Kendo
- 410
- 143
There are so many directions one can head. Growing is just one.
Medusa
Trichome Engineer
Supporter
- 4,713
- 263
Yes siri.... I don't usually call people scum was not the right choice of word ...got worked up ...maybe are new first lady can run the pot biz show ..she's such a trusting sole ... LOL thanks for the English lesson @ETak
Medusa
Trichome Engineer
Supporter
- 4,713
- 263
Thinking about starting a biz advertising marrying immigrants for citizenship...$5000 a wack must divorce within 2 months ....No SEX ....I could make 30,000 a yr and sure it would be legal beings are governor thinks its ok...heck every month could make 60,000 still grow my weed ...Sound like a plan ? Always thinking ....M
dirk d
- 1,538
- 263
hey I was thinking the same thing. Marry but WITH LOTS of sex :) Must move to Utah though lol hey i think some guy did that already...lol
jimmy the hat
- 202
- 63
I had those same thoughts before the Seattle Cup.....It was what I dreamed of....I talked to the Bogs and dropped a G on seed stock....cant wait for pdx cup.....l
Used to be 30k a marriage.....that was the late 90's early 00's....its not legal...nor easy....I think its 3-5 years minimum to get citizenship by marriage and only after a whole lot of hassel
Medusa
Trichome Engineer
Supporter
- 4,713
- 263
Yah have a client keeps marring young Russian and Chilean women. Now that's a happy man. ! For some reason they keep divorcing him in a timely matter.
Herb Forester
- 766
- 143
Here it is folks: city taxes, city bans without a vote, per-se blood draw DUID, and ending OMMP. That's what the politicians and cops are up to here in Oregon.
Tell Your Oregon Reps To Support Will Of The Voters On Measure 91
November 20, 2014
by Russ Belville
After reading this story in the Statesman-Journal, I think it is vitally important for supporters of Oregon’s Measure 91 to contact their state representative and senator and urge them to respect the will of the voters on Measure 91. You can find your legislators here and then send them an email or letter. There are four basic areas the League of Oregon Cities and other lobbyists are fighting us over:
Senator Dembrow & Representative Smith Warner,
My name is Russ Belville and I am a constituent of yours who worked very hard to see that Measure 91, our initiative to legalize marijuana, passed statewide.
Now I am very troubled by reports that the legislature is being lobbied by the League of Oregon Cities and others to subvert the will of the voters by making changes to Measure 91 that are completely inconsistent with Measure 91.
In particular, Senator Lee Beyer is quoted in the Statesman-Journal saying that November’s vote in favor of marijuana meant Oregonians support recreational usage and not that they support the specific details of Measure 91. His assumption is that most voters “didn’t pay a heck of a lot of attention” to or read all the fine print in the proposal.
I assure you, the fine print in the proposal is exactly what Oregonians supported, for it is within that fine print that Oregon learned the lessons from the process of legalization taking place in Washington and Colorado.
At least 70 Oregon cities passed local taxes on marijuana prior to Measure 91’s passage. As you know, Measure 91 vests sole taxation authority over marijuana to the state and repeals and supersedes all previously passed local taxes. This is how we tax alcohol in Oregon, yet cities believe they should be able to tack on an extra tax for alleged “costs of regulation” that are already covered by Measure 91 and are never quantified by the cities.
The low $35/ounce state taxation is a lesson learned from the high taxation at multiple levels of production, processing, and retail and among multiple city, county, and state jurisdictions. In Washington and Colorado, the price of black market and medical marijuana is far lower than the overtaxed recreational price, leading to pot dealers in the parking lots of legal pot shops, undercutting the legal sellers. That’s exactly what we don’t want at our Oregon pot shops.
The right of localities to ban pot shops and other licensees is also enshrined in Measure 91, but only through a vote of the people. This was the lesson learned from the other two legalization states where city councils and county commissions banned pot shops of their own accord, ignoring the will of the voters in those locales that overwhelmingly supported legalization. Such bans also undercut the point of legalization by leaving the illegal pot dealers and the medical marijuana dispensaries as the only source for marijuana that all Oregon adults may legally possess and use.
The lack of a per se THC DUID limit, such as Washington and Colorado, is also a major reason I and others supported Measure 91. It’s not that we don’t want police stopping impaired drivers, regardless of reason for that impairment. It’s that there is no reliable testing for marijuana impairment through saliva, urine, or blood screening that is scientifically valid. Any limit the legislature would add would certainly convict innocent drivers of impairment for merely having high tolerances to marijuana.
Most importantly, Measure 91 explicitly mentioned three times that it changed the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act in no way. Tens of thousands of patients and their caregivers would not have supported Measure 91 if it did change OMMA. Yet Sen. Fred. Girod is already asking “Can we do away with the Oregon Medical Marijuana Program if we are going to legalize marijuana?”
