Dear Ohio Stoners and Users of Cannabis

xer0

Well-Known Member
Please stop with the possession is only a small fine BS because it is NOT just that. It also comes with an immediate suspension of your license for 6-12 months, forces you into drug "counseling" that you must pay for out of your own pocket, and gets you a year of probation. Buy in bulk? Expect jail time if you get caught. Get caught with a gram of concentrates? Do not pass Go, Do not collect $200. Got kids? CPS is more than willing to take them.
 

Gunky

Well-Known Member
Please stop with the possession is only a small fine BS because it is NOT just that. It also comes with an immediate suspension of your license for 6-12 months, forces you into drug "counseling" that you must pay for out of your own pocket, and gets you a year of probation. Buy in bulk? Expect jail time if you get caught. Get caught with a gram of concentrates? Do not pass Go, Do not collect $200. Got kids? CPS is more than willing to take them.
So fix it! Don't sell out to bunch of gangsters.
 
Gunky,
  • Like
Reactions: howie105

Gunky

Well-Known Member
@Bluestang Supply and demand. If there is no/low demand, then they have to lower the price (if they want to stay in business). And considering their operating costs would be much lower than the costs of someone doing the same thing in a black market, I feel pretty confident that's exactly what would happen. Furthermore, that's exactly what history says will happen. Also, I'm pretty sure there was something written into this law that would have allowed medical customers to buy at cost.

This has nothing to do with emotions. This has to do with pain. That's why I didn't sound emotional. However, I should be emotional. My state just told me I don't matter.

Also, I didn't say people in Ohio don't want it legalized. I said they do want it legalized. But that doesn't matter now, because Ohioans consciously went to the polls and said OVERWHELMINGLY that they want it not to be legalized.

They didn't say they don't want it to be legalized today. They said they want it not to be legalized. Big difference.

Business is entirely about making money. People with money do not invest in markets that don't exist; markets that the people have said very clearly they do not want to exist.

You know the market exists, just as I know the market exists. However, the voters said that market does not exist, and anyone with money would be making a very bad investment by trying to create such a market.

Even though I would be a legitimate medical consumer, I wanted this to happen for the sake of everyone, not just myself or other legitimate medical consumers. But it's very clear that those people don't want the same thing for me. At least not enough to do what they knew was the right thing. Consequently, I hope they legalize it for medicinal purposes only. Which wouldn't surprise me, considering I saw poll results indicating that 90% of Ohio voters think it should be legalized for medical purposes.
Virtually everything you have said here is wrong. You don't seem to understand that supply and demand operate differently under a monopoly. That's the point. A monopoly can charge whatever they want to charge. There is no alternative source to undercut their price structure. The idea that legal shops have less overhead than black market is laughable. It's the exact opposite. As for your 'everybody rejected what I badly wanted so now I hope they don't get what they want' - uh, maybe you ought to wait a little longer between having a thought and posting it?
 
Gunky,

xer0

Well-Known Member
So fix it! Don't sell out to bunch of gangsters.

Uhm...Issue 3 would have FIXED everything I just brought up. Was it perfect? Fuck no...but it was this state's best chance at changing these laws. Selling out to gangsers? Eh...maybe...but it still would be better than living in constant fear of having my property or worse my kid taken from me over my choice of medicine.

You really do not understand the situation here. There have been TONS of grassroot campaigns for MMJ over the last 10 years and none of them get close. Why? Because the politicians in Columbus don't let them. They do not want legal cannabis all. Here is an "editorial" Mike DeWine was pushing out to business owners for them to spread to their employees.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/288507799/issue3?secret_password=BIsNs8jScY6K4zG0ZzhC

These people are 100% anti-cannabis and they run everything in this state. As I sit here getting ready for work it really eats at me that I am working for a prohibitionist asshole.

So yeah...I'm not fixing shit...I'm fucking done with this state. I'm going to explore bankruptcy as an option to get out from under this house and we are starting to look into Colorado and Oregon. Home schooling is very important to us and those two seem to be the best options for being able to do both that and home growing.
 

Aimless Ryan

Came to read about grinders; fucked combustion
I can't move to Colorado or Oregon, or even go to Colorado or Oregon. I can barely move. And all kinds of other shit.

Same guy who walked 3,500 miles from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean in 211 days five years ago.

Ohioans who voted No last night, you better hope that doesn't happen to you. Because if it does, you will be all alone, with no access to anything.

Seems like I've said that somewhere before.
 

KimDracula

Well-Known Member
Everyone does realize that the Ohio legislature was behind Issue 2, right? Looks like all the co-sponsors are Republican. They didn't actually care about protecting anyone from monopolies. They wanted to trick people into voting down legalization. And it worked. I don't understand anyone being pleased by this.
 

Gunky

Well-Known Member
Your position is not as solid as you make it out to be and continues to be based on misinformation. Also, it's starting to look like you're gloating... from CA, no less. C'mon, man.
I am not gloating and I am not celebrating. It was still a bad law and I think wisely rejected. The facts are as I stated: monopolies get to charge what they want. As far as price goes, look at Washington state. Legal weed in an exclusive environment tends to be more expensive than black market. These are facts, not me being triumphal or whatever it is you imagine. You may not believe it but as a cannabis friend I was trying to do old Aimless a favor by letting him know he is losing it on the internet and saying really dumb stuff which he should think twice about before posting.
 
Gunky,

Aimless Ryan

Came to read about grinders; fucked combustion
Maybe you should share that link with the people who already spent shitloads of money to give us our [one and only?] option to legalize cannabis in Ohio yesterday. I'm sure they'll do it again. Because that's one common trait with people who get things done. They do the same thing over and over; especially when it doesn't work.
 
Aimless Ryan,

MinnBobber

Well-Known Member
It was a tough choice, legal drug cartel written into the State Constitution OR pursue a better law that lets Ohio's farmer's /growers participate---have competition to keep prices down.

It certainly is frustrating to not get legal RIGHT NOT but the future could very well be a better law.
The Green Wave is sweeping the country and at some point even the Ohio career politicians will realize a 180 turn is in order.....

Here in MN, we have a new medical cannabis law which may even be WORSE THAN Issue #3.
- just medical , not rec
- tiny list of eligible conditions
- $200 fee to register for program
- duo-opoly, just 2 growers /manufacturuers so no competition
- no home grow
- no cannabis flowers, only pills, liquids, conc
- difficult to even get many Dr's to sign you up as they are fearful due to Schedule 1 Fed status.
- one patient reported his monthly cost was over $2000.....
- after a few months, only 600 registered med cannabis patients instead of thousands they were expecting------ cuz the law is completely "not in the best interests of the patients".
- governor insisted any med cannabis law had to be blessed by the law enforcement community , what's up with that??

Once a law is in or especially a constitution change like Issue 3, it is supremely tough to change.
Even more difficult to change when the 10 growers would have an almost endless supply of $$$$ from their cannabis profits.... They didn't spend $25,000,000 to let others join in down the road. They tried to buy into a permanent license to bleed you dry.

Tough call but I really hope it is for the best---hang in their Ohio folks, chin up, and keep working for a better law.
Ohio did not want MONOPOLY cannabis, I think they DO want cannabis however.
 
Last edited:

KimDracula

Well-Known Member
The language of Issue 3 was quite good, in fact. Equal or better than any other legalization to date. The only real objection was who was going to make the most money. The idea that it would function like a monopoly came straight from Issue 2 and the Ohio Republican-controlled legislature (which shouldn't even be allowed, IMO. Aren't these supposed to be voter-initiated?) which opposes legalization. Issue 2 was insidious in its genesis and dishonest about its motivations. There were plans for many growers to grow on those sites and many dispensaries.

It will take years for legislators to come around there, if ever, and don't think the proposed laws will be better. My biggest objection to the position most opponents are taking is that it comes straight from the BS propaganda of prohibitionists. Everyone just ran with the monopoly angle without looking at the nuances. I hope there is another legitimate effort in 2016, but it's a huge gamble to count on it.

Holding out for the perfect when the stakes are high and the objections are ideological rather than practical is imprudent. This depresses me and makes me worried about how voters are going to react in CA. I see a lot of people being very belligerent about supporting only the most radical proposals instead of uniting around the best feasible initiative and passing it.

Good luck in life and legalization for the future to everyone.
 

grokit

well-worn member
Wed Nov 04, 2015 at 09:20 AM PST
How the Ohio legislature blocked marijuana decriminalization for the next 20 years

All of the attention in yesterday's Ohio election was on Issue 3, the proposal to legalize marijuana.

However, Issue 2, a proposal to protect "the initiative process from being used for personal economic benefit," a poison pill inserted by the Ohio legislature, also passed.

The vote was much closer on Issue 2 than 3. I was advising people that if they wanted to vote against Issue 3, just vote against Issue 3.

Here's how Issue 2 is likely to prevent future decriminalization efforts and a few lessons learned for those of us interested in decriminalizing marijuana in other states.

ResponsibleOhio_550_zpsy6buqjgq.jpg


Here’s what Ohio Issue 2 said. The proposed amendment would:

Prohibit any petitioner from using the Ohio Constitution to grant a monopoly, oligopoly, or cartel for their exclusive financial benefit or to establish a preferential tax status.

Require the bipartisan Ohio Ballot Board to determine if a proposed constitutional amendment violates the prohibitions above, and if it does, present two separate ballot questions to voters. Both ballot questions must receive a majority yes vote before the proposed amendment could take effect.

Basically, the amendment puts determination of what constitutes a monopoly, oligopoly, or cartel, in the sole hands of the Ohio Ballot Board.

The Ohio Ballot Board consists of Secretary of State Jon Husted (R), two Republicans, and two Democrats. In other words, this constitutional amendment that was just passed puts sole control of determining whether all future ballot proposals are some kind of monopoly in the hands of Secretary of State Jon Husted.

Here’s why this likely blocks decriminalization for a long time to come.
  • The state legislature won’t touch the issue because it is majority Republican and they would face a political backlash. Primarily from older, "tough on crime" Republicans. A ballot initiative is therefore the only political chance for decriminalization in Ohio.
  • Roughly $20-30 million is required to pass a ballot initiative in the state. Any initiative.
  • ResponsibleOhio raised this money from investors based on their ability to make a profit. The only way they can make a profit is if they have growing privileges for some amount of time. This time around, they proposed 10 growers.
  • In the future, however, because of Issue 2, this is now virtually impossible. The legislature can say a monopoly or oligopoly is whatever it wants. 100 growers? 1000 growers? They can literally block it for any number of investors.
Now you might say, as I've heard from many: "Good." Everyone should be allowed to grow and sell marijuana.

The problem with this approach is that "everyone" is not going to fund $20-30 million to pass a ballot initiative. Raising the $20-30 million requires some guarantee of profiting. Even if it's a short term guarantee.

A few lessons for the future...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/...n-for-the-next-20-years?detail=emailcommunity
 

Gunky

Well-Known Member
http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2015/10/ohio_voters_support_marijuana.html
By Jackie Borchardt, Northeast Ohio Media Group
Follow on Twitter
on October 08, 2015 at 6:15 AM, updated October 08, 2015 at 2:57 PM



COLUMBUS, Ohio -- A majority of Ohioans favor legalizing recreational marijuana but support has not significantly changed in the past six months despite widespread advertising and campaigning for a legalization measure that appears on the November ballot, according to poll results released Thursday.

In a new Quinnipiac University poll, 53 percent of Ohio voters support legalizing "small amounts of marijuana for personal use" while 44 percent oppose it. That's largely unchanged from an April poll where 52 percent of Ohioans supported legalization and 44 percent opposed it.
 
Last edited:

MinnBobber

Well-Known Member
I'm not in Ohio, but for me the intolerable part was making it a Constitutional Amendment, instead of just a law that is passed.
MN has a new shitty med cannabis LAW and trying to change it is extremely extremely difficult.
A Constitutional Amendment would be into the realm of impossible to change.

The Constitution is not meant for detailed program items like this. The Constitution would be the place for a proposed basic right in Ohio, like a simple statement that it is legal from x date for 21 year old plus citizens to grow and possess cannabis for rec and/or medical purposes.

