Vote NO !! and here is why!!

[tip top toker]

uhhhh, are you aware the law limits you to buying only one ounce if you are only recreational?

otherwise, like you advocate, go get a med license and go crazy if you need to carry around more.

well said. if you're simply a user who likes a smoke in the evening, an ounce at a time will be just fine, if you get serious and want to grow your own and smoke yoruself mad, then get a card as is so easily possible.

 

[UncleBuck]

Not only that, according to this legislation, you can't sell cannabis without a license. So if you end up with more than an ounce from your 5x5 area, then you're already in violation of the new limits and no real recourse except to break the law and sell without a license to get back under limits. Nice little Catch-22 there that the proponents would like us all to pretend isn't there. The only ones who want this bill are the ones dispensing the "Kool-Aid" and those who drink it up like it's ambrosia.

(b) living and harvested cannabis plants shall be assessed by square footage, not by weight in determining the amounts set forth in section 11300(a);
(c) in a criminal proceeding a person accused of violating a limitation in this Act shall have the right to an affirmative defense that the cannabis was reasonably related to his or her personal consumption.

the law says that if you grow a plant that has more than an ounce, no big deal. you can simply harvest an ounce and leave the rest as a 'harvested cannabis plant' within the confines of your 5x5 area, as it will be assessed by square footage only.

if you do not want to do this, and the imaginary people who will conduct random searches to assure you are compliant (LOLZ!) catch you with more you can simply argue that it was 'reasonably related to personal consumption', which is easy to do as long as you are not clearly carrying selling amounts.

nice try at scare tactics, though. might want to stick to reading the bill and not trying to scare others into voting for more cannabis prohibition.

 

[UncleBuck]

GOOD NEWS! looks like yes has a statistically significant advantage in the most recent polls!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_19#Polls

 

[fdd2blk]

uhhhh, are you aware the law limits you to buying only one ounce if you are only recreational?

otherwise, like you advocate, go get a med license and go crazy if you need to carry around more.

so you wouldn't buy 2? it would be really easy to go to the store twice. what if you had only a few grams left so you went and restocked before running out. ut oh, you just went over your "LIMIT".

why the limit to begin with? give me one good reason for the 1 ounce limit. you all approve of it. why? why a limit on what you can posses? i don't understand the reasoning and no one who approves of the measure can explain it to me.

 

[fdd2blk]

well said. if you're simply a user who likes a smoke in the evening, an ounce at a time will be just fine, if you get serious and want to grow your own and smoke yoruself mad, then get a card as is so easily possible.

so nice of you to decide what others need and what they can do about it.

it takes an ounce to make a pound of butter. i often use 2. what if i want to make a double batch of butter?

why the limit?

 

[fdd2blk]

(b) living and harvested cannabis plants shall be assessed by square footage, not by weight in determining the amounts set forth in section 11300(a);
(c) in a criminal proceeding a person accused of violating a limitation in this Act shall have the right to an affirmative defense that the cannabis was reasonably related to his or her personal consumption.

the law says that if you grow a plant that has more than an ounce, no big deal. you can simply harvest an ounce and leave the rest as a 'harvested cannabis plant' within the confines of your 5x5 area, as it will be assessed by square footage only.

if you do not want to do this, and the imaginary people who will conduct random searches to assure you are compliant (LOLZ!) catch you with more you can simply argue that it was 'reasonably related to personal consumption', which is easy to do as long as you are not clearly carrying selling amounts.

nice try at scare tactics, though. might want to stick to reading the bill and not trying to scare others into voting for more cannabis prohibition.

yeah, those damn imaginary people. tell that to all those already imprisoned.



define "process" and "cannabis" please:

(i) Personally possess, process, share, or transport not more than one ounce of cannabis, solely for that individual’s personal consumption, and not for sale.


the DA is NOT on your side. you need to look at this from their point of view. when they DO kick in your door the verbiage will be against you. hope you have a good lawyer.

 

[whiteflour]

It's one (1) singular ounce, period. Over an ounce is intent with distribute on the federal level and a felony. They are trying to keep you under that.

 

[tip top toker]

so nice of you to decide what others need and what they can do about it.

it takes an ounce to make a pound of butter. i often use 2. what if i want to make a double batch of butter?

why the limit?

i thoguht you had a medical card? i thought that this did not effect "medical users". if this is the case then people who want to use more, get a card.

so nice of you to decide that it's not quite right for you, so sod the rest of the people not in your situation that were waiting for something like this.

As i say, that's only relevant if it does not effect card carriers.

 

[mae]

Right now the limit is ZERO. One ounce is a huge improvement. Let's move forward.

 

[whiteflour]

Right now the limit is ZERO. One ounce is a huge improvement. Let's move forward.

