-
As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.
Poll shows Cali voters favor legalization
- Thread starter Neo 420
- Start date
Neo & anti -
Here are the problems I have with the bill.
1.It changes very little. We are granted the privilege of legally smoking in our own homes (when our own children aren't also home) as well as possibly getting the privilege to grow in our homes if authorized by our city.
However for those privileges we must consent to the following items in the bill that are not worth the minimal privileges we are going to gain:
a. We must consent that we will not smoke in any "space" in the presence of minors. (is my backyard a "space"? Guess I'll just have to resort to cigarettes and liquor when my children are home)
b. We must consent that our local governments retain the right to "adopt ordinances, regulations, or other acts having the force of law to control, license, regulate, permit or otherwise authorize... culitvation, etc..."
One of you brought up the point earlier that they are only referring to commercial grows however although the above paragraph is in the "Commercial Regulations and Controls" the wording of the paragraph does not specify that local governments onlyhave the ability to "adopt ordinances...permit..."for commercial grows. Furthermore there is no definition on what constitutes a commercial grow. I believe it is clear that local government has the right to authorize (or not) cultivation regardless of area.
c. We must consent that local government is granted the same abilities in regards to permitting retail operations. It also specifies that it must be "licensed" yet there is no mention of how one obtains this "license".
d. We must consent that local government is granted the right to create "any other appropriate controls necessary for protection of the public health and welfare." However it is up to local government on what is "appropriate".
e. We must consent that in addition to "paying all federal, state and local taxes, fees, fines, penalties or other financial responsibility imposed on all or similarly situated businesses" that we will also pay "special or excise, transfer or transaction taxes, benefit assessments, or fees...".
2. The bill is not retroactive. It doesn't release anyone from incarceration. This is unacceptable!
===================================================
One of you asked me to provide the section in the bill that allowed the ability to provide preferential treatment to corporations. The sections that, in my opinion, allow this are both the tax section and the commercial section. Local government is clearly given the discretion, with no limitations on how they will tax and/ or license. If they decide on a fee structure based on a per location or license basis then these "fees" could be used to make only large scale operations profitable. There by assisting in the destruction of the small "mom and pop" commercial and retail operations.
I believe that we must demand a bill that provides both limitations and guidence on how fees are to be assesed. We also need a bill that provides the same on local government ability to "permit", etc.
In short the time is now, we must vote no on the tax and regulate bill in Novemebr! and demand legalization without exploitation.
Here are the problems I have with the bill.
1.It changes very little. We are granted the privilege of legally smoking in our own homes (when our own children aren't also home) as well as possibly getting the privilege to grow in our homes if authorized by our city.
However for those privileges we must consent to the following items in the bill that are not worth the minimal privileges we are going to gain:
a. We must consent that we will not smoke in any "space" in the presence of minors. (is my backyard a "space"? Guess I'll just have to resort to cigarettes and liquor when my children are home)
b. We must consent that our local governments retain the right to "adopt ordinances, regulations, or other acts having the force of law to control, license, regulate, permit or otherwise authorize... culitvation, etc..."
One of you brought up the point earlier that they are only referring to commercial grows however although the above paragraph is in the "Commercial Regulations and Controls" the wording of the paragraph does not specify that local governments onlyhave the ability to "adopt ordinances...permit..."for commercial grows. Furthermore there is no definition on what constitutes a commercial grow. I believe it is clear that local government has the right to authorize (or not) cultivation regardless of area.
c. We must consent that local government is granted the same abilities in regards to permitting retail operations. It also specifies that it must be "licensed" yet there is no mention of how one obtains this "license".
d. We must consent that local government is granted the right to create "any other appropriate controls necessary for protection of the public health and welfare." However it is up to local government on what is "appropriate".
e. We must consent that in addition to "paying all federal, state and local taxes, fees, fines, penalties or other financial responsibility imposed on all or similarly situated businesses" that we will also pay "special or excise, transfer or transaction taxes, benefit assessments, or fees...".
2. The bill is not retroactive. It doesn't release anyone from incarceration. This is unacceptable!
===================================================
One of you asked me to provide the section in the bill that allowed the ability to provide preferential treatment to corporations. The sections that, in my opinion, allow this are both the tax section and the commercial section. Local government is clearly given the discretion, with no limitations on how they will tax and/ or license. If they decide on a fee structure based on a per location or license basis then these "fees" could be used to make only large scale operations profitable. There by assisting in the destruction of the small "mom and pop" commercial and retail operations.
I believe that we must demand a bill that provides both limitations and guidence on how fees are to be assesed. We also need a bill that provides the same on local government ability to "permit", etc.
