COMMENTS: 58
Legal Pot in California in 2010? "Oaksterdam" Provides the Model
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Drugs headlines via email.
There is a buzz moving through the culture, as the public attitudes around cannabis use are rapidly shifting, that the legalization of marijuana in some states, particularly California, is a growing possibility.
Recent polling by Zogby in May demonstrated that a majority of Americans, say it "makes sense to tax and regulate" marijuana. The Zogby poll, commissioned by the conservative-oriented O'Leary Report, found 52 percent in favor of legalization, only 37 percent opposed. As Ryan Grim reports on the Huffington Post , a previous ABC News/Washington Post poll found 46 percent in support. In California, a Field Poll found 56 percent backing legalization and as a result California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger called for an open debate on legalization, all which suggest that American society may be reaching a tipping point when it comes to legal pot.
An array of new circumstances -- Democrats in power, economic recession leaving states starving for revenue that could come from taxing cannabis sales, less funds for law enforcement and Mexican drug operatives moving into the US to grow huge amounts of untaxed pot, contributing to the horrible drug violence South of the Border -- support the growing public support for legalization of pot.
Anther element perhaps pushing changes to our pot laws is the gaggle of strange bed fellows who are outspoken on the issue. Former Secretary of State George Shultz and the late conservative economist Milton Friedman have been for legalization for years. But recently Fox News' latest conservative wild man Glenn Beck and CNN's much more reasonable Jack Cafferty have publicly questioned the billions spent each year fighting the endless war against drugs. They are joining the growing chorus that suggest it now makes more financial and social sense to tax and regulate marijuana.
At the epicenter of legal pot talk and strategic political action is Richard Lee, a highly successful pot entrepreneur, who over the past decade has turned the "uptown" entertainment area of downtown Oakland, California into what many call Oaksterdam, a play on Amsterdam, their sister city in Holland. A centerpiece of the Oakland transformation is Oaksterdam University which Lee founded to prepare people for jobs in the cannabis industry. As he told MSNBC, "my basic idea is to professionalize the industry, and have it taken seriously just like beer and distilling hard liquor." The University, along with half a dozen other "cannabis businesses," controlled by Lee bring thousands of visitors to Oakland daily.
California Pot Legalization Initiative
And it was Richard Lee who raised eyebrows among many last week, including some in the "drug reform establishment," when he announced an effort to qualify for the California statewide ballot in November of 2010, The Control, Regulate and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010, the first major statewide initiative designed to legalize marijuana for personal use.
Lee and TaxCannabis2010.org, the newly minted organization he started to push the initiative, calls for the legalization of small amounts of marijuana for personal possession by adults 21 and older, and allows cities and counties the option of regulating sales and cultivation. The legal amount would be 1 ounce for personal possession, with cultivation allowed in a space no larger than 5 feet by 5 feet.
Lee feels very strongly that the tide has turned among the public as the polls indicate. "This will be a landmark opportunity that will generate interest and funds nationwide," he said. If successful, the initiative will be viewed as a watershed "a first step in changing federal law."
Lee's group plans to send the initiative to California Attorney General Jerry Brown in July for the summary and title oversight required by law. Signature gathering will begin in August, with 650,000 signatures required by January to make the November 2010 ballot. An efficient political operation, with paid signature gatherers, as well as thousands of volunteers is expected.
Recently I spent a morning in Oakland with Lee touring the array of facilities that make up his Oaksterdam network, including his ownership of seven buildings in a few block radius. The fact that Lee is at the center of the legalization action is not a surprise, given his drive, passion and obvious business skills. In fact, it is tempting to say after spending time with the whip smart political advocate and businessman, that I have seen the pot future and it is Richard Lee and Oaksterdam.
Lee is not exactly a household word in political and drug reform circles. But based on his current media attention -- including Geraldo, MSNBC, and tons of print articles, he very soon will be the person most associated with pot legalization in America. Lee is no "Johnny come-lately," either. Over the past decade, he has taken major strides in building a cannabis business empire in the entertainment section of Oakland which includes new bars, restaurants, a rash of new highly designed condos, the popular Paramount Theatre, and the spectacular renovation of the famous Fox Theater, which lay dormant for many years. Lee joked that he heard that when the Allman Bothers Band played in Oakland recently, that the Fox enjoyed the pungent smell of pot smoke, a welcome sign for the area to be pot friendly. Much of the downtown growth effort comes from initiatives begun when Jerry Brown, now Attorney General and candidate for governor, was Mayor.
