Vote NO to legalize cannabis....Or else

[dnaprotection]

Tax and regulate is the path of those who know no better because they have forgotten they are human beings and what it means to be such.
It is way past time to do as we are instructed by the Declaration of Independence and declare our 'certain rights' held by 'The People'.
We in Lake County Ca are attempting to do so:

http://freedomtogardenact.org/initiative

INITIATIVE MEASURE TO BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO THE VOTERS

The county council has prepared the following title and summary of the chief purpose and points of the proposed measure:

AN INITIATIVE MEASURE TO RESTORE THE NATURAL HUMAN RIGHT TO GROW AND USE PLANTS FOR THE BASIC NECESSITIES OF LIFE

This initiative measure asserts that human beings are naturally endowed with the fundamental self-evident right to have and grow the natural plants of this earth and the naturally occurring seeds thereof and that these rights are held in perpetuity outside of the constitutional responsibility of a government to protect an individual's right to engage in commerce.

This measure seeks to exempt all Lake County residents within the unincorporated areas of the County from any County permitting or other County ordinances that would limit an individual's outside and/or greenhouse home gardening efforts or abilities as described in the initiative and would declare any law, to the extent it would specifically deny these human rights, to be unconstitutional under both the federal and state constitutions.

This measure would require, in the event any neighbor complaints occur as a result of the right to have and grow the natural plants of this earth, which complaints are not related to a specific, medically- verifiable toxic health risk to the public, that the parties involved would be sent to mediation provided by the County of Lake.

This initiative measure would require that all who exercise the rights described in the measure must take reasonable care to prevent environmental destruction and to mitigate foreseen negative impacts on the natural environments. The Lake County Environmental Health Department would be required by this measure to act as the administrative authority as to complaints by neighbors and foreseen negative environmental impacts should mitigation be neglected by an individual engaging in the gardening practices described in this measure, but that authority is restricted to circumstances where a verifiable neighbor or resident of the County signs a written complaint and officially registers it with the County.

This initiative measure will require that any law, to the extent that it would specifically deny or disparage the human right to garden as described therein, (and not withstanding an individual in violation of using illegal garden chemicals), must be set aside unless it can be determined either that the individual circumstance is occurring within the context of commerce related activities as defined by this measure or if the individual's violation of the environmental obligations described in this measure rises to the violation of a criminal statute.

This measure provides that it will not apply in circumstances where a private rental or lease agreement exists pertaining to the use or occupancy of private land unless it is otherwise specifically enumerated within such an agreement or unless the agreement does not specify any terms and conditions regarding outside or greenhouse gardening.

The initiative measure provides that if any provision of the ordinance or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance is held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.


'The Freedom to Garden Human Rights Restoration Act of 2014'

An Ordinance to restore the natural Human Right to grow and use plants for the basic necessities of life.

Whereas in the State of California, the People of the County of Lake do hereby Find, Declare and Ordain as follows:
When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for people to reaffirm and reestablish the fundamental human rights with which they are naturally endowed, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's origins entitle them, and to recognize a decent respect for the opinions of humankind, requires that they should declare the causes which compel them to come forward toward the reestablishment of those rights.

We hold these truths to be self-evident:

That all humans beings are created equal. That human beings are naturally endowed with certain rights, and that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that to secure these rights, governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, and that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to re-declare and reestablish the inherent human rights that would intrinsically correct such governmental negligence, and to reconstitute such in a form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Therefore, in accordance with the 9th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America,

Amendment IX:

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.",

and also in accordance with the California State Constitution, Article 1 Declaration of Rights, Section 21.:

..."This declaration of rights may not be construed to impair or deny others retained by the people.",

and, also as consistent with County of Lake Ordinance No. 2267 in relation to private property rights, and, whereas disregard and contempt for certain human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of humankind, and, whereas in a world which human beings endeavor to enjoy freedom of speech and belief, and where freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of peoples everywhere, be it here proclaimed that it has become necessary to reaffirm and specifically re-constitute the self evident inherent freedom to grow and use plants as described herein:

Section 1., Findings:

That human beings are naturally endowed with the fundamental self evident right to have and grow the natural plants of this earth, and the naturally occurring seeds thereof, to be used for their own needs as individuals in pursuit of life and in effort to live, and that such basic human rights have been recognized and acknowledged to exist, and that these rights are held in perpetuity outside of the constitutional responsibility of a government to protect an individual's right to engage in commerce.

Section 1.(a)

That all County of Lake residents residing within the unincorporated areas of the County who exercise the rights described in Section 1. of this Act at their residence within said area, and are compliant with Section 2.(a), and are gardening outside (outdoors) or in a greenhouse (and not withstanding any generally applicable urgency ordinance(s) specifically relating to water conservation), are, as accorded in the paragraphs above, necessarily exempt from any County permitting or other County ordinances that would limit an individual's home gardening efforts or abilities in conjunction with Section 1.

