.
.
.
In my possession, along with the possession of other statewide advocates for cannabis reform, are petitions that will be circulating to put the “Regulate Marijuana Like Wine” initiative on the November 2012 ballot. This initiative, authored by Judge Jim Gray and cannabis activist Steve Kubby, will set up a regulated distribution system for marijuana sales similar to the distribution systems currently in place for wine and beer sales. In addition, this initiative will also revitalize the hemp industry in California (that’s cannabis plants with less than 0.3% THC or the equivalent of non-alcoholic beer) and prohibit the manufacture and sale of genetically modified cannabis and hemp seeds. In other words, no FrankenWeed made by the likes of Monsanto. While Proposition 19 was a good start, it did not have any provisions to help revitalize the hemp industry in California
By bringing legitimacy to the cannabis trade with this system of distribution and taxation, we can take the trade from the hands of the underground drug cartels and terrorists, bring a halt to the incarceration of non-violent offenders, create many new jobs in the cannabis and hemp industries and create a safer distribution system that will improve public safety and the tax revenues for the state. So if you are a registered voter in California and see someone soliciting signatures for this petition, please stop by and sign your name on the dotted line. The goal is to get 10,000 names of registered voters by next Sunday and 808,000 signatures in the next 5 months.
Can this be the dent we need to bring this failed War on Drugs to an end? Only your signatures can help bring this about on the November 2012 ballot. Don’t delay, sign today.
Here is the initiative in a nutshell (from the Regulate Marijuana Like Wine web site):
In Short – This California Voter Initiative for 2012 intends to:
- Repeal prohibition of marijuana for adults
- Strictly regulates marijuana, just like the wine industry
- Allows hemp agriculture and products
- Does not change laws regarding medical marijuana, impairment, workplace, vehicle operation, or use by minors under 21 years old
- Provides specific personal possession exemptions
- Requires dismissal of pending court cases
- Defense against all related litigation
- Prevents California from supporting federal enforcements that conflict with this law and requires the State to petition the Feds to remove marijuana from Schedule One
- Prohibits commercial advertising of non-medical marijuana
- Generates new revenue from sales taxes, while creating no new taxes
And now, the actual legalise as submitted to the Office of the Attorney General (Kamala Harris, who should be sending Americans for Safe Access and the California chapter of NORML a yearly Christmas card for her victory over Steve Cooley)
The Regulate Marijuana Like Wine Act 2012
_____________________________________
The People of the State of California do enact as follows:
Section 1. Findings, Declarations, Purpose, Directives, and Orders
Section 11420 is added to the Health and Safety Code as Chapter 6.8 Regulation and Taxation of Marijuana. This section shall be known as and may be cited as the “The Regulate Marijuana Like Wine Act of 2012,” known hereinafter as the “Act.”
(a) The People of the State of California find and declare all of the following:
(1) Outlawing marijuana has created illicit markets, empowered gangs, drug cartels and terrorists, resulted in violence, corruption and violations of rights against search and seizure, and contributed to the highest incarceration rate in the world.
(2) Marijuana is an untapped revenue source for the State of California. The best way to tap that source for the benefit of all Californians is to regulate and tax marijuana just like wine.
(3) The regulation of marijuana will benefit the People of the State of California by reducing criminal gang and cartel activity, promoting agriculture, creating jobs by reestablishing a hemp industry, and reducing the fiscal and incarceration overpopulation burdens on law enforcement, and courts.
(b) This Act does all of the following:
(1) Repeals California Health and Safety Code sections 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11361, 11485, Vehicle Code section 23222(b). Marijuana is removed from Health and Safety Code sections 11364 through 11375, 11366, 11366.5, 11469 through 11495, 11532(b)(7), 11590, 11703, and 11999. Adults 21 years of age and older, and approved business entities shall no longer be prohibited from association, use, possession, trade, processing, packaging, gifting, vending, sales, distribution, storage, transportation, production, or cultivation of marijuana. This Act establishes rights not defenses.
(2) Establishes that the following shall be punishable by a fine of, up to $2,500.00 per occurrence.
(A) The sale or distribution of marijuana by or to any individual under 21 years old, or;
(B) The sale or commercial activity authorized herein, when outside the commercial and regulatory system established herein.
(3) Removes “marijuana,” “THC,” and “CBD,” explicitly or by inference as a controlled substance, from Health and Safety Code section 11054.
(4) This Act does not control, repeal, modify, or change statutes pertaining to:
(A) Operating a motor vehicle;
(B) Using marijuana or being impaired while in the workplace or in public;
(C) Medical marijuana statutes as set forth in Proposition 215 (H&S11362.5) and its progeny.
(5) For persons under 21 years of age it is an infraction punishable by a fine up to $2,500.00, for any one of the following:
(A) Possession of over one ounce of marijuana.
(B) Cultivation of marijuana.
(C) Gifting, sharing, distributing, sales, storage, transporting over one ounce of marijuana.
(D) Possession of one ounce or less of marijuana, in this class shall be an infraction with a $100 fine.
(6) This Act enjoins the search, arrest, prosecution, property seizure, asset forfeiture, eradication costs, and/or any criminal or civil penalty, or sanction, for activity authorized herein.
(7) No later than February 1, 2013, the state Department of Alcohol Beverage Control shall adopt regulations and procedures, provide and accept forms for the implementation of commercial activity under this Act. Such regulations shall not prohibit marijuana farming, the operation of marijuana establishments or point of sale outlets, either expressly or through regulations that make their operation different than wine or beer regulations and fees, or unreasonably impracticable. Should the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control fail to have procedures in effect by this date, it shall use forms presently used for wine and beer, and replace the words wine, beer, alcohol, with the word marijuana, and accept and process those forms within sixty days of submission or approval is automatic. Localities may not adopt higher or extra fees, limits, site plans, zoning, regulations or procedures for commercial activity which are different than those which regulate grape farms, wineries, distribution and sales of wine and beer. Commercial cultivation, infused-product manufacturing, and distribution licenses, consistent with the declarations, purposes and goals of this section may be issued if fees are equal to or less than any such fees charged for similar wine industry activity. Should the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control fail to enact regulations, a person or business acting commercially, shall not be subject to the penalty provided in 11420 (b)(2)(B).
(8) All pending state court actions under said amended statutes which conflict with the provisions of this Act, shall be dismissed with prejudice.
(9) The state and/or local jurisdictions may regulate the processing, distribution, sales, and outdoor use within 600 feet of a school, and in residential zones.
(10) Experimentation, development, research, testing, cultivation, sales, or possession of genetically-modified (GMO) marijuana, hemp, and its seeds, shall be banned throughout the state of California.
Section 2. Provisions
(a) This Act adopts the definitions of marijuana, concentrates, and THC as they presently exist in Health and Safety Code Sections 11018 and 11006.5. However, those definitions shall be broadly interpreted to include the species Cannabis Indica, Ruderalis, and Americana, as well as any plant part, form, derivative, interspecies hybrids or cross-breeds, and all non-genetically-modified strains of the Cannabis genus and plant.
(b) State taxes and regulations which may be similar and apply to the grape farming and wine industries, produce and processed agricultural products and brokerage industry, distribution, wholesale and retail sales, and transactions of agricultural crops and products shall apply to marijuana, regardless of THC level, using the grape farming and winery industry as an example, so long as the results support these declarations, purposes and goals.
(c) All wholesale and retail products with a final THC level below 0.3 percent shall be authorized for sales as hemp products. All marijuana or hemp products with a final THC level of 0.3 percent or above shall be restricted for sales to persons 21 years of age or older and regulated in a manner similar to wine, so long as the results support these declarations, purposes and goals. Both hemp and marijuana are declared agricultural crops.
(d) The State of California, and all branches of its government, shall liberally construe the meaning and implementation of this Act to favor and benefit this class of adults, and business entities as follows:
(1) No taxes, fees, laws, rules, regulations, zones, local city or county zoning requirements may be adopted or enacted to defeat, deny, or prohibit the purposes of this Act, or to defeat, deny, or prohibit this adult class or, associations, organizations, commercial, agricultural, or industrial businesses authorized herein, from engaging in the activities authorized and protected by this Act.
(2) Adults 21 years and older may produce up to 6 mature outdoor flowering plants, or up to 12 mature indoor flowering plants per person; or a total number of plants cultivated per household not to exceed 12 mature flowering plants outdoors or 24 plants indoors. The cultivation shall take place in an indoor or outdoor space or area not visible to the public. These plants and their produce may not be made available for sale.
(3) Nothing in this section shall prevent a property owner from prohibiting conduct that damages their property.
(4) This Act creates and requires statewide standards and preempts and nullifies any and all conflicting local regulations, while allowing local jurisdictions limited regulation under Health and Safety Code 11570 over cultivation in residential and school zones only. Local regulations cannot decrease plants in (d)(2) above but may allow a greater number of plants instead.
(5) No regulations, taxes, or fees shall be enacted or imposed upon marijuana for qualifying business entities, which are more severe or restrictive than those comparable and reasonable in the commercial wine grape farming and winery regulations of the alcohol industry model.
(e) State, local, elected, appointed, hired employees, officers, and officials shall not directly or indirectly cooperate with or assist federal, state, local officers or officials, volunteers, or employees who eradicate marijuana, act for seizure or forfeiture, or to defeat any liberally construed purpose of this Act, nor may any state or local agency contract to eradicate marijuana that is being grown, manufactured or stored under the provisions of this Act.
