Ohio pot legalization - Maybe next time (1 Viewer)

[MikeIke]

Tomorrow Ohio will vote on a constitutional amendment to allow legalized marijuana for recreational and medicinal use. I personally am in favor of legalizing it. However, I'm not sure if I should vote for it tomorrow, because of the way the law is written.

Basically, if the issue passes there will be 10 companies that control the growth and distribution of legal weed. I object to this because it shuts out any other companies from participating. And keep in mind - this would be written into the state constitution. It's pretty difficult to change a law after the fact when it's in the Constitution.

The other objection I have to the law as proposed is that any home grower would need to obtain a license from the state. I've dabbled in growing before (the results were not good) and I'd like to try again. But I don't like that I would need to get a license to grow a few plants in my own home.

On the other hand, I am strongly in favor of legalized Marijuana. I kind of feel like if this issue doesn't pass, we might not get another chance to legalize it for years.

What say the FFA? Should I vote for a bad law that legalizes it in a way I don't like, or vote against in the hope that a better initiative comes up in the near future?

 

[Warsteinner]

I'm voting yes on issue 2 and yes on issue 3.

 

[SacramentoBob]

Take the Jefferson route. If you can't secure all of your rights, secure the ones you can.

 

[wadegarrett]

Voting no on 2 and yes on 3.

I don't care who grows it...just care that I can go get it.

And license schmicense...once it passes no one is going to come banging on your door to check and see if you have one.

 

[top dog]

Take the Jefferson route. If you can't secure all of your rights, secure the ones you can.

I don't like the monopoly either, but I'd rather see it legal with a monopoly that we can work on changing later rather than be illegal with no monopoly.

 

[grateful zed]

legalize it

 

[Swing 51]

Article on the backers of the ballot initiative, including Nick Lachey, in the Wash Post. The cast of characters throwing money at it is interesting. :

And yet it has driven a wedge into the usual pro-marijuana coalition, in part because of language in the measure that would restrict virtually all large-scale marijuana cultivation to 10 designated farms.

The owners of those farms? A random bunch, including Lachey, designer Nanette Lepore, NBA legend Oscar Robertson, NFL journeyman Frostee Rucker, a pair of President William Howard Taft’s great-great-grandnephews and twenty-some others — who, not coincidentally, are the same folks bankrolling the campaign, and stand to become very, very wealthy if the measure passes.

It was his financial advisers who presented Lachey with the idea of getting into the marijuana game. According to ResponsibleOhio executive director Ian James, they heard about the opportunity through another client, Rucker, a defensive end for the Arizona Cardinals who used to play for the Cincinnati Bengals and Cleveland Browns.

Rucker, in turn, was recruited by James Gould, the Cincinnati sports agent and private-equity guy who masterminded this one-of-a-kind ballot initiative, after previous adventures helping Build-A-Bear go public and advising Donald Trump through his ill-fated involvement in the short-lived United States Football League.

Gould and James are responsible for transforming Ohio’s marijuana legalization movement from a grass-roots activists club to a “suit-and-tie” operation, funded by bottom-line-minded investors alert to the untapped economic potential of a particularly pungent cash crop.

As one investor put it during a video pitch to other contributors reported by the Columbus Dispatch, “Let’s hop on this tsunami of money and ride the top of that wave to some enrichment for us.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/the-ohio-marijuana-vote-that-could-make-nick-lachey-a-weed-kingpin-yes-that-nick-lachey/2015/10/30/58bd2b28-7cc4-11e5-b575-d8dcfedb4ea1_story.html

 

[Juxtatarot]

Does this have a good chance at passing? I thought Ohio had a lot of old, conservative types.

 

[SacramentoBob]

I'm voting yes on issue 2 and yes on issue 3.

Reading about this mess now. Doesn't yes on #2 invalidate #3?

 

[wadegarrett]

Does this have a good chance at passing? I thought Ohio had a lot of old, conservative types.

Heard today it's 46% yes, 46% no, 8% undecided.

