" if it passes that we will be on an accelerated path"
Perhaps, but I'm not convinced of that. Too much potential for legal confusion, federal retaliation and misdirection by the feds and anti-marijuana zealots in positions of responsibility in municipal govts, who will certainly obstruct the implementation of Prop 19 by invoking the "save the children" rap that Prop 19 sings along with to a degree, by perpetuating the myth of "danger" associated with Cannabis use. How many Cannabis-smoking/growing parents will be exposed to losing their kids if Prop 19 passes?
Prop 19: Maintenance and addition of criminal and civil penalties
"Maintains existing laws against selling drugs to a minor and driving under the influence.
Maintains an employer's right to address consumption of marijuana that affects an employee's job performance.
Maintains existing laws against interstate or international transportation of marijuana.
Every person 18 years of age or older who hires, employs, or uses a minor in transporting, carrying, selling, giving away marijuana, or knowingly sells or gives away marijuana to someone under the age of 14, shall be imprisoned in state prison for a period of three, five, or seven years.
Every person 18 years of age or older who knowingly sells or gives away marijuana to someone older than the age of 14 but younger than 18, shall be imprisoned in the state prison for a period of three, four, or five years.
Every person 21 years of age or older who knowingly sells or gives away marijuana to someone older than the age of 18 but younger than 21, shall be imprisoned in county jail for up to six months and fined up to $1,000 per offense.
Any person who is licensed, permitted, or authorized to sell marijuana, who knowingly sells or gives away marijuana to someone under the age of 21 results in them being banned from owning, operating, or being employed by a licensed marijuana establishment for one year. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_19_(2010)#Maintenance_and_addition_of_criminal_and_civil_penalties
That's not "legalization." It's a sucker-punch.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Prop 19 is a recipe for expensive confusion, costing precious time and money.
Prop 19 is a recipe for expensive confusion, costing precious time and money.
What's needed instead is a formal re-assessment of Cannabis, based in credible science. The studies have been done. The reports written. Cannabis is the safest most effective herbal preventative and therapeutic agent that there is. Cannabis in many forms (seeds, buds, essential oils, etc.) is effective in preventing, treating and in some cases, curing a wide range of ailments, including physical, emotional, and substance abuse (i.e. alcohol & hard drugs) problems.
Prohibition in any form for anything creates a vicious, violent, black market with real damage inflicted on individuals, the environment and society. Ending prohibition of the world's most nutritious, useful, environmentally beneficial agricultural resource, by recognizing its true value, will do more good than any other move we could make. It's been done in other countries and the results are tangible, verifiable and profound.
Unfortunately, Prop 19 perpetuates the baseless, erroneous, prohibitionist myth of people needing government 'protection' from marijuana. Misinformation and a "Reefer Madness" imposed valuation of Cannabis conveys corporate control over our freedom to farm.
Violation of our Constitutional rights is a greater threat to national security than marijuana could ever be, even if the lies being told about it were true. Individual responsibility for life choices is the key to normalizing our relationship with Ca
What's needed instead is a formal re-assessment of Cannabis, based in credible science. The studies have been done. The reports written. Cannabis is the safest most effective herbal preventative and therapeutic agent that there is. Cannabis in many forms (seeds, buds, essential oils, etc.) is effective in preventing, treating and in some cases, curing a wide range of ailments, including physical, emotional, and substance abuse (i.e. alcohol & hard drugs) problems.
Prohibition in any form for anything creates a vicious, violent, black market with real damage inflicted on individuals, the environment and society. Ending prohibition of the world's most nutritious, useful, environmentally beneficial agricultural resource, by recognizing its true value, will do more good than any other move we could make. It's been done in other countries and the results are tangible, verifiable and profound.
Unfortunately, Prop 19 perpetuates the baseless, erroneous, prohibitionist myth of people needing government 'protection' from marijuana. Misinformation and a "Reefer Madness" imposed valuation of Cannabis conveys corporate control over our freedom to farm.
