Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Narrow by Date

Comment Archives: Last 30 Days

Re: “Chief Justice Seeks Emergency Traffic Court Reform, Jerry Brown Pushes Amnesty Program

Why are people thanking them? Oh, that's right, cause they do not understand what it's really about? So I'll gladly explain. You see, when a giant unlawful scheme comes under scrutiny by the public, it tends to draw unwanted attention. And when the number of people who start to wake up and take it upon themselves to research facts, then question authority based on those facts, you start to notice things which never happen, done by people who never give and always take, such as amnesty. And you can always bet there's some ulterior motive which has nothing to do with kindness or caring for anyone other than themselves.

For example, if you recall the illegal contracts with red flex, the Australian company behind the red light camera's, that came under scrutiny by citizens who were tired of being abused and extorted by corrupt officials acting under color of law. They, taking it upon themselves to dig into matters, uncovered a slew of unlawful problematic issues and gross violations by officials that could no longer be ignored. So the system, being as kind as it is, suddenly and cheerfully, offered amnesty to thousands of drivers who had pending cases, or had not yet paid fines.

Those drivers were happy,.... until sometime later when the real issues came out, and municipalities were forced to return some of the peoples money. By "some of the people", I mean, it did not include those who participated in the ever so gracious and cleverly premeditated plans to fleece the public for as much as they could while they still had the chance, all under the guise of amnesty.

It's a funny thing when people start to wake up and look into facts for themselves. My guess is people other than myself must have come across past traffic engineering manuals and took a closer look at how surveys were being done and applied to the legal factors used to convict offenders for crimes without prosecutors, to substitute in the place of non-existent evidence. They also must have then noticed the odd issues of the seemingly artificial lowering of speed limits under false pretenses, which not only cause more tickets to be issued, but an increase of accidents as well.

The question must of then begged them, as it did me, who exactly would be liable for all the damages that might have been caused as a result of the city merely trying to screw the public out of more money? Exactly how many unlawful and invalid tickets were issued to people who were actually not in violation of the presumed limit laws? And more importantly, just how much revenue has been consistently generated through such illegal and harmful practices, and all under the guise of public safety? Oooops! Or was I the only that noticed.

And that's not even counting the issues of intentional deceptive language that's been used to falsely require registration of millions of "private automobiles" as "commercial motor vehicles" for illicit profit. Oh what tangled webs we weave.

Posted by Izraul Hidashi on 08/11/2016 at 6:50 PM

Re: “Las Vegas Now A Bust for Most California Medical Pot Patients

A lot of people who live in Nevada have California marijauna medical cards but not California State Issued cards. A person who resides in NV can not get a Ca state issued card. People who reside in NV get these cards from Ca because it is cheaper, less of a wait and California Cards are not obtained at the DMV. Nobody wants the police to know that they have a medical marijuana card. If a cop pulls you over for any minor violation and checks your dmv record then it is quite possible for that office to administer a DUI test and take you to the hospital for a blood test. Considering the 2ng law a person might be charged with a DUI even if that person is not under the influence and had not smoked for a week or two. What is safer for a person living in Nevada who has to drive some times. Getting a Nevada mj medical card or a California mj recommendation?

Posted by Betty Dekota on 08/11/2016 at 5:05 PM

Re: “Big Soda Is Spending Big Money Against Oakland Sugary Beverage Tax Proposal

@Garden Gal, from the pro-soda tax campaign's web site: >>>The tax is estimated to generate $6-8 million per year and all tax revenue will go into the city’s general fund. Accountability is written into the measure: the measure creates a Community Advisory Board with representatives from health, dental care, and nutrition, as well as parents from the Oakland Unified School District and residents of communities most impacted by the negative health effects of sugary drink consumption. The Board will make recommendations to the City Council about funding programs that improve children’s health and will issue annual public reports detailing the impact of funded programs.<<<
http://www.oaklandvsbigsoda.com/faq

This is similar to the community advisory board that has been overseeing the Measure DD funding that renovated Lake Merritt, where the citizens oversight process has worked well. I know many people are cynical about allowing money to pass through the General Fund, but to structure it to have its own separate account puts it into a category of ballot measures for which election laws require a super-majority of 66% to pass, a very difficult standard to achieve. With the example of the Measure DD money, I am willing to trust this process and I support this tax.

Posted by Valerie Winemiller on 08/11/2016 at 4:29 PM

Re: “Guacamole 61 Brings the Meat to Epicurious Garden in Berkeley

I'm so not in agreement. Place has bland food and is insanely overpriced for Mexican. And don't tell me the price is justified by the neighborhood. Cactus on Solano and College is half the price and twice as good.

