• CD Moderators: someguyontheinternet
  • Cannabis Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules

something you americans should know about the legalisation proposition

Sega420

Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 15, 2009
Messages
4,261
Location
between dimensions
-A REPOST IN CD OF HUACA'S POST IN "drugs in the media"-



The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010
[excerpt from text]
...
Section 3: Lawful Activities
Article 5 of Chapter 5 of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code, commencing with section 11300 is added to read:
Section 11300: Personal Regulation and Controls
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, it is lawful and shall not be a public offense under California law for any person 21 years of age or older to:
(i) Personally possess, process, share, or transport not more than one ounce of cannabis, solely for that individual’s personal consumption, and not for sale.
(ii) Cultivate, on private property by the owner, lawful occupant, or other lawful resident or guest of the private property owner or lawful occupant, cannabis plants for personal consumption only, in an area of not more than twenty-five square feet per private residence or, in the absence of any residence, the parcel. Cultivation on leased or rented property may be subject to approval from the owner of the property. Provided that, nothing in this section shall permit unlawful or unlicensed cultivation of cannabis on any public lands.
(iii) Possess on the premises where grown the living and harvested plants and results of any harvest and processing of plants lawfully cultivated pursuant to section 11300(a)(ii), for personal consumption.
(iv) Possess objects, items, tools, equipment, products and materials associated with activities permitted under this subsection.
(b) “Personal consumption” shall include but is not limited to possession and consumption, in any form, of cannabis in a residence or other non-public place, and shall include licensed premises open to the public authorized to permit on-premises consumption of cannabis by a local government pursuant to section 11301.
(c) “Personal consumption” shall not include, and nothing in this Act shall permit cannabis:
(i) possession for sale regardless of amount, except by a person who is licensed or permitted to do so under the terms of an ordinance adopted pursuant to section 11301;
(ii) consumption in public or in a public place;
(iii) consumption by the operator of any vehicle, boat or aircraft while it is being operated, or that impairs the operator;
(iv) smoking cannabis in any space while minors are present.

Section 11301: Commercial Regulations and Controls
Notwithstanding any other provision of state or local law, a local government may adopt ordinances, regulations, or other acts having the force of law to control, license, regulate, permit or otherwise authorize, with conditions, the following:
(a) cultivation, processing, distribution, the safe and secure transportation, sale and possession for sale of cannabis, but only by persons and in amounts lawfully authorized;
(b) retail sale of not more than one ounce per transaction, in licensed premises, to persons 21 years or older, for personal consumption and not for resale;
(c) appropriate controls on cultivation, transportation, sales, and consumption of cannabis to strictly prohibit access to cannabis by persons under the age of 21;
(d) age limits and controls to ensure that all persons present in, employed by, or in any way involved in the operation of, any such licensed premises are 21 or older;
(e) consumption of cannabis within licensed premises;
(f) safe and secure transportation of cannabis from a licensed premises for cultivation or processing, to a licensed premises for sale or on-premises consumption of cannabis;
(g) prohibit and punish through civil fines or other remedies the possession, sale, possession for sale, cultivation, processing, or transportation of cannabis that was not obtained lawfully from a person pursuant to this section or section 11300;
(h) appropriate controls on licensed premises for sale, cultivation, processing, or sale and on-premises consumption, of cannabis, including limits on zoning and land use, locations, size, hours of operation, occupancy, protection of adjoining and nearby properties and persons from unwanted exposure, advertising, signs and displays, and other controls necessary for protection of the public health and welfare;
(i) appropriate environmental and public health controls to ensure that any licensed premises minimizes any harm to the environment, adjoining and nearby landowners, and persons passing by;
(j) appropriate controls to restrict public displays, or public consumption of cannabis;
(k) appropriate taxes or fees pursuant to section 11302;
(l) such larger amounts as the local authority deems appropriate and proper under local circumstances, than those established under section 11300(a) for personal possession and cultivation, or under this section for commercial cultivation, processing, transportation and sale by persons authorized to do so under this section;
(m) any other appropriate controls necessary for protection of the public health and welfare.

Section 11302: Imposition and Collection of Taxes and Fees
(a) Any ordinance, regulation or other act adopted pursuant to section 11301 may include imposition of appropriate general, special or excise, transfer or transaction taxes, benefit assessments, or fees, on any activity authorized pursuant to such enactment, in order to permit the local government to raise revenue, or to recoup any direct or indirect costs associated with the authorized activity, or the permitting or licensing scheme, including without limitation: administration; applications and issuance of licenses or permits; inspection of licensed premises and other enforcement of ordinances adopted under section 11301, including enforcement against unauthorized activities.
(b) Any licensed premises shall be responsible for paying all federal, state and local taxes, fees, fines, penalties or other financial responsibility imposed on all or similarly situated businesses, facilities or premises, including without limitation income taxes, business taxes, license fees, and property taxes, without regard to or identification of the business or items or services sold.