There can be positive changes to streamline the production, processing, and retailing of marijuana to avoid two redundant supply chains. However, the right of patients to possess and cultivate more usable marijuana must be protected; there are some who absolutely cannot make do on the recreational limits of Measure 91. Furthermore, patients rights to home manufacture of edibles and concentrates should be preserved, as they often need those higher-potency items for proper medicinal effect.
I would warn you both not to assume the voters will be satisfied with any changes you make to Measure 91 because we’re simply happy with legalization. Please pledge to me your support of the will and intent of 71% of Multnomah County voters who understood that Measure 91 was crafted to avoid the pitfalls of Colorado and Washington. Please do not support any local marijuana taxes, allowing city councils / county commissions to ban without a vote of the people, creating any unscientific per se DUID standard, or major changes to the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act.
Thank you.
Tell Your Oregon Reps To Support Will Of The Voters On Measure 91
November 20, 2014
by Russ Belville
After reading this story in the Statesman-Journal, I think it is vitally important for supporters of Oregon’s Measure 91 to contact their state representative and senator and urge them to respect the will of the voters on Measure 91. You can find your legislators here and then send them an email or letter. There are four basic areas the League of Oregon Cities and other lobbyists are fighting us over:
- Right of cities to establish local marijuana taxes;
- Right of cities to establish bans on marijuana licenses without a vote of the people;
- Establishment of a blood-draw ng/ml THC DUID limit (like Washington);
- Abolishing or severely curtailing the Oregon Medical Marijuana Program.
Senator Dembrow & Representative Smith Warner,
My name is Russ Belville and I am a constituent of yours who worked very hard to see that Measure 91, our initiative to legalize marijuana, passed statewide.
Now I am very troubled by reports that the legislature is being lobbied by the League of Oregon Cities and others to subvert the will of the voters by making changes to Measure 91 that are completely inconsistent with Measure 91.
In particular, Senator Lee Beyer is quoted in the Statesman-Journal saying that November’s vote in favor of marijuana meant Oregonians support recreational usage and not that they support the specific details of Measure 91. His assumption is that most voters “didn’t pay a heck of a lot of attention” to or read all the fine print in the proposal.
I assure you, the fine print in the proposal is exactly what Oregonians supported, for it is within that fine print that Oregon learned the lessons from the process of legalization taking place in Washington and Colorado.
At least 70 Oregon cities passed local taxes on marijuana prior to Measure 91’s passage. As you know, Measure 91 vests sole taxation authority over marijuana to the state and repeals and supersedes all previously passed local taxes. This is how we tax alcohol in Oregon, yet cities believe they should be able to tack on an extra tax for alleged “costs of regulation” that are already covered by Measure 91 and are never quantified by the cities.
The low $35/ounce state taxation is a lesson learned from the high taxation at multiple levels of production, processing, and retail and among multiple city, county, and state jurisdictions. In Washington and Colorado, the price of black market and medical marijuana is far lower than the overtaxed recreational price, leading to pot dealers in the parking lots of legal pot shops, undercutting the legal sellers. That’s exactly what we don’t want at our Oregon pot shops.
The right of localities to ban pot shops and other licensees is also enshrined in Measure 91, but only through a vote of the people. This was the lesson learned from the other two legalization states where city councils and county commissions banned pot shops of their own accord, ignoring the will of the voters in those locales that overwhelmingly supported legalization. Such bans also undercut the point of legalization by leaving the illegal pot dealers and the medical marijuana dispensaries as the only source for marijuana that all Oregon adults may legally possess and use.
The lack of a per se THC DUID limit, such as Washington and Colorado, is also a major reason I and others supported Measure 91. It’s not that we don’t want police stopping impaired drivers, regardless of reason for that impairment. It’s that there is no reliable testing for marijuana impairment through saliva, urine, or blood screening that is scientifically valid. Any limit the legislature would add would certainly convict innocent drivers of impairment for merely having high tolerances to marijuana.
Most importantly, Measure 91 explicitly mentioned three times that it changed the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act in no way. Tens of thousands of patients and their caregivers would not have supported Measure 91 if it did change OMMA. Yet Sen. Fred. Girod is already asking “Can we do away with the Oregon Medical Marijuana Program if we are going to legalize marijuana?”
There can be positive changes to streamline the production, processing, and retailing of marijuana to avoid two redundant supply chains. However, the right of patients to possess and cultivate more usable marijuana must be protected; there are some who absolutely cannot make do on the recreational limits of Measure 91. Furthermore, patients rights to home manufacture of edibles and concentrates should be preserved, as they often need those higher-potency items for proper medicinal effect.