Posted by Jono Schneider on 08/11/2016 at 4:00 PM

Re: “Big Soda Is Spending Big Money Against Oakland Sugary Beverage Tax Proposal

how will the revenue from such a tax be spent?

Posted by garden gal on 08/11/2016 at 3:41 PM

Re: “Marijuana Legalization Proponents Sue Sen. Dianne Feinstein Over Proposition 64

@Dave Armstrong: Gonzales v. Raich took *three years* to wind its way through the court system before it *lost* in the SCOTUS; assuming your lawsuits even get that far--and many others have tried the same route and failed--that's still at least 15,000 people busted for weed *per year* in California alone until the case is *even heard*, because there are no "right now" (!) shortcuts; and if the decision goes against you--as it very likely could, given the court's current and probable future makeup--then what?
- OR -
Less than *three months* from now, we can *definitely* end the prohibition of possession, cultivation, sales to, and use of cannabis by adults not only in California, but Nevada, Arizona, Maine, and Massachusetts, plus medical use in Florida, North Dakota, and possibly even Arkansas; if that happens, nearly one out of every four Americans (23.5%)--at least the adults--will be *free* of the threat from prosecution for their personal possession and use of cannabis, and well over half the states will allow at least some kind of medical use. At that point, the obstruction to reform in Congress on such issues as access to banking, federal tax equity, and scheduling under the CSA by corporate prison and LE tools or prohibitionist relics like Feinstein and Grassley will become increasingly untenable.

How about this: you keep working on your "front" with your magic-bullet lawsuits and blogs--which nobody from the pro-64 side is working against, right?--and let those of us with a more pragmatic and *proven* strategy--and sans an existing vested interest, BTW--continue working on ours unhampered by the unfounded fear and disinformation tactics from you and your cronies in the "215" weed industry; fair enough?

Appreciate the offer for a personal dialogue, but we prefer to discuss the issue in a *public* forum, where everybody can view and weigh the arguments for themselves.

Also, just a piece of honest, well-intentioned advice: you might want to check out this thing called a "paragraph break" ... !

Posted by Miles Monroe on 08/11/2016 at 2:27 PM

Re: “Big Soda Is Spending Big Money Against Oakland Sugary Beverage Tax Proposal

Russell Mondy: "Soda isn't unhealthy. Too much soda is."

This is basically wrong. According to a study published in the Lancet, for each additional 12-oz soda per day that a child consumes, his/her odds of obesity increase by 60% in a 1.5 year follow up. This fact sheet published by Harvard School of Public Health talks about the many, many studies that have found various harmful effects of soda:

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsour…

Posted by Tommy Katz on 08/11/2016 at 9:48 AM

Re: “Big Soda Is Spending Big Money Against Oakland Sugary Beverage Tax Proposal

Brian E. Williams.

Why shouldn't they help themselves to a cut of what you pay for anything that's not healthy for you? Because it isn't their money that's why. They didn't earn it. Soda isn't unhealthy. Too much soda is. Too much of anything is. Maybe charge a soda tax to the individuals that get sick from drinking soda and then using public facilities.

Chris Darling, citing some obscure Canadian study doesn't justify you ripping off my money for something that does me no harm. When people want a soda, they're not going to say "The tax is keeping me from buying it." Now they'll buy it with your hand in their pocket over you pretending like you care about their health when all you want is their money because you got other stuff you want to pay for and you're desperate for new revenue.

Posted by Russell Mondy on 08/11/2016 at 8:28 AM

Re: “Big Soda Is Spending Big Money Against Oakland Sugary Beverage Tax Proposal

If taxes on soda and candy do not reduce sales of soda and candy, then why have beverage companies spend more than $1 million in two cities to stop a tax that won't affect them at all? Surely the demand for soda is more elastic than the demand for cigarettes. Or beverage companies just so concerned for the well-being of their customers, that they are trying to stop the tax solely from the goodness of their hearts? Do they care more about the happiness of poor people than they care about the million dollars that they spent? Surely not. I they were to do such a thing, then beverage company stockholders would sue for failing in their duty to the owners.

Why should the public NOT take a cut of this soda pop bonanza? If the costs of sugar consumption fall upon the public through negative health effects, and the attendant cost to the public of dealing with these negative health effects, then it only makes sense to extract some portion of that money from the corporate profits of beverage manufacturers. Government regulation, whether over toxic pollution or cigarettes or sugared beverages, is essential to combating the negative externalities corporations choose to ignore. Those who gain from producing Pepsi, Red Bull & Snapple can bear some of the costs to society.

