ICMAG Administration endorses The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010

[Hydrosun]

It gets nuttier with every post.
The one voting to truly imprison on a massive scale is yourself.

Really CA is imprisoning smokers on a massive scale, and their locking up closet growers too? I must have missed that over the last few decades.

This Prop 19 is not in Texas it is CA. In CA smokers and closet growers are not imprisoned now even if they DON'T have a med card (which is super easy to get).

If I'm really nutty you can show us how CA is throwing the book at one ounce smokers and gardeners with 25sq'.

 

[GanjaAL]

I agree with you on this... they are not... but to try and get people to vote on prop 19 saying it will make it better it won't.

People will still go to jail and some laws have new stiffer penalties with prop 19.

People just want it so they can sell it to rec users to make a buck without caring who goes to jail.

Again for those who did not see....

people are going to jail in record numbers for possesion of more than an oz and that will not change with prop19 going into effect.

I do not care how much wishfull thinking there is. There is big money to be made for local LE with federal grants for drug busting marijuana raids. Now it will be easier for them and the only ones who could care less are the ones making to money to recover from a raid.

 

[Anti]

264. (a) Rape, as defined in Section 261 or 262, is punishable by
imprisonment in the state prison for three, six, or eight years.
(b) In addition to any punishment imposed under this section the
judge may assess a fine not to exceed seventy dollars ($70) against
any person who violates Section 261 or 262 with the proceeds of this
fine to be used in accordance with Section 1463.23. The court shall,
however, take into consideration the defendant's ability to pay, and
no defendant shall be denied probation because of his or her
inability to pay the fine permitted under this subdivision.

Ok. So the MAX for a cannabis related crime is... say it with me... seven years.

The MAX for a rape is.... say it with me.... eight years!


Let's see if I can do this math.

7+1=8

Therefore 8>7!

Therefore RAPE STILL HAS HIGHER MAX PENALTY THAN CANNABIS!

So that pretty much terminates your objections at this point and you'll be voting yes now, right?

 

[desertdweller]

My take on the cities or counties that ban the sale of it, if i was a city and the other 30 cities around mine banned it, just think of all that sales tax coming to my city from the surrounding 30 cities now it is legal in my city(politician thinking). remember, cities cannot ban carrying or having it, just the sale of it. is it just that easy ? or am i just to navie? also, an ounce is fine, just buy one, go home, drop it off and go buy another..etc,etc..way easier than the way it is now..or am i just to navie again?

 

[Anti]

people are going to jail in record numbers for possesion of an more than an oz and that will not change with prop19 going into effect.

If people carry an ounce on them, they won't go to jail in record numbers. If they want to be street dealers, they will be in violation of the new law much the same as they are in violation of the current law.

If you want to sell more than an ounce at a time, have the buyer come to your fucking grow op. Jesus. I can't believe people this stupid could be contemplating the criminal life. You're going to get caught! You don't think very well!

 

[GanjaAL]

Are you are not listening... I only care about the people going to jail. Some people carry more than an oz for personal use... that again will not change.

Again you are not reading... the biggest reason people are going to jail is for possesion of more than an oz not for intent to sell.

Again for more than an oz as they did not have baggies or a scale.

 

[igrowone]

My take on the cities or counties that ban the sale of it, if i was a city and the other 30 cities around mine banned it, just think of all that sales tax coming to my city from the surrounding 30 cities now it is legal in my city. remember, cities cannot ban carrying or having it, just the sale of it. is it just that easy ? or am i just to navie?

indeed, early adopters will be rewarded
it will be tough to not allow sales, some won't of course
i'd think the big differentiator will be visibility, likely some will want low visibility shops, not many will want WalmartMJ

 

[JJScorpio]

Are you thick?

Prop 19 allows you to possess 10 pounds if the 10 pounds were grown in the 25 sq foot. You can only take an ounce or less with you when you leave the premises.

Uhhhh very wrong!

Again for those who do not understand.

with prop19:

possesion of an oz or less no infraction of any kind... great and love that.

However for possesion over an oz it will still be 6 months in jail with a 500.00 fine.

Also changes gifts of marijuana to friends 18-20 from a 100 infraction to a possible stint of 6 months in jail and 1k fine.

Also the number one reason people are going to jail now is possesion of more than an oz which they recieve 6 months in jail and 500.00 fine.

This will not change with prop 19 being voted in.

 

[JJScorpio]

Are you are not listening... I only care about the people going to jail. Some people carry more than an oz for personal use... that again will not change.

Again you are not reading... the biggest reason people are going to jail is for possesion of more than an oz not for intent to sell.

Again for more than an oz as they did not have baggies or a scale.