Section 1.(b)
That any law, to the extent that it would specifically deny or disparage the human rights as described in Section 1. of this Act is unconstitutional by both the Federal Constitutions 9th Amendment, and also by the State Constitutions Article 1 Declaration of Rights, Section 21, and by the fact that such self evident human rights are held in perpetuity by the People.

Section 2., Responsibilities:

Should neighbor complaints that are not related to Section 2.(a) herein, or that are not related to a specific medically verifiable toxic health risk to the public arise as an official complaint to the County as a result of an individual(s) exercising the rights as described in Section 1., and Section 1.(a), (and not withstanding any effected party choosing to seek remedy and or reparations by way of litigation through civil proceedings), all the effected parties shall be directed to mediation provided for by the County of Lake, and if resolution between the effected parties cannot be achieved in a reasonable effort to mediate (to be determined by the appointed mediator), the effected parties shall then continue mediation at their own expense (to be equally divided between the effected parties) until a resolution between the parties can be agreed upon, or until one of the effected parties withdraws from the mediation.

Section 2.(a)

All who exercise the rights described in Section 1., and Section 1.(a) of this Act, shall take reasonable care to prevent environmental destruction, and are responsible to mitigate any possible foreseen negative impacts on the natural environments, and all persons who neglect such practices shall be subject to the authority designated under Section 2.(b) herein, but such remedies are to be used to help individuals come into compliance with this section and not to unreasonably burden individuals who exercise the rights described in Section 1.

Section 2.(b)

The County of Lake Environmental Health Department shall administer over individual circumstances that may arise related to Section 2. and Section 2.(a) herein, but all such administrative authority and compliance inquiries shall be restricted to circumstances where a verifiable neighbor (or resident of the county) complaint in writing and signed by the complainant has been officially registered with the county.

Section 3., Special Circumstances:

Any law, to the extent that it would specifically deny or disparage the Human Rights as described in Section 1. of this Act, (and not withstanding an individual in violation of using illegal gardening chemicals, including but not limited to, certain pesticides, herbicides, fungicides and fertilizers), is to be set aside unless it can be determined that the individual circumstance is occurring within the context of "commerce" related activities as defined herein, or if an individual's violation(s) of Section 2.(a) of this Act are to the extent of violating a criminal statute.

Section 3.(a)

This Act shall not apply in circumstances where (a) private rental or lease agreement(s) (contract) exist(s) pertaining to the occupancy and or use of any private land unless such is otherwise specifically enumerated within said agreement(s) (contract), or unless the agreement(s) (contract) does not specify any conditions or agreement pertaining to outside (or greenhouse) home gardening.

Section 4., Definitions:

(a) For the express purposes of this Act, the word "commerce" shall be taken to mean:
The buying and selling of goods or services in any form, and in direct reference to the exchange of United States currency (or other such legally recognized tender) for such goods or services.

(b) For the express purposes of this Act, the words phrased as "compliance inquiries" shall be taken to mean:
A written and delivered inquiry, and an in person inquiry as to responding to (a) specific complaint(s), and to which access to inspect private property shall only be in circumstances where the respondent has voluntarily agreed to and granted such access, or where on an individual basis, a court order has provided for such access.

(c) For the express purposes of Section 1. of this Act, the words phrased as "to be used for their own needs" shall be taken to mean:
For use as food, medicine, fiber, fuel, building materials, environmental damage mitigation or other environmental concerns, privacy, aesthetics or ambiance, spiritual/religious requirement, (or other) basic necessities of life.

(d) For the express purposes of Section 1. of this Act, the word "natural" and the words phrased as "naturally occurring" shall be taken to mean:
Plant species and varieties of such that have evolved in nature through the traditional pollination and cross pollination processes, be that by wind/weather, or animal (including human) assistance.

(e) For the express purposes of Section 1.(a) and Section 3.(a) of this Act, the word "greenhouse" shall be taken to mean:
Any structure where the sun's light can penetrate at least 80% of the roof (ceiling or top) surface and that is intended for and used for growing plants in.

Section 5., Severability:

If any provision of this Act or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the Act which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Act are severable. The People of the County of Lake hereby declare that we would have adopted this Act irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof.

 

[catbuds]

Dnaprotection, I really hope Cali wins this. This IS AS IT SHOULD BE! There should only be one law concerning the cannabis plant ....... that it be protected from thieft like anyother personal property! When legalization was up for the vote here, I asked our county sheriff, if legalized, how did he plant to handle pot plant thieft. He said he wouldn't even send his men out to take police reports or statements. This was a personal conversation, off the record, but in his public statements, he claims pot is a gateway drug! How backwood, redneck, uninformed & outdated can he get? Time to vote..........him out of office!
- But yeah. Its time Cali makes a big move & brings the rest of us along for the ride! Good luck! I'll be following this!


