Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on June 25, 2010, 02:37:08 PM
-
Very interested to see how the vote turns out.
Legalized Marijuana and the Crime Question
June 25, 2010 - 11:33 AM | by: Dan Springer
It's an argument you hear frequently from marijuana advocates: 'Legalize the drug, take the profit away, squeeze out the drug dealers and lower crime.' To be sure, the drug cartels would be impacted as would the entire drug underworld.
But while some see major improvements, others predict higher usage rates and even more problems associated with the drug. One thing we know is that the drug trade in Mexico has gotten much more violent. Officials say 15,000 murders have been tied to the Mexican drug wars since 2006.
Norm Stamper, the former Seattle police chief who supports legalization says, "50-70 percent of Mexican drug cartel money represent marijuana sales. That (legalization) would deal a huge blow to them." But most of law enforcement has serious reservations.
Drug Czars past and present oppose the California ballot initiative that would legalize small amounts of marijuana. John Walters, who served in that capacity under President Bush, says "The danger here is, when we don't take this seriously we encourage consumption and consumption drives up the cost and provides more money for these criminal groups to expand their capacity to do harm."
Walters calls medical marijuana a fraud which has led to more pot smoking. California was the first to test those waters in 1996 and since then 13 states have followed suit.
And violence still surrounds the drug even where it is considered "medicine." Just last night there were two murders at a medical marijuana dispensary in Los Angeles.
Critics also point to the Netherlands which legalized marijuana long ago. As the country got known as a place to use drugs, there was an explosion of so-called coffee shops which are really just places to purchase and smoke marijuana.
They have become such a nuisance and attracted so much crime that officials have shut down thousands over the last few years.
Another debate surrounding legalization is over the clash that would exist between state and federal drug laws. Only an act of Congress could make marijuana legal under federal law.
The D.E.A., F.B.I. and other federal agencies have continued to enforce national drug laws even in states with medical marijuana. Although, while the Bush Administration took a hard line approach to the issue, President Obama has sent slightly different signals. Last year his attorney general Eric Holder instructed agents to stop pot dispensary raids if the outlets were operating within state law.
But Obama opposes outright legalization. His drug czar Gil Kerlikowski says, "We will have more criminal justice costs, more social costs, and the taxes, whatever taxes may be collected, and that's a very vague number, wouldn't begin to pay for all those costs."
Legalization would lead to a host of other sticky issues. Among them, drugs in the workplace. Courts have upheld the right of employers to require a drug-free work environment in states that allow medical marijuana. Would that change at all if pot were legal.
And what about custody cases? Judges, when deciding which home is more suitable for raising children can factor in drug use even when that drug use is allowed under state law.
So as Californians get ready to vote on the issue in November, people around the country are watching.
http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/06/25/legalized-marijuana-and-the-crime-question/?test=latestnews
-
IMO, the nation as a whole suffers if rampant drug use is present.
I can't support a 2012 candidate who endorses pot use or lax enforcement of drug laws, can you?
-
IMO, the nation as a whole suffers if rampant drug use is present.
I can't support a 2012 candidate who endorses pot use or lax enforcement of drug laws, can you?
I can regarding pot. Illegal pot is stupid.
The question of it being a problem in the work place?
There are plenty of legal drugs already being used in the work place. The consequences would be the same.
Also, you won't get rid of the drug cartels by making pot legal. That's another stupid belief.
-
legalized it. People are going to do it any way...Might as get rid of the Mexican-cartel connection... collect a hefty ass tax
Everyone wins...
Allow zero advertisement on the product like tobacco. No brands like Newport Cheddar dank gold Etc, purple maze haze, etc... ;D
-
The war on drugs is A major loss, as Ron Paul state over and over...Let pull out of that war..
Take a look at the amount money that could be servicing our national debt..
http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm
-
IMO, the nation as a whole suffers if rampant drug use is present.
I can't support a 2012 candidate who endorses pot use or lax enforcement of drug laws, can you?
They need to legalize it, the fact that there is a epidemic of Oxy, Vico, etc abuase is crazy. The drug companies need to come up with a non-opiate based pain killer.
-
I'm for decriminalizing it but don't know what the effect would be. Just seems like a waste of resources but I wonder how many potheads would want a high doctor, cop, nurse, teller, taxi driver, or whatever taking care of them.
The whole system probably only works because responsible people are sticking to alcohol and prescription drugs, LOL!
-
Legalize Cocaine= The drug wars end tommorow, the cartels go belly up, left wing narco terrorists lose most of their funding, inner cities become safe again, illegal immigration is reduced, crime drops 1000% and half of the law enforcement community gets reassigned or loses their job. Politicians lose a huge platform to run on and the war on drugs is admitted to be a failure.
Legalize Heroin= The drug wars end tommorow, the Afghan warlords go bankrupt, terrorists lose a ton of funding, inner cities become safe again, crime drops 1000% and half of the law enforcement community gets reassigned or loses their job. Politicians lose a huge platform to run on and the war on drugs is admitted to be a failure.
Legalize Marajuana= A few stoners, deadbeats, hippies, college students, people that can't afford heroin or cocaine and some rastafarians, rappers and leftist politicians will declare a victory for " cancer patients and people with glacoma". The Liqour industry takes a huge hit. Crime drops 1000% and Right Wing politicians will declare that this is the nail in the coffin for America.
-
we will never get rid of the cartels like oz said thats just stupid, its the same as idiots saying that legalizing drugs will get rid of gangs...they will just find something else to do.
if we legalize marijuana the cartels will just start pushing cocaine, if we legalize cocaine they will push something else etc.
I think pot does have valuable medical uses to a specific SMALL % of ppl...
my main thing with this has always been that there is no way to immediately identify if someone is high or not with alcohol we have a BAC test but with pot there is no such test. So when someone is driving under the influence of pot how do we know it? draw blood? im sure all the pro pot proponents would be willing to have that done everytime a cop pulls them over b/c they are suspected to be driving under the influence...
until then, it should remain banned...
-
At least one of the top potential 2012 GOp challengers doesnt think the police should be enforcing drug possession laws. This ex-governor was also a steady marijuana user in the past as well.
-
I think it should be decriminalized for a variety of reasons..
1. We are spending a lot of money and stopping a small percentage of the shipments
2. we are using a lot of Law Enforcement resources and getting very little actual results. This includes all drugs. For example, we have street narcotics units that work directly with addressing street level drug dealings. Typically they spend 20 hrs preparing for a buy bust. They spend 10 hrs doing the buy bust. They arrest 30 people in a 5 hr operation for felony drug offense. The suspect spends a day in jail and is back out on the street getting busted the next week. Repeat process 52 times.
3. As long as alcohol and tobacco are legal we are inconsistent hypocrites.
The fact is we have been at war with drugs for years. We haven't put a dent in it and we won't anytime soon. I advocate spending a portion of the money we are spending on drug suppresion on drug rehabilitation. I also think we have laws in place to address illegal behaviors which will address the fear of what happens if it became legal.. ie. you drink too much wine and drive, you get arrested. You drink too much beer and assault someone, you get arrested, you smoke to much pot and laugh too loud in a theater, you get removed, you get caught at work high on cocaine, you get fired. Seems pretty simple.
-
IMO, the nation as a whole suffers if rampant drug use is present.
I can't support a 2012 candidate who endorses pot use or lax enforcement of drug laws, can you?
how did I know there was an alterear motive to this question? ::) ::) ::)
-
Yeah it looks like a set up lol
-
The fact is we have been at war with drugs for years. We haven't put a dent in it and we won't anytime soon. I advocate spending a portion of the money we are spending on drug suppresion on drug rehabilitation. I also think we have laws in place to address illegal behaviors which will address the fear of what happens if it became legal.. ie. you drink too much wine and drive, you get arrested. You drink too much beer and assault someone, you get arrested, you smoke to much pot and laugh too loud in a theater, you get removed, you get caught at work high on cocaine, you get fired. Seems pretty simple.
How do you know someone is high?
-
maybe the war on drugs IS a success in that the $$$$ is being spent.
tax dollars keeping millions of americans at work.
these americans pay their taxes.
the drug vermin (the hardcore stuff users) isolated to pockets in each town.
the suburban pot smokers usually get away with it.
They know they'll never 'win' it, but they'll always keep it managed, keep ppl working and keep the tax revenue rolling in.
Or, look at it this way, if they ended the war on drugs tomorrow, they'd be releasing millions of prisoners along with millions of DEA agents and other govt workers. Hello, more unemployment and welfare.
-
If drugs became legal what would the gangs do? Other illegal things to make money. But then, 90% of law enforcement resources being wasted on an unwinnable war on drugs could be used to stop REAL crime. The secondary effects of the drug war would largely be mitigated- IE robberies, thefts, murders etc. because there would be nothing to fight over and no need to harm someone to get a fix.
The legalization of drugs would absolutely cripple the cartel, end drug smuggling operations and stop the overcrowing of the US prison system ( which is largely made up of drug offenders).
IMO legalizing pot is a total waste of time and nothing more than a political hot button issue. It would hurt the Cartels somewhat, but nothing crazy. Theres way more money in coke, meth, heroin, perscription drugs, steroids, ectasy etc. Legalizing pot would be a victory for practically nobody.
-
If drugs became legal what would the gangs do? Other illegal things to make money. But then, 90% of law enforcement resources being wasted on an unwinnable war on drugs could be used to stop REAL crime. The secondary effects of the drug war would largely be mitigated- IE robberies, thefts, murders etc. because there would be nothing to fight over and no need to harm someone to get a fix.
The legalization of drugs would absolutely cripple the cartel, end drug smuggling operations and stop the overcrowing of the US prison system ( which is largely made up of drug offenders).
IMO legalizing pot is a total waste of time and nothing more than a political hot button issue. It would hurt the Cartels somewhat, but nothing crazy. Theres way more money in coke, meth, heroin, perscription drugs, steroids, ectasy etc. Legalizing pot would be a victory for practically nobody.
Except the pots heads.
I agree with most of what you say though. I remember hearing or reading somewhere that 50% of law enforcement revenue is used to fight drugs.
Imagine if that was all used to fight REAL crime?
-
How do you know someone is high?
1. Bag of cheetos, or orange tinted fingers, smells a lot like marijuana...laughs at everything, refuses to fight
2. erradict behavior, disoriented, dilated pupils
You know someone is high pretty much like you know someone is drunk, just with out the smell of alcohol
-
If drugs became legal what would the gangs do? Other illegal things to make money. But then, 90% of law enforcement resources being wasted on an unwinnable war on drugs could be used to stop REAL crime. The secondary effects of the drug war would largely be mitigated- IE robberies, thefts, murders etc. because there would be nothing to fight over and no need to harm someone to get a fix.
The legalization of drugs would absolutely cripple the cartel, end drug smuggling operations and stop the overcrowing of the US prison system ( which is largely made up of drug offenders).
IMO legalizing pot is a total waste of time and nothing more than a political hot button issue. It would hurt the Cartels somewhat, but nothing crazy. Theres way more money in coke, meth, heroin, perscription drugs, steroids, ectasy etc. Legalizing pot would be a victory for practically nobody.
while I agree that it would allow more LE to focus on other crimes, it wouldnt eliminate gangs or the cartels...
gang members would just find something else illegal to do, rob, steal, create and sell other new drugs...these ppl are not going to all of a sudden become productive members of society just b/c we legalize drugs...
same thing with the cartels they will just change their business model...
the problem is that meth, coke, heroin are drugs that are highly addictive and cause grave damage to the body...ppl arent going to work on such drugs so how are they going to get the money in order to buy these drugs?
yes alcohol and tobacco are addictive and destructive but not anywhere on the same level as meth, coke and heroin...
again you need immediate tests to determine if someone is under the influence of these drugs...ppl driving under perception altering narcotics should not be driving...
-
1. Bag of cheetos, or orange tinted fingers, smells a lot like marijuana...laughs at everything, refuses to fight
2. erradict behavior, disoriented, dilated pupils
You know someone is high pretty much like you know someone is drunk, just with out the smell of alcohol
LOL so anytime a cop sees a bag of cheetos and someone gives a nervous laugh(happens all the time) they assume youre driving high and takes you in?
again there needs to be an immediate way of determining if someone is high or not like with alcohol...if not then everyone better be ok with being taken in if you have a bag of junk food in your car...
-
LOL so anytime a cop sees a bag of cheetos and someone gives a nervous laugh(happens all the time) they assume youre driving high and takes you in?
again there needs to be an immediate way of determining if someone is high or not like with alcohol...if not then everyone better be ok with being taken in if you have a bag of junk food in your car...
Typically, DWI or drunk drivers are initially identified by their driving behavior, driving 10mph in a 60mph zone, weaving, driving with headlights off, crashing into other cars or trees. I think it would work pretty much the same. Currently we have DRO officers or Drug Recognition officers who go through extensive training to identify drug influence. When an officer pulls over a car for erratic driving and there is no sign of alcohol abuse, then a DRO is called to the scene to evaluate the driver. They can be pretty accurate. If probable cause exists to believe they are under the influence, then blood is drawn.
So the immediate way of determining would be
1. Initial reason for contact.. driving the wrong way in a one way..
2. Field Sobriety Testing and RDO evaluation
It would be no different than a drunk person refusing to give a breath sample..
-
Well yeah, they would have to do other illegal things. But then law enforcement would be freed up to stop them from doing those illegal things.
My own personal CT is this-- The cartels need the drugs to be illegal and so do the politicians. Illegality means huge profits for the drug dealers, big budgets for law enforcement and a healthy reelection platform issue for the politicians. The US government wants drugs to remain illegal so it can continue to piss away tax dollars on overtime for cops, building more jails, using more invasive ways to monitor the public and to present a politically incorrect enemy that the public will rally against regardless of the price (think about the children!). The right wing wants to use military tactics to fight an enemy that will never die as long as human beings inhabit the planet, while the left wants to put needle exchange programs and rehab centers on every block. Pharmaceutical companies want "street drugs" kept as illegal as possible because they want to soak up the market of recovering addicts who want anti depressants, anti psychotics, heroin substitutes, serotonin replacers, and every other conceivable "solve all of your problems in a pill" fix. Then, for the rest of us who can't cope with reality and can afford psychiatry ( want to get high but don't want to break the law) they want to soak up that market as well. Another player is the religious community. Drugs remain illegal because of the moral decay that will surely ensue once people can put whatever they want into their bodies. How can churches, mosques and synagogues tell their praticioners with a straight face that taking drugs is wrong, when it's not even illegal? How can they brainwash their followers into crushing up some god powder and sniffing themselves into heaven? The most logical way would be to ensure that the most readily available euphoria's are kept away from the flock.
I could keep going, but you get the idea.
The DEA, Customs, a large quantity of the FBI, elements of the Navy, Coast Guard, CIA, ATF, DHS, Border Agents, local police, corrections on the local and federal level = All base their existence on the illegality of drugs.
-
Typically, DWI or drunk drivers are initially identified by their driving behavior, driving 10mph in a 60mph zone, weaving, driving with headlights off, crashing into other cars or trees. I think it would work pretty much the same. Currently we have DRO officers or Drug Recognition officers who go through extensive training to identify drug influence. When an officer pulls over a car for erratic driving and there is no sign of alcohol abuse, then a DRO is called to the scene to evaluate the driver. They can be pretty accurate. If probable cause exists to believe they are under the influence, then blood is drawn.
So the immediate way of determining would be
1. Initial reason for contact.. driving the wrong way in a one way..
2. Field Sobriety Testing and RDO evaluation
It would be no different than a drunk person refusing to give a breath sample..
yes you see but with drinking and driving you have the ability to take a breathelyzer and prove youre not drunk...with pot there is no such test, so unless youre willing to give blood everytime you get pulled over and are suspected of driving under the influence which will happen A LOT more if its legal then you shouldnt be for legalizing pot...
giving blood seems a tad excessive...
-
"The DEA, Customs, a large quantity of the FBI, elements of the Navy, Coast Guard, CIA, ATF, DHS, Border Agents, local police, corrections on the local and federal level = All base their existence on the illegality of drugs"
I will differ with you on local police basing their existence on the illegality of drugs. While it is a part of it, assaults, sexual assaults, burglary, fraud, robbery, traffic enforcement, domestic disturbances, criminal mischief, theft give us job security. Not all is tied to drugs.
-
yes you see but with drinking and driving you have the ability to take a breathelyzer and prove youre not drunk...with pot there is no such test, so unless youre willing to give blood everytime you get pulled over and are suspected of driving under the influence which will happen A LOT more if its legal then you shouldnt be for legalizing pot...
giving blood seems a tad excessive...
I am not in the catagory of people who believe drug use with significantly increase if it is legal. We already deal with people who drive under the influence of drugs, so it wouldnt be anything new. And as far as pot.. Only the people smoking it at the time, can't smell the overpowering odor of the weed they just toked.. its in their clothes, on their hands, you can sometimes smell it coming from the car several feet away.. not really a mystery thing there..
-
"The DEA, Customs, a large quantity of the FBI, elements of the Navy, Coast Guard, CIA, ATF, DHS, Border Agents, local police, corrections on the local and federal level = All base their existence on the illegality of drugs"
I will differ with you on local police basing their existence on the illegality of drugs. While it is a part of it, assaults, sexual assaults, burglary, fraud, robbery, traffic enforcement, domestic disturbances, criminal mischief, theft give us job security. Not all is tied to drugs.
True, but a large number of murders, burgalries, assaults, robberies, thefts and frauds are directly tied to the illegal trade.
-
True, but a large number of murders, burgalries, assaults, robberies, thefts and frauds are directly tied to the illegal trade.
Not all that many..
Domestic abuse/violence is normally independent
Assaults are more likely tied to alchohol
Sexual assaults, alcohol or opportunity
I concede some burglaries and thefts are related but mostly it is career criminals who are too lazy to actually work for a living who find it much easier the just steal other peoples stuff.
Murders in this city are usually known to the victim and not drug related for the most part. Murders along border towns, probably a whole different ball game.
The point being, whether drugs are legalized or illegal, local law enforcement will truck along. I think we could better focus our resources on more effective prevention if we didn't tie up so much trying to arrest all drug offenders. We have street level narcs, Organized Crime detectives, Metro Tactical units, all focusing on drugs..
-
I am not in the catagory of people who believe drug use with significantly increase if it is legal. We already deal with people who drive under the influence of drugs, so it wouldnt be anything new. And as far as pot.. Only the people smoking it at the time, can't smell the overpowering odor of the weed they just toked.. its in their clothes, on their hands, you can sometimes smell it coming from the car several feet away.. not really a mystery thing there..
im not saying use of it would increase, im saying that policing of it for driving under the influence of it would increase and yes it would...
LOL bud I used to be a big pot head many years ago I know, if you dont want to smell like weed while high there are many things that you can do to not smell like weed...
subsequently smelling like weed isnt proof that your high either...
-
Very interested to see how the vote turns out.
Legalized Marijuana and the Crime Question
June 25, 2010 - 11:33 AM | by: Dan Springer
...
Critics also point to the Netherlands which legalized marijuana long ago. As the country got known as a place to use drugs, there was an explosion of so-called coffee shops which are really just places to purchase and smoke marijuana.
They have become such a nuisance and attracted so much crime that officials have shut down thousands over the last few years.
Not surprised that this comes from Fox. While not technically incorrect, he only tells that part of the story that suits his goals.
Yes, there is still crime associated with coffee shops. And yes, they have attracted some crime. However, the crime they have attracted is crime from and for foreigners -- especially the French, who drive all the way through Belgium to get their drugs here. Drug runners are indeed a nuisance -- but only exist because neighboring countries have much stricter drug laws, thereby of course creating a suction effect towards The Netherlands. The problem is not the legalisation of drugs, it is the fact that it cannot work in a Europe with no borders if countries have differing drug laws. It would work like a charm if all countries had the same laws.
So for the US situation it would be much easier to implement, as there isn't going to be a lot of drug tourism from neighboring countries.
-
The Union: the business behind getting high
trailer:
full movie
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9077214414651731007 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9077214414651731007)
-
yes you see but with drinking and driving you have the ability to take a breathelyzer and prove youre not drunk...with pot there is no such test, so unless youre willing to give blood everytime you get pulled over and are suspected of driving under the influence which will happen A LOT more if its legal then you shouldnt be for legalizing pot...
giving blood seems a tad excessive...
They have tests that can determine between exogenous and endogenous growth hormone and testosteron. You're telling me that a simple breath test (or swab) can't be created to test for THC? If such tests were to be done on a large scale, companies will jump at the opportunity to pump out millions of these. This is not a problem.
-
GW nailed it. The war on drugs is great business.
And with the economy as bad as it is - dropping all those programs creates a whole lot of unemployment, and the $ would just get wasted elsewhere.
In 20 years, the war on drugs will still look the same.
-
They have tests that can determine between exogenous and endogenous growth hormone and testosteron. You're telling me that a simple breath test (or swab) can't be created to test for THC? If such tests were to be done on a large scale, companies will jump at the opportunity to pump out millions of these. This is not a problem.
iono if they can or cannot but FACT OF THE MATTER is THEY DONT HAVE ONE and until they do have one it should not be legalized...
you want some stoned ass dude driving around town?
-
iono if they can or cannot but FACT OF THE MATTER is THEY DONT HAVE ONE and until they do have one it should not be legalized...
you want some stoned ass dude driving around town?
The fact of the matter is, stone assed dudes already do it...
-
The fact of the matter is, stone assed dudes already do it...
correct but if you think the ppl that already smoke are going to be as descrete as they are now if it was made legal youre being ignorant...
AND AS I SAID this isnt about the USE of marijuana its about the POLICING of driving under the influence of marijuana which would undoubtedly increase if it was made legal...
so until we have an option other than drawing blood everytime a person is suspected of driving under the influence IT SHOULDNT BE LEGALIZED...
-
correct but if you think the ppl that already smoke are going to be as descrete as they are now if it was made legal youre being ignorant...
AND AS I SAID this isnt about the USE of marijuana its about the POLICING of driving under the influence of marijuana which would undoubtedly increase if it was made legal...
so until we have an option other than drawing blood everytime a person is suspected of driving under the influence IT SHOULDNT BE LEGALIZED...
You think that's the case because they can't prove intoxication with weed?
-
You think that's the case because they can't prove intoxication with weed?
to which point are you addressing oz?
whether or not ppl are going to be as discrete as they are now? no not b/c they cant prove youre high but simply b/c it would be legal and there would be no need to hide it...
whether or not the police would look for it more? no not b/c they cant prove youre high but b/c they would undoubtedly be on the look out for it more since as I stated ppl wouldnt be as discrete as they are now...
simple fact of the matter is unless youre ok with being hauled to jail for a blood test everytime a cop thinks your under the influence you shouldnt be for the legalization of pot...
you think these guys are going to draw blood and let you go on your way? LMAO youre going to go sit in a drunk/high tank until they think youre not high...there needs to be an immediate way of proving youre not high unless your willing to submit to mandatory blood tests and sitting in a jail cell everytime youre suspected of driving high...
-
to which point are you addressing oz?
whether or not ppl are going to be as discrete as they are now? no not b/c they cant prove youre high but simply b/c it would be legal and there would be no need to hide it...
whether or not the police would look for it more? no not b/c they cant prove youre high but b/c they would undoubtedly be on the look out for it more since as I stated ppl wouldnt be as discrete as they are now...
simple fact of the matter is unless youre ok with being hauled to jail for a blood test everytime a cop thinks your under the influence you shouldnt be for the legalization of pot...
you think these guys are going to draw blood and let you go on your way? LMAO youre going to go sit in a drunk/high tank until they think youre not high...there needs to be an immediate way of proving youre not high unless your willing to submit to mandatory blood tests and sitting in a jail cell everytime youre suspected of driving high...
So Prozac needs to be banned? Valium? Etc. Because it's illegal to drive while impaired with those, yet there is nothing besides a blood test that will show it. If you try to use the lame argument that it cannot be done because there is no non-invasive test yet, then do be consistent.
-
So Prozac needs to be banned? Valium? Etc. Because it's illegal to drive while impaired with those, yet there is nothing besides a blood test that will show it. If you try to use the lame argument that it cannot be done because there is no non-invasive test yet, then do be consistent.
prozac and valium are PROSCRIPTION DRUGS!!!!!!!!!!
ppl want to make marijuana legal for EVERYONE...not just those with a prescription...
nice try though...
-
to which point are you addressing oz?
whether or not ppl are going to be as discrete as they are now? no not b/c they cant prove youre high but simply b/c it would be legal and there would be no need to hide it...
whether or not the police would look for it more? no not b/c they cant prove youre high but b/c they would undoubtedly be on the look out for it more since as I stated ppl wouldnt be as discrete as they are now...
simple fact of the matter is unless youre ok with being hauled to jail for a blood test everytime a cop thinks your under the influence you shouldnt be for the legalization of pot...
you think these guys are going to draw blood and let you go on your way? LMAO youre going to go sit in a drunk/high tank until they think youre not high...there needs to be an immediate way of proving youre not high unless your willing to submit to mandatory blood tests and sitting in a jail cell everytime youre suspected of driving high...
I kind of see what you are saying but the mere fact, if it is a fact, that they can't prove you are high in the same they can prove you are under the influence of alcohol is the real issue here. People will still hide it regardless and the processes of probable cause will change.
I am for the legalization of pot but with an increase in penalties for driving under the influence.
-
I am for the legalization of pot but with an increase in penalties for driving under the influence.
Are you okay with police, fire, and govt officials using pot on a regular basis as well?
-
I kind of see what you are saying but the mere fact, if it is a fact, that they can't prove you are high in the same they can prove you are under the influence of alcohol is the real issue here. People will still hide it regardless and the processes of probable cause will change.
I am for the legalization of pot but with an increase in penalties for driving under the influence.
this is where I think ppl are misunderstanding me, I am for the legalization of pot but only when they can test for its prescense without a blood test...everytime a cop even suspects your under the influence youre going to have to give a blood sample to prove it...they arent going to let you drive away after you are suspected of it so you will go spend some time in a drunk tank...
thats to much for just suspicion and with no way of proving your innocence other than a blood test...
-
Are you okay with police, fire, and govt officials using pot on a regular basis as well?
as long as they are not high at work, whats the difference between pot and alcohol?
-
this is where I think ppl are misunderstanding me, I am for the legalization of pot but only when they can test for its prescense without a blood test...
Sounds like a fair compromise.
I'm fine iwth it - it'll get a ton of ppl off anti-depressants. However, if you smoke and drive, I want your ass in the same situation as if you drank and drive. None of this "pot doesn't affect judgement" bullshit.
HOWEVER, what about the effects on us, as a nation?
Does Weed affect your IQ?
Yes- the national institute of drug abuse came to the conclusion that smoking marijuana causes cognitive impairments lasting up to 28 days after smoking marijuana.
http://www.drugabuse.gov/NIDA_notes/NNvol18N5/Cognitive.html
Now, we're already not #1 in world education rankings... far from it. Do we really want to see what happens to our high school scores and college attendance rates if pot is legal?
-
as long as they are not high at work, whats the difference between pot and alcohol?
You're only drunk for a few hours. Weed affects your cog abilities for a month. I don't care if my garbage man uses weed. But mayor, governor, or even president? No way!
Yes- the national institute of drug abuse came to the conclusion that smoking marijuana causes cognitive impairments lasting up to 28 days after smoking marijuana.
http://www.drugabuse.gov/NIDA_notes/NNvol18N5/Cognitive.html
-
You're only drunk for a few hours. Weed affects your cog abilities for a month. I don't care if my garbage man uses weed. But mayor, governor, or even president? No way!
Yes- the national institute of drug abuse came to the conclusion that smoking marijuana causes cognitive impairments lasting up to 28 days after smoking marijuana.
http://www.drugabuse.gov/NIDA_notes/NNvol18N5/Cognitive.html
link doesnt work and alcohol can effect your cognitive abilities after its use as well...
youre only drunk and high for a few hours...both have after effects
-
link doesnt work and alcohol can effect your cognitive abilities after its use as well...
youre only drunk and high for a few hours...both have after effects
You can google a shitload of pages detailing long term effects of pot.
While all of the long-term effects of marijuana use are not yet known, there are studies showing serious health concerns. For example, a group of scientists in California examined the health status of 450 daily smokers of marijuana but not tobacco. They found that the marijuana smokers had more sick days and more doctor visits for respiratory problems and other types of illness than did a similar group who did not smoke either substance.
Let's look at the long-term $$ costt to America - all those lost work days hurt our GDP and increase healthcare costs as a nation.
-
Are you okay with police, fire, and govt officials using pot on a regular basis as well?
What tommy said.
Personally I'd rather they got high then drank. Things would never get to the point of war if world leaders just had meetings, got high and ate together after wards.
-
You can google a shitload of pages detailing long term effects of pot.
While all of the long-term effects of marijuana use are not yet known, there are studies showing serious health concerns. For example, a group of scientists in California examined the health status of 450 daily smokers of marijuana but not tobacco. They found that the marijuana smokers had more sick days and more doctor visits for respiratory problems and other types of illness than did a similar group who did not smoke either substance.
Let's look at the long-term $$ costt to America - all those lost work days hurt our GDP and increase healthcare costs as a nation.
Let's compare the ill effects of legalized alcohol, use, abuse etc.. and compare the same things to pot.
If anything they should legalize pot and make alcohol illegal.
-
this is where I think ppl are misunderstanding me, I am for the legalization of pot but only when they can test for its prescense without a blood test...everytime a cop even suspects your under the influence youre going to have to give a blood sample to prove it...they arent going to let you drive away after you are suspected of it so you will go spend some time in a drunk tank...
thats to much for just suspicion and with no way of proving your innocence other than a blood test...
Yeah good point. They will figure something out.
-
Sounds like a fair compromise.
I'm fine iwth it - it'll get a ton of ppl off anti-depressants. However, if you smoke and drive, I want your ass in the same situation as if you drank and drive. None of this "pot doesn't affect judgement" bullshit.
HOWEVER, what about the effects on us, as a nation?
Does Weed affect your IQ?
Yes- the national institute of drug abuse came to the conclusion that smoking marijuana causes cognitive impairments lasting up to 28 days after smoking marijuana.
http://www.drugabuse.gov/NIDA_notes/NNvol18N5/Cognitive.html
Now, we're already not #1 in world education rankings... far from it. Do we really want to see what happens to our high school scores and college attendance rates if pot is legal?
It isn't because of pot.
-
So just because pot is 'about as bad' as alcohol, let's legalize it?
I mean, tobacco and alcohol and every other med out there is bad - what's another 305 million daily tokes going to hurt things?
I guess the only "plus" is that we all know it'll never be legalized. Aside from all the reasons I give and the fact you'd have to have a SERIOUS politician endorse legalization (Palin 2010 approval of lax enforcement noted). And it would put the drug industry out of business, since ppl can grow it in their yards. Never gonna happen.
-
It isn't because of pot.
Right. But we're not going to move from #20 (or wherever we currently are) to 15 or 10 by ADDING pot use. More likely, we would drop, all other factors equal.
-
LOL 240 I had to study alot of drugs and their effects on the body both short term and long term when I was getting my psych degree...did you know that long term consistant use of pot will actually borrow holes in youre brain? crazy shit man
-
LOL 240 I had to study alot of drugs and their effects on the body both short term and long term when I was getting my psych degree...did you know that long term consistant use of pot will actually borrow holes in youre brain? crazy shit man
I believe it. I know so many people who have smoked pot since high school. They've gotten so much dumber in 15 years. of course, nobody here who uses on a regular basis will admit it'll dulled them.
The long-term effects upon our nation, if 100 mil americans decided to just start smoking pot tomorrow, would be insane. Yes, alcohol and tobacco and prozac are also bad - and people using them to justify legalizing weed is silly. It's like defending Palin's idiocy by pointing out Obama is doing a terrible job. :)
-
I believe it. I know so many people who have smoked pot since high school. They've gotten so much dumber in 15 years. of course, nobody here who uses on a regular basis will admit it'll dulled them.
The long-term effects upon our nation, if 100 mil americans decided to just start smoking pot tomorrow, would be insane. Yes, alcohol and tobacco and prozac are also bad - and people using them to justify legalizing weed is silly. It's like defending Palin's idiocy by pointing out Obama is doing a terrible job. :)
So outlaw everything?
Everyone has there own vice. They choose, whether its legal or not, to use it. Making it illegal causes more problems.
-
Right. But we're not going to move from #20 (or wherever we currently are) to 15 or 10 by ADDING pot use. More likely, we would drop, all other factors equal.
Legalizing pot, if done sensibly which seems what you infer won't happen, will do nothing more than alcohol. If we want to raise our education pot is far down on the list.
-
So just because pot is 'about as bad' as alcohol, let's legalize it?
I mean, tobacco and alcohol and every other med out there is bad - what's another 305 million daily tokes going to hurt things?
I guess the only "plus" is that we all know it'll never be legalized. Aside from all the reasons I give and the fact you'd have to have a SERIOUS politician endorse legalization (Palin 2010 approval of lax enforcement noted). And it would put the drug industry out of business, since ppl can grow it in their yards. Never gonna happen.
It will happen, maybe not now, or in the next 10 years, but in the next 20 for sure.
While we are on a crusade to make these things illegal that hurt you, lets also do, pork fat, salt, refined sugar and anything made with white flour.
You really do have a few liberal tendencies 240 :) ;D
-
It will happen, maybe not now, or in the next 10 years, but in the next 20 for sure.
While we are on a crusade to make these things illegal that hurt you, lets also do, pork fat, salt, refined sugar and anything made with white flour.
You really do have a few liberal tendencies 240 :) ;D
If the taxpayer is going to be paying for every fatass idiot with diabetes by age 25, then yes, I'm all for either making the evils less attainable (taxes) or greater education.
-
I believe it. I know so many people who have smoked pot since high school. They've gotten so much dumber in 15 years. of course, nobody here who uses on a regular basis will admit it'll dulled them.
The long-term effects upon our nation, if 100 mil americans decided to just start smoking pot tomorrow, would be insane. Yes, alcohol and tobacco and prozac are also bad - and people using them to justify legalizing weed is silly. It's like defending Palin's idiocy by pointing out Obama is doing a terrible job. :)
LOL I dont think it dulled me but I do definitely remember thinking more clearly about a month or so after I quit
or like defending obama by bringing up bush/palin/mccain... ;) but you never do that so...
-
Right. But we're not going to move from #20 (or wherever we currently are) to 15 or 10 by ADDING pot use. More likely, we would drop, all other factors equal.
People who want to use pot use it weather it's legal or not. The argument by people who are against legalizing it because it will become rampant is completely unfounded. Usage would be limited to certain age restrictions, much like alcohol is. And please show me where marijuana usage is directly linked to school performance. I was on a plethora of drugs from acid to marijuana throughout high school and maintained a 3.9GPA. I still smoke pot on a near daily basis to this day and fall into the top 8% income in the US. So please again, explain to me where your logic is coming from because I don't see it.
-
either legalize em all or make them ALL illegal
C6H12O6 is ALSO A DRUG
-
:-\
Police: Mom Smoked Pot, Drove Off With Baby On Roof
Officers Say Infant Found Unharmed On Roadway
POSTED: 7:48 am PDT June 4, 2012
UPDATED: 8:02 am PDT June 4, 2012
Authorities in Phoenix arrested a woman who they said smoked marijuana then accidentally drove away with her 5-week-old son in a child safety seat on the roof of her car.
Officer James Holmes, a spokesman for the Phoenix Police Department, said the infant fell off the moving vehicle and landed in the middle of a roadway. Officials with the Phoenix Fire Department found the baby unharmed and took him to an area hospital as a precaution, the Arizona Republic reported.
According to the newspaper, Holmes said the baby's mother, 19-year-old Catalina Clouser, was booked on child-abuse and aggravated DUI charges after she returned to the scene.
Holmes said Clouser had apparently been smoking marijuana with her boyfriend at a nearby park prior to the incident and went to a friend's house where she admitted to smoking more pot.
Holmes told the Republic that Clouser left the house with the baby asleep in the car seat and realized the baby was missing when she reached home.
According to the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, Clouser was released from custody with electronic monitoring. It was unclear if she posted bail.
The child is said to be in good condition and in the custody of Child Protective Services.
To read the original story click here.
http://www.turnto23.com/news/31150747/detail.html
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/nyregion/mayor-supports-plan-to-change-marijuana-arrest-policy.html?_r=1&hp (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/nyregion/mayor-supports-plan-to-change-marijuana-arrest-policy.html?_r=1&hp)
Bloomberg Backs Plan to Limit Arrests for Marijuana
By THOMAS KAPLAN
Published: June 4, 2012
ALBANY — Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said on Monday that he would support a proposal by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo to significantly curb the number of people who could be arrested for marijuana possession as a result of police stops.
Connect with NYTMetro
Metro Twitter Logo.
Follow us on Twitter and like us on Facebook for news and conversation.
Mr. Cuomo urged lawmakers on Monday to change state law to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana in public view, an offense that critics say leads to unfair charges against thousands of people who are ordered to empty their pockets during police stops that have proliferated under the Bloomberg administration's stop-and-frisk practice.
Mr. Bloomberg, whose administration had previously defended low-level marijuana arrests as a way to deter more serious crime, said in a statement that the governor’s proposal “strikes the right balance” in part because it would still allow the police to arrest people who were smoking marijuana in public.
Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, announced his plans to seek the change in state law at a news conference at the Capitol on Monday. The governor said he would seek to downgrade the possession of 25 grams or less of marijuana in public view from a misdemeanor to a violation, with a maximum fine of $100 for first-time offenders.
The New York City police commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly, attended the news conference as a way of demonstrating the city’s support for Mr. Cuomo’s proposal. Echoing the mayor, he described the governor’s proposal as a “balanced approach.”
Mr. Kelly noted that when he had been asked in the past about the city’s high number of marijuana arrests, he responded that people unhappy with the arrests should lobby the Legislature to change state law, which he called a better option “than having police officers, New York City police officers, turn a blind eye to the law as it was written and as it is still written.”
“This law will make certain that the confusion in this situation will be eliminated,” he said, adding, “Quite frankly, it will make the application of this law much clearer.”
Mr. Cuomo’s proposal followed a memorandum to officers that Mr. Kelly issued in September clarifying that they were not to arrest people who take small amounts of marijuana out of their pockets after being stopped by the police. Mr. Bloomberg and Mr. Kelly said the governor’s proposal was consistent with the city’s directive.
Mr. Cuomo said changing the law was a better approach in the long term, saying, “I think it puts the police in an awkward position to tell them: enforce some laws, don’t enforce other laws.”
“This is nice and clean: change the law, period,” the governor added.
Critics of the Police Department’s marijuana-arrest policies have complained that Mr. Kelly’s memorandum has had little effect. But a city spokesman said that since the commissioner’s memorandum the number of low-level marijuana arrests has fallen by nearly a quarter.
-
Very interested to see how the vote turns out.
Legalized Marijuana and the Crime Question
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAH!!!
You're nuts! ;D
-
I totally agree with this. Cuomo has long exceeded my expectations so far.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/nyregion/mayor-supports-plan-to-change-marijuana-arrest-policy.html?_r=1&hp (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/nyregion/mayor-supports-plan-to-change-marijuana-arrest-policy.html?_r=1&hp)
Bloomberg Backs Plan to Limit Arrests for Marijuana
By THOMAS KAPLAN
Published: June 4, 2012
ALBANY — Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said on Monday that he would support a proposal by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo to significantly curb the number of people who could be arrested for marijuana possession as a result of police stops.
Connect with NYTMetro
Metro Twitter Logo.
Follow us on Twitter and like us on Facebook for news and conversation.
Mr. Cuomo urged lawmakers on Monday to change state law to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana in public view, an offense that critics say leads to unfair charges against thousands of people who are ordered to empty their pockets during police stops that have proliferated under the Bloomberg administration's stop-and-frisk practice.
Mr. Bloomberg, whose administration had previously defended low-level marijuana arrests as a way to deter more serious crime, said in a statement that the governor’s proposal “strikes the right balance” in part because it would still allow the police to arrest people who were smoking marijuana in public.
Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, announced his plans to seek the change in state law at a news conference at the Capitol on Monday. The governor said he would seek to downgrade the possession of 25 grams or less of marijuana in public view from a misdemeanor to a violation, with a maximum fine of $100 for first-time offenders.
The New York City police commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly, attended the news conference as a way of demonstrating the city’s support for Mr. Cuomo’s proposal. Echoing the mayor, he described the governor’s proposal as a “balanced approach.”
Mr. Kelly noted that when he had been asked in the past about the city’s high number of marijuana arrests, he responded that people unhappy with the arrests should lobby the Legislature to change state law, which he called a better option “than having police officers, New York City police officers, turn a blind eye to the law as it was written and as it is still written.”
“This law will make certain that the confusion in this situation will be eliminated,” he said, adding, “Quite frankly, it will make the application of this law much clearer.”
Mr. Cuomo’s proposal followed a memorandum to officers that Mr. Kelly issued in September clarifying that they were not to arrest people who take small amounts of marijuana out of their pockets after being stopped by the police. Mr. Bloomberg and Mr. Kelly said the governor’s proposal was consistent with the city’s directive.
Mr. Cuomo said changing the law was a better approach in the long term, saying, “I think it puts the police in an awkward position to tell them: enforce some laws, don’t enforce other laws.”
“This is nice and clean: change the law, period,” the governor added.
Critics of the Police Department’s marijuana-arrest policies have complained that Mr. Kelly’s memorandum has had little effect. But a city spokesman said that since the commissioner’s memorandum the number of low-level marijuana arrests has fallen by nearly a quarter.
-
we will never get rid of the cartels
Funny, I haven't heard anything from Al Capone since prohibition ended. They will find something new, but nothing remotely as profitable.
-
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAH!!!
You're nuts! ;D
Uh, okay.
-
I wonder if it will get this cheap in Colorado and Washington?
Uruguay Will Sell Legal Marijuana For $1 Per Gram, Official Says
10/21/13
MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay (AP) — Uruguay's drug czar says the country plans to sell legal marijuana for $1 per gram, though he's given higher figures in the past.
A law already passed in the lower house of Congress and expected to pass in the Senate later this year would make Uruguay the first country in the world to license and enforce rules for the production, distribution and sale of marijuana for adult consumers.
The El Pais newspaper reported Sunday that drug chief Julio Calzada says marijuana sales should start in the second half of 2014 at a price of $1.
He says the idea isn't to make money, but to wrench the market away from illegal dealers. Calzada said in August that the price would be around $2.5 per gram.
Sales are for locals only.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/21/uruguay-marijuana-1-per-gram_n_4137179.html
-
Funny, I haven't heard anything from Al Capone since prohibition ended. They will find something new, but nothing remotely as profitable.
+1
-
Poll: Clear majority support legalizing marijuana for the first time
Posted by
CNN's Bryan Koenig
(CNN) - More Americans think that marijuana should be legalized than those who want it kept illegal, according to a new poll.
According to the Gallup poll, 58% say that pot should be legalized, the first time in Gallup polling that a clear majority favor the move. Thirty-nine percent oppose legalization.
The 58% in favor of legalization is far removed from the 12% who said the same thing when Gallup first started asking in 1969, and it's up 10 percentage points since last November. The increase comes after a slight dip from when those supporting legalization first hit half the survey population, 50%, in 2011.
CNN's Sanjay Gupta: Why I changed my mind on weed
The survey attributes much of the pro-marijuana momentum to public referendums last year in Colorado and Washington state that made pot legal. Among those surveyed, 38% admitted to having tried the drug themselves.
Attorney General Eric Holder has said the Department of Justice will not seek to block the Colorado and Washington laws.
Federal enforcement of marijuana laws in the so-called "War on Drugs" has declined under the Obama administration. Justice has issued guidelines to federal prosecutors telling them to no longer pursue mandatory-minimum sentences against low-level nonviolent drug offenders.
Most support for legalization comes from Democrats, 65%, and Independents, 62%. About one in three Republicans, 35%, agreed. The younger the respondent, the more likely they were to favor legalization: 67% for 18 to 29 year-olds compared to 62% for those 30 to 49. and 56% for those between 50 and 64. Only those 65 and older reported less than half in favor of legalizing marijuana, at 45%.
The Gallup poll was conducted October 3-6, with 1,208 adults nationwide questioned by telephone. The survey's overall sampling error is plus or minus four percentage points.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/10/22/poll-clear-majority-support-legalizing-marijuana-for-the-first-time/?hpt=po_c2
-
This is the kind of thing the Republicans need to get their act together on.
Telling consenting adults they can't consume certain harmless natural substances.
::)
-
Smoking Marijuana May Cause Men to Grow Breasts
Thursday, 05 Dec 2013
By Courtney Coren
Smoking marijuana may cause gynecomastia, also known as man boobs, according to plastic surgeon Dr. Anthony Youn.
Gynecomastia can occur when a man has more estrogen in his body than testosterone, which can result in the development of more breast tissue than what is typical in most men, Youn explains in an editorial he wrote for CNN.
The active ingredient cannabis has been shown to decrease the testosterone levels in animals, creating an imbalance in the ratio of testosterone to estrogen. This also causes testicles to shrink and abnormalities to develop as well as affects how sperm functions.
This may not necessarily be the case in humans. However, some studies have shown that chronic marijuana users do have lower testosterone levels than nonusers.
A study done in 1972 did show a link between pot smoking and gynecomastia, while a 1977 study did not. However, the Michigan plastic surgeon notes that the 1977 study suffered from a small sample size and may not be very accurate.
"The legalization of marijuana is some state[s ] could make it easier for researchers to determine the exact effects of cannabis use on hormone levels, gynecomastia and other bodily functions," Youn explains. "If a true link between smoking pot and gynecomastia does exist, then we should expect to see a spike in gynecomastia treatments in those states which have legalized marijuana."
According to the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, there was a 30 percent increase in the number of men undergoing plastic surgery to correct gynecomastia from 2011 to 2012.
Youn concludes smoking pot "probably" can give someone man boobs even though more studies are still needed to prove the connection.
He added that it has become routine for himself and the majority of other plastic surgeons he has talked to to ask gynecomastia patients if they smoke pot, and if so, "it's probably best to put out that joint."
http://www.newsmax.com/US/marijuana-smoking-man-breasts/2013/12/05/id/540239#ixzz2mePG90hQ
-
Smoking Marijuana May Cause Men to Grow Breasts
Thursday, 05 Dec 2013
By Courtney Coren
Smoking marijuana may cause gynecomastia, also known as man boobs, according to plastic surgeon Dr. Anthony Youn.
Gynecomastia can occur when a man has more estrogen in his body than testosterone, which can result in the development of more breast tissue than what is typical in most men, Youn explains in an editorial he wrote for CNN.
The active ingredient cannabis has been shown to decrease the testosterone levels in animals, creating an imbalance in the ratio of testosterone to estrogen. This also causes testicles to shrink and abnormalities to develop as well as affects how sperm functions.
This may not necessarily be the case in humans. However, some studies have shown that chronic marijuana users do have lower testosterone levels than nonusers.
A study done in 1972 did show a link between pot smoking and gynecomastia, while a 1977 study did not. However, the Michigan plastic surgeon notes that the 1977 study suffered from a small sample size and may not be very accurate.
"The legalization of marijuana is some state could make it easier for researchers to determine the exact effects of cannabis use on hormone levels, gynecomastia and other bodily functions," Youn explains. "If a true link between smoking pot and gynecomastia does exist, then we should expect to see a spike in gynecomastia treatments in those states which have legalized marijuana."
According to the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, there was a 30 percent increase in the number of men undergoing plastic surgery to correct gynecomastia from 2011 to 2012.
Youn concludes smoking pot "probably" can give someone man boobs even though more studies are still needed to prove the connection.
He added that it has become routine for himself and the majority of other plastic surgeons he has talked to to ask gynecomastia patients if they smoke pot, and if so, "it's probably best to put out that joint."
http://www.newsmax.com/US/marijuana-smoking-man-breasts/2013/12/05/id/540239#ixzz2mePG90hQ
Is anyone here on getbig seriously worried about the pot-related lowered testosterone of the general populace? (Cuz it won't be happening to any getbigger who is hormonized no matter how much one smokes.)
So because of pot, a bunch of guys will be even less muscular compared to me than they are now? Cool!
-
you know the problem? I'll tell you the problem. I dont give a shit if ppl do it in their homes
BUT they won't. No, people are inherently selfish idiots. They'll smoke and drive. They'll do it on the streets so I have to smell it. They'll do it then shoot an old man on their lawn and blame anything but their own anger.
I'm 100% fine with legalizing pot. BUT if you get high and you drive, guess what, you lose your license for a year, no exceptions. Cause just like every other jackass drinking & driving or racing or whatever, you are endangering others.
if you handle a gun while high, boom, you lose abilitty to own them. If you are going to get stoned, cool, but the minute you become a danger with a car or gun, they need to throw the book at you.
Once you legalize, you have this punks coming out with "but but but weed is better than alcohol, we should be able to drive..." and "I have a permit, I can go to the gun range stoned, it's my right.
People can't just get high at home. They have to take that show on the road and endanger others. Fuck them. That's why they'll never have national legalization - cause they're too fcking stupid to just keep that shit in the house. They'll be smoking that shit at red lights, grinning about it.
-
The story doesn't make a connection between the increase in crime and pot smoking, but it makes you wonder.
Seattle facing rift between police and politicians over jump in crime, open pot smoking
By Dan Springer
Published December 09, 2013
FoxNews.com
Whether it’s commercial airplanes, coffee or computers, Seattle has long been a city known for being ahead of the curve. But now, a range of issues – including a jump in serious downtown crime and open pot smoking – are threatening to open a rift between police and politicians that could damage the city’s image.
“We were getting more and more comments from people who are working downtown, owning a business, living downtown or visiting, that they just weren’t feeling comfortable anymore,” says Kate Joncas, Executive Director of the Downtown Seattle Association.
Joncas wrote a letter to the city council saying the level of violence downtown was unacceptable and was putting Seattle’s economy at risk.
One business apparently not hurting is marijuana sales. But while recreational pot is now legal statewide, it is still against the law to smoke it in public.
Minors are barred from lighting up anywhere. But whether at the annual hempfest event or on the streets downtown, it remains a law that is largely ignored by both public and police.
Meantime, violent crime in the downtown business district jumped. Among the highest profile crimes were the fatal stabbing of a soccer fan by a homeless man and a city bus shooting that left the driver injured and shooter dead.
At the same time, Seattle police have been accused of de-policing. Recently City Attorney Pete Holmes levied the charge, saying there was evidence officers were no longer dealing with nuisance crimes like urinating in public and open drug use.
But officers have turned the tables,saying Holmes, an ardent supporter of legalizing marijuana, wouldn’t prosecute even if they did enforce the laws. Holmes calls that a cop out.
“If you ever hear an officer saying, ‘I’m not going to (enforce the law) because of x, y and z,’ I don’t care what the reason is, recognize that you got an admission that they’re not doing their job.”
Holmes acknowledges the city asks a lot of the officers. Under the mayor’s Center City Initiative, police are required to direct many of the poor and mentally unstable offenders into social services before arresting them for their crimes.
Complicating the issue is the fact that the Department of Justice found the Seattle Police Department frequently violated civil rights by engaging in a pattern of excessive force.
The city entered into a consent decree and is now under the watch of a federal monitor. In his preliminary report, police reformer Merrick Bobb said there was significant resistance to his oversight and troubling rumors of de-policing among the rank and file officers.
But interim Police Chief Jim Pugel denies his cops are turning a blind eye. Yet, he also argues his officers’ hands are frequently tied by City Hall.
“We do have somewhat of a fickle group of folks that we serve,” says Pugel, “They want order, they want a crime-free area, but they want it done in a particular, what we call the Seattle way.”
Seattle officers are not allowed to speak with reporters on the record, but several told Fox News off camera that while there’s not an organized effort to de-police, cops are less willing to enforce the so-called quality of life crimes, saying elected leaders, including the city attorney, don’t have their back.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/12/09/seattle-facing-rift-between-police-and-politicans-over-ump-in-crime-open-pot/
-
NYS Lawmakers Roll Out Measure To Tax, Legalize Marijuana
Krueger: State Could Pull In Hundreds Of Millions Of Dollars In Revenue
December 11, 2013
NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) — A New York State lawmaker outlined her proposal Thursday to raise revenue by making marijuana legal.
State Sen. Liz Krueger’s measure — the Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act — would legalize, regulate and tax marijuana under state law.
“It will take the market in marijuana away from the criminal enterprises, just as happened when alcohol prohibition was ended,” she said at a City Hall press conference.
Krueger, a Democrat from Manhattan, said her bill would bring in hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue for the state. New York State Assembly Health Committee Chairman Richard Gottfried (D-Manhattan) signed onto the measure.
“It would establish an excise tax of $50 an ounce of marijuana and authorize localities to charge a sales tax on retail sales if they wish to,” Krueger said.
Towns and cities could also opt out of marijuana sales.
“I last smoked marijuana when I was a sophomore in college. It was 1976. It was a Cheech and Chong movie. I don’t intend to smoke it ever again,” the lawmaker noted.
The bill would allow the purchase of 2 ounces of pot by people 21 and older. It makes the minimum age for marijuana possession and consumption 18.
Krueger said recent surveys show that right now, it is easier for a high school student to buy marijuana than to purchase beer or cigarettes.
New Yorkers hearing about the proposal for the first time had a mixed reaction, CBS 2′s Lou Young reported.
“Look at all the problems we have with people driving while impaired. No, don’t legalize it,” said Maggine Mills of Rockland County’s Nanuet.
“You know, you might as well say ‘yes,’ because they’re doing it anyway and don’t pay taxes on it,” added Frank Tornese of West Nyack.
City Comptroller John Liu, who has studied the issue, said the economic impact from a pot tax is substantial.
“We have close to a million people who use it on a regular basis. It’s a market of $1.65 billion here in New York City every year, so it makes sense, seeing as so many people are using it on a regular basis, to decriminalize it,” Liu said.
Liu estimates that a pot tax would generate $431 million in New York City alone.
“There’s unfair enforcement, particularly against minorities and minority youth, and also people are using it. The medical experts say it is not as dangerous as alcohol. Marijuana does not get people into a violent state whereas, unfortunately, alcohol does,” Liu said.
Albany watchers say the bill faces long odds for quick passage, but proponents say just introducing it with so many backers is an important first step, Young reported/
Colorado and Washington state have already enacted similar legislation.
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/12/11/nys-lawmakers-roll-out-measure-to-tax-legalize-marijuana/
-
DEA's Anti-Pot Campaign Is Losing Teens Thanks To State Legalization Efforts
Posted: 12/20/2013 4:23 pm EST | Updated: 12/20/2013 7:19 pm EST
WASHINGTON -- The head of the Drug Enforcement Administration is blaming the legalization of marijuana in certain states for the fact that an increasing number of American high school seniors don't see regular pot use as harmful.
"The mixed messages being sent to America's teens about the harmfulness and legality of using record-high-potency marijuana are obscuring kids' awareness of the effects their use will have on them," DEA Administrator Michele M. Leonhart said in a statement on Friday.
A survey released by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Institutes of Health this week found that just shy of 40 percent of high school seniors viewed regular marijuana use as harmful, down from more than 44 percent in 2012. The survey also found that 36 percent of high school seniors said they had smoked marijuana in the preceding year, compared to 12 percent of eighth-graders.
"Those who aspire to see their own or others' children accomplish great things in life or who want to live in a nation of increasing prosperity should be very concerned about the increase in marijuana use by teenagers, including the fact that a staggering 12 percent of 13 and 14-year-olds are abusing the drug," Leonhart said.
Washington and Colorado recently legalized recreational marijuana use for adults, and the Justice Department has said it will allow the states' regulatory systems to go forward.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/20/dea-marijuana-legalization_n_4481989.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
-
DEA's Anti-Pot Campaign Is Losing Teens Thanks To State Legalization Efforts
Posted: 12/20/2013 4:23 pm EST | Updated: 12/20/2013 7:19 pm EST
WASHINGTON -- The head of the Drug Enforcement Administration is blaming the legalization of marijuana in certain states for the fact that an increasing number of American high school seniors don't see regular pot use as harmful.
