yesterday the terminator signed in a pot bill.Doesn't he see we are on the verge of legalization.WTF:rastasmoke:
Printable View
yesterday the terminator signed in a pot bill.Doesn't he see we are on the verge of legalization.WTF:rastasmoke:
no duh,how bout posting in one of the other threads about it ;)
It might not pass, I hope to god it doesn't its not nearly as great as you think, go Read my Post Jack had Dream, it clearly underlines the truth about prop 19. Read that and if you still want yes, well I question if your a current Medical user, because 19 strips EVERY AND ALL MEDICAL BENEFITS that Jack and Denis faught to get for us. Thats like spitting on the Mans grave.
One Love...
:rastasmoke:
Excuse me? Nothing medical gets stripped away from you. Do you even understand how our legal system works? There's nothing in Prop 19 that overrides Prop 215 or SB420, NOR DOES IT HAVE THE POWER TO DO SO.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeroWingX
yea prop 19 will make it ok for recreational use for folks 21 or older.Just like beer
yea but yesterday Arnold signed a bill that says they can't put you in jail for a small amount of pot.I guess theyfinally realized the courts could save money .
What a bunch of clowns we have running our state
Here is a question.... have you read 19?Quote:
Originally Posted by khyberkitsune
I have top to bottom, EVERY sentence... and yes about a good 95% of Medical laws are instantly stripped from patients. So yes it does have the right, and it will come November if Voted in. Don't believe me? Re- Read what you think you read and youll start to notice you didn't read the bill quite as well as you thought you did.
One example right here. As of now Medical Marijuan Patients have no laws against them smoking in public, as this is considered medicating , same as popping a asprin. As soon as 19 passes smoking in public whether you have a Medical card or not, WILL BE ILLEGAL! you dont consider that a nullification? Think sir before you open your mouth, just because you THINK you know the law I promise you I know it that much better. (not to be a dick)
This is just one example. They are sugar coating Laws that void Medical laws instantly and people like you don't see them and thats how the Government passes things right under your nose and you smile and agree...
Educate before you try bashing sir.
One Love
:rastasmoke:
And even that has Loop holes I just red that bill. nd when I say its Looped holed... Go read it... Enough said...Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by khyberkitsune
if you read his other posts you will clearly see he is a moronic troll,dont feed the troll hehe :jointsmile:
yep go ahead sheep bahhh baahhh see ya at the chopping block, idiot...
I'm Over it you all seem so damn set in your Idiot ways, go Vote Yes and f^&* everything up, when you regret it i'll be there to smile and say I told ya so... Sheep...
Whaaaa go cry a river while the whaabulance comes for you,my little kids whine less than you.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeroWingX
I'm not whining, hahaha ur comedy bro... OK well this is about as helpful as driving without a Steering wheel, look you have your side I have mine so lets keep this Civil shall we?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ub3rB0ng
If my stance is a little to aggressive I apologize.
I'm just trying to make people see this isnâ??t for us, its for these Corporations who are about to make millions off us
hehe read my other posts before you trip out ;) I could care less if they make millions as long as they dont come around me ;) ill be fine and dandy with my lil 5x5 piece of paradise in multiple locations.
LoL dang u got Land like that huh? thats chill wish I had that...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ub3rB0ng
thats what happens when you come from a family of norcal farmers hehe :) over 2k acres. on 2 locations
Nice, guess us SoCal Urban Growers are just unfortunate and screwed. Suxs to be us... "Tax measure on the Nov. 2 ballot would impose an annual tax of $600 per square foot on indoor marijuana cultivation of up to and including 25 square feet, and a $900-per-square-foot tax for anything larger.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ub3rB0ng
The tax, which makes no distinction between medical and recreational cultivation, would cost a resident $15,000 a year if he or she cultivates pot in a 5-foot-by-5-foot growing space indoors."
This is the price tage for indoor ops here very very soon.But kool for you Nor-Cal Farmers, thanks for thinking about us who arn't so fortunate :thumbsup:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeroWingX
Sigh,that wasnt a shot at you or anything,just simply answering your question. Besides the only ones complaining about anything are those of you out there using growing and selling as your primary means of income.
we don't want folks smoking in public.nobody needs to medicate that bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeroWingX
look like the growers will have to pay taxes now
Its not my Primary source of income Its not about income, I'm a college student and a Tattoo artist. I grow because I have a Panic disorder (father gave that 1 to me) and breed High CBD strains with lower THC for that. I then expanded with Painkilling strains, Anti Anxiety(social anxiety, paranoia, ect), PMS symptoms, stomach aches or Nausea, Stress, and im still finding more medical strains and uses for Marijuana. This isn't about money for me its about helping people. Dude I charge 40-50 1/8th and like 140-180 Ounce, And I deliver... I really only Charge for The lights and nutrients lol... The extra money yes Helps put me through school, but hey sorry I have to live man... Its never about money anyone who knows me will tell you that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ub3rB0ng
you ever wonder or care why I put "One Love" after most all my posts? Its because I believe it, Marijuana is a very unique Resource. It heals people Hemp is extremely useful in clothing, industrial grade ropes, Bio Fuel, hell even cooking... One love signifies the People should regulate it, One Love for a common goal, and a common thing. It unites people. This Prop is not going to do that its going against everything I stand for, Freedom and love. Its Just going to be Industrialized and Meaningless.... Go buy ur MJ from a store and go about your day... where is the Love in that? I chat for Hours with people I supply now, ask em how their day is, whatâ??s been new. Sometimes sit n blaze with em... Thatâ??s the realization of the true dream... One Love...
