legalization in California! 3 threads merged! Get active!

[Reefer Rogue]

Cannabis will never be legalized through conventional means. This is because of the liability laws and the government would then have to apologize and admit they were wrong and they lied to people with false propaganda, prejudice and ignorance. If they legalized cannabis then the reparations would be so high from the claimaints who have had their liberty taken away that they would infact bankrupt the government. Thus, they must keep this just say no stance to save themselves. The war on drugs is a war with no end and a war without a chance for a truce or peace. Neither side will back down and therefore the side in power, the side who dominates, shall dictate. If we, the oppressed, don't make a consession of having a solution for reparations, it's never going to happen. We have to make an offer through an injunction or a class action suit or an intervener. The laws against cannabis are more harmful then the substance itself. Give peace a chance.

[8182KSKUSH]

The deadline has come and gone on this constitutional amendment. Not a word anywhere about it. The sec. of states site has not updated yet, but I am going to guess that it failed to get the required number of siggies based on the fact that the proponent of the measure is apparently non existent.
Nice.
I hope Springer accomplished what he/she set out to do.

[8182KSKUSH]

Maybe we could go ahead and take this thread down, or un-sticky it and bury it since it is now dead.

[painretreat]

Hi Kush, I am not so sure it is completely dead. There are some activist's in the Inland Empire trying other means, which take a lot of patience!
Have you checked all the info from the Attn: Gen Edmund G. Brown's site? Or Jerry Brown: He wrote a long article of his interpretation of the 215/420 laws the last week of August?? Pr

[8182KSKUSH]

I am very very certain that it is done/ was done the day it was proposed.
The deadline for gathering the signatures, and turning them in was Sept 5th.
Problem 2,
As per the guidelines on the sec. of states website, to gather signatures, there are certain criteria that must be followed. Within this criteria, the proponent has to fulfill certain requirements. So even if you or I would want to volunteer to collect signatures, we could not, because we would have to get in contact with Christopher Springer, whom has left no contact information at all with the sec. of state. I believe this was all a big gotcha, so that someone can say, "ha ha look at this, there was a constitutional amendment that needed in circulation to gather signatures to effectively legalize cannabis in CA, and the stoner's are so stupid not even 1 person signed it."
At least that is my suspicion. I don't know how else to explain what was happening, or in this case not happening. It's also telling, that to get this into circulation, you have to pay I believe $200, which is held in escrow, and then refunded to the proponent of the measure if the minimum number of signatures is met.
So why would someone pay the money, then leave no contact info, unless they never intended to collect a single signature in the first place.
I have seen a site here and there that is claiming to be gathering signatures on line, these folks are ill informed however. Signatures gathered on line are not valid according to the sec. of state. Also not well known, is that only signatures of registered voters are valid, within the county of their residence. There are alot of little rules regarding this process that many folks just aren't aware of apparently from what I have seen.
Do you know something I don't? Don't hold out on me IR! I would rather be completely wrong in this case, and still hold out a tiny amount of hope that I am.

Here is an excerpt from the guidelines as per the state of California for petition circulators:

Petition Circulators The proponent(s) of an initiative measure are required to ensure that any person, company, or other organization who solicits signatures to qualify the proposed initiative measure, whether they are paid or volunteer, receives instruction on the requirements and prohibitions imposed by state law with respect to the circulation of petitions and the gathering of signatures. Such instructions must emphasize the prohibition of the use of signatures on an initiative petition for a purpose other than qualification of the proposed measure for the ballot. (Section 9607) The petition may be circulated by a number of individuals carrying separate, identical parts of the petition called sections. Each petition circulator who obtains signatures must complete the attached declaration to the petition. Preprinted dates or generalized dates, other than the particular range of dates during which the petition section was actually circulated, are not allowed (Assembly v. Deukmejian (1982) 30 Cal.3d 638, 180 Cal.Rptr. 297). The declaration must be signed under penalty of perjury. It need not be sworn before a notary public or other officer authorized to administer oaths, but must include the circulator's signature, date, and place of signing (Code Civ. Proc. Section 2015.5). Prior to allowing a person to circulate an initiative petition for signatures, the person, company official, or other organizational officer who is in charge of signature gathering shall execute and submit to the proponent(s) a signed statement that reads as follows (Section 9609):

So you can see where the problem is.
I still don't understand why there was no, zero, zip, nada, mention of this from any of the so called "pot pseudo celebrity gurus" that all endorsed the prior initiative that was in circulation.