"The mixed messages being sent to America's teens about the harmfulness and legality of using record-high-potency marijuana are obscuring kids' awareness of the effects their use will have on them," DEA Administrator Michele M. Leonhart said in a statement on Friday.
A survey released by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Institutes of Health this week found that just shy of 40 percent of high school seniors viewed regular marijuana use as harmful, down from more than 44 percent in 2012. The survey also found that 36 percent of high school seniors said they had smoked marijuana in the preceding year, compared to 12 percent of eighth-graders.
"Those who aspire to see their own or others' children accomplish great things in life or who want to live in a nation of increasing prosperity should be very concerned about the increase in marijuana use by teenagers, including the fact that a staggering 12 percent of 13 and 14-year-olds are abusing the drug," Leonhart said.
Washington and Colorado recently legalized recreational marijuana use for adults, and the Justice Department has said it will allow the states' regulatory systems to go forward.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/20/dea-marijuana-legalization_n_4481989.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
Maybe because Just like most anything else, responsible and moderate use isn't. However, just like booze it should not be open for minors to use.
-
What a clown.
MSNBC’s Touré Neblett Insists He’s Living Proof Marijuana Doesn’t Harm Intelligence
By Matthew Sheffield | January 4, 2014 9
On Friday we learned that New York Times columnist David Brooks does not approve of marijuana legalization on account of his belief that the drug dulls the minds of its habitual users.
Sure, that’s what a lot of those pointed-headed scientist types think but why should we listen to them? Instead, we should take the word Touré Neblett, currently an MSNBC pundit and quite possibly one of the dumbest people ever to appear regularly on television.
Reacting to the Brooks column in a Friday segment on MSNBC’s The Cycle non-debate debate program, Neblett confidently asserted that moderate marijuana use does not negatively impact people’s lives:
“You can integrate a small amount of marijuana into your life without wrecking your mind or losing your life or losing your marriage or all these sorts of things,” he stated.
When asked by his co-host Krystal Ball why he would know such a thing, Neblett replied that his own “personal experience” proved that Mary Jane doesn’t rot the brain.
“I do know that from personal experience and I’m not afraid or embarrassed to admit that,” he said.
Neblett continued: “Brooks has this argument that if you smoke weed, it makes you dumber, right? I mean, like, I read his article, I feel like that made me a little dumber, too.”
Despite his stated beliefs, if one were to look solely at his actions, an impartial observer would have to conclude that Neblett is actually trying to prove that David Brooks was correct. In the year and a half since he started with The Cycle, Neblett has really distinguished himself for his stupidity. That’s saying a lot considering the intramural competition.
In November, for instance, Neblett implied that gerrymandering, the politicized redrawing of congressional districts, can have an impact on the election prospects of U.S. senators. One month later, he deliberately stated that black CNN anchor Don Lemon is a “white leader.” He also appears to believe that California Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein are not actually from the same state.
And who can forget the MSNBC host’s cocksure pronouncement that George Zimmerman was not Hispanic but rather a “Peruvian American?”
Besides being a 9/11 truther, Neblett has stated that he thinks that his fellow Democrats as a party do not use “racial code.” He said this literally less than one month after Vice President Joe Biden told a mostly black audience that Republicans were “going to put y’all back in chains.”
Neblett’s comment also came less than a month after the MSNBC pundit himself accused Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney of conducting a “niggerization” campaign against President Barack Obama.
For the children, one hopes that someone passes a law banning Neblett from reading any future David Brooks columns. Were he to become even “a little dumber,” the vacuum that might result could trigger a cosmic singularity.
Hat tip: Noah Rothman.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-sheffield/2014/01/04/msnbc-s-tour-neblett-insists-he-s-living-proof-marijuana-doesn-t-#ixzz2pkBmnzmm
-
Colorado pot shops likely targets of cartels, say experts
By Joseph J. Kolb
Published January 10, 2014
FoxNews.com
Employees roll joints behind the sales counter at Medicine Man marijuana dispensary in Denver. (AP)
As the smoke settles from the first week of legal marijuana sales in Colorado, experts are warning that sanctioned pot dealers could become targets for the very folks they put out of business.
Taking over a trade once ruled by drug cartels and turning it into an all-cash business could make pot shops prime targets for extortion, black-market competition and robbery. One veteran border narcotics agent told FoxNews.com Colorado's legal pot industry will find it hard to keep the criminals from horning in on a lucrative business they once controlled.
"What is quite possible is that cartels will hire straw owners who have clean records who can apply for a license, then sell large quantities both legally and on the black market."
- Denver DEA office spokesman Albert Villasuso
"Mexico is already in Colorado without the risks," the agent, who requested anonymity, said of the state's heavy pre-existing cartel presence. "Legal businesses will likely see a rise in extortion attempts while law enforcement will see a lot of backdoor deals being made."
Cartels, especially the Juarez and Sinaloa, who have a strong presence in Colorado, could not have been happy with the estimated $1 million in sales Jan. 1, the first day of legalized retail sales. In 2012 the Mexican Competitiveness Institute issued a report saying that Mexico’s cartels would lose as much as $1.425 billion if Colorado legalized marijuana. The organization also predicted that drug trafficking revenues would fall 20 to 30 percent, and the Sinaloa cartel, which would be the most affected, would lose up to 50 percent.
Faced with such losses, the violent cartels could force their way in as black market wholesalers or simply rob pot dispensaries, which take only cash and have not been able to establish accounts with banks because of lenders' fears of violating federal laws. But the general consensus is that the Mexican cartels will not quietly relinquish the Denver market.
The owner of the Colorado Springs dispensary told the Denver Post he is planning to get a concealed-weapons permit, for protection when he has to move money out of the store.
"Any way you plan it out, there's going to be a large amount of cash around," he said. "And that's extremely scary."
Denver police are taking a wait-and-see posture as to what may emerge.
“It’s only been a week, so we still have to sit back and see how this will play out,” Denver Police spokesman Sonny Jackson told FoxNews.com. “We’re a police department, we’re always concerns about what may happen.”
Jackson said he would not speculate as to if or which cartels may decide to infiltrate the legitimate businesses or how.
“We’re concerned with the public consumption right now,” Jackson said.
The Marijuana Enforcement Division of the Colorado Department of Revenue, the primary enforcement office responsible for overseeing the production and sale of the retail marijuana, did not return repeated attempts by Fox News.com for comment.
Denver DEA office spokesman Albert Villasuso said with some 50 retail outlets in operation, the agency can only monitor if, how and when the cartels decide to move in to the legalized retail industry in Colorado.
"What is quite possible is that cartels will hire straw owners who have clean records who can apply for a license, then sell large quantities both legally and on the black market," Villasuso said. "We still don't know what the fall out will be but when there is this much money involved the potential is great for groups to want capitalize."
Villasuso also said that even if legal stores do face extortion efforts by cartel groups it is unlikely law enforcement will even be made aware of it if merchants are too frightened to come to police. Extortion has proven to be a lucrative ancillary enterprise for cartels in Mexico resulting in thousands of businesses closing rather than pay the quota, as it is called, or the store owners face the threat of death, which too has occurred.
One group who hopes to mitigate any risks is the Blue Line Protection Group, which specializes only in security for the marijuana stores.
Seeing a growing market, Ted Daniels started the company and uses ex-military and law enforcement to provide security for the stores' money and supply shipments, and the growing operations. The highly-trained and combat-experienced guards are heavily-armed with assault rifles and protective vests.
"This was an industry here that created a lot of challenges," Daniels told WDVR television news in Denver Jan. 7. "This group I put together is designed specifically to protect product, people, and money."
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/01/10/colorado-pot-shops-likely-targets-cartels-say-experts/
-
Good commentary. I like this guy.
America ill-prepared for marijuana mayhem
By Dr. Keith Ablow
Published January 10, 2014
FoxNews.com
With many states legalizing medical marijuana, and Colorado legalizing recreational marijuana, we are about to learn what I already know as a practicing psychiatrist: Marijuana is not harmless and will lead many millions of people into addiction, depression, psychosis, anxiety and lack of motivation.
I support legalizing marijuana, because I do not support the government making the decision whether people use it or not.
I also don’t like jailing people for the same behavior (drug use) that so many of our elected officials have engaged in. And I believe strongly that, in carefully selected cases, marijuana (and other potentially addictive drugs, by the way) can be very useful, medically.
We are way behind the curve educating people about the risks of marijuana abuse and dependence—which could cost us many billions of dollars and ruin many, many lives.
Here’s the big trouble, though: We are way behind the curve educating people about the risks of marijuana abuse and dependence—which could cost us many billions of dollars and ruin many, many lives.
I know this sounds alarmist, but it is true, and we are completely unprepared for the fallout.
Research studies show that cannabis users are at a 40 percent increased risk of psychosis. Research studies show that marijuana may well be a risk factor for schizophrenia, depression and anxiety disorders.
And research shows that marijuana is linked to a syndrome in which people have little motivation to pursue goals and interests that they once found compelling.
In my own practice, I find that people addicted to marijuana can have lives veering out of control—without the energy to pursue employment, with relationships failing, with grades dropping—yet insist that their chronic, daily marijuana use has nothing to do with it.
And this kind of disregard for cause and effect, even a disregard for the broken parts of one’s existence—a new drug-induced variant of the philosophical posture which the French call la belle indifference—may now become epidemic.
There is no chance, whatsoever, that the states which have legalized medical marijuana (never mind recreational marijuana) are policing its use in any real way.
Prescription mills are offering medical marijuana certification to anyone who claims any kind of chronic pain, or any symptoms of a number of other ill-defined conditions. Millions will become frequent users and will become less than they were.
Just as disturbing, marijuana will join Facebook and iPhones and video games in removing people from reality, making them less empathetic and less autonomous.
Is it an accident, a meaningful coincidence or part of a toxic slippery slope that we have a disempowering government in Washington and a new way to stay weak wafting like a smokescreen over the land?
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/01/10/america-ill-prepared-for-marijuana-mayhem/
-
I dont smoke weed....but the Ban on pot is just about the most backwards shit in the country at this time. Its based on total lies and science doesnt support the reason it was banned in the first place...
People who support the ban on weed are retarded
-
I dont smoke weed....but the Ban on pot is just about the most backwards shit in the country at this time. Its based on total lies and science doesnt support the reason it was banned in the first place...
People who support the ban on weed are retarded
I don't really know what I think about whether it should be legal at this point. No easy answer.
Ablow is intellectually honest about the whole subject. He thinks it should be legal, but doesn't deny the health implications.
-
Advocates of marijuana legalization turn attention to Massachusetts
By Joshua Miller / Globe Staff / January 12, 2014
Advocates of marijuana legalization, emboldened by successes with ballot questions in Colorado and Washington state, are laying the groundwork for a similar battle in Massachusetts in the next presidential election year.
“In 2016, Massachusetts will find itself in the crosshairs for cannabis reform,” said Allen St. Pierre, the executive director of NORML, a national group in favor of the legalization of marijuana.
Massachusetts voters passed measures that decriminalized possession of small amounts of the drug in 2008 and allowed its use for medical purposes in 2012 — both with more than 63 percent support. Buoyed by such results, advocates have launched a similar effort to both get a question calling for the drug’s legalization on the 2016 ballot and to raise enough money for victory.
But some critics and lawmakers caution that passage is far from guaranteed. Despite its liberal reputation, Massachusetts, analysts say, has a strong traditional strain that will make legalized marijuana a tough sell.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2014/01/13/advocates-marijuana-legalization-turn-attention-massachusetts/MrAdSmnUclODSIk2BrmuQK/story.html
-
I dont smoke weed....but the Ban on pot is just about the most backwards shit in the country at this time. Its based on total lies and science doesnt support the reason it was banned in the first place...
People who support the ban on weed are retarded
:D :D :D :D
-
Welfare for weed in Colorado? Lawmakers worried, but sellers say it doesn’t happen
By Eric Boehm
Published January 14, 2014
At Colorado’s newly minted recreational marijuana shops, cash is king.
Because the drug is still illegal at the federal level, most pot shops in Colorado are not taking credit cards or other forms of electronic payment, thanks to the complications that could come from federal authorities tracking down customers and store owners through those transactions. It’s a legal business, but one that’s forced to operate as if it were still partially in the black market.
To make things easier for their customers — and to keep people from having to carry large stacks of cash with them as they come and go, which could attract criminals — many shops have installed ATMs inside.
“That was something that was really important to the police officers that we met with before we opened. They didn’t want people bringing in a lot of cash,” said Jay Griffin, manager of Dank Colorado, a pot shop in Denver that has an ATM.
But what if the cash coming out of those ATMs is coming straight from the taxpayer?
Three Colorado state lawmakers worry it might be.
They have introduced a bill that would ban the use of food stamps and other forms of electronic welfare benefits from being accessed at ATMs located inside marijuana dispensaries, as the pot shops are legally known. The measure, Senate Bill 37, would also block access to welfare benefits at strip clubs.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/14/welfare-for-weed-in-colorado-lawmakers-worried-but-sellers-say-it-doesnt-happen/?intcmp=latestnews
-
Obama: Marijuana No More Dangerous Than Alcohol
The Huffington Post | By Mollie Reilly
Posted: 01/19/2014
With a majority of Americans now in favor marijuana legalization, President Barack Obama is now saying weed is no more dangerous to individuals' health than alcohol.
In an interview with the New Yorker's David Remnick published Sunday, Obama said while he believes marijuana is "not very healthy," the drug isn't as harmful as some insist.
“As has been well documented, I smoked pot as a kid, and I view it as a bad habit and a vice, not very different from the cigarettes that I smoked as a young person up through a big chunk of my adult life. I don’t think it is more dangerous than alcohol," Obama told Remnick.
When asked if he believes marijuana is less harmful than alcohol, Obama said it is less damaging "in terms of its impact on the individual consumer."
"It’s not something I encourage, and I’ve told my daughters I think it’s a bad idea, a waste of time, not very healthy," he added.
Marijuana is currently classified by the Drug Enforcement Administration as a Schedule 1 substance, which the DEA considers "the most dangerous class of drugs with a high potential for abuse and potentially severe psychological and/or physical dependence." Other Schedule 1 drugs include heroin, ecstasy and LSD.
Obama said his focus on reforming laws that punish drug users, noting the racial disparity in drug arrests.
"We should not be locking up kids or individual users for long stretches of jail time when some of the folks who are writing those laws have probably done the same thing," he said.
In August, the Obama administration announced it would not stop Washington and Colorado from legalizing recreational marijuana use, marking a major step away from the administration's war on drugs.
In the New Yorker interview, Obama said he believes these new laws are "important."
“It's important for it to go forward because it’s important for society not to have a situation in which a large portion of people have at one time or another broken the law and only a select few get punished," he said.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/19/obama-marijuana-alcohol_n_4627740.html
-
Marijuana and the military: Can an active-duty spouse sell pot?
By Tad Sooter
SOUTH KITSAP — Kathy, a South Kitsap resident, saw once-in-a-lifetime potential in the newly legalized marijuana industry.
She spent months last fall combing through the state’s Liquor Control Board rules, lining up investors and nailing down locations for three retail stores. After filing applications with the state, she had one more thing to do: tell her husband.
Kathy’s spouse is an active duty military service member. He happened to be deployed and out of contact during the months she was making her plans. Kathy broke the news of her planned business venture when he returned this month. He was surprised but supportive.
“He said ‘it sounds like a great opportunity, let’s do it,’” said Kathy, 29, who asked her last name and details of her husband’s service be withheld.
The question now is whether her husband’s military employers will be so understanding.
Initiative 502 legalized limited possession and consumption of recreational marijuana in Washington. It also allows production, processing and sales of marijuana through licensed businesses — the kind Kathy applied for.
The state law is in direct conflict with federal law and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which criminalize possession and distribution of pot. A service member who is found carrying drugs, or tests positive for them, may face administrative separation or worse. Security clearances can also be jeopardized.
How the military will view a service member whose spouse is, by federal standards, a drug dealer, remains to be seen.
“The spouse is technically violating federal law, even if she’s following state law,” said Steven Krupa, a Pierce County defense lawyer who also serves as a Command Judge Advocate at Joint Base Lewis-McChord. “If your husband gets into any sort of connection to this, they could get into trouble,”
Lawyers say the conflict between legalized pot and military code creates a treacherous gray area for service members and their families. Initiative author Alison Holcomb, who serves as criminal justice director for the ACLU of Washington, said it’s a wrinkle of the new marijuana law that has yet to be explored.
“I simply don’t know where the military comes down on this,” Holcomb said.
A spokeswoman with Submarine Group 9 at Naval Base Kitsap — Bangor said the Navy has no specific policies addressing legalized marijuana in Washington. A U.S. Department of Defense spokesman pointed to federal statutes already on the books and said his office could not comment on hypotheticals.
Kathy said her husband has inquired with his superiors to determine if her proposed enterprise could jeopardize his career.
Krupa has already seen a number of drug violations involving service members whose spouses had medical marijuana cards. Some argued they’d had incidental contact with their spouse’s legal pot. The success of the defense was varied, Krupa said. Much depends on how staunchly local commands enforce code.
Kathy said she has done everything she can to dissociate her husband from her proposed stores. He won’t be part of the ownership, help with the operation or have contact with the inventory.
“He’s going to have no involvement in the company whatsoever,” she said.
With more than 7,000 marijuana business applications filed statewide — 216 in Kitsap — there are likely more military spouses testing the uncertain legal boundaries.
Kathy said she’s never smoked marijuana. She has no interest in trying it. Her interest is in the profits, which she believes could be substantial, especially for retail stores. Only 10 will be allowed in the county. Retail licenses will probably be issued this summer.
Kathy envisions clean, secure shops serving a middle-class clientele.
“I don’t see why it has to be any different from an upscale wine shop,” she said.
http://www.stripes.com/news/us/marijuana-and-the-military-can-an-active-duty-spouse-sell-pot-1.262841
-
Florida to vote on legalizing medical marijuana
CNN's Ashley Killough
(CNN) – Florida voters will get a chance to vote on legalizing marijuana in November.
The Florida Supreme Court on Monday approved wording that can appear as a ballot initiative during the midterm elections later this year.
The use of marijuana for medical reasons is legal in 20 states and the District of Columbia, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
New York governor announces plan for medical marijuana at hospitals
Former Gov. Charlie Crist, who's challenging incumbent Gov. Rick Scott this year, released a statement Monday in support of the amendment proposal.
"This is an issue of compassion, trusting doctors, and trusting the people of Florida. I will vote for it," he said.
With the marijuana issue seeing more support from Democrats than Republicans in recent polls, it's no surprise that Crist, a former Republican governor turned Democrat, would support having a marijuana ballot initiative on the same ticket as his race against the incumbent GOP governor. The amendment could drive more voter turnout in Crist's favor.
According to a Quinnipiac University Poll released in November, 82% of Florida voters support legalizing medical marijuana, while 16% oppose it. Breaking it down by party lines, 87% of Democrats support it, compared to 70% of Republicans.
The governor says that he would vote against such an amendment.
"I have a great deal of empathy for people battling difficult diseases and I understand arguments in favor of this initiative," he said in a statement provided to CNN by a spokesman. "But, having seen the terrible affects of alcohol and drug abuse first-hand, I cannot endorse sending Florida down this path and I would personally vote against it."
"No matter my personal beliefs, however, a ballot initiative would be up to the voters to decide."
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/27/florida-to-vote-on-legalizing-medical-marijuana/
-
Weed=Illegal because of William Randolph Hearst.
Weed stayed illegal to justify the budget for the Prison Industrial Complex....
It is Job security for the DEA, sort of like giving the government welfare.
They must justify their budgets.
those are the cold hard facts
-
In the weeds: Paul, Christie, Perry open to softer pot laws ahead of 2016
By Seth McLaughlin-The Washington Times
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
Republicans eyeing the White House in 2016 are pushing their party to change its stance and accept a softening of federal marijuana laws — a dramatic shift from the GOP’s most recent contenders who railed against the drug and questioned its medicinal value.
Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky has arguably been the most vocal on the subject, saying the federal government should leave the issue entirely to the states. Texas Gov. Rick Perry also argues that marijuana’s legal status should be a state issue, and he points to drug courts in his state that he said have helped move Texas toward decriminalization.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, meanwhile, has vowed to scrap the “failed war on drugs” altogether — more than four decades after President Nixon, a Republican, set it into motion by naming drug abuse as “public enemy No. 1 in the United States.”
“Certainly, the Republican Party has been a lot slower moving on this issue than on the Democratic side, but particularly in the past several months some prominent figures have sort of recalibrated themselves when it comes to the issue of marijuana,” said Erik Altieri, a spokesman for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.
“This is something that probably would have been unimaginable in 2008: that GOP front-runners for president would be talking in terms of being smart on crime rather than hard on crime.”
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has called the war on drugs a failure and has talked about ending it.
Enlarge Photo
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has called the war on drugs a ... more >
In 2012, Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney promised to fight “tooth and nail” against marijuana legalization, even for medical use, and the 2008 nominee, Sen. John McCain, said scientific evidence shows that pot is a “gateway drug.”
Mr. McCain, though, signaled an attitude change in September by saying that “maybe we should legalize” marijuana.
The shift has happened in both parties. In a New Yorker interview published this month, President Obama — who has acknowledged using pot in his youth — said marijuana may be less dangerous as a drug than alcohol.
But some are imploring both parties to hold firm.
“Let’s protect our kids and communities. Do we want a massive dumbing down of our young people in our country?” said Calvina Fay, executive director of Drug Free America Foundation and Save Our Society From Drugs. “There are many solutions to this problem that do not include giving up and legalizing and normalizing drug use.”
Public opinion is headed the other direction, however. Voters in two states — Colorado and Washington — have approved referendums allowing people older than 21 to possess a limited amount of marijuana for personal use, and more than 12 states have decriminalized possession of small amounts. Since 1996, when California became the first state to enact legislation allowing medical marijuana, 20 other states have followed suit.
Sixteen states have decriminalized the possession of small amounts of marijuana, and some are positioned to follow Colorado and Washington by allowing recreational by adults.
In states that permit medical marijuana, it is commonly prescribed for chronic pain, nausea from cancer chemotherapy, glaucoma and some other conditions.
An NBC/Wall Street Journal Poll released this week found that 55 percent of those surveyed would support efforts in their states similar to those in Colorado and Washington.
Under federal law, marijuana is classified as a Schedule I substance, making it illegal for anyone to manufacture or distribute the drug.
. . .
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/29/republicans-eyeing-a-presidential-run-in-2016-star/#ixzz2rw5200Lz
-
Reminds me of the states that started lotteries to help with education expenses and their education system still stinks and the states are broke.
Colorado's pot tax revenues could go up in smoke, says lawmaker
By Joseph J. Kolb
Published January 31, 2014
FoxNews.com
Much of the $40 million in sales tax revenue Colorado hopes to collect from legal pot sales could be going up in smoke because banks and credit card companies refuse to work with sellers, claims a state lawmaker.
Unless banks can get a clear signal from federal regulators that it is okay to work with pot dealers without running afoul of laws aimed at launderers of drug money, the marijuana trade will remain what it is in Colorado – an all-cash business. State Sen. David Balmer says that makes it ripe for unreported – and untaxed - transactions.
“So far Colorado has not been able to come up with a solution to the banking problem,” Balmer said. “The vast majority of sales will not be accounted for.”
“The vast majority of sales will not be accounted for.”
- Colorado state Sen. David Balmer
Marijuana is considered an illegal drug by the federal government, and laws such as the Bank Secrecy Act carry severe penalties for banks. Last week, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said the feds will soon issue regulations opening banking services to state-sanctioned marijuana businesses.
"You don't want just huge amounts of cash in these places," Holder said in a speech at the University of Virginia. "They want to be able to use the banking system. And so we will be issuing some regulations I think very soon to deal with that issue."
Balmer said the new rules can’t come soon enough. He believes the state was ill-prepared for what has become a booming business since the beginning of 2014. In addition to the banking issue, he said Colorado does not have enough field agents to regulate the industry.
Officials expect retail marijuana sales tax to put $19,729,867 into state coffers in the current fiscal year and more than twice that in the next.
But for now, tracking sales is all but impossible. Businesses have no bank statements to confirm revenue or deposits, and many have expressed concern about the robbery risk associated with handling large amounts of cash. Some have set up limited liability corporations to create one-degree of separation to try to open bank accounts, but if banks know about the arrangement, they often balk, according to Balmer.
And they often can tell where the greenbacks come from.
“The large cash deposits smell like marijuana, so some of the businesses are spraying the cash with room freshener or perfume to hide the marijuana smell,” Balmer said. “The banks are even more suspicious when they have a person trying to deposit a large cash deposit that smells like perfume.”
With the above realities, said Balmer, the marijuana businesses have begun buying enormous safes to store cash and are hiring armed guards to protect their stores 24/7.
According to Casey Bauer, spokesman for the state Department of Regulatory Agencies, the Department of Revenue has created regulations with the understanding that obtaining banking services can be difficult for members of Colorado's marijuana industry. The business licensees are expected to keep detailed records and provide the Department of Revenue with full financial and inventory accountability. The Department has the authority to go into a business licensed by the state to inspect books and records, which could lead to a third party audit.
“There is a new inventory tool that was launched on Jan. 1, 2014, which tracks inventory from seed to sale,” Bauer said.
The tool Bauer is referring to is the Marijuana Inventory Tracking Solution (MITS) which she said is one piece of the robust and comprehensive regulatory scheme that the Department of Revenue has created and will continue to refine over time.
Department of Revenue spokeswoman Daria Serna said her office accepts state tax revenue in a number of ways and cash is one of them.
“The launch of retail marijuana has given the Department an opportunity to review its processes and make improvements,” she said. “We cannot go into detail about our processes and procedures, because it would compromise security, but we want tax payers to know that safety is our number one priority.”
Serna admitted that from a regulator perspective it would be helpful to have bank records from licensed businesses.
“We have crafted our regulations with the understanding that obtaining banking services can be difficult for members of Colorado’s marijuana industry,” Serna said. “Our licensees are expected to keep detailed records and provide us with full financial and inventory accountability.”
This provides little solace to Balmer, who sees a system ripe for not making appropriate tax deposits but criminal activity.
“The majority of our marijuana retailers are trying to be honest,” he said. “But this is the Wild West and nobody really knows how to be lawful because this still violates federal law.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/31/colorado-pot-tax-revenues-could-go-up-in-smoke-says-lawmaker/
-
Reminds me of the states that started lotteries to help with education expenses and their education system still stinks and the states are broke.
Colorado's pot tax revenues could go up in smoke, says lawmaker
By Joseph J. Kolb
Published January 31, 2014
FoxNews.com
Much of the $40 million in sales tax revenue Colorado hopes to collect from legal pot sales could be going up in smoke because banks and credit card companies refuse to work with sellers, claims a state lawmaker.
Unless banks can get a clear signal from federal regulators that it is okay to work with pot dealers without running afoul of laws aimed at launderers of drug money, the marijuana trade will remain what it is in Colorado – an all-cash business. State Sen. David Balmer says that makes it ripe for unreported – and untaxed - transactions.
...
"You don't want just huge amounts of cash in these places," Holder said in a speech at the University of Virginia. "They want to be able to use the banking system. And so we will be issuing some regulations I think very soon to deal with that issue."
...
Officials expect retail marijuana sales tax to put $19,729,867 into state coffers in the current fiscal year and more than twice that in the next.
...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/31/colorado-pot-tax-revenues-could-go-up-in-smoke-says-lawmaker/
With millions of dollars' worth of tax revenue at stake, I think the gov't will be finding a solution to this problem sooner rather than later.
I'm not clear on why this situation would remind anyone of the lottery & crappy schools situation. It seems very dissimilar to me.
-
With millions of dollars' worth of tax revenue at stake, I think the gov't will be finding a solution to this problem sooner rather than later.
I'm not clear on why this situation would remind anyone of the lottery & crappy schools situation. It seems very dissimilar to me.
California, for example, started a lottery to use the money for education system. The system still stinks and the state is broke.
If they're trying to use drug money to raise revenue, and the revenue never materializes, then to me it's similar to what happened with lotteries. It may not be the cash cow people think.
In fact, government attempts to raise money rarely produces a windfall.
-
California, for example, started a lottery to use the money for education system. The system still stinks and the state is broke.
If they're trying to use drug money to raise revenue, and the revenue never materializes, then to me it's similar to what happened with lotteries. It may not be the cash cow people think.
In fact, government attempts to raise money rarely produces a windfall.
Don't let the facts get in the way of your argument but I guess you live in Hawaii (and not CA), right?
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303393804579310603091572462
(This article is from Jan 9, 2014)
California Budget Increases Spending as State Enjoys a Surplus
Gov. Brown Urges Fiscal Restraint While Proposing More Funds for Schools, Debt Repayment
SACRAMENTO, Calif.—A resurgent stock market and a voter-approved tax increase has given California a windfall of several billion dollars, resulting in a rapid turnaround from the state's massive budget gaps of recent years.
On Thursday, Gov. Jerry Brown called the improvement in the state's fiscal house "good news," and he proposed spending an additional $10 billion annually for California's schools. But anticipating calls for further increased spending and preparing for a likely re-election bid, he also urged fiscal restraint as he officially proposed a $154.9 billion budget.
"By no means are we out of the wilderness, we have serious issues before us in terms of long-term liabilities, debts, and we must be very prudent in the way we spend public funds," Mr. Brown said. However, "after years of drought, and cutbacks and pink slips for the teachers, we are finally able to provide a substantial amount of new money for all the schools of California."
If lotteries aren't making as much money for the state as some folks thought they would, it's because people aren't buying enough lottery tickets.
Weed, OTH, is selling like hotcakes and if it's not raking in as much tax revenue as it should right now, it's due to banks essentially forcing weed selling businesses to accept cash only and also being very hesitant to accept the cash deposits (which will likely lead to under-reporting of sales).
Like I said, though, the gov't loves tax revenue (and banks love money, too) so this problem will likely be fixed very soon.
I get that you want to find fault with MJ legalization, but this temporary tax issue is a weak way to do it.
-
Don't let the facts get in the way of your argument but I guess you live in Hawaii (and not CA), right?
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303393804579310603091572462
(This article is from Jan 9, 2014)
California Budget Increases Spending as State Enjoys a Surplus
Gov. Brown Urges Fiscal Restraint While Proposing More Funds for Schools, Debt Repayment
SACRAMENTO, Calif.—A resurgent stock market and a voter-approved tax increase has given California a windfall of several billion dollars, resulting in a rapid turnaround from the state's massive budget gaps of recent years.
On Thursday, Gov. Jerry Brown called the improvement in the state's fiscal house "good news," and he proposed spending an additional $10 billion annually for California's schools. But anticipating calls for further increased spending and preparing for a likely re-election bid, he also urged fiscal restraint as he officially proposed a $154.9 billion budget.
"By no means are we out of the wilderness, we have serious issues before us in terms of long-term liabilities, debts, and we must be very prudent in the way we spend public funds," Mr. Brown said. However, "after years of drought, and cutbacks and pink slips for the teachers, we are finally able to provide a substantial amount of new money for all the schools of California."
If lotteries aren't making as much money for the state as some folks thought they would, it's because people aren't buying enough lottery tickets.
Weed, OTH, is selling like hotcakes and if it's not raking in as much tax revenue as it should right now, it's due to banks essentially forcing weed selling businesses to accept cash only and also being very hesitant to accept the cash deposits (which will likely lead to under-reporting of sales).
Like I said, though, the gov't loves tax revenue (and banks love money, too) so this problem will likely be fixed very soon.
I get that you want to find fault with MJ legalization, but this temporary tax issue is a weak way to do it.
How do you get that I "find fault with MJ legalization"?
And speaking of facts getting in the way, here are a few:
1. California's lottery was established in 1984 and was designed to provide revenue for schools.
2. California has had a budget crisis for years, including billion dollar deficits up through 2012, so citing a surplus in 2014 is silly.
3. In November 2012, the voters passed the Temporary Taxes to Fund Education, which increased taxes on Californians to provide additional funding for schools. Why the heck would this be necessary if the lottery, which had been established 28 years earlier, had been successful??
4. Lottery players already provide over $1 billion annually. From 1985 through 2012, the lottery provided more than $25 billion to fund education. In spite of that, they still raised taxes to fund education. So the argument people need to buy more tickets is absurd.
Overall, the problem is government is a horrible money manager. Giving government more money is not a solution.
-
Sorry if I incorrectly inferred that you're against ganja. My bad.
As far as your other points, couldn't it be argued that a big part of the reason for CA's budget woes of past years has been because taxes weren't high enough? (Related to prop 13 related problems with raising taxes, maybe?)
And doesn't the fact that this year there's a surplus (so no deficit but still a large outstanding debt) after raising taxes support this point?
And isn't it fairly reasonable that, however bad the debt situation has gotten with lottery tax revenue, the situation would be worse without it (ceteris paribus, of course)?
So does your comparison boil down to, "The government often doesn't manage money well and often over-promises what can be done with the money"?
If so, I guess I agree, in general, but I'd point out that the #1 job of government isn't balancing the budget.
Some things are important enough to "go into the red" over.
-
Sorry if I incorrectly inferred that you're against ganja. My bad.
As far as your other points, couldn't it be argued that a big part of the reason for CA's budget woes of past years has been because taxes weren't high enough? (Related to prop 13 related problems with raising taxes, maybe?)
And doesn't the fact that this year there's a surplus (so no deficit but still a large outstanding debt) after raising taxes support this point?
And isn't it fairly reasonable that, however bad the debt situation has gotten with lottery tax revenue, the situation would be worse without it (ceteris paribus, of course)?
So does your comparison boil down to, "The government often doesn't manage money well and often over-promises what can be done with the money"?
If so, I guess I agree, in general, but I'd point out that the #1 job of government isn't balancing the budget.
Some things are important enough to "go into the red" over.
No worries.
Yes you can argue that budget woes are the result of the lack of revenue (i.e., taxes), but I don't think it's a very good argument. The problem with running government isn't lack of funding. The amount of money the government takes from taxpayers is obscene. Government has proved, conclusively, that it cannot manage money.
They could tax people at 90 percent and we'd still have pork barrel spending, mismanagement, waste, fraud, abuse, etc.
Here, our public education system is terrible. But education takes up the largest portion of our state budget. The problem isn't money, it's how the money is being spent.
I never said the government's no. 1 job is to have a balanced budget, but the government should not be operating in the red. It should be operating within its means without abusing taxpayers.
But back to my overall point: there is no goose that lays the golden egg when it comes to government spending.
-
Reminds me of the states that started lotteries to help with education expenses and their education system still stinks and the states are broke.
Colorado's pot tax revenues could go up in smoke, says lawmaker
By Joseph J. Kolb
Published January 31, 2014
FoxNews.com
Much of the $40 million in sales tax revenue Colorado hopes to collect from legal pot sales could be going up in smoke because banks and credit card companies refuse to work with sellers, claims a state lawmaker.
Unless banks can get a clear signal from federal regulators that it is okay to work with pot dealers without running afoul of laws aimed at launderers of drug money, the marijuana trade will remain what it is in Colorado – an all-cash business. State Sen. David Balmer says that makes it ripe for unreported – and untaxed - transactions.
“So far Colorado has not been able to come up with a solution to the banking problem,” Balmer said. “The vast majority of sales will not be accounted for.”
“The vast majority of sales will not be accounted for.”
- Colorado state Sen. David Balmer
Marijuana is considered an illegal drug by the federal government, and laws such as the Bank Secrecy Act carry severe penalties for banks. Last week, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said the feds will soon issue regulations opening banking services to state-sanctioned marijuana businesses.
"You don't want just huge amounts of cash in these places," Holder said in a speech at the University of Virginia. "They want to be able to use the banking system. And so we will be issuing some regulations I think very soon to deal with that issue."
Balmer said the new rules can’t come soon enough. He believes the state was ill-prepared for what has become a booming business since the beginning of 2014. In addition to the banking issue, he said Colorado does not have enough field agents to regulate the industry.
Officials expect retail marijuana sales tax to put $19,729,867 into state coffers in the current fiscal year and more than twice that in the next.
But for now, tracking sales is all but impossible. Businesses have no bank statements to confirm revenue or deposits, and many have expressed concern about the robbery risk associated with handling large amounts of cash. Some have set up limited liability corporations to create one-degree of separation to try to open bank accounts, but if banks know about the arrangement, they often balk, according to Balmer.
And they often can tell where the greenbacks come from.
“The large cash deposits smell like marijuana, so some of the businesses are spraying the cash with room freshener or perfume to hide the marijuana smell,” Balmer said. “The banks are even more suspicious when they have a person trying to deposit a large cash deposit that smells like perfume.”
With the above realities, said Balmer, the marijuana businesses have begun buying enormous safes to store cash and are hiring armed guards to protect their stores 24/7.
According to Casey Bauer, spokesman for the state Department of Regulatory Agencies, the Department of Revenue has created regulations with the understanding that obtaining banking services can be difficult for members of Colorado's marijuana industry. The business licensees are expected to keep detailed records and provide the Department of Revenue with full financial and inventory accountability. The Department has the authority to go into a business licensed by the state to inspect books and records, which could lead to a third party audit.
“There is a new inventory tool that was launched on Jan. 1, 2014, which tracks inventory from seed to sale,” Bauer said.
The tool Bauer is referring to is the Marijuana Inventory Tracking Solution (MITS) which she said is one piece of the robust and comprehensive regulatory scheme that the Department of Revenue has created and will continue to refine over time.
Department of Revenue spokeswoman Daria Serna said her office accepts state tax revenue in a number of ways and cash is one of them.
“The launch of retail marijuana has given the Department an opportunity to review its processes and make improvements,” she said. “We cannot go into detail about our processes and procedures, because it would compromise security, but we want tax payers to know that safety is our number one priority.”
Serna admitted that from a regulator perspective it would be helpful to have bank records from licensed businesses.
“We have crafted our regulations with the understanding that obtaining banking services can be difficult for members of Colorado’s marijuana industry,” Serna said. “Our licensees are expected to keep detailed records and provide us with full financial and inventory accountability.”
This provides little solace to Balmer, who sees a system ripe for not making appropriate tax deposits but criminal activity.
“The majority of our marijuana retailers are trying to be honest,” he said. “But this is the Wild West and nobody really knows how to be lawful because this still violates federal law.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/31/colorado-pot-tax-revenues-could-go-up-in-smoke-says-lawmaker/
Like I said, because of the amount of tax money at stake, the government was likely to find a solution to this problem pretty quickly. About 2 weeks after that Faux News story:
Banks cleared to accept marijuana business
By Evan Perez, CNN Justice Reporter
February 17, 2014 -- Updated 1339 GMT (2139 HKT)
(CNN) -- The U.S. government issued rules on Friday for the first time allowing banks to legally provide financial services to state-licensed marijuana businesses.
The Justice Department issued a memorandum to prosecutors that closely follows guidance last August largely limiting federal enforcement priorities to eight types of crimes.
These include distribution to children, trafficking by cartels and trafficking to states where marijuana isn't legal. If pot businesses aren't violating federal law in the eight specific priorities, then banks can do business with them and "may not" be prosecuted.
The Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued guidelines that Director Jennifer Shasky Calvery said was intended to signal that "it is possible to provide financial services" to state-licensed marijuana businesses and still be in compliance with federal anti-money laundering laws.
More at link below:
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/02/14/politics/u-s-marijuana-banks/?iid=EL (http://edition.cnn.com/2014/02/14/politics/u-s-marijuana-banks/?iid=EL)
-
Prohibition made Capone and organized crime into a national power that still exists to this day. Drug laws do the same. Decriminalize all drugs and treat the fallout medically through universal healthcare. Dope is the number one cash crop in the US annually. Another source of revenue. And it's fun.
-
Drugged driving deaths increase in Hawaii
Fatalities increase after medical marijuana legalized
Published 2:42 PM HST Mar 02, 2014
HONOLULU —Is marijuana making our roads safer or more dangerous? National studies are mixed on drivers under the influence of pot, but Hawaii statistics show a clear trend.
As a medical marijuana user, Joe Rattner has seen his health improve by using the drug.
"It relaxes me completely from my brain to my bodily functions. So I go about my day a little easier," said Rattner.
A recent study also suggests medical marijuana may have made roads safer.
It is based on national accident reports, and determined states that allowed medical marijuana saw a significant decrease in traffic fatalities during the first year of the program.
In Hawaii, the numbers didn't drop they actually increased from 132 deaths in 2000 to 140 in 2001.
The study suggested drivers substituted pot for alcohol, but overall there hasn't been much of a change with alcohol and fatal accidents.
Nearly 50 percent of drivers tested in those deadly accidents, tested positive for alcohol. That was true before and after the introduction of medical marijuana.
Other studies found marijuana affects driving behavior differently than alcohol, although there were some similarities.
"There is some decreased reflexes with medical marijuana or marijuana in general," said Big Island ER physician Dr. Josh Green.
"It totally slows your reaction down. Your reaction time is totally minimized. You are even thinking about other things than what you should be doing while driving," said Rattner.
Distracted driving or more like drunk driving? That can depend on the user.
According to Honolulu Police Department officers when they pull over drivers, they test for impairment. Which means some long-time or frequent marijuana users may still have the balance and adequate reflexes to pass even if they are high.
One of the statistics that is significant since the introduction of medical marijuana in Hawaii, is the percentage of drivers involved in fatal crashes that tested positive for THC - the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana. Since 2001, that amount has tripled from five to 15 percent.
"Any decrease in your capacity to swerve and get out of the way of an accident is bad -- don't do it," said Green.
Unlike a breathalyzer or blood test that determines how much alcohol is in a driver's system at a particular time, THC can remain in the bloodstream for days or weeks -- which means more frequent users could have high levels even if they did not use marijuana just before being tested.
http://www.kitv.com/news/hawaii/drugged-driving-deaths-increase-in-hawaii/24767738#ixzz2uwMTV3U3
-
Drugged driving deaths increase in Hawaii
Fatalities increase after medical marijuana legalized
Published 2:42 PM HST Mar 02, 2014
HONOLULU —Is marijuana making our roads safer or more dangerous? National studies are mixed on drivers under the influence of pot, but Hawaii statistics show a clear trend.
As a medical marijuana user, Joe Rattner has seen his health improve by using the drug.
"It relaxes me completely from my brain to my bodily functions. So I go about my day a little easier," said Rattner.
A recent study also suggests medical marijuana may have made roads safer.
It is based on national accident reports, and determined states that allowed medical marijuana saw a significant decrease in traffic fatalities during the first year of the program.
In Hawaii, the numbers didn't drop they actually increased from 132 deaths in 2000 to 140 in 2001.
The study suggested drivers substituted pot for alcohol, but overall there hasn't been much of a change with alcohol and fatal accidents.
Nearly 50 percent of drivers tested in those deadly accidents, tested positive for alcohol. That was true before and after the introduction of medical marijuana.
Other studies found marijuana affects driving behavior differently than alcohol, although there were some similarities.
"There is some decreased reflexes with medical marijuana or marijuana in general," said Big Island ER physician Dr. Josh Green.
"It totally slows your reaction down. Your reaction time is totally minimized. You are even thinking about other things than what you should be doing while driving," said Rattner.
Distracted driving or more like drunk driving? That can depend on the user.
According to Honolulu Police Department officers when they pull over drivers, they test for impairment. Which means some long-time or frequent marijuana users may still have the balance and adequate reflexes to pass even if they are high.
One of the statistics that is significant since the introduction of medical marijuana in Hawaii, is the percentage of drivers involved in fatal crashes that tested positive for THC - the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana. Since 2001, that amount has tripled from five to 15 percent.
"Any decrease in your capacity to swerve and get out of the way of an accident is bad -- don't do it," said Green.
Unlike a breathalyzer or blood test that determines how much alcohol is in a driver's system at a particular time, THC can remain in the bloodstream for days or weeks -- which means more frequent users could have high levels even if they did not use marijuana just before being tested.
http://www.kitv.com/news/hawaii/drugged-driving-deaths-increase-in-hawaii/24767738#ixzz2uwMTV3U3
Holy shit, is this article indicative of the general level of journalism in Hawaii? --- Could it be that the writer and editor(s) were stoned,lol?
The title is "Drugged driving deaths increase in Hawaii" but what the hell is "drugged driving"?
I ask because about 3/4's through the article it says that though the % of drivers killed who had THC in their systems tripled (from 5% to 15%), it points out that the presence of THC in one's system does not mean that the driver was high since THC can linger in one's system for "days or weeks".
Also, does KITV not have a statistics major they can make use of? That traffic fatalities went from 132 to 140 seems near useless info because of the small size of the sample.
Just a shit article.
Thanks BB.
-
Holy shit, is this article indicative of the general level of journalism in Hawaii? --- Could it be that the writer and editor(s) were stoned,lol?
The title is "Drugged driving deaths increase in Hawaii" but what the hell is "drugged driving"?
I ask because about 3/4's through the article it says that though the % of drivers killed who had THC in their systems tripled (from 5% to 15%), it points out that the presence of THC in one's system does not mean that the driver was high since THC can linger in one's system for "days or weeks".
Also, does KITV not have a statistics major they can make use of? That traffic fatalities went from 132 to 140 seems near useless info because of the small size of the sample.
Just a shit article.
Thanks BB.
I have no problem with the way the article was written.
This part is troubling:
"There is some decreased reflexes with medical marijuana or marijuana in general," said Big Island ER physician Dr. Josh Green.
"It totally slows your reaction down. Your reaction time is totally minimized. You are even thinking about other things than what you should be doing while driving," said Rattner.
-
I have no problem with the way the article was written.
That you'd admit that is funny as hell but whateva.
This part is troubling:
"There is some decreased reflexes with medical marijuana or marijuana in general," said Big Island ER physician Dr. Josh Green.
"It totally slows your reaction down. Your reaction time is totally minimized. You are even thinking about other things than what you should be doing while driving," said Rattner.
Hilarious.
The very reasonable ER physician says "...some decreased reflexes...in general" followed by the quotes by Rattner (Id'd in this article only as a medical marijuana user) "It totally slows your reaction down." "Your reaction time is totally minimized."
Like I said, BB, this is a shitty article.
It seems to have been written/edited by 2 or more folks with quite different viewpoints.
-
That you'd admit that is funny as hell but whateva.
Hilarious.
The very reasonable ER physician says "...some decreased reflexes...in general" followed by the quotes by Rattner (Id'd in this article only as a medical marijuana user) "It totally slows your reaction down." "Your reaction time is totally minimized."
Like I said, BB, this is a shitty article.
It seems to have been written/edited by 2 or more folks with quite different viewpoints.
Sounds like balanced reporting to me.
-
Sounds like balanced reporting to me.
Including the title and subtitle? You don't find them at least a little misleading after reading the article?
You a Fox News sucker-upper or something?
-
Including the title and subtitle? You don't find them at least a little misleading after reading the article?
You a Fox News sucker-upper or something?
Yes. No.
::)
-
Yes. No.
::)
Dishonest and not-too-bright is no way to live out your golden years, BB.
-
Dishonest and not-too-bright is no way to live out your golden years, BB.
Yawn. ::)
-
BTW, who started this thread about a dumb article that ridiculously tried to link legalized marijuana with crime, anyway?
I think that other state governments are taking notice with great interest of the more than predicted amount of marijuana tax money that the state of Colorado has rolling in and so we'll likely see more and more states following suit before long.
-
Dishonest and not-too-bright is no way to live out your golden years, BB.
Beach Bum still believes the earth is flat and the sun rotates around the earth.
And he is on a non-stop mission to take away peoples right to do with their bodies as they please(in this case smoking weed).
A bad combo indeed.
-
Would this become more prevalent with legalization?
3rd-Graders Caught Smoking Pot In Sonora School Bathroom
March 5, 2014
SONORA (CBS SF) — Three third-grade students at a Sonora elementary school were busted for smoking pot in the school’s bathroom last week.
Two 8-year-olds and a 9-year-old were caught by another student, who immediately informed school administrators. Those officials then alerted local police.
The students were questioned by officers, and later released to their parents on February 27th.
Sonora Elementary School Principal Chris Boyles would not speak with CBS SF regarding the case, but Superintendent Leigh Shampain confirmed that the students were caught smoking marijuana in the school’s bathroom. He would not discuss how the students might be disciplined.
“(I’m) shocked. To be in third grade and have their own pipe,” parent Linda Rodriguez commented to KTXL-TV. “I think they should be expelled, but I also think they should follow it further to where they found (the drugs).”
The case was forwarded to the Tuolumne County Probation Department.
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/03/05/third-graders-caught-smoking-pot-in-sonora-school-bathroom/
-
Would this become more prevalent with legalization?
3rd-Graders Caught Smoking Pot In Sonora School Bathroom
March 5, 2014
SONORA (CBS SF) — Three third-grade students at a Sonora elementary school were busted for smoking pot in the school’s bathroom last week.
Two 8-year-olds and a 9-year-old were caught by another student, who immediately informed school administrators. Those officials then alerted local police.
The students were questioned by officers, and later released to their parents on February 27th.
Sonora Elementary School Principal Chris Boyles would not speak with CBS SF regarding the case, but Superintendent Leigh Shampain confirmed that the students were caught smoking marijuana in the school’s bathroom. He would not discuss how the students might be disciplined.
“(I’m) shocked. To be in third grade and have their own pipe,” parent Linda Rodriguez commented to KTXL-TV. “I think they should be expelled, but I also think they should follow it further to where they found (the drugs).”
The case was forwarded to the Tuolumne County Probation Department.
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/03/05/third-graders-caught-smoking-pot-in-sonora-school-bathroom/
Are you implying that it's prevalent now?
-
Would this become more prevalent with legalization?
3rd-Graders Caught Smoking Pot In Sonora School Bathroom
March 5, 2014
SONORA (CBS SF) — Three third-grade students at a Sonora elementary school were busted for smoking pot in the school’s bathroom last week.
Two 8-year-olds and a 9-year-old were caught by another student, who immediately informed school administrators. Those officials then alerted local police.
The students were questioned by officers, and later released to their parents on February 27th.
Sonora Elementary School Principal Chris Boyles would not speak with CBS SF regarding the case, but Superintendent Leigh Shampain confirmed that the students were caught smoking marijuana in the school’s bathroom. He would not discuss how the students might be disciplined.
“(I’m) shocked. To be in third grade and have their own pipe,” parent Linda Rodriguez commented to KTXL-TV. “I think they should be expelled, but I also think they should follow it further to where they found (the drugs).”
The case was forwarded to the Tuolumne County Probation Department.
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/03/05/third-graders-caught-smoking-pot-in-sonora-school-bathroom/
I'm not sure it would. This is a failure by adult to properly supervise children.
-
BB's next thread idea:
Legalized guns, fire, gravity and the juvenile crime question.
-
I'm not sure it would. This is a failure by adult to properly supervise children.
This happened at school, so not sure I'd blame the parents, but would sure like to know where the kids got it.
-
Actually surprised to hear Governor Moonbeam say this.
-
Would this become more prevalent with legalization?
3rd-Graders Caught Smoking Pot In Sonora School Bathroom
March 5, 2014
SONORA (CBS SF) — Three third-grade students at a Sonora elementary school were busted for smoking pot in the school’s bathroom last week.
Two 8-year-olds and a 9-year-old were caught by another student, who immediately informed school administrators. Those officials then alerted local police.
The students were questioned by officers, and later released to their parents on February 27th.
Sonora Elementary School Principal Chris Boyles would not speak with CBS SF regarding the case, but Superintendent Leigh Shampain confirmed that the students were caught smoking marijuana in the school’s bathroom. He would not discuss how the students might be disciplined.
“(I’m) shocked. To be in third grade and have their own pipe,” parent Linda Rodriguez commented to KTXL-TV. “I think they should be expelled, but I also think they should follow it further to where they found (the drugs).”
The case was forwarded to the Tuolumne County Probation Department.
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/03/05/third-graders-caught-smoking-pot-in-sonora-school-bathroom/
Very sorry to say, but nothing new with this one. It's been happening as long as people have been around.
-
Very sorry to say, but nothing new with this one. It's been happening as long as people have been around.
Third graders smoking pot is not a longstanding problem in this country.
-
Third graders smoking pot is not a longstanding problem in this country.
Human nature hasn't been transformed in the past few months. Perhaps you're confusing it with media focus.
-
Human nature hasn't been transformed in the past few months. Perhaps you're confusing it with media focus.
It simply hasn't been happening for "as long as people have been around." You realize a third grader is about eight years old? You must be high (so to speak) if you think we have had a problem with eight-year-olds smoking pot for our entire country's history.
-
3rd graders,i wouldn't look any further than the parents
-
3rd graders,i wouldn't look any further than the parents
That's the logical place to start, but sometimes it's not a parental failure.
-
It simply hasn't been happening for "as long as people have been around." You realize a third grader is about eight years old? You must be high (so to speak) if you think we have had a problem with eight-year-olds smoking pot for our entire country's history.
Okay, so when did it become a problem?
-
I don't see them buying it anywhere,my guess is they have older brother or sister that smokes or the parents
-
Okay, so when did it become a problem?
I'm not sure it is a widespread problem. I have never seen this being a problem, nor have I heard or read about it being a problem.
-
I don't see them buying it anywhere,my guess is they have older brother or sister that smokes or the parents
Definitely possible, but could have been a neighbor, someone at school, etc.
-
I'm not sure it is a widespread problem. I have never seen this being a problem, nor have I heard or read about it being a problem.
Through the media, you mean?
-
Through the media, you mean?
Through the news (online, print, TV), my interaction with numerous schools, teachers, etc.
-
Through the news (online, print, TV), my interaction with numerous schools, teachers, etc.
Is this the first such case you've been made aware of?
-
Is this the first such case you've been made aware of?
No, I have heard of young kids experimenting with drugs before. But a chronic problem with eight year olds smoking pot? No.
On what basis did you conclude that eight year olds smoking pot has been a problem in the U.S. for the last 200+ years?
-
No, I have heard of young kids experimenting with drugs before. But a chronic problem with eight year olds smoking pot? No.
On what basis did you conclude that eight year olds smoking pot has been a problem in the U.S. for the last 200+ years?
Is that what this is?
-
So we're talking about an isolated problem versus a widespread problem, right?
Trying to figure whether this problem will soon become widespread. Is that right?
-
So we're talking about an isolated problem versus a widespread problem, right?
Trying to figure whether this problem will soon become widespread. Is that right?
On what basis did you conclude that eight year olds smoking pot has been a problem in the U.S. for the last 200+ years
-
On what basis did you conclude that eight year olds smoking pot has been a problem in the U.S. for the last 200+ years
Wouldn't you say that any instance of children using marijuana is a problem?
-
Wouldn't you say that any instance of children using marijuana is a problem?
You didn't answer his question.
-
You didn't answer his question.
Maybe I misinterpreted it. Why don't you ask me the question?
-
Maybe I misinterpreted it. Why don't you ask me the question?
You can read can't you? If you didn't understand the question you should have asked BB instead of pretending you did.
-
You can read can't you? If you didn't understand the question you should have asked BB instead of pretending you did.
Do you suppose he's asking whether any children have smoked marijuana during the time period he referred to?
-
..because if you view each instance as a problem, the answer should make sense.
Right?
If it doesn't make sense, please explain.
-
Do you suppose he's asking whether any children have smoked marijuana during the time period he referred to?
You can't be serious.
-
You can't be serious.
Do you believe that any children have smoked pot during the time period Beach referred to?
-
...it's a very simple question.
-
So if you want to talk about an isolated problem versus a widespread problem, then do it. Come out and say it.
-
...it's a very simple question.
Yet you can't seem to answer it. All you do is answer a question with a question.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Question_dodging
Question dodging is the intentional avoidance of answering a question.
This may happen when the person questioned either does not know the answer and wants to avoid embarrassment, or when the person is being interrogated or questioned in debate, and wants to avoid giving a direct response.
Overt question dodging can sometimes be employed humorously, in order to sidestep giving a public answer in a political discussion: when a reporter asked Mayor Richard J. Daley why Hubert Humphrey had lost the state of Illinois in the 1968 presidential election, Daley replied "He lost it because he didn't get enough votes."
