Why I'm voting NO on prop. 19

[underplay]

Oh, by the way, the local police have absolutely no right to even enter your home to make sure you are following the growing area requirements, they will need a warrant to enter your premises. Probable cause will no longer work.

 

[Sure Shot]

What's wrong with co-ops becoming obsolete?

 

[veggiegardener]

Medical users can still grow according to prop 215, prop 19 does not effect you if your a medical card holder, well ok, it does. It gives you more rights.

READ THE PROPOSITION!!!

Cultivation is purposely excluded from the protections.

I really think a literacy test should be required for voters...

 

[underplay]

First of all, co-ops will not become obsolete.

 

[mr.swishas&herb]

Don't read well?

I think you're probably going to be surprised when you read that bill and realize it is 25 square feet. Not 625 sq. ft.(Twice the space I currently use).

you should be happy you already have it better than most of the country...I am not a resident of California therefore my opinion on the topic is irrelevant, I was simply expressing the fact that a 25 square foot area would be the greatest thing I could imagine in my life so I feel that you should be greatful for the ability to smoke weed legally period They still make our medically ill citizens get hooked on oxy and opiates that are addictive.

 

[underplay]

READ THE PROPOSITION!!!

Cultivation is purposely excluded from the protections.

I really think a literacy test should be required for voters...

I really cant believe you...have you even read the bill?

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, it is lawful and shall not be a public offense under
California law for any person 21 years of age or older to:

(i) Personally possess, process, share, or transport not more than one ounce of cannabis, solely for
that individual’s personal consumption, and not for sale.

(ii) Cultivate, on private property by the owner, lawful occupant, or other lawful resident or guest of
the private property owner or lawful occupant, cannabis plants for personal consumption only, in an area
of not more than twenty-five square feet per private residence or, in the absence of any residence, the
parcel. Cultivation on leased or rented property may be subject to approval from the owner of the
property. Provided that, nothing in this section shall permit unlawful or unlicensed cultivation of
cannabis on any public lands.

Obviously you have not read the proposition, so I highlighted it for you

 

[veggiegardener]

What's wrong with co-ops becoming obsolete?

Cost to the patient.

Co-ops charge little or nothing to its members.

I'm not talking about "dispensaries".

A co-op is a group of patients who grow for each other or as in my case, benefit from the efforts of a member who grows.

The only thing we don't consume is some of the trim, which I trade to an edibles enterprise in exchange for brownies, etc.

 

[veggiegardener]

I really cant believe you...have you even read the bill?

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, it is lawful and shall not be a public offense under
California law for any person 21 years of age or older to:

(i) Personally possess, process, share, or transport not more than one ounce of cannabis, solely for
that individual’s personal consumption, and not for sale.

(ii) Cultivate, on private property by the owner, lawful occupant, or other lawful resident or guest of
the private property owner or lawful occupant, cannabis plants for personal consumption only, in an area
of not more than twenty-five square feet per private residence or, in the absence of any residence, the
parcel. Cultivation on leased or rented property may be subject to approval from the owner of the
property. Provided that, nothing in this section shall permit unlawful or unlicensed cultivation of
cannabis on any public lands.

Obviously you have not read the proposition, so I highlighted it for you

I see nothing relevant to my comment.

 

[underplay]

Hey veggiegardener, find a new job, once this passes, everyone will have cheap access to this beautiful plant, and the option to grow there own for free, instead of going through high priced dealers who take advantage of medicals users.

 

[underplay]

READ THE PROPOSITION!!!

Cultivation is purposely excluded from the protections.

I really think a literacy test should be required for voters...

I really cant believe you...have you even read the bill?

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, it is lawful and shall not be a public offense under
California law for any person 21 years of age or older to:

(i) Personally possess, process, share, or transport not more than one ounce of cannabis, solely for
that individual’s personal consumption, and not for sale.

(ii) Cultivate, on private property by the owner, lawful occupant, or other lawful resident or guest of
the private property owner or lawful occupant, cannabis plants for personal consumption only, in an area
of not more than twenty-five square feet per private residence or, in the absence of any residence, the
parcel. Cultivation on leased or rented property may be subject to approval from the owner of the
property. Provided that, nothing in this section shall permit unlawful or unlicensed cultivation of
cannabis on any public lands.

Obviously you have not read the proposition, so I highlighted it for you

I see nothing relevant to my comment.

Can you even read?

 

[underplay]

Does everyone here see where im getting at? Its CLEARLY obvious veggiegardener is spreading dis-information and blatantly LYING.

He is not quoting any law from the bill or making any factual statements, I really hope the people reading this don't believe this guy.

You know, for you lying to everyone and spreading this dis-info, i wouldnt mind seeing you suffer without your medicine.

 

[veggiegardener]

You are a complete liar, prop 19 does not prevent any rights that prop 215 gives. Your spreading dis-information.

Why dont you give this article a read and educate yourself instead of spreading bullshit for your own personal gain.

http://hightimes.com/blog/evan/6681?utm_source=rss_home

You haven't done the reading. You are ill equipped to argue a bill yoiu may have read, but refuse to understand.

The ONLY way to prove me wrong is to show me language that SPECIFICALLY protects the status quo of the medical grower.

You can't and saying you can is lying.

Who do you work for? Which dispensary? In Oakland?

 

[veggiegardener]

Does everyone here see where im getting at? Its CLEARLY obvious veggiegardener is spreading dis-information and blatantly LYING.

He is not quoting any law from the bill or making any factual statements, I really hope the people reading this don't believe this guy.

You know, for you lying to everyone and spreading this dis-info, i wouldnt mind seeing you suffer without your medicine.

You obviously haven't even read the whole thread, along with various links. Anybody who HAS read it can see you for what you are.

 

[veggiegardener]

Hey veggiegardener, find a new job, once this passes, everyone will have cheap access to this beautiful plant, and the option to grow there own for free, instead of going through high priced dealers who take advantage of medicals users.

Really hate being wrong, don't you?

You are, you know.

 

[underplay]

I think its you who are working for the dispensary.

Prop. 19 makes it perfectly clear that the Initiative does NOT give municipalities any control over how medical marijuana patients obtain their medicine or how much they can possess and cultivate as the purpose of the legislation was to exempt the CUA and the MMP from local government reach. Whatever control municipalities have over patients and collectives is limited by the CUA and the MMP, not by Prop. 19.

To further reduce everyone’s understandable anxiety over allowing municipalities to unduly control collectives, I direct everyone’s attention to the last statute of the MMP, 11362.83, which reads. “Nothing in this article shall prevent a city or other local governing body from adopting and enforcing laws CONSISTENT with this article.”

Since collectives are expressly allowed, local ordinances banning them are not consistent with the MMP. Health and Safety Code Section 11362.83, which limits municipalities ability to ban coops or overly restrict them, is unaffected by Prop. 19 as it expressly states in Sections 2B (7 & that the laws created by Prop. 19 must be followed "EXCEPT as permitted under Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9.”

 

[underplay]

Go ahead and start with factual evidence, i just provided multiple quotes from the proposition that proves, you are clearly, a liar.

 

[veggiegardener]

Health and Safety Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9

I've read that entire diatribe.

I've also read the language in the H &S codes.

WHAT YOU ARE MISSING IS THAT GROWING AREAS ARE NO WHERE MENTIONED. As a referendum, PROP 19 WILL SUPERCEDE Prop 215 BECAUSE Prop 215 DID NOT limit grow size. Do you get it?

Are you subtle enough to understand the consequences?

Accuse me of ulterior motives, but you're wrong.

I will NOT stop talking about this until Prop 19 is defeated.

The bill's language was designed to take away the rights of Medical growers. The corporations don't like competition.

By the way.

Fuck you.

 

[Sure Shot]

Cost to the patient.

Co-ops charge little or nothing to its members.

I'm not talking about "dispensaries".

A co-op is a group of patients who grow for each other or as in my case, benefit from the efforts of a member who grows.

The only thing we don't consume is some of the trim, which I trade to an edibles enterprise in exchange for brownies, etc.

What's the cost of gardening outdoors

This is the first time I've heard someone argue prices will increase.
What is your reasoning behind suggesting medical growers will suffer higher cost?

 

[miteubhi?]

I give up trying to reason with the unreasonable.

You will find your own truth regardless of what the words of prop19 says underplay.

You see an easy way to get cheap pot. Cool.

Enjoy slavery you ignorant fuck.

I don't like calling names but you sir, if I can call you that, remind me of school on Sunday.

No class.

Go be a bully on the playground.
You have a lot of learning to do underplay.

 

[veggiegardener]

I think its you who are working for the dispensary.

I went back to check. What you posted isn't in prop 19. It is a diatribe written by a lawyer probably hired by the authors of Prop. 19.

Get your facts straight.

You can find the bill linked on the first page of this thread.

Liar.