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

[Rednick]

really blowjobs every night?


im moving to colorado!!!!

It wouldn't let me edit my post.

We are working on the blowjobs.

But the other two are in effect.

Scales at dispensaries are checked at least monthly by the, not sure which department.
For warehouse grows: (supposed to do this)
Dumps of your res must be pHed at 7 so Algae doens't fuck up the system.
In Boulder you have to buy wind and solar energy credits for your electricity.

A lot of things are in the works for regulations, some reasonable some not.

Just make no mistake about government spending.
If there is a budget to justify, they will dollar bills for toilette paper to justify that budget.
Remember, you gotta feed the beast.

The Dept of Rev is given a lot of power to create a whole new entity of enforcement. I don't think they will spare any expense. Our government regularly violates TABOR (Taxpayer Bill of Rights), there is money, they will put their cup in it.


I sure do hope they make some headway on the BJ issue, I know a lot of people here could benefit.

 

[vta]

I support the ability to grow out 100 plants to find the right genetics for breeding.
I Support giving pounds to friends if I have it to give and I support large gardens and tall trees..

That's awesome...most here and I included feel the same. It's just not relevant as we are not voting on that...unlimited cannabis freedom. As one that preaches the gospel of freedom, you should be fully aware of the voting populace. A populace that listens to a preacher of a different gospel. When you do then please realize that they would never vote for a law with no restrictions. One with no limitations and no regulations. "It will be everywhere!" they will scream, "think of the children!".

Now present these people with a law that:
Regulates the commercial growing..they think of 'Mexicans in Yosemity'.
Increases penalties for selling to minors...big plus for them
Tax Money...They are being told that the revenue generated could be over a billion dollars a year...for education and roads.
Restricts growing space....Most people don't want a 10k grow in the apartment next to them. No way they go for unlimited.
Allows cities to regulate...they see this as control when in reality it allows for us to be able to purchase from stores and ANY changes to cultivation can only be to increase said minimums.
Keeps people out of Jail..even the most conservative person knows someone that smokes pot, and they don't see them as criminals.

You give them something like that {prop19} then they might vote for it.

Don't give up your dream though...this 1st step will lead to it.

 

[localhero]

gaius,

somehow i missed that. and ive said before that opposition to mj would be emboldened by a no vote on 19, and missenterpreted as public oppinion. thats part of the whole arm twisting aspect lee put us all in.

and man do i not like cooley, or whitman.

cooley is one of this communities biggest enemies.


i wonder if she gets on the anti mj train like she has on immigration, how it will affect her vote. considering that most liberal voters not attached at the heart to the mj cause seem to view 19 as a legalization bill, you would think that those same voters who would also be wooed to vote for her on her populist immigration stance might reconsider her as a viable option.

in laymens terms, an anti pot stance on her part would wake up would be crossover voters to the demon she really is, and hopefully kill her candidacy.

 

[vta]

gaius,

somehow i missed that. and ive said before that opposition to mj would be emboldened by a no vote on 19, and missenterpreted as public oppinion. thats part of the whole arm twisting aspect lee put us all in.

and man do i not like cooley, or whitman.

cooley is one of this communities biggest enemies.


i wonder if she gets on the anti mj train like she has on immigration, how it will affect her vote. considering that most liberal voters not attached at the heart to the mj cause seem to view 19 as a legalization bill, you would think that those same voters who would also be wooed to vote for her on her populist immigration stance might reconsider her as a viable option.

in laymens terms, an anti pot stance on her part would wake up would be crossover voters to the demon she really is, and hopefully kill her candidacy.

she's against it...

'You want law-and-order, Brown Noser?' Whitman published a statement on her campaign website in March that calls marijuana "a gateway drug whose use would expand greatly among our children if it were to be legalized." It was part of a five-point crime statement that also supported the Three Strikes law, the death penalty and prison reform--if by prison reform you mean building more prisons--and opposition to any more gun control laws.

 

[mullray]

LA times article on the Oakland Farms..... http://www.latimes.com/sns-ap-us-pot-city-cultivation,0,7010250.story
This sort of sums up a few arguments that have been going on here...

