Many Washington marijuana activists oppose legalization initiative

Well 502 is obviously not perfect, but it's a step. I dont see any reason that someone pro full legalization would appose it.

 

Very interesting

 

Can you hear the narcs laughing their asses off as you Washington jack-offs actually argue AGAINST a law that allows for some form of legalization? Only a bunch of stoners would vote to continue getting arrested. You couldn't make this stuff up. Deeply disturbing.

 

You guys are saying that further legalization MAY come later... but I'm saying that no one can say if that's going to happen.

No. What you said was this:

If this law is passed, you can pretty guarantee that cannabis laws will continue to be unjust for the next 100 years as well.

and this:

You're right, this is the first law, and who's to say there will be any more following this one? If this law comes into power than we're not going to see the major reform that we all want for another 10 years at least

and this:

and who says this law will be amended, at all? You sure they won't just establish their monopoly and leave it at that? Because I really doubt that after this passes we will be able to make any more progress...

and this:

No, if we vote this in, we're stuck with it, and every other state that follows our example will base their laws around ours.

Pretty bold and self-assured statements. And I'm calling dogshit on all of it.

Then you go on to say that if we don't pass 502, than by default 514 will not pass... that's a damn fallacy if I've ever seen one.

Where did I say that? Point me to the post and the exact sentence where I uttered those words. (Hint: You can't, because I never said it.)

 

Soooo...we're looking at a provisional reform of cannabis prohibition in Washington, the minute particulars of which are (purportedly) unsatisfying to a substantial minority of smokers, growers, and distributors.

The urinalysis/hematologic maxima are fairly liberal; the buds can be possessed in substantial quantities without fear of serious legal repercussion and can be freely dispensed with the rough equivalent of a liquor license; the Feds, as always, will be less-than-enthused and will needlessly exercise their over-weening authority as per their usual M.O.; the profit margin and, by extension, the power of the cartels will sharply and proportionally diminish as production/distribution shifts Northward; and, finally, any serious defects latent within the current legislation can certainly be amended, albeit arduously, in the future.

So, why isn't everyone on board with this one, again? The naysayers sound like a bunch of histrionic fussbudgets making much ado about nothing. What a fucking mess.

 

^it's deja vu all over again

 

Soooo...we're looking at a provisional reform of cannabis prohibition in Washington, the minute particulars of which are (purportedly) unsatisfying to a substantial minority of smokers, growers, and distributors.

The urinalysis/hematologic maxima are fairly liberal; the buds can be possessed in substantial quantities without fear of serious legal repercussion and can be freely dispensed with the rough equivalent of a liquor license; the Feds, as always, will be less-than-enthused and will needlessly exercise their over-weening authority as per their usual M.O.; the profit margin and, by extension, the power of the cartels will sharply and proportionally diminish as production/distribution shifts Northward; and, finally, any serious defects latent within the current legislation can certainly be amended, albeit arduously, in the future.

So, why isn't everyone on board with this one, again? The naysayers sound like a bunch of histrionic fussbudgets making much ado about nothing. What a fucking mess.

Well, the vast majority of the contributors in this thread are in agreement with you. But I suppose this is Bluelight, and the case of the general marijuana user will be very different. I have little respect for marijuana users as drug reformers in general, as they tend to be stuck in their selfish perspectives (as Folley here demonstrates). I am sure that once they get their precious weed into the same sphere as tobacco and alcohol, most will be content to allow the continued repression of the users of the rest of the pharmacopoeia.

 

Hemp, can be used for all sorts of purposes, marijuana is a more difficult plant to "play" with.

 

I live in Australia where its $20 a gram, i can't help but laugh at people complaining about $13-$15 a gram. Then again that's all you marijuana smokers do, complain and talk about weed.
Legal or not, your still getting stoned anyway, who cares where the profits go.

 

it was always a big point in the legalization debate that a ban only will lead to the spread of illegal crime structures, therefore it makes more sense to just keep it legal in the first place. of course those cartel-lobbies arent gonna sit back and watch letting this happen without a fight but its kinda sad that they seem to be successfull, getting little piss growers to side with them and ratting out the rest of the movement for the sake of the status quo.

the point of legalization is decriminalization from a rational point of view and always has been. its not supposed to make it easier for organized crime to sell their shit, that would fundamentally oppose the idea (and benefits) of legalization. thats why i can understand that youd need a permit for conducting business. theres hardly a way around that if you want to keep the benefits (taxing, quality, dry out organized crime). basically you would give up almost every single upside except "getting high easily", if you dont keep things regulated like this.

a sad example being czech republic, where they just let the cartels do their job. they have no control about purity, about prices, no taxes and the mafia makes easier money than ever before.thats pretty much declaring the war on drugs over without disarming the enemy. its a half assed action.

this anticampaign is all about preventing you to get weed legalized. its NOT to get you a better chance for doing so. you must be pretty naive if you really think that way. its divide and conquer! feds are working against you, the cartels are working against you and now your greedy ass growers who didnt grasp what legalization really means are working against you. this could be very well be the last chance to actually change things despite all that opposition and theres simply no sane justification to pretend otherwise and pass up this opportunity. it also would be a huge disgrace to all the people who took risks and fought really hard for over a century to finally get this herb legalized.

