Mass-diver
NES Member
These places are obviously, much, much easier to defend than retail operations. You basically just have a couple layers of key card access, cameras, and good door. Plus, it's a secret when harvest time is....
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Anybody else happy marijuana is legal in MA?
- Thread starter plynch113
- Start date
These places are obviously, much, much easier to defend than retail operations. You basically just have a couple layers of key card access, cameras, and good door. Plus, it's a secret when harvest time is....
KBCraig
NES Member
Mere possession is not a federal drug offense.
Interesting topic to say the least.
If one has a card i dont see how the use of it makes you a PP. Because the question asks if you are an unlawful user of, by having a card or being in a state that has it recreational how can you be considered unlawful? SMH. It also asks if you depend on it with that question and I am sure people who smoke can go without it since it is not physically addicting.
Funny how veterans on the west coast can work on MJ farms with their firearms.
Basic logic tells most responsible gun owners to leave their guns alone if they are under the influence of any drug.
Often-times, this world doesn't make any sense!
If one has a card i dont see how the use of it makes you a PP. Because the question asks if you are an unlawful user of, by having a card or being in a state that has it recreational how can you be considered unlawful? SMH. It also asks if you depend on it with that question and I am sure people who smoke can go without it since it is not physically addicting.
Funny how veterans on the west coast can work on MJ farms with their firearms.
Basic logic tells most responsible gun owners to leave their guns alone if they are under the influence of any drug.
Often-times, this world doesn't make any sense!
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,532
- Likes
- 33,566
Because you are still in violation of federal law, even though in compliance with state law.
I understand this completely. If you are abiding by state law though I don't see how they can say you are an "unlawful" user. I think you posted a link to the comm2a link about a case involving MJ and restoring 2nd amendment rights. I'm aware federal law overrules state laws, even though said federal law is unconstitutional. It is way overdue to reschedule it but I doubt that will happen anytime soon.
Not as long as you have stuffy old white guys who like a gin and tonic or five at the end of the day deciding what is a "drug" and what isn't.
Mass-diver
NES Member
Galvin announced that they probably won't be able to certify the result by 12/15 - this is pretty much unheard of, but will although lawmakers to come back in January (from break) and modify the law without a brief window of legality.
With so may politicians opposed to this law, it's not surprising that, in all likelihood, it will never be implemented.
With so may politicians opposed to this law, it's not surprising that, in all likelihood, it will never be implemented.
Well 25 states recognize the plant to have medical value. Pretty funny how a lot of these states are blue states. I cant stand politics but I'm sure its more than a coincidence of this fact. Time will tell, eventually things will change. It's taking a similar course that liquor did back in the day. There is 2 much money to be made the federal gov will want its chunk and with military vets being able to provide security for this business they can't hide infringe on the rights of law abiding people forever.
federal. FEDERAL. FEDERAL. FEDERAL. FEDERAL. FEDERAL
this has been explained probably 9 times in this thread alone.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,532
- Likes
- 33,566
What you think is of no relevance unless you can convince someone, or some org, with power of your position.
The position of the BATFE is that MJ use renders one a PP. The 9th circuit court recently held that having a MM card renders one a PP, and there is no need to prove that the holder of the card is actually using the drug - being licensed to do so is enough.
Wesson v. Fowler et. al. The issue in that case was a past conviction, not current use.
because you're not abiding by the federal law, and attesting to it on a federal form. I don't get what you can't figure out.
Billsail
NES Member
I don't smoke but voted yes for all the reasons posted. I don't see any shops opening any time soon though. After the legislature figures all the rules, they'll have to work out the tax scheme, and you can bet it will be more than a 6% sales tax. Add a "vice tax", and drug education fees to the price. Then they need to figure state licensing and permit fees. This may take a tiny bit longer if they see a need for any additional legislation to codify the whole thing.
Now give all the individual towns time, if they choose to allow shops, to work out the zoning regulations and ways to extract their pound of flesh, in the way of local licensing and permit fees.
You all know none of this will not come quickly, in this state. I'm saying the over/under is 2018. Where is the smart money? You won't see any local corner "Potstops" any time soon.
The hop-heads are gonna need to be patient.
Now give all the individual towns time, if they choose to allow shops, to work out the zoning regulations and ways to extract their pound of flesh, in the way of local licensing and permit fees.
You all know none of this will not come quickly, in this state. I'm saying the over/under is 2018. Where is the smart money? You won't see any local corner "Potstops" any time soon.
