Vote NO on prop 19... (great read for anyone that will be voting in november in cali)
- Thread starter sm0keyrich510
- Start date
- Status
Needofweed
Active Member
what i dont understand is, why anyone 18-20 years of age that can legaly grow smoke and posses mj under prop215 would vote for prop19 wich state very clearly that you must be 21 or older.
and people say 19 does not effect 215 .... bullshit
and people say 19 does not effect 215 .... bullshit
Needofweed
Active Member
prop19 is a peace of crap prop.
i smoke grow and buy legaly right now tax free.
in other words heres prop19 in a nutshell........government says give me as much money as i want and ill let you smoke grow and buy restricted amount of weed , and people say ok heres my wallet
i smoke grow and buy legaly right now tax free.
in other words heres prop19 in a nutshell........government says give me as much money as i want and ill let you smoke grow and buy restricted amount of weed , and people say ok heres my wallet
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
And we have that. Almost all polling data says we've got the votes. There is near solidarity amongst smokers in Cali. Log on to facebook and you'll see 173k people subscribed to the yes on 19 page. Look on the stoners against prop 19 page. 476 people. We have the support. The opposition to prop 19 in the cannabis community is a very tiny but very vocal minority.
Prop 215 is fantastic. I don't think many people disagree with that. It's the idea that only prop 215 patients are the ones who deserve legal protection makes me sick.
Needofweed
Active Member
Rancho Cordova is asking voters to make the city the first in California to approve a tax on home-grown pot for personal use.
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/08/29/2990210/rancho-cordova-asking-voters-to.html
brought to you buy prop 19
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/08/29/2990210/rancho-cordova-asking-voters-to.html
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/08/29/2990210/rancho-cordova-asking-voters-to.html
brought to you buy prop 19
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/08/29/2990210/rancho-cordova-asking-voters-to.html
Teeaytchsee
Active Member
its more than a difference of opinion when factual information is displayed and ignored on one side and not one of you opponents have given any legitimate sources. you are kidding yourself if you think your random fear based on hearsay is a worthwhile argument. give us something to go off. give us the information like we present to you and read the damn info that is presented before stating an argument against it. you can THINK whatever you want, don't state it as fact without something...ANYTHING... backing it up.
Teeaytchsee
Active Member
hence the purpose of a debate...
this is getting tiresome. you don't listen, assume everything we present is "opinion" no matter the source, and carry on with your same tired ignorant rant. i didn't dislike you, but im starting to. euthanize the stupid, let freedom reign on those that can yank their heads out of their asses long enough to get educated.
Teeaytchsee
Active Member
you dont understand it because you failed to read. IF THEY NOW HAVE A LEGAL RIGHT TO SMOKE, NO MATTER THEIR AGE, UNDER 215 THAT WILL NOT BE TAKEN AWAY OR CHANGED IN ANY WAY BY PROP 19. read dammit read!
http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/pdf...posed-laws.pdf
Teeaytchsee
Active Member
to save our lazy naysayers some time...
.
.
.
7. Ensure, if a city decides not to tax and regulate the sale of cannabis, that buying and selling cannabis within that city’s limits remain illegal, but that the city’s citizens still have the right to possess and consume small amounts, except as permitted under Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9 of the Health and Safety Code.
8. Ensure, if a city decides it does want to tax and regulate the buying and selling of cannabis (to and from adults only), that a strictly controlled legal system is implemented to oversee and regulate cultivation, distribution, and sales, and that the city will have control over how and how much cannabis can be bought and sold, except as permitted under Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9 of the Health and Safety Code.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7. Ensure, if a city decides not to tax and regulate the sale of cannabis, that buying and selling cannabis within that city’s limits remain illegal, but that the city’s citizens still have the right to possess and consume small amounts, except as permitted under Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9 of the Health and Safety Code.
8. Ensure, if a city decides it does want to tax and regulate the buying and selling of cannabis (to and from adults only), that a strictly controlled legal system is implemented to oversee and regulate cultivation, distribution, and sales, and that the city will have control over how and how much cannabis can be bought and sold, except as permitted under Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7 through 11362.9 of the Health and Safety Code.
.
.
.
Teeaytchsee
Active Member
crying about taxation is childish and not worth an educated response. good luck to you.
Burger Boss
Well-Known Member
And after reading the sacbee article, I see that the thrust of the proposed tax is toward PERSONAL USE, NOT MEDICAL!
If you are unable to separate personal, recreational use from medical use, don't worry, PROP 19 DOES!
LOL, and as if such an outrageously over the top tax could be imposed anyway!
Uhhh......keep trying Needy, it just gets funnier each time.
AND BTW: "prop 19 destroys 215 because of these words in the proposition:.............................................................".
Still waiting for that.....BB
Needofweed
Active Member
look man im voting no. its not my fualt you hate the "drug dealers" that suppply you now bet you didnt hate them before prop19.sorry you would rather buy your weed at a gass station.
and if u got your 215 card and are paying 60 an eighth thats your choice.
i got my 215 card because i get headachs for $60.you dont need aids or be dying to get your card.
you just need the want to live a better, more comfortable life.
i grow my own weed and buy it inbeetween harvest of other growers for no more than $120 an once for top grade medical of course.
Oh yeah and i pay zero none 0 taxes not 1.8 not 0.8 not 0.1 nothing.
and if u got your 215 card and are paying 60 an eighth thats your choice.
i got my 215 card because i get headachs for $60.you dont need aids or be dying to get your card.
you just need the want to live a better, more comfortable life.
i grow my own weed and buy it inbeetween harvest of other growers for no more than $120 an once for top grade medical of course.
Oh yeah and i pay zero none 0 taxes not 1.8 not 0.8 not 0.1 nothing.
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
If you think prop 19 allows for the sale of bud at gas stations then you clearly don't know what you're talking about.
If you think we should vote to keep prohibition so we can protect the profits of drug dealers then you're either insanely selfish or just insane.
I've got no problem with drug dealers (assuming they aren't gangbangers or others who bring guns/violence into the weed business). But if you think people should vote against ending prohibition to help protect their profits you are either a very selfish dealer or there is a screw loose in your head.
What about all the casual smokers who don't smoke enough or don't have any ailments so they don't need a 215 card? Why are you more worthy then them of legal protection?
Needofweed
Active Member
first off quit putting words in my mouth.
im not saying i want to "protect the profits of drug dealers" iall im saying is i bet he/she was your friend before prop19
now people that have been buying weed of these drug dealers are all for saying fuck off for all the years you supplied me with what i wanted.
Plus you dont need an "ailments" for 215 card, like l said i got mine for headaches not mirgrains just you average headache.
All you need is $60 and the want to live a better more comfortable life.
then you get all the benefits of prop 215.
what we need is a prop that take the necessary dr. recommendation out of 215 then that would be great .
im not saying i want to "protect the profits of drug dealers" iall im saying is i bet he/she was your friend before prop19
now people that have been buying weed of these drug dealers are all for saying fuck off for all the years you supplied me with what i wanted.
Plus you dont need an "ailments" for 215 card, like l said i got mine for headaches not mirgrains just you average headache.
All you need is $60 and the want to live a better more comfortable life.
then you get all the benefits of prop 215.
what we need is a prop that take the necessary dr. recommendation out of 215 then that would be great .
Burger Boss
Well-Known Member
Well, that little rant was just amazing!
I DON'T buy cannabis - I DON'T sell cannabis - I DON'T "HATE" anybody!
I point out that you were WRONG in your understanding of the sacbee article and you reply with another personal attack, and continue the rant with "gass" stations, 215 cards, $60 eighths, YOUR headaches, and most interestingly, your inability to grow enough smoke for yourself, to last season to season.
AND .........."Prop 19 desroys 215 because these words appear in the proposition:......................................................".
I am STILL WAITING!
Weedoozie
Well-Known Member
This is not necessarily true. Those cards that are $60 are worrisome to me as I see those as being less legitimate than the state issued cards. A friend of mine in LA got a card for "headaches"--just headaches--at one of those $60 card giving places and was still busted by the LAPD after the fact and the cops were trying to prove that his card wasn't valid because it wasn't state issued. They cut it in half like it was a fake ID. He was so pissed he wanted to sue them but the lawyer he could afford said he didn't have a case and that he should just drop it while they're not pressing charges against him. That was a messed up situation. I, on the other hand, am safe with my state issued card
Also, anyone with a card paying $60 for an 1/8 is being ripped off.
Needofweed
Active Member
what? did you skip this part?
The tax, which makes no distinction between medical and recreational cultivation, would cost a resident $15,000 a year if he or she cultivates pot in a 5-foot-by-5-foot growing space indoors
Needofweed
Active Member
this shit is happening it not funny
- Status