Can we defeat Prop 19? will it pass? Is it as bogus as it seems?

Serapis

Well-Known Member
Yea I thought so. How about you all stop bitching about the law as it stands pass it then fix it.
^^^ Exactly my point.

Rather than trash everyone's ability to grow or legally buy and consume MJ, pass the law, then form a coalition of like minded people and petition for reasonable changes with your local city government. Voting NO because the law is not perfect is asinine. You know how many churches and 'medical' dispensaries are hoping you'll vote no? Those voting NO are just being used.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Again, are you blind or illiterate? Where does "possess and consume" and "bought and sold" spell CULTIVTATION? How many times will you ignore this? How many times will to resort to personal attacks? How many times do you have to be shown how full of shit you are?

And for fucks-sake, how much time do you spend alone at your computer? But its understandable...
for once you are right. 'cultivtation' does not appear anywhere in anything i cited. however, cultivation does, and what i've shown you specifically makes medical users exempt from the cultivation limits set for recreational users. you asked me to point and say look, i am pointing and saying look. you are trying your best not to. too bad 5 other people get it already.

i have not made any personal attacks on you. you are the one who just called me blind, illiterate, and full of shit....those seem like personal attacks. i have legitimate concerns, based on the tone of your writing, that there is sand in your vagina and that it is irritating you. thus, not a personal attack.

i hope we can move forward amicably from here with the mutual understanding that prop 19 does not take away any of the rights you have under 215. :-P
 

tnrtinr

Well-Known Member
NORML ENDORSES AND SUPPORTS THIS BILL. You people that don't have forgotten who you are.
 

colonuggs

Well-Known Member
I am not tring to troll you. But clearly you are just reading what you want the bill to say. The thing your missing this is what the governemnt is willing to give. If you spit in there face and dont take it they wont give you a second chance. Is prop 19 the best no does it need work yes. But whats going to be a figth you can win. The one were you say F U to the U.S. Government we want it our way? FYI this aint Burger king. Or the fight were you have now have legal MJ and can put up justafiable proof to amend the law?


Yea I thought so. How about you all stop bitching about the law as it stands pass it then fix it.
You think this is our only chance to take a step in the direction of legalization??

Fact: This is only our first chance—it will certainly not be the last.

There were three other initiatives that sought to be placed on the ballot this year; all three would have legalized not only possession, but also private distribution among individual adults.
Some even called for the release of non-violent marijuana offenders. However, staffed exclusively by volunteers, all failed to gather the required number of signatures for the petitions.
(Richard Lee invested $1.3 million of his own money to hire a company to obtain the requisite signatures for the current proposed initiative.)

What now?

The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Initiative is not the only path to legalization. We have come so far, and are now so close—it is imperative that we let the next step be the right one. Legalized marijuana is within reach, yet the movement could be set back with such a problematic initiative at the helm. Instead of rushing to pass a measure that prohibits marijuana under the guise of legalization, we can draft an initiative that calls for true legalization and that has the full support of marijuana law reform organizations and leaders of the movement.

The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Initiative is rife with ambiguity, expands the War on Drugs, undermines the medical marijuana movement, arrests more people for marijuana, offers no protection for small farmers and insufficient protection for medical marijuana users, has a high potential for monopolization, provides no regulations to prevent corporate takeover of the industry, cartelizes the economy, and divides our community into poor, unlicensed, mom-and-pop gardener versus rich, licensed, corporate farmer. And since the one thing that’s clear about the initiative is that it’s vague, it could very easily prove to be a Pandora’s box of unintended consequences. Beyond its vagueness, which itself is problematic, these side effects are inherently socially dangerous. The impact that such a failed legalization initiative could have on the movement nation-wide could be disastrous.

This is not a question of whether to legalize or not to legalize. Legalization is the goal and it is inevitable. The question is whether we want to rush in and settle for an initiative that is so poorly-worded as to be ambiguous, and so vague as to be open to vast interpretation from judges—or wait for the wording and other inconsistencies to be corrected for 2012. If we hold out for a perfect initiative we will wait forever. But if we at least hold out for an initiative that is direct, unambiguous, well-defined and clearly written, we will have an unprecedented opportunity to inspire the world to join the movement to legalize marijuana.


NORML ENDORSES AND SUPPORTS THIS BILL. You people that don't have forgotten who you are.
Many pro-legalization activists are rallying behind the idea of taking the time to craft an initiative that will be a clear step up from the current cannabis situation of in California and will result in increased access—not its opposite. Both NORML and the MPP, the foremost cannabis law reform organizations in the country, have suggested we wait and make another attempt at legalization during the 2012 elections. Dale Gieringer, Director of California’s NORML, said, “I do think it’s going to take a few more years for us to develop a proposal that voters will be comfortable with.”[32] Likewise, Bruce Mirken, MPP’s Director of Communications, was quoted as saying, “In our opinion, we should wait and build our forces and aim at 2012.
 

The Ruiner

Well-Known Member
Oh yes there is.... The bill specifically exempts restrictions on prop 215 patients and providers. It refers to the previous bill by name and number. Why are you lying? And why do you believe all pro prop 19 people are seeing $ dancing in their head? Thats plain stupid. Maybe the pro peeps like the idea of growing their own weed, or smoking it without risk of jail and huge fines. Just maybe this will take away the need for abusers to visit doctors in attempts to get cards.

You have not presented a good reason to be against the bill. The bill is not stripping any of your rights away, it grants additional rights. If you are a patient, why the fucl do you even care about 19? Have you actually read the bill?

The amendments consisted of adding the phrase "except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9" to the end of Items 7 & 8 under Purposes.

The initiative mentions medical marijuana three times and omits mentioning it once.

The Mentions

The three mentions are Items 6, 7, and 8 in Section 2, B. Purposes.

6. Provide easier, safer access for patients who need cannabis for medical purposes.

The courts will determine that this means Prop. 19 is intended to amend and supersede California's medical marijuana laws; Proposition 215 (H&S 11362.5) and SB 420 (H&S 11362.7-H&S 11362.9).

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.

There ya go, 3 exemptions for medical marijuana, and you claim there were none. You are blowing smoke.....
"bought and sold"
"possess and consume"

Duh...
 

The Ruiner

Well-Known Member
I am not tring to troll you. But clearly you are just reading what you want the bill to say. The thing your missing this is what the governemnt is willing to give. If you spit in there face and dont take it they wont give you a second chance. Is prop 19 the best no does it need work yes. But whats going to be a figth you can win. The one were you say F U to the U.S. Government we want it our way? FYI this aint Burger king. Or the fight were you have now have legal MJ and can put up justafiable proof to amend the law?


Yea I thought so. How about you all stop bitching about the law as it stands pass it then fix it.
How am I reading what I want? The bill is FLAWED. Why does everyone think that adjustments will be made IN FAVOR of MMJ if this passes? Why does there even need to be fixing in the first place? The bill is brought to us by lobbyists, how hard is it to understand that special interests wrote this bill? How hard is it to understand democratic process, That there are an unknown/infinite number of chances for something better to come along? I wont stop bitching because none of you seem to get that this affects MY RIGHTS...telling me to relinquish my rights, or that its good for me is pretty fucking much assinine and I will never agree with you. And neither will most patients in my position.
 

The Ruiner

Well-Known Member
NORML ENDORSES AND SUPPORTS THIS BILL. You people that don't have forgotten who you are.
Totally backwards... Dick Lee forgot where the fuck he is coming from, so is High Times, so is NORML. Turning your back on what has been your power base for 15 years is a pretty fucked up and stupid move... and I hope it backfires right in their faces when this fails.
 

The Ruiner

Well-Known Member
for once you are right. 'cultivtation' does not appear anywhere in anything i cited. however, cultivation does, and what i've shown you specifically makes medical users exempt from the cultivation limits set for recreational users. you asked me to point and say look, i am pointing and saying look. you are trying your best not to. too bad 5 other people get it already.

i have not made any personal attacks on you. you are the one who just called me blind, illiterate, and full of shit....those seem like personal attacks. i have legitimate concerns, based on the tone of your writing, that there is sand in your vagina and that it is irritating you. thus, not a personal attack.

i hope we can move forward amicably from here with the mutual understanding that prop 19 does not take away any of the rights you have under 215. :-P
Tone aside, I find you to be generally aloof to what other people say...you seem to half-way read what you want, and only address what you want. And you seem way too self-assured to ever be taken seriously enough for me. Frankly, I think you are lonely and bitter in the real world. You come across as negative and arrogant, always looking for a way to put people down that dont agree with you, and frankly I think its sad, but what the fuck, right? You are who you are.

As far as 19, there are ABSOLUTELY NO PROTECTIONS OR EXEMPTIONS FOR MEDICAL GROWERS. Also, neither are MMJ patient-growers exempt from taxation on their growing spaces under prop 19.
 

