There were several reasons why Prop 205 failed. The biggest detractor for me was the semi-monopoly it gave the current medical dispensaries and growers.
The Safer Arizona initiative goes too far in the other direction. Arizona voters will not go for a free-for-all, and they shouldn't.
Thanks Nick Meyers;
I have been watching this is going to be interesting. With the legislature and HB2404 might get one part of the attempt to change the rule by making more stringent rules by paid signature gathers. Register & classes and no out of state 501(c)3 able to hire or contribute. GOODBYE MPP
So lets look at Safer and Dave David Stephen Wisniewski. I can see a of lot of holes in the boat. The one take not mentioned Dave and his crew of grassroots volunteers of signatures and the ability to amend the initiative along the way give Safer AZ viability. Really Safer is the ONLY consumer advocate marijuana users have that is now making any impact.
It will need to be amended to a grievance process with Kathy Inman and amend to palatable to both it now has the need to become symbiotic relationship.
It is either this or the legislature not wanting the possibility of a voter mandated initiative on legalization. This session push the rules see what passes, is action that will be taken next year. Then before the legalization effort gains steam on a midterm election turnout.. The legislature definitely does not want a rouge government department "DEPARTMENT OF MARIJUANA LICENSE AND CONTROLS"
The legislature might legalize small amounts and set it up like CO or WA. with the 3 plant rule no special license can buy clones. If this happens both are outside looking at what might have been.
I find it extremely fortunate to have an objectionable view being published in the WEEKLY. I am of the view that their underlying principles in this marijuana medical to recreational scheme. I have little doubt that so much monies from civil seizures went into MPPs a 501(c)(3) coffers to promote legalization. If this is the case and I believe it is, what is the level of perverse?
This study is a veteran based study on PTSD. While we know the horrors of war the disgusting reasoning we have been using lately.
It seem this study has a predetermined conclusion and this study. This in place to validate and eliminate veracity to any arbitrary objections.
It seems that there are 2 possible positive conclusions. That simply being a Vet does not automatically give considerations to PTSD. Combat experienced, not support logistics in rear areas cooks on LST's or mechanics in non theatre operations submariners and the like. I can imagine how hard it must be to find a combat experienced Vet, that is not on some kind of medication and has been for awhile. Or to find a combat experienced Vet that is not into illegal or abuse of legal drugs. As both of these would invalidate anything this study can provide.
1- Is to understand how cannabinoids in cannabis effect a huge variety of compulsive behaviors. If so how and in what ways and strain variety can target those behaviors possibilities. One must take into account, that during HW Bush presidency and his desert storm.
The medical impacts per 100,000 soldiers not deployed living at home base were 10x more encompassing than those deployed. 10x time more overdoses, 10x more domestic violence, 10x more DUI related. Only a very small percentage of the personal in the Department of Defence military are in the theatre of operations.
2- This study will only pertain to a small amount and be used mainly as tool limit and possible validate a strain that might be useful in treating combat related issues.
The name of the organization's MAPS funding these studies after looking them up they are mainly organizations that supply information use of MDMA. While the group does research on other psychotic drugs the target is not on freedom of use. To establish divisions of consumption enforcement and administration are a shifting variable that needs to be monitored and adjusted by social changes. While this group the founders from big Pharma "Novataris" is under contract with the FDA to study and administer MDMA for PTSD. conflict?
Will this group MAPS a 501(c)(3) nonprofit lobby in support or opposition for legalization. Using this data as conclusive evidence that marijuana has no medical effect, and compounds of MDMA with Certain stains be administered has shown possibilities.
Real bottom line we need to know ll how contribute complete o
Nick Meyers; Has brought some very useful insight into the possibilities of of bill being passed by the legislature.
I would like to take exception to this part of the article
" The argument is reminiscent of the lawsuit against Prop 205, which claimed that the law wasn't adequately explained to voters so they wouldn't know what they were passing" .
This is so true on PROP 205. I didn't have a clue to the tentacle impact of the the proposed " DMLC" seemed to me to be a replacement vehicle to the County atty and Police slush/retirement fund. Outside state investors who won't disclose contributors. At every turn of prop was a "TO BE DETERMINED". Which means we dont know, you dont know ?>>>>>> Does it really mean that, or does it mean we dont want to say, it would damage the support ?
