Prop 19 - Legalize, regulate, and tax marijuana in california

Wow, no thread on this yet?

I'm kind of new to this whole great debate stuff as I tend to avoid it for the most part..

Quote:

---

Proposition 19, also known as the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010, is a California ballot proposition which will be on the November 2, 2010 California statewide ballot. It legalizes various marijuana-related activities, allows local governments to regulate these activities, permits local governments to impose and collect marijuana-related fees and taxes, and authorizes various criminal and civil penalties.[1] In March 2010, it qualified to be on the November statewide ballot.[2] It requires a simple majority in order to pass, and would take effect the day after the election.[3] Yes on 19 is the official advocacy group for the initiative, and No On Proposition 19 is the official opposition group.[4]
Proponents of Proposition 19 argue that it would help with California's budget shortfall, cut off funding to violent drug cartels, and redirect law enforcement resources to more dangerous crime,[5] while opponents claim that its gaps and flaws will have serious unintended consequences on public safety, workplaces, and federal funding.[6] As of October 2010, even if the proposition is passed, the sale of marijuana will remain illegal under federal law via the Controlled Substances Act.[7][8][9]

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Califor...ition_19_(2010)

Discuss.


I think this would be great. I'm not a pot head in the slightest, only tried the shit once. The stuff is so much less dangerous than most legal substances out there today (Alchohol, tobacco, etc), and the crop itself is very useful and has tons of benefits. I'd imagine his passing would lead to things like hemp products being used, such as hemp paper and hemp rope, which as far as I know are much better for the environment.

We had an initiative in Wa state, but the petition didn't get enough signatures to go on the ballot. Personally, I think pot should be treaded the same way as alcohol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by t3h m00kz

...the crop itself is very useful and has tons of benefits. I'd imagine his passing would lead to things like hemp products being used, such as hemp paper and hemp rope, which as far as I know are much better for the environment.

---

There are already plenty of hemp products available in America, it's just against the law to produce them locally.

Reading through the Wikipedia article, though, I can't see anything about legalizing hemp production. As far as I'm aware, you can't make a lot of, if any, hemp material out of the strains used for producing marihuana, just as you can't produce marihuana from an industrial hemp plant.

Are you sure it regulates the growing of industrial hemp?

Furthermore, similar actions, though to a lesser severity, have been enacted in other states, lessening their cannabis penalties, correct? It was my understanding that they're still liable to federal penalties if the DEA or similar organization catches them. Would that not apply in this circumstance as well?

All in all, though, this is definitely a step in the right direction. Props to Prop 9.

I do think its a great idea, like you guys said, its less damaging than say alcohol. Plus they government would make a bomb due to all the tax they receive.

The only issue I see, is that pot can lead some users into harder drugs, such as cocaine and heroin which are

The problem is, people are allowed to grow there own marijuana which is out sight of being taxed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Limited

The only issue I see, is that pot can lead some users into harder drugs, such as cocaine and heroin which are

---

A common misconception, and one that needs to be addressed. The illegality of cannabis creates a black-market system wherein dealers will carry a multitude of substances, to cater to their clients demands.

Because the availability of cannabis is tied in with that of harder drugs, dealers will become pushers, encouraging their clients to "try something stronger" or "go for a bigger high". Hard drugs are more expensive, and as such it is in the best interest of the dealer to sell them.

There is little scientific evidence supporting that people who use cannabis are more likely to use harder drugs than anyone else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thehoodedsmack

There is little scientific evidence supporting that people who use cannabis are more likely to use harder drugs than anyone else.

---

Scientific evidence? No there isnt...Is there hundreds of case studies? Yes. Are their conferences happening every year that talk about smoking and hard drug use and how to reduce the harm they cause? Yes.

I agree with your statement that dealers would try to sell harder drugs. That still remains the 'black market' though, its pretty hard to prevent. If the government can help prevent that from occurring, then they should try to.

The other problem is legalizing it, affectively says to the public, its okay to do it. Which, like alot of other substances can bring alot of health problems.

The American government is completely anal about drugs, they don't give two shits for people who have drug problems. The amount of red tape involved in the area of harm reduction is outstanding. They affectively give up hope on the drug addicts, either making them come completely clean, or leave them to rot. Now clearly that isnt the fault of the American public, no one is suggesting it is. However I can see from the governments point of view, they don't want to lead down that road....And I'm referencing hard drugs, I view pot as being relatively harmless.

Less than 1% of people who use cannabis use heroin or cocaine. All I'm saying is that contrary to what you stated, cannabis is not a "gateway drug". The factors in its sale, and the tendencies of the individual are the only ones that influence whether a person will migrate to a harder drug. Cannabis on its own will not make a person seek out a harder drug.

Guys, what makes Cannabis a "gateway drug", is the person who uses it. If one enjoys the feeling of cannabis, but wants more, they may be very likely to move to a harder drug. Is this the fault of the cannabis? No. It is the fault of the person; the fact of the matter is that if cannabis acts as a "gateway drug" for you, you were probably going to get into hard drugs regardless of whether or not you ever did cannabis. Its a psychological fact that some people are thrill seekers. Some get their thrills with drugs, some get them with incredibly unsafe activity (rock climbing, sky diving, etc). Using the "cannabis is a gateway drug" argument is a ridiculous logical fallacy, because the gateway is not in the drug, it is in the mind of the user.

