November Initiative Tests A Big Voting Block: Marijuana Smokers

[FlyMolo]

From taxcannabis.org

Q: Could the Initiative affect medical cannabis growers?

A: Yes, by providing legal permits to gardens, the Initiative will also make possible the first legal commercial growing, once cannabis cultivation is regulated and permitted by either local governments or the state.

Q: Will the Initiative attract big business and cut out the little guys, and the cottage industry they have worked so hard to create?

A: The Initiative will actually give local groups an equal opportunity to obtain licenses and/or permits for the sale and cultivation of medical cannabis, adult cannabis, and hemp. Local groups can work with local governments to help determine regulations and licensing for cultivation and sales. The Initiative is also significant in that it allows for personal cultivation by adults.

So to legally grow in a space larger than the allotted 5x5 for adults 21+ I will need a legal permit. This bill does not clarify the procedure for that and it does not protect me should my local government decide they do not want a commercial grow, whether for medicinal or recreational users alike within their county or city lines. The procedure could mean horrendously high application fees, long wait periods or even quotas that will only allow a certain number of people to grow commercially. I do not want this as it forces us to operate in plain sight for all the federal agents to see. If I wanted to grow in a 10x10 garden I can under prop 215 but this initiative will overrule my rights as a cultivator of medicinal marijuana but not my rights as a consumer of medicinal marijuana. Like I said, this a ploy for commercial franchises to exploit the medical marijuana market that is already taxed and regulated per prop 215. The dispensaries that buy the medicine from cultivators enforce their own QC on the medicine they dispense which is a lot more efficient as successful dispensaries have high standards.

By the way, I'm still paranoid about being stopped on the road for a broken tail light only to have the officer administer a drug test be it swab or urine only to test positive for a joint I smoked 2 days ago. Now that fix it ticket will turn into a DUI charge and there goes my freedom.

 

[Ganjarden]

Q: Does the Initiative change medical cannabis laws in California?

A: No, it won’t change or affect current medical cannabis laws or protections offered to qualified patients. Patients will still be able to possess what is needed for medical use, and will retain all rights under Prop 215 and SB 420. In fact, the Initiative will clarify state law, to protect medical cannabis collectives and businesses operating responsibly under their local guidelines. Currently, the legality of medical cannabis sales is in dispute. Many cities and counties are struggling with the interpretation of SB 420, particularly around the allowance for cash transactions. As a result, these localities are unable to control and tax medical cannabis for distribution to qualified patients. The Initiative specifically grants cities and counties the ability to regulate sales for medical cannabis and commercial cultivation for safe, regulated medicine. The Initiative will also allow for research, safety testing, and potency monitoring.

Q: How will the Initiative affect patients who grow at home?

A: Patient gardens will remain legal, and protections will remain unchanged for patients who choose to grow their own medicine.

Q: How will the Initiative affect collective and cooperative cultivation?

A: The Initiative will allow for greater protection for collectives and cooperatives in storefront locations. City and county governments will now have the clearly established ability to regulate collective and/or commercial growing.

Q: If the Initiative passes, will non-medical patients have more rights than
patients?

A: No, adults 21 and over will be able to possess up to one ounce of cannabis outside of the home. Adults may only grow in a 5’x5’ area, and will have an affirmative defense to possess what they grow for personal use in that area. Patients and/or collectives will still be able to possess the amount needed for their medical use.

Q: If the Initiative passes, will it still be beneficial to be a medical cannabis patient?

A: Yes, medical patients will receive the greatest protections. Qualified patients will be allowed to possess and grow more than adults (to cover their medical needs). We also hope to see exemptions or discounts on services, and taxes to subsidize the cost to patients needing medical cannabis.

 

[Ganjarden]

By the way, I'm still paranoid about being stopped on the road for a broken tail light only to have the officer administer a drug test be it swab or urine only to test positive for a joint I smoked 2 days ago. Now that fix it ticket will turn into a DUI charge and there goes my freedom.