P.S. here in the state of Md, we just got a new workable mmj law (first one was trash) & decriminalization, which takes effect in october (mmj already in effect). A sheriff's deputy (old school friend) told me the sheriff said; we can't arrest them for 10 grams or less, but we can still take their dope & throw it in the incinerator!
- screw this crap! I want to move to a warmer climate anyway! Winters here can be as harsh as LEO......

 

[Pepe le skunk]

In CO, both MMJ & retail exist as part of the state constitution, the highest level of state law. That can only be changed by a vote of the people, period. Our MMJ scene has always existed in full compliance with the state constitution and the law. The legislature is extremely limited in what they can & can't do.

Any and every citizen needs to make sure they help write the law in their state or country (canada) for medical or recreational cannabis to prevent the state legislature from taking away your right to grow your own at home.
Everyone already knows the corporations have the representatives in their pocket and don't care about medical patients rights. As a mater of fact they only want your money and want to make sure they prevent you from doing anything that would take the advantage away from them.

And the other important thing is to prevent only state run locations from being able to operate in your state. A number of states only allow a number of locations to operate under guidelines effectivly setting up a monopoly in their state run cannabis grows. Do not let this happens in your state or watch all the profit go into some millionaires pockets already in bed with the representatives and not into your pocket or your neighbors.
They simply price you out and your so excited about legal weed you didn't see them bending you over and running away with the treasure chest.

Just remember:
1. They are not setting this up for your benefit.
2. They don't give a rats azz about your medical neccessities.
3. They want all the profit for themselfs and their cronies.
4. If they could own it all and stop any competition from the black market or elsewhere that is exactly want they will do.

 

[Soulrebel239]

I will be voting yes. It's been to long, now we as growers need to be ready.

 

[the gnome]

Any and every citizen needs to make sure they help write the law in their state or country (canada) for medical or recreational cannabis to prevent the state legislature from taking away your right to grow your own at home.
Everyone already knows the corporations have the representatives in their pocket and don't care about medical patients rights. As a mater of fact they only want your money and want to make sure they prevent you from doing anything that would take the advantage away from them.

And the other important thing is to prevent only state run locations from being able to operate in your state. A number of states only allow a number of locations to operate under guidelines effectivly setting up a monopoly in their state run cannabis grows. Do not let this happens in your state or watch all the profit go into some millionaires pockets already in bed with the representatives and not into your pocket or your neighbors.
They simply price you out and your so excited about legal weed you didn't see them bending you over and running away with the treasure chest.

Just remember:
1. They are not setting this up for your benefit.
2. They don't give a rats azz about your medical neccessities.
3. They want all the profit for themselfs and their cronies.
4. If they could own it all and stop any competition from the black market or elsewhere that is exactly want they will do.

very wise words.
unfortuately govt is an evil that that we have to deal with.
so citizens of any state getting into the med/recreation biz needs to have a strong buyer beware mentality

the devils in the details
and if it isn't then... you'll just have to pass the bill to see whats in it

btw,
bit of fact,
it's not common knowledge many know of except the native americans
and they remember very well what happened when the pilgrims landed in north america.
one of the settlers is an ancestor of our great politician and president Barrack "Barry" Obama,
his pilgrim ancestor who went by the name of Paton Obozo
was by chance on the 1st boat to land at plymouth rock.

well when the pilgrims settled in and finally had a sit down for a heart to heart chat at the 1st thanksgiving with the indians,
Obozo giving one of his many speeches said to the indians
we come in peace
we are here to help in any way we can....
on and on and on went the speech touting goodwill.
in conclusion,
Obozo ended with a solemn promise
with a straight face he told the indians to tell all the indians of america who had lived on their land for many moons
if you like your country
you can keep your county

 

[rolandomota]

most of us dont live in progressive marijuana states and most states with medickal marijuana want you dying or practically dying in order to "let" you smoke and then they want you to pay insane prices for it tax the living daylights out of it what a joke. and then they want to tell you how much to smoke and what you can and cannot make with your weed and how much you can keep. its so dumb to be listening to these quacks that dont care about you and your love for smoking ganja. so who cares if they legalize or not just grow your own in the privacy of your own home tell no one share with no one. if you do share say your buying it for top dollar from a "connection". Just dont say it's the electrical connection in your wall! i sure would not want anyone knowing what im doing im my house it's no ones bussiness. I was very dissapointed when california voted no but not surprised. THeirs too many people making a lot of money without the chance of getting in trouble already why would they want to change that? thats why all this medical marijuana bull ticks me off. It's only a front to keep competion low and prices high.

