November's Marijuana Legalization Initiative: Imperfect, But Worthy Of Your Vote

[markscastle]

Full auto ??? if you are class 3 you already gave up your rights to n search
even a FFL they do not need any excuse to come in.

Not worried about it brother! Point is if you are legal under 215 you can own guns and grow.Now if you get busted selling you still could get added time for having guns.But people have been getting ripped alot here in Cali and some home invations also. I`d rather be alive myself! I checked with my uncle who is a judge,My son`s best friend who is an agent for Homeland,and a relitive who is a director for the NSA, they all agree with me with the exception I shouldn`t be growing MMJ in the first place,LOL!

 

[G-Dog]

Guns? that Avatar? Are you Planty?

 

[markscastle]

This is a very hot topic on all the boards. I see a lot of people voting NO on this bill, but the threads that have actual polls included show a 2/3 majority in passing this law. These polls are no where near scientific and even include people that are not California or US voters.

California was the first state to pass a medical marijuana law and now you have 14 others. Many people outside of California are hoping for this law to pass so that the other states will do as before, and follow suit. Eventually the pressure of all these liberally inclined voter states will force the federal government to admit they made a mistake and repeal the federal sanctions against this harmless plant. California is my home away from home, but I am not a resident or legal voter there. I still hope that this law passes.

Those that say that the law is wrong because it will not allow children to smoke have to be nuts. You will never get a legal majority that will allow children to smoke and I would never be in favor of it. Children have to mature and learn before they can be allowed to make decisions like this for themselves.

The grow limits will be a loophole that could and will be filled in various ways. Not a real issue.

Taxation? Please, the only way you are going to ever get anywhere with any form of government is money. It is the fuel they are addicted to and is the only way.

Price going down? The price is already down in California and I like to go there regularly to sample the various things being offered. If California passes this law it will open up many legal opportunities for anyone that can grow with the changes. The need for seeds should go up like crazy and many people that do not smoke now may once it is legal. This is only a bad thing for the cartels.

So once this law is on the books it will be refined in the years to come. Please California, register and vote and get this thing rolling. You did a great job with the MMJ so now lets go a step further. Believe it or not it is progress.

The prices are down in Cali because of Kelly vs. the People.Without a set limit on plants people are growing more.Still gets dry just before harvast time though.I sell seeds off and on and most of my costomers are east coast and world wide. Don`t sell that many in Cali as there are so many good strains and clones out here. I might be able to sell more in Cali if Prop 19 passes but still I`m voting No in November because it`s the right thing to do!

 

[markscastle]

Guns? that Avatar? Are you Planty?

Who?

 

[markscastle]

I bet we are keeping the mods working in this thread! Do they get overtime? LOL!

 

[G-Dog]

This topic is so hot that it gets people mad and they may violate rules of good taste and possibly site rules. I can see the mods watching it for that reason.

I was just telling my girl (who is not exactly politically inclined) that people in Cali watch the price of bud the way others watch the price of fuel. It is Very important to them. It is almost like there is a price per ounce in all the Cali cities that is reliably consistent. When I was in Arcata on Labor Day it was $240 per ounce. Everyone I talked to had the exact same price for whatever they were selling. If you go to cities outside of California it is nothing like that. The price is whatever anyone will pay.

 

[Slowpuffer]

I can see the folks with inside information , shutteling to buy rights to get into the mj business. To bad the judges and polititians that sent some of your bros and sisters to jail, will now be your connection !! I don't live in Ca., but i'd vote no to what they are proposing. What will you do when they say you must pay taxes to raise tomatoes ?? Same plant, basicly !! Why is mj being eyed to save the state from doom ?? $50 an oz. is a little stiff, dont you think ?? And for what ?? It's just a weed !! Just a non residents, (that lived in Ca. from 1961 till 1975,) 2 cents !! The Redondo pier area was my stomping grounds !! In my opionion, you have the best , most lenient mmj law in the country, and why change it. I think the politicians know that they screwed up, letting this get out of hand, and now they want their share of the bounty !! Ha !! Let our bros. and sisters out of prison !! Before i'd vote for this bill, they'd need to assure me that no family members of state workers or judges, police or familys of anyone connected with the goverment could get a lic. to grow, or distribute mj in Ca.. Ca. is lookin for a free get out of jail card, after destroying the lives of millions of their citizens, and i would vote no. Having said all this, I wish my state (Ma.) had the exact same law that you now have. I don't understand why you'd want anything more ?? If i could harvest 4 plants, every 10 weeks, that's all I need !!

