Repeal Cannabis Prohibition Act of 2012

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

^I wrote letters to NORML, Hightimes, MPP, for months trying to get them to get together an organized million man march and they wouldn't even respond. They even gave me a sticky thread for it here at icmag in the legal forum section to help me.

honestly>>> i dont think they really want MJ legalized. they have made a nice little living for themselfs "advocating" for legalization while never really accomplishing shit. why would they want to end their gravy train???

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

^that's why I am just gonna keep over growing

 

[RollmeoneKenobi]

Keep on growing Hash!

 

[Hammerhead]

I agree wit hydro on all points. I'm voting for the wine act. I believe we should be supporting this bill. We don't need to confuse voters anymore then they where with 19. Like I mentioned in the other thread I don't believe you can vote for both. If they end up on the same ballot you have to pick one or the other? and if half vote for one and half vote for the other neither Will get passed. So IMO we should all be backing the wine act.

 

[kmk420kali]

Here is as close as I can find on this dilemma--

Two Liquor-Store Initiatives Heading for the Ballot -- What Happens if Both Pass?
Battle Could Set Precedent in More Ways Than One

By Erik Smith
Staff writer/ Washington State Wire

OLYMPIA, July 26.—Secretary of State Sam Reed is expected to certify Initiative 1105 for the ballot today, placing two initiatives on the ballot that deal with the same subject, and possibly creating an enormous headache for state officials and lawyers alike.
Initiative 1105 would shutter the state’s liquor stores and allow hard-liquor sales in private stores, as is done in California and 31 other “open” states. Initiative 1100, already certified for the ballot, would do the same thing.
And that leaves four months for people to wonder: What if both pass?
State elections officials announced late Friday that Initiative 1105, entirely backed by two liquor distributors, had easily qualified for the ballot after submitting 359,525 signatures. Only 241,000 were required, and a random check of three percent of the signatures submitted showed that enough of them were valid for the measure to qualify. The rejection rate was 18.55 percent.

The Soundalikes That Aren’t

If you read the ballot titles for both, you’ll be hard-pressed to tell the difference. That’s because the state attorney general’s office and the courts evaluate each measure independently, and they don’t aim to make a comparison.
So both ballot titles hit on the most obvious point – the elimination of the state liquor store system – and they ignore the point that caused the financial backers of the two initiatives to spend millions of dollars to run their paid signature drives. One measure favors big retailers; the other preserves a business monopoly for liquor distributors that exists in some form in every state of the union.
Initaitive 1100, backed by Costco stores at a cost of about $1 million, would for the first time allow retailers to purchase hard liquor, beer and wine directly from manufacturers.
Initiative 1105 was the distributors’ response – the campaign kicked into gear only after Costco announced its support for the other. That measure would require retailers to purchase through distributors and would essentially establish the same system in Washington that exists in the 32 “open” states. That late-starting signature drive cost about $2 million and was entirely supported by Young’s Market Co. of Los Angeles and The Odom Corp. of Bellevue, a partner of Southern Wines and Spirits, the nation’s largest liquor distributor.
There are differences in the taxation structures imposed by the two initiatives. But while the two campaigns are likely to focus on those differences, they have a big point in common. Both would repeal the state’s markup on booze, which is the main reason hard liquor costs more in Washington than in other states.

What if Both Pass?

So what happens if voters say yes to both? Dave Ammons, spokesman for the secretary of state’s office, has been trying to answer that one ever since it became clear that both sides were mounting serious campaigns. The question never has come before Washington courts before, though it’s almost happened at least three times. The answer is so murky that the only thing for sure is that the courts have to decide.
There are two ways that it might go. The courts might decide that where the two initiatives conflict, the initiative that got the most votes prevails.
Or they might decide that the voters intended to pass both measures and that both carry equal weight. In which case it might come down to the actual wording and effect of the measure.
If it’s the latter case, Initiative 1100 would prevail. That’s because Initiative 1105 modifies the statutes on the books, while 1100 wipes them clean away and replaces them with new ones.
Washington courts have never had a chance to rule on the subject, because voters have never approved two conflicting ballot measures on the same subject. Certainly they’ve had the chance – it’s just never played out that way.
In 1988, they faced a pair of competing environmental cleanup measures, initiatives 97-A and 97-B. They wound up approving only one of them, I-97-A, which was backed by environmental groups – and which launched the state’s Model Toxics Control Act.
In 1993, they had a choice of two spending-limit measures, initiatives 601 and 602, and approved only I-601.
And in 2005, trial lawyers and insurance companies carried out a duel with conflicting ballot measures on malpractice reform. But after watching millions of dollars of worth of television advertising, Washington voters threw up their hands and rejected both I-330 and I-336.

http://www.washingtonstatewire.com/home/4265-two_liquor_store_initiatives_heading_for_the_ballot_what_happens_if_both_pass.htm

 

