StoneElemental
Member
Haha MM420 I don't think I've ever enjoyed and agreed that much on such a long-winded speech post.Take care everyone.
-S.E.
-S.E.
-
ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
ICMAG Administration endorses The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010
- Thread starter JJScorpio
- Start date
- Status
I would vote for that
I know right, lol
We would get a ton of votes from the 18-99 male demographic and some fems as well i'm sure!
StoneElemental
Member
localhero
Member
problem is, after 215 passed, a fantastic law, things didnt get more liberal, instead we got hb 420. and med cards have gone waaaaaaaaaay down by the way. mom just got hers for 45 bucks.
which makes the argument this:
the past trend has shown us that liberal laws get ammended and tweeked into less liberal laws.
19 is not a liberal law and does not expand our rights from prop 215.
if history is a lesson, we can all assume that 19 will evoke more restrictions than less. which is a pretty low bar to set.
i could deal with someone trying to ammend and whittle down a full legalization bill.
whittle down 19?? where would that take us?
StoneElemental
Member
Sorry guys I don't wanna tell anyone how to vote and whatnot, its just not me im not "pushy" in person I guess you could say. However I really don't think you guys are going to get another shot and probably one as good as offered now. Pessimistic? I'd say more realistic (sorry local had to steal it once).
-S.E.
-S.E.
localhero
Member
its like haggling over a price. someone starts high (215), then someone counters low (420, county limits etc), someone counters back less high than the first offer (kelly vs. the state) and a middle ground is met (current cali situation).
19 is a very low starting bid.
i would hate to see where the middle ground on that prop leads us.
stoneelemental- haha thats optimistic, and i believe thats the only way to make 19 work. it will take a "make it work" aproach, to steal from tim gunn.
19 is a very low starting bid.
i would hate to see where the middle ground on that prop leads us.
stoneelemental- haha thats optimistic, and i believe thats the only way to make 19 work. it will take a "make it work" aproach, to steal from tim gunn.
I'm for it!!!! People getting arrested and going to jail over cannabis is just ridiculous. There are a lot of people in it for profit, but oh well. This will keep a lot of people out of jail, and other states may follow
OP
OP
i still say if you gonna tax it, then people should enjoy legitimacy and all the protections that implies. i really worry that the new felonies are there to make sure the industrial prison complex doesn't lose out and that revenue from fines also stays up. while the bill itself stipulates that income generated will be used to finance enforcement of the new law. better not get caught smoking outside at the local open air or park, as the punishment is harsh and they will surely love to go around fining everyone and anyone.
they shouldn't have made new felonies, nor should they have made the monopoly regulations. it should have been that anyone can get a license to grow and sell as long as they pay taxes on their net profits. the sale should also be left in peoples hands, again as long as they pay tax on the profit. let the free market decide who's cannabis it wants. all this regulation is exactly the opposite of a free market. you guys all keep harping on the greedy growers, but don't you think they would be more then happy to be able to do what they always have done but with out fear of jail and with normal profit margins and the ability to plan and invest long term. but this is not what they are offering. they are saying all you who supplied everyone all these years at the risk of jail, all you who even served time or had other losses are now out of business, because we the government will sell the licenses to produce cannabis to the highest bribers....i mean bidders. who will then be allowed to operate legally while all the rest of the growers of cali can still be busted should they continue, even though their product will possibly go down lots due to the legal factories with their monopolies being able to grow without fear. i for one understand peoples frustrations with this proposition.
as i said before i do see the positive aspects of prop 19 passing, just worry that we are being deceived with this bill and that the end will not be what we hope for.
they shouldn't have made new felonies, nor should they have made the monopoly regulations. it should have been that anyone can get a license to grow and sell as long as they pay taxes on their net profits. the sale should also be left in peoples hands, again as long as they pay tax on the profit. let the free market decide who's cannabis it wants. all this regulation is exactly the opposite of a free market. you guys all keep harping on the greedy growers, but don't you think they would be more then happy to be able to do what they always have done but with out fear of jail and with normal profit margins and the ability to plan and invest long term. but this is not what they are offering. they are saying all you who supplied everyone all these years at the risk of jail, all you who even served time or had other losses are now out of business, because we the government will sell the licenses to produce cannabis to the highest bribers....i mean bidders. who will then be allowed to operate legally while all the rest of the growers of cali can still be busted should they continue, even though their product will possibly go down lots due to the legal factories with their monopolies being able to grow without fear. i for one understand peoples frustrations with this proposition.
as i said before i do see the positive aspects of prop 19 passing, just worry that we are being deceived with this bill and that the end will not be what we hope for.
