Victims of the war on medical marijuana…
Why are so many local elected officials complete nuts when it comes to medical marijuana? Well, there are a lot of reasons for that, but one of them is that the California League of Cities simply doesn’t dig the idea.
Proof of this is coming up on Thursday, July 8, at Hilton Hotel in Costa Mesa, where the Orange County Division of the League will present a seminar entitled Medical Marijuana Dispensaries: Can Cities “Just Say No”? It will deal with issues including legality, blight & public safety issues.
Never mind that California voters already voted to make medical marijuana legal! And this November we will have a chance to vote to make cannabis safe – and tax the proceeds.
Here are the meeting details:
The number of medical marijuana dispensaries has nearly tripled across California in the last two years — and the sites now impact every city in Orange County. Cities are grappling with how to contain and — if possible — eliminate these operations on grounds ranging from land use authority to public safety concerns.
With State voters considering further legalization this November and legal precedents mounting on the issue, the Orange County Division is partnering with public safety and legal experts to outline cities’ options.
Featuring Presentations by:
- Sheriff Sandra Hutchens
- Orange County Sheriff’s Department
- Lieutenant Adam Powell, Special Investigations Bureau, OC Sheriff’s Department
- Nicole Sims, Sr. Deputy County Counsel, County of Orange
- Jeff Shunk, Deputy District Attorney, OC District Attorney’s Office
- Jeffrey Dunn, Partner, Best, Best & Krieger
- Patrick Muńoz, Partner, Rutan & Tuckers, LLP
Thursday, July 8, 2010
City Selection Committee Meeting: 5:00pm (Agenda)
Division Business Meeting: 5:15pm (Agenda)
Networking Reception: 6:00pm
Dinner: 6:30pm
Hilton Hotel of Costa Mesa, at 3050 Bristol Street , Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Note: The City Selection Committee will make a 4-year appointment to Orange County LAFCO at this meeting. For information on this appointment opportunity, click here.
The Division will hold a Business Meeting at which appointments will be made to its Advocacy Committee and its Board of Directors. Please see separate opportunity notices for Advocacy Committee and Board of Directors.
notice: no medical experts! marijuana’s class 1 categorization is a FARCE!
All you have to do is follow the money. Just about all of those who are so concerned benefit financially from the absurd “war on drugs”–law enforcement, prosecutors, and don’t forget the prison industry.
Does anyone know of anybody who is in jail or prison because they were busted with less than 1 oz of marijuana?
Marijuana was decimalized in the state of California in 1975 and now if you don’t have a doctors note or medical necessity there is a civil penalty of $100 for less than 1 oz.
As noted above Marijuana is a Federal class 1 or schedule 1 drug.
The change in California law in 1975, has had no effect in the last 35 years on the Federal schedule dealing with drug law enforcement.
In November if the “Tax Cannabis 2010” gets on the ballot and passes, the only change would be a new tax. It will not have any affect on the Federal drug laws.
Now of course “POT HEADS” are kind of stupid from years of killing off their brain cells with all the recreational drug use in their past, and if they vote for a “personal use tax” on their pot, (a tax increase) so will I.
Having just one person in prison for marijuana violations is too many. Try and come up with one supportable reason why it’s illegal.
And to the last poster, you’d be surprised at how many successful, hard working, and highly educated people are “pot heads,” so you can make your snarky and uninformed little comments all you want; I’m sure you won’t be giving up that 6 pack of Budweiser every evening.
cut and paste
In a survey of five work sites, 18 percent of persons who drank alcohol and 12 percent of illicit drug users reported that their performance at work had declined due to alcohol or drug use.
Workplaces take the brunt in lost/poor performance, accidents, and crime.
Studies show that approximately 6 to 11 percent of fatal accident victims test positive for THC.
The human costs to the individual, family, and community are incalculable.
End cut and paste
I be waiting to learn of that one person who be in prison because of less than 1 oz of pot.
That was a cogent response, sort of. The point is, first, that many thousands of persons across the country are in prison due to marijuana violations; you deftly avoided the point. One once or one pound–what’s the difference?
Your rather bland little compilation of “facts” is similarly unpersuasive–define “alcohol or drug use” first. Are we talking about someone who drinks a quart a night, or a glass of wine? Or has an occasional bong hit, or does a quarter ounce in an evening? Little things like facts mean something, you know.
“Studies show”–you’ve been watching too much Fox. Name one of these “studies,” please.
What are “human costs”–nice dramatic term, but utter crap without a context.
…………”One once or one pound–what’s the difference?”
The difference is a fine for less than 1 oz to prision time for the “pusher man”
……….”Or has an occasional bong hit, or does a quarter ounce in an evening?”
California police are not looking for those people cause since 1975 that kind of recreational use was decriminalized .
This is nothing more than a cleverly disguised tax increase. And in this case, I will vote for the tax increase.
cook,
Just so you know, it will still be illegal to drive under the influence of marijuana. And 99.9% of workplaces will still not allow drug use while at work. So your fears are unfounded.
Many countries in Europe have gone this route with zero problems.
Moreover, the anti-drug laws in this country have a disproportionate impact on minorities, particularly African Americans.
“This is nothing more than a cleverly disguised tax increase.”
So it could have nothing to do with finally getting rid of a stupid draconian law, such as prohibition, that makes criminals out of people for no good reason?
That is correct Rapscalion, this has nothing to do with getting rid of a stupid draconian law.
I read the summary, Art. I see that work place tokeing will not be legalized and driving under the influence will still get you arrested.
The only “NEW” item is the tax. And since the tax and its forms would violate the 5th, it would be unenforceable. My opinion.
Sorry, but if any person can grow their own (like brewing one’s own beer) and have an appeciable amount without law enforcement shoving its nose in those peoples’ personal business, then it’s getting rid of said penal enforcement.
You are already paying taxes in the form of law enforcement, prosecution, and prison salaries and costs with this law in place. I also think you’re confusing the supremacy clause with a Constitutional amendment.
Try and think outside of the ‘tax” box. There’s much more to life than that. Theocracy, for example.
Well good luck with your proposition.
Cook.
In four months we will find out how CA voters feel about this issue.