Sadly there is no change in that but that is the current law already. So it's not making it worse or better it will be the same as it is right now. I feel the same as you with regards to this law as it's bullshit.

 

[FlyMolo]

Q: Does the Initiative change medical cannabis laws in California?

A: No, it won't change or affect current medical cannabis laws or protections offered to qualified patients. Patients will still be able to possess what is needed for medical use, and will retain all rights under Prop 215 and SB 420. In fact, the Initiative will clarify state law, to protect medical cannabis collectives and businesses operating responsibly under their local guidelines. Currently, the legality of medical cannabis sales is in dispute. Many cities and counties are struggling with the interpretation of SB 420, particularly around the allowance for cash transactions. As a result, these localities are unable to control and tax medical cannabis for distribution to qualified patients. The Initiative specifically grants cities and counties the ability to regulate sales for medical cannabis and commercial cultivation for safe, regulated medicine. The Initiative will also allow for research, safety testing, and potency monitoring.

Q: How will the Initiative affect patients who grow at home?

A: Patient gardens will remain legal, and protections will remain unchanged for patients who choose to grow their own medicine.

Q: How will the Initiative affect collective and cooperative cultivation?

A: The Initiative will allow for greater protection for collectives and cooperatives in storefront locations. City and county governments will now have the clearly established ability to regulate collective and/or commercial growing.

Q: If the Initiative passes, will non-medical patients have more rights than
patients?

A: No, adults 21 and over will be able to possess up to one ounce of cannabis outside of the home. Adults may only grow in a 5'x5' area, and will have an affirmative defense to possess what they grow for personal use in that area. Patients and/or collectives will still be able to possess the amount needed for their medical use.

Q: If the Initiative passes, will it still be beneficial to be a medical cannabis patient?

A: Yes, medical patients will receive the greatest protections. Qualified patients will be allowed to possess and grow more than adults (to cover their medical needs). We also hope to see exemptions or discounts on services, and taxes to subsidize the cost to patients needing medical cannabis.

I will restate this once again. So if my local government decides it does not want the commercial cultivation of medical or recreational marijuana within its limits or the commercial distribution then the people who want to do so or ALREADY doing so under 215 are screwed? Remember, I'm asking not from a sole patient's point of view but from an individual who belongs to a collective that may or may not grow more medicine than oneself. This law will protect the privacy rights of patients but force the cultivators and co-ops who serve those that do not have the means to cultivate themselves to 1. Operate in the open for all the federal agencies to know who they are, what they're doing and where they're doing it. 2. Obey guidelines drawn up by local government that MAY or MAY NOT allow cultivation effectively reversing the Kelly decision of January 2010. That "protection" for cultivators this law speaks of will only benefit those in the storefront locations so a grow op among a dozen people providing medicine for 100+ patients who do not have the means to cultivate their own will HAVE to be moved from where ever they are now to inside a "storefront". Essentially a huge, neon sign of where thieves can rip off a crop or Feds to rip off a crop.

 

[FlyMolo]

Sadly there is no change in that but that is the current law already. So it's not making it worse or better it will be the same as it is right now. I feel the same as you with regards to this law as it's bullshit.

You honestly don't think that once this becomes legal on a recreational level that LEO aren't going to screen for it more vigorously? CA makes a ton of money from fees that are a product from DUIs. It can cost the average person thousands of dollars in legal fees and court fines as well as involuntary programs should they be found guilty of a DUI charge. Since there is no conclusive way to determine the presence of cannabis that is close to 100% accurate other than a blood test and since cannabis can remain in the system for well over a month in some cases, is it wrong for me to assume that law enforcement agencies around the state won't try to generate some more income for their budgets by administering mandatory drug screens for all traffic stops?

 

[GanjaAL2]

Hahahahaha... big neon sign please come and arrest me or beeter yet just rob me.

