Vote YES or NO on Prop 19

[dagnabit]

been reading everything every one has pointed out and i see some valid points made by the yes people..but those of you who say every no voter has some secret agenda behind there vote that is just bullshit.
like i stated before my no vote is on a moral point of the law criminalizing passing a joint for those 18-20 year olds..
i haven't seen anything in any of the new law that makes this not a crime for them yes people can carry a oz on them but where dose it state that is for those under 21 if it dose please post that.
regardless of what this bills real intentions are{making mr lee rich}i would be a big time yes person if they had not made passing a joint a criminal offense.
in fact i was until i read that part of the law so maybe sme of us just aren't as fucking GREEDY as you and want freedom.
and legalization not some bullshit that can destroy a young persons life (and when i say young person i mean some one who is old enough to die fighting for our freedoms)
yet you all are ok with putting them in jail for passing a joint as long as u can now sell weed ..
i for one will have to stand on the moral ground here and hold the mirror up for you so when you point that finger screaming greedy pot dealer its pointed at the right person ...ps ya i know my grammar is terrible so no need to point it out hahahaha

its not about the grammar but doing what i did would help

now..
im glad i understand your reasons..
let me ask.
do you want 215/420 repealed for the same moral reasons?
the bill the gov just signed also does not change that law.
how do you think 19 will allow us to sell weed?

so you would rather see thousands continue to be criminals than to require 18-21 year olds to still get their cards?

i call bullshit. every 18-20 y/o will be just fine after 19 just like they are now.

why are you hanging out with kids anyway?

 

[Runner]

i would be a big time yes person if they had not made passing a joint a criminal offense in fact i was until i read that part of the law so maybe sme of us just aren't as fucking GREEDY as you and want freedom and legalization not some bullshit that can destroy a young persons life

Perhaps people won't second guess your intentions if you don't post obvious misinfo

http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=4525&wtm_view=penalties

http://www.nocuffs.com/drug_cases/mar_Marijuana_penalties.asp

As you can see passing a joint to a 18-21yo is already a felony with 3 years minimum sentence. 19 makes it six months.

 

[delerious]

A friend brought up a good point this evening...

It dawned on me, like a ray of light. People had kept telling me that this would stop mexican cartels... well in reality it seems it will help them. Imagine a state where the law enforcement is diminished because something you want to grow is legal. Imagine not worrying about your crops being busted or having competition from locals. Last I checked, it seems a lot easier to smuggle something from California to the rest of the country, then from Mexico.

This could all be wrong, but I'm a logical person, INTJ (if you know what that means) and this makes sense to me.

Where does prop19 make growing in national forests legal? <- This is what the feds should be spending their time and money on.

 

[Herborizer]

I read an interview(I cant remember the source or the person being interview and am trying to locate the article again) where a lawyer said that any case that someone is in prison for can go in front of a judge and petition for release as the crime for the original sentence is longer a crime. This was an article discussing 19 and the effects of it passing.

Wow, I didn't know that. This would be fantastic news!

 

[BigBudBill]

Wow, I didn't know that. This would be fantastic news!

Yeah, it couldn't be written into the bill as a mass release because each case MUST be treated separately. As such, you have the right to petition for release if the crime is no longer on the books. What stinks is that it will be up to the judges discretion. If you had blow and guns at your less than 5 x 5 I wouldn't expect any help from the courts. If you were a person who did not get a rec for whatever reason and got caught with less than a 5 x 5 grow area or maybe some weight from a crop in your house, you MAY have a chance at release and records expunged. I hope to see lots of this happen after 19 passes.

 

[Herborizer]

Just sent some more money to the Yes on 19 campaign. If you want this to pass I suggest doing the same. Just think, you get a cool memorabilia shirt for doing it!

http://store.yeson19.com/home

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

been reading everything every one has pointed out and i see some valid points made by the yes people..but those of you who say every no voter has some secret agenda behind there vote that is just bullshit .like i stated before my no vote is on a moral point of the law criminalizing passing a joint for those 18-20 year olds ..i haven't seen anything in any of the new law that makes this not a crime for them yes people can carry a oz on them but where dose it state that is for those under 21 if it dose please post that .regardless of what this bills real intentions are{making mr lee rich}i would be a big time yes person if they had not made passing a joint a criminal offense in fact i was until i read that part of the law so maybe sme of us just aren't as fucking GREEDY as you and want freedom and legalization not some bullshit that can destroy a young persons life and when i say young person i mean some one who is old enough to die fighting for our freedoms yet you all are ok with putting them in jail for passing a joint as long as u can now sell weed ..i for one will have to stand on the moral ground here and hold the mirror up for you so when you point that finger screaming greedy pot dealer its pointed at the right person ...ps ya i know my grammar is terrible so no need to point it out hahahaha

I dont believe 18-20 y.o. use should be a crime. But than again I also believe if you can die for your country you should be able to buy a beer in a bar. Unfortunatly we have too many christian watch groups and overzealous mothers to ever let this happend. If we were to allow this same right for mj use it would just be another tool to construct the demise of 19. But how many people currently get in trouble for buying booze for underage kids. We all know it happends, but more than likely no one is to find out. I agree it sucks for anyone under 21, but we need to look at the bigger picture. Should we reallly shoot down 19 because a few kids cant wait a year or two to become legal?

