A Change of Heart: Prop 19

[krunchbubble]

Except that Prop 19 does not limit the CUA at all--



Let's look at 11362.5--


Cultivation is clearly dealt with in subsection (d)
So I don't know why they are saying that 19 is "Leaving out cultivation"... Honestly bro, this article is trash...written for ppl who don't check up on what it is saying...at least they are hoping not--





It does not have to mention how much you can cultivate under 19, as it has already been handled with 215-- Once again, 19 does not change the status of a 215 Patient...a fact that should be apparent by it's failure to mention it, while giving complete deferment to 215, by using 11362.5 as a reference, which is the complete Purpose of Prop 215--





Because in the Intent part, it lists things that are not effected..THAT WERE NOT COVERED IN THE "PURPOSE"--
11362.5 clearly was covered in the Purpose--

Check it out bro-- I was a "No" in the beginning for the very reasons you are-- I started looking into things, and looking up things...asking questions to our Collective's Lawyer...and now I am almost obsessed with learning about this shit!! (According to my wife!! lol)
I am convinced that this is not going to effect us Patients at all-- Or I would not vote Yes on it--

i must say, this is an outstanding post. and the fact that you are honest about being "NO", speaks volumes....

being obsessed about it is a good thing, you are helping people learn about it......

 

[kmk420kali]

i must say, this is an outstanding post. and the fact that you are honest about being "NO", speaks volumes....

being obsessed about it is a good thing, you are helping people learn about it......

Thanks--

 

[SCF]

Except that Prop 19 does not limit the CUA at all--



Let's look at 11362.5--


Cultivation is clearly dealt with in subsection (d)
So I don't know why they are saying that 19 is "Leaving out cultivation"... Honestly bro, this article is trash...written for ppl who don't check up on what it is saying...at least they are hoping not--





It does not have to mention how much you can cultivate under 19, as it has already been handled with 215-- Once again, 19 does not change the status of a 215 Patient...a fact that should be apparent by it's failure to mention it, while giving complete deferment to 215, by using 11362.5 as a reference, which is the complete Purpose of Prop 215--





Because in the Intent part, it lists things that are not effected..THAT WERE NOT COVERED IN THE "PURPOSE"--
11362.5 clearly was covered in the Purpose--

Check it out bro-- I was a "No" in the beginning for the very reasons you are-- I started looking into things, and looking up things...asking questions to our Collective's Lawyer...and now I am almost obsessed with learning about this shit!! (According to my wife!! lol)
I am convinced that this is not going to effect us Patients at all-- Or I would not vote Yes on it--

agreed. If it messed with medical marijuana. I would be a NO vote too.

But it doesn't so yes it is!!!!

Thanks for being civil!

 

[kmk420kali]

My hopes are, that 30 to 40% of the No ppl here...when it comes time, in that li'l booth, to mark Yes or No...you will ask yourself, "Can I possibly vote No...on Legalization of Cannabis, in any form??"

 

[zen_trikester]

.

They already said they are ready to come in and bust people when 19 passes the fed said that when people file their tax returns they will have all the proof they need to raid someone.

I've been looking around for any federal reaction to this and haven't found anything. could you please post a link to where you read this or is this just conjecture?

