The Ruiners' Hypothetical Questions to 19 Supporters

[Greather420]

It almost seems to me that people NOT living in California have a better grasp on the whole issue, because they don't have ANY personal interest in the outcome. None of their rights are going to be affected, for better or worse, if 19 passes in California. I have been following and even participating in your threads about this issue, Ruiner, and I respect your opinion and even applaud you for raising the questions you have raised. I am an avid supporter of prop 19, but I agree with some of the issues you have. That is, I did agree, until I started reading the responses some people have had to your questions. Non-local, unbiased people who have read the prop and all the sections listed. I AM A RESIDENT AND MEDICAL PATIENT IN CALIFORNIA AND I HAVEN'T EVEN READ THAT MUCH INTO IT! Now that certain sections have been quoted on this thread I am more convinced than ever that I am making the right decision by voting yes. I would be more inclined to side with the NO vote if someone who supported that argument could actually show me where it says prop 215 cardholders would be penalized under this new legislation....I can only assume that since no evidence has been shown, it doesn't exist.
Since a lot of your argument is based on speculation of how things MIGHT be if 19 passes, here is my speculation on what MIGHT happen if 19 DOESN'T pass....
All the opposers of prop 19 (namely, the CA Police, Highway Patrol, and DEA) will have won a MAJOR victory against the legalization of Marijuana. Instead of new measures being taken to amend the situation (i.e. new bills being passed, etc.), the war AGAINST MJ will be strengthened. After almost facing the loss of control over marijuana, the fight against collectives and MMJ patients will be increased, and we, as patients, will find it harder to practice the freedoms we are supposed to be allowed. If you think that is a load of crap, just take a look at the number of collectives in the Los Angeles area (and I'm sure other areas as well) now compared to a year ago. They have been finding ways to regulate and close many collectives even with the laws of 215 in place. What's to stop them from finding more ways to close them if 19 doesn't pass?
My point in this whole thing is this....How can we ever imagine a future where NONE of this will matter if we, as smokers and growers and sellers and so on, stop things from moving forward? If you are saying you are completely content with things the way they are, and you HONESTLY believe your current rights will never be in question, then by all means, vote NO. But for those of us who want to see progression in this state (and others to surely follow), the YES vote is the only way for that to happen.

Just a side note, but I found this article online and I thought it was VERY interesting. It addresses a lot of the issues that have been brought up here, so give it a read if you are interested.
http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/content/2010/07/20/California-s-Prop-19-Word-Word-Analysis

 

[Greather420]

One question I forgot to ask....I can see where prop 19 says our rights as 215 patients won't be affected....can anyone show me where it promises the same if 19 DOESN'T pass?

 

[Hayduke]

Where the tinfoil hats at?
No matter what, your gona beable to buy fuckin weed. YOUR the one being selfish. Oh no! i cant grow in more than a 25sq foot area, my life will be over! Dude get real. The bill DOES say it has no affect on prop 215, why do you continue to ignore this? And even if it does affect 215, its still not harming you because you can still go out and buy weed! it just wont be as cheap as growing it, but your not gona die!

I am a bit conflicted Johnny...Your Avatar suggests you are kind...but your words...

Besides making me a felon and 1000's of adults criminals (some legalization!) prop 19 gives local municipalities regulation control...and the right to not allow stores to sell this Midwestern wet pipe dream...

What people who are not in Cali do not get...Local municipalities are actively fighting MMJ dispensaries and collectives (not in pot friendly Alameda and SF counties).

The one dispensary in Ramona (rural SD county) recently had to use an attorney to counter a cease and desist order from the city.

In North County San Diego (large area) there is a collective that has been restricted, and cannot accept new members, and a nice dispensary...in an industrial park...the neighbors complained to the City...the City had the dispensary in court last week and will find out soon if they can continue to operate.

Remember 215 is supposed to provide and protect safe access.

People who think that once the city can regulate pot stores, that they will welcome them with open arms is freaking high...like suddenly in 24 days...the sun will rise on a pot friendly San Diego!!!!

 

[UncleBuck]

... prop 19 gives local municipalities regulation control...and the right to not allow stores to sell this Midwestern wet pipe dream...

What people who are not in Cali do not get...Local municipalities are actively fighting MMJ dispensaries and collectives (not in pot friendly Alameda and SF counties).

The one dispensary in Ramona (rural SD county) recently had to use an attorney to counter a cease and desist order from the city.