A false accusation of question dodging can sometimes be made as a disingenuous tactic in debate, in the informal fallacy of the loaded question. A common way out of this argument is not to answer the question (e.g. with a simple 'yes' or 'no'), but to challenge the assumption behind the question. This can lead the person questioned to be accused of "dodging the question".
Often the aim of dodging a question is to make it seem as though the question was fulfilled. The person who asked the question feeling satisfied with the answer, unaware that the question was not properly answered.
The form of a dodged question, this example being "Why are you here?", could be:
Refusing to answer ("No comment.")
Changing the subject ("Your shoelace is undone.")
Explaining redundant things to distract one's focus ("Well I arrived here 10 minutes ago and I decided that...")
Creating an excuse not to answer ("I'm feeling sick, I can't answer now.")
Repeating the question ("Why are you here?")
Answering the question with another question ("Why do you think I'm here?")
Answering things that weren't asked ("I'm in the corridor.")
Questioning the question ("Are you sure that's relevant?")
Challenging the question ("You assume I am here for a reason.")
Giving an answer in the wrong context ("Because I was born.")
-
Looks like you're making a self-diagnosis.
Do you say that any children have smoked marijuana during that period?
Do you view every possible instance as a problem?
If so, there has been a problem.
Right?
-
Looks like a self-diagnosis.
Do you say that any children have smoked marijuana during that period?
Do you view every possible instance as a problem?
If so, there has been a problem.
You can't help yourself from doing it. You're still doing it. Answer BB question.
-
You can't help yourself from doing it. You're still doing it. Answer BB question.
Children have smoked marijuana.
Children smoking marijuana is a problem.
Therefore, there has been a problem.
Is that plain enough for you, or would you like to break it down further?
-
Children have smoked marijuana.
Children smoking marijuana is a problem.
Therefore, there has been a problem.
Is that plain enough for you, or would you like to break it down further?
Shouldn't you ask BB to explain his question to you? You said you didn't understand it.
-
Shouldn't you ask BB to explain his question to you? You said you didn't understand it.
Maybe he can clarify, sure. Sounds good.
-
Wouldn't you say that any instance of children using marijuana is a problem?
On what basis did you conclude that eight year olds smoking pot has been a problem in the U.S. for the last 200+ years?
-
Yet you can't seem to answer it. All you do is answer a question with a question.
True. lol
-
On what basis did you conclude that eight year olds smoking pot has been a problem in the U.S. for the last 200+ years?
The conclusion is that children have been smoking marijuana, and that means a problem.
(can't wait to see where any disagreement could possibly arise from)
-
The conclusion is that children have been smoking marijuana, and that means a problem.
(can't wait to see where any disagreement could possibly arise from)
That doesn't really answer the question. You said this:
Very sorry to say, but nothing new with this one. It's been happening as long as people have been around.
On what basis did you conclude that 8 year old kids have been smoking pot "as long as people have been around"?
-
That doesn't really answer the question. You said this:
On what basis did you conclude that 8 year old kids have been smoking pot "as long as people have been around"?
Yes, Beach, it answers the question: "On what basis did you conclude that eight year olds smoking pot has been a problem in the U.S. for the last 200+ years"
If you'd like to deny that children have smoked pot anywhere it exists (including in America in the past 200+ years), or that children smoking pot is a problem, please do. Otherwise, we are left with a single possibility.
-
Yes, Beach, it answers the question: "On what basis did you conclude that eight year olds smoking pot has been a problem in the U.S. for the last 200+ years"
If you'd like to deny that children have smoked pot anywhere it exists (including in America in the past 200+ years), or that children smoking pot is a problem, please do. Otherwise, we are left with a single possibility.
No, it doesn't. On what facts do you base your opinion that eight year olds have been smoking pot for the past 200 years?
-
No, it doesn't. On what facts do you base your opinion that eight year olds have been smoking pot for the past 200 years?
Facts say that people cannot be separated from the seeking of pleasure, and facts say that marijuana may be perceived as a way to deliver that to oneself. (btw, consumed may be a more accurate description, as smoking is only part of the story)
So no matter how sheltered a person may have lived his own life, it should become impossible to believe that every child in history has been successfully steered away from finding cannabis as a tool to deliver pleasure.
People, including children, were regularly treated with marijuana tinctures, as well, which was not an uncommon household item. Surely you wouldn't stake a claim to say that every child in history was successfully minded to the point where consumption was limited only at the direction of the parent. Right?
The unavoidable conclusion is that people, including children, have sought pleasure by consuming marijuana in the past.
-
Facts say that people cannot be separated from the seeking of pleasure, and facts say that marijuana may be perceived as a way to deliver that to oneself. (btw, consumed may be a more accurate description, as smoking is only part of the story)
So no matter how sheltered a person may have lived his own life, it should become impossible to believe that every child in history has been successfully steered away from finding cannabis as a tool to deliver pleasure.
People, including children, were regularly treated with marijuana tinctures, as well, which was not an uncommon household item. Surely you wouldn't stake a claim to say that every child in history was successfully minded to the point where consumption was limited only at the direction of the parent. Right?
The unavoidable conclusion is that people, including children, have sought pleasure by consuming marijuana in the past.
I see. So pure conjecture on your part that we have had a chronic problem with eight year olds smoking pot for the past 200 yards. Got it.
-
So basically:
A: People seek pleasure, its our nature
B: 200 years ago, Children were exposed to Weed when used a treatment aliments
Therefore A + B proves C
C: There was a chronic problem with 8 year olds smoking pot.
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
Classic CT'er logic. Perfect for the politics board too because we do this crap all the time. lol
-
So basically:
A: People seek pleasure, its our nature
B: 200 years ago, Children were exposed to Weed when used a treatment aliments
Therefore A + B proves C
C: There was a chronic problem with 8 year olds smoking pot.
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
Classic CT'er logic. Perfect for the politics board too because we do this crap all the time. lol
^^^ Wurd. :)
-
I see. So pure conjecture on your part that we have had a chronic problem with eight year olds smoking pot for the past 200 yards. Got it.
LOL. Pretty punny to use the word "chronic" in your attempt to put words in Jack T's mouth, imo. Bravo.
I also think it's funny how this whole "discussion" between you and Jack T. started by you implying that the problem (of youngsters smoking pot) was prevalent (prevalent, btw, means widespread) when you tried to suggest that it would likely become "more prevalent" with your question.
(As an aside, I pondered whether using "more prevalent" does in fact change the meaning of the sentence instead of just "prevalent" in your sentence "Would this become more prevalent with legalization?" and have to conclude that it does.)
Then, when Jack T. seems to agree with you that it's a problem of some sort, you come out and say something like, "I don't know that it IS widespread."
And now you come out and criticize him for "conjecture"? Coming from you, that's a complete and total laugh.
-
So basically:
A: People seek pleasure, its our nature
B: 200 years ago, Children were exposed to Weed when used a treatment aliments
Therefore A + B proves C
C: There was a chronic problem with 8 year olds smoking pot.
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
Classic CT'er logic. Perfect for the politics board too because we do this crap all the time. lol
OzmO, I respect the way you think/write but please tell me where Jack T. wrote or even implied (strongly or otherwise) that it (young kids smoking weed) was a "chronic" problem?
Seemed to me he was just saying that this issue has occurred before without comment on how widespread or common it is. I could be wrong, though.
-
So basically:
A: People seek pleasure, its our nature
B: 200 years ago, Children were exposed to Weed when used a treatment aliments
Therefore A + B proves C
C: There was a chronic problem with 8 year olds smoking pot.
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
Classic CT'er logic. Perfect for the politics board too because we do this crap all the time. lol
Who said 'chronic', OzmO? And who questioned 'chronic'?
PLEASE read the thread if you're going to direct a comment at someone.
Hope you don't bitch out on this, either. Answer.
-
OzmO, I respect the way you think/write but please tell me where Jack T. wrote or even implied (strongly or otherwise) that it (young kids smoking weed) was a "chronic" problem?
Seemed to me he was just saying that this issue has occurred before without comment on how widespread or common it is. I could be wrong, though.
No, you're absolutely right.
Thank you, RRKore. I appreciate it.
It's all fun.
-
I see. So pure conjecture on your part that we have had a chronic problem with eight year olds smoking pot for the past 200 yards. Got it.
So will you suggest that we've had significant periods of time when these cases didn't occur?
Was everyone a proper parent, then, or what? Trying to figure where you're coming from.
-
OzmO, I respect the way you think/write but please tell me where Jack T. wrote or even implied (strongly or otherwise) that it (young kids smoking weed) was a "chronic" problem?
Seemed to me he was just saying that this issue has occurred before without comment on how widespread or common it is. I could be wrong, though.
He heavily implies the problem is long standing, common and wide spread.
So will you suggest that we've had significant periods of time when these cases didn't occur?
Was everyone a proper parent, then, or what? Trying to figure where you're coming from.
Here he does it again.
-
Yet you can't seem to answer it. All you do is answer a question with a question.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Question_dodging
Question dodging is the intentional avoidance of answering a question.
This may happen when the person questioned either does not know the answer and wants to avoid embarrassment, or when the person is being interrogated or questioned in debate, and wants to avoid giving a direct response.
Overt question dodging can sometimes be employed humorously, in order to sidestep giving a public answer in a political discussion: when a reporter asked Mayor Richard J. Daley why Hubert Humphrey had lost the state of Illinois in the 1968 presidential election, Daley replied "He lost it because he didn't get enough votes."
A false accusation of question dodging can sometimes be made as a disingenuous tactic in debate, in the informal fallacy of the loaded question. A common way out of this argument is not to answer the question (e.g. with a simple 'yes' or 'no'), but to challenge the assumption behind the question. This can lead the person questioned to be accused of "dodging the question".
Often the aim of dodging a question is to make it seem as though the question was fulfilled. The person who asked the question feeling satisfied with the answer, unaware that the question was not properly answered.
The form of a dodged question, this example being "Why are you here?", could be:
Refusing to answer ("No comment.")
Changing the subject ("Your shoelace is undone.")
Explaining redundant things to distract one's focus ("Well I arrived here 10 minutes ago and I decided that...")
Creating an excuse not to answer ("I'm feeling sick, I can't answer now.")
Repeating the question ("Why are you here?")
Answering the question with another question ("Why do you think I'm here?")
Answering things that weren't asked ("I'm in the corridor.")
Questioning the question ("Are you sure that's relevant?")
Challenging the question ("You assume I am here for a reason.")
Giving an answer in the wrong context ("Because I was born.")
I'm bumping this again because he seems to be unable to stop himself from doing this.
-
By the way, this story happened in California, where the pot laws have been in place for nearly 20 years.
-
SS4U, I'm genuinely trying to figure out where Beach Bum is coming from. I hope to learn from it.
-
...these issues are larger than all of us.
-
SS4U, I'm genuinely trying to figure out where Beach Bum is coming from. I hope to learn from it.
I don't think you are. Your strategy is to ask a question every time you're asked one thus putting the questioner in the position of having to answer a question instead of you explaining yourself.
-
I don't think you are. Your strategy is to ask a question every time you're asked one thus putting the questioner in the position of having to answer a question instead of you explaining yourself.
Please fix your glasses and look at what you quoted above. What "question with a question" are you talking about?
-
Please fix your glasses and look at what you quoted above. What "question with a question" are you talking about?
You know what you're doing. Your goal is to put someone on the defensive and never have to provide difinite complex answers.
-
You know what you're doing. Your goal is to put someone on the defensive and never have to provide difinite complex answers.
It shouldn't require much complexity, to say that certain people are going to seek pleasure through taking marijuana. That's about as basic as it gets.
-
It shouldn't require much complexity, to say that certain people are going to seek pleasure through taking marijuana. That's about as basic as it gets.
We get it. You read Socrates in your intro to philosophy class and have mastered the Socratic method.
-
We get it. You read Socrates in your intro to philosophy class and have mastered the Socratic method.
All this, and not a single word about the topic.
-
All this, and not a single word about the topic.
I never made claims. You did.
-
I never made claims. You did.
What claim have I made, that you'd challenge?
-
OzmO, I respect the way you think/write but please tell me where Jack T. wrote or even implied (strongly or otherwise) that it (young kids smoking weed) was a "chronic" problem?
Seemed to me he was just saying that this issue has occurred before without comment on how widespread or common it is. I could be wrong, though.
My mistake, however
The logic is still sound taking the word "Chronic" out.
Children have smoked marijuana.
Children smoking marijuana is a problem.
Therefore, there has been a problem.
Is that plain enough for you, or would you like to break it down further?
The conclusion is that children have been smoking marijuana, and that means a problem.
(can't wait to see where any disagreement could possibly arise from)
-
What claim have I made, that you'd challenge?
Did it again. You can't stop yourself.
-
Who said 'chronic', OzmO? And who questioned 'chronic'?
PLEASE read the thread if you're going to direct a comment at someone.
Hope you don't bitch out on this, either. Answer.
Should i think carefully first? ::)
Regardless, you still are up to your stupid logic and dodge tactics.
You are the one you just can't directly answer questions.
-
Did it again. You can't stop yourself.
You made a statement, and I asked you to clarify.
-
My mistake,
That's true.
however
The logic is still sound taking the word "Chronic" out.
So attempt to correct me. Please.
-
Haha..Beach loves it when the schmoes take the heat off him.
-
So if anyone can challenge anything I've said, then please do it.
Otherwise, please quit littering the thread.
No one here wants to see children take pot, so let's not forget we're on the same page.
-
Haha..Beach loves it when the schmoes take the heat off him.
You're just mad because everyone knows your play book.
-
You're just mad because everyone knows your play book.
Haha..I'm not. GB is the funniest place I've ever seen. I love it.
-
That's true.
So attempt to correct me. Please.
already did. ;)
When you can back a claim with actual data and research then i will give you some credit, which may be possible, i donno. But your logic, as usual, used as fact, is false.
-
already did. ;)
When you can back a claim with actual data and research then i will give you some credit, which may be possible, i donno. But your logic, as usual, used as fact, is false.
I don't know what it is you're denying, OzmO. Please be specific.
-
I don't know what it is you're denying, OzmO. Please be specific.
::)
same old shit
When you can back a claim with actual data and research then i will give you some credit, which may be possible, i donno. But your logic, as usual, used as fact, is false.
-
My mistake, however
The logic is still sound taking the word "Chronic" out.
Depends on what one means by the term "a problem" because technically, if even a single 8-year old is smoking pot, it could be called "a problem". (Just a teeny little one for society as a whole.)
And, since this whole sub-discussion arose after BB posted an article describing how 2 kiddies smoked pot and then he seemed to take some liberties with inaccurate language by asking the misleading question, "Would this become more prevalent with legalization?" (NOT "Would this become prevalent with legalization?"), I find it hard to want to come down on Jack T. for any of his own language shenanigans.
That being said, I now gather that maybe Jack has some history of trolling you and SS4U so I'm going to say "ooops!" and see my way out of this discussion without further comment. 8)
-
already did. ;)
When you can back a claim with actual data and research then i will give you some credit, which may be possible, i donno. But your logic, as usual, used as fact, is false.
???
Be specific.
-
Depends on what one means by the term "a problem" because technically, if even a single 8-year old is smoking pot, it could be called "a problem". (Just a teeny little one for society as a whole.)
And, since this whole sub-discussion arose after BB posted an article describing how 2 kiddies smoked pot and then he seemed to take some liberties with inaccurate language by asking the misleading question, "Would this become more prevalent with legalization?" (NOT "Would this become prevalent with legalization?"), I find it hard to want to come down on Jack T. for any of his own language shenanigans.
That being said, I now gather that maybe Jack has some history of trolling you and SS4U so I'm going to say "ooops!" and see my way out of this discussion without further comment. 8)
Yes, anyone that's been defeated in debate has been trolled. Just ask them, and they'll tell you.
-
Yes, anyone that's been defeated in debate has been trolled. Just ask them, and they'll tell you.
LOL. Preaching to the choir, mang.
I've been posting here regularly for months but BB will tell you that I'm a gimmick...after I figuratively ate his lunch a couple of times, of course, lol.
-
When someone abandons the topic in order to focus on the opponent, it's a pretty sure sign.
-
...all part of the fun, though, lol
-
???
Be specific.
::)
same old shit
-
When someone abandons the topic in order to focus on the opponent, it's a pretty sure sign.
-
When someone abandons the topic in order to focus on the opponent, it's a pretty sure sign.
Unless it's Coach, you forgot to add. ;D
-
Unless it's Coach, you forgot to add. ;D
Hahah..Coach just abandons the thread, period.
-
Actually, Coach is one of the nicest guys on here.
Funny how this shit works.
-
When someone abandons the topic in order to focus on the opponent, it's a pretty sure sign.
When someone only answers a question with a question it's pretty clear they have nothing of value to say.
-
When someone only answers a question with a question it's pretty clear they have nothing of value to say.
Funny, you've said that three times in a row after making a statement.
-
Depends on what one means by the term "a problem" because technically, if even a single 8-year old is smoking pot, it could be called "a problem". (Just a teeny little one for society as a whole.)
And, since this whole sub-discussion arose after BB posted an article describing how 2 kiddies smoked pot and then he seemed to take some liberties with inaccurate language by asking the misleading question, "Would this become more prevalent with legalization?" (NOT "Would this become prevalent with legalization?"), I find it hard to want to come down on Jack T. for any of his own language shenanigans.
That being said, I now gather that maybe Jack has some history of trolling you and SS4U so I'm going to say "ooops!" and see my way out of this discussion without further comment. 8)
lol nah, its just a typical tactic of Jack. He often dodges, defects or misdirects when pressed. Its more tedious than trolling. Jack's alright, he's a good guy. I don't consider Jack a troller. He's just tragically flawed in many of his conclusions.
Like i said to Jack, show me some hard data or research on Children smoking pot 200 years ago and i will give him credit. I am sure some 8 year old kid smoked pot in the world 200 years ago, but was it so often and so many kids that it was a problem as defined the way would see it today? Where, for example, there was school complaining that their students were smoking too much pot? See we have to kind put this in perspective. Another example, i am sure there was someone some place 200 years ago who tortured a squirrel. Is it accurate to say there was a problem 200 years with children torturing squirrels?
Until then, my A + B = C CT'er logical fallacy still stands.
-
Yes, anyone that's been defeated in debate has been trolled. Just ask them, and they'll tell you.
You havent defeated anyone. Defeating an opponent would require you to have made a contribution to the discourse.
-
haven't abandoned the topic.
learn to read better.
lol same old shit.
-
Funny, you've said that three times in a row after making a statement.
Yet you keep doing it.
-
Yet you keep doing it.
its hilarious how he does that huh?
-
its hilarious how he does that huh?
I've read some of his other posts and it's all the same thing over and over again. This is what happens when a kid takes an intro to philosophy course and thinks he's Socrates.
-
OzmO, sorry, but it's too obvious that you haven't read the thread.
-
lol at the giant collection of hurt asses running around here.
-
I've read some of his other posts and it's all the same thing over and over again. This is what happens when a kid takes an intro to philosophy course and thinks he's Socrates.
Yet you never seem to bring the challenge.
-
lol at the giant collection of hurt asses running around here.
Your ego requires you to tell yourself that, suckratease. You're a coffee house philosopher
-
Haha..it's all good. Anyone that's serious about the topic can read the thread for themselves. That's all that matters.
You guys are alright, as far as I'm concerned.
-
Yet you never seem to bring the challenge.
I only asked you to answer BB and quite dodging questions. Seeing how you can't help yourself from dodging I understand how you might find that a challenge.
-
I only asked you to answer BB and quite dodging questions. Seeing how you can't help yourself from dodging I understand how you might find that a challenge.
Haha..it's all good. Anyone that's serious about the topic can read the thread for themselves. That's all that matters.
You guys are alright, as far as I'm concerned.
-
OzmO, sorry, but it's too obvious that you haven't read the thread.
stay on topic, re read my posts.
-
stay on topic, re read my posts.
Okay, Oz. Will do, and we'll fight this another day.
-
Okay, Oz. Will do, and we'll fight this another day.
Staying on topic means fighting it now. Am I to conclude you have no answers to my assertions?
-
This video is long but interesting. Includes some info about why marijuana is a Schedule 1 drug in the first part of the video and gets pretty good at about the 8m15s mark when Tennessee Congressman Cohen begins to directly question DEA Chief of Operations Tom Harrigan:
-
What is everyone arguing about, weed is good for the body and the economy, adults should be able to consume any drug they want.
-
Staying on topic means fighting it now. Am I to conclude you have no answers to my assertions?
What is it you're challenging, Oz?
Please make sure it's something I said, though, and not something that someone else said.
-
What is it you're challenging, Oz?
Please make sure it's something I said, though, and not something that someone else said.
Should i either conclude:
1. You can't read?
2. You refuse to read?
3. You have no answers to my assertions?
Which is it?
-
Should i either conclude:
1. You can't read?
2. You refuse to read?
3. You have no answers to my assertions?
Which is it?
You're not being specific. Please describe the conflict.
-
You're not being specific. Please describe the conflict.
I already have, specifically. Why are your refusing to read or comment on it?
Is it because you can not or will not?
-
I already have, specifically. Why are your refusing to read or comment on it?
Is it because you can not or will not?
He wants to divert attention away from himself. He won't explain himself or give definitive answers to any question because it would require him to back up his opinions. It's much easier to repeatedly ask questions and/or claim ignorance. That way, you are always on the defensive and he isn't. He can feel smart by really saying nothing at all.
-
I already have, specifically. Why are your refusing to read or comment on it?
Is it because you can not or will not?
Then use a quote.
Simple, right?
-
He wants to divert attention away from himself. He won't explain himself or give definitive answers to any question because it would require him to back up his opinions. It's much easier to repeatedly ask questions and/or claim ignorance. That way, you are always on the defensive and he isn't. He can feel smart by really saying nothing at all.
lol I know. That's his basic MO. I have dealt with him on the CT board in the past. It get tedious after a while. But like i said, he's alright.
PS Jack, i finally got busted for wearing a belt through the scanner at the airport. But i did, at the same time, get toothpaste, deodorant, gel and shaving cream through the x-ray. BLAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
Meanwhile now that there's TSA precheck......... :D
-
Then use a quote.
Simple, right?
Not as simple as you taking the time to read.
Have you lost your ability to read or are you just scared?
-
lol I know. That's his basic MO. I have dealt with him on the CT board in the past. It get tedious after a while. But like i said, he's alright.
PS Jack, i finally got busted for wearing a belt through the scanner at the airport. But i did, at the same time, get toothpaste, deodorant, gel and shaving cream through the x-ray. BLAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
Meanwhile now that there's TSA precheck......... :D
As have I. In a previous incarnation of course. ;D
-
Not as simple as you taking the time to read.
Have you lost your ability to read or are you just scared?
It's simpler for you, you mean. Either you have a specific challenge or you don't.
State your case, OzmO. Right here and right now. Let's settle this thing.
-
It's simpler for you, you mean. Either you have a specific challenge or you don't.
State your case, OzmO. Right here and right now. Let's settle this thing.
He already did. Ozmo, don't bother. It's like debating pee wee Herman. "I know you are but what am I". He will always deflect and put the focus on the other person.
-
lol I know. That's his basic MO. I have dealt with him on the CT board in the past. It get tedious after a while. But like i said, he's alright.
PS Jack, i finally got busted for wearing a belt through the scanner at the airport. But i did, at the same time, get toothpaste, deodorant, gel and shaving cream through the x-ray. BLAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
Meanwhile now that there's TSA precheck......... :D
So why don't you comply with security demands at the airport?
-
So why don't you comply with security demands at the airport?
Why don't you answer questions that posters ask you on get big?
-
It's simpler for you, you mean. Either you have a specific challenge or you don't.
State your case, OzmO. Right here and right now. Let's settle this thing.
Read up, respond and we will discuss.
scared?
-
Read up, respond and we will discuss.
scared?
I've already read the thread as it was developing. Didn't you?
-
I've already read the thread as it was developing. Didn't you?
If you did then you should be able to respond shouldn't you?
scared?
-
If you did then you should be able to respond shouldn't you?
scared?
You could have made dozens of quotes by now. Any reason why you haven't made the supposed one in question?
-
You could have made dozens of quotes by now. Any reason why you haven't made the supposed one in question?
In this time do you think you can have read up? And..............being that you claim you have read the thread as it was developing what's stopping you from responding?
scared?
-
In this time do you think you can have read up? And..............being that you claim you have read the thread as it was developing what's stopping you from responding?
scared?
I've been responding for several minutes now.
-
I'll catch you later, OzmO. You'd better have an argument ready if you think you've got one. (and it serves you right about the airport :P)
-
I'll catch you later, OzmO. You'd better have an argument ready if you think you've got one. (and it serves you right about the airport :P)
Blah blah blah. Your little routine might work in coffee shops but this is getbig.
-
I've been responding for several minutes now.
Have you been responding to my assertions regarding the subject?
scared?
-
I'll catch you later, OzmO. You'd better have an argument ready if you think you've got one. (and it serves you right about the airport :P)
When have you ever engaged anyone in a legit argument?
Here's your chance and you are running away as usual.
scared.
-
Blah blah blah. Your little routine might work in coffee shops but this is getbig.
It doesn't work in coffee shops I assure you. He would be publicly laughed at and ridiculed.
the only place his act works is on a forum.
Its basically a form of trolling.
that's why no one really takes him seriously around here except on occasion when it comes to fear propaganda and America bashing, our resident looney from Canada.
-
meltdown
-
meltdown
::)
scared.
-
Hahaha...Beach Bum was so anxious to oppose me, he didn't realize we were effectively in agreement when I made the first post in this thread.
Then you and SS4U couldn't resist joining the routine, and the comedy fell right into place.
Too bad it's such a serious subject.
-
Hahaha...Beach Bum was so anxious to oppose me, he didn't realize we were effectively in agreement when I made the first post in this thread.
Then you and SS4U couldn't resist joining the routine, and the comedy fell right into place.
Too bad it's such a serious subject.
Still can't respond to my assertions even though you claim you've been reading the thread as it develops.
Delusional much?
Scared also.
-
Hahaha...Beach Bum was so anxious to oppose me, he didn't realize we were effectively in agreement when I made the first post in this thread.
Then you and SS4U couldn't resist joining the routine, and the comedy fell right into place.
Too bad it's such a serious subject.
What a pathetic attempt at making yourself feel better. What a fragile ego you must have. You are an awful debater.
-
Hahaha...you twats haven't said a single word about the topic since you've been on the thread.
What does that say about yourselves?
-
Hahaha...you twats haven't said a single word about the topic since you've been on the thread.
What does that say about yourselves?
Get over yourself. You got called on your antics and no one can take you seriously.
-
It's right here to be read by anyone that's interested or bored, lol
-
It's right here to be read by anyone that's interested or bored, lol
yet you can't read up and comment even though you claim to have read the thread....
scared?
Delusional?
Unable?
-
yet you can't read up and comment even though you claim to have read the thread....
scared?
Delusional?
Unable?
I don't know if you're being serious, Oz, but just state your case if you've got a problem with anything I've said. Do it.
-
I don't know if you're being serious, Oz, but just state your case if you've got a problem with anything I've said. Do it.
Already have. Were you lying when you claimed you have read the thread as it developed?
Dishonest much?
Scared?
-
Already have. Were you lying when you claimed you have read the thread as it developed?
Dishonest much?
Scared?
Fuck this, Oz. Come over to the missing airliner thread and give your thoughts.
-
Fuck this, Oz. Come over to the missing airliner thread and give your thoughts.
Have you been reading this thread as it developed or have you been lying?
Because if you had been doing as you say you would easily know.
Lie much?
Scared?
Or just not a very honest person in this particular instance?
Which thread?
-
This probably deserves its own thread:
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/3/14/colorado-court-somepotcasescanbeoverturned.html (http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/3/14/colorado-court-somepotcasescanbeoverturned.html)
Colorado court rules some pot convictions can be overturned
March 14, 2014 6:30PM ET
Judges say law legalizing marijuana in state can be applied retroactively; attorney general plans to appeal
(http://america.aljazeera.com/content/ajam/articles/2014/3/14/colorado-court-somepotcasescanbeoverturned/jcr:content/mainpar/adaptiveimage/src.adapt.960.high.1394840581641.jpg)
The ruling could affect hundreds of people who were given jail terms for petty marijuana possession, and some inmates could be released, said one of the law's authors. Rick Wilking/Reuters
Some Colorado residents convicted of possessing small amounts of marijuana can ask for their convictions to be overturned because of the state’s recent legalization of the drug, its second-highest court ruled Thursday. The decision has prompted a firestorm of criticism from opponents of marijuana legalization, including the state’s attorney general.
In a unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel of the Colorado Court of Appeals found that a woman whose 2011 conviction for possessing cannabis had been under appeal was entitled to have her sentence and conviction overturned because of a "significant change in the law."
Colorado’s Amendment 64, which decriminalized the possession of an ounce or less of marijuana, took effect in December 2012.
The panel agreed with defense attorneys who argued that the marijuana law should be applied retroactively. While noting that laws generally are forward-looking, the judges said there were some legal exceptions.
"The general presumption of prospective application, however, is subject to a doctrine established by our General Assembly and Supreme Court enabling a defendant to benefit retroactively from a significant change in the law," Judge Mary Hoak wrote in the 16-page opinion.
The ruling could affect hundreds of people who were given jail terms for petty marijuana possession, and some inmates could be released, said Brian Vicente, one of the amendment's authors. "This is a huge victory," he said.
Vicente said Colorado prosecuted as many as 9,000 cases a year for marijuana possession. After it was decriminalized, a number of appeals were still in the courts.
The ruling came in the case of Brandi Jessica Russell, who was convicted in Grand County of possessing one gram or less of methamphetamine, possession of marijuana concentrate and possession of less than an ounce of marijuana.
Her attorney, Brian Emeson, said Thursday that the ruling is another indication the "tide is turning" on the nationwide attitude toward possession of small amounts of pot.
Emeson said he still handles a number of marijuana appeals, which shows prosecutors have not backed off.
"This ruling shows it would be wise for them to focus on more pressing matters," he said.
Sparking controversy
Colorado Attorney General John Suthers issued a statement on Thursday announcing plans to appeal the ruling because of the implications it could have on other cases not involving marijuana. Suthers’ main argument is that the ruling does not apply to previous convictions because the amendment legalizing marijuana in the state does not specifically say it can be applied retroactively.
More at link.
-
Some Colorado Marijuana Arrestees Might be Able to Overturn Their Convictions
by FUSION LIVE @FusionLiveTV Posted 03/26/2014, 09:46AM
Updated 03/26/2014
Two months ago on The Cannabusiness Report, we did a segment about the fact that even though marijuana is legal in Colorado, there are still thousands of inmates serving time for weed convictions. But it looks like that's about to change. As a result of a recent Colorado Court of Appeals ruling, as many as 10,000 marijuana convictions could now potentially be overturned. In this segment, we discuss the situation with social justice journalist Matt Fleischer, as well as Patrick Mulligan, an attorney from Denver who is working to overturn marijuana convictions.
http://fusion.net/Culture/video/overturning-colorado-marijuana-convictions-536921
-
Some Colorado Marijuana Arrestees Might be Able to Overturn Their Convictions
by FUSION LIVE @FusionLiveTV Posted 03/26/2014, 09:46AM
Updated 03/26/2014
Two months ago on The Cannabusiness Report, we did a segment about the fact that even though marijuana is legal in Colorado, there are still thousands of inmates serving time for weed convictions. But it looks like that's about to change. As a result of a recent Colorado Court of Appeals ruling, as many as 10,000 marijuana convictions could now potentially be overturned. In this segment, we discuss the situation with social justice journalist Matt Fleischer, as well as Patrick Mulligan, an attorney from Denver who is working to overturn marijuana convictions.
http://fusion.net/Culture/video/overturning-colorado-marijuana-convictions-536921
all for it
-
when alcohol is legal and weed is not, you know something is wrong.
-
Poll: Nationwide Marijuana Legalization Inevitable
Wednesday, 02 Apr 2014
Nationwide marijuana legalization seems inevitable to three-fourths of Americans, whether they support it or not, according to a new poll out Wednesday.
The Pew Research Center survey on the nation's shifting attitudes about drug policy also showed increased support for moving away from mandatory sentences for non-violent drug offenders.
The telephone survey found that 75 percent of respondents — including majorities of both supporters and opponents of legal marijuana— think that the sale and use of pot eventually will be legal nationwide. It was the first time that question had been asked.
Some 39 percent of respondents said pot should be legal for personal adult use. Forty-four percent of those surveyed said it should be legal only for medicinal use. Just 16 percent said it should not be legal at all.
The responses come as two states have legalized recreational marijuana, with more than 20 states and Washington D.C. allowing some medical use of the drug.
"It's just a matter of time before it's in more states," said Steve Pratley of Denver, a 51-year-old pipefitter who voted for legalization in Colorado in 2012.
Pratley, who did not participate in the Pew survey, agreed with 76 percent of respondents who said people who use small amounts of marijuana shouldn't go to jail.
"If marijuana isn't legalized, it fills up the jails, and that's just stupid," Pratley said.
Legalization opponents, however, drew a distinction between making pot legal for all and thinking that pot users belong in jail.
"It's an illegal drug, period. I don't see it spreading," said Laura Sanchez, a 55-year-old retiree in Denver who voted against legalization. She agreed that pot smokers don't belong in jail, but she disagreed with legalization.
"I've seen no proof that it's good for anybody," said Sanchez, who also did not participate in the survey.
The poll suggested that despite shifting attitudes on legalization, the public remains concerned about drug abuse, with 32 percent of those surveyed calling it a crisis and 55 percent of respondents viewing it as a serious national problem.
And a narrow majority, 54 percent, said that marijuana legalization would lead to more underage people trying it.
As for mandatory minimum sentences, public attitudes have been shifting for years.
In 2001, the survey was about evenly divided on whether it was a good thing or bad thing for states to move away from mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent drug offenders. In 2014, poll respondents favored the move by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, or 63 percent to 32 percent. The other 5 percent either didn't respond or said they didn't know.
Public officials are well aware of the public's shifting attitudes on drug penalties.
Just last month, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder testified in support of proposed sentence reductions for some non-violent drug traffickers in an effort to reserve the "the harshest penalties for the most serious drug offenders."
"Certain types of cases result in too many Americans going to prison for too long, and at times for no truly good public safety reason," Holder said last month at the U.S. Sentencing Commission.
Drug legalization activists said the Pew results come as no surprise.
"We see a growing bipartisan recognition that mandatory minimums went too far and did more harm than good," said Ethan Nadelmann, head of the Washington-based Drug Policy Alliance, which opposes criminal penalties for non-violent drug users.
Marijuana legalization opponents saw signs of hope in the survey, too.
Kevin Sabet, co-founder of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, which opposes pot legalization, pointed to the fact that 63 percent said it would bother them if people used marijuana openly in their neighborhood.
"Saying that we don't want people to serve prison time for marijuana is very different from saying I want a pot shop in my neighborhood selling cookies and candies and putting coupons in the paper," Sabet said.
The poll of 1,821 adults was conducted Feb. 14-23. The survey had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.6 percentage points.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/marijuana-legalization-poll/2014/04/02/id/563248#ixzz2xkShIZZV
-
Wyoming college student ate marijuana cookie before fatal fall
Published April 03, 2014
Associated Press
The Denver coroner says an exchange student from Wyoming fell to his death after eating a marijuana cookie.
Nineteen-year-old Levy Thamba died after falling from the balcony of a Denver hotel on March 11. An autopsy report released Wednesday says he died from the fall but also lists "marijuana intoxication" as a contributing factor in his death.
Officials at Northwest College in Powell, Wyo. say Thamba, a native of the Republic of Congo, started taking classes there as an exchange student in January.
His death is the first publicized fatality since recreational marijuana sales became legal in Colorado in January. Police have not released the findings of their investigation.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/04/03/wyoming-college-student-ate-marijuana-cookie-before-fatal-fall/?intcmp=latestnews
-
Christie: 'I'll consider' edible medical marijuana for adults
Posted by
CNN's Ashley Killough and Steve Kastenbaum
Sayreville, New Jersey (CNN) - Gov. Chris Christie said Thursday he's willing to think about legalizing medical marijuana in edible form for patients above the age of 18.
"If there becomes a large adult population that needs this type of edible (marijuana), I'll consider it," the New Jersey Republican said at a town hall in Sayreville.
While some forms of medical marijuana were already legal, Christie signed a bill last year that allows dispensaries to sell edible marijuana - but only to minors who have the approval of both a psychiatrist and a physician.
The governor said so far no one has presented the case that there's a large enough adult demand for edible marijuana. But if enough evidence is presented and the legislature sends him a bill, he said, "I'll sign it."
His answer came as a response to a question from Jennie Storms, a pediatric registered nurse who identifies herself as a cannabis advocate and activist. Her 14-year-old son suffers from a rare form of epilepsy known as Dravet Syndrome.
Storms, whose story has previously been featured on CNN, said she's concerned that once her son turns 18, he won't be able to get marijuana treatment in the edible form that he needs, as he's unable to smoke.
"Can you explain why? Why did you say minors only? There are disabled 24-year-olds with epilepsy who have a mental age of five," she said. "They can't eat. They can't smoke…Those on hospice with oxygen, if they smoke, if they vaporize, they'll blow themselves up."
Storms and Christie carried on a civil argument for 10 minutes, as she continued to press him on the subject. Questions about medical marijuana have become common at his weekly town halls the past few months.
The governor, a staunch opponent of non-medicinal pot, warned he's not going to permit marijuana laws to get "bigger and bigger and bigger so that what slides through (are) people who are using it for recreational purposes, not truly medical purposes."
At town halls, he frequently warns that expanded laws could lead to a "slippery slope" of legalized marijuana, like recently passed laws in Colorado and Washington State.
"I'm not going to turn our state into a place for people to fly into to get high," he said.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/04/03/christie-ill-consider-edible-medical-marijuana-for-adults/
-
HAHAHA, a fat slob would select edibles, these fucking guys man.
It's nature you morons, it grows without any input from humans, we have a symbiotic relationship with it and if anyone here knows how to navigate pubmed the literature is astounding.
It does the following
Potent anti-cancer (CBD)
Increases serotonin (ocd and aggression)
Lowers anadamide levels and treats ADHD
Treats nausea and chronic pain
Treats MS/PARKISONS/ALZ
The USA has a patent for neuroprotection (it improves brain function and decreases tau tangles and Beta amyloid plaques)_
It lowers glutamate in the limbic system(tics, tourettes, compulsive disorders)
is a potent brochodialator
Has been shown to help migraines, significantly so.
It is literally a wonder drug, you have all been lied too. I would know,I have literally read every paper related to health on the subject, there are literally no side effects when done appropriately and the addiction is on par with coffee as is the intoxication.
It is the number one medicinal substance in the world, no other compound has all of these benefits and robustly so.
-
HAHAHA, a fat slob would select edibles, these fucking guys man.
It's nature you morons, it grows without any input from humans, we have a symbiotic relationship with it and if anyone here knows how to navigate pubmed the literature is astounding.
It does the following
Potent anti-cancer (CBD)
Increases serotonin (ocd and aggression)
Lowers anadamide levels and treats ADHD
Treats nausea and chronic pain
Treats MS/PARKISONS/ALZ
The USA has a patent for neuroprotection (it improves brain function and decreases tau tangles and Beta amyloid plaques)_
It lowers glutamate in the limbic system(tics, tourettes, compulsive disorders)
is a potent brochodialator
Has been shown to help migraines, significantly so.
It is literally a wonder drug, you have all been lied too. I would know,I have literally read every paper related to health on the subject, there are literally no side effects when done appropriately and the addiction is on par with coffee as is the intoxication.
It is the number one medicinal substance in the world, no other compound has all of these benefits and robustly so.
What are the negative side-effects?
-
What are the negative side-effects?
Negative effects are generally dose dependent. At low doses you get increased serotonin, high doses dramatically alter it resulting in anxiety/panic/obsessive thoughts etc. That again, dissipates with tolerance and these reactions are rare when followed medically.
The combustion of the leaf is an issue, however, the data indicate that MJ's anti cancer negates this. vaporization or edibles alter this. Eating weed is probably the most medicinal, it's psychoactivity is higher (the liver makes a stronger version of THC that you don't get from smoking) but onset much slower and most side effects such as anxiety are negligible. It also is addictive physically and mentally if used in significant quantities over time. It has a mild withdrawal syndrome, similar to nicotine.
High doses can worsen depression, those prone to schizophrenia should not take it as it can trigger psychosis. However, this only occurs in those with precipitating factors and genes for schizophrenia.
The other issue that pops up with the side effect question is that it really depends on the strain. for example THC is physchoactive, it gets you high, but Cannabidiol is not, however, it's an anxiolytic, epileptilytic, excellent for pain and appears to induce apoptosis in cancer cells (makes them go emo and suicide).
So with indicas(CBD heavy), you can get sedation, fatigue, lethargy large increases in appetite
With sativa's you can get anxiety, paranoia, racing thoughts and panic reactions.
Long term, there are no consequences if you start in adult hood, we have pretty conclusive evidence that weed alters the development of the young brain. This is because Anadamide(analgolous to endorphins) has a huge role in brain development. One other issue is that you will probably cease dreaming as anadamide controls this intimately and smoking would downregulate production of this neuropeptide, what consequence does that have? likely nothing, a lot of stuff alters sleep architecture.
It's toxicity is zero, almost literally.
-
...
Eating weed is probably the most medicinal, it's psychoactivity is higher (the liver makes a stronger version of THC that you don't get from smoking) but...
...
Interesting!! I've never read this before but it totally squares with my personal experience. I was once given a large brownie and told to only eat half but I ate all of it and it ended up making me higher (and for a longer time) than ever before. Honestly, it felt like "hard" drugs and was not all that pleasant...
-
Negative effects are generally dose dependent. At low doses you get increased serotonin, high doses dramatically alter it resulting in anxiety/panic/obsessive thoughts etc. That again, dissipates with tolerance and these reactions are rare when followed medically.
The combustion of the leaf is an issue, however, the data indicate that MJ's anti cancer negates this. vaporization or edibles alter this. Eating weed is probably the most medicinal, it's psychoactivity is higher (the liver makes a stronger version of THC that you don't get from smoking) but onset much slower and most side effects such as anxiety are negligible. It also is addictive physically and mentally if used in significant quantities over time. It has a mild withdrawal syndrome, similar to nicotine.
High doses can worsen depression, those prone to schizophrenia should not take it as it can trigger psychosis. However, this only occurs in those with precipitating factors and genes for schizophrenia.
The other issue that pops up with the side effect question is that it really depends on the strain. for example THC is physchoactive, it gets you high, but Cannabidiol is not, however, it's an anxiolytic, epileptilytic, excellent for pain and appears to induce apoptosis in cancer cells (makes them go emo and suicide).
So with indicas(CBD heavy), you can get sedation, fatigue, lethargy large increases in appetite
With sativa's you can get anxiety, paranoia, racing thoughts and panic reactions.
Long term, there are no consequences if you start in adult hood, we have pretty conclusive evidence that weed alters the development of the young brain. This is because Anadamide(analgolous to endorphins) has a huge role in brain development. One other issue is that you will probably cease dreaming as anadamide controls this intimately and smoking would downregulate production of this neuropeptide, what consequence does that have? likely nothing, a lot of stuff alters sleep architecture.
It's toxicity is zero, almost literally.
You are saying on hand there are a number of side-effects and then on other that there are no consequences if you start smoking as adult?
Also, do you agree with this guy?
Good commentary. I like this guy.
America ill-prepared for marijuana mayhem
By Dr. Keith Ablow
Published January 10, 2014
FoxNews.com
With many states legalizing medical marijuana, and Colorado legalizing recreational marijuana, we are about to learn what I already know as a practicing psychiatrist: Marijuana is not harmless and will lead many millions of people into addiction, depression, psychosis, anxiety and lack of motivation.
I support legalizing marijuana, because I do not support the government making the decision whether people use it or not.
I also don’t like jailing people for the same behavior (drug use) that so many of our elected officials have engaged in. And I believe strongly that, in carefully selected cases, marijuana (and other potentially addictive drugs, by the way) can be very useful, medically.
We are way behind the curve educating people about the risks of marijuana abuse and dependence—which could cost us many billions of dollars and ruin many, many lives.
Here’s the big trouble, though: We are way behind the curve educating people about the risks of marijuana abuse and dependence—which could cost us many billions of dollars and ruin many, many lives.
I know this sounds alarmist, but it is true, and we are completely unprepared for the fallout.
Research studies show that cannabis users are at a 40 percent increased risk of psychosis. Research studies show that marijuana may well be a risk factor for schizophrenia, depression and anxiety disorders.
And research shows that marijuana is linked to a syndrome in which people have little motivation to pursue goals and interests that they once found compelling.
In my own practice, I find that people addicted to marijuana can have lives veering out of control—without the energy to pursue employment, with relationships failing, with grades dropping—yet insist that their chronic, daily marijuana use has nothing to do with it.
And this kind of disregard for cause and effect, even a disregard for the broken parts of one’s existence—a new drug-induced variant of the philosophical posture which the French call la belle indifference—may now become epidemic.
There is no chance, whatsoever, that the states which have legalized medical marijuana (never mind recreational marijuana) are policing its use in any real way.
Prescription mills are offering medical marijuana certification to anyone who claims any kind of chronic pain, or any symptoms of a number of other ill-defined conditions. Millions will become frequent users and will become less than they were.
Just as disturbing, marijuana will join Facebook and iPhones and video games in removing people from reality, making them less empathetic and less autonomous.
Is it an accident, a meaningful coincidence or part of a toxic slippery slope that we have a disempowering government in Washington and a new way to stay weak wafting like a smokescreen over the land?
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/01/10/america-ill-prepared-for-marijuana-mayhem/
-
You are saying on hand there are a number of side-effects and then on other that there are no consequences if you start smoking as adult?
Also, do you agree with this guy?
Yes, side effects and consequences(inferring long term use) were meant to imply different things in my sentence.
A side effect on drinking is elevated liver enzyme, a consequence of continued usage is hepatic damage and eventual full cirrohsis.
there is nothing related to demotivation syndrome, it lowers dopamine however sativas tone DA neurotransmission. It's strain specific, anyone with any knowledge on the subject would know that.
It is less addictive then coffee or on par with it and cigarettes, it's a moot argument he should read some books on medicine. Availability has no bearing on addiction we see this everywhere. Addiction is a disease related to the reward center in your brain, namely, the mesocorticolimbic pathway and the nucleus accumbens.
His last argument sounds like he is into reefer madness? grades dropping, relationships failing. Is this guy a doctor? did he ever consider that sick people have lives that are out of control and MJ is a self medication, perhaps they would be worse? why did he jump to his biased conclusion? shit I answered that myself there.
He is dealing with MJ addicts, that's what he does, I use daily and am a doctor, I wrote this blazed off the top of my head and could rip this guys ass in two that must prove MJ makes you a doctor, puts your life in the right direction and makes your grades improve. Do you not see how silly his argument is? losers will always be losers.
On top of that he is a poor scholar, he cites a 40% stat he hauled out of his ass, if he knew anything about cannabinoids, he would know that some have anti-psychotic properties, oh ya, that demotivation that he is talking about? thats from low dopamine, what do anti-psychotics do? lower dopamine. I wonder if there is evidence to corroborate my view. looka here
Recent Pat CNS Drug Discov. 2014 Mar 6. [Epub ahead of print]
Therapeutic Potential of Cannabinoids in Schizophrenia.
Kucerova J, Tabiova K, Drago F, Micale V1.
Author information
Abstract
Increasing evidence suggests a close relationship between the endocannabinoid system and schizophrenia. The endocannabinoid system comprises of two G protein-coupled receptors (the cannabinoid receptors 1 and 2 [CB1 and CB2] for marijuana's psychoactive principle Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol), their endogenous small lipid ligands (namely anandamide [AEA] and 2-arachidonoylglycerol [2-AG], also known as endocannabinoids), and proteins for endocannabinoid biosynthesis and degradation. It has been suggested to be a pro-homeostatic and pleiotropic signalling system activated in a time- and tissue-specific manner during pathophysiological conditions. In the brain, activation of this system impacts the release of numerous neurotransmitters in various systems and cytokines from glial cells. Hence, the endocannabinoid system is strongly involved in neuropsychiatric disorders, such as schizophrenia. Therefore, adolescence use of Cannabis may alter the endocannabinoid signalling and pose a potential environmental risk to develop psychosis. Consistently, preclinical and clinical studies have found dysregulations in the endocannabinoid system to alter blood and/or cerebrospinal fluid biochemistry. It has been proved that changed expressions of CB1 and CB2 receptors were linked to altered levels of AEA and 2-AG in the cerebrospinal fluid and/or blood. Thus, partial efficacy of antipsychotic compounds which manipulate this system may provide a novel therapeutic target for the treatment of schizophrenia. The present article reviews current available knowledge on herbal, synthetic and endogenous cannabinoids with respect to the modulation of schizophrenic symptomatology. Furthermore, this review will be highlighting the therapeutic potential of cannabinoid-related compounds and presenting some promising patents targeting potential treatment options for schizophrenia."
His view is that of a simpleton. He is a doctor true and true, doesn't keep up to date on the research.
On top of that we have viable strategies to reduce addiction, NAC has been studied as it lowers glutamate intracellularly by shifting extracellular vesicle production, in turn it reduces addictive tendencies.
Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2014 Jan;24(1):51-64. doi: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2013.11.002. Epub 2013 Nov 15.
Cannabidiol as a potential treatment for psychosis.
Schubart CD1, Sommer IE2, Fusar-Poli P3, de Witte L2, Kahn RS1, Boks MP4.
Author information
Abstract
Although cannabis use is associated with an increased risk of developing psychosis, the cannabis constituent cannabidiol (CBD) may have antipsychotic properties. This review concisely describes the role of the endocannabinoid system in the development of psychosis and provides an overview of currently available animal, human experimental, imaging, epidemiological and clinical studies that investigated the antipsychotic properties of CBD. In this targeted literature review we performed a search for English articles using Medline and EMBASE. Studies were selected if they described experiments with psychosis models, psychotic symptoms or psychotic disorders as outcome measure and involved the use of CBD as intervention. Evidence from several research domains suggests that CBD shows potential for antipsychotic treatment.
So this guy has been caught is several half truths so far, before I go on, let me geuss he is a christian right winger? I don't agree with anything he is saying to be honest. It has clear medicinal benefits and adults should be able to do as they please, why would anyone favor prohibition, is colorado not enough evidence?
Like I said, you need a susceptibility to psychosis for MJ to induce it, it's because the endocannabinoid system plays a role in schizophernia. These individuals appears to have alterations in the CB1/CB2 receptor which predispose them to psychosis, the mj pushes them over the edge so to speak. Also, psychosis and schizophrenia are not the same, you can have acute psychosis (trip out) and be fine, the number is inflated because psychosis is a dynamic state. Many drugs induce it, however, mj induces psychosis which appears to break into schizo for those with the genes for it.
The truth is that this drug is less harmful then alcohol or tobacco and by a wide margin.
-
Libertarianism is growing so fast because it encompasses the good policies of the left and right without all the lunacy.
-
One other thing is this access argument. Humans have something called will power and can think, just giving people access to stuff doesn't mean they will consume it compulsively. We see this with alcohol, the number of alcoholics remains stagnant, despite access, why? because addiction is an illness, mj is just some peoples drug of choice. Prohibition won't alter that, or will free reign.
-
Yes, side effects and consequences(inferring long term use) were meant to imply different things in my sentence.
A side effect on drinking is elevated liver enzyme, a consequence of continued usage is hepatic damage and eventual full cirrohsis.
there is nothing related to demotivation syndrome, it lowers dopamine however sativas tone DA neurotransmission. It's strain specific, anyone with any knowledge on the subject would know that.
It is less addictive then coffee or on par with it and cigarettes, it's a moot argument he should read some books on medicine. Availability has no bearing on addiction we see this everywhere. Addiction is a disease related to the reward center in your brain, namely, the mesocorticolimbic pathway and the nucleus accumbens.
His last argument sounds like he is into reefer madness? grades dropping, relationships failing. Is this guy a doctor? did he ever consider that sick people have lives that are out of control and MJ is a self medication, perhaps they would be worse? why did he jump to his biased conclusion? shit I answered that myself there.
He is dealing with MJ addicts, that's what he does, I use daily and am a doctor, I wrote this blazed off the top of my head and could rip this guys ass in two that must prove MJ makes you a doctor, puts your life in the right direction and makes your grades improve. Do you not see how silly his argument is? losers will always be losers.
On top of that he is a poor scholar, he cites a 40% stat he hauled out of his ass, if he knew anything about cannabinoids, he would know that some have anti-psychotic properties, oh ya, that demotivation that he is talking about? thats from low dopamine, what do anti-psychotics do? lower dopamine. I wonder if there is evidence to corroborate my view. looka here
Recent Pat CNS Drug Discov. 2014 Mar 6. [Epub ahead of print]
Therapeutic Potential of Cannabinoids in Schizophrenia.
Kucerova J, Tabiova K, Drago F, Micale V1.
Author information
Abstract
Increasing evidence suggests a close relationship between the endocannabinoid system and schizophrenia. The endocannabinoid system comprises of two G protein-coupled receptors (the cannabinoid receptors 1 and 2 [CB1 and CB2] for marijuana's psychoactive principle Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol), their endogenous small lipid ligands (namely anandamide [AEA] and 2-arachidonoylglycerol [2-AG], also known as endocannabinoids), and proteins for endocannabinoid biosynthesis and degradation. It has been suggested to be a pro-homeostatic and pleiotropic signalling system activated in a time- and tissue-specific manner during pathophysiological conditions. In the brain, activation of this system impacts the release of numerous neurotransmitters in various systems and cytokines from glial cells. Hence, the endocannabinoid system is strongly involved in neuropsychiatric disorders, such as schizophrenia. Therefore, adolescence use of Cannabis may alter the endocannabinoid signalling and pose a potential environmental risk to develop psychosis. Consistently, preclinical and clinical studies have found dysregulations in the endocannabinoid system to alter blood and/or cerebrospinal fluid biochemistry. It has been proved that changed expressions of CB1 and CB2 receptors were linked to altered levels of AEA and 2-AG in the cerebrospinal fluid and/or blood. Thus, partial efficacy of antipsychotic compounds which manipulate this system may provide a novel therapeutic target for the treatment of schizophrenia. The present article reviews current available knowledge on herbal, synthetic and endogenous cannabinoids with respect to the modulation of schizophrenic symptomatology. Furthermore, this review will be highlighting the therapeutic potential of cannabinoid-related compounds and presenting some promising patents targeting potential treatment options for schizophrenia."
His view is that of a simpleton. He is a doctor true and true, doesn't keep up to date on the research.
On top of that we have viable strategies to reduce addiction, NAC has been studied as it lowers glutamate intracellularly by shifting extracellular vesicle production, in turn it reduces addictive tendencies.
Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2014 Jan;24(1):51-64. doi: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2013.11.002. Epub 2013 Nov 15.
Cannabidiol as a potential treatment for psychosis.
Schubart CD1, Sommer IE2, Fusar-Poli P3, de Witte L2, Kahn RS1, Boks MP4.
Author information
Abstract
Although cannabis use is associated with an increased risk of developing psychosis, the cannabis constituent cannabidiol (CBD) may have antipsychotic properties. This review concisely describes the role of the endocannabinoid system in the development of psychosis and provides an overview of currently available animal, human experimental, imaging, epidemiological and clinical studies that investigated the antipsychotic properties of CBD. In this targeted literature review we performed a search for English articles using Medline and EMBASE. Studies were selected if they described experiments with psychosis models, psychotic symptoms or psychotic disorders as outcome measure and involved the use of CBD as intervention. Evidence from several research domains suggests that CBD shows potential for antipsychotic treatment.
So this guy has been caught is several half truths so far, before I go on, let me geuss he is a christian right winger? I don't agree with anything he is saying to be honest. It has clear medicinal benefits and adults should be able to do as they please, why would anyone favor prohibition, is colorado not enough evidence?
Like I said, you need a susceptibility to psychosis for MJ to induce it, it's because the endocannabinoid system plays a role in schizophernia. These individuals appears to have alterations in the CB1/CB2 receptor which predispose them to psychosis, the mj pushes them over the edge so to speak. Also, psychosis and schizophrenia are not the same, you can have acute psychosis (trip out) and be fine, the number is inflated because psychosis is a dynamic state. Many drugs induce it, however, mj induces psychosis which appears to break into schizo for those with the genes for it.
The truth is that this drug is less harmful then alcohol or tobacco and by a wide margin.
You lost me after the first few paragraphs. Too much medicalese.
Regarding Ablow, he's a doctor. Brown and Johns Hopkins graduate. Two of the best schools in the country. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Ablow
He says this based on his own experience:
"In my own practice, I find that people addicted to marijuana can have lives veering out of control—without the energy to pursue employment, with relationships failing, with grades dropping—yet insist that their chronic, daily marijuana use has nothing to do with it."
-
You lost me after the first few paragraphs. Too much medicalese.
Regarding Ablow, he's a doctor. Brown and Johns Hopkins graduate. Two of the best schools in the country. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Ablow
He says this based on his own experience:
"In my own practice, I find that people addicted to marijuana can have lives veering out of control—without the energy to pursue employment, with relationships failing, with grades dropping—yet insist that their chronic, daily marijuana use has nothing to do with it."
Some people are like that, it has nothing to due with marijuana. If he was correct (he is implying causation when it's not possible, a fallacy) then there wouldn't be examples of people like me, or dustin or joe rogan or................
What he is describing is mentally sick people who are self medicating. He is describing addiction, anyone addicted to anything are often aloof, unstable etc. Ever see someone without a smoke for a period of time?
The other thing with you is that you seem to think credentials matter in matters of fact, they don't. He is patently wrong and his argument is a fallacy, fact. He is implying causation where none can exist, I get he is just making an anecdotal statement, but my anecdotal statement clashes with his, so who is right? well thankfully we have facts and they are on my side. In fact, MJ may be a viable harm reduction strategy for addicts or harder drugs, research on this is being done, how can you square that fact with the rough hole this man has created?
-
Some people are like that, it has nothing to due with marijuana. If he was correct (he is implying causation when it's not possible, a fallacy) then there wouldn't be examples of people like me, or dustin or joe rogan or................
What he is describing is mentally sick people who are self medicating. He is describing addiction, anyone addicted to anything are often aloof, unstable etc. Ever see someone without a smoke for a period of time?
The other thing with you is that you seem to think credentials matter in matters of fact, they don't. He is patently wrong and his argument is a fallacy, fact. He is implying causation where none can exist, I get he is just making an anecdotal statement, but my anecdotal statement clashes with his, so who is right? well thankfully we have facts and they are on my side. In fact, MJ may be a viable harm reduction strategy for addicts or harder drugs, research on this is being done, how can you square that fact with the rough hole this man has created?
You are the one who questioned his credentials. I just pointed out where he went to school.
He isn't just making an anecdotal statement. He is talking about his experience treating patients, which I imagine is pretty extensive, and research:
"Research studies show that cannabis users are at a 40 percent increased risk of psychosis. Research studies show that marijuana may well be a risk factor for schizophrenia, depression and anxiety disorders.
And research shows that marijuana is linked to a syndrome in which people have little motivation to pursue goals and interests that they once found compelling."
-
You are the one who questioned his credentials. I just pointed out where he went to school.
He isn't just making an anecdotal statement. He is talking about his experience treating patients, which I imagine is pretty extensive, and research:
"Research studies show that cannabis users are at a 40 percent increased risk of psychosis. Research studies show that marijuana may well be a risk factor for schizophrenia, depression and anxiety disorders.
And research shows that marijuana is linked to a syndrome in which people have little motivation to pursue goals and interests that they once found compelling."
His experience is anecdotal, it's the very definition of it. He said research studies, a sure sign he has no idea what he is talking about, normally people remember studies and the outcomes.
There is no link between anxiety nor depression and marijuana, the evidence I posted above is "research studies" contradicting his claim, but unlike him I have the proof.
I admit the risk of psychosis is there, it's a mild hallucinogen, it's going to do that, but triggering chronic psychotic disorders like schizophrenia? that rate is way way lower, like 2%, as a propensity is needed, altered gene function.
His arguments are weak, if it's addiction as the argument, alcohol is worse, if it's side effects, Tylenol is worse, if it's inducing or worsening illness, alcohol, tobacco, caffeine and soda pop are worse.
Just because some people misuse a substance isn't grounds for banning it, specifically when the addictive potential is low. The most addictive substances are the dopaminergics, as you recall ::), mj lowers this but strengthens it's tone, not an addictive property. You need increased dopamine in the nucleus accumbens for much of the addictive euphoric responses, mj doesn't have a large affinity here.
He is just wrong, he is seeing sick people self medicating. For instance, say I run a detox clinic (alcohol), my opinion based on my experiences would be that alcohol wrecks lives, destroys health, causes confusion, apathy, addiction and kills. Would you say that something framed as the above should be legal? hell no? but alas that's not the truth. It should read, I have seen morons get fucked up on alcohol and kill and spiral out of control. The drug isn't the issue.
This is also a sliding scale, some drugs are more addictive, but we know why, we know how, where etc. MJ isn't magic, it's withdrawal syndrome is classified.
"Int J Eat Disord. 2014 Mar;47(2):219-23. doi: 10.1002/eat.22229. Epub 2013 Nov 26.
Cannabis withdrawal syndrome: An important diagnostic consideration in adolescents presenting with disordered eating.
Chesney T1, Matsos L, Couturier J, Johnson N.
Author information
Abstract
Although previously thought to have no withdrawal symptoms, there is now convergent evidence for a cannabis withdrawal syndrome (CWS), criteria for its diagnosis, and evidence of its impact in the adolescent population. Cannabis withdrawal syndrome represents an important and under-recognized consideration in adolescents with disordered eating. We describe three clinical cases of adolescents presenting to an eating disorders program with primary complaints of gastrointestinal symptoms, food avoidance, and associated weight loss. They did not meet the criteria for an eating disorder, but did fulfill the DSM-5 criteria for CWS. This report emphasizes the importance of considering the impact of heavy cannabis use in adolescents presenting with gastrointestinal complaints, and eating disorder symptoms, including weight loss."
He may be top of the class smart but he is not special, he aint no special.
-
His experience is anecdotal, it's the very definition of it. He said research studies, a sure sign he has no idea what he is talking about, normally people remember studies and the outcomes.
There is no link between anxiety nor depression and marijuana, the evidence I posted above is "research studies" contradicting his claim, but unlike him I have the proof.
I admit the risk of psychosis is there, it's a mild hallucinogen, it's going to do that, but triggering chronic psychotic disorders like schizophrenia? that rate is way way lower, like 2%, as a propensity is needed, altered gene function.
His arguments are weak, if it's addiction as the argument, alcohol is worse, if it's side effects, Tylenol is worse, if it's inducing or worsening illness, alcohol, tobacco, caffeine and soda pop are worse.
Just because some people misuse a substance isn't grounds for banning it, specifically when the addictive potential is low. The most addictive substances are the dopaminergics, as you recall ::), mj lowers this but strengthens it's tone, not an addictive property. You need increased dopamine in the nucleus accumbens for much of the addictive euphoric responses, mj doesn't have a large affinity here.
He is just wrong, he is seeing sick people self medicating. For instance, say I run a detox clinic (alcohol), my opinion based on my experiences would be that alcohol wrecks lives, destroys health, causes confusion, apathy, addiction and kills. Would you say that something framed as the above should be legal? hell no? but alas that's not the truth. It should read, I have seen morons get fucked up on alcohol and kill and spiral out of control. The drug isn't the issue.
This is also a sliding scale, some drugs are more addictive, but we know why, we know how, where etc. MJ isn't magic, it's withdrawal syndrome is classified.
"Int J Eat Disord. 2014 Mar;47(2):219-23. doi: 10.1002/eat.22229. Epub 2013 Nov 26.
Cannabis withdrawal syndrome: An important diagnostic consideration in adolescents presenting with disordered eating.
Chesney T1, Matsos L, Couturier J, Johnson N.
Author information
Abstract
Although previously thought to have no withdrawal symptoms, there is now convergent evidence for a cannabis withdrawal syndrome (CWS), criteria for its diagnosis, and evidence of its impact in the adolescent population. Cannabis withdrawal syndrome represents an important and under-recognized consideration in adolescents with disordered eating. We describe three clinical cases of adolescents presenting to an eating disorders program with primary complaints of gastrointestinal symptoms, food avoidance, and associated weight loss. They did not meet the criteria for an eating disorder, but did fulfill the DSM-5 criteria for CWS. This report emphasizes the importance of considering the impact of heavy cannabis use in adolescents presenting with gastrointestinal complaints, and eating disorder symptoms, including weight loss."
He may be top of the class smart but he is not special, he aint no special.
I don't think a doctor talking about his experience and observations of patients is anecdotal. It might fall within the literal definition, but that's not what anecdotes really are IMO (which I think are limited experiences a person has with someone or something).
And not sure if you missed it, but he actually believes marijuana should be legal. He is just intellectually honest about the health implications.
-
I don't think a doctor talking about his experience and observations of patients is anecdotal. It might fall within the literal definition, but that's not what anecdotes really are IMO (which I think are limited experiences a person has with someone or something).
And not sure if you missed it, but he actually believes marijuana should be legal. He is just intellectually honest about the health implications.
He may be intellectually honest, I hope so, but he is misinformed. Also, people using a drug aka self medicating will mis use the drug. Small metered dosages of proper strains would help these people, these are addicts. They abuse Marijauna, smoke too much and it becomes consuming.
It's a very mild drug.
-
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2014/04/08/not-as-many-people-buying-recreational-pot-as-predicted
-
He may be intellectually honest, I hope so, but he is misinformed. Also, people using a drug aka self medicating will mis use the drug. Small metered dosages of proper strains would help these people, these are addicts. They abuse Marijauna, smoke too much and it becomes consuming.
It's a very mild drug.
I think you can say that about many drugs if they are used in moderation.
-
I think you can say that about many drugs if they are used in moderation.
Agreed. That;s my point. It;'s the person not the drug. ALWAYS. the drug is the crutch of choice, some are more difficult to manage and probably positively correlate with illness. That is the worse the trauma/issue the harder the drug.
-
Agreed. That;s my point. It;'s the person not the drug. ALWAYS. the drug is the crutch of choice, some are more difficult to manage and probably positively correlate with illness. That is the worse the trauma/issue the harder the drug.
I agree to an extent. Yes the person and how they use is a huge factor. The drug itself is a factor too. Some are more dangerous than others.
The problem with moderation is many people don't use legal or illegal drugs in moderation.
-
I agree to an extent. Yes the person and how they use is a huge factor. The drug itself is a factor too. Some are more dangerous than others.
The problem with moderation is many people don't use legal or illegal drugs in moderation.
Right, but that's their problem. Responsible adults shouldn't be handcuffed by the weak and mentally ill. It also harms no one.
-
Right, but that's their problem. Responsible adults shouldn't be handcuffed by the weak and mentally ill. It also harms no one.
A bit an overstatement, no? People who drink and drive hurt people. Same for any other person who abuses a drug and then hurts someone.
Also, we have a crackheads/ice users here who commit a lot of property crime.
-
A bit an overstatement, no? People who drink and drive hurt people. Same for any other person who abuses a drug and then hurts someone.
Also, we have a crackheads/ice users here who commit a lot of property crime.
I think I said responsible usage didn't I? making your point moot.
-
I think I said responsible usage didn't I? making your point moot.
Maybe, maybe not. Depends on the drug.
-
Eric Holder 'Cautiously Optimistic' About Marijuana Legalization In Washington And Colorado
Posted: 04/15/2014 7:30 am EDT Updated: 04/15/2014 10:59 am EDT
CHARLESTON, S.C. -- Attorney General Eric Holder is "cautiously optimistic" about how things are going in Washington state and Colorado following the legalization and state regulation of marijuana.
But the nation's top law enforcement official, who spoke to The Huffington Post in an interview on Friday, also said it was tough to predict where marijuana legalization will be in 10 years.
"I'm not just saying that, I think it's hard to tell," Holder said in a jury room at the federal courthouse in Charleston, which he visited as part of the Justice Department's Smart on Crime initiative. "I think there might have been a burst of feeling that what happened in Washington and Colorado was going to be soon replicated across the country. I'm not sure that is necessarily the case. I think a lot of states are going to be looking to see what happens in Washington, what happens in Colorado before those decisions are made in substantial parts of the country."
Under Holder, the Justice Department has allowed marijuana legalization to move forward in Washington and Colorado and has issued guidance to federal prosecutors that is intended to open up banking access for pot shops that are legal on the state level.
Based on the reports he has received out of Washington and Colorado, Holder also said he thinks things are going about how he'd expected them to go.
"I think what people have to understand is that when we have those eight priorities that we have set out, it essentially means that the federal government is not going to be involved in the prosecution of small-time, possessory drug cases, but we never were," Holder said. "So I'm not sure that I see a huge change yet, we've tried to adapt to the situation in Colorado with regard to how money is kept and transacted and all that stuff, and try to open up the banking system."
"But I think, so far, I'm cautiously optimistic," Holder continued. "But as I indicated to both governors, we will be monitoring the progress of those efforts and if we conclude that they are not being done in an appropriate way, we reserve our rights to file lawsuits."
Holder's positive outlook on how legalization is going in Washington and Colorado stands in contrast to the views expressed by Drug Enforcement Administration head Michele Leonhart, who reportedly criticized President Barack Obama for comparing marijuana to alcohol. Leonhart claimed earlier this month that voters were mislead when they voted to legalize and regulate marijuana on the state level, that Mexican drug cartels are "setting up shop" in Washington and Colorado and that this country should have "never gone forward" with legalization. Another DEA official recently claimed that "every single parent out there" opposed marijuana legalization.
Washington and Colorado, of course, aren't the only places in the U.S. reforming their approach to marijuana. In March, Washington, D.C., decriminalized the possession of small amounts of marijuana. Asked about D.C.'s move, Holder said it didn't make sense to send people to jail on possession charges.
"Well, I'll tell you, as a former judge, I had to put in jail substantial numbers of young people for possessory drug offenses, and it was not from the perspective I had as a judge necessarily a good use of law enforcement resources," Holder said. "When I became U.S. attorney we put in place certain guidelines so that people would not end up, especially young people, with criminal records and all that then implies for them."
"So again, we'll see how it works in Washington, D.C.," Holder said.
Asked about his own personal history with marijuana, Holder told HuffPost he used pot in college and had characterized it as "youthful experimentation" in background checks for various federal nominations.
"Yeah, I certainly have said in my four, five, whatever number confirmation hearings I've had that you fill out the forms, that I had 'youthful experimentation' -- I think was the phrase that we were told to use -- when I was in college," Holder said.
Holder also acknowledged the Obama administration has made the political decision not to unilaterally "reschedule" marijuana by taking it off the list of what the federal government considers the most dangerous drugs, though that is something the attorney general has the authority to do. Instead, Holder has said DOJ would be willing to work with Congress if they want to reschedule marijuana, which doesn't seem likely to happen in the near future.
"I think that given what we have done in dealing with the whole Smart on Crime initiative and the executive actions that we have taken, that when it comes to rescheduling, I think this is something that should come from Congress," Holder said. "We'd be willing to work with Congress if there is a desire on the part of Congress to think about rescheduling. But I think I'd want to hear, get a sense from them about where they'd like to be."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/15/eric-holder-marijuana-legalization_n_5148663.html
-
Study finds brain changes in young marijuana users
By Kay Lazar | GLOBE STAFF APRIL 15, 2014
Young adults who occasionally smoke marijuana show abnormalities in two key areas of their brain related to emotion, motivation, and decision making, raising concerns that they could be damaging their developing minds at a critical time, according to a new study by Boston researchers.
Other studies have revealed brain changes among heavy marijuana users, but this research is believed to be the first to demonstrate such abnormalities in young, casual smokers.
The Boston scientists also found that the degree of brain changes appeared to be directly related to the amount participants smoked per week.
Researchers did not study whether those changes were linked to corresponding declines in brain function, but lead author Jodi Gilman, a psychology instructor at Harvard Medical School and a brain scientist at Massachusetts General Hospital, said such abnormalities in young brains are reason for concern.
“This is when you are making major decisions in your life, when you are choosing a major, starting a career, making long-lasting friendships and relationships,” Gilman said.
The findings, published Wednesday in the Journal of Neuroscience, come amid an increased debate about the long-term effects of marijuana, as a growing number of states legalize the drug for medicinal and recreational use.
Forty Boston-area young adults aged 18 to 25, many from Boston University, were selected for the study. Researchers used scans to measure the volume, shape, and density of two regions of the brain — the nucleus accumbens and the amygdala.
Half of the group said they used marijuana at least once a week, and the other 20 had not used the drug in the past year, and reported using it less than five times in their life.
Among the group that did smoke, the median use was about six joints per week.
Scans revealed that the nucleus accumbens was larger in marijuana users, compared with nonusers, and its alteration was directly related to how much the person smoked. The nucleus accumbens is a hub in the brain that is involved with decision making and motivation. Structural changes were also seen in the amygdala, which is involved with emotional behavior.
These changes, Gilman said, may be evidence that the brain is forming new connections that encourage further drug use, “a sort of drug learning process.” The study did not address whether the brain changes are permanent.
The results are similar to animal studies that show when rats are given THC, the mind-altering ingredient in marijuana, their brains also form new connections, indicating an adaptation to the unnatural level of reward and stimulation from marijuana.
Other scientists not involved in the study say its small size makes it hard to extrapolate to the general population. But they also said the findings may help explain what happened to the brains of participants in other marijuana studies that demonstrated behavioral and functional changes, but did not use scans to identify potential brain abnormalities.
“Anything that underscores that there may be structural changes in the brain [from marijuana use] is important,” said Dr. Staci Gruber, an associate psychiatry professor at Harvard Medical School and a director of brain imaging at McLean Hospital.
Gruber’s studies of marijuana smokers have focused on those with longer, more chronic use and have found that those who started smoking at earlier ages, while still in their teens, are less able to perform certain reasoning and decision-making tasks, compared with those who started later in life.
Stuart Gitlow, president of the American Society of Addiction Medicine, said the Mass. General study provides much-needed “hard evidence” of brain changes that appear to match the changes in cognitive skills — thinking and reasoning — that other researchers have demonstrated in marijuana studies.
“We’ve known that people who use marijuana when they’re younger tend to have cognitive abnormalities, but this gives us direct evidence,” he said.
“It’s fairly reasonable to draw the conclusion now that marijuana does alter the structure of the brain, as demonstrated in this study,” Gitlow said, “and that structural alteration is responsible, at least to some degree, for the cognitive changes we have seen in other studies.”
Earlier research has shown different brain changes linked to alcohol or other drug use, such as cocaine.
Dr. Hans Breiter, a coauthor of the Mass. General study, said there are still many unanswered questions about the potential long-term effects of these various chemicals, especially if people use more than one drug. One of his earlier studies, for instance, showed that the amygdala region of the brain shrank with cocaine use, while the new marijuana study suggests an increase.
“Most drug users use more than one drug,” said Breiter, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine.
“Cocaine users use opiates, and most marijuana users also drink,” he said.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/health-wellness/2014/04/15/casual-marijuana-use-creates-brain-changes-new-report-shows/X1cN8A7h5pOVJkeYkXTXlJ/story.html
-
Use in children or developing brains is problematic, so is alcohol, it's a moot point.
-
Use in children or developing brains is problematic, so is alcohol, it's a moot point.
"Forty Boston-area young adults aged 18 to 25, many from Boston University, were selected for the study."
-
"Forty Boston-area young adults aged 18 to 25, many from Boston University, were selected for the study."
Yes I have read the study, the brain develops into adulthood. This isn't some revelation, many substances have negative effects.
There are also studies highlighting the lack of long term consequences, this study isn't causal also.
-
Yes I have read the study, the brain develops into adulthood. This isn't some revelation, many substances have negative effects.
There are also studies highlighting the lack of long term consequences, this study isn't causal also.
So smoking marijuana is "problematic" (your word) up to age 25?
-
So smoking marijuana is "problematic" (your word) up to age 25?
I wouldn't say that, I
-
So smoking marijuana is "problematic" (your word) up to age 25?
Sorry for the tard post, the point is what type of consumption? chronic? acute? oral, inhalation. I think there is little consequence to an adult using it occasionally like alcohol.
There simply isn't enough information nor can we control for all the nuisance variables in this case. Any drug that has an endogenous receptor that is so intimately tied to brain development could have an impact.
I would argue it's problematic in healthy kids. Does that clarify? then based on the disorder, intractable seizures respond to CBD then no I don't think it's problematic.
The US has a patent on medical marijuana for NEUROPROTECTION. The study is inconclusive and has too many confounders. Chronic and responsible use has different effects as well.
Do you know the effects of drugs on the developing brain? ssri? benzos? far greater impact.
-
Sorry for the tard post, the point is what type of consumption? chronic? acute? oral, inhalation. I think there is little consequence to an adult using it occasionally like alcohol.
There simply isn't enough information nor can we control for all the nuisance variables in this case. Any drug that has an endogenous receptor that is so intimately tied to brain development could have an impact.
I would argue it's problematic in healthy kids. Does that clarify? then based on the disorder, intractable seizures respond to CBD then no I don't think it's problematic.
The US has a patent on medical marijuana for NEUROPROTECTION. The study is inconclusive and has too many confounders. Chronic and responsible use has different effects as well.
Do you know the effects of drugs on the developing brain? ssri? benzos? far greater impact.
You said you read the study? This is from the first sentence of the article:
"Young adults who occasionally smoke marijuana show abnormalities in two key areas of their brain related to emotion, motivation, and decision making, raising concerns that they could be damaging their developing minds at a critical time, according to a new study by Boston researchers."
-
You said you read the study? This is from the first sentence of the article:
"Young adults who occasionally smoke marijuana show abnormalities in two key areas of their brain related to emotion, motivation, and decision making, raising concerns that they could be damaging their developing minds at a critical time, according to a new study by Boston researchers."
I read the study, this isn't the study this is an article, the power of the study is shit, the methods shit. They found alterations in chronic users ie six joints a week. that's not occasional. the other group was occasional. They found what Beach Bum? what concerns you here? do you even know what the nucleus accumbens does? why would forming new connections be bad? they infer they are, um nope, MJ increases growth factors namely BDNF, hence increased connectivity. They also didn't study or indicate if the changes had any negative effects.
Guess what receptors are in the limbic system (read above I have been through this), CB receptors, if you study any drug in this fashion (and they have) they alter brain function. THC is also lipophilic so 6 joints a week would saturate you for a while, hence chronic use.
This study doesn't control confounding variables, and all it has indicated is that brain alterations occur with usage, probably in line with the clinical effects, bad and good.
-
I read the study, this isn't the study this is an article, the power of the study is shit, the methods shit. They found alterations in chronic users ie six joints a week. that's not occasional. the other group was occasional. They found what Beach Bum? what concerns you here? do you even know what the nucleus accumbens does? why would forming new connections be bad? they infer they are, um nope, MJ increases growth factors namely BDNF, hence increased connectivity. They also didn't study or indicate if the changes had any negative effects.
Guess what receptors are in the limbic system (read above I have been through this), CB receptors, if you study any drug in this fashion (and they have) they alter brain function. THC is also lipophilic so 6 joints a week would saturate you for a while, hence chronic use.
This study doesn't control confounding variables, and all it has indicated is that brain alterations occur with usage, probably in line with the clinical effects, bad and good.
Nothing concerns me here. I'm just trying to understand your position. You're sort of all over the place. You previously said occasional, responsible use has no adverse effects. When I posted this study, you then said any use by a developing brain is problematic (and the brain develops into young adulthood). Now you're saying six joints a week is not "occasional" (which misstates what the study actually says) so you dismiss the findings of this study.
Here is what it actually says about the frequency of use:
"Half of the group said they used marijuana at least once a week, and the other 20 had not used the drug in the past year, and reported using it less than five times in their life.
Among the group that did smoke, the median use was about six joints per week."
-
6 Joints a week is excessive not occasional.
If you smoke 6 joints a week you are a pot head.
Basically, you can get high on 1-3 hits. Joints prolly give you 10-30 hits. This would mean you got "high" 60 to 150 times if you smoked 6 joints a week. or 9 -25 times a day. lol.
that's like being drunk all day.
-
6 Joints a week is excessive not occasional.
If you smoke 6 joints a week you are a pot head.
Basically, you can get high on 1-3 hits. Joints prolly give you 10-30 hits. This would mean you got "high" 60 to 150 times if you smoked 6 joints a week. or 9 -25 times a day. lol.
that's like being drunk all day.
That's a joint a day. I have no idea if that is excessive or "occasional," but six joints a week was the median for those who smoked.
-
That's a joint a day. I have no idea if that is excessive or "occasional," but six joints a week was the median for those who smoked.
It's a lot in terms of drug effect. Smoking may also be different as the liver converts THC into another more psychedelic molecule that isn't available through combustion.
-
That's a joint a day. I have no idea if that is excessive or "occasional," but six joints a week was the median for those who smoked.
6 joints a week is excessive.
A better way to gauge use would be to record how many times a day does a person get high.
Getting high once a day can be compared to a 2-4 beers in an hour.
-
6 joints a week is excessive.
A better way to gauge use would be to record how many times a day does a person get high.
Getting high once a day can be compared to a 2-4 beers in an hour.
Six was only the median, so some smoked less and some smoked more.
Why do you think a joint a day is excessive?
-
Nothing concerns me here. I'm just trying to understand your position. You're sort of all over the place. You previously said occasional, responsible use has no adverse effects. When I posted this study, you then said any use by a developing brain is problematic (and the brain develops into young adulthood). Now you're saying six joints a week is not "occasional" (which misstates what the study actually says) so you dismiss the findings of this study.
Here is what it actually says about the frequency of use:
"Half of the group said they used marijuana at least once a week, and the other 20 had not used the drug in the past year, and reported using it less than five times in their life.
Among the group that did smoke, the median use was about six joints per week."
I am all over the place because it's a complex topic in which I cannot make blanket statements. I think it's healthy, I think high doses of THC have robust health consequences. I am trying to be honest and explain the nuance to you. The thing is the body and brain have an endocannabinoid system, which is located in the limbic (amygdala) an cortex. Now the amydala is a key center for fear and emontionality. Low and high doses of THC have paradoxical effects, low increases serotonin, high decreases. It also exerts it's effects via modulation.
I didn't dismiss the findings, the found what they found, I disagree with the conclusion. Also, why are we discussing this? you aren't even educated on this? I mean they are describing neuroadaptation, WHOAA
"["Neuroadaptation" in long-term cannabis abuse. A clinical and electroencephalographic case study].
[Article in German]
Winterer G1, Schmidt LG, Frick K, Ulrich G.
Author information
Abstract
This report is about electroencephalographic changes in a twenty-eight year old patient with longterm heavy cannabis use. He was admitted to our hospital after he had developed a depressive-apathetic syndrome. Two days after the last cannabis-intake, the patient had recovered from initial psychopathology and his EEG was completely inconspicuous at this day. Some days later however the patient's behavior became increasingly impulsive and unstable, while his EEG showed a marked disturbed regulation of vigilance. In the following weeks his impulsiveness became less and his EEG returned to normal. We suggest that these alterations may reflect a discontinuation of the initial neuroadaption of the central nervous system to the drug.
"
there were changes induced by the drug and they caused withdrawal and return.
Also, the above is research, yours is an article, you may prefer someone explain this stuff to you but I prefer reading it for myself as I can understand it just fine.
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/178/2/101.long
This paper highlights the negatives of MJ, it's a review of the literature. Have a read.
There is also the complete difference in motor functioning, cognitive tasks etc when acute versus chronic .
So they found "chronic MJ uses induces neuroadaptation, but we can't say anything other then there was a change". That's all they found, the area is well known.
"Neuropharmacology. 2014 Apr 5. pii: S0028-3908(14)00109-9. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2014.03.014. [Epub ahead of print]
Prior stimulation of the endocannabinoid system prevents methamphetamine-induced dopaminergic neurotoxicity in the striatum through activation of CB2 receptors.
Nader J1, Rapino C2, Gennequin B1, Chavant F3, Francheteau M1, Makryiannis A4, Duranti A5, Maccarrone M6, Solinas M1, Thiriet N7.
Author information
Abstract
Methamphetamine toxicity is associated with cell death and loss of dopamine neuron terminals in the striatum similar to what is found in some neurodegenerative diseases. Conversely, the endocannabinoid system (ECS) has been suggested to be neuroprotective in the brain, and new pharmacological tools have been developed to increase their endogenous tone. In this study, we evaluated whether ECS stimulation could reduce the neurotoxicity of high doses of methamphetamine on the dopamine system. We found that methamphetamine alters the levels of the major endocannabinoids, anandamide (AEA) and 2-arachidonoyl glycerol (2-AG) in the striatum, suggesting that the ECS participates in the brain responses to methamphetamine. Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), a cannabis-derived agonist of both CB1 and CB2 cannabinoid receptors, or inhibitors of the main enzymes responsible for the degradation of AEA and 2-AG (URB597 and JZL184, respectively), blunted the decrease in striatal protein levels of tyrosine hydroxylase induced by methamphetamine. In addition, antagonists of CB2, but not of CB1, blocked the preventive effects of URB597 and JZL184, suggesting that only the former receptor subtype is engaged in neuroprotection exerted by ECS stimulation. Finally, we found that methamphetamine increases striatal levels of the cytokine tumor necrosis factor alpha, an effect that was blocked by ECS stimulation. Altogether, our results indicate that stimulation of ECS prior to the administration of an overdose of methamphetamine considerably reduces the neurotoxicity of the drug through CB2 receptor activation and highlight a protective function for the ECS against the toxicity induced by drugs and other external insults to the brain. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled 'CNS Stimulants'.
Oh my god it's protects da brain? it dun stop da neurotoxicity, but they said it changes the brain.
Mini Rev Med Chem. 2009 Apr;9(4):448-62.
Endocannabinoid system: emerging role from neurodevelopment to neurodegeneration.
Basavarajappa BS1, Nixon RA, Arancio O.
Author information
Abstract
The endocannabinoid system, including endogenous ligands ('endocannabinoids' ECs), their receptors, synthesizing and degrading enzymes, as well as transporter molecules, has been detected from the earliest stages of embryonic development and throughout pre- and postnatal development. ECs are bioactive lipids, which comprise amides, esters and ethers of long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids. Anandamide (N-arachidonoylethanolamine; AEA) and 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG) are the best studied ECs, and act as agonists of cannabinoid receptors. Thus, AEA and 2-AG mimic several pharmacological effects of the exogenous cannabinoid delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Delta(9)-THC), the psychoactive principle of cannabis sativa preparations like hashish and marijuana. Recently, however, several lines of evidence have suggested that the EC system may play an important role in early neuronal development as well as a widespread role in neurodegeneration disorders. Many of the effects of cannabinoids and ECs are mediated by two G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), CB1 and CB2, although additional receptors may be implicated. Both CB1 and CB2 couple primarily to inhibitory G proteins and are subject to the same pharmacological influences as other GPCRs. This new system is briefly presented in this review, in order to put in a better perspective the role of the EC pathway from neurodevelopment to neurodegenerative disorders, like Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, and multiple sclerosis. In addition, the potential exploitation of antagonists of CB1 receptors, or of inhibitors of EC metabolism, as next-generation therapeutics is discussed.
Its role in nervous system development is quite complex, I suggest you learn about g coupled proteins first.
This study had different results.
Neuropsychopharmacology. 2014 Mar 17. doi: 10.1038/npp.2014.67. [Epub ahead of print]
Long-Term Effects of Cannabis on Brain Structure.
Battistella G1, Fornari E2, Annoni JM3, Chtioui H4, Dao K4, Fabritius M5, Favrat B6, Mall JF7, Maeder P1, Giroud C5.
Author information
Abstract
The dose-dependent toxicity of the main psychoactive component of cannabis in brain regions rich in cannabinoid CB1 receptors is well known in animal studies. However, research in humans does not show common findings across studies regarding the brain regions that are affected after long-term exposure to cannabis. In the present study, we investigate (using Voxel-based Morphometry) gray matter changes in a group of regular cannabis smokers in comparison with a group of occasional smokers matched by the years of cannabis use. We provide evidence that regular cannabis use is associated with gray matter volume reduction in the medial temporal cortex, temporal pole, parahippocampal gyrus, insula, and orbitofrontal cortex; these regions are rich in cannabinoid CB1 receptors and functionally associated with motivational, emotional, and affective processing. Furthermore, these changes correlate with the frequency of cannabis use in the 3 months before inclusion in the study. The age of onset of drug use also influences the magnitude of these changes. Significant gray matter volume reduction could result either from heavy consumption unrelated to the age of onset or instead from recreational cannabis use initiated at an adolescent age. In contrast, the larger gray matter volume detected in the cerebellum of regular smokers without any correlation with the monthly consumption of cannabis may be related to developmental (ontogenic) processes that occur in adolescence.Neuropsychop harmacology advance online publication, 16 April 2014; doi:10.1038/npp.2014.67.
Again no permenant conseqeunces.
-
I am all over the place because it's a complex topic in which I cannot make blanket statements. I think it's healthy, I think high doses of THC have robust health consequences. I am trying to be honest and explain the nuance to you. The thing is the body and brain have an endocannabinoid system, which is located in the limbic (amygdala) an cortex. Now the amydala is a key center for fear and emontionality. Low and high doses of THC have paradoxical effects, low increases serotonin, high decreases. It also exerts it's effects via modulation.
I didn't dismiss the findings, the found what they found, I disagree with the conclusion. Also, why are we discussing this? you aren't even educated on this? I mean they are describing neuroadaptation, WHOAA
"["Neuroadaptation" in long-term cannabis abuse. A clinical and electroencephalographic case study].
[Article in German]
Winterer G1, Schmidt LG, Frick K, Ulrich G.
Author information
Abstract
This report is about electroencephalographic changes in a twenty-eight year old patient with longterm heavy cannabis use. He was admitted to our hospital after he had developed a depressive-apathetic syndrome. Two days after the last cannabis-intake, the patient had recovered from initial psychopathology and his EEG was completely inconspicuous at this day. Some days later however the patient's behavior became increasingly impulsive and unstable, while his EEG showed a marked disturbed regulation of vigilance. In the following weeks his impulsiveness became less and his EEG returned to normal. We suggest that these alterations may reflect a discontinuation of the initial neuroadaption of the central nervous system to the drug.
"
there were changes induced by the drug and they caused withdrawal and return.
Also, the above is research, yours is an article, you may prefer someone explain this stuff to you but I prefer reading it for myself as I can understand it just fine.
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/178/2/101.long
This paper highlights the negatives of MJ, it's a review of the literature. Have a read.
There is also the complete difference in motor functioning, cognitive tasks etc when acute versus chronic .
So they found "chronic MJ uses induces neuroadaptation, but we can't say anything other then there was a change". That's all they found, the area is well known.
"Neuropharmacology. 2014 Apr 5. pii: S0028-3908(14)00109-9. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2014.03.014. [Epub ahead of print]
Prior stimulation of the endocannabinoid system prevents methamphetamine-induced dopaminergic neurotoxicity in the striatum through activation of CB2 receptors.
Nader J1, Rapino C2, Gennequin B1, Chavant F3, Francheteau M1, Makryiannis A4, Duranti A5, Maccarrone M6, Solinas M1, Thiriet N7.
Author information
Abstract
Methamphetamine toxicity is associated with cell death and loss of dopamine neuron terminals in the striatum similar to what is found in some neurodegenerative diseases. Conversely, the endocannabinoid system (ECS) has been suggested to be neuroprotective in the brain, and new pharmacological tools have been developed to increase their endogenous tone. In this study, we evaluated whether ECS stimulation could reduce the neurotoxicity of high doses of methamphetamine on the dopamine system. We found that methamphetamine alters the levels of the major endocannabinoids, anandamide (AEA) and 2-arachidonoyl glycerol (2-AG) in the striatum, suggesting that the ECS participates in the brain responses to methamphetamine. Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), a cannabis-derived agonist of both CB1 and CB2 cannabinoid receptors, or inhibitors of the main enzymes responsible for the degradation of AEA and 2-AG (URB597 and JZL184, respectively), blunted the decrease in striatal protein levels of tyrosine hydroxylase induced by methamphetamine. In addition, antagonists of CB2, but not of CB1, blocked the preventive effects of URB597 and JZL184, suggesting that only the former receptor subtype is engaged in neuroprotection exerted by ECS stimulation. Finally, we found that methamphetamine increases striatal levels of the cytokine tumor necrosis factor alpha, an effect that was blocked by ECS stimulation. Altogether, our results indicate that stimulation of ECS prior to the administration of an overdose of methamphetamine considerably reduces the neurotoxicity of the drug through CB2 receptor activation and highlight a protective function for the ECS against the toxicity induced by drugs and other external insults to the brain. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled 'CNS Stimulants'.
Oh my god it's protects da brain? it dun stop da neurotoxicity, but they said it changes the brain.
Mini Rev Med Chem. 2009 Apr;9(4):448-62.
Endocannabinoid system: emerging role from neurodevelopment to neurodegeneration.
Basavarajappa BS1, Nixon RA, Arancio O.
Author information
Abstract
The endocannabinoid system, including endogenous ligands ('endocannabinoids' ECs), their receptors, synthesizing and degrading enzymes, as well as transporter molecules, has been detected from the earliest stages of embryonic development and throughout pre- and postnatal development. ECs are bioactive lipids, which comprise amides, esters and ethers of long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids. Anandamide (N-arachidonoylethanolamine; AEA) and 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG) are the best studied ECs, and act as agonists of cannabinoid receptors. Thus, AEA and 2-AG mimic several pharmacological effects of the exogenous cannabinoid delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Delta(9)-THC), the psychoactive principle of cannabis sativa preparations like hashish and marijuana. Recently, however, several lines of evidence have suggested that the EC system may play an important role in early neuronal development as well as a widespread role in neurodegeneration disorders. Many of the effects of cannabinoids and ECs are mediated by two G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), CB1 and CB2, although additional receptors may be implicated. Both CB1 and CB2 couple primarily to inhibitory G proteins and are subject to the same pharmacological influences as other GPCRs. This new system is briefly presented in this review, in order to put in a better perspective the role of the EC pathway from neurodevelopment to neurodegenerative disorders, like Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, and multiple sclerosis. In addition, the potential exploitation of antagonists of CB1 receptors, or of inhibitors of EC metabolism, as next-generation therapeutics is discussed.
Its role in nervous system development is quite complex, I suggest you learn about g coupled proteins first.
This study had different results.
Neuropsychopharmacology. 2014 Mar 17. doi: 10.1038/npp.2014.67. [Epub ahead of print]
Long-Term Effects of Cannabis on Brain Structure.
Battistella G1, Fornari E2, Annoni JM3, Chtioui H4, Dao K4, Fabritius M5, Favrat B6, Mall JF7, Maeder P1, Giroud C5.
Author information
Abstract
The dose-dependent toxicity of the main psychoactive component of cannabis in brain regions rich in cannabinoid CB1 receptors is well known in animal studies. However, research in humans does not show common findings across studies regarding the brain regions that are affected after long-term exposure to cannabis. In the present study, we investigate (using Voxel-based Morphometry) gray matter changes in a group of regular cannabis smokers in comparison with a group of occasional smokers matched by the years of cannabis use. We provide evidence that regular cannabis use is associated with gray matter volume reduction in the medial temporal cortex, temporal pole, parahippocampal gyrus, insula, and orbitofrontal cortex; these regions are rich in cannabinoid CB1 receptors and functionally associated with motivational, emotional, and affective processing. Furthermore, these changes correlate with the frequency of cannabis use in the 3 months before inclusion in the study. The age of onset of drug use also influences the magnitude of these changes. Significant gray matter volume reduction could result either from heavy consumption unrelated to the age of onset or instead from recreational cannabis use initiated at an adolescent age. In contrast, the larger gray matter volume detected in the cerebellum of regular smokers without any correlation with the monthly consumption of cannabis may be related to developmental (ontogenic) processes that occur in adolescence.Neuropsychop harmacology advance online publication, 16 April 2014; doi:10.1038/npp.2014.67.
Again no permenant conseqeunces.
So you say you "cannot make blanket statements" and in the next sentence say "I think it's healthy . . . ." lol Seriously? The reason you're all over the place is because you keep making unqualified (i.e., blanket) statements.
What's pretty clear to me based on what I've read, seen, and heard is we cannot call marijuana use "healthy," harmless, etc. Whether it should be legal is a separate question, but calling it harmless, or even "healthy" sounds pretty naive.
-
So based on the research my personal and professional opinion on MJ use is that it can be of utility for a variety of illnesses and can be detrimental to some (like any drug). It's side effects and public health risks are moot in terms of legalization, if alcohol is legal no argument can be made for a less harmful substance with clear medicinal effects.
Kids shouldn't use it, except as a medicine in which there is clear efficacy. This brain structure issue isn't novel either, opiates do it, amphetamines do it and yet we have kids on Adderall. Amphetamine induces dopaminergic neuronal apoptosis yet we use it in kids. These arguments aren't rational, unless you want to apply them in a cherry picked fashion.
The endocannabinoid system appears to be intimately related to neurodevelopment too (growth and differentiation of the brain).
So if we are talking about medicinal effects and usage it would be pathology related, if we are discussing legalization no rational argument exists when juxtaposed with alcohol.
-
So you say you "cannot make blanket statements" and in the next sentence say "I think it's healthy . . . ." lol Seriously? The reason you're all over the place is because you keep making unqualified (i.e., blanket) statements.
What's pretty clear to me based on what I've read, seen, and heard is we cannot call marijuana use "healthy," harmless, etc. Whether it should be legal is a separate question, but calling it harmless, or even "healthy" sounds pretty naive.
I can have an opinion but in matters of fact I cannot. We haven't even defined healthy, you are using a common fucking argumentative tactic of attacking semantics, side arguments and irrelevant point.
Good thing your opinion doesn't matter because you get your science from a newspaper. It has many healthy properties, I just fucking outlined them read what I actually posted. I don't know why I get into with you, you are a nitwit that misconstrues everything.
It's not black and white, sorry if you want it to be that simple, if you can't understand nuance then I don't know what to tell you. The substance can both be healthy are harmful depending on many variables. Alcohol is fine in the healthy but don't drink if you have hepatitis.
You didn't even make a fucking argument, you simply copy and pasted a shitty article thinking it trumps the newer research I just posted.
Your questions are also retarded, you ask me if I think it's fine and rebut me with use in children. You haven't addressed one point, just twist everything, you said it was fine, but I found this study in schizophrenics that shows it's not. That is the depth of your argument, your knowledge on the subject.
You haven't touched one study I posted that contradicts yours, proves my point. Nor have you countered my contentions about your paper.
J Addict Res Ther. 2013 Apr 24;Suppl 4. pii: 010.
A Review of Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Studies in Marijuana using Adolescents and Adults.
Sneider JT1, Mashhoon Y2, Silveri MM1.
Author information
Abstract
Marijuana (MJ) remains the most widely used illicit drug of abuse, and accordingly, is associated with adverse effects on mental and physical health, and neurocognitive decline. Studies investigating the neurobiology of underlying MJ effects have demonstrated structural and functional alterations in brain areas that contain moderate to high concentrations of cannabinoid (CB1) receptors and that are implicated in MJ-related cognitive decrements. Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H MRS), a non-invasive imaging technique used to assess neurochemistry, has been widely applied to probe a variety of substance-abusing populations. To date, however, there is a relative paucity of MRS published studies characterizing changes in neurometabolite concentrations in MJ users. Thus, the current review provides a summary of data from the eight existing MRS studies of MJ use in adolescents and adults, as well as interpretations and implications of study findings. Future MRS studies that address additional factors such as sex differences, onset and duration of use, abstinence and age, are warranted, and would lead to a more thorough characterization of potential neurochemical correlates of chronic MJ use, which would fill critical gaps in the existing literature.
"
Here this paper is none sensationalized, are we done here yet or have I raped you hard enough? Would you like the full paper? it goes through all the imaging studies (your study is one).
-
What's pretty clear to me based on what I've read, seen, and heard is we cannot call marijuana use "healthy," harmless, etc. Whether it should be legal is a separate question, but calling it harmless, or even "healthy" sounds pretty naive.
This is meaningless, it's not harmless, either is drinking large amounts of water and running in place. It's relatively harmless compared with other legal drugs. It is less harmful then Tylenol, that's a fact. It's toxicity is absolutely astounding and it's impairment no more then a cup of coffee.
I am sure Montell Williams would disagree with you saying it's not healthy. it fits the fucking definition of healthy in many regards.
It's a neuroprotectant fact
It has potential anti cancer effects
Helps seizures
Reduces inflammation
Improves digestion, reduces IBS
is a bronchodialator.
Is an anxiolytic
reduces chronic stress (remember all those PTSD studies you read?)
Are we done yet or are you going to cherry pick some more? maybe you could find a grey area to exploit.
-
I can have an opinion but in matters of fact I cannot. We haven't even defined healthy, you are using a common fucking argumentative tactic of attacking semantics, side arguments and irrelevant point.
Good thing your opinion doesn't matter because you get your science from a newspaper. It has many healthy properties, I just fucking outlined them read what I actually posted. I don't know why I get into with you, you are a nitwit that misconstrues everything.
It's not black and white, sorry if you want it to be that simple, if you can't understand nuance then I don't know what to tell you. The substance can both be healthy are harmful depending on many variables. Alcohol is fine in the healthy but don't drink if you have hepatitis.
You didn't even make a fucking argument, you simply copy and pasted a shitty article thinking it trumps the newer research I just posted.
Your questions are also retarded, you ask me if I think it's fine and rebut me with use in children. You haven't addressed one point, just twist everything, you said it was fine, but I found this study in schizophrenics that shows it's not. That is the depth of your argument, your knowledge on the subject.
You haven't touched one study I posted that contradicts yours, proves my point. Nor have you countered my contentions about your paper.
J Addict Res Ther. 2013 Apr 24;Suppl 4. pii: 010.
A Review of Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Studies in Marijuana using Adolescents and Adults.
Sneider JT1, Mashhoon Y2, Silveri MM1.
Author information
Abstract
Marijuana (MJ) remains the most widely used illicit drug of abuse, and accordingly, is associated with adverse effects on mental and physical health, and neurocognitive decline. Studies investigating the neurobiology of underlying MJ effects have demonstrated structural and functional alterations in brain areas that contain moderate to high concentrations of cannabinoid (CB1) receptors and that are implicated in MJ-related cognitive decrements. Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H MRS), a non-invasive imaging technique used to assess neurochemistry, has been widely applied to probe a variety of substance-abusing populations. To date, however, there is a relative paucity of MRS published studies characterizing changes in neurometabolite concentrations in MJ users. Thus, the current review provides a summary of data from the eight existing MRS studies of MJ use in adolescents and adults, as well as interpretations and implications of study findings. Future MRS studies that address additional factors such as sex differences, onset and duration of use, abstinence and age, are warranted, and would lead to a more thorough characterization of potential neurochemical correlates of chronic MJ use, which would fill critical gaps in the existing literature.
"
Here this paper is none sensationalized, are we done here yet or have I raped you hard enough? Would you like the full paper? it goes through all the imaging studies (your study is one).
So to recap, you have been talking out of both sides of your mouth in this thread. Including the following:
It is literally a wonder drug, you have all been lied too. I would know,I have literally read every paper related to health on the subject, there are literally no side effects when done appropriately and the addiction is on par with coffee as is the intoxication.
It is the number one medicinal substance in the world, no other compound has all of these benefits and robustly so.
Long term, there are no consequences if you start in adult hood
So based on the research my personal and professional opinion on MJ use is that it can be of utility for a variety of illnesses and can be detrimental to some (like any drug). It's side effects and public health risks are moot in terms of legalization, if alcohol is legal no argument can be made for a less harmful substance with clear medicinal effects.
Kids shouldn't use it, except as a medicine in which there is clear efficacy.
I am all over the place because it's a complex topic in which I cannot make blanket statements. I think it's healthy, I think high doses of THC have robust health consequences.
So you've said: It's a wonder drug, it is healthy, it literally has no side effects when used "appropriately," high doses are healthy, kids should not use, those with developing brains shouldn't use. But it "can be detrimental."
This is comical. lol
I think I'll stick with Ablow's opinion over yours.
-
Six was only the median, so some smoked less and some smoked more.
Why do you think a joint a day is excessive?
I already explained that smoking a joint in a day is like being drunk all day
-
I already explained that smoking a joint in a day is like being drunk all day
Are you saying being high impairs someone in the same way as being drunk?
-
So to recap, you have been talking out of both sides of your mouth in this thread. Including the following:
So you've said: It's a wonder drug, it is healthy, it literally has no side effects when used "appropriately," high doses are healthy, kids should not use, those with developing brains shouldn't use. But it "can be detrimental."
This is comical. lol
I think I'll stick with Ablow's opinion over yours.
There is literally no contradiction in anything I said there.
I said high doses were unhealthy, but that's not odd that you would completely misrepresent me. I even see the sentence you got that from and I was implying that it has certain negative consequences which can be robust like induction of psychosis. It is a wonder drug for many conditions, again no contradiction. The issue here is you aren't all that bright.
Your study had no conclusion on negative or positive you pleb, what opinion are you talking about?
Again where am I talking out of both sides of my mouth?
recreationally ther eis no argument
It is a wonder drug for intractable seizure, adhd, forms of OCD, pain, Nausea etc.
It shouldn't be given to kids unless medicinal (ie kids shouldn't be getting high)
It has detrimental effects which are dose dependent. The studies I posted corroborate this,not someone's discussion.
Let's do this with alcohol
It has benefits (anxiety reduction, mood lift) but is also detrimental, it has dose related effects. Long term is depletes thiamine causing confabulations and an illness, that isn't an acute effect, so acute versus chronic is different. In low doses it may have benefits even, for the liver, mental health etc, the heart, so is it good or bad Beach Bum? neither, it's a complex topic that you need to have an understanding of to discuss rationally. This will be my last response as I am not interested in debating with someone who hasn\t addressed one point and thinks he has caught me in his web of intellectual dishonesty. A substance exhibiting confounding effects isn't new, all things in moderation.
You do this a lot, move the goal posts, won't define terms, rebut a wall of text an arguments with a semantic argument.
Believe what you want, the facts are out there.
Its you who are confused, probably because you have no idea what you are talking about.
-
Are you saying being high impairs someone in the same way as being drunk?
Depends on the context of what you are comparing it to.
An alcohol buzz is different than being high.
-
....
So you've said: It's a wonder drug, it is healthy, it literally has no side effects when used "appropriately," high doses are healthy, kids should not use, those with developing brains shouldn't use. But it "can be detrimental."
This is comical. lol
I think I'll stick with Ablow's opinion over yours.
This discussion of whether pot (or freakin' anything) is "healthy" or "harmless" is near meaningless.
Reminds me of the Katt Williams bit about weed where he questions why aspirin is legal but pot is not; With aspirin, he points out, if you take 13 of those mofo's it'll be your last damn headache...as opposed to weed which is basically impossible to OD on.
Per little Katt, the principle effects of weed are: Hungry, Happy, Sleepy.
-
There is literally no contradiction in anything I said there.
I said high doses were unhealthy, but that's not odd that you would completely misrepresent me. I even see the sentence you got that from and I was implying that it has certain negative consequences which can be robust like induction of psychosis. It is a wonder drug for many conditions, again no contradiction. The issue here is you aren't all that bright.
Your study had no conclusion on negative or positive you pleb, what opinion are you talking about?
Again where am I talking out of both sides of my mouth?
recreationally ther eis no argument
It is a wonder drug for intractable seizure, adhd, forms of OCD, pain, Nausea etc.
It shouldn't be given to kids unless medicinal (ie kids shouldn't be getting high)
It has detrimental effects which are dose dependent. The studies I posted corroborate this,not someone's discussion.
Let's do this with alcohol
It has benefits (anxiety reduction, mood lift) but is also detrimental, it has dose related effects. Long term is depletes thiamine causing confabulations and an illness, that isn't an acute effect, so acute versus chronic is different. In low doses it may have benefits even, for the liver, mental health etc, the heart, so is it good or bad Beach Bum? neither, it's a complex topic that you need to have an understanding of to discuss rationally. This will be my last response as I am not interested in debating with someone who hasn\t addressed one point and thinks he has caught me in his web of intellectual dishonesty. A substance exhibiting confounding effects isn't new, all things in moderation.
You do this a lot, move the goal posts, won't define terms, rebut a wall of text an arguments with a semantic argument.
Believe what you want, the facts are out there.
Its you who are confused, probably because you have no idea what you are talking about.
I'm not confused. I'm simply quoting you. Was genuinely trying to understand your position, but I can see you're felling a little challenged. lol
I'm giving more weight to what I read from Alblow and other sources, including this from him (posted earlier):
"Research studies show that cannabis users are at a 40 percent increased risk of psychosis. Research studies show that marijuana may well be a risk factor for schizophrenia, depression and anxiety disorders.
And research shows that marijuana is linked to a syndrome in which people have little motivation to pursue goals and interests that they once found compelling."
It's ok if you disagree.
-
Depends on the context of what you are comparing it to.
An alcohol buzz is different than being high.
I'm trying to use your context. You said smoking a joint a day is like being drunk all day. What I'm asking is whether you think the effects of smoking a joint in a day are the same as someone being drunk?
-
This discussion of whether pot (or freakin' anything) is "healthy" or "harmless" is near meaningless.
Reminds me of the Katt Williams bit about weed where he questions why aspirin is legal but pot is not; With aspirin, he points out, if you take 13 of those mofo's it'll be your last damn headache...as opposed to weed which is basically impossible to OD on.
Per little Katt, the principle effects of weed are: Hungry, Happy, Sleepy.
Ok. That clip made me laugh out loud. ;D
-
I'm trying to use your context. You said smoking a joint a day is like being drunk all day. What I'm asking is whether you think the effects of smoking a joint in a day are the same as someone being drunk?
No, but if you drank lets say a case and a half thought he course of a 12 hour day, you would prolly be buzzed most of the day. If you took 2-3 hits from a joint and smoked it every 1-2 hours during a 12 hour day you would be high all that time too. That being said, high and drunk are 2 different things, but they are both forms of being intoxicated.
-
No, but if you drank lets say a case and a half thought he course of a 12 hour day, you would prolly be buzzed most of the day. If you took 2-3 hits from a joint and smoked it every 1-2 hours during a 12 hour day you would be high all that time too. That being said, high and drunk are 2 different things, but they are both forms of being intoxicated.
Thanks. So when people smoke a joint, they don't smoke the whole thing at once like a cigarette?
-
Thanks. So when people smoke a joint, they don't smoke the whole thing at once like a cigarette?
Not typically. Plus now a days people smoke a bowl more often then a joint. Still the same thing though, take few hits, get high, it lasts 1-2 hours until it fully wears off.
-
I'm not confused. I'm simply quoting you. Was genuinely trying to understand your position, but I can see you're felling a little challenged. lol
You cannot understand my position because you haven't read anything I posted, simply attacked an inconsistency that when examined is false anyway. How am I challenged, I legitimately was trying to give you information but you seem to be trolling. That's fine.
I'm giving more weight to what I read from Alblow and other sources, including this from him (posted earlier):
"Research studies show that cannabis users are at a 40 percent increased risk of psychosis. Research studies show that marijuana may well be a risk factor for schizophrenia, depression and anxiety disorders.
I have agreed with that in principle. What type of anxiety disorder? OCD or GAD? PTSD? because it's been found very helpful for PTSD. if I post that study his point isn't clear now is it. Is he confused too or perhaps you are placing to much weight into one study that gave us no insight.
And research shows that marijuana is linked to a syndrome in which people have little motivation to pursue goals and interests that they once found compelling."
I have already addressed both your points and you are wrong.
Rev Med Liege. 2013 May-Jun;68(5-6):281-6.
[So called "soft" drugs: cannabis and the amotivational syndrome].
[Article in French]
Schmits E1, Quertemont E.
Author information
Abstract
In spite of its soft drug reputation, severe cannabis abuse can produce a number of adverse chronic effects. Whereas the majority of consumers make a ((soft)) use of cannabis, there is a minority of problematic cannabis users. However, many of cannabis chronic effects are still controversial, especially regarding the causal nature of their relationship with cannabis use. There is a scientific consensus to claim that cannabis induces a state of dependence in a small proportion of users. Severe abuse of cannabis can also lead to cognitive impairments, especially on memory, although these effects usually improve after the cessation of cannabis use. The statistical link between cannabis use and the development of psychotic disorders is more worrying, although the causal nature of this relationship remains controversial. Finally, a chronic abuse of cannabis is reputed to induce an amotivational syndrome, mainly characterized by a state of apathy. Although the symptoms of the amotivational syndrome are in keeping with some clinical observations, it remains difficult to ascertain whether this clinical picture is causally produced by cannabis abuse.
Oh my god he might be jumping the gun, stick with his opinion as you clearly haven't read a single thing I posted.
Worst troll ever.
It's ok if you disagree.
Disagree with what? I said it causes an increased risk of psychosis, you must of missed my first post where I go through most of the shit he mentions. Do you know your ignorant? serious question.
-
Another study confirming my point
Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2012 Oct;20(5):420-9. doi: 10.1037/a0029117. Epub 2012 Jun 25.
Residual effects of cannabis use on neurocognitive performance after prolonged abstinence: a meta-analysis.
Schreiner AM1, Dunn ME.
Author information
Abstract
Cannabis is the most widely used illicit drug in the U.S., and the number of illicit and licit users is rising. Lasting neurocognitive changes or deficits as a result of use are frequently noted despite a lack of clarity in the scientific literature. In an effort to resolve inconsistencies in the evidence of lasting residual effects of cannabis use, we conducted two meta-analyses. First, we updated a previous meta-analysis on broad nonacute cognitive effects of cannabis use through inclusion of newer studies. In a second meta-analysis, we focused on evidence for lasting residual effects by including only studies that tested users after at least 25 days of abstinence. In the first meta-analysis, 33 studies met inclusion criteria. Results indicated a small negative effect for global neurocognitive performance as well for most cognitive domains assessed. Unfortunately, methodological limitations of these studies prevented the exclusion of withdrawal symptoms as an explanation for observed effects. In the second meta-analysis, 13 of the original 33 studies met inclusion criteria. Results indicated no significant effect of cannabis use on global neurocognitive performance or any effect on the eight assessed domains. Overall, these meta-analyses demonstrate that any negative residual effects on neurocognitive performance attributable to either cannabis residue or withdrawal symptoms are limited to the first 25 days of abstinence. Furthermore, there was no evidence for enduring negative effects of cannabis use.
No long term seqeulae, it's neuroadaptation. This is also a META ANALYSIS. the very best study for truth one can conduct in most instances.
http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/7zd3g/cannabis_is_a_safer_drug_than_aspirin_and_can_be/
safer then aspirin? a oxford trained scientist who is a foremost expert on cannabinoids disagrees with your one study that actually had no conclusion.
I will use this thread as a repository of correct information on the drug just to rub Beach bums ass.
"injections of THC, the active principle of cannabis, eliminate dependence on opiates (morphine, heroin) in rats deprived of their mothers at birth. The findings could lead to therapeutic alternatives to existing substitution treatments."
I bet it's because it reduces dopamine known to be addicting. I wonder if you could make that connection genius?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090706090440.htm
AND THE TOPPER
BRAND SPANKING FUCKING NEW 2014
Schizophr Res. 2014 Jan;152(1):283-8. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2013.11.014. Epub 2013 Dec 2.
A controlled family study of cannabis users with and without psychosis.
Proal AC1, Fleming J2, Galvez-Buccollini JA2, Delisi LE3.
Author information
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Cannabis is one of the most highly abused illicit drugs in the world. Several studies suggest a link between adolescent cannabis use and schizophrenia. An understanding of this link would have significant implications for legalization of cannabis and its medicinal value. The present study aims to determine whether familial morbid risk for schizophrenia is the crucial factor that underlies the association of adolescent cannabis use with the development of schizophrenia.
METHODS:
Consecutively obtained probands were recruited into four samples: sample 1: 87 non-psychotic controls with no drug use; sample 2: 84 non-psychotic controls with cannabis use; sample 3: 32 patients with a schizophrenia spectrum psychosis with no drug use; sample 4: 76 patients with schizophrenia spectrum psychosis with cannabis use. All cannabis using subjects used this drug during adolescence, and no other substance, with the exception of alcohol. Structured interviews of probands and family informants were used to obtain diagnostic information about probands and all their known relatives.
RESULTS:
There was an increased morbid risk for schizophrenia in relatives of the cannabis using and non-using patient samples compared with their respective non-psychotic control samples (p=.002, p<.001 respectively). There was no significant difference in morbid risk for schizophrenia between relatives of the patients who use or do not use cannabis (p=.43).
CONCLUSIONS:
The results of the current study suggest that having an increased familial morbid risk for schizophrenia may be the underlying basis for schizophrenia in cannabis users and not cannabis use by itself.
Ug oh, looks like I have been spot on. Perhaps you jumped to an unfounded conclusion based on a single article in which you misinterpreted.
ANOTHER LOLOLOLOL
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/11/03/us-pot-induced-psychosis-idUSTRE4A26JV20081103?feedType=RSS&feedName=healthNews&rpc=22&sp=true
"They found that individuals treated for post-pot smoking psychotic episodes had the same likelihood of having a mother, sister or other "first-degree" relative with schizophrenia as did the individuals who had actually been treated for schizophrenia themselves. This suggests that cannabis-induced psychosis and schizophrenia are one and the same, the researchers note. "These people would have developed schizophrenia whether or not they used cannabis," Arendt explained in comments to Reuters Health."
do you enjoy the raping I am giving? can I fuck your mouth too?
Abstract
Background
Cannabis is one of the most highly abused illicit drugs in the world. Several studies suggest a link between adolescent cannabis use and schizophrenia. An understanding of this link would have significant implications for legalization of cannabis and its medicinal value. The present study aims to determine whether familial morbid risk for schizophrenia is the crucial factor that underlies the association of adolescent cannabis use with the development of schizophrenia.
Methods
Consecutively obtained probands were recruited into four samples: sample 1: 87 non-psychotic controls with no drug use; sample 2: 84 non-psychotic controls with cannabis use; sample 3: 32 patients with a schizophrenia spectrum psychosis with no drug use; sample 4: 76 patients with schizophrenia spectrum psychosis with cannabis use. All cannabis using subjects used this drug during adolescence, and no other substance, with the exception of alcohol. Structured interviews of probands and family informants were used to obtain diagnostic information about probands and all their known relatives.
Results
There was an increased morbid risk for schizophrenia in relatives of the cannabis using and non-using patient samples compared with their respective non-psychotic control samples (p=.002, p<.001 respectively). There was no significant difference in morbid risk for schizophrenia between relatives of the patients who use or do not use cannabis (p=.43).
Conclusions
The results of the current study suggest that having an increased familial morbid risk for schizophrenia may be the underlying basis for schizophrenia in cannabis users and not cannabis use by itself.
The abstract, I know you like to thoroughly review the literature before coming to a conclusion.
http://schizophreniabulletin.oxfordjournals.org/content/38/2/316.short
This association between better cognitive performance and cannabis use in schizophrenia may be driven by a subgroup of “neurocognitively less impaired” patients, who only developed psychosis after a relatively early initiation into cannabis use.
Wait, those who use and have schizo are better off? I wonder why, could it be the anti-psychotic effect of some cannabinoids. If only there was research.
Again brand new
Recent Pat CNS Drug Discov. 2014 Mar 6. [Epub ahead of print]
Therapeutic Potential of Cannabinoids in Schizophrenia.
Kucerova J, Tabiova K, Drago F, Micale V1.
Author information
Abstract
Increasing evidence suggests a close relationship between the endocannabinoid system and schizophrenia. The endocannabinoid system comprises of two G protein-coupled receptors (the cannabinoid receptors 1 and 2 [CB1 and CB2] for marijuana's psychoactive principle Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol), their endogenous small lipid ligands (namely anandamide [AEA] and 2-arachidonoylglycerol [2-AG], also known as endocannabinoids), and proteins for endocannabinoid biosynthesis and degradation. It has been suggested to be a pro-homeostatic and pleiotropic signalling system activated in a time- and tissue-specific manner during pathophysiological conditions. In the brain, activation of this system impacts the release of numerous neurotransmitters in various systems and cytokines from glial cells. Hence, the endocannabinoid system is strongly involved in neuropsychiatric disorders, such as schizophrenia. Therefore, adolescence use of Cannabis may alter the endocannabinoid signalling and pose a potential environmental risk to develop psychosis. Consistently, preclinical and clinical studies have found dysregulations in the endocannabinoid system to alter blood and/or cerebrospinal fluid biochemistry. It has been proved that changed expressions of CB1 and CB2 receptors were linked to altered levels of AEA and 2-AG in the cerebrospinal fluid and/or blood. Thus, partial efficacy of antipsychotic compounds which manipulate this system may provide a novel therapeutic target for the treatment of schizophrenia. The present article reviews current available knowledge on herbal, synthetic and endogenous cannabinoids with respect to the modulation of schizophrenic symptomatology. Furthermore, this review will be highlighting the therapeutic potential of cannabinoid-related compounds and presenting some promising patents targeting potential treatment options for schizophrenia.
So as you can see your question is retarded, it's a complex topic. It induces schizo in some, treats it in others and for the vast majority without any history of schizo in the family will suffer nothing.
So now that every single thing you have stated has been rebutted with actual research and not opinion what are your thoughts on the drug? I mean you were trying to understand my position, could you paraphrase my position?
-
Hey Beach Bum whats his opinion on this? I am bored so I figured I would pick on the whipping boi a bit more.
Background
Cannabis is one of the most highly abused illicit drugs in the world. Several studies suggest a link between adolescent cannabis use and schizophrenia. An understanding of this link would have significant implications for legalization of cannabis and its medicinal value. The present study aims to determine whether familial morbid risk for schizophrenia is the crucial factor that underlies the association of adolescent cannabis use with the development of schizophrenia.
Methods
Consecutively obtained probands were recruited into four samples: sample 1: 87 non-psychotic controls with no drug use; sample 2: 84 non-psychotic controls with cannabis use; sample 3: 32 patients with a schizophrenia spectrum psychosis with no drug use; sample 4: 76 patients with schizophrenia spectrum psychosis with cannabis use. All cannabis using subjects used this drug during adolescence, and no other substance, with the exception of alcohol. Structured interviews of probands and family informants were used to obtain diagnostic information about probands and all their known relatives.
Results
There was an increased morbid risk for schizophrenia in relatives of the cannabis using and non-using patient samples compared with their respective non-psychotic control samples (p=.002, p<.001 respectively). There was no significant difference in morbid risk for schizophrenia between relatives of the patients who use or do not use cannabis (p=.43).
Conclusions
The results of the current study suggest that having an increased familial morbid risk for schizophrenia may be the underlying basis for schizophrenia in cannabis users and not cannabis use by itself.
-
waaaaaaa a thread I need read, thank you so much
I live in London England and it's impossible, it's a little island.
I have a friend in Canada who has a 'medical' license to grow.
I have smoked dope all my life (well since I was 25....
The 'mental illness' thing is something you saw in a right-wing stupid newspaper, or something to do with the fact that you can't get it or grow it so they sell you this disgusting skunk shit which will in fact make you mentally illl, if you have already got that tendancy it'll take you over the edge. Last week it was all woody and this week it smells of mud. (That was my Jam mersh? The other crap we get here is Jamaican merce (Commercial) and that is mostly rubbish too.
Do not smoke that genetically modified GM nasty skunk
Where you live in America it's practically legal nowadays, so I'm living in the wrong country all of a sudden. It'd be cheaper to travel to Amsterdam and smuggle
xL
-
Hey Beach bum are you going to a least man up and take a beating or are you going to run away as usual when confronted with reality and not the one that exists solely in your head.
Could you find me more quotes that you think are contradictory yet are completely in line with each other? Perhaps instead of arguing semantics (a losing effort regardless), you could attempt to argue the facts I have presented. Or is it to much medicalese for you to bother? Sometimes understanding things is hard and you have to research, read and learn.
I have never seen a mod get manhandled like this and run from his own board.
-
Not typically. Plus now a days people smoke a bowl more often then a joint. Still the same thing though, take few hits, get high, it lasts 1-2 hours until it fully wears off.
Do you think taking a few hits a day from a bowl (or joint) is excessive?
-
Hey Beach bum are you going to a least man up and take a beating or are you going to run away as usual when confronted with reality and not the one that exists solely in your head.
Could you find me more quotes that you think are contradictory yet are completely in line with each other? Perhaps instead of arguing semantics (a losing effort regardless), you could attempt to argue the facts I have presented. Or is it to much medicalese for you to bother? Sometimes understanding things is hard and you have to research, read and learn.
I have never seen a mod get manhandled like this and run from his own board.
Aw that's so cute. Did you miss me? :D
I'm not going to go back and quote you again. And all you have been doing is pulling stuff off the internet that supports whatever point you're trying to make, which is that marijuana is a harmless wonder drug that can actually be harmful. lol . . .
I can do that too. Here is something it took me about 15 seconds to find:
Marijuana also raises heart rate by 20-100 percent shortly after smoking; this effect can last up to 3 hours. In one study, it was estimated that marijuana users have a 4.8-fold increase in the risk of heart attack in the first hour after smoking the drug. This risk may be greater in older individuals or in those with cardiac vulnerabilities.
A number of studies have linked chronic marijuana use and mental illness. High doses of marijuana can produce a temporary psychotic reaction (involving hallucinations and paranoia) in some users, and using marijuana can worsen the course of illness in patients with schizophrenia. A series of large studies following users across time also showed a link between marijuana use and later development of psychosis. This relationship was influenced by genetic variables as well as the amount of drug used, drug potency, and the age at which it was first taken—those who start young are at increased risk for later problems.
Associations have also been found between marijuana use and other mental health problems, such as depression, anxiety, suicidal thoughts among adolescents, and personality disturbances, including a lack of motivation to engage in typically rewarding activities. More research is still needed to confirm and better understand these linkages.
Marijuana use during pregnancy is associated with increased risk of neurobehavioral problems in babies. Because THC and other compounds in marijuana mimic the body’s own endocannabinoid chemicals, marijuana use by pregnant mothers may alter the developing endocannabinoid system in the brain of the fetus. Consequences for the child may include problems with attention, memory, and problem solving.
Additionally, because it seriously impairs judgment and motor coordination, marijuana contributes to risk of injury or death while driving a car. A recent analysis of data from several studies found that marijuana use more than doubles a driver’s risk of being in an accident. The combination of marijuana and alcohol is worse than either substance alone with respect to driving impairment
http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana
I can be a Google.com expert too. :)
-
Do you think taking a few hits a day from a bowl (or joint) is excessive?
Define few?
If someone gets mildly high once a day i believe its not much different than having a couple of beers at dinner each day.
-
Define few?
If someone gets mildly high once a day i believe its not much different than having a couple of beers at dinner each day.
I don't know? Three? You mentioned a bowl and taking a few hits.
But your second sentence was what I was asking about. So mildly high is the same as a couple of beers. Does that mean a person who is more than "mildly high" (however much smoking that involves) is the same as someone who is actually drunk?
-
I don't know? Three? You mentioned a bowl and taking a few hits.
But your second sentence was what I was asking about. So mildly high is the same as a couple of beers. Does that mean a person who is more than "mildly high" (however much smoking that involves) is the same as someone who is actually drunk?
Weed impairs people differently than alcohol. Not sure i can describe it very well or how to put each degree in perspective. Motor functions seem to diminish on both, but some claim they concentrate much better stoned, which i think is true. So for some, sometimes that increased concentration leads to better motor functions.
the stoner you get the more mellow you get, where as alcohol can have to opposite effect. Alcohol is more like liquid courage while weed is more like liquid creativity.
But what matters is driving or operating heavy machinery. That's shouldn't be done on weed or alcohol.
-
Weed impairs people differently than alcohol. Not sure i can describe it very well or how to put each degree in perspective. Motor functions seem to diminish on both, but some claim they concentrate much better stoned, which i think is true. So for some, sometimes that increased concentration leads to better motor functions.
the stoner you get the more mellow you get, where as alcohol can have to opposite effect. Alcohol is more like liquid courage while weed is more like liquid creativity.
But what matters is driving or operating heavy machinery. That's shouldn't be done on weed or alcohol.
Reminds me of this Family Guy clip. :D
If you think people concentrate better when stoned, then why the prohibition on driving and operating heavy machinery?
-
Reminds me of this Family Guy clip. :D
If you think people concentrate better when stoned, then why the prohibition on driving and operating heavy machinery?
Because it doesn't affect everyone the same way. But again, i am not a expert on its effects. Just lots of first hand experience :D
-
Because it doesn't affect everyone the same way. But again, i am not a expert on its effects. Just lots of first hand experience :D
With smoking and driving or just smoking? :o
-
Aw that's so cute. Did you miss me? :D
I'm not going to go back and quote you again. And all you have been doing is pulling stuff off the internet that supports whatever point you're trying to make, which is that marijuana is a harmless wonder drug that can actually be harmful. lol . . .
I can do that too. Here is something it took me about 15 seconds to find:
Marijuana also raises heart rate by 20-100 percent shortly after smoking; this effect can last up to 3 hours. In one study, it was estimated that marijuana users have a 4.8-fold increase in the risk of heart attack in the first hour after smoking the drug. This risk may be greater in older individuals or in those with cardiac vulnerabilities.
A number of studies have linked chronic marijuana use and mental illness. High doses of marijuana can produce a temporary psychotic reaction (involving hallucinations and paranoia) in some users, and using marijuana can worsen the course of illness in patients with schizophrenia. A series of large studies following users across time also showed a link between marijuana use and later development of psychosis. This relationship was influenced by genetic variables as well as the amount of drug used, drug potency, and the age at which it was first taken—those who start young are at increased risk for later problems.
Associations have also been found between marijuana use and other mental health problems, such as depression, anxiety, suicidal thoughts among adolescents, and personality disturbances, including a lack of motivation to engage in typically rewarding activities. More research is still needed to confirm and better understand these linkages.
Marijuana use during pregnancy is associated with increased risk of neurobehavioral problems in babies. Because THC and other compounds in marijuana mimic the body’s own endocannabinoid chemicals, marijuana use by pregnant mothers may alter the developing endocannabinoid system in the brain of the fetus. Consequences for the child may include problems with attention, memory, and problem solving.
Additionally, because it seriously impairs judgment and motor coordination, marijuana contributes to risk of injury or death while driving a car. A recent analysis of data from several studies found that marijuana use more than doubles a driver’s risk of being in an accident. The combination of marijuana and alcohol is worse than either substance alone with respect to driving impairment
http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana
I can be a Google.com expert too. :)
What in the fuck is that? do you know what references are? you have no idea if the claims are true? you just accept their claims? Listen, it's clear you are no academic, you are arguing with a doctor posting retarded articles with no context. These claims are meaningless 1) without references, no competing data, 2)without context. Lets add context and reason to this article. I will stop if you admit you have no idea what you are talking about.however lets destroy this articles regardless.
"Marijuana also raises heart rate by 20-100 percent shortly after smoking; this effect can last up to 3 hours. In one study, it was estimated that marijuana users have a 4.8-fold increase in the risk of heart attack in the first hour after smoking the drug. This risk may be greater in older individuals or in those with cardiac vulnerabilities."
oh cool, how much does exercise raise the heart rate? caffeine might raise heart rate, let's check. Now I decided to use this study for a reason, to teach you two lessons.
Pharmacotherapy. 2014 Mar 19. doi: 10.1002/phar.1419. [Epub ahead of print]
Effect of Caffeinated Versus Noncaffeinated Energy Drinks on Central Blood Pressures.
Phan JK1, Shah SA.
Author information
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE:
To evaluate the effects of caffeinated energy shots compared with noncaffeinated energy shots as assessed by changes in peripheral and central hemodynamic parameters in healthy subjects.
DESIGN:
Randomized, double-blind, controlled crossover study.
SETTING:
University campus.
PATIENTS:
Ten healthy volunteers.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:
Subjects were randomized to receive either a caffeinated or noncaffeinated energy shot; after a minimum 6 days washout period, subjects were given the alternate energy shot. Peripheral blood pressures, and central hemodynamic parameters, were assessed and recorded for each subject at baseline and at 1 and 3 hours after consumption of the energy shots. Peripheral systolic blood pressure (SBP) increased significantly with the caffeinated energy shot compared with noncaffeinated (8.30 ± 4.19 mm Hg and -0.20 ± 5.55, respectively, p=0.009) at 3 hours. Central SBP increased significantly with the caffeinated energy shot compared with noncaffeinated (8.00 ± 4.03 mm Hg and 1.50 ± 6.57, respectively, p=0.045) at 3 hours. Peripheral and central diastolic blood pressure were nonsignificantly higher with the caffeinated energy shot at 3 hours. Peripheral and central pulse pressure were consistently higher with consumption of the caffeinated beverage. Heart rate, augmentation index, pulse pressure amplification ratio, ejection duration and Subendocardial Viability Ratio were not different between the two interventions over time. P1 height was significantly higher with the caffeinated shot compared with the noncaffeinated shot at both 1 and 3 hours (p=0.035 and 0.013, respectively). Three and one subjects experienced an adverse effect with the caffeinated and noncaffeinated shot, respectively.
CONCLUSION:
A caffeinated energy shot acutely increases peripheral and central SBPs compared with a noncaffeinated energy shot. Larger studies with a placebo comparator are needed to assess the significance of peripheral and central hemodynamic changes with noncaffeinated energy drinks.
This gives us two points.One caffeine has some significant effects on blood pressure, pulse and heart rate, and two, it shows that when you compare your articles claim to say this point, it makes no sense. I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Are you suggesting marijuana is bad because it raises heart rate and that this is a reason for not legalizing? or are you suggesting I didn't know cannabis increase HR? what point are you attempting to get across. It does increase heart rate, however, tolerance develops to that effect overtime, GASP, the point in context makes it less scary and to a degree a half truth. You could critically appraise things too, if you went to school that is.
Let's continue....... shall ... we ....betafag.
"A number of studies have linked chronic marijuana use and mental illness. High doses of marijuana can produce a temporary psychotic reaction (involving hallucinations and paranoia) in some users, and using marijuana can worsen the course of illness in patients with schizophrenia. A series of large studies following users across time also showed a link between marijuana use and later development of psychosis. This relationship was influenced by genetic variables as well as the amount of drug used, drug potency, and the age at which it was first taken—those who start young are at increased risk for later problems.
"
What studies? what type of mental illness? what the fuck..... ok so high doses (too much of the drug) can cause a psychedelic reaction? wait.. well fuck me, cannabis appears to be a mild psychedelic. It's like the alcohol page saying temporary reactions of too much include losing consciousness. You are the type of person who then equates alcohol with losing consciousness, however that's not the whole truth, see how intelligent people think? water intoxication is real, ie to much water, it causes irregular heart beat, coma, death.The last past is just not true, where are they getting this information from? it's clear that genetics not cannabis is the culprit in schizophrenogenesis. Psychosis isn't a sole state, is it chronic or acute? we may never know if these hyperintelligent beings who wrote the above don't fill us in.
"Marijuana use during pregnancy is associated with increased risk of neurobehavioral problems in babies. Because THC and other compounds in marijuana mimic the body’s own endocannabinoid chemicals, marijuana use by pregnant mothers may alter the developing endocannabinoid system in the brain of the fetus. Consequences for the child may include problems with attention, memory, and problem solving."
WTF point are you making, the fucking bitter irony is you posted a abuse fact as if it's marijuana's sole manner of usage. However, i'll play dumbo, I generally like to start the fetus at two joints a day and have him dabbing by 3, certainly no latter then 4 (that would be child abuse). I am a strong proponent of abuse of all things in fact, it's how you get the medicinez to work.
"Additionally, because it seriously impairs judgment and motor coordination, marijuana contributes to risk of injury or death while driving a car. A recent analysis of data from several studies found that marijuana use more than doubles a driver’s risk of being in an accident. The combination of marijuana and alcohol is worse than either substance alone with respect to driving impairment"
Good point brah, I am also a big champion of using drugs and driving for everyone, even those with permits and ride along passes. I wonder how much alcohol increases chance of accident, probably way less right, duh..........\
That last point scares me, if a third drug is added do you become a supervillian? Fuck me, that last point makes sense now. See I didn't understand percentages and synergism, I was like well if alcholo is the worst for impairment, taking some of these Xanax and oxy's won't matter. That explains why I felt a bit more off that night, so did I supoose to substract?????
Thanks for coming out.
-
What in the fuck is that? do you know what references are? you have no idea if the claims are true? you just accept their claims? Listen, it's clear you are no academic, you are arguing with a doctor posting retarded articles with no context. These claims are meaningless 1) without references, no competing data, 2)without context. Lets add context and reason to this article. I will stop if you admit you have no idea what you are talking about.however lets destroy this articles regardless.
"Marijuana also raises heart rate by 20-100 percent shortly after smoking; this effect can last up to 3 hours. In one study, it was estimated that marijuana users have a 4.8-fold increase in the risk of heart attack in the first hour after smoking the drug. This risk may be greater in older individuals or in those with cardiac vulnerabilities."
oh cool, how much does exercise raise the heart rate? caffeine might raise heart rate, let's check. Now I decided to use this study for a reason, to teach you two lessons.
Pharmacotherapy. 2014 Mar 19. doi: 10.1002/phar.1419. [Epub ahead of print]
Effect of Caffeinated Versus Noncaffeinated Energy Drinks on Central Blood Pressures.
Phan JK1, Shah SA.
Author information
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE:
To evaluate the effects of caffeinated energy shots compared with noncaffeinated energy shots as assessed by changes in peripheral and central hemodynamic parameters in healthy subjects.
DESIGN:
Randomized, double-blind, controlled crossover study.
SETTING:
University campus.
PATIENTS:
Ten healthy volunteers.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:
Subjects were randomized to receive either a caffeinated or noncaffeinated energy shot; after a minimum 6 days washout period, subjects were given the alternate energy shot. Peripheral blood pressures, and central hemodynamic parameters, were assessed and recorded for each subject at baseline and at 1 and 3 hours after consumption of the energy shots. Peripheral systolic blood pressure (SBP) increased significantly with the caffeinated energy shot compared with noncaffeinated (8.30 ± 4.19 mm Hg and -0.20 ± 5.55, respectively, p=0.009) at 3 hours. Central SBP increased significantly with the caffeinated energy shot compared with noncaffeinated (8.00 ± 4.03 mm Hg and 1.50 ± 6.57, respectively, p=0.045) at 3 hours. Peripheral and central diastolic blood pressure were nonsignificantly higher with the caffeinated energy shot at 3 hours. Peripheral and central pulse pressure were consistently higher with consumption of the caffeinated beverage. Heart rate, augmentation index, pulse pressure amplification ratio, ejection duration and Subendocardial Viability Ratio were not different between the two interventions over time. P1 height was significantly higher with the caffeinated shot compared with the noncaffeinated shot at both 1 and 3 hours (p=0.035 and 0.013, respectively). Three and one subjects experienced an adverse effect with the caffeinated and noncaffeinated shot, respectively.
CONCLUSION:
A caffeinated energy shot acutely increases peripheral and central SBPs compared with a noncaffeinated energy shot. Larger studies with a placebo comparator are needed to assess the significance of peripheral and central hemodynamic changes with noncaffeinated energy drinks.
This gives us two points.One caffeine has some significant effects on blood pressure, pulse and heart rate, and two, it shows that when you compare your articles claim to say this point, it makes no sense. I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Are you suggesting marijuana is bad because it raises heart rate and that this is a reason for not legalizing? or are you suggesting I didn't know cannabis increase HR? what point are you attempting to get across. It does increase heart rate, however, tolerance develops to that effect overtime, GASP, the point in context makes it less scary and to a degree a half truth. You could critically appraise things too, if you went to school that is.
Let's continue....... shall ... we ....betafag.
"A number of studies have linked chronic marijuana use and mental illness. High doses of marijuana can produce a temporary psychotic reaction (involving hallucinations and paranoia) in some users, and using marijuana can worsen the course of illness in patients with schizophrenia. A series of large studies following users across time also showed a link between marijuana use and later development of psychosis. This relationship was influenced by genetic variables as well as the amount of drug used, drug potency, and the age at which it was first taken—those who start young are at increased risk for later problems.
"
What studies? what type of mental illness? what the fuck..... ok so high doses (too much of the drug) can cause a psychedelic reaction? wait.. well fuck me, cannabis appears to be a mild psychedelic. It's like the alcohol page saying temporary reactions of too much include losing consciousness. You are the type of person who then equates alcohol with losing consciousness, however that's not the whole truth, see how intelligent people think? water intoxication is real, ie to much water, it causes irregular heart beat, coma, death.The last past is just not true, where are they getting this information from? it's clear that genetics not cannabis is the culprit in schizophrenogenesis. Psychosis isn't a sole state, is it chronic or acute? we may never know if these hyperintelligent beings who wrote the above don't fill us in.
"Marijuana use during pregnancy is associated with increased risk of neurobehavioral problems in babies. Because THC and other compounds in marijuana mimic the body’s own endocannabinoid chemicals, marijuana use by pregnant mothers may alter the developing endocannabinoid system in the brain of the fetus. Consequences for the child may include problems with attention, memory, and problem solving."
WTF point are you making, the fucking bitter irony is you posted a abuse fact as if it's marijuana's sole manner of usage. However, i'll play dumbo, I generally like to start the fetus at two joints a day and have him dabbing by 3, certainly no latter then 4 (that would be child abuse). I am a strong proponent of abuse of all things in fact, it's how you get the medicinez to work.
"Additionally, because it seriously impairs judgment and motor coordination, marijuana contributes to risk of injury or death while driving a car. A recent analysis of data from several studies found that marijuana use more than doubles a driver’s risk of being in an accident. The combination of marijuana and alcohol is worse than either substance alone with respect to driving impairment"
Good point brah, I am also a big champion of using drugs and driving for everyone, even those with permits and ride along passes. I wonder how much alcohol increases chance of accident, probably way less right, duh..........\
That last point scares me, if a third drug is added do you become a supervillian? Fuck me, that last point makes sense now. See I didn't understand percentages and synergism, I was like well if alcholo is the worst for impairment, taking some of these Xanax and oxy's won't matter. That explains why I felt a bit more off that night, so did I supoose to substract?????
Thanks for coming out.
If you looked at the link, its from a U.S. government agency.
What I admit is that I'm not an "expert" in what marijuana can or cannot do to the human body. Neither are you. You're just a dude I'm exchanging cut-and-paste with on the internet.
Actually, I think I've learned more from the short exchanges I've had with Ozmo about this subject. Then again, he's recounting personal experiences without giving me pages of crap he pulled off the internet.
-
With smoking and driving or just smoking? :o
lol both. :o
-
If you looked at the link, its from a U.S. government agency.
What I admit is that I'm not an "expert" in what marijuana can or cannot do to the human body. Neither are you. You're just a dude I'm exchanging cut-and-paste with on the internet.
Actually, I think I've learned more from the short exchanges I've had with Ozmo about this subject. Then again, he's recounting personal experiences without giving me pages of crap he pulled off the internet.
If thinking that makes you feel better, I prescribe it or have and I have an intimate knowledge of it. Also, don't equate what I post to what you post, I posted primary research, ie fact, you posted opinion and not even a thorough one. On top of that you appeal to authority, the US government agency, so what. Why are you posting an abuse sheet anyway? perhaps we are all over the place because I am still not sure what your position is, nor am I sure you even know. You seem to be trying to find negatives about the drug, my first post went over those, those same ones you keep bringing up. The reason this is happening is two fold, you don't know what you are reading and/or you didn't read it. I can tell thinking tuckers you out so the latter rather then the former is most likely true.
I am an expert, it may upset you to find that out but some people actually know what they are talking about. You see you have this habit of arguing without actually making any points, it's quite he skill, you skirt the issue and try and obfuscate as much as possible.
The last comment about Ozmo is meant to upset me? Ozmo is a smart guy, he can read the thread and I doubt he would agree with you.
and last, you are left arguing a position you didn't even hold because you have back peddled to the point of an infinite regress my man. You are now posting abuse sheets as a form of argument, your position appears to be that sometimes in some people when the misuse the drug they have moderate-severe side effects. Well you appear to have won the debate, I can't argue that position, although I am not sure I was ever involved with debating it.
-
lol both. :o
Oh snap. Better be careful. :)
-
If thinking that makes you feel better, I prescribe it or have and I have an intimate knowledge of it. Also, don't equate what I post to what you post, I posted primary research, ie fact, you posted opinion and not even a thorough one. On top of that you appeal to authority, the US government agency, so what. Why are you posting an abuse sheet anyway? perhaps we are all over the place because I am still not sure what your position is, nor am I sure you even know. You seem to be trying to find negatives about the drug, my first post went over those, those same ones you keep bringing up. The reason this is happening is two fold, you don't know what you are reading and/or you didn't read it. I can tell thinking tuckers you out so the latter rather then the former is most likely true.
I am an expert, it may upset you to find that out but some people actually know what they are talking about. You see you have this habit of arguing without actually making any points, it's quite he skill, you skirt the issue and try and obfuscate as much as possible.
The last comment about Ozmo is meant to upset me? Ozmo is a smart guy, he can read the thread and I doubt he would agree with you.
and last, you are left arguing a position you didn't even hold because you have back peddled to the point of an infinite regress my man. You are now posting abuse sheets as a form of argument, your position appears to be that sometimes in some people when the misuse the drug they have moderate-severe side effects. Well you appear to have won the debate, I can't argue that position, although I am not sure I was ever involved with debating it.
All you did was grab something off the internet and post it. You interspersed that with technical terms to try and make yourself sound educated about the subject, lobbed repeated insults, then got lonely when I went away for the weekend.
Here is the primary problem: for whatever reason, you have a lot invested in this subject and you let emotion get in the way of having a rational discussion.
I don't really know what I think about this drug. I had a discussion with someone last night about this. I'm not sure what I think about whether it should be legal or not, and have not expressed an opinion in this thread one way or the other.
What I do believe is there are a number of health implications from smoking this stuff. That was really the start of our exchange. You can believe this a "wonder drug" all you want. That isn't what I've been reading about this drug.
-
All you did was grab something off the internet and post it. You interspersed that with technical terms to try and make yourself sound educated about the subject, lobbed repeated insults, then got lonely when I went away for the weekend.
The references are right there for everyone to read, you are not comparing apples to apples. All I did was provide cogent thought out responses with references which demolished you
Here is the primary problem: for whatever reason, you have a lot invested in this subject and you let emotion get in the way of having a rational discussion.
I don't think anyone would describe me as emotional. We weren't having a discussion, you were being taught.
I don't really know what I think about this drug. I had a discussion with someone last night about this. I'm not sure what I think about whether it should be legal or not, and have not expressed an opinion in this thread one way or the other.
What I do believe is there are a number of health implications from smoking this stuff. That was really the start of our exchange. You can believe this a "wonder drug" all you want. That isn't what I've been reading about this drug.
It is a wonder drug for SOME conditions, that is a more true statement. It isn't for the mentally fragile, besides a mechanistic reductionist approach to the drug (which I have taken all thread long) many of the subjective effects are paramount. The chief one being the altered perception, in a simple way it allows you to see truth, it cuts through your bullshit, you can cause harsh reactions in those not prepared for repressed memories etc. This stuff all comes flooding back with chronic use. The paranoia at least feels like this heightened awareness manifest, in other terms you notice so much more through this altered perception you begin to become concerned. Things and patterns you never gave a sniff at become important, instead of numbing you it opens your mind, that can be scary and panic inducing. This is why I use it, I use it to enhance my life, it enhances perceptions, that is, it makes food taste better, touch feel better, sound louder and more vivid, it feels like you are a child again. Even though it's the same stuff, that wonder and awe is there, it enhances life. It helps with meditation and with letting go of ego, power and conformity. I honestly can say that nothing has improved my life and outlook on life more then Cannabis. It's giving into astonishment, the concrete feeling of awe, reproducible walking lucidity.
-
Oh snap. Better be careful. :)
That was long ago lol. Would think of it today.
-
That was long ago lol. Would think of it today.
Good. You know Big Brother is always watching . . . .
-
:o
The Drinking Age Is Past Its Prime
Camille Paglia
The age 21 rule sets the United States apart from all advanced Western nations, and it has pushed kids toward pills and other anti-social behavior.
The National Minimum Drinking Age Act, passed by Congress 30 years ago this July, is a gross violation of civil liberties and must be repealed. It is absurd and unjust that young Americans can vote, marry, enter contracts, and serve in the military at 18 but cannot buy an alcoholic drink in a bar or restaurant. The age 21 rule sets the United States apart from all advanced Western nations and lumps it with small or repressive countries like Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Indonesia, Qatar, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates.
Congress was stampeded into this puritanical law by Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), who with all good intentions were wrongly intruding into an area of personal choice exactly as did the hymn-singing 19th-century Temperance crusaders, typified by Carrie Nation smashing beer barrels with her hatchet. Temperance fanaticism eventually triumphed and gave us 14 years of Prohibition. That in turn spawned the crime syndicates for booze smuggling, laying the groundwork for today’s global drug trade. Thanks a lot, Carrie!
Now that marijuana regulations have been liberalized in Colorado, it’s time to strike down this dictatorial national law. Government is not our nanny. The decrease in drunk-driving deaths in recent decades is at least partly attributable to more uniform seat-belt use and a strengthening of DWI penalties. Today, furthermore, there are many other causes of traffic accidents, such as the careless use of cell phones or prescription drugs like Ambien – implicated in the recent trial and acquittal of Kerry Kennedy for driving while impaired.
Learning how to drink responsibly is a basic lesson in growing up — as it is in wine-drinking France or in Germany, with its family-oriented beer gardens and festivals. Wine was built into my own Italian-American upbringing, where children were given sips of my grandfather’s home-made wine. This civilized practice descends from antiquity. Beer was a nourishing food in Egypt and Mesopotamia, and wine was identified with the life force in Greece and Rome: In vino veritas (in wine, truth). Wine as a sacred symbol of unity and regeneration remains in the Christian Communion service. Virginia Woolf wrote that wine with a fine meal lights a “subtle and subterranean glow, which is the rich yellow flame of rational intercourse.”
What this cruel 1984 law did is deprive young people of safe spaces where they could happily drink cheap beer, socialize, chat, and flirt in a free but controlled public environment. Hence in the 1980s we immediately got the scourge of crude binge drinking at campus fraternity keg parties, cut off from the adult world. Women in that boorish free-for-all were suddenly fighting off date rape. Club drugs — Ecstasy, methamphetamine, ketamine (a veterinary tranquilizer) — surged at raves for teenagers and on the gay male circuit scene.
Alcohol relaxes, facilitates interaction, inspires ideas, and promotes humor and hilarity. Used in moderation, it is quickly flushed from the system, with excess punished by a hangover. But deadening pills, such as today’s massively overprescribed anti-depressants, linger in body and brain and may have unrecognized long-term side effects. Those toxic chemicals, often manufactured by shadowy firms abroad, have been worrisomely present in a recent uptick of unexplained suicides and massacres. Half of the urban professional class in the U.S. seems doped on meds these days.
As a libertarian, I support the decriminalization of marijuana, but there are many problems with pot. From my observation, pot may be great for jazz musicians and Beat poets, but it saps energy and will-power and can produce physiological feminization in men. Also, it is difficult to measure the potency of plant-derived substances like pot. With brand-name beer or liquor, however, purchased doses have exactly the same strength and purity from one continent to another, with no fear of contamination by dangerous street additives like PCP.
Exhilaration, ecstasy, and communal vision are the gifts of Dionysus, god of wine. Alcohol’s enhancement of direct face-to-face dialogue is precisely what is needed by today’s technologically agile generation, magically interconnected yet strangely isolated by social media. Clumsy hardcore sexting has sadly supplanted simple hanging out over a beer at a buzzing dive. By undermining the art of conversation, the age 21 law has also had a disastrous effect on our arts and letters, with their increasing dullness and mediocrity. This tyrannical infantilizing of young Americans must stop!
http://time.com/72546/drinking-age-alcohol-repeal/
-
You can die for your country at 18 but you can't drink in it until you are 21.
-
You can die for your country at 18 but you can't drink in it until you are 21.
Definitely a contradiction.
Have you ever seen "physiological feminization in men" from smoking pot?
-
Huh?
-
Huh?
From the bold part of the opinion piece I posted.
-
From the bold part of the opinion piece I posted.
thats opinion laced and likely not factual. But pot has always been a bit of a demotivator.
-
thats opinion laced and likely not factual. But pot has always been a bit of a demotivator.
Definitely sounds like her opinion. Was just asking about what you have seen. I don't recall my pot smoking friends ever being "feminized."
-
Definitely sounds like her opinion. Was just asking about what you have seen. I don't recall my pot smoking friends ever being "feminized."
My experience and observations are if you smoke pot every day, 3-4 times a day..... starting with a "wake and bake" you tend to become passive and lack initiative. But at the same time I know one guy who literally smokes like that and is very aggressive and proactive at his job all the time.
Not sure exactly what feminized means but I don't know any girly stoners lol
-
My experience and observations are if you smoke pot every day, 3-4 times a day..... starting with a "wake and bake" you tend to become passive and lack initiative. But at the same time I know one guy who literally smokes like that and is very aggressive and proactive at his job all the time.
Not sure exactly what feminized means but I don't know any girly stoners lol
I smoke maybe 6-8 bowls aday if off, maybe two or so when I work. I find it motivation, however I am not neurotypical. This effect is likely due to blunted dopamine, which would cause apathy etc.. I wake a bake everyday and am a professional. It is the person dude, these same people would be lazy and unmovitaved regardless, they simply are using the drug to escape. If you use it with the intention to improve things, that occurs.
Getting high should not be the goal.
-
Safety concerns about legal marijuana edibles
By Kelly David Burke
Published April 23, 2014
FoxNews.com
Two recent deaths and increased emergency room visits in Colorado have highlighted concerns about the safety of legal marijuana edibles.
Dr. George Sam Wang of Children's Hospital Colorado says part of the problem is that the effects of edible marijuana begin more slowly than smokeable pot, though they tend to last longer.
"One of the dangers that we've been seeing with adult recreational retail use is they'll take the recommended dose, wait, feel no effects and then continue to stack doses. Then before they know it they have a pretty large amount in their system and then they get potentially pretty severe effects," he said.
Investigators say that appears to be what happened to Levy Thamba, a college student from the Republic of Congo who had never tried marijuana before. Friends say he ate the recommended dose of one-sixth of a marijuana-infused cookie on March 11. When he felt no effects he ate the entire cookie: six times the recommended dose. He later became irrational and jumped off a hotel balcony to his death.
In an autopsy report, the Denver medical examiner concluded that Thamba's death was an accident and listed "marijuana intoxication" as a contributing factor.
"The edibles industry is huge," points out Colorado state representative Jonathan Singer. "About 40 percent of the marijuana industry is in edibles."
"Edibles are a huge part of our business," agrees Jamie Perino, owner of Euflora, situated on Denver's 16th Street Mall and a popular tourist destination.
"Because there's no place for visitors to come and enjoy smoking recreational marijuana - it's illegal to smoke pot in public or in hotels - edibles are probably at least 50, if not on some days 70, percent our sales."
Edibles range from marijuana-infused mints, to candies, baked goods and beverages. Their popularity seems to have taken everyone - lawmakers, health officials and the industry itself, by surprise.
State law requires the products be sold in child-proof packaging and labels show the amount of the psychoactive ingredient THC they contain.
"Child resistant packaging has been proven to work," Dr. Wang says. "But if you take them out of the child resistant packaging...obviously a child isn't going to know the difference between a marijuana containing product and a non-marijuana containing product, and they often don't taste any different."
Wang says that in 2009, 2010 and 2011 combined, Childrens Hospital had 14 children come to their ER for marijuana intoxication. Last year alone, that number rose to eight cases and they have had eight more cases in just the first few months of this year. Six of those required admission to critical care.
Most of the kids are toddlers, and symptoms vary depending on the size of the child and the amount of marijuana in their system. "Symptoms range from sleepiness to where we've had kids actually getting breathing tubes to help them breathe and put on a ventilator."
Singer is co-sponsor of a bill that would require pot edibles to be instantly recognizable, even when out of the packaging.
"Whether it's a stamp or a symbol or a shape or a universal color, there should be something that's easily recognizable to both parents and kids so everyone knows what they're putting in their mouth."
Perino and many others in the industry think that is going too far. "I mean it really is a strong industry and has many strong points and to have it over regulated, and have things shut down before it's even started, would be a sad thing to see," he said.
Perino believes parents need to be responsible for keeping these products away from their kids. She also believes much of the concern is overblown due to recent media attention on cases like that of Kristine Kirk, who was shot and killed by her husband Richard on April 14.
At the time of the shooting, Kristine Kirk was on the phone with a 911 operator she had called to report her husband was "totally hallucinating." Police say Richard Kirk had purchased marijuana-infused candy earlier in the day, al he was also taking prescription medication. Kirk faces a first-degree murder charge and the case is still under investigation.
"It's really unfortunate two people have lost their lives," Perino says. "But I think that people have been waiting for something to happen so they can say, 'Oh look how bad marijuana is.' But let's look at the alcohol related deaths since January 1 in Colorado (when recreational marijuana became legal). How does that stack up?"
Perino says she and her employees take very seriously the task of educating customers about the effects of marijuana, especially the edible kind. "We recommend ten milligrams to start, especially if they've never done them before. We tell them to wait at least 45 minutes if not an hour to see how it's going to affect them before they ingest any more."
Singer, one of only two state legislators to publicly endorse legalizing marijuana, says education is critical but more needs to be done. "When you have edibles that are shaped like gummy bears or lollypops or lemon drops we need to make sure there is something clear on there that clearly identifies it as not for child consumption," he said.
He maintains his bill, which passed the Colorado House unanimously and is now in the hands of the Senate, is also good for the industry.
If the bill becomes law, the state's Marijuana Enforcement Division of the Department of Revenue will be tasked with deciding exactly how marijuana edibles will be required to look to make them instantly distinguishable from the products they mimic.
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/04/23/safety-concerns-about-legal-marijuana-edibles/
-
Couple faces sentencing for marijuana 'ministry'
By Associated Press
POSTED: 11:01 a.m. HST, Apr 28, 2014
LAST UPDATED: 12:33 p.m. HST, Apr 28, 2014
A Big Island man who openly used his ministry to promote marijuana use was expected to be sentenced Monday in federal court for possessing nearly 300 pot plants as part of a distribution ring.
Roger Christie of Hilo pleaded guilty last year to one count of conspiring to manufacture, distribute and possess marijuana plants.
The charge carries a minimum sentence of five years and a maximum of 40 years in prison. Federal prosecutors are recommending five years in prison followed by four years of supervised release.
His wife, Sherryanne Christie, was also expected to be sentenced Monday following her husband's hearing.
Roger Christie, the founder of the Hawaii Cannabis Ministry, also known as the THC Ministry, and his wife have tried to fight the charges on religious grounds.
The couple pleaded guilty after U.S. District Judge Leslie Kobayashi ruled against allowing a defense based on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Prosecutors say religion was a front for drug trafficking. They say ministry members paid "donations" in exchange for marijuana.
Christie "was always pushing the limits to see how far he could go in his marijuana trafficking activities under the auspices of the ministry," prosecutors said in court documents filed last week. "Christie was clearly in this marijuana trafficking business for financial gain, inasmuch as the ministry's marijuana and associated paraphernalia sales ... were the sole source of income to sustain co-defendant Sherryanne L. Christie ... and himself."
The documents state the couple lived a modest but comfortable lifestyle. Roger Christie also pleaded guilty to two counts of failing to file a tax return. As part of his plea agreement, he will forfeit his apartment and more than $21,000 seized by federal agents.
A federal grand jury indicted the Christies and 12 others on marijuana trafficking counts after a 2010 raid of the ministry. Christie has been in federal detention since, while his wife has been free on bail.
http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/20140428_Couple_faces_sentencing_for_marijuana_ministry.html?id=257050861
-
Safety concerns about legal marijuana edibles
By Kelly David Burke
Published April 23, 2014
FoxNews.com
Two recent deaths and increased emergency room visits in Colorado have highlighted concerns about the safety of legal marijuana edibles.
Dr. George Sam Wang of Children's Hospital Colorado says part of the problem is that the effects of edible marijuana begin more slowly than smokeable pot, though they tend to last longer.
"One of the dangers that we've been seeing with adult recreational retail use is they'll take the recommended dose, wait, feel no effects and then continue to stack doses. Then before they know it they have a pretty large amount in their system and then they get potentially pretty severe effects," he said.
Investigators say that appears to be what happened to Levy Thamba, a college student from the Republic of Congo who had never tried marijuana before. Friends say he ate the recommended dose of one-sixth of a marijuana-infused cookie on March 11. When he felt no effects he ate the entire cookie: six times the recommended dose. He later became irrational and jumped off a hotel balcony to his death.
In an autopsy report, the Denver medical examiner concluded that Thamba's death was an accident and listed "marijuana intoxication" as a contributing factor.
"The edibles industry is huge," points out Colorado state representative Jonathan Singer. "About 40 percent of the marijuana industry is in edibles."
"Edibles are a huge part of our business," agrees Jamie Perino, owner of Euflora, situated on Denver's 16th Street Mall and a popular tourist destination.
"Because there's no place for visitors to come and enjoy smoking recreational marijuana - it's illegal to smoke pot in public or in hotels - edibles are probably at least 50, if not on some days 70, percent our sales."
Edibles range from marijuana-infused mints, to candies, baked goods and beverages. Their popularity seems to have taken everyone - lawmakers, health officials and the industry itself, by surprise.
State law requires the products be sold in child-proof packaging and labels show the amount of the psychoactive ingredient THC they contain.
"Child resistant packaging has been proven to work," Dr. Wang says. "But if you take them out of the child resistant packaging...obviously a child isn't going to know the difference between a marijuana containing product and a non-marijuana containing product, and they often don't taste any different."
Wang says that in 2009, 2010 and 2011 combined, Childrens Hospital had 14 children come to their ER for marijuana intoxication. Last year alone, that number rose to eight cases and they have had eight more cases in just the first few months of this year. Six of those required admission to critical care.
Most of the kids are toddlers, and symptoms vary depending on the size of the child and the amount of marijuana in their system. "Symptoms range from sleepiness to where we've had kids actually getting breathing tubes to help them breathe and put on a ventilator."
Singer is co-sponsor of a bill that would require pot edibles to be instantly recognizable, even when out of the packaging.
"Whether it's a stamp or a symbol or a shape or a universal color, there should be something that's easily recognizable to both parents and kids so everyone knows what they're putting in their mouth."
Perino and many others in the industry think that is going too far. "I mean it really is a strong industry and has many strong points and to have it over regulated, and have things shut down before it's even started, would be a sad thing to see," he said.
Perino believes parents need to be responsible for keeping these products away from their kids. She also believes much of the concern is overblown due to recent media attention on cases like that of Kristine Kirk, who was shot and killed by her husband Richard on April 14.
At the time of the shooting, Kristine Kirk was on the phone with a 911 operator she had called to report her husband was "totally hallucinating." Police say Richard Kirk had purchased marijuana-infused candy earlier in the day, al he was also taking prescription medication. Kirk faces a first-degree murder charge and the case is still under investigation.
"It's really unfortunate two people have lost their lives," Perino says. "But I think that people have been waiting for something to happen so they can say, 'Oh look how bad marijuana is.' But let's look at the alcohol related deaths since January 1 in Colorado (when recreational marijuana became legal). How does that stack up?"
Perino says she and her employees take very seriously the task of educating customers about the effects of marijuana, especially the edible kind. "We recommend ten milligrams to start, especially if they've never done them before. We tell them to wait at least 45 minutes if not an hour to see how it's going to affect them before they ingest any more."
Singer, one of only two state legislators to publicly endorse legalizing marijuana, says education is critical but more needs to be done. "When you have edibles that are shaped like gummy bears or lollypops or lemon drops we need to make sure there is something clear on there that clearly identifies it as not for child consumption," he said.
He maintains his bill, which passed the Colorado House unanimously and is now in the hands of the Senate, is also good for the industry.
If the bill becomes law, the state's Marijuana Enforcement Division of the Department of Revenue will be tasked with deciding exactly how marijuana edibles will be required to look to make them instantly distinguishable from the products they mimic.
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/04/23/safety-concerns-about-legal-marijuana-edibles/
Yes people can consume to much, people should know what they are putting into their bodies, this is evolution at work.
-
Yes people can consume to much, people should know what they are putting into their bodies, this is evolution at work.
Yes, but don't you think it's our responsibility to put safeguards in place to make it very difficult for people to harm themselves and/or others?
-
I smoke maybe 6-8 bowls aday if off, maybe two or so when I work. I find it motivation, however I am not neurotypical. This effect is likely due to blunted dopamine, which would cause apathy etc.. I wake a bake everyday and am a professional. It is the person dude, these same people would be lazy and unmovitaved regardless, they simply are using the drug to escape. If you use it with the intention to improve things, that occurs.
Getting high should not be the goal.
Yeah, and after a while you don't get as high. I couldn't function smoking that much a day. My friend is just like you though. He can smoke fat joint straight to his head and conduct a seminar.
-
Yes, but don't you think it's our responsibility to put safeguards in place to make it very difficult for people to harm themselves and/or others?
Of course, proper labelling is a must. But the point about the onset is lack of drug knowledge, edibles alter the compounds in MJ, making them stronger, due to the first pass (liver) metabolism. Also, the onset is really long like 1.5 hours, again common knowledge. Could proper labelling help those that show no self control?
-
Yeah, and after a while you don't get as high. I couldn't function smoking that much a day. My friend is just like you though. He can smoke fat joint straight to his head and conduct a seminar.
Yes, I have a tolerance, I feel mildly relaxed but my awareness becomes much more expansive. It kinda becomes like coffee, I bowl up in the AM, drink coffee and work then repeat without the caffeine to my hearts content. I find people with quick wit, or perhaps quick processing enjoying it the most as it tends to dampen sensory input.
-
Former Supreme Court Justice Claims Marijuana Should Be Legalized
Posted: 04/29/2014 11:27 am EDT Updated: 04/29/2014
Last week, during an interview with NPR's Weekend Edition Saturday, former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens said that he believes our beloved federal government should legalize marijuana.
The former high court host said he feels that it should be legalized due to the changing mindset that's taking place on a national basis.
"Yes," Stevens said in response to show host Scott Simon's question as to whether possessing marijuana should be legal under federal law. "I really think that that's another instance of public opinion [that's] changed. And recognize that the distinction between marijuana and alcoholic beverages is really not much of a distinction. Alcohol, the prohibition against selling and dispensing alcoholic beverages has I think been generally, there's a general consensus that it was not worth the cost. And I think really in time that will be the general consensus with respect to this particular drug."
Appointed by President Gerald Ford, Stevens deems himself as a conservative, but he was also considered part of the court's liberal wing.
The former Supreme Court ruler has been stirring up a little controversy as of late with a new book that was recently published, Six Amendments, in which he recommends six changes to the U.S. Constitution. A few of his ideas include abolishing the death penalty, enforcing limits on how much money corporate entities can "donate" to elections, and executing stricter gun control laws.
I'm looking forward to a time when the powers that be can be honest and forthright regarding their position on important issues such as reforming our current drug policy without having to retire first. (And then I awakened from my pipe dream.)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-/former-supreme-court-marijuana-legalization_b_5229995.html
-
Of course, proper labelling is a must. But the point about the onset is lack of drug knowledge, edibles alter the compounds in MJ, making them stronger, due to the first pass (liver) metabolism. Also, the onset is really long like 1.5 hours, again common knowledge. Could proper labelling help those that show no self control?
I can't stand "individual responsibility" neocons like you. I bet you sided with the banks during the housing crisis too..."it's the buyer's fault for accepting a loan they couldn't pay." ::)
-
I can't stand "individual responsibility" neocons like you. I bet you sided with the banks during the housing crisis too..."it's the buyer's fault for accepting a loan they couldn't pay." ::)
NOT taking any blame away from the banks in this mess....
But why wouldn't it be the buyers fault for taking on a loan that they can't afford?
At some point personal responsibility must play into what happens to people. I agree that at some level laws should be created to protect people from themselves but how much should we continue to dumb things down for people?
Are you the type of person who thinks that people should be able to do what ever with out consequences? Do you believe a person should be able to accept a loan and its ok they don't pay it?
-
I can't stand "individual responsibility" neocons like you. I bet you sided with the banks during the housing crisis too..."it's the buyer's fault for accepting a loan they couldn't pay." ::)
Nice analogy, fail.
If a grown human wants to consume a drug for recreational purposes he should know what he is ingesting. In no way is drugging yourself the same as a complex decision like a mortgage.
But if I was to critique your point regardless of how silly it is, some of he blame falls on the person who accepted the loan, blame isn't a monopoly.
Thanks for stopping by.
-
One negative side effect which I have experienced to some degree is the cyclical vomiting syndrome or cannabis hyperemesis (puking due to cannabis). It appears to happen only to chronic users, it happens to me almost like a hangover, whenever I go ham with some buddies. basically it appears that cannabis over time reduces blood flow to the stomach, which can cause vomiting, gastroparesis etc. the treatment oddly enough is hot showers. It has been described in the literature.
Clin Med Res. 2014 Mar 25. [Epub ahead of print]
Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome: A Case Report and Review of Pathophysiology.
Iacopetti CL1, Packer CD.
Author information
Abstract
Cannabis is the most widely used illicit drug in the United States, with lifetime prevalence of use estimated at 42% to 46%.1 The antiemetic properties of cannabis are well-known by the medical community and by the general public; however, less well-recognized is the paradoxical potential for certain chronic users to develop hyperemesis. We describe in this case a patient with prior extensive work-up for nausea and vomiting and previous diagnosis of cyclic vomiting syndrome who presented with characteristic features of cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome. We review the current literature for this condition and highlight potential mechanisms for its pathogenesis
It appears to be related to misuse not medicinal usage. If someone was using this for a chronic disorder like epilepsy, this would be a concern for sure. while it's dose related, it's not fun.
-
I bet the dog was happy. :)
Miami police find marijuana grow house hidden under doghouse
Published May 14, 2014
FoxNews.com
Lazara Lopez and Julio Valdes were charged with drug possession and trafficking, according to CBS Miami.
A marijuana grow house under a doghouse may land someone in the big house.
Florida police acted Monday night on an anonymous tip that led them to a home in west Miami-Dade where they said they found a doghouse covering a crawl space that led them to about 64 plants and 50 pounds of marijuana, CBS Miami reported.
The space was described as too small for an adult to stand. The electrical work was so poor, police wondered how the house didn't explode prior to the discovery.
Police also found evidence of a cockfighting ring in the back of the house with both live and dead roosters, the report said.
Julio Valdes and Lazara Lopez were arrested and reportedly face charges ranging from drug possession and trafficking within 1,000 feet of a school. Bail was reportedly set at $43, 000 and they need to prove they can come up with the funding from legal sources.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/05/14/miami-cops-find-marijuana-grow-house-hidden-under-dog-house/?intcmp=latestnews
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/20/jacob-lavoro_n_5353696.html
Teen Faces Life In Prison Over Hash Brownies
The Huffington Post | by David Moye
Jacob Lavoro, 19, is facing a potential life sentence for making and selling pot brownies.
A teenager who allegedly made and sold hash brownies could serve life in prison because of the ingredients he used.
Officials in Round Rock, Texas, have charged Jacob Lavoro, 19, with a first-degree felony because he chose to use hash oil rather than marijuana.
That allows the state to use the entire weight of the brownies -- sugar, cocoa, butter and other ingredients -- to determine the weight of the drugs, KHON-TV reports.
The brownies confiscated by Round Rock officials weighed about 1.5 pounds. Lavoro could be sentenced between five years and life in prison.
The punishment is too harsh, according to Jamie Spencer, the legal counsel for the Texas division of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.
"That's higher than the punishment range for sexual assault, higher than the punishment range for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. It's kind of crazy," Spencer told KUTV.com.
Lavoro's lawyer, Jack Holmes, is also outraged by the charges.
"I’ve been doing this 22 years as a lawyer and I’ve got 10 years as a police officer and I’ve never seen anything like this before,” he said, according to KFOR-TV. “They’ve weighed baked goods in this case. It ought to be a misdemeanor.”
KEYE-TV reached out to the district attorney, hoping to find out how the case might be prosecuted. So far, there's been no response.
Lavoro's father, Joe Lavoro, says if his son is determined to have done something illegal, he should be punished, but doesn't agree with the proposed penalty.
"Five years to life? I'm sorry, I'm a law abiding citizen. I'm a conservative. I love my country. I'm a Vietnam veteran, but I'll be damned ... this is wrong, this is damn wrong!" he told KEYE-TV. "If [Jacob] did something wrong he should be punished, but to the extent that makes sense. This is illogical. I'm really upset, and I'm frightened, I'm frightened for my son."
-
Teen Faces Life In Prison Over Hash Brownies
The Huffington Post | by David Moye
Jacob Lavoro, 19, is facing a potential life sentence for making and selling pot brownies.
A teenager who allegedly made and sold hash brownies could serve life in prison because of the ingredients he used.
Officials in Round Rock, Texas, have charged Jacob Lavoro, 19, with a first-degree felony because he chose to use hash oil rather than marijuana.
That allows the state to use the entire weight of the brownies -- sugar, cocoa, butter and other ingredients -- to determine the weight of the drugs, KHON-TV reports.
The brownies confiscated by Round Rock officials weighed about 1.5 pounds. Lavoro could be sentenced between five years and life in prison.
The punishment is too harsh, according to Jamie Spencer, the legal counsel for the Texas division of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.
"That's higher than the punishment range for sexual assault, higher than the punishment range for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. It's kind of crazy," Spencer told KUTV.com.
Lavoro's lawyer, Jack Holmes, is also outraged by the charges.
"I’ve been doing this 22 years as a lawyer and I’ve got 10 years as a police officer and I’ve never seen anything like this before,” he said, according to KFOR-TV. “They’ve weighed baked goods in this case. It ought to be a misdemeanor.”
KEYE-TV reached out to the district attorney, hoping to find out how the case might be prosecuted. So far, there's been no response.
Lavoro's father, Joe Lavoro, says if his son is determined to have done something illegal, he should be punished, but doesn't agree with the proposed penalty.
"Five years to life? I'm sorry, I'm a law abiding citizen. I'm a conservative. I love my country. I'm a Vietnam veteran, but I'll be damned ... this is wrong, this is damn wrong!" he told KEYE-TV. "If [Jacob] did something wrong he should be punished, but to the extent that makes sense. This is illogical. I'm really upset, and I'm frightened, I'm frightened for my son."
Texas. Don't go there.
-
Texas. Don't go there.
Or mess with it.
-
Why You Should Be Alarmed About Marijuana Legalization, According to a Former Obama Drug Adviser
Rob Bluey
May 30, 2014
Marijuana legalization poses a significant health risk to America’s youth—and many parents have no clue about the consequences, says a former Obama administration drug policy adviser.
“Today’s marijuana is not the marijuana of the ‘60s, ‘70s or ‘80s. It’s five to 15 times stronger,” Kevin Sabet said in an exclusive interview with The Foundry. “I think a lot of Baby Boomers’ experience with pot—a couple of times in the dorm room—they don’t correspond to what kids are experiencing today.”
Sabet, a former senior adviser at the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, wrote the book “Reefer Sanity: Seven Great Myths About Marijuana” to shed light on the marijuana legalization movement.
He pointed to Colorado, which has operated with de-facto legalization for five years, as a case study. By 2011, Denver had more medical marijuana shops than Starbucks or McDonalds.
The state has more kids using marijuana, he said, resulting in more kids in treatment and higher rate of car crashes. There have even been two deaths tied to marijuana use, including one involving domestic violence.
“Legalization in practice is a lot scarier than legalization in theory,” Sabet said. “It means a pot shop in your backyard, mass advertising and commercialization and greater health harms.”
In the book, Sabet takes on the myth that marijuana isn’t addictive. He said one in six kids who try marijuana will become addicted—the same as alcohol. That’s because young people are vulnerable than adults.
“There are more kids in treatment for marijuana today than all other drugs, including alcohol, combined,” Sabet said.
He worries that as other states and the District of Columbia consider legalization, more people will be hurt by the drug.
http://blog.heritage.org/2014/05/30/alarmed-marijuana-legalization-according-former-obama-drug-adviser/
-
Why You Should Be Alarmed About Marijuana Legalization, According to a Former Obama Drug Adviser
Rob Bluey
May 30, 2014
Marijuana legalization poses a significant health risk to America’s youth—and many parents have no clue about the consequences, says a former Obama administration drug policy adviser.
“Today’s marijuana is not the marijuana of the ‘60s, ‘70s or ‘80s. It’s five to 15 times stronger,” Kevin Sabet said in an exclusive interview with The Foundry. “I think a lot of Baby Boomers’ experience with pot—a couple of times in the dorm room—they don’t correspond to what kids are experiencing today.”
Sabet, a former senior adviser at the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, wrote the book “Reefer Sanity: Seven Great Myths About Marijuana” to shed light on the marijuana legalization movement.
not true, grade a stuff was always high in THC, maybe the Mexican brick weed, this is a common fallacy.
He pointed to Colorado, which has operated with de-facto legalization for five years, as a case study. By 2011, Denver had more medical marijuana shops than Starbucks or McDonalds.
The state has more kids using marijuana, he said, resulting in more kids in treatment and higher rate of car crashes. There have even been two deaths tied to marijuana use, including one involving domestic violence.
“Legalization in practice is a lot scarier than legalization in theory,” Sabet said. “It means a pot shop in your backyard, mass advertising and commercialization and greater health harms.”
In the book, Sabet takes on the myth that marijuana isn’t addictive. He said one in six kids who try marijuana will become addicted—the same as alcohol. That’s because young people are vulnerable than adults.
“There are more kids in treatment for marijuana today than all other drugs, including alcohol, combined,” Sabet said.
You just can't make up shit.
He worries that as other states and the District of Columbia consider legalization, more people will be hurt by the drug.
http://blog.heritage.org/2014/05/30/alarmed-marijuana-legalization-according-former-obama-drug-adviser/
-
After 5 Months of Sales, Colorado Sees the Downside of a Legal High
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/01/us/after-5-months-of-sales-colorado-sees-the-downside-of-a-legal-high.html?_r=4
-
....there is scant hard data.
-
The full paragraph:
Despite such anecdotes, there is scant hard data. Because of the lag in reporting many health statistics, it may take years to know legal marijuana’s effect — if any — on teenage drug use, school expulsions or the number of fatal car crashes.
-
The full paragraph:
Despite such anecdotes, there is scant hard data. Because of the lag in reporting many health statistics, it may take years to know legal marijuana’s effect — if any — on teenage drug use, school expulsions or the number of fatal car crashes.
....until then its all conjecture.
Doesn't change the point of my post.
And....
Heaven forbid, people die as a result of accidents from people who are high.
Wait, doesn't that already happen with Alcohol? :D
-
....until then its all conjecture.
Doesn't change the point of my post.
And....
Heaven forbid, people die as a result of accidents from people who are high.
Wait, doesn't that already happen with Alcohol? :D
It was out of context. Nobody really knows what the long term implications will be, but early reports are not good.
The fact drunk drivers kill and injure tons of people isn't very good precedent.
-
It was out of context. Nobody really knows what the long term implications will be, but early reports are not good.
The fact drunk drivers kill and injure tons of people isn't very good precedent.
Weed is an intoxicant. Things like this happened before they legalized it.
Until there is hard data articles like this are mostly conjecture.
The reason i brought up Alcohol is perspective. If the argument is weed causes problems and therefore shouldn't be legalized, then what of the 1000's of deaths, violence, rape etc. each year that Alcohol causes?
-
Weed is an intoxicant. Things like this happened before they legalized it.
Until there is hard data articles like this are mostly conjecture.
The reason i brought up Alcohol is perspective. If the argument is weed causes problems and therefore shouldn't be legalized, then what of the 1000's of deaths, violence, rape etc. each year that Alcohol causes?
There's no question there is conjecture involved.
I don't think the alcohol comparison helps. If marijuana will cause injury and death like alcohol, that would be a reason not to legalize it.
-
There's no question there is conjecture involved.
I don't think the alcohol comparison helps. If marijuana will cause injury and death like alcohol, that would be a reason not to legalize it.
It won't and hasn't.
2 very different effects.
Justifying making illegal while alcohol causes so many more problems is stupid, always has been.
But our real problem isn't alcohol or weed. Its crank.
-
It won't and hasn't.
2 very different effects.
Justifying making illegal while alcohol causes so many more problems is stupid, always has been.
But our real problem isn't alcohol or weed. Its crank.
We'll sounds like you have it figured out. I don't. And weed really has nothing to do with alcohol.
What's stupid is what we did with nicotine and tobacco companies. Much bigger scourge than any drug out there.
-
We'll sounds like you have it figured out. I don't. And weed really has nothing to do with alcohol.
What's stupid is what we did with nicotine and tobacco companies. Much bigger scourge than any drug out there.
What i have figured out is there are plenty of conjecture-ridden article out there suggesting weed should be illegal because of the "bad" things that happen all the while we have Alcohol killing, raping and harming thousands a year. Its a retarded argument.
I think some of the no-smoking are stupid too.
-
What i have figured out is there are plenty of conjecture-ridden article out there suggesting weed should be illegal because of the "bad" things that happen all the while we have Alcohol killing, raping and harming thousands a year. Its a retarded argument.
I think some of the no-smoking are stupid too.
You think it's stupid for people to oppose legalization of a drug that might kill, injure, or harm people, because there are other legal drugs that already do the same? Not a very strong position.
-
You think it's stupid for people to oppose legalization of a drug that might kill, injure, or harm people, because there are other legal drugs that already do the same? Not a very strong position.
It nullifies the rationale for why alcohol is legal and thus arbitrary and thus pointless to debate.
if safety is an issue then comparing it to a legal drug is a fair argument, particularly when the drug is patently safer. Also, odd you are arguing for more government control?
-
You think it's stupid for people to oppose legalization of a drug that might kill, injure, or harm people, because there are other legal drugs that already do the same? Not a very strong position.
Yeah, because until there is hard data, we are talking conjecture.
But we do have hard date on alcohol and what it does.
It nullifies the rationale for why alcohol is legal and thus arbitrary and thus pointless to debate.
if safety is an issue then comparing it to a legal drug is a fair argument, particularly when the drug is patently safer. Also, odd you are arguing for more government control?
-
It nullifies the rationale for why alcohol is legal and thus arbitrary and thus pointless to debate.
if safety is an issue then comparing it to a legal drug is a fair argument, particularly when the drug is patently safer. Also, odd you are arguing for more government control?
No it doesn't. The safety or dangerousness of a completely unrelated drug is irrelevant.
Where exactly did I argue for government control?
-
You think it's stupid for people to oppose legalization of a drug that might kill, injure, or harm people, because there are other legal drugs that already do the same? Not a very strong position.
...unless the probability of "killing, injuring and harming" is significantly lower than that of the legal drugs, wouldn't you say?
-
...unless the probability of "killing, injuring and harming" is significantly lower than that of the legal drugs, wouldn't you say?
No. You judge each substance on its own merit, not whether it has a lower body count than a completely unrelated substance.
-
No it doesn't. The safety or dangerousness of a completely unrelated drug is irrelevant.
...
Errr, what? In a comparison, you'd be considering the safety of both drugs, wouldn't you?
If safety is the concern, then the DEGREE of "dangerousness" is relevant, isn't it?
After all, all kinds of things are dangerous to some degree or another but outlawing everything except swaddling one's self in bubble-wrap and staying indoors doesn't seem so reasonable to me.
-
Errr, what? In a comparison, you'd be considering the safety of both drugs, wouldn't you?
If safety is the concern, then the DEGREE of "dangerousness" is relevant, isn't it?
After all, all kinds of things are dangerous to some degree or another but outlawing everything except swaddling one's self in bubble-wrap and staying indoors doesn't seem so reasonable to me.
I think there might be a connection with the degree of munchies and HoHo's. Because when i was drunk i never wanted HoHo's....I wanted fried food!
-
Errr, what? In a comparison, you'd be considering the safety of both drugs, wouldn't you?
If safety is the concern, then the DEGREE of "dangerousness" is relevant, isn't it?
After all, all kinds of things are dangerous to some degree or another but outlawing everything except swaddling one's self in bubble-wrap and staying indoors doesn't seem so reasonable to me.
No. What the heck does a drunk driver or liver cancer, etc. have to do with someone smoking pot?
-
No. You judge each substance on its own merit, not whether it has a lower body count than a completely unrelated substance.
Are you high now, BB?
You seriously think that when deciding the legality of a given behavior that comparing it to similar legal behavior is irrelevant? In what universe?
BTW, alcohol is not a "completely unrelated substance". It, like weed, is largely a recreational drug.
-
Are you high now, BB?
You seriously think that when deciding the legality of a given behavior that comparing it to similar legal behavior is irrelevant? In what universe?
BTW, alcohol is not a "completely unrelated substance". It, like weed, is largely a recreational drug.
Are you drunk or just dense? You don't evaluate the safety, health implications of marijuana by looking at the safety, health implications of alcohol. Makes no sense. Can't say it any simpler for you.
And yes, they are completely unrelated substances.
-
Anyway, it's almost useless to be discussing this. At this point, many, many, many Americans have first-hand experience with weed so they're not so susceptible to the exaggerated "reefer madness"-like arguments against it.
Apparently in Florida right now they're debating whether to legalize it (to some degree) and, in an effort to sway public opinion (guess which way, lol) a certain Sheriff's Dept. decided to use its facebook page to blame weed abuse for some guy who, in a fit of rage, threw and injured a baby. Laughably, the heavy-handed attempt to slag weed backfired; When I last looked at the page there were about 3,000 comments with maybe only 1 out of 100 believing the sheriff's account.
Today, lol, the number of comments is down to 700 or so. I wonder why?, haha
Here's an account of the whole thing:
http://www.liberalamerica.org/2014/06/10/florida-man-throws-a-baby-across-room-sheriff-blames-marijuana-abuse/ (http://www.liberalamerica.org/2014/06/10/florida-man-throws-a-baby-across-room-sheriff-blames-marijuana-abuse/)
And here's a link to the facebook post that started all the hoopla (you may need to scroll down to find the post):
http://www.facebook.com/polkcountysheriff?fref=photo (http://www.facebook.com/polkcountysheriff?fref=photo)
-
Are you drunk or just dense? You don't evaluate the safety, health implications of marijuana by looking at the safety, health implications of alcohol. Makes no sense. Can't say it any simpler for you.
And yes, they are completely unrelated substances.
No, they are related in that both are substances used by folks recreationally to attain a state of altered consciousness.
C'mon, BB, why do you think folks compare them so often if they're "totally unrelated"? lol
So you seem really good at making declarative statements about your beliefs but I don't see you explaining your rationale for why, when deciding whether a given behavior is legal, you think that considering similar legal behaviors makes no sense.
Realize, of course, that I'm not saying that's the ONLY factor to consider, but I am saying it's an important one.
-
Are you drunk or just dense? You don't evaluate the safety, health implications of marijuana by looking at the safety, health implications of alcohol. Makes no sense. Can't say it any simpler for you.
And yes, they are completely unrelated substances.
Oh yeah it does. If your point is that Weed causes problems, then the legality of another substance in the same category that causes far more problems is very relevant.
Don't tell me i can't smoke weed because it causes a few problems when Alcohol is legal and causes thousands of deaths, violence and rape every year.
Complete bull shit.
-
Oh yeah it does. If your point is that Weed causes problems, then the legality of another substance in the same category that causes far more problems is very relevant.
Don't tell me i can't smoke weed because it causes a few problems when Alcohol is legal and causes thousands of deaths, violence and rape every year.
Complete bull shit.
I'm not telling you cannot smoke. I'm accepting the fact there are consequences to using this drug and there may be consequences to legalizing this drug. Whether or not it should be legal is somewhat of a separate question. At least for me.
I don't think policy makers and voters are making a weed/alcohol comparison, or at least I'm not aware of any. That might be because it's a very poor way of making a decision on whether or not we should legalize this drug.
My position on this whole subject is closer to Ablow than anyone else. I posted his commentary several pages back.
-
Oh yeah it does. If your point is that Weed causes problems, then the legality of another substance in the same category that causes far more problems is very relevant.
Don't tell me i can't smoke weed because it causes a few problems when Alcohol is legal and causes thousands of deaths, violence and rape every year.
Complete bull shit.
BB probably realizes he's not being very logical at this point and is just "sticking to his guns" in a curmudgeonly way.
-
No, they are related in that both are substances used by folks recreationally to attain a state of altered consciousness.
C'mon, BB, why do you think folks compare them so often if they're "totally unrelated"? lol
So you seem really good at making declarative statements about your beliefs but I don't see you explaining your rationale for why, when deciding whether a given behavior is legal, you think that considering similar legal behaviors makes no sense.
Realize, of course, that I'm not saying that's the ONLY factor to consider, but I am saying it's an important one.
Yes they are both recreational drugs. That's about where the similarities end. And this has nothing to do with whether pot should be legalized.
What declarative statements have I made about legalizing marijuana?
-
I'm not telling you cannot smoke. I'm accepting the fact there are consequences to using this drug and there may be consequences to legalizing this drug. Whether or not it should be legal is somewhat of a separate question. At least for me.
I don't think policy makers and voters are making a weed/alcohol comparison, or at least I'm not aware of any. That might be because it's a very poor way of making a decision on whether or not we should legalize this drug.
My position on this whole subject is closer to Ablow than anyone else. I posted his commentary several pages back.
Ok.
Most people who advocate legalizing weed cite things like alcohol and nicotine. It doesn't make much sense to have things that kill so many people each year yet make something illegal that doesn't.
Much of this is because of the demonetization of weed in our culture.
-
Yes they are both recreational drugs. That's about where the similarities end. And this has nothing to do with whether pot should be legalized.
What declarative statements have I made about legalizing marijuana?
Oh, so they ARE related now? Good for you.
Who said you made declarative statements "about legalizing marijuana"? Read it again, mang.
-
Ok.
Most people who advocate legalizing weed cite things like alcohol and nicotine. It doesn't make much sense to have things that kill so many people each year yet make something illegal that doesn't.
Much of this is because of the demonetization of weed in our culture.
I agree people talk about one drug being less dangerous than the other. What I'm saying is this doesn't drive policy.
-
I agree people talk about one drug being less dangerous than the other. What I'm saying is this doesn't drive policy.
What drives policy? I would think its arguments/people on both sides.
-
Oh, so they ARE related now? Good for you.
Who said you made declarative statements "about legalizing marijuana"? Read it again, mang.
Good grief. They are related because you have to consume them. They are related because you usually have to buy them. You can find other similarities, none of which have anything to do with this subject. Using your logic, you can call weed related to a cheeseburger.
They are completely unrelated when it comes to what they do to the human body and whether it ought to be legalized. But I'm about done repeating myself.
-
What drives policy? I would think its arguments/people on both sides.
Safety, health and welfare, crime, etc.
-
Safety, health and welfare, crime, etc.
argued, proposed, support etc. by people.
-
argued, proposed, support etc. by people.
Agree.
-
...
They are completely unrelated when it comes to what they do to the human body ...
Really? You know a lot about this, do you?
Seems to me that both cause an altered state of consciousness that can be pleasurable.
And, according to the link below, both increase dopamine, albeit through different mechanisms:
http://thebrain.mcgill.ca/flash/i/i_03/i_03_m/i_03_m_par/i_03_m_par_alcool.html (http://thebrain.mcgill.ca/flash/i/i_03/i_03_m/i_03_m_par/i_03_m_par_alcool.html)
To be fair, they don't look alike, though. lol
BTW, you funny. "Completely unrelated" has now become "completely unrelated when it comes to what they do to the human body" which isn't exactly right, but oh well.
-
(http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad179/thethinkingblue/potfacebook_zps7b0ffd6c.jpg)
-
Good grief. They are related because you have to consume them. They are related because you usually have to buy them. You can find other similarities, none of which have anything to do with this subject. Using your logic, you can call weed related to a cheeseburger.
They are completely unrelated when it comes to what they do to the human body and whether it ought to be legalized. But I'm about done repeating myself.
No drug organization in the world does what you are suggesting, everything is relative to other drugs, the LD50's etc. all of it. The relative toxicities of the drugs are known, it's also something that has been used since before alcohol and has ecletic origins.
You compare burgers to chicken burgers to determine which is heathier in your example, wouldn't it make sense to compare similar DRUGS to each other? your analogy is brutally flawed.
We are discussing recreational usage here, responsible adult usage. It beats alcohol on all parameters. Alcohol is in fact on of the most addictive substances with perhaps the nastiest withdrawal of all, benzos might be it but it's close.
-
No drug organization in the world does what you are suggesting, everything is relative to other drugs, the LD50's etc. all of it. The relative toxicities of the drugs are known, it's also something that has been used since before alcohol and has ecletic origins.
You compare burgers to chicken burgers to determine which is heathier in your example, wouldn't it make sense to compare similar DRUGS to each other? your analogy is brutally flawed.
We are discussing recreational usage here, responsible adult usage. It beats alcohol on all parameters. Alcohol is in fact on of the most addictive substances with perhaps the nastiest withdrawal of all, benzos might be it but it's close.
What "drug organizations" are you talking about?
When it comes to government approving a drug, I do not believe they include as all or part of the analysis that it kills or injures less people than a legal drug.
If you're aware of any FDA approved drug, or any other drug in the U.S. that was legalized using that analysis, I'd like to hear about it.
-
What "drug organizations" are you talking about?
When it comes to government approving a drug, I do not believe they include as all or part of the analysis that it kills or injures less people than a legal drug.
If you're aware of any FDA approved drug, or any other drug in the U.S. that was legalized using that analysis, I'd like to hear about it.
"I do not believe"? lol. You are lazy, BB. Would it kill you to actually try to learn a little about the subject about which you seem to have a minority opinion?
Do some reading and post your findings. Or stfu. Pretty please.
-
"I do not believe"? lol. You are lazy, BB. Would it kill you to actually try to learn a little about the subject about which you seem to have a minority opinion?
Do some reading and post your findings. Or stfu. Pretty please.
You still here Simpleton Simon? You having anything substantive to add or are you just trolling?
-
You still here Simpleton Simon? You having anything substantive to add or are you just trolling?
And I though we were friends. lol
Seriously, I'M the simpleton when you are contending that, when it comes to the gov deciding the legal status of a drug, the legal status of other drugs is not considered? In what world does that make sense?
Sheesh, ya lazy bum, if you have some sort of info that backs up this wholly counter-intuitive reasoning, then provide it. And if you haven't misinterpreted what you've read, I'll be the first to admit you were right.
Otherwise you're talking just to talk.
-
And I though we were friends. lol
Seriously, I'M the simpleton when you are contending that, when it comes to the gov deciding the legal status of a drug, the legal status of other drugs is not considered? In what world does that make sense?
Sheesh, ya lazy bum, if you have some sort of info that backs up this wholly counter-intuitive reasoning, then provide it. And if you haven't misinterpreted what you've read, I'll be the first to admit you were right.
Otherwise you're talking just to talk.
As I said before, I'm done repeating myself. Go back and read my posts. If you don't understand them, it will not surprise me. If you disagree with them, then good for you. That's what this board is all about: people offering different viewpoints.
And if you want to continue acting like Simpleton Simon, you are free to do that as well, although the position of Village Idiot is occupied and she is doing a fine job.
-
As I said before, I'm done repeating myself. Go back and read my posts. If you don't understand them, it will not surprise me. If you disagree with them, then good for you. That's what this board is all about: people offering different viewpoints.
And if you want to continue acting like Simpleton Simon, you are free to do that as well, although the position of Village Idiot is occupied and she is doing a fine job.
I went back and looked.
You didn't post any links to or provide any information at all that would lead one to believe that you know the first thing about the process by which the government determines the legality of any drug.
If you wanna just leave it at, "I've been talking out of my ass the whole time." then fine with me.
I, for one, take this board a little more seriously and so I'm gonna leave those that are interested with this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Substances_Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Substances_Act)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_and_Drug_Administration#Drugs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_and_Drug_Administration#Drugs)
http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/why-is-marijuana-illegal/ (http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/why-is-marijuana-illegal/)
-
I went back and looked.
You didn't post any links to or provide any information at all that would lead one to believe that you know the first thing about the process by which the government determines the legality of any drug.
If you wanna just leave it at, "I've been talking out of my ass the whole time." then fine with me.
I, for one, take this board a little more seriously and so I'm gonna leave those that are interested with this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Substances_Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Substances_Act)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_and_Drug_Administration#Drugs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_and_Drug_Administration#Drugs)
http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/why-is-marijuana-illegal/ (http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/why-is-marijuana-illegal/)
You've demonstrated pretty clearly that you're a simpleton. But hey the board needs all kinds. Everyone has their role. :)
-
You've demonstrated pretty clearly that you're a simpleton. But hey the board needs all kinds. Everyone has their role. :)
Yeah, but to you it seems "clear" that factoring in the legality of one drug when deciding the legality of another isn't reasonable so I'm not gonna lose any sleep about what you think, lol. --- Or what you SAY you think; I haven't been on this board long but I'm sure I'm not the only one to notice your tendency to be amusingly petty the way you'll sometimes lash out a little when folks figuratively corner after you've taken one of frequent illogical stances on some issue that's being discussed. When you're reduced to name-calling, it's telling, lol.
-
Yeah, but to you it seems "clear" that factoring in the legality of one drug when deciding the legality of another isn't reasonable so I'm not gonna lose any sleep about what you think, lol. --- Or what you SAY you think; I haven't been on this board long but I'm sure I'm not the only one to notice your tendency to be amusingly petty the way you'll sometimes lash out a little when folks figuratively corner after you've taken one of frequent illogical stances on some issue that's being discussed. When you're reduced to name-calling, it's telling, lol.
Youre describing yourself.
You've demonstrated pretty clearly that you're a simpleton. But hey the board needs all kinds. Everyone has their role. :)
Cant expect much from a child rapist like kore. Hes a know kiddy fiddler.
-
Youre describing yourself.
Cant expect much from a child rapist like kore. Hes a know kiddy fiddler.
Gee, where's my "due process"? lol
-
Gee, where's my "due process"? lol
Ask the five year old boy you violently raped.
-
Ask the five year old boy you violently raped.
What's this about?
-
What's this about?
Kore violated a kid and threatened the parents with violence if they went to the authorities. I was told this by a very reliable source.
-
Kore violated a kid and threatened the parents with violence if they went to the authorities. I was told this by a very reliable source.
When's the first you heard of this accusation, RRKore?
-
When's the first you heard of this accusation, RRKore?
Well, I DIDN'T hear about it -- the whole episode was "unreported".
When some researchers dug up the story, I was able to get off (again!, lol) because of my good friend Archer's legal advice about how my rights to due process were being violated.
-
Ask the five year old boy you violently raped.
Word of the victim alone doesn't count some wise dude on the internet once said, lol.
-
Ask the five year old boy you violently raped.
BTW, trolly-mcTroll, your funnin' here is tantamount to admitting that you were full of shit with all that "you are a bad person to be joking about rape BS" now, isn't it? (Not that I don't approve, lol.)
-
Okay, lol. I see.what you guys are up to.
-
What's this about?
It's about Archer forgetting that this isn't the G&O board, actually. lol
He's messing with me a little in the G&O style because he's apparently a little sore due to the little side discussion we had in the thread linked below.
I don't take it seriously and no one else should either -- I'm kinda stoked that I apparently got his goat. -- So to speak, I should add because, no, I did not have sex with his goat, lol.
Read from reply #22 to get all the details:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=539034.0 (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=539034.0)
-
It's about Archer forgetting that this isn't the G&O board, actually. lol
He's messing with me a little in the G&O style because he's apparently a little sore due to the little side discussion we had in the thread linked below.
I don't take it seriously and no one else should either -- I'm kinda stoked that I apparently got his goat. -- So to speak, I should add because, no, I did not have sex with his goat, lol.
Read from reply #22 to get all the details:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=539034.0 (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=539034.0)
You didnt get my goat though I'm sure you've molested a few of those as well. Im mocking your stupidity.
Yeah, but to you it seems "clear" that factoring in the legality of one drug when deciding the legality of another isn't reasonable so I'm not gonna lose any sleep about what you think, lol. --- Or what you SAY you think; I haven't been on this board long but I'm sure I'm not the only one to notice your tendency to be amusingly petty the way you'll sometimes lash out a little when folks figuratively corner after you've taken one of frequent illogical stances on some issue that's being discussed. When you're reduced to name-calling, it's telling, lol.
This comment is what prompted my post. The fact that you are so lacking in self awareness that you cant recognize that this describes you to a T is both hilarious and pathetic. Youre a bitter old man who lashes out when hes butthurt.
-
You didnt get my goat though I'm sure you've molested a few of those as well. Im mocking your stupidity.
This comment is what prompted my post. The fact that you are so lacking in self awareness that you cant recognize that this describes you to a T is both hilarious and pathetic. Youre a bitter old man who lashes out when hes butthurt.
Whateva, mang. You took the position of a rapist-sympathizer and ya got treated like one. Deal with it. lol
I'm still laughing about your ill-put "due process" objections about using a woman's claims of being sexually assaulted in a effort to study the prevalence of sexual assault when no one is being legally charged with anything. That's either some mind-bogglingly confused thinking or maybe just extremely poor writing on your part, ya self-proclaimed "statistics hobbyist". lol
About the comment that prompted you to adopt the mode of Captain-Save-a-Schmoe (lol), I'm pretty sure that BB is older than me and more bitter but no matter what, I doubt if he needs or wants any of your help. I guess I could be wrong about that, though.
Truth is, you don't seem like the dumbest guy here but I think it's likely that I'm smarter, funnier, AND a better bodybuilder than you. lol
None of that means we can't be friends, though, right? ;D
-
Whateva, mang. You took the position of a rapist-sympathizer and ya got treated like one. Deal with it. lol
I'm still laughing about your ill-put "due process" objections about using a woman's claims of being sexually assaulted in a effort to study the prevalence of sexual assault when no one is being legally charged with anything. That's either some mind-bogglingly confused thinking or maybe just extremely poor writing on your part, ya self-proclaimed "statistics hobbyist". lol
About the comment that prompted you to adopt the mode of Captain-Save-a-Schmoe (lol), I'm pretty sure that BB is older than me and more bitter but no matter what, I doubt if he needs or wants any of your help. I guess I could be wrong about that, though.
Truth is, you don't seem like the dumbest guy here but I think it's likely that I'm smarter, funnier, AND a better bodybuilder than you. lol
None of that means we can't be friends, though, right? ;D
So you denied branding anyone who disagreed with you as a pro-rape and desperately tried to pass off your insinuation as a joke but here you are doing it again. Your lack of self awareness is amazing or could it be that you are just so stupid you have no idea what you're saying. Most likely youre a liar who got caught saying something ridiculously immature and when called on it tried to deny you meant it.
I'm sorry that you find due process to be funny. You see, due process is the basis for our legal system. Someone can't accuse another person of something without proving the allegation. Maybe you would be better served moving to some backward third world nation that doesn't value due process of the law.
-
So you denied branding anyone who disagreed with you as a pro-rape and desperately tried to pass off your insinuation as a joke but here you are doing it again. Your lack of self awareness is amazing or could it be that you are just so stupid you have no idea what you're saying. Most likely youre a liar who got caught saying something ridiculously immature and when called on it tried to deny you meant it.
Holy Wants-to-dish-it-out-but-can't-take-it!!
I mean, you can't be serious, can you? This from the guy who a few posts up was writing that I had raped a 5-year old boy? Too freakin' funny! Here's a thought: You and your various personalities maybe ought to have a little pow-wow where you discuss consistency and the meaning of the word "hypocrite". (Naw, fuck it, this is Getbig -- I expect a little craziness, lol.)
Honestly, crazy-guy, when I quipped to Shockwave that he was throwing in with the pro-rape crowd, I was trying to inject some levity into the conversation while making him aware of how his (and your) arguments could be perceived. You can doubt this all ya want but it seems to me, that since you've clearly taken a look at my historical posts (not because I got your goat, though, lol), I'm sure that you've seen that I try to be funny pretty often. Like all wannabe funny guys, though, I do fail sometimes. So when Shockwave seemed to be sincerely offended at my joke, I told him I was just kidding.
I'm sorry that you find due process to be funny. You see, due process is the basis for our legal system. Someone can't accuse another person of something without proving the allegation. Maybe you would be better served moving to some backward third world nation that doesn't value due process of the law.
Uh, Hello? McFly? You do realize that no one was accusing anyone in particular of anything, don't you? You realize that the legal system was not involved, right? Were someone being charged with a crime, I would agree with you. But that isn't the case.
Now, it does occur to me that what you're trying to say is that accepting the study's questionable statistics about the prevalence of sexual assaults could prejudice those in the legal system (cops, DA's, judges, juries) against those who will in the future be charged with sexual assault and thereby arguably deprive them of due process but if you mean that then you suck at writing because that's not what you've said.
BTW, no hard feelings on my part, honestly. I didn't mean to abuse your goat, I really didn't. lol
-
Activists sue to block marijuana sales tax in Colorado
By Kelly David Burke
Published July 01, 2014
FoxNews.com
Marijuana legalization advocates are suing to block state and local governments from collecting certain taxes on weed sold in Colorado, out of concern that businesses paying the fees would incriminate themselves at the federal level.
The suit, which addresses the complications that arise from a state legalizing a drug that remains illegal under federal law, was filed in Denver District Court by local attorney Rob Corry. The main goal is to reduce the 29 percent wholesale and retail taxes collected at the state and local levels on sales of recreational marijuana, and specifically block those taxes that apply only to their industry.
Recreational marijuana was legalized in Colorado when voters approved an amendment to the state constitution in November 2012. Legal sales began Jan. 1.
But the lawsuit contends that requiring those involved in Colorado's legal marijuana industry to pay taxes could get them in trouble with the feds.
"They're open records, and they are admitting to a federal crime," Corry said. "It's still a federal crime to sell marijuana and I don't agree with that law, but it is the law."
Corry filed the suit on behalf of six individuals, two of whom use only pseudonyms in the complaint. Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, Denver Mayor Michael Hancock, the Denver Treasury Division and the state Department of Revenue are listed as defendants.
The suit uses the rationale that federal law takes precedence over state law: "The underlying rationale of the preemption doctrine is that the Supremacy Clause invalidates state laws that 'interfere with, or are contrary to, the laws of Congress.'"
"The fact that there are marijuana-specific taxes," Corry maintains, "puts every single one of these business owners and every single one of these consumers in danger of federal prosecution, potentially. That's a violation of the Fifth Amendment."
But when it comes to taxes, the federal government also is entitled to its share, explained Amanda Cruser, a Denver area tax attorney who once worked for the U.S. Department of Justice. "On the federal side, if you don't pay your income taxes and you don't pay your employment taxes, you're going to be subjecting yourself to criminal tax charges," she said.
The irony of the federal government collecting taxes on a substance illegal under federal law is not lost on federal drug task force head Tom Gorman.
"As far as I know, if the federal government takes money from a criminal enterprise, that's part of money laundering," Gorman said. "When they can seize the money because it's illegal but then to take it in and use the money, to me would be a violation of law in itself."
In an August 2013 press release, the Justice Department said it had notified Colorado and Washington (the two states that have legalized recreational marijuana) that it would essentially look the other way -- at least for now. "The Department has informed the governors of both states that it is deferring its right to challenge their legalization laws at this time," the statement said.
That stance has done little to clarify the situation since this and subsequent administrations would reserve the right to change that policy. The lack of certainty has left both opponents and proponents of marijuana legalization frustrated and confused.
"I think the federal government needs to make up its mind whether they have supremacy over state law, and then enforce that law," Gorman said. "It makes no sense. The federal government needs to step up and say if you wanna change it, change it in Congress not state by state."
Corry, a legalization advocate, agrees. "This question of the tension between federal law and state law is the question that confronts the marijuana community every day," he said. "Our governor has been essentially impotent. He should demand that Congress should do something about this and we hope this lawsuit, by depriving them from tax revenue, will cause that to happen."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/01/colorado-lawsuit-calls-for-tax-reductions-on-recreational-pot/?intcmp=latestnews
-
Activists sue to block marijuana sales tax in Colorado
By Kelly David Burke
Published July 01, 2014
FoxNews.com
Marijuana legalization advocates are suing to block state and local governments from collecting certain taxes on weed sold in Colorado, out of concern that businesses paying the fees would incriminate themselves at the federal level.
The suit, which addresses the complications that arise from a state legalizing a drug that remains illegal under federal law, was filed in Denver District Court by local attorney Rob Corry. The main goal is to reduce the 29 percent wholesale and retail taxes collected at the state and local levels on sales of recreational marijuana, and specifically block those taxes that apply only to their industry.
Recreational marijuana was legalized in Colorado when voters approved an amendment to the state constitution in November 2012. Legal sales began Jan. 1.
But the lawsuit contends that requiring those involved in Colorado's legal marijuana industry to pay taxes could get them in trouble with the feds.
"They're open records, and they are admitting to a federal crime," Corry said. "It's still a federal crime to sell marijuana and I don't agree with that law, but it is the law."
Corry filed the suit on behalf of six individuals, two of whom use only pseudonyms in the complaint. Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, Denver Mayor Michael Hancock, the Denver Treasury Division and the state Department of Revenue are listed as defendants.
The suit uses the rationale that federal law takes precedence over state law: "The underlying rationale of the preemption doctrine is that the Supremacy Clause invalidates state laws that 'interfere with, or are contrary to, the laws of Congress.'"
"The fact that there are marijuana-specific taxes," Corry maintains, "puts every single one of these business owners and every single one of these consumers in danger of federal prosecution, potentially. That's a violation of the Fifth Amendment."
But when it comes to taxes, the federal government also is entitled to its share, explained Amanda Cruser, a Denver area tax attorney who once worked for the U.S. Department of Justice. "On the federal side, if you don't pay your income taxes and you don't pay your employment taxes, you're going to be subjecting yourself to criminal tax charges," she said.
The irony of the federal government collecting taxes on a substance illegal under federal law is not lost on federal drug task force head Tom Gorman.
"As far as I know, if the federal government takes money from a criminal enterprise, that's part of money laundering," Gorman said. "When they can seize the money because it's illegal but then to take it in and use the money, to me would be a violation of law in itself."
In an August 2013 press release, the Justice Department said it had notified Colorado and Washington (the two states that have legalized recreational marijuana) that it would essentially look the other way -- at least for now. "The Department has informed the governors of both states that it is deferring its right to challenge their legalization laws at this time," the statement said.
That stance has done little to clarify the situation since this and subsequent administrations would reserve the right to change that policy. The lack of certainty has left both opponents and proponents of marijuana legalization frustrated and confused.
"I think the federal government needs to make up its mind whether they have supremacy over state law, and then enforce that law," Gorman said. "It makes no sense. The federal government needs to step up and say if you wanna change it, change it in Congress not state by state."
Corry, a legalization advocate, agrees. "This question of the tension between federal law and state law is the question that confronts the marijuana community every day," he said. "Our governor has been essentially impotent. He should demand that Congress should do something about this and we hope this lawsuit, by depriving them from tax revenue, will cause that to happen."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/01/colorado-lawsuit-calls-for-tax-reductions-on-recreational-pot/?intcmp=latestnews
Does this really make sense as anything other than club owners trying to avoid paying taxes? I mean, sure, they don't want to run into any future issues with having violated federal law but it's not like they're conducting business in a dark corner of the universe. In other words, the federal government isn't going to need to depend on them paying taxes to prove they were selling weed when it's being done so openly.
BTW, wasn't there a somewhat similar issue that was cleared up lickety-split when banks were concerned violating federal law by letting these cannabis club owners deposit money? Pretty sure it's back in this thread somewhere...
-
Open for business: Legal marijuana sales underway in Washington
By Dan Springer
Published July 08, 2014
FoxNews.com
Washington state’s marijuana industry is now open for business.
Twenty months after voters legalized recreational marijuana, the first pot stores are licensed and selling the drug. And business was already booming.
Amber McGowan, a manager at Cannabis City in Seattle, said she’s expecting to sell all 10 pounds in the store this first historic day.
“There’s definitely a market out there that would rather go the safe route, because a lot of people don’t like going to their dealer,” McGowan said. “The dealer is usually pretty shady.”
Washington state follows Colorado, which was the first to open pot retail stores on Jan. 1. Voters in both states legalized possession of up to an once of marijuana for recreational use in November 2012. Colorado was able to approve sales earlier because it licensed only medical marijuana shops that were already tightly regulated. Washington’s medical marijuana industry operates with very little government oversight.
Not everyone is celebrating. Dr. Leslie Walker, who practices at Seattle Children’s Hospital, sees negative consequences for society and especially young people.
“It’s the kids who will have short-term memory problems, kids who aren’t going to be able to get up in the morning to go to school,” Walker said.
Since pot became legal for adults in 2012, police have seen an increase in people smoking and driving. In the years leading up to legalization, the percentage of impaired drivers who had been high on marijuana held steady at 28 percent. Since then, 40 percent of impaired drivers tested positive for pot.
Hospitals also have seen an increase in adults seeking treatment after eating food laced with marijuana.
Because the edibles today have a much higher THC level than what was consumed in the 1960’s, Amber McGowan has a warning for her customers.
“If you’re not a regular user, take it in moderation. One puff is probably plenty and steer clear of edibles until you get a tolerance for it,” McGowan said.
Buyers will be limited initially by a tight supply. Cannabis City will limit customers to packets containing just two grams on opening day. Most growers that have been licensed expect their first harvest in late summer. The small supply means high prices. Pot will sell for $25 per gram, about double the street price. Four or five joints will cost $50.
The marijuana is heavily taxed at every step in the process. The government collects a 25 percent tax when growers sell it to processors, when processors sell it to retail stores and when stores sell it to consumers. Forty percent of the tax revenue will go into the state’s general fund. The rest will pay for prevention and drug treatment programs.
Outside Cannabis City, which was opening its doors at high noon, it was a low-key celebration among those first in line.
“It’s all about the freedom,” said Deb Greene of Seattle. “It’s all about not sneaking around buying it.”
Cal Jones has been smoking pot since 1965. “It’s a shame that people east of Colorado are still going to prison for it,” Jones said.
Other states may soon join Colorado and Washington’s lead. Voters in Alaska will vote on legalization in November. A ballot measure may also qualify in Oregon.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/08/open-for-business-legal-marijuana-sales-underway-in-washington/?intcmp=latestnews
-
Obama Continues Plans to Oppose Legalization of Marijuana
Wednesday, 09 Jul 2014
Closely mirroring its past positions, the Obama administration's 2014 drug policy will focus tightly on curbing heroin use and prescription painkillers abuse while continuing to oppose the legalization of marijuana for medical and recreational use.
Officials are particularly concerned about preventing fatal overdoses, said Michael Botticelli, acting director of the White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy. He outlined the administration's blueprint at a news conference Wednesday at a drug treatment facility in Roanoke.
He acknowledged that the strategy does not substantially differ from past drug policy positions but said the White House is now focused "in-depth" on the problem associated with the abuse of opioids, which include heroin and painkillers.
"With the reports of increasing heroin use in many American communities, including right here in Virginia, we are growing increasingly concerned by the potential transition from prescription opioid abuse to heroin and injected drug use," Botticelli said.
In March, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder called the increase in heroin-related deaths an urgent health crisis and said first responders should carry Narcan, an overdose reversal drug. This year, actor Philip Seymour Hoffman died from a toxic mix of drugs including heroin and cocaine. In 2013, "Glee" actor Cory Monteith died of an overdose of heroin and alcohol.
Gail Burress, director of adult clinical services at Roanoke's Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare, where Wednesday's news conference was held, said there's been a "tremendous escalation" of heroin use in town, including among teenagers.
"It's risk-taking at a new level," she said.
Botticelli said he traveled to Roanoke to highlight its comprehensive efforts to curb drug abuse. He noted that Roanoke had the first drug court in Virginia and praised the city's police chief for implementing a program that allows first-time, non-violent drug offenders to avoid prison.
The news conference came one day after Washington became the second state, after Colorado, to allow people to buy recreational marijuana legally.
Botticelli said the White House's opposition to medicinal and recreational marijuana remains unchanged.
"Because quite honestly it sends the wrong message to our youth," he said.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Drug-Policy-obama-legalization/2014/07/09/id/581671#ixzz370ErV1B9
-
New York Today: A Marijuana-Friendly Borough
By ANDY NEWMAN and ANNIE CORREAL
JULY 9, 2014
Good morning on this fine Wednesday.
Marijuana is now effectively legal to possess in Brooklyn – at least for most people.
The district attorney, Kenneth P. Thompson, announced Tuesday that his office would not prosecute adults carrying up to two ounces of the drug unless there were aggravating factors.
Among them: having a significant criminal record or smoking in some public places or around children.
That is the will of the district attorney, over police objections. But what is the will of the people?
We unscientifically surveyed a dozen passers-by in front of the D.A.’s office and a police station.
A large majority backed the policy.
“I approve of it, as long as it’s not paraded in the streets, because of the little children,” said Irvin Diggs, 63, a handyman walking by the 79th Precinct station house in Bedford-Stuyvesant.
Sylvia Morse, 27, an urban planning graduate walking by the prosecutor’s office downtown, said that while the measure did not eliminate discriminatory police enforcement, “it provides a check and balance.”
(There will be a protest against arrest disparities outside City Hall today.)
Only two of the 12 people we talked to expressed reservations.
A 52-year-old named Ivette said the threshold was too lax. “Smaller quantities, maybe,” she said.
T. Salik, a former corrections officer, said, “You can’t walk down the street with an open container of alcohol. Why should you be able to smoke marijuana openly?”
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/07/09/new-york-today-a-marijuana-friendly-borough/
-
Obama Continues Plans to Oppose Legalization of Marijuana
Wednesday, 09 Jul 2014
Closely mirroring its past positions, the Obama administration's 2014 drug policy will focus tightly on curbing heroin use and prescription painkillers abuse while continuing to oppose the legalization of marijuana for medical and recreational use.
Officials are particularly concerned about preventing fatal overdoses, said Michael Botticelli, acting director of the White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy. He outlined the administration's blueprint at a news conference Wednesday at a drug treatment facility in Roanoke.
He acknowledged that the strategy does not substantially differ from past drug policy positions but said the White House is now focused "in-depth" on the problem associated with the abuse of opioids, which include heroin and painkillers.
"With the reports of increasing heroin use in many American communities, including right here in Virginia, we are growing increasingly concerned by the potential transition from prescription opioid abuse to heroin and injected drug use," Botticelli said.
In March, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder called the increase in heroin-related deaths an urgent health crisis and said first responders should carry Narcan, an overdose reversal drug. This year, actor Philip Seymour Hoffman died from a toxic mix of drugs including heroin and cocaine. In 2013, "Glee" actor Cory Monteith died of an overdose of heroin and alcohol.
Gail Burress, director of adult clinical services at Roanoke's Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare, where Wednesday's news conference was held, said there's been a "tremendous escalation" of heroin use in town, including among teenagers.
"It's risk-taking at a new level," she said.
Botticelli said he traveled to Roanoke to highlight its comprehensive efforts to curb drug abuse. He noted that Roanoke had the first drug court in Virginia and praised the city's police chief for implementing a program that allows first-time, non-violent drug offenders to avoid prison.
The news conference came one day after Washington became the second state, after Colorado, to allow people to buy recreational marijuana legally.
Botticelli said the White House's opposition to medicinal and recreational marijuana remains unchanged.
"Because quite honestly it sends the wrong message to our youth," he said.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Drug-Policy-obama-legalization/2014/07/09/id/581671#ixzz370ErV1B9
Governments message: Don't worry youth, just wait until you are 21, then you drink a 5th of JD, beat up your wife and crash your car into a school bus..... If that's not your thing, have a cigarette.
-
Governments message: Don't worry youth, just wait until you are 21, then you drink a 5th of JD, beat up your wife and crash your car into a school bus..... If that's not your thing, have a cigarette.
And die of lung cancer.
-
And die of lung cancer.
Or appear in one of those commercials......
-
Or appear in one of those commercials......
With a hole in their throat . . .
-
After 20 Years in Prison, Missouri Man Serving Life Without Parole for Marijuana Asks Governor for Clemency
For the past 20 years, Chris Mizanskey, now 33, has had to go to prison to see his father. But his dad, Jeff, is not a murderer or a rapist. He was, however, busted for possession of about five pounds of pot, his third marijuana-related felony. And in Missouri, if you get three drug felonies, even if it's just marijuana, you can get life without parole.
Meanwhile, during the past two decades, Chris has seen a sea change in marijuana laws, as several states have legal pot for medicine and two states have it for recreational use. So lately he has been wondering why his dad is sentenced to die in prison for something that most of America considers harmless -- and he wants Missouri Governor Jay Nixon to address his concerns by granting his father clemency.
"I think twenty years is more than enough," Chris tells Daily RFT. "My dad never hurt anybody. He never killed anybody. He made some mistakes, but he's paid more than enough."
Jeff's troubles began on December 18, 1993, when he drove his friend, Atilano Quintana, to a Super 8 motel in Sedalia to meet two men. Jeff says he thought they were going to meet two men to discuss moving furniture to New Mexico for Quintana's sister, who had recently moved there. To this day, he claims he had no clue Quintana was going there to buy a few pounds of marijuana.
And Quintana didn't know that the two friends who were in the motel with the brick of weed had just been busted the day before -- with thirteen bricks of marijuana -- and were coerced to participate in a sting operation to nab more buyers, which is why there were cops and surveillance equipment in the adjoining room. You can guess what happened next.
Although Quintana was in possession of the package when he and Jeff were arrested and the surveillance video clearly suggests he was the one making the purchase, he was given a ten-year sentence for possession with intent to distribute, a Class B felony.
For the same charge, Jeff, who was busted in 1984 for selling an ounce of pot to an undercover cop and again in 1991 for possession of more than 35 grams of marijuana, got life without parole. He had never before done prison time, never had a violent offense, and his pot convictions did not have aggravating factors, such as involving minors or an illegal firearm. But none of that mattered because of an archaic Missouri law.
Jeff was convicted under Missouri's "prior and persistent drug offender" statute, a Three Strikes-like statute that permits a court to hand out a life-without-parole sentence to somebody with three nonviolent drug offenses. But Missouri's law is unique in that it doesn't require at least one violent offense to lock up a person for life, whereas most states' habitual-offender laws do. California requires at least one violent offense. So does Georgia. And even Alabama, which doesn't require a distinction between violent and nonviolent felonies, paroled a man who had initially received a life without parole sentence for three nonviolent felonies -- the third of which happened to be a selling-marijuana conviction.
But when it comes to pot, Missouri can be stricter than Georgia or Alabama -- and Jeff Mizanskey might never get out of prison.
Jeff has tried the appeals process, but his family has been unable to afford private counsel, and he has either filed his own appeals or depended on overworked public defenders. Unsurprisingly, the appeals went nowhere.
More here:
http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2013/10/missouri_man_serving_life_in_p.php?page=2 (http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2013/10/missouri_man_serving_life_in_p.php?page=2)
-
After 20 Years in Prison, Missouri Man Serving Life Without Parole for Marijuana Asks Governor for Clemency
For the past 20 years, Chris Mizanskey, now 33, has had to go to prison to see his father. But his dad, Jeff, is not a murderer or a rapist. He was, however, busted for possession of about five pounds of pot, his third marijuana-related felony. And in Missouri, if you get three drug felonies, even if it's just marijuana, you can get life without parole.