 

[Ganjarden]

Since when have they administered a drug test without probable cause? Plus think about the money it would take to increase the drug tests on all drivers pulled over there is no way they have the resources to pull that off. They would be losing way more money then it could ever bring in. Plus I'm sure that would fail in court if they tried to piss test every driver pulled over. We still have some rights in this country. I honestly believe there is no way they could pull that off legally.

 

[TorturedSoul]

I will restate this once again. So if my local government decides it does not want the commercial cultivation of medical or recreational marijuana within its limits or the commercial distribution then the people who want to do so or ALREADY doing so under 215 are screwed? Remember, I'm asking not from a sole patient's point of view but from an individual who belongs to a collective that may or may not grow more medicine than oneself. This law will protect the privacy rights of patients but force the cultivators and co-ops who serve those that do not have the means to cultivate themselves to 1. Operate in the open for all the federal agencies to know who they are, what they're doing and where they're doing it. 2. Obey guidelines drawn up by local government that MAY or MAY NOT allow cultivation effectively reversing the Kelly decision of January 2010. That "protection" for cultivators this law speaks of will only benefit those in the storefront locations so a grow op among a dozen people providing medicine for 100+ patients who do not have the means to cultivate their own will HAVE to be moved from where ever they are now to inside a "storefront". Essentially a huge, neon sign of where thieves can rip off a crop or Feds to rip off a crop.

Again, this legislation concerns non-medical users.

As for #1 in bold, if they are now following the letter of the law there shouldn't be problems. If they are not, perhaps they should be - or at least working hard to change whichever bits of the law that they feel is unjust. (Not simply paying lip-service to the laws and then doing whatever they please under the table.) And as for #2, Yep, that's about the size of it. Just like all local laws in all local jurisdictions, one should obey them as they are presumed to be the wishes of the majority. If at any time this is found NOT to be the case, call for impeachment/removal, vote them out of office, start an initiative to have the local ordinances changed, etc.

When it comes down to it, the laws for recreational cannabis use and the people who use cannabis for purposes of recreation do NOT have any special rights or privileges over and above that of everyone else. It is better to fight to legalize than to remain silent and continue to be a criminal - even if the latter choice is the easiest (and even safest). To do otherwise is to snub the precepts upon which this nation was founded.

And there are already too many people who do that - many of them hold political offices.

I guess I'm a little off-topic.

Get cannabis legalized for non-medical use - in WHATEVER form you can. Once that milestone is passed, it will be (relatively, lol) easy to modify the laws. IOW, it will be less of a fight to make this type of legislation friendlier to the cause than it has proven to actually legalize in the first place. Yes, this works both ways - do not let your guard down, as it will also be (again, relatively) easy for the opposition to make the legislation more restrictive compared to the (lack of) ease of legislation. This is not the war, it is only a battle - but one of major importance to future "campaigns."

 

[Ganjarden]

I will restate this once again. So if my local government decides it does not want the commercial cultivation of medical or recreational marijuana within its limits or the commercial distribution then the people who want to do so or ALREADY doing so under 215 are screwed?

How many towns and counties already have laws and moratoriums against that right now? I'm sorry but if your growing for any commercial reason yeah I think you should have to state that to the world. What other industry can you do something for commercial reasons but be completely unregulated and hidden from the world? Especially an intoxicant. If you give me a good example I'll shut up.

 

[FlyMolo]

How many towns and counties already have laws and moratoriums against that right now? I'm sorry but if your growing for any commercial reason yeah I think you should have to state that to the world. What other industry can you do something for commercial reasons but be completely unregulated and hidden from the world? Especially an intoxicant. If you give me a good example I'll shut up.

