(California) Marijuana legalization measure gets big lift

[Newsjock]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

In a dramatic shift of sentiment, nearly half of California's likely voters now want to legalize marijuana use in the state, according to a new Field Poll.

"The numbers have flipped (on Proposition 19) since our July poll," said Mark DiCamillo, the poll's director. "That's a major change in the direction of public feelings on legalizing marijuana."

... Forty-nine percent of those likely voters now support Prop. 19, with 42 percent opposed. In a July poll, 48 percent of those surveyed planned to vote against the ballot initiative, with 44 percent backing legalization.

The reversal came despite a total absence of paid advertising for either side. Neither supporters nor opponents of the measure have raised much money for the Prop. 19 campaign, so far relying on word-of-mouth and media coverage to get their stories out.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/09/25/MNC21FJMOQ.DTL&tsp=1

[pokercat999]

1. THIS IS REALLY, REALLY BAD!

My prediction is that if CA legalizes marijuana so many people will move to the state that it will tip the balance of the very surface of the US and it will tilt up dumping everyone into the Pacific Ocean!

[Scuba]

2. Can I just get some and go home?

[pattmarty]

6. That will just be ONE of many things to work out. Everybody and.........

........their brothers will be on planes, trains and automobiles headed to sunny Calif. I just hope that some peoples "excitement" over this doesn't cause a backlash there. This WILL effect the cost of the herb throughout the rest of the US ya know. Hopefully a lot of the States will just say "fuck it" as to enforcing Marijuana laws for small amounts for personal use. Maybe I won't move to Spain just yet.

[robdogbucky]

25. I would consider Portugal though n/t

[Occulus]

53. We have a drug team here that's probably salivating at the prospect

They love pot busts. This is a college town and I know from personal experience that these assholes actually take enjoyment in ruining people's lives. They are all smiles and excitement.

I won't say what should be done to people like that.

[pattmarty]

84. We could start by legalizing Marijuana and putting a lot of these.............

..........authoritarian ass holes out of a job. Put them out in the street with a tin cup where most of these "gorillas" belong. I am 63 yo and can count the "good" cops I have seen on one hand and still have fingers left. MOST of these pricks have what I call the "John Wayne complex". Lazy cocksuckers that have nothing better to do but bust mostly younger people with a gram of weed and a pipe (paraphernalia, don't ya know).

[Le Taz Hot]

102. Yeah, our local Sherrif

has got some sort of jihad against medical marijuana growers in the area. The city just passed a moratorium on outdoor marijuana growing. Good luck with that one in that probably 1 in 5 houses are growing the shit around here. (I'm in Central California. RED Central California).

[Trajan]

114. Let's not overstate this presumed mass migration for pot

Pot is already available on every neighborhood ....

Why would anybody pay for a plane ticket or gas when they could just buy the pot around the corner ?

Anybody that buys pot in CA would be wise to leave it in CA .... There is a good chance they would be arrested once they leave CA, depending on which state they may be stopped in ...

[ProudDad]

97. Just don't try to go home

through bat-shit crazy fascist republican Arizona!!!!


Of course, there's tons of pot here in Bat-Shit Crazy Arizona anyway...

It's brought in across the border by jan brewer's headless illegal immigrant mules...

[Zephie]

3. I know I would move...

But I have a Quaker parrot and they're illegal in Cali. I love my Greenie better than I love my Green. Still, it's only a matter of time after 19 passes that the rest of the country will fall in step.

[Ter]

30. Who's gonna know about your parrot?

Be a rebel, it's only a small law with almost no way of getting caught. :)

[Zephie]

44. I actually considered it

But he'd have to go to the vet eventually and that could be a problem. The law is that Quakers are to be euthanized when found, owned or not. It's sad really, they claim that Quakers are detrimental to native species and harmful to the environment but they're really not any more dangerous than any other species of bird around. They're just the most charming little bird to have in your home too. =(

[kurtzapril4]

47. Quaker parakeets are not good for the environment.

They're lovely birds..if kept in the house. Unfortunately, people release them, and that's where they become a problem. They are cavity nesters, and the will push out native cavity nesters in order to reproduced.

[movonne]

46. I'm not so sure about the red states...the preacher will be out in

masses...

[quakerboy]

99. Ferrets as well

Its bizarre. They somehow figure that domestic neuter ferrets are going to start a colony in the wild.

[davidhilton]

4. Yeah! I read that on the inner-tubes somewhere.

[earcandle]

9. Oh please... Just leave if you have those fears!

This will be a huge cash cow for California. 

We'll be growing and making clothes and rope and fuel and
recreation relaxation and move the country in a completely
different direction.  

[Merlot]

56. You forgot tourism. That will be a BIG boost to the economy

There's so much to see and do here anyhow, this just really is the "tide that lifts all boats!"

[truedelphi]

71. + 1. n/t

[WhiteTara]

11. you may be right...although

I'm still waiting for Guam to be upside down in the sea. I wonder if the roots will show.

