washington and colorado approve recreational use

  • Thread starter kushtrees
  • Start date
  • Tagged users None
azmmjadvocates

azmmjadvocates

442
43
Why wait? A lot of these two faced bastards love to shit-talk pot all day long- and then invest in it when nobody's looking! Specific example? How about a prominent Wyoming state legislator, who invested millions in a giant MMC just outside of Boulder, this like 3 years ago already?
I don't think anyone should wait any-longer, I can certainly understand why my judge friend is a bit edgy lol The hypocritical bastards are called politicians lol Capitol hill will string along a decision long enough to get their investment dollars in first and then vote in power who they invested their money in. So I don't see a true end to this for a few years down the road, and likely big pharma or tobacco will prevail for all of our hard work. As long as it settles along the lines of alcohol, I'm cool with that. I can make wine, the 14th amendment should assure me I'll be able to grow my own cannabis. the same as I can tobacco, for personal use .

All we have to do is look to alcohol prohibition, those who led the way will become folk heros, Jack Herer, Mark Emery, Tommy Chong, many others and all of us to a lesser degree paved the way and will be remembered, that's the most we can ask for. We need to let the other side know that now is the time for them to give up or face what history will write about them. .
 
nope notme

nope notme

11
3
..and as usual, the fuckin' blews loves to slant this as negatively as possible; just tonight they have some blowhards from the local chamber of commerce whining about how the negative stigma will impact the local economy. Of course they cited no evidence whatsoever...

Plenty of idiots in the local opinion pages too; how the moral fiber of our community is threatened (how? that was never addressed), how the 'small' impact of pot-tourism won't make up for the shortfall from other- curiously undefined- economic impacts, blah, blah, blah.

My favorite is the one about how this has increased access to pot for our kids- as if any 7th grader with the brains to tie his own shoes can't get his hands on some between morning classes and his lunch break right?! I don't know what planet they inhabit, but whatever THEY'RE smoking has to be pretty good!
Thats really why I'm steping forward and trying to be part of this, not that i'm trying to jump on the bandwaggon, but feeling like I have to join in support so we push back. I'm just a regular guy but im gonna do what I can. I do agree with AzMMJ too that we have to let them know they better back down.
 
nope notme

nope notme

11
3
tty I dont see how they can say any of that, hell i seen Aron Burnett on CNN pretty much excited as hell, I don't see how they see all this negative stigma. There are going to be so many people coming to Colorado, not just from the US. Yeah there will be some Neocon conventions we will loose i bet but we will get back so much more. I hope lots of money comes in, they don't look at like wht AZmmj said about tourism ect. there will be so much money flowing different directions. I bet realestate offices are getting calls like crazy, travel agencies too.
 
putembk

putembk

2,665
263
First it's good to see all the new peeps getting active on the forum. New ideas and fresh comments.

Here is the latest from the Denver Post this morning. Slowly but surely county after county in Colorado is now starting to overlook those with an once on marijuana in their possession. Weld county with Ken Buck is the one holding out the most by saying nothing has changed in his county until the law actually goes into effect.

In reading the article there was a very interesting quote from Jim Gerhardt of the North Metro Drug Task Force To paraphrase he said they weren't actively arresting for simple possession anyway so not much has changed there, however grow operations will be greatly impacted by 64. It has created a loophole in plant numbers. He said we won't be able to automatically shut down a grow with more than 6 plants because if there are more than one person claiming ownership. There is nothing prohibiting 100 people combining their plant count in one location. He went on to say they don't even have to be a resident of the state or the US for that matter.

That is interesting, today my wife owns 6 plants. May start calling shirt tail relatives as well. lol
 
K

kolah

4,829
263
I am not so sure I like the idea of non residents flocking here to CO just to grow. To me I think this will cause problems for us residents in CO and it may also send more feds here to investigate/stop interstate shipping.

I also think there needs to be some type of plant limit. 100 would seem fair to me. IMO anymore than that and it's pretty accurate to say that a grow is falling into "commercial grow" status. That would be 100 per person, per grow site. ie No combining 5 people to grow 500 at one site.

