Community | September 28, 2010 | 13 comments

Stash: Chaos Erupts Over Prop 19 at California Cannabis Expo

source: http://bit.ly/a9Ybr1

Image
ras_menelik
You got that, people? A woman who makes money selling marijuana under Prop 215 is standing alongside a bishop who would overturn Prop 215 if he had the chance. Lanette Davies is working in solidarity with Bishop Ron Allen, who has said of legalizing marijuana:

* “…one would have had to smoke 14 joints made from 60s strength marijuana to come close to getting the same effects as smoking one joint today in 2010.”
* “Why not legalize crack cocaine? Why don’t we legalize burglary? It’s a smokescreen.”
* …it gives inmates in our prisons and county jails the right to both possess and smoke marijuana while incarcerated.” (It doesn’t.)
* “California drivers will be able to operate a car while under the influence of marijuana.” (No, they won’t.)
* “…pot is a gateway drug and that legalizing it will only create more health care needs.”
* “It’s going to cause crime to go up. There will be more drug babies.”

Moments before the start of the debate Davies grabbed a microphone and announced that she had been kicked off the panel again. No on 19 supporters, angry at Lanette’s removal, drowned out the moderator as she tried to announce the panel and rules of the debate. Nate Bradley, a representative of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) rushed up to the stage, “Can you try to act like adults?” he demanded.

Yes on 19, met by much louder opposition than the No on 19 side, argued that patient’s rights are are untouched and therefore protected under Prop. 19 and that the cities and counties that levee heavy taxes or choose not to allow sales will lose out to the ones who do. Chris Conrad pulled up the proposition on a projector and attempted to show the audience the protections in the bill but was also drowned out by hecklers. Visibly irritated, he also yelled into the microphone, “Prop 19 is perfect! It is on the ballot! I can vote yes on 19!”, he added that he was one of the parties responsible for Prop 215 being on the ballot in 1996 and had been instrumental in getting SB420 passed. “If you are against 19, are you saying you would rather face prison?

Steve D’Angelo, owner and founder of Harborside Healther Center in Oakland took to the microphone. “I have been a cannabis activist for 37 years and it is sad to see everyone so divided… If Jack Herer was here, although this bill is not perfect, I believe he would walk into the voting booth and vote YES. It is not perfect, but we cant go into the voting booth and choose, NO. This is what we have and this is what we should work from.”

Dennis Peron, creator of Proposition 215 also took the microphone, ‘You could have done something great Richard, but you didn’t consult us, you ignored all of us,” he said.

“No, I didn’t, I came to you Dennis and we spoke about it,” Lee claimed. Peron taught at Oaksterdam University until he and Lee became divided over Proposition 19.

One audience commentator visiting from Florida pointed out that Prop 19 is not just important for Californians, “California has the opportunity to stand up and legalize marijuana. To see you bickering over wording and technicalities is disappointing.

It reminds me of the “Brooks Brothers Riot” leading to the 2000 selection of President Bush. When you’re unpopular and wrong, just get louder and uglier.
http://bit.ly/a9Ybr1
  1. groups:
    Community,   H.E.M.P.,   Make Marijuana Matter,   Cannabis Culture,   6 more
  2. tags:
    Legalize It
  3.     
    |

13 comments // Stash: Chaos Erupts Over Prop 19 at California Cannabis Expo

  • Atalanta_Starnight
  • budmayne
    • 0
      budmayne  

    • In the sense that people in the past weren't growing hydroponically, breeding, using things like CO2, and using different light spectrums for different stages of plant life (growing indoors), yeah Marijuana is a lot more potent than it was. Only because of the progression of horticulture.

      Ask any old stoner. Or flip through a high times from 1975.
      don't believe it's not stronger than it was, because for the most part it is.

      Now as far as outdoor buds goes.... Yeah they probably haven't gotten anymore potent.

    • 1 year ago
  • MAssappeal
    • +1
      MAssappeal  

    • So this is how the holdout corporatists and prison industrialists are going to try to defeat prop 19. If you can't convince the majority to side with you on the main issue, divide your opponents over smaller issues. All I can say to CA voters is don't be fooled by the rhetoric, the goal is in sight. Once prop 19 is passed they can begin to address the finer points of the issue that will come up, but none of the issues surrounding marijuana legalization can be addressed the way it is now. Also, I gotta say I find myself taking issue with the statement, and the debate surrounding it, that marijuana is much stronger today than in the 60s. I've heard bud today compared to crack in its potency and am surprised more smokers haven't come out to say something to the effect of "so what?!" Anyone who knows anything about cannabis or cocaine can tell you that cannabis differs significantly from cocaine products in origin and effect. It has been repeatedly shown that the health effects of cannabis use are in no way comparable to those of cocaine use, and may in many ways be singularly beneficial. Therefore, the only response I can make to such a statement is "great!" Having been an inexperienced kid at one point I have smoked my fair share of shitty, low-potency rag and will say readily that I ain't going back. Aside from the poor quality of the high, I definitely remember being aware of the damage I was doing myself by smoking chemically treated industrial "beaster" buds. The increased potency of todays buds (although I feel like some people are forgetting about some of those legendary strains, now extinct, that existed back in the day), reflects little more than an increased attention to growing methods. Does anyone who was alive in the 60s remember such a proliferation of organically grown pot? I feel like, in some ways this aspect of the debate is like trying to explain crop rotation to medieval europeans. It's not magic, it doesn't just get more potent through some alchemy on the grower's part, It's just...a better use of what's already there. So, in summary of a really long winded comment, whenever someone brings up the fact that pot is so much stronger now than it was 50 years ago, I can only spark some green crack and thank god they're right.

