PROP 19: YOU DECIDE...

[stormin94]

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.

[boaz]

... 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.

stormin, i think you have made some good arguements for what you believe and i could share your concern if this were true. but here is the acual language (the entire prop is here btw)

B. Purposes
1. Reform Californiaâ??s cannabis laws in a way that will benefit our state.
2. Regulate cannabis like we do alcohol: Allow adults to possess and consume small amounts of cannabis.
3. Implement a legal regulatory framework to give California more control over the cultivation, processing, transportation, distribution, and sales of cannabis.
4. Implement a legal regulatory framework to better police and prevent access to and consumption of cannabis by minors in California.
5. Put dangerous, underground street dealers out of business, so their influence in our communities will fade.
6. Provide easier, safer access for patients who need cannabis for medical purposes.
7. Ensure that if a city decides not to tax and regulate the sale of cannabis, that buying and selling cannabis within that cityâ??s limits remain illegal, but that the cityâ??s citizens still have the right to possess and consume small amounts, except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.
8. Ensure that if a city decides it does want to tax and regulate the buying and selling of cannabis (to and from adults only), that a strictly controlled legal system is implemented to oversee and regulate cultivation, distribution, and sales, and that the city will have control over how and how much cannabis can be bought and sold, except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.

that seems fairly straightforward to me but even if were not explicitly mentioned here, and it IS but even if it were not, it would be implied by the California Constitution.

there is no 'gov't' take over here. there is not tax here. My simple question is what gov't control and what gov't tax will be in place the day after this prop passes? the answer is NONE. show me one in the prop.

the only actual event that will happen is that all Californian's will have granted themselves permission to grow and consume as much cannabis as they can grow in 25sf. (or as large as they need for medical use, see California Supreme). all this other stuff is just simply not in the prop.

your county gov't MAY implement an over the counter sales mechanism that where the consumer would no longer need a doctors letter to be a part of it and this mechanism MAY involve taxes but that is completely up to YOUR local gov'ts, county and city.

but, all that said, I do understand your point, I think, and you have made the best arguement I have heard so far. :twocents:

The best argurement I ever heard for prohibition was years ago on another ccannabis forum :rastasmoke: this guy just laid out honestly, he said look I grow for a living and I need this for my retirement. I can understand that arguement, too. don't really agree, but understand.

[greenghost]

i vote yes on the subject because i think we need it and its one step closer to legalization federally, etc.....check out this article though about how some actual medical patients don't want it.....so crazy if you ask me.



Medical Marijuana Advocates Oppose Prop 19

[mikeyman]

An incredible new poll from the Public Policy Institute of California has Prop 19 up 52 - 41, with only 7 percent of voters undecided.

[boaz]

^ :greenthumb: c'mon cali voters.

[boaz]

An incredible new poll from the Public Policy Institute of California has Prop 19 up 52 - 41, with only 7 percent of voters undecided.

damn I hope that holds or expands. a big win means mandate. the people will have spoken so loud that the cali leg, governor and the feds could not dare question the will of the voters.

[middieman440]

get of the tobacco train,these people wont be getting involved,if prop 19 passes,it will still be illegal federally,it would be a major risk for tobacco companies or any company getting involved because they will just lose everything they had.....

dam every person brings up the so called big tobacco companies,in every thread about legalization,know what you are speaking of before you speak..

and again the monasato people or whatever is will not happen...

prop 19 is just a stepping stone,a step we need to take to move forward...

alot of money has been put into this and i highly doubt the people who have dumped in thousands of dollars will do it again just to lose out on there money..

remember this is a STEPPING STONE TOWARDS THE FUTURE OF FULL LEGALIZATION...

and keep in mind it will never be fully legal the goverment always gets a peice of the cake,and i am fine with that,.just like the food you buy and the water you drink,the goverment is always involved..!!

and to people worried about the goverment product<"strains" grow your own...

i am now officially done talking about prop 19 and the future of the herb....

and also the no voters 90% of you are in this because weed is your income,go get a job...

go vote yes! and lets open the doors to weed freedom..

[mikeyman]

ok ok well edumacate us..So maybe the tobacco companies won't get in on it.
:rastasmoke:
that will be fine with me

[StoneMeadow]

Let's say the lead holds and Prop 19 passes. So, what do I do then? I'm thinking I should go ahead and get an mmj card so the Prop 19 restrictions don't apply to me, right?

I have an unused closet I could convert to an indoor grow area, with conveniently located 15 amp electric in it and a sink right next to it. Given that it'll be November, should I start a 24/0 indoor grow right away?

I also have plenty of land that's not directly viewable from the county road or by neighbors,so theft shouldn't be an issue. We don't really get much in the way of frost here, so should I start outdoors? I could planter-grow it and move the planters into the sun room as the weather turns stormy and colder. If an outdoor grow started in November seems like a bad idea when should I start the plants? Feb? Remember, I'm already a year-round gardener...just no experience with mmj.

Thanks for any suggestions!

[leadmagnet]

Maintaining our medical card is certainly the best option for many of us even subsequent to 19 passing.

Look at it as an extended growers license.