Read more: Chances are high pot measure will pass

Chances are high pot measure will pass
Willie Brown

Sunday, September 27, 2009

That proposed ballot initiative to legalize marijuana in California for people 21 and older - and let local government tax the sales - has a good chance of passing.

People are no longer outraged by the idea of legalization, and truth be told, there is just too much money to be made both by the people who grow marijuana and the cities and counties that would be able to tax it.

Unlike the 1970s, when Mayor George Moscone first moved to decriminalize pot, marijuana is no longer about hippies. Thanks to medical marijuana, pot has moved from the alleyways to Main Street, with pot clubs springing up all over the state.

And let's be honest for a moment. How many of the people going into those clubs do you think are really sick? Anyone who has observed those operations knows that much of the pot is being used recreationally anyway, so we might as well have a discussion about whether to bring it out in the open.

You might think the Legislature would pick up on this, and indeed Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, has made a proposal to legalize and tax pot. But although legalizing marijuana fits both Republicans' libertarian instincts and Democrats' progressivism, they won't touch it with a 10-foot-long pack of rolling papers.

For all our weak-kneed politicians, however, I don't see any organized opposition to legal pot on the horizon. So if the pot growers put their money in the right places, they win in 2010.

__________________

Great to see. I never thought I would see it in my lifetime. To be fair about the recreational use. I think more the beneficial effects it has on people, I think its even more beneficail the high associated with the use. The government keeps trying to make that out to be such a horrible thing but its not.

i absolutely agree, killerweed, the "buzz" in and of itself obviously has value for some. that is reason eneough to allow free adults to decide to pertake if they wish to. its really none of their business anyways.

that's my biggest gripe regarding anti-marijuana laws, (that the government does not have the right, to tell me I can't use cannabis) ... I shouldn't have to rely on medical-marijuana allowances, to half-assed 'protect' me ... now, that the question of Taxation has hit the mainstream news, I can finally see legalization happening, eventually ... ain't nothin' that changes Congressional votes faster, than CASH! ... $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

__________________
" keep it simple, it's a WEED ! "

" when in doubt, imitate Nature "

" 2008 people voted for Obama to prove they weren't racists.....in 2010 they will vote to show they arent socialists " - Islandborn

this is bittersweet, at best.


better read that bill thoroughly before supporting it.



edit: I agree with you imagereaper, that's one problem I have with it being criminal too. however, having the GOV control, manufacture, tax, and regulate my favorite flower doesn't sound like a good option either.

can someone convince me that legalization is a good thing?

I've got a somewhat unrelated question. Do you HAVE to be a CA resident to get a medical card or is there way around it?

that is great question. i was born in Cali but don't live there anymore so i'll try to stay out of the debate, but . . . i tend to agree with the Mayor that the local growers will be the winners if this passes. the way this bill is worded it allows counties but does not force them to legalize sales, so the change over should be fairly limited at first. Probably just SF and Oaksterdam for a while. It would still take some serious cajone's for the counties and cities to basically tell the feds to f' themselves with their stupid little cannabis laws.

but i could be wrong. maybe the status quo is best for the growers and the patients.

as an outsider, i support this if it means i can hop a plane to Oaksterdam and legally purchase cannabis, being an adult and all. I'm not sure if this new law would only apply to Cali citizens but I would think the counties and cities could hammer out all those details later.

but, to answer the question from mrchanger, I don't live in Cali and I'm not an attorney but yes, you must be a Californian to qualify for Prop 215. I don't think there are any legal ways around that but others with medical and/or legal backgrounds would know better than me. I would hope that there is some sort of emergency allowance for people with, for example, cancer who need it for chemo or something, but I'm not even really sure about that. Someone from California would know a lot more than me.

oh yeah, and the way i read this, the distribution would still be thru private individuals and partnerships, not the gov't. this bill only gives the county and city gov't the right to legalize distibution to adults by adults. i don't think it takes control of it like was proposed in New Mexico or something, but others please correct me if that is wrong.

good idea. think i'll read it while i watch football and load a bowl.


The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010

Title and Summary:

Changes California Law to Legalize Marijuana and Allow It to Be Regulated and Taxed.

Initiative Statute.

Allows people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use. Permits local governments to regulate and tax commercial production and sale of marijuana to people 21 years old or older. Prohibits people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using it in public, smoking it while minors are present, or providing it to anyone under 21 years old. Maintains current prohibitions against driving while impaired. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Savings of up to several tens of millions of dollars annually to state and local governments on the costs of incarcerating and supervising certain marijuana offenders. Unknown but potentially major tax, fee, and benefit assessment revenues to state and local government related to the production and sale of marijuana products.

continued here

i would say . . . yes. i'm thinking mid Nov. 2010 . . Oaksterdam . . the victory celebration. i say we all meet there and smoke one with the Mayor and maybe Governor Moonbeam and Jeff Jones and Richard Lee and all the others out there who are working towards this.

who's with me?

__________________

most people automatically say "yes, you have to be a CA resident" , however, I am re-reading Prop. 215, and I haven't found that written requirement YET ... I find 'the Doctor must be licensed for practice in California', but I haven't seen anything specific, for patient residency, yet ...

it directly affects me, as I recently changed my legal residency, but spend a lot of time in California (fulltime RVer) ... I am keeping my Doctor's Medical MJ recommendation current, and am currently 'under his medical supervision', so I think I'd have some good legal standing ... health problems don't disappear, by crossing state lines ...

__________________
" keep it simple, it's a WEED ! "

" when in doubt, imitate Nature "

" 2008 people voted for Obama to prove they weren't racists.....in 2010 they will vote to show they arent socialists " - Islandborn

yeah, you might be right, IR, I was thinking about when I signed up for the clubs, I needed a Cali ID, but that is probably just for the club membership. I moved out of L.A. right before Prop 215 but moved back to Bezerkely for a while and had to get my Cali ID renewed to join the clubs. but lucky for me they still had my DL number in the system and for some reason I actually remembered it after all those years so I got it renewed. I think when they say you can check out of California anytime you want but you can never leave they may have been referring to the DMV computers.

RV'ing thru Cali sounds really cool, IR. I've always wanted to do that. you can actually rent RV's for a week or two, I thought about doing that some time. Maybe next year.