 

[Jhhnn]

Any and every citizen needs to make sure they help write the law in their state or country (canada) for medical or recreational cannabis to prevent the state legislature from taking away your right to grow your own at home.
Everyone already knows the corporations have the representatives in their pocket and don't care about medical patients rights. As a mater of fact they only want your money and want to make sure they prevent you from doing anything that would take the advantage away from them.

And the other important thing is to prevent only state run locations from being able to operate in your state. A number of states only allow a number of locations to operate under guidelines effectivly setting up a monopoly in their state run cannabis grows. Do not let this happens in your state or watch all the profit go into some millionaires pockets already in bed with the representatives and not into your pocket or your neighbors.
They simply price you out and your so excited about legal weed you didn't see them bending you over and running away with the treasure chest.

Just remember:
1. They are not setting this up for your benefit.
2. They don't give a rats azz about your medical neccessities.
3. They want all the profit for themselfs and their cronies.
4. If they could own it all and stop any competition from the black market or elsewhere that is exactly want they will do.

I won't argue with any of that. While circumstances will vary by state, I would point out that the Colorado method of constitutionally protected MMJ, personal growing & retail licensure is a winning compromise, satisfying a broad spectrum of different interests. It co-opts interests that might otherwise be hostile to legalization using positive & negative incentives. It annihilates control-freak ambitions while giving them something to control. Advocates & activists would do well to study it & adopt it as a template for their own efforts.

A64 has been brilliantly conceived & executed, utterly changing the place of cannabis culture in CO. We're no longer locked out of the system but rather locked into the system, a complete reversal of fortune. I'm sure some are uncomfortable with that, but it's important to realize that the system changed a helluva lot more than we did. For the vast, vast majority of users, it's overwhelmingly positive.

 

[Jhhnn]

very wise words.
unfortuately govt is an evil that that we have to deal with.
so citizens of any state getting into the med/recreation biz needs to have a strong buyer beware mentality

the devils in the details
and if it isn't then... you'll just have to pass the bill to see whats in it

btw,
bit of fact,
it's not common knowledge many know of except the native americans
and they remember very well what happened when the pilgrims landed in north america.
one of the settlers is an ancestor of our great politician and president Barrack "Barry" Obama,
his pilgrim ancestor who went by the name of Paton Obozo
was by chance on the 1st boat to on plymouth rock.

well when the pilgrims settled in and finally had a sit down for a heart to heart chat at the 1st thanksgiving with the indians,
Obozo giving one of his many speeches said to the indians
we come in peace
we are here to help in any way we can....
on and on and on went the speech touting goodwill.
in conclusion,
Obozo ended with a solemn promise
with a straight face told the the indians to tell all the indians of america who had lived on their land for many moons
if you like your country
you can keep your county

Please, Gnome- give credit where credit is due. The Obama Admin could easily have stymied Colorado Retail Marijuana. I have no doubt that a Romney DoJ would have done so quite ruthlessly. He said he would, remember? I think they would also have extended suppression efforts to Colorado legal personal growers, as well. I truly believe that highly successful Colorado legalization will be functionally irreversible & highly contagious by the time the 2016 election rolls around, thanks in no small part to the Obamites. Going in, I'm sure they believed that as much as I do. They've shown our efforts a great deal of faith & respect as this has unfolded.

Despite the Libertarian lipstick, America's right wing establishment is deeply authoritarian, particularly when the subject is drugs, mandatory minimum sentencing, & dirty, filthy, spaced out, lazy, no-good degenerate law breaking child endangering dope-pushing hippie & minority scum.

Never forget- that's what they believe, and that's how they frame the issues. Obviously, their political opponents see it differently or we wouldn't be where we are.

 

[Heusinomics]

There are many good arguments being laid out.

It is my opinion that "hyper" or excessive regulation IS criminalization in disguise.

Additionally making the lists of allowable or licensed growers low it naturally leaders to a gov held monopoly!

Ed lays it out very clearly in his newest gro book with the example of "the tomato model"!
If we want it "legalized" why wd we agree to insane tax shakedowns and and insiders club of earth raping corporations telling what we can and can't grow/eat/smoke/love.

The "legalized like alcohol" idea was a trick by the lobiests to hand big biz!
Don't let your state b fooled by industrial agro biz, alcohol is obviously a bad model to follow.

 

[shaggyballs]

Seems we are all for legalization, but The cautious people are afraid of a runaway freight train effect!

 

[dnaprotection]

Seems we are all for legalization, but The cautious people are afraid of a runaway freight train effect!