[Betsy Ross]

15. I want what you're smoking.

LOL!

[Odin2005]

17. LOL!

[alfredo]

21. Naw, South Carolina sucks so much it will balance things out.

[LiberalLovinLug]

36. Slow and easy now

Back away from the bong

[Skink]

51. please please every pothead move.

and stay there.

[MindPilot]

65. We will gladly take your potheads....if

you take all of our right-wing nutjobs. (That includes Meg & Carly)


signed,
the state of California

[Le Taz Hot]

103. High five!

And could you also please take the Catholic and Mormon churches -- two entities largely responsible for Prop H8? Thanks so much.

[RainDog]

80. if we can quarantine all the fundamentalist idiots in Texas and put barbed wire around the state

because you all seriously fuck up this nation with all the talibornagains who dislike reality.

[lark]

115. Unfortunately, it's not just TX

that pretty much describes most of the south outside of university towns. Now, quarantine the south (except for free zone university towns) and you'll have made some real progress towards sanity in this country. PS - I live in FL, so should know. If this was to happen, I'd of course move. Only reason I'm here now is because mom is an 85 year old widow and needs me.

[SammyWinstonJack]

121. 'potheads'. San Antonio would lose lots of peeps. Is that what you're hoping?

:evilgrin:

[Occulus]

126. Just for the slur of "pothead",

I hope it gets passed in your state as well, and I hope it becomes ubiquitous enough that there is nowhere for you to turn to get away from users.

You appear to deserve that fate.

[tabasco]

132. Yeah, all those losers

like Carl Sagan.

[Bigmack]

60. OMG!

I never EVEN thought of that. And if they save National Geographics at a higher rate than the rest of the country, that will only accelerate the process.... Oh dear. Ms Bigmack

[truedelphi]

70. So I guess I better start buying a Big Big Boat.

With plenty of storage places for the reefer.

[SugarShack]

77. I vote this the funniest post on DU!!!!

Im lmfao!!!!

[donheld]

79. That will NOT happen, but

what will happen is, CA will become so heavy it will break off and fall into the ocean.:D

[Daphne08]

82. Now that's funny. Thanks for my first laugh of the day

and I needed it. :D

[Winterblues]

85. Dirty hippies need a bath anyway

:silly:

[ProudDad]

110. This is GOOD!!! REALLY, REALLY GOOD!!!

Here in Arizona, we could end up with "beach front property" and can finally get free of our "underwater" mortgages!

[yurbud]

111. we could become the Amersterdam of America and get out of the recession with THC tourism

[Imagevision]

118. K&R!

[slackmaster]

122. It will be like Okies coming here during the Dust Bowl days looking for the land of milk and honey

We should call out the militia, station armed thugs on the border, and tell the invaders there's no more weed.

[Liberal_in_LA]

127. lol n/t

[PassingFair]

131. We'll have to organize an emergency pro legalization vote in New York!

Quickly!

[Devil_Fish]

134. That's fine with me, I live on a Boat in the Pacific Ocean. NT

[pattmarty]

5. This is what I will be watching for on Nov 2. We know already that........

...............the Dems will lose seats in BOTH houses, it's just a matter of how many. If Prop 19 passes, this will be maybe the only reason to rejoice. The really interesting thing will be how this is instituted in Calif and how the Feds respond to it. Either way the wall will have fallen and more "liberal" states like Or, Il, NY, Ma etc will probably start to pass similar pieces.

[jerseyjack]

7. Reaction of the Feds if 19 passes -

If Proposition 9 passes, the reaction may be like the reaction in N.Y. when that state refused to enforce prohibition. N.Y. stopped enforcing prohibiton and the feds did not want to spend the money to pick up the slack. Prohibition effectively ceased in N.Y.

Also, if federal prosecution continues, remember we have a principle of law called Jury Nullification. Google it and learn from it.

[drmeow]

29. I've always wanted to be

on a jury for a drug trial so I could both use and educate the other jurors about Jury Nullification :)

[eridani]

54. Which is why, unless you are a very good actor, that you never will be

Just say that the law is stupid and you're out, even if you also say that even stupid laws have to be enforced.

[MindPilot]

64. I once watched most of a jury panel dismissed

based on the judge saying "if any of you have any problem with drug laws, please raise your hand."

About half the panel's hands were up and the judge said "you're all dismissed. Thank you for your service."

[movonne]

48. and those repugs that take over will do everthing in their power

to overthrow this...just wait..

[JNelson6563]

52. A referendum is much harder to undo than legislation

Once an issue has been put to a vote by the people that's the way it is, unless you get another vote from the people on the same subject. A state lege can't go back and legislate (change the law) on what the people just voted. That's why, if you've got an issue you want changed in a way that cannot be changed back, you get it on the ballot directly.

Julie

[Merlot]

58. What about prop 8? Looks like the judiciary is overturning that one

That's my only concern.