Section 11303: Seizure
(a) Notwithstanding sections 11470 and 11479 of the Health and Safety Code or any other provision of law, no state or local law enforcement agency or official shall attempt to, threaten to, or in fact seize or destroy any cannabis plant, cannabis seeds or cannabis that is lawfully cultivated, processed, transported, possessed, possessed for sale, sold or used in compliance with this Act or any local government ordinance, law or regulation adopted pursuant to this Act.

Section 11304: Effect of Act and Definitions
(a) This Act shall not be construed to affect, limit or amend any statute that forbids impairment while engaging in dangerous activities such as driving, or that penalizes bringing cannabis to a school enrolling pupils in any grade from kindergarten through 12, inclusive.
(b) Nothing in this Act shall be construed or interpreted to permit interstate or international transportation of cannabis. This Act shall be construed to permit a person to transport cannabis in a safe and secure manner from a licensed premises in one city or county to a licensed premises in another city or county pursuant to any ordinances adopted in such cities or counties, notwithstanding any other state law or the lack of any such ordinance in the intervening cities or counties.
(c) No person shall be punished, fined, discriminated against, or be denied any right or privilege for lawfully engaging in any conduct permitted by this Act or authorized pursuant to Section 11301 of this Act. Provided however, that the existing right of an employer to address consumption that actually impairs job performance by an employee shall not be affected...
http://www.taxcannabis.org/index.php/pages/initiative/
http://70.32.87.43/documents/initiative.pdf

----------------------------



The proposed bill has limits to personal possession and personal cultivation. Exceed those limits and your cannabis stash over 1 ounce or garden size greater than 5 feet square and you are in violation. Why have limits on garden size? So the cops can inspect your premises. This legislation would not end the prohibition of cannabis but will continue to allow police harassment of users and growers. This legislation only decriminalizes small amounts. In my opinion, there should be no limits to cannabis possession and cultivation. I don't want the cops searchng me to see if I have more than 1 ounce. I don't want the cops climbing over my fence and measuring my garden. This is not freedom, but control. Also, this opens the door for local government to enact their own legislation to license, tax, control, arrest, etc. If passed, this would increase the size of government and allow even more intrusion into your personal affairs. It's like saying wine is legal, but you can only possess a certain number of bottles and your vineyard can't exceed a certain number of square feet. Do you want some cops counting your wine bottles and checking out your grape vines? I sure don't, it's none of their damned business.

Instead of the above Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act, a much better way is the MERP model:
“The MERP model of Marijuana Re-Legalization would minimally allow non-commercial cultivation of unlimited numbers of plants, by adults above the age of 18, without any form of government taxation, regulation or other interference." http://www.newagecitizen.com/MERP/Re...NowObama02.htm
 
It's like saying wine is legal, but you can only possess a certain number of bottles and your vineyard can't exceed a certain number of square feet.

I think that's likely true to some extent. I'm not sure if there are limits on personal possession of alcohol, but I'm almost certain that you'd need some sort of commercial license to make more than a certain amount of wine/beer/liquor. Hence the illegality of moonshine.

Either way, looking at the way alcohol's sale and use is regulated, I wouldn't expect cannabis to be any different. And as philosophically-correct as you may be about personal freedoms, I'd rather small progress than no progress at all.
 
whoa whoa whoa -
this was a repost. the entire post up there was just my reposting of Huaca's post in "Drugs in the media" board.

just so you all know.

i just thought it was great information that a LOT of californians probably wont even see, and instead simply vote "Yes".

it IS a step in the right direction, but cops knocking on ur door and searching ur house without a warrant. to make sure you dont have too much weed?
nuh-uh.
like Huaca's post says. it is not freedom, it is control. disguised as freedom.
personally, if i was in Cali, i would not vote yes on this.

& weekend addiction, the US is in no way ahead.
spain, belguim, and fuckloads of other western countries have made it legal to grow and smoke herb for years now.
The US and the UK are still stuck in the dark ages unfortunately :(
 
The proposed bill has limits to personal possession and personal cultivation. Exceed those limits and your cannabis stash over 1 ounce or garden size greater than 5 feet square and you are in violation. /QUOTE]

My brother made a good point. 25 square feet is a 2-dimensional measurement. What's going to stop people from making "pot towers" to overcome this area limit? It's something I would like to see.

But... even with 25 square feet of base soil, you could easily exceed the one once "personal use" limitation. It doesn't make sense. One plant can yield much more than an oz, and with 5x5 feet several plants could be grown.

I don't like all the control this new bill would impose. But since an ounce of pot lasts me several months, I could be happy keeping several small plants growing. If a person could force really short seasons, even a highly tolerant hardcore pothead could stay stoned without breaking the law. Maybe.