So what are you hearing in the grape vine? I am not in contact with any activists here in the I.E, mostly because the activists that I have been in contact with previously make me want to puke!
But I would love to hear what the talk around town is on this subject!

[8182KSKUSH]

1341. (08-0009) Marijuana Legalization. Individual Rights. Constitutional Amendment. Summary Date: 04/08/08 Failed: 09/30/08

Proponent: Christopher Springer

[painretreat]

Heh Kush, thanks for following this matter up for me. Appreciate it! Well, the I.E. is very busy with the Ronald matter, had a fundraiser last mo for him-did you go?

Pretty much, all is the same until the Federal gov't makes it legal! But, there is a lot of hard work in that direction! Are you aware of the 'educational meetings' and gathering info meetings. MAPP is pretty cool, you get real informed of what is going on locally, legally. Pretty good education-it is in Riverside. I attend as regularly as I can. The MAPP meeting are first Weds of each month in Riverside. lots of other stuff. Pretty much word of mouth in the meetings, but when and where the meetings-open to all legal users!

I think this is your thread, so on a personal note. has your sone caught anything lately? Should be a better time of year for fisihing! do you foresee the day you can put a worm on your hook and light a blunt with your son while fishing. I'd think that would be a very bonding, experience. 20 years ago, I would not have! PR

[8182KSKUSH]

Originally Posted by painretreat

Heh Kush, thanks for following this matter up for me. Appreciate it! Well, the I.E. is very busy with the Ronald matter, had a fundraiser last mo for him-did you go?

Pretty much, all is the same until the Federal gov't makes it legal! But, there is a lot of hard work in that direction! Are you aware of the 'educational meetings' and gathering info meetings. MAPP is pretty cool, you get real informed of what is going on locally, legally. Pretty good education-it is in Riverside. I attend as regularly as I can. The MAPP meeting are first Weds of each month in Riverside. lots of other stuff. Pretty much word of mouth in the meetings, but when and where the meetings-open to all legal users!

I think this is your thread, so on a personal note. has your sone caught anything lately? Should be a better time of year for fisihing! do you foresee the day you can put a worm on your hook and light a blunt with your son while fishing. I'd think that would be a very bonding, experience. 20 years ago, I would not have! PR

No I didn't, he didn't say anything to me about it. He had a couple at his house but I haven't gone to any others. Looks like he will be getting his trial date pushed back again. On a personal note, he seems very optomistic about how things will work out, so that's good! He's probably got the best read on the way things are going right now, so him feeling good is a good thing.
No I haven't gone to any meetings or anything. I have my hands full now and have been up to my kneck in "medical marijuana" and don't really have anything real positive to say about the political situation here in California to be honest. Much like the national scene. LOL. If you go though, try to find out
1. Who is Christopher Springer
2. What was the motive behind the constitutional amendment that was doomed to fail.
3. Why did the proponent for the measure leave no contact information so that people could follow up with him to collect legal signatures?

Most of all, BE CAREFUL, in those "meetings". I am sure I don't have to tell you this but, be careful, I would not put it past any DEA agent and or local LEOs conducting surveilence and or attending undercover. This isn't hear say or anything, just my first gut reaction to the thought of educational meet-ups etc going on you know what I mean? It's been a hell of a year.

As for fishing, no time lately, we just expanded our family and have a couple new pets that are eating every spare second of our time. In the short-term our fishing may be more limited, but we are now trading it off for a couple of life long companions for my son!