Rick, you are talking about how people are jumping on this because the economy is shit and then you say that people should wait for a better prop. Doesn't that tell you that now is the time to do this and another time may never come? It wasn't just money that got this done. it isn't like you can just write a check and get a prop on the ballot. This is there because somebody funded it sure, but it does give a lot of people what they want and it appeals to people who are on the fence about MJ issues. It gives smokers huge protections over workplace urine testing and less chance of LEO harassment (legal is even better than an infraction for determining probable cause), a potential for cheaper product, a safer product that is regulated, and an opportunity for establishments that can cater to users. to non-users it gives a solution to crime problems and overspending for enforcement, it makes it harder for their kids to buy, it will raise tax money, it will create jobs, it will instigate a whole new form of tourism that is only currently available in Amsterdam, it forces growers making tax free money to pay their taxes, it will reduce the chance of people stealing electricity for illgal grows or growing on state land, it will reduce the money that gangs and cartels are making and will put a dent in their ability to import and sell more dangerous drugs. How about hemp? People forget about that one!! It is laid out so that from a commercial aspect individual communities can do as they wish... that is awesome for both pro communities and anti communities. Regardless of how one community feels about selling MJ they can be a part of the legal hemp movement which will probably be as much of a money maker as MJ will be. No other place in the US allows for hemp cultivation and there will be plenty of people buying Cali made hemp hooddies... those can be exported and sold all over the world while the MJ has to stay in Cali.

What types of things do you think need fixing with the prop? Are those things that only growers/smokers want or are they things that everyone would vote for. Remember this prop is a compromise for a lot of people. there are more than smokers and growers that will be voting for this prop. I know many would like bigger gardens and the ability to carry more than an ounce away from their garden, but I don't think the non-growing community wants or cares about that. In order for people to believe that this bill will help crime and street dealing issues the personal garden and cary limits have to be personal sized. I think we all know that it is doable in the specifications they dictate, though certainly it is a different way of growing for many.

Jed

 

[GET MO]

Hey thanks yo, your the first one to come up with a legitament answer to this shit.
Two questions
is it 25sq ft per person or household?
can I grow my meds in one room and my recreational in another?

.... I still feal that this will lead to corporate take over like tobacco, but if it gets that bad ill just move to another med state.

Except that Prop 19 does not limit the CUA at all--



Let's look at 11362.5--


Cultivation is clearly dealt with in subsection (d)
So I don't know why they are saying that 19 is "Leaving out cultivation"... Honestly bro, this article is trash...written for ppl who don't check up on what it is saying...at least they are hoping not--





It does not have to mention how much you can cultivate under 19, as it has already been handled with 215-- Once again, 19 does not change the status of a 215 Patient...a fact that should be apparent by it's failure to mention it, while giving complete deferment to 215, by using 11362.5 as a reference, which is the complete Purpose of Prop 215--





Because in the Intent part, it lists things that are not effected..THAT WERE NOT COVERED IN THE "PURPOSE"--
11362.5 clearly was covered in the Purpose--

Check it out bro-- I was a "No" in the beginning for the very reasons you are-- I started looking into things, and looking up things...asking questions to our Collective's Lawyer...and now I am almost obsessed with learning about this shit!! (According to my wife!! lol)
I am convinced that this is not going to effect us Patients at all-- Or I would not vote Yes on it--

 

[kmk420kali]

Hey thanks yo, your the first one to come up with a legitament answer to this shit.
Two questions
is it 25sq ft per person or household?
can I grow my meds in one room and my recreational in another?

.... I still feal that this will lead to corporate take over like tobacco, but if it gets that bad ill just move to another med state.

25 per parcel of land...or Address, if there are multi Residences--
To be honest, I don't know about the Medical+Recreational grow part-- Interesting question-- I think you found one that is not covered explicitly--

 

[rives]

Hey thanks yo, your the first one to come up with a legitament answer to this shit.
Two questions
is it 25sq ft per person or household?
can I grow my meds in one room and my recreational in another?

.... I still feal that this will lead to corporate take over like tobacco, but if it gets that bad ill just move to another med state.

Am I missing something here? Why would you need 2 grows if you are medical? The limits have been tossed out on that, other than the federal 99 plant thing, and that would still apply anyhow.

 

[SCF]

25 per parcel of land...or Address, if there are multi Residences--
To be honest, I don't know about the Medical+Recreational grow part-- Interesting question-- I think you found one that is not covered explicitly--

i think since they are both separate laws. it only pertains to the medical and or caregiver on the property. And when proper paper work is presented. Should the authoritys then leave a hands off. We are winning the medical portion of it in california courts. thats the good thing.



ok maybe i read it wrong. In prop 215 it states, a patient can grow or possess as much as they need, and nothing can over turn that. unless the voters decided too... So in a medical case. a prop 19 defense wouldn't be necessary, as a medical defense is all you need.