Posted by Brian E. Williams on 08/11/2016 at 7:43 AM

Re: “Big Soda Is Spending Big Money Against Oakland Sugary Beverage Tax Proposal

Actually, in places that have placed a tax on sodas and sugary drinks, consumption has gone down. And it is poor people who are both most likely to get diabetes and also have least access to dental and medical coverage to deal with the problems.
Link about soda tax decreasing consumption:http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/13/upshot/yes-soda-taxes-seem-to-cut-soda-drinking.html?_r=0
Link about poverty being a cause of diabetes:
http://www.diabetesincontrol.com/poverty-a…

Posted by Chris Darling on 08/11/2016 at 7:32 AM

Re: “Big Soda Is Spending Big Money Against Oakland Sugary Beverage Tax Proposal

Taxes on soda, snacks or candy is just a way to tax poor people. Their not going eat any less of it. They'll just pay more. They already pay more whenever the price goes up. So now government gets a cut. Calling them "Big Soda" is designed to vilify these companies for doing legal business. Soon I can see taxes on all food for our own good for some future reason.

Posted by Russell Mondy on 08/11/2016 at 1:46 AM

Re: “Marijuana Legalization Proponents Sue Sen. Dianne Feinstein Over Proposition 64

Hey Miles,
The plan is to take this issue all the way to the Federal Supreme Court if necessary right NOW! Why wait till the pot boils over (excuse the pun) and people's livelihood and assets have been put in jeopardy! Just as people are made to believe that putting the cart (state law) before the horse (federal law) and making cannabis quasi legal at a state level while federal law enforcement entities like the IRS simply look the other way is ridiculous and a pipe dream ( another pun) my fellow marijuana smoker. It's as simple as this my friend, always ask for permission (from the Feds) rather than forgiveness in federal court later...right?! I'm not trying to spread a campaign of "fear" but rather an individual who's a champion of "truth" seeking justice and educating the public and the people of the facts in this matter! I'm in the process of launching a blog to just that, educate everyone as to my personal experiences and hands on knowledge of this industry so that we ALL don't have to go through the marijuana business mayhem and madness that exist in the real world today. Rather than taking a negative attitude and saying defamatory statements about people and organization you simply know nothing about I highly suggest you open your eyes and actually see the writing on the wall and do what's necessary. I have several lawsuits filed in order to bring these various matters involving marijuana to light and in order to educate the public of the major problems that exist in this business and the industry as a whole. We need to ALL join together, look at the facts and the truth and actually do something about it before it's too late and the rights and freedoms we ALL should have to grow and produce our own medicine from a natural plant put on earth by God are taken away by our own government and the corporation that want to control, regulate and tax cannabis. Wake up Miles and smell the marijuana and what the capitalist cannabis conspiracy is trying to do by misleading and misguiding people who chose to use marijuana as their personal choice of medicine for whatever reason. Cannabis is not the new cash cow for corporations and our governments simply because a smaller percentage of us choose to and use marijuana rather than alcohol, tobacco and prescription drugs. This is truly a matter of common sense and knowledge of the facts surrounding the stigma created many years ago to stymie the most productive plant on the planet! If you'd like to talk to me personally or debate this matter I welcome your input and or questions so feel free and email me me at dave@medimarts.com and I'll gladly respond in a timely manner.

Sincerely Concerned,

Dave Armstrong
Managing Member of MediMarts
A Closed-Loop California Collective

Posted by Dave Armstrong on 08/10/2016 at 10:25 PM

Re: “Marijuana Legalization Proponents Sue Sen. Dianne Feinstein Over Proposition 64

@Dave Armstrong: Right, like how the feds and IRS are busting and shutting down the *legal* weed businesses right now in Colorado and Washington state, huh ... ?!

As for "thousands of us to potential slaughter"--hyperbole much?--over 15,000 people *were* busted in California for weed in 2015, a number which will drop by at least 80%, based on the experience in CO and WA ...

So what's *your* solution; wait another two years (30,000 more busted) or four years (60,000 busted), or maybe another twenty (300,000 busted) for the "perfect" legalization that you "215" profiteers somehow never seem to be able to even get on the ballot?

The only ones facing a "loss of livelihood" are you and the other so-called "non-profit collectives", which is why, other than the cops, corporate prisons, and pharma and rehab tools like S[c]AM, you're the ones spreading all the fear and disinformation.

