Do you support marijuana legalization in California? (to buy, costs)

[PNW-type-gal]

Originally Posted by Jehjeh

PNW-type-gal, get ready for some links. This response turned out much longer than I intended (waaay longer -- wow ), but here we go:

First, if Big Marijuana is run by cartels, Colorado has already shown that this version of Big Marijuana doesn't go away -- it just grows, no pun intended. I've already put links for that in a previous post.

The cartels grow pot based on supply and demand. Since, in most states, recreational pot is illegal, the demand is still high. According to our local police (I saw a presentation on this, I'll try to dig up an official link), the majority of illegal pot grown here in Oregon goes south to California, where your 38 million residents are a MUCH bigger market than our 3.8 million residents. Some of the pot here goes east, but it is the market to our south that drives the local illegal production. One of the things Oregon monitors is how much a site can produce, and that has to be sold into the legal market. As long as there is a lucrative market to the south of us, there is a lot of incentive to get around that.

The only way to know about pesticides, mold, etc is to test the product. That only happens when the product is legal and distribution is controlled - hence the recall. I just got a robocall today about the recall of General Mills flour because of salmonella, even though there are regulations and testing in place to keep salmonella out of the food chain as much as possible.

Although the rules here do allow someone to grow (a limited amount - maybe 4 plants?) their own, for their own use, and there is no regulation on how to grow, much like vegetable gardens. You make your own decisions on what chemicals you use. In the commercial arena, where you sell a product for other people to use, you don't get to do that. There is regulation on where you can grow and that is being argued all over the state.

As far as the link in the Denver Post to the story about pot growers "trying to weaken regulations on pesticides" - did you actually read that story? Here is a pretty good paragraph from the article, summing up what the growers are complaining about that:

Cannabis industry insiders have said the existing law offers them no due process, allowing the government to come into their cultivations and destroy their valuable crops and giving the industry no leeway to challenge the testing and ruling.

They are also arguing that the pesticide regulations are arbitrary in that many of the chemicals on the list have no science (either way) supporting the ban. Personally, I'd argue the state has a right to ban them (as it has done) and then let the ruling be reversed by scientific information from studies - rather than the standard way it is done, where it is assumed harmless until proven otherwise, which, to me, is the stupid way to do it. So in that sense the state has actually been proactive for once. Yay?

I don't think you can legally grow commercial pot in a residential house here, medical or otherwise. Outdoor, greenhouses and warehouses converted into greenhouses with massive grow lights and required ventilation scrubbers. Oregon tests for mold, although I know there is disagreement on where the limit should be set (some say higher, some say lower). I think you can grow up to 4 (?) plants in your own house for your own use.*

Commercial and medical pot in Oregon is tested for pesticides, herbicides and mold and has to be labeled by content and potency of the various byproducts (THC and CBD). I did sound for friends playing at a store opening and got a chance to see the handouts they had for all their varieties (edibles were not legal for recreational use at the time) and it was a pretty impressive list.

Unlike California, the sale of hard alcohol is regulated here by the Oregon Liquor Control Commission (hard alcohol is sold through state-franchised stores ONLY, beer and wine can be licensed to be sold in grocery stores and corner stores) so we already have more of a mechanism to handle licensing and permitting of adult-only "consumables" (for lack of a better word). They also deal with wineries, breweries, distilleries in the production end of things.

In a lot of ways, it is better to be a state getting in on the tail-end of legalizing things, rather than the cutting edge - wait and see how it works in other places, what works and doesn't work. But that is assuming you don't already have a giant problem with the illegal trade.

*The state allows any jurisdiction (city, county) where the vote against Measure 91 was higher than 55% to outright ban production and sales (medical, commercial AND personal). But not use.

[SHABAZZ310]

Originally Posted by downtownnola

California among 8 states to vote on legal weed in November - Jun. 29, 2016

Very interesting. It looks like California will have the opportunity in November to vote whether or not to allow recreational use of marijuana, with the potential of raising $1 billion in tax revenue. Thoughts?

I think there might actually be legalization this time...

[marcopolo666]

Originally Posted by downtownnola

California among 8 states to vote on legal weed in November - Jun. 29, 2016

Very interesting. It looks like California will have the opportunity in November to vote whether or not to allow recreational use of marijuana, with the potential of raising $1 billion in tax revenue. Thoughts?

What, it isn't legal already?

[DCMann2]

Voted yes in 2010, voting yes now.

[3rdGen SFan]

I'd rather the proposal be called "the legalization of supplemental marijuana". Calling it "recreational" can stir up negative opinions.

Though, I do support the legalization of marijuana primarily because a lot of us need to reduce stress in the safest or relatively safest ways. Marijuana, taken IN MODERATION, has been helping me a lot.

Some benefits to be had for the average person in the use of marijuana include:

Stress reduction--lower risk of developing stress-induced illnesses.

Reduced risk or prevention of developing Alzheimer's Disease (also a treatment and possible cure for people who are suffering with Alzheimer's Disease).

Marijuana's (THC's) result of reducing beta amyloid protein plaque formation in the brain and reducing inflammation of brain tissue might also provide similar prevention & treatment of other forms of dementia and cerebral amyloid agiopathy.

Lower insulin resistance/reduced risk of developing type 2 diabetes (even though marijuana smokers tend to eat a lot during "the munchies" [which is actually sort of more like an insatiable appetite]).

Reduced risk of obesity.

Beneficial for people who suffer with anxiety & depression. A friend of mine claims he suffers with anxiety, but I wouldn't have known it if he didn't tell me. He's the one who greeted me first then invited me to "hang out" and smoke a few bowls of marijuana. He also constantly greets & flirts with women on the street. If he has anxiety disorder, marijuana is certainly helping him in a major degree.

[neutrino78x]

Originally Posted by DCMann2

Voted yes in 2010, voting yes now.

I support the idea, but I had to vote no in 2010. They didn't allow for employers to maintain a drug free workplace and they didn't require licensing for marijuana farms.

If they do it correctly I will vote yes. I think it is a good idea.

[blam]

As long as alcohol is legal one can't possibly make a point against legalization of marijuana.

[WestGuest]

Originally Posted by mysticaltyger

People should think twice about voting for pot legalization in CA. Colorado's legalization has had a lot of unexpected / unintended consequences and has not generated much tax revenue for the state:

Has Pot Lost Its Buzz in Colorado? - Fortune

That's a really dishonest post. The Denver Post statewide poll showed Coloradoans would vote "Yes" all over again by a wide margin. ANother study should teens were no more likely to try it whether legal or not.

[notmeofficer]

My answer,,, yes and no

I suggest people read Measure a
This year I think we are running about 2000 complaints for violations of measure A..less than last year.. illegal grows continue steady.. and honey oil labs continue to spike upwards with huge damage to the community (forest fire,, death and neighborhoods and dwellings destroyed by lab fires)


https://ballotpedia.org/Shasta_Count...(November_2014)



Having seen the disaster that large scale marijuana has upon an area I would generally vote no for any expansion of existing law... many aspects of the ballot I could support

Please read the ballot here:
https://ballotpedia.org/California_M...ition_64_(2016)


and educate yourself on the big money like Sean Parker who wants to be a billionaire over marijuana... pro or con you ARE being manipulated for profit

Ultimately ALL drug use is harmful..marijuana included... and I think we will regret this social experiment years down the road.. about 1/3 of our population will be less capable.. less durable.. less "available" for life

BTW,, the ballot claims local control but there is a move afoot to make it so LOCAL control to further restrict marijuana use would be negated. EVERYONE should be concerned about this... social control from centralized government... instead of the will of the people.. that is scary

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by neutrino78x

I do support legalization of marijuana. I think it would help take power away from the cartels in Mexico and around the world. I will have to see how the proposal is worded, however.

It still has to be legal for an employer to fire someone for coming to work under the influence. It still has to be illegal to drive under the influence. Employers should still be able to drug test people and have a drug free workplace.

You should have to be a certain age to legally consume marijuana. 21 would be fine.

Smoking ANYTHING in a bar or restaurant, or public transportation, or private mass transit (Greyhound, airliners) should be illegal.

It should be illegal to sell it at your house. It should have to be a commercial property with a license to sell it.

It needs to continue to be illegal to grow it out in the woods in Humbolt County. It should have to be a licensed farm. The government should be able to revoke the license if the operation is doing other illegal things, etc.

All valid points.

One more thing...it really needs to be legalized at the federal level. Or at the very least, the federal government has to allow states to legalize it or not. Right now the legal status of pot is still in limbo even if a state legalizes it.