In North County San Diego (large area) there is a collective that has been restricted, and cannot accept new members, and a nice dispensary...in an industrial park...the neighbors complained to the City...the City had the dispensary in court last week and will find out soon if they can continue to operate.

Remember 215 is supposed to provide and protect safe access.

People who think that once the city can regulate pot stores, that they will welcome them with open arms is freaking high...like suddenly in 24 days...the sun will rise on a pot friendly San Diego!!!!

you raise a good point, and i will agree with you that prop 19 does give a lot of power to local municipalities to allow lesser or higher limits and other things of the like.

i imagine in places like the emerald triangle, where the economy is frankly dependent upon pot, municipalities will do what they can to strengthen their local economies by loosening limits. whereas in places like north san diego, where affluence rules and the economy would not crash if pot went away, things might not be as loose as they are up north.

all that is my pure speculation.

i don't think mendocino or trinity or humboldt and the local towns and municipalities therein will want to shoot themselves in the foot with excessive restrictions and regulations. just my thoughts...

 

[Hayduke]

One question I forgot to ask....I can see where prop 19 says our rights as 215 patients won't be affected....can anyone show me where it promises the same if 19 DOESN'T pass?

There are few guarantees in life. If 19 does not pass...215 could still be affected...IF another voter initiative gets enough signatures to be put on a ballot...then the people could vote to repeal or amend 215...Just like they could for 19..."Marijuana is now illegal in all forms...notwithstanding any other law"

Unfortunately the legal ease will be interpreted by less than pot friendly Judges and DA's

Here is a thought...After prop 19 passes in November suddenly making simple possession a jail able offense for a 20 year old...will the Governators Decrimialization starting Jan 2011 trump the vote of the people???? The overturning of SB420 would suggest not.

Legalization my ass

 

[The Ruiner]

It almost seems to me that people NOT living in California have a better grasp on the whole issue, because they don't have ANY personal interest in the outcome. None of their rights are going to be affected, for better or worse, if 19 passes in California. I have been following and even participating in your threads about this issue, Ruiner, and I respect your opinion and even applaud you for raising the questions you have raised. I am an avid supporter of prop 19, but I agree with some of the issues you have. That is, I did agree, until I started reading the responses some people have had to your questions. Non-local, unbiased people who have read the prop and all the sections listed. I AM A RESIDENT AND MEDICAL PATIENT IN CALIFORNIA AND I HAVEN'T EVEN READ THAT MUCH INTO IT! Now that certain sections have been quoted on this thread I am more convinced than ever that I am making the right decision by voting yes. I would be more inclined to side with the NO vote if someone who supported that argument could actually show me where it says prop 215 cardholders would be penalized under this new legislation....I can only assume that since no evidence has been shown, it doesn't exist.
Since a lot of your argument is based on speculation of how things MIGHT be if 19 passes, here is my speculation on what MIGHT happen if 19 DOESN'T pass....
All the opposers of prop 19 (namely, the CA Police, Highway Patrol, and DEA) will have won a MAJOR victory against the legalization of Marijuana. Instead of new measures being taken to amend the situation (i.e. new bills being passed, etc.), the war AGAINST MJ will be strengthened. After almost facing the loss of control over marijuana, the fight against collectives and MMJ patients will be increased, and we, as patients, will find it harder to practice the freedoms we are supposed to be allowed. If you think that is a load of crap, just take a look at the number of collectives in the Los Angeles area (and I'm sure other areas as well) now compared to a year ago. They have been finding ways to regulate and close many collectives even with the laws of 215 in place. What's to stop them from finding more ways to close them if 19 doesn't pass?
My point in this whole thing is this....How can we ever imagine a future where NONE of this will matter if we, as smokers and growers and sellers and so on, stop things from moving forward? If you are saying you are completely content with things the way they are, and you HONESTLY believe your current rights will never be in question, then by all means, vote NO. But for those of us who want to see progression in this state (and others to surely follow), the YES vote is the only way for that to happen.

Just a side note, but I found this article online and I thought it was VERY interesting. It addresses a lot of the issues that have been brought up here, so give it a read if you are interested.
http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/content/2010/07/20/California-s-Prop-19-Word-Word-Analysis

dude...go ahead and vote as you see fit. I think that maybe you should go talk to people in dispensaries. Just humor me.

Do you really think that 4/5 people that wrote 215 would fail to endorse 19 for no reason? and that 3/5 of them are strongly opposed to it (the 4th is concerned about what role 19 will play with MMJ)? Do you really think that only high times and norml are the only ones qualified to examine this bill? Are you really going to ignore that where it counts, (sections 2C(2)) 19 forgets to mention the CUA? None of that means anything to you?