The hop-heads are gonna need to be patient.
Last edited:
inkdesigner
NES Member
Well, 2018 would be good, since the ballot question doesn't allow for places to begin seeking a permit/license until late 2017, with an opening date in Jan of 2018. First crack goes to the 6 currently operating medical dispensaries in the Commonwealth.
Since it took 3 years from passing the medical marajuana law to the opening of the first dispensary, I would bet it could take at least as long for the first local corner pot shop to open. And, given the Commonwealth's greedy nature, I bet it will still be cheaper to purchase from some guy in back alley than from a legally licensed and permitted shop.
Mass-diver
NES Member
They are trying to push the date back to mid-2018 "or later" for applications. We aren't going to see stores for a long time.
The timetable in the law voted on by the citizens of MA is identical to what CO used (they made 500million the first year). But this MA, we need to make sure it's done in the most corrupt and inefficent manner.
It's really shameful not to just implement the law as approved by the voters.
Billsail
NES Member
Remember that this is the state that has crying Baker as the governor. He doesn't seem to be able to do anything right. One of his arguments against legalization was
LINK Why yes, yes it is about the creation of a billion-dollar, for-profit industry. You are theoretically a Republican. You should understand that you should be SUPPORTING new businesses and industries in this state!
The issue is that it is about public morality, which is also an important issue to many Republicans. He's trying to suggest a sort of pervasive stigma to marijuana which be believes should continue and will not just be a private thing but something that is promoted through the retail market.
Mass-diver
NES Member
I'm sure. This is Massachusetts. The government here seems to be literally incapable of doing anything right.
Criminals love the fact the "legal" pot stores can't have any armed employees and have to deal in cash only. Easy unarmed cash rich "work place."
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Mass-diver
NES Member
rep308
NES Member
Senate President Stan Rosenberg eyes raising pot smoking age to 25
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/lo..._rosenberg_eyes_raising_pot_smoking_age_to_25
"The doctors say 25 for marijuana. I'm going to raise that with our caucus and see if it gets any legs," Rosenberg said in a Boston Herald Radio interview this morning. "I know that they put 21 in the ballot question, so that's going to be the law, but neurological scientists would tell you that the formation of the brain is not complete until about the age 25. And heavy use of marijuana while the brain is still developing can cause a lifetime, can do things to the brain that you will have to live with for the rest of your life, and will have a lot of negative impacts on you an an individual."
They just can't resist screwing with the law
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/lo..._rosenberg_eyes_raising_pot_smoking_age_to_25
"The doctors say 25 for marijuana. I'm going to raise that with our caucus and see if it gets any legs," Rosenberg said in a Boston Herald Radio interview this morning. "I know that they put 21 in the ballot question, so that's going to be the law, but neurological scientists would tell you that the formation of the brain is not complete until about the age 25. And heavy use of marijuana while the brain is still developing can cause a lifetime, can do things to the brain that you will have to live with for the rest of your life, and will have a lot of negative impacts on you an an individual."
They just can't resist screwing with the law
Beacon Hill has over turned at least half of all laws passed by initiative petition. If they thought pot was more a libertarian issue they'd throw that over too.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
they know what's best for you.
In this case the legislature knows that they're being carefully watched. There's been a huge amount of speculation that Beacon Hill would significantly rein in the will of the voters. I think that serves to put them a little on notice. In the past when they've gone against ballot measures, there hasn't been this much publicity.
Not ready this weedend ?
http://www.metro.us/boston/marijuana-law-should-take-effect-this-week-in-massachusetts
The office of Secretary of State William Galvin plans to deliver the official results to the Governor’s Council for certification on Wednesday, the Associated Press reported.
As long as the council certifies the results as expected, the law will take effect the next day as planned.
Galvin’s office previously said the official tally might not be ready in time for the Dec. 15 certification, the Boston Globe reported.
“All those tokers can hold their breath a little longer, but they’ll be able to exhale” by early 2017, Galvin joked, according to the Globe.
http://www.metro.us/boston/marijuana-law-should-take-effect-this-week-in-massachusetts
The office of Secretary of State William Galvin plans to deliver the official results to the Governor’s Council for certification on Wednesday, the Associated Press reported.
As long as the council certifies the results as expected, the law will take effect the next day as planned.
Galvin’s office previously said the official tally might not be ready in time for the Dec. 15 certification, the Boston Globe reported.
“All those tokers can hold their breath a little longer, but they’ll be able to exhale” by early 2017, Galvin joked, according to the Globe.
