those who are paranoid about carrying a dub sack in their pockets down the streets (FYI guys most cops will more than likely just take your bud...or in most cases will give it back to you as mj has been listed as a non-priority in californa...especially minor possession of small amounts!)

i think its really messed up that people will flat out lie and tell everyone 19 is merely "legalization" (when its not and legalization of mj CAN NOT happen on a state level as the federal government can block it from going through should it pass) 

prop 19 is not LEGALIZATION...prop 19 is TAX and CONTROL (more emphasis on CONTROL) the mj industry...its mostly a bill set up so legit businesses can open up and force you to buy from them...we hate the oil companies in the middle east dominating the market right? well prop 19 is going to give california its own oil companies...but instead of oil...think cannabis. 

im glad the government will block this should it pass (finally they do something right).


----------



## sm0keyrich510 (Oct 31, 2010)

desert dude said:


> I am not so sure the feds would lose. If the feds charge you, they will try you in a federal court. The jury will not be allowed to hear anything about P215, or P19 if it passes because those pertain to CA law and are irrelevant to federal law. The jury will be forced to consider only federal law. If you are lucky, you will get one juror who is willing to nullify the feds case and wind up with a hung jury; most likely you won't be lucky.
> 
> By posting this I am not implying that I approve of federal, I do not.


this is true. should 19 pass the feds COULD (and probably WOULD) come to ca and just bust people left and right and the feds dont bust you and send you to state court it is federal and everything you said is true...they could send up to jail in federal court...and should 19 pass the feds can (and possibly will) send people to jail if ca refuses to pull prop 19 (if it passes)


----------



## desert dude (Oct 31, 2010)

sm0keyrich510 said:


> ive been hearing for awhile now that prop 19's support is falling down more and more as the days near to the election.
> 
> im honestly not shocked when i read this in the article:
> The reversal in attitudes comes after U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced his opposition to the measure and said the Justice Department would "vigorously enforce" federal marijuana laws in California if voters approved it.
> ...


You sound like your mind is closed on the matter, but the fed has no supremacy in this matter. CA has every right to pass and implement P19. The feds hands are completely tied.


https://www.aclu-sc.org/releases/view/103050


----------



## desert dude (Oct 31, 2010)

sm0keyrich510 said:


> this is true. should 19 pass the feds COULD (and probably WOULD) come to ca and just bust people left and right and the feds dont bust you and send you to state court it is federal and everything you said is true...they could send up to jail in federal court...and should 19 pass the feds can (and possibly will) send people to jail if ca refuses to pull prop 19 (if it passes)



Maybe so. That is all the more reason to vote FOR prop 19. This is a fight that we need to have.


----------



## beardo (Oct 31, 2010)

desert dude said:


> the fed has no supremacy in this matter. CA has every right to pass and implement P19. The feds hands are completely tied.


that is a total lie


----------



## desert dude (Oct 31, 2010)

beardo said:


> that is a total lie


Well, the ACLU disagrees with you, and Dave Nick disagrees with you, and retired Judge Jim Gray disagrees with you. Your credentials as a constitutional lawyer are not overwhelming, Beardo. If the feds have a supremacy clause case with P19, then they just as surely have as strong a case against P215, yet they have done nothing regarding P215; that ought to tell you something.


----------



## potroast (Oct 31, 2010)

The Ruiner said:


> I'd rather know who your attorney was...just so no one else hires them.



Oh, Yeah, right. It must be my attorney's fault. Nice deflection, dolt. 




fdd2blk said:


> am i missing something?



NOW you're starting to understand ...


----------



## beardo (Oct 31, 2010)

SwungChris said:


> What an idiot.


 thanks for the enlightenment your post was very informative I can tell you have read and can fathom the complexities of prop 19


----------



## newgrowboxgrower (Oct 31, 2010)

im from canada and very interested in this issue, i may not understand your government structure, but what i wonder is why would the federal government even allow this prop 19 to be voted on if they have no intention of giving it any credibility if it passes?