Giving the local government license to inspect my home would do nothing to allay my paranoia. And this bill offers no protection from federal agents, which is even scarier.
 
whoa whoa whoa -
this was a repost. the entire post up there was just my reposting of Huaca's post in "Drugs in the media" board.

just so you all know.

i just thought it was great information that a LOT of californians probably wont even see, and instead simply vote "Yes".

it IS a step in the right direction, but cops knocking on ur door and searching ur house without a warrant. to make sure you dont have too much weed?
nuh-uh.
like Huaca's post says. it is not freedom, it is control. disguised as freedom.
personally, if i was in Cali, i would not vote yes on this.

& weekend addiction, the US is in no way ahead.
spain, belguim, and fuckloads of other western countries have made it legal to grow and smoke herb for years now.
The US and the UK are still stuck in the dark ages unfortunately :(

I said ahead of some countries. Like the UK that you just mentioned. Were not the head of the pack even though we have the most drug users in the world. Go figure.
 
It doesn't make sense. One plant can yield much more than an oz, and with 5x5 feet several plants could be grown.

this is EXACTLY the same situation that australians have!
they are allowed to grow but not allowed to have more than say.... a few oz.

clearly the fools who wrote this know absolutely nothing about cannabis cultivation!
 
I think this is a very unnecessary argument against the bill.
Not only does this bill 100% legalize pot for the majority of smokers out there, it also VASTLY reduces the profile of marijuana in the eyes of the cops in a state that already relatively lenient on the issue. I would highly doubt that cops are going to be eager to measure the plot of land you have in your yard, or weigh out that fat ass bag you are allowed to carry around to make sure it's less than an oz.
I would imagine that enforcement in driving situations would be much less than before. They would only slap you with a DWI if you are really being a dick and smell obviously like pot.

Most of this bill reads like a dream. Much better than any real piece of legislation I've seen.
It even says that no cannabis plant will be destroyed or seized by the police.
 
Solution: Put your plot indoors, and tell the laws to get a fucking warrant.

If this happens to pass there will be a scramble to amend a bunch of things in this bill. It's 100% a step in the right direction, but don't think it won't be tweaked like crazy (for "good" and "bad")...
 
Where does it mention anything about this being national
 
What does the bill say about driving while high?

I do not but I know tons of people who do.

If I were in CA I certainly would vote for the law as some legalization is better than none at all and I hear they are cracking down on medical herb.

People are still going to grow herb and keep growing it very well.

Yeah certain European and even central/South American countries do have better drug laws but this is a step in the right direction.
 
Last edited:
I think this is a very unnecessary argument against the bill.
Not only does this bill 100% legalize pot for the majority of smokers out there, it also VASTLY reduces the profile of marijuana in the eyes of the cops in a state that already relatively lenient on the issue. I would highly doubt that cops are going to be eager to measure the plot of land you have in your yard, or weigh out that fat ass bag you are allowed to carry around to make sure it's less than an oz.
I would imagine that enforcement in driving situations would be much less than before. They would only slap you with a DWI if you are really being a dick and smell obviously like pot.

Most of this bill reads like a dream. Much better than any real piece of legislation I've seen.
It even says that no cannabis plant will be destroyed or seized by the police.
yeah i agree, i think this is a bill that will pave the way for others against the war on drugs.
 
(iii) Possess on the premises where grown the living and harvested plants and results of any harvest and processing of plants lawfully cultivated pursuant to section 11300(a)(ii), for personal consumption.

In all fairness, the bill does say you can possess the results of any harvest from a legal size garden, although you can't transport it off your premises. The bill leaves it open for local jurisdictions to impose taxes on cultivation and sales.

Suppose a town passes an ordinance to tax personal cannabis gardens. The ordinance could require all cannabis gardens in town to be registered to facilitate the collection of this tax. There goes your right to privacy and your name is in the big database. Suppose you are then pulled over by a traffic cop. He runs your driver's license and your name comes up as a cannabis cultivator. Will that piece of information give the cop probable cause to search your vehicle for illegal-weight cannabis?

I just get so tired of the government sticking its big snout into my private life. I left home decades ago to gain independence from my parents to be able to make my own decisions without their interference. I'm an adult. I don't need mommy or daddy government micromanaging my life.
 
Did you read it?

(b) “Personal consumption” shall include but is not limited to possession and consumption, in any form, of cannabis in a residence or other non-public place, and shall include licensed premises open to the public authorized to permit on-premises consumption of cannabis by a local government pursuant to section 11301.
(c) “Personal consumption” shall not include, and nothing in this Act shall permit cannabis:
(i) possession for sale regardless of amount, except by a person who is licensed or permitted to do so under the terms of an ordinance adopted pursuant to section 11301;
(ii) consumption in public or in a public place;
(iii) consumption by the operator of any vehicle, boat or aircraft while it is being operated, or that impairs the operator;
(iv) smoking cannabis in any space while minors are present.
 
Just because it says cops can come search without a warrant doesn't mean they ultimately will be able to. Its a big step.

I didn't read the whole thing either but, I'm not sure I saw anywhere that says they can just show up and search. They must have probable cause without a warrant or permission. I'm sure that would still apply as a civil right. Its not like the cops can search ya because you might have it now even with the decriminalizing.
 
Top