[JNelson6563]

68. Well, that's unconstitutional.

Prop 8 denies human rights, it's unconstitutional and should be overturned. Legalizing pot, on the other hand, is constitutional, it's expanding a freedom. Plus it will be a cash cow though it will cut into the lower judicial's racket.

Julie

[Le Taz Hot]

104. Obama has already said he will

file a lawsuit against California for defying the feds. Some of you guys spend SO much time focusing on Republicans that you're not paying attention to what your own guys are doing. Just FYI, if Prop. 19 passes and if Obama does what he's threatening to do, California will, for no good reason, be in play in 2012.

[hollowdweller]

125. If dems would lose both houses the GOP might pass a resolution for the feds

To crack down on CA should it pass.

[iamthebandfanman]

8. so cant wait for this to happen

all the other states will be forced to give in eventually...

all of americas pot will start coming from california..

i think ull see a wave effect happen..border states are going to realise how much trouble its going to be to try to stop it from crossing the state line

[lunatica]

10. I've been one of those talking to everyone but I concentrate on the uses of hemp

And I take the time to listen to concerns, which just happen to be all the myths that abound. That it leads to more drugs, that kids will get it, yada yada. If you tell them that it would be harder for them to get it if it were legal than it is now that it's illegal because it would be basically under the same laws liquor regulation is, they begin to get it.

But the uses of hemp are the clincher. There is no down side to the uses of hemp. It puts nutrients in the ground while it grows, leaving great soil for other plants so it doesn't require pesticides and it can be grown constantly without having to leave the ground fallow. It doesn't require pesticides because bugs don't eat it and cuts down on weeds which means it doesn't require toxic weed killers. It can be used to make clothing without all the toxins needed to grow cotton and it yields far more than cotton does per acre. It has essential amino acids for nutrition and the list goes on and on. It's a winner argument.

These are just some of its uses

[shanti]

27. i'm with ya there!

but is hemp included in the bill? i thought it was just cannabis.

[Lance_Boyle]

86. Hemp is cannabis ruderalis.

The smoking stuff is cannabis sativa or cannabis indica or hybrids of the two.

[shanti]

94. didn't answer my question

i know there's a difference.

[Lance_Boyle]

95. your question asked "just cannabis" and I clarified that hemp *is* cannabis. n/t

[Mike Marble]

107. Prop 19 would legalize the production of industrial hemp. n/t

[bitchkitty]

12. Good for them.

I remain pessimistic. :(

If it does happen, I do not predict a major exodus to California. It's not like there will be free cannabis handed out to anyone who asks, and I don't see where it says you will be able to grow your own legally.

You can get weed anywhere, for much less than the cost of moving to California.

[MindPilot]

14. "Allows persons 21 years old to posses, cultivate & transport marijuana for personal use."

That is the very first line in the proposition. It is limited to one ounce and 25sq feet of area within private property dedicated to cultivation.

[bitchkitty]

81. Cool!

I still don't see an exodus to California though. :)

[Buns_of_Fire]

130. No free cannabis handed out at the California Welcome Centers?

What would say "Welcome to California" better? ;-)

[MindPilot]

13. DIFI wrote the "against" article in the voter's guide.

along with the prez of MADD. It's the usual authoritarian screeching that there will be carnage on the highways, everyone from surgeons to landscapers will be showing up for work stoned, chaos and anarchy will reign, civilization will collapse, Earth will fall out of orbit and spin off into the Sun.

The "for" article, on the other hand, was written by a Superior Court judge and two former Chiefs of Police.

[Odin2005]

18. MADD are a bunch of dumbass prohibitionists.

[Kievan Rus]

43. Agreed. I loathe MADD and all like-minded nanny staters

[Scuba]

20. If MADD is against legalization, they're mad....

...take all the drunk drivers and turn them into stoned drivers and the roads will be infinately safer.

[pscot]

73. There would still be accidents

but nobody would be traveling faster than 30 mph.

[shanti]

28. well fwiw

boxer has come out against it too, and i lurve me some barbara boxer, just not her position on this. they probably think it's political suicide to come out in favor.

[MindPilot]

34. It's supported by 49% of the voters.

Yeah, being in favor of something supported by roughly half the people you represent is political suicide. Riiiight.

Kinda like that bailout that was opposed by 95% of the voters but they did it anyway. I think Boxer's opposition speaks volumes about who she truly represents and it ain't "us the people".

[shanti]

49. would you rather have carly fiorina?

huh, huh?


i thought so...

[MindPilot]

67. I hate having to make those kinds of choices.

:banghead:

[pattmarty]

83. In this case it's not too much of a choice. If it was Feinstein/Fiorina............

............I could see your point. Boxer is one of the "good guys". She is being politically "safe" in her not supporting this which I don't agree with, but so is the "70's liberal" Jerry Brown. I would be more down on brown than Boxer.