Violation of our Constitutional rights is a greater threat to national security than marijuana could ever be, even if the lies being told about it were true. Individual responsibility for life choices is the key to normalizing our relationship with Ca
Saturday, October 30, 2010
William Panzer dissects Prop 19
"It's about 1:40 a.m. and I just watched Cannabis Planet's Prop 19 show in which I was misquoted by Dragonfly. I've been hanging out on the sidelines in the ongoing debate within the movement. Now that we're getting close to election time, I thought I'd share some thoughts.
"First, Prop 19 is not "legalization" and I don't believe those in the movement who are against Prop 19 are against legalization. To the contrary, I believe most movement opponents are against 19 because they are FOR legalization.
"Every anti-cannabis law on the books today will remain unchanged if Prop 19 passes with a single exception: a new offense is added, Health & Safety Code §11361(c) which provides that a person 21 or older who gives less than an ounce of cannabis to a person 18-21 (as, for example, a 21 year old boy handing a joint to his 20 year old girlfriend) is guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to 6 months in jail and a $1000 fine. Under current law, the offense would call for a $100 maximum fine and no jail.
"The fact that 19 fails to repeal or even amend any other section of the Health & Safety Code is both it's greatest flaw and, ironically as I'll explain below, perhaps its saving grace.
"The most common fear is that 19 could potentially impinge on medical cannabis rights. Proponents have pointed to the purpose language as evidence that it would not effect 215/420. In reality, the court's do not look at the purpose language, only resorting to it if an ambiguity is found in the body of the statute. As for the body of Prop 19, I am less than thrilled with the drafting. There are inconsistencies and the language is loose enough to support several different interpretations. If an appellate court were inclined to find that Prop 19 preserved all 215/420 rights, there is language in 19 to support that. If, on the other hand, an appellate court was inclined to find that 19 allowed local municipalities to impinge on 215/420, there is language that could support that position too. The bottom line is that the body of the statute could have clearly stated that local municipalities are not authorized to pass any ordinance or regulation that infringes on 215/420 in any manner, but it doesn't.
"As scary as the above may seem, I have now come to the conclusion that it is likely moot. I now believe that it is likely that §11301 "Commercial Regulations and Controls", the section of Prop. 19 that authorizes local government to legalize and regulate cultivation, sales, taxes, etc., will likely be ruled invalid as an unconstitutional delegation of powers in violation of the following sections of the California Constitution:
"ARTICLE 4 LEGISLATIVE
SEC. 16. (a) All laws of a general nature have uniform operation.
(b) A local or special statute is invalid in any case if a general
statute can be made applicable."; and
"ARTICLE 11 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
SEC. 5. (a) It shall be competent in any city charter to provide
that the city governed thereunder may make and enforce all ordinances
and regulations in respect to municipal affairs, subject only to
restrictions and limitations provided in their several charters and
in respect to other matters they shall be subject to general laws.
City charters adopted pursuant to this Constitution shall supersede
any existing charter, and with respect to municipal affairs shall
supersede all laws inconsistent therewith."
"Because Prop. 19 fails to either repeal or amend current cannabis criminal law, we would have a situation where, for example, state law dictates that sale of cannabis is a felony, yet Prop. 19 gives cities and counties authority to override this state law. This is an authority that is specifically denied to local municipalities in the state constitution. Thus Prop. 19's goal of authorizing local government to override state law would require a constitutional amendment. The saving grace is that if the power to override state law prohibiting cannabis cannot be legally delegated to the locals, than the power to impinge on 215/420 similarly cannot be delegated to local authorities.
"The most amazing factor of this whole debate to me is how Prop. 19 is being almost universally portrayed as "legalization" in the media and by many in our movement who, quire frankly, I suspect have never actually read the text of the initiative! What makes little sense to me is that this initiative, which doesn't legalize cannabis, is being sold as legalization. It seem to me, it would make more sense to draft an initiative that does legalize cannabis and sell it as regulation.
"Nevertheless, because it is being touted as legalization, if it passed it would be perceived around the world as legalization. It would also give some modest protections to cannabis users. It essentially protects you from getting an infraction ticket in your own home so long as there are no children under the same roof. The greatest benefit would be to persons who wanted to cultivate a modest indoor grow, or about one healthy outdoor plant.
