Repeal Cannabis Prohibition Act of 2012 : California has a second!

[Ernst]

Repeal Cannabis Prohibition Act of 2012 text


by Repeal Cannabis Prohibition on Thursday, August 18, 2011 at 12:27pm

Repeal Cannabis Prohibition Act of 2012
This initiative measure is submitted to the People of the State of California in accordance with the provisions of Article II, Section 8 of the Constitution.
This initiative measure adds Chapter 6.7, entitled “Repeal of Cannabis Prohibition,” to Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code.
PROPOSED LAW
SECTION 1. Sections 11420, 11421, 11422, 11423, 11424, 11425, 11426, 11427, and 11428 are added to the Health and Safety Code, to read:
11420(a). This Act shall be known and may be cited as the Repeal Cannabis Prohibition Act of 2012.
(b)(1) The People of the State of California hereby find and declare that the purposes of the Repeal Cannabis Prohibition Act of 2012 are as follows:
(A) To ensure that adults have the right to obtain and use cannabis.
(B) To ensure that adults who participate in cannabis related activities are not subject to criminal arrest, prosecution, or sanction.
(C) To make cannabis available for scientific, medical, industrial, and research purposes.
(2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede legislation prohibiting persons from driving impaired, nor to condone the diversion of cannabis to minors.
(c) “Cannabis” means “marijuana” as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 11018 and “concentrated cannabis” as defined in Section 11006.5.
11421(a). The following statutes are hereby repealed from the Health and Safety Code: Section 11054(d)(13), Section 11054(d)(20), Section 11357, Section 11358, Section 11359, Section 11360, and Section 11361. Section 23222(b) of the California Vehicle Code is hereby repealed. Cannabis related activities are hereby removed from the prohibitions contained within Health
and Safety Code Sections 11364.7, 11365, 11366, 11366.5, 11379.6 and 11570.
(b). The repeal of Health and Safety Code section 11360, as related to sales only, will be effectuated within 180 days of passage of the Act in order to allow the California Department of Public Health the opportunity to enact commercial cannabis regulations.
11422. It shall not be a crime or public offense for an adult to use, possess, share, cultivate, transport, process, distribute, sell or otherwise engage in cannabis related activities.
11423(a). The California Department of Public Health shall oversee the regulatory system for the commercial cultivation, manufacturing, processing, testing, transportation, distribution, and sales of cannabis. This shall include promulgation of regulations to control, license, permit, or otherwise authorize the commercial cultivation, manufacturing, processing, testing, transportation, distribution and sales of cannabis. These regulations shall include appropriate
controls on the licensed premises for commercial cultivation, sales and on-premises consumption of cannabis including limits on zoning and land use, locations, size, hours of operation, occupancy, protection of adjoining and nearby properties, and other environmental and public health controls. These regulations may not include bans of the conduct permitted by this Act.
(b) Any regulations created by the California Department of Public Health may not impede on the individual rights set forth in this Act. Any taxes, regulations, fines and fees imposed pursuant to this section shall not be imposed on personal amounts of cannabis below 3 pounds of
processed cannabis and 100 sq. ft. of cannabis plant canopy provided that the processed cannabis was not sold or purchased pursuant to subdivision (a).
(c) The California Department of Public Health may regulate the smoking of cannabis in public and where minors are present.
11424. This Act, and all state implementations of this Act, shall preempt enactments of local jurisdictions with the exception that local jurisdictions may enhance the rights and protections of persons involved in cannabis related activities beyond what is delineated by the state or this Act.
11425. This Act shall not adversely affect the individual and group medical rights and protections afforded by California Health and Safety Code §11362.5 through §11362.83.
11426. Cannabis related conduct that contributes to the delinquency of a minor shall remain punishable by Penal Code section 272. Driving while impaired by cannabis shall remain punishable by Vehicle Code Sections 23103, 23152(a) and 23153. Impairment occurs when a person's mental or physical abilities are so impaired that he or she is no longer able to drive a vehicle with the caution of a sober person, using ordinary care, under similar circumstances.
11427. If any provision of this Act or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the Act that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Act are severable.
11428. The provisions of this Act shall become effective November 7, 2012.

So what does this do?

The thing is many small efforts are not as good as one big one in my opinion.

 

[Ernst]

(A) To ensure that adults have the right to obtain and use cannabis.

I understand this as a right to buy weed but not to grow and share. Am I wrong?

 

[HankDank]

I understand this as a right to buy weed but not to grow and share. Am I wrong?

11422. It shall not be a crime or public offense for an adult to use, possess, share, cultivate, transport, process, distribute, sell or otherwise engage in cannabis related activities.

 

[Ernst]

Oh...

Who likes this one over regulate like wine?


I don't see big money behind either. Maybe I am wrong.

 

[forestbud]

About time! Maybe this was what the 2012 prophecy was really all about! California Cannabis Industry will be the next wonder of the world.