Regroup after this first battle and fight for a better version
 
MinnBobber,

LazyIdol

Well-Known Member
This thread has long since served its usefulness. You had your choice and I had mine. I am not calling anyone selfish for making their choices and I will not continue to tolerate being called selfish for making my own choice.
 

Chill Dude

Well-Known Member
The language of Issue 3 was quite good, in fact. Equal or better than any other legalization to date. The only real objection was who was going to make the most money. The idea that it would function like a monopoly came straight from Issue 2 and the Ohio Republican-controlled legislature (which shouldn't even be allowed, IMO. Aren't these supposed to be voter-initiated?) which opposes legalization. Issue 2 was insidious in its genesis and dishonest about its motivations. There were plans for many growers to grow on those sites and many dispensaries.

Holding out for the perfect when the stakes are high and the objections are ideological rather than practical is imprudent. This depresses me and makes me worried about how voters are going to react in CA. I see a lot of people being very belligerent about supporting only the most radical proposals instead of uniting around the best feasible initiative and passing it..

It's not the idea that it would function like a monopoly, it's a FACT that it would. If you take the time to read the legislation you would see that.. I live in California and if the language was similar to Issue 3 in Ohio, I wouldn't vote for it... This movement is about FREEDOM, personal rights and bringing revenue to the state for schools and other important investments!! Legalization should not be a few rich guys who bought some land and want to make millions on their investments..(the new drug lords. Haha) To me that's pathetic and I will not support it!

@KimDracula, I appreciate your opinion, but I just don't agree with it..
 
Chill Dude,

Chill Dude

Well-Known Member
Why? 2016 is only one year away :tup:

@grokit, I disagree with the author of that article you posted..even the title " How Ohio legislature blocked marijuana de criminalization for the next 20 years" sounds ridiculously pessimistic.

Ohioans are for legalization 53% to 46%. I'm sure if the put together a quality, well thought out piece of legislation, Ohio will win legalization...
 

Aimless Ryan

Came to read about grinders; fucked combustion
I am not calling anyone selfish...

That's because no one who disagrees with you asserted that every single Ohioan with a legitimate need for this medicine is unworthy of having access to it. You did. That's selfish.

Words have meanings.
 
Aimless Ryan,

xer0

Well-Known Member
@grokit, I disagree with the author of that article you posted..even the title " How Ohio legislature blocked marijuana de criminalization for the next 20 years" sounds ridiculously pessimistic.

Ohioans are for legalization 53% to 46%. I'm sure if the put together a quality, well thought out piece of legislation, Ohio will win legalization...

Again...you know nothing about the legislature in this state. It doesn't matter what voters want because they will not allow this issue to get to the ballot. If one does push its way through they will use every dirty trick they can to stop it. Voter initiative is the only way the law changes in this state and that is now more difficult than before. Oh...and these guys are mainstays. Career politicians who people in this state are so used to voting for that its pretty much automatic at this point. No one is voting them out.

20 years is probably a bit much but I would be willing to bet that it is at least 8 years before Ohio gets another chance.
 

Chill Dude

Well-Known Member
Maybe so, but if I lived in Ohio, there's no way I'd support Issue 3, I'd rather buy in the Black market than support a bunch of greedy millionaires who would have monopolistic control forever, with no way to change it.

I live in California, and if they put together bad legislation like issue 3, there's no way in hell I would vote for it in 2016!! Legalization is about personal freedom and bringing in tax dollars for schools and other important investments, not padding the pockets a of a few greedy bastards who then become the new drug lords!
 
Chill Dude,

His_Highness

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
Whenever something like this set back occurs (and it is a set back in my mind) I remind myself that momentum is now on our side and 'the majority' is now in favor of some form of legalization. It's gonna happen...

I can see both sides of this debate and while I do view this as a set back...with my optimism firmly in place the only question in my mind is .... since legalization is gonna happen which would have been faster.... passing legalization with the flaws in place OR waiting for the majority momentum to push it to something more palatable?

As the Rolling Stones sang...Time Is On My Side....Yes it is!
 
Top Bottom