The real clincher to prop 205 failure was the Quazi board of citizens that really had no vote, but possible recipients of DMLC handouts as success of the program and the department.
If you are going to sell this kind of heep of. This is no different than Trumps Mexican Wall. We are going to stop the illegal stuff and they are going to pay for it. The society has been paying for it since 1971 and Nixon's now they see an end of the road.
What we paid for the citizens of America war on drugs. These two groups non sustainable behemoths. This is what prop 205 was supplier and enforcer as one feeding the behemoths that consume all in it's path. Cost to benefit was always has been and will be in the negative.
If they wanted a program MPP could've followed the other states legalization structure, of incorporating the other state agencies to a combined legalization agencies effort.> Not this stand alone (police, court, license, market selling & limiting,medical restricting, revenue collecting, interstate trade, governing department) for 8 years and then maybe it will negotiate with the legislature on powers of government. WHAT!!!~!!! This was prop 205 after reading it several times it was clear.
Being so pro pot-I am betting Nick's dog uses pot now too and most likely looks like a Gremlin when it gets wet in the movie. Probably has a name that would fit a prison. But i am slightly stereotyping maybe. God bless America.
I hope your brother survived Mr Meyers.
I have a question in my mind and ponder the answer. It has been reported that the RICO moneys collected by the Sheriff's Dept. during Dupnick & Nanos tenure is not accounted for. The monies Radtke pleaded to misuse was about 10% of the unaccounted balance. Where's the meat to all of this? Was any money from a RICO account diverted to MPP in its proposal of 205 ?
Why won't MPP list all of their contributors ? What do they have to hide, if this is truly a civil minded concern or something else?
Bottom line we dont need police controlling manufacturing, distributing, selling, a product they construct to extract the most out of. In several ways, keeps arrest and conviction numbers up, keep the stigma up to keep need for control. Use monies collected from the sell of Marijuana to be consistently a point counter point villain and advocate at the same time. This is one of the biggest lines of animal dung that has been served in Arizona. Then at the same time want to assume of medical review. All on their own or pay one of point counterpoint studies to keep it in a perpetual dark high profit all can feast area.
In the above I should of stated Arizona Supreme Court governing Arizona licensed attorneys.
Let's ask MPP for a 501(c)3 audit but wait they are not a non-profit they are a for profit Lobbying Agency DC based and immune from disclosure of contributors. So ask reported the 5 million spent on the Arizona campaign 205 only about 15% came from growers/processors/retailers or the " ADA" Arizona dispensary association.
What really pisses me off and should every Arizona citizen is the Supreme Court on legal representation. It seems that an attorney can be disbarred for counseling a client on how to legally obtain Marijuana in Arizona. This is what MPP went to the supreme court over or their attorneys in conjunction with a group of county attorney. Completely obscene using the court to deny legal representation in a state where it has been passed legal. let's remember this when reinstatement of Judges come around next election. I will post names.
Seems they can't live within the desires and want of the population it hurts business. Keep this MPP BS and it will all be civil actions run by their own court revenue licence and police freaking stupid. Market self regulating with police powers won't happen. Wake up people change the schedule 1 keep the medical and I could care less about self administered wants and desires of recreational they are not the same as need.
Like a wino and bong liquors say this stuff is the same Alcohol they give in a medical situation. Yea I know some use Nyquil but hey if the liquor store is closed that will work. It's all the same just have to drink a little more.
Carpet Baggers is correct as to the MPP. They are not a friend of legalization except to the extent it can benefit certain contributors to the cause.
Their greed in the the way Prop 205 was written, was a part of the reason it failed.
Thanks for the insight into the confirmation of Jeff Sessions as Attorney General.
We all know in this cleaning of the administrative oversight and governmental regulations. This attributed to fees being applied to every function of a market product. Which brings us to MPP or Marijuana Policy Project their design mission and track record.
Some are of the opinion that a government run distribution system with one target and one target only to get as much marijuana out to the public and become a Ad Hoc to the marijuana industry.
