Marijuana Sales Boost Northern California County (Sacramento, Commerce: crimes, living, cost of)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'd argue that most of it is actually grown legally by US citizens rather than Mexican Cartels.
I agree that the cartel is a bit of a red herring. It serves more to illustrate that in an unregulated industry there is no control on who gets in and who does what.
The issue that is interesting is whether or not what your cousin is doing is actually legal. For now, they are operating in a grey area which shows no sign of being addressed by the law.
The issue that is interesting is whether or not what your cousin is doing is actually legal. For now, they are operating in a grey area which shows no sign of being addressed by the law.
As of now, it is legal. Since all the recommendations are there, if the friend ever had a run in with the cops (which isn't going to happen in far northern CA, especially not for MJ), he has all the documents showing that the plants are being grown legally. The dispensaries are suppose to get there supply off of legal growers which includes "patients" because they have a right to grow up to 12 plants. Legal growers of course also include recreational growers in the Emerald Triangle.
It is a huge money maker. Actually this friend, is AGAINST legalization of MJ because he knows it would cut into his profits. My cousin on the other hand supports legalization, because he isn't making money off of it anyways, so he had nothing to lose. He told his buddy that too, saying somthing like, "I don't want it to continue being illegal so you can buy youself a new car."
As of now, it is legal. The dispensaries are suppose to get there supply off of legal growers which includes "patients" because they have a right to grow up to 12 plants. Legal growers of course also include recreational growers in the Emerald Triangle.
I think the spirit of AB420 appeared to be allowing a group of patients to share the MJ they grow among themselves. Our legislature was too shortsighted to see that the patients didn't necessarily need to know each other or even live near each other. Or that "patients" could supply many dispensaries. Or that a group of patients would pool their resources and create a large supply. I think in the mind of our brilliant state legislature, this was going to stop at friends sharing pot amongst each other.
My biggest question is what will happen to these profits if California finally legalizes Marijana? If the common dirt farmer can grow weed and it becomes as available as cigars and cigarettes will the Emerald Triangle loose its primary industry again like it once did with logging?
Derek
Based on what I know about MJ (particularly medicinal use) I think it's past due that it's just legalized and generally accepted for use. Physiologically, it's supposed to be much less harmful than alcohol, cigarettes and many prescription meds. It's never caused a death, it has anti-depressant and "peaceful" type effects on people (rather than those of aggression). Of course, the same type of thing with not driving on MJ (just like not driving on alcohol) should apply, but really I don't know why it's currently outlawed so vehemently.
It would also be a perfect opportunity for California, in this sinking economic state, to maximize it's resources--legalize MJ, tax it's usage, and save the law enforcement resources that are otherwise wasted chasing this harmless "weed".
It would also be a perfect opportunity for California, in this sinking economic state, to maximize it's resources--legalize MJ, tax it's usage, and save the law enforcement resources that are otherwise wasted chasing this harmless "weed".
Based on what I know about MJ (particularly medicinal use) I think it's past due that it's just legalized and generally accepted for use. Physiologically, it's supposed to be much less harmful than alcohol, cigarettes and many prescription meds. It's never caused a death, it has anti-depressant and "peaceful" type effects on people (rather than those of aggression). Of course, the same type of thing with not driving on MJ (just like not driving on alcohol) should apply, but really I don't know why it's currently outlawed so vehemently.
It would also be a perfect opportunity for California, in this sinking economic state, to maximize it's resources--legalize MJ, tax it's usage, and save the law enforcement resources that are otherwise wasted chasing this harmless "weed".
And people send me messages saying I'm ignorant.
Law enforcement uses "harmless weed" as a huge resource. That is one of the biggest reason they get to search people which leads to usually bigger arrests. These arrests are people with guns, harder drugs, or other more serious crimes.
Everything is different for the city and environment which this is taking place. You could be in a affluent area with little to no crime where someone is a "casual" user and they may not be a serious criminal. In high crime areas it's different for the most part.
Smoking weed may not be the most dangerous thing someone does but it usually goes hand in hand with worse things. Everything has exceptions but those are usually in the minority.
And who are you to judge who is sick and who isn't? How can you tell just because they where a doo-rag and baggy jeans. It's attitude's like yours that will one day turn this into another witch hunt.
Come on...
It's a Wave Cap not a doo-rag.
