legalization in California! 3 threads merged! Get active!

Damn, now I feel like a goof. Lol

Thanks for setting me straight.

I think the goof is actually on all of us.:mad:

um i know this goes to the beginning of this topic

US is an assignee to Geneva convention, we just renamed enemy troops to "combatants" and found the right to use excessive interrogation methods on them (torture)

also

US is an assignee to NPT, did we ever discard any of our nukes? lol

International treaties should be no problem for US to overcome, UN is kinda US's b*tch, what US wants goes thru what we dont wish doesnt, want me to mention some? In israeili-palestinian issue, most condemntions of security council when israel kills civilians gets a swift veto and thats the end of it!

Sure US can legalize it, no seious legal problems, when world court orders a halt to an international dispute on an execution in texas, world's opinion is of 0 importance to US, why should world's opinion matter on marijuana :))

u must be kidding thinkin intl treaties have any real meaning for US, we made half them or more, we have our own ways of goting or bullyin around or right into them.;)

Spot on, the UN is a toothless shark. I doubt that treaty is what is preventing the end of prohibition, and I sincerely doubt the UN could do a damn thing about it, should the US decided to decriminalize, however, it is a handy scapegoat. What is really ironic, the liberals in this country are always the ones that are talking about how "the UN is the almighty last word and authority" at least when they are talking about "certain" issues.
Just look at what they are doing about Russia, NADA.
Personally I believe the US should kick the UN HQ outta the US and withdraw it's membership. What a worthless bunch of skin sacks! Probably save a whole lot of "brown" people from being raped in every oriface world wide by "peacekeepers" too, under the guise of "peace keeping missions".:D
This really isn't the place, but it would be intresting to start a thread about the UN, I am curious to hear if there is anything that anyone could think of that the UN has actually done, (aside from raping innocent brown people all over the world and not paying any parking tickets.):thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 8182KSKUSH

It's just frustrating, I was at a clinic today, spoke to a handful of people, (patients and employees) only 1 of them was even aware that something was going on, and none of them knew the first one was dead, none of them knew about the second one. Something stinks to me.

I feel bad for you out there. I lived in Miami for a couple years. I know what you are likely dealing with. Hopefully you have access to some better stuff than the mexican weed. But if not it does do the trick I guess, worked for me for 11 years anyway. It's neat that you have an intrest in the ongoings politically out here, too bad more people out here weren't as intrested as you!:D

---

It takes only one person for thousands to know something, one person to change it all, one person to actually go over and beyond what activism has done. Some people don't watch the news, some people don't read magazines, others to. You need to get out there and put it in every form of advertisement. Some people pass by some sorts thats why there are so many. You can have one ad for something and it wouldn't catch an eye but another ad for the same thing may catch that persons eye. Just do as much as you can to help. I live in amsterdam some of the year and have been to California twice. I still do all I can to help with spreading the word.

Peace and Love:rastasmoke:

Cannabis will never be legalized through conventional means. This is because of the liability laws and the government would then have to apologize and admit they were wrong and they lied to people with false propaganda, prejudice and ignorance. If they legalized cannabis then the reparations would be so high from the claimaints who have had their liberty taken away that they would infact bankrupt the government. Thus, they must keep this just say no stance to save themselves. The war on drugs is a war with no end and a war without a chance for a truce or peace. Neither side will back down and therefore the side in power, the side who dominates, shall dictate. If we, the oppressed, don't make a consession of having a solution for reparations, it's never going to happen. We have to make an offer through an injunction or a class action suit or an intervener. The laws against cannabis are more harmful then the substance itself. Give peace a chance. :hippy:

The deadline has come and gone on this constitutional amendment. Not a word anywhere about it. The sec. of states site has not updated yet, but I am going to guess that it failed to get the required number of siggies based on the fact that the proponent of the measure is apparently non existent.
Nice.:mad:
I hope Springer accomplished what he/she set out to do.:mad:

Maybe we could go ahead and take this thread down, or un-sticky it and bury it since it is now dead.

Hi Kush, I am not so sure it is completely dead. There are some activist's in the Inland Empire trying other means, which take a lot of patience!
Have you checked all the info from the Attn: Gen Edmund G. Brown's site? Or Jerry Brown: He wrote a long article of his interpretation of the 215/420 laws the last week of August?? Pr ;)

I am very very certain that it is done/ was done the day it was proposed.
The deadline for gathering the signatures, and turning them in was Sept 5th.
Problem 2,
As per the guidelines on the sec. of states website, to gather signatures, there are certain criteria that must be followed. Within this criteria, the proponent has to fulfill certain requirements. So even if you or I would want to volunteer to collect signatures, we could not, because we would have to get in contact with Christopher Springer, whom has left no contact information at all with the sec. of state. I believe this was all a big gotcha, so that someone can say, "ha ha look at this, there was a constitutional amendment that needed in circulation to gather signatures to effectively legalize cannabis in CA, and the stoner's are so stupid not even 1 person signed it."
At least that is my suspicion. I don't know how else to explain what was happening, or in this case not happening. It's also telling, that to get this into circulation, you have to pay I believe $200, which is held in escrow, and then refunded to the proponent of the measure if the minimum number of signatures is met.
So why would someone pay the money, then leave no contact info, unless they never intended to collect a single signature in the first place.
I have seen a site here and there that is claiming to be gathering signatures on line, these folks are ill informed however. Signatures gathered on line are not valid according to the sec. of state. Also not well known, is that only signatures of registered voters are valid, within the county of their residence. There are alot of little rules regarding this process that many folks just aren't aware of apparently from what I have seen.
Do you know something I don't? Don't hold out on me IR! I would rather be completely wrong in this case, and still hold out a tiny amount of hope that I am.

Here is an excerpt from the guidelines as per the state of California for petition circulators:

Petition Circulators The proponent(s) of an initiative measure are required to ensure that any person, company, or other organization who solicits signatures to qualify the proposed initiative measure, whether they are paid or volunteer, receives instruction on the requirements and prohibitions imposed by state law with respect to the circulation of petitions and the gathering of signatures. Such instructions must emphasize the prohibition of the use of signatures on an initiative petition for a purpose other than qualification of the proposed measure for the ballot. (Section 9607) The petition may be circulated by a number of individuals carrying separate, identical parts of the petition called sections. Each petition circulator who obtains signatures must complete the attached declaration to the petition. Preprinted dates or generalized dates, other than the particular range of dates during which the petition section was actually circulated, are not allowed (Assembly v. Deukmejian (1982) 30 Cal.3d 638, 180 Cal.Rptr. 297). The declaration must be signed under penalty of perjury. It need not be sworn before a notary public or other officer authorized to administer oaths, but must include the circulator's signature, date, and place of signing (Code Civ. Proc. Section 2015.5). Prior to allowing a person to circulate an initiative petition for signatures, the person, company official, or other organizational officer who is in charge of signature gathering shall execute and submit to the proponent(s) a signed statement that reads as follows (Section 9609):

So you can see where the problem is.
I still don't understand why there was no, zero, zip, nada, mention of this from any of the so called "pot pseudo celebrity gurus" that all endorsed the prior initiative that was in circulation. :wtf:

So what are you hearing in the grape vine? I am not in contact with any activists here in the I.E, mostly because the activists that I have been in contact with previously make me want to puke!
But I would love to hear what the talk around town is on this subject!:jointsmile: