Bobby: As for the whole arresting cultivators issue, there is still ambiguity in 19... what if a child lives in the house, what if an 20 year old lives in the house, what if it doesn't meet electrical safety standards, what if 2 leaves are hanging over the 5x5 area, what if someone makes a 5x5x30 ft grow, what if it's a residence across the street from a school, what if hoa's start making non-cultivation rules... These are just the ones that I can think of in a momentary pause. I assure you the police will come up with many better ones. I'm not saying another prop could necessarily fix all those problems, but I think public opinion will play a lot into how the police choose to deal with grows.
...which brings me to the point about public opinion. We need more time to have more documentaries, news stories, movies, whatever to make it into the mainstream so that people can see up close and personal how mmj can help people. BTW did anyone see that one on HBO a while back that had the mom who lived in a non-mmj state? She was like two different people before and after smoking in terms of the effects her nervous system disorder had on her? Unless she's one of the best actresses I've ever seen, it was crazy!
Once you have some years of people seeing how mmj can really help people, you will get mom and dad voter more on board. Californians are very tolerant compared to the rest of the country, but they still worry about drugs and the safety of their children. We haven't completely sold the average professional on the mj movement, and until we do, how can this possibly play out well on the city levels? Sure, maybe Oakland and a few other cities will be on board, but LA's fighting tooth and nail right now for reasonable dispensary laws. How will you get them to understand recreational use if they're not even sure yet that they want mmj?
The rescheduling and legalization are completely related events. I'm sure a state will pass recreational first, but that passage doesn't do anything to ensure the federal legalization. And I can see a lot of feds digging in against mmj just to prove they wear the biggest pants.
Sure, it sounds super groundbreaking if you're from another state who won't be crippled financially by all the legal battles, or if you just aren't considering all sides of the equation.
I think you get why most medium sized growers don't like it. So many of them will have to shut down their grow ops if their city doesn't allow commercial production, even if they can afford the probably ridiculously priced permit. Why would they want to vote for something that shuts them down to a 5x5, even if they have no intent to sell?
The small growers and smokers seem to like it because NOTHING will change for them except a $100 ticket and not needing an rx. Some people would vote yes to a pile of poo with the word mj on it. :-)
Illmind: I read the threat as... we're being tolerant about your dispensaries, but pass this crap and we'll reopen our battle on them. Hmmm, maybe we'll even check out legal channels to prove 215 is in violation of federal law, which it is. It's not that they'll be knocking on every smoker and grower's door, but there are lots of ways for feds to put pressure on states. I didn't even get into all the funding they can withhold from us.
Darth--So a state law that contradicted federal law got prohibition ended or women the vote? Yeah, not at all. Working on the rescheduling, again, seems like the best option.