(f) Within 30 days of passage of this Act, the offices of both the state Attorney General and the Department of Public Health shall inform the United States Department of Health and Human Services, the United States Attorney General, Congress, Drug Enforcement Agency, and Food and Drug Administration that in 1996 the state of California recognized the current medical use of marijuana in treatment in the United States, and since 1996 has approved a state-regulated physician medical marijuana practice. Physicians have recommended the use of marijuana to thousands of patients. For that reason diligently demand or petition as is appropriate (see 21 CFR 1308.43, 21 USC 811-812) that marijuana and tetrahydrocannabinols as defined in §21 USC 802(16) be removed from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, 21 USC 800 et seq., where it is currently listed as an addictive drug with no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
(g) The State of California is ordered to protect and defend all provisions of this Act from any and all challenges or litigation, whether by persons, officials, cities, counties, the state or federal governments.
(h) This Act prohibits all commercial advertising for sales, distribution, and use of marijuana, except for medical marijuana and products that contain less than a final THC level below 0.3 percent. This provision shall be enforced hereafter by penalties to be set forth by the Legislature.
(i) This Act shall become effective immediately upon passage.
Section 3. Severability
If any of the provisions of this Act, or any part thereof, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining provisions shall not be affected, but shall remain in full force and effect, and to this end the provisions of this Act are severable.
Visit for more information on the initiative and how you can help circulate petitions.
Another illegal pot shop run by the pusher man was shut down a few blocks from me.
It was a criminal enterprise run by a criminal.
“The Regulate Marijuana Like Wine Act 2012”
What a waste of air.
Amy Winehouse died of alcohol poisoning. That was the official autopsy. She would have been far better off smoking grass, and maybe someday getting help for her mental or emotional disturbance that caused her to feel a compunction to drown her pain. Marijuana is like wine, which was one of her choices often. You can get a heady buzz or sickly drunk. It’s hard to kill yourself with wine. That would require several bottles. She used hard stuff during the binge that killed her. Pot on the other hand doesn’t kill. She could have smoked herself into a comatose state but she’d come out of it and live to see another day… and have another chance to get help.
“It was a criminal enterprise run by a criminal”
Then what do you consider the “leaders” in the banking and financial services industry and their amen corner supporters in Washington (Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Gary Miller, et al.) that led us into this economic quagmire and begged for taxpayer monies to bail them out? Angelic saints?
Guy “what do you consider the “leaders” in the banking and financial services industry”
My opinion is they are crooks too, and if I could kick their asses I would.
And yet, by and large, the banking criminals escape accountability, don’t they?
Ohhh, but people pushing pot get held to account, don’t they?
Welcome to America’s two-tiered justice system…frequent lack of accountability for political and corporate elites, but the hammer will come down on a pot smoker.
But you consider smoking reefer a bigger crime than monetary fraud, right? What part of smoking or consuming cannabis justifies making it a crime? And don’t give me the claptrap that it is a Schedule I drug according to the Controlled Substances Act?
Guy and anon,
The guy the cops busted was a pusher man, a LA cop who was fired for being a bad penny.
nobody borthering the joint smoker, just the pusher man, BIG diff.
So by making cannabis illegal, you encourage this kind of underground activity to occur. How often do people like this check ID of their customers? Not as often as Hamid at Old World Liquor located at the Northwood Town Center in the City of the Beige (aka Irvine to the rest of you).
So what part of using cannabis is criminal, cook? Evading the question or is mixing your prescription meds with your liquor preventing you from formulating a coherent and competent answer?
Nobody bother pot smokers? What are you talking about? People get arrested all the time for possession of small amounts of pot.
I’m not saying possessing pot isn’t illegal. I’m saying that there’s one system of justice for that, and another, far less accountable system of justice, for political and corporate elites.
Looks good at first blush, but: how much money is behind the petition drive? It’s usually supposed to take something like $1 million to qualify with paid gatherers.
For this reason I am toying with an idea to organize “The Recall Coalition” which would consist of anyone who would like to unconditionally recall elected official without a cause based on the membership duty.
The purpose would be to have a sufficient power to keep politicians in line with their promises as true representative and not a runaway demagog.
Membership would be non partisan with unconditional duty to sign recall petition.
After that a member may vote same person in or do what ever he politically wants.
Such RECALL COALITION would have more power than any OCCUPATION one can imagine.
I’m not getting paid to solicit signatures and I can give you a list of names that are out there with similar petitions who are not getting paid. In fact, you have the power to gather them yourself simply by visiting the web site and putting your name on the e-mail list. That way, you can print and download your own petition form. In accordance with state law, the signer has the right to ask if the petition gatherer is getting paid by the line or not. In my case, it’s been my pet project for 24 years and frankly I don’t want any money for these efforts. (FYI I’m doing fine, financially) I’m sure Big Alcohol and Big Pharma are going to put their monies into defeating this effort. We can counteract that money with some of our own big monied donors, like that gravely voice, bearded owner of The Mens’ Wearhouse George Zimmer, the Facebook guys and Woody Harrelson. How much money is behind it? Quite a bit from what I understand, but I’m not getting paid.
