TokinPodPilot
Well-Known Member
Indeed and indeed. Those are the first rational things you've said.... too bad it wasn't intentional.
vote NO on legalized and TAXED
- Thread starter fdd2blk
- Start date
Indeed and indeed. Those are the first rational things you've said.... too bad it wasn't intentional.
Mindmelted
Well-Known Member
potroast
Uses the Rollitup profile
i'm voting against it because i don't believe in it. how hard is that? i have the right as a voter to decide for myself. i will not be coerced by guilt.
you are trippin'.
ink the world
Well-Known Member
Much of a hypocrite?
So it's OK for you to smoke and grow weed, but not to expose your kids to the idea of responsible use?
And for the record I just hired a new artist, she's smokes pot and gets paid $60 an hour for her skilled work. So much for a stoner not being able to get a job.
Fail.
Mindmelted
Well-Known Member
blazin256
Well-Known Member
i saw on the news where if this bill went through, prices of pot would go down to $38 an ounce. i dont know if that is true but if it is that would be dumb. if the price drops too much you would get people coming in from all over to buy up all they could, then go to states where its still very illegal, and make a killing. then guess who would benefit? the state itself and the drug smugglers (still). and people that really did need it, couldn't get it. again i dont know if that price drop is true but something to think about anyway.
undertheice
Well-Known Member
knowing what we do about the game of politics, it should be obvious that such news is aimed at discouraging certain segments of the population from voting for the measure. those who see this in merely financial terms and those who are making a tidy living off of weed's presently inflated prices may be scared off by the idea of a drop in price. of course legalization won't be the golden goose promised by some, but neither will it cause the bottom to drop out of the market.
this is a lie, directed at both growers and opponents.
growers will want to vote against it because their profits will dwindle (supposedly)
opponents will want to vote against it because at these prices pot will be readily accessible.
either way it is a lie.
the market will find a way to balance itself and prices will remain more or less the same.
and anybody who uses weed who votes against it being legal and taxed at any level is craaazy.
an opportunity for the repression to end and ppl actually consider voting against it. i guess weed does kill brain cells after all, or at least makes them retarded, or something....
every other crop that is commercially grown is taxed and regulated. it's gonna be the same with weed...... if you vote against this measure then you support with the status quo, because your vote will only preserve said status quo. if you are indeed unhappy with the status quo then you move to change it.
police putting you in jail for walking around with the flower of a plant.... and you are voting against this abuse stopping..... dumbass....
growers will want to vote against it because their profits will dwindle (supposedly)
opponents will want to vote against it because at these prices pot will be readily accessible.
either way it is a lie.
the market will find a way to balance itself and prices will remain more or less the same.
and anybody who uses weed who votes against it being legal and taxed at any level is craaazy.
an opportunity for the repression to end and ppl actually consider voting against it. i guess weed does kill brain cells after all, or at least makes them retarded, or something....
every other crop that is commercially grown is taxed and regulated. it's gonna be the same with weed...... if you vote against this measure then you support with the status quo, because your vote will only preserve said status quo. if you are indeed unhappy with the status quo then you move to change it.
police putting you in jail for walking around with the flower of a plant.... and you are voting against this abuse stopping..... dumbass....
this is a lie, directed at both growers and opponents.
growers will want to vote against it because their profits will dwindle (supposedly)
opponents will want to vote against it because at these prices pot will be readily accessible.
either way it is a lie.
the market will find a way to balance itself and prices will remain more or less the same.
and anybody who uses weed who votes against it being legal and taxed at any level is craaazy.
an opportunity for the repression to end and ppl actually consider voting against it. i guess weed does kill brain cells after all, or at least makes them retarded, or something....
every other crop that is commercially grown is taxed and regulated. it's gonna be the same with weed...... if you vote against this measure then you support with the status quo, because your vote will only preserve said status quo. if you are indeed unhappy with the status quo then you move to change it.
police putting you in jail for walking around with the flower of a plant.... and you are voting against this abuse stopping..... dumbass....
you do NOT go to jail in cali for less than an ounce. it's a simple fine.
you WILL go to jail if this passes and you have more than an ounce.
where is the change?
i love how you insult those who you are trying to gain support from. brilliant.
blazin256
Well-Known Member
honestly i can only see bad coming from this. the price drop might not be immediate, but once it starts coming down and causing "problems" in other states, the feds would likely come in and close it all down. i think to do any good it would have to be legal across the board in all states. then you wouldn't have a majority (maybe) of it going out of state and have others profit tremendously. if more and more states continue to decriminalize, use for medicinal, etc, it would just be legal period. any body got a link for what the bill is suppose to actually do?