Thanks so much for everyone contributing to this conversation. Its so great to have this good open discussion. Im sure there are lots of ppl like me who really want to know the reality of all the facts before we can totally make up our minds how this should go. The mrs and I are just mom and pop growers but we do use over a pound a month
Thanks everyone for getting all your views out on the table it really helps. Reading all the legal jargon is not easy. Just because it says SuperMod on my tag doesnt make me admin or speak for how I feel about this. Im going to reserve my right to decide till we get a bit closer to "post" time.
Thanks everyone for getting all your views out on the table it really helps. Reading all the legal jargon is not easy. Just because it says SuperMod on my tag doesnt make me admin or speak for how I feel about this. Im going to reserve my right to decide till we get a bit closer to "post" time.
If anyone hasn't seen it, I urge them to check out NORML's take on Prop 19. They go through it part by part and dispel all the FUD that we're seeing a lot of in this thread.
StoneElemental
Member
Props there homie! I know I'll be reading I encourage others to at least read it aswell.
-S.E.
-S.E.
Well if you think people who test positive for weed are EXEMPT from being fired with cause, then you have seen something in Prop 19 that I have not read.
Those employees who are currently tested (truck drivers, bus drivers, and almost everyone under the sun) can still be tested and can still be fired.
You are asking this community to vote for a bill that imprisons growers and you are using false hope of free weed smoke breaks for employees. Prop 19 does NOTHING to change the MJ in the work place dynamic.
ICmag has highlighted the ACLU suit against Walmart for firing a MI medical patient. Please tell me if a med patient can be fired why do you believe a CA rec user can't be fired after Prop 19?
localhero
Member
passing a legalization law, prop or otherwise, as the same with any law concerning personal freedoms must be encompassing and set in the negative in order to be successful in its original intention (rights)
the bill of rights are, except for 6 and 7 (which are very specific and in line with the spirit of the rest) "negative rights"
meaning it defines what the government CANNOT DO.
there is no mention in the bill of rights about how much jail time we can recieve for enjoying our rights too much..
heres the text:
* First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
* Second Amendment –
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. [7]
* Third Amendment –
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
* Fourth Amendment –
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
* Fifth Amendment –
No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
* Sixth Amendment –
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
* Seventh Amendment – Civil trial by jury.
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
* Eighth Amendment –
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
* Ninth Amendment –
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
* Tenth Amendment –
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
the bill of rights are, except for 6 and 7 (which are very specific and in line with the spirit of the rest) "negative rights"
meaning it defines what the government CANNOT DO.
there is no mention in the bill of rights about how much jail time we can recieve for enjoying our rights too much..
heres the text:
* First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
* Second Amendment –
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. [7]
* Third Amendment –
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
* Fourth Amendment –
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
* Fifth Amendment –
No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
* Sixth Amendment –
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
* Seventh Amendment – Civil trial by jury.
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
* Eighth Amendment –
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
* Ninth Amendment –
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
* Tenth Amendment –
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Just because you use words like, misinformed, flawed, nut job, fear-mongering, hypocrisy, half truths and the like does not mean ANY of my points have been such. You use a lot of buzz words but have not pointed out the impossibilities of my statements or my hypocrisy.
The fact that I use HIDs to grow MJ doesn't mean that it would not grow in my back yard garden. Also HIDs are NOT ILLEGAL, nor are they REGULATED. I can USE my HIDs to grow ANY plant I want and in the state I live in growing MJ is not a crime. Sure it is a federal crime, and it still will be if Prop 19 passes.