----------



## veggiegardener (Oct 31, 2010)

potroast said:


> Yes, I am compliant with all of our laws. It was STATE pigs that were in the swat team. Obviously there's something about it that YOU don't understand.
> 
> Ask my friend Jovan Jackson who was just found guilty in STATE court for operating a dispensary. Prosecuted under STATE law, by STATE pigs, and found guilty in a STATE court. The DA convinced the judge to not allow his medical defense, in STATE court. If you need me to explain it in more detail, don't ask.
> 
> ...


I've followed and been appalled at the shenanigans pulled by some dispensaries.

One was selling hundreds of pounds out the back door to individual dealers. That one was closed down by the Feds, but never prosecuted.

They were satisfied to take the Money, Weed and ownership of the property, and dared the owner to do something about it. He lost about a million dollars.

If the "state"(county?) was involved, JJ probably had some back door action, as well. They will bust people if they're adding to the street dealing problem, or failing to pay at least sales tax and income tax.

People don't get convicted for running a clean, transparent operation.

The best dispensaries are very much in partnership with law enforcement, because they benefit from doing so.


----------



## desert dude (Oct 31, 2010)

newgrowboxgrower said:


> im from canada and very interested in this issue, i may not understand your government structure, but what i wonder is why would the federal government even allow this prop 19 to be voted on if they have no intention of giving it any credibility if it passes?


The US federal government does not control the state governments, at least that is what the tenth amendment to the US constitution says. There are many who say that the tenth amendment is a "dead letter" and means nothing. This position is one of the factors that gave rise to the tea-party. 

 The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. 


----------



## beardo (Oct 31, 2010)

desert dude said:


> If the feds have a supremacy clause case with P19, then they just as surely have as strong a case against P215, yet they have done nothing regarding P215; that ought to tell you something.


 They have done nothing???? on 215??? since its inception?? really? Do you actually believe that or did you just think I would?


----------



## desert dude (Oct 31, 2010)

beardo said:


> They have done nothing???? on 215??? since its inception?? really? Do you actually believe that or did you just think I would?


Nothing in regard to the supremacy clause, which is the point you raised regarding to P19.


----------



## The Ruiner (Oct 31, 2010)

potroast said:


> Oh, Yeah, right. It must be my attorney's fault. Nice deflection, dolt.


Then I guess the only logical conclusion to this is that... I dont even have to say it...


----------



## veggiegardener (Oct 31, 2010)

SwungChris said:


> What an idiot.


Well, now that you've chimed in, I regret not voting twice.

With your help we can DEFEAT P19!


----------



## PROP.19 (Oct 31, 2010)

Prop.19 will show the world people still have power over big government, VOTE YES. I wounder how much it would cost the tax payers to prosecute 500,000+ people for marijuana


----------



## desert dude (Oct 31, 2010)

PROP.19 said:


> Prop.19 will show the world people still have power over big government, VOTE YES. I wounder how much it would cost the tax payers to prosecute 500,000+ people for marijuana


Actually, we know the answer to that question. Last year about 800,000 people were arrested for MJ charges in the US. The feds spent about $20B on their part. The states probably spent about the same amount. Oppressing people ain't cheap, or effective for that matter, but it sure is a lot of fun.


----------



## veggiegardener (Oct 31, 2010)

Prop 19 passing would show the world that even the best ideas can be corrupted by greed.


----------



## desert dude (Oct 31, 2010)

veggiegardener said:


> Prop 19 passing would show the world that even the best ideas can be corrupted by greed.


I would rebut that if I understood what you were talking about.


----------



## Viagro (Oct 31, 2010)

There are plenty of reasons not to like prop 19, but this is just a foot in the door, and the problems can be ironed out.

The bigger picture is the impact this will have on the country over all. It will create a nationwide debate that 
will drive things in the right direction and create an unstoppable momentum for more mature, lucid and realistic legislation.

