Marijuana legalization amendment approved for Ohio's November ballot (Perry: income, live)

[OhioJB]

My main concerns continue to be:

1) License fees for home growers. Once there's a fee it'll be considered revenue the state can't do without to combat drug abuse or whatever. This is a terrible idea, and will be near impossible to get rid of once implemented.

2) Database with names in it of those who have received licenses to home grow, with nothing to stop the Federal government from seizing it and prosecuting home growers.

3) Very limited number of plants (4) and limited amount of your own home grown finished product you could have in your residence. Next year's LegalizeOhio2016 amendment still limits the number of plants (6), but I don't believe there's a limit to how much of your own home grown finished product you could have in your residence. Of course when I say finished product I don't mean to sell it, which would be illegal. It's just for personal use.

4) If this passes the 10 commercial grow site owners and the marijuana commission will pretty much dictate everything, and there's nothing preventing the big money backers of the amendment/growers from being on the commission. Meaning they have an interest in denying applications for home grow licenses, increasing license fees for growers, etc.

5) Requiring licenses will greatly contribute to an increase in law enforcement efforts to find home growers that don't have a license, all for the sake of ensuring everyone pays the $50/year. When money is involved like that the government will stop at nothing to make sure they get their grubby hands on other people's money.

6) If this passes, and I last heard it had a clear lead (think it stood at 58% for), forget about LO2016 or the other amendments a couple other groups are organizing. They'll either lose steam due to lack of funding, or the big money backers of the current amendment and politicians will do everything they can to prevent other amendments from getting on the ballot.

And if you think #5 above is an exaggeration take a look at what's been happening in Humboldt County, California. The Feds have been all over that area because so many people grow there because the climate is supposedly the best to grow in. I watched a documentary recently on Netflix called Cash Crop. One of the illegal growers there said law enforcement comes in, takes the marijuana right when the season is about finished, under reports how much marijuana was confiscated, and they also have some type of infra-red device (his claims, not mine) where they can see inside a person's home and see the bands on money. They'll confiscate $300,000 but report they confiscated $40,000. Where there's money involved there'll be corruption involved, no doubt. Now, here in Ohio it'll be more about going after those without licenses, and of course charging them heavy fines, court costs, etc.

Who needs that aggravation? If I were inclined to grow if it were legal no way would I want my name in a database of growers for the Feds to confiscate, nor would I be willing to pay a fee. So back to square one since I wouldn't want to pay $300/ounce or whatever they'll be charging for it, with little hope for other amendments making it onto the ballot at that point.

I just think this is a really, REALLY, bad amendment. Only thing the No voters may have on their side is turnout is normally low unless it's a Presidential election. This year may see a rare change though, possibly more young voters turning out than senior citizens. They want their chronic, man.

For those on the fence or planning to vote Yes, I suggest you ask what happens when Issue 2 passes, which looks likely as well. If both 2 & 3 pass 3 could be nullified if 2 gets more Yes votes, and it could possibly go to the courts for who knows how long if Issue 3 gets more votes. I suggest waiting for a much better amendment next year. Easy for me to say I know since I don't smoke or grow it, I just care about civil liberty and know the war on marijuana has been ridiculous and extremely costly, not to mention the lives it has very negatively impacted and even ruined by way of incarceration, etc..

Vote Smart...I know I will.

[L2DB]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88

This is the direction the nation is going. More states are likely to legalize next year, probably to be followed by even more states in the years following, and eventually Ohio will get a bill that is good for everybody, not just a wealthy few. It's our first chance, not our last. If it's really the will of the people, than it's inevitable. Don't just jump on the first thing that comes along.

I read somewhere that a lot of the issues with Issue 3 will go out the window when/if the federal law changes regarding marijuana. The restrictions regarding the 10 growers or whatever violate all kinds of interstate commerce laws or something.

[Señor Slick]

C'mon, JB .... Just vote No on 2 and YES on 3. :-)

[WhipperSnapper 88]

Originally Posted by L2DB

I read somewhere that a lot of the issues with Issue 3 will go out the window when/if the federal law changes regarding marijuana. The restrictions regarding the 10 growers or whatever violate all kinds of interstate commerce laws or something.

A law that needs fixing the minute it is passed, should not be passed to begin with.

What you're reading is just a justification by those who are willing to overlook the flaws with this law in order to achieve legalization.

[WhipperSnapper 88]

Originally Posted by OhioJB

My main concerns continue to be:

1) License fees for home growers. Once there's a fee it'll be considered revenue the state can't do without to combat drug abuse or whatever. This is a terrible idea, and will be near impossible to get rid of once implemented.

2) Database with names in it of those who have received licenses to home grow, with nothing to stop the Federal government from seizing it and prosecuting home growers.

Something else that people need to consider that I think some people haven't realized, is that the minute you pay that fee, get that license and enter the database, you instantly lose your right to buy a gun or have a concealed carry license.

[L2DB]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88

A law that needs fixing the minute it is passed, should not be passed to begin with.

That's every law depending on what side of the aisle you sit on.

[no1brownsfan]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88

Something else that people need to consider that I think some people haven't realized, is that the minute you pay that fee, get that license and enter the database, you instantly lose your right to buy a gun or have a concealed carry license.

And this is some BS too, and hypocritical! Then again everything surrounding prohibition of cannabis is hypocritical. Not to mention un-Constitutional. Where was the amendment process for prohibition of cannabis, like with alcohol, and later an amendment process for repealing? It was all done outside of the rules to pander to special interests who greased the palms of the elected officials and continue to do so today trying to keep it illegal. Follow the money! How convenient, huh? But I digress... I can have a case of beer in my refrigerator, yet have a right to buy a gun, own a gun, or obtain a concealed carry, yet I can't have an ounce of weed in my home? Now let's be realistic, I'm thinking the drinker especially those who do so above moderation is more inclined to snap, than some one who might smoke a little above moderation! It's ridiculous! Now, I do believe though that license is ONLY if you want to grow your own, not if I wanted to just go and buy it.

Originally Posted by L2DB

That's every law depending on what side of the aisle you sit on.

Me personally....I sit on neither side. They're two sides of the same coin. Both are for expanding government in our lives and restricting our individual liberties. At least the Democratic party makes no bones about it, and are pretty up front about it, whereas the Republicans aren't. Oh, sure they say they're the party of "smaller government" but save for a few, such as Ron Paul, and maybe Rand (though I'm not sold on him like I was his dad) the rest are full of s***!

[Señor Slick]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88

Something else that people need to consider that I think some people haven't realized, is that the minute you pay that fee, get that license and enter the database, you instantly lose your right to buy a gun or have a concealed carry license.

Whipper ...... do you have a source for this information? I have only heard people speculate about the issue. I have not seen anything in black and white.

[WhipperSnapper 88]

Originally Posted by Señor Slick

Whipper ...... do you have a source for this information? I have only heard people speculate about the issue. I have not seen anything in black and white.

A few years ago the ATF sent a letter to gun dealers nationwide, that said in part:

“there are no exceptions in federal law for marijuana purportedly used for medicinal purposes, even if such use is sanctioned by State law…any person who uses…regardless of whether his or her state has passed legislation authorizing marijuana for medicinal purposes, is an unlawful user…and is prohibited by Federal law from possessing firearms of ammunition…..if you are aware that the potential transferee is in possession of a card authorizing the possession and use of marijuana under State law, then you may not transfer firearms or ammunition to the person.”

https://www.atf.gov/file/60211/download

If they don't make an exception for medical marijuana users, I doubt they'll make an exception for recreational marijuana users / growers either.

Here are more links discussing this issue...

ATF: Illegal to sell guns to med marijuana users - US news - Crime & courts | NBC News

Get a Medical Marijuana Card, Lose Your Second Amendment Rights | Hawaii Reporter

Illinois: medical marijuana patients must surrender guns under proposed rule (VIDEO)

[OhioJB]

Originally Posted by Señor Slick

C'mon, JB .... Just vote No on 2 and YES on 3. :-)

I'll be reading Issue 2 to make sure there's nothing in it I don't like enough that would force me vote No. Up to this point I've only considered the simple issue of whether we should allow monopolies, or oligopolies, in relation to the current amendment Issue 3. Time to delve deeper to see what else they've included and how it would affect future amendments.

Can't convince me on Issue 3 to change my mind though. NIce try there Senor Slick!