I would warn you both not to assume the voters will be satisfied with any changes you make to Measure 91 because we’re simply happy with legalization. Please pledge to me your support of the will and intent of 71% of Multnomah County voters who understood that Measure 91 was crafted to avoid the pitfalls of Colorado and Washington. Please do not support any local marijuana taxes, allowing city councils / county commissions to ban without a vote of the people, creating any unscientific per se DUID standard, or major changes to the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act.
Thank you.
Herb Forester
- 766
- 143
Lawmakers take first look at implementing marijuana law
Anna Staver, Statesman Journal 6:14 p.m. PST November 19, 2014
By the end of a legislative meeting with the Oregon Liquor Control Commission on Wednesday, one thing was clear to the lawmakers involved: There is a lot of work to be done before recreational marijuana sales start in January 2016.
"The seed has just been planted," Rep. Margret Doherty, D-Tigard, said.
Oregon voters approved the sale and consumption of recreational marijuana 56 percent to 44 percent this November, but the ballot initiative's 36 pages left a lot of the regulatory details up to the OLCC to figure out by January 2016.
That's left some of the state's lawmakers wondering whether they should step in during the 2015 legislative session to modify the law or create additional statutory requirements.
"Can we do away with the Oregon Medical Marijuana Program if we are going to legalize marijuana?" Sen. Fred Girod, R-Stayton, asked Jesse Sweet, a policy analyst with the OLCC.
Measure 91 states that it makes no changes to the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act, but nothing prohibits the legislature from making changes.
Girod doesn't see why the state would need to spend the money on two separate regulatory systems with two sets of personnel. He thinks recreational stores could sell medical marijuana strains.
He'd also like to lower the amount of marijuana a household could possess. Measure 91 set that limit at 8 ounces, which is about 224 joints.
And Girod wants to make sure that giving someone a marijuana infused product, like a cookie or brownie, without their knowledge is a criminal offense.
"I like brownies. I like cookies," Girod said. "I would hate to think at the staff lounge we could have brownies and cookies that are laced with marijuana."
Sen. Lee Beyer, D-Springfield, asked the OLCC representatives to develop a list of changes it would like to make to the law and to bring them back to the committee.
"Keep in mind this is a statute, and statutes can be changed," Beyer told the audience gathered to watch the hearing.
He took November's vote in favor of marijuana to mean that Oregonians support recreational usage and not that they support the specific details of Measure 91.
His assumption is that most voters "didn't pay a heck of a lot of attention" to or read all the fine print in the proposal.
One area that interested all the lawmakers on the joint interim task force was that Measure 91 sets no legal limit for driving under the influence. Instead, it tasks OLCC with figuring one out.
The trouble with pot is that unlike alcohol a person can test positive for THC, the psychoactive composite in marijuana, days after he or she got high.
Washington and Colorado set their DUI limits at 5 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood.
The framers of Measure 91 didn't include that standard because the scientific community is divided over whether that's an accurate assessment of a person's impairment, Sweet said.
Critics argue that the 5 nanogram level means most medical marijuana patients would fail a sobriety test.
OLCC plans to work with the Oregon State Police and the Department of Justice to come up with an impaired driving level for Oregon.
The committee plans to meet again in December.
http://www.statesmanjournal.com/sto...rst-look-implementing-marijuana-law/19301493/
By the end of a legislative meeting with the Oregon Liquor Control Commission on Wednesday, one thing was clear to the lawmakers involved: There is a lot of work to be done before recreational marijuana sales start in January 2016.
"The seed has just been planted," Rep. Margret Doherty, D-Tigard, said.
Oregon voters approved the sale and consumption of recreational marijuana 56 percent to 44 percent this November, but the ballot initiative's 36 pages left a lot of the regulatory details up to the OLCC to figure out by January 2016.
That's left some of the state's lawmakers wondering whether they should step in during the 2015 legislative session to modify the law or create additional statutory requirements.
"Can we do away with the Oregon Medical Marijuana Program if we are going to legalize marijuana?" Sen. Fred Girod, R-Stayton, asked Jesse Sweet, a policy analyst with the OLCC.
Measure 91 states that it makes no changes to the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act, but nothing prohibits the legislature from making changes.
Girod doesn't see why the state would need to spend the money on two separate regulatory systems with two sets of personnel. He thinks recreational stores could sell medical marijuana strains.
He'd also like to lower the amount of marijuana a household could possess. Measure 91 set that limit at 8 ounces, which is about 224 joints.
And Girod wants to make sure that giving someone a marijuana infused product, like a cookie or brownie, without their knowledge is a criminal offense.
