Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Ohio

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)

7. Agreed

Reply to votetastic (Reply #6)

Mon Nov 2, 2015, 07:14 PM

Nov 2015

Honestly, I don't really have a problem with the 10 growers. In 4 years, we will have the ability to add more. Or we can vote now, and likely have nothing for the next 4 years.

Is 10 rich dudes getting richer worse than Mexican cartels making money and putting people in jail over weed? I don't think so.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

9 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why does Issue 3 limit MJ growth to 10 facilities? [View all] Auggie Nov 2015 OP

I quote the first three words of the ballot text. LoveIsNow Nov 2015 #1

Ohio probably has one chance to get this right and they blow it right out of the gate Auggie Nov 2015 #4

It's called greed. Look to those named as principals in the ten "farms". No Vested Interest Nov 2015 #5

The ten groups wanted to have a monopoly on the business, apparently. No Vested Interest Nov 2015 #2

They way I read it is that production is limited to ten parcels of land. peace13 Nov 2015 #3

This message was self-deleted by its author votetastic Nov 2015 #6

Agreed Travis_0004 Nov 2015 #7

Municipalities and the state can just stop enforcing laws that are anti No Vested Interest Nov 2015 #8

Also, dont forget, you can grow your own. Travis_0004 Nov 2015 #9