Why I'm voting NO on prop. 19

Status
Not open for further replies.

Needofweed

Active Member
look man im voting no. its not my fualt you hate the "drug dealers" that suppply you now bet you didnt hate them before prop19.sorry you would rather buy your weed at a gass station.
and if u got your 215 card and are paying 60 an eighth thats your choice.
i got my 215 card because i get headachs for $60.you dont need aids or be dying to get your card.
you just need the want to live a better, more comfortable life.
i grow my own weed and buy it inbeetween harvest from other growers for no more than $120 an once for top grade medical of course
 

colonuggs

Well-Known Member
food for thought

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.

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.”[33]

Ultimately, the decision is not up to any organization; it’s up to YOU. How will you vote? Read the initiative for yourself and just VOTE KNOW
 

Dan Kone

Well-Known Member
go to freson theres no despenaries.
there were over 500 at one time in LA now theres alittle over 100.
I thought you said if one city bans them the rest will follow? That was your logic for why every city/county will make laws like rancho cordova. So how come there are still thousands of dispensaries in California?

Should we repeal prop 215 just because some cities in California don't allow dispensaries? Your telling people they should vote against prop 19 because 2 cities are making bad laws. Well there are several cities that ban dispensaries and have several bad medical marijuana laws. So do you support the repeal of prop 215 for the same reasons?

If not, then it doesn't make sense to vote against prop 19 just because it'll have some of the same problems as prop 215. Waiting to legalize until every city/county in California won't pass their own bad cannabis laws is probably the stupidest idea I've ever heard in my life.
 

colonuggs

Well-Known Member
I thought you said if one city bans them the rest will follow? That was your logic for why every city/county will make laws like rancho cordova. So how come there are still thousands of dispensaries in California?

Should we repeal prop 215 just because some cities in California don't allow dispensaries? Your telling people they should vote against prop 19 because 2 cities are making bad laws. Well there are several cities that ban dispensaries and have several bad medical marijuana laws. So do you support the repeal of prop 215 for the same reasons?

If not, then it doesn't make sense to vote against prop 19 just because it'll have some of the same problems as prop 215. Waiting to legalize until every city/county in California won't pass their own bad cannabis laws is probably the stupidest idea I've ever heard in my life.
September 14, 2010

SAN DIEGO — The San Diego Board of Supervisors took a stand this week on legalizing marijuana in California. The supervisors voted against it. Unanimously. But drive a few hundred miles north and visit the Oakland City Council. They voted in favor of legalization. Unanimously.

.
The subject comes up because we’ll be voting this November on the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010, a.k.a. Proposition 19. Up until now, marijuana has been legal in California for medicinal uses only. But Prop. 19 would allow the cultivation, sale and use of pot for any reason you desire.

Supporters of legalizing marijuana say passing Prop. 19 could solve a host of social and economic problems.

It would remedy our state budget disaster by generating a huge amount of sales tax revenue. It would free up cops and D.A.’s to arrest and jail dangerous criminals because they wouldn’t waste their time prosecuting people who sell marijuana. So, legalizing the stuff would make us our state richer and safer, not to mention more happy and blissful.

The march toward legalizing marijuana in California began 14 years ago with the passage of Prop. 215, which allowed for medical use. Unfortunately Prop. 215 has been nothing but trouble. It put state law in direct conflict with federal law, which does not allow any sale or use of marijuana. The proposition was also badly written. It’s short and vague, and it’s required years of legislative work to try to clarify it for practical use.

Here’s my take on medical marijuana: If cannabis has medicinal value, and some studies show that it has, we already have a tested institution for selling prescription medicine. It’s called a pharmacy. In the ideal world we'd throw out Prop. 215, make sure marijuana clears all of the legal hurdles to get approved for medical use, let doctors prescribe it to worthy patients and let patients pick it up at their local drug store.

If, on the other hand, California voters decide to legalize marijuana for medical and recreational use by passing Prop. 19, it’s a whole new ballgame and (I assume) a whole new fight between the state and the feds.
 

Needofweed

Active Member
im just trying to show you that if one city does it others will follow.
quit tying to put words in my mouth dude.
 

nathenking

Well-Known Member
Government will forever grow. It's the inevitable evolution of society.
So voting no and keeping it illegal, is more rational to you?
I don't follow your logic.
Im not voting to keep it illegal, im voting no so WE can write a new prop and not shoot ourselves in the leg... That is my reasoning...
 

Needofweed

Active Member
it just like saying if pot is legalized in cali it wil spread through the whole country
california is a model state.
 

Needofweed

Active Member
prop19 advocates say it will produce billions in dollors of tax revenue yearly. this analysis is based on taxing todays market price of "$300" an oz.At the same time prop19 advocates say mj prices will drop to 30 dollors an oz. thats a 90% drop in the propesed tax revenue for the state.This is whats going to take my state out of the hole.This is barly enough to pay the bureacrats associated with prop19
 

nathenking

Well-Known Member
prop19 advocates say it will produce billions in dollors of tax revenue yearly. this analysis is based on taxing todays market price of "$300" an oz.At the same time prop19 advocates say mj prices will drop to 30 dollors an oz. thats a 90% drop in the propesed tax revenue for the state.This is whats going to take my state out of the hole.This is barly enough to pay the bureacrats associated with prop19
Exactly... All this speculation from the supporters isnt any more sain or valid than from the nay sayers... I dont know a single person who is gonna pay taxes on there ganja... Some are gonna 5000watters, and some are gonna be farmers with a few hundred elbows... And not a one of them is gonna all of a sudden pay tax... That turns out to be alot of money at the end of the year... So where is all this tax money gonna come from... The fools that pay it, and the fools that get there certificate to have these big grows... With tax, electric, labour, insurance, supplies and security... The price is gonna stay the same for killer indoor.... 2 cents
 

Sure Shot

Well-Known Member
75,000 people are arrested for marijuana-related arrest are made each year in California alone.
89% of marijuana-related arrest are simply for possession!
 

nathenking

Well-Known Member
75,000 people are arrested for marijuana-related arrest are made each year in California alone.
89% of marijuana-related arrest are simply for possession!
And how many people get let off... out of the 89percent of people, who had more than an ounce????
 

SB Garlic

Active Member
And how many people get let off... out of the 89percent of people, who had more than an ounce????
I got busted with less that an eighth before I had a rec and was not let off at all. I had to waste 6 months in a drug rehab program, which really hurt my education. This was right after high school and it really slowed my life down, and is a huge waste of everyones money.
 

vertise

Well-Known Member
yea you normally dont just get "let go". Alot of time, money and problems that come from being arrested for minor pot issues.
 

nowwhat

Member
  1. any other appropriate controls necessary for protection of the public health and welfare.
from section 11301, last item apparently opens up local regulations to regulating ANY and ALL aspects if they play the "public health and welfare" card. In other words, using said language a county or city could outlaw most aspects of the legalization.

Am i reading this langauge wrong????
 

Sure Shot

Well-Known Member
from section 11301, last item apparently opens up local regulations to regulating ANY and ALL aspects if they play the "public health and welfare" card. In other words, using said language a county or city could outlaw most aspects of the legalization.

Am i reading this langauge wrong????
Yes, city councils still hold power.
Go figure:?
 

nowwhat

Member
So it comes down to being a roullette because of the loosely written language, which opens it up to re-regulation and taxation by every tom, dick and harry with a council seat.....

Did you file your mj-4 this year?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top