 

[NirvAnamation]

I'm the majority. I want to be able to grow a few plants and smoke my bud, free of being arrested.

I'm sorry your dealing business is going to die, but try getting a job in a legal bud farm or something.

 

[UncleBuck]

There are few guarantees in life. If 19 does not pass...215 could still be affected...IF another voter initiative gets enough signatures to be put on a ballot...then the people could vote to repeal or amend 215...Just like they could for 19..."Marijuana is now illegal in all forms...notwithstanding any other law"

Unfortunately the legal ease will be interpreted by less than pot friendly Judges and DA's

Here is a thought...After prop 19 passes in November suddenly making simple possession a jail able offense for a 20 year old...will the Governators Decrimialization starting Jan 2011 trump the vote of the people???? The overturning of SB420 would suggest not.

Legalization my ass

boy dude, you sure managed a lot of fail in this one post.

if prop 19 passes, 215 WILL NOT BE effected. see purposes section, points 7 and 8.

and the legalese will be interpreted, true, but the way judges and DA's must interpret it is in accordance with the purposes section. and in case you are wondering what the purposes section says, see point 6.

and a 20 year old busted for simple possession is NOT a jailable offense, it is a civil infraction with a $100 fine.

being able to cultivate and possess marijuana? that IS legalization.

6. Provide easier, safer access for patients who need cannabis for medical purposes.


7. Ensure that if a city decides not to tax and regulate the sale of cannabis, that buying and selling cannabis within that city’s limits remain illegal, but that the city’s citizens still have the right to possess and consume small amounts, except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.


8. Ensure that if a city decides it does want to tax and regulate the buying and selling of cannabis (to and from adults only), that a strictly controlled legal system is implemented to oversee and regulate cultivation, distribution, and sales, and that the city will have control over how and how much cannabis can be bought and sold, except as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.

 

[UncleBuck]

Are you really going to ignore that where it counts, (sections 2C(2)) 19 forgets to mention the CUA? None of that means anything to you?

yet oddly, you choose to ignore the purposes section, points 7 and 8.

 

[Hayduke]

i don't think mendocino or trinity or humboldt and the local towns and municipalities therein will want to shoot themselves in the foot with excessive restrictions and regulations. just my thoughts...

True...but squirrels and deer out number people in these counties.

 

[The Ruiner]

yet oddly, you choose to ignore the purposes section, points 7 and 8.

Yeah, I am sorry to think it logical that it should have been listed there...I forgot about your exemptions (that by virtue of their omission of the CUA in section 2C (2)) that in the most technical sense aren't exemptions. Considering the CUA is a state law what place would it have being listed there, with the other state laws not to be affected by 19...Really freaking sorry to disapoint you, UB. Gosh, where I would I be without you? What could California do without UncleBuck? What? Wait...Uncle Buck isnt Californian? Then what is he doing here? What am I going to find out next? That Uncle Buck and Steve Cooley say the same thing about prop 19? That would be too much to bear! What?!?! They already say the same thing about prop 19? That it wont affect medical marijuana? I know, for sure, that Uncle Buck wouldnt lie to me....but what about Steve Cooley? What's going on here?

 

[UncleBuck]

thanks for the quite insincere apologies and indignant sarcasm. you are a peach.

face it: points 6, 7, and 8 in the purposes section explicitly exempt medical cannabis from the reach of prop 19. prop 19 is for recreational, prop 215 is for medicinal. you want another picture?

no, i do not live in california. yes, i do have a dog in this fight, in several ways. firstly, i drive through cali often. my med card does not work in cali. so every time i drive through, i risk a $100 ticket. also, i will be soon be living in cali. so yes, this does effect me in several ways.

if you cannot accept the fact that people outside of cali have a dog in this fight, then close your eyes and pretend i am speaking for one of the dozen+ family and friends i have living in the state, each and every one of whom will vote and will vote yes on prop 19.

seems like you still need to get that sand out of your vagina.

 

[The Ruiner]

thanks for the quite insincere apologies and indignant sarcasm. you are a peach.

face it: points 6, 7, and 8 in the purposes section explicitly exempt medical cannabis from the reach of prop 19. prop 19 is for recreational, prop 215 is for medicinal. you want another picture?

no, i do not live in california. yes, i do have a dog in this fight, in several ways. firstly, i drive through cali often. my med card does not work in cali. so every time i drive through, i risk a $100 ticket. also, i will be soon be living in cali. so yes, this does effect me in several ways.

if you cannot accept the fact that people outside of cali have a dog in this fight, then close your eyes and pretend i am speaking for one of the dozen+ family and friends i have living in the state, each and every one of whom will vote and will vote yes on prop 19.

seems like you still need to get that sand out of your vagina.

I know I know....the sand...that damn sand! It just makes me so disagreeable...

Believe it or not, today you actually brought a smile to my face today...thanks for being civil.

I think man, I am just really fucking scared/stressed about how this bill could be used. I had a 30 minute talk with someone from Oaksterdam yesterday about 19. I pretty much laid my case out, and we went back and forth. The dude assured me that the intention is to, indeed, maintain the integrity of 215 while expanding the privileges outlined in 19 to the general public. He assured me that they have every intention of maintaining patients' rights and that 19 *should* have no affect towards 215, and that that is not the intended result (fucking patients over that is)...Now I am not saying that I have changed my mind, but I felt better getting my questions answered as close to the source as I could get...Because I could tell by the dudes vernacular that he wasnt some minimum wage hired-help just answering phones and general questions...he seemed to have really good grasp of MJ/CA laws, and didnt seem to be put on the spot by some of the questions that absolutely stumped the girl I was originally talking to.

So...Buck...yeah...the sand...but I bet if you were in my shoes you would have some serious sand too!

 

[UncleBuck]

dude, my apologies for constantly not being civil. you have clearly proven yourself the bigger man here. clearly.

there is ALWAYS sand in my vagina for one reason or the other.

i certainly hope your fears don't come to fruition, but nonetheless i will feel a bit of sadness if/when prices drop and people who depended on selling high quality medical for a living are no longer able to compete, or if they can compete, only scratch out a meager living rather than a comfortable one.

more polling has come out which makes it look like prop 19 will certainly pass, and if it does, there will be HUGE implications. neither of us know exactly what these implications will be. but i think we both agree on moving forward on ending prohibition, whether it be with apprehension or with glee. the naysayers have certainly made me more aware of the many negatives in this bill, if nothing else (even if i don't show it in my responses).

 

[UncleBuck]

boy, this thread sure slipped into oblivion once we start being all civil and shit.

i blame you. damn you, ruiner!

 

[fdd2blk]

....................

 

[mr2shim]

.................... View attachment 1212399

I can't fathom how someone that smokes marijuana can bubble in "no". You "no" voters need to move to Georgia or South Carolina, you don't deserve to live in California.

 

[beardo]

As am MM user, I originally thought that this so called legalization would be a step forward even if there was competition from corporate growers. I have since changed my mind. Note the name of this bill:
The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010
Cannabis is currently legal in ca and it is not hard to get it ( here in LA county) for stress related medical use.
However, after reading the actual bill in my election guide and realizing it will tax & restrict my rights as a medical user, I am no longer fooled by the misinformation. Here is link that explains it by an attorney.
WHY PRO-POT ACTIVISTS OPPOSE THE 2010 TAX CANNABIS INITIATIVE: 18 REASONS TO VOTE KNOW http://thehive.modbee.com/node/20404

http://votetaxcannabis2010.blogspot.com/2010/07/why-pro-pot-activists-oppose-2010-tax.html

Prop 19 would restrict and tax the rights of current medical users contrary to what proponents are saying. Read the law yourself, but don’t get the intent section mixed up with the actual law. My alarm went off when I realized the language referring to current law “except as permitted under Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9 of the Health and Safety Code”, is only in the preliminary section and suspiciously missing from the actual law. Decide for yourself if your willing to give up your rights. I'm not.
http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/pdf/english/text-proposed-laws.pdf

I cant believe how misleading the whole 19 propaganda campaign is-'legalize marijuana' is how their selling it...if that's what they wanted they just could've written marijuana is no longer prohibited.

 

[Greather420]

I cant believe how misleading the whole 19 propaganda campaign is-'legalize marijuana' is how their selling it...if that's what they wanted they just could've written marijuana is no longer prohibited.

Now that's just silly. There HAS to be restrictions when dealing with the "legalization" of a controlled substance....it's the same as alcohol and cigarettes. Now, I'm NOT comparing weed to those two things, because I would much rater walk into my 15 year old's room and find them smoking a bowl than drunk on the floor, but there should still be some regulations as to how it is used. Either way, it's going to be a good thing in the end.
I just wanted to add something I had been thinking about since a previous post by Ruiner. You mentioned I should talk to people at collectives and see how they feel about prop 19. I have to admit, I didn't actually talk to anyone, BUT, the collective in LA that I go to regularly is offering a free gift for everyone who votes. A couple of other collectives I've seen online have been pushing for yes. Not only that, but one of the best (and COMPLETELY Prop 215-abiding) collectives I go to got raided by the DEA last week. Their entire stock was confiscated and they were allowed to stay open, but with NO PRODUCT!! Another collective in that area has been closed pending a court case that keeps getting pushed back again and again....been going on for almost a year now! It seems to me like the crack downs on legally operating collectives are being stepped up now that the vote is getting closer. Coincidence? I don't know, but maybe, just MAYBE it could be they are trying to get rid of as many as possible before they no longer have the authority......well, just a thought!

 

[The Ruiner]

Now that's just silly. There HAS to be restrictions when dealing with the "legalization" of a controlled substance....it's the same as alcohol and cigarettes. Now, I'm NOT comparing weed to those two things, because I would much rater walk into my 15 year old's room and find them smoking a bowl than drunk on the floor, but there should still be some regulations as to how it is used. Either way, it's going to be a good thing in the end.
I just wanted to add something I had been thinking about since a previous post by Ruiner. You mentioned I should talk to people at collectives and see how they feel about prop 19. I have to admit, I didn't actually talk to anyone, BUT, the collective in LA that I go to regularly is offering a free gift for everyone who votes. A couple of other collectives I've seen online have been pushing for yes. Not only that, but one of the best (and COMPLETELY Prop 215-abiding) collectives I go to got raided by the DEA last week. Their entire stock was confiscated and they were allowed to stay open, but with NO PRODUCT!! Another collective in that area has been closed pending a court case that keeps getting pushed back again and again....been going on for almost a year now! It seems to me like the crack downs on legally operating collectives are being stepped up now that the vote is getting closer. Coincidence? I don't know, but maybe, just MAYBE it could be they are trying to get rid of as many as possible before they no longer have the authority......well, just a thought!

The raids are a tandem effort initiated by a handful of dispensary operators and Steve (not) Cooley. The city had no issue with the dispensaries being "post-moratorium" additions until some owners boo-hooed about it because they werent making as much money. Enter (not) Cooley and his (seemingly) alcohol-induced rampage across the county, which if elected in November will become the entire state (which only serves LAW ENFORCEMENT-RELATED SPECIAL INTERESTS like private prisons and correctional officers unions). I recently have seen the turn around from dispensaries I have spoken to about 19...which is due to a pipe-dream of a cash-wave toppling their current puny establishments looking to build them skyscrapers of cash and chronic. They seem to think all the taxing will be done on the growers end of things...which means they either, one, are completely oblivious, or two, understand that medical growers will become criminal as of November 3 and their only chances of growing medically for a living are now over...(which isn't illegal...contrary to what BS comes out of peoples' mouths around here) unless they "go commercial" and put a giant red flag on themselves and their operations. As far as the authority to shut them down goes, it will remain regardless of 19. Law enforcement gets the first say in the process by raiding/arresting the collective operators, the only recourse is to win in court...which unless they have been totally being douche-bags about how they opertate (which is totally likely in far too many instances) they should win...after they pay a fuck-ton in lawyers fees and have already had their lives ruined. I am getting the impression lately that Cooley is leaving the russian/armenian outlets alone...you know the ones where the kids behind the counter are wearing Armani Exchange fucking everything and dont know the first goddamn thing about the product they are selling? Yeah, for some reason they are being left alone. (FYI a russian drug minister was in LA yesterday addressing citizens OF THIS COUNTRY that 19 would be a disaster...but he's just upset about the NATO implicit poppy/heroin production in Afghanistan and is decrying us for some weed...)
By chance did you see the last LAJEMM? There are two letters written about 19 by the same person in there...one is a total repulsive hit-piece on MMJ, at which I was fucking surprised that is was published in the LAJEMM, and the other is a non-sensical fairy-tale about how there are such big problems in the world and by voting yes in 19 you can start to fix them. Funny thing is this, the second piece is a paid advertisement, the first one this far below-par whore of no literary talent must have just wrote of his on free will...yeah right...The point I am trying to make is if 19 is so goddamn awesome then why are they having to PAY SO MANY PEOPLE to try and sell it? Why are they paying people who are blaming senseless shootings on MMJ to write letters in their favor?