 

[BigBudBill]

I dont believe 18-20 y.o. use should be a crime. But than again I also believe if you can die for your country you should be able to buy a beer in a bar. Unfortunatly we have too many christian watch groups and overzealous mothers to ever let this happend. If we were to allow this same right for mj use it would just be another tool to construct the demise of 19. But how many people currently get in trouble for buying booze for underage kids. We all know it happends, but more than likely no one is to find out. I agree it sucks for anyone under 21, but we need to look at the bigger picture. Should we reallly shoot down 19 because a few kids cant wait a year or two to become legal?

HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Greyskull]

Vote YES or NO on Prop 19

Has anyone noticed a lack of prop 19 information/propoganda being sent out to voters?

Everyday in my mailbox there is propoganda materials about van 'sleeping' tran or loretta "i changed my name to be better accpted by the latino community' sanchez or measure g or meg whitman....

But nothing (pro or con) on/about 19.

What are people who are not icmag savvy being supplied with in regards to prop 19? Are they being left to their own imagination?

(ill probably find a load of materials in my mailbox today haha)

 

[Hydrosun]

All those mailings you mentioned are paid political ads. The yes on 19 campaign has 10x the no campaign but there isn't much money being spend by either side. Where are all the fancy TV spots?

 

[Greyskull]

Vote YES or NO on Prop 19

All those mailings you mentioned are paid political ads. The yes on 19 campaign has 10x the no campaign but there isn't much money being spend by either side. Where are all the fancy TV spots?

Thats what im saying

I feel like joe/jane average Corporate beer drinking guy is being left to use his/her own imagination... Which could be good, and it could be bad....

What are the sheeple to do?

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

Where are all the fancy TV spots?

The ONDCP has anti-drug commercials on every major broadcast station available. Not only is it required of these stations to run these ads as part of their Public Safety Announcement requirements, but they also get paid alot of money from the ONDCP for advertising time and as a stipulation of running these advertisements they are not allowed to run any pro-drug advertising. Another stipulation to running the ONDCP anti-drug commercials is that if any station runs a pro-drug commercial the ONDCP can pull their advertising and fine the broadcasting company for being uncompliant with their contract. So there is really no incentive for any station to jeopordize themselfs for a pro-marijuana advertisement.

 

[Hydrosun]

The ONDCP has anti-drug commercials on every major broadcast station available. Not only is it required of these stations to run these ads as part of their Public Safety Announcement requirements, they get paid alot of money from the ONDCP for advertising time and as a stipulation of running these advertisements they are not allowed to run any pro-drug advertising.

That is why you never see any pro-marijuana commercials allowed.

My brain on drugs, me letting the toddler wander off and drown in the pool, me shooting my friend in the head as we are high and laughing, me running over a little kid leaving the drive through, me as a little stick figure who loses his girlfriend, me as a stick figure disappointing my dog.

Thank god for the government but for their cool TV commercials I may have become a marijuana smoker!

 

[Hydrosun]

What are the sheeple to do?

They will listen to their union leaders and vote yes. We are lucky marijuana is not gay or else the mormons would have spent hundreds of millions defeating this CA prop.

 

[kmk420kali]

If Prop 19 does pass.......and some Californian people are sitting in prison for growing in a 25 sq ft area or less.....I wonder if they will actually get an early release....?.....or even a pardon?

....that would make sense to me, since what they did would no longer be illegal....

*they should not have been imprisoned in the first place morally speaking....

I doubt they will get Pardons...but in reality, there are very few, if any, ppl sitting in Prison for a small grow only--
My buddy just got out, he was busted with over 700 plants...and got Felony Probation-- He broke his Probation, is the only reason he went to Prison--
But the important thing to remember, is that California is currently under a Federal Mandate to lower the Prison Population by 10,000 Inmates-- They are doing this mostly, by removing Parole obligations...(The friend I referred to above, upon release got "Irrevocable Parole", meaning he has no testing and no reporting, cannot be sent back unless he commits a violent crime)
So, I see that if they petition the Courts, ppl with non-violent cannabis charges will have a great chance at early release--

 

[vta]

 

[vta]

If People Oppose Prop 19, Are They Prohibitionists?

by Rob Kampia
October 4, 2010

The Marijuana Policy Project has largely sat out the campaign to end marijuana prohibition in California this election cycle, but the recent escalation of infighting among allies who claim to support marijuana legalization has inspired me to speak out, and firmly.

The best way to explain is to tell a true story about something that happened just across the border, in Nevada, in 2006.

MPP was in the midst of campaigning for our ballot initiative to tax and regulate marijuana like alcohol in Nevada. (Only six statewide initiatives to end marijuana prohibition have ever been voted on — one in California in 1972, one in Oregon in 1986, two in Alaska in 2000 and 2004, and two in Nevada in 2002 and 2006. The highest voter-getters were the 2004 Alaska initiative and the 2006 Nevada initiative; each received 44% of the vote.)

Surprisingly, one of the leading libertarians in Nevada — someone who had real access to mainstream media outlets — told me he was going to oppose our initiative. The reason? As a libertarian, he didn’t like taxes, and he didn’t like regulations.

I explained to him that it’s one thing to be disappointed with the exact wording of the initiative, but it’s another thing to actually oppose the initiative. He didn’t budge.

I then pointed out that if he opposed the initiative, he would also have to endorse making alcohol illegal. “How interesting,” he said, wondering what I meant.

I expounded that — by campaigning and voting against the marijuana initiative — he would be choosing to keep marijuana illegal instead of taxing and regulating it. So, if prohibition is somehow preferable to taxes and regulations, he should prefer alcohol prohibition over alcohol being taxed and sold in bars and restaurants.

I never heard from him again, even to this day. But, to his credit, he ended up not campaigning against the initiative, I think because he’s well known to be intellectually honest and consistent.

The same dilemma now faces anti-prohibitionists in California, except, unfortunately, some anti-prohibitionists are choosing to advocate for prohibition, because Prop. 19 isn’t “perfect enough,” they imply.

One need not be a lawyer to find something not to like about Prop. 19, if one looks hard enough. The initiative gives local governments the option to prohibit or legalize the sale of marijuana; perhaps you prefer not to give local governments any option at all? The initiative allows all adults to possess up to one ounce of marijuana; perhaps you prefer a pound or more? The initiative allows all adults to grow 25 square feet of marijuana; perhaps you prefer not allowing grow-your-own at all?

These kinds of debates are legitimate and — to be sure — it’s literally impossible to reach a consensus on any of these points before or even after a statewide initiative is drafted and qualified for the ballot. So the issue isn’t whether a consensus can be reached.

Rather, the issue is whether anti-prohibitionists really want their souls to be burdened with voting to prohibit marijuana — which is what they’d be doing by voting against Prop. 19 on November 2.

Have you ever heard a marijuana user say the following? “I don’t want marijuana to become legal, because it would take the fun out of it. It would make it less glamorous.”

I respond to such pea-brained declarations of adolescent rebellion by saying, “Oh, because you want to have more fun, you therefore want the government to continue arresting more than 800,000 people every year for what you, yourself, are doing? And you want to spend my tax money — and yours — to accomplish this?”

How selfish.

Of course, to be fair, people who say they like the glamour of being an outlaw don’t really want more than 800,000 of their brethren to be arrested every year for marijuana. It’s just that the glamour-seekers are losing sight of what’s really important: They’re choosing a public policy that resonates with them (keeping marijuana allegedly “cool” because it’s illegal), while inadvertently overlooking the horrible byproduct of that choice (arresting the equivalent of every man, woman, and child in the state of Montana every year, forever).

So, to bring it back to California, it’s important that opponents of Prop. 19 at least be intellectually honest: By opposing the initiative for whatever reasons one has, the tradeoff is that more than 60,000 people will continue to be cited for marijuana offenses every year in California. That’s not something that I’d want to have on my conscience.

Going back to the top of this column: Many people who remember the 1972 initiative in California, which lost with 34% of the vote, muse nostalgically about how great it would have been if that initiative had passed … how it would have changed the whole course of events, especially in the midst of President Nixon’s administration. But have you read that initiative? It was inferior to this year’s initiative in California.

And you know what? Coincidentally, they’re both labeled “Prop. 19.” The first Prop. 19 failed 38 years ago; do we really want to lose again, in just a few weeks?

Please visit Yeson19.com to support the current campaign.

 

[SCF]

been reading everything every one has pointed out and i see some valid points made by the yes people..but those of you who say every no voter has some secret agenda behind there vote that is just bullshit .like i stated before my no vote is on a moral point of the law criminalizing passing a joint for those 18-20 year olds ..i haven't seen anything in any of the new law that makes this not a crime for them yes people can carry a oz on them but where dose it state that is for those under 21 if it dose please post that .regardless of what this bills real intentions are{making mr lee rich}i would be a big time yes person if they had not made passing a joint a criminal offense in fact i was until i read that part of the law so maybe sme of us just aren't as fucking GREEDY as you and want freedom and legalization not some bullshit that can destroy a young persons life and when i say young person i mean some one who is old enough to die fighting for our freedoms yet you all are ok with putting them in jail for passing a joint as long as u can now sell weed ..i for one will have to stand on the moral ground here and hold the mirror up for you so when you point that finger screaming greedy pot dealer its pointed at the right person ...ps ya i know my grammar is terrible so no need to point it out hahahaha

this was put in the bill, to encourage, people who dont smoke pot, and consider it evil, to say, hey, its no different than drinking.

Also, feds consider 18 to 20 a minor period. So it would be highly against federal law, giving them more reason to stop us.

Like Charles Lynch's case. He owned a medical shop in San Luis County. only charges they had on him for over 3000 patients under that age. Being federal, for selling to minors, even though they were prop 215, they could not use medical caregiver as a defence, and he was forced to look like someone who sold on the streets to minors. he was found guilty after the jury was threatn not to even consider state law only federal, and a min 100 years in Prison.

How fair is that?

and about the past people in Prison. i agree they should be let go. and i believe they will be. But when i got my 215 in 1999, they would not expunge any of my old records of marijuana under an ounce. Those or our laws.




so lets stop people from going to jail and prison starting NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Hydrosun]

The highest voter-getters were the 2004 Alaska initiative and the 2006 Nevada initiative; each received 44% of the vote.)

Rather, the issue is whether anti-prohibitionists really want their souls to be burdened with voting to prohibit marijuana — which is what they’d be doing by voting against Prop. 19 on November 2.

I respond to such pea-brained declarations of adolescent rebellion by saying, “Oh, because you want to have more fun, you therefore want the government to continue arresting more than 800,000 people every year for what you, yourself, are doing? And you want to spend my tax money — and yours — to accomplish this?”

How selfish.

So, to bring it back to California, it’s important that opponents of Prop. 19 at least be intellectually honest: By opposing the initiative for whatever reasons one has, the tradeoff is that more than 60,000 people will continue to be cited for marijuana offenses every year in California. That’s not something that I’d want to have on my conscience.

Are the 56% no voters in AK and NV feeling the burden in their souls? Probably not. How many Nevadans and Alaskans are incarcerated over weed only offenses? Not that many.

Bringing it back to CA the new infraction instead of misdamenor MOST of the 60,000 citations he mentions will become PARKING TICKETS, so it shouldn't weigh too heavily on his conscience.

Also prop 19 will not cover the rest of the 60,000 citations because over an oz or growing greater than 25' same penalty with or without 19.

For the world wide movement it will be great to see CA do this, but similar to the NV guy talked about in the article, I don't like taxes and regulations.

I personally would rather risk the occasional $100 parking ticket instead of supporting an entire regulatory system with taxes on every ounce.

Most Californians and weed smokers would probably rather just buy it from 7/11 and pay the taxes and get what you get. So when this passes in 26 days, I'll celibate for the movement and have my fingers crossed for the good California growers out there.

 

[SCF]

Are the 56% no voters in AK and NV feeling the burden in their souls? Probably not. How many Nevadans and Alaskans are incarcerated over weed only offenses? Not that many.

Bringing it back to CA the new infraction instead of misdamenor MOST of the 60,000 citations he mentions will become PARKING TICKETS, so it shouldn't weigh too heavily on his conscience.

Also prop 19 will not cover the rest of the 60,000 citations because over an oz or growing greater than 25' same penalty with or without 19.

For the world wide movement it will be great to see CA do this, but similar to the NV guy talked about in the article, I don't like taxes and regulations.

I personally would rather risk the occasional $100 parking ticket instead of supporting an entire regulatory system with taxes on every ounce.

Most Californians and weed smokers would probably rather just buy it from 7/11 and pay the taxes and get what you get. So when this passes in 26 days, I'll celibate for the movement and have my fingers crossed for the good California growers out there.

ya but are you willing to risk 4 years in prison for 29 grams? 2 year min for attempt of sales, and 1 year min for over an ounce. 29 grams.

let alone growing 4 plants will get u the same prison sentence, as someone growing 40.

4 years in PRISON!!!! mandadted!