California MJ Growers & Smokers on Legalizing MJ

```votes are private````

I think anybody in CA who grows or smokes weed and votes against legalization should be kicked out of our state. I think they are either brainwashed by propaganda, greedy, or hypocritical.

How can we come so far to legalize the herb and then when its finally on the ballot vote no? I just do not understand.

And why do people think if its legal, they will have to smoke chemical laced weed. Nobody is going to make you buy schwag. You are just scared of the future, as the media has taught you to be.

Sure, a big company may be created. America is all about corporations. If this big company can provide a bunch of awesome strains of weed, at a very low price, and hire people to sell it and grow it, breed it, etc, I do not see the problem. I'll still be growin myself and if I buy it will only be primo from a club or something of that quality, whatever the new creation is.

And then theres the growers who say they will all loose money. Take a look in the mirror. Don't be a greedy drug dealer posing as a hippy pot farmer using legislation to line your pockets. Fact is in CA, especially since last year, the market has been flooded with MJ anyways. Only the super duper has a chance. Maybe instead of trying to profit off an illegal drug and basing your entire income off that, you should have diversified your income. You may as well start making or growing some other illegal drug, since that is obviously your business. If you are a really good grower and etc, why not try and get a job wherever this new company, which hasnt even happened yet and might not even happen at all, takes all your business.

I know nothing is perfect, but this legalization will stop fines and arrests for many marijuana related charges, and that is worth it to me!
Vote on the poll and give your arguments here.

Well 5150, after pissing all over my parade over in MY thread, I wander over here and find you RANTING about those who would vote no.
Just who the hell are you talking about? So far your poll only shows YES. So why are you taking such a negative view of this? BB

I just had to get it off my mind, and if someone else feels the same way, or disagrees they can post. I'm not going to argue on here or anything. If someone strongly believes differently and has good points I would love to hear them. btw all votes are PRIVATE.

Man i wish my family lived n cali. Yall would have bout 50 more yes's. Smoke one

so for some reason my good friend from humboldt is not going to vote yes. he said because it will drive down prices and he doesn't want a big corporation taking over. Its not like hes a big grower or anything, so I do not understand the propaganda.

we debated for a while and I told him my points....*sigh*.....hopefully he changes votes!

Just finished reading AB2254. How many of you have done the same?

And I'm voting NO. From your poll, looks like I'm the only one. How tragic.

Why will I vote no? How about the fact that this bill "..shall not preempt the authority of any county, city, city and county, California Community College campus, campus of the California State University, or campus of the University of California to adopt and enforce additional smoking and tobacco control ordinances, regulations, or policies that are more restrictive..." which basically translates into a LEGAL and BINDING way for your local Government to restrict the consumption of recreational cannabis anyway it wants just short of your own home. In short, the local politicians will decide FOR YOU where you can buy, consume and commercially cultivate cannabis.

Does that mean they lose out on tax revenue should your town/city decide not to legalize? Not exactly. They could limit the number of commercial growers and tax them, however since your local gov't won't allow a legal place for recreational purchase they won't be able to sell locally. Sure you could grow your own in a 5x5 area but the only place you can consume it is your home. But what if you're a UC or CSU college student 21+ yrs old and you live on campus? Now, with this bill there's a possibility you won't even be able to do that.

Now someone posted that since the legal possession limit is 1oz of cannabis flowers or concentrate that they would grow as much as possible and sell from their home...(really?) Unfortunately, under this bill you would need to ask your local gov't for a permit to do so, which would cost money (up to $5000) to apply and IF they allow you to do so, it would cost another $2500 which you would have to pay annually. It will also mean that your "commercial" premises would have to be inspected continuously. Don't believe me? Ask the The Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control as they "shall administer and enforce..." the regulations. Who also by the way recently proposed UPPING the alcohol tax in CA so that a bottle of two buck chuck ($2 bottle of Charles Shaw wine) would cost $7.11. Who knows what they would tax for legal Cannabis? A wholesaler could purchase a few pounds at $600! Pretty cheap right? But that's tax free. How much would a consumer (who pays the tax) expect to pay?