"I guess my conclusion is that though Prop. 19 was poorly thought out and poorly drafted and, in my opinion, tragically represents a lost opportunity, I don't fear that it will be used to curtail medical rights, nor will it result in commercial cannabis stores and high taxes on everything cannabis. So I plan to hold my nose, close my eyes, and vote "yes" for the message effect. Then I'll keep my fingers crossed that if it is declared unconstitutional as I anticipate, there will be a groundswell to come back with a better and true legalization initiative in two years."
Bill Panzer
"First, Prop 19 is not "legalization" and I don't believe those in the movement who are against Prop 19 are against legalization. To the contrary, I believe most movement opponents are against 19 because they are FOR legalization.
"Every anti-cannabis law on the books today will remain unchanged if Prop 19 passes with a single exception: a new offense is added, Health & Safety Code §11361(c) which provides that a person 21 or older who gives less than an ounce of cannabis to a person 18-21 (as, for example, a 21 year old boy handing a joint to his 20 year old girlfriend) is guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to 6 months in jail and a $1000 fine. Under current law, the offense would call for a $100 maximum fine and no jail.
"The fact that 19 fails to repeal or even amend any other section of the Health & Safety Code is both it's greatest flaw and, ironically as I'll explain below, perhaps its saving grace.
"The most common fear is that 19 could potentially impinge on medical cannabis rights. Proponents have pointed to the purpose language as evidence that it would not effect 215/420. In reality, the court's do not look at the purpose language, only resorting to it if an ambiguity is found in the body of the statute. As for the body of Prop 19, I am less than thrilled with the drafting. There are inconsistencies and the language is loose enough to support several different interpretations. If an appellate court were inclined to find that Prop 19 preserved all 215/420 rights, there is language in 19 to support that. If, on the other hand, an appellate court was inclined to find that 19 allowed local municipalities to impinge on 215/420, there is language that could support that position too. The bottom line is that the body of the statute could have clearly stated that local municipalities are not authorized to pass any ordinance or regulation that infringes on 215/420 in any manner, but it doesn't.
"As scary as the above may seem, I have now come to the conclusion that it is likely moot. I now believe that it is likely that §11301 "Commercial Regulations and Controls", the section of Prop. 19 that authorizes local government to legalize and regulate cultivation, sales, taxes, etc., will likely be ruled invalid as an unconstitutional delegation of powers in violation of the following sections of the California Constitution:
"ARTICLE 4 LEGISLATIVE
SEC. 16. (a) All laws of a general nature have uniform operation.
(b) A local or special statute is invalid in any case if a general
statute can be made applicable."; and
"ARTICLE 11 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
SEC. 5. (a) It shall be competent in any city charter to provide
that the city governed thereunder may make and enforce all ordinances
and regulations in respect to municipal affairs, subject only to
restrictions and limitations provided in their several charters and
in respect to other matters they shall be subject to general laws.
City charters adopted pursuant to this Constitution shall supersede
any existing charter, and with respect to municipal affairs shall
supersede all laws inconsistent therewith."
"Because Prop. 19 fails to either repeal or amend current cannabis criminal law, we would have a situation where, for example, state law dictates that sale of cannabis is a felony, yet Prop. 19 gives cities and counties authority to override this state law. This is an authority that is specifically denied to local municipalities in the state constitution. Thus Prop. 19's goal of authorizing local government to override state law would require a constitutional amendment. The saving grace is that if the power to override state law prohibiting cannabis cannot be legally delegated to the locals, than the power to impinge on 215/420 similarly cannot be delegated to local authorities.
"The most amazing factor of this whole debate to me is how Prop. 19 is being almost universally portrayed as "legalization" in the media and by many in our movement who, quire frankly, I suspect have never actually read the text of the initiative! What makes little sense to me is that this initiative, which doesn't legalize cannabis, is being sold as legalization. It seem to me, it would make more sense to draft an initiative that does legalize cannabis and sell it as regulation.