Posted by Miles Monroe on 08/10/2016 at 2:11 PM

Re: “Inclusive Weed Entrepreneurs: Supernova Women

While I support making cannabis policy more "inclusive" and reversing damage caused by the War on Drugs, I am skeptical of efforts to promote cannabis industry as an economic solution for Oakland. Oakland's lax cannabis policy (lack of any enforcement by OPD) has resulted in a cottage grow-house industry, as I have personally witnessed in my neighborhood.

Posted by Kent Lewandowski on 08/10/2016 at 1:20 PM

Re: “Mad Props: A Roundup of the 17 Initiatives on California's November 2016 Ballot

Proposition 53 is essentially an anti high speed rail measure, which the author failed to point out.

Posted by Kent Lewandowski on 08/10/2016 at 1:15 PM

Re: “Guacamole 61 Brings the Meat to Epicurious Garden in Berkeley

Come and enjoy the best the gourmet ghetto has to offer. You won't be disappointed.

Posted by Direll Venable on 08/10/2016 at 1:03 PM

Re: “East Bay Homeless Campers Accuse Caltrans of Illegally Confiscating and Destroying Valuable Property — and Even Family Heirlooms

My Facebook pages provide the solution to the problem...
The information has been provided to the Oakland City Council and to the Attorney for the City of Oakland...
Please read Facebook pages titled,
Real Estate Crisis or Government Sanctioned Racketeering?
Regards, Allen Sanford

Posted by Allen Sanford on 08/10/2016 at 1:00 PM

Re: “Anti-Legalizers Sue California Over Prop 64 Ballot Language

Marijuana consumers deserve and demand equal rights and protections under our laws that are currently afforded to the drinkers of far more dangerous and deadly, yet perfectly legal, widely accepted, endlessly advertised and glorified as an All American pastime, booze.

Plain and simple!

Legalize Marijuana Nationwide!

It's time for us, the majority of The People to take back control of our national marijuana policy. By voting OUT of office any and all politicians who very publicly and vocally admit to having an anti-marijuana, prohibitionist agenda! Time to vote'em all OUT of office. Period. Plain and simple.

Politicians who continue to demonize Marijuana, Corrupt Law Enforcement Officials who prefer to ruin peoples lives over Marijuana possession rather than solve real crimes who fund their departments toys and salaries with monies acquired through Marijuana home raids, seizures and forfeitures, and so-called "Addiction Specialists" who make their income off of the judicial misfortunes of our citizens who choose marijuana, - Your actions go against The Will of The People and Your Days In Office Are Numbered! Find new careers before you don't have one.

The People have spoken! Get on-board with Marijuana Legalization Nationwide, or be left behind and find new careers. Your choice.

Legalize Nationwide!

Posted by Brian Kelly B Bizzle on 08/10/2016 at 10:45 AM

Re: “Mad Props: A Roundup of the 17 Initiatives on California's November 2016 Ballot

This article is incorrect. Prop 54 does NOT end gut and amend practices. They will still exist, albeit with three days for special interests to blow up compromises. Prop 54 is funded by billionaire Charles Munger, Jr. It will tie the Legislature up in knots and, for the first time, will allow the use of legislative proceedings for attack ads. Vote NO.

Posted by Steven Maviglio on 08/10/2016 at 8:35 AM

Re: “Marijuana Legalization Proponents Sue Sen. Dianne Feinstein Over Proposition 64

If you want to truly discuss misleading information and deception and consumer protection then explain how Prop 64 and recent legislation (MMRSA) can turn federal law (CSA) and current state law (Prop 215) completely upside down. If you're really concerned with violating federal advertising laws and kids then the fact that anyone having anything to do with marijuana faces federal enforcement and potential incarceration from the IRS! So when the state, county or city you live or operate in ask you to make a "sale" and pay "sales" taxes your setting yourself up for disaster and will be out of business just as fast as you got into business. This is a travesty of justice and an outright lie being fed to Californians just so they can turn the "Comoassionate Use Act" into the "Cash in on our Use Act" and fill state and local municipalities coffers with cash from cannabis. The state, county and city governments cannot and will not protect anyone from the long arm of the IRS and Rule 280E or the potential of criminal charges and imprisonment! Wake up California and smell the cannabis crisis being brewed up by our trusted lawmakers, just say NO (on Prop 64) to our leaders who are purposefully leading thousands of us to potential slaughter and the loss of your assets and livelihood!

Dave Armstrong
Managing Member of MediMarts
A Closed-Loop California Collective

Posted by Dave Armstrong on 08/10/2016 at 7:31 AM

Most Popular Stories


© 2016 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation