BREAKING NEWS: Voters say yes' on B: Marijuana reform measure a...

Ukiah_Mom wrote:

Does anyone else think that if Obamam makes Hillary his running mate, and they win, that she'll have him killed so she can be Pres?
I think that's why he won't do it. The Clinton's will stop at nothing.
Totally not about pot, sorry to change the subject.

You mean like Vince Foster? LOL I said the same thing last night.... It's one way to get rid of them both!

MendocinoNotMendo wrote:

<quoted text>
umm, no i don't. are people really concerned about that?(i'm being honest - is that really a concern that people are talking about?)

Only the Rush Limbaugh disciples.

medo lover wrote:

measure b at the end of the day is illegal and just as others have said, there are no limits on measure b!!!!! each card is good for six plants, so get as many cards as possible and your in baby!
measure b is a joke!
i think im going to start a measure to end wine making in mendocino county. im surrounded by it! its freakin smells like grapes everywhere! its bad for the enviroment! and then im going to drive myself to willits and purchase some meth, since everybody is so worried about plants, the meth labs have been booming!

According to the Kelly decision you can have as many plants as you think you will need to meet your medical need.

MendocinoNotMendo wrote:

<quoted text>
what's "medo"?
and while you'd have a hard time purging wine-making from this area, you could certainly go after grape cultivation if you feel it is a threat to the environment in it's current state.

I bet you 1000 dollars that if the people of California voted to make wine illegal the police would arrest wine makers.

anonymous wrote:

<quoted text>
Felons are barred by law from voting.

Whatever enlightened one.

anonymous wrote:

<quoted text>
I bet you 1000 dollars that if the people of California voted to make wine illegal the police would arrest wine makers.

sorry, i misunderstood your post; i thought you were only referring to wine-making in this region and not wine as a whole. in that case, yes i believe you are absolutely right that they would.

no name wrote:

<quoted text>
why doesn't PG&E give away electricity for free or why isn't water , dirt, or fertilizers free. and if you want sick people to get it for free ask the governor to include it in medi-cal. and i have donated numerous amounts of meds to truly sick people. and by the way if you want us to give it away ask pfizer and merck to do the same with there meds. i believe prescription cancer drugs can run up a big bill. and Fremont worry about your political issues.(I live in Mendo but am visiting lake county at my GFs house)

I bet you've sold a lot too... come on now, be honest. Personal use = personal profit.

anonymous wrote:

<quoted text>
According to the Kelly decision you can have as many plants as you think you will need to meet your medical need.

Yeap, and the cops can bust you day and night and make you prove your medical needs in court. Remember, one of the purposes of setting limits was to provide some protection for medical users from being harrassed. Think the legitimate patients are happy about that?

Fat Lady wrote:

<quoted text>
Whatever enlightened one.

DONE WITH THE CHIPS AND SODA FAT LADY!? REMEMBER....WE NOW CAN GROW MORE THANKS TO YOU "YES ON B ers"

reality checker wrote:

<quoted text>
Kelley has EVERYTHING to do with us. Kelley ruled that statwide voter approved legislature cannot be amended without statewide voter approved amendments.
Mendocino county initiatives cannot amend state initiatives.

You can't even bother to spell your hero's name right....

Where the hell do you get laid around here?

Reality Check wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeap, and the cops can bust you day and night and make you prove your medical needs in court. Remember, one of the purposes of setting limits was to provide some protection for medical users from being harrassed. Think the legitimate patients are happy about that?

Actually you are wrong the courts have ruled that your medical need is between you and your doctor not the judge or the police.

Physicians are the gatekeepers
Appellate court in People v. Spark overturns conviction after finding that the Compassionate Use Act does not require a finding of "serious illness" for affirmative defense under Prop 215, California's Compassionate Use Act.

Note: The portion of this ruling that was published and citable deals with not second-guessing the doctor and not having to prove the defendant was "seriously ill". The portion that was not certified for publication is regarding whether or not there was substantial evidence supporting the conviction. People v. Spark is good law in California.

http://www.chrisconrad.com/expert.witness/spa...

Fat Lady wrote:

<quoted text>
You can't even bother to spell your hero's name right....

But does that invalidate my statement? No. It doesn't. Here, I'll say it again. Kelly has EVERYTHING to do with....

is that better?

theNord wrote:

<quoted text>
I bet you've sold a lot too... come on now, be honest. Personal use = personal profit.

actually i work 55-60 hours a week at a job and just grow a few for PERSONAL USE in the privacy of my backyard and no my neighbors don't care about the smell because they have more important things to worry about

anonymous wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually you are wrong the courts have ruled that your medical need is between you and your doctor not the judge or the police.
Physicians are the gatekeepers
Appellate court in People v. Spark overturns conviction after finding that the Compassionate Use Act does not require a finding of "serious illness" for affirmative defense under Prop 215, California's Compassionate Use Act.
Note: The portion of this ruling that was published and citable deals with not second-guessing the doctor and not having to prove the defendant was "seriously ill". The portion that was not certified for publication is regarding whether or not there was substantial evidence supporting the conviction. People v. Spark is good law in California.
http://www.chrisconrad.com/expert.witness/spa...

Wow. Aren’t you an arrogant one? No, I’m not wrong in my premise. You, as is typical, grasped onto a portion you felt you could discredit, while ignoring the issue. Spent anytime working in the current Presidential administration??

Fine, you are right. Medical needs are between a patient and a doctor. Happy?

Now, back to the premise, if you want to go crazy and plant a bunch of MJ, call it your medical needs and waive the Constitution around in your defense, be prepared for lots of time in court. Again, a purpose of SB 420 was to provide guidelines and clarifications to prevent the harassment that was happening under the CUA, but the politicians botched it up (go figure). You fancy yourself savvy on case law, how about a little legislative history? Look at the groups that backed SB 420, and those that opposed it, and ask yourself...why they did so, and are they glad that it will now unravel?

Too bad all the time, money and energy spent on Measure B issues, on both sides, wasn't spent legalizing marijuana for adult recreational use so as to take all of the pressure off trying to fit all pot smoking into medical purposes

get real folks, whats the big deal, you allow adults to use alcohol and carry on about pot like it is the dangerous choice between the two

I think Mendo needs to grow up and follow suit with the cities who have put their thinking caps on and legalized it for consenting adults and stop the drama over something that is very simple to figure out - like alcohol and tobacco you put an age on it for legal use and thats it

If someone deals to kids, then they get popped like people who sell alcohol to minors,(well make that sometimes, because we know up at the Earthdance in Laytonville they have open alcohol sales to minors, but the authorities say thats not their problem because its on private land)

anyway, now it seems to me you all have locked yourself into a massive war and again it makes all of your lives about pot instead of letting pot be a part of your lives sometimes if you are an adult and so inclined

now where would be the fun and drama in that simple solution & what would you guys have to do?

measure b results are not final. Things could really change now!

On 1728 hours June 4, County Clerk Susan
Ranochak announced her department still had
10,835 absentee ballots left to process, as well
as 439 provisional ballots left to review. The
"final" report Tuesday midnite was based on a
slender count of only 16,436 votes.
Accordingly, actual turnout was a low-normal
primary ratio of 57% of registered voters, not as
previously reported.
Ranochak will announce no more interim
results until the final canvass is complete and
certified, perhaps on June 10 or 13. They legally
have 30 days to complete it, but it won't take
that long.

Reality Check wrote:

<quoted text>
Wow. Aren’t you an arrogant one? No, I’m not wrong in my premise. You, as is typical, grasped onto a portion you felt you could discredit, while ignoring the issue. Spent anytime working in the current Presidential administration??
Fine, you are right. Medical needs are between a patient and a doctor. Happy?
Now, back to the premise, if you want to go crazy and plant a bunch of MJ, call it your medical needs and waive the Constitution around in your defense, be prepared for lots of time in court. Again, a purpose of SB 420 was to provide guidelines and clarifications to prevent the harassment that was happening under the CUA, but the politicians botched it up (go figure). You fancy yourself savvy on case law, how about a little legislative history? Look at the groups that backed SB 420, and those that opposed it, and ask yourself...why they did so, and are they glad that it will now unravel?

I am more than willing to be the test case.....bring it on.
People that have valid cases that spend a lot of time in court get big checks at the end.
Like :
Jim Blair
Emeryville patient James Blair had his medicine and his cultivation equipment seized by Emeryville Police Department in December 2003. Police confiscated Blair's 30 full-grown plants, yet his criminal case resulted in a dismissal of all charges. On 4/20/04, an Alameda Superior Court judge issued a court order for the return of Blair's property. After being denied his property by Emeryville PD, Blair, with ASA's help, threatened contempt of court. Emeryville PD eventually capitulated and agreed to return some of Blair's property. However, due to an alleged burglary of an evidence locker, Emeryville's Police Chief was compelled to write Blair a letter in June 2004 that many of his items were "no longer in our possession." The "stolen" items included most of Blair's cultivation equipment and most of his medical marijuana.
ASA is representing Blair in filing a civil suit against the City of Emeryville and Emeryville Police Department for damages resulting from his wrongful search and seizure. ASA is using the Bane Civil Rights Act to seek triple damages for Blair and attorneys fees for the organization.
On April 11, 2006, the City of Emeryville settled, and agreed to pay $15,000 to Blair for seizing his medical marijuana and cultivation equipment. Emeryvlle now enforces a policy of not confiscating medical marijuana from qualified patients who show a valid ID card or doctor's recommendation.
Blair's civil suit complaint seeking damages for unlawful search and seizure (filed 12/9/04)
Blair's opposition to demurrer by City of Emeryville (filed 4/11/05)

and:
Michael Lee
San Leandro medical marijuana patient Michael Lee had his 99 marijuana plants seized from him in a 2000 raid by the Contra Costa Sheriff at his previous residence in Richmond. After charges against him were dismissed, Lee filed a motion for return of property. The Contra Costa Superior Court denied the motion on grounds that the case was still under investigation and that the statute of limitations had not run out. After waiting for the three-year statute of limitations to run out, Lee, with ASA's assistance, filed another motion for return of property in August 2004. At his hearing, Lee discovered that police had destroyed his property without his consent. The judge denied the motion for return of property, but made comments that were extremely helpful for taking Lee's case to federal court to argue Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment (due process) violations. In August 2005, ASA filed a lawsuit in federal court on behalf of Lee to challenge the illegal destruction of his property.The case settled in March 2007 with an agreement that Contra Costa County compensate Lee for $8,000.00, the approximate value of the property.
Lee's civil lawsuit complaint challenging local law enforcement violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments (filed 8/30/05)
Settlement Agreement (4/3/2007)

Watcher wrote:

OK now, It's official.
All you child poisoning drug dealers have to go back to what ever state you came from and crawl back under your rock.

you must be an under cover meth head or a drunk.