Review your posts quoting mine, you seem to get upset at my opinion and then you make your own statement of opinion NOT FACT. Prop 19 does NOT help everyone else in the world.
If Prop 19 did help everyone in the world the day it was passed Thailand would repeal the DEATH PENALTY for weed and NEVER kill another smoker. Well maybe Thailand would do WHATEVER the hell they want irrespective of CA.
You are asking people to vote for bad law that will INCREASE the prison time served of CA growers. You use Utopian arguments such as this will help the entire world, but you state ZERO rational as to HOW this will help the entire world.
Many CO cities have voted to make weed possession a NON CRIME. Those guys in CO didn't need to make ADDITIONAL criminal penalties for weed, they just repealed and refused to enforce BAD law.
When CO cities did this it did not change the world. So your argument is that if CA passes this all will be well with the world. How do you reconcile the fact that CO allows one to possess and not be a criminal AND the state of AK for over a decade has proclaimed the right of all people to grow on their own land for personal consumption?
Why are people still being locked up and killed because of weed if AK and CO allow one to LEGALLY posses weed?
The answer is your "act locally", even if people in Thailand are thinking globally, they are acting locally and did not care what AK or CO did. You think they will care what CA does, I do not. IF the US federal government reclassified MJ off schedule 1 then we may see other countries follow along, but as it stands now places like Mexico and Argentina are well further along than the USA, but unfortunately Thailand still has the death penalty for weed even though weed possession is 100% legal in Mexico and Argentina.
Vote for this bad law if you will but I encourage every Californian to vote NO because this bill creates NEW CRIMINAL PENALTIES that this community should NEVER sanction.
Really, HIDs aren't illegal - well my friend check what happens under prohibition. http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/3924285/Garden-chain-worker-admits-dope-charges
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10649868
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10641981
After checking these links also consider that South Australia was just regulated. If you are caught with an HID light in South Australia you can be fined $20,000 and/or 1 year in jail. To buy lights you need to produce 100 points of ID - these records then go to police at the end of days trade.
Who said Thailand?
Hell yes - vote yes to prohibition!
"I can USE my HIDs to grow ANY plant I want and in the state I live in growing MJ is not a crime." Yep but God never made HIDs so please!
"If Prop 19 did help everyone in the world the day it was passed Thailand would repeal the DEATH PENALTY for weed and NEVER kill another smoker. Well maybe Thailand would do WHATEVER the hell they want irrespective of CA" Go study history you selfish brat - Thailand was one of the largest sources of high quality weed (totally tolerated) until the US Government and the UN bribed them with Aid on the condition that they take a hard line to drugs. Go study history and find out who was behind this shambles in the first place - That'd be Anslinger and last I checked he was an American. Look at who has driven drug laws - the US. If the US legalizes it's game over; the single narcotics convention collapses (Note: "Single" Narcotics Convention)
Fact: as long as the profits in the drug trade are high and drugs remain illegal, people will be killed because it is criminals who ruthlessly dominate the drug trade (note Mexico where 20,000 have been killed in the past 3 years but where possession of all drugs is legal). You can decriminalize which is worthless because then the consumer can buy grossly inflated black market product off organized crime who make inordinate sums of money controlling the drug trade. Any more questions about the culture - go figure.
Good thing I don't have any kids....
damn it looks like i'll have to read that word for word bill and analisis after all.
here's some nice sounding stuff we'd get from prop 19 according grnmtngrwr's link
not sure about the cannabis testing for employment, can easily see that still being done.
also why does it not mention cultivation specifically with regard to prop 215, while it does mention all other aspects of medical use. so how sure are we that the medical use grower can still grow his amount of plants if it's over 25sq ft?
here's some nice sounding stuff we'd get from prop 19 according grnmtngrwr's link
not sure about the cannabis testing for employment, can easily see that still being done.
also why does it not mention cultivation specifically with regard to prop 215, while it does mention all other aspects of medical use. so how sure are we that the medical use grower can still grow his amount of plants if it's over 25sq ft?