Stay up to date with the latest Drugs headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: macdon1 on Jun 15, 2009 1:10 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It is a religious discrimination
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: richholland on Jun 15, 2009 2:55 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
take a good look at the dutch situation although pot is legalised it is not free.
and prizes went up, 5 seeds for $ 60,before legalisation $ 5, 10 seeds if quality good.
in the coffeeshop no beer, no wine, no tobacco.
freedom could be grow your own weed.
no people in jail for smoking.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Hey guess what I think would be fun
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bcainw on Jun 15, 2009 4:53 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
=========================================
Why is it that neither Richard Lee, High Times, NORML, MPP or DPA will talk about the one real solution . . .
Allowing all adults to simply grow whatever they want without and taxation, regulation or other forms of government interference. The drug cartels would be out of business in a week; the sick would have access to cheap medicine (free to $30 an ounce) and about 27 Billion dollars would stay in the US each year.
That in essence is the MERP Model which is supported by Bruce W. Cain, John Sinclair and many others. Note that John Lennon, of the Beatles, came to John Sinclair's aid in 1971 after he was put in jail for 10 years for 2 joints. For more:
goto newagecitizen.com
Then click on "MERP Headquarters"
Then read all the articles and watch all the videos concerning MERP. If you don't have the time just read this one article for an overview:
How to Make Marijuana Free and Legal for For All Adults Within A Year:
Introduction to Your Involvement in the MERP Movement to Re-Legalize Marijuana Throughout the United States and the Planet
http://www.newagecitizen.com/MERP/RelegalizeNowObama00.htm
Under MERP personal cultivation is treated like a sacred inalienable liberty. The government cannot tax, regulate or interfere with personal cultivation. MERP does not preclude the government from issuing commercial licenses or taxing commercial sales. But it can do nothing about personal cultivation which will insure modest prices which is what is required if we REALLY want to destroy the Mexican Drug Cartels and insure that medical patients -- many who are unable to work and living in poverty -- have free (Marijuana grown outdoors) or cheap access to their medicine (Marijuana grown indoors).
Some call MERP radical but it is really no more radical than the way we treat beer and wine: you can produce both at home without taxes, regulation or other forms of government interference.
Richard Lee's upcoming initiative is more like the current hard liquor model: personal cultivation would still be treated as a serious crime -- just as with the moonshine distillers in the southern states (e.g., Tennessee).
Under Richard Lee's "hard liquor" model you will still be harassed and go to jail for merely cultivating you own Marijuana. Sorry Richy baby, but this is not acceptable.
Before launching your initiative you need to rewrite it to meet the criteria of the MERP Model. Otherwise I think it should be rejected.
As a "Ken Kesey Unitarian" (e.g., Read "Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test") and unabashed "intellectual hippie" I see through your self serving agenda and I REALLY don't like what I see. The hippies had it right when they attempted to break away from government "control" by establishing their communes and insisting on having full access to "Mother Nature's" favorite plant.
You need to also consider that as the economy tanks Marijuana can also be grown for hemp flour, hemp oil: both of which are some of the most nutritious foods on the planet. People will need to grow hundreds of plants for this purpose. Under Richy's plan this will never happen.
Richy. Wipe those "dollar signs" away from you eyes and rewrite you initiative to conform with the MERP Model. Otherwise you will be seen for what you are: a betrayer of the American People.
Yours in Peace and Freedom,
Bruce W. Cain
Note: always available for an interview
Contact me at: newagecitizenx@comcast.net
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: California law
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: Do Not Tax or Regulate Personal Cultivation. Got it?
Posted by: login@bugmenot.com
» RE: Do Not Tax or Regulate Personal Cultivation. Got it?
Posted by: pelican beak
» RE: Do Not Tax or Regulate Personal Cultivation. Got it?