[Merlot]

59. It's political suicide to go against big industry: liquor, beer, pharmaceuticals

They have the money and now the legal means (citizens united) to bury anyone they don't like. And when anyone threatens their profits, they get ugly quick.

[jmowreader]

72. They KNOW it's political suicide to come out in favor

If any California politician, especially someone who's as much in the Repukes' sights as Barbara Boxer, comes out in favor of legalization the religious right will flood that state with anti-that-politician money.

"Barbara Boxer wants YOUR CHILDREN to have marijuana parties at school!" No one in their right mind supports children either having marijuana, having parties with it or having said parties at school. Find the biggest pothead on this board and he or she will say the same thing. But all the anti-legalization forces will say she does.

But seriously, this is an issue you need to talk out both sides of your mouth on...

[Mike Marble]

116. California elected officials who endorse P19/are not chicken shits:

Elected Officials
•Congressman Pete Stark (CA-13)
•Congressman Dan Hamburg (CA-1) (Ret.)
•Congressman Pete McCloskey (CA-11) (Ret.)
•California State Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (Ret.)
•California State Senator Mark Leno
•California State Senator Tom Hayden (Ret.)
•California State Assemblymember Tom Ammiano
•California State Assemblymember Hector De La Torre
•California State Assemblymember Kerry Mazzoni (Ret.)
•Alameda County Supervisor Nate Miley
•Mendocino County Supervisor John Pinches
•San Francisco Supervisor David Campos
•San Francisco Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi
•Berkeley Mayor Tom Bates
•Fairfax Vice Mayor Larry Bragman
•The Berkeley City Council
•The Oakland City Council
•The West Hollywood City Council
•Arcata City Councilmember Shane Brinton
•Berkeley City Councilmember Kriss Worthington
•Berkeley City Councilmember Darryl Moore
•Hayward City Councilmember Bill Quirk
•Oakland City Councilmember Rebecca Kaplan
•Oakland City Councilmember Jean Quan
•Oakland City Councilmember Pat Kernighan
•Oakland City Councilmember Larry Reid
•Oakland City Councilmember Nancy Nadel
•West Hollywood City Councilmember John Duran
•Windsor Town Councilmember Debora Fudge
•Palm Springs Unified School District Board Member Justin Blake
•AC Transit Board President Rocky Fernandez
•East Bay Municipal Utility District Board President Doug Linney
•Water Replenishment District of Southern California Director Rob Katherman
•Modoc County Democratic Central Committee Chair Thomas Romero
•Alameda County Democratic Central Committee Member Edie Irons
•California Republican Party Delegate David LaTour

[krabigirl]

92. Well, she didn't write the "against" opinion in the election guide.

DiFi has been the leader with her holier-than-thou nanny state crusade.

[Occulus]

55. Isn't MADD the discredited organization whose head or founder or some such got a DUI? n/t

[Bennyboy]

75. Di FI is an IDIOT.

Complete MORAN. Especially when it comes to this subject.

Right now she is trying to increase penalties for people that make edibles.

The only countries that have tested driving on cannabis (NOT THE US) have all confirmed that it is no more dangerous than fast food and less dangerous than talking on a cell phone. And among the age group males between 18-25 it is actually shown to be an advantage. they drive slower and are more aware.

know I am much more aware when i drive loaded (which is everywhere)and I haven't had an accident or ticket since the 70's. And I used to drive 200 miles a day.Everyday.

[krabigirl]

91. Cannot wait until 2012 to hopefully vote DiFi out for good. She needs a strong primary challenger.

[Le Taz Hot]

105. She'll be 79 in 2012

We probably won't have to worry about her

[sofa king]

16. Can we thank the Tea Baggers?

If so, I think the Tea Party is going to go down in American History as an example of a political movement which achieves positive social change through opposition to that change.

I'm having a hard time coming up with other examples.

[-..__...]

19. Are the Tea Baggers against legalization of pot?

Considering their smaller government/keep the government out of everyones personal affairs attitude... I would think they would be in support of legalization.

If they did/do have any opposition... it would be against any taxation of marijuana.

[sofa king]

22. They're not coherent enough to be libertarians.

No, the point I'm making is that the Tea Party has managed to polarize politics in general so much that they may have inadvertently made dope legalization into a mainstream issue simply because voters wish to distance themselves as much as possible from the right wing.

[krabigirl]

93. no, not the current batch of theocrats. they love big govt. nt

[robdogbucky]

23. "despite a total absence of paid advertising for either side..."

I'll be darned, someone (Boxer & Fiorina) both seemed to have found money to put an ad right in the OP, right here on DU. Who paid for that? The fairy god mother?

Definitely, as cited in Lunatica post above, when discussed rationally and patiently with anyone opposed and they start in on the fright/danger/scare propaganda, it is most effective to simply lay most of that to rest with calm reasoning and facts.

What I have found as the most penetrating message is that research indicates Prop 19 passage will translate into conservatively 40,000 new jobs, $1.4 billion in revenues to the state in taxes that can be used to rescue education and other public interest programs, regulate it just like alcohol and have the success that the end of alcohol prohibition brought. Those cited are union jobs and the data indicate that for every union job created there are at least 1.5 non-union jobs created for related services to those initial jobs. Fuel and materials for growing, labor for processing/packaging/marketing, etc. The economic advantage of passage is a no-brainer.

The outrageous lies in some of the opposition literature (more of that non-spending to support/oppose I guess) like the marijuanaharmsfamilies.com web page, (also advertising here on DU)is the best way to counter them. The crap at that site is clearly racist, anti-Dem, and so out of touch with reality that most middle school students laugh at it.

I fear our otherwise beneficial political candidates that also oppose this without thinking will pay the price when the electorate shows them how they feel about this issue and those politicians' hypocrisy.

I had a cousin that lived in Las Vegas for some 5 years in the 80s, working for the DARE! program. It was all about selling pencils and bumperstickers to suckers at school rallies. He at that time had a gambling habit and spent all his ill-got gains from promoting the hypocritical DARE! campaign on the Las Vegas Sports Book. Ironic, eh?

He laughs when he is asked about the efficacy of that program.




Just my dos centavos


robdogbucky

[Occulus]

57. DARE was shown to actually INCREASE drug use in communities that used it.

I collapsed in laughter when I found that out...

[Bennyboy]

24. STONERS AGAINST Prop 19.

I am not sure how I will vote on this. I hate the idea of corporations taking over the one thing in my life that is not so corrputed.

But on the other hand I am setting myself up to become exactly that.


http://votetaxcannabis2010.blogspot.com/2010/09/prop-19-ma-and-pa-are-out-of-work-and.html

Prop 19: Ma and Pa are out of work and you’re still easy to bust
Prop 19: Ma and Pa are out of work and you’re still easy to bust – it’s corporatization, not legalization.

… or Malmo-Levine on Prop 19: Why I believe things will be worse for most taxpayers & cannabis users/growers/dealers under Prop 19 than current California pot laws: Prop 215 and California-style decrim.

By David Malmo-Levine

Part 1: Quotes you need to read to fully understand Prop 19

“I struggled against tyranny. I didn’t do that to replace one tyranny with another.” – Bishop Desmond Tutu

“This is not our only chance to vote yes to legalization, but it may be our only chance to vote no to the corporatization of cannabis.” – Dragonfly De La Luz

“The pro-Prop. 19 people are counting on the average voter not knowing anything about statutory interpretation rules. Under those rules, if Prop. 19 had specifically stated in Section 2, “Intent,” that it was NOT intended to affect H & S 11362.5, then the courts would interpret it as not affecting 11362.5. But because the intent section is silent, the courts will look at the language of the proposition to figure out the intent. And as noted above, the Purposes section at paragraphs 6 and 7 already provides evidence that the Proposition is intended to affect MM (Medical Marijuana) and MM patients.
Why would the Prop. 19 people set things up like this? This is no accident; a lot of attorney work and money went into drafting this thing to accomplish the desired results – results presumably desired by Richard Lee and friends. Why would they want to be sure that patients’ current rights to grow and distribute are SEVERLY limited, while running around telling everyone they are not affected?
Well, in addition to being potential voting support for Prop. 15, MM patients also reflect a LARGE and VALUABLE potential market share for the “commercial cannabis industry” this proposition is intended to create. It is going to be contrary to the commercial interests of whoever wants to create a “commercial cannabis industry” to let such a large group of potential cannabis consumers continue to cultivate and share with each other, via the collective system, cannabis – instead of being FORCED TO BUY IT FROM THE “COMMERCIAL CANNABIS INDUSTRY.”

[robdogbucky]

26. Bennyboy you sound like

one of the "Marijuana kingpins," of the marijuanaharmsfamilies.com website. Ha ha ha ha ha, but I tease.

I can hear you now in an Alan Arkin voice, "That's not funny robdogbucky, I could lose my livelihood..."

They have changed the language on that site in the last week BTW, as someone prolly noticed how far over the line they were with the original:

"Marijuana kingpins are moving beyond 'medical marijuana' and now want to usher in FULL-BLOWN marijuana culture to forever change California (Prop. 19). Hollywood actors, marijuana money bosses, adult film 'entrepeneurs' and even the NAACP are calling for pot legalization..."

Too bad they changed it to eliminate that sentence about porn, the NAACP and hollywood actors, as it did more to point out the hypocrisy of the website than anything we could say about it.

They still assert that "studies show marijuana is a gateway drug to cocaine and meth..."

and that is a good enough gaff right there to lampoon them on. Especially when surrounded by testimony that the opposite of that is actually true. I have heard more stories about how cannabis has helped people become free from harmful addictions, myself included.

Carry on, merry profiteers, the peoples' will shall prevail. When I can grow my own, it will negate any other arguments about corporate profits/abuse. My personal feeling is that just like folks can make their own wine and beer in their basement, they will grow their own high-quality cannabis in their backyard.



Just my dos centavos


robdogbucky

[Jackpine Radical]

31. If pot is a gateway drug, then

the gate swings both ways.

[defendandprotect]

33. Then alcohol is also a gateway drug ....!!

[Jackpine Radical]

35. I defy you to show me one hard drug user who didn't start

on amniotic fluid.

[defendandprotect]

38. You're sure it's not drunken sperm ....???

[LiberalLovinLug]

37. and so is Coffee!

This is what I always point out to people who spout the gateway nonsense.

What percent of the people who do cocaine or crack, at one time were addicted to caffeine every day?
To me caffeine is more similar to cocaine in its high than marijuana.
Its a natural progression. Every one who drinks coffee is at risk of being a crack head!

[RainDog]

62. micro breweries and budweiser co-exist

a lot of people do not and will drink drink budweiser.

Marc Emery states the only reason the mom and pop's oppose this is money. they're afraid they won't make as much money. that makes them no better than a corporation that is willing to exploit people for other gains.

how can anyone not vote to keep people out of prison for possessing a plant?

[Bennyboy]

74. As a brewer....

It is very hard to sell your beer. Most use (guess what??) a distributor to get beers in the stores. If you do not play with them or their way or sell yourself, they will shut you out. Way too many micro breweries die every year to even make that comparison. And the largest of those, Sierra Nevada, is a HUGE GINORMOUS Corporation.

[RainDog]

78. so that justifies keeping cannabis/hemp illegal?

not in my world.

[Mike Marble]

108. Stoners Against Prop 19 are the pot movement's Tea Partiers.

They are full of shit, stalking horses for growers and dispensaries whose economic self-interest are threatened by legalization.

And David Malmo-Levine is a Canadian pot activist, not an expert on California law.

[defendandprotect]

32. Imagine the numbers are higher and have always been higher ....

important to keep that info from voters and from citizens in other states!

California will be smart to legalize -- and so would be every other state and every

other nation -- !!

Costa Rica -- legalize

Mexico -- legalize

!!!



Obviously, we'd knock out a whole lot of corruption -- in government - among elites

and elected officials -- and in police enforcement. It would be a much healthier

America! Plus we now have 7,000 troops and 46 war ships off Costa Rica monitoring

drug situation there!!

[Duer 157099]

39. This prop makes things worse for medical cannabis patients

Sorry to say that I'm opposed to it, not because I'm opposed to legalization, but because the restrictions in the bill actually make things WORSE for medical cannabis patients. It will make it illegal for ANYONE to use cannabis with underage kids in the house. Got kids? Got a medical condition that you need cannabis for? Tough fucking luck!

[MindPilot]

41. The acutal wording, I think, is "with minors present."

I'm assuming that would mean in close enough proximity to inhale smoke like in the same room.

My concern is that the "what about the CHILDREN!!!1?" crowd will go nuts over edibles--most of which come in the form of a sweet treat.

[Duer 157099]

42. I wonder why there isn't a law about taking Ambian "with minors present"?

Stupid fucking idiots

[shanti]

50. feinstein

she already brought that bs up about brownies.

[MindPilot]

63. Oh, yeah. IIRC, that was about candy-flavored meth

or some other such strange shit, but could be construed...

[RainDog]

61. this is not true. one of THE top marijuana attorneys addressed this issue.

and I posted about it here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9192956&mesg_id=9192956David Nick has never lost a jury trial in a state marijuana case including many precedent setting trials involving some of the most revered figures in the medical marijuana movement such as Brownie Mary, Dennis Peron (Nick has been Peron’s sole attorney since 1994) and Steve Kubby.

Here's what Nick has to say:

PROP. 19 IS THE BEST THING TO HAPPEN TO MMJ PATIENTS SINCE PROP. 215

Anyone who claims that Proposition 19 will restrict or eliminate rights under the Compassionate Use Act (CUA) or the Medical Marijuana Program (MMP) is simply wrong. If anything, Proposition 19 will permit individuals to grow and possess much more than ever before with patients, coops and collectives still receiving the same protections they are entitled to under the CUA and MMP.

Here is why.

The legal arguments claiming the "sky will fall" if Prop. 19 passes are based on the fallacious conclusion that the Initiative invalidates the CUA and MMP. This baseless fear stems from a flawed legal analysis which focuses on just about every portion of Prop. 19 EXCEPT the relevant portions. This flawed legal analysis is driven by an incorrect understanding of the rules of statutory construction.

PROP. 19 PROVIDES ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS TO PATIENTS FROM THE ACTIONS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT

Section 2B presents the controlling and relevant purposes for understanding what Prop. 19 can and cannot do. This section EXPRESSLY excludes the reach of Prop. 19 from the CUA and MMP. Sections 2B (7 & 8) specifically state that the purpose of this initiative is to give municipalities total and complete control over the commercial sales of marijuana "EXCEPT as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.”

[Duer 157099]

66. Thanks, I will read that.

I realize that both "sides" (or all 3 or 4 or 5 "sides") need to spin things their way, but the fact that this prop is so poorly worded that it makes that possible, has me concerned.

I want to support Prop 19, I really do.

edit to correct the link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9192956&mesg_id=9192956

[Mike Marble]

109. Not true. Read what Americans for Safe Access has to say.

That is the leading medical marijuana defense group in the country, one rooted in California:

http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=6127

Proposition 19 FAQ


Does ASA support or oppose Proposition 19?
Neither. ASA's mission is to ensure safe and legal access to cannabis for therapeutic uses and research. We take no position on Proposition 19, because it lies outside the scope of our focus and area of expertise. Our neutral position should not be interpreted as support or opposition.

Is Proposition 19 the most important issue for medical cannabis in this election?
No. Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley, a staunch medical cannabis opponent, is seeking the position of California's next Attorney General. Medical cannabis advocates must help defeat Cooley to protect safe access in the state. If Cooley is elected as our next Attorney General, he will likely dismantle the gains made by medical cannabis patients over the past 14 years, rewrite the Attorney General Guidelines to ban the sales of medical marijuana, continue to raid dispensaries and undermine the full implementation of state law, work with the DEA to conduct raids across the state; and work to overturn important legal precedents in the courts.

Would legalizing cannabis help patients?
ASA believes that the legalization, taxation and/or regulation of cannabis for non-medical purposes are separate from the regulation of medical cannabis. While it is possible that the taxation and regulation of cannabis at the local or state level may improve conditions for medical cannabis patients and providers, there is no guarantee of this outcome. It is vital we continue to advocate for the rights of patients and increased scientific research.

Does Proposition 19 hurt patients?
No. While it is possible there will be unanticipated consequences and legal controversy, nothing in the text of Proposition 19 is designed to deny any rights to medical cannabis patients.

Does Proposition 19 overrule the medical marijuana laws of California?
No. Proposition 19 is designed to, among other things, "

rovide easier, safer access for patients who need cannabis for medical purposes." Although a statement of purpose is not necessarily controlling, courts generally look to it in interpreting the statute's language. The purpose of Proposition 19 is not to overturn Proposition 215 or any other state or local medical cannabis law.

Will Proposition 19 allow localities to ban medical marijuana dispensaries?
Unclear. Currently, there is no legal authority stating that localities must regulate dispensaries under Proposition 215 and SB 420. Proposition 19 allows for local regulation of medical cannabis sales, but also allows localities to ban such activity. If Proposition 19 is adopted, it is unclear how the courts will integrate both laws with respect to dispensaries. However, regardless of whether or not Proposition 19 is adopted, ASA will continue to fight against local bans of medical cannabis collectives and cooperatives.

Does Proposition 19 make it a crime to smoke marijuana in public?
No. Proposition 19 maintains the status quo. It neither authorizes, nor prohibits such conduct.

Does Proposition 19 make it a crime to smoke in front of your children?
No. Proposition 19 maintains the status quo. It neither authorizes, nor prohibits such conduct. The normal child endangerment laws remain in effect.

Who supports Proposition 19?
The National Black Police Association, retired United States Surgeon General Dr. Joycelyn Elders, Harvard Economist Jeffrey Miron, Congressman Pete Stark (CA-13), Congressman Dan Hamburg (CA-1) (Ret.), Congressman Pete McCloskey (CA-11) (Ret.), California State Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (Ret.), California State Senator Mark Leno, California State Senator Tom Hayden (Ret.), California State Assemblymember Tom Ammiano, California State Assemblymember Hector De La Torre, California NAACP, California Libertarian Party, California Green Party, California Young Democrats, Republican Liberty Caucus, ACLU of Northern California, ACLU of Southern California, ACLU of San Diego, and many other individuals and organizations in law enforcement, elected office, social justice, faith-based programs, many medical and non-medial cannabis consumers, and more. See http://yeson19.com/node/13 for a complete list of endorsers.

Who opposes Proposition 19?
The California Beer & Beverage Distributors donated $10,000 to Public Safety First, a political action committee organized to oppose the proposition. The California Narcotics Officers' Association donated $20,500; the Cal Police Chiefs Association contributed $30,000. The California Correctional Supervisors Organization donated $7,500. The Placer County Deputy Sheriff's Association, the California Peace Officers Association, the California District Attorney Association and the Peace Officers Association of Los Angeles County have all contributed, as well. Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca has been an outspoken opponent. Earlier this month, current and former heads of the Drug Enforcement Administration held a press conference in Washington to oppose the proposition and urge the White House to sue to stop it if it passes. (Data from the Huffington Post)

[Mike Marble]

117. Please stop spreading that Stoners Against Prop 19 bullshit.

The initiative DOES NOT interfere with patients' rights under Prop 215 and SB 420.