FootClan
Well-Known Member
This is why i would VOTE NO BUDDY!! I dont mind that 1/3 of cannibas users in Ca are too dumb or lazy to go get there recomendation......I have mine and im allowed to posses up to 8 ounces in my county thats 8 not 1 or 2 or 4,5,6,7.. no 8 ounces So why would i want a law that would make that "8 ounces" go down to "1 ounce". hhmmm ?? 1 ounce or 8?? seems easy choice to me....
Also The dispensary that i volunteer at is very worryed that they will be forced to pay a very very large sum of money for these " permits" and honestly the owner cant afford them just starting out bizz takes lots of money. Granited more established dispensary's will make is becuase they have that kinda profit others will go out of bizz or be squezzed out by larger corps. thats my opinion anyways....
Also what is this 21 and up nonsense? and i cant even smoke in the same residence with somone under 21?? but i can get shitty drunk in front of my kids,neigbors, friends, family, lawin forment, public sporting events,?? what kinda crap is that??
I have friends that are prop 215 patients part of a colletive that are UNDER 21 would they become criminals?????? am i now a criminal for smoking with them?
" sorry prop215 patients under 21 you use to be a prop 215 patient now your just a criminal" is that how its going to go??
Also The dispensary that i volunteer at is very worryed that they will be forced to pay a very very large sum of money for these " permits" and honestly the owner cant afford them just starting out bizz takes lots of money. Granited more established dispensary's will make is becuase they have that kinda profit others will go out of bizz or be squezzed out by larger corps. thats my opinion anyways....
Also what is this 21 and up nonsense? and i cant even smoke in the same residence with somone under 21?? but i can get shitty drunk in front of my kids,neigbors, friends, family, lawin forment, public sporting events,?? what kinda crap is that??
I have friends that are prop 215 patients part of a colletive that are UNDER 21 would they become criminals?????? am i now a criminal for smoking with them?
" sorry prop215 patients under 21 you use to be a prop 215 patient now your just a criminal" is that how its going to go??
Leothwyn
Well-Known Member
I'm pretty sure the bill will leave medical user's rights unchanged. They're separate things.
I'm with you on the other things though.
I'm with you on the other things though.
you can't go and make shit illegal for adults just because children can get harmed from it. It's kinda like the right to have guns in your home. Sure some idiots gonna leave his loaded glock in the dresser for a kid to get but that doesn't mean I can't own a gun. It's like having aspirin around sure a kid could get the aspirin and eat half the bottle and die but that doesn't make aspirin illegal. Notice where this is going you can have stuff to kill a kid in your house and that's all fine and dandy but some weed around the home means the kids life is gonna be shit? Damn I have castor bean plants in my yard and that is legal you know what happens if something ingests those? Ricin poisoning but that's fine it's legal.
there are other bills in the works, this is NOT our only chance.
california is already collecting hella money from smokers. how much do they need?
obama ain't gonna allow any of it to happen anyways.
Leno Decriminalization Bill Passes Public Safety Committee
Posted June 23rd, 2010 by canorml_admin
SACRAMENTO, Jun 22 - The California Assembly Public Safety Committee approved Sen. Mark Leno's bill SB 1449 to downgrade petty marijuana possession from a misdemeanor to an infraction. The bill passed with no discussion by a vote of 4-1, with Ammiano (D-SF), Beall (D-SJ), Hill (D-SanMateo) and Yamada (D-Davis) voting aye, and Portantino (D-Pasadena) nay. The two Republicans, Hagman and Gilmore, abstained.
SB 1449 now moves on to the Assembly floor for a final vote. Similar decriminalization bills have passed the Senate three times in past years, only to be defeated in the Assembly. Sponsors are hopeful that the Assembly will change its mind this time, given the cost savings in the bill, the state's ongoing budget crisis, and the bill's support by the district attorneys and court system.
Read more:
4/20 Bills Pass Committees
Sen. Leno Introduces Cal. Bill to Make MJ Possession an Infraction
California Collects $100 Million in Cannabis Sales Taxes
Posted May 6th, 2010 by canorml_admin
Cal NORML Release - May 5, 2010
The California Board of Equalization reports that the state is collecting $50 - $100 million
in sales taxes from medical marijuana, confirming the estimate previously published in an economic analysis by California NORML (also independently affirmed by Americans for Safe Access).