Posted by: hedgewytch
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jstepp590 on Jun 15, 2009 5:26 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whether it's legalized or not won't stop me smoking it so I don't care about that. I do care about 800,000 lives ruined every year though. I also care about our government being bankrupted over it. Decriminalize it if nothing else.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: don't forget savings
Posted by: aahpat
» RE: wasted lives
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: don't forget savings
Posted by: Shrapnel
Comments are closed-
Posted by: aahpat on Jun 15, 2009 5:31 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Any legalization regime that makes it through the state houses and congress will be tempered by those fears. Even pot will be extremely, in many states, prohibitively regulated.
Getting America past the flat out prohibition of today and into the start of a legalization regulatory regime would be more than I would expect to see in my lifetime here in puritanical America. A state regulatory regime in 2010 in California, in any form, would be a dream come true.
Unlike prohibition, regulations can always be disputed and debated.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: They may have fears
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: A legalization regime
Posted by: Shrapnel
» RE: A legalization regime -- Amen
Posted by: aahpat
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Koondog on Jun 15, 2009 6:07 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Far, far, far more important
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LMNOP on Jun 15, 2009 6:10 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It's still wouldn't be enough incentive
Posted by: AngryWhiteFemale
» RE: It's still wouldn't be enough incentive
Posted by: LMNOP
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ellie on Jun 15, 2009 6:52 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
a doc told me that in this state, even the rx version of thc (marinol or sativex) is only allowed to be prescribed by cancer docs dealing with chemo treatment in stage 4 cancers (end stage, meaning death is probable within months) and they have to get permission from the medical board before writing the script and the pharmacy has to file with their board for approval to order in and dispense too which can take weeks or even months... this doc told me of several cases where the patient was already dead and buried before the approvals came in...
we are surrounded by 2 states that allow medical marijuana, but a bill has been tied up in the state legislature since 2004...
and this guy wants to set up a mini amsterdam in calif???
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: hell, we can't even get medical weed...
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield
» RE: that is an amazing religious prohibition you have, isn't it?
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: that is an amazing religious prohibition you have, isn't it?
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: You don't have to be an offensive ass hole, but you are
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: Native American Ceremonial Plants
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: You don't have to be an offensive ass hole, but you are
Posted by: bizeeb
» BTW lauren
Posted by: bizeeb
» RE: BTW lauren
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: You don't have to be an offensive ass hole, but you are
Posted by: bornxeyed
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Steven Eisenhauer on Jun 15, 2009 7:31 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: linecrosser on Jun 15, 2009 7:51 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: xvictor on Jun 15, 2009 8:18 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
KAHLEE4NIA, HERE I COME!!!!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: "Legal Pot in California in 2010? "
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: aaweeble1 on Jun 15, 2009 8:25 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
RT
Online Privacy when it Counts
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Toxic spy link do not click
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: Pot is illegal??
Posted by: AlteredStates
Comments are closed-
Posted by: peteralter on Jun 15, 2009 9:12 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: willymack on Jun 15, 2009 9:33 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Things like cold, hard FACTS have never been an impediment to our people squaring off with one another and engaging in acrimonious debates over the merits or demerits of this or that.
All kinds of things come into play here, and all kinds of characters emerge from the woodwork to further muddle the picture with their take on the subject.
It then boils down to a "for" or "against" argument with us vs them overtones.
The basis for the acrimony is the false premise that there are (always) two sides to every argument, and that since everyone is entitled to his opinion, both sides must be valid, therefore TRUE.
The corrosive nature of this mindset is exploited by those only too willing to use it for their own selfish ends. The phony "war on drugs" is no exception.
Let's face it; people are making MONEY from the "war on drugs". They're the WRONG people, and they're certainly not good people.
There's really only ONE side to this issue and one true solution, and that involves ending the costly and futile "war on drugs", and pulling the rug out from underneath the crooks profiting from it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: John More on Jun 15, 2009 10:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: masthead on Jun 15, 2009 10:37 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: cannabis, another opiate for the masses, sold today is not the same as it was in the sixties
Posted by: Shrapnel
» RE: cannabis, another opiate for the masses, sold today is not the same as it was in the sixties
Posted by: pomes
» and unlike your blow habit
Posted by: pomes
» RE: cannabis, another opiate for the masses, sold today is not the same as it was in the sixties
Posted by: bizeeb
» even if that were true, so what?