I agree with you whole heartedly. Unfortunately for many grow ops, their current medicinal grow will be classified as commercial grows despite them being anything but. They are caretakers growing medication for themselves as well as other who do not have the means to. This legislation gives the medicinal user and recreational user more rights but takes away the rights of medicinal cultivators as they will be forced under this legislation to fall under the definition of "commercial". As for regulations, I'm certain that those who sell the medicine to dispensaries pay taxes on the crop already. And these are the local guys who either do it as a hobby or as a supplement to income. The way this legislation is written, folks like RJ Reynolds and Phillip Morris (who have already bought large sprawls of land land in CA. I wonder why?) The more notable and successful dispensaries have their own quality control in place already to detect harmful elements such as pesticides, mold and mildew. What's wrong with keeping these regulations in place? Why hand over the power to the politicians and local governments who are either out to fill their coffers or persecute the marijuana community. Let the community maintain an already high standard I say. As far as I know the only city that has openly supported this legislation is Oakland. Los Angeles is cracking down on dispensaries forcing many patients to get their medication from delivery services which is a small loop hole and even that route is being sighted for eradication. So there they are, shutting down dispensaries while the patients organize for a legal fight. Under this legislation, the patients won't have a prayer because the City of LA will decide for everyone, patients and non-patients alike where they can buy and commercially cultivate cannabis. What if Oakland was the only city that allowed the cultivation and sale of cannabis? That is possible under this legislation that I feel is targeting the small, local growers for elimination in favor for widespread commercial cultivation by those who have the financial resource and political clout to do so. I believe those who organized wrote this legislation are among those individuals.

 

[FlyMolo]

Again, this legislation concerns non-medical users.

As for #1 in bold, if they are now following the letter of the law there shouldn't be problems. If they are not, perhaps they should be - or at least working hard to change whichever bits of the law that they feel is unjust. (Not simply paying lip-service to the laws and then doing whatever they please under the table.) And as for #2, Yep, that's about the size of it. Just like all local laws in all local jurisdictions, one should obey them as they are presumed to be the wishes of the majority. If at any time this is found NOT to be the case, call for impeachment/removal, vote them out of office, start an initiative to have the local ordinances changed, etc.

When it comes down to it, the laws for recreational cannabis use and the people who use cannabis for purposes of recreation do NOT have any special rights or privileges over and above that of everyone else. It is better to fight to legalize than to remain silent and continue to be a criminal - even if the latter choice is the easiest (and even safest). To do otherwise is to snub the precepts upon which this nation was founded.

And there are already too many people who do that - many of them hold political offices.

I guess I'm a little off-topic.

Get cannabis legalized for non-medical use - in WHATEVER form you can. Once that milestone is passed, it will be (relatively, lol) easy to modify the laws. IOW, it will be less of a fight to make this type of legislation friendlier to the cause than it has proven to actually legalize in the first place. Yes, this works both ways - do not let your guard down, as it will also be (again, relatively) easy for the opposition to make the legislation more restrictive compared to the (lack of) ease of legislation. This is not the war, it is only a battle - but one of major importance to future "campaigns."

Following the letter of the law? Do you mean Federal Law that will still view cannabis as illegal? Medicinal or legally commercial, the Federal government will still classify cannabis as an illegal substance. I personally feel that the only reason why the Feds haven't cracked down on the medicinal community is because its been composed of responsible people for the most part and has been a small blip on their radar. Commercially cultivate and sell it and I'm not too sure the Feds will still play nice.

 

[Ganjarden]

Unfortunately for many grow ops, their current medicinal grow will be classified as commercial grows despite them being anything but. They are caretakers growing medication for themselves as well as other who do not have the means to. This legislation gives the medicinal user and recreational user more rights but takes away the rights of medicinal cultivators as they will be forced under this legislation to fall under the definition of "commercial". As for regulations, I'm certain that those who sell the medicine to dispensaries pay taxes on the crop already. And these are the local guys who either do it as a hobby or as a supplement to income. The way this legislation is written, folks like RJ Reynolds and Phillip Morris (who have already bought large sprawls of land land in CA. I wonder why?)