California NORML currently estimates the state's retail market for medical marijuana at
over $1 billion per year in a total adult use market of $6 billion. An initiative to legalize
and tax marijuana for adult use will be on this November's ballot (see http://www.taxcannabis2010.org).
Opponents of legal marijuana, led by Los Angeles City Attorney Steve Cooley, have sought
to choke off the state's lucrative medical marijuana market by claiming that sales are
illegal. The state stands to lose $10s of millions in sales tax revenues and millions more
in enforcement costs if Southern California's dispensaries are closed.
"Marijuana prohibition is a losing proposition for California's taxpayers," argues Cal NORML
director Dale Gieringer, "On one hand it costs the state to arrest, prosecute, and imprison
marijuana offenders, on the other it deprives the state of valuable tax revenues."
Adult use legalization could net the state some $1.4 billion in revenues according to the
state's Legislative Analyst's Office, or over $1.2 billion by California NORML's estimate.
- Cal NORML Release 5/5/10
DEA Flouts Mendocino Medical Marijuana Ordinance by Raiding First Grow Permit Applicant
Posted July 10th, 2010 by canorml_admin
COVELO, Cal, Jul 7th 2010: The DEA flouted Mendocino County's newly enacted medical marijuana cultivation ordinance by raiding the first collective that had applied to the sheriff's cultivation permit program.
A multi-agency federal task force descended on the property of Joy Greenfield, 68, the first Mendo patient to pay the $1050 application fee under the ordinance, which allows collectives to grow up to 99 plants provided they comply with certain regulations. Ms Greenfield had applied in the name of her collective, "Light the Way," which opened in San Diego earlier this year. Her property had passed a preliminary inspection by Mendo sheriff's deputies shortly before the raid, and she had bought the sheriff's "zip-ties" intended to designate her plants as legal. In the days before the raid, Ms Greenfield had seen a helicopter hovering over her property; she inquired with the sheriff, who told her the copter belonged to DEA and wasn't under his control.
The agents invaded her property with guns drawn, tore out the collective's 99 plants and took Ms Greenfield's computer and cash. Ms Greenfield was not at home during the raid, but spoke on the phone to the DEA agent in charge. When she told him that she was a legal grower under the sheriff's program, the agent replied "I don't care what the sheriff says."
When she returned to her house she found it in disarray with soda cans strewn on the floor. "It was just a mess," she said, "No one should be able to tear your house apart like that."
Ms. Greenfield called the raid a "slap in the face of Mendocino's government."
The DEA has been tight-lipped about the raid, but claims it was part of a larger investigation involving other suspects.
"Here Mendo is trying to step out in front by passing this ordinance, and what do the feds do but raid the first applicant," commented Ms Greenfield's attorney, Bob Boyd of Ukiah. " The DEA is stepping all over local authorities trying to tax and regulate."
Neither Boyd nor other locals believe that the sheriff tipped off the DEA or gave them any information about permit applicants. Sheriff Allman has been highly supportive of efforts to bring local growers into the permit program. Nonetheless, observers fear that the raid will have a chilling effect.
"This raid is clear evidence that the DEA is out of control," said California NORML director Dale Gieringer. "A change in federal law is long overdue. In the meantime, the DEA needs a new director who will enforce Attorney General Holder's pledge not to interfere in state medical marijuana laws." The agency is currently directed by Michele Leonhart, a Bush holdover who has presided over numerous medical marijuana raids and has obstructed research efforts to develop marijuana for medicine. Obama has renominated her to head the agency - a move strongly opposed by drug reformers, who are calling on the administration to honor its pledge of change.
california is already collecting hella money from smokers. how much do they need?
obama ain't gonna allow any of it to happen anyways.
Leno Decriminalization Bill Passes Public Safety Committee
Posted June 23rd, 2010 by canorml_admin
SACRAMENTO, Jun 22 - The California Assembly Public Safety Committee approved Sen. Mark Leno's bill SB 1449 to downgrade petty marijuana possession from a misdemeanor to an infraction. The bill passed with no discussion by a vote of 4-1, with Ammiano (D-SF), Beall (D-SJ), Hill (D-SanMateo) and Yamada (D-Davis) voting aye, and Portantino (D-Pasadena) nay. The two Republicans, Hagman and Gilmore, abstained.
SB 1449 now moves on to the Assembly floor for a final vote. Similar decriminalization bills have passed the Senate three times in past years, only to be defeated in the Assembly. Sponsors are hopeful that the Assembly will change its mind this time, given the cost savings in the bill, the state's ongoing budget crisis, and the bill's support by the district attorneys and court system.