"Nevertheless, because it is being touted as legalization, if it passed it would be perceived around the world as legalization. It would also give some modest protections to cannabis users. It essentially protects you from getting an infraction ticket in your own home so long as there are no children under the same roof. The greatest benefit would be to persons who wanted to cultivate a modest indoor grow, or about one healthy outdoor plant.
"I guess my conclusion is that though Prop. 19 was poorly thought out and poorly drafted and, in my opinion, tragically represents a lost opportunity, I don't fear that it will be used to curtail medical rights, nor will it result in commercial cannabis stores and high taxes on everything cannabis. So I plan to hold my nose, close my eyes, and vote "yes" for the message effect. Then I'll keep my fingers crossed that if it is declared unconstitutional as I anticipate, there will be a groundswell to come back with a better and true legalization initiative in two years."
Bill Panzer
Reply to "Any corporation that gets big enough to dominate the marijuana market will be taken down by the feds."
The corporately corrupted Supreme Court has ruled that corporations are people and can pour unlimited funds into our elections. Obama appointed a Monsanto shill to head up the Dept. of Agriculture. The corporations own the Feds!
Control is control and right now, by & large, the chemical companies have it by virtue of warped values and corrupt politics, antagonistic toward the planetary systems critical to survival.
I know of at least one mad genetic plan that I heard at a science congress in Frankfurt in 2002. Genetic markers were being developed for Cannabis by Italian researchers. Almost all of the distinguished agricultural scientists and industry professionals there got up and left the room. In the California, I'd like to think that my efforts to expose mad agricultural research at UC Davis, regarding development of soil born viruses to attack Cannabis, had something to do with that project being discontinued, if in fact it truly has been.
The only way to devalue the extinctionistic, unevenly distributed chemically-based economy is to develop regional currencies based in "Gaiatherapeutic" industries, with a free agricultural market inclusive of Cannabis agriculture, manufacture and trade.
www.shastashares.com
I'd like nothing better than to adopt the widespread illusion that Prop 19 would legalize Cannabis. I anticipate lawsuits and legal hassles galore if this passes, and endless arguments about impacted myths that have been debunked by hard science.
If I could in good conscience vote for less than a completely realistic, comprehensive view of Cannabis I might, but my interpretation of Prop 19 is that it concedes rightful jurisdiction introduces confusion and wastes our most precious limited resource -- time. Certainly, a part of me wants to vote yes on 19 and I acknowledge the progress afforded by Prop 215. But how long are we going to go along with a globally contrary illusionary valuation of Cannabis?
Here's the DEA's "clarified" definition of hemp, another legal battle waiting to happen...
""Hemp” and marijuana are actually separate parts of the species of plant known as cannabis. Under federal law, Congress defined marijuana to focus on those parts of the cannabis plant that are the source of tetrahydrocannabinols (THC). THC is the hallucinogenic substance in marijuana that causes the psychoactive effect or “high.” The marijuana portions of the cannabis plant include the flowering tops (buds), the leaves, and the resin of the cannabis plant. The remainder of the plant — stalks and sterilized seeds — is what some people refer to as “hemp.” However, “hemp” is not a term that is found in federal law."
http://www.justice.gov/dea/pubs/pressrel/pr100901.html
Too much is at stake to put up with this insultingly incompetent resource mismanagement. Opposition by prohibitionist America is no longer credible. 'Time' is the limiting factor in the equation of survival. We have nothing to fear but the atmosphere itself.
Control is control and right now, by & large, the chemical companies have it by virtue of warped values and corrupt politics, antagonistic toward the planetary systems critical to survival.
I know of at least one mad genetic plan that I heard at a science congress in Frankfurt in 2002. Genetic markers were being developed for Cannabis by Italian researchers. Almost all of the distinguished agricultural scientists and industry professionals there got up and left the room. In the California, I'd like to think that my efforts to expose mad agricultural research at UC Davis, regarding development of soil born viruses to attack Cannabis, had something to do with that project being discontinued, if in fact it truly has been.