 

[TorturedSoul]

I can see the folks with inside information , shutteling to buy rights to get into the mj business.

Huh?

To bad the judges and polititians that sent some of your bros and sisters to jail, will now be your connection !!

Huh?

I don't live in Ca., but i'd vote no to what they are proposing.

You got more bros and sisters?

What will you do when they say you must pay taxes to raise tomatoes ??

Is that up for vote too?

Same plant, basicly !!

What's your average length of buzz when you smoke a tomato?

Why is mj being eyed to save the state from doom ??

You tell me. Most of us know that's not what this is about.

$50 an oz. is a little stiff, dont you think ??

I think that the answer to that question depends on the selling price of your ounce. I KNOW that no specific monetary amount for a tax is mentioned in Proposition 19.

And for what ?? It's just a weed !! Just a non residents, (that lived in Ca. from 1961 till 1975,) 2 cents !! The Redondo pier area was my stomping grounds !!

Most old hippies I know would have - and still do - at least read the documents in question before forming a firm opinion. I posted a link previously in the thread in hopes that people would do so.

In my opionion, you have the best , most lenient mmj law in the country, and why change it.

while some people associate "lenient" with "best" for some reason, that is neither here nor there. This law is about RECREATIONAL use. It is also about legalizing the possession and consumption for EVERY man and woman of age 21 or over in California, and the cultivation of same in all municipalities that choose to allow that. And it makes mention of premises such as those that the Dutch know as "coffee shops."

I think the politicians know that they screwed up, letting this get out of hand, and now they want their share of the bounty !! Ha !! Let our bros. and sisters out of prison !!

I wouldn't have a problem with politicians (or anyone else) sharing in the bounty. What's good for me is good for thee and all that.

A good first step in curtailing the stuffing of prisons with cannabis consumers/growers would be deciding that such things are no longer crimes, wouldn't you think (I guess not?).

Before i'd vote for this bill, they'd need to assure me that no family members of state workers or judges, police or familys of anyone connected with the goverment could get a lic. to grow, or distribute mj in Ca..

That's pretty prejudicial. I've got a cousin that works for the state (well, he works for the people of the state) and an uncle that used to. You don't think that it should be legal for me to grow cannabis, then?

What did I ever do to you?

Ca. is lookin for a free get out of jail card, after destroying the lives of millions of their citizens, and i would vote no.

I don't know about that, but having bothered to READ the initiative, it is clear that the people of California would like to stay out of jail. You aren't interested in that, huh? Why, then, did you mention your brothers and sisters that are incarcerated?

Having said all this, I wish my state (Ma.) had the exact same law that you now have. I don't understand why you'd want anything more ?? If i could harvest 4 plants, every 10 weeks, that's all I need !!

Not everyone feels that they should have to have a medical condition in order to use cannabis recreationally.

There have already been problems associated with (the real or perceived) "working the system" as far as medicinal use is concerned. There are threads here discussing it. As far as that goes, there are members here who are experiencing those problems first hand. (I posted a link to one member's thread where he stated this first-hand, if you care enough to follow the link and read. He has my sympathy. It is in part for people in his shoes that I feel that this initiative is important.)

Funny you should mention your state. Have you read MA's HB2929 and SB1801? Probably not, because they're lengthier than California's Prop19 - but maybe so, since they concern your state directly. If I lived in MA, I'd be moving to CA - and then voting for Prop19. Or at least walking door-to-door in MA urging my friends and neighbors to write to their representatives telling them in no uncertain terms to kill these things and to instead consider something like California's Proposition 19.

Just a couple things mentioned in Massachusetts House Bill 2929: Class C cannabis (at least 1% but less than 5% THC) - $150/ounce, Class B (at least 5% but less than 10% THC) cannabis - $200/ounce, Class A cannabis (at least 10% THC) - $200/ounce. Cultivation license - $500/year, Processing license - $1000/year, trade license - $3000/year, Retail license - $2500/year. I just skimmed through it, but there look to be other fees mentioned as well.

Is your opposition to Prop19 simply a case of sour grapes? I could see where residents of MA would not be too thrilled with what the residents of CA are trying to accomplish with the initiative. But this is a good (bad?) example of the difference between citizens creating and voting on something as opposed to the House/Senate (aka "politicians") of a state doing it. (I also appreciate the fact that the California initiative is written in plain English, whereas the Massachusetts bills are as twisted and verbally-convoluted as... a politician.)