That's what I think, anyway. I see too many narrow, shortsighted opinions on this matter.


----------



## The Ruiner (Oct 31, 2010)

Viagro said:


> There are plenty of reasons not to like prop 19, but this is just a foot in the door, and the problems can be ironed out.
> 
> The bigger picture is the impact this will have on the country over all. It will create a nationwide debate that
> will drive things in the right direction and create an unstoppable momentum for more mature, lucid and realistic legislation.
> ...


May I ask your locale, sir?


----------



## PROP.19 (Oct 31, 2010)

20B$ and were the "criminals" ??? WAKE UP AMERICA


----------



## veggiegardener (Oct 31, 2010)

Viagro said:


> There are plenty of reasons not to like prop 19, but this is just a foot in the door, and the problems can be ironed out.
> 
> The bigger picture is the impact this will have on the country over all. It will create a nationwide debate that
> will drive things in the right direction and create an unstoppable momentum for more mature, lucid and realistic legislation.
> ...


Shortsightedness doesn't come into it. Most of those here over 40 are experienced with this issue, over long decades. We know that we don't want to refight battles we've already won over MMJ.

Write a better law and you'll get our support.


----------



## fdd2blk (Oct 31, 2010)

potroast said:


> Oh, Yeah, right. It must be my attorney's fault. Nice deflection, dolt.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



prop 215 and prop 19 are both state initiatives. neither one will save you from your little raid.

it appears YOU will never understand.


----------



## potroast (Oct 31, 2010)

fdd2blk said:


> it appears YOU will never understand.




Yeah, cling to that, you'll sleep better young man.


----------



## Viagro (Oct 31, 2010)

The Ruiner said:


> May I ask your locale, sir?


The Santa Cruz mtns until recently. Why?

My opinion is just an opinion. Like all the rest.


----------



## Viagro (Oct 31, 2010)

veggiegardener said:


> Shortsightedness doesn't come into it. Most of those here over 40 are experienced with this issue, over long decades. We know that we don't want to refight battles we've already won over MMJ.
> 
> Write a better law and you'll get our support.


Sometimes it's one step backwards before two steps forward.

I suspect you'll win this battle, while losing the war.


----------



## fdd2blk (Oct 31, 2010)

potroast said:


> Yeah, cling to that, you'll sleep better young man.


your insults still don't change the fact that prop 19 won't offer anyone any more protection then 215 offered you.


----------



## gupp (Oct 31, 2010)

fdd2blk said:


> your insults still don't change the fact that prop 19 won't offer anyone any more protection then 215 offered you.


From the feds, true, but it will protect you from state police when they can't arrest you. I-19 is a road to freedom, not the destination. I'd rather have it than more DEA raids, drug dealers, cartels, and even local police involved.


----------



## fdd2blk (Oct 31, 2010)

gupp said:


> From the feds, true, but it will protect you from state police when they can't arrest you. I-19 is a road to freedom, not the destination. I'd rather have it than more DEA raids, drug dealers, cartels, and even local police involved.


except he was raided by the state employed police under 215. a state prop. prop 19 will give him no more protection then 215 gave him. it's pretty simple to see.


----------



## SwungChris (Nov 1, 2010)

Yeah this stuff is real complex. I wish there were some classes to take or something. What a dumb ass.


----------



## veggiegardener (Nov 1, 2010)

Viagro said:


> Sometimes it's one step backwards before two steps forward.
> 
> I suspect you'll win this battle, while losing the war.


I've won my war.

I'll be talking to a bunch of people in the next year on how to get this right.

No more bullshit power grabs.

Time to put Cannabis next to the pumpkins at the farmer's market.

Santa Cruz Mountains?

Do you know Valerie Corale?(Not sure if that's spelled correctly. It's been a while.)