Read more:
4/20 Bills Pass Committees
Sen. Leno Introduces Cal. Bill to Make MJ Possession an Infraction
California Collects $100 Million in Cannabis Sales Taxes
Posted May 6th, 2010 by canorml_admin
Cal NORML Release - May 5, 2010
The California Board of Equalization reports that the state is collecting $50 - $100 million
in sales taxes from medical marijuana, confirming the estimate previously published in an economic analysis by California NORML (also independently affirmed by Americans for Safe Access).
California NORML currently estimates the state's retail market for medical marijuana at
over $1 billion per year in a total adult use market of $6 billion. An initiative to legalize
and tax marijuana for adult use will be on this November's ballot (see http://www.taxcannabis2010.org).
Opponents of legal marijuana, led by Los Angeles City Attorney Steve Cooley, have sought
to choke off the state's lucrative medical marijuana market by claiming that sales are
illegal. The state stands to lose $10s of millions in sales tax revenues and millions more
in enforcement costs if Southern California's dispensaries are closed.
"Marijuana prohibition is a losing proposition for California's taxpayers," argues Cal NORML
director Dale Gieringer, "On one hand it costs the state to arrest, prosecute, and imprison
marijuana offenders, on the other it deprives the state of valuable tax revenues."
Adult use legalization could net the state some $1.4 billion in revenues according to the
state's Legislative Analyst's Office, or over $1.2 billion by California NORML's estimate.
- Cal NORML Release 5/5/10
DEA Flouts Mendocino Medical Marijuana Ordinance by Raiding First Grow Permit Applicant
Posted July 10th, 2010 by canorml_admin
COVELO, Cal, Jul 7th 2010: The DEA flouted Mendocino County's newly enacted medical marijuana cultivation ordinance by raiding the first collective that had applied to the sheriff's cultivation permit program.
A multi-agency federal task force descended on the property of Joy Greenfield, 68, the first Mendo patient to pay the $1050 application fee under the ordinance, which allows collectives to grow up to 99 plants provided they comply with certain regulations. Ms Greenfield had applied in the name of her collective, "Light the Way," which opened in San Diego earlier this year. Her property had passed a preliminary inspection by Mendo sheriff's deputies shortly before the raid, and she had bought the sheriff's "zip-ties" intended to designate her plants as legal. In the days before the raid, Ms Greenfield had seen a helicopter hovering over her property; she inquired with the sheriff, who told her the copter belonged to DEA and wasn't under his control.
The agents invaded her property with guns drawn, tore out the collective's 99 plants and took Ms Greenfield's computer and cash. Ms Greenfield was not at home during the raid, but spoke on the phone to the DEA agent in charge. When she told him that she was a legal grower under the sheriff's program, the agent replied "I don't care what the sheriff says."
When she returned to her house she found it in disarray with soda cans strewn on the floor. "It was just a mess," she said, "No one should be able to tear your house apart like that."
Ms. Greenfield called the raid a "slap in the face of Mendocino's government."
The DEA has been tight-lipped about the raid, but claims it was part of a larger investigation involving other suspects.
"Here Mendo is trying to step out in front by passing this ordinance, and what do the feds do but raid the first applicant," commented Ms Greenfield's attorney, Bob Boyd of Ukiah. " The DEA is stepping all over local authorities trying to tax and regulate."
Neither Boyd nor other locals believe that the sheriff tipped off the DEA or gave them any information about permit applicants. Sheriff Allman has been highly supportive of efforts to bring local growers into the permit program. Nonetheless, observers fear that the raid will have a chilling effect.
"This raid is clear evidence that the DEA is out of control," said California NORML director Dale Gieringer. "A change in federal law is long overdue. In the meantime, the DEA needs a new director who will enforce Attorney General Holder's pledge not to interfere in state medical marijuana laws." The agency is currently directed by Michele Leonhart, a Bush holdover who has presided over numerous medical marijuana raids and has obstructed research efforts to develop marijuana for medicine. Obama has renominated her to head the agency - a move strongly opposed by drug reformers, who are calling on the administration to honor its pledge of change.
Sure Shot
Well-Known Member
Opposition to Pot Measure Gains Narrow Lead in Poll
http://www.cannabisnews.org/tag/proposition-19/Contrast to Earlier Results, Survey Finds That 48% of Likely Voters Are Against Prop. 19
Californians who intend to vote in November narrowly oppose Proposition 19, which would make the state the first to legalize marijuana possession and sales, according to a recent survey.