The only way to devalue the extinctionistic, unevenly distributed chemically-based economy is to develop regional currencies based in "Gaiatherapeutic" industries, with a free agricultural market inclusive of Cannabis agriculture, manufacture and trade.
www.shastashares.com
I'd like nothing better than to adopt the widespread illusion that Prop 19 would legalize Cannabis. I anticipate lawsuits and legal hassles galore if this passes, and endless arguments about impacted myths that have been debunked by hard science.
If I could in good conscience vote for less than a completely realistic, comprehensive view of Cannabis I might, but my interpretation of Prop 19 is that it concedes rightful jurisdiction introduces confusion and wastes our most precious limited resource -- time. Certainly, a part of me wants to vote yes on 19 and I acknowledge the progress afforded by Prop 215. But how long are we going to go along with a globally contrary illusionary valuation of Cannabis?
Here's the DEA's "clarified" definition of hemp, another legal battle waiting to happen...
""Hemp” and marijuana are actually separate parts of the species of plant known as cannabis. Under federal law, Congress defined marijuana to focus on those parts of the cannabis plant that are the source of tetrahydrocannabinols (THC). THC is the hallucinogenic substance in marijuana that causes the psychoactive effect or “high.” The marijuana portions of the cannabis plant include the flowering tops (buds), the leaves, and the resin of the cannabis plant. The remainder of the plant — stalks and sterilized seeds — is what some people refer to as “hemp.” However, “hemp” is not a term that is found in federal law."
http://www.justice.gov/dea/pubs/pressrel/pr100901.html
Too much is at stake to put up with this insultingly incompetent resource mismanagement. Opposition by prohibitionist America is no longer credible. 'Time' is the limiting factor in the equation of survival. We have nothing to fear but the atmosphere itself.
Love trumps law.
Your planet is dying, why would I want to come down there?
Besides, somebody's got to fly ahead, trusting you'll catch up sooner than too late.
Can you and I agree that Cannabis is more than merely 'beneficial' -- that Cannabis is in fact both unique and essential? Know why? There are three very specific reasons, backed by irrefutable science. Food, climate, biofuels.
Tune-up & call in this Sunday at high noon
Axilological praxis : The Art of Shifting Cannabis Value
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/projectpeace
I do appreciate your sacrifices, your service, and your ability to communicate your views. No doubt, this war has taken a heavy toll on all of us, on many levels. Friends I've lost to cancer, just for starters, and the nine hundred fifty million starving, malnourished people that could otherwise be self-sustaining, and the other millions of casualties that are unnecessary, beyond the pale.
Most recently, on July 8th, my longtime friend, patriot and Cannabis associate, THC Ministry Reverend Roger Christie, was taken to federal prison in Honolulu and remains in federal prison to this day. He's been denied bail four times and his trial postponed until April 2011. Roger's is a first-time, non-violent accusation with no local complaint registered against him.
Please people, write to Roger and let him know his standing up for the Constitution means something to you. Tell others you know about him. For twenty-five years he's been a valuable, widely respected member of his Big Island community, and a globally respected cultural ambassador, a premiere Cannabis scholar, delightfully sincere and charming hemp store entrepreneur, and courageous founder of the Hawaiian THC Ministry.
http://the-last-marijuana-trial.com/
This is what essential civilian demand does that Prop 19 doesn't. It demands that "Green Prisoners" be released from prison by recognizing the illegality of Cannabis prohibition. How can a "strategic resource" possibly be a "Schedule One drug"? They're opposites!
Thanks, but I'm not waiting for the approval of soccer moms and don't under-estimate their capacity for understanding what's best for their families and community. Look at the success of hemp foods in the US even though we can't grow it here! Soccer moms are making that choice more and more.
Even if I have to do it alone, I'll continue to call for immediate, comprehensive objective revaluation of Cannabis from experts in all fields. As far as I can tell through my years of filming and participating in the evolution of 21st Century Cannabis culture, the plant is valuable far beyond the rightful jurisdiction of any court. Why would I seek permission to grow it?
Not just for humankind, by the way. Mankind s far beyond its rightful authority in inducing scarcity of a unique and essential food resource upon which other species also depend for optimum health and ultimate survival.