So if these people are care taking why is the price so high for what it boils down to is plant matter. A hobby is great but why charge so much if it's just a hobby. For a plant that can grow so well in such a wide variety of environments. I've grown it myself and could happily produce enough with this law to supply me and 2 friends at least.(i'm not talking selling I couldn't smoke all that weed I would have to much) There are great grows on this site for relatively cheap that produce great results. If your growing for other people and charging them I believe you should be like any other small business. So, will corporations run the legal marijuana market? Yes. Is that bad? No, because individuals and two-person partnerships and small groups can all create an Incorporated Company to do business (as everyone must do for any legal business). My family owned a legal business. It was a lot of work and regulations but that's the world we live in being legal and all. The medical laws are not perfect either. Many people are still going jail right now in California for home grows, dispensaries and distribution. As for RJ Reynolds and Phillip Morris buying land I'd loved to see an article on that or anything other than rumor.

The more notable and successful dispensaries have their own quality control in place already to detect harmful elements such as pesticides, mold and mildew. What's wrong with keeping these regulations in place? Why hand over the power to the politicians and local governments who are either out to fill their coffers or persecute the marijuana community. Let the community maintain an already high standard I say.As far as I know the only city that has openly supported this legislation is Oakland. Los Angeles is cracking down on dispensaries forcing many patients to get their medication from delivery services which is a small loop hole and even that route is being sighted for eradication. So there they are, shutting down dispensaries while the patients organize for a legal fight. Under this legislation, the patients won't have a prayer because the City of LA will decide for everyone, patients and non-patients alike where they can buy and commercially cultivate cannabis. What if Oakland was the only city that allowed the cultivation and sale of cannabis? That is possible under this legislation that I feel is targeting the small, local growers for elimination in favor for widespread commercial cultivation by those who have the financial resource and political clout to do so. I believe those who organized wrote this legislation are among those individuals.

Those with quality control are fabulous but not all dispensaries have that. They shouldn't have a problem at to follow the law then. Quite possibly those will be the ones who show the rest of california how it should but done. Why shouldn't every single one have quality controls and regulations? Handing the power to the politicians and local governments isn't that better then no government? Have you had a gun placed on you head trying to grab a sack from a shady person you thought would hook you up? That was a great night for me. Sure you can be robbed anywhere but I would have never been in that situation if I could have gone to a store or grow my own without fear. You can't flush a grow closet, I'd be going to jail for years. How can all those politicians refuse the 1.4 billion dollars in taxes. I'm sure some hard ass towns will be against at first. Hell there are still dry counties in america, but you really believe in your whole state only one city will be legal. I still like wide spread legal corporations with all the guidelines rules of growing a product that is going to be consumed. The company that sells you soil for growing your plants is a corporation. The nutrients come from a corporation too. The pots you put seedlings in: corporate-made. The house you live in is entirely furnished and constructed from materials made and sold by corporations. The organic companies selling organic foods are corporations. Dr. Bronner's Hemp Soap is a corporation. Hemp Hoodlamb, Satori, Livity hemp clothing -- all corporations. Manitoba Harvest hemp food, a corporation. Cannabis Culture Magazine, a corporation. Yes, the big bad Starbucks is a corporation, but so is the "Cafe Paris" or "Homestyle Cooking & Coffee" or any independent business run by individuals or partners or small groups. All companies and businesses that operate legally are corporations -- unless they are non-profit societies, which means they cannot keep the money.

 

[Ganjarden]

Following the letter of the law? Do you mean Federal Law that will still view cannabis as illegal? Medicinal or legally commercial, the Federal government will still classify cannabis as an illegal substance. I personally feel that the only reason why the Feds haven't cracked down on the medicinal community is because its been composed of responsible people for the most part and has been a small blip on their radar. Commercially cultivate and sell it and I'm not too sure the Feds will still play nice.

I don't get it your afraid to vote yes because the feds won't play nice? When have the ever played nice with cannabis. They have been cracking down on every bit of cannabis medical, hemp, and recreational. Since harry angslinger. What do you expect they still raid and arrest people for medical marijuana even after the presidents attorneys little promise. If this passes medical cannabis will be an even smaller blip. Being afraid is a pretty bad reason to vote no.

 

[TorturedSoul]

I stand corrected and couldn't agree with you more.