Of course, the powers that be within your political party will bring in the likes of Aspergillus Alexandra to speak on the “horrors” of cannabis legalization in order to justify the continued taxpayer financing of our Drug War interdiction efforts in places like Latin America, Mexico and Afghanistan. Efforts that cost billions of dollars annually and that both of our US Senators support, even though it is well known that Sen. Boxer has quite the number of staffers that like to celebrate 420. So does Dana Rohrbacher and his staffers on the down low from what I know. Just visit his OC office if you want the 411 on some real good, high THC product.
Don’t believe me about the DPOC and Aspergillus Alexandra? It happened in 2010 when Melissa Fox’s husband, Michael, and Gus Ayer tried to introduce a resolution to support Prop 19 and marijuana legalization. Guess what? Despite the overdramatic antics of the former employee of Heidi Fleiss, the DPOC approved the resolution to support Prop 19. As far as the statewide party goes, they turned into yellow bellies at the mere mention of ****whispered tone***** “cannabis” Hell, since you are such a dedicated Democrat that lives in Orange County you should have known about that if you were at that convention, hootenanny or whatever fancy name you call your get togethers. I’m not even a Democrat and I knew about this.
Yeah, Greg, that was before I knew you but not that long ago – it was last year! While folks like me, Gus, Mike Fox, and the Young Dems were trying to get the DPOC to endorse Prop 19. The NO people – no, I guess there were actually no NO people, they were abstain people – an old guy called John Smith was their most outspoken advocate as I remember – they brought in an UTTERLY CRAZY BITCH who gave a Reefer Madness presentation, a lot of us were laughing at her. This is the person GF is describing. I’m trying to remember how her story went, something like the first time she puffed on a joint she got raped, and it was all downhill from there.
And as a result of her rape, she went to work for Heidi Fleiss and made millions of dollars and tried to exploit her story into a made for Lifetime TV movie that never aired.
It’s too lucrative for the law enforcement unions to make pot legal. They get block grants, and are free to bust down doors with impunity, and the asset forfeiture laws keep their toys and play lounges at the station spiffy.
While the state Democratic party took no position on Prop 19 last year, the Democratic Party of Orange County approved a resolution favoring it by what I recall to be a large margin. So we’re not your problem.
John Smith (the CDP’s regional director for Region 16, same as Steve Young for Region 18) and I agree on some issues (good government, unions) and disagree on others. This is one of the “disagree” ones. Again, his side lost last year, despite that presentation — and that bears note.
Re-read the last part of your comment; I’m not sure why you think from my comment that you didn’t know about this.
Re-read the first part of your comment also: my concern is not whether you are getting paid personally (good on you for volunteering) but whether the campaign as a whole has the people-power to make it happen. On rare occasions this works through volunteers (and this could be one); more often, to find out if a petition drive will succeed, ask how much money is behind it.
Don’t underestimate our people power. The cannabis movement, a movement I have been involved with longer than most people in your political party (with the exception of members of the Cannabis Peace Corps like the Fitts and John Grace) has always been underestimated by so called political insiders. When we exceed their expectations, they become real dumbfounded.
I thrive on the anti-establishment vibe of the cannabis legalization movement. Some people talk about being anti-establishment but choose to hang around the fort. Most of the cannabis legalization activists I know live and breathe their message. Unlike some of the poseurs in the Democratic and Republican parties who claim they support us “in secret.” Like that moron Ron what his name who hangs around the Occupy tent city but supports the establishment. Or a closet stoner like Dana Rohrbacher.
I wish that the movement were as politically powerful as you say it is. I’ve been pro-legalization (and an occasional activist in this effort) for about 35 years. Much of that time, legalization has been just around the corner in the eyes of advocates.
Yeah, yeah, you thrive on being anti-establishment. If you want to be anti-establishment, I think it’s best to do so where they can see the whites of your eyes. I thrive on making change happen, not just rattling swords.
Why not regulate it similar to alcohol?
The whole idea of it being taboo just adds to the allure.
Plus who is going to buy shady stuff from Pooky or Brad when they can go to a nice clean store and buy stuff that is probably not laced with who knows what.
You do realize that this is what is being proposed, right?
Just what we don’t need – more government employees to regulate marijuana, especially as they’ve made a mess of the current laws on marijuana – this will lead to a system with rampant corruption – but maybe that’s what the politicians want to keep campaign contributions coming. Then instead of just the human devastation caused by alcohol we can add that of marijuana – the libertarian way to nirvana.
That’s some major drivel there, Larry. Are you saying marijuana should not be legal and reasonably regulated? Why? Aren’t we as adults capable of using the product if we see fit to do so, as we would in having a martini?
I know of no “human devastation” caused by marijuana — that’s the law enforcement lobby talking there. If there is any financial interest in keeping marijuana illegal it’s the cops, prison industry, and the myriad of programs based on anti drug hysteria.