I've smoked for 30 years and I've never needed to carry more than an ounce for my head. Is the weed in Cali that bad? And as it stands now if you get caught with less than an ounce you get a fine and lose your bag. So what's better?

 

[GanjaAL]

I know this sir and you are not reading it right... people now are going to jail in record numbers for more than an oz on there person. They know it is a simple infraction for an oz or less but they still do it. That again will not change. So please don't make people think it is a free for all and curb people from going to jail because it won't. People are people and when they feel comfortable they will push the limits and it will not be any different with prop 19. However people will make a killing at the bank.

 

[MrBomDiggitty]

i say just don't vote. let non-smokers and non-growers decide

 

[JJScorpio]

I know this sir and you are not reading it right... people now are going to jail in record numbers for more than an oz on there person. They know it is a simple infraction for an oz or less but they still do it. That again will not change. So please don't make people think it is a free for all and curb people from going to jail because it won't. People are people and when they feel comfortable they will push the limits and it will not be any different with prop 19. However people will make a killing at the bank.

But they are going to prison for possessing pounds in their residence. With this Bill if they grow it in their 25 sq foot they don't get anything except a lot of nice smoke to sit on....

 

[GrnMtnGrwr]

So we've already made this point, that some are ok with less freedoms while others aren't. That is the basis for a lot of this discussion.

It seems pretty clear that the ones against Prop 19 are the ones that are ok with less freedoms.

Medical usage is not the same as recreational, and thinking 19 isn't needed because 215 is easy to game is idiotic.

 

[gaiusmarius]

well those that are convincing are those arguing from the big picture point of view. with the caveat that this thing ain't perfect, but it's better then nothing and a no vote really would send the wrong message.

if it really allows all those things you listed they didn't do a very good job of making it clear. like i pointed out the wording about solely for personal consumption doesn't jive with sharing up to an ounce or trading an ounce.

but i really hope the positive interpretations are the correct ones, in which case this bill will stop a lot of people living in fear and or hiding their toking and in the end the under 21, will get old enough sooner or later too. as i say i hope that they don't try make up the numbers with under age smokers. with any luck they will want to use the revenue for other stuff then just wasting it on checking the size of peoples gardens or what ever.

one tip though for the lobbyists here, try to get your point across without telling people they are idiots or greedy etc. keep your anger out of it, makes it much easier for someone to see your point of view.

threats and profanity directed at others is against the tou too, so lets try and keep the discussion on a civil level. the majority wants this bill to pass after all so no need to make enemies about this. in the end Californians will vote as they see fit all we can do is try give advise and share our opinions.

 

[gaiusmarius]

Chris Conrad once again makes a lot of sense in this plea for folks to get it together and get the vote out on Prop. 19. I do not mean to focus on Chris, but sometimes when you can’t say it better yourself, then why bother….

Colleagues,

We have powerful enemies in the November election: Meg Whitman and Steve Cooley. Whitman is an avowed enemy of medical marijuana and would have veto power over all our legislation for the next multiple years. Cooley is such an incompetent attorney that he can’t even read law correctly but he thinks SB 420 does not protect patients, he thinks it mandates prison for anyone with more than a few ounces. These people are a threat to everything we have built up as a movement. And yet “reformers” are wasting energy opposing Prop 19?

Let’s get real. SB 420 — which allows collectives, ID cards, immunity from arrest and safe harbor – is not from an initiative. It was legislated so it can be modified or upended at any time, with or without Prop 19. The safe harbor quantities that People v Kelly provides could be dropped to a few grams, and gardens reduced to a couple plants and 10 square feet. Read the People v Urziceanu decision’s evaluation of Prop 215 v SB 420 to get an idea of what losing SB420 means. It’s not pretty.
At this point, a no vote on Prop 19 combined with a Whitman/Cooley victory is a no vote on SB 420, a no vote on safe harbors, a no vote on collectives, and the prohibitionists will litigate like it is a no vote on Prop 215 and a yes vote to send adults to jail for small personal amounts of marijuana. Every bit of energy we spend “debating the merits” of Prop 19 is energy that we give to the drug warriors because none of it matters at all if we lose Prop 19. We must pass it.

Here’s why: If Prop 19 passes, it guarantees that localities can license sales to patients because it allows licensed sales to anyone over age 21 (I know, it sucks for people below age 21, but let’s stay on point here). If Prop 19 passes, it guarantees that patients will be able to have at least an ounce just by virtue of being adults. It specifically lists Prop 215/ HS11362.5 and SB 420 statutes in two places in the purposes, by general reference in the purpose “6. Provide easier, safer access for patients who need cannabis for medical purposes.” and “12. Make cannabis available for scientific, medical, industrial, and research purposes” and by statutes as in “except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.” That would not even have been necessary because it also protects them by _not naming those statutes as being changed anywhere in the newly created statutes. (Remember the Galambos appeals court held that it was illegal to transport medical marijuana because Prop 215 did _not name HS11360 transportation_ as being changed; luckily the legislature passed SB420 to protect it.) It says in the ballot argument that themedical marijuana laws are “preserved.” That alone could be used in court to defend collectives and safe harbor if the legislature turns sour and try to change SB 420.

Without Prop 19, patients and collectives are at greater risk than with it, and if it loses it sends exactly the wrong message to the legislature, namely that Californians don’t want legal marijuana. That will be cited as a pendulum change, and that could bode disaster. Remember, we have in our midst paid agitators and provocateurs who are determined to undermine us and stop Prop 19 from being passed. They prey on your fear. They claim to be our allies, and to be helping, but they are our opponents determined to keep cannabis consumers criminals. Unfortunately, we can’t tell them from the zealots because some people with good intentions are freaked out, running in circles and screaming that the sky is falling, the sky is falling. Well, the sky might well be falling if Prop 19 loses.

Get over it, pull yourselves together and go out to register every voter you can get your hands on and drag them to the polls to vote Yes on Prop 19 and No to Whitman and Cooley on Nov 2, or better yet to vote absentee Yes on Prop 19 and No to Whitman and Cooley.

– Chris Conrad, court-qualified cannabis expert and consultant

this speaks to me, i wonder if we could ask Chris Conrad to do a word for word explanation of the bill? just to help those on the fence know what they would be getting with this bill.

 

[Hydrosun]

Ok. So the MAX for a cannabis related crime is... say it with me... seven years.

The MAX for a rape is.... say it with me.... eight years!


Let's see if I can do this math.

7+1=8

Therefore 8>7!

Therefore RAPE STILL HAS HIGHER MAX PENALTY THAN CANNABIS!

So that pretty much terminates your objections at this point and you'll be voting yes now, right?

Weed = 7/8ths of a rape wow that is a good deal, you are right everyone should lend their name to this legislation.

 

[Hydrosun]

Are you thick?

Prop 19 allows you to possess 10 pounds if the 10 pounds were grown in the 25 sq foot. You can only take an ounce or less with you when you leave the premises.

Sure but buy a QP from your friend and both of you get 7 years. Gather up 4oz from various state legal places and then drive back to a shit whole city that bans sales you get 7 years for the possession.

Believe it or not some people would like to buy a QP and drive back home with the same FREEDOM you say is so important for one oz.

 

[GanjaAL]

That is the big picture people are not seeing...

But to be honest it looks like this little prop is going to pass. I have said my piece and hope I am dead wrong... oh God please make me wrong. However if I am right... it is going to suck for everyone.

 

[Frozenguy]

It seems pretty clear that the ones against Prop 19 are the ones that are ok with less freedoms.

Medical usage is not the same as recreational, and thinking 19 isn't needed because 215 is easy to game is idiotic.

No, I'm not ok with less freedoms.
GrnMtnGrwr, consider a level of limits/language that you would find unsatisfactory (whatever that may be). Now realize at that point, I know there would be people fighting for yes votes still because it offers a level of legalization they are ok with. But you are not, because like me, you have a line drawn, far from perfection, that you aren't willing to cross. Or maybe you dont have a line?

Anyways, I'm just asking for some understanding, because I do want freedoms for people, just more and just because I think its worth it to wait another year or a couple, doesn't mean I'm for less freedoms. Just means I'll wait longer for more freedoms in the long run.

And considering how easy it is to get a recommendation and grow essentially unlimited amounts, I dont feel sorry for people complain about not wanting to. I know its not as easy as just growing tomatoes, but come on man, its really freaking easy to grow a large amount of bud in your house. When has that ever been possible in America, besides Alaska.. So I dont see the problem in waiting. If we had nothing, man I would be all over this getting signatures myself.

You'll notice a lot of the No people are from out of town, and dont live and grow in Cali. They want to vacation here and smoke and not have to get a recommendation (some of them, not all). Also they want their own states to come up with a bill now and they dont want to wait so they're on us to vote in it because everyone will follow. Its really easy to grow in California right now, legally under state law. So its not like no one can grow. Everyone over the age of 18 (not 21 like with prop19 for recreational) can grow cannabis, usually the same day they decide they want to.

 

[GrnMtnGrwr]

And considering how easy it is to get a recommendation and grow essentially unlimited amounts, I dont feel sorry for people complain about not wanting to.

So prohibition is fine and CA residents should just continue to make medical marijuana look like nothing more than a screen for recreational use?

You're so confident that legalization suited to your liking is only a year or two away that you're willing to vote no on legalization?