"Prop 19 written to take away medical growers rights"

[vertise]

I am invested just like every other marijuana user both medicinal and recreational, who is sick of the unjust prosecution of people who choose to smoke weed. I do not grow for anything but personal use, and i dont need 99 plants and 12 pounds for my needs as no one does. I back up my understanding of the prop with the links i provide, the lawyers and doctors who voice there opinion to news outlets around the state. I also back it up via common sense. Knowing that in california and even throughout the USA there is a supreme court ruling that says that medicine recommended/prescribed by a doctor that is legal via the law cannot be limited by an opposing law.

 

[The Ruiner]

I am invested just like every other marijuana user both medicinal and recreational, who is sick of the unjust prosecution of people who choose to smoke weed. I do not grow for anything but personal use, and i dont need 99 plants and 12 pounds for my needs as no one does. I back up my understanding of the prop with the links i provide, the lawyers and doctors who voice there opinion to news outlets around the state. I also back it up via common sense. Knowing that in california and even throughout the USA there is a supreme court ruling that says that medicine recommended/prescribed by a doctor that is legal via the law cannot be limited by an opposing law.

So basically you back up the bill with things that will not and cannot be considered when the CA govt is interpreting this law? So your assertion that MMJ wont be affected is meaningless and serves no purpose other than to mislead people into thinking things about 19 that arent true? you refer everyone to propaganda from sources that will say absolutely anything to get what they want from the CA voter?

this is not about persecution, and if that was your deal you would be way for the CCHHI before prop 19, being as that the CCHHI actually does something about this whereas 19 doesn't.

 

[vertise]

Um no i gather you didnt read what i said about the court case ect. I don't understand it was simple to get. I do not want to repeat over and over. Lawyers and esp doctors are interviewed in these articles along with many other educated people. Your only understanding of this prop is via uneducated guesses. Its ok, your entitled to that.

 

[vertise]

BTW cchh will never happen. Most people will not vote for a bill that allows pounds and pounds and huge gardens. Obviously people who grow will love it but the majority of voters that are non smokers who will vote yes on 19 are doing so because of the other benefits pot will provide.

 

[The Ruiner]

Um no i gather you didnt read what i said about the court case ect. I don't understand it was simple to get. I do not want to repeat over and over. Lawyers and esp doctors are interviewed in these articles along with many other educated people. Your only understanding of this prop is via uneducated guesses. Its ok, your entitled to that.

I read what you have said, and I don't agree with you. You are up to your neck in propaganda about 19 and refuse to climb out from under it. My "only understanding" about 19 is that it is a trojan horse for mega-weed inc to turn EVERYONE into a consumer, and/or a criminal. Every article you show in support is propaganda, admit it. They mean nothing, and are promising that "everything will be fine." Well, all of those people that wrote those articles, their opinions, just like yours and mine DONT MEAN SHIT in the end.

The most decisive difference between you and I is that you are willing to leave all of the interpretations to the CA govt, whereas I would rather present to them a better, more clearly written piece of legislation, or not have them meddling in CA MJ law at all.

19 supporters are like sheep inviting wolves to dinner...

 

[vertise]

Non smokers who see that its harmless and should not warrant arrests will vote yes. I was reading a thread on here started by a guy who was growing a few plants in his apartment. His landlord called the cops and he was arrested. He lost his job. Him and his family (wife and kids) were evicted. He has nothing in savings because he was supporting his family as well as he could. When everything is said and done he will have huge debts to go along with everything else because of laywer fees. All this would be avoided under 19.

 

[The Ruiner]

BTW cchh will never happen. Most people will not vote for a bill that allows pounds and pounds and huge gardens. Obviously people who grow will love it but the majority of voters that are non smokers who will vote yes on 19 are doing so because of the other benefits pot will provide.

What other benefits? Fanciful hopes. And nothing to back it up but some more propaganda, i bet.

 

[The Ruiner]

Non smokers who see that its harmless and should not warrant arrests will vote yes. I was reading a thread on here started by a guy who was growing a few plants in his apartment. His landlord called the cops and he was arrested. He lost his job. Him and his family (wife and kids) were evicted. He has nothing in savings because he was supporting his family as well as he could. When everything is said and done he will have huge debts to go along with everything else because of laywer fees. All this would be avoided under 19.