Meanwhile, during the past two decades, Chris has seen a sea change in marijuana laws, as several states have legal pot for medicine and two states have it for recreational use. So lately he has been wondering why his dad is sentenced to die in prison for something that most of America considers harmless -- and he wants Missouri Governor Jay Nixon to address his concerns by granting his father clemency.
"I think twenty years is more than enough," Chris tells Daily RFT. "My dad never hurt anybody. He never killed anybody. He made some mistakes, but he's paid more than enough."
Jeff's troubles began on December 18, 1993, when he drove his friend, Atilano Quintana, to a Super 8 motel in Sedalia to meet two men. Jeff says he thought they were going to meet two men to discuss moving furniture to New Mexico for Quintana's sister, who had recently moved there. To this day, he claims he had no clue Quintana was going there to buy a few pounds of marijuana.
And Quintana didn't know that the two friends who were in the motel with the brick of weed had just been busted the day before -- with thirteen bricks of marijuana -- and were coerced to participate in a sting operation to nab more buyers, which is why there were cops and surveillance equipment in the adjoining room. You can guess what happened next.
Although Quintana was in possession of the package when he and Jeff were arrested and the surveillance video clearly suggests he was the one making the purchase, he was given a ten-year sentence for possession with intent to distribute, a Class B felony.
For the same charge, Jeff, who was busted in 1984 for selling an ounce of pot to an undercover cop and again in 1991 for possession of more than 35 grams of marijuana, got life without parole. He had never before done prison time, never had a violent offense, and his pot convictions did not have aggravating factors, such as involving minors or an illegal firearm. But none of that mattered because of an archaic Missouri law.
Jeff was convicted under Missouri's "prior and persistent drug offender" statute, a Three Strikes-like statute that permits a court to hand out a life-without-parole sentence to somebody with three nonviolent drug offenses. But Missouri's law is unique in that it doesn't require at least one violent offense to lock up a person for life, whereas most states' habitual-offender laws do. California requires at least one violent offense. So does Georgia. And even Alabama, which doesn't require a distinction between violent and nonviolent felonies, paroled a man who had initially received a life without parole sentence for three nonviolent felonies -- the third of which happened to be a selling-marijuana conviction.
But when it comes to pot, Missouri can be stricter than Georgia or Alabama -- and Jeff Mizanskey might never get out of prison.
Jeff has tried the appeals process, but his family has been unable to afford private counsel, and he has either filed his own appeals or depended on overworked public defenders. Unsurprisingly, the appeals went nowhere.
More here:
http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2013/10/missouri_man_serving_life_in_p.php?page=2 (http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2013/10/missouri_man_serving_life_in_p.php?page=2)
This story is from October 2013. Here is a more recent link, although it doesn't look like much has changed for him.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/11/missouri-man-serving-life-in-prison-for-pot-while-some-states-have-legalized-it/
-
This story is from October 2013. Here is a more recent link, although it doesn't look like much has changed for him.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/11/missouri-man-serving-life-in-prison-for-pot-while-some-states-have-legalized-it/
Thanks for the more recent link.
Though not much has changed since Oct 2013 for the poor Missouri man serving life solely for non-violent marijuana offenses, there have been some changes in the marijuana laws in the rest of the country:
- Recreational use of MJ was legalized in Portland, Maine.
- Medical marijuana legalized in the states of Maryland, Minnesota, and New York. (Bringing total # of states where MMJ is legal to 24.)
-
Washington's legal marijuana sales rake in nearly $150,000 in taxes in first few days
Associated Press
on July 11, 2014
SEATTLE — Washington will haul in nearly $150,000 in excise taxes from the first three days of legal marijuana sales — and that doesn't include state and local sales taxes.
Randy Simmons, the Liquor Control Board's project manager for legal pot, says that's not bad, considering the market is in its infancy, with only a few stores open statewide.
The law voters passed in 2012 to legalize pot for adults specifies that excise taxes of 25 percent are imposed when producers sell their product to licensed retail stores, and another 25 percent is imposed when shops sell to consumers.
All excise taxes due from the first day of sales Tuesday totaled $61,604. The figure dipped to $30,924 on Wednesday, and rose to $55,728 on Thursday, for a total of $148,256.
http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2014/07/3-day_tax_haul_from_washington.html (http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2014/07/3-day_tax_haul_from_washington.html)
-
lol @ the "rake in nearly $150,000" headline. What is that, like one tenth of one percent of their GET for the year?
-
lol @ the "rake in nearly $150,000" headline. What is that, like one tenth of one percent of their GET for the year?
I had similar thoughts when I read that, too.
Then I read that the 150G's represents 3 days' worth of business from only 6 stores currently open statewide. And those numbers don't include sales tax.
To be clear, 25 businesses have apparently received licenses to sell MJ, but only a handful were ready to do so during the first few days that it was legal.
-
I had similar thoughts when I read that, too.
Then I read that the 150G's represents 3 days' worth of business from only 6 stores currently open statewide. And those numbers don't include sales tax.
To be clear, 25 businesses have apparently received licenses to sell MJ, but only a handful were ready to do so during the first few days that it was legal.
Ok? It's still a nominal amount.
-
Ok? It's still a nominal amount.
Why ya gotta rain on their parade?
Is that Washington state not rainy and depressed enough?
-
Why ya gotta rain on their parade?
Is that Washington state not rainy and depressed enough?
Washington is beautiful. I was there several months ago. Got to go up the Space Needle. Very nice.
But the $150k is pretty meaningless.
-
Washington is beautiful. I was there several months ago. Got to go up the Space Needle. Very nice.
But the $150k is pretty meaningless.
A small sum? Yes.
Meaningless? No, I disagree. Considering how many states are running a deficit, it's not meaningless.
What it means, if nothing else, is that legalized MJ is a gov't money-maker that's being missed out on in states where it's not being taxed.
Because, let's face it, whether it's legal or not, people are spending a lot of money on weed.
-
A small sum? Yes.
Meaningless? No, I disagree. Considering how many states are running a deficit, it's not meaningless.
What it means, if nothing else, is that legalized MJ is a gov't money-maker that's being missed out on in states where it's not being taxed.
Because, let's face it, whether it's legal or not, people are spending a lot of money on weed.
I disagree. It doesn't even cover the salaries of all the people involved in regulating the industry. It's actually costing the government (and the taxpayers) money.
-
I disagree. It doesn't even cover the salaries of all the people involved in regulating the industry. It's actually costing the government (and the taxpayers) money.
It doesn't cover 3 days' worth of their salaries? (How many such folks are there? How much do they make? How do I apply?)
Source?
-
It doesn't cover 3 days' worth of their salaries? (How many such folks are there? How much do they make? How do I apply?)
Source?
Seriously? Three days worth of salaries? Good grief. You have to look at the annual total cost of employees involved in the regulation of the industry. That includes the tax office, law enforcement, etc. Even if you only looked at three days worth of costs (not just salaries), it's certainly more than $150k.
And don't ask me for a link. Go do your own homework. You need the learning experience.
-
Seriously? Three days worth of salaries? Good grief. You have to look at the annual total cost of employees involved in the regulation of the industry. That includes the tax office, law enforcement, etc. Even if you only looked at three days worth of costs (not just salaries), it's certainly more than $150k.
And don't ask me for a link. Go do your own homework. You need the learning experience.
3 days' worth of costs, then? How would you even be able to figure out what that is?
And law enforcement COSTS? WTF are you talking about? Don't you think you could reasonably subtract a huge freaking number from that since you're no longer hassling recreational smokers?
You're not a dummy but your posts lack some when you make them too fast, I think.
-
3 days' worth of costs, then? How would you even be able to figure out what that is?
And law enforcement COSTS? WTF are you talking about? Don't you think you could reasonably subtract a huge freaking number from that since you're no longer hassling recreational smokers?
You're not a dummy but your posts lack some when you make them too fast, I think.
lol. Of all people. lol. You say some of the most absurd or incredibly uniformed things on this board.
But I digress. Like I said, if you want to know the numbers, do your own research.
In terms of law enforcement costs, who the heck do you think is regulating the industry? What happens when a business doesn't pay the taxes it owes? What happens when someone doesn't have a properly regulated business?
How old are you? Do you have any experience in the real world?
-
lol. Of all people. lol. You say some of the most absurd or incredibly uniformed things on this board.
But I digress. Like I said, if you want to know the numbers, do your own research.
In terms of law enforcement costs, who the heck do you think is regulating the industry? What happens when a business doesn't pay the taxes it owes? What happens when someone doesn't have a properly regulated business?
How old are you? Do you have any experience in the real world?
lol. Which uniform do my absurd comments wear?
(Hate to say I told ya so but I'm thinking that your typo has something to do with you making comments a little too quickly, lol.)
Yeah, I know I risk not getting any straight answers out of you since I poked a little fun at you but on the off chance that you're not in a sensitive mood tonight I'll try to engage you anyway:
Am I maybe misunderstanding you here? Are you really saying that you think that MJ being legalized in Washington state is going to cost the taxpayers more than it will earn for them (via taxes)?
Just in terms of legal system expenditures it seems like the gov't should be coming out ahead since it will no longer be spending the money to prosecute most folks who use marijuana, right?
From your questions about expenses related to having folks make sure that folks in the new MJ biz follow the licensing and tax laws, I think you're overestimating those expenses. If you aren't, and legalizing MJ in Washington IS costing the gov't more money than it earns, that seems like it'd be fairly big news and would be an easy thing for you to find a supporting link for, wouldn't it?
Now, I do hear what you're saying about, "If you want to know the numbers, don't bug me about it" but asking for a supporting link to back up a counter-intuitive claim doesn't seem unreasonable and is something that you frequently do yourself.
-
lol. Which uniform do my absurd comments wear?
(Hate to say I told ya so but I'm thinking that your typo has something to do with you making comments a little too quickly, lol.)
Yeah, I know I risk not getting any straight answers out of you since I poked a little fun at you but on the off chance that you're not in a sensitive mood tonight I'll try to engage you anyway:
Am I maybe misunderstanding you here? Are you really saying that you think that MJ being legalized in Washington state is going to cost the taxpayers more than it will earn for them (via taxes)?
Just in terms of legal system expenditures it seems like the gov't should be coming out ahead since it will no longer be spending the money to prosecute most folks who use marijuana, right?
From your questions about expenses related to having folks make sure that folks in the new MJ biz follow the licensing and tax laws, I think you're overestimating those expenses. If you aren't, and legalizing MJ in Washington IS costing the gov't more money than it earns, that seems like it'd be fairly big news and would be an easy thing for you to find a supporting link for, wouldn't it?
Now, I do hear what you're saying about, "If you want to know the numbers, don't bug me about it" but asking for a supporting link to back up a counter-intuitive claim doesn't seem unreasonable and is something that you frequently do yourself.
You just cannot help yourself can you? I'm starting to think you might be a 240 clone, just constantly making stuff up.
You posted an article touting Washington "raking in" $150k in taxes in a few days. I pointed out how that amount is meaningless. I didn't say anything about what will happen longterm. No one knows, because the numbers are not in.
So try and focus: the fact $150k in GET was raised in a few days is insignificant. That's the point.
-
lol. Of all people. lol. You say some of the most absurd or incredibly uniformed things on this board.
But I digress. Like I said, if you want to know the numbers, do your own research.
In terms of law enforcement costs, who the heck do you think is regulating the industry? What happens when a business doesn't pay the taxes it owes? What happens when someone doesn't have a properly regulated business?
How old are you? Do you have any experience in the real world?
Maybe i read it wrong but are you saying that it costs more money and manpower to regulate the weed-industry now than when it was fully illegal ???
-
Maybe i read it wrong but are you saying that it costs more money and manpower to regulate the weed-industry now than when it was fully illegal ???
You read it wrong. We are talking about a few days of GET. The costs regulating the industry dwarf a few days of GET (unless the GET is astronomical).
-
You just cannot help yourself can you? I'm starting to think you might be a 240 clone, just constantly making stuff up.
You posted an article touting Washington "raking in" $150k in taxes in a few days. I pointed out how that amount is meaningless. I didn't say anything about what will happen longterm. No one knows, because the numbers are not in.
So try and focus: the fact $150k in GET was raised in a few days is insignificant. That's the point.
Ah, OK. Well ninja, that's why I asked. Not sure why that gets your panties in such a twist.
Still not sure what you were on about with your comment about the 3 days' worth of excise taxes not paying the salaries of the regulators. (Because to make your comment meaningful, you need to be talking about just 3 days' worth of the salaries.) Whateva, though.
-
lol
Got stuck at the Denver Airport yesterday in B terminal and smelt cannabis several times.
-
lol
Got stuck at the Denver Airport yesterday in B terminal and smelt cannabis several times.
Did you inhale? :D
-
Lol. Had too.
-
Lol. Had too.
What I hate is when you can tell it's really good shit.
OTH, my city has 2 Walmarts and you can always smelly shitty mexican brown weed in the parking lot of the ghetto walmart at night.
-
What I hate is when you can tell it's really good shit.
OTH, my city has 2 Walmarts and you can always smelly shitty mexican brown weed in the parking lot of the ghetto walmart at night.
Haven't seen shifty Mexican brown weed in a long time. You are in so-cal right?
-
Should marijuana use be legal?
(http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/140728141528-pot-poll-jan-305-story-top.png)
Posted by
CNN Political Unit
Washington (CNN) – Around half the public says that marijuana use should be legal, according to recent national polling.
Forty-eight percent of those questioned in a CBS News survey in early May said that the use of marijuana should be legal, with 47% disagreeing. The poll suggested partisan, gender and generational divides, with a majority of men, younger Americans, Democrats and independents saying recreational pot should be legal. Women, those 45 and older, as well as Republicans, disagree.
An ABC News/Washington Post poll conducted in early January also indicated that Americans were divided on the issue.
A Pew Research Center survey conducted in February and a CNN/ORC International poll conducted in early January both indicated a slight majority supported legalizing marijuana use. Fifty-four percent of those questioned in the Pew poll, and 55% of those sampled in the CNN poll supported legalizing marijuana.
According to the CNN poll and numbers from General Social Survey polling, support for legalizing marijuana has steadily soared over the past quarter century – from 16% in 1987 to 26% in 1996, 34% in 2002, and 43% two years ago.
Attitudes have dramatically changed
Why has support for legalizing marijuana tripled since the 1970s and 1980s?
"Attitudes toward the effects of marijuana and whether it is morally wrong to smoke pot have changed dramatically over time," said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "That also means that marijuana use is just not all that important to Americans any longer."
In 1972, about a year after President Richard Nixon declared drugs "public enemy Number One," 65% said the use of marijuana was a very serious problem for the United States. Now that is down to 19%, according to the CNN survey.
The number who said marijuana is a gateway drug (47%), is down 23 points since 1972. The number who said marijuana is addictive (50%), is down 10 points. And the number who said marijuana is physically harmful (43%) is down 23 points.
"Clearly there are some reservations about marijuana, but not the widespread fear that existed during the original War on Drugs in the 1970s," added Holland.
The biggest change indicated by the poll reflected the number of people who said smoking pot is morally wrong. In 1987, 70% said it was, making it a sin in the minds of more Americans than abortion or pornography.
Now, that number has been halved – just 35% today said smoking marijuana is morally wrong.
Widespread agreement that it is not morally wrong may be one of the bigger drivers of the pro-legalization movement.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/07/28/should-marijuana-use-be-legal/
-
Bill Kristol: Legalizing Pot Is 'Playing With Our Kids' Futures'
Thursday, 31 Jul 2014
By Bill Hoffmann
Continued legalization of marijuana across the United States would be a disaster for the nation, Bill Kristol, founder and editor of The Weekly Standard and an ABC News political commentator, told Newsmax TV.
"It's really irresponsible the attitude people have taken towards this, that it's a chic thing … to say we've got to decriminalize some of these drugs,'' Kristol said Wednesday on Newsmax's "The Steve Malzberg Show.
"But it's playing with our kids' futures, really.''
Story continues below video.
Kristol said he served as chief of staff to Secretary of Education William Bennett during the Reagan administration, when Washington launched its ambitious crusade against drugs.
"You looked at the damages being done by the drug epidemic then, and there'll be more drug use if it's legal and if it's cheap. So yeah, I'm very concerned about what's happening.''
Thus far, Colorado and Washington, have legalized the recreational use of marijuana, and Maryland passed a law decriminalizing possession of 10 grams or less. Maryland, New York and Minnesota have also passed legislation for the use of medical pot.
Kristol also weighed in on President Barack Obama's use of executive power and the recent warnings by Democrats that the GOP wants to impeach the commander-in-chief.
"I’m not for impeaching him, no one really is, I guess, at this point,'' Kristol said.
"The conventional wisdom is … it would be an utter political disaster, a horrible mistake."
Kristol said he was surprised that Florida Sen. Marco Rubio was one of 11 Republicans who voted along with Democrats in the Senate to keep the president's request for $3.7 billion to help ease the U.S.-Mexico border crisis.
"I would have voted on the other way on that…. Getting this president $3 billion with no strings, basically no legal changes … that doesn't sit well with me,'' he said.
"It's not that we're not spending enough money that's causing this to happen right? So it's crazy for Republicans to go along with that Democratic narrative.''
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsmax-Tv/marijuana-legal/2014/07/30/id/585901#ixzz395Ef7fQL
-
Bill Kristol: Legalizing Pot Is 'Playing With Our Kids' Futures'
Thursday, 31 Jul 2014
By Bill Hoffmann
Continued legalization of marijuana across the United States would be a disaster for the nation, Bill Kristol, founder and editor of The Weekly Standard and an ABC News political commentator, told Newsmax TV.
"It's really irresponsible the attitude people have taken towards this, that it's a chic thing … to say we've got to decriminalize some of these drugs,'' Kristol said Wednesday on Newsmax's "The Steve Malzberg Show.
"But it's playing with our kids' futures, really.''
Story continues below video.
Kristol said he served as chief of staff to Secretary of Education William Bennett during the Reagan administration, when Washington launched its ambitious crusade against drugs.
"You looked at the damages being done by the drug epidemic then, and there'll be more drug use if it's legal and if it's cheap. So yeah, I'm very concerned about what's happening.''
Thus far, Colorado and Washington, have legalized the recreational use of marijuana, and Maryland passed a law decriminalizing possession of 10 grams or less. Maryland, New York and Minnesota have also passed legislation for the use of medical pot.
Kristol also weighed in on President Barack Obama's use of executive power and the recent warnings by Democrats that the GOP wants to impeach the commander-in-chief.
"I’m not for impeaching him, no one really is, I guess, at this point,'' Kristol said.
"The conventional wisdom is … it would be an utter political disaster, a horrible mistake."
Kristol said he was surprised that Florida Sen. Marco Rubio was one of 11 Republicans who voted along with Democrats in the Senate to keep the president's request for $3.7 billion to help ease the U.S.-Mexico border crisis.
"I would have voted on the other way on that…. Getting this president $3 billion with no strings, basically no legal changes … that doesn't sit well with me,'' he said.
"It's not that we're not spending enough money that's causing this to happen right? So it's crazy for Republicans to go along with that Democratic narrative.''
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsmax-Tv/marijuana-legal/2014/07/30/id/585901#ixzz395Ef7fQL
Who is this idiot? the drug epidemic? the damage that has been done by the war on drugs far exceeds this and what the fuck do kids have to do with legal drugs for adults.
I would be more worried about the climate then drugs with regards to kids futures. They are going to inherit alot of fucking problems.
-
Bankrupt California city eyes marijuana for revenue
By Kelley Beaucar Vlahos
Published July 31, 2014
FoxNews.com
July 11, 2014: Marijuana plants for sale are displayed at the medical marijuana farmers market at the California Heritage Market in Los Angeles, Calif.Reuters
The bankrupt California city of San Bernardino has a new idea for raising revenue – legalize medical marijuana, and tax the pot.
Ironically, the plan was spurred by concerns about not having enough resources to crack down on the illegal medical marijuana dealers springing up all over town.
So the city is now looking at legalizing the sellers, and using the proceeds to enforce the regulations.
It’s not quite “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em,” but like many municipalities in California today, San Bernardino is recognizing that it could be bringing millions of dollars into its foundering coffers each year if it opened its doors to regulated medical marijuana dispensaries. And it would be able to have a say in who operates these places, as well as how and where.
“This is a no-brainer,” said Karen O’Keefe, director of state policies at the Marijuana Policy Project in California. “More and more people are realizing that you’d really have to be in the Stone Age to oppose this.”
But San Bernardino is not exactly there, yet. According to City Attorney Gary Saenz, a legislative review panel has been formed by the City Council to study the idea. This panel is collecting data, talking to the city police department and examining laws in other jurisdictions before bringing a proposal to the full committee. It plans on holding at least two more public meetings on the subject through August.
“We are in the exploratory phase,” Saenz told FoxNews.com, insisting that “my primary objective is to close down the seedy shops.”
Police have reported as many as 20 illegal storefronts in town at any given time, he said. Legalizing and regulating this now-unwieldy industry, he feels, is one of the tools available to the city to start taking control.
“We have in this city a proliferation – and a lot of cities in California are experiencing it – of illegal medical marijuana dispensaries. These people are defiant and they are opening up these things right and left.
“We are a city of limited resources,” he added, noting to shut a business down requires civil enforcement, including protracted legal proceedings, and often the police. Even when they do go after the violators aggressively, often they pop up elsewhere and another comes to town in its place.
“We can’t close them down to the satisfaction of our citizens,” said Saenz, so “this city attorney’s office is presenting our council with options. And the idea is essentially, primarily, to close down illegal shops” and using the new money from the legal ones to do it.
City Council member James Mulvihill said he was on board with the idea early on after hearing it cost the city $10,000 every time it went after an illegal dealer. He, as well as the mayor’s chief of staff, Michael McKinney, say any funds gleaned from the regulation and tax of marijuana dispensaries would be used exclusively for enforcement.
“I think we are making the right steps. It’s been a hot issue,” Mulvihill told FoxNews.com, noting that he has not received a lot of negative feedback since the idea was made public in the last two open council meetings. “Prohibiting them is obviously not working. It’s almost easier to regulate it than prohibit it.”
He said he is supporting a plan to permit less than a half a dozen dispensaries. He said they could charge upward of $60,000 a year in fees, plus something in the order of 10 percent a year in taxes, much like nearby Palm Springs, which he says regulates in order to pay for enforcement too.
McKinney said Mayor R. Carey Davis, prefers “not to see any marijuana dispensaries in the city of San Bernardino,” but is listening to all the options on how to combat the current problems.
McKinney said his office has been getting calls advocating both sides of the issue.
Saenz wants to be clear this idea has not sprung out of a newfound desire of town officials or citizenry to embrace marijuana. In fact, San Bernardino is one of 200 California municipalities that have maintained an outright ban on pot shops since medical marijuana was made legal through a ballot referendum in 1996.
This was reaffirmed last year when the state Supreme Court in San Francisco unanimously ruled that local jurisdictions have authority to prohibit medical marijuana despite its legality at the state level.
But San Bernardino, population 209,924, has other problems. In 2012, it declared bankruptcy, at the time becoming the largest city in the U.S. to do so.
Mulvihill insists his own support for the dispensaries is quite narrow.
“I’m doing this because of the trouble we’re in -- we can’t control it,” he said. “I’m not doing this for potheads.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/31/bankrupt-california-city-eyes-marijuana-for-revenue/
-
Who is this idiot? the drug epidemic? the damage that has been done by the war on drugs far exceeds this and what the fuck do kids have to do with legal drugs for adults.
I would be more worried about the climate then drugs with regards to kids futures. They are going to inherit alot of fucking problems.
+100
-
$2M Anti-Pot Campaign Warns of Becoming 'Lab Rat'
DENVER — Aug 10, 2014
Associated Press
A campaign to discourage Colorado youths from using marijuana titled "Don't Be a Lab Rat" will use human-sized rat cages and television and movie-theater ads, with the goal of telling teens there's uncertainty surrounding the effects of pot.
The campaign launching Monday moves away from trying to scare teens like some anti-meth commercials, The Denver Post reports ( http://goo.gl/QGTPpQ ). The $2 million campaign was commissioned by the governor's office and uses money from legal settlements with various pharmaceutical companies.
A handful of rat cages will be displayed throughout Denver with campaign messaging, including one calling for volunteers for a lab experiment.
"Volunteers needed," one of the messages will read. "Must have a developing brain. Must smoke weed. Must not be concerned about schizophrenia."
One of the television and theater commercials will show teens lighting up in a smoke-filled car, with text on the screen referencing a Duke University study that argues teenage pot use results in lasting drops in IQ.
Teens will also be directed to a website, DontBeALabRat.com, to read studies on the possible consequences of pot use.
"We don't say, 'It's absolute'; we say, 'This study exists. Some people dispute that. Make up your own mind,'" said Mike Sukle, who created the campaign. "At some point, they have to make up their mind. The days of 'Just Say No,' that was a fairly failed effort."
Sukle has previously worked on anti-meth campaigns designed to shock teenagers to try to prevent them from using the drugs. But with acceptance of marijuana use increasing, the challenge for the campaign was bigger.
"This was a tricky one," Sukle said.
He said his team pitched possible messages to teens, such as telling them marijuana could cost them a scholarship or get them in trouble. But Sukle said the message that stuck was one that addressed the teens' sense of self, and what bothered them was being told about research suggesting marijuana could affect their brain development.
Mason Tvert, a marijuana activist who helped lead the legalization effort in Colorado, is skeptical of the ad campaign and said that it's designed to scare like past anti-drug efforts.
"What it comes down to is are the ads intended to scare them or are the ads intended to inform them?" he said. "These ads are intended to scare them."
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/2m-anti-pot-campaign-warns-lab-rat-24923080
-
This thread is not complete without Rick James. :)
-
Jeb Bush: 'I strongly urge' Floridians to vote against medical marijuana
Alex LearyAlex Leary, Times Washington Bureau Chief
Thursday, August 14, 2014
Jeb Bush is adding his influential voice to the medical marijuana debate in Florida, saying the ballot initiative could harm Florida's reputation.
“Florida leaders and citizens have worked for years to make the Sunshine State a world-class location to start or run a business, a family-friendly destination for tourism and a desirable place to raise a family or retire,” Bush said in a statement. “Allowing large-scale, marijuana operations to take root across Florida, under the guise of using it for medicinal purposes, runs counter to all of these efforts. I believe it is the right of states to decide this issue, and I strongly urge Floridians to vote against Amendment 2 this November.”
Bush joined the the Florida Chamber, Associated Builders and Contractors of Florida and the Florida Trucking Association in the coalition fighting the initiative.
"Normally we focus on creating jobs, improving education and making Florida more competitive, but this is the type of business Florida can do without," said Mark Wilson, President and CEO of the Florida Chamber of Commerce. "I find it curious that the largest funder of this push to legalize pot is a personal injury trial lawyer firm, yet such measures are overwhelmingly opposed by Florida's medical and law enforcement community. Florida voters are smart and when the facts are on the table, I believe they will say no to drugs in Florida."
Wilson also raised concerns that growers, transporters, sellers, doctors, patients and caregivers involved in the transfer and administration of potent marijuana products will be given complete civil and criminal immunity under the amendment. "That," he said, "is a huge red flag for Amendment 2."
Sen. Marco Rubio also says he opposes the medical marijuana voters will decide in November, but Rubio said he supports the use of noneuphoric strains.
http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/jeb-bush-i-strongly-urge-floridians-to-vote-against-medical-marijuana/2192873
-
7 Harmful Side Effects Pot Legalization Has Caused in Colorado
Cully Stimson / @cullystimson / August 20, 2014
There is more bad news out of Colorado regarding the negative impact of marijuana legalization.
As I reported a few weeks ago, some professors published a peer-reviewed article on the negative social costs to outright legalization. I noted that although overall traffic fatalities in Colorado have gone down since 2007, they went up by 100 percent for operators testing positive for marijuana—from 39 in 2007 to 78 in 2012. (Colorado legalized marijuana for medical usage in 2009, before legalizing marijuana for other uses in 2012.) Furthermore, in 2007, those pot-positive drivers represented only 7 percent of total fatalities in Colorado, but in 2012 they represented 16 percent of total Colorado fatalities.
Now, there is even more proof from Colorado that legalizing pot, as I have argued before, is terrible public policy.
This new report paints an even bleaker picture of what is happening in Colorado since it legalized the possession, sale, and consumption of marijuana.
According to the new report by the Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area entitled “The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact,” the impact of legalized marijuana in Colorado has resulted in:
1. The majority of DUI drug arrests involve marijuana and 25 to 40 percent were marijuana alone.
2. In 2012, 10.47 percent of Colorado youth ages 12 to 17 were considered current marijuana users compared to 7.55 percent nationally. Colorado ranked fourth in the nation, and was 39 percent higher than the national average.
3. Drug-related student suspensions/expulsions increased 32 percent from school years 2008-09 through 2012-13, the vast majority were for marijuana violations.
4. In 2012, 26.81 percent of college age students were considered current marijuana users compared to 18.89 percent nationally, which ranks Colorado third in the nation and 42 percent above the national average.
5. In 2013, 48.4 percent of Denver adult arrestees tested positive for marijuana, which is a 16 percent increase from 2008.
6. From 2011 through 2013 there was a 57 percent increase in marijuana-related emergency room visits.
7. Hospitalizations related to marijuana has increased 82 percent since 2008.
The report includes other data about the negative effect of legalizing marijuana in Colorado, including marijuana-related exposure to children, treatment, the flood of marijuana in and out of Colorado, the dangers of pot extraction labs and other disturbing factual trends.
Don’t expect this data to impact the push to legalize pot in Colorado, or elsewhere for that matter. Big pot is big business, and the push to legalize is really all about profit, despite inconvenient facts.
Drug policy should be based on hard science and reliable data. And the data coming out of Colorado points to one and only one conclusion: the legalization of marijuana in the state is terrible public policy.
http://dailysignal.com/2014/08/20/7-harmful-side-effects-pot-legalization-caused-colorado/
-
7 Harmful Side Effects Pot Legalization Has Caused in Colorado
Cully Stimson / @cullystimson / August 20, 2014
There is more bad news out of Colorado regarding the negative impact of marijuana legalization.
As I reported a few weeks ago, some professors published a peer-reviewed article on the negative social costs to outright legalization. I noted that although overall traffic fatalities in Colorado have gone down since 2007, they went up by 100 percent for operators testing positive for marijuana—from 39 in 2007 to 78 in 2012. (Colorado legalized marijuana for medical usage in 2009, before legalizing marijuana for other uses in 2012.) Furthermore, in 2007, those pot-positive drivers represented only 7 percent of total fatalities in Colorado, but in 2012 they represented 16 percent of total Colorado fatalities.
Now, there is even more proof from Colorado that legalizing pot, as I have argued before, is terrible public policy.
This new report paints an even bleaker picture of what is happening in Colorado since it legalized the possession, sale, and consumption of marijuana.
According to the new report by the Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area entitled “The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado: The Impact,” the impact of legalized marijuana in Colorado has resulted in:
1. The majority of DUI drug arrests involve marijuana and 25 to 40 percent were marijuana alone.
2. In 2012, 10.47 percent of Colorado youth ages 12 to 17 were considered current marijuana users compared to 7.55 percent nationally. Colorado ranked fourth in the nation, and was 39 percent higher than the national average.
3. Drug-related student suspensions/expulsions increased 32 percent from school years 2008-09 through 2012-13, the vast majority were for marijuana violations.
4. In 2012, 26.81 percent of college age students were considered current marijuana users compared to 18.89 percent nationally, which ranks Colorado third in the nation and 42 percent above the national average.
5. In 2013, 48.4 percent of Denver adult arrestees tested positive for marijuana, which is a 16 percent increase from 2008.
6. From 2011 through 2013 there was a 57 percent increase in marijuana-related emergency room visits.
7. Hospitalizations related to marijuana has increased 82 percent since 2008.
The report includes other data about the negative effect of legalizing marijuana in Colorado, including marijuana-related exposure to children, treatment, the flood of marijuana in and out of Colorado, the dangers of pot extraction labs and other disturbing factual trends.
Don’t expect this data to impact the push to legalize pot in Colorado, or elsewhere for that matter. Big pot is big business, and the push to legalize is really all about profit, despite inconvenient facts.
Drug policy should be based on hard science and reliable data. And the data coming out of Colorado points to one and only one conclusion: the legalization of marijuana in the state is terrible public policy.
http://dailysignal.com/2014/08/20/7-harmful-side-effects-pot-legalization-caused-colorado/
None of that seem especially compelling, imo.
Maybe ol' Cully Stimson from The Heritage Foundation is just a hard-liner when it comes to recreational substances, though.
Any idea what he thinks about alcohol being legal?:
Oh, wait, lol: What follows is what he wrote about that issue in Sept 2010:
Unsafe in Any Amount: How Marijuana Is Not Like Alcohol
Marijuana advocates have had some success peddling the notion that marijuana is a “soft” drug, similar to alcohol, and fundamentally different from “hard” drugs like cocaine or heroin. It is true that marijuana is not the most dangerous of the commonly abused drugs, but that is not to say that it is safe. Indeed, marijuana shares more in common with the “hard” drugs than it does with alcohol.
A common argument for legalization is that smoking marijuana is no more dangerous than drinking alcohol and that prohibiting the use of marijuana is therefore no more justified than the prohibition of alcohol. As Jacob Sullum, author of Saying Yes: In Defense of Drug Use, writes:
Americans understood the problems associated with alcohol abuse, but they also understood the problems associated with Prohibition, which included violence, organized crime, official corruption, the erosion of civil liberties, disrespect for the law, and injuries and deaths caused by tainted black-market booze. They decided that these unintended side effects far outweighed whatever harms Prohibition prevented by discouraging drinking. The same sort of analysis today would show that the harm caused by drug prohibition far outweighs the harm it prevents, even without taking into account the value to each individual of being sovereign over his own body and mind.[7]
At first blush, this argument is appealing, especially to those wary of over-regulation by government. But it overlooks the enormous difference between alcohol and marijuana.
Legalization advocates claim that marijuana and alcohol are mild intoxicants and so should be regulated similarly; but as the experience of nearly every culture, over the thousands of years of human history, demonstrates, alcohol is different. Nearly every culture has its own alcoholic preparations, and nearly all have successfully regulated alcohol consumption through cultural norms. The same cannot be said of marijuana. There are several possible explanations for alcohol’s unique status: For most people, it is not addictive; it is rarely consumed to the point of intoxication; low-level consumption is consistent with most manual and intellectual tasks; it has several positive health benefits; and it is formed by the fermentation of many common substances and easily metabolized by the body.
To be sure, there are costs associated with alcohol abuse, such as drunk driving and disease associated with excessive consumption. A few cultures—and this nation for a short while during Prohibition—have concluded that the benefits of alcohol consumption are not worth the costs. But they are the exception; most cultures have concluded that it is acceptable in moderation. No other intoxicant shares that status.
Alcohol differs from marijuana in several crucial respects. First, marijuana is far more likely to cause addiction. Second, it is usually consumed to the point of intoxication. Third, it has no known general healthful properties, though it may have some palliative effects. Fourth, it is toxic and deleterious to health. Thus, while it is true that both alcohol and marijuana are less intoxicating than other mood-altering drugs, that is not to say that marijuana is especially similar to alcohol or that its use is healthy or even safe.
In fact, compared to alcohol, marijuana is not safe. Long-term, moderate consumption of alcohol carries few health risks and even offers some significant benefits. For example, a glass of wine (or other alcoholic drink) with dinner actually improves health.[8] Dozens of peer-reviewed medical studies suggest that drinking moderate amounts of alcohol reduces the risk of heart disease, strokes, gallstones, diabetes, and death from a heart attack.[9] According to the Mayo Clinic, among many others, moderate use of alcohol (defined as two drinks a day) “seems to offer some health benefits, particularly for the heart.”[10] Countless articles in medical journals and other scientific literature confirm the positive health effects of moderate alcohol consumption.
The effects of regular marijuana consumption are quite different. For example, the National Institute on Drug Abuse (a division of the National Institutes of Health) has released studies showing that use of marijuana has wide-ranging negative health effects. Long-term marijuana consumption “impairs the ability of T-cells in the lungs’ immune system to fight off some infections.”[11] These studies have also found that marijuana consumption impairs short-term memory, making it difficult to learn and retain information or perform complex tasks; slows reaction time and impairs motor coordination; increases heart rate by 20 percent to 100 percent, thus elevating the risk of heart attack; and alters moods, resulting in artificial euphoria, calmness, or (in high doses) anxiety or paranoia.[12] And it gets worse: Marijuana has toxic properties that can result in birth defects, pain, respiratory system damage, brain damage, and stroke.[13]
Further, prolonged use of marijuana may cause cognitive degradation and is “associated with lower test scores and lower educational attainment because during periods of intoxication the drug affects the ability to learn and process information, thus influencing attention, concentration, and short-term memory.”[14] Unlike alcohol, marijuana has been shown to have a residual effect on cognitive ability that persists beyond the period of intoxication.[15] According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, whereas alcohol is broken down relatively quickly in the human body, THC (tetrahydrocannabinol, the main active chemical in marijuana) is stored in organs and fatty tissues, allowing it to remain in a user’s body for days or even weeks after consumption.[16] Research has shown that marijuana consumption may also cause “psychotic symptoms.”[17]
Marijuana’s effects on the body are profound. According to the British Lung Foundation, “smoking three or four marijuana joints is as bad for your lungs as smoking twenty tobacco cigarettes.”[18] Researchers in Canada found that marijuana smoke contains significantly higher levels of numerous toxic compounds, like ammonia and hydrogen cyanide, than regular tobacco smoke.[19] In fact, the study determined that ammonia was found in marijuana smoke at levels of up to 20 times the levels found in tobacco.[20] Similarly, hydrogen cyanide was found in marijuana smoke at concentrations three to five times greater than those found in tobacco smoke.[21]
Marijuana, like tobacco, is addictive. One study found that more than 30 percent of adults who used marijuana in the course of a year were dependent on the drug.[22] These individuals often show signs of withdrawal and compulsive behavior.[23] Marijuana dependence is also responsible for a large proportion of calls to drug abuse help lines and treatment centers.
To equate marijuana use with alcohol consumption is, at best, uninformed and, at worst, actively misleading. Only in the most superficial ways are the two substances alike, and they differ in every way that counts: addictiveness, toxicity, health effects, and risk of intoxication. [/size]
-
None of that seem especially compelling, imo.
No one factor should be considered in isolation.
In addition to that, and other side effects (both health and social), we have to consider how things like this will play out if legalization goes nationwide.
-
No one factor should be considered in isolation.
In addition to that, and other side effects (both health and social), we have to consider how things like this will play out if legalization goes nationwide.
Yeah, true.
Do you really think it'll ever be legalized (even just as medical MJ) in every state?
I'm wondering if it's any kind of legal in any of the states that only sell hard alcohol through ABC stores. Any idea?
-
Yeah, true.
Do you really think it'll ever be legalized (even just as medical MJ) in every state?
I'm wondering if it's any kind of legal in any of the states that only sell hard alcohol through ABC stores. Any idea?
I don't know. I doubt it, but twenty years ago I never thought we'd have homosexual marriage. Things can change pretty rapidly in this country.
No idea about the alcohol.
-
I don't know. I doubt it, but twenty years ago I never thought we'd have homosexual marriage. Things can change pretty rapidly in this country.
No idea about the alcohol.
I don't understand why you give a fuck about homo's? It's not that I particularly want them to get married, but who gives a fuck? Why give a fuck about something so trivial in the grand scheme.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/CVKDn3c.jpg)
-
I don't understand why you give a fuck about homo's? It's not that I particularly want them to get married, but who gives a fuck? Why give a fuck about something so trivial in the grand scheme.
I don't care what consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedroom, and I hope people who choose the homosexual lifestyle find all the happiness life has to offer.
I don't approve of using the government to change traditional marriage for a number of reasons, but that's the subject for another thread.
-
Pot Addiction Is Real: Harvard Study
Tuesday, 02 Sep 2014
Many people believe that marijuana is not addictive, but a new study challenges that theory.
"As more people are able to obtain and consume cannabis legally for medical and, in some states, recreational use, people are less likely to perceive it as addictive or harmful," study co-author John Kelly, a psychiatrist at Massachusetts General Hospital's Center for Addiction Medicine, said in a hospital news release.
"But research shows that cannabis use can have significant consequences, and we know that among adolescents it is second only to alcohol in rates of misuse," he added.
In the new study, Kelly's team followed outcomes for 127 teens, ages 14 to 19, treated at an outpatient substance abuse clinic. Marijuana was the substance used most often by 90 of the teens.
Of those 90 teens, 76 (84 percent) met criteria for marijuana dependence, including increased tolerance for, and use of, marijuana, as well as unsuccessful attempts to reduce or stop using the drug. About two-fifths of the 90 teens also experienced symptoms of withdrawal when they stopped using marijuana -- a sign of drug dependence, according to the study authors.
Teens who exhibited withdrawal symptoms were more likely to experience negative consequences such as trouble at school or on the job, or financial or relationship problems, Kelly's team said.
The teens who developed withdrawal symptoms were also more likely to meet the guidelines for marijuana dependence and for mood disorders, according to the study published recently in the Journal of Addiction Medicine.
People who recognized and accepted that they had a substance abuse problem tied to their marijuana use were more likely to make progress towards abstinence, compared to those who did not think they had a problem, the researchers noted.
"The importance of understanding the addictiveness, risks and harms associated with cannabis use is a major theme of this study's findings," said said Kelly, an associate professor of psychiatry in addiction medicine at Harvard Medical School in Boston. "Recognizing those risks is known to reduce the likelihood that someone will start to use drugs, and better understanding of the role of substances in the problems experienced by patients may help them cut down on future use."
"Unfortunately, the general trend in attitudes in the U.S. is to minimize the risks and not recognize the addictiveness of cannabis," he added.
The study was supported by a grant from the U.S. National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
http://www.NewsmaxHealth.com/Health-News/marijuana-addiction-cannabis-pot/2014/09/02/id/592095/#ixzz3CCVuRDxr
-
Court mulls legality of firing for pot use off job
Associated Press By SADIE GURMAN
DENVER (AP) — Pot may be legal in Colorado, but you can still be fired for using it.
Now, the state's highest court is considering whether workers' off-duty use of medical marijuana is protected under state law.
Colorado's Supreme Court on Tuesday heard arguments in a case involving Brandon Coats, a quadriplegic medical marijuana patient who was fired by the Dish Network after failing a drug test in 2010.
Coats said he never got high at work. But pot's intoxicating chemical, THC, can stay in the system for weeks.
Coats says his pot smoking is allowed under a little-known state law intended to protect employees from being fired for legal activities off the clock. But the company argues that because pot remains illegal at the federal level, medical marijuana isn't covered by the state law.
The case is being watched closely around the country and could have big implications for pot smokers in the first state to legalize recreational sales of the drug. Though the Colorado case involves medical marijuana, the court's decision could also affect how companies treat employees who use the drug recreationally.
Tuesday's arguments highlighted the clash between state laws that are increasingly accepting of marijuana use and employers' drug-free policies that won't tolerate it.
"This case need not be an endorsement or an indictment of medical marijuana" but a chance to set standards for employee conduct, Dish attorney Meghan Martinez told the justices, who could rule in the coming weeks or months. "It's a zero-tolerance policy. It doesn't matter if he was impaired or not."
Coats, 35, was paralyzed in a car crash as a teenager and has been a medical marijuana patient since 2009, when he discovered that pot helped calm violent muscle spasms. Coats was a telephone operator with Dish for three years before he failed a random drug test in 2010 and was fired. He said he told his supervisors in advance that he probably would fail the test.
Coats' case comes to the justices after a trial court judge and Colorado's appeals court upheld his firing, saying pot can't be considered lawful if it is outlawed at the federal level.
"We're getting very confused and mixed messages from everywhere," Coats' attorney, Michael Evans, told justices.
He asked the court to issue a narrow ruling that would apply to people like Coats: those in nonhazardous jobs who are not impaired at work and whose employers don't have federal contracts that could be jeopardized.
Twenty-three states and Washington, D.C., allow medical marijuana. Colorado and Washington state also now allow recreational sales, though court cases so far have involved medical patients.
Colorado's constitution specifically says that employers don't have to amend their policies to accommodate employees' marijuana use. But Arizona law says workers can't be punished for lawfully using medical marijuana unless it would jeopardize an employer's federal contract.
State Supreme Courts in California, Montana and Washington state have all ruled against fired patients. A lawsuit filed by a physician assistant in New Mexico who said she was fired for using medical marijuana, which helps with her post-traumatic stress disorder, is still pending.
Denver labor and employment attorney Vance Knapp said a Coats win "would turn employment policies into chaos." Other states with lawful-activity laws could see them challenged as a result.
Coats, who has been unable to find steady work because of his marijuana use, said after the hearing that he was hopeful he would prevail. At the very least, he said, the court will offer clarity on the issue.
"I'm not going to be able to get a job in the near future, so if I can fight the fight and hopefully change that, that's what I am going to do," he said.
http://news.yahoo.com/colorado-high-court-considers-pot-044139294.html
-
Holder "cautiously optimistic" on legal pot
By Jeremy Diamond, CNN
Tue October 21, 2014
Washington (CNN) -- The outgoing U.S. attorney general said he is "cautiously optimistic" when it comes to Washington and Colorado's experiment with marijuana legalization.
Eric Holder, who announced last month his plans to retire, is one of President Barack Obama's longest-serving Cabinet members and has faced the delicate task of defining federal policy after a wave of marijuana legalization at the state level across the country.
"We don't want to put into the federal system, low level people who are simply there for possessory offenses," Holder said Monday in an interview with CNN's Evan Perez
Holder last year outlined eight enforcement areas the Justice Department would focus on in a move aimed at calming nerves in Washington and Colorado, the only two states where recreational marijuana is legal.
The eight "priority areas" have focused the Justice Department's efforts on preventing marijuana distribution to minors, inter-state trafficking and drug violence.
But Holder made clear Monday that his agency could change its non-interventionist stance if the states' regulatory frameworks aren't up to snuff.
"What I've told the governors of those states is that if we're not satisfied with their regulatory scheme that we reserve the right to come in and to sue them. So we'll see," Holder said.
The sale and possession of marijuana remains illegal under federal law.
The Justice Department's policy hasn't meant total immunity for marijuana growers and dispensaries in states with both medical and recreation marijuana, where dispensaries and growhouses have since been raided and owners prosecuted.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/21/politics/holder-marijuana-optimistic/index.html?hpt=po_c2
-
Is Hillary Clinton ready for marijuana's 2016 push?
By Dan Merica, CNN
Thu October 16, 2014
Washington (CNN) -- When Hillary Clinton graduated from Wellesley College in 1969 -- where the future first lady and Secretary of State says she did not try marijuana -- only 12% of Americans wanted to legalize the drug.
In 45 years, however, the tide has changed for legalization: 58% of Americans now want to make consumption legal, two states (Colorado and Washington) already have and two more states (Oregon and Alaska) could join them by the end of the year.
Despite their growth in approval, many activists see 2014 as a smaller, but important, step to their end goal. It is 2016, when voters will also have to decide who they want in the White House, that marijuana activists feel could be the real tipping point for their movement.
"There will certainly be even more on the ballot in 2016," said Tamar Todd, director of marijuana law and policy and the Drug Policy Alliance. "More voters coming to the polls means more support for marijuana reform and in presidential election years, more voters turn out."
Demographics and money are also an important consideration. Big donors who are ready to fund pro-legalization efforts are more loose with their money in presidential years, according to activists, while Democrats and young people are more likely to turn out. This means legalization activists will be better funded to reach the nearly 70% of 18 to 29 year old Americans who support legalization.
On paper, activists feel their plan will work. But it is one yet to be decided factor -- who Democrats will nominate for president in 2016 -- that could throw a wrench into their push.
Clinton is the prohibitive favorite for the Democrats' nomination, but to many in the marijuana legalization community, she is not the best messenger for their cause.
"She is so politically pragmatic," said Allen St. Pierre, the executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. "If she has to find herself running against a conservative Republican in 2016, I am fearful, from my own view here, that she is going to tack more to the middle. And the middle in this issue tends to tack more to the conservative side."
Making a concerted push during a presidential election year means activists' goals will be directly contrasted with the Democrats' presidential standard bearer. This happened in 2004, when more conservative voters helped tip the presidential election for President George W. Bush at the same time that 11 states had anti-gay marriage questions on the ballot.
Clinton has moved towards pro-legalization, though.
Earlier this year, during a town hall with CNN, she told Christiane Amanpour that she wants to "wait and see" how legalization goes in the states before making a national decision. At the same event, she cast some doubt on medical marijuana by questioning the amount of research done into the issue.
Later in the year, Clinton labeled marijuana a "gateway drug" where there "can't be a total absence of law enforcement."
"I'm a big believer in acquiring evidence, and I think we should see what kind of results we get, both from medical marijuana and from recreational marijuana before we make any far-reaching conclusions," Clinton told KPCC in July. "We need more studies. We need more evidence. And then we can proceed."
This is more open, however, than in 2008 when Clinton was outright against decriminalization, a step that is less aggressive than legalization.
Despite warming on the issue, Clinton's position is concerning to activists like St. Pierre because he feels they are far from solid.
"If reforms keep picking up... the winds in our sails are clear," he said. "But if we lose one of more or all of those elections this year, cautious people around her could make the argument that this thing has peaked and you now have to get on the other side of it."
St. Pierre said he also watched -- laughing -- as Clinton tried to personally distance herself from marijuana at the CNN town hall.
"Absolutely not," Clinton said when asked if she would try the drug. "I didn't do it when I was young, I'm not going to start now."
"I will eat both of my shoes if she and Bill didn't trip their nuts off at Wellesley and Oxford."
What's more, some activists spoke highly of Democrats with executive experience like Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, who spent eight years as mayor of Baltimore.
O'Malley, who is also entertaining a run at the presidency in 2016, supports medical marijuana and approved a Maryland law that decriminalized possession of small amounts of the drug in 2014.
"As a young prosecutor, I once thought that decriminalizing the possession of marijuana might undermine the Public Will necessary to combat drug violence and improve public safety," O'Malley said in a statement at the time. "I now think that decriminalizing possession of marijuana is an acknowledgement of the low priority that our courts, our prosecutors, our police, and the vast majority of citizens already attach to this transgression of public order and public health."
As for where the governor is on legalization, Lis Smith, his top political adviser, said as long "as long as it is consistent with the goal of driving down crime," O'Malley is "open to sensible drug policy."
With an eye on 2016, some activists are starting to contrast that view with Clinton.
"I think in 2016 there is going to be a number of states with legalization initiatives on the ballot and there will be broad support," Todd said. "I don't see standing behind and defending the status quo of this destructive policy as helping a candidate in the 2016 election."
Clinton has come face-to-face with some aspects of marijuana policy on her trips to stump for Democrats across the country.
While raising money in Colorado for Sen. Mark Udall earlier this week, Clinton saw marijuana in her coffee. Pointing to the foam design atop Udall's latte, Clinton said, "Look at you, you got like a plant. Is that a marijuana plant?"
To laughs from the baristas at PigTrain Coffee, some who may have seen that the design looked more like a rose than marijuana, one answered jokingly, "That's exactly what it is."
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/16/politics/hillary-clinton-marijuana/index.html
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/10/15/after-california-decriminalized-weed-teen-arrest-overdose-and-dropout-rates-fell/ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/10/15/after-california-decriminalized-weed-teen-arrest-overdose-and-dropout-rates-fell/)
After California decriminalized marijuana, teen arrest, overdose and dropout rates fell
By Christopher Ingraham October 15
A new report from the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice adds to the growing body of evidence that legalizing or decriminalizing marijuana does not lead to any number of doomsday scenarios envisioned by legalization opponents. Looking specifically at California, where full marijuana decriminalization went into effect on Jan. 1, 2011, the report finds that "marijuana decriminalization in California has not resulted in harmful consequences for teenagers, such as increased crime, drug overdose, driving under the influence, or school dropout. In fact, California teenagers showed improvements in all risk areas after reform."
Most notable in the above table is the drop in school dropout rates. Recent studies have suggested links between heavy marijuana use and low school completion rates. But many experts question the direction of causality in this relationship, suggesting that there could be any number of confounding factors that account for this relationship. While it's still early in California's decriminalization experiment, the numbers above should suggest we cast a skeptical eye on claims of plummeting academic achievement in a post-legalization world.
In fact, as the report authors write: "By a variety of measures, California’s teenage behaviors actually improved dramatically after marijuana was effectively legalized — improvements that occurred more weakly or not at all among older Californians and among teenagers nationwide."
Now of course this doesn't address causality, and these numbers shouldn't be taken to imply that decriminalization caused these declines. But they do show, pretty clearly, that in the two years since full-scale decriminalization went into effect, California's kids are still all right. The sky hasn't fallen. And they add to a mounting body of research that shows, for instance:
that teen drug and alcohol use continues to fall, even as more states decriminalize marijuana and make it available for medical purposes;
that states with medical marijuana laws haven't seen any uptick in teen marijuana use;
that states with medical marijuana have actually seen decreases in prescription drug overdoses;
that Alaska, where personal marijuana use has been de facto legalized for nearly 40 years, is completely average on a variety of economic and demographic indicators;
and that traffic fatalities have fallen in Colorado since legalization there.
By contrast, there is little evidence of increased social harms in states where marijuana has been decriminalized. The one credible study I'm aware of is a DEA report finding that more Colorado drivers involved in car crashes are testing positive for marijuana use. But a bucket of salt is needed here: unlike alcohol, inactive marijuana metabolites remain in the body long after consumption - days or weeks, depending on frequency of use. But the presence of metabolites doesn't necessarily indicate you were high at the time of the test - only that you got high some time in the days or weeks prior.
Even if we accept that more Coloradans are using marijuana, and that some of them are getting behind the wheel while stoned, we still have to note that traffic fatalities are down overall - this is likely because it's far less dangerous to drive stoned than it is to drive drunk. This would suggest that some Coloradans are using marijuana in place of alcohol, rather than in addition to it.
In short, the barrier of proof facing legalization opponents is incredibly high. In order to present a compelling case against marijuana liberalization, they have to demonstrate A) that liberalization is associated with a negative outcome; B) that that association is indeed causal, not just coincidental; and C) that the harms from that negative outcome are greater than the myriad harms caused by blanket prohibition of marijuana. But so far, state experiments with liberalization have not produced any consequences that pass even that first test. Considering that we're now close to 20 years out from when California voters first legalized medical marijuana, this should be reassuring news for everyone.
-
Sen. Merkley: ‘I lean in favor of’ legalizing marijuana in Oregon
By Niraj Chokshi October 24 Follow @NirajC
Oregon’s junior senator said that, on balance, he supports a measure on the November ballot that would legalize marijuana in his state.
In an interview this week with Talking Points Memo, Sen. Jeff Merkley, a Democrat up for reelection, said that while both sides make strong cases for and against Measure 91, the positives of legalization outweigh the negatives. Here’s where he stands, according to TPM’s Sahil Kapur:
“I think folks on both sides of the argument make a good case,” Merkley said. “And there is concern about a series of new products — and we don’t have a real track record from Colorado and Washington. But I feel on balance that we spend a lot of money on our criminal justice system in the wrong places and I lean in favor of this ballot measure.”
While politicians nationwide have been reluctant to stake out a position on the issue, Merkley is unlikely to be the last to so explicitly announce his support for legalization as attitudes toward the drug continue to shift. Reps. Jared Polis of Colorado and Earl Blumenauer of Oregon have been fighting to end the federal prohibition of pot for some time now. As an increasingly clear majority of Americans support the idea of legalizing the drug, more are expected to follow.
“I think the next presidential election is likely to have both nominees end up supporting decriminalizing and it’s going to take voters to decide whether they want those candidates to pledge to declassify marijuana from a schedule 1 controlled substance if they win,” “Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd said last month in an online question-and-answer session on Reddit, a virtual gathering place for a variety of communities and interests.
Nearly half the states allow medically sanctioned marijuana use, while legal sales famously began in Colorado and Washington this year. Voters in Oregon, Alaska and D.C. will vote to join those early adopters in the fall. A recent poll in Oregon, the results of which are embedded below, suggests the measure may well pass.