Just today, it was announced that Amy Winehouse died of…wait just a second because Larry Morrisey and some of the geriatrics like Larry Gilbert and Mike Tardif are gonna piss and shit in their Depends when I utter this term…”alcohol poisoning.” That’s right, a legal drug that you can buy over the counter at any supermarket, CVS, Rite Aid, 99 Cent Store or liquor store.
Raps, there have been ZERO overdose deaths from cannabis use. The only “harm” I recall from cannabis use is that you may raid a fridge, your kid’s Halloween candy stash or simply take a nap. Real ” human devastation” there. But I suppose Larry Morrissey would prefer the other type of human devestation that has been the end result of our Federal government’s War on Drugs. Devestation such as:
1) 30,000 deaths of men, women and children in Mexico at the hand of their drug cartels.
2) A creation of a permanent underclass in US inner city neighborhoods
3) A disparate incarceration rate of ethnic minorities convicted of non-violent drug offenses when in fact white use more of these drugs than the ethnic minorities who get locked up and are used for cheap labor.
4) Devestating effects to our environment as a result of these drug cartels’ actions
5) Continued government harassment of persons who use medical cannabis to treat their ailments as opposed to the poisons that Big Pharma tries to peddle to our clinics and doctors.
But since these victims are not of your skin hue, they are just “collateral damage.” Right, Larry?
I consider marijuana legalization to be one of the most important things that we can do — largely because of the taxation benefits, the blow to drug cartels, the undercutting of government credibility, and the undoing of the horrific and disproportionate effect that the drug war has had on minority and poor communities — but I have to disagree with something you’ve said that strikes me as a canard.
I think that many fewer people have died from cannabis intoxication than from alcohol intoxication, but the notion that (the virtual impossibility of overdoses aside) cannabis use is COMPLETELY without harm strikes me as bullshit — and an unnecessarily overreaching claim. I think that it’s dangers are comparable to something like Xanax — avoid operating heavy machinery, including cars.
I’m confident that pot smoking has led to car some crashes — ditto for eating fast food while driving — although having occasionally driven under the influence of both alcohol and marijuana at various times in my misspent youth, I would much rather be surrounded on roadways by slow and paranoid dope smokers than bleary and weaving drinkers.
You think fewer people have died from cannabis intoxication? Produce some hard numbers for me or some facts for your inane assumption. No wait a minute, try this number on for size. ZERO (0) people have died from cannabis overdose. Even the Office for National Drug Control Policy admits this fact despite the fact that they still call cannabis a Schedule I Drug.
Believe me, I have tried it many times and the result is that I either end up taking a nap or calling New York Pizzeria on Yale and Trabuco for delivery.
I suppose if you “hang around the fort” with the Drug Warriors like Feinstein, Brown, Boxer, Biden and Obama long enough, you’ll believe the lies that they and their Republican counterparts have been peddling to the American public for years to justify continuing the War on Drugs.
Right — zero people have died from cannabis overdose. Read my comment and try to see where I ever said otherwise. Let me know if you find anything.
That is different from saying that no one has ever dies from cannabis intoxication, particularly if it involves, say, operating heavy machinery at a high rate of speed. Overdose and intoxication are different things, got it?
The rest of your insulting rant is therefore irrelevant. I’m glad that you enjoyed your pizzas and your naps. Now start reading more carefully.
“many fewer people have died from cannabis intoxication.”
You were the one that made the claim. Now prove it.
Be very careful, rookie blogger. On this issue, you are wading into a subject matter where you will get eaten alive. I suppose if you hang around enough Drug Warriors like Feinstein, Biden and Aspergillus Alexandra, you will end up believing their lies.
Wasn’t it your Democratic Party that unleashed the likes of Harry J. Anslinger on us? If memory serves me correct, he was an appointee of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Your party has no claim on the moral high ground on this issue. You have the same amount of blood on your hands as your Republican counterparts when it comes to waging war on the American people. Which is what this War on Drugs has become. And don’t be like that moronic poseur Ron V and make the excuse that “the Republicans are worse.” To which I reply, did I ever say that I was a Republican? Ask Spanky. He’ll verify that fact that I am not a Republican.
By the way, where is Obama’s secret plan to end the War on Drugs? Oh wait, it exists in the same realm as Nixon’s “secret plan” to end the War in Vietnam! Or is it the same realm as the California Democratic Party commitment to end the War on Drugs or the California Republican Party’s commitment to support marriage equality? Where is that resolution on your state party’s platform? Hell, I have a better chance for finding fucking Waldo in your party’s platform than finding any language that supports drug policy reform like the Green, Libertarian and Peace and Freedom parties’ platforms.