:rastasmoke:
You're uninformed, 19 does not affect 215 in any way. All medical uses cannot be stripped or affected by 19, it says it in the text.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeroWingX
I can legally medicate anywhere smoking is permitted. This will still be legal after 19 passes.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyman
And because your a Medical Patient you wont be confined to a 5X5 grow space either huh?...Quote:
Originally Posted by eastbaygordo
hmmm...
Maybe,maybe not but I dont think so.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeroWingX
I'm pretty sure they will lol, but I'll figure it out...
Just gotta roll with the punches,whether it gets voted yes or no.
well yea ...i'm sure there will be much debate about it.I didn't see any tax figures in the prop..The taxes will have to be practical and fair for growers and the buying publicQuote:
Originally Posted by Ub3rB0ng
Not really there are 3 seperate Taxes for the buyer, the 50 an ounce is just 1Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyman
It wasnt just the medical users that got prop 215 passed. Those of us who are perfectly healthy and just enjoy relaxing under the effects of MMJ helped get your prop passed. Stop being selfish and help those of us who cant get a script legally. Yes i could go get a script for insomnia blah blah blah. But seriously it wouldnt hold up in court. I dont have any documentaion of any illness that would grant me a script. So for you to sit there and say vote No because it will belittle my prop 215 rights is just selfish.
No, it doesn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeroWingX
In fact, in Section 2, Article B Statement 12: "Make cannabis available for scientific, medical, industrial, and research purposes." is explicitly mentioned, and no other section makes mention of affecting Prop 215 or SB420, WHICH IT MUST DO IF A PROPOSED BILL OR PROPOSITION WERE TO AFFECT THOSE LAWS.
Go back to school and practice your basic reading comprehension, troll. Also, go acquire some basic legal knowledge while you're at it.
I am a 31 y.o. male who's been growing for 10 years I wanted to become a firefighter so I am now a medic but I developed a condition which ruined my hopes of firefighting. My next hope was to grow at a medical marijuana farm an anyone direct me to a place.
the last 4 posts were outstanding.Thanks guys.Like i said they will have to make it fair so the growers can still make money.But i think it is time for the growers to pay some taxes on their income like the rest of us.If they tax it to much for the buyer,the business will go underground and the don't want that.:pimp:
there really is no need for calling anyone a "troll" or any of that other stuff. ZeroWing is just stating what he believes. He pointed out something about Prop 19 that I had not noticed before. The summary section, which ZW is referencing, does not match the actual language in the text.
I could tell everyone what it is but thats no fun :rastasmoke:
Can anyone spot the difference??
One Love :rasta:
okay, times up. :jointsmile:
this is the summary:
"Prohibits people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using it in public, smoking it while minors are present, or providing it to anyone under 21 years old."
this is the actual text:
Nothing in this article shall authorize a qualified patient or person with an identification card to engage in the smoking of medical marijuana under any of the following circumstances:
(a) In any place where smoking is prohibited by law.
(b) In or within 1,000 feet of the grounds of a school, recreation center, or
youth center, unless the medical use occurs within a residence.
(c) On a school bus.
(d) While in a motor vehicle that is being operated.
(e) While operating a boat.
the summary "prohibits" while the text says "Nothing .. shall authorize".
which one counts? I honestly don't know. I don't recall seeing this discussed anywhere but I don't ever check out other herb forums or anything. I think its interesting. they say two entirely different things. My guess is the text counts not the summary but I'm no California Herb Attorney. :D ... yet.
And all of those are actually referencing and reinforcing prior-stated regulations and H&S codes that were long-ago passed. There is NOTHING NEW in those words.Quote:
Originally Posted by boaz
It's basically a reaffirmation of already-existing rules and regs on the books regarding the consumption of intoxicating substances, and stating that this law does NOT circumvent those pre-existing rules.
yes, don't get me wrong I support voting yes, even tho I don't live there :rastasmoke:, and I have been saying the exact same thing that you just said and it is true but the summary does seem different that the actual text. I think that is what is causing so much confusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by khyberkitsune
Maybe its just standard legal double talk but the summary say this prop will prohibit this that an the other thing whereas the text just says it will not authorize them. to me that is different. like I said, the summary probably is not even used for the actual law but it seems like false advertising to me. :twocents:
its kinda like having a prop where the summary says everyone will get a tax increase if they vote yes, and then in the text saying that nothing in this prop will prevent anyone from getting a tax increase. subtle but I could see why its causing confusion out there.
but anyways, I would still vote Yes, the text most likely trumps the summary, but I just thought it was interesting and prolly is whats causing all the confusion over this prop.
oh yeah, more details :stoned: if you look at the current State laws I don't believe there are any currently in the books about smoking in front of a minor. So, the text version would amount to literally nothing, whereas the summary seems to imply something different. no big deal I'm sure just kinda interesting.
im so glad arnold signed this bill into law, but prop 19 is whats really needed.
Is Oakland Sprouting out?
yea every little bit helps.
And has no one noticed that the text does not say public, while the summary does, that's falsely misleading :jointsmile: it also says nothing of minors, in the text provided here at least :wtf:Quote:
Originally Posted by boaz
Edit: just thought I'd add that I find the difference between autos and boats amazing, you can smoke in a boat while it's being operated, as long as your not the one operating it, but only in a car that's not being operated, why the difference? do the makers of said law smoke on a boat with friends and a designated driver? lol food for thought
MeDiCaTeD:jointsmile:
a car can be a closed enviorment ,the driver could get a contact high:rastasmoke: