Is PROP 19 Really Good for 215 patients or are we being TRICKED??

FootClan

Well-Known Member
Will prop 215 patients be restricked to only posessing 1 ounce instead of 8 ounces which is what the state guide line is now!! And what about patients personal gardens??? The state limit guidline is 6 mature plants but if your restricked to 1 ounce? how does that work?? 6 mature plants can bring over a pound easy so would that now be A CRIME?? how does one grow just 1 ounce at a time??? lol And what about the dispensary's? Im SURE they will be forced to eather pay thousands of dallors for permits or go out of bizzz?? That sucks i volunteer at a collective and i dont want us to all be tricked into voting for somting this is not in prop 215 patients best interest... And neather do my fellow patients...I already know muiltipul venders who are all voting NO on this bill.......Id like to get more non bias info before i make up my mind but i know for sure that any law that will limit a already low number of plants allowed to grow is a law im VOTING NO ON............ Is anyone a lawyer and has actually read the bill and knows what there talking about wanna jump in here and straightin me out???
 

naimad1234

Well-Known Member
The way I understand things is Prop 19 is not supposed to change the MMJ (215) program at all. but I could be wrong
 

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
Ok, is prop 19 to legalize marijuana?

Because I dont think it has anything to do with the medical side of it. If you are a patient you can probably still have 8 ounces, if you are a provider the same as under 215.

Otherwise it would make no sense.
 

FootClan

Well-Known Member
Ok, is prop 19 to legalize marijuana?

Because I dont think it has anything to do with the medical side of it. If you are a patient you can probably still have 8 ounces, if you are a provider the same as under 215.

Otherwise it would make no sense.
so does anyone ACTUALLY KNOW if will affect us 215 patients??? so far everyone just keeps saying " i think" i want wanna KNOW not think
 

KlosetKing

Well-Known Member
since none of this is enacted yet, no one KNOWS. it is all speculation and all estimation at this point. good luck in your endeavor finding answers to questions that cant be answered until 2-3 months after the bull (hopefully) passes.
 

KlosetKing

Well-Known Member
and to clarify, nothing i can find says anything about prop 19 actually effecting anything for medical users. there is just a lot of speculation as to how it 'may reduce the amount of persecution medical paitents recieve from authorities' and other theories that again, will not be known until a few months after it does or does not pass.
 

FootClan

Well-Known Member
and to clarify, nothing i can find says anything about prop 19 actually effecting anything for medical users. there is just a lot of speculation as to how it 'may reduce the amount of persecution medical paitents recieve from authorities' and other theories that again, will not be known until a few months after it does or does not pass.
So where suppose to vote on a bill that dosent tell us what will happen to us regarding prop 215 patients????? it should say in the bill in plain english" this bill will not effect prop 215 patients" or it should say " this bill WILL affect prop 215 patients and in this way". i mean this a big freakin deal how can they not account for this issue did they think that no one would ask or care about this??? If they arent addressing it in the bill then i doubt it will be good for us 215 patients. if your saying they can just make up rules after the fact then thats crazy and just another reason why i might VOTE NO.....i wanna know in detail what im voting on and how it will affect me and if the asnwer to that is " well just vote and we will see"" FUCK THAT im not going take a chance and vote on somthing that they cant even tell us how it will affect us .....to many on knowns why cant they just tell us how it affects us and if they honestly dont know then they should rewrite the bill so it clearly states what will happen this is bull crap...just the lack of solid information about this makes me wanna vote NO....gosh why cant we just get a clear easy to read copy of this bill and know exactly what it will be.....this is not hard they are making it hard on purpose....i read the bill its in lawyer talk all worded confusing and hard to read.....why cant they word it in normal english.?? what they only want people with 6 year collage degrees who studyed law to be able to read it?? so stupid
 

KlosetKing

Well-Known Member
So where suppose to vote on a bill that dosent tell us what will happen to us regarding prop 215 patients????? it should say in the bill in plain english" this bill will not effect prop 215 patients" or it should say " this bill WILL affect prop 215 patients and in this way". i mean this a big freakin deal how can they not account for this issue did they think that no one would ask or care about this??? If they arent addressing it in the bill then i doubt it will be good for us 215 patients. if your saying they can just make up rules after the fact then thats crazy and just another reason why i might VOTE NO.....i wanna know in detail what im voting on and how it will affect me and if the asnwer to that is " well just vote and we will see"" FUCK THAT im not going take a chance and vote on somthing that they cant even tell us how it will affect us .....to many on knowns why cant they just tell us how it affects us and if they honestly dont know then they should rewrite the bill so it clearly states what will happen this is bull crap...just the lack of solid information about this makes me wanna vote NO....gosh why cant we just get a clear easy to read copy of this bill and know exactly what it will be.....this is not hard they are making it hard on purpose....i read the bill its in lawyer talk all worded confusing and hard to read.....why cant they word it in normal english.?? what they only want people with 6 year collage degrees who studyed law to be able to read it?? so stupid
i have to say iam confused as to why this upsets you so much? i mean, if it doesnt effect you, then if anything you should be happier. again iam not expert on this bill and i cant seem to find a clear cut copy of it anywhere, but as far as i know it doesnt effect anything medical, it is strictly a law aimed towards Recreational Use.

But this is where i get upset. you are not the first medical patient i have heard complain about how the bill didnt effect them. think about it this way. In the best case scenario, this bill passes and it reduces price of Marijuana due to more widespread use, it frees up law enforcement to persue more important issues, and and in turn (so it is speculated, as is all of this) reduces the patient harrassment we have seen in various states and counties since MMJ laws have been passed. WORST case scenario, it does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING positive or negative for patients, and it doesnt mean anything to you. My question lies here-in. If it does nothing for you does that mean that you wont vote?
i have seen this on other boards, MMJ patients claiming that if it doesnt have any effect on them, why should they vote? this is absolutely ludicrous to me. Do not forget that it was many recreational voters that got your bills passed to begin with. If it werent for recreation users, MMJ and MJ in movement in general would not be where it is, period. Second of all, to not vote on it and try to help your fellow non-violent criminal friends from persuing their choosen form of chemical abuse (like it or not thats all it is, like alcohol, nicotine, caffiene, etc) is failing your fellow man, your fellow stoner (not to mention abandoning the very fabric of stoner society) and the very people who got you the privelage to hold that card.

just my take.
 

whiteflour

Well-Known Member
I've read over the legislation and there's not anything against 215 patients. They would have repeal that off the books to lower the limit for card holders. What it's going to do is effectively double tax people WITH a card, while allowing anyone to start going to a dispensary. I feel like they need to make recommendations free now but there's not anything to say that will happen.
 

KlosetKing

Well-Known Member
What it's going to do is effectively double tax people WITH a card, while allowing anyone to start going to a dispensary.
thing is i havent even see this. i mean i guess it MIGHT in areas that already have a MMJ tax, but even now only a few counties are even doing that. at THIS point in time, not many MMJ patients would even be effected by that.
 

whiteflour

Well-Known Member
Might? More like Will. Right now the tax is fixed so they can't change it. Once local municipalities can setup their own tax, "to cover costs", you better believe they'll mock up some costs to cover. I'm sure there will be a few that won't but that will be few and far between. I know my city will. There still isn't even a dispensary here. Several have been established over the years but all got shut down on technicalities. Now you have LA is closing down all of their dispensaries. This all equates to lost revenue and it has to be made up somewhere.

They can't commercialize it how it stands unless the FDA reschedules it. No corporation or chain store in their right mind would even think of getting involved with this. That leaves only dispensaries to do the peddling.
 

FootClan

Well-Known Member
i have to say iam confused as to why this upsets you so much? i mean, if it doesnt effect you, then if anything you should be happier. again iam not expert on this bill and i cant seem to find a clear cut copy of it anywhere, but as far as i know it doesnt effect anything medical, it is strictly a law aimed towards Recreational Use.

