# NORML Breaking News: Marijuana Legalization Bills Introduced In Massachusetts!



## LowRider (Mar 24, 2009)

Californias highly publicized effort to legalize the commercial cultivation and sale of cannabis is getting some well-deserved company!
A pair of bills  House Bill 2929 and Senate Bill 1801  seeking to *tax and regulate the cannabis industry* have just been introduced in the Massachusetts legislature.
These proposals* seek to legally regulate the commercial production and distribution of marijuana* for adults over 21 years of age.  Like Californias proposal, they would impose licensing requirements and excise taxes on the retail sale of cannabis. By some estimates, these taxes could raise nearly $100 million in annual state revenue.
Adults who possess or grow marijuana for personal use, or who engage in the non-profit transfer of cannabis, would _not be subject to taxation_ under the law.
You can read more about these bills at the new website: http://www.cantaxreg.com. If you live in Massachusetts, we urge you to write your elected officials in support of H. 2929 and S. 1801 by going here.
Decades of whispered grumblings about the wisdom and efficacy of prohibition is rapidly giving way to a seriousreally serious public discussion about how to replace it, said former NORML Board Member Richard Evans, who assisted in drafting the landmark legislation. Those who consider themselves leaders in government and the media have the obligation to either show how prohibition can be made to work, or join in the exploration of alternatives.
We cant think of a better place to begin this discussion on the east coast than Massachusetts, where last November 65 percent of voters endorsed a statewide initiative reclassifying marijuana possession as a fine-only offense under state law.  Will a majority of Bay State voters also support _legalization_? We may soon find out!


----------



## valleyboy (Mar 24, 2009)

i really wish it could be like this, could you imagine being able to legally grow in your backyard?


----------



## SPEARCHUCKER (Mar 24, 2009)

It really steams my britches and puts me in a jealous rage of fury that my state will be dead last in doing anything of the sorts.

Now Im gonna sit here and cry.


----------



## LowRider (Mar 24, 2009)

SPEARCHUCKER said:
			
		

> It really steams my britches and puts me in a jealous rage of fury that my state will be dead last in doing anything of the sorts.
> 
> Now Im gonna sit here and cry.


 
In the bible belt to uh?  me to.  We shall cry together my friend.:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:


----------



## zipflip (Mar 24, 2009)

i'd put money on it that the state i live in will be the last to adopt any decriminalization or legalization of any kind lol.  its sad place here, let me tell you wat...


----------



## IRISH (Mar 24, 2009)

Holler, Holler, East Coast!!!...

jump on that train, and ride it till the wheels fall off her...

with Oaksterdam coming to Ann Arbor, Michigan, can the train be coming here next?...bb...


----------



## DutchMasterPuff (Mar 24, 2009)

banjobuzz said:
			
		

> Holler, Holler, East Coast!!!...
> 
> jump on that train, and ride it till the wheels fall off her...
> 
> with Oaksterdam coming to Ann Arbor, Michigan, can the train be coming here next?...bb...



Hey keep the wheels on till it gets to Michigan... and there better be room!


----------



## LowRider (Mar 24, 2009)

I just read the bill looks like a very high tax is right. heres how it is broken down to those who haven't read it or don't want to read it.

Class C One hundred fifty dollar per ounc 
Class B Two hundred dollars per ounc
Class A Two hundred fifty dollars per ounce.


All cannabis sold by processors shall be analyzed and graded as follows:
(1) If said cannabis contains more than 1% THC and less than 5% THC, then said cannabis shall be labeled C.
(2) If the cannabis contains 5% or more than 5% and less than 10% THC, then said cannabis shall be labeled B.
(3) If the cannabis contains 10% THC or more, then said cannabis shall be labeled A.


----------



## tcbud (Mar 24, 2009)

Sounds like a grading nightmare.
I want to be a first in line for that job.


----------



## SPEARCHUCKER (Mar 24, 2009)

Doesnt seem that bad to me LowR. A victory is a victory.

I hope it generates tons of money for the state. Seeing those $$$$$ signs is the only thing that would help change things in the south. Especially with our superior weather and soil.


----------



## slowmo77 (Mar 24, 2009)

i agree, when they start seeing dollars roll in to other states more will jump on. instead of wasting money they could be makin money. what branch of government doesn't like money? none


----------



## LowRider (Mar 24, 2009)

SPEARCHUCKER said:
			
		

> Doesnt seem that bad to me LowR. A victory is a victory.
> 
> I hope it generates tons of money for the state. Seeing those $$$$$ signs is the only thing that would help change things in the south. Especially with our superior weather and soil.


 
its not that its bad to me, but these places have to make money which means the prices will be near black market prices.


----------



## kubefuism (Mar 24, 2009)

As long as the state is not in control of production I'm so there and jumping up and down till I puke.  Pa is finaly looking at MMJ, thank God for small miricles.


----------



## SIR CHINK (Mar 26, 2009)

Oh snizz ;] hope this passes! I'ma def write to em!


----------



## Dr. GreenBrain (Mar 26, 2009)

LowRider said:
			
		

> I just read the bill looks like a very high tax is right.



In CA the taxes will be high if they pass the bill too, but they expect that, with all the pot being dumped onto the market, the price of weed will fall dramatically. In this article, they estimate that a joint will cost someone $1 including taxes.

This article is where I got the quote in my signature by Judge James P. Gray

CONGRATS MASS! Even if it doesn't pass this time around, introducing a bill is still a small vicotry.