Posted by: P.E.A.C.E.
» RE: cannabis, another opiate for the masses, sold today is not the same as it was in the sixties
Posted by: flaplather
» RE: cannabis, another opiate for the masses, sold today is not the same as it was in the sixties
Posted by: AlteredStates
» Prison can damage a brain permanently too but
Posted by: aahpat
» Dude, if you can't trust your dealer,
Posted by: hedgewytch
Comments are closed-
Posted by: P.E.A.C.E. on Jun 15, 2009 12:14 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"We The People" are being illegally prosecuted for growing "every herb bearing seed" - in violation of the First Amendment "freedom of religion"-- how can intelligent, freedom-loving people not understand that? Isn't a federal, Constitutional defense stronger than a medical marijuana, Prop 215 defense?
Cannabis is nutritionally unique and essential.
Cannabis is the only crop that produces food and fuel form the same harvest.
Cannabis is the only crop that produces enough atmospheric monterpenes to stop global broiling and global warming.
If Alternet is so progressive, then why haven't the strongest arguments been given the consideration they are due?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bongjamesbong2001 on Jun 15, 2009 1:05 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The power to tax is the power to destroy," so wrote Chief Justice John Marshall, back about 1828, for the US Supreme Court. The idea was not new then. Muslims have been taxing non-Muslims into oblivion for 1400 years in Muslim countries, following the dictates of the Qu'ran, their holy book. So it could well be for taxation and cannabis. You get greedy legislators mixed up in the taxation bill, and soon you have a whole bunch of cannabis tax prisoners taxed OUT of the cannabis market and their liberties and into the next State Prison. Isn't that already what's happening in states like Iowa, where every cannabis arrest is accompanied by a charge of failing to pay the cannabis tax (even if doing so would cause you to get arrested on a possession charge--an obvious violation of the US CONSTITUTION)? Why pay tax on something you grow in your living room for your own personal consumption? So some guy can claim legitimacy for a dubious business complex that teeters on being forfeited every day?
The real question is, IS the legislature already skimming off more money through fines and bail and forfeitures than it would be getting by taxing? With the current system, the NATIONAL POLICE STATE PAYS FOR ITSELF and provides the powers that be with the muscle to throw around. A TAX STATE would involve lots of expensive accountants and would not give the bullcops the power to make as free as establishment wants with their constituents. Prison is the endstation anyway, why make it more complicated to get there than is needed? THIS is the way the Establishment thinks.
We don't need a cannabis tax. I want to grow it and toke it without some accountant AND a cop sticking their noses through my front door. Getting rid of 80% of our prisons and cops is the most efficient way of reducing taxes and restoring State budgets to the point where they can provide citizens with services instead of punishment.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mtatasmith on Jun 15, 2009 8:43 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: xmvince on Jun 16, 2009 7:20 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Voicedude on Jun 16, 2009 4:38 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They'll legalize, and then control and tax the crap out of it. So what? It's the same thing they do not only with cigarettes and alcohol, but also gas, milk, bread and more. (In case you didn't know it, most of the cost of bread is taxes, folks!) Plus they'll slap the same legal limitations on it that they've already got on both cigarettes and alcohol, and I'm all for that too! Keep it away from kids and off the road.
In short, it's time for my state to lead once again. Especially with how bad we behaved with Prop 8.
We really don't have a fiscal choice, and the rest is long overdue...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Aquinas on Jun 20, 2009 4:31 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Think about it for a minute and see if it doesn't drive you buggy.
I think people could understand if alcohol were declared illegal, as it has a very bad history, but even alcohol occurs naturally in certain fermenting crops. I can't get over the supreme arrogance of any individual looking at a naturally growing plant and declaring it illegal henceforth. If this arrogant trend continues, can we look forward to someday having a room full of potted plants, through which our wise legislators can parade, while pointing out which one they consider illegal ?