"Opponents argue the urban pot farms would put small medical marijuana growers out of business.

Permits would not be limited to Oakland-based businesses. Councilwoman Desley Brooks said she hoped local business owners and minorities would be encouraged to apply."

 

[vta]

LA times article on the Oakland Farms..... http://www.latimes.com/sns-ap-us-pot-city-cultivation,0,7010250.story
This sort of sums up a few arguments that have been going on here...

"Opponents argue the urban pot farms would put small medical marijuana growers out of business.

Permits would not be limited to Oakland-based businesses. Councilwoman Desley Brooks said she hoped local business owners and minorities would be encouraged to apply."

What's that got to do with prop19? Thats a 215 thingy...

 

[igrowone]

I have read that restrictions on medical grows are holding up in court. Such as no outside gardens or cannot be seen when someone looks over the fence.

My point is Prop 19 defers this height of plants and other regulatory matters to local Government.

So yes 1 foot tall is possible especially in the "Dry Counties" prop 19 allows for. A "Dry County" is a county where one cannot have or conduct Cannabis business such as a coffee shop or over the counter sales. Prop 19 allows for counties to allow or not allow Canna-businesses to operate. I'm sure cultivation of any kind will be viewed as business as it is now.

Perhaps someone can show me why this is not true with actual Prop 19 language?

I just find the defence of Prop 19 that 25 sq ft is okay because we can grow trees a bit of a reach if not a lie.

there is language that does state that the 25 sq ft area can not be reduced by localities, though it may be expanded
but you're right that the height is not specified
as it is worded, i believe this will be a judiciary issue, the cali supreme court will decide what is reasonable
they had their reasons for excluding height, my guess is there is a bit of gaming here to provide the judiciary some latitude in determining what quantity of MJ is reasonable for personal use
1 foot is not impossible, but would conflict with the stated purpose of the prop to grow for personal use

 

[mullray]

What's that got to do with prop19? Thats a 215 thingy...

Not really. Oakland tends to be doing its own thing....

Hey, I'm pro prop 19 - don't shoot the messenger.

 

[mullray]

there is language that does state that the 25 sq ft area can not be reduced by localities, though it may be expanded
but you're right that the height is not specified
as it is worded, i believe this will be a judiciary issue, the cali supreme court will decide what is reasonable
they had their reasons for excluding height, my guess is there is a bit of gaming here to provide the judiciary some latitude in determining what quantity of MJ is reasonable for personal use
1 foot is not impossible, but would conflict with the stated purpose of the prop to grow for personal use

This is for sure. I take 25 squared to mean 25 squared as would I suspect any jury. Look, if Prop 19 passes I really don't think the State police will be pushing these laws and testing them and the DEA has far more to worry about.

 

[GanjaAL]

I am sorry but prop 19 will not keep people out of jail. Again... people are going to jail for carrying more than an oz. This will not change. It is 6 months in jail and 500.00 fine for carrying more than an oz... and this is what is the leading cause of arrests in california.

For less than an oz people are only getting tickets for 100.00.

So as you can see prop19 will not do anything to curb the incarceration rate and may infact increase it by people thinking it is a free for all as taxation is not legalization.

 

[Frozenguy]

share some of your insight on how prop19 will take away ones right to get a medical rec before they reach 21.

I didn't mean it to sound like that. As far as I understand/hope, 18+ year olds will still be able to get a recommendation as they can now.

so if people are being left alone even though they are breaking the law right now then WHY would there all of a sudden be a spike in arrests regarding prop19?

I dont get what you're saying. Well, I guess I do but I dont think I said there would be a spike in arrests. I dont think there will be, unless they intend to extremely enforce these new regs which would be stupid and wasteful. So I dont think there will be a spike in arrests.

 

[JJScorpio]

I am wondering the same thing! As most of LE want this bill to pass...LOL. I think it has to do with the fact that they get grant money for marijuana busts from the federal government.

Drawing you out of the woodwork huh?

Almost every DA and LE agency in Cali is against this Bill. And you and the other few in this thread have snuggled right up with them. They must be feeling good about that. I never thought I'd see the dat "supposed smokers" and LEO worked together to prevent legalization.

