Vote YES or NO on Prop 19

[SCF]

This for sure brings a 60's era type of feeling. Much love, cuz i get by with a little help from my friends...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBDF04fQKtQ&feature=related


Ok so i added the Yes votes (combined out of state, in state but would rather be voting on another bill, and Yes votes from this thread and the stickied thread which i will post a link here in the Cannabis Law Forum.)

And the no votes the same, from above thread, this thread, from out of state, this state, and the sticked thread.

Also the undecided votes, just going off the 2 threads and undecided.

Tally so far is........


ICMAG VOTES

717 Yes Votes for prop 19

287 No Votes for prop 19


31 Undecided votes

1035 total votes so far. Registered members here on ICMAG


70 percent yes vote

28 percent no vote

02 percent undecided vote.

Resources

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=175317

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=182317&page=138

 

[mean mr.mustard]

Worst band in the world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqP3wT5lpa4

Happy belated bday Brother John...

 

[SCF]

Worst band in the world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqP3wT5lpa4

Happy belated bday Brother John...

 

[vta]

The Prop. 19 Battle Lines Are Drawn


cannabis California -- With election day now less than a month away, California's Proposition 19 tax and regulate marijuana legalization initiative is leading in most polls (although a Monday Reuters/Ipsos poll showing it losing by nine points sent a chill down the spines of supporters) and is well-positioned to make California the first entity anywhere to legalize marijuana. But what happens in the next 27 days is crucial, as proponents and opponents alike seek to come up with the votes to prevail.

The battle lines are drawn.

Lining up in support of Prop 19 are dozens of (mostly) retired law enforcement figures, including former San Jose Police Chief Joe McNamara and former Seattle Police Chief Norm Stamper, as well as Law Enforcement Against Prohibition and the National Black Police Association; four California US congressmen; dozens of state and local elected officials; local ACLU chapters; the California NAACP; the California Libertarian Party, the California Green Party; the California Young Democrats and many local Democratic groups; the Republican Liberty Caucus; organized labor groups, including the SEIU of California, the Western States UFCW, the longshoremen, and various union locals; clergy, including the California Council of Churches IMPACT and the Interfaith Drug Policy Initiative; economist Dr. Jeffrey Miron; and a number of physicians, including former US Surgeon General Joyce Elders. California's burgeoning professional cannabis community has moved Prop 19 forward, with supporters including the Harborside Health Center, the Berkeley Patients Group, and the initiative's primary sponsor, Oaksterdam's Richard Lee.

On the other side are the usual suspects: The California Narcotics Officers' Association, the California Association of Highway Patrolmen, the California Police Chiefs Association, the California Correctional Supervisors Organization, the California Peace Officers Association, the California District Attorney Association, and local police associations. They are joined by all federal drug czars past and present, past and present DEA administrators, both California US senators and most of the congressional delegation, most newspaper editorial boards, the California Chamber of Commerce, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, the California Beer and Beverage Distributors (who chipped in $10,000 to

Public Safety First, a political action committee created to oppose Prop 19), Californians for a Drug-Free Youth, DARE America, and other anti-drug organizations.

But given marijuana's increasing popular acceptance, legalization foes aren't getting much traction anymore with "marijuana is the devil's drug" messages. Instead, they are forced into tangential attacks: Prop 19 will lead to more drugged driving; it will lead to workers high on the job, they say. It won't earn tax revenues because everyone will grow his own. It will create a "regulatory nightmare." Jacob Sullum at Reason magazine and veteran expert activist and Prop 19 steering committee member Chris Conrad's Prop 19 Fact Check and Rumor Control web page both do a thorough job of debunking those claims.

The opposition so far has been relatively low profile -- because it doesn't have any money. According to campaign contribution data at the California Secretary of State's office, Public Safety First has only managed to raise $178,000 to oppose Prop 19 this year, and more significantly, only has $54,000 in the bank right now. That's not enough to bankroll any kind of media campaign in the nation's most populous state.

That's a change from the past, when foes of drug reform initiatives could count on big money from special interests, as was the case in 2008, when a sentencing reform initiative that appeared headed for victory went down in flames after a big injection of funds from the powerful and wealthy prison guards' union. This year, the prison guards and their pile of cash are sitting it out.

The Prop 19 campaign fervently hopes they continue to do just that. Its worst fear at this point is a last-minute negative advertising blitz, and there is still time for that to happen. That's because, like the opposition, Prop 19 is essentially broke. Although it has raised more than $700,000 this year, it only has $67,000 in the bank. An independent pro-Prop 19 group,

Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP), has another $100,000 in the bank, thanks to surprise donations from Dr. Bronner's Magic Soapsand the DC-area store Capitol Hemp. SSDP is spending the money between now and Election Day on a Yes We Cannabis Fire Truck Tour doing voter registration and get-out-the-vote work on California campuses.

For the opposition, the lack of cash means it has to work to try to get its message out. Aside from the former drug czars coming out against the measure, a handful of debates, the penning of some op-eds, and a presence on the web, People First hasn't done much. It has held a handful of lackluster press conferences, which have generated some coverage, and spokesmen are always willing to give good quote when reporters call, but so far, that's about it.

Other than for the lack of cash, opposition from the usual suspects is pretty much as expected. What is surprising is the emergence of a vocal anti-Prop 19 movement with the marijuana community. From cannabis connoisseur Dragonfly de la Luz and her

Stoners Against Prop 19to Vote No on Prop 19, with its warning of a "Prop 19 cartel," to medical marijuana dispensary operators like HopeNet, the Green Door, and the California Cannabis Association, a fifth column within the marijuana movement is seeking to defeat Prop 19.

Their arguments, which can be read on their web sites, are varied, but boil down to a couple of main claims: that passage of Prop 19 will somehow hurt medical marijuana patients or dispensaries, and that Prop 19 is "not legalization" because it sets possession limits and allows for taxation and regulation of cultivation and distribution. There is an additional fillip of conspiracy-tinged fears that Prop 19 will lead to a corporate takeover of the pot industry. Left unspoken is the economic self-interest of growers and dispensary operators.

Those arguments have been heartily answered in detail by, among others, Chris Conrad (here), national NORML outreach director Russ Bellville (here.) Those readers interested in the battle over clauses, intentions, and meanings can compare the two sets of sites and decide for themselves.

"They have said nothing we have not been able to disprove," said Conrad, "but it doesn't matter because they're not reality-based. They're like our own little Tea Party, with a politics of fear and conspiracy stuff, tangents about corporate takeovers, and libertarian anti-tax and anti-regulation notions."

"We want parity and equality, and that means if you sell something, you have to pay taxes," said Mikki Norris, Conrad's long-time partner in life and activism. "The anti-tax thing has inserted itself into every movement, including this one."

Tensions boiled over during a debate last weekend at the Cow Palace in San Francisco during the International Cannabis and Hemp Expo, a pot industry trade show. Medical marijuana entrepreneur Richard Lee, the primary motivating force behind Prop 19, was subjected to loud heckling and shouting as he attempted to explain why pot people should vote for the initiative. A disgusted Lee finally rolled away in his wheelchair, leaving Conrad to carry on.

Nevertheless, Conrad sees the "Stoners Against Prop 19" types more as a distraction than as serious opposition. "I don't think they're that important, really," he said. "We have some serious opposition, and we're waiting for those ads to come out, we're waiting for the school bus full of children with the stoned driver. We're more worried about that kind of opposition in the works than we are by these people."

For Dale Gieringer, long-time head of California NORML, opposition to Prop 19 inside the marijuana community is overstated, but could impact the election result in a tight race. "It's a tempest in a teapot, a minority of a minority," said Geiringer. "But this looks like it's going to be a very close election, so it's possible they could affect the outcome.

Despite the heated rhetoric and venom on display in recent weeks, both sides should treat each other with respect, he said. "There are too many people casting aspersions about others' intentions in this," Gieringer said. "There are good people on both sides of Prop 19. There are some very dedicated supporters of legal marijuana who simply do not like the wording of Prop 19 for one reason or another."

But not voting for Prop 19 is the wrong choice, said Gieringer. "Some will conscientiously not vote for something that's not to their taste, but I don't think that's a wise thing to do in a close election. This election is about do you favor legal marijuana or not, and all the other concerns can be adjusted afterward," he said.

"They don't want to pay taxes, they're afraid it opens things up to big business," said Gieringer. "Others think it doesn't go far enough, and there are medical marijuana people who are afraid this will somehow infringe on patients' rights under Prop 215 and Senate Bill 420. I don't agree with that analysis."

