pot

An initiative to legalize marijuana sounds like a dream come true for pro-pot protesters, an ilk quite common in Berkeley and its environs, so why is the bill not receiving the support to match?

We’d like to start off with the facts. Proposition 19, “The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act” treats cannabis much like the law currently treats alcohol. Adults 21 and older are free to grow pot on 25 square feet of private property and possess up to 1 ounce of cannabis, which may be shared but not sold. Persons 21 and over can only smoke on licensed zones and may only buy from licensed commercial employers. And, of course, no driving is permitted while under the influence, so lock up those car, boat and airplane keys. State law regarding medical marijuana, however, is not affected by Prop. 19. Read up more on the facts here.

So what’s the catch? read more »


potOakland has always been a leader in the fight for cannabis legalization. Back in 2007, it became the home of the nation’s first cannabis college and as of Tuesday, will become the first city in the nation to have a business-tax category for cannabis operations.

The new measure places a 1.8 percent tax on the four licensed medical pot dispensaries in Oakland. Many club owners see this as a step toward legitimization of the pot industry, and California sees it as a way of getting some extra moolah. Marijuana is California’s biggest cash crop after all. read more »


Alright, Berkeley. We know you like to indulge in a little “Mary Jane” every now and then. We can smell it in the air on Telegraph Ave. Annd … pretty much everywhere else in the city. So what say you about this?

Apparently some local networks have refused to air the above ad because it “promotes marijuana use,” but if that glassy-eyed robot lady really is an example of a “real marijuana user” then we must respectfully disagree. Also, we’re kind of in favor of anything that would help the state out of its massive budget pothole (get it? Get it?!). read more »


Richard Nixon once said, “People get drunk to have a good time; people smoke weed to get high.” So it wouldn’t be far-fetched to assume his ghost had a hand in this case of a possible foiled cover-up. OK, maybe that would be a bit far-fetched. But in a world with with 24 hour service on T-graph, anything’s possible.

Anyway, it appears that Berkeley citizens may have rebuked an anti-marijuana plan. Or they’ve merely unearthed an idiotically obstructed recount of a failed pro-weed initiative.

The bill, had it passed, would have allowed a patient to obtain medical marijuana without any cap on the amount. However, it missed by just 191 votes in 2004, prompting the weed people (like the swamp people but more weedish) to fork over 22,600 bucks for a second look at the results from the Diebold Election Systems machines. That money went towards recounting data that mysteriously no longer exists. Hence, the judge gave the plaintiffs a refund and called the election–and its officials–into question.

First off, we’re curious as to who these shady anti-pot guys are. Yes, we know you’re probably thinking that, as respected quasi journalists, we should be privy to these things. We’re working on it, people. Geez. Secondly, we’re curious as to how this whole post steered clear of tired marijuana puns. A medal will be probably be forthcoming. With consciences clear, we stoically await multiple sneering pundit comments regarding “Berkeley” and “marijuana.”

Image Source: Ian Umeda, Daily Cal
2004 CA Election Results Nullified; Election Officials Sanctioned by Court [WIRED]