Keep hanging around the fort like your wannabe Democratic Party poseur “radical” Ron V. Your myopic support for a party that treats your ideas like toilet paper when they get ushered into power is fucking laughable. It’s like being with an unfaithful spouse who tells you “this time it will be different” and then turns around and fucks the brains out of your best friend or their secret lover for the umpteenth time. But perhaps that’s the way you and some of your fellow Democrats like to roll. (Believe me, I know plenty of delusional Republicans like that too) Aspiring to always be like the jilted lover or disposable partner must be a deep down secret fetish. Or maybe you don’t know any better because you have this inherent need to feel accepted by those who really don’t give a shit about you and your concerns (a la the Northwood Night Stalker). It is a real sick way to live but it’s your life.
Let’s go back to my comment, before you squirted all that ink into the water:
We both apparently agree that no one has died of cannabis overdose.
We both apparently agree that fewer people have died from cannabis intoxication — “zero,” if that’s your estmated number, is “fewer” — than from alcohol intoxication, which we know kills a lot of people each year in drunk driving accidents and the like.
So given that — you insult me and go on a rant against the Democratic Party.
What I know of Ron, from his work in the Occupy movment is good; I have no idea of his stand on cannabis. A lot of Democrats take what strikes me a chickenshit positions. But, as with the vote at the DPOC endorsing Prop 19, many of us there are pushing for better. I don’t think that the Republicans can say the same. And I don’t think that any other social force — Libertarian, libertarian, or otherwise — is going to bring about the change in a deeply entrenched two-party system.
But then I realize that trying to engage you at all, not challenging a canard about the effects of smoking pot, is the actual “rookie mistake.” You’re not arguing in good faith and you’re willing to yell and distract as much as you to disguise that. So, thanks for your time.
You don’t think any social force is going to bring about change? If you keep hanging around the fort and hoping to make friends with everyone in your inner circle by appeasing them (which you and Ron love to do), then you are right nothing is going to change. If you keep that self defeatist mindset that there is nothing you can do because something is “deeply entrenched,” then yes NOTHING is going to change. If you are afraid of hurting people’s feelings and mince words instead of being brutally honest, then yes NOTHING is going to change. This is why the cannabis movement has been gaining momentum. Because the activists that I keep company with know damn well that having a self defeatist mindset, hanging around the fort and being wishy washy with our honesty does not help bring about CHANGE. It doesn’t take a Juris Doctorate degree to figure that out.
The Democratic Party deserves all of the ridicule that it has coming to them as a party that says one thing and does something else because they are a bunch of chickenshits. Which is why nothing changes when them or the Elephants take control. Did the words Harry J. Anslinger strike a raw nerve with you? Good, I hope it did because the truth hurts, doesn’t it Esq. Encino? And before you go into your knee jerk reaction that “Republicans are worse,” let me remind you once again that I am not a Republican (ask Geoff Willis, because I piss him off on this blog as much as I do you).
By the way, why was this language in Prop 19?
And how do you imagine that that differs from my own position?
I always thought the tobacco and alcohol industries were the main funders of anti-pot hysteria. Why can’t they all just get along? Like all us smokers drinkers and stoners do…
And the pharmaceutical industry opposes marijuana legalization as well. Unlike crap like Paxil and Viagra, you can not patent a plant. Same goes for Monsanto who will oppose this initiative because of the provision prohibiting the sale and manufacture of genetically modified hemp and cannabis seed in California.
Guy, Monsanto is the LARGEST PRODUCER OF OPIUM in the world.
It was thier genetics that recently introduced the “opium” free poppy to Afganistan in order to topple the Taliban.
Monsanto likely has the best strains of dope any where but Iowa, which by the way produces highly potent strains.
This is perhaps the most under reported issue in the election there too.
But these are the folks that ignored Edwards mistress so……….
do you read what you write?
“there have been ZERO overdose deaths from cannabis use. The only “harm” I recall from cannabis use is that you may raid a fridge, your kid’s Halloween candy stash or simply take a nap. Real ” human devastation” there” Guy Fawkes
“1) 30,000 deaths of men, women and children in Mexico at the hand of their drug cartels. ” Guy Fawkes
So what is it? no harm or 30,000 deaths?
Are you addled, Cook? There was no contradictions at all in what GF wrote.
Those 30,000 deaths are due to the drug being illegal (thanks to fogeys like you) NOT due to the drug itself.
The usual liberal response – take the easy way out and eliminate the law as a way to reduce crime instead of improving enforcement. Only this time you want to give those who can’t even do a good job of enforcing the current laws a much more complex set of laws. We’ll spend a fortune on inspectors, etc and only take in a few dimes as everyone will just throw some seeds in their backyard.
Too bad we aren’t so compassionate about what happens in Mexico when it comes to immigration.
This comment is still based on the premise that cannabis SHOULD be illegal. I sure don’t see why it should be.
Do you also think alcohol should still be illegal? That would put you in a tiny minority, for sure.
Currently you can grow it and smoke it and the cops will not bother you.
But if you turn to commercial retail business, to be the pusher man, then you will have a problem.
So Vern, is your problem with the personal choice of personal use,
Or
you think the criminals should be left alone to kill Mexicans by the thousands to protect their profit share of the drug trades?