[SpaceKiller]

yea i agree cannabis should be treated like a fine wine. i dont understand why its so hard to do.

simply because they call it the gateway, well 80% of people drink alcohol before they ever touch cannabis or any other drug for that matter, i never hear them using that excuse. just getting real old and boring already i hope something changes fast.

most drugs can be done responsibly just like any other drugs that been legal for centuries, the people they always use for examples are usually pretty out there before they ever touch cannabis before.

saw this scared striaght, a guy was like "YOU THINK IT STARTS WITH JUST WEED, HELL NO. YOU TRY WEED YOULL WANT THE NEXT BEST THING!! LOOK AT ME I GOT HIGH AND DRUNK GOT IN A FIGHT AND BIT HALF A MANS FACE OFF!!! YOU DONT WANT TO BE IN HERE WITH ME!! CAUSE THIS IS WHERE SMOKING POT LEADS TO!!"

im pretty sure it wasnt either the alcohol or even the cannabis, who the hell bites chunks out of peoples faces and the guy looked like a damn lunatic already, i just really hate how people use some drugs as an excuse for their own true stupidity.

 

[SpaceKiller]

cannabis has kept me off tons of things, helps cut the cost on prescription pills, keeps me from wanting to ever get drunk, always hated cigs since i tried it, keeps me away from everything because im a responsible individual not some idiot who likes to abuse people and substances then blame the drugs for everything bad ive done in my life.

those people the huge majority of the time are just literally bad people and crazy they were probably full blown criminals before they ever touched drugs, their drug habit is the last thing they shouldve been checking out with some of those crazy basterds..

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A "GATEWAY DRUG".... ONLY A GATEWAY MENTALITY

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

yea i agree cannabis should be treated like a fine wine. i dont understand why its so hard to do.

simply because they call it the gateway, well 80% of people drink alcohol before they ever touch cannabis or any other drug for that matter, i never hear them using that excuse. just getting real old and boring already i hope something changes fast.

most drugs can be done responsibly just like any other drugs that been legal for centuries, the people they always use for examples are usually pretty out there before they ever touch cannabis before.

saw this scared striaght, a guy was like "YOU THINK IT STARTS WITH JUST WEED, HELL NO. YOU TRY WEED YOULL WANT THE NEXT BEST THING!! LOOK AT ME I GOT HIGH AND DRUNK GOT IN A FIGHT AND BIT HALF A MANS FACE OFF!!! YOU DONT WANT TO BE IN HERE WITH ME!! CAUSE THIS IS WHERE SMOKING POT LEADS TO!!"

im pretty sure it wasnt either the alcohol or even the cannabis, who the hell bites chunks out of peoples faces and the guy looked like a damn lunatic already, i just really hate how people use some drugs as an excuse for their own true stupidity.

you can't die from binge smoking.

 

[budlover123]

The other CA bill doesn't have the size restriction, nor does it have a possession limit....

I say 2 bill bills is not enough, get enough of them in there and one of them is bound to pass, right?

I like this bill, I think the restrictions will give it's detractors less negative spin to generate. And Besides, a bill with no restrictions is probably much less likely to pass.

I'm really liking that one of the engineers of the prop 215 law is working on this, he did it before, that shit is mad regulated, but a huge step in the right direction.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A "GATEWAY DRUG".... ONLY A GATEWAY MENTALITY

That = Truth

Another truth is while some of the people here are interested in legalization, many others are very opposed to the idea, for many different reasons usually involving money. To those people I say the gravy train is over, but fear not because there's still money to be made in cannabis, it just won't be so easy anymore, but wouldn't it be nice if everything was legal and legit? I still pay twice as much for beer that's not Coors or budweiser, people will pay for "micro-grow" weed

There is a reason why corporations can give us such great products at low prices, cutting corners every step of the way. From treating workers much worse than you ever would to using cheap chemicals and methods that you personally would never use with your own stuff.

They will probably sell weed by the joint commercially so they can use 50% reconstituted weed like they do with tobacco

 

[Hammerhead]

that post right there means there will be a split some will favor the wine act some will favor the other one. It's not a good idea to have multiple measures. IMO if that happens I don't think any will pass. It divides the community.

 

[budlover123]

Just vote yes for all of them. 1/2 of the California weed smoking population is already on that patient list, might as well vote yes on all you can, right?

Or are you worried about the possibility of more than one bill becoming law? lets cross that bridge smoking a fat joint when we get to it

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

^ seriously, just vote yes on both. why not. lets get this shit legalized in one state and hope the rest follow!

 

[vta]

 

[crazybear]

Vote for whichever will do the most good I'd say! But I change until we stand up & get it changed federally !

 

[Hammerhead]

has there ever been 2 measures or more on the same ballot that you could vote for ???. I have never seen that. I always thought that you had to vote for only 1 you could not vote for multiple measure's in the same category. This needs to be clearified if we all vote for all of them and then they say those dont count then what.

