Legal Pot In Calif. Would Put Oregon Police 'In A Pickle'

MedicalNeed

New Member
MEDFORD, Ore. (AP) – If both California Proposition 19 and Oregon Measure 74 pass, what then?

Speculation runs the gamut: The price of marijuana will drop. Oregonians will flock to California to get high. Growers will ship product to the East Coast to get a better price. Police will have a more difficult time determining who's legally allowed to possess or distribute marijuana.

No one knows for sure what the impacts will be if California legalizes small amounts of marijuana and Oregon establishes state-run medical marijuana dispensaries, or what'll happen if one measure passes and the other doesn't.

"I suspect that locally the price will go down, and we will quickly become the source for the illegal marijuana trade throughout the country," said Sgt. Erik Fisher of the Oregon State Police Drug Enforcement Section. "It certainly puts the OSP in a pickle. I think it's going to be a mess."

Fisher, who said the State Police agency is careful not to take a position on Measure 74, predicts that law enforcement will struggle with conflicting marijuana laws if either or both measures pass. Fisher said the trooper agency has no problems with people legally growing or consuming pot under existing medical marijuana laws.

California's initiative would allow a person 21 or older to possess up to an ounce of marijuana and to grow it in a space of up to 25 square feet at home. In Oregon, Measure 74 would set up state-regulated marijuana dispensaries funded by charging growers and dispensaries an annual licensing fee and 10 percent of their income.

Passage of Proposition 19 would prompt Jackson County residents to cross state lines to buy weed, predicts Lori Duckworth, executive director of the Southern Oregon chapter of the National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws, based in Medford.

"They would run for the border," she said.

Duckworth said many local residents who may need medical marijuana are reluctant to get a card for fear their names will become known to law enforcement.

"They don't want to be on the list," she said.

Melanie Barniskis, spokeswoman for Progressive Reform of Oregon, said her organization supports legalization of drugs in general to end confusion over laws. It believes that drug abuse is a medical issue, not a legal issue.

Barniskis sees different scenarios playing out, depending on how voters respond to the two initiatives.

If Proposition 19 and Measure 74 fail in both states, she expects law enforcement will take that as a mandate to come down hard on pot growers and consumers.

If Proposition 19 passes, she believes there will be a temptation for Southern Oregon pot growers to ship product across the border to take advantage of the wide-open market.

If both measures pass, marijuana will become like any other agricultural product – subject to supply and demand, she said.

"The price is going to drop drastically in the beginning," she predicted. "The price is going to be consumer-driven."

She doubts the marijuana trade would be taken over by big business exclusively, as some fear, partly because different types of pot treat different maladies. One type of marijuana is good for headaches for one individual, but not for someone else, she said.

Fisher of the State Police rejects the idea that police will become emboldened if Measure 74 fails, because the existing Oregon Medical Marijuana Act is still in effect.

He believes California's initiative will pose the most problems." I suspect if Proposition 19 passes, it will get the attention of the federal government," he said.

Troopers would have to make judgment calls if marijuana were found during a traffic stop, determining whether it was purchased in California or whether the person has a legitimate medical marijuana card in Oregon, he said.

If marijuana drops to $50 an ounce or less, he expects much of the marijuana grown in Oregon and California will head to the East Coast, where it can fetch up to $700 an ounce.

With a climate well-suited for marijuana cultivation, Southern Oregon already leads the state in seizures of illegal plants, he said.

Medford police Deputy Chief Tim George doubts residents of Jackson County will head to the border to get their weed.

"Why would you burn up your gas money?" he said. "No one's going to drive to Hilt for an ounce of weed."

George concedes that an ounce of pot costs about $300 or more presently, but doesn't think an expected price drop in California would attract local residents, particularly when Jackson County is awash in weed.

If Measure 74 and Proposition 19 pass, George said it will not hinder the Medford Police Department's campaign to stop the illegal use of marijuana.

"As Charlton Heston once said, I won't let go of it 'from my cold dead hands,'" George said.


