Log In | Register
Backers of a California initiative to legalize marijuana said they would submit far more signatures Thursday than needed to qualify the measure for the November ballot.
Pot-legalization initiative signs in
Seeded on Fri Jan 29, 2010 10:47 AM EST
Article Source: Home - LA Daily News- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (18)
The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010 would legalize possession of small amounts of marijuana for adults. It also would allow limited growing on private property and permit local governments to decide whether to legalize and tax pot sales.
"Our current laws aren't working. We should have learned from alcohol prohibition," said Oakland medical marijuana entrepreneur Richard Lee, the measure's main backer.
The signatures were filed as a 15,000-square-foot store stocked with marijuana growing supplies prepared to open in Oakland - another sign of the mainstreaming of pot in some parts of California.
- 3 votes
#1 - Fri Jan 29, 2010 10:48 AM ESTIt also would allow limited growing on private property and permit local governments to decide whether to legalize and tax pot sales.
I'm not overly familiar with the details, but are they really suggesting a law where I can be smoking a joint, walk across the wrong street, and be charged with possession? That strikes me as far too much like the nutjobs that have banned smoking in your own car, in that one city I don't say the name of because I'm pretending it isn't there.
It seems like a law that's simply begging to become obnoxiously complicated and sporadically enforced in an unfair manner. Kinda reminds me of the FBI raids on cannabis clubs that were legal in San Francisco, that would occur every couple months during the Bush years.
- 1 vote
I don't think it has to do with an individual smoking a joint but cities being able to regulate and tax pot sales. That would be no different than taxing alcohol or other products, would it?
The reason why Bush could do that was because the federal laws are in conflict with state laws. Obama has suspended that enforcement. If states legalize it within their borders, there will also be a move to legalize or at least decriminalize it on the federal level.
States that are strapped for cash are at the forefront of this movement. It will not only increase income but will decrease expense by removing pot related arrests and imprisonments to cease.
- 3 votes
In that little quote we used (which, yes, is the total of my ability to research this on a Friday morning before I blather about it), it states "whether to legalize," as well. That's the part I find problematic. Inconsistent policies from one city to the next. I mean, can anyone even tell me what street marks the border between Venice and Santa Monica, or San Francisco and Daily City, or San Jose and Sunny Vale?
The reason why Bush could do that was because the federal laws are in conflict with state laws. Obama has suspended that enforcement.
I know. My problem with it is the same, though. One group saying it's perfectly legal and another one saying it's not on the opposite corner of the street.
Don't get me wrong--I'm totally for legalizing it because of the many good reasons (even if I do think that pot is for dirty hippies and fourteen year-olds that can't find real drugs). I'd just like to see state-wide, consistent legislation.
- 2 votes
I don't know that one law can address every city in the state. I don't know if the state can usurp some city functions. I doubt the state can force a city to allow pot farms or stores within its borders.
But as to personal use, I don't think cities have the power to usurp that state law. Years ago, the state law was changed to allow a person to carry an ounce on their person. No city could usurp that, so I'm not sure they could a new law on personal use either.
I haven't read the petition so I don't know its provisions other than what the article states, but what I got from the article is that cities would only be allowed to regulate and tax sales, not personal use.
- 3 votes
be allowed to regulate and tax sales
Cool. Then that sounds good. Zoning laws for where dispensaries are legal and city taxes? Totally fine by me.
- 3 votes
can anyone even tell me what street marks the border between Venice and Santa Monica,
I believe it is Santa Monica Blvd. and the Santa Monica pier. I do agree with you about where are the boundaries.
I believe it is Santa Monica Blvd. and the Santa Monica pier.
It's actually Dewey Street. I knew the answer, but was tryin' to make a point :P
I know the point you were making and I agree with all you said. It has been 25 years since I was on the pier. Is it still there? I have CRS, Can't Remember @!$%#.
It has been 25 years since I was on the pier. Is it still there?
Of course! They put in a new ferris wheel. It's now solar powered and has many more lights.
I have CRS, Can't Remember @!$%#.
I need to get doctor certified. I'd present that to my boss next time he asks me why two numbers on a four page report weren't updated to the minute and I end up wanting to slap him in the face.
This is the small snowball that will gradually become larger, and more difficult to ignore, across the states. This could reap municipalities millions in increased tax revenue. Now if we could only get the numb-nuts in Washington to realize the potential windfall of fresh cash !
- 1 vote
LOL I'm glad they updated it, I used to hang out at the beach on the Santa Monica side. Venice is..... well Venice. Are the crazies still hanging out there?
I totally agree that they should treat it like alcohol. Regulate it and tax it. It would definitely curb some of the crime in this country and bring in some revenue to the states. How can something, that you can basically just throw a seed into the ground to produce, be illegal.
- 4 votes
#2 - Fri Jan 29, 2010 11:06 AM ESTI get it. The reason for making it legal is money for government. Good reason,
what next? Shutter to think.
#3 - Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:23 AM ESTActually, in the case of California at least, that's the excuse. Its legalization here is going to happen. We've all known that for a long while. It's not a matter of if but when.
When the state and city budgest went into a tail spin, the proponents of legalization jumped right in. They were ready to dangle new taxes in front of the faces of those mighty government spenders. Our state legislators already took the big leap -- almost. They seriously considered a bill that would have imposed a $50 an ounce tax on marijuana. It didn't pass, but I think more out of fear of bucking big religion than anything else.
The tobacco companies, who were behind making it illegal in the first place (didn't want the competition), are standing in the wings, ready to become big marijuana growers once it's legal. Their business models are all set up and ready to go.
California may or may not be the first state to legalize it. Others are on the path too, but it is going to happen.
- 3 votes
ray, what you should be shuttering about is the devastation the war on drugs has caused this country. From empowering gangs and cartels to eroding what few civil liberties we have left this temperest movement is taking the country down and we can no longer afford it.
- 1 vote
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