 

[wadegarrett]

I'm voting yes on issue 2 and yes on issue 3.

Reading about this mess now. Doesn't yes on #2 invalidate #3?

Think so. Then it'll end up in the courts and .

 

[cstu]

I've dabbled in growing before (the results were not good)

I myself dabbled in pacifism once (not in 'Nam, of course)

 

[Buckfast 1]

It always feels great to vote in favor of freedom.

 

[lod01]

Yes and make sure you vote correctly on HJR 4 because it was written to over rule #3 if #3 passes.

if #3 passes and the HJR 4 passes, they will say the growers constitute a monopoly and try and nix it with HJR 4. - HJR 4, known as the anti-monopoly amendment, would prohibit constitutional amendments that add monopolies, oligopolies or cartels; specify or designate tax rates; or confer a commercial right, license or interest that is not available to similarly situated persons.

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2015/08/what_happens_if_both_marijuana.html

 

[MikeIke]

Yes on 3, no on 2 means you're in favor of legalized Marijuana as the bill is written. Don't get it backwards, Ohio voters!

 

[MikeIke]

Take the Jefferson route. If you can't secure all of your rights, secure the ones you can.

This is the way I'm leaning. I'd rather have it legal despite my misgivings about the bill as written.

 

[MikeIke]

I'm voting yes on issue 2 and yes on issue 3.

So you're against legalization?

 

[top dog]

I'm voting yes on issue 2 and yes on issue 3.

So you're against legalization?

Maybe he's for ambiguity?

 

[Warsteinner]

I'm voting yes on issue 2 and yes on issue 3.

So you're against legalization?

No, I smoke daily and want it legalized, just not in the way it is being written.

 

[Warsteinner]

I'm voting yes on issue 2 and yes on issue 3.

So you're against legalization?

No, I smoke daily and want it legalized, just not in the way it is being written.

Either way I'm still going down the street to my street pharmacist to get it. I won't pay the marked up prices just because it's in a store.

 

[MikeIke]

I'm voting yes on issue 2 and yes on issue 3.

So you're against legalization?

No, I smoke daily and want it legalized, just not in the way it is being written.

Fair enough, that's the issue I was wrestling with.ETA: I read your post incorrectly. Why would you vote yes on both? 2 would invalidate 3.

 

[top dog]

If it passes I probably won't partake but once in a blue moon. Never been a big weed fan. Always preferred alcohol. I just think it being illegal and untaxed is dumb.

 

[lod01]

I'm voting yes on issue 2 and yes on issue 3.

So you're against legalization?

No, I smoke daily and want it legalized, just not in the way it is being written.

Just grow it yourself. We used to all the time along the edges of cornfields.

 

[Warsteinner]

I'm voting yes on issue 2 and yes on issue 3.

So you're against legalization?

No, I smoke daily and want it legalized, just not in the way it is being written.

Just grow it yourself. We used to all the time along the edges of cornfields.

If it passes I certainly will give it a shot. For now I'm a connoisseur, not a farmer.

 

[Galileo]

I'm voting yes on issue 2 and yes on issue 3.

Reading about this mess now. Doesn't yes on #2 invalidate #3?

Think so. Then it'll end up in the courts and .

This

I also read somewhere that if they both pass, whichever gets more votes will supersede the other. I can't imagine this would be right. Like others, I would love to see legalization, but I think the circumstances under which that will happen with the proposed legislation is pretty crappy. Equally crappy though is the attempt by law makers to block legalization by proposing a contradicting amendment. So much for government for the people, by the people.

 

[McGarnicle]

Wait, what?

Oh no way!

 

[MikeIke]

I'm voting yes on issue 2 and yes on issue 3.

So you're against legalization?

No, I smoke daily and want it legalized, just not in the way it is being written.

Either way I'm still going down the street to my street pharmacist to get it. I won't pay the marked up prices just because it's in a store.

But the stuff you could buy legally would probably be way better than what you're getting from a guy you know.

