DavidBriggs
New member
This is a dangerous political battle we are fighting. 2010 Proposition 19, California State considers legalization of cannabis. But at what cost? Some argue
High Times reported -- “Don't make the mistake of believing that the tobacco companies aren't poised to pounce on mass-produced commercial schwag. In 1993, Phillip Morris riled a trademark application for "Marley" brand cannabis cigarettes. Other tobacco companies registered such names as "Acapulco Gold" and "Red Leb," and in 1998, it was revealed that British American Tobacco had a secret plan to introduce cigarettes containing "subliminal" amounts of ganja if it were ever legalized.”
You may feel skeptical at this point that legalizing cannabis using Prop 19 is actually very detrimental to our cause as Cannabis believers. You may have a few points of your own, for instance;
Now that we have examined either viewpoint and the reasons for and against. Let us see how this new law would affect court cases that have already occurred that now would have no legal ground in court. They would simply be another jailed criminal. Below are lawsuit cases that would be lost under proposition 19 just within the past two months.
Pot growers file class action lawsuit against Tehama County - Colusa Sun-Herald | 8 Jun 10
Group challenges Tehama pot law - The Record Searchlight | 10 Jun 10
Medical Marijuana Dispensary Hails Court Ruling as Victory - Orange County Weekly | 5 Jul 10
2 Lake Forest Dispensaries Reopen - Orange County Weekly | 9 Jul 10
Blind woman's medical pot suit thrown out - Press Telegram | 14 Jul 10
Upland medical marijuana cases may hinge on Anaheim case - Contra Costa Times | 15 Jul 10
Dragonfly De La Luz a well known and respected Cannabis Culture writer observed;
“While amendments were made ostensibly to prevent the initiative from affecting current medical marijuana law, a careful reading of the initiative reveals that this is not, in fact, the case. Certain medical marijuana laws are exempt from the prohibitions the initiative would enact, while others are glaringly absent.
Cultivation is one such law that is noticeably non-exempt.[17] In spite of the fact that the tax cannabis Web site says otherwise, the only medical marijuana exemptions that the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Initiative actually makes are with regard to possession, consumption and purchase limits, which only ensure that patients would still be allowed to buy medicine at dispensaries. The word “cultivate” is conspicuously absent. Whereas today a person with a doctor’s recommendation has the right to grow up to an unlimited number of plants, the initiative would drastically reduce that number to whatever can fit in a 5’x5’ footprint (around 3-6 plants—per property, not per person). This will force many patients to resort to buying instead of growing their own medicine, because of the inconvenience caused by producing multiple grows a year rather than growing a year’s supply of medicine at one time, as many patients currently do outdoors. And growing indoors—which typically requires special grow lights, an increase in hydro use, and a lot of time and attention—is a comparatively expensive endeavor.
The initiative would further impact medical marijuana patients by banning medicating in the privacy of their own homes if there are minors present, as well as in public (currently perfectly legal[18])—an invaluable liberty to those with painful diseases who would otherwise have to suffer until they got home to relieve their pain.
Finally, the medical marijuana laws that are exempted from this initiative apparently only apply to cities. For medical marijuana patients who live in an area that has county or local government jurisdiction, according to a strict reading of the initiative, medical marijuana laws are not exempt.[19]”
Food for thought.
Here 2 other great resources, be sure to read the comments, they offer further perspective.
For Prop 19 - http://www.420magazine.com/forums/i...-california-s-prop-19-word-word-analysis.html
Against Prop 19 - http://www.examiner.com/x-14883-San...supersede-or-amend-its-medical-marijuana-laws
- “Medical Cannabis” is over. So are the caregivers, growers, and allowable amounts.
- Big business will be the only ones with enough money to buy the freedom to grow large amounts for distribution.
- Collectives will dissipate and disappear and the growers and distributors will be jailed for obscure pieces of the law.
- Enormous taxes will be placed on the cannabis to dissuade all operations but large operations.
- Chemicals will be infused into the cannabis which will “preserve” the marijuana cigarette additionally the potency will be greatly decreased to increase consumption.
- The industry will be totally and completely stripped from those currently at its lead who mostly are interested in quality and the health of their patients and be placed firmly in the hands of Phillip Morris (Who already owns 400 Acres in Northern California and has trademarked Marleys, in reference to the pot-smoking reggae legend Bob Marley)
High Times reported -- “Don't make the mistake of believing that the tobacco companies aren't poised to pounce on mass-produced commercial schwag. In 1993, Phillip Morris riled a trademark application for "Marley" brand cannabis cigarettes. Other tobacco companies registered such names as "Acapulco Gold" and "Red Leb," and in 1998, it was revealed that British American Tobacco had a secret plan to introduce cigarettes containing "subliminal" amounts of ganja if it were ever legalized.”
You may feel skeptical at this point that legalizing cannabis using Prop 19 is actually very detrimental to our cause as Cannabis believers. You may have a few points of your own, for instance;
- Everyone 21 and up can smoke a little and grow a little.
- Maybe this will stop the drug cartels from Mexico a little.
- Legalization is cool and progressive.
- Taxes collected off of the potheads will be great.
Now that we have examined either viewpoint and the reasons for and against. Let us see how this new law would affect court cases that have already occurred that now would have no legal ground in court. They would simply be another jailed criminal. Below are lawsuit cases that would be lost under proposition 19 just within the past two months.
Pot growers file class action lawsuit against Tehama County - Colusa Sun-Herald | 8 Jun 10
Group challenges Tehama pot law - The Record Searchlight | 10 Jun 10
Medical Marijuana Dispensary Hails Court Ruling as Victory - Orange County Weekly | 5 Jul 10
2 Lake Forest Dispensaries Reopen - Orange County Weekly | 9 Jul 10
Blind woman's medical pot suit thrown out - Press Telegram | 14 Jul 10
Upland medical marijuana cases may hinge on Anaheim case - Contra Costa Times | 15 Jul 10
Dragonfly De La Luz a well known and respected Cannabis Culture writer observed;
“While amendments were made ostensibly to prevent the initiative from affecting current medical marijuana law, a careful reading of the initiative reveals that this is not, in fact, the case. Certain medical marijuana laws are exempt from the prohibitions the initiative would enact, while others are glaringly absent.
Cultivation is one such law that is noticeably non-exempt.[17] In spite of the fact that the tax cannabis Web site says otherwise, the only medical marijuana exemptions that the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Initiative actually makes are with regard to possession, consumption and purchase limits, which only ensure that patients would still be allowed to buy medicine at dispensaries. The word “cultivate” is conspicuously absent. Whereas today a person with a doctor’s recommendation has the right to grow up to an unlimited number of plants, the initiative would drastically reduce that number to whatever can fit in a 5’x5’ footprint (around 3-6 plants—per property, not per person). This will force many patients to resort to buying instead of growing their own medicine, because of the inconvenience caused by producing multiple grows a year rather than growing a year’s supply of medicine at one time, as many patients currently do outdoors. And growing indoors—which typically requires special grow lights, an increase in hydro use, and a lot of time and attention—is a comparatively expensive endeavor.
The initiative would further impact medical marijuana patients by banning medicating in the privacy of their own homes if there are minors present, as well as in public (currently perfectly legal[18])—an invaluable liberty to those with painful diseases who would otherwise have to suffer until they got home to relieve their pain.
Finally, the medical marijuana laws that are exempted from this initiative apparently only apply to cities. For medical marijuana patients who live in an area that has county or local government jurisdiction, according to a strict reading of the initiative, medical marijuana laws are not exempt.[19]”
Food for thought.
Here 2 other great resources, be sure to read the comments, they offer further perspective.
For Prop 19 - http://www.420magazine.com/forums/i...-california-s-prop-19-word-word-analysis.html
Against Prop 19 - http://www.examiner.com/x-14883-San...supersede-or-amend-its-medical-marijuana-laws