This charlatan group cares less about the consumer repercussions by state authorities. This MPP only want restrictions, They do want restrictions to make market more profitable. As well to run its tentacles through every governmental department to shave off a piece of the market establishing their own viability market and control.
As we look at last week's post we think of the idea to coach his younger to consume in a clandestine away from parents and authorities.
Then in the same desires wants a government control to help stop access to children. This is like opening up a Liquor store across from a detox clinic. Then talk about to be more clandestine in sneaking in mini's. Install a huge flashing neon sign daily discounts punch card. Probably to be inline with the Court Ordered Program go to the class then run across he street and on, and on, and on.
Bottom line MPP needs the stigmas. Mpp needs to support the viability of all the stigmas. Then Ad-Hoc each and every tentacle of a stigma, the more the better. So in arbitrating each stigma tentacle a % is pulled and established as necessary and needs to be paid.
If any moral person thinks that 205 while keeping all the over prosecuted felonies in place, the rules/laws to be determined was anything more than establishing the value of each tentacle. Then to administer/profit for life this beast. This is like building bully to fight a bully and you end up with two bully's DUH! -----
For example, at least five of 10 people on MPP's board of directors have direct ties to the industry: Troy Dayton is the CEO of the ArcView Group, which invests in marijuana businesses. Joby Pritzker, whose family started and owns Hyatt Hotels, invests in pot businesses. Tripp Keber is the CEO of Dixie Elixirs, which produces pot edibles. James Slatic is CEO of MedWest, which produces marijuana concentrates. And Rob Kampia, executive director of MPP, is a board member and the treasurer of the National Cannabis Industry Association, the lobbying arm of the pot industry.
It will get taken off the schedule 1 by May my prediction like all social progress ever passed was by republican congress civil Rights 64, Voter rights 68, Then SS FDR and a democratic congress but a large republican caucus support.
It is the job of Congress to make law. Right now, the marijuana industry exists only due to administrative guidance from several Federal Agencies, which could change in a heartbeat.
Here are 2 fantastic ongoing public studies conducted by Washington State Univ.
Washington State is ongoing with study without federal oversight. They have a complete structure to the marijuana business and open markets that are allowed to export. Where Nick Meyers is from.
First is how the legalization is going, up dated annually started in 2012 > http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1616/Wsipp_I-502-Evaluation-Plan-and-Preliminary-Report-on-Implementation_Report.pdf
The second more related to the study done concurrently with the first by the same institution. With all focuses and with some cross border markets similar to Arizona.
Allan thanks for the rebuttal, I go to WA frequently as well as OR. I have a Medical card for WA. I stay in Snoqualmie go to Medical dispensaries there as well.
The difference is between 205 and the way WA incorporated the legalization process. This was 2 completely different government regulations completely Arizona was not even close to the way Washington did theirs or Oregon Or California or Colorado.
As far as WA goes I usually stay on the eastside of Seattle, Bellevue Issaquah. Ask any dispensary owner the tax rate imposed with excise considered is 45%. With a higher state mandated minimum wage and income tax. The retail Prices are considerably cheaper than the medical in Arizona ? ( can you say price fixing )
I do appreciate from other state talking about legalization in their state. The compassion they had to get there and then to feel others can enjoy freedom restricted to others. The first thing other states did was to decriminalize. Arizona wanted in prop 205 to keep all the criminal laws attributed but have an agreed to plea bargain to commit a limited crime. THAT IS JUST PLAIN UGLY TO THE EXTREME.
In doing so marijuana is still over policed prosecuted counseled legal represented, property seized, marketed, still vilified for profit. So if other states want to look at Arizona dont look at the costume called legalization. Look under mask at the obscene monster that could have been birthed with a voracious appetite called the "Department of Marijuana License and controls"
Simply put Marijuana does not constitute its own governmental department. It is just not that important. Prop 205 said it was so important it needs to build it own separate government with police powers even more autonomous than the Indian Reservations.
Interesting take on social perceptions regarding the user profile. Every parent would like all of their children to be a social inspired.
So If I am to understand with the story minors should not use marijuana. However talk their parent into voting it legal, to restrict their access. Giving the parent background that is illegal to them. Then these minors have the BACKGROUND for all to be counseling on marijuana.