Merkley is up for reelection, but he’s polling strongly against opponent Monica Wehby. In at least five polls since the start of September, he’s leading by a margin of 8 to 21 percentage points.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/10/24/sen-merkley-i-lean-in-favor-of-legalizing-marijuana-in-oregon/
-
Smoke if you got em. :)
Oregon, Alaska and Washington, D.C. legalize marijuana
By Dan Merica, CNN
Wed November 5, 2014
Washington (CNN) -- Voters in Oregon, Alaska and Washington, D.C. have voted to approve sweeping pro-marijuana legalization, according to a CNN projections.
The three wins have pro-legalization activists enthused and many are already looking towards 2016, when ballot initiatives in states such as California, Massachusetts, Maine, Nevada and Arizona are likely to be put to voters.
In Oregon, the law legalizes personal possession, manufacture and sale of marijuana for people 21 years of age and older. Mimicking similar plans in Washington State and Colorado, the Oregon law will also create a commercial regulatory system for the production, distribution and sale of marijuana.
Alaska's law is similar to Oregon and would tax and regulate the production, sale and use of marijuana, making the use legal for people over 21 years old
Washington, D.C.'s proposal, while scaled back compared to the others, allows for a person over 21 years old to posses up to two ounces of marijuana for personal use and grow up to six cannabis plants in their home. It also allows people to transfer up to one ounce of marijuana to another person, but not sell it.
The issue is not fully resolved for the District of Columbia, however. Because of its unique status as a district, not a state, Congress has the authority to overrule D.C. laws and some lawmakers have signaled that they would likely work to overrule the popular vote.
Pro-marijuana activists heralded the victories as "huge" on Tuesday.
"It's always an uphill battle to win a marijuana legalization initiative in a year like this, when young people are so much less likely to vote, which makes today's victory all the sweeter," said Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance said about Oregon. "The pace of reform is accelerating, other states are sure to follow, and even Congress is poised to wake from its slumber."
Wins in Washington, D.C. also have activists hoping for federal recognition.
"With marijuana legal in the federal government's backyard," said Tom Angell, chairman of Marijuana Majority, "it's going to be increasingly difficult for national politicians to continue ignoring the growing majority of voters who want to end prohibition."
Not all news was positive, however, for marijuana activists on Tuesday, however.
Voters in Florida gave the thumbs down to medical marijuana in the the Sunshine State earlier in the night, according to a CNN projection.
The measure - which is one of many on ballots in 2014 - would have legalized the use of medical marijuana in Florida and would have tasked the state's Department of Health with regulating it.
Because the measure would have altered Florida's constitution, supporters needed 60% for the question to pass. Only 57% of voters voted yes, compared to 43% who voted no with 91% of vote reporting.
Marijuana has been a surging issue of late.
In 2013, according to Gallup, more Americans supported legalization than those who opposed it. Just 14 years earlier, those who opposed it had over a 2-to-1 advantage. A 2014 Pew Research poll found that 54% of Americans supported making marijuana legal.
Ever since voters in Colorado and Washington allowed the sale of legalized marijuana in 2014 (after voters decided to legalize years before), the push for more marijuana legalization has become a popular nationwide effort.
The laws in Oregon and Alaska are similar to what Colorado and Washington State passed and would allow recreational sale and taxation of the drug. Both votes are expected to be close, with polls mixed on the results.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/04/politics/marijuana-2014/index.html
-
Regular pot smokers have shrunken brains, study says
(http://www.trbimg.com/img-546111c8/turbine/la-sci-sn-regular-marijuana-shrinks-brain-2014-001/750/750x422)
Among those who use marijuana at least four times weekly, the brain motivation and reward network looks different and works differently than it does in those who don't use pot, a new study finds. (Rick Bowmer / Associated Press)
By MELISSA HEALY
Experimental mice have been telling us this for years, but pot-smoking humans didn't want to believe it could happen to them: Compared with a person who never smoked marijuana, someone who uses marijuana regularly has, on average, less gray matter in his orbital frontal cortex, a region that is a key node in the brain's reward, motivation, decision-making and addictive behaviors network.
More ambiguously, in regular pot smokers, that region is better connected than it is in non-users: the flow of signal traffic is speedier to other parts of that motivation and decision-making network, including across the superhighway of "white matter" that connects the brain's hemispheres.
The researchers who conducted the study speculate that the orbital frontal cortex's greater level of "connectedness"--which is especially pronounced in people who started smoking pot early in life--may be the brain's way of compensating for the region's under-performing gray matter. Whether these "complex neuroadaptive processes" reverse themselves when marijuana use stops is an important unanswered question, they added.
The new findings, reported Monday in the journal PNAS, confirm findings about chronic marijuana use from rodents. But scientific evidence in humans has been more mixed.
Even now, however, the authors of the study acknowledge that they cannot discern whether a pot smoker's smaller orbital frontal cortex is the cause or the result of chronic marijuana use. A 2012 study found that subjects with a smaller orbital frontal cortex at age 12 were more likely to start using marijuana by age 16, suggesting that deficits in this crucial region may predispose one to substance-abuse behaviors.
This study, conducted by researchers from the University of Texas' Center for Brain Health and the Albuquerque-based Mind Research Network, did not follow subjects over time, so it is at a disadvantage in showing cause and effect. Instead, it compared 48 "chronic" marijuana users (at least four times a week over the past six months) with 62 non-using control subjects who were matched for age and gender with the using group. Subjects were an average age of 28 to 30 years old.
Researchers noted that the IQ of the marijuana-using group was significantly lower than that of the non-using group--not a finding of the study, but an incidental factor that might be indirectly linked to marijuana use.
http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-regular-marijuana-shrinks-brain-20141110-story.html
-
Regular pot smokers have shrunken brains, study says
(http://www.trbimg.com/img-546111c8/turbine/la-sci-sn-regular-marijuana-shrinks-brain-2014-001/750/750x422)
Among those who use marijuana at least four times weekly, the brain motivation and reward network looks different and works differently than it does in those who don't use pot, a new study finds. (Rick Bowmer / Associated Press)
By MELISSA HEALY
Experimental mice have been telling us this for years, but pot-smoking humans didn't want to believe it could happen to them: Compared with a person who never smoked marijuana, someone who uses marijuana regularly has, on average, less gray matter in his orbital frontal cortex, a region that is a key node in the brain's reward, motivation, decision-making and addictive behaviors network.
More ambiguously, in regular pot smokers, that region is better connected than it is in non-users: the flow of signal traffic is speedier to other parts of that motivation and decision-making network, including across the superhighway of "white matter" that connects the brain's hemispheres.
The researchers who conducted the study speculate that the orbital frontal cortex's greater level of "connectedness"--which is especially pronounced in people who started smoking pot early in life--may be the brain's way of compensating for the region's under-performing gray matter. Whether these "complex neuroadaptive processes" reverse themselves when marijuana use stops is an important unanswered question, they added.
The new findings, reported Monday in the journal PNAS, confirm findings about chronic marijuana use from rodents. But scientific evidence in humans has been more mixed.
Even now, however, the authors of the study acknowledge that they cannot discern whether a pot smoker's smaller orbital frontal cortex is the cause or the result of chronic marijuana use. A 2012 study found that subjects with a smaller orbital frontal cortex at age 12 were more likely to start using marijuana by age 16, suggesting that deficits in this crucial region may predispose one to substance-abuse behaviors.
This study, conducted by researchers from the University of Texas' Center for Brain Health and the Albuquerque-based Mind Research Network, did not follow subjects over time, so it is at a disadvantage in showing cause and effect. Instead, it compared 48 "chronic" marijuana users (at least four times a week over the past six months) with 62 non-using control subjects who were matched for age and gender with the using group. Subjects were an average age of 28 to 30 years old.
Researchers noted that the IQ of the marijuana-using group was significantly lower than that of the non-using group--not a finding of the study, but an incidental factor that might be indirectly linked to marijuana use.
http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-regular-marijuana-shrinks-brain-20141110-story.html
You must be a heavy pot smoker then..
-
You must be a heavy pot smoker then..
Me? Nah. I don't even drink coffee. lol
But thanks anyway. :)
-
Bob Marley: Marlboro Man of marijuana?
Shannon Bond in New York
November 18, 2014
(http://im.ft-static.com/content/images/db7da420-a5ba-4593-a47a-0843a29f2e5e.img)
Jamaican Bob Marley, who has spearheaded the movement of Reggae, the popular music of Jamaica, is seen here in 1981.©AP
Can Bob Marley become the Marlboro Man of marijuana?
Privateer Holdings, a Seattle-based private equity firm that invests in the marijuana industry, has struck a deal with the estate of the Jamaican reggae star to launch a global cannabis brand.
Its Marley Natural subsidiary will start selling products late next year, including “heirloom Jamaican cannabis strains”, marijuana-infused skin creams and lip balms, and accessories such as vaporizers and pipes “based on those that Bob preferred”.
It is Privateer’s biggest move into the blossoming consumer market for recreational marijuana that has emerged thanks to the legalisation of sales and production in several US states including Colorado and Washington, and Uruguay, decriminalisation in other places, and growing acceptance of medicinal use. The drug remains illegal under federal US law.
In the US, the total medical and recreational market is expected to hit $2.6bn in revenue this year. America’s illegal cannabis market was estimated at about $40bn in 2010 by Rand Corp, the think-tank.
For Brendan Kennedy, Privateer’s chief executive, the offer to partner with Marley’s estate was irresistible.
“The question we’ve been asking ourselves for four and a half years is: what does the first global brand look like in this industry?” he said. “If you were to look throughout history for the one person most associated with this product, it would be Bob Marley. He has a global reach.”
The singer’s cultural status has not dimmed since his death in 1981. Marley’s estate brought in $20m in the past year, putting him at number five on Forbes’ annual list of top-earning deceased celebrities – behind Michael Jackson and Elvis Presley, but ahead of Marilyn Monroe and John Lennon. His greatest hits album, Legend, first released in 1984, hit number five on the Billboard sales chart this September.
His heirs have also traded on his name to launch a number of businesses, including House of Marley, which sells headphones and audio accessories, and Marley Coffee. The family has been caught up over the years in legal battles with each other and with Marley’s record label over control of his assets, image, name and music. The singer died without a will.
The decision to step into the emerging legitimate marijuana market is in keeping with Marley’s long-time advocacy for legalization and social justice, said Cedella Marley, the singer’s daughter.
“Opinions toward cannabis are changing. People are recognising the benefits of the herb,” she said. “Our father was leading this conversation for 50 years so it’s natural that he’s part of this conversation today.”
Marley Natural products will be sold in countries and jurisdictions where they are legal, including cannabis in some places. Mr Kennedy said he was interested in markets including the Netherlands, Uruguay, Canada, Spain and Israel.
Financial terms of the arrangement were not disclosed, but Marley Natural will be a wholly owned subsidiary within Privateer and the family is participating in Privateer, Mr Kennedy said.
Privateer has raised $22m through equity funding and a convertible bridge loan. It is in the midst of another funding round, expected to close before the end of this year, that will add another $50m. Its businesses include Tilray, a Canadian medical marijuana producer, and Leafly, an online cannabis ratings site.
The recent liberalisation of US marijuana laws has spurred a rush of companies and investors into the market. The parent company of High Times, the US marijuana magazine, has launched a private equity fund that is aiming to raise $300m to invest in cannabis ventures. Tom Bollich, the co-founder of online gaming group Zynga, has become chief executive of a marijuana growing equipment company.
“The midterm elections sent a clear message that the end of prohibition is a mainstream cause supported by an overwhelming majority of Americans across the political spectrum,” Mr Kennedy said, referring to recent votes in Oregon, Alaska and Washington DC, to allow access to recreational marijuana.
“We see this as a mainstream product, consumed by people around the US and around the world,” he said. “Everybody has a little bit of Bob in their playlist.”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/01da3e7e-6e81-11e4-a65a-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3JXnb1bpJ
-
Me? Nah. I don't even drink coffee. lol
But thanks anyway. :)
That is a bunk study, did they examine the OFC before usage? also, the OFC is abnormal in ADHD and OCD, of which shrinking would be beneficial. It's hard to draw any real conclusions from this in terms of impact. Other areas of the brain shrink in response to stress like the hippocampus.
-
That is a bunk study, did they examine the OFC before usage? also, the OFC is abnormal in ADHD and OCD, of which shrinking would be beneficial. It's hard to draw any real conclusions from this in terms of impact. Other areas of the brain shrink in response to stress like the hippocampus.
If you say so.
I thought this part was a sophisticated way of calling potheads stupid: "Researchers noted that the IQ of the marijuana-using group was significantly lower than that of the non-using group--not a finding of the study, but an incidental factor that might be indirectly linked to marijuana use."
-
One of these threee, I'm pretty sure, is Beach Bum in drag:
-
Speaking of unintelligent potheads . . . . How you doing Simpleton Simon? :)
-
Speaking of unintelligent potheads . . . . How you doing Simpleton Simon? :)
You talkin' to me? Cuz I'll have you know that I am NOT a pothead, lol.
(I mean, I would be a pothead if I were a man of leisure like some ol' Dos Equis quaffin' Beach Bum like yourself, but I have bills to pay and my job is too challenging for me to do high.)
BTW, I'm in South Thailand right now doin' fine.
Especially since our current hotel here in Chalong has probably the best wifi & fastest DL speeds I've seen in Thailand.
BTW, marijuana, though still illegal in Thailand, is supposedly easier to get now than ever according to my inlaws here.
-
Marijuana Industry Sets Its Sights On The Mainstream
Posted: 11/24/2014
Marijuana is growing up. As Colorado and Washington’s recreational marijuana industries blossom and new markets in Oregon and Alaska begin to take shape, so-called ganjapreneurs are looking for ways to take cannabis mainstream. Before long, they hope, marijuana products will be as widely available as alcohol -- and just as socially acceptable.
“Ideally, I would like to see the 21-to-35 year-old taking a four-pack of these to a barbecue,” Joe Hodas, chief marketing director for the marijuana product manufacturer Dixie, said earlier this year of the company's new watermelon cream-flavored "elixir," Dixie One. The drink contains five milligrams of THC -- just enough to produce a subtle buzz.
“This is a full experience in a bottle, much like beer," Hodas said. "Sometimes they’ll want a beer, sometimes they’ll want two or three beers. This sort of affords you that calibration."
Since starting in 2010, Colorado-based Dixie has developed a wide array of marijuana products, from THC-infused chocolates to concentrated cannabis for e-cigarettes. Many of its offerings are aimed at experienced marijuana users with high tolerances -- the company's top seller is a line of elixirs containing 75 milligrams of THC. Lower-dose products are proving increasingly popular, however.
“It’s been selling really surprisingly well,” Hodas told The Huffington Post recently of Dixie One. “In some of our stores, it had been outselling our 75 mg elixir. We were going to be happy if it sold decently well, but it was outselling in some cases. That said to us, we were correct, there is a market for that consumer.”
Encouraged by the success of Dixie One, the company is focusing on casual cannabis consumers. This week, Dixie released another low-dose product, a mint that releases THC directly into the bloodstream as it dissolves in the mouth.
“I think the low-dose consumer is an expansion demographic for us,” Hodas said. “It’s my belief that the core marijuana user is a small circle, and in a much larger surrounding circle is the casual user and a much larger market.”
At the moment, the recreational cannabis industry is limited to Colorado, Washington, Alaska and Oregon. Marijuana advocates and business owners say it's only a matter of time before more states follow, bringing cannabis products like Dixie One to store shelves and backyard barbecues across America. More than 20 states and the District of Columbia have legalized medical marijuana, and this month voters in Washington, D.C., approved a referendum to legalize recreational use in the nation's capital.
Already, Colorado and Washington state illustrate how cannabis is shedding its stoner image and entering mainstream culture. Marijuana products have been featured prominently in gourmet dinners and in cooking seminars in both states. The drug has become a fashionable substance to offer as a celebratory toast at weddings. Yoga enthusiasts can seek zen at marijuana-fueled classes.
Earlier this year, the Colorado Symphony Orchestra held a “Classically Cannabis” fundraiser, where well-heeled attendees sipped drinks, shook hands and smoked pot from joints, vaporizers and glass pipes, while a brass quintet played Debussy, Bach, Wagner and Puccini.
"Cannabis is being elevated into the pantheon of refined and urbane inebriants, no different than boutique rye or fine wine," said Matt Gray, the publisher of a new gourmet marijuana cookbook.
A number of worrying episodes have accompanied the legal high, however. In March, a 19-year-old college student leapt to his death from a hotel balcony in Denver after eating marijuana-infused cookies. In April, police said a Denver man shot his wife to death after he said he had eaten marijuana candy and prescription pills.
Hospital officials in Colorado have said that they have been treating a growing number of adults and children who have consumed marijuana products, whose potency can be hard to judge.
State laws in Colorado and Washington already require a “serving” of THC in an edible marijuana product to be limited to 10 milligrams -- about the amount in a medium-sized joint. (The rules in Alaska and Oregon have not yet been set.) Some products, such as candy bars, may contain multiple servings, however, and package labels do not always include serving size or dosage information.
To address these issues, Colorado and Washington officials, and representatives of the cannabis industry, are finalizing new regulations that will require clearer labeling and childproof packaging. And, much like the alcohol industry encourages consumers to "drink responsibly," the makers of marijuana products are taking steps to educate customers and encourage responsible consumption.
“I think the idea of being proactive with our messaging -- being safe and responsible with our messaging -- we’re trying to do that now early on, versus being told to do that after the fact,” Hodas said.
“We are concerned about the uneducated consumer who may have a bad experience with edibles, because that means they may not use our products in the future," Hodas added. "So educating that consumer and making sure they know how to use them is of great importance to Dixie and the rest of the industry."
To that end, Dixie, like most marijuana product companies, has detailed information its website about how to enjoy its products. Marijuana Policy Project launched an educational campaign, aptly named ”Consume Responsibly,” with advice about preventing and responding to over-consumption or accidental consumption, as well as other detailed information about cannabis products, their effects and the laws that govern their possession, sale and use.
Recognizing that Colorado's marijuana laws are luring tourists to the state, the inaugural billboard for the campaign in Denver encouraged moderation and patience. “Don’t let a candy bar ruin your vacation," the sign read. "With edibles, start low and go slow.”
"We are aiming to boost the industry's image by removing negative stereotypes and stigmas, while promoting education surrounding the many uses of cannabis,” said Olivia Mannix, co-founder of Cannabrand, an ad agency representing marijuana-related businesses. “We feel that the public image of cannabis ultimately influences policy makers and is crucial for widespread legalization.”
Still, getting the message -- and brands -- in front of the public has been a challenge for marijuana companies. State laws ban advertisements on television or billboards that directly market marijuana products. Google, Facebook and Twitter refuse to accept marijuana advertising on their websites.
While marijuana businesses may have dreams of mass market sales and global domination, for the moment, they seem to be taking the "go slow" approach.
“The eyes of the world are on us right now, and how we handle that spotlight will go a long way in shaping public opinion about legal marijuana,” Taylor West, deputy director of the National Cannabis Industry Association, told HuffPost. “Our businesses and our people are committed to building an industry we can be proud of. That means no shortcuts and none of the leeway that plenty of other industries out there get."
Her appeal to the marijuana industry is simple: “The future of this industry depends on the present -- don’t screw it up.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/24/marijuana-industry-mainstream_n_6195194.html?ir=Business
-
Spending bill prohibits funds for DC to implement marijuana legalization
By Dan Merica, CNN
Tue December 9, 2014
Washington (CNN) -- The congressional spending bill agreed to on Tuesday night blocks Washington, DC lawmakers from using federal or local funds to implement November's popularly passed referendum to legalize marijuana in the district.
The legislation, according to a release from Republican Rep. Hal Rogers, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, "prohibits both federal and local funds from being used to implement a referendum legalizing recreational marijuana use in the district."
The language in the bill -- found on page 660 of the 1,603 page document -- is word-for-word what Republican Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland proposed earlier in the year.
"None of the funds contained in this act may be used to enact or carry out any law, rule or regulation to legalize or otherwise reduce penalties associated with the possession, use, or distribution of any schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act or any tetrhydrocannabinols derivative for recreational purposes," reads the bill.
DC marijuana activists' worst fears were realized on Tuesday night with the agreed upon language. Earlier in the day, activists worried that Congress would thwart November's popular vote to legalize pot in the district.
"This House language sucks," Adam Eidinger, chair of the DC Cannabis Campaign, said after the language was released. "Only the Senate can step up and do something or presidential veto. Otherwise our election has just been overturned and we will take it to the streets."
In response to the Congress' decision, pro-marijuana groups are prepared to protest Wednesday night.
Although the proposal needs to pass the House and Senate and get signed into law by the President, it appears unlikely the Democrats will risk shutting down the government to remove the marijuana language.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who believes that DC should be able to do what it wants, admitted to reporters earlier today that "if they put it in there, it's going to be hard to take it out."
And in announcing the deal, Rep. Nita Lowey, D-New York, said that although she "strongly oppose[ s ] several policy riders included in this final agreement ... I am pleased Democrats were able to eliminate many of the most damaging provisions."
By moving to stop legalization efforts in DC, Congress will have trumped the over 70 percent of district residents who voted to legalize marijuana in November.
Congress, under DC's Home Rule charter, is able to veto every law approved by either DC voters or government. In the past, this power has been used to block everything from abortion spending to needle exchange.
During the 2011 budget negotiations, President Barack Obama reportedly used the district's law of paying for low-income women's abortions as a bargaining chip with House Speaker John Boehner.
"John, I will give you DC abortion. I am not happy about it," Obama said, according to The Washington Post.
"This was always a possibility but I think it is very, very disturbing that Democrats have given this away," said Michael Collins, policy manager for the Drug Policy Alliance, a group that lobbied for the DC law. "This is really one of the final acts of Democratic leadership before Republicans control both sides and for them to give this away, it just seems to very tone deaf."
The DC Cannabis Campaign, the group who introduced and passed the legalization ballot initiative, also blamed congressional Democrats for blocking the legislation.
"This is a big issue and if you are going to overturn an election, you are going to demoralize young Democrats across the country," said Eidinger said.
DC Mayor-elect Muriel Bowser has not yet commented on the possibility of Congress addressing the district's marijuana law. But her spokesman, Joaquin McPeek, before the language came out on Tuesday that Bowser "would hope that Congress would respect the will of the voters and reject any challenge to their rights."
With Congress blocking marijuana funding, expect many DC residents to cry foul about what they calling living under the thump of Congress.
"This is nothing new," said Mark Plotkin, a longtime figure in DC politics. "We are a colony. We are America's colony and anytime they want to screw around with us, they can do such things."
What's more, while Congress is making decisions for the district, proponents of district autonomy were quick to point out that district residents still have no voting member of the House or Senate.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/09/politics/dc-marijuana-house-blocked/index.html?hpt=po_c2
-
I don't care what consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedroom, and I hope people who choose the homosexual lifestyle find all the happiness life has to offer.
I don't approve of using the government to change traditional marriage for a number of reasons, but that's the subject for another thread.
didn't see this, you say choose as if it's a choice, why don't you choose to be attracted to men?
-
didn't see this, you say choose as if it's a choice, why don't you choose to be attracted to men?
Because I'm man, and men are naturally attracted to women. That's how most of got here. What does that have to do with the legalization of marijuana?
-
Because I'm man, and men are naturally attracted to women. That's how most of got here. What does that have to do with the legalization of marijuana?
LOL @ how you just assume that the way you see the world is the way everyone else must also see it
-
Because I'm man, and men are naturally attracted to women. That's how most of got here. What does that have to do with the legalization of marijuana?
You can't choose who you are attracted to, your silly natural (whatever that means, it occurs in nature and is thus natural) argument is complete fail, you didn't choose your attraction, same way a gay person cannot choose. Simple experiment, choose to be attracted to a man, sexuality is a choice after all.
Let us know the results. some species re produce without a mate, that is natural for them.
-
1) legalize
2) tax the shit out of it
3) if you're driving stoned, you lose license for 2-5 years.
that I could live with. I don't like it, but if it can relieve the massive debt, okay. But if I'm run over by a stoner idiot, giggling while hotboxing,ugh. I'd double DUI charges immediately and keep them off the road. Too many casual people already drink 5 beers and drive... I don't want someone getting blazed and giggling "hey, the breathalizer cannot catch me!"
-
You can't choose who you are attracted to, your silly natural (whatever that means, it occurs in nature and is thus natural) argument is complete fail, you didn't choose your attraction, same way a gay person cannot choose. Simple experiment, choose to be attracted to a man, sexuality is a choice after all.
Let us know the results. some species re produce without a mate, that is natural for them.
I was naturally attracted to females, just like the overwhelming majority of men. That said, we do choose our sexual practices. Anyone can choose to engage in a homosexual lifestyle. But if you're trying to say homosexuality is genetic, you are wrong.
And this has nothing to do with legalizing dope.
-
I was naturally attracted to females, just like the overwhelming majority of men. That said, we do choose our sexual practices. Anyone can choose to engage in a homosexual lifestyle. But if you're trying to say homosexuality is genetic, you are wrong.
And this has nothing to do with legalizing dope.
so you are naturally attracted to women but gay people are making a choice? that makes a lot of sense, not that I expect you to adhere to logic. It is clearly genetic. Hey man you made the comment in this thread, perhaps you shouldn't have mentioned it? particularly if you didn't want to have to support your position.
so you could choose to be attracted to men is what you are saying?
-
so you are naturally attracted to women but gay people are making a choice? that makes a lot of sense, not that I expect you to adhere to logic. It is clearly genetic. Hey man you made the comment in this thread, perhaps you shouldn't have mentioned it? particularly if you didn't want to have to support your position.
so you could choose to be attracted to men is what you are saying?
I made a comment in response to a question about whether I thought marijuana would be legalized:
I don't know. I doubt it, but twenty years ago I never thought we'd have homosexual marriage. Things can change pretty rapidly in this country.
No idea about the alcohol.
So no, I wasn't trying to turn this into some "homosexuality is genetic" discussion.
It is "clearly genetic"? I cannot tell you how many times I have read exclusive, breaking news on this website. It's incredible. lol
No it's not genetic. You're trolling again. The science doesn't support you. There is no gay gene. Numerous people have chosen to engage in that behavior and then stop. It's a lifestyle choice.
No, I cannot choose to be attracted to men. I am only attracted to women. (Well, actually just one.) I could choose to engage in whatever sexual practices I want. That's what homosexuals do. Every consenting adult in this country has the right to sleep with whomever they want. More power to them.
-
hey,hey,hey,
smoke weed everyday!!!
Gonna roll one after my meal, shower and shot then go train!
-
hey,hey,hey,
smoke weed everyday!!!
Gonna roll one after my meal, shower and shot then go train!
DUI post reported.
-
Feds: Native American Tribes Can Make Their Own Marijuana Laws
AP
Posted: 12/11/2014
GRANTS PASS, Ore. (AP) — The U.S. Justice Department said Thursday Indian tribes can grow and sell marijuana on their lands as long as they follow the same federal conditions laid out for states that have legalized the drug.
Oregon U.S. Attorney Amanda Marshall said Thursday the announcement addresses questions raised by tribes about how legalization of pot in states like Oregon, Washington and Colorado would apply to Indian lands.
Only three tribes have expressed interest in growing and selling marijuana, said Marshall, who co-chaired a group that developed the policy. One is in California, one in Washington state and one in the Midwest. She did not name them.
"That's been the primary message tribes are getting to us as U.S. attorneys," Marshall said from Portland. "What will the U.S. as federal partners do to assist tribes in protecting our children and families, our tribal businesses, our tribal housing? How will you help us combat marijuana abuse in Indian County when states are no longer there to partner with us?"
Marshall warned the announcement is not a green light to tribal authorities — and that marijuana is still illegal under federal law. The U.S. government's prosecution priorities involve pot-related gang activity, violence, sales to kids and trafficking continue, she said.
Problems could arise for tribes with lands in states that still outlaw marijuana, due to the likelihood that marijuana could be transported or sold outside tribal boundaries, she added.
Seattle attorney Anthony Broadman, whose firm represents tribal governments throughout the West, said the announcement represents a "potential for an enormous economic development tool here.
"If tribes can balance all the potential social issues, it could be a really huge opportunity," Broadman said.
But those social issues are monumental.
"Indian tribes have been decimated by drug use," Broadman said. "Tribal regulations of pot are going to have to dovetail with tribal values, making sure marijuana isn't a scourge like alcohol or tobacco."
Tribes selling marijuana may not be subject to state and local taxes, allowing them to undercut off-reservation sales. In Washington, taxes add 25 percent to the price of pot. But Alison Holcomb, a primary drafter of Washington state's legalization measure, said most people in larger states won't want to drive to far-flung reservations to buy pot.
"The reality is that so much of the market depends on convenience, it's not just price that drives consumer choices," Holcomb said.
The Yakama Nation in Washington state recently passed a ban on marijuana on the reservation and is trying to halt state regulated pot sales and grows on lands off the reservation where it still holds hunting and fishing rights. The Hoopa Valley Tribe in Northern California has battled illegal pot plantations on its reservation, where they cause environmental damage.
Marshall said with 566 tribes around the country recognized by the federal government, there will be a lot of consulting going on between tribes and federal prosecutors. As sovereign nations, some tribes have their own police, some rely on federal law enforcement, and some call in state and local police.
With limited resources and vast amounts of territory to cover, federal prosecutors will not prosecute minor cases, Marshall said.
The tribal policy is based on the so-called "Cole Memo" of August 2013, named after the deputy attorney general who wrote it, in which the Justice Department said the federal government wouldn't intervene as long as legalization states tightly regulate the drug and take steps to keep it from children, criminal cartels and federal property.
In all, the memo said, U.S. attorneys reserve the right to prosecute for eight issues: Sales to kids, marijuana proceeds going to criminal enterprises, shipping marijuana to states where it is illegal, illegal sales, firearms and violence, drugged driving and other public health issues, growing marijuana on public lands and possession of marijuana on federal property.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/11/native-american-tribes-marijuana_n_6311738.html
-
DUI post reported.
You do that...
Never said I was driving so I then plan to accuse you for having falsy accused me...
-
You do that...
Never said I was driving so I then plan to accuse you for having falsy accused me...
Walking while stoned post reported.
-
Walking while stoned post reported.
LOL!!! Guilty, shit...
-
LOL!!! Guilty, shit...
:D
-
I made a comment in response to a question about whether I thought marijuana would be legalized:
So no, I wasn't trying to turn this into some "homosexuality is genetic" discussion.
It is "clearly genetic"? I cannot tell you how many times I have read exclusive, breaking news on this website. It's incredible. lol
No it's not genetic. You're trolling again. The science doesn't support you. There is no gay gene. Numerous people have chosen to engage in that behavior and then stop. It's a lifestyle choice.
No, I cannot choose to be attracted to men. I am only attracted to women. (Well, actually just one.) I could choose to engage in whatever sexual practices I want. That's what homosexuals do. Every consenting adult in this country has the right to sleep with whomever they want. More power to them.
Are you from the south or something? this is the most backwards post I think I have ever read. so you admit attraction is innate but can't possibly fathom that some people are attracted to the same sex? You are only attracted to one woman hey, oh brother. ::)
Your lifestyle choice argument is absurd, have you looked at any stats regarding mental health, suicide, bullying, quality of life for gays? why the fuck would anyone choose that? I am not trolling, gayness is not a choice, it's insulting to the kids struggling with these issues to have assholes like you say it's a choice, they would choose to be ridiculed and bullied or even take there own lives because they choose to?
-
Are you from the south or something? this is the most backwards post I think I have ever read. so you admit attraction is innate but can't possibly fathom that some people are attracted to the same sex? You are only attracted to one woman hey, oh brother. ::)
Your lifestyle choice argument is absurd, have you looked at any stats regarding mental health, suicide, bullying, quality of life for gays? why the fuck would anyone choose that? I am not trolling, gayness is not a choice, it's insulting to the kids struggling with these issues to have assholes like you say it's a choice, they would choose to be ridiculed and bullied or even take there own lives because they choose to?
LMFAO take a breath there and go help a gay teen through getting bullied.
Fact is it simply b/c they may be gentically predisposed to being attracted to it, engaging in the act is a CHOICE...
plenty of people have genetic predispositions to things like violence, addiction etc. It is still a choice for them to get into a fight or do drugs.
If you think that being gay isnt a choice then a person who is genetically predisposed to being violent doesnt have a choice in being violent I guess ::)
-
Are you from the south or something? this is the most backwards post I think I have ever read. so you admit attraction is innate but can't possibly fathom that some people are attracted to the same sex? You are only attracted to one woman hey, oh brother. ::)
Your lifestyle choice argument is absurd, have you looked at any stats regarding mental health, suicide, bullying, quality of life for gays? why the fuck would anyone choose that? I am not trolling, gayness is not a choice, it's insulting to the kids struggling with these issues to have assholes like you say it's a choice, they would choose to be ridiculed and bullied or even take there own lives because they choose to?
Are you from Canada or something?
mature dialogue isn't my forte :D
No kidding.
-
LMFAO take a breath there and go help a gay teen through getting bullied.
Fact is it simply b/c they may be gentically predisposed to being attracted to it, engaging in the act is a CHOICE...
plenty of people have genetic predispositions to things like violence, addiction etc. It is still a choice for them to get into a fight or do drugs.
If you think that being gay isnt a choice then a person who is genetically predisposed to being violent doesnt have a choice in being violent I guess ::)
Agree.
-
Are you from Canada or something?
No kidding.
The number of times I have owned you on here is infinite. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth again, for you it wasn't a choice, for gay people it is...mmmkay.
nothing you say has a modicum of logic, why would millions of people choose something so difficult? they wouldn't.
-
LMFAO take a breath there and go help a gay teen through getting bullied.
LOL
Fact is it simply b/c they may be gentically predisposed to being attracted to it, engaging in the act is a CHOICE...
Ok, so you think they should deny themselves pleasure and life satisfaction? what if it was the other way around and you were had to suppress your urges for woman because it was frowned upon?
plenty of people have genetic predispositions to things like violence, addiction etc. It is still a choice for them to get into a fight or do drugs.
Ahh violence and addiction are negative things, being attracted to someone is not, why would you deny them love? comparing companionship to drug addiction (could be from trauma, abuse etc) is absurd. you are absurd.
If you think that being gay isnt a choice then a person who is genetically predisposed to being violent doesnt have a choice in being violent I guess ::)
False analogy, you are not comparing apples to apples here. Gayness harms no one, violence is against the law in most instances. One is a basic human condition, the other part of pathology. It's clearly not a choice, why the fuck is the suicide rate so high? they really want to live like that? Violence is also prone to things like setting, emotion, drugs etc gayness is not. If you are upset you don't turn gay, if you drink you don't turn gay. Sexual orientation is at the core of being human.
You can pull up your pants I am done.
-
The number of times I have owned you on here is infinite. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth again, for you it wasn't a choice, for gay people it is...mmmkay.
nothing you say has a modicum of logic, why would millions of people choose something so difficult? they wouldn't.
::) The only thing you own is a grossly exaggerated sense of self worth. Nobody is impressed by the psychobabble ad hominem you spout on the board. Even you're not impressed by you, you self-identified troll.
mature dialogue isn't my forte :D
I am nothing like I am on here. On here I dislike people, very much so hence the vitriol I spew. I also do troll quite a bit.
This is why I don't take you seriously.
-
::) The only thing you own is a grossly exaggerated sense of self worth. Nobody is impressed by the psychobabble ad hominem you spout on the board. Even you're not impressed by you, you self-identified troll.
This is why I don't take you seriously.
Meltdown.
You keep saying this thing about self worth, yet you post stuff where I am self-depreciating. Just in case you are unaware, based on who I am talking to or what the subject is I ass around. Pointing out that I troll or take the piss out of people is what you do when you lose an argument. Just because you aren't self aware enough to see you do it as well isn't my issue.
-
Meltdown.
You keep saying this thing about self worth, yet you post stuff where I am self-depreciating. Just in case you are unaware, based on who I am talking to or what the subject is I ass around. Pointing out that I troll or take the piss out of people is what you do when you lose an argument. Just because you aren't self aware enough to see you do it as well isn't my issue.
::) You are apparently not smart enough to realize that repeatedly claiming that you have "won" some kind of "argument" on a friggin message board, while constantly trying to make yourself sound superior, when you're clearly not, is a classic example of an exaggerated sense of self worth.
Let me break this down for you: this is only the internet. Nobody gives a rip how smart you think you are, whether you "win" some kind of argument. What your alleged credentials might be. How much money you make. How long your little ding dong is. Etc., etc.
Nobody cares. ::)
-
::) You are apparently not smart enough to realize that repeatedly claiming that you have "won" some kind of "argument" on a friggin message board, while constantly trying to make yourself sound superior, when you're clearly not, is a classic example of an exaggerated sense of self worth.
Let me break this down for you: this is only the internet. Nobody gives a rip how smart you think you are, whether you "win" some kind of argument. What your alleged credentials might be. How much money you make. How long your little ding dong is. Etc., etc.
Nobody cares. ::)
You obviously care enough to reply, this board is for debate is it not? you often lose these debates when you engage with me, why post other then to have a good time and blow off steam?
I would also challenge your claim that message boards do not matter, this is patently false and can often have real life ramifications. My ding dong isn't little either, check your pm's.
you tend to try and assassinate my character when you are put in a corner, from this gay thing, to ebola to ben steins expelled. I could be just surfing the net but fucking with you is much more fun.
-
You obviously care enough to reply, this board is for debate is it not? you often lose these debates when you engage with me, why post other then to have a good time and blow off steam?
I would also challenge your claim that message boards do not matter, this is patently false and can often have real life ramifications. My ding dong isn't little either, check your pm's.
you tend to try and assassinate my character when you are put in a corner, from this gay thing, to ebola to ben steins expelled. I could be just surfing the net but fucking with you is much more fun.
Oh brother. I have the good fortune to interact with a lot of very smart people from all different professions and education levels. None of them act like you. That's one of the hallmarks of people who are very intelligent: they don't have to tell anyone. Same with people who have a high net worth and/or high income. It's obvious. You? You're trying too hard. And it's not working. You come across as a little kid sometimes.
No, this message board is not real life, and the only reason I keep responding is I'm a little bored and have a little time on my hands. And it's entertaining.
And stop crying already. Nobody is assassinating your character. ::) I didn't call you bad person. I simply said you have an undeserved overly inflated ego and I'm not impressed by your proclaimed intellect.
Nothing in my PMs. Don't send me any gay pictures. You got the wrong dude.
-
Oh brother. I have the good fortune to interact with a lot of very smart people from all different professions and education levels. None of them act like you. That's one of the hallmarks of people who are very intelligent: they don't have to tell anyone. Same with people who have a high net worth and/or high income. It's obvious. You? You're trying too hard. And it's not working. You come across as a little kid sometimes.
No, this message board is not real life, and the only reason I keep responding is I'm a little bored and have a little time on my hands. And it's entertaining.
And stop crying already. Nobody is assassinating your character. ::) I didn't call you bad person. I simply said you have an undeserved overly inflated ego and I'm not impressed by your proclaimed intellect.
Nothing in my PMs. Don't send me any gay pictures. You got the wrong dude.
no where in this thread did I talk about being smart, again this is a message board perhaps you should take your own advice? this is not a professional setting. You always go back to this "i know such and such, the doctors I converse with etc". You claimed you would take the advice of the "doctors" you know over mine regarding ebola, who has egg on their face now? I only care about truth, correctness, you like to believe things that make you feel good or that fit in with your bias. That's a sign of low intellect and just in case you lack comprehension, that isn't me making a claim about myself, but one of you.
-
no where in this thread did I talk about being smart, again this is a message board perhaps you should take your own advice? this is not a professional setting. You always go back to this "i know such and such, the doctors I converse with etc". You claimed you would take the advice of the "doctors" you know over mine regarding ebola, who has egg on their face now? I only care about truth, correctness, you like to believe things that make you feel good or that fit in with your bias. That's a sign of low intellect and just in case you lack comprehension, that isn't me making a claim about myself, but one of you.
You must be high. No, wait, you probably are high. lol
You constantly beat your chest on here when talking to people about how you have "owned" them. How juvenile is that?
I always talk about the smart people I interact with. I love it, because they are smarter than me, and they make me a smarter person. You? You're just an internet troll that I find mildly entertaining.
Yes, I will listen to what my doctor friends say over above some Canadian on a message board. They are smarter than you.
-
You must be high. No, wait, you probably are high. lol
You constantly beat your chest on here when talking to people about how you have "owned" them. How juvenile is that?
I always talk about the smart people I interact with. I love it, because they are smarter than me, and they make me a smarter person. You? You're just an internet troll that I find mildly entertaining.
Yes, I will listen to what my doctor friends say over above some Canadian on a message board. They are smarter than you.
Nothing juvenile about an owning, if anything being owned by another grown man should make you feel juvenile. Your thoughts are childish, this gay thing for example, it is absurd to suggest they are choosing it and you are not. It's also ok to be juvenile in the right context, see how tomy told me to save a gay kid from being bullied? juvenile or clever?
Your friends were dead wrong, I was one hundred percent right. Yes, they all seem super intelligent, getting things completely wrong is a sign of genius ::)
I doubt you listen to what anyone says, you believe evolution is a lie (despite overwhelming facts), you think the world is 6000 years old, despite that being demonstrably false. Perhaps you are projecting your own juvenile cognitive patterns onto me, I am not the one who believes in talking snakes and noah's ark.
I only commented on the gay thing because scumbags like you make it hard for people struggling with these issues, hearing that they are choosing it when they have no control over attraction can be damaging. Does that sound juvenile to you?
-
Nothing juvenile about an owning, if anything being owned by another grown man should make you feel juvenile. Your thoughts are childish, this gay thing for example, it is absurd to suggest they are choosing it and you are not. It's also ok to be juvenile in the right context, see how tomy told me to save a gay kid from being bullied? juvenile or clever?
Your friends were dead wrong, I was one hundred percent right. Yes, they all seem super intelligent, getting things completely wrong is a sign of genius ::)
I doubt you listen to what anyone says, you believe evolution is a lie (despite overwhelming facts), you think the world is 6000 years old, despite that being demonstrably false. Perhaps you are projecting your own juvenile cognitive patterns onto me, I am not the one who believes in talking snakes and noah's ark.
I only commented on the gay thing because scumbags like you make it hard for people struggling with these issues, hearing that they are choosing it when they have no control over attraction can be damaging. Does that sound juvenile to you?
Yes you sound like a juvenile. I should add: a not-too-bright juvenile. You don't impress me.
You also have a hard time staying on topic. It's ok though. I deal with people like you with short attention spans all the time. lol
My friends were right. Nothing they said to me was false.
-
Yes you sound like a juvenile. I should add: a not-too-bright juvenile. You don't impress me.
You also have a hard time staying on topic. It's ok though. I deal with people like you with short attention spans all the time. lol
My friends were right. Nothing they said to me was false.
::)
take this L like a man.
-
::)
take this L like a man.
::)
-
::)
Your gonna take this L.
-
Congress quietly ends federal government's ban on medical marijuana
(http://www.trbimg.com/img-548fdde0/turbine/lat-medicalpot-wre0024310513-20141121/750/750x422)
Under a provision in the spending bill passed by Congress over the weekend, states where medical marijuana is legal would no longer need to worry about federal drug agents raiding retail operations. Agents would be prohibited from doing so. (Robert F. Bukaty / Associated Press)
By EVAN HALPER contact the reporter Nation Politics and Government
Tucked deep inside the 1,603-page federal spending measure is a provision that effectively ends the federal government's prohibition on medical marijuana and signals a major shift in drug policy.
The bill's passage over the weekend marks the first time Congress has approved nationally significant legislation backed by legalization advocates. It brings almost to a close two decades of tension between the states and Washington over medical use of marijuana.
Under the provision, states where medical pot is legal would no longer need to worry about federal drug agents raiding retail operations. Agents would be prohibited from doing so.
The Obama administration has largely followed that rule since last year as a matter of policy. But the measure approved as part of the spending bill, which President Obama plans to sign this week, will codify it as a matter of law.
Pot advocates had lobbied Congress to embrace the administration's policy, which they warned was vulnerable to revision under a less tolerant future administration.
More important, from the standpoint of activists, Congress' action marked the emergence of a new alliance in marijuana politics: Republicans are taking a prominent role in backing states' right to allow use of a drug the federal government still officially classifies as more dangerous than cocaine.
"This is a victory for so many," said the measure's coauthor, Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of Costa Mesa. The measure's approval, he said, represents "the first time in decades that the federal government has curtailed its oppressive prohibition of marijuana."
By now, 32 states and the District of Columbia have legalized pot or its ingredients to treat ailments, a movement that began in the 1990s. Even back then, some states had been approving broader decriminalization measures for two decades.
The war on medical marijuana is over. Now the fight moves on to legalization of all marijuana.
- Bill Piper, a lobbyist with the Drug Policy Alliance
The medical marijuana movement has picked up considerable momentum in recent years. The Drug Enforcement Administration, however, continues to place marijuana in the most dangerous category of narcotics, with no accepted medical use.
Congress for years had resisted calls to allow states to chart their own path on pot. The marijuana measure, which forbids the federal government from using any of its resources to impede state medical marijuana laws, was previously rejected half a dozen times. When Washington, D.C., voters approved medical marijuana in 1998, Congress used its authority over the city's affairs to block the law from taking effect for 11 years.
Even as Congress has shifted ground on medical marijuana, lawmakers remain uneasy about full legalization. A separate amendment to the spending package, tacked on at the behest of anti-marijuana crusader Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), will jeopardize the legalization of recreational pot in Washington, D.C., which voters approved last month.
Marijuana proponents nonetheless said they felt more confident than ever that Congress was drifting toward their point of view.
"The war on medical marijuana is over," said Bill Piper, a lobbyist with the Drug Policy Alliance, who called the move historic.
"Now the fight moves on to legalization of all marijuana," he said. "This is the strongest signal we have received from Congress [that] the politics have really shifted. ... Congress has been slow to catch up with the states and American people, but it is catching up."
The measure, which Rohrabacher championed with Rep. Sam Farr, a Democrat from Carmel, had the support of large numbers of Democrats for years. Enough Republicans joined them this year to put it over the top. When the House first passed the measure earlier this year, 49 Republicans voted aye.
Some Republicans are pivoting off their traditional anti-drug platform at a time when most voters live in states where medical marijuana is legal, in many cases as a result of ballot measures.
Polls show that while Republican voters are far less likely than the broader public to support outright legalization, they favor allowing marijuana for medical use by a commanding majority. Legalization also has great appeal to millennials, a demographic group with which Republicans are aggressively trying to make inroads.
Approval of the pot measure comes after the Obama administration directed federal prosecutors last year to stop enforcing drug laws that contradict state marijuana policies. Since then, federal raids of marijuana merchants and growers who are operating legally in their states have been limited to those accused of other violations, such as money laundering.
"The federal government should never get in between patients and their medicine," said Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Oakland).
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-medical-pot-20141216-story.html
-
Gonna burn one down now to celebrate the good news!!!
-
Marijuana use has increased in Colorado, study shows
Published December 26, 2014
Associated Press
DENVER – Colorado emerged as the state with the second-highest percentage of regular marijuana users as it began legalizing the drug, according to a new national study.
The Denver Post reports the study by the National Survey on Drug Use and Health found about 1 out of 8 Colorado residents older than 12 had used marijuana in the past month. Only Rhode Island topped Colorado in the percentage of residents who reported using pot as often, according to the study.
The study averaged state-specific data over two-year periods. It found that, for the 2011-2012 period, 10.4 percent of Colorado residents 12 and older said they had used pot in the month before being surveyed. That number jumped to 12.7 percent in the 2012-2013 data. That means about 530,000 people in Colorado use marijuana at least once a month, according to the results.
Nationally, about 7.4 percent of people 12 and older reported monthly marijuana use. That's an increase of about 4 percent.
In Washington state, which also legalized marijuana use and limited possession for adults, monthly pot use rose about 20 percent to 12.3 percent of people 12 and older.
The survey is among the first to quantify pot use in Colorado since late 2012, when voters approved legal pot use and possession for those over 21. But the survey did not analyze data from 2014, when recreational marijuana shops opened, which means it is not a good indication of the effect of commercial sales on marijuana use.
"I don't think this tells us about the long-term impacts of legalization," said University of California, Los Angeles, professor Mark Kleiman, who studies marijuana policy. The number of medical marijuana patients in Colorado rose over the same time period, so the results are not surprising, Kleiman said.
He told The Post that researchers will have a better idea about pot use in the first state to legalize recreational sales of the drug once they can focus on data showing how many people use pot daily.
"The fraction of people who are monthly users who are in fact daily users has gone way, way up," he said.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/12/26/marijuana-use-has-increased-in-colorado-study-shows/?intcmp=latestnews
-
Marijuana use has increased in Colorado, study shows
Published December 26, 2014
Associated Press
DENVER – Colorado emerged as the state with the second-highest percentage of regular marijuana users as it began legalizing the drug, according to a new national study.
The Denver Post reports the study by the National Survey on Drug Use and Health found about 1 out of 8 Colorado residents older than 12 had used marijuana in the past month. Only Rhode Island topped Colorado in the percentage of residents who reported using pot as often, according to the study.
The study averaged state-specific data over two-year periods. It found that, for the 2011-2012 period, 10.4 percent of Colorado residents 12 and older said they had used pot in the month before being surveyed. That number jumped to 12.7 percent in the 2012-2013 data. That means about 530,000 people in Colorado use marijuana at least once a month, according to the results.
Nationally, about 7.4 percent of people 12 and older reported monthly marijuana use. That's an increase of about 4 percent.
In Washington state, which also legalized marijuana use and limited possession for adults, monthly pot use rose about 20 percent to 12.3 percent of people 12 and older.
The survey is among the first to quantify pot use in Colorado since late 2012, when voters approved legal pot use and possession for those over 21. But the survey did not analyze data from 2014, when recreational marijuana shops opened, which means it is not a good indication of the effect of commercial sales on marijuana use.
"I don't think this tells us about the long-term impacts of legalization," said University of California, Los Angeles, professor Mark Kleiman, who studies marijuana policy. The number of medical marijuana patients in Colorado rose over the same time period, so the results are not surprising, Kleiman said.
He told The Post that researchers will have a better idea about pot use in the first state to legalize recreational sales of the drug once they can focus on data showing how many people use pot daily.
"The fraction of people who are monthly users who are in fact daily users has gone way, way up," he said.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/12/26/marijuana-use-has-increased-in-colorado-study-shows/?intcmp=latestnews
This is a retarded study. did you look at the years? it is completely meaningless, they have no comparison data, this isn't due to legalization obviously.
-
This is a retarded study. did you look at the years? it is completely meaningless, they have no comparison data, this isn't due to legalization obviously.
Are you suggesting that if they include 2014 data after recreational marijuana use was legalized, that marijuana use would decrease?
-
Are you suggesting that if they include 2014 data after recreational marijuana use was legalized, that marijuana use would decrease?
no, I never even hinted at that.
The study conclusions are useless, it shows that more people smoke weed as legalization was approaching, I would suggest what you said is sensible, I doubt it was enforced legally, the chatter, stores setting up would all lead to that. Who wouldn't see this outcome? People who would like to use but won't interact with "drug dealers" can now get it, this population alone will jack the data up.
If they were hoping to learn anything about legalized marijauna and epidemiological data they choose the wrong year, one in which it was illegal, thus the data is bunk.
-
no, I never even hinted at that.
The study conclusions are useless, it shows that more people smoke weed as legalization was approaching, I would suggest what you said is sensible, I doubt it was enforced legally, the chatter, stores setting up would all lead to that. Who wouldn't see this outcome? People who would like to use but won't interact with "drug dealers" can now get it, this population alone will jack the data up.
If they were hoping to learn anything about legalized marijauna and epidemiological data they choose the wrong year, one in which it was illegal, thus the data is bunk.
I can see where it has value. If marijuana use in Colorado increased after voters approved legal pot use and possession for those over 21, then it stands to reason that legalization of recreational marijuana use shops will lead to an increase in use as well. Not exactly earth shattering news.
I do think it's troubling that a number of users appear to include those in ages 12 to 21.
-
I can see where it has value. If marijuana use in Colorado increased after voters approved legal pot use and possession for those over 21, then it stands to reason that legalization of recreational marijuana use shops will lead to an increase in use as well. Not exactly earth shattering news.
I do think it's troubling that a number of users appear to include those in ages 12 to 21.
Yes, just based on it's functions in the body the endocannabinoid system shouldn't be fucked with in youth. It does have the potential to induce cognitive dysfunction.
-
(During sex) "...90 percent of women reported that marijuana increased feelings of sexual pleasure and satisfaction to varying degrees, and 40 percent of women reported that marijuana increased the quality of their orgasm."
Sex and Marijuana
What are the Sexual Effects of Marijuana?
Marijuana comes from the hemp plant called cannabis sativa, and has long been considered to have aphrodisiac qualities and various sex effects, both positive and negative. Mention of the sex effects of marijuana can be found in the Arabian Nights, and is recognized in Ayurveda medicine. Marijuana has also been associated with the practice of Tantra.
As you read the pros and cons of marijuana and sex below, keep in mind that drug effects are rarely simple, and there is no true “wonder drug” that will give you every benefit without any drawback (or vice versa). Also, because sex is more than just a physiological process, drugs may impact your psychological and social experience of sex in unpredictable ways.
Does marijuana make sex better?
- At lower doses, marijuana may alter how you sense and perceive sexual stimuli in ways that enhance sex. People report that their awareness of touch is heightened, and their perception of time can change. So things "feel" better, and sex seems to go on longer as well.
- For men, marijuana may shift attention away from their usual focus on the penis. In one survey of 800 men, 83 percent found that marijuana enhanced sexual pleasure, but this was unrelated to their erections or ejaculatory control.
- In another study, 75 percent of men said that marijuana increased sexual pleasure and satisfaction, 68 percent reported that it enhanced their orgasm, and 39 percent found that it increased the duration of intercourse.
- Women are even more likely than men to report enhanced sexual desire with marijuana use. In one study, 90 percent of women reported that marijuana increased feelings of sexual pleasure and satisfaction to varying degrees, and 40 percent of women reported that marijuana increased the quality of their orgasm.
The Bottom Line: While we don’t know why marijuana has positive effects on sexual satisfaction in men and women, research and anecdotal evidence consistently show that in small doses, there are perceived positive effects. Lab research on animals offers contradictory results.
More at: http://sexuality.about.com/od/sex_and_drugs/a/marijuana_sex.htm (http://sexuality.about.com/od/sex_and_drugs/a/marijuana_sex.htm)
-
Feinstein, Grassley Up in Arms Over Legalized Pot
Wednesday, 14 Jan 2015
By Jennifer G. Hickey
In November, Oregon, Alaska and the District of Columbia became the latest states to approve the legalization of marijuana, but those laws may place them at odds with international law, according to two members of the Senate.
On Jan. 6, Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California and Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa raised their concern with Secretary of State John Kerry and Attorney General Eric Holder that the Obama administration's decision to permit Colorado, Washington and other states to proceed with legalizing recreational marijuana not only violates federal law, but U.S. obligations under the United Nations Convention on Narcotics.
"The Department of Justice's decision to allow these state laws to take effect has put the United States in the difficult position of defending its compliance with the treaties," they wrote, adding that the nation's position as a global leader against drugs "has been weakened" by the decision.
In 2013, the Justice Department issued a clarification of federal drug policy and said that it was deferring its right to challenge legalization laws to the states.
"These approaches threaten to weaken U.S. standing as an international leader on drug control issues and may undermine the international treaties the United States and other countries have signed," Grassley said in a press release about the letters.
The letter sets a deadline of Feb. 1 for Kerry to clarify the State Department’s interpretation of the treaties.
Their concerns are shared by United Nations officials, who spoke out after Assistant Secretary of State William Brownfield called for a "flexible interpretation" of UN Drug Control Conventions last October.
Brownfield told reporters that nations should "accept the fact that some countries will have very strict drug approaches" and "we must have some tolerance for those differing" policies.