That's the closest thing to behaving like a god that I can think of.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: macdon1 on Jun 15, 2009 1:10 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It is a religious discrimination
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: richholland on Jun 15, 2009 2:55 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
take a good look at the dutch situation although pot is legalised it is not free.
and prizes went up, 5 seeds for $ 60,before legalisation $ 5, 10 seeds if quality good.
in the coffeeshop no beer, no wine, no tobacco.
freedom could be grow your own weed.
no people in jail for smoking.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Hey guess what I think would be fun
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bcainw on Jun 15, 2009 4:53 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
=========================================
Why is it that neither Richard Lee, High Times, NORML, MPP or DPA will talk about the one real solution . . .
Allowing all adults to simply grow whatever they want without and taxation, regulation or other forms of government interference. The drug cartels would be out of business in a week; the sick would have access to cheap medicine (free to $30 an ounce) and about 27 Billion dollars would stay in the US each year.
That in essence is the MERP Model which is supported by Bruce W. Cain, John Sinclair and many others. Note that John Lennon, of the Beatles, came to John Sinclair's aid in 1971 after he was put in jail for 10 years for 2 joints. For more:
goto newagecitizen.com
Then click on "MERP Headquarters"
Then read all the articles and watch all the videos concerning MERP. If you don't have the time just read this one article for an overview:
How to Make Marijuana Free and Legal for For All Adults Within A Year:
Introduction to Your Involvement in the MERP Movement to Re-Legalize Marijuana Throughout the United States and the Planet
http://www.newagecitizen.com/MERP/RelegalizeNowObama00.htm
Under MERP personal cultivation is treated like a sacred inalienable liberty. The government cannot tax, regulate or interfere with personal cultivation. MERP does not preclude the government from issuing commercial licenses or taxing commercial sales. But it can do nothing about personal cultivation which will insure modest prices which is what is required if we REALLY want to destroy the Mexican Drug Cartels and insure that medical patients -- many who are unable to work and living in poverty -- have free (Marijuana grown outdoors) or cheap access to their medicine (Marijuana grown indoors).
Some call MERP radical but it is really no more radical than the way we treat beer and wine: you can produce both at home without taxes, regulation or other forms of government interference.
Richard Lee's upcoming initiative is more like the current hard liquor model: personal cultivation would still be treated as a serious crime -- just as with the moonshine distillers in the southern states (e.g., Tennessee).
Under Richard Lee's "hard liquor" model you will still be harassed and go to jail for merely cultivating you own Marijuana. Sorry Richy baby, but this is not acceptable.
Before launching your initiative you need to rewrite it to meet the criteria of the MERP Model. Otherwise I think it should be rejected.
As a "Ken Kesey Unitarian" (e.g., Read "Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test") and unabashed "intellectual hippie" I see through your self serving agenda and I REALLY don't like what I see. The hippies had it right when they attempted to break away from government "control" by establishing their communes and insisting on having full access to "Mother Nature's" favorite plant.
You need to also consider that as the economy tanks Marijuana can also be grown for hemp flour, hemp oil: both of which are some of the most nutritious foods on the planet. People will need to grow hundreds of plants for this purpose. Under Richy's plan this will never happen.
Richy. Wipe those "dollar signs" away from you eyes and rewrite you initiative to conform with the MERP Model. Otherwise you will be seen for what you are: a betrayer of the American People.
Yours in Peace and Freedom,
Bruce W. Cain
Note: always available for an interview
Contact me at: newagecitizenx@comcast.net
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: California law
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: Do Not Tax or Regulate Personal Cultivation. Got it?
Posted by: login@bugmenot.com
» RE: Do Not Tax or Regulate Personal Cultivation. Got it?
Posted by: pelican beak
» RE: Do Not Tax or Regulate Personal Cultivation. Got it?