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
Why are you guys all talking about the CUA/MMP? That's never been the issue? What good does it do to divert back to them? The problem is with how shittily written prop 19 is.
Lol, i'm not talking about that of the sort, don't even know what it is.

I am simply quoting pieces of text from the bill and from the health and safety legislation. You seem to be putting up a VERY good effort in ignoring and not addressing the point. Cultivation is as normal for MMJ patients, i have yet to hear or see any evidence that disproves this. It seems rather mad to be arguing a side you have no evidence for, against a side that has concrete evidence..

I am not a cali resident, personally i don't mind how any of you vote, but doesn't mean you should run around spreading false information as fact. Yes or no people should be allowed to make up their own choice without being lied to to vote a certain way. Oh wait, that's politics though.

If there is " ABSOLUTELY NO PROTECTIONS OR EXEMPTIONS FOR MEDICAL GROWERS." then please explain to me what "
except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9." means?? please expain just what that means :lol:
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
As far as 19, there are ABSOLUTELY NO PROTECTIONS OR EXEMPTIONS FOR MEDICAL GROWERS.
like tiptoptoker, i would also like you to stop ignoring this phrase and explain exactly what it means to you, personally.

"except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9"

as for my blind, illiterate, full of shit, aloof, lonely, bitter, negative and arrogant self, i would like to invite you to my oktoberfest party tonight. there will be schnitzer and shiner. i do understand if you must decline due to previous plans of removing sand from your vagina. my wife tells me that can be quite irritating. :)
 

The Ruiner

Well-Known Member
Lol, i'm not talking about that of the sort, don't even know what it is.

I am simply quoting pieces of text from the bill and from the health and safety legislation. You seem to be putting up a VERY good effort in ignoring and not addressing the point. Cultivation is as normal for MMJ patients, i have yet to hear or see any evidence that disproves this. It seems rather mad to be arguing a side you have no evidence for, against a side that has concrete evidence..

I am not a cali resident, personally i don't mind how any of you vote, but doesn't mean you should run around spreading false information as fact. Yes or no people should be allowed to make up their own choice without being lied to to vote a certain way. Oh wait, that's politics though.

If there is " ABSOLUTELY NO PROTECTIONS OR EXEMPTIONS FOR MEDICAL GROWERS." then please explain to me what " except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9." means?? please expain just what that means :lol:

That part of the bill that says "except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9." is only referring to cannabis that is "bought and sold" and then "possess(ed) and consumed" not cultivation. The sentence would read differently if cultivation had been included. Like:

7. Ensure, 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 CULTIVATE, possess and consume small amounts, except as permitted under Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9 of the Health and Safety Code.

I don't understand what "proof" you need. There is nothing to prove... there is an entire paragraph that outlines which standing california state laws that are not to be affected by prop 19...

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: Section 11357 (relating to possession on school grounds), Section 11361 (relating to minors, as amended herein), Section 11379.6 (relating to chemical production), or Section 11532 (relating to loitering to commit a crime or acts not authorized by law) of the Health and Safety Code; Section 23152 of the Vehicle Code (relating to driving while under the influence); Section 272 of the Penal Code (relating to contributing to the delinquency of a minor); or any law prohibiting use of controlled substances in the workplace or by specific persons whose jobs involve public safety.

How and why could you omit the CUA/MMP from this list? They are state laws, just like these, they are quite pertinent to the subject matter of 19, and for some really strange reason they dont appear in this paragraph. Can you honestly think that they just "forgot" to put them in there? What more proof do you need? Read the bill, read my response to J. David Nicks' letter (link in my signature), I can tell you right now that there absolutely no convincing pieces of evidence to support the claim that MMJ patient growers wont be affected by 19. Never has been, and there wont be any.

Seriously, all the bullshit that is going around means nothing... and that is really fucking important to remember. Because if this POS is passed, we are letting the CA govt decide what this bill says... not fucking NORML, not High Times, not fucking Dane Kone or Uncle Buck. Fucking lawmakers, people that for the most part, are opposed to 19. 19 lets lawmakers re-write how MJ in CA works, and none of us will be a part of that process. So the hopes and dreams that "we can fix it" are analogous with a co-dependent thinking their abusive/addicted spouse will change. They don't want to change.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
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.
too busy rubbing sand out of uncomfortable locations to include the part of prop 19 that actualy does talk about cultivation, i assume.

ex·cept

1    https://secure.reference.com/sso/register_pop.html?source=favorites/ɪkˈsɛpt/ Show Spelled[ik-sept] Show IPA
–preposition 1. with the exclusion of; excluding; save; but: They were all there except me.
 

The Ruiner

Well-Known Member
like tiptoptoker, i would also like you to stop ignoring this phrase and explain exactly what it means to you, personally.

"except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9"

as for my blind, illiterate, full of shit, aloof, lonely, bitter, negative and arrogant self, i would like to invite you to my oktoberfest party tonight. there will be schnitzer and shiner. i do understand if you must decline due to previous plans of removing sand from your vagina. my wife tells me that can be quite irritating. :)
Funny thing, I never once directly said those things about you. Every time there is an "I think" or "it seems"...I make it very clear that it is my opinion.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Funny thing, I never once directly said those things about you. Every time there is an "I think" or "it seems"...I make it very clear that it is my opinion.
for someone who urged others to 'debate the issue, not the person' earlier in this thread, you sure do spend a lot of time focusing on me and telling me what you think of me.

funny, because i definitely do not think much of you. you are a champion of ignoring the obvious, however...

No one can point to any part of the bill and say "look, there's the 215 exemption for cultivation"

*points and says "look, there's the 215 exemption for cultivation!"*

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.
 

beardo

Well-Known Member
I love capitalism, but I accept it has its inefficiencies. Take a look at any post of mine in the Politics section on this forum.

Answer this: what possible negative effects will commercialization of marijuana have on smokers? I can understand the growers, but IMO screw them. Industrialization and automation left plenty out of work, but the economy recovered and jobs were created later on. And you do understand that a majority of marijuana actually is in the hands of Mexican cartels, correct? You're against uprooting them and their revenue sources? Please.

Did you even read my entire post at all, or did you just read a sentence and let your temper get the best of you? I've talked about how tobacco, alcohol, prescription drugs, and others are regulated and taxed. Why shouldn't marijuana be part of that process? And why shouldn't municipalities have the right to sell or not. I live around areas where no alcohol can be sold. So people go to the next town and pay the sales tax and go back home and do their thing. The fact that each municipality will have their own say will lead to competition amongst them and end up in lower prices for you and everyone else. Keep in mind that marijuana tourism will probably upstart at the same time and lead to more gross revenue for this cash strapped state.

I can't believe you all sit there and care about a bunch of growers that just don't care about you at all. They have the ability to keep prices inflated, and you just sit there and pay away idly. Not to mention that actually receiving an infraction or a misdemeanor in your eyes is far more reputable than not being hassled at all is so backwards it boggles my mind.
I'm glad you think the economy has recovered and jobs have been created. Wish I lived on whatever planet your on. And mexican drug cartels are supplying the majority of marijuana? Really? wheres this? on the news or in the real world? Screw all the growers huh- and everyone who depeneds on them and their servises and buisness - HUH ! I''''m not sure if you've ever smoked marijuana or grown it but your not worth the time effort and risk people have put in for generations to provide those in need with marijuana.
 

sharon1

Active Member
And how exactly will the law regarding whether or not it is in the presence of minors be enforced? That is very difficult to do, and I doubt the police will come knocking on your door making an attempt to do so. You're being far too paranoid..
All it will take is an ex-spouse, or snotty tween to call the cops. Mark my words, it will become the hottest news story...to report parents damaging their child's fragile phsyche by smoking pot in front of them.

I am going to vote for this measure....but I seriously doubt it passes. Hope I'm wrong.
 

Brokenneck

Well-Known Member
oh wow,
thought I was just in for a bit of light reading.
I love the subject. I can see how one could think that another member was directing insults at them.
I know, it's hard not to bang your hands on your chest and shout how you feel.
From what I have noticed it really does not help.
I am passionate about this subject seems as most of you are here. Can we try to agree on one thing? We all want it legal.
If you keep beating on each other it's not making a step forward, I think that is all we are looking for.

Nothing directed at anyone.

Let's try to debate one of the most important issues without the personal attacks.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
UB,

Refer to post 91 in this thread.

Jeffers Afternoon.
already addressed that many times over. you responded by sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting 'nananananananalalalalallalalanananannanananana'.

you have failed in upholding your assertion that prop 19 takes away the rights of medical users. no surprise, there have already been many court cases which upheld the rights of medical users in face of lower limits.

end point: if prop 19 passes, medical users will retain all the rights they currently have under 215.

end. of. story.
 
Top