No tax on Cannabis. No regulation of Cannabis farming. Imposed bureaucracy will only increase the cost of farming and perpetuate further interference with corporate entities that control our political system. Besides, Cannabis is a successful competitor, fortunately a very beneficial one, and will spread naturally, unless of course, the government continues and expands its war against ditch weed.
Our freedom to farm "every herb bearing seed" is the first test of religious freedom. First Amendment, there it is. Defend it or not. Use it or lose it.
Is everyone who loves the Cannabis plant a Cannabis minister yet? Why not start your own individual ministry in order to help reclaim our First Amendment right on behalf of the ancient Cannabis culture? Of which we are co-evolving the leading edge. If this makes sense to you, then you can simply write a letter to yourself in appreciation for the true value of Cannabis. Potential may still remain if we act wisely, efficiently, and with conscious application of the gentle quiet power of truth.
Love trumps law.
Besides, somebody's got to fly ahead, trusting you'll catch up sooner than too late.
Can you and I agree that Cannabis is more than merely 'beneficial' -- that Cannabis is in fact both unique and essential? Know why? There are three very specific reasons, backed by irrefutable science. Food, climate, biofuels.
Tune-up & call in this Sunday at high noon
Axilological praxis : The Art of Shifting Cannabis Value
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/projectpeace
I do appreciate your sacrifices, your service, and your ability to communicate your views. No doubt, this war has taken a heavy toll on all of us, on many levels. Friends I've lost to cancer, just for starters, and the nine hundred fifty million starving, malnourished people that could otherwise be self-sustaining, and the other millions of casualties that are unnecessary, beyond the pale.
Most recently, on July 8th, my longtime friend, patriot and Cannabis associate, THC Ministry Reverend Roger Christie, was taken to federal prison in Honolulu and remains in federal prison to this day. He's been denied bail four times and his trial postponed until April 2011. Roger's is a first-time, non-violent accusation with no local complaint registered against him.
Please people, write to Roger and let him know his standing up for the Constitution means something to you. Tell others you know about him. For twenty-five years he's been a valuable, widely respected member of his Big Island community, and a globally respected cultural ambassador, a premiere Cannabis scholar, delightfully sincere and charming hemp store entrepreneur, and courageous founder of the Hawaiian THC Ministry.
http://the-last-marijuana-trial.com/
This is what essential civilian demand does that Prop 19 doesn't. It demands that "Green Prisoners" be released from prison by recognizing the illegality of Cannabis prohibition. How can a "strategic resource" possibly be a "Schedule One drug"? They're opposites!
Thanks, but I'm not waiting for the approval of soccer moms and don't under-estimate their capacity for understanding what's best for their families and community. Look at the success of hemp foods in the US even though we can't grow it here! Soccer moms are making that choice more and more.
Even if I have to do it alone, I'll continue to call for immediate, comprehensive objective revaluation of Cannabis from experts in all fields. As far as I can tell through my years of filming and participating in the evolution of 21st Century Cannabis culture, the plant is valuable far beyond the rightful jurisdiction of any court. Why would I seek permission to grow it?
Not just for humankind, by the way. Mankind s far beyond its rightful authority in inducing scarcity of a unique and essential food resource upon which other species also depend for optimum health and ultimate survival.
No tax on Cannabis. No regulation of Cannabis farming. Imposed bureaucracy will only increase the cost of farming and perpetuate further interference with corporate entities that control our political system. Besides, Cannabis is a successful competitor, fortunately a very beneficial one, and will spread naturally, unless of course, the government continues and expands its war against ditch weed.
Our freedom to farm "every herb bearing seed" is the first test of religious freedom. First Amendment, there it is. Defend it or not. Use it or lose it.
Is everyone who loves the Cannabis plant a Cannabis minister yet? Why not start your own individual ministry in order to help reclaim our First Amendment right on behalf of the ancient Cannabis culture? Of which we are co-evolving the leading edge. If this makes sense to you, then you can simply write a letter to yourself in appreciation for the true value of Cannabis. Potential may still remain if we act wisely, efficiently, and with conscious application of the gentle quiet power of truth.
Love trumps law.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
