Why Legalization should be Stopped! (wait, hear me out!)

i would appreciate a response on my comment -

The biggest set back for the nation in this regard was passing prop 215 without establishing all the laws in which all authorities would abide by. This led to thousands of arrests and hundreds of thousands in product lost. this also led to the SB 420, which was a failure also.

not more badgering...

Leave the SB420 and prop 215 talk behind, we are not talking about either of them. Not that we can't learn from history, but we need to debate THIS initiative/bill on ITS merits.

One thing you have failed to show me is WHERE in the legislation it says a 20 year old can go to state prison for 7 years for simple possesion/use. SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THAT, since you claim to be so familiar with this bill.

Last night I asked for the verbiage of this bill/initiative and fdd2blk obliged. From the looks of it, what he posted may not be the ENTIRE bill, but it does seem to cover most of what I'd expect it to cover. So if my vague familiarity with this bill is impotent compared to your supreme understanding of it, then please simply SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THAT.

Abe23 said it best before, you are letting the perfect stand in the way of the good. Luckily my fiancee has plentiful family in California that will be balancing out your vote many times over.

As far as I lnow this bill does not negate Prop 215. That being said:



(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 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:


(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;

============================================================================================================================


Therefore if you have a med license or are a caregiver these limitations don't apply to you but you are still limited by Prop 215. But shit, I could be wrong you know they write laws just so they can use them however they want. It just depends how good your lawyer is.

dukeofbaja said:

Leave the SB420 and prop 215 talk behind, we are not talking about either of them. Not that we can't learn from history, but we need to debate THIS initiative/bill on ITS merits.

One thing you have failed to show me is WHERE in the legislation it says a 20 year old can go to state prison for 7 years for simple possesion/use. SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THAT, since you claim to be so familiar with this bill.

Last night I asked for the verbiage of this bill/initiative and fdd2blk obliged. From the looks of it, what he posted may not be the ENTIRE bill, but it does seem to cover most of what I'd expect it to cover. So if my vague familiarity with this bill is impotent compared to your supreme understanding of it, then please simply SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THAT.

Abe23 said it best before, you are letting the perfect stand in the way of the good. Luckily my fiancee has plentiful family in California that will be balancing out your vote many times over.

Click to expand...

maybe if you weren't so drunk, ... i gave you the link as well. http://70.32.87.43/documents/initiative.pdf

Of course you dont want to talk about the past - history is known to repeat itself doesnt it???

Who cares if it is the entire bill or not - WTF does that have to do with anything. I havent read the bill only what people post on this thread and my thread. I dont need to read the entire thing to know that it is not going to result in happy stoners all over CA like you and others think it will. I can think logically and know this...

dukeofbaja said:

Leave the SB420 and prop 215 talk behind, we are not talking about either of them. Not that we can't learn from history, but we need to debate THIS initiative/bill on ITS merits.

One thing you have failed to show me is WHERE in the legislation it says a 20 year old can go to state prison for 7 years for simple possesion/use. SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THAT, since you claim to be so familiar with this bill.

Last night I asked for the verbiage of this bill/initiative and fdd2blk obliged. From the looks of it, what he posted may not be the ENTIRE bill, but it does seem to cover most of what I'd expect it to cover. So if my vague familiarity with this bill is impotent compared to your supreme understanding of it, then please simply SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THAT.

Abe23 said it best before, you are letting the perfect stand in the way of the good. Luckily my fiancee has plentiful family in California that will be balancing out your vote many times over.

Click to expand...

Thank you fdd, you are a gentleman and a scholar.

fdd2blk said:

maybe if you weren't so drunk, ... i gave you the link as well. http://70.32.87.43/documents/initiative.pdf

Click to expand...

I appreciate the information. You obviously have a level head to be bringing these points up.

I would like to ask you, what is your legal limit right now if you are a script holder in CA?

stonedmetalhead1 said:

As far as I lnow this bill does not negate Prop 215. That being said:



(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 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:


(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;

============================================================================================================================


Therefore if you have a med license or are a caregiver these limitations don't apply to you but you are still limited by Prop 215. But shit, I could be wrong you know they write laws just so they can use them however they want. It just depends how good your lawyer is.

Click to expand...

i'm a card holder. i'm allowed 3 pounds, 30 plants, 100 square feet of canopy space.

dukeofbaja said:

Leave the SB420 and prop 215 talk behind, we are not talking about either of them. Not that we can't learn from history, but we need to debate THIS initiative/bill on ITS merits.

One thing you have failed to show me is WHERE in the legislation it says a 20 year old can go to state prison for 7 years for simple possesion/use. SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THAT, since you claim to be so familiar with this bill.

Last night I asked for the verbiage of this bill/initiative and fdd2blk obliged. From the looks of it, what he posted may not be the ENTIRE bill, but it does seem to cover most of what I'd expect it to cover. So if my vague familiarity with this bill is impotent compared to your supreme understanding of it, then please simply SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THAT.

Abe23 said it best before, you are letting the perfect stand in the way of the good. Luckily my fiancee has plentiful family in California that will be balancing out your vote many times over.

Click to expand...

The perfect stand in the way of the good?!?! I will take that as a compliment as I am damn near perfect. I wouldnt call your stance "the good" more like the ignorant.