Neither does Americans for Safe Access (ASA), the country's largest medical marijuana defense group, and one deeply rooted in the California medical marijuana scene. As a group concentrating on medical marijuana, ASA is neutral on Prop 19, but, in response to numerous questions from members and other interested observers, ASA has created a Prop 19 FAQ on its web site.

"Does Prop 19 hurt patients?" was the question. "No. While it is possible there will be unanticipated consequences and legal controversy, nothing in the text of Proposition 19 is designed to deny any rights to medical cannabis patients," was ASA's answer

"Does Prop 19 overrule the medical marijuana laws of California?" was the question. "No. Proposition 19 is designed to, among other things, '[p]rovide easier, safer access for patients who need cannabis for medical purposes.' Although a statement of purpose is not necessarily controlling, courts generally look to it in interpreting the statute's language. The purpose of Proposition 19 is not to overturn Proposition 215 or any other state or local medical cannabis law," was ASA's answer.

"Will Prop 19 allow localities to ban medical marijuana dispensaries?" was the question. "Unclear. Currently, there is no legal authority stating that localities must regulate dispensaries under Proposition 215 and SB 420. Proposition 19 allows for local regulation of medical cannabis sales, but also allows localities to ban such activity. If Proposition 19 is adopted, it is unclear how the courts will integrate both laws with respect to dispensaries," was ASA's answer.

It is worth noting that many California communities already ban dispensaries. Other, more medical marijuana friendly, locales regulate and tax them.

"People are concerned when voters are considering something so similar to a right already afforded them and that a new law might somehow restrict those rights," said ASA spokesman Kris Hermes. "There are many questions unanswered, especially around the issue of distribution. We're fighting right now to prevent local governments from adopting bans against distribution. Given that Prop 19 allows for wet and dry localities, and because we haven't completely ironed out the issue of whether local governments can ban medical marijuana distribution, this could infringe on those rights, especially if courts side with law enforcement against having a patchwork of different rules for different counties," Hermes said.

"There are also entrepreneurs who see their business being threatened by a huge influx of legal marijuana," said Hermes. "For some people, there is definitely a financial interest at stake, but ASA doesn't feel that should be a reason to oppose the initiative."

"What's not so clear is whether local governments might not have more power to tax, regulate, and potentially ban medical marijuana collectives," said CANORML's Gieringer. "The initiative gives very strong authority to local governments to do such things. It's not clear what their authority is now.
Many patients feel that, under current law, local governments have to accept collectives and maybe dispensaries. My reading is that that is not required by Prop 215, but might arguably be required by SB 420. But SB 420 is a statute and can be changed by the legislature at any time. I wouldn’t be surprised if they start tinkering around next year regardless of Prop 19. But the stronger the vote Prop 19 gets, the stronger the position of both patients and other users next year."

On November 3, regardless of the intricacies of the arguments over Prop 19, the rest of the world is going to wake up to a headline from California. Is it going to be "California Legalizes Marijuana" or is it going to be "California Rejects Marijuana Legalization?" California voters have 27 days to decide.

Source: AlterNet (US)
Author: Phillip S. Smith

 

[Leon Brooks]

if this does not pass... i will leave this pathetic hypocritical joke of a country... that, for me, would be the last straw.

do as i say not as i do america. VOMIT. only question is what modern country isnt being bullied by the U.S. for me to move too. "greatest country on the planet" yet one of the farthest behind in so many critical areas of social programs. education, healthcare,infrastructure. what good is survival of the fittest (capitalism) if we are all dumb and sick. oh thats right, easier to control the weak.

this county is a joke and a bad one at that.

 

[Mr Celsius]

vta good post, poor article IMO.

I like informative information, but I also like it in a non-bias manner... this is clearly from the pro-pot side. It dumbs down some concerns myself and others have, throws them aside like our opinions don't matter. Not the best way to earn credibility or respect IMHO.

 

[dagnabit]

but in what the late 70's early 80's somewhere back there the feds done the same thing over the drinking age
told everyone raise it to 21 or loose your highway money and every state bent over

not all of 'em...


LA waited to bend over to pressure from TX (dead 18 year olds piling up on I-10 twixt beaumont and lake charles)

course back home in NOLA the age is still "old enough to see over the counter"

i miss home :.(

 

[dagnabit]

Earlie Cuyler: What did I tell you about drinking underneath the age, huh?