What I see here (in this thread) is a failure to acknowledge the issue for the human rights issue it really is.
Question:
What in the constitution protects your right to grow a carrot or a tomato?
If you can find the answer to that then you also know what protects your human rights to grow any plant including cannabis.
If you cannot find such wording then the cannabis issue is revealed for what it really is...control the food and you control the people, just ask Monsanto
There is no specific wording to protect your human rights in this area as of yet and so plants and people are being discriminated against regardless of the 14th amen (equal protection), and the door is wide open for Monsanto et al to continue their quest for private ownership of all that keeps us alive.
Its time to stand up and declare the human right to garden and end the discrimination.

 

[the gnome]

Please, Gnome- give credit where credit is due. The Obama Admin could easily have stymied Colorado Retail Marijuana. I have no doubt that a Romney DoJ would have done so quite ruthlessly. He said he would, remember? I think they would also have extended suppression efforts to Colorado legal personal growers, as well. I truly believe that highly successful Colorado legalization will be functionally irreversible & highly contagious by the time the 2016 election rolls around, thanks in no small part to the Obamites. Going in, I'm sure they believed that as much as I do. They've shown our efforts a great deal of faith & respect as this has unfolded.

Despite the Libertarian lipstick, America's right wing establishment is deeply authoritarian, particularly when the subject is drugs, mandatory minimum sentencing, & dirty, filthy, spaced out, lazy, no-good degenerate law breaking child endangering dope-pushing hippie & minority scum.

Never forget- that's what they believe, and that's how they frame the issues. Obviously, their political opponents see it differently or we wouldn't be where we are.

Jhhnn,
like lawyers and insurance companies its a necessary evil we have to deal with, be it rep/dems or who ever.
they're all the same really and none of them deserves to be trusted as history has shown us

"barry" is prez now so he's in the hot seat and running the show as i see it
and were getting our 2 terms of his BS lies and all that goes with it
as we did with bush's 2 terms.
you obviously lean a certain way by your republican comment.
then how about this.
florida is going to be the 1st state to pass medical marijuana in the deepest of the deep south,
that in it's self is pretty amazing.

the bill passed with bipartisan support,
but it was a republican led initiative by matt gaezt and afterwards dem katie edwards joined in cosponsoring the bill.
yesterday our republican govenor rick scott signed the measure and it will pass in the nov elections.
as you say give credit where credit is due.
does that mean i should support the republicans because of it?
does it mean you should?
give credit, i do...but cautiously and with great reserve.
way more politicians are dirty, corrupt,
and self serving 1st
what ever good they do usually lines another political feather in their nest or that of the party
and has never countered the all the bad they have done and our now doing.

btw, it was govt that made cannabis illegal under the flimsiest of pretenses in the 1st place
and now they're here to *help us*
classic how govt creates the problem and then comes to the rescue
think about that one and then giving credit where it's due.

I'll leave it at that

 

[bentom187]

Jhhnn,
btw, it was govt that made cannabis illegal under the flimsiest of pretenses in the 1st place
and now there here to *help us*
classic how govt creates the problem and then comes to the rescue and were suppose to give credit where it's due?
I'll leave it at that

Gold. /thread.

 

[Jhhnn]

I just try to stay positive, Gnome, and there's good reason to be positive about A64 & the Obama Admin's way of dealing with it. This is an enormous & very favorable shift in policy, soft peddled with the opposition's own rhetoric of States Rights & personal freedom. Fighting against it is fighting against their own words, dangerous territory for any politician. It knocks the wind out of their sails.

It's also important to recognize that MMJ is now the fall-back position of prohibition. They already lost that fight in 20 states, so the handwriting is on the wall. It's not like they're giving up- they're just retreating to what they hope is a more defensible position. They still want recreational users & providers to be suppressed. If that's what the Obama Admin wanted, too, they'd have done it here in CO. They haven't.

The problem for right wing authoritarians is that they're playing catch-up in trying to move to that new position even as A64 & I-502 threaten to make it untenable. We broke through, & the Obama Admin is helping us push further. It's just the truth- get past your hate-um gubmint headset & deal with it.

The US govt is not a monolithic entity. It's compartmentalized with some parts more necessary & desirable than others, also with competing factions & interests. If you think that the DEA isn't hating on Obama as much as you are, maybe more, then you aren't looking at this squarely. It's not like anybody said the govt was here to save us, at all. In CO, the Obama Admin just got out of our way, put the DEA on the bench, also made moves to normalize banking for the marijuana industry. Any state that follows in our footsteps will get the same treatment. Step right up, guys- build a coalition of interests in your state to put cannabis, cannabis users & providers on the side of the law where it all belongs. Or not- you won't get much help if you don't respect what you're trying to change, if raving is more important than constructive action. You'll need more than stoners to get there- you'll need business interests & civic action groups along with ordinary citizens who see it as a source of tax revenue, taxes they won't pay. They also see it as ending a waste of money & resources. And you'll need to provide assurances to those fearful of change. Your allies will do it better than you can. None of them share your contempt for govt- it's a big turn-off for them.

