I see nothing "silly" about arguments in opposition to prop 19. Proposition 215 was a landmark initiative that paved the way for California to have safe, convenient reasonably priced access to cannabis with a doctors reccommendation. If there is any possibility that prop 19 could supercede or undermine 215 in anyway, I don't see how any legal medical patient could support something like that.
The writing of prop 19 conveniently uses many "weasel-words" which so many other poorly written bills include. The writers do this to leave certain areas vague as to discribe the bill's specific intentions. Writers of propositions, when created by some one or some group who is part of the government (as is the case with 19),use weasel- words to often create loopholes which are intended to be exploited by corporations or even individuals which the powers at be have interests in.
I've said before and so far not generated a meaningful rebuttal to the simple fact that prop 19 was created so that the government can exploit our cannabis industry for tax revenues. It was born out of California's desperate budget deficit situation. If it were correctly branded for what it really is (simply a marijuana taxation initiative, and further regulations), it would have an almost zero percent chance of passing. Instead, they've focussed onthe parts of the bill which are popular with voters, like creating the illusion of legalization. Again, that's not an unusual tactic for the government to use when they want something passed that is in their best interest, but they know the people won't like it so they ignore those parts to gain votes. I've read through the "comprehensive" guides relating to prop 19. I have yet to read one that is truely neutral on the subject, and are actually just an individual's interpretation of the bill rather than a truely unbiased statement of the facts. A copy of what looks like the actual bill (cannot verify that since the links are almost always on a private site rather than a government one), which may or may not be complete and unaltered. I have examined most of what is represented as the actual Proposition 19, and still find the wording (specifically relating to legal medical access) disturbing. I've come to the conclusion that people would have to be extremely naive to believe Prop 19 would not adversely affect any aspect of 215 or other important legislation with regards to safe medical marijuana access for patients.
I realize that many people who use this site are probably not medical users, so something that creates the illusion of absolute marijuana legalization would sound like an awesome idea. But as a medical patient, I think it's scary to know that there is a possibility of having my rights as a patient violated.