"I like brownies. I like cookies," Girod said. "I would hate to think at the staff lounge we could have brownies and cookies that are laced with marijuana."
Sen. Lee Beyer, D-Springfield, asked the OLCC representatives to develop a list of changes it would like to make to the law and to bring them back to the committee.
"Keep in mind this is a statute, and statutes can be changed," Beyer told the audience gathered to watch the hearing.
He took November's vote in favor of marijuana to mean that Oregonians support recreational usage and not that they support the specific details of Measure 91.
His assumption is that most voters "didn't pay a heck of a lot of attention" to or read all the fine print in the proposal.
One area that interested all the lawmakers on the joint interim task force was that Measure 91 sets no legal limit for driving under the influence. Instead, it tasks OLCC with figuring one out.
The trouble with pot is that unlike alcohol a person can test positive for THC, the psychoactive composite in marijuana, days after he or she got high.
Washington and Colorado set their DUI limits at 5 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood.
The framers of Measure 91 didn't include that standard because the scientific community is divided over whether that's an accurate assessment of a person's impairment, Sweet said.
Critics argue that the 5 nanogram level means most medical marijuana patients would fail a sobriety test.
OLCC plans to work with the Oregon State Police and the Department of Justice to come up with an impaired driving level for Oregon.
The committee plans to meet again in December.
http://www.statesmanjournal.com/sto...rst-look-implementing-marijuana-law/19301493/
Herb Forester
- 766
- 143
One Democratic Senator is already claiming the people just wanted legalization and they don’t care too much about Measure 91’s “fine print”.
"Keep in mind this is a statute, and statutes can be changed," [Sen.] Beyer told the audience gathered to watch the hearing.
Still think scum is too strong a word 'Dusa?
Last edited:
Medusa
Trichome Engineer
Supporter
- 4,713
- 263
Okay back to scum. Thanks for posting all this info. Herb we all appreciate ! Somebody send those scum a joint they need to mellow out.
jimmy the hat
- 202
- 63
thanks for the info Herb..... such bs ..... The dui part worries me. Im just guessing on this.... but due to my daily consumption I probably would never be able to drive...even days after smoking.(I like concentrates)....And people with higher/lower metabolisms? This definitely needs to be addressed by someone other than politicians and cops......Also lowering household possesions? Is there a limit on wine collections? Personally I would love to have a walk in weed cellar with nitrogen sealed jars of exotic strains
bagseedwndrs
- 150
- 63
Your right this needs to be addressed. Even if i i stopped it might be a year before i ncould legally drive. cuz i enjoy dabs
O
oregonmellow
- 156
- 43
The scary part about the rec.bill passing is the fucking Wal-Mart growers flooding the market with shitty weed and driving the little money the hand-crafted grower could make into the fucking ground and who nows whats going to be used to grow that shit no thanks
O
oregonmellow
- 156
- 43
Sorry folks my last post wasn't very mellow,I have been growing very fine meds for almost 35 years in the good earth without the high test shit that others use almost always impressive to my circle as they always want to know what I got growing on.I am not a "blower of my own horn"just someone who has been waiting along time to be able to share legit with like-minded folks about this wonderful plant,Peace.
O
oregonmellow
- 156
- 43
I guess what ever people want to use, it is safe and properly taken care,like I said who knows what kind of shit is going to be out there tainted,old moldy warehouse weed takes me back to some of the shit that would show up in the 70*s.Peace
Jboys3
- 236
- 43
I understand your rant, but from an old retailer standpoint the market will adjust as it sees fit. You will have your WalMart, Budwieser, Marlboro, et al brands for the mass market consumer. You will also have your locally grown high end, great tasting, aromatic et al brands for the savy consumer, and finally you will get a bunch of Keystone [pun intended] users.
I am hoping the state of Oregon will allow the Brew Pub/Local Winery action to happen in Oregon....
O
oregonmellow
- 156
- 43
In reality you can*t rant if the horse has no hooves because they were used to make non-toxic glue therefore horses could curb ranting because you couldn*t ride them
Jboys3
- 236
- 43
I knew I prefered paste over glue...
O
oregonmellow
- 156
- 43
Jboys I am totally in agreement it*s just going to take a bit of time to flush some of the other crap out there will be that consumer looking for that special product thank you.Peace
O
oregonmellow
- 156
- 43
@Kendo,just wondering thoughts on Fed tax collection.tho I wish the thought would go away I don*t think it will, trying to be legit I guess,forgive me for thinking about taxes.Peace.
Latest posts
-
My cheap halfassed low expectation 2024 grow.- weed420420420420420 posted
-
ODoes anyone know who the parents are of the Mikado strain????
- OGreggie posted
-
Best flower nutrients suggestions please?- Gtglicky3 posted