 

Right. Because if we don't vote in this exact law, we will never have another chance at legalization.... even though there is another initiative on the ballot next year, and over 55% of Americans are in support of it.


So you want "herb" legalized? Why don't you want to grow it then? Until I can grow my own and not have to fund any immoral organization, marijuana is not legal.

 

funding no immoral organization. right. you just imply that every crime syndicate should be able to start their own unregulated grow op within us borders on a perfectly legal basis, so you dont need a permit. now thats hypocrisy.

 

Because if we don't vote in this exact law, we will never have another chance at legalization.... even though there is another initiative on the ballot next year, and over 55% of Americans are in support of it...So you want "herb" legalized? Why don't you want to grow it then? Until I can grow my own and not have to fund any immoral organization, marijuana is not legal.

Wrong. The legality of a substance and the right to produce said substance on your own initiative are not one and the same issue. The latter is often encompassed by the former, but to equate the two is ridiculous. If we (those in support of 502) can be reasonably expected to wait another year for another piece of legislation, I'm sure you can just as easily wait out the interim during which 502's t's and i's can be crossed and dotted (respectively) wrt to growing, etc.

As noted above, your stance on this issue is self-contradictory, hopelessly convolved, and myopic in the extreme. Big picture, forest-for-the-trees, &c.

 

I'm sure you can just as easily wait out the interim during which 502's t's and i's can be crossed and dotted (respectively) wrt to growing, etc.

As noted above, your stance on this issue is self-contradictory, hopelessly convolved, and myopic in the extreme. Big picture, forest-for-the-trees, &c.

Except that's bull shit, because they will never allow you to grow weed under 502. You think they would just give up a monopoly that over half the population supports, not just making money off the weed, but from the taxes as well?

You think they're just going to let Average Joe Blow grow if they can help it? HELL NO. They want to make as much money as possible, and grow thousands of dollars worth of weed for the price of seeds and electricity is not going to sit well with them.

Also, are you aware that under 502, medical patients can only have ONE ounce per 60 days? That's less than .5 a day to medicate yourself

funding no immoral organization. right. you just imply that every crime syndicate should be able to start their own unregulated grow op within us borders on a perfectly legal basis, so you dont need a permit. now thats hypocrisy.

Oh be quiet. Marijuana is not meth. It's not made by "crime syndicates". The vast majority of marijuana in Washington is homegrown by someone who loves to grow and smoke, and has a stealth op in their attic. Saying the cartels are running the weed trade here is completely laughable. Maybe the really shitty bulk/brick weed, but no one smokes that shit here. The majority of marijuana here is grown locally small time, but you wouldn't know, because you don't live here.

 

Also, are you aware that under 502, medical patients can only have ONE ounce per 60 days? That's less than .5 a day to medicate yourself

i didn't see that in my (admitted quick) reading of the measure. which section is it in?

alasdair

 

No damn clue, TBH I was told it by a friend and medical patient who was also volunteer at Hempfest. Common sense says it would be in the same place as the other medical stipulations

 

^ i see no reference to any such limit in the measure.

maybe your friend is wrong? i'm surprised you, of all people, would take just take something at face value.

anyhoo, i'm researching something related to this and your comment caught my eye...

alasdair

 

Bill text as PDF for those interested:
http://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/i502.pdf

Folley, please actually read the bill...

Adults 21 years or older may possess up to "one ounce of useable marijuana," 16 ounces of marijuana-infused product in solid form, 72 ounces of marijuana-infused product in liquid form or "any combination" of all three.

And that's just normal old law abiding adults posessing an ounce *at any one time*, not people licensed for medicinal use... put 2 and 2 together - an ounce every 60 days is a ridiculous premise...

People never cease to be governed by their emotions rather than facts set in front of them. Its kind of sad really.

 

i went to hempfest and live in seattle it gives the government way too much power in the distribution of pot why should we buy and support the same people we are against they will have too much control of what we choose to do with our lives.

 

HOW FUCKING SILLY ARE WE GOING TO BE? If you guys legalize weed, how likely are the cops to be busting down your door to weigh your stash? Jesus Christ....

 

^ That's the other thing. I feel WA cops are going to have bigger problems on their hands than harrassing the guy who grows 4-8 unlicensed plants in his closet for personal use. Kind of defeats the whole purpose of a legalisation biull if the cops will still arrest for trivial almounts of pot.