The Field Poll found that 48% of likely voters oppose the measure and 44% support it, a contrast with two polls taken in May that showed voters were leaning slightly in favor of the measure.
“History suggests that chances aren’t good when you start out behind,” said Mark DiCamillo, the director of the poll. But he said the results were close enough that the measure has a chance to win. “It depends on the quality of the campaign.”
The poll found a very high level of awareness of the initiative with more than three-quarters of likely voters saying that they have heard about it. Those voters back it 48% to 44%. But likely voters who had not heard about the measure until they were told about it by the poll takers oppose it by 2 to 1.
The initiative would allow people 21 and older to possess, grow and transport marijuana for personal use, and would authorize cities and counties to regulate and tax commercial sales.
DiCamillo said he expected opponents to assert that the measure will lead to more crime and addiction, while proponents argue that it will bring in tax revenue in a time of endless budget crises. “That’s where the tug of war is, societal impacts versus the financial benefits,” he said.
Roger Salazar, the spokesman for Public Safety First, an opposition committee connected to law enforcement groups, said the poll shows voters are becoming more skeptical. “Any time you have an initiative written as confusingly as this one is, people aren’t going to give it the benefit of the doubt,” he said. “There’s no certainty in terms of the revenues, there’s no certainty of how this is going to impact law enforcement and public safety.”
Dale Sky Clare, a spokeswoman for the Proposition 19 campaign, said the poll shows that the challenge will be to educate voters about the regulations the measure imposes and the tax revenues it could produce. “The folks that are familiar with the proposition itself, that have educated themselves on the proposition, find that they like it,” she said. “This is going to be a nail-biter to the very end.”
The Field Poll randomly surveyed 1,005 likely voters between June 22 and July 5, interviewing participants by telephone in English, Spanish, Cantonese, Mandarin, Korean and Vietnamese. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.2 percentage points.
The poll found that while white voters support the measure, Latino, black and Asian American voters heavily oppose it. DiCamillo said he was surprised by the intensity of the opposition. “There just might be greater concerns within the ethnic community about the social effects,” he said.
The Bay Area is the only region that supports the measure. Los Angeles County, where a quarter of the voters live, is split over it; San Diego and Orange counties oppose it.
Men are evenly divided, but women oppose it by 9 points.
Likely voters younger than 30 heavily support it. They are joined by likely voters between 50 and 64 who came of age during the Vietnam War. Likely voters who are 65 and older oppose it 57% to 33%.
Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
http://www.cannabisnews.org/tag/proposition-19/Contrast to Earlier Results, Survey Finds That 48% of Likely Voters Are Against Prop. 19
Californians who intend to vote in November narrowly oppose Proposition 19, which would make the state the first to legalize marijuana possession and sales, according to a recent survey.
The Field Poll found that 48% of likely voters oppose the measure and 44% support it, a contrast with two polls taken in May that showed voters were leaning slightly in favor of the measure.
“History suggests that chances aren’t good when you start out behind,” said Mark DiCamillo, the director of the poll. But he said the results were close enough that the measure has a chance to win. “It depends on the quality of the campaign.”
The poll found a very high level of awareness of the initiative with more than three-quarters of likely voters saying that they have heard about it. Those voters back it 48% to 44%. But likely voters who had not heard about the measure until they were told about it by the poll takers oppose it by 2 to 1.
The initiative would allow people 21 and older to possess, grow and transport marijuana for personal use, and would authorize cities and counties to regulate and tax commercial sales.
DiCamillo said he expected opponents to assert that the measure will lead to more crime and addiction, while proponents argue that it will bring in tax revenue in a time of endless budget crises. “That’s where the tug of war is, societal impacts versus the financial benefits,” he said.
Roger Salazar, the spokesman for Public Safety First, an opposition committee connected to law enforcement groups, said the poll shows voters are becoming more skeptical. “Any time you have an initiative written as confusingly as this one is, people aren’t going to give it the benefit of the doubt,” he said. “There’s no certainty in terms of the revenues, there’s no certainty of how this is going to impact law enforcement and public safety.”
Dale Sky Clare, a spokeswoman for the Proposition 19 campaign, said the poll shows that the challenge will be to educate voters about the regulations the measure imposes and the tax revenues it could produce. “The folks that are familiar with the proposition itself, that have educated themselves on the proposition, find that they like it,” she said. “This is going to be a nail-biter to the very end.”
The Field Poll randomly surveyed 1,005 likely voters between June 22 and July 5, interviewing participants by telephone in English, Spanish, Cantonese, Mandarin, Korean and Vietnamese. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.2 percentage points.
The poll found that while white voters support the measure, Latino, black and Asian American voters heavily oppose it. DiCamillo said he was surprised by the intensity of the opposition. “There just might be greater concerns within the ethnic community about the social effects,” he said.
The Bay Area is the only region that supports the measure. Los Angeles County, where a quarter of the voters live, is split over it; San Diego and Orange counties oppose it.
Men are evenly divided, but women oppose it by 9 points.
Likely voters younger than 30 heavily support it. They are joined by likely voters between 50 and 64 who came of age during the Vietnam War. Likely voters who are 65 and older oppose it 57% to 33%.
Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
bud nugbong
Well-Known Member
in my opinion the gov is still not sure how they will make money off of this. one of the easiest plants to grow that can really be grown almost anywhere. once it is legalized or whatever do you think you will really go to a dispensary to get bud. nah youll be out in the yard harvesting a fat ass tree. it will be like those who have veggie gardens. free ass cucumbers and tomatoes. shits gonna be 2.65$ a pound at the stores if they dont pull thier price control BS. hows that compared to 250 a zip.
the only down side is when your crusty ass neighbors leave a shit load of males out to spread thier pollen all over town. (i think it will be harder to grow outdoors without gettin pollinated)
i think they (gov) are content with making money off of the tickets rather than having something that they will never be able to really tax.
the only down side is when your crusty ass neighbors leave a shit load of males out to spread thier pollen all over town. (i think it will be harder to grow outdoors without gettin pollinated)
i think they (gov) are content with making money off of the tickets rather than having something that they will never be able to really tax.
Leothwyn
Well-Known Member
I picked up a newspaper called 'West Coast Leaf' or 'The Leaf', or something like that, when I was in a dispensary recently. It was packed with articles about people being arrested or bullied by local and fed. law enforcement. Being in humboldt, I guess I had the impression that the medical thing was working out fine. There's bullshit happening all over the state in more conservative areas. Just makes me more aware of what a mess it's going to be if this passes. I'm not saying people ought to vote yes or no... just that it's not going to smooth whenever it happens.
FootClan
Well-Known Member
this is a lie, directed at both growers and opponents.
growers will want to vote against it because their profits will dwindle (supposedly)
opponents will want to vote against it because at these prices pot will be readily accessible.
either way it is a lie.
the market will find a way to balance itself and prices will remain more or less the same.
and anybody who uses weed who votes against it being legal and taxed at any level is craaazy.
an opportunity for the repression to end and ppl actually consider voting against it. i guess weed does kill brain cells after all, or at least makes them retarded, or something....
every other crop that is commercially grown is taxed and regulated. it's gonna be the same with weed...... if you vote against this measure then you support with the status quo, because your vote will only preserve said status quo. if you are indeed unhappy with the status quo then you move to change it.
police putting you in jail for walking around with the flower of a plant.... and you are voting against this abuse stopping..... dumbass....
I think YOUR crazy for voting yes for somthing that you dont even know what your voting for..........your ready to vote yes but do you even know what your voting yes too....?? like fdd2blk said if your cought with over an ounce once law passes you go to JAIL!! right now im allowed to have 8 ounces in my posession........so for me 1 ounce would be like a step back not forward........why dont poeple see that?? its good for non medical users i guess but what about prop 215 patients?? its already legal for me so if everyone else is to dumb to go get there doctors note thats there prob i dont wanna be punished because those poeple rather have it legal and restricked to one ounce verse paying 100 bucks for there card...and come on have you guys seen the list for qaulifying ailments for medical cannibas its like two pages long pretty much everyone is a canidate for medical cannibas........just go down and get your freakn note then this law wont seem so good to you .........it only seems good to people that arent patients yet... of course that just my opinion and ive posted many posts on here trying to find ONE person that can convience me that this is a good bill?? so far NO ONE has givin me any info on as to why it would benifit prop 215 patiens........yes i know it will bring money to Ca but what does it do for ME ME ME ME ME I wanna know whats it do for me i dont care if ca makes more in taxes i mean really they already made so much off me from ticktets and the dmv and bridge tall and all kinds of ways they find to screw over its citizens so as far as im concerned fuck ca and making more money of me they can take some of those thousands they took from me over the years and put that to use.. so i just wanna know how is will benifit me and for me its already legal so i dont see how it benfits me when i can already carry half a pound around legally........