 

[NREC34]

Please pass it Ohio. You are the only state near me where there's a snowballs chance.

 

[Galileo]

Map showing states with legal marijuana

 

[Warsteinner]

I'm voting yes on issue 2 and yes on issue 3.

So you're against legalization?

No, I smoke daily and want it legalized, just not in the way it is being written.

Either way I'm still going down the street to my street pharmacist to get it. I won't pay the marked up prices just because it's in a store.

But the stuff you could buy legally would probably be way better than what you're getting from a guy you know.

I call that stuff "hide behind the couch weed." I like good old fashioned reggie. I don't like getting all paranoid.

 

[Galileo]

The whole lead up to the vote has been rather quiet. Only the last couple days have I seen a few TV adds from both sides of the issue, Honestly, I don't think most voters even know these constitutional amendments are up for vote.

 

[MikeIke]

The whole lead up to the vote has been rather quiet. Only the last couple days have I seen a few TV adds from both sides of the issue, Honestly, I don't think most voters even know these constitutional amendments are up for vote.

I've gotten a few mailers about it but there certainly hasn't been a big media push either way. I wonder if it was a mistake to bring it to ballot in an off year? Probably would have had a better chance passing in 2016, what with the Presidency up for grabs and all.

 

[NutterButter]

Vote yes. Don't eff this up.

 

[MikeIke]

Vote yes. Don't eff this up.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that iwillI will be voting yes. Legalized weed in a way I don't like is better than illegal weed.

 

[Johnny Rock]

Article on the backers of the ballot initiative, including Nick Lachey, in the Wash Post. The cast of characters throwing money at it is interesting. :

And yet it has driven a wedge into the usual pro-marijuana coalition, in part because of language in the measure that would restrict virtually all large-scale marijuana cultivation to 10 designated farms.

The owners of those farms? A random bunch, including Lachey, designer Nanette Lepore, NBA legend Oscar Robertson, NFL journeyman Frostee Rucker, a pair of President William Howard Taft’s great-great-grandnephews and twenty-some others — who, not coincidentally, are the same folks bankrolling the campaign, and stand to become very, very wealthy if the measure passes.

It was his financial advisers who presented Lachey with the idea of getting into the marijuana game. According to ResponsibleOhio executive director Ian James, they heard about the opportunity through another client, Rucker, a defensive end for the Arizona Cardinals who used to play for the Cincinnati Bengals and Cleveland Browns.

Rucker, in turn, was recruited by James Gould, the Cincinnati sports agent and private-equity guy who masterminded this one-of-a-kind ballot initiative, after previous adventures helping Build-A-Bear go public and advising Donald Trump through his ill-fated involvement in the short-lived United States Football League.

Gould and James are responsible for transforming Ohio’s marijuana legalization movement from a grass-roots activists club to a “suit-and-tie” operation, funded by bottom-line-minded investors alert to the untapped economic potential of a particularly pungent cash crop.

As one investor put it during a video pitch to other contributors reported by the Columbus Dispatch, “Let’s hop on this tsunami of money and ride the top of that wave to some enrichment for us.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/the-ohio-marijuana-vote-that-could-make-nick-lachey-a-weed-kingpin-yes-that-nick-lachey/2015/10/30/58bd2b28-7cc4-11e5-b575-d8dcfedb4ea1_story.html

What a bunch of BS. Legislating monopolies now?

 

[MikeIke]

Does this have a good chance at passing? I thought Ohio had a lot of old, conservative types.

Ohio is the 7th most populous state in the nation, and it contains a diverse mixture of old, young, white, minority, rich, and poor. There's a reason that is one of the main targets for presidential elections. We're pretty much 50/50 on everything. As Ohio goes, so goes the country.

 

[Brony]

Take the Jefferson route. If you can't secure all of your rights, secure the ones you can.

Charles Jefferson...for Earth, Wind and Fire and little brother.