If you can't put on a headset that lets you do that, then you'll just perpetuate the current system. If that's what you want, knowing that the chances of being busted eventually are quite strong, you're on your way to getting there.

 

[the gnome]

well jhhnn i like the way its being done in colo,
I'm 100% with ya there and glad its set up the way it is.
but even tho, obama has no respect for the US constitution or your states
but I agree Govt should just get out of the way,
and by merely staying out of the way he has no political skin in the game so he's doing you no personal favor imo,
but the winds will blow another way one day and when they start to see the enormous profits i wonder for how long and to what degree the stand by mode will last.
i remember reading a few years ago on IC that the DEA under obama regime went through cali smashing dispensary one after another along with heads.

If you think that the DEA isn't hating on Obama as much as you are, maybe more, then you aren't looking at this squarely.

seems like obama couldn't control his dogs on that one?
coming from a president who openly said to the latino's about republicans land politics in general
"you reward your friends and punish your enemies"
that's a hard one to swallow and tells you the kind of person he is.
quite a distance and sounds nothing like the hope and change candidate for president, does it?
so he's elected and lets see what kind of hope and change we have.
now we have a president who uses the DEA, DOJ, IRS, EPA, dept.of homeland security
and other govt agencies, to punish his enemies
a blind man can see govt IS his own personal monolithic entity he's using to "punish his enemies" at his whim which by his own actions has shown his enemies are anyone who doesn't agree with him or his policies/politics
which happens to be everyday americans and american businesses,
look what the DOJ did to the gibson guitar co.
its obama who hates the american people and has done everything in his power to earn my total lack of respect for him
along with millions of other americans,
even some democrats are getting disturbed at what this president has done and is doing


obama and holder are one of the most politically ruthless machines to come along in many a year,
one only needs to look where obama cut his teeth politically.
in the ring of chicago politics, the most ruthless and corrupt in the nation.
BUT
why the change of heart now?
its the same reason he was very anti gay marriage in the beginning...then had that change of heart.
VOTES, his history on stances and changes seem dependent on if elections are held that year.
I just have serious issues and doubt with where our govt is heading and has been doing lately.
I don't want to keep heading off topic to much or too far but you keep leading into obama as canna's new best buddy because he is staying out of the way,
which i genuinely appreciate. and I guess is all cool and groovy for us in the canna biz,
but there's a much bigger picture many of us have been looking at.
its what he is doing to this country
and the american people which will have its eventual impact on canna and every other biz in the nation
and yourself included wheter you like it or not,i
one only has to look at history to see what's coming in the future and i guarantee it's not a pretty picture

but that's for another thread

 

[Pepe le skunk]

What I see here (in this thread) is a failure to acknowledge the issue for the human rights issue it really is.
Question:
What in the constitution protects your right to grow a carrot or a tomato?
.

You don't get it. Let me spell it out for you again.

1. They are not setting this up for your benefit.
2. They don't give a rats azz about your medical neccessities.
3. They want all the profit for themselfs and their cronies.
4. If they could own it all and stop any competition from the black market or elsewhere that is exactly want they will do.

Human rights don't apply when they are killing us all slowly to fill their pockets with cash. You assume they give a rats azz about you and your human rights. The same people who lock you up for a joint? Please! Take off your rose colored glasses. Only way to beat them is to get to the ballot box first with citizen written and a good lier (lawyer) to write the ballot initiative first. If gov or big business reps do it first your state is doomed to follow NJ and Conn inside good old boys setup..

 

[dnaprotection]

You don't get it. Let me spell it out for you again.

1. They are not setting this up for your benefit.
2. They don't give a rats azz about your medical neccessities.
3. They want all the profit for themselfs and their cronies.
4. If they could own it all and stop any competition from the black market or elsewhere that is exactly want they will do.

Human rights don't apply when they are killing us all slowly to fill their pockets with cash. You assume they give a rats azz about you and your human rights. The same people who lock you up for a joint? Please! Take off your rose colored glasses. Only way to beat them is to get to the ballot box first with citizen written and a good lier (lawyer) to write the ballot initiative first. If gov or big business reps do it first your state is doomed to follow NJ and Conn inside good old boys setup..

So your saying I somehow don't get it?
Get what?
Your statement is a bit incoherent in terms of who you mean by 'they'?
If 'they' means the corpsgov then I think I may 'get it' even better then you...maybe you should reread my post that you quoted so that maybe you will get it

 

[Jhhnn]

You don't get it. Let me spell it out for you again.

1. They are not setting this up for your benefit.
2. They don't give a rats azz about your medical neccessities.
3. They want all the profit for themselfs and their cronies.
4. If they could own it all and stop any competition from the black market or elsewhere that is exactly want they will do.

