New Cali. Legalization Bill

Discussion in 'Marijuana Legalization' started by Proles, Feb 19, 2010.

  1. All of these legalisation bills are confusing me :p

    Is this the November one?
     
  2. This looks like ammiano reintroduced the bill, fortunately the ballot iniative will probably happen before this is even consider(correct me if im wrong). But the November one is not a Bill its a petitioned iniative from the people of california
     
  3. You are correct. Call it a backup plan.
     
  4. I dont know much about all this either but i think im correct the november one is a initiative the people of california will vote for it and this new bill is for the, i guess the govenment people to vote on it. Pretty baked right now. I might be wrong lol :smoking:
     
  5. This is not a ballot measure, this is the CA legislative bill being pushed forward by rep Tom Amiano out of SF.

    The flat reality of the matter is that the majority of our elected representatives arn't going to "risk" their political careers making marijuana legal, they'd much rather ignore the will of the people and accomplish nothing, which they percieve to be a much smaller risk than taking a controversial stance on something like Marijuana.

    God I can't wait to vote all those bums out, thats what californians should be focused on. Getting our dumbass career politicians out of power is the #1 best thing Californians can do for themselves, even as recently as December we had our brilliant leaders make it illegal to sell 80% of all HD TVs in california.

    Of course, it's not illegal to buy them, or to use them if you somehow manage to acquire one - That would be crazy! So the next TV I buy (in the next 12 months) will be purchased from an online vendor not based in California, they'll ship me the TV from Delaware or wherever free (it'll be a big TV), I'll set it up myself and look! Not a single dollar of it gets taxed by CA, and not a single CA based worker was employed in my several thousand dollars worth of purchase.

    Thank god they're stupid enough to try and jam all this shit down our throat same time we're having a major economic crisis both locally and globally so people are actually starting to notice, myself included, that the Gov. may not have our best interests at heart when they make the decisions on how we'll all live.
     
  6. Californians vote to legalize in nov with or without this bill and our vote in Nov, if it legalizes it, would be a lot stronger than Ammiano's bill. Ammiano just likes his name in the paper. Since its good for us overall, I'm glad he is an attention whore. Hes doing good work.
     
  7. #8 GoliathToker79, Feb 20, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2010
    hd tvs illegal in california is this yet another bullshit weak attempt to be go "green"?? thats starting to annoy the shit out of me. why 80% percent what bout the other 20% there legal?? im a bit confused that sounds like some crazy dumbass regulation right there??
     
  8. #9 vendetta777, Feb 20, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 20, 2010
    From skimming through both the bill and initiative, it doesn't seem like the Richard Lee initiative is that well crafted as it has many basic flaws to it(is it possible to make ammendments once passed?). First off lets look at AB 390, "Assembly Bill 390 calls for creating a regulatory structure for marijuana similar to that in place for beer, wine and liquor and allowing a state-licensed network of commercial marijuana cultivators." Ok, sounds good. Now lets look at the Richard Lee Initiative. "Richard Lee’s ballot initiative, called the Regulate, Control, and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010, would decriminalize possession of less than an ounce of marijuana as well as personal cultivation of up to 25 square feet of marijuana plants. Lee’s initiative would also leave the current penalties for all other marijuana-related crimes in place, and would leave the details of regulation and taxation up to individual counties and cities in California. This could essentially lead to the equivalent of “wet” counties and “dry” counties in California, potentially making things complicated for California courts.

    What the fuck? This seems to me to be just half-ass legalization and won't allow large commercial farms to drive the price down, but instead just keep prices high and benefit himself to maintain a monopoly over the supply and production in his own town. Richard Lee has become a fucking sellout to big business and i have no respect for this fucker. I hope that Ammiano's Bill passes before this atrocity of an initiative is voted on in November to avoid this bullshit.
     



  9. First off, I live in Seattle, not California, so maybe my opinion is worthless, but...


    I know it's easy to get upset at Richard Lee for not making this as full-blown legal as it could be, but honestly even this doesn't have an excellent chance of passing, if he made it any more progressive it would for-sure be shot down. Even if this is passed the initiative would still be up for voted and would take control, what it seems like Lee is trying to do and get things started and make things a little better until the initiative will take place in the beginning of next year.
     
  10. Err, yes it does. If the vote was taken last month in CA it would have passed with a 10% margin. Californians and Americans in general are ready for the government to be effective for once or get the fuck out of the way.

    Cannabis staying as a schedule 1 drug even 30 years after GOVERNMENT DRUG TRIALS determined that Cannabis would be effective at treating cancer, aids, glaucoma and a whole host of other ailments that do not have any other treatment that is a) more effective or b) less expensive. And of course the 14 states having medical cannabis laws on the books.

    From the federal controlled substances act:
    Realities in order...

    1)"(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse." Cannabis is not physically addictive, has no hangover and does not impair motor functions except at high doses. The governments own study determined that habitual marijuana users generally suffer NO degradation in their hand-eye coordination once they're comfortable being active while high.

    2)"(B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States. This one is really funny, Gov's own studies have shown for YEARS that it has significant medicinal value and is considered by many to be the most important plant (for medicine) since Aspirin, except Aspirin kills thousands of people ever year. Oh, and you can't grow your own aspirin. And if you sell aspirin in your pharmacy, you don't get raided by the DEA. Well, unless you're Bouncing Bear Botanicals

    3) "There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision."This one is my favorite. It actually not only specifies that it has to be dangerous, but that it has to be dangerous to a person who takes it WHILE THEY ARE UNDER PHYSICIAN CARE. Anybody here see a problem with this?

    The fact that Cannabis is still a schedule one drugs after literally 60 years of trying to make it go away is just one more example of how our government is far more concerned with controlling "its" citizens, than acting in our best interest. Whats coming is 60 years of built up pressure as global society attempts to regain a meaningful balance, and governments struggle to keep their populations submissive.


    Fuck. That.
     

Share This Page