I didn't mean to sound like a dick with my statement, btw. Just sort of happened.

Unfortunately for many grow ops, their current medicinal grow will be classified as commercial grows despite them being anything but. They are caretakers growing medication for themselves as well as other who do not have the means to. This legislation gives the medicinal user and recreational user more rights but takes away the rights of medicinal cultivators as they will be forced under this legislation to fall under the definition of "commercial". As for regulations, I'm certain that those who sell the medicine to dispensaries pay taxes on the crop already.

It would seem to me that if a caregiver is either giving the cannabis to those with a need (and a card), or selling it for no more than the amount that it cost to grow (and only what it cost to sell that amount - not the entire crop), then the caregiver is both non-commercial and non-profit. But since I haven't heard of many - or even any - growers selling their cannabis to dispensaries for $200-$700 per pound...

I don't doubt that there are caregivers who grow for others and either give them the cannabis or only accept the actual cost-to-grow as price. But I can't help but wonder if such caregivers are in the minority.

I have seen more than one person on this site mention that they got their card and then that they were picking up more (and more) caregivers, buying more lights (etc.), and so on. I got the impression that to most of them, it was a business. I could have misunderstood (I hope so). But I know there is a problem with certain unscrupulous people "selling patients" to growers - sometimes in lots of 5, 10, 20 - even 100 I'm told. Tell me the people involved with that (patient-sellers... AND growers) aren't turning a profit.

I've long thought that there should be some type of regulation/oversight in the industry - and that's coming from someone that most of the time thinks government should stay where it belongs (out of people's lives) and be as small as possible instead of a vast bureaucratic juggernaut. I feel the same way about the pharmaceutical industry. It's not that I want to hurt the cannabis industry - I just want to see the ill get their meds (of whatever type) at cost instead of people profiting from their misery. (I know, fighting against the entire world...)

Following the letter of the law? Do you mean Federal Law that will still view cannabis as illegal? Medicinal or legally commercial, the Federal government will still classify cannabis as an illegal substance. I personally feel that the only reason why the Feds haven't cracked down on the medicinal community is because its been composed of responsible people for the most part and has been a small blip on their radar. Commercially cultivate and sell it and I'm not too sure the Feds will still play nice.

Federal law has no legal standing. It is based on a false premise. In addition to that - and far more importantly - it is unconstitutional. States have sole legal authority to decide this and every other issue that has not been expressly ceded to the federal government in the US Constitution. It is not an issue of national security, clear & present danger to the populace, concerning the design/production of currency, etc.

I support my state, my nation, and the governments of both. But we have clear and easy to understand documents that explain their powers - and the limits of same. Deciding to overstep those bounds because an ever-growing majority of the ruled are mindless lemmings is NOT a valid method of governing. The US Constitution would have to be amended first. Governments only have the power that We the People allow them to have.

 

[FlyMolo]

So if these people are care taking why is the price so high for what it boils down to is plant matter. A hobby is great but why charge so much if it's just a hobby. For a plant that can grow so well in such a wide variety of environments. I've grown it myself and could happily produce enough with this law to supply me and 2 friends at least.(i'm not talking selling I couldn't smoke all that weed I would have to much) There are great grows on this site for relatively cheap that produce great results. If your growing for other people and charging them I believe you should be like any other small business. So, will corporations run the legal marijuana market? Yes. Is that bad? No, because individuals and two-person partnerships and small groups can all create an Incorporated Company to do business (as everyone must do for any legal business). My family owned a legal business. It was a lot of work and regulations but that's the world we live in being legal and all. The medical laws are not perfect either. Many people are still going jail right now in California for home grows, dispensaries and distribution. As for RJ Reynolds and Phillip Morris buying land I'd loved to see an article on that or anything other than rumor.