Rusty: You said if I could afford to bring back enough for you then you don't care what I do. And it's my body and I can kill it however I want to. And America's about freedom.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0457146/quotes?qt0163730

 

[Herborizer]

Wow, I just listened to that debate between Conrad and Dragonfly... Dragonfly is so full of crap its amazing! I can't believe anyone would listen to her. Conrad blew her away. He called her out on cherry picking and piecing things together that just isn't true. I highly suggest listening to that debate if you are thinking of voting no.

Please vote Yes on Prop 19.

 

[vta]

vta good post, poor article IMO.

I like informative information, but I also like it in a non-bias manner... this is clearly from the pro-pot side. It dumbs down some concerns myself and others have, throws them aside like our opinions don't matter. Not the best way to earn credibility or respect IMHO.

I post it all...good and bad. I'm confused...first you say good post then basically say that by me posting that, somehow I lost/will lose respect-credibility??? Just so you know...I am for the advancement of Cannabis reform. For 3 decades I have been considered a criminal in the eyes of society. For that, I now have a criminal record for the rest of my life. A record that would not exist if not for the prohibition of cannabis. Don't kid yourself....we all know that cannabis is safer than booze and even aspirin, there is so logical reason to oppose 19 as it gives us the most liberal cannabis law to come around in a hundred years. If 19 doesn't give you enough...so sorry...this isn't about you...or me for that matter. This is about cannabis reform...you know that fire we set with medical cannabis...well 19 is like pouring gasoline on it. I am 215 and a caregiver so the limits of 19 mean nothing for me. What matters is changing the laws...here and everywhere. For years I have posted articles on this movement here and on OG. If you think your little smirk about credibility will somehow stop me from spreading this information...you are wrong sir.

 

[vta]

Wow, I just listened to that debate between Conrad and Dragonfly... Dragonfly is so full of crap its amazing! I can't believe anyone would listen to her. Conrad blew her away. He called her out on cherry picking and piecing things together that just isn't true. I highly suggest listening to that debate if you are thinking of voting no.

Please vote Yes on Prop 19.

Yeah...that chick is so far off its not even funny. The sad part is people have actually bought into her game.

Herb...you should check out the CSPAN debate I posted. It's 40 min:jawdrop:

 

[vta]

GOING LEGIT, IF PROPOSITION 19 PASSES


Source: Times-Standard (Eureka, CA)
If you are like me, you are one of thousands of commercial medical marijuana growers in Northern California, and you, like me, are concerned about what Prop. 19, the "tax and control" initiative will do to our economy. You have thrived in a community that supports and even depends on the ( variably legal ) medical marijuana commerce. If you are like me, when you first heard about the initiative, your first desire was to vote against it. You have exhausted hours discoursing with friends, acquaintances, and probably even strangers about how this will hinder our community and its economy. You, like me, are scared of change and the end of our day in the sun.

One thing I've noticed, though, when talking about legalization with friends, associates, etc., is that the general consensus seems to be, "Well, I'm just going to wait, play it safe, and see how it all plays out." But with November rolling ever closer, polls are continuously gaining support for Prop. 19, and rumors are buzzing like honeybees. I'm sure you've heard the ones about indoor warehouses in Oakland that are supposed to produce 120 pounds per day once their cycles get going. You've heard about Phillip-Morris weasels buying up land in the mountains/farm regions of Northern California. The threat of legal loopholes and corporate commercialization will swallow up our small private farms ( now considered full-scale, commercial grow-ops ), and our way of life will come to an end.

Well, I'm proposing we do something about it! We are pioneers who have forged the path to even make this initiative possible, and we have a right to have a say in how it goes when it's legal. That's why I'm starting the "Northern California Cannabis Farmers Alliance," a company ( eventually incorporated ) that will comprise collective action of group and individual farms all across Northern California. We will grow recreational, medical and hemp-resourceful cannabis for licensed dealers ( brokers ). With this new initiative, we will have to legitimize business and compete with corporate commercialization. The NCCFA will protect small family farms and current cannabis growers from corporate suffocation and market overflow. It will create jobs, protect farmers' rights and stimulate cannabis research in a growing market.