A few more.
"To take from one, because it is thought that his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, ‘the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry, & the fruits acquired by it." Thomas Jefferson.
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson.
I think the take away is grow your own and quit trying to tax and regulate your neighbors.
Dude I wish you would stop quoting these long dead individuals who started rolling in their graves in the Nixon era. You're living in Lala land. America is far from perfect and if you have freedoms and liberties - consider yourself lucky because most don't. Prop 19 is as good as you're getting it. I say you should vote no and see what happens. Please don't bitch in 10 years time when the DEA are all over the med scene and smashing in doors at 2am in the morning. Please never howl for legalization and justice then. You would have had your chance and blown it.
Really, HIDs aren't illegal - well my friend check what happens under prohibition. http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/3924285/Garden-chain-worker-admits-dope-charges
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10649868
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10641981
After checking these links also consider that South Australia was just regulated. If you are caught with an HID light in South Australia you can be fined $20,000 and/or 1 year in jail. To buy lights you need to produce 100 points of ID - these records then go to police at the end of days trade.
Who said Thailand?
Hell yes - vote yes to prohibition!
"I can USE my HIDs to grow ANY plant I want and in the state I live in growing MJ is not a crime." Yep but God never made HIDs so please!
"If Prop 19 did help everyone in the world the day it was passed Thailand would repeal the DEATH PENALTY for weed and NEVER kill another smoker. Well maybe Thailand would do WHATEVER the hell they want irrespective of CA" Go study history you selfish brat - Thailand was one of the largest sources of high quality weed (totally tolerated) until the US Government and the UN bribed them with Aid on the condition that they take a hard line to drugs. Go study history and find out who was behind this shambles in the first place - That'd be Anslinger and last I checked he was an American. Look at who has driven drug laws - the US. If the US legalizes it's game over; the single narcotics convention collapses (Note: "Single" Narcotics Convention)
Fact: as long as the profits in the drug trade are high and drugs remain illegal, people will be killed because it is criminals who ruthlessly dominate the drug trade (note Mexico where 20,000 have been killed in the past 3 years but where possession of all drugs is legal). You can decriminalize which is worthless because then the consumer can buy grossly inflated black market product off organized crime who make inordinate sums of money controlling the drug trade. Any more questions about the culture - go figure.
Dude you are helping more than you know. The examples of other governments REGULATING gardeners into felons is all the more reason this community should NEVER sanction a bill that would imprison growers or smokers.
And FUCK the whole god thing. The glass beer bottle and glass pipe I use weren't dug whole from the Earth.
Why you getting mad at me for Thailand killing smokers? You are the one advocating legislation that REQUIRES the imprisonment of growers and smokers if they break rules. I say we are all free.
Sounds like you have a problem with the US Federal policy, just as I do. How about working to break that strangle hold on this community and leave people free to grow in CA without NEW crimes as ESTABLISHED by YOUR vote.
These and other long dead individuals are more important than you can ever understand and for that I am sorry. It pains me that you will live your life to settle for "is as good as you're getting it." I'd rather live and die on my own terms than abandon my values. Time will tell how good we get it, but when they put you or your neighbor in prison understand that I never gave my sanction to their horror, but you did.
localhero
Member
i agree hydro, a real legalization bill would be very simple to write. for example a random guy on icmag (like me) could have easily written in two minutes without legal council:
No person shall be persecuted, fined, or imprisoned for the possession, sale, cultivation or consumption of marijuana in the state of california.
there, that simple. no mention of how much i can grow, or how many ways i can be fined or imprisoned.
can we vote on that? i dont think anyone on this board or in their right minds would take more than half a second to vote yes.
No person shall be persecuted, fined, or imprisoned for the possession, sale, cultivation or consumption of marijuana in the state of california.
there, that simple. no mention of how much i can grow, or how many ways i can be fined or imprisoned.
can we vote on that? i dont think anyone on this board or in their right minds would take more than half a second to vote yes.
- Status
