Danko, I've read every page before I made a comment. I've also been asking questions of Oaksterdam regarding all of these topics and their answers do differ slightly from yours.
I'm surprised at you claiming others have no reading comprehension when your arguments make no sense and contradict what you cut and paste. I understand that how people appear on the net and who they really are , are miles apart. But your online persona comes across as a moron. I hope that is miles apart from who you are.
The fact of the matter is that the bill has some vague areas that are just plain bad.
Remember this is the tax and regulate bill, not the let people grow it for free bill. The reasoning behind only being able to posess an oz at a time is this. If you need to smoke more than an oz recreationally, you will have to buy it from the people who will tax you. If they don't make it difficult to grow , ( C'mon, you have to be a retard to not be able to grow an oz in a 5x5 area.) they won't make any money taxing you on what you buy.
Who this bill is good for is the occasional smoker. For hardcore fiends who smoke morning , noon and night, this will not help you.
Counties are already fighting prop 215. My county refused to support it until 2 years ago when a person I know won a 6 year court case that cost him over a 100 K and his marriage. Law enforcement happily cooperated with feds to bust med patients.
Dennis Peron:
Peron claims this is not legalization but "thinly veiled prohibition". The flyer (prepared by KC Kimber of California Cannabis Inc.) advertising the boycott lists the following points:
It limits personal possession to one ounce and cultivation to a five-by-five plot, or 25 square feet. This is guaranteed to keep law enforcement employed raiding and prosecuting people for marijuana.
It explicitly criminalizes the commercial sale, production, and cultivation of marijuana in cities and in counties that do not tax and regulate marijuana "without limitation".
It "sends the wrong message" by placing the age limit the same as alcohol, even though marijuana is much safer.
It makes public consumption illegal, creates new felonies where there were none before, and makes it illegal for parents to smoke in front of their own kids.
It will limit competition and create monopolies by preventing ordinary people from getting into the business.
It should be noted that Oakland has limited the number of medical marijuana dispensaries that may operate in that city to four, and that they each pay $30,000 per year for a business license. Further, that these four dispensaries were the proponents of Measure F, which increased the tax medical marijuana patients pay in Oakland for medicine from $1.20 per $1,000 to $18 per $1,000; a total increase of about $350,000 paid in taxes on the cost of medicine by the sick and dying in Oakland per year. Additionally, they intend to spend $1 million on the signature drive to get their tax and regulate initiative on the ballot.
This adds up to the sick and dying in Oakland paying $120,000 per year for business licenses, $350,000 in taxes, and $1 million for a signature drive to tax and regulate them and their medicine. This is on top of the several hundred dollars each one has to pay every year for their recommendation and county identification card.
So, yes, having read it, contemplated it, asked questions and carefully read the answers through email with the proponents, I am voting against it.