[Uncle Joe]

40. Kiicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Newsjock.

[xxqqqzme]

45. I'm going to vote for it but I do wish

a little more thought had gone into its implementation.

[budkin]

69. Smoking drugs is illegal!!!!!

[shanti]

76. tell that to the tobacco industry

:eyes:

[Freddie Stubbs]

87. The big question is, what happens if this passes?

Even if it is no longer against CA law, it will still be illegal in the eyes of the federal government.

[mike_c]

88. well, first thing is that I light a big fat spliff sitting on my FRONT doorstep...

...rather than in the backyard. That's sort of the wink-wink reality here in northern Humboldt County. The house I rent came with a mylar lined grow room in the attic.

But to answer your "big question"-- what happens if Prop 19 passes? :smoke:

[musiclawyer]

89. Nothing in terms of the feds.

They won't sue, despite what comes out of their mouth.
The smart cities and counties are drafting their taxation and zoning ordinances now. There will be a big upheaval in the grow industry. Expect lots of consolidation and buyouts. And it's just a matter of time before big tobacco gets involved. I expect in ten years you'll have mainstream bud being sold by big tobacco, the niche/organic stuff being left to specialty shops and co-ops.

[musiclawyer]

90. Nothing in terms of the feds.

They won't sue, despite what comes out of their mouth.
The smart cities and counties are drafting their taxation and zoning ordinances now. There will be a big upheaval in the grow industry. Expect lots of consolidation and buyouts. And it's just a matter of time before big tobacco gets involved. I expect in ten years you'll have mainstream bud being sold by big tobacco, the niche/organic stuff being left to specialty shops and co-ops.

[divineorder]

113. I think the feds will draw back a bit

and decide to enforce things on the margins. The last thing Obama wants is to get into a big fight with California before 2012. However, he can't just let it go-prohibition is Federal Law. So he files suit, a suit that probably won't come into effect until 2013 or so. He may take other measures to in effect, quarantine California. A few examples of on the margin enforcement: look out for cars leaving California, target grows big enough to trigger federal prosecution instead of relying on state courts, and tighten up on tax scrutiny on growers and dispensaries. Dispensaries should have already prepared for closer scrutiny by the IRS and made sure their taxes are current, even if filed under some other category of business. The same should be true for their personal tax liablities as well, and their employees-make sure there are no reasonable grounds for tax penalties.

A person who is driving out of California should be careful about transporting anything across state lines into a state that does not tolerate it. I fully expect that the Feds could very well work with some Highway Patrol and State Troopers in looking for cars with California license plates and possible contraband.

Your one or two joint person should be relatively safe unless they smoke on or in Federal property, so anyone who wants to light up in a National Park should be particularly cautious not to do so around Federal Workers there.

[JoeyTrib]

96. You know there's like a ton of weed stores in CA, right?

A buddy of mine saw this place called "the 420 shop" for medical marijuana near the beach. No feds and some hot chicks carrying paper bags out. :smoke:

[slackmaster]

123. Yes, and the inevitable legal train wrecks will provide endless entertainment

[Socal31]

98. Why did my supposedly (D) senator write the "against" argument...

in my election book that I received on Saturday?

[RainDog]

100. because few politicians are going to support sane drug laws

because the American govt. has spend decades lying about the reality of cannabis as a substance.

the only politicians I know who have spoken out in favor of legalization are Barney Frank and some libertarians.

mainstream American politicians have no integrity, for the most part.

[shanti]

124. don't worry about that

it doesn't really matter what their personal opinion of cannabis is. if the law passes, they will abide by it.

[Imagevision]

101. If alcholics chose smoking weed instead of drinking more people would still be alive how many

times have you witnessed a report where someone OD'd or killed someone in a car crash while under the influence of marijuana versus killing someone while drunk?!

[EFerrari]

112. Nobody ever smoked a joint and then went up a tower with a rifle. Nobody.

[Poll_Blind]

133. Agreed, at least in my experience. n/t

PB

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Imagevision]

119. And how many people end up dead yearly smoking cigarettes?!...

[mdmc]

120. ..

[sofa king]

128. Someone help me corner the market on Sluggles in California!

Mmmm, Sluggles.

[ProudDad]

129. The Beginning of the end of the phony "war on drugs(tm)" (n/t)

[urotsukidoji]

135. THE DEFINITIVE BOOK on this subject

For those individuals that wish to assess the true Science of the cannabinoids for themselves - without all of the lies and politics so common to this "debate" - I suggest you all read a brilliant new book called "The Pot Book," edited by Julie Holland, MD. (It's available from Amazon for around $12 and, no, I don't work for the company).

http://www.amazon.com/Pot-Book-Complete-Guide-Cannabis/dp/1594773688/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1287462423&sr=8-1

I have found no better resource for the Truth.