----------



## cubby (Mar 26, 2009)

If this passes the south would have no choise but to ennact legalization. When the state legislators relize that they are paying for increased incarcerarion rates due to illegally imported weed from other states it will become abundantly clear that the neo-moralist view of prohibitive enforcement makes no sence.
You can be sure people will be buying legal weed to ship south, just like people in the north go down south to buy handguns without any quesstions, restrictions, or requirements.
I immagine that the constitution requirement that states must repect legal standing in other states will end up being the last gasp of prohibition.:hubba:


----------



## Dr. GreenBrain (Mar 26, 2009)

cubby said:
			
		

> If this passes the south would have no choise but to ennact legalization. When the state legislators relize that they are paying for increased incarcerarion rates due to illegally imported weed from other states it will become abundantly clear that the neo-moralist view of prohibitive enforcement makes no sence.
> You can be sure people will be buying legal weed to ship south, just like people in the north go down south to buy handguns without any quesstions, restrictions, or requirements.
> I immagine that the constitution requirement that states must repect legal standing in other states will end up being the last gasp of prohibition.:hubba:



Holly crap, I never thought of that! You are totally right, it will be like dominoes. We may be on the cusp of a major revolution in this country, though I suspect this isn't the first time.


----------



## smokeytimes (Mar 26, 2009)

The way I see it yes there is a huge movement to at the least get more states to approve MMJ.  But I think as the states that legalize MJ the rest of the states will start to see how much money they can bring in, in the form of taxes they too will start to loose the neo-moralist view they now have.

Victories may be small now, but look at how much MMJ has been in the news lately.  I'm 40 and I have ever seen this much talk about MJ as we havve seen in the last year.  
I think this in itself is a positive victory just that the public image of MJ is changing in the publics eyes.


----------



## goody420 (Mar 26, 2009)

living in the northeast the few months has been exciting. but even watching the major news channels the last couple of week you hear them talking about it almost every night. so the more thay talk the better i hope. keeping my fingers crossed


----------



## LowRider (Mar 26, 2009)

cubby said:
			
		

> If this passes the south would have no choise but to ennact legalization. When the state legislators relize that they are paying for increased incarcerarion rates due to illegally imported weed from other states it will become abundantly clear that the neo-moralist view of prohibitive enforcement makes no sence.
> You can be sure people will be buying legal weed to ship south, just like people in the north go down south to buy handguns without any quesstions, restrictions, or requirements.
> I immagine that the constitution requirement that states must repect legal standing in other states will end up being the last gasp of prohibition.:hubba:


 
Not sure how you came to that conclusion.  The only gun your taking back that day would be some type of long gun (rifle/shotgun) and that DEPENDS ON STATE LAW.  Handguns MUST be shipped from the DEALER you bought it from to your local DEALER.  NO IF'S or BUT'S about it.  please refram from mentioning gun laws when you have no clue.


----------



## SPEARCHUCKER (Mar 26, 2009)

Im not sure that is always the case LowRider.  I know the issue was on the table last year here (think it got stopped hard). But here, you can take a handgun directly home from a gunshow, and maybe even if you are buying it from a private citizen.

We love us some guns here. Gots possums to stew, squirrels to giblet. We needs them.


----------



## LowRider (Mar 26, 2009)

you can do private sale anywhere, may break the law depending on state if you don't feel out the transfer paper, and for the gun show, you still have to go through a background check and the dealer still has to ship the gun back to a local dealer if out of state and if there's a waiting period well you still have to wait, just because its a gun show doesn't mean federal law isn't in effect.


----------



## PUFF MONKEY (Mar 27, 2009)

zipflip said:
			
		

> i'd put money on it that the state i live in will be the last to adopt any decriminalization or legalization of any kind lol. its sad place here, let me tell you wat...


ohio???


----------



## SPEARCHUCKER (Mar 27, 2009)

> In ______, licensed gun dealers (known as Federal Firearms Licensees, or FFLs) are required to conduct a criminal background check on each and every individual they sell a gun to. However, due to a loophole in federal and state law, unlicensed sellers are also allowed to sell firearms at ______ gun shows without conducting background checks on purchasers. The ______ State Police report that between 22 and 35 percent of the firearms sellers at ______ gun shows do not possess an FFL and are not required by law to perform background checks.



I took out the state for a _______. But thats how it works here Low.


----------



## PUFF MONKEY (Mar 27, 2009)

and many states now have an instant check system in place so a BG check only tales 5-10 minutes even at gun shows..TN, rules for speedy gun buying


----------



## cubby (Mar 27, 2009)

LowRider said:
			
		

> Not sure how you came to that conclusion. The only gun your taking back that day would be some type of long gun (rifle/shotgun) and that DEPENDS ON STATE LAW. Handguns MUST be shipped from the DEALER you bought it from to your local DEALER. NO IF'S or BUT'S about it. please refram from mentioning gun laws when you have no clue.


 

   The corridor between Virginis and NY is known as a gun runners paradise. People go from NY to Virginia, purchase trunks full of weapons not available to them legaly in their home state and resell them to gangbangers. you can pretend that all these gun dealers are on the up-and-up but facts belie your assertions.
   Firearms enthusiasts recognize these basic facts, "gun nuts" deny them because they are afraid of any laws they feel would further restrict their ease of availability.


----------



## LowRider (Mar 27, 2009)

SPEARCHUCKER said:
			
		

> I took out the state for a _______. But thats how it works here Low.


  its called private sale.


----------