Here's the NORML page that has links to MA HB2929 and SB1801:
NORML Breaking News: Marijuana Legalization Bills Introduced In Massachusetts! | NORML Blog, Marijuana Law Reform

I thought I'd include it so that any resident of California that wants to can see an example of what other states are considering as far as cannabis legalization. If Proposition 19 fails to pass and other states' proposed legislation does pass, then the CA State House and Senate will be able to see truly greedy versions of such in practice. They just might decide to create and approve something just as greedy for the state of California before the citizens have a chance to try again with another good and reasonably fair initiative such as this one.

Personally, I hope that Proposition 19 is approved before the politicians have a chance to try it their way.

 

[G-Dog]

God I can just imagine what your Marc Emery threads must look like.

 

[Slowpuffer]

Huh?



Huh?



You got more bros and sisters?



Is that up for vote too?



What's your average length of buzz when you smoke a tomato?



You tell me. Most of us know that's not what this is about.



I think that the answer to that question depends on the selling price of your ounce. I KNOW that no specific monetary amount for a tax is mentioned in Proposition 19.



Most old hippies I know would have - and still do - at least read the documents in question before forming a firm opinion. I posted a link previously in the thread in hopes that people would do so.



while some people associate "lenient" with "best" for some reason, that is neither here nor there. This law is about RECREATIONAL use. It is also about legalizing the possession and consumption for EVERY man and woman of age 21 or over in California, and the cultivation of same in all municipalities that choose to allow that. And it makes mention of premises such as those that the Dutch know as "coffee shops."



I wouldn't have a problem with politicians (or anyone else) sharing in the bounty. What's good for me is good for thee and all that.

A good first step in curtailing the stuffing of prisons with cannabis consumers/growers would be deciding that such things are no longer crimes, wouldn't you think (I guess not?).

Before i'd vote for this bill, they'd need to assure me that no family members of state workers or judges, police or familys of anyone connected with the goverment could get a lic. to grow, or distribute mj in Ca..

That's pretty prejudicial. I've got a cousin that works for the state (well, he works for the people of the state) and an uncle that used to. You don't think that it should be legal for me to grow cannabis, then?

What did I ever do to you?



I don't know about that, but having bothered to READ the initiative, it is clear that the people of California would like to stay out of jail. You aren't interested in that, huh? Why, then, did you mention your brothers and sisters that are incarcerated?



Not everyone feels that they should have to have a medical condition in order to use cannabis recreationally.

There have already been problems associated with (the real or perceived) "working the system" as far as medicinal use is concerned. There are threads here discussing it. As far as that goes, there are members here who are experiencing those problems first hand. (I posted a link to one member's thread where he stated this first-hand, if you care enough to follow the link and read. He has my sympathy. It is in part for people in his shoes that I feel that this initiative is important.)

Funny you should mention your state. Have you read MA's HB2929 and SB1801? Probably not, because they're lengthier than California's Prop19 - but maybe so, since they concern your state directly. If I lived in MA, I'd be moving to CA - and then voting for Prop19. Or at least walking door-to-door in MA urging my friends and neighbors to write to their representatives telling them in no uncertain terms to kill these things and to instead consider something like California's Proposition 19.

Just a couple things mentioned in Massachusetts House Bill 2929: Class C cannabis (at least 1% but less than 5% THC) - $150/ounce, Class B (at least 5% but less than 10% THC) cannabis - $200/ounce, Class A cannabis (at least 10% THC) - $200/ounce. Cultivation license - $500/year, Processing license - $1000/year, trade license - $3000/year, Retail license - $2500/year. I just skimmed through it, but there look to be other fees mentioned as well.

Is your opposition to Prop19 simply a case of sour grapes? I could see where residents of MA would not be too thrilled with what the residents of CA are trying to accomplish with the initiative. But this is a good (bad?) example of the difference between citizens creating and voting on something as opposed to the House/Senate (aka "politicians") of a state doing it. (I also appreciate the fact that the California initiative is written in plain English, whereas the Massachusetts bills are as twisted and verbally-convoluted as... a politician.)

Here's the NORML page that has links to MA HB2929 and SB1801:
NORML Breaking News: Marijuana Legalization Bills Introduced In Massachusetts! | NORML Blog, Marijuana Law Reform

I thought I'd include it so that any resident of California that wants to can see an example of what other states are considering as far as cannabis legalization. If Proposition 19 fails to pass and other states' proposed legislation does pass, then the CA State House and Senate will be able to see truly greedy versions of such in practice. They just might decide to create and approve something just as greedy for the state of California before the citizens have a chance to try again with another good and reasonably fair initiative such as this one.