This is the position they want you to take. They'll give you what you want NOW, so long as you let them jerk the taxes around as they need LATER. You'll enjoy your lap of luxury for a few years until this gets rescheduled federally. Then the price is going to drop dramatically for every state except California. The one state that can jerk the taxes around as they need to price control.

 

[ganjaluvr]

I say, let everyone vote however they want to vote.

rather if its yes or no.

why? because.. legalizing marijuana.. isn't going to effect me at all.


I'm going to keep growing no matter what happens. I mean, if it gets legalized.. its not going to effect my decision to grow. I'm gonna grow no matter what happens.

It has no barrier on rather or not I continue to grow my own personal buds. period.

that's my opinion.

 

[whiteflour]

I say, let everyone vote however they want to vote.

rather if its yes or no.

why? because.. legalizing marijuana.. isn't going to effect me at all.


I'm going to keep growing no matter what happens. I mean, if it gets legalized.. its not going to effect my decision to grow. I'm gonna grow no matter what happens.

It has no barrier on rather or not I continue to grow my own personal buds. period.

that's my opinion.

I agree, to a point. I really don't care if this passes. Why? Because I'm going to grow at home regardless, and just as soon as a southern state gets MMJ. I'm out of here. I'm not stupid this state has no agricultural hope for cannabis in the future. Short season in the north, lack of water in the south. After you add in supply chains and overhead this state will be out compete in the first year.

But if you can't look at this law and tell its nothing but smoke and mirrors you're just buying into the coinage of "legalization". You're simply letting the state pull the wool over your eyes. Californians are used to letting the government do that though.

 

[Luger187]

i hope they dont start charging us with tax evasion when we dont buy from a store

 

[UncleBuck]

i hope they dont start charging us with tax evasion when we dont buy from a store

and where the hell in the prop do they even write anything that makes you think this?

growing your own is cheaper anyway

 

[Luger187]

and where the hell in the prop do they even write anything that makes you think this?

growing your own is cheaper anyway

if theyre charging a tax on it, and i dont pay that tax, technically they can do that. they did it with mobsters back in the day, and im pretty sure still do today

and also some people just cant grow themselves. so if they were to buy from a friend, they COULD get em for tax evasion. although anything under a few thousand dollars probly wont get u in much trouble. im just sayin...

 

[UncleBuck]

if theyre charging a tax on it, and i dont pay that tax, technically they can do that. they did it with mobsters back in the day, and im pretty sure still do today

and also some people just cant grow themselves. so if they were to buy from a friend, they COULD get em for tax evasion. although anything under a few thousand dollars probly wont get u in much trouble. im just sayin...

how would you buy it from the store without paying the tax? i spend money at stores all the time, they NEVER forget to charge me tax. not once. EVER.

how are they going to get you and your friend for tax evasion? this is just grasping at straws.

i can't believe stoners would look so far for some type of reason not to vote for legalization.

 

[Luger187]

how would you buy it from the store without paying the tax? i spend money at stores all the time, they NEVER forget to charge me tax. not once. EVER.

how are they going to get you and your friend for tax evasion? this is just grasping at straws.

i can't believe stoners would look so far for some type of reason not to vote for legalization.

lol
let me explain again...
im sure most stores that sell the weed to me will charge tax, probably all of them. i guess there may be a few that dont, but thats besides the point.

if im at a weed dealers house, and he sells me an ounce. then he happens to get raided at that moment(for scenario purposes). since they cant do anything to me for possesion of the ounce, they COULD take me in for not paying tax. im not saying they will, but with higher purchases/deals, they just might. its happened MANY times in the past. thats how they put people in prison when they cant really charge them with anything.

 

[JoeCa1i]

read this yet, http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100718/ap_on_re_us/us_pot_city_cultivation

 

[Luger187]

read this yet, http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100718/ap_on_re_us/us_pot_city_cultivation

yeah, i believe someone posted an article talkin about that earlier in the thread. oakland is trying to take over the marijuana industry i guess. i hope it doesnt turn out like tobacco, where we cant grow it and have to buy it from a select few commercial growers

 

[whiteflour]

yeah, i believe someone posted an article talkin about that earlier in the thread. oakland is trying to take over the marijuana industry i guess. i hope it doesnt turn out like tobacco, where we cant grow it and have to buy it from a select few commercial growers

It won't be anything like tobacco. Tobacco isn't a "true" monopoly. It's taken 300 years to get to the point it is today, and every time one company closed it was because someone could make a better quality, cheaper product. That is still true today, but you can't tell that by retail prices, due to taxes. Taxes forced quality decline in the tobacco market, and taxes will do the same here. Export tobacco products are top notch smoke.