You can all guarantee that I'll be talking with Gypsy about this one. Personally, I want no one here that sides with LE over people that want to legally enjoy this plant.....

 

[vta]

Not really. Oakland tends to be doing its own thing....

Hey, I'm pro prop 19 - don't shoot the messenger.

It's cool...I just would like to see this thread kept on subject. There is a connection between Oakland and 19 as they allow for large facilities...it's just the laws are different and one can get easily confused if outside stuff in thrown in the mix.

 

[JJScorpio]

if Chris Conrad is right, not passing 19 will not only look like a change of public opinion on cannabis but also endanger 215 and 420.

did you read this localhero?

I think Chris Conrad is mistaken.....

“except as permitted under Health and Safety Section 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9″.

Health and Safety Section 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9 would be the exception and would not be affected by this Bill. Don't these sections cover medical marijuana in California?

 

[NorCalFor20]

im voting NO

prop 215 works fine for me!

fuck richard lee!

 

[Nuggsy Bogues]

I've had a breeding project i've been working on for a year that would be impossible to carry on in a 5x5 space shared with my personal plants. So I would either have to give up something that I am passionate about and feel I have a right to, or keep it going and become a criminal.

And if prop 19 does affect 215 (I still don't see anything that guarantees the cultivation rights of medical collectives), growers and farmers who have dedicated their lives to our beloved plant may be ones who are turned into criminals if they aren't allowed permits.

Money talks, and the big business capitalists with deep pockets are the ones who are going to end up with permits.

This isn't the future I imagine for cannabis and I really hope i'm wrong.

 

[krunchbubble]

And you and the other few in this thread have snuggled right up with them. They must be feeling good about that. I never thought I'd see the dat "supposed smokers" and LEO worked together to prevent legalization.

You can all guarantee that I'll be talking with Gypsy about this one. Personally, I want no one here that sides with LE over people that want to legally enjoy this plant.....

and how do we NO voters snug up with leo? how are we working with leo to prevent legalization? because we have an opinion? holy fuck, people have an opinion not of ours, they must like the police, better go tell the teacher......... quickly JJ.....go run

personally, i don't like forum administrators who talk shit to members of the forums because they may not have the same opinion.....

now go tell the teacher i said that.......

 

[GanjaAL]

Drawing you out of the woodwork huh?


You can all guarantee that I'll be talking with Gypsy about this one. Personally, I want no one here that sides with LE over people that want to legally enjoy this plant.....

What ever floats your boat... all that ever comes of your posts are insults for not seeing it your way and the mere fact you are not even from california is subject at best.

Also I would like to know your rebutle to this:

I am sorry but prop 19 will not keep people out of jail. Again... people are going to jail for carrying more than an oz. This will not change. It is 6 months in jail and 500.00 fine for carrying more than an oz... and this is what is the leading cause of arrests in california.

For less than an oz people are only getting tickets for 100.00.

So as you can see prop19 will not do anything to curb the incarceration rate and may infact increase it by people thinking it is a free for all as taxation is not legalization.

Also I will remind you... I am a Californian, Part Apache indian and Veteran of the USMC and you want to threaten me... wow! This has no effect on you what so ever but the people of california. Why would you want to see this prop pass???

It will not win over the conservitive and bible belt states and only serves to line the pockets of those backing this prop and to fill the coffers of corupt politicians so they can spend it all.
<!-- / message -->

 

[johnnyla]

just gets more confusing. so many good points on both sides. glad there are a few months left to figure it out. i'm starting to lean towards YES, but only if my prop 215 rights are not restricted in any way.

i also hope that these mega warehouses are dealt with properly... i.e. lightning strike burns the warehouse down, or a bunch of Hemp pollen destroys each harvest.

 

[JJScorpio]

I have no use for anyone that would take away the rights of millions of people to be able to grow and smoke their own cannabis so they can continue to make money off of med patients.

If you want to side with LEO and send a message that people do not want legalization, don't expect me to agree or respect that opinion. Is that clear enough?