NewsHawk: MedicalNeed:420 MAGAZINE
Source:kval.com
Author: DAMIAN MANN
Contact: KVAL CBS 13 - News, Weather and Sports - Eugene, OR - Eugene, Oregon | Contact Us
Copyright: 2010 Fisher Communications, Inc.
Website:Legal pot in Calif. would put Oregon police 'in a pickle' | KVAL CBS 13 - News, Weather and Sports - Eugene, OR - Eugene, Oregon | Local & Regional News
 
Well, let's just put Oregon "in a pickle"! See the problems that you create by trying to outlaw one of God's plants? We have treaties to live up to? Well, since the US wrote those treaties and blackmailed other countries into signing on to it, they can damn well UNwrite those treaties too!

I wish we had FEDERAL propositions!
 
the more pickles we have, the faster we will get federal legalization.
 
Dogs will sleep with cats and rats will grow to the size of great danes.

Those poor police will have no reason to pull you over or stop you for a quick search cause you smell like a garden.

Oregon will have a bill in the house to legalize if Proposition 19 passes. Measure 74 is for patients not the public in general. 74 has been needed since Oregon passed the Medical Marijuana law.

Please vote if you are from California or Oregon.
 
I just had a flash on prop 19 in calif. Under current law after Jan 1 2011 possession of under an ounce will be a infraction with a 100.00 fine. Of course multiple infractions can be raised to a misdemeanor and several misdemeanors can be raised to a felony.

Under this new California law is possession of pot by a minor an infraction too? The age I am interested in is 18 to 20yr:11mo:31days.
 
the only thing that changes under newly signed SB 1449 is the amount of fine, no need to appear in court and no criminal record for possession of under one oz.

growing even one plant would remain a felony for everyone thats healthy (or to poor to see a Dr every year) and be up to 36 months possible jail time.

it does not reduce probable cause searches for all, like 19 does.

Edit; add text of SB 1449..

So did you decide to vote no on 19 without reading that whole prop either?
??

https://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/sen/sb_1401-1450/sb_1449_bill_20100930_chaptered.html

BILL NUMBER: SB 1449 CHAPTERED BILL TEXT CHAPTER 708 FILED WITH SECRETARY OF STATE SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 APPROVED BY GOVERNOR SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 PASSED THE SENATE JUNE 3, 2010 PASSED THE ASSEMBLY AUGUST 30, 2010 AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 5, 2010 INTRODUCED BY Senator Leno FEBRUARY 19, 2010 An act to amend Section 11357 of the Health and Safety Code, and to amend Section 23222 of the Vehicle Code, relating to controlled substances. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 1449, Leno. Marijuana: possession. Existing law provides that, except as authorized by law, every person who possesses not more than 28.5 grams of marijuana, other than concentrated cannabis, is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine of not more than $100. This same penalty is imposed for the crime of possessing not more than 28.5 grams of marijuana while driving on a highway or on lands, as specified. Existing law provides with respect to these offenses that, under specified conditions, (1) the court shall divert and refer the defendant for education, treatment, or rehabilitation, as specified, and (2) an arrested person who gives satisfactory evidence of identity and a written promise to appear in court shall not be subjected to booking. This bill would provide that any person who commits any of the above offenses is instead guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine of not more than $100. This bill would eliminate the above-described provisions relating to booking and to diversion and referral for education, treatment, or rehabilitation. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 11357 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to read: 11357. (a) Except as authorized by law, every person who possesses any concentrated cannabis shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of not more than one year or by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500), or by both such fine and imprisonment, or shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison. (b) Except as authorized by law, every person who possesses not more than 28.5 grams of marijuana, other than concentrated cannabis, is guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars ($100). (c) Except as authorized by law, every person who possesses more than 28.5 grams of marijuana, other than concentrated cannabis, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of not more than six months or by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500), or by both such fine and imprisonment. (d) Except as authorized by law, every person 18 years of age or over who possesses not more than 28.5 grams of marijuana, other than concentrated cannabis, upon the grounds of, or within, any school providing instruction in kindergarten or any of grades 1 through 12 during hours the school is open for classes or school-related programs is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500), or by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of not more than 10 days, or both. (e) Except as authorized by law, every person under the age of 18 who possesses not more than 28.5 grams of marijuana, other than concentrated cannabis, upon the grounds of, or within, any school providing instruction in kindergarten or any of grades 1 through 12 during hours the school is open for classes or school-related programs is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be subject to the following dispositions: (1) A fine of not more than two hundred fifty dollars ($250), upon a finding that a first offense has been committed. (2) A fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500), or commitment to a juvenile hall, ranch, camp, forestry camp, or secure juvenile home for a period of not more than 10 days, or both, upon a finding that a second or subsequent offense has been committed. SEC. 2. Section 23222 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read: 23222. (a) No person shall have in his or her possession on his or her person, while driving a motor vehicle upon a highway or on lands, as described in subdivision (b) of Section 23220, any bottle, can, or other receptacle, containing any alcoholic beverage which has been opened, or a seal broken, or the contents of which have been partially removed. (b) Except as authorized by law, every person who possesses, while driving a motor vehicle upon a highway or on lands, as described in subdivision (b) of Section 23220, not more than one avoirdupois ounce of marijuana, other than concentrated cannabis as defined by Section 11006.5 of the Health and Safety Code, is guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars ($100).
 