Those with quality control are fabulous but not all dispensaries have that. They shouldn't have a problem at to follow the law then. Quite possibly those will be the ones who show the rest of california how it should but done. Why shouldn't every single one have quality controls and regulations? Handing the power to the politicians and local governments isn't that better then no government? Have you had a gun placed on you head trying to grab a sack from a shady person you thought would hook you up? That was a great night for me. Sure you can be robbed anywhere but I would have never been in that situation if I could have gone to a store or grow my own without fear. You can't flush a grow closet, I'd be going to jail for years. How can all those politicians refuse the 1.4 billion dollars in taxes. I'm sure some hard ass towns will be against at first. Hell there are still dry counties in america, but you really believe in your whole state only one city will be legal. I still like wide spread legal corporations with all the guidelines rules of growing a product that is going to be consumed. The company that sells you soil for growing your plants is a corporation. The nutrients come from a corporation too. The pots you put seedlings in: corporate-made. The house you live in is entirely furnished and constructed from materials made and sold by corporations. The organic companies selling organic foods are corporations. Dr. Bronner's Hemp Soap is a corporation. Hemp Hoodlamb, Satori, Livity hemp clothing -- all corporations. Manitoba Harvest hemp food, a corporation. Cannabis Culture Magazine, a corporation. Yes, the big bad Starbucks is a corporation, but so is the "Cafe Paris" or "Homestyle Cooking & Coffee" or any independent business run by individuals or partners or small groups. All companies and businesses that operate legally are corporations -- unless they are non-profit societies, which means they cannot keep the money. What say you

I say chill. I'm not against corporations. Hell, I work for one. I am against corporations that have shown time and time again to enact legal yet unethical practices in hopes of turning bigger profits. Business is business and there's a right way to do it and then there's the successful way to do it. I'll admit right now that my blurp on Corporate tobacco buying up land in Ukia and Mendo is heresy, but take a look at the purchase trends and property value of places in Mendocino county. I'm sure it will raise an eyebrow or two as some areas are experiencing a 125% jump in land purchases from a year ago today and over 40% increases in property value. That could only mean one thing; land is getting scarce up there in a short amount of time. Google Trulia and look it up.

Now, some of you wonder why a grower charges so much for a bit of MJ? Well that's all relative isn't it? I could walk into my dispensary and pay $20 US for 1/8. Is that really expensive to you? Sure there are dispensaries that sell their medication for ridiculous amounts of money but how long do they stick around? Please define cost of growing for me as well. Do you mean the growing equipment? The growing risks? The fertilizers? How about the cost of water? Transportation costs? Is labor a factor? How about electricity? Is it wrong for a grower to incorporate these into their cost? Unfortunately, under this initiative, the definition of commercial will be derived from the size of the grow and not the price (if any) it sells for.

As far as fear from Federal prosecution stands, yeah, I'd be scared. If I were a medicinal grower forced to commercial status under this initiative due to the size of my garden, how much easier would it be for the DEA to find me? What about potential thieves? Despite legalization, there will still be those who will take from others what they desire by force. Sadly this is the reality. Soul, I have not heard of these scams and quite frankly it disgusts me. It's little better than human trafficking just to up your legal growing limit. I will definitely inquire more about this, but could you be a friend and point the way?

Now about Federal law and it's validity in our 50 states; is Federal law concerning cannabis really moot? If so why is Eddy Lep in prison? What about the numerous DEA raids on medical dispensaries in CA? Surely, despite our opinions they have some merit still. Am I right to assume this?

 

[Lemon Paradise]

wow,, alot of spirited discussion in the last day...

good arguments on both sides, and civilized discussion is what this is all about,, isn;t it,,

to get this out in the open, and get people talking about it. A couple of the poijnts brought up that I really agree with is the fact that any legalization is a great first step.

as for growing more than the 5x5,, well if you are a caregiver, and care for your patients,, then setup a 5x5 in their house, and tend to their garden at their place.. maybe charge a small fee for your consulting services..

