Quote Originally Posted by stormin94
... 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 California??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 city??s limits remain illegal, but that the city??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.