I'm sorry but you make me chuckle. Maybe someone on the other side of the spectrum thinks it's attitude's like yours that is the problem with society today. Have you ever thought of that? We should question who is ill and not, if they walk and seem fine.
Don't you look twice at the people who get out of a car parked in the handicap parking stall to only see them get out and they are only about 20 years old and walking fine? They parked there because it was their grandmothers car and she has the placard and they are lazy. People take advantage of every government system. Don't get me wrong I think it's great for the few people who actually need the assistance.
I don't like paying taxes knowing a young (mid 20's) mother of three children in a 2500 + sq. ft. house with a granite kitchen, marble bathrooms, with a brand new Chevy Tahoe 22" rims, a couple jet skis, a boat and a Lexus has all of this on what income? How did they get that? Oh, the mother collects welfare while the father of the children who lives with them is out working also. That's nice, that's a good use of my tax money....Yes, this is a real personal account I have had.
I have many other stories like this. So, continue justifying why a person with baggy jeans and a "doo-rag" should be able to smoke weed with no real terminal illness.
I'm sorry but you make me chuckle. Maybe someone on the other side of the spectrum thinks it's attitude's like yours that is the problem with society today. Have you ever thought of that? We should question who is ill and not, if they walk and seem fine.
Don't you look twice at the people who get out of a car parked in the handicap parking stall to only see them get out and they are only about 20 years old and walking fine? They parked there because it was their grandmothers car and she has the placard and they are lazy. People take advantage of every government system. Don't get me wrong I think it's great for the few people who actually need the assistance.
I don't like paying taxes knowing a young (mid 20's) mother of three children in a 2500 + sq. ft. house with a granite kitchen, marble bathrooms, with a brand new Chevy Tahoe 22" rims, a couple jet skis, a boat and a Lexus has all of this on what income? How did they get that? Oh, the mother collects welfare while the father of the children who lives with them is out working also. That's nice, that's a good use of my tax money....Yes, this is a real personal account I have had.
I have many other stories like this. So, continue justifying why a person with baggy jeans and a "doo-rag" should be able to smoke weed with no real terminal illness.
You're lying because there is a limit of how much a person can collect. Did you forget about Clinton's Welfare reform. That same myth about I know so in so with a mansion on welfare thing always comes up with people. It's just not true and you know it.
Also wearing a wave cap is not an indication of a "Thug".
You're lying because there is a limit of how much a person can collect. Did you forget about Clinton's Welfare reform. That same myth about I know so in so with a mansion on welfare thing always comes up with people. It's just not true and you know it.
Also wearing a wave cap is not an indication of a "Thug".
No, I am not lying. It is a true story. I was there and I saw this. I don't think welfare gave them enough money to buy all of these items. That would be a lie if I said that. The father of the children works and I am sure that is how they were able to afford all of these luxuries. My point was to point out that a lot of our systems are broken and can't be regulated properly.
Welfare will not make you rich but people take advantage of it. In my story the girl does not need to receive any assistance because her husband works and they are obviously doing all right if they can afford everything they have. If you are on welfare you should not be accumulating luxuries. I would like to think people receiving assistance are doing whatever they can to get off the assistance as quick as possible. I know that is a far fetched dream. I have no problem helping people who are trying to better themselves but I don't want to help people who are just grabbing things because they are free.
And you are right, a person wearing a wave cap or other clothing does not make them a thug. The problem is that is what most thugs do wear. It is hard to pick out a good person who dresses in common hip hop wear (or whatever people want to call it) or a criminal in his everyday clothing? Why are most crimes committed wearing a black hooded sweatshirt? I wear them and am not a criminal, so I know clothing does not always mean a person is a criminal.
The federal government has no problem with ignoring many federal statutes not to mention the Constitution itself.
The Controlled Substances Act's supposed constitutionality is based on an overtly broad interpretation of the Commerce Clause which is the product of 'living constitutionalism' run amok.
It took the Great Depression to end Prohibition as the cost of maintaining it and the potential revenues to be gained from alcohol relegalization made even previous supporters to recognize that it had to go - now would be a good time to change the marijuana laws. (In fact - if the GOP wants to get back power in 2012, the smartest thing for them to do would be to advocate legalization of marijuana - this strategy could actually deny Obama a second term! And in a CA context it could make CA a purple state again!)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And people send me messages saying I'm ignorant.