Posted by: hedgewytch
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jstepp590 on Jun 15, 2009 5:26 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whether it's legalized or not won't stop me smoking it so I don't care about that. I do care about 800,000 lives ruined every year though. I also care about our government being bankrupted over it. Decriminalize it if nothing else.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: don't forget savings
Posted by: aahpat
» RE: wasted lives
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: don't forget savings
Posted by: Shrapnel
Comments are closed-
Posted by: aahpat on Jun 15, 2009 5:31 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Any legalization regime that makes it through the state houses and congress will be tempered by those fears. Even pot will be extremely, in many states, prohibitively regulated.
Getting America past the flat out prohibition of today and into the start of a legalization regulatory regime would be more than I would expect to see in my lifetime here in puritanical America. A state regulatory regime in 2010 in California, in any form, would be a dream come true.
Unlike prohibition, regulations can always be disputed and debated.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: They may have fears
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: A legalization regime
Posted by: Shrapnel
» RE: A legalization regime -- Amen
Posted by: aahpat
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Koondog on Jun 15, 2009 6:07 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Far, far, far more important
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LMNOP on Jun 15, 2009 6:10 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It's still wouldn't be enough incentive
Posted by: AngryWhiteFemale
» RE: It's still wouldn't be enough incentive
Posted by: LMNOP
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ellie on Jun 15, 2009 6:52 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
a doc told me that in this state, even the rx version of thc (marinol or sativex) is only allowed to be prescribed by cancer docs dealing with chemo treatment in stage 4 cancers (end stage, meaning death is probable within months) and they have to get permission from the medical board before writing the script and the pharmacy has to file with their board for approval to order in and dispense too which can take weeks or even months... this doc told me of several cases where the patient was already dead and buried before the approvals came in...
we are surrounded by 2 states that allow medical marijuana, but a bill has been tied up in the state legislature since 2004...
and this guy wants to set up a mini amsterdam in calif???
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: hell, we can't even get medical weed...
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield
» RE: that is an amazing religious prohibition you have, isn't it?
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: that is an amazing religious prohibition you have, isn't it?
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: You don't have to be an offensive ass hole, but you are
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: Native American Ceremonial Plants
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: You don't have to be an offensive ass hole, but you are
Posted by: bizeeb
» BTW lauren
Posted by: bizeeb
» RE: BTW lauren
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: You don't have to be an offensive ass hole, but you are
Posted by: bornxeyed
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Steven Eisenhauer on Jun 15, 2009 7:31 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: linecrosser on Jun 15, 2009 7:51 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: xvictor on Jun 15, 2009 8:18 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
KAHLEE4NIA, HERE I COME!!!!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: "Legal Pot in California in 2010? "
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: aaweeble1 on Jun 15, 2009 8:25 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
RT
Online Privacy when it Counts
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Toxic spy link do not click
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: Pot is illegal??
Posted by: AlteredStates
Comments are closed-
Posted by: peteralter on Jun 15, 2009 9:12 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: willymack on Jun 15, 2009 9:33 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Things like cold, hard FACTS have never been an impediment to our people squaring off with one another and engaging in acrimonious debates over the merits or demerits of this or that.
All kinds of things come into play here, and all kinds of characters emerge from the woodwork to further muddle the picture with their take on the subject.
It then boils down to a "for" or "against" argument with us vs them overtones.
The basis for the acrimony is the false premise that there are (always) two sides to every argument, and that since everyone is entitled to his opinion, both sides must be valid, therefore TRUE.
The corrosive nature of this mindset is exploited by those only too willing to use it for their own selfish ends. The phony "war on drugs" is no exception.
Let's face it; people are making MONEY from the "war on drugs". They're the WRONG people, and they're certainly not good people.
There's really only ONE side to this issue and one true solution, and that involves ending the costly and futile "war on drugs", and pulling the rug out from underneath the crooks profiting from it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: John More on Jun 15, 2009 10:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: masthead on Jun 15, 2009 10:37 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: cannabis, another opiate for the masses, sold today is not the same as it was in the sixties
Posted by: Shrapnel
» RE: cannabis, another opiate for the masses, sold today is not the same as it was in the sixties
Posted by: pomes
» and unlike your blow habit
Posted by: pomes
» RE: cannabis, another opiate for the masses, sold today is not the same as it was in the sixties
Posted by: bizeeb
» even if that were true, so what?
Posted by: P.E.A.C.E.
