I am an honest freak (or reasonably responsibly balanced "misfit", if you prefer) of an artist working and resting to best carefully contribute towards helping society. Too many people abuse reasoning (e.g. 'partial truth = whole truth' scam), while I exercise reason to explore and express whole truth without any conflict-of-interest -- all within a sometimes offbeat style of psychedelic artistry.
"There are some things so serious you have to laugh at them." – Niels Bohr
Feel free to join us in seamlessly riding our boundless community waves.
Fun through serious, my carefully formed results are honest and usually offer a freshly unique view.
Helping raise awareness and any other constructive way to participate in our growing community is equally appreciated.
Spirit Wave content uses Creative Commons...
To protect my professional use of Spirit Wave, I secure the trademark by necessity, so Spirit Wave™.
Spirit Wave Journal 
“For the first few years, the state will also limit the number of marijuana licenses for selling and growing marijuana.”
I agree that textured prohibition is better than outright prohibition, but that lawful limit is the only possible source towards “Big Marijuana” (i.e. cannabis monopoly, effectively speaking).
With a plant that can be professionally grown in literally any state, there’s no way to lock up supply (e.g. via patent, etc.) to form monopolistic problems, so the only way is favoritism by law.
It’s the exact same problem causing healthcare products (especially pharmaceuticals) and services to be outrageously severely price fixed.
Of course, any similar price fixing in the cannabis market will simply contribute to the black market.
“Spin to protect the children!” might as well become humanity’s mantra and foolish judicial base.
Judicial regulations don’t really regulate. They inevitably discriminate on behalf of our effectively governing oligarchy leveraging those regulations too often with conflicts of interest against public safety.
The natural regulation from responsible flexibility (i.e. conclusively objectively, so fairly, so justly implemented unalienable right to liberty) doesn’t discriminate, but does provide judicial leverage where it can only be just — in dealing with obvious harm (not risk).
Risk is subjective (so unfair, so unjust). In a good nation, risk management is purely an education matter.
In our nation, the whole judicial mess is brutal complexity without true basics (like a house without a foundation) — so chaos disguised as national integrity.
That was my comment at: Basic rational change sometimes requires dragging the establishment along, kicking and screaming (DrugWarRant)