In short the time is now, we must vote no on the tax and regulate bill in Novemebr! and demand legalization without exploitation.
localhero
Member
whats up mike,
yeah all of your points are valid, props for puting the actual writing in your post.
im kinda wavering on the smoking in the pressence of minors. i know, why? that looks like it was thrown in there because it had to be. otherwise anti legalization freaks would cry foul. as would many child advocates. thats speculation ofcourse. but what i think the intention was that people shouldnt be smoking bud around kids. send them off to another room or something. but the verbage is still too vague. the writer should have put in a definition of , "space" in the definitions section. my con side to this is that it would allow for a witch hunt of pot smokers where angry and or crazy neighbors call the cops and child protective services on you.
what i thought was 7 years jail time for smoking around kids was really this:
Section 4: Prohibition on Furnishing Marijuana to Minors
Section 11361 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to read:
Prohibition on Furnishing Marijuana to Minors
(a) Every person 18 years of age or over who hires, employs, or uses a minor in transporting, carrying, selling, giving away, preparing for sale, or peddling any marijuana, who unlawfully sells, or offers to sell, any marijuana to a minor, or who furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer, or give any marijuana to a minor under 14 years of age, or who induces a minor to use marijuana in violation of law shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a period of three, five, or seven years.
i agree with you mike they should have clearly defined acceptable parameters for liscensing requirements and fees for commercial grows. thats a huge buttfuck waiting to happen for everyone. its already a clear set up to mirror commercial tobacco regulations. we can have 5 ft they can have 500,000.
its a crappy bill that left out critical definitions in key areas.
yeah all of your points are valid, props for puting the actual writing in your post.
im kinda wavering on the smoking in the pressence of minors. i know, why? that looks like it was thrown in there because it had to be. otherwise anti legalization freaks would cry foul. as would many child advocates. thats speculation ofcourse. but what i think the intention was that people shouldnt be smoking bud around kids. send them off to another room or something. but the verbage is still too vague. the writer should have put in a definition of , "space" in the definitions section. my con side to this is that it would allow for a witch hunt of pot smokers where angry and or crazy neighbors call the cops and child protective services on you.
what i thought was 7 years jail time for smoking around kids was really this:
Section 4: Prohibition on Furnishing Marijuana to Minors
Section 11361 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to read:
Prohibition on Furnishing Marijuana to Minors
(a) Every person 18 years of age or over who hires, employs, or uses a minor in transporting, carrying, selling, giving away, preparing for sale, or peddling any marijuana, who unlawfully sells, or offers to sell, any marijuana to a minor, or who furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer, or give any marijuana to a minor under 14 years of age, or who induces a minor to use marijuana in violation of law shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a period of three, five, or seven years.
i agree with you mike they should have clearly defined acceptable parameters for liscensing requirements and fees for commercial grows. thats a huge buttfuck waiting to happen for everyone. its already a clear set up to mirror commercial tobacco regulations. we can have 5 ft they can have 500,000.
its a crappy bill that left out critical definitions in key areas.
Yo local! Thanks!
I can actually deal with the provision regarding smoking around minors in a "space". (Even though it is perfectly legal to hot box your house with tobacco and drink a gallon of whiskey in the presence of a minor). If that were the only section I had a problem with I would gladly vote for the bill.
I just can't get past the allowance for local government to pick and choose who they wish to "license". With the current standard for local and state government to give highly preferential treatment to deep pockets I see this bill as a fast track to Walmart quality and Marlboro toxicity.
I can actually deal with the provision regarding smoking around minors in a "space". (Even though it is perfectly legal to hot box your house with tobacco and drink a gallon of whiskey in the presence of a minor). If that were the only section I had a problem with I would gladly vote for the bill.
I just can't get past the allowance for local government to pick and choose who they wish to "license". With the current standard for local and state government to give highly preferential treatment to deep pockets I see this bill as a fast track to Walmart quality and Marlboro toxicity.
My understanding is that these "licenses" are only to sell commercially. Anyone can grow their 5x5 with no license. If you want to start brewing your own beer in your kitchen, you don't need a license. If you want to start brewing your own beer in your kitchen and then selling it at the supermarket, you need a license.
If you want to open a brewery and churn out vast quantities of your beer you need a lot of licenses, permits, etc.
That's regulation of commerce, not MJ.
Once again, if you're currently growing illegally and you think things are fine as they are, there would be nothing to stop you from continuing to grow illegally once the law changes. Just grow more than a 5x5. Hell, even YOU would be protected by this, as police are not likely to spend a lot of time trying to figure out who is growing legally and who isn't. Unless you stick your head out or do something stupid, this kind of legalization is even going to be better for the black market growers.
Some states still have sodomy laws on the books. But because homosexuality has become a protected class in the eyes of the majority, nobody (not even super homophobes) is out there trying to enforce these laws.
It would be the same with legal herb. Yeah, you might potentially get a ticket if a cop saw you smoking somewhere, but he also might turn a blind eye (especially if he is growing his own 5x5 at home.)
Anti-
Read my post above the one you responded to. I did my best to present why, I believe, that the ability to cultivate is not given as a blanket right but as a privilege. And local government is given the right to "regulate, permit, license... cultivation" (no mention of exclusively commercial cultivation). Although that provision is in the commercial section there is no restrictive wording that makes it so a 5x5 area is not able to be considered commercial.