There's also the argument that the generated revenue from tax would help alleviate California's financial woes. Don't make this stoner laugh harder. I just can't take it. The advocates state that there's roughly $1.5 billion in annual revenue from illegal marijuana sales and this bill will derail the crime syndicate's cash flow and generate income for the state. But that's revenue from ILLEGAL sales so of course the numbers are astronomical. NEWS FLASH: California ALREADY GETS REVENUE from the taxing of medical marijuana (which is legal) and guess what California spends more money on than anything else, including schools, community centers, local programs, artistic institutions and hospitals? Correctional Facilities. Look this up as it is an undeniable fact. CA spends more tax revenue on jails than anything else. While they cut school programs and ask teacher's to take furloughs to curb spending, what do jails do to help? Nothing really unless you consider the release "less violent" criminals which would include some of our counter-culture buddies (thank goodness) a way to alleviate our debt. All the while, they still clamor in Sacramento to expand jails so they don't have to release anyone. As for the people they release, while they may dodge incarceration, will they still be fined? Hell yes.

My biggest problem with this bill however is the enforcement guidelines especially when it comes to driving; they are the same as alcohol. Operating a vehicle or heavy machinery while impaired is never a good idea but if a PO stops you for swerving in your lane and thinks you're drunk, he/she can give you a sobriety test and or a breathalyzer. You can of course refuse these field test and request a blood test to determine your B.A.C. But what if the PO thinks you're high? What then? There is no breathalyzer for cannabis. The only way I know of to determine the presence of cannabinoids in your body is through a blood test and to me that's the problem. Cannabinoids can stay present in your system for up to 50 days in some cases. So let's say you toke up with your legally purchased or grown bud one fine day and never do so again for a week. Then you're pulled over for some minor traffic violation and the PO thinks you are under the influence of something and makes you perform sobriety tests and you pass. Let's say that he/she then administers a breathalyzer test and that too, you pass. BUT he/she now believes you are under the influence of cannabis and order's a blood test. That toke last week will still be in your system and you'll be slapped with a hefty fine, lose your privilege to drive and/or jailed. Sure cops can do this now but they don't. Why? Because right now marijuana is not legal for recreational use and therefore, less common. Until there is an effective and conclusive way to determine you are presently under the influence of cannabis then this bill is a bad idea.

I am not against the legalization of Pot, but this bill has some shoddy wording and was hastily conceived. Instead of trying to legalize cannabis for recreation in CA, I think we should focus on the Federal Government recognizing the plant as medication because let's face it, that what cannabis is. For those thinking that it's legalization for recreational use will spur the Federal Government to adopt the same guideline, please wake up and think about this clearly. For over a decade, the state of California has had a near perfect model for, while medically classified, effectively legal cannabis in all of its practices. Several states have followed suit modeling CA's system and more are currently considering new legislation to create a MMJ program. But the Federal Government has yet to do so. So let me ask you folks this: What in the world makes you think that cannabis will be legalized on a Federal level if this shoddy bill passes?

i'm voting no...

richard lee is like phillip morris.
why cant the little guys get in on this too?

this bill was written by the clubs for the clubs.

i have more rights as a 215 patient.

i dont care if you call me a greedy drug dealer.
if it wasnt for guys like me, you mother fuckers wouldnt even be on Rollitup.org


3 other bills with no financial backing were proposed, and written much better.

people just hear "legalization" and they act like rookies with a hard on.


do some research.

why would richard lee spend 1.3 million of his own money if not to benefit himself.

this is a corporate mindset and if passed, this would be a corporate takeover and cornering of the marijuana market.

he's already making good money living well off, why vote yes to fatten his pockets even more?


this is exactly how we get into big messes.
our food industry is fucked up because of corporate take overs.

people need to learn to support local growers, weather weed, or tomatoes.


do research and think long and hard about what you will do in november.


you wont be able to legally smoke anywhere you want.
i understand people just want to smoke with out worrying about problems with the law.
but you can do this now in the same manner if its passed or not.

you wont be able to legally smoke anywhere you want.
--- dude, its illegal right now, how is this worse?

i understand people just want to smoke with out worrying about problems with the law.
but you can do this now in the same manner if its passed or not.
--- no, not for everybody

-- What are you negative reasons?

"..shall not preempt the authority of any county, city, city and county, California Community College campus, campus of the California State University, or campus of the University of California to adopt and enforce additional smoking and tobacco control ordinances, regulations, or policies that are more restrictive..."

1. means that no area should make their policies more restrictive, but have all the power to make them more open, so what is the problem here? Your "in short" leaves much to be desired. I think you have interpreted this COMPLETELY backwards.

2. which basically translates into a LEGAL and BINDING way for your local Government to restrict the consumption of recreational cannabis anyway it wants just short of your own home. In short, the local politicians will decide FOR YOU where you can buy, consume and commercially cultivate cannabis..its illegal now, so how is this worse?

3. Maybe I am interpreting the wrong way? but the way i see it is that they are saying no place in CA should adopt more restrictive policies preemptively, meaning before due course.