Personally, I hope that Proposition 19 is approved before the politicians have a chance to try it their way.

That's all good tourtured soul !! I should'nt express my opionion anyhow, as I don't live there !! You cut me up so bad, that I thought I was reading the fox news for a minute !! Ha !! But after this passes and it gets implimented, then you tell me how you got it better, than what you got now !! Because you can get a card now, no matter if you're in perfect health. But i'm back quite !! I'm for whatever the potheads of Ca. want !! And i never said i was for the Ma. bills !! You're twisting my words, are you a republican, as they're good at that !!

 

[TorturedSoul]

I should'nt express my opionion anyhow

By all means, express your opinions. Ours just differ from each other. But a debate isn't a debate if everyone is on the same side of an issue.

But after this passes and it gets implimented, then you tell me how you got it better, than what you got now !!

Because you can get a card now, no matter if you're in perfect health.

Fixing THAT would be a major help. Cutting out the fraud - or at least fixing it enough so that it wasn't perceived by some to be a joke - would probably stop the occurrence of events that are the topics of threads such as this one by RedBeard4U ("Judge Leland Harris Dept 107, Van Nuys Division of Los Angeles County court system today decided that the valid recommendation that I brought to court was no good. Judge Harris told me that the court would only accept recommendations from doctors from UCLA, & USC. “He said, “Reputable Doctors” I told him that I was unaware that under California law that there were any distinctions between doctors. He told me, “that there were to many sham doctors out there that will give a recommendation to anyone who wanted it”. I would now have to have a good doctor at USC or UCLA agree with the “not” so good or ‘Not” good enough doctor that I went to for my evaluation. Then they need to white that down on their letterhead, to be taken to court. This is the equivalent to, “bring me the wicked witch of the west’s broom stick”.")

If even ONE less person will be arrested, fined, hassled, or looked at as a criminal... Then this initiative is a good thing.

If the overall price of an ounce of cannabis drops any at all... Then this initiative is a good thing.

If the commercial cannabis-grower will have a legitimate non-medicinal market for his/her products and no longer needs to engage of the terrible (and illegal) practice of "buying patients" and so fueling many of the things that are wrong with the current medicinal situation... Then this initiative is a good thing.

If the price of an ounce of cannabis available in a dispensary becomes less than that of an ounce sold for recreational purposes instead of MORE (as it currently is)... Then this initiative is a good thing.

If even ONE less person will be unjustly terminated from their employment when they test positive for using cannabis on their own time... Then this initiative is a good thing.

All the talk about it potentially providing additional tax monies is really incidental, IMHO. But if it helps the uneducated and closed-minded among the population to come to terms with and vote for it, then I really don't mind a bit. [EDIT: Yes, it's called the Control and TAX Cannabis... But does anyone really think that a bunch of heads were sitting around the bong one night and thinking, "Gee, it'd sure be nice if we could all pay tax on this stuff?" I expect that a bunch of heads were thinking, "Gee, it'd sure be nice if we could get the voting public at large to legalize this stuff. But how could we get the people who don't toke up to vote for it? I know, let's call it a TAX act and maybe they'll vote for it so that someone besides them gets to pay tax on something." I could be wrong, of course.]

And i never said i was for the Ma. bills !! You're twisting my words, are you a republican, as they're good at that !!

I never stated - and certainly did not mean to infer - that you were for those bills. As I DID state, I cited those as an example of what can happen when the state (as opposed to the people) decides to consider the legalization of cannabis. Not knowing if you were aware of those two bills, I did feel that it wouldn't hurt to make sure so that you would be able to take steps to help the people of your state defend against them, but that was not my primary reason for mentioning them.

And while I make it a point to not discuss my political-affiliation in a semi-anonymous public forum, I can assure that I would not be considered a Republican in any post-antiquity definition of the term.

BtW, the great thing about these forums is that no (non-staff) person can edit another person's post. Therefore, if someone feels that their words have been twisted, changed, or otherwise modified, all they have to do is to refer back to their own posts. It keeps things honest, civil, and friendly.

 

[SnowBender]

with how those other bills are written , we better pray 19 passes or we're fucked on getting recreational weed coast to coast for a good long while.

 

[hydronewbie]

TS: Very well articulated as always. Many thanks, bro.

 

[FlyMolo]

Here's a peek at what the minds behind prop 19 are really after. Very interesting I'd have to say. It seems those who wrote up prop 19 are going to use their city as a sort of experiment. Oakland in general is very lenient to the medical community in terms of consumption but seems to have been cracking down on the cultivators and distributors of medical bud. It seems that they're trying to create a monopoly in the medical growing industry, but perhaps I'm reading too much into it?