the only thing that changes under newly signed SB 1449 is the amount of fine, no need to appear in court and no criminal record for possession of under one oz.

growing even one plant would remain a felony for everyone thats healthy (or to poor to see a Dr every year) and be up to 36 months possible jail time.

it does not reduce probable cause searches for all, like 19 does.

Edit; add text of SB 1449..

So did you decide to vote no on 19 without reading that whole prop either?
??

Interesting that this is deleted in SB1149,
" By changing the
penalties for an existing crime, this bill would impose a
state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this
act for a specified reason. "
AND ALSO DELEATED....
" Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if the
person has been previously convicted three or more times of an
offense described in this subdivision during the two-year period
immediately preceding the date of commission of the violation to be
charged, the previous convictions shall also be charged in the
accusatory pleading and, if found to be true by the jury upon a jury
trial or by the court upon a court trial or if admitted by the
person, Sections 1000.1 and 1000.2 of the Penal Code are applicable
to the person, and the court shall divert and refer the person for
education, treatment, or rehabilitation, without a court hearing or
determination or the concurrence of the district attorney, to an
appropriate community program which will accept the person. If the
person is so diverted and referred, the person is not subject to the
fine specified in this subdivision. In any case in which a person is
arrested for a violation of this subdivision and does not demand to
be taken before a magistrate, the person shall be released by the
arresting officer upon presentation of satisfactory evidence of
identity and giving his or her written promise to appear in court, as
provided in Section 40500, and shall not be subjected to booking.

SEC. 2. No reimbursement is required by this
act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local
agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a
new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or
changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of
Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a
crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the
California Constitution."

Doesn't this constitute a change in the current status, even though I agree with all the removals.

This is where the state is going to get its money. by not sending the proper portions back down to the local authorities.

Just thinking outloud
 
How will the state be getting this "Alleged" money when it is the local level that will be getting the tax money?

If that did setup the stacking of cannabis offense couldn't one simpily use the Medical Clause and law to circumvent recreational prosecution just as it is now in CA.?
 
How will the state be getting this "Alleged" money when it is the local level that will be getting the tax money?

If that did setup the stacking of cannabis offense couldn't one simpily use the Medical Clause and law to circumvent recreational prosecution just as it is now in CA.?

That is my point exactly, the existing setup is sufficient, Not that it is enough, it is not. something better drafted making adult smoking legal.
 
how is current law sufficient for those with no medical need that want to grow???
 
how is current law sufficient for those with no medical need that want to grow???

Let me get this right. You have no medical need? You want to grow?