dtp5150 said:

you wont be able to legally smoke anywhere you want.
--- dude, its illegal right now, how is this worse?

i understand people just want to smoke with out worrying about problems with the law.
but you can do this now in the same manner if its passed or not.
--- no, not for everybody

-- What are you negative reasons?

"..shall not preempt the authority of any county, city, city and county, California Community College campus, campus of the California State University, or campus of the University of California to adopt and enforce additional smoking and tobacco control ordinances, regulations, or policies that are more restrictive..."

1. means that no area should make their policies more restrictive, but have all the power to make them more open, so what is the problem here?

Click to expand...

right now, possession of an ounce or less is a 100 dollar fine. not really that big a deal.

passing of this bill will not make it a free for all.

what's the problem? that big post was too long for you to read, wasn't it?

dtp5150 said:

you wont be able to legally smoke anywhere you want.
--- dude, its illegal right now, how is this worse?

i understand people just want to smoke with out worrying about problems with the law.
but you can do this now in the same manner if its passed or not.
--- no, not for everybody

-- What are you negative reasons?

"..shall not preempt the authority of any county, city, city and county, California Community College campus, campus of the California State University, or campus of the University of California to adopt and enforce additional smoking and tobacco control ordinances, regulations, or policies that are more restrictive..."

1. means that no area should make their policies more restrictive, but have all the power to make them more open, so what is the problem here? Your "in short" leaves much to be desired. I think you have interpreted this COMPLETELY backwards.

Now how's that for backwards? Let's see if I can state this plainly. The way the legalization bill is written, it will not force local governments to let you smoke cannabis anywhere you want. All this says is that if a local government does not want the smoking of cannabis anywhere but you're home, they can. There can be legal, designated places for people to smoke marijuana in your city under AB2254 but if you're city doesn't want to allow in a public space, tough. This bill does not preempt the authority of local governments

2. which basically translates into a LEGAL and BINDING way for your local Government to restrict the consumption of recreational cannabis anyway it wants just short of your own home. In short, the local politicians will decide FOR YOU where you can buy, consume and commercially cultivate cannabis..its illegal now, so how is this worse?

Cannabis is illegal? Really? Because I clearly remember the state of California passing proposition 215 in 1997 which made medical cannabis LEGAL. Sure I can't smoke a joint walking down main st. under 215 but AB2254 won't stop my town from telling me any different.

3.

Click to expand...

Quit playing. This is serious legislation with some serious consequences for any and all users of cannabis both recreation and medicinal. Do not think for one moment that legalizing Marijuana under this bill won't bring some serious quid pro quo. Legalize? Not with these strings...

You say that currently, even being a medical patient, you cannot smoke a joint walking down a street. In fact it would be disrespectful to non-smokers to smoke in most public places ( some people get bad reactions to cannabis ).

This law will make it legal for non-medical patients to possess and ounce, with no fine, and smoke in their house. Even grow in their own house! That's awesome! What is the big deal? Legislation doesn't get passed without financial backing. It sounds like you're jealous of Richard Lee's success.

and look at that, at least we got someone admitting they are a greedy drug dealer. maybe you shoulda went to school instead of selling drugs and tryin to get rich, and voting weed illegal.

and you act like I wouldn't be here if it wasnt for you? what kind of high and mighty shit are you on. maybe i'll leave cuz of people like you being here.

$100 fine isnt that big a deal except if youre broke as fuck or on probation. Also, don't forget about the charges for illegally buying or selling!

and regarding DUI and MJ, ive known people getting DUI for driving high since 2002.

Also, I've learned that just because someone talks a lot, doesn't make them right. Especially a rambling argument where they create scenarios out of thin air to support their position. Oh ya, that was some copy and pasted blah blah anyways.

If you're against corporations you're in the wrong country. You could always go off the grid somewhere in the mountains if you just can't take it anymore. Not sure if you got the memo but America is a capitalistic society. People other than you are getting rich. Deal with it, and don't make decisions based on jealousy. Same mother fuckers talking about don't want a big corp to take over weed sales are the same mother fuckers shopping at walmart and paying $12 to see avatar.

Also, if there is some big gaping error with this bill, as it seems everyone is terribly afraid of the consequences and unknown future, i'm sure an amendment of some sort could be put forth in the future, when and if these problems happen.

Smoking & possession:
Right now: you can't smoke in your home and possess any MJ with no fine. Its illegal, also paraphernalia. If you are medical its ok.