I figured you would have a hole army of inbreeds waiting to vote on this. lol.

this bill says
"to permit the cultivation of small amounts of cannabis"
"to personally posses, process, share, or transport not more than one ounce of cannabis, solely for that individual's personal consumption and not for sale"
"possession for sale regardless of amount, except by a person who is licensed or permitted to do so under the terms of an ordinace pursuant to section 11301"

section 11301 says
sale or trade can only be done on licensed premises.
meaning clubs who pay a ton for permits. this is written by a club owner trying to corner the market it has nothing to do with us we are better off under 215 and even if this passes most of us will have to keep med cards so we can have more than an ounce

if you want to freely grow and smoke pot in cali, simply go see a DR.

we do NOT NEED this initiative.

did anyone read ca.gov and see the initiatives that are collecting signitures? there is one more for cannabis if it makes it i'll vote yes on it. i'll try to find it again and link it

fdd2blk said:

if you want to freely grow and smoke pot in cali, simply go see a DR.

we do NOT NEED this initiative.

Click to expand...

See, I have a problem with that more than being limited to a 5x5 space to grow my own. I don't want to get a doctor's not to say that I have a medical need for cannabis, because I don't and it would be insulting to the people who do get therapeutic benefits from it for me to pretend otherwise. For all the good it has done to legalization movement, I do think the way 215 is being in abused by people who are really recreational users is a problem. I imagine that if this thing becomes law, a lot of people's insomnia, migraines and backaches will be miraculously cured...

abe23 said:

See, I have a problem with that more than being limited to a 5x5 space to grow my own. I don't want to get a doctor's not to say that I have a medical need for cannabis, because I don't and it would be insulting to the people who do get therapeutic benefits from it for me to pretend otherwise. For all the good it has done to legalization movement, I do think the way 215 is being in abused by people who are really recreational users is a problem. I imagine that if this thing becomes law, a lot of people's insomnia, migraines and backaches will be miraculously cured...

Click to expand...

you have a medical need for pot, you just don't realize it.

you smoke pot because it alters your mood. you had a reason to need your mood altered. you qualify.

it's not insulting to anyone. if you need pot, you need pot. we are not to judge.


there aren't really any problems with med pot these days. other then the feds fucking with people. people who "can't sleep" haven't hurt anything. it's been years, it would have shown by now.

Proposal
Legalization of Marijuana-Related Activities. The measure provides that no person, individual, or corporate entity could be arrested or prosecuted for the possession, cultivation, transportation, distribution, or consumption of various products derived from cannabis plants, including marijuana and hemp. The measure also provides that the manufacture, marketing, distribution, or sale between adults of equipment or accessories associated with the above products shall not be prohibited.
Medicines. As noted earlier, Proposition 215 legalized the cultivation and possession of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Similar to Proposition 215, this measure contains language stating that the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes in California is legal and provides that licensed physicians cannot be penalized for prescribing marijuana for medicinal purposes. In addition, the measure prohibits the taxation of marijuana products that are prescribed for medical purposes.
Regulation of Commercial Production. This measure requires that commercial production of marijuana products for recreational or religious use be regulated in a manner analogous to California’s wine industry. Commercial production of marijuana is defined in this measure as the production of more than 99 flowering female marijuana plants and 12 pounds of dried, cured flowers of marijuana. The production of a lesser amount is deemed personal use and is exempt from permitting or licensing requirements or taxation. The measure also limits the commercial production of marijuana products to persons age 21 or older.

now thats something i can vote for
sorry i cant find the direct like. and i cant upload a pdf

there are numerous measures being worked on. i'm waiting for the "good one".

meanwhile, richard lee still owes me a book.

i'm voting NO just because the dude burned me.

it also says in this one that anyone on parole, probation or in jail or prison for nonviolent cannabis crime would be released
oh btw this is from the jack herer cannabis hemp initiative

fdd2blk said:

there are numerous measures being worked on. i'm waiting for the "good one".

meanwhile, richard lee still owes me a book.

i'm voting NO just because the dude burned me.

Click to expand...

i see him in oakland alot people treat him like he invented weed. i don't know his story why is he this canna-god in oakland?

stupidclown said:

i see him in oakland alot people treat him like he invented weed. i don't know his story why is he this canna-god in oakland?

Click to expand...

i've seen him as well. he signed the pics that i sent him. he used them in his newsletter. i won a "pics of your garden contest". fucker was supposed to send me a signed copy of the grow bible. after 7 emails and him completely ignoring me i gave up. he never sent my PRIZE. didn't even acknowledge the fact i existed. flat out ignored me.

i attended OU about a year later. i brought in one of the newsletters with my pics in it. asked him to sign it for me. he said "oh, that is you?". i said "yep". he signed it and never said a word about my book. he knows he owes it to me. it was back before all this stuff blew up big so it's not like i got lost in his busyness. he wasn't that busy back then.


dude used my pics on the promise of rewarding me. he burned me instead and until i get my book, he can fuck himself. i'm VOTING NO.

dude has zero personality as well. like talking to a jar of mayo.

he has never done anything to me but i'm voting no because i see this as a power grab the oil company guys do things like this around the world to make sure they keep a hold on the market

btw that's shitty. if a guy can't be trusted to keep his word i wouldn't do any business with him

there is a thread here somewhere with pics of the article in it. i wrote a few simple paragraphs to go with the pics. i started it way back then, .....