That’s not the same as it being legal. When it’s legal, you would be able to buy it at Costco and Trader Joe’s. And it could be taxed up the ying-yang and still be cheaper (and more likely to be pure) than it is now.
Marijuana laws just push people towards meth. That’s massively dumb.
Towards meth?????
That’s Nancy Reagan talk, Greg.
I think he means laws AGAINST marijuana. They put people in a situation where they’re already doing something illegal, so they think “why not try something else illegal?” They cause folks to go to a pusher, and the pusher says, “hey, try some of this too!” They cause young people (like we did in the 60’s) to say – hey, THIS stuff is harmless, the law and our parents are probably lying about the other stuff being harmful as well!”
This, to me, is the real meaning of “gateway drug.” It would disappear when legalized.
Making pot illegal both drives people towards other alternatives — as if meth is really an “alternative,” but people want to play with their brains so in that sense it is — and, as Vern notes, undermines the legitimate public health argument to be made that some drugs (like meth) really are bad for you. For both reasons, it’s massively dumb.
Cook, therein lies the struggle.
Not everyone who wishes has the facilities (in so many senses) to grow good weed. It takes space, time, extreme care, just like if you enjoy Lamb Chops, raising the perfect calf (Vern, can you check that for us, is young male lamb consider a calf?) .
So there must be some Co-opertive method to distribute the herb.
I am not ignorant to Mike tardiff’s complaints about dispenseraries, although in his case I beleive them to be artifical, flat out false and an old white man afraid of “those kids smoking Mary Jane”. especially, in our city, where so many of the patrons are brown.
So to my point, is we need to try and tamp down the commerce to the point where it becomes organic and we are not visiting a RJR subsidary for our grams of GOO.
On the subject, The San Diego Business Jounal, measures economic statistics, one factor is measuring industries renting space. The Marijuana industry was far and above (by ten fold) the largest lease signers. So much so that the La Jolla investment crowd (read doctors) are investing.
Of course this all at risk given the Obama Administrations recent actions. Now that is a JOB KILLER (and a Buzz Kill).
That was so long, I feel like Greg Diamond!
Sobriety becomes you, Mr. Notdead.
Hey, where’s our Caesar salad?
KLIND: piker! (Good points, though.)
Cook,
You’re right. There’s so much money in it and the current laws on medical use are just being ignored (I smell payoff), which leads me to think that the new set of laws are just a front for pushers.
My premise for all drugs is: responsible use (based on common sense and not lawyered opinions)
You’re all distracted by the first half of Cook’s comment. It’s the end that shows that he just stubbornly doesn’t get it:
you think the criminals should be left alone to kill Mexicans by the thousands to protect their profit share of the drug trades?
One last time – if it were legal, there would not be CRIMINALS dealing it, fighting over turf, and killing thousands of Mexicans? How much clearer can we make that?
If you regulate & tax marijuana in CA like the wine industry, then marijuana from Mexico will be much cheaper and you’ll still have the fighting & killing in Mexico over market share.
The very basis for making marijuana illegal was faulty and it (pot) doesn’t come close to meeting the definition of a scheduled controlled substance. I also favor its legalization because it lessens the role government plays in our personal lives.
Having said that, this petition, though well intentioned, cannot withstand legal scrutiny. Until action is taken on the federal level, the constitutional concept of preemption will continue to make state action meaningless. The only benefit to a petition like this is for the PR and public awareness value – which may make it worth it.
If it was legal, crime would go away.
Can it really be that easy?
Eliminate crimes just by repealing the laws?
Are there any laws worth keeping? Or should sociality be a free for all?
I can see the saving, no cops, lawyers, courts, jails, and not stop signs, street signals, speed limits.
Wall Street and the banks would be gone, who would save money in a bank?
Would not have to worry about the 99 percent or the 1 percent anymore, as there would not be private property anymore, only what you can hold in your own 2 hands.
One question, since booze is legal, why hasn’t the booze related crimes gone away?
No, it’s not that easy at all — except for some victimless crimes like cannabis use.
I would say “nice straw man argument,” but it doesn’t quite get even that far.
What about that major league pitcher who was killed by the booze driver?
“victimless crimes like cannabis use” But Vern said 30 thousand Mexicans die in Mexico because of weed.
And if you did not know in California, your weed was decimalized by the prior governor. And I don’t think the new one X’ed out that decree.
I am still watching for the massive drop in crime and the massive drop in price that was promised by the pro-dopers.
It is my opinion that marijuana is the number one drug of child molesters and rapist, and if it is made “legal” then there will be a marked increase of those crimes. Well may its number two behind booze, and we all know that legal booze is another victimless crime.
No cook, 30,000 have died at the hands of the cartels in Mexico because the product (weed) is illegal and its trade has been moved to the underground market. Do you read what you write? Here’s a better question. Do you know how to read?