 

[hydronewbie]

Pot Proposition Doing Well in New Poll ... 50% to 40%

I'm sure we'll be seeing ups and downs but I just got this from the Prop 19 Twitter

CA Prop 19: Legal, Regulated Marijuana Favored 50%-40% in New Poll | Elections

 

[GanjaAL2]

And the feds are fallowing their New SOP to the tee! Again like I said... the feds will not care what laws are passes as you can see they are Rogues on their own program.

Contrary to the belief that it will keep people out of jail for marijuana, this initiative actually creates new demographics of people to incarcerate. (See Fact #2 and Fact #3) It is difficult to see how the government would save on court and imprisonment costs if the initiative merely shifts arrests from one demographic to another.

Myth #2: The initiative will keep young adults out of jail for using marijuana.
Fact: This initiative would put more young people in jail for pot. If it becomes law, any adult 21 or over who passes a joint to another adult aged 18-20 would face six months in jail and a $1,000 fine. [8] (NORML's Web site reports that the current penalty for a gift of marijuana of 1 oz. or less is a $100 fine.[9])

Myth #3: You'll be able to light up freely in the privacy of your home.
Fact: That depends. Under the initiative, even adults consuming marijuana in the privacy of their homes could face arrest if there are minors present (not something one would expect from an initiative that claims to treat marijuana like alcohol and tobacco)[10]. Current marijuana law contains no such restrictions. Thanks to Prop. 215, which legalized marijuana for medicinal use, cannabis consumers have been legally free to smoke in the privacy of their homes since 1997. This initiative seeks to undermine that freedom, making it absolutely illegal to smoke marijuana if there are minors present. (The initiative is ambiguous with regard to whether “present” means being in the same room as the consumer, the same house, the same apartment building, or within wafting distance—apparently leaving this up to the interpretation of judges.) There is no exception for medical marijuana patients or for parents consuming in the presence of their own children.

 

[TorturedSoul]

Contrary to the belief that it will keep people out of jail for marijuana, this initiative actually creates new demographics of people to incarcerate. (See Fact #2 and Fact #3) It is difficult to see how the government would save on court and imprisonment costs if the initiative merely shifts arrests from one demographic to another.

Myth #2: The initiative will keep young adults out of jail for using marijuana.

You are making a presumption there, it seems.

Fact: This initiative would put more young people in jail for pot. If it becomes law, any adult 21 or over who passes a joint to another adult aged 18-20 would face six months in jail and a $1,000 fine. [8] (NORML's Web site reports that the current penalty for a gift of marijuana of 1 oz. or less is a $100 fine.[9])

You're making a definite presumption there. Several, actually: That more young people would be arrested. That any adult 21 or over would be dumb enough to be caught doing such a thing. And, whether even if such would be the case, that it would necessarily be a bad thing. I often find myself wondering how people of that age get caught. And then I read about the dumb shit that happened to even get most of them noticed in the first place... You can't whip your kids these days for pulling bonehead moves without half the people looking at you like you're a child-abuser, most of the parents seem to have the mistaken impression that they aren't supposed to discipline their "live with Mom & Dad for free" kids - you know, the ones that make up the majority of the demographic you seem to be blindly championing? - just because they've managed to somehow survive past their 18th birthday, and you'll for sure go to jail if you whip someone else's kid... So, it occurs to me, realizing that the only possible form of discipline that these kids are likely to receive is via the court system, that a good scare and forcing them to follow someone's (ok, admittedly, draconian) rules for a short period of time - there is the presumption of probation - that it's in many cases going to ultimately be a good thing.

Myth #3: You'll be able to light up freely in the privacy of your home.

No, that's a non-debatable fact. If someone's dumb enough to do so in the same airspace/room as a person that is clearly not legally allowed to participate in that activity, well... They say you can't arrest someone for stupidity, but maybe they're wrong? Besides, who do you expect is going to narc on all of these people that you're worried about, honestly? The kids? Are the over-21 adults supposed to call 5-0 on themselves? Is the herb that you're smoking so strong that you fear that it'll knock 100 points off your IQ while your high and that you'll forget and open the door when someone knocks and let them see you and your adult kid toking up? Because - with all due respect - You're coming off more like a non-consumer who's only read about it. I hesitate to use the term "troll," because I wish to continue to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I and everyone I know is able to maintain well enough to clear the smoke from their lungs and to send anyone out of the room that would get in trouble (or that would get THEM in trouble) before opening the front door. Maybe it's... Nah, I'm not all that smart. And I'm for sure BURNT after the decades. And I can figure it out.