After the law: Everyone 21 can smoke in their home and possess an OZ with no fine. Totally legal.
always: you can never smoke in public anywhere you please, and thats how it should be. you can't drink, smoke ciggs, get naked, or have sex anywhere you please in public either.

buying and selling:
right now: buying and selling is completely illegal unless you're a medical patient
after the bill: there will be places anyone 21+ can go buy weed and perhaps even sell weed

growing
right now: growing weed is illegal unless you have medical
after the bill: anyone 21+ can grow a 5x5 area of plants.


I still do not understand the negative reasons?! Also, only losers are 21+ and live on campus. With more seriousness, its really usually only phd/doctorate students from out of country on scholarship. Or its single parents. They have separate "dorms" than normal too, with much different rules. And you really used that as a point in your argument? Stop playing? People like me have actually been there. Most of yall are just scared of losing money from the CSU/UC kids, not standing up for their rights.

It really shows how our government totally screwed society over with propaganda when even a bunch of potheads wont vote to legalize weed. Or maybe its cannabis-induced paranoia. Regardless, its just sad.

One can only speculate on the reasons for the negativity posted. My take is that there are folks with financial interests that would be in jeopardy if this Bill passes. And FUCKING SHAME ON YOU! I've waited for 45 years for this to happen, and to see greedy S.O.B's slinking around with their cute "smoke & mirrors" arguments, just about sets me balistic! I'm 71 now, and I'm praying that this year will be the LAST time I have to be stealthy with my grow. Next year, I plan to "landscape" my moble home lot with the finest strains! BB

and look at that, at least we got someone admitting they are a greedy drug dealer. maybe you shoulda went to school instead of selling drugs and tryin to get rich, and voting weed illegal.

i did go to school. i just finished actually. weed paid for my education. i never said i was tryin to get rich, i'm just tryin to stay happy.


and you act like I wouldn't be here if it wasnt for you? what kind of high and mighty shit are you on. maybe i'll leave cuz of people like you being here.
i didnt mean me specifically, i meant you buy weed from a guy like me, this culture was instilled into you because of a guy like me.
you can say what you want, but you know i'm tellin the truth.

This law will make it legal for non-medical patients to possess and ounce, with no fine, and smoke in their house. Even grow in their own house! That's awesome! What is the big deal? Legislation doesn't get passed without financial backing. It sounds like you're jealous of Richard Lee's success.
i dont get jealous, i'm glad he's making money. but you obviously dont understand the way big business works.
try to see the bigger picture bro. richard lee doesnt give a shit about you. i give a shit about every person i have ever smoked with. well, 90% of them.


If you're against corporations you're in the wrong country. You could always go off the grid somewhere in the mountains if you just can't take it anymore. Not sure if you got the memo but America is a capitalistic society. People other than you are getting rich. Deal with it, and don't make decisions based on jealousy. Same mother fuckers talking about don't want a big corp to take over weed sales are the same mother fuckers shopping at walmart and paying $12 to see avatar.

this is the most ridiculous thing i've read. i agree its a capitalistic society, but it doesnt get better when you let it happen.
thats like sayin "if you dont like being raped, you're in the wrong country"'

i dont go to wal mart and i dont pay to watch movies.


growing
right now: growing weed is illegal unless you have medical
after the bill: anyone 21+ can grow a 5x5 area of plants.
but you're not allowed to produce more than an ounce at a time.
on average i smoke 2-4 grams a day. thats 3 pounds a year. i'm only allowed an ounce if this passes, how can i grow just an ounce? what am i supposed to do in between harvests? go buy it from richard lee. thats what they want you to do anyways.

everyone has the right to vote how they want. naturally they will vote for whats best for their interest.

the only reason i would even vote for this is to help cali out of its financial situation.

but cali is kind of irresponsible when it comes to money.

i've stated my reasons for voting no, i'm against corporate take overs. i'm sorry it inconveniences you if i dont like to be raped.

I'll admit that I have not read the proposition, but I will before I vote. I read somewhere that there were mandatory minimum sentences for people in the 18-20 age range (adult, but not legal to smoke). Is that true? If so, that'll get me to vote no.

The thing is, it's not like this is our one and only chance for legalization. If this fails, there will be more attempts until it happens. Like I said, I haven't read it yet, but if it's a crappy deal IMO, I can wait for the next one.

some people can't see past the immaturity of simply wanting it legal. they are clueless to what any of this really means. they think pot will flow freely if this passes. kinda scary.


free pot for everyone!!!!!!!

how's that "hope and change"?

public defense, incarceration costs, medical care, transportation,over-crowding of prisons, the criminalization of MJ is costly in more ways than just financially.