But this is where i get upset. you are not the first medical patient i have heard complain about how the bill didnt effect them. think about it this way. In the best case scenario, this bill passes and it reduces price of Marijuana due to more widespread use, it frees up law enforcement to persue more important issues, and and in turn (so it is speculated, as is all of this) reduces the patient harrassment we have seen in various states and counties since MMJ laws have been passed. WORST case scenario, it does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING positive or negative for patients, and it doesnt mean anything to you. My question lies here-in. If it does nothing for you does that mean that you wont vote?
i have seen this on other boards, MMJ patients claiming that if it doesnt have any effect on them, why should they vote? this is absolutely ludicrous to me. Do not forget that it was many recreational voters that got your bills passed to begin with. If it werent for recreation users, MMJ and MJ in movement in general would not be where it is, period. Second of all, to not vote on it and try to help your fellow non-violent criminal friends from persuing their choosen form of chemical abuse (like it or not thats all it is, like alcohol, nicotine, caffiene, etc) is failing your fellow man, your fellow stoner (not to mention abandoning the very fabric of stoner society) and the very people who got you the privelage to hold that card.

just my take.

fabric of stoner society lol......i just want to know clearly what im voting for if its like you say not going to effect me beyond paying more for my recomendation then id vote yes....
 

poplars

Well-Known Member
I'm not voting for that shit. there's always some sort of legal-loophole they'll be able to fuck us over with, I'll pass on that shit. sure it's selfish but I don't care.
 

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
Read the Initiative

h1 { text-align: center; }
Proposition 19: The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010

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

poplars

Well-Known Member
I'm pretty sure after this gets passed, they'll try to pass something else to change the current medical laws. . . it is this next bill you have to watch out for and vote it down!
 

whiteflour

Well-Known Member
I'm pretty sure after this gets passed, they'll try to pass something else to change the current medical laws. . . it is this next bill you have to watch out for and vote it down!
They won't need to really. They'll just jack up taxes as they need to deter people from using it. Until their willing to treat cannabis like a commodity this law is nothing more than an attempt to make the state your drug dealer. Nowhere in the law does it state who can be licensed to sell or grow. So that part is going to fall back on the medical community. Increased demand with same supply.
 

KlosetKing

Well-Known Member
Might? More like Will. Right now the tax is fixed so they can't change it. Once local municipalities can setup their own tax, "to cover costs", you better believe they'll mock up some costs to cover. I'm sure there will be a few that won't but that will be few and far between. I know my city will. There still isn't even a dispensary here. Several have been established over the years but all got shut down on technicalities. Now you have LA is closing down all of their dispensaries. This all equates to lost revenue and it has to be made up somewhere.

They can't commercialize it how it stands unless the FDA reschedules it. No corporation or chain store in their right mind would even think of getting involved with this. That leaves only dispensaries to do the peddling.
i do agree. but what i said still holds true, since a lot of communities havent even begun taxing MMJ YET then when they implement a tax, how could it be considered double if there was no tax before? will taxes be hiked? iam sure. will places that already have taxes be hiked above what they are? i bet. but to say that all MMJ patients taxes should be expected to double is really only speculation that strikes fear into MMJ patients keeping them from voting out of fear of losing the right that the very recreational users pushed to get passed for them.
 

whiteflour

Well-Known Member
Because they're still "selling" cards to med patients. Either dispensaries need to lose the tax for them or they shouldn't be charging for recommendations. No one is going to an MMJ doctor for medical consultation, they go for his state stamp of "approval", and are being charged to get it. That in my opinion is double taxing, or atleast a double standard.
 

KlosetKing

Well-Known Member
i see what your getting at now and i agree that it could be seen as a double tax in some areas due to that. But i would also say keep in mind the restrictions by law a recreational user would have over a medical user. i speak primarily of possession alone.
(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.
if this bill had no written effect on medical patients, then it stands to reason that a medical patient could not only grow more plants, but posses more on them at once. a quick look at http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000881 and you can see that while 3 states allow only an oz on a med patient, most of them are at least 2 ounces, with 6-12 plants, and some even go as high as 24oz at (OR and WA). so ya i see it may hurt a few people in some states, but the state in question, California, has 8 oz usable; 18 plants (6 mature, 12 immature), and a fee of only 33-66 dollars on average. sounds to me like the medical patient is getting the better end of the deal than a recreational user.

again iam not saying that in other states this may effect med patients differently, but in California, it doesn't seem like its going to directly influence anything for medical users, except for maybe a drop in price due to availability. id be more wary of pharmaceutical companies finding a way into the industry.
 
Top