I say we legalize it. I may or may not have done it quite a few times, and I may or may not know that it isn't nearly as bad for you as drinking. It'd help the economy, not just by profiting from the cannabis, but from also all of the stoners that need to eat because they have the hardcore munchies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Limited

The only issue I see, is that pot can lead some users into harder drugs, such as cocaine and heroin which are

---

How is this any different to Alcohol???

Alcohol makes me angry and want to fight someone vs. marijuana makes me want to go buy and eat a bag of doritos... The junk food industry should be pushing for pot legalization.

Hahaha paladin you just gave me an idea. If prop 19 passes, buy stock in Frito-Lay. And yea, the junk food industry should be pushing for this. Why aren't they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EX12693

Hahaha paladin you just gave me an idea. If prop 19 passes, buy stock in Frito-Lay. And yea, the junk food industry should be pushing for this. Why aren't they?

---

PR shitstorm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EX12693

Hahaha paladin you just gave me an idea. If prop 19 passes, buy stock in Frito-Lay. And yea, the junk food industry should be pushing for this. Why aren't they?

---

http://mrldust.files.wordpress.com/2...pg?w=369&h=294

it has started.

Hmm.. I guess it would cause a shitstorm. Stupid political correctness.

Leo, I'd take my point back, but that pic looks fake. :/

As long as companies and laws are enacted to prevent marijuana smoking (and its included effects) in employment, during work shifts and breaks, and all forms of transportation and operation of transportation vehicles, then socially I won't care that much. Do I think it's great? No. But the economical benefactors to it are needed and as long as people are not high while operating machinery or transportation and working their job then I think it's relatively obsolete.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkHalo003

As long as companies and laws are enacted to prevent marijuana smoking (and its included effects) in employment, during work shifts and breaks, and all forms of transportation and operation of transportation vehicles, then socially I won't care that much. Do I think it's great? No. But the economical benefactors to it are needed and as long as people are not high while operating machinery or transportation and working their job then I think it's relatively obsolete.

---

This. Driving under the influence of anything is dangerous. It doesn't matter if it has a relatively small effect, you're still in control of something deadly and you better be in full control. As for smoking on the job, I don't think laws are require for that. If a boss is pissed off because someone's getting high at work all the time then the boss can just fire said person.

Like I said, It should be treated like alcohol.

Today's the day, we'll see how it rolls.

It'll be interesting to see how weed legalization will move around the world if this bill (?) goes through. You can grow a shitload of weed in 2.3 square metres ._.

As I suspected. Even if it passes, it still conflicts with Federal law, so really I have no idea how they intend to keep the DEA from bum-rushing the state.

Does anyone know what time the results will be available? It was supposed to be voted on today.

According to NORML, this will make marijuana completely legal, as depicted in the proposition, which is pretty plain and clear. Not sure about the details on the federal law.

polls closed at 8. People are still in line to vote. Results soon.

http://www.stickam.com/normlshowlive

Live coverage by NORML.

If this passes I'm having a few fucking beers. ... WA state :C

It's not gonna pass.

Prop 19 shot down

46% yes
54% no


to be honest though, I consider the fact that it was even on the ballot as a victory. That means that people are actually thinking about it.

wrap it up marijuanailures :realsmug:

If ANY court allows this bill to pass over the Federal laws that exist, it means that state laws voted on by the people trump Federal Laws, which opens a whole slew of lawsuits or new laws (Arizona Law anyone?)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dwood

If ANY court allows this bill to pass over the Federal laws that exist, it means that state laws voted on by the people trump Federal Laws, which opens a whole slew of lawsuits or new laws (Arizona Law anyone?)

---

I'm not even sure they can allow it. I wish I knew more about American legal process, but it definitely doesn't seem like it should even be possible to have a citizen-voted bill overrule federal laws. It almost seemed like people were fooling themselves, thinking "Nah, it's cool, if it passes, weed's legal", without any consideration to how federal laws come into play.

It's the same thing with states that have legalized medical mrihuana, Just because the local authorities don't prosecute, doesn't mean the DEA can't or won't come in and take you to federal court/prison.

they've had something similar in Oregon (Wa too?). basically the Feds try to bust you but the State won't help them. The Feds don't really bust users as much as they track dealers and organized trafficking. Without local law enforcement it's not likely they'll catch a lot of small time use-growers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thehoodedsmack

I'm not even sure they can allow it. I wish I knew more about American legal process, but it definitely doesn't seem like it should even be possible to have a citizen-voted bill overrule federal laws..

---

It's a question of the enumerated powers of the federal government as set forth by the tenth amendment. All powers not specifically laid down in the constitution or following amendments are to be inherited by the states as reserved powers. The real problem is the national regulation of the CSA (controlled substances act) which allows the federal government to lump a lot of drugs/meds/plants etc in one big group that the government can legally tax (and in most cases restrict the ability to pay the tax, therefore making it illegal).