 

[MikeIke]

Article on the backers of the ballot initiative, including Nick Lachey, in the Wash Post. The cast of characters throwing money at it is interesting. :

And yet it has driven a wedge into the usual pro-marijuana coalition, in part because of language in the measure that would restrict virtually all large-scale marijuana cultivation to 10 designated farms.

The owners of those farms? A random bunch, including Lachey, designer Nanette Lepore, NBA legend Oscar Robertson, NFL journeyman Frostee Rucker, a pair of President William Howard Tafts great-great-grandnephews and twenty-some others who, not coincidentally, are the same folks bankrolling the campaign, and stand to become very, very wealthy if the measure passes.

It was his financial advisers who presented Lachey with the idea of getting into the marijuana game. According to ResponsibleOhio executive director Ian James, they heard about the opportunity through another client, Rucker, a defensive end for the Arizona Cardinals who used to play for the Cincinnati Bengals and Cleveland Browns.

Rucker, in turn, was recruited by James Gould, the Cincinnati sports agent and private-equity guy who masterminded this one-of-a-kind ballot initiative, after previous adventures helping Build-A-Bear go public and advising Donald Trump through his ill-fated involvement in the short-lived United States Football League.

Gould and James are responsible for transforming Ohios marijuana legalization movement from a grass-roots activists club to a suit-and-tie operation, funded by bottom-line-minded investors alert to the untapped economic potential of a particularly pungent cash crop.

As one investor put it during a video pitch to other contributors reported by the Columbus Dispatch, Lets hop on this tsunami of money and ride the top of that wave to some enrichment for us.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/the-ohio-marijuana-vote-that-could-make-nick-lachey-a-weed-kingpin-yes-that-nick-lachey/2015/10/30/58bd2b28-7cc4-11e5-b575-d8dcfedb4ea1_story.html

What a bunch of BS. Legislating monopolies now?

Technically, I think it would be a dechapoly.

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

If I can keep 4 flowering plants growing at all time, I don't give a #### about the monopoly.

I grew indoors when I was (much) younger, but it involved too much paranoia about being busted.

 

[trogg78]

It must be nice to be privileged enough that the negative consequences of prohibition don't affect you..

 

[SacramentoBob]

If I can keep 4 flowering plants growing at all time, I don't give a #### about the monopoly.

I grew indoors when I was (much) younger, but it involved too much paranoia about being busted.

That was just from smoking weed.

 

[MikeIke]

It must be nice to be privileged enough that the negative consequences of prohibition don't affect you..

Huh? I've already said I'm in favor of it. I don't particularly like the way it's written, but I'll most likely be voting for it anyway. 2/10 for trolling. You got a response from me , but that was a pretty weak effort.

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

If I can keep 4 flowering plants growing at all time, I don't give a #### about the monopoly.

I grew indoors when I was (much) younger, but it involved too much paranoia about being busted.

That was just from smoking weed.

I'm sure that didn't help.

The big mistake I made was telling several of my friends about it, some of whom had very big mouths. It got to the point where way too many people had heard about it.

 

[tommyboy]

Id vote for both and take what you can get

 

[Johnny Rock]

Get it passed and then sue to open up the market. Go for punitive damages or its equivalent in weed.

 

[Galileo]

The city of Toledo already voted recently to decriminalize pot. There was a 70-30 vote for approval on that issue... http://ballotpedia.org/City_of_Toledo_Marijuana_Decriminalization_%22Sensible_Marijuana_Ordinance%22_Initiative,_Issue_1_(September_2015)

Of course, the State of Ohio then filed a lawsuit against the city of Toledo... http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/07/us-usa-toledo-marijuana-idUSKCN0S02TU20151007

 

[MikeIke]

Columbus decriminalized it so that possession is a misdemeanor. Baby steps

 

[lardonastick]

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

Columbus decriminalized it so that possession is a misdemeanor. Baby steps

I won't be happy until everybody is required to smoke or otherwise ingest the equivalent of at least one joint a day

 

[peaces]

Smoke two joints