The initiative is ambiguous with regard to whether "present" means being in the same room as the consumer, the same house, the same apartment building, or within wafting distance–apparently leaving this up to the interpretation of judges.

Every presumption that I have read leans heavily toward the "area of affect" rule. At worst, go into a bedroom and shut the freaking door. You old enough to have fathered a child? Pretend it's a baby. Wouldn't you follow the same strategy for an infant? Common-sense is not a bad thing, lol.

There is no exception for medical marijuana patients or for parents consuming in the presence of their own children.

Hello? It has been stated over and over and over... And it is CLEARLY written into the very proposition itself, that none of this will supercede, modify, or change current medical laws. Could you at least READ the thing?

The first rule I was given in my very first debate class way back when was that a successful - that is not to say a winnable one, only one that makes sense to participate in - debate requires an opponent that uses logic, is cognizent with the facts of an issue, and (preferably) comes to the table with an open mind.

Therefore, I will no longer be commenting on this issue. I find myself hoping to be engaged on a new point but all I get to do is go round and round with the same old suppositions. There are only so many different ways that a person can explain something before the realization dawns upon him that the person he is attempting to explain things to is not misunderstanding at all. I have reached that point. I'm going through a rough patch right now and it is at times like this that I hope to visit this site, unwind among friends, do a little reading, learn what I can, maybe even teach someone something if and when I'm able. I look back at the post I just typed and realize that not only am I far from being at my best, my patience has come to an end. To those of you who've read the text of Proposition 19 and taken steps to understand it - whether you agree with the issue at hand or not - I would like to tender my apologies. To the rest of you, you have my sympathies.

Fight the Good Fight,
~TS~

Unsubscribed

 

[FlyMolo]

TS has some very good points but like GanjAL2 he/she too is making plenty of presumptions and leaving out some very important points. However, I believe the nature of this community it to make presumptions and I think the way this bill is written, we damn well should.

Since TS is now unsubscribed, I will not expect him/her to respond so instead of asking him/her to clarify anything in his/her previous post(s) I'd much prefer to have you folks ask yourselves one question: With this bill's language, what is the worst that could happen? Not just to yourselves, but also to the Marijuana movement and community.

GanjAL2 is accurate in that this bill will create two new offenses should this bill pass. Perhaps the most disturbing is the language pertaining to Marijuana and minors. Here is the section straight from the website

Prohibition on Furnishing Marijuana to Minors
(a) Every person 18 years of age or over who hires, employs, or uses a minor in transporting, carrying, selling, giving away, preparing for sale, or peddling any marijuana, who unlawfully sells, or offers to sell, any marijuana to a minor, or who furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer, or give any marijuana to a minor under 14 years of age, or who induces a minor to use marijuana in violation of law shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a period of three, five, or seven years.
(b) Every person 18 years of age or over who furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer, or give, any marijuana to a minor 14 years of age or older shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a period of three, four, or five years.
(c) Every person 21 years of age or over who knowingly furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer or give, any marijuana to a person aged 18 years or older, but younger than 21 years of age, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of up to six months and be fined up to $1,000 for each offense.
(d) In addition to the penalties above, any person who is licensed, permitted or authorized to perform any act pursuant to Section 11301, who while so licensed, permitted or authorized, negligently furnishes, administers, gives or sells, or offers to furnish, administer, give or sell, any marijuana to any person younger than 21 years of age shall not be permitted to own, operate, be employed by, assist or enter any licensed premises authorized under Section 11301 for a period of one year.

There is one very important word found in section C not found in section A or B and that is the word knowingly. Section A and B do not have it. What if a minor steals your legal weed, gets caught and fesses up to police that they stole it from YOUR garden/stash? Have you "furnished" a minor with Marijuana? Read section B, does it say "knowingly" anywhere? Why is that word in section C but not in Section A or B? With this Bill's language, what is the worst that could happen?

How about consuming in a space void of minors? TS points out that all presumptions of "space" lead to an area of effect and asks us to exercise common sense. Fine. We will. The question is whether or not the Law enforcement officer who smells it will or judge we might have to appear before will too. What if their definition of "space" is not congruent with TS's or ours? Can such a thing happen? Judge Leland Harris of Van Nuys CA has already gone on record that only "Reputable" doctors from USC or UCLA can legally write a medical marijuana prescription. Common sense tells me that other judges/law enforcement will not use common sense like Judge Harris. With this Bill's language, what is the worst that could happen?