SCF

 

[Zen Master]

question. the whole 25 sq ft thing.

is that canopy or?........ pot size? garden bed size?


how about vertical height? can you have a 30 foot high wall of vertical plants that you need a ladder to access, so long as the footprint is 25 sq ft?

 

[kmk420kali]

question. the whole 25 sq ft thing.

is that canopy or?........ pot size? garden bed size?


how about vertical height? can you have a 30 foot high wall of vertical plants that you need a ladder to access, so long as the footprint is 25 sq ft?

Pretty sure they will draw on the only Precedence there is on this subject, which is the County Limits...and those that went by size, stated "Canopy Limits"--

 

[kmk420kali]

i think since they are both separate laws. it only pertains to the medical and or caregiver on the property. And when proper paper work is presented. Should the authoritys then leave a hands off. We are winning the medical portion of it in california courts. thats the good thing.



ok maybe i read it wrong. In prop 215 it states, a patient can grow or possess as much as they need, and nothing can over turn that. unless the voters decided too... So in a medical case. a prop 19 defense wouldn't be necessary, as a medical defense is all you need. SCF

Yes, agreed--
I think where it might come into play, is when you have a 215 Patient growing a Medical Garden...then you have a nonPatient, still grow the 1 25 sq ft garden under 19, at the same address--
I think this is one of those that we will just have to see how it plays out...if it is even an issue at all--

 

[SCF]

Yes, agreed--
I think where it might come into play, is when you have a 215 Patient growing a Medical Garden...then you have a nonPatient, still grow the 1 25 sq ft garden under 19, at the same address--
I think this is one of those that we will just have to see how it plays out...if it is even an issue at all--

yeah. at that point, its probably best just to combine the gardens. as two separate gardens would cause more attention. but thats a good point. and thats if it becomes a police state where they are going into each home to find out amount of plants. im assuming this is to prevent spending money on raids, searches, arrest, and courts, helicopter etc. so hopefully they wont give a ratts ass anymore.


but if it does become a police state! then its time to fight for our rights. as us Americans have ALWAYS DONE!!!!!!!

 

[StellarP]

question. the whole 25 sq ft thing.

is that canopy or?........ pot size? garden bed size?


how about vertical height? can you have a 30 foot high wall of vertical plants that you need a ladder to access, so long as the footprint is 25 sq ft?

Finally.........no mention of cubic feet, so go high(pun intended)

Cheers
StellarP

 

[Zen Master]

Pretty sure they will draw on the only Precedence there is on this subject, which is the County Limits...and those that went by size, stated "Canopy Limits"--

so 25 sq ft footprint including the fan's stretching out... but then what about height?


2 foot okay? what about 20 foot?

how do you gauge "canopy" in vertical height?


a LOT of people are gonna be pissed if they have a garden bed thats 25 sq ft and have the plants slightly spilling out, only to get in some sort of LEO contact over some bullshit like that.


I'm just questioning because I'm iffy on the verbage used in 19 and this is specifically one of the things.

 

[Zen Master]

if its NOT canopy size (as I suspect it will be), then you could conceivably take a 1 gallon pot, put your clone in it, cut the bottom of the pot off and transplant that into the ground, your actual 'garden' size is merely a 1 gallon pot at this time, sure the roots spill out through the bottom and spread, but hey thats out of your control. You could veg a plant for months and have a gigantor trunk that fills the entire 1 gallon almost and have very little of your "25 sq ft" used so far....

that is of course unless its canopy, if so then this is moot....

but a 25 sq ft CANOPY garden, is a LOT smaller in actual footprint than a 25 sq ft garden bed...