    • 1 year ago
  • Sarah_Honea
    • +1
      Sarah_Honea  

    • The thing about that 60's rant is bogus. Back in the day the leaves were smoked. It was not until the 80s that everyones started jumping on the bud bandwagon. If you are a 215 card holder from cali, use the leaves---no where near as heavy as the bud. The bud is for healing-the leaf is for feeling.

    • 1 year ago
  • Xenzaka
    • +1
      Xenzaka  

    • Marijuana is not stronger than before. It's all simply marijuana. Now, on the other hand, you could choose to grow it an alternative way, but that does not change much.

      Sexual selection and selective breeding has caused that appearance that marijuana today is much stronger.

    • 1 year ago
  • Nephwrack
  • jubal
  • Conniepae
    • +2
      Conniepae  

    • Very Rovian, louder and uglier. Rarely using facts, honesty is not a requirement. 'Just say it' and move along. A percentage of people will believe it. Some people still believe it's illegal to lie, it must be true. Unfortunately, there is no protection against out and out lies. The 'court of public opinion' doesn't require, the truth and nothing but the truth. Sad, sad, sad.

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
  • Nephwrack
    • +1
      Nephwrack  
    • iamaman:

      what liberty are you talking about? the liberty to spend time in jail for a plant? cause i'm pretty sure that the only ppl whose profit are being hurt by this are the cartels.

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
    • +1
      iamaman  
    • Nephwrack:

      naive comment. check out any edition of "high times".

      also co-ops are prohibited from purchasing any marijuana, i believe, outside of the co-op itself. meaning that members must grow any "product" they distribute by themselves. it can not be contracted out. most of the cartel stuff is outdoor stuff or even from illegal grows on state land, and is often of inferior quality compared to many indoor operations. it is also more profitable to grow indoors because the artificial environments that are simulated are geared specifically for rapid production (ie. 24/7 growing cycles and specified nutrients applied at specific cycles.)

      so the point being........ lets make sure pot heads stay out of jail as much as we can before we dive in head first into a national campaign. it is way better having states laws on your side than against you. the corporations and unions are already starting to form. all the home growers that made a decent living running an operation @ home will have a hard time competing, even if they were a member of multiple co-ops. maybe that is why the unions are forming- to "regulate" the free market price. until weed goes federal, the importation will still be illegal.

      there is no doubt in my mind that marijuana has always been used as some sort of commodity or resource throughout history. hence the persistence of greed through capitalization or monopolization. it will always exist.

      however liberty, for everyone in the US, is not always guaranteed when regarding the use of marijuana as any kind of a resource.

      its sorta like Carlos Escobars famous question "pluma o plomo?" (silver or lead?). or in other words, take the bribe or die.

      so its liberty or profit. i see all the coops conglomerating into super operations that will take advantage of free market competition through expanding production and supply in order to maintain a competitive "price level".

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
    • +1
      iamaman  
    • Nephwrack:

      also the main concern with pop 19 is that it is uncertain if it will conflict with prop 420 and 215. for example people who grow there own may be vulnerable to harsher penalties just because they happen to also have a family with under age children living at home with them. also the use of marijuana in private clubs or lounges may also be limited if not banned outright, creating a precedence that may make weed more prohibitive than currently accepted. stigmatizing it as worse than alcohol.

      for medical use, the "compassionate use" propositions that made marijuana legal in Ca have very broad protections for those with medical recommendations. the fear is that the new law may be too specific and perhaps less lenient.

      it just depend on which side of the fence your on. In LA most people dont grow there own and some oz's can regularly go for $400. that is just as high, if not higher, than street value before props 420 and 215 were implemented.

      i know the cops are a lot more relaxed about it now, as long as they dont smell it on your breath when driving. even then you would have to admit to have smoked in the past 1 or 2 hours (maybe three i forget). if you get busted, its a DUI felony and lots of legal fees, not to mention the day in jail jsut to get booked and the ding it puts on your insurance rating in LA.

    • 1 year ago
  • Nephwrack
more from Community:
from the community

top videos