Vern may have said you are addled. I’m going to steal a line from one of the more outspoken and over the top commentators on this blog. (Please do not sue me)
Cook. You are a moron mongoloid!
How many alcohol related deaths occur each year?
100,000 deaths. That’s more than a statistic.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_alcohol_related_deaths_occur_each_year
Alcohol abuse kills some 75,000 Americans each year and shortens the lives of these people by an average of 30 years, a U.S. government study suggested Thursday.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6089353/ns/health-addictions/t/alcohol-linked-us-deaths-year/
……………………….
Why the alcohol links? Because you are saying that regulating marijuana like alcohol would decrease deaths because no one dies of legal drug use. That is not true. Legal alcohol and cigarettes claims many lives.
Here in California, the personal use of marijuana has been decimalized, it is only the retail pusher who knowingly breaks the law who is shut down.
…………………………………….
How many weed related deaths are there each year?
Answer:
Some people argue that there has been no recorded deaths from using pot, but this is 100% not true. To say no one dies from pot and then say millions die from smoking, is completely ignorant and hypocritical.
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_weed_related_deaths_are_there_each_year
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger Just Decriminalized Marijuana in California
Can’t find anything on governor Brown cancelling Arnold decree, so I guess marijuana is legal in California.
Let me make a suggestion, stop smoking your pot for a couple weeks and air out, get clear headed then check the facts.
I don’t care if you want to smoke pot all day long and vegetate, enjoy. Lucky for mankind its reported to lower sperm counts so the chances of you reproducing is greatly lowered. And that is good news.
“marijuana is the number one drug of child molesters and rapist(s)”
Where did you come up with that assumption Even Fox News knows better than to publish crap like you are spewing.
Ok you got me, I can not find any statistics to back up my statement about child molesters and rapist using pot in their crimes.
But I can find hundreds of real life crime cases that would show drug use was a part of the criminal acts. I have included just one below, maybe you heard of this case about the sheriff son and his friends.
—————–
the online journal of criminology
The night of the (alleged) rape, she drank some beer, smoked some dope and then willingly gulped more than five shots of 80-proof liquor. She did not, however, willingly take the possible “spike” of a powerful prescription sedative later found in the Haidl house
——————-
Daily Pilot
“Men who are convicted of preying on women who are too intoxicated to say ‘no’ are sexual predators. The public has the right to know who they are, where the live, and what they did,” said Orange County district attorney’s office Chief of Staff Susan Schroeder. “Again, they want to be treated different than other similarly situated defendants. This is one of the reasons why they are dangerous.”
———————
What about him?
They don’t die because of weed, they die because of violence involving its sale. If they were dying of violence over sale of horses you wouldn’t want to outlaw horses, would you?
I’m going to presume that you mean “decriminalized.” That’s not what leads to the big drop in price — legalization does.
By the way, since you’re watching: what was the price before and what is it now? In other words, how do you know that the price hasn’t dropped?
Your opinion would be more respectable if you had any evidence at all that it is the “number one drug of child molesters and rapists.” Seriously, where do you get this? If it’s from nowhere, don’t you feel even the tiniest bit ashamed?
Drunk driving is not a victimless crime. I’m glad to clear that up for you.
The price at the one of dispensaries in junior’s neighborhood had an 1/8 going for $45 to $55 last week depending upon the strain. (Yes, this “dirtbag” sometimes goes to Santa Ana) Street value would probably be 10 times that amount and the quality not so good.
This plan is awful.
RMLW is far worse than prop 19 with a lot more deception.
Check into the “harm reduction officers” section aka “narc squad”
Kubby is a fraud.
RMLW will actually:
from version 1
1. redefine medical marijuana as having less than 1% THC.
2. Allow the production of GMO cannabis with a knock-out gene to prevent the plants from producing THC.
3. still not legalize any non-medical use
4. appply taxes, regulations and controls to medical marijuana, thus making even medical marijuana more expensive and less available.
from version 2 aka “narc squad clause”
in essence:
1. citizens cannabis plants contained any genetic material from GMO cannabis (so monsato or whoever could then sue for theft of patented material, like Monsanto did to that canadian farmer over his rapeseed crop. Since cannabis is wind pollinated, after a few years peoples own plants could have been seeded with GMO pollen), and
2. if the plants were producing 1% or more THC which would be illegal under RMLW.
Version 3 is just version 1 minus the narc squad
Now there is version 4
I’m not going to bother going into details about version 4 and why these people can’t be trusted. But consider this from version 4
1. read it for yourselves goto the atty generals website and look under the old name for the new text.
2. when you read it, please note that it provides a $2,500.00 fine for minors in possession of marijuana, to which, under the court system, significant assessment penalties will also be added.
The “narc squad”/harm reduction officer provision has been removed. You might want to read the final draft.
Did you miss this part of my post?
Version 3 is just version 1 minus the narc squad
I have read it & this is not the answer. GMO? Really?