Prop 19
- Started
- Last post
- 61 Responses
- randommail0
The tobacco companies must be lobbying for this. They have the facilities and distribution to make billions off marijuana from day one. Like scarabin said, just package them up like cigarettes. And market dozens of different brands. And imagine all the cool package designs. Money-wise, it would be good for the design and advertising industries.
- zarkonite0
"This is because the initiative doesn’t call for full legalization; it proposes to legalize possession of only up to one ounce."
I've been reading the article pointed to earlier that claims this isn't a "real" legalization... and this chick is out of her mind. The above quote illustrates how far she thinks things should go to be called legalized, I will NEVER need more than an oz at a time... who would really? you can't cope with that you might've had too many experiments with chemicals.
- sure, you don't need more than an ounce at a time. But a small time grower/producer needs it.sandbag
- possession is not production. two entirely different sets of rules. You're allowed 6 plants in a 5'x5' parcel of self-production.zarkonite
- there are provisions for larger scale production if you own a dispensary.zarkonite
- ukit0
Actually that was an interesting read...the point she is making is that this initiative wouldn't really reduce crime, because no one is getting arrested for possession of less than an ounce right now anyway. And use by minors would still be illegal.
After reading that, I get the sense that a lot of this is coming from the existing "medicinal" marijuana industry. They like things the way they are and if this passes many of them could be put out of business.
- They're hippies who can't run a biz and they see the writting on the wall.zarkonite
- jetSkii0
Peace on Earth
- ukit0
Anyway, no matter what you think, how can you not find this amusing
"One corporation that is poised to take the place of the mom-and-pop growers is AgraMed. While Oakland’s city council prepares to consider a proposal in July to license four commercial indoor marijuana farms in the city, AgraMed has plans to build a 100,000-sq.-ft. marijuana mega-farm near Oakland International Airport that, “according to projections, could generate 58 pounds of pot a day and $59 million a year in revenue."
- ukit0
- scarabin0
i don't see tobacco companies selling them under existing brand names (though camel could take advantage of an exotic eastern vibe for hash, etc) because it would essentially pollute their existing brand equity. more likely they'll be introduced under new new names
- e-pill0
this is all news to me. guess in nyc we arent so lucky.
- Miguex0
- I like the "organic" feel of the top one, I can't read what is says but I'm sure is something like "rolled by hand"Miguex
- G3 is a great option for "premium" substance. the white widow one is just there on the photoMiguex
- i see foul pouches working for loose herb, but not for a pack of TWELVE joints. that needs to be rigid to protect themscarabin
- yeah, I dont smoke anymore but they used to have cigarette paper boxes, I think not anymoreMiguex
- this is a fun time to be a package designer.. im jealouse-pill
- I smoked some G13 once and it made me pass outfooler2
- ukit0
- scarabin0
"not only does the initiative not end the drug war, it apparently taxes the drug to fund the drug war."
- scarabin0
man, i don't know how to vote on this.
- Dodecahedron0
I personally don't see marijuana becoming overly branded and commercialized. Maybe in a small way but not mass marketed.
- Why not? all drugs are heavily marketed, why would this one not be the same?zarkonite
- because it's like potatoes. name a big brand of potatoes. Do they have tv ads and fancy packages?Dodecahedron
- There would be a huge amount of stigma and regulations to get around too. Not an easy thing, selling it is, marketing not so much.Dodecahedron
- ...marketing not so much.Dodecahedron
- I'd never buy weed in a package with a logo on it. I'd be a douche if I did.Dodecahedron
- why is it like potatoes? you can't smoke potatoes, you can't entertain yourself with a potatoe.. I don't see the similarities.zarkonite
- similarities...zarkonite
- I think he misspelled potatoes, the correct way to spell it was :
A-L-C-O-H-O-LMiguex
- Uglyfreak0
Alcohol hasn't gotten any worse after prohibition, I don't think we should expect this to get any worse.
- mikotondria30
Vote YES, my friend has worked very hard, and he's a nice guy, he deserves it. Hell, I don't even smoke anything and I want it to pass.
- zarkonite0
from the article: Myth #1, I hope no one could possibly believe that.
Myth #2, you americans don't think that anyone under the age of 21 should have legal fun. Too bad but if she wants pot to be legal for people under 21, she's being kind of hopeful given that no other fun substances are.
Myth #3, again, minors can't drink so minors can't smoke pot... there's a certain logic to this she doesn't seem to grasp.
Myth #4, she complains you might no be able to grow pot if you rent... buy your own fucking place if you want to do what you want, renting has a lot of restrictions this is just another one.
Myth #5, her problem is with having to buy pot from a licensed establishement... I guess she doesn't like liquor stores and pharmacies either!
Myth #6, she doesn't state any facts and her logic is flawed. She says that cities have made marijuana possession their lowest priority but that the new rules would make helping a minor get high a grave offence... seems to me like she's ASSUMING cities will react by assigning cops to hunting down adults who are trying to get minors high but that seems unlikely to me.
Myth #7, the source she's quoting directly contradicts her argument. Ref 15 states that the money will be used to administer the new programme, not just pay cops to chase underage pot smokers.
Myth #8, she doesn't seem to know that running any type of business costs money.
Myth #9, again showing she hates corporations and rich people more than anything else.
etc... it's obvious that these rules are not the holy grail of freedom but it's not a bad idea either. I'd vote for it, just because it pushes the debate in the right direction.
- kush0
$50 per ounce tax = voting no.. got my 215 rec anyways could care less