Now their is some progressive ground work right there. (WT_)
To look at this story from a parental perspective of 5. Hogwash one son writes for a marijuana industry and uses. The younger adolescent is exposed and worries about self incrimination of bad parenting yea OK.
I seriously doubt Nick has a clue what the parameters and understanding of LEGAL and ILLEGAL. Slightly legal while still heavily Illegal is a bubble. As it is now marijuana is the vehicle for over criminalizing, prosecution, counseling, incarcerating, policing, legal representation. SIMPLY OVER PROFILING AT EVERY TURN AND THIS IS JUST ANOTHER.
This 205 was an attempt to keep overcharging and gouging while over restricting regulations. They just cant figure out a way to repeal amend the Medical Marijuana. These industry people hide behind it like a parent taking the toddler to a political rally. Telling this is the way to think, not to think for themselves. But know more what to fear hate and attack as the enemy and we will teach you the enemy.
So some members of our legislature are wanting to make it harder for the citizen to override political incompetence. Other members (Thorpe?) want to hobble student voters. This is a shameful way to govern. I personally wouldn't vote democrat, but my republican vote should not be considered guaranteed...
Thanks Nick Meyers , for a insight to attempts of forces to control Marijuana.
I believe the legislature will act on marijuana before the next legislative session when the roll of the initiative gains steam.
It is my opinion the biggest reason for the failure of 205. Was a new independent department. A new department that had tax, police, court, license powers away from the power of the legislature.
This Gorilla of a monstrous appetite with wanting a new family to feed. This department would have used the existing Felony laws as a tool.
Anyone would have to be just plain blind to think this Department would not have folded itself into each county attorneys use to tax and run the industry. It had to if they wanted police power to prosecute for felonies. DUH!
Prop 205 was NOTHING at all like how other states have legalized marijuana. This is the lie that wants to perpetuate that it was about legalization. Prop 205 was about retail market control and enforcement of the market PERIOD. MONEY !
There were so many misleading and blatant lies slick willy salesmen. If you quarried anyone of the dispensaries owner or principals of 205 how it was going to work it was always left as TBD (to be determined) so essentially nobody really knew what they were voting for.
Even that 6 plant carrot dangled was a joke. Anyone would ask how was that going to work license? inspection? sign affidavit, gain plant material, report output, buy pre tax clones? All of this was TBD that is the failure of 205 collectively.
Nick Meyers; Interesting dimensional view of the potential marijuana/hemp revenues and markets.
Had 205 passed we would of had a negotiated medical marijuana division of the Department of Health. Much like market forces competing against one another. If we limit this, it will impact that, so we can study and divert upon need. >> SAME?
So many ask then what would be the needs. DUH! Really? Cash flow and market expansion and availability of market limit competition.
Stifle, control outside interference collaborate with interstate economic federally illegal organizations against commerce laws build immune banking away from federal oversight.
There is no mention of all of these that have their hands in the cookie jar. Let's keep the jar called medical that is really the only way till the feds change. 205 was a market control travesty. We watch what happens in other states how it is administered through multiple existing state agencies. Not this GORILLA called the " Department of Marijuana License and Controls"
WHICH NO OTHER STATE HAS LEGALIZED I SUCH A RECLUSIVE GOVERNMENTAL SEGREGATED WAY AS 205 WANTED TO DO.
Now all we need do is make industrial hemp legal to grow and manufacture with and we'll have a growth industry that will not only benefit the environment but create jobs and industry nationally.
Some good news finally....now come on Arizona. Let's get the proposition right this time in 2018.
Thank You. Nick Meyers, for reporting the the freedoms and challenges going forward in this apprehensive marijuana climate.
Well then it would be safe to say his annual medical marijuana card was worth the hassle and cost. One is to ponder what would Nadir would have done in a post 205 environment.
Would he even of had a base for defence, 205 would have gutted medical marijuana. Would this proposed " Department of Marijuana License and Controls" just be another layer of administrative input on what is impaired ?
IMHO I would say the story has a double narrative. One is the value and the need for the Medical Marijuana Program. Two the court taking into consideration the value of that program with extended rights that are attributed.
Tucson Weekly |
7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 |
(520) 797-4384 |
Powered by Foundation