----------



## sm0keyrich510 (Nov 1, 2010)

desert dude said:


> You sound like your mind is closed on the matter, but the fed has no supremacy in this matter. CA has every right to pass and implement P19. The feds hands are completely tied.
> 
> 
> https://www.aclu-sc.org/releases/view/103050


this is simply not true. at the end of the day the government would have every right to come to cali and start arresting everyone under prop 19 for possession, cultivation, etc. 

remember california belongs to the u.s.a....not the other way around. 

at the very least the government could punish ca by not giving ca any grant money (which is used for a WIDE range of things from education, to roads, mass transit, etc.) which they can do...or they can do just like i said and knock on the door of prop 19 businesses and throw them in jail because the federal laws over ride the state laws. period. especially when there is the whole schedule 1 drugs document where it states marijuana is illegal on a federal level..trust me the governments hands wont be tied...but the growers/sellers will damn sure have their hands tied...behind their back in cuffs. thing about it, if states had more authority than the government then the government wouldnt exist.

california is a state in a union of states...not its own country.


----------



## desert dude (Nov 1, 2010)

sm0keyrich510 said:


> this is simply not true. at the end of the day the government would have every right to come to cali and start arresting everyone under prop 19 for possession, cultivation, etc.
> 
> remember california belongs to the u.s.a....not the other way around.
> 
> ...


All the things you say are things the federal government can do, I agree. But that wasn't the question. The question was whether the feds have a SUPREMACY clause argument, i.e. can they get the courts to strike down P19 as unconstitutional. That they can not do.

As to your other scenario of the feds withholding funds. I would like to see the feds try to withhold funds as a way to punish CA voters for voting. A Democrat president punishing a mostly Democrat state for exercising their voting rights, and their conscience, in a democratic way. Put down the bong and think this through.


----------



## sm0keyrich510 (Nov 1, 2010)

desert dude said:


> All the things you say are things the federal government can do, I agree. But that wasn't the question. The question was whether the feds have a SUPREMACY clause argument, i.e. can they get the courts to strike down P19 as unconstitutional. That they can not do.
> 
> As to your other scenario of the feds withholding funds. I would like to see the feds try to withhold funds as a way to punish CA voters for voting. A Democrat president punishing a mostly Democrat state for exercising their voting rights, and their conscience, in a democratic way. Put down the bong and think this through.


remember this SAME president said the feds would not go after MEDICAL (ie. prop 215) marijuana. RECREATIONAL (prop 19) marijuana is something different (and prop 19 makes marijuana recreational). 

the feds are not powerless and california does not have the right to vote in something that DIRECTLY conflicts with federal law..prop 215 doesnt go against federal law...prop 19 does...

prop 215 was about decriminalization and the abilty to use mj medicinally. thats why the feds are more accepting of prop 19. they've already admitted they will not tolerate this measure (or respect it) should it pass. 

the feds WOULD hold funds if that was their only option as they will not be bullied by one state...its more likely they would make an example out of CA..the WRONG example to set with so many states wanting to legalize.

medical marijuana and/or decriminalization is something EVERY state can pass (or not if they choose not to) but LEGALIZATION will have to come from the federal level if its going to work, be fair, and successful. period.


----------



## desert dude (Nov 1, 2010)

sm0keyrich510 said:


> remember this SAME president said the feds would not go after MEDICAL (ie. prop 215) marijuana. RECREATIONAL (prop 19) marijuana is something different (and prop 19 makes marijuana recreational).
> 
> the feds are not powerless and california does not have the right to vote in something that DIRECTLY conflicts with federal law..prop 215 doesnt go against federal law...prop 19 does...
> 
> ...


Well, if you are so terrified by the feds then vote no on P19. Personally, I welcome the fight with the feds; it is long overdue, I voted yes. 

I suspect you are in for a long wait if you are waiting for the feds say, "after thinking about it for 40 years and spending a trillion dollars, we have decided we were wrong so we are going to dismantle all of the drug bureaucracies and let freedom rein..." The ONLY way the war on drugs will end is if the people force the issue.