 

[SkimmingDaSky]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. It isn't up to California to make weed legal in your state. If you want something done, do it yourself, don't rely on others; you'll find this will markedly improve your life in every aspect.

I like the little touch where if I'm not with you, I'm killing peoples dogs and breaking into their homes with force... this is cute and also very rudimentary debate tactics... guys would we call this a straw-man?

There is no in-between in your mind... mostly because your mind is closed. There is an in-between, not voting.

As for no places being legal:

India
Peru
Columbia
Nepal
Belgium

and I'm sure there are more that are close to being legal (much like having a medical license already makes your legal )

I don't see all of Europe or all of Asia or All of South America going legal because there are other countries within those regions that have legal marijuana.

Please, come back with some logical arguments, until then I'll be ignoring your comments.

In India its not even legal to have weed, it is just tolerated there.
In Peru it is only legal to have 8 grams of bud haaaa lol
Columbia, possession up to 20 grams.
Belgium it is only decriminalized.

This will be the only law that says its legal to grow, smoke, and sell weed for recreational use. Even in Amsterdam you can only buy up to 5 grams to smoke and only grow outdoors. Cali will send a bold statement to the Feds with this bill. I am curious to see how this pans out and how the Feds will react.

My state did try and pass decriminalization, but it was immediately shot down. I look to Cali for inspiration, because this is the recreational smoker's dream. I honestly do see Prop 19 having a great effect on the US. More states on the East Coast are passing MMJ laws b/c of Prop 215. More states are set to vote on bills like this in 2012. It is a slow change, but it is happening.

If the Feds respect this law and see the money coming in, Cali will be the new mecca of weed. New genetics and seed companies $$$$. Increased tourism $$$$. Hemp=paper, clothing, cosmetic products, etc $$$$. Legit businesses create legit jobs with payrolls. The Feds will prolly get with it if this passes smoothly.....This can only be a stepping stone in momentum, never backwards. Why stall the process? I truly see mj becoming legal in about 10 years on a Federal level.

 

[rives]

Good job, Skimming. It is becoming obvious that every time one of the no group makes a statement about legality anywhere outside California, it needs to be researched. So far the statements have ranged from wildly inaccurate to total fabrications.

 

[SCF]

In India its not even legal to have weed, it is just tolerated there.
In Peru it is only legal to have 8 grams of bud haaaa lol
Columbia, possession up to 20 grams.
Belgium it is only decriminalized.

This will be the only law that says its legal to grow, smoke, and sell weed for recreational use. Even in Amsterdam you can only buy up to 5 grams to smoke and only grow outdoors. Cali will send a bold statement to the Feds with this bill. I am curious to see how this pans out and how the Feds will react.

My state did try and pass decriminalization, but it was immediately shot down. I look to Cali for inspiration, because this is the recreational smoker's dream. I honestly do see Prop 19 having a great effect on the US. More states on the East Coast are passing MMJ laws b/c of Prop 215. More states are set to vote on bills like this in 2012. It is a slow change, but it is happening.

If the Feds respect this law and see the money coming in, Cali will be the new mecca of weed. New genetics and seed companies $$$$. Increased tourism $$$$. Hemp=paper, clothing, cosmetic products, etc $$$$. Legit businesses create legit jobs with payrolls. The Feds will prolly get with it if this passes smoothly.....This can only be a stepping stone in momentum, never backwards. Why stall the process? I truly see mj becoming legal in about 10 years on a Federal level.

This is the most liberal law out there for the legalization of marijuana in the whole world!!!!!

 

[Nor'Easter]

yes it may have serious flaws but it opens the doors to better things, if people don't take this chance they may not get another anytime soon, so for God's sakes VOTE YES! I can't, as I don't live in Cali but would if I could. I suspect most of the opposition are big commercial grows, whether medical or not. But think of someone else besides yourself for a change and see that this is a good starting point that can always be improved upon. If you vote no, you are on the same side as narcs and other nasty characters. That is reason enough to vote yes!