TS then states: ".. And it is CLEARLY written into the very proposition itself, that none of this will supercede, modify, or change current medical laws. Could you at least READ the thing?"

Luckily I have and there is one important aspect that is surprisingly very focused in this Bill and that is the area of Marijuana cultivation. Currently (thanks to the Kelley decision earlier this year) it is up to a medical patient to decide how much medication he/she needs. If you need 1lb a week to meet your medical needs, then you can grow 1lb a week so if you pull that off in a space no bigger than 25 square feet then my hats off to you. But let's use common sense here. How many medical patients who already have the legal right also have the means to grow their own? What about the medical collectives? TS claims this bill will not affect current medical laws but it is the medical laws that permit the collectives to legally exist and operate. Under this bill, only licensed premises owned and operated by licensed individuals will be legally allowed to participate in growing and selling Marijuana. Sounds cool to me but will there be open competition? Can ANYONE get licensed to grow and sell to not only the medical community, but also the recreational crowd? Here's a better question; HOW does one get licensed? This Bill fails to address that. Maybe what's going on in Oakland will shed some light on the process. Afterall, this is the place where this Bill originated. What if getting licensed meant having to fork over thousands? What if getting licensed meant you had to own a warehouse capable of growing over 100lbs a month at a minimum and that you had to employ a workforce to run it too? Could Prop 19 make a Marijuana Aristocracy legal? With this Bill's language, what is the worst that could happen?

Like GanjAL2 and Tortured Soul, I am also making a few presumptions however I like to think that my presumptions ride on the tail coats of common sense as I'm using real world examples to make them.

But by all means, don't take my word for it. Please, if you haven't already, read the Bill yourself. You read the whole initiative here. Once finished, please ask yourself: With this Bill written the way it is, what is the worst that could happen?

 

[Lemon Paradise]

TS has some very good points but like GanjAL2 he/she too is making plenty of presumptions and leaving out some very important points. However, I believe the nature of this community it to make presumptions and I think the way this bill is written, we damn well should.

Since TS is now unsubscribed, I will not expect him/her to respond so instead of asking him/her to clarify anything in his/her previous post(s) I'd much prefer to have you folks ask yourselves one question: With this bill's language, what is the worst that could happen? Not just to yourselves, but also to the Marijuana movement and community.

GanjAL2 is accurate in that this bill will create two new offenses should this bill pass. Perhaps the most disturbing is the language pertaining to Marijuana and minors. Here is the section straight from the website

Prohibition on Furnishing Marijuana to Minors
(a) Every person 18 years of age or over who hires, employs, or uses a minor in transporting, carrying, selling, giving away, preparing for sale, or peddling any marijuana, who unlawfully sells, or offers to sell, any marijuana to a minor, or who furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer, or give any marijuana to a minor under 14 years of age, or who induces a minor to use marijuana in violation of law shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a period of three, five, or seven years.

so what in this paragraph, do you have a problem with,, having a minor sell, transport, prepare, pot, or to sell a minor pot, or is it not being able to give it to 14yr old?

(b) Every person 18 years of age or over who furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer, or give, any marijuana to a minor 14 years of age or older shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a period of three, four, or five years.

so, again, you have a problem with giving pot to a 14 yr old? and I will go out on a limb here and say if it was STOLEN from you, then you are not going to be prosecuted for furnishing it to the THEIF that STOLE it from you. If it is legal to have, then you have the right to call the cops becasue it was STOLEN from you..

(c) Every person 21 years of age or over who knowingly furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer or give, any marijuana to a person aged 18 years or older, but younger than 21 years of age, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of up to six months and be fined up to $1,000 for each offense.

so, if you give pot to an adult (over 18) but under 21,, you goto the county farm,, 1000 fine,, not the felony everyone is talking about,, and what is the penalty in CA for giving alcohol to someone 18-21?

(d) In addition to the penalties above, any person who is licensed, permitted or authorized to perform any act pursuant to Section 11301, who while so licensed, permitted or authorized, negligently furnishes, administers, gives or sells, or offers to furnish, administer, give or sell, any marijuana to any person younger than 21 years of age shall not be permitted to own, operate, be employed by, assist or enter any licensed premises authorized under Section 11301 for a period of one year.

what is section 11301,, is that wwhat will allow recreational mj retail? if so, then it makes sense,, if it is what allows mmj dispensaries, then it does not..