By the way, you are wrong on the withholding funds issue, and on your assertion that CA has no right to enact P19, there is no difference between P215 and P19 with regards to the feds.


----------



## Serapis (Nov 1, 2010)

The Ruiner said:


> May I ask your locale, sir?


Wake up and get a clue dude.... The locale of an opinion doesn't matter. This issue is being debated all over the world now because of prop 19. It doesn't matter where he or she lives, their opinion is just as valid as yours when it comes to the debate. If you don't see that, you are just acting ignorant.

I'm posting in this manner because when The Ruiner runs into a debater with hard to answer questions on 19, he resorts to telling the person their opinion doesn't matter if they aren't in California.... I find that to be pretty short sighted. The debate can go on regardless, if The ruiner actually had facts and could debate.


----------



## deprave (Nov 1, 2010)

I think there is a lot of people who actually understand why they are voting 'no' but for many people the reason is fear and propaganda, when the *enemy of the people* are fighting so hard to spread their blatant lies and propaganda - how can you sit back and support this evil fear campaign against the people.

Regardless of any fears I may have or personal reasons, *the government and corporations has threatened the people* on this, and If I stood on the 'yes' or the 'no' side then I would vote 'yes' to fight the oppressors and win one for the people. Please vote yes! Do this one for people all around the world! Dont be a dousche! (lol!)

This lie has to end ASAP - 70 years is long enough!


----------



## beardo (Nov 1, 2010)

In a few hours we can all vote against tax and controll


----------



## TokinPodPilot (Nov 1, 2010)

desert dude said:


> Well, if you are so terrified by the feds then vote no on P19. Personally, I welcome the fight with the feds; it is long overdue, I voted yes.
> 
> I suspect you are in for a long wait if you are waiting for the feds say, "after thinking about it for 40 years and spending a trillion dollars, we have decided we were wrong so we are going to dismantle all of the drug bureaucracies and let freedom rein..." The ONLY way the war on drugs will end is if the people force the issue.
> 
> By the way, you are wrong on the withholding funds issue, and on your assertion that CA has no right to enact P19, there is no difference between P215 and P19 with regards to the feds.


Except you won't be the one having to do the fighting. You talk a good game, but you won't be the one risking anything.
https://www.rollitup.org/legalization-marijuana/367374-riu-prop19-poll-vote-here-post4842662.html#post4842662


desert dude said:


> My guess is that you are more likely to be sucking dick than me, when you are sitting in a federal penitentiary for growing and distributing marijuana. I don't smoke it, sell it or grow it.


Although this does explain the peanut gallery posting and argumentation that you seem to favor. Now I begin to understand that part of the problem is at least partly ignorance-based. But please continue with your armchair quarterbacking... it seems appropriate that you're the forum equivalent of the poseur yelling at the athletes on his TV.


----------



## Dan Kone (Nov 1, 2010)

sm0keyrich510 said:


> this is simply not true. at the end of the day the government would have every right to come to cali and start arresting everyone under prop 19 for possession, cultivation, etc.


Oh come on. That's such an unnecessary scare tactic. I understand if you don't like prop 19, but you don't need to resort to that. If you want to oppose prop 19, do it by bringing up legitimate realistic points. 

The DEA does not have the resources to patrol the streets of California looking out for people they suspect of having a joint or a few plants in their closet. Basically, that's a bunch of crap. 



> at the very least the government could punish ca by not giving ca any grant money (which is used for a WIDE range of things from education, to roads, mass transit, etc.) which they can do...


They could, but they won't. The recession is much more important to the federal government then prop 19. California's recovery is crutial to the recovery of the country.

You really think Obama would economically damage California in order to oppose prop 19? The headline could read "Obama puts country into a depression, but it's ok because he got Californian's back for prop 19!"

Never going to happen!



> or they can do just like i said and knock on the door of prop 19 businesses and throw them in jail because the federal laws over ride the state laws.