They have one entire year to pick this amendment apart, alter it for regulation and tax it. Let's hope we get some benefit out of it all.

I kinda wonder why they didn't lay down all the details BEFORE passing it....we are kinda working backwards IMO. It could have been very simplistic and straight forward. Mostly just follow alcohol regulations....that is what they advertised 64 as... "Legalize like alcohol". And drop all this bullshit MMED badging bullshit. No one needs a stinkin' badge to work in a g-damn liquor store.
 
putembk

putembk

2,665
263
I am not so sure I like the idea of non residents flocking here to CO just to grow. To me I think this will cause problems for us residents in CO and it may also send more feds here to investigate/stop interstate shipping.

I also think there needs to be some type of plant limit. 100 would seem fair to me. IMO anymore than that and it's pretty accurate to say that a grow is falling into "commercial grow" status. That would be 100 per person, per grow site. ie No combining 5 people to grow 500 at one site.

They have one entire year to pick this amendment apart, alter it for regulation and tax it. Let's hope we get some benefit out of it all.

I kinda wonder why they didn't lay down all the details BEFORE passing it....we are kinda working backwards IMO. It could have been very simplistic and straight forward. Mostly just follow alcohol regulations....that is what they advertised 64 as... "Legalize like alcohol". And drop all this bullshit MMED badging bullshit. No one needs a stinkin' badge to work in a g-damn liquor store.
kolah, are you staying warm up their? I agree don't want out of staters coming in just to grow or claim a plant count, just repeating what the paper stated. You are right working backward, what is so surprising about that? Just interesting watching the developments unfold. I think there needs to be a prerequisite before you start writing the new laws that will ultimately govern our state. You should have to be stoned, that way we will all see eye to eye. ha ha 100 plants, yea I would go for that, so far I have been getting by on 13 or so. Gonna need some help for that though. Anybody need a job. This is way to funny. To be continued.....
 
K

kolah

4,829
263
Yeah it 's been pretty dang cold for November but still no snow.

I think the main prob is the people responsible for writing the laws and regulations for it. I know one dickhead involved is heavily financed in the liquor business. A g-dam conflict of interest or what?

I'd really like to know everyones name who will be responsible for laying down the 64 regs. Because we all know once it's implemented there is no changing it. By being proactive NOW we may be able to have a firmer hand in what gets laid out.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

6,892
313
First it's good to see all the new peeps getting active on the forum. New ideas and fresh comments.

Here is the latest from the Denver Post this morning. Slowly but surely county after county in Colorado is now starting to overlook those with an once on marijuana in their possession. Weld county with Ken Buck is the one holding out the most by saying nothing has changed in his county until the law actually goes into effect.

In reading the article there was a very interesting quote from Jim Gerhardt of the North Metro Drug Task Force To paraphrase he said they weren't actively arresting for simple possession anyway so not much has changed there, however grow operations will be greatly impacted by 64. It has created a loophole in plant numbers. He said we won't be able to automatically shut down a grow with more than 6 plants because if there are more than one person claiming ownership. There is nothing prohibiting 100 people combining their plant count in one location. He went on to say they don't even have to be a resident of the state or the US for that matter.

That is interesting, today my wife owns 6 plants. May start calling shirt tail relatives as well. lol

Hey- this is outrageously discriminatory! I only have ONE sister!!!
 
sky high

sky high

4,796
313
Unfortunately...as we saw with Amendment 20.....the State legislature has left the door open wide to shape this law after-the-fact however they see fit...especially to cover such "loopholes".

Funny (OK, not funny) to watch the same thing happen here that happened with MMJ. A law is passed..allowing 3/3.....and before it can even be signed..folks are talking that it should allow them..not 3/3...but up to the Fed limit of 100!

"Like.....dooooood...I like, um, have an edibles variance for those extra 93..."
Hearts18stoned
 
K

kolah

4,829
263
I just read where Denver is following Boulder and dropping recent MJ busts.

Is it too early for me to eat Crow, yet? :)
 
putembk

putembk

2,665
263
How do we get laws passed in this country with such vague guidelines. Reminds me of Obama Care. It's the law of the land and NOBODY has read it. For all I know we could be supporting the Chinese health care system. But if it was read and refined it would take a 20 year feasibility study just like the ongoing study of how to lessen the congestion on I-70 on weekends. They have had an ongoing study for years and have spent millions and can't figure out what to do.
 
K

kolah

4,829
263
How do we get laws passed in this country with such vague guidelines. Reminds me of Obama Care. It's the law of the land and NOBODY has read it. For all I know we could be supporting the Chinese health care system. But if it was read and refined it would take a 20 year feasibility study just like the ongoing study of how to lessen the congestion on I-70 on weekends. They have had an ongoing study for years and have spent millions and can't figure out what to do.

Agree. Reptilian Nancy Pelosi said "lets pass it and then we'll see whats in it." LOL. Obamacare law is something like 20,000 pages.

The states need to secede from the union, one by one. Supplement the loss in federal money by legalizing weed.
 
azmmjadvocates

azmmjadvocates

442
43
How do we get laws passed in this country with such vague guidelines. Reminds me of Obama Care. It's the law of the land and NOBODY has read it. For all I know we could be supporting the Chinese health care system. But if it was read and refined it would take a 20 year feasibility study just like the ongoing study of how to lessen the congestion on I-70 on weekends. They have had an ongoing study for years and have spent millions and can't figure out what to do.

You just hit the head on the nail on their next line of attack, "INITIATIVE REFORM" I almost wonder if some of these guys drafting these measures really think things thru. Non Residents growers flocking to Co is one thing, but can you imagine now the talk that must be going on in Mexico? What do they have to lose? If they get busted growing thousands of plants, all that can happen to them is get deported and come right back in a different grow house.

Well I guess you guys will be really supporting immigration reform lol Se habla espan grow. Kola is spot on too about DEA. I don't understand why anyone would put this huge of a loophole in the law when politicians are lining up on our side. What Idiots, as soon as this gets out they are going to bail, how can the whitehouse get behind this? Here comes another memo for the prohibitionist politicians to wave. Fucking idiots, you mark my words, all we have to see is a law that states voter initiatives cannot contradict federal law, and you watch they will craft their initiative wrapped around something else people will vote for.
 
azmmjadvocates

azmmjadvocates

442
43
lol...I think it's a bit early. 2014 is far off but I'll probably slow- bake the sucker....if need be...and videotape it.
LMFAO
If this shit goes fully legit Federally and we can all come out from hiding, I may fly up there (if not there already lol) and hold the camera for you, hell I will even partake in some with you out of celebration.
 
azmmjadvocates

azmmjadvocates

442
43
Agree. Reptilian Nancy Pelosi said "lets pass it and then we'll see whats in it." LOL. Obamacare law is something like 20,000 pages.

The states need to secede from the union, one by one. Supplement the loss in federal money by legalizing weed.
Do you remember when Obama care was only like 12 pages and they complained? lol
 
K

kolah

4,829
263
haha, I would totally enjoy the Crowfest. If we keep the feds out, I'd eat the sonzabitch with the feathers still on it.
 
sky high

sky high

4,796
313
The NOBODY has read Obamacare argument is weak, my friend. Um....how many of the NON-socialists ;) (a.k.a.....the fuckin hypocrites who are on Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid who are railing against "socialized medicine") have READ either SS Act? Better yet, dumbing it wayyy down.... do you think any of these SS/MC recipients can even state factually WHEN these Acts were passed by the Fed? Like I say... weaksauce.

Hopefully the FED will shut the retail side of this down and save you the move, az. :D
 
putembk

putembk

2,665
263
Can't argue that, however it's kind of stupid when the speaker of the house says in front of the nation. We need to pass Obama Care so we can see what is in it. This is one on the most insulting things I have ever heard a politician say. We the people are getting fucked.
 
Top Bottom