Furthermore there is also the added provision that reads " a local government may adopt ordinances, regulations, or other acts having the force of law to control, license, regulate, permit or otherwise authorize... appropriate controls on cultivation, transportation, sales, and consumption of cannabis to strictly prohibit access to cannabis by persons under the age of 21;
It seems clear that the bill makes it lawful to grow in a 5x5 area with the contingency that your local government has the right to regulate it, authorize it, etc...
This along with the other reasons I listed make this bill unacceptable.
Read my post above the one you responded to. I did my best to present why, I believe, that the ability to cultivate is not given as a blanket right but as a privilege. And local government is given the right to "regulate, permit, license... cultivation" (no mention of exclusively commercial cultivation). Although that provision is in the commercial section there is no restrictive wording that makes it so a 5x5 area is not able to be considered commercial.
Furthermore there is also the added provision that reads " a local government may adopt ordinances, regulations, or other acts having the force of law to control, license, regulate, permit or otherwise authorize... appropriate controls on cultivation, transportation, sales, and consumption of cannabis to strictly prohibit access to cannabis by persons under the age of 21;
It seems clear that the bill makes it lawful to grow in a 5x5 area with the contingency that your local government has the right to regulate it, authorize it, etc...
This along with the other reasons I listed make this bill unacceptable.
SeniorBuzz
Member
the question that needs to be asked, is:
why would any sensible voter want to increase, the already increasing chaos, around medical marijuana dispensaries opening everywhere, along with the increase in the number of growers
seems as if they first need to decide on where mmj dispensaries can locate
and while they are at it, decide on how testing is going to be done
why would any sensible voter want to increase, the already increasing chaos, around medical marijuana dispensaries opening everywhere, along with the increase in the number of growers
seems as if they first need to decide on where mmj dispensaries can locate
and while they are at it, decide on how testing is going to be done
SeniorBuzz
Member
what is going, with the dispensaries, tells me that more needed to be spelled out in the state bill, so that the chaos that is going on right now, never happened. it's really bad press
TC2010 is designed to further the chaos
marijuana dispensaries shouldn't be legislated, and regulated at a city, or county level, but at a state level
If TC2010 passes, mj becomes owned by local politicians and big money, a deadly combination
binaryfission
Member
YES YES YES YES YES YES!!!!! and YES some more. This guy gets it.
ITS Muthaf*cking OURS!!! tell your friends.
WE need to stop thinking about it like some soccer mom can take this away from us. She can in actuality, but not if we get involved and speak out to our friends and neighbors.
Come Up from the Basement and Decriminalize Pot!!!
Where is the chaos?? I'm not talking about the shit LEO and the media make up...but where is this chaos you speak of??
1st they say there are more than 1,000 clubs when there were about 600. Wow, they really blew that out of proportion. Realistically we have 10,000,000 people here in LA and the 130 clubs they left us with is not enough.
Then again this is kind of off topic since this initiative has nothing to do with med clubs.
The more the merrier! Overgrow the Government! I want to see cannabis growing everywhere. Bill's back yard, Mary's greenhouse, Sam's garage.....If this passes...Thousands more will grow. Then they might leave us alone.
Most of the views I see here against this initiative are either people that think this will cut into their wallet or younger peeps afraid of smoking with kids. When in fact this law will keep more people from getting into the system. And I think the profit growers will still make a profit....if they are smart and get on the ball.
Hey senior....I think that if TC2010 passes, Every single neighborhood in California, every one, will have people growing pot in it. And that's wonderful! But please don't kid yourself when talking about big money...big money already has a hand in it...it's a black market thing. The big money that is in it now, doesn't want it passed either...some of them will also blow your head off and bury you in the national forest your hiking in. If this passes there will be a new 'big money'. Who that is is still left to be determined. It's not going to be Phillip Morris, yet. Fed laws have to change for those types of players. So in the meantime the guys that are now growing the good stuff, yeah you know who you are
, will be able to brand. I can't wait! I see grower associations, distribution networks, packaging business, and retail markets everywhere. It is a lot like wine...you can buy the cheap shit or that killer vintage. The choice is yours.SeniorBuzz
Member
OH yes they will use all of that and then some. Right now the spot light is on us. The next election is in our hands and those that don't want this to pass are going to do whatever it takes to spread doubt. We should start seeing commercials soon.
True negative news is not good but remember, most of it is just sensationalism. There have always been negative articles about clubs, nothing new. There is no major crime that you speak of. Not any more than the same crime you have at liquor stores and banks. In fact it's less.
SeniorBuzz
Member
well, i personally have gotten alot out of this thread so far...im able to weigh the opposing perspective and opinion against what ive got so far..lets keep it going...ive got a friend, a lawyer, who recently became legalized...maybe i will be able to convince him to sit down w me for a few minutes and break it down in laymans terms....
CaptainTrips
Active member
With only 49% in favor in this polls before the multi million anti-ads bombarding the airwaves, the chances don't seem very good...
IMO this bill will pass due to the proposed taxation plan. This will bring much needed revenue to the state and local coffers. Polls don't really mean anything...Just ask Alvin Greene..