Not true, considering law enforcement FIRST gets to make the call on the legality, THEN the court. If he has a space bigger than 5x5 then 19 would make him a criminal anyway. NONE OF IT WOULD BE AVOIDED

 

[vertise]

Its clear i guess to those who understand it. Unclear to those who don't. Its not about being a sheep or anything vote how you want your entitled to miss interpret anything you want.

 

[The Ruiner]

Its clear i guess to those who understand it. Unclear to those who don't. Its not about being a sheep or anything vote how you want your entitled to miss interpret anything you want.

Well, infact EVERYONES INTERPRETATION IS A MISINTERPRETATION. Its unclear, because.........ITS WRITTEN UNCLEAR. That's the problem with 19....

 

[vertise]

he didnt have a space bigger, only a few plants as i stated in a closet around 3x3. Also law enforcement will have no means for arrest along with the DA. The law is clear in the bill.

 

[vertise]

It is written in what one consider a "legal language".

 

[The Ruiner]

he didnt have a space bigger, only a few plants as i stated in a closet around 3x3. Also law enforcement will have no means for arrest along with the DA. The law is clear in the bill.

Again, not exactly true. If it is even suspected that he is growing a larger area the same thing can/will happen.

 

[vertise]

You are entitled to your interpretation, I am not interested in going back and forth. I am simply explaining how a pro 19 interprets it.

 

[The Ruiner]

It is written in what one consider a "legal language".

I am so fucking tired of this arguement...as if a pre-law student with a degree in philosophy cant under-fucking-stand a simple bill. Get away from me. You think way too fucking highly of yourself and obviously have no respect for another persons intellect. Anyone who thinks I am "mislead" by the language in the bill reeks of ignorance or avarice.

 

[vertise]

Its not a argument legal language is how its written. You sir just come off as a jerk. Also if he is suspected of growing a bigger amount they can show up yes, but if he is not then they cannot arrest or do anything about it. Also the 5x5 area is a minimum. Counties and towns must allow a 5x5 area under state law. Other towns may say you can have a 10x10 area. He could grow a 20 foot tall plant in a 5by 5 area and have nothing to worry about btw.

 

[The Ruiner]

Its not a argument legal language is how its written. You sir just come off as a jerk. Also if he is suspected of growing a bigger amount they can show up yes, but if he is not then they cannot arrest or do anything about it. Also the 5x5 area is a minimum. Counties and towns must allow a 5x5 area under state law. Other towns may say you can have a 10x10 area. He could grow a 20 foot tall plant in a 5by 5 area and have nothing to worry about btw.

How it is written blows ron jeremy's floppy dong. I am a jerk, but you are something far worse. The 5x5 is the MAXIMUM, I dont know where you got minimum but that is humoring in a certain way...is it the "legal language" of in an area of not more than 25 square feet per private residence that throws you off?

 

[vertise]

wow you should defend all of your logic with "blows ron jeremy's floppy dong" whenever you get the chance. Get your law degree and defend everything with....Legal language blows ron jeremy's floppy dong. I see a bright future. Also minimum was for rec, i was talking about medicinal grows can still be as big as needed.

 

[squarepush3r]

Non smokers who see that its harmless and should not warrant arrests will vote yes. I was reading a thread on here started by a guy who was growing a few plants in his apartment. His landlord called the cops and he was arrested. He lost his job. Him and his family (wife and kids) were evicted. He has nothing in savings because he was supporting his family as well as he could. When everything is said and done he will have huge debts to go along with everything else because of laywer fees. All this would be avoided under 19.

or if he got even the simplest medical license which currently are available and have been for 14 years?

 

[squarepush3r]

Its not debating on what people say, its debating on how the bill is interpreted. People who understand the bill know it is a good thing. Know that it does not affect medicinal patients. Also, those who think CCHH will ever have a fucking chance is an idiot. Who in hell thinks that 99 plants and 12 pounds of personal product will ever be legal. Thats just simply ridics

then why do you support elite corporations and big players being able to, as they would under prop 19 as "commercial." You say its ridiculous that the average person would grow more than 5x5 feet, but its perfectly fine for Marlboro to grow on a 300 acre farm?