Honestly, this is a US Supreme Court case in the making.

I think the radio had it summed up this morning: people for prop 19 were to chill to go out and vote.

Sad result, but glad to see that literally millions of people voted in favor of it. Right direction for sure... maybe in a few years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cojafoji

It's a question of the enumerated powers of the federal government as set forth by the tenth amendment. All powers not specifically laid down in the constitution or following amendments are to be inherited by the states as reserved powers. The real problem is the national regulation of the CSA (controlled substances act) which allows the federal government to lump a lot of drugs/meds/plants etc in one big group that the government can legally tax (and in most cases restrict the ability to pay the tax, therefore making it illegal).

Honestly, this is a US Supreme Court case in the making.

---

Basically this. I'm sure there are many state and local laws that actually violate federal law; it's just that they don't get repealed until the courts say it has to be after a case was brought up involving that law. That's just how it works here in the USA. Any court can actually call a law unconstitutional, but it can be appealed up through to the Supreme Court.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

Basically this. I'm sure there are many state and local laws that actually violate federal law; it's just that they don't get repealed until the courts say it has to be after a case was brought up involving that law. That's just how it works here in the USA. Any court can actually call a law unconstitutional, but it can be appealed up through to the Supreme Court.

---

I think a state loophole might be to declassify the drug as a scheduled substance, thereby eliminating the need regulate (tax) it. If a state were to do that, there's nothing the federal government could do. It would still be able to tax it, but it wouldn't be able to legally confiscate it, because it's not within the governments power to classify it AS such.

At least I think.

Its the federal government that does that classification. And if Cali makes it Taxable then they violate federal law. There's no doubt about it, but our current president was a pothead at one point so I doubt he'll prosecute :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dwood

Its the federal government that does that classification. And if Cali makes it Taxable then they violate federal law. There's no doubt about it, but our current president was a pothead at one point so I doubt he'll prosecute :P

---

It's the governments right to tax it. THAT'S IT. Nothing more. If it is legal at the state level, they should be bound to issue and collect those taxes. If they do not, then they would be in violation of federal law, because marijuana is TOTALLY legal with the proper federal tax stamp.

Actually, the federal government is only truly able to legalize a drug. Even if drug charges on a state level are abolished, its still a federal crime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cojafoji

It's the governments right to tax it. THAT'S IT. Nothing more. If it is legal at the state level, they should be bound to issue and collect those taxes. If they do not, then they would be in violation of federal law, because marijuana is TOTALLY legal with the proper federal tax stamp.

---

If they sell marijuana to any joe blow that wants it then they have to tax it. If it's taxable, they can do anything to it that they want, including remove it off of the market. I'm not sure you understand the commerce clause of the Constitution very well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dwood

If they sell marijuana to any joe blow that wants it then they have to tax it. If it's taxable, they can do anything to it that they want, including remove it off of the market. I'm not sure you understand the commerce clause of the Constitution very well.

---

I mentioned the illegality by lack of proper tax stamps on the last page. As for the commerce clause, if it all takes place within the state, growing, selling etc, then it really doesn't apply.

Needs more precedent.

Needs less federal penalties

21 USC Chapter 13, Part D

Penalties have no bearing on law or precedent. They are merely the end result of bureaucratic implementation.

Okay, but like I said before, its a FEDERAL crime to possess a controlled substance (marjiuana is Schedule I). Federal law trumps state slaw. So unless legislation is passed on a federal level, marijuana would still be illegal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paladin

Okay, but like I said before, its a FEDERAL crime to possess a controlled substance (marjiuana is Schedule I). Federal law trumps state slaw. So unless legislation is passed on a federal level, marijuana would still be illegal.

---

except the state won't prosecute you. they won't even arrest you. only the Feds would.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paladin

Okay, but like I said before, its a FEDERAL crime to possess a controlled substance (marjiuana is Schedule I).

---

Yes, yes it is. But if you'd read what I wrote, I think you'll find that I was proposing ideas and solutions so that it might be legal through certain restrictions/loopholes etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sleepy1212

except the state won't prosecute you. they won't even arrest you. only the Feds would.

---

yeah, decriminalization. Its what Amsterdam did.

But decriminalization != legalization

decriminalization is better than nothing

Here is the latest trend, I read this on an article. Legally-sanctioned cannabis sounded like a fantasy just a few years back. Now, legislators are looking into ways to tax the coveted weed, on both federal and state levels.

i never understood how hardcore marijuana addicts feel compelled to sign up for obscure forums to post their stoner propaganda

They do it because they love weed and doesn't afraid of anything. The man doesn't like it. Anyone else think this be like it do?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NneYaTano

Anyone else think this be like it do?

---

What the fuck did I just read?

Hats off to 8Prop19!

smoking is an form of expression regarding personal distrust and archetypal freedoms, retort if for reasons unbeknownst to willing minds if you aren't in full accordance. its been nice, perhaps another time or so eh

goodbye blue sky

redmond and WA reporting in, cops lol at you if they catch you with weed now. Of course Cali might actually get legalization right this time, unlike their last bill and WA's fucked up "you can't grow your own".