 

[itsaplant]

Would their still be low paying poverty line cannabis industry jobs with No health care, low pay, long hours in the hot sun if this passes?

 

[Ernst]

I'd think so.

I don't see these "boutique" legalization efforts working.

California voted no to prop 19 circa 1972 and that allowed people to grow and share which meant hippies would grow and sell making money and displacing old time residents of many parts of California IMO.
Then in 2010 California voted no again to commerce..

No commerce language has a chance in my opinion.. All these things do is delay us and allow industry to slowly gain control and I don't mean the little guy..

But we shall see.. Fixing the barn door ( prop 19 ) after the horse has left the barn ( this effort of topic ) is useless..

I think only if we limit scope to private persons and forbid sales like prop 215 will we have a chance to gain the votes.

 

[deprave]

Guys, its cheap to grow weed and if it was legal damn near everyone would do it, this would stimulate the economy, and it would be the right thing to do for the people, legalize it! It is the only way that's morally right, this plant grows naturally and is given to us by the earth and it treats the earth and us very well.

 

[JayTrinity]

How cheap? Im guessing $400 per plant after the 150 gallons of soil and the time spent plus $200 to get it trimmed perpound plus securiTy fence

 

[Ernst]

I'd think it is as cheep as a plant grows in the Sun..

It's expensive because it is illegal and there is the two edge sword.. Folks want to sell and have businesses but don't want everyone growing it by law.

 

[mccumcumber]

Legalizing pot would be nice, but I doubt California is going to be the first State to do it. Why? Well...
If you live north of Marin County you don't want it legalized cause you're probably making money off of the prohibition market. I don't think anyone from NorCal would like to start competing to sell something that they have been selling with relative ease for the past 40 or so years.
If you live in the central valley you may want to legalize weed, but all of the dumb asses that surround you don't, for really no other reason than them being retarded rednecks.
If you live in the bay area (the only area that voted to legalize it last time) well you can vote to legalize it, but there's really no point, it wouldn't change anything at all.
If you live in the Central Coast you have the same dillemas as NorCal with a little bit of dumbass redneck to accompany it.
Outside of the greater LA and SD areas, SoCal is not the biggest fan of weed either. And the law enforcement/DA definitely do not support it (look at Cooley's history)
All of this, and the fact that weed is legal if you just go get your card deters people from voting yes. I know actually legalizing is a huge step, and I'm all for it... I'm just pessimistic about the issue. That and, how do you think the feds would react to first state to actually legalize pot. I'm guessing they'd get pretty pissed. Let CO or MI or OR legalize it first, and see what happens to growers over there. If anything it would cause the DEA to lay off of us for a bit... which would be pretty nice.

 

[Cali chronic]

The real deal in my opinion is... It is a DEA cash cow. Most people who consume cannabis are law abiding citizens and have money to bilk like the difference to give a citizen a j walking ticket who is shopping but let a homeless guy walk in the middle of the street cleaning car windows.
The ones who want it illegal are the drug cartels as well as enforcement. Enforcement waits for the cartel to collect 100 of thousands of dollars then confiscates it. Cartels play the game as usually they have enough points to recover from a loss.
The ones that suffer?
People who are good neighbors who smoke cannabis for recreation or medical with expired tags or the likes of. The state for not getting sales tax action on that illegal money confiscated. Which should get trickled down to schools and roads.
On a Federal level no income tax can be divulged and claimed as it is illegal.
All while the DEA skates off with a bundle of money the divvy up amongst themselves. IMO

 

[Cali chronic]

Legalizing pot would be nice, but I doubt California is going to be the first State to do it. Why? Well...
If you live north of Marin County you don't want it legalized cause you're probably making money off of the prohibition market. I don't think anyone from NorCal would like to start competing to sell something that they have been selling with relative ease for the past 40 or so years.
If you live in the central valley you may want to legalize weed, but all of the dumb asses that surround you don't, for really no other reason than them being retarded rednecks.
If you live in the bay area (the only area that voted to legalize it last time) well you can vote to legalize it, but there's really no point, it wouldn't change anything at all.
If you live in the Central Coast you have the same dillemas as NorCal with a little bit of dumbass redneck to accompany it.
Outside of the greater LA and SD areas, SoCal is not the biggest fan of weed either. And the law enforcement/DA definitely do not support it (look at Cooley's history)
All of this, and the fact that weed is legal if you just go get your card deters people from voting yes. I know actually legalizing is a huge step, and I'm all for it... I'm just pessimistic about the issue. That and, how do you think the feds would react to first state to actually legalize pot. I'm guessing they'd get pretty pissed. Let CO or MI or OR legalize it first, and see what happens to growers over there. If anything it would cause the DEA to lay off of us for a bit... which would be pretty nice.

I would think those set up would understand that the losses would be gone adding to bottom line along with other expenses of being stealth not to mention the trimmings would be sold off for textiles, paper clothes, oil etc....I can make beer on my own but there are still 2 aisles of it in every store.