Human rights don't apply when they are killing us all slowly to fill their pockets with cash. You assume they give a rats azz about you and your human rights. The same people who lock you up for a joint? Please! Take off your rose colored glasses. Only way to beat them is to get to the ballot box first with citizen written and a good lier (lawyer) to write the ballot initiative first. If gov or big business reps do it first your state is doomed to follow NJ and Conn inside good old boys setup..

No doubt there's a lot of that wrt MMJ. OTOH, no state legislature is willing to even approach legalization on their own. They're trying to hold the line at MMJ, much like re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic after it hit the iceberg. A64 is their iceberg.

In WA, the voters didn't go far enough, left the legislators entirely too much leeway in their legalization effort & are now suffering for it.

In CO, the instructions to the legislature were much more specific- "Implement this using these deadlines or lose control completely." It's a sweeping & brilliant piece of legislation, essentially the Magna Carta of marijuana. The authoritarian elements in State govt accepted it only because they had to, because we gave them no choice. The Obama Admin did have a choice- they could have given us the Romney but chose not to do so. In that, they've shown themselves to be fully complicit with our efforts, fully cognizant of the fact that there would be no going back unless reefer madness really did set in.

As our success continues in CO, it won't be hidden under a basket, bet on that. Other activists can easily use our success to promote their own. Use A64 as a template, changing only what's necessary to make it fit your state. Now you can sell the Hell out of it- "It's the same thing as Colorado" will get a lot of traction the further this unfolds, bet on that. Back it up with the numbers, too. Borrow the slogans & quote the people who contributed to our success. Use it as a springboard.

America wants to end the marijuana war on terms they can accept. They know it's stupid, divisive & counter productive. They just haven't known what to accept because they didn't know what was out there, on the other side of legalization. We're letting them know, replacing exploitable uncertainty with factual evidence. They already like what they see, and they'll like it more every day.

 

[paper thorn]

So why didn't you guys set it up so regular folks could make a little income from it, instead of just having six measly plants? And don't tell me how you can grow trees. Still only three in flower and 3 in veg. What if a guy wants to keep a dozen of his killer strains? Over just in moms. I could have 60 - 100 plants and just produce enough for me, doesn't mean I'm going bigtime.

As it is, by the time you get a license, a retail location and a grow location, whatever amenities, your up in the 5 to 6 figure range. And you have to produce 50 pounds a week to pay the bills.

Counts out all the small time growers and only the guys doing their not-really-legal-meds-for-profit grows on a commercial scale can afford to get in the game.

Sorry for ranting and showing what could be mistaken for class envy, just having a bad week; my job sucks, my bosses suck, I'm out of weed, my cat died...

 

[bentom187]

It's just the truth- get past your hate-um gubmint headset & deal with it.

The US govt is not a monolithic entity.

So wrong on so many levels. There is a reason the real anti authoritarian's don't care for government. It is nothing but violence and coercion . You would not accept that in any aspect of your life and then get over it. Its called subjugation you don't have to like it , you don't have to accept it and in fact you should fight it. You have rights. Is it easier to beg ? sure, especially if you want to legitimize the violent suppression of your rights. But I think the right model is to put them in there place and overgrow the fXXk out of this country and others. Make the "problem" so rampant that it can not be stopped.
I don't think we would be voting on the right of talking or using your legs or ownership of specific body part's, why is it so with consuming substances ?
Its your body not anyone else's.

Libertarian takeover lipstick FTW.

David Brat Is Right
Let’s not shy away from the truth about what government is.

With just seven little words, the freakout began: “The government holds a monopoly on violence.”

These were written by David Brat, a professor of economics at Virginia’s Randolph-Macon College and, now, the Republican party’s nominee for the state’s seventh congressional district. “Unusual” and “eye-opening” was the New York Daily News’s petty verdict. In the Wall Street Journal, Reid Epstein insinuated darkly that the claim cast Brat as a modern-day fascist. And, for his part, Politico’s Ben White suggested that the candidate’s remarks “on Neitzsche and the government monopoly on violence don’t make a whole lot of sense.” As is its wont, the progressive blogosphere lost its collective marbles too: One contributor sardonically described Brat’s claim as a “doozy,” while another contended that such opinions were sufficient for “one to question his, shall we say, cognitive coherence.”











This reaction is rather surprising, for what Brat wrote is not merely a statement of fact, but a thoroughly neutral statement of fact. “If,” Brat submitted,


you refuse to pay your taxes, you will lose. You will go to jail, and if you fight, you will lose. The government holds a monopoly on violence. Any law that we vote for is ultimately backed by the full force of our government and military.

Who among us genuinely doubts this to be the case? Only those, I would venture, who are so uncomfortable with the consequences of their philosophy that they seek the dull refuge of lazy euphemism and collective myopia. It is, it seems, decidedly easier idiotically to repeat that “government is the only thing we all belong to,” or that “government is simply the name we give to the things we choose to do together” than to acknowledge that, whether one is advocating a small government that takes care of the basics or a Leviathan that seeks to meddle in the smallest recesses of the human heart, one is invoking Thomas Hobbes. George Washington almost certainly never said that “government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force,” nor did he describe the state as “a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” But these maxims, attributed to him, gained wide currency because, imprimatur or none, they contain a valuable truth. Brat’s words are the heir to this recognition. In his supposedly “unusual” essay, he asks whether “we trust institutions of the government to ensure justice”; suggests that “history teaches us” to worry about the scope of the state; and, channeling a sentiment that would be extraordinarily familiar to the Founding Fathers and in accord with the philosophies and historical examples that inspired them, mocks the arrogant notion that we now “live in particularly lucky and fortunate times where the State can be trusted to do minimal justice.” He observed, too, that however secure the principle that Americans may defend themselves against violence if attacked, they will nonetheless eventually have to abide by a judgment from the state. When Brat argues that “when push comes to shove, the State will win in a battle of wills,” he is confirming that violence is only legitimate when the state says that it is. That’s a monopoly.

There is nothing incoherent or sinister about this. On the contrary: That a potential member of Congress is so elegantly aware of the remarkable strength of the body that he is seeking to join is little short of refreshing. Also bracing was that Brat’s contention was cast in bipartisan — or, rather, nonpartisan — terms. First, he asked whether his audience was happy to trust the extraordinary power of the government to the temporary custody of the Right or Left. Then he suggested that anybody who “answered ‘no’ to either question” could well find themselves with “a major problem in the future.” In doing so, he joined a long line of forward-looking Americans who have, in Edmund Burke’s felicitous phrase, tended not to “judge of an ill principle in government only by an actual grievance,” but have been disposed instead to “anticipate the evil, and judge of the pressure of the grievance by the badness of the principle.” The colonists, Burke espied, “augur misgovernment at a distance; and snuff the approach of tyranny in every tainted breeze.” So, too, the architects of the nation. It was evident in the late 18th century that despotism was a perennial prospect, and, as Brat hints, the horrors of the 20th century should have served only to amplify that trepidation. Where, pray, is the problem here?

It may well irk those who would grow the state beyond all control that a public figure chose so directly to remind the people what “government” means. But it should vex almost nobody else. To refuse to subordinate language to politics is the first and most important duty of the free man. Alas, both Left and Right too often lean toward imprecision and pretense when it suits their ends, shooting sharpened daggers at plain-speaking sorts who dare to express the less pleasant truths of our society in harsh and unlovely language. The Left reacts with particular exasperation when one observes that taxation is forced confiscation of property; the Right when one points out that firearms are lethal weapons whose purpose is to kill. Euphemisms abound. No, we are told earnestly, “taxation is the price we pay for civilization!” “Taxes pay for good things!” “Without taxes, the country would collapse!” Perhaps so. But, wherever one comes down on the question, it has no bearing whatsoever on the nature of taxation. Whether one is taking 1 percent of a citizen’s income or 100 percent of a citizen’s income, one is still taking it. To acknowledge that this is the case is not to cast a political judgment but to recognize reality. Bravo!

So, too, it is with the debate over gun control. It is an incontrovertible fact that firearms are explicitly designed to kill living things — specifically, to expel hard projectiles at such a speed that they will rip unmercifully through skin, bone, and organs and incapacitate, maim, or end the life of a living creature. It is true that a gun can be a “defensive tool.” It is also true that in many cases all one needs to do is to point a gun at someone and he will stop doing what he was doing. But that is because the gun is a lethal weapon and he knows this to be the case. One would not get the same reaction from a crook if one pointed a banana at him. Ever vigilant against the tyranny of delicacy, George Orwell observed in 1939 that “truisms as that a machine-gun is still a machine-gun even when a ‘good’ man is squeezing the trigger . . . have turned into heresies which it is actually becoming dangerous to utter.”

If David Brat’s wholly inoffensive observations are enough to give a person the vapors, he might well look to reconsider the foundations of his philosophy. In certain cases — rape, murder, defense of the realm — the case for government force is an easy one to make. In others — the hosting of cowboy poetry festivals, the banning of smoking, the hyper-regulation of small businesses — it is downright farcical. Were I convinced that the state should be using its power to determine the optimum price of milk, I would probably recoil at the word “violence,” too. This, though, has no bearing on whether its use is pertinent. David Brat was correct: Governments of all sorts rely upon force and maintain a monopoly on fire, and thereby invite all of us to turn our skeptical eyes toward them. Let’s try not to crucify a man for looking on them without favor and telling all who would listen the acrid truth about what he has seen.