The NCCFA will be set up like a huge network. Each farm will operate as its own legal business franchise/corporate shareholder with tax/stock options and full benefits for employees. Farms will be organized by a county branch who will be able to meet specific local needs, supply desired amendments, etc., locally and broker local distributors, etc. Eventually I want county branches to have a service similar to "temp agencies" that can provide local farms with willing, competent and desirable "seasonal workers" ( trimmers, etc. ) besides their own permanent workers, farmers and employees. County branches will also inspect farms ( don't be scared! Everything will be legal and YOU will be protected ) to make sure everything is up to code and environmentally friendly. Most importantly, 3 to 8 percent of all profits ( varying by farm ) will be donated to fund recreational, medical and resourceful marijuana/hemp research, and get real facts out there about its gifts/use! s.

I know you might be questioning me. You might say "I'm still going to hope it doesn't pass!" Or maybe, "What a sell-out, we'll still be screwed." I ask you pessimists and nay-sayers to think of legalization not as the end to our way of life, but as a way to legitimize it, and a way to finally be respected as providers of a necessary service. All we need to do this is be organized, figure out our legal business schemes and unite under one corporate entity to protect our individual rights, skills, and ( I hate to say it ) profits. I, too, will have a hard time adjusting to this new business plan. I am so adapted to our underground ways, I originally feared becoming legit. I probably won't ever be able to say "Kush Co, how much marijuana would you like to buy today?" on the phone. But this is a chance for us to play ball with the big leagues, and to be able to compete, we must unite. Right now this idea is just a baby ( though forms are ready to go for when Prop.! 19 passes ), and to get it up and running, I am going to need major help from everyone who wants to protect current growers ( lawyers, insurance people, brokers, financial advisors, etc. ). I am working on appointing a board of directors, which should represent all involved counties. I encourage anyone interested to contact me at [email protected] and check us out on facebook @ Nor-Cal Cannabis Farmers Alliance.


SOURCE
Author: Jordan Anderson
Note: Jordan Anderson, owner of NCCFA, resides in Willits.

 

[prefersativas]

boo hoo. of course it won't be legal overnight even if prop 19 passes. alcohol was legalized state by state to the dismay of the feds. there was a war then like there is now.

also, i disagree. once prop 19 passes, the feds would have to use the commerce clause to gain jurisdiction over marijuana matters that take place intrastate (within the state). FEDS only have jurisdicktion in interstate matters (when commerce crosses a boarder into another state).

YES on 19!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm sure someone has beaten me to it, but the Fed's have already won that one. The Supreme Court has ruled that the Fed law trumps state on MMJ. Cited the Commerce Clause. Interestingly, Clarence Thomas voted AGAINST the Governments case. Since that ruling, several States have introduced laws stating that products constructed entirely within their States, and remaining in that State only, are exempt from Fed law. Usually intended to protect firearms from Federal intrusions on 2nd Amendment rights.
Prop 19, if it passes, should result in a new Supreme Court case. One day.

 

[SCF]

Yeah...that chick is so far off its not even funny. The sad part is people have actually bought into her game.

Herb...you should check out the CSPAN debate I posted. It's 40 min:jawdrop:

beyond off! i wonder where these moles come from...

It was a nice listen though to hear the opposition of our "own" kind.

 

[vta]

beyond off! i wonder where these moles come from...

It was a nice listen though to hear the opposition of our "own" kind.

Check it..

Video from Norml

Radical Russ takes excerpts from the Dragonfly debate and shreds her to pieces. If anyone believes her crap..they should listen to this and make up their own mind.

 

[SCF]

Check it..

Video from Norml

Radical Russ takes excerpts from the Dragonfly debate and shreds her to pieces. If anyone believes her crap..they should listen to this and make up their own mind.

masterpiece!

 

[mean mr.mustard]

I think it's pretty sad that there is the absolutist attitude here.

Nobody really bothers to respect any opinion that doesn't match theirs.

There's roundabout high fives whenever someone gets insulted and belittled for having such an opinion.

Hammering ourselves into the ground may not be the best thing we could be doing with our time.

It's not too hard to have at least a baseline level of respect for anyone risking prosecution for this plant.

Why can't we try to look a little better than political candidates?

I think we should try.

 

[Big D]

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

 

[kmk420kali]

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

+1000 !!!!!

 

[Hydrosun]

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

And the money necessary to buy my IPA!