I am sorry, but I do not feel bad for the people charging 75.00 for 1/8, if this hurts thier business... business changes all the time, and business models change, and the successful ones are the ones that can adapt. and if you are charging 75.00 for 1/8, then you are commercial, not giving care.. IMHO anyways..

as for the RJ Reynolds of the world,, I doubt they would invest so much time, money, effort, and the risk to their reputation on a large commercial grow,, if it was still federally illegal..

as for the 5x5 area...? I was just reading about vertical grows in high times,, looks pretty cool,, but theoretically, couldn't you take that to the extreme?,, say, have a 5x5 room that is 50'ft tall.. lol and grow right up the wall...

anyways, I do not live in CA, but think that if it were to become legal, it would get other states to really take it seriously, and if nothing else, it has really opened up the conversation, which is a good thing as well.

 

[Lemon Paradise]

oh, one more thing,, I think that if big corp. did eventually get into it, it would just bring the retial cost down.. sorta like beer..

the budweisers of the world make commercial swill, I buy to get through the week..lol
when I go out, or to a party, or to visit with friends etc, then I will usuallt get a nice micro-brew, or one of my home brews..
much better quality, taste, etc,, although the micro brew will cost much more, and the home brew takes a ton of labor.. so I think there is a place for the corp groweres, they will make the low grade, low cost, stuff, and the smaller operators would have the better quality etc..

 

[FlyMolo]

wow,, alot of spirited discussion in the last day...

good arguments on both sides, and civilized discussion is what this is all about,, isn;t it,,

to get this out in the open, and get people talking about it. A couple of the poijnts brought up that I really agree with is the fact that any legalization is a great first step.

as for growing more than the 5x5,, well if you are a caregiver, and care for your patients,, then setup a 5x5 in their house, and tend to their garden at their place.. maybe charge a small fee for your consulting services..

I am sorry, but I do not feel bad for the people charging 75.00 for 1/8, if this hurts thier business... business changes all the time, and business models change, and the successful ones are the ones that can adapt. and if you are charging 75.00 for 1/8, then you are commercial, not giving care.. IMHO anyways..

as for the RJ Reynolds of the world,, I doubt they would invest so much time, money, effort, and the risk to their reputation on a large commercial grow,, if it was still federally illegal..

as for the 5x5 area...? I was just reading about vertical grows in high times,, looks pretty cool,, but theoretically, couldn't you take that to the extreme?,, say, have a 5x5 room that is 50'ft tall.. lol and grow right up the wall...

anyways, I do not live in CA, but think that if it were to become legal, it would get other states to really take it seriously, and if nothing else, it has really opened up the conversation, which is a good thing as well.

I *Heart* this idea!!! The collective I belong to is full of great people that I enjoy conversing with and knowing. I'm not sure about a consulting fee but just paying for cost would be enough for me. Other caretakers could decide for themselves. I'm seeing a few of them later today and again this evening and I'm bringing this up. I'll let you know how this turns out! Thanks Herb Zen!

 

[bigjake]

I am reading all this .And granted this is not the Holy grail of bud laws it is
a start .One thing i noticed most of you people talking are from med states
now.You talk about the Law busting you for this and that if it passes hell
were i am sitting having a sprout will get you put in jail.

I would love to see this pass for the simple reason other states may
see some light and ease up.

And tell me WHAT rights at all do most of the states have now none !!
Even in med states you still have very limited rights that could be crushed
any time .It has to start some place .The haters are not going to let a bill
pass that is perfect .But if it does pass and normal people see that the evil
weed smokers are not what they been told .The laws could be changed for
the better .Just my view .

Trust me i see the bud on the screen from there and get hungry.LOL
weed cost here for kiler bud is crazy if you can get it.

 

[Lemon Paradise]

I *Heart* this idea!!! The collective I belong to is full of great people that I enjoy conversing with and knowing. I'm not sure about a consulting fee but just paying for cost would be enough for me. Other caretakers could decide for themselves. I'm seeing a few of them later today and again this evening and I'm bringing this up. I'll let you know how this turns out! Thanks Herb Zen!

thanks.. open discussion will always bring out good ideas,, glad it could be me this time