There is one very important word found in section C not found in section A or B and that is the word knowingly. Section A and B do not have it. What if a minor steals your legal weed, gets caught and fesses up to police that they stole it from YOUR garden/stash? Have you "furnished" a minor with Marijuana? Read section B, does it say "knowingly" anywhere? Why is that word in section C but not in Section A or B? With this Bill's language, what is the worst that could happen?

again, if someone STOLE your LEGAL stash, then you can call the cops to have THEM arrested for STEALING your property. Just like if the broke in and stole yout TV, Stereo, COmputer, etc, they STOLE it...

How about consuming in a space void of minors? TS points out that all presumptions of "space" lead to an area of effect and asks us to exercise common sense. Fine. We will.

I do not smoke in front of my kids, I do not smoke in my living room, I only smoke in my bedroom, or my basement. But, that's just me,,, if you want to be able to smoke in the same room as your kids,, that's on you..

The question is whether or not the Law enforcement officer who smells it will or judge we might have to appear before will too. What if their definition of "space" is not congruent with TS's or ours? Can such a thing happen? Judge Leland Harris of Van Nuys CA has already gone on record that only "Reputable" doctors from USC or UCLA can legally write a medical marijuana prescription. Common sense tells me that other judges/law enforcement will not use common sense like Judge Harris. With this Bill's language, what is the worst that could happen?

that does suck, I have seen that thread, but the fact of the matter is, for me, it would not be an issue,,, cop would not smell MJ if he came to my door,, as I would not have smoked anywhere close to where that door was.. and I would never smoke anywhere near my kids.

TS then states: ".. And it is CLEARLY written into the very proposition itself, that none of this will supercede, modify, or change current medical laws. Could you at least READ the thing?"

Luckily I have and there is one important aspect that is surprisingly very focused in this Bill and that is the area of Marijuana cultivation. Currently (thanks to the Kelley decision earlier this year) it is up to a medical patient to decide how much medication he/she needs. If you need 1lb a week to meet your medical needs, then you can grow 1lb a week so if you pull that off in a space no bigger than 25 square feet then my hats off to you. But let's use common sense here. How many medical patients who already have the legal right also have the means to grow their own? What about the medical collectives? TS claims this bill will not affect current medical laws but it is the medical laws that permit the collectives to legally exist and operate. Under this bill, only licensed premises owned and operated by licensed individuals will be legally allowed to participate in growing and selling Marijuana. Sounds cool to me but will there be open competition?

to sell for rectreational purposes... this is not about MMJ, so a dispensary selling to both rec users and med users would have to be extra vigilant,, but if it was solely a med dispensary, then I would believe that this would not apply.. again, though I am now making the assumption

Can ANYONE get licensed to grow and sell to not only the medical community, but also the recreational crowd?

good question, but I would think it is 2 separate businesses, and should be such,,

Here's a better question; HOW does one get licensed? This Bill fails to address that. Maybe what's going on in Oakland will shed some light on the process. Afterall, this is the place where this Bill originated. What if getting licensed meant having to fork over thousands? What if getting licensed meant you had to own a warehouse capable of growing over 100lbs a month at a minimum and that you had to employ a workforce to run it too? Could Prop 19 make a Marijuana Aristocracy legal? With this Bill's language, what is the worst that could happen?

the worst that could happen,,, read Mass's bill..

2k+/yr importer/cultivator license, 2500/yr processor license, 3000/yr trade license, 2500/yr retail license...
class c pot (THC less than 5%) = 150/oz tax
class b pot (5.0% to less than 10%) = 200/oz tax and
class a pot (10% THC and over) 250/oz tax,, now that is a greedy a$$ bill,, lol
I would be dancing for joy if we had the bill you guys have

Like GanjAL2 and Tortured Soul, I am also making a few presumptions however I like to think that my presumptions ride on the tail coats of common sense as I'm using real world examples to make them.

I think everyone thinks their presumtions are correct,,,

But by all means, don't take my word for it. Please, if you haven't already, read the Bill yourself. You read the whole initiative here. Once finished, please ask yourself: With this Bill written the way it is, what is the worst that could happen?

30 million adults can legally grow their own and enjoy cannabis??

 

[markscastle]

Why is anyone even writing anything in this thread? Prop 19 is dead in the water! It can not pass ,it`s old news before it even goes up for vote.The People of California just aren`t stupid enough to fall for the lies and spin from prop 19 yeh sayers,LOL! Last poll was 44% down from the 56% it started from and it`s only July for God`s sake! By November it will have fallen way more! Ha Ha Ha What a waste of time! We don`t want No stinking MJ taxes,Regulations and Controls! Ha Ha Ha !