I will make an assumption here, from the word ass/u/me).

You are over the age of 18, you have absolute perfect health, you don't smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, smoke MJ or take non prescribed pills.

There fore a medical need is not needed. I can get that.

Apparently you just want to grow for the pure pleasure of watching MJ grow.


I don't believe any of that. You want to smoke MJ without the fear of a ticket. You want to grow so that you can either use all of it over the year, or use some and sell the rest. thus reducing your cost for MJ.

I can get behind that.

To get a recommendation, you need to be over 18, and meet one of many qualifying conditions. Such as AD (attention deficit) (side effect of smoking MJ), chronic cough (brought on by smoking MJ?), Blurry vision (possible effect of smoking MJ), Chronic pain (possibly by being over the age of 18 and living in this country of unhealthy activities), and so forth.

Anyone who desires to smoke or consume MJ for any reason, can and should get a certificate. The only need to have the severe conditions the legislation has listed for guidelines is for the state issued permit for medical needs.

What is the big deal? Big brother will get my information. I will be put on a list of pot smokers (I love this one), you are already on that list they already have your information. If they don't then you don't need either permission or approval to smoke MJ.

Oh it is too expensive, I paid 200.00 with a 100.00 renewal, for a full year. That is less than 20.00 a month. I do not know anyone (don't get me wrong I used this excuse for 3 years) who could not save 20.00 a month.

There are also those people out there that would love to be a caregiver and have a few licensee's to increase their grow count, they would be willing to pay your fees. California allows 99 plants to be grown on one lot by one caregiver.

That would not stop you from growing your 6 in your own back yard as well.
 
i have no real medical need, (but have been a caregiver for 5 years) maintaining a script for me each year is just plain lying. there are many many many HONEST people in California just waiting for the legal permission to grow their own without having to lie to and pay a doctor to do so.

why on earth do you want to see honest people go to jail for growing some smoke to toke on the weekends? or loose their jobs for smoking for a few days before they go back to work monday morning.

You want to keep the probable cause which hunt alive? why?
 
i have no real medical need, (but have been a caregiver for 5 years) maintaining a script for me each year is just plain lying. there are many many many HONEST people in California just waiting for the legal permission to grow their own without having to lie to and pay a doctor to do so.

My goodness, you must be a Saint. Everyone lies to some extent every day, hundreds of times a day, don't pull that "holier than thou" crap.

You consume MJ illegally, lying is the least of your vises.

When are you going to convince your church that the consumption of MJ is not prohibited in the Bible. Reminding them "...all things in moderation..."

If you are not Christian then of the numerous other religions including Islam reject the consumption of alcohol and other mind altering medicines completely.

Then maybe an Atheist, which is fine, then establishing your own moral and ethical law as it suits you, then violation of other peoples law is not a sin, therefore the sin of lying would be far greater, and I wish to applaud your evolution into the person you have become.


why on earth do you want to see honest people go to jail for growing some smoke to toke on the weekends? or loose their jobs for smoking for a few days before they go back to work monday morning.

I do not want to see anyone one go to jail over MJ. Anyone who currently or in the future consumes MJ and works for a company that does random drug tests should;

1. ask and get a confirmed answer what drugs are tested. MJ may not be on the list. Be careful though and make sure you know all the possible names MJ can be listed under, also it could be added to the test without notice.

2. If MJ is on the test list, and the results of the MJ test is a dischargable offense, then you must consume a body cleansing product prior to going to work.


You want to keep the probable cause which hunt alive? why?

I am sorry I am not sure what you mean by "the probable cause which hunt alive."

Probable cause is what law enforcement agents use to perform their duties.

I believe that you are referring to the smell of smoke automatically granting the investigative officer permission to search a vehicle.

I am sorry to offend you but prop 19 will not eliminate that. Just as legal alcohol didn't stop officer Joe from performing a sobriety test because the smell of booze emanated from your car window.
 
Man, you really should look into applying for work at faux news... they'd love to have you.
 
Back
Top Bottom