 

[kmk420kali]

has there ever been 2 measures or more on the same ballot that you could vote for ???. I have never seen that. I always thought that you had to vote for only 1 you could not vote for multiple measure's in the same category. This needs to be clearified if we all vote for all of them and then they say those dont count then what.

I posted this last page--

Two Liquor-Store Initiatives Heading for the Ballot -- What Happens if Both Pass?
Battle Could Set Precedent in More Ways Than One

By Erik Smith
Staff writer/ Washington State Wire

OLYMPIA, July 26.—Secretary of State Sam Reed is expected to certify Initiative 1105 for the ballot today, placing two initiatives on the ballot that deal with the same subject, and possibly creating an enormous headache for state officials and lawyers alike.
Initiative 1105 would shutter the state’s liquor stores and allow hard-liquor sales in private stores, as is done in California and 31 other “open” states. Initiative 1100, already certified for the ballot, would do the same thing.
And that leaves four months for people to wonder: What if both pass?
State elections officials announced late Friday that Initiative 1105, entirely backed by two liquor distributors, had easily qualified for the ballot after submitting 359,525 signatures. Only 241,000 were required, and a random check of three percent of the signatures submitted showed that enough of them were valid for the measure to qualify. The rejection rate was 18.55 percent.

The Soundalikes That Aren’t

If you read the ballot titles for both, you’ll be hard-pressed to tell the difference. That’s because the state attorney general’s office and the courts evaluate each measure independently, and they don’t aim to make a comparison.
So both ballot titles hit on the most obvious point – the elimination of the state liquor store system – and they ignore the point that caused the financial backers of the two initiatives to spend millions of dollars to run their paid signature drives. One measure favors big retailers; the other preserves a business monopoly for liquor distributors that exists in some form in every state of the union.
Initaitive 1100, backed by Costco stores at a cost of about $1 million, would for the first time allow retailers to purchase hard liquor, beer and wine directly from manufacturers.
Initiative 1105 was the distributors’ response – the campaign kicked into gear only after Costco announced its support for the other. That measure would require retailers to purchase through distributors and would essentially establish the same system in Washington that exists in the 32 “open” states. That late-starting signature drive cost about $2 million and was entirely supported by Young’s Market Co. of Los Angeles and The Odom Corp. of Bellevue, a partner of Southern Wines and Spirits, the nation’s largest liquor distributor.
There are differences in the taxation structures imposed by the two initiatives. But while the two campaigns are likely to focus on those differences, they have a big point in common. Both would repeal the state’s markup on booze, which is the main reason hard liquor costs more in Washington than in other states.

What if Both Pass?

So what happens if voters say yes to both? Dave Ammons, spokesman for the secretary of state’s office, has been trying to answer that one ever since it became clear that both sides were mounting serious campaigns. The question never has come before Washington courts before, though it’s almost happened at least three times. The answer is so murky that the only thing for sure is that the courts have to decide.
There are two ways that it might go. The courts might decide that where the two initiatives conflict, the initiative that got the most votes prevails.
Or they might decide that the voters intended to pass both measures and that both carry equal weight. In which case it might come down to the actual wording and effect of the measure.
If it’s the latter case, Initiative 1100 would prevail. That’s because Initiative 1105 modifies the statutes on the books, while 1100 wipes them clean away and replaces them with new ones.
Washington courts have never had a chance to rule on the subject, because voters have never approved two conflicting ballot measures on the same subject. Certainly they’ve had the chance – it’s just never played out that way.
In 1988, they faced a pair of competing environmental cleanup measures, initiatives 97-A and 97-B. They wound up approving only one of them, I-97-A, which was backed by environmental groups – and which launched the state’s Model Toxics Control Act.
In 1993, they had a choice of two spending-limit measures, initiatives 601 and 602, and approved only I-601.
And in 2005, trial lawyers and insurance companies carried out a duel with conflicting ballot measures on malpractice reform. But after watching millions of dollars of worth of television advertising, Washington voters threw up their hands and rejected both I-330 and I-336.

 

[Hammerhead]

I did read that but its in Washington not Cali. knowing how our political system has reacted in the past its more likely they would choose the bill with the most restrictions. If we all vote for both and are passed we are leaving it up to the politicians to decide witch one to employ. If i vote for the cannabis wine act and they both pass they could through out the wine act and implement the one with more restriction's,Taxes,fees blah blah. I could be way off but I can See this as a problem why create a problem. The community should back the best bill and pass that bill IMO.

 

[Bacchus]

If the weaker one passes, then it is a start. And in 2 more years another can be written to iron out the wrinkles in the first.

If Cali passes one of them, then Oregon and Washington will follow

 

[Hammerhead]

I dont like leaving the decision up to the politicians. If they have both in front of them its basicly taking our voting power out of our hands. I have said it many times I will help pass what bill there is but if I have a choice to pass a better bill why would I not do that why would everyone not do that?