That they can do, but to a very limited extent. If there are thousands of these businesses, then they don't have the resources to even make a dent. They'd have to pull DEA agents away from the cartels in Mexico which could potentially over throw the Mexican government or pull agents out of Afghanistan investigating Al Queda/Taliban opium trading where the profits go towards killing American soldiers. 

The DEA has it's hands full right now. They don't have the resources to go through California arresting business owners. They'll arrest a few people in a show trial, then move on. 

You aren't being realistic here. If this were 1998 this would be a real concern. But now, not so much.


----------



## fdd2blk (Nov 1, 2010)

i just saw my first prop 19 commercial, and i watch A LOT of TV.
it was during dancing with the stars and it was from the yes side.


----------



## Dan Kone (Nov 1, 2010)

fdd2blk said:


> i just saw my first prop 19 commercial, and i watch A LOT of TV.
> it was during dancing with the stars and it was from the yes side.


I'm very disappointed in their lack of ad buys.


----------



## gupp (Nov 1, 2010)

Dan Kone said:


> I'm very disappointed in their lack of ad buys.


I'm under the impression that it costs a lot of $$$ and neither side has very much money.


----------



## Serapis (Nov 1, 2010)

gupp said:


> I'm under the impression that it costs a lot of $$$ and neither side has very much money.


Are you kidding? The NO side is funded by holy rollers, liquor distillers and distributors, dispensaries and many more with big coffers.


----------



## beardo (Nov 1, 2010)

Serapis said:


> Are you kidding? The NO side is funded by holy rollers, liquor distillers and distributors, dispensaries and many more with big coffers.


 And the yes side was funded by Dick Lee and George Soros


----------



## Serapis (Nov 1, 2010)

beardo said:


> And the yes side was funded by Dick Lee and George Soros


Funded by? How about enjoyed the support of? If GS has given generously to the initiative, you would have seen numerous ads. The No side is all special interests, including the 215 "surplus" growers....

It sickens me that other pot users and growers would vote to continue prohibition... Utterly ridiculous.....


----------



## beardo (Nov 1, 2010)

Serapis said:


> Funded by? How about enjoyed the support of? If GS has given generously to the initiative, you would have seen numerous ads. The No side is all special interests, including the 215 "surplus" growers....
> 
> It sickens me that other pot users and growers would vote to continue prohibition... Utterly ridiculous.....


 1 million extra last week alone isn't enough for a private donation?


----------



## CA MMJ (Nov 2, 2010)

fdd2blk said:


> um, prop 19 is a STATE initiative. the feds will still come get you.
> it appears you don't understand that.
> 
> if you were compliant under 215 and you still took charges then how can you possibly feel prop 19 will help you? it makes no sense. you were compliant, weren't you?


No they wouldn't, because they would have to arrest over half of California. If Prop 19 passes, they will only be going after big timers, and people that aren't compliant with state law, not just anyone who has a tiny garden or smokes a little herb now and then. The only people that will be negatively affected are those who will lose their black market money. And also people who will lose their sin-money I guess you could call it (Tobacco Company, Alcohol, Pharmaceutical, Dirty Politicians, etc). 

I think everyone understands that if you're compliant with the medical laws that you probably won't get arrested, but the government can, and will do what it wants. They will continue to arrest marijuana users, medical, state legal, or state illegal, simply because they're the ones "in power" so they can. That's why Prop 19 is just the starting ground. Everyone knows its not a perfect law, but its a start, and thats what we need, for marijuana prohibition has failed drastically, and legalizing (eventually nationwide) would bring in BILLIONS of needed dollars. Vote yes if you don't like Nancy Pelosi! "There will be no more spending" my fucking ass.


----------



## gupp (Nov 2, 2010)

Serapis said:


> Are you kidding? The NO side is funded by holy rollers, liquor distillers and distributors, dispensaries and many more with big coffers.


Hardly a group of people with anything in common


----------