» RE: cannabis, another opiate for the masses, sold today is not the same as it was in the sixties
Posted by: flaplather
» RE: cannabis, another opiate for the masses, sold today is not the same as it was in the sixties
Posted by: AlteredStates
» Prison can damage a brain permanently too but
Posted by: aahpat
» Dude, if you can't trust your dealer,
Posted by: hedgewytch
Comments are closed-
Posted by: P.E.A.C.E. on Jun 15, 2009 12:14 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"We The People" are being illegally prosecuted for growing "every herb bearing seed" - in violation of the First Amendment "freedom of religion"-- how can intelligent, freedom-loving people not understand that? Isn't a federal, Constitutional defense stronger than a medical marijuana, Prop 215 defense?
Cannabis is nutritionally unique and essential.
Cannabis is the only crop that produces food and fuel form the same harvest.
Cannabis is the only crop that produces enough atmospheric monterpenes to stop global broiling and global warming.
If Alternet is so progressive, then why haven't the strongest arguments been given the consideration they are due?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bongjamesbong2001 on Jun 15, 2009 1:05 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The power to tax is the power to destroy," so wrote Chief Justice John Marshall, back about 1828, for the US Supreme Court. The idea was not new then. Muslims have been taxing non-Muslims into oblivion for 1400 years in Muslim countries, following the dictates of the Qu'ran, their holy book. So it could well be for taxation and cannabis. You get greedy legislators mixed up in the taxation bill, and soon you have a whole bunch of cannabis tax prisoners taxed OUT of the cannabis market and their liberties and into the next State Prison. Isn't that already what's happening in states like Iowa, where every cannabis arrest is accompanied by a charge of failing to pay the cannabis tax (even if doing so would cause you to get arrested on a possession charge--an obvious violation of the US CONSTITUTION)? Why pay tax on something you grow in your living room for your own personal consumption? So some guy can claim legitimacy for a dubious business complex that teeters on being forfeited every day?
The real question is, IS the legislature already skimming off more money through fines and bail and forfeitures than it would be getting by taxing? With the current system, the NATIONAL POLICE STATE PAYS FOR ITSELF and provides the powers that be with the muscle to throw around. A TAX STATE would involve lots of expensive accountants and would not give the bullcops the power to make as free as establishment wants with their constituents. Prison is the endstation anyway, why make it more complicated to get there than is needed? THIS is the way the Establishment thinks.
We don't need a cannabis tax. I want to grow it and toke it without some accountant AND a cop sticking their noses through my front door. Getting rid of 80% of our prisons and cops is the most efficient way of reducing taxes and restoring State budgets to the point where they can provide citizens with services instead of punishment.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mtatasmith on Jun 15, 2009 8:43 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: xmvince on Jun 16, 2009 7:20 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Voicedude on Jun 16, 2009 4:38 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They'll legalize, and then control and tax the crap out of it. So what? It's the same thing they do not only with cigarettes and alcohol, but also gas, milk, bread and more. (In case you didn't know it, most of the cost of bread is taxes, folks!) Plus they'll slap the same legal limitations on it that they've already got on both cigarettes and alcohol, and I'm all for that too! Keep it away from kids and off the road.
In short, it's time for my state to lead once again. Especially with how bad we behaved with Prop 8.
We really don't have a fiscal choice, and the rest is long overdue...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Aquinas on Jun 20, 2009 4:31 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Think about it for a minute and see if it doesn't drive you buggy.
I think people could understand if alcohol were declared illegal, as it has a very bad history, but even alcohol occurs naturally in certain fermenting crops. I can't get over the supreme arrogance of any individual looking at a naturally growing plant and declaring it illegal henceforth. If this arrogant trend continues, can we look forward to someday having a room full of potted plants, through which our wise legislators can parade, while pointing out which one they consider illegal ?
That's the closest thing to behaving like a god that I can think of.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
NYC Police Accused of 'Anal Assault' Over Marijuana Use
Do Employers Really Need to Give Drug Tests for Pot?
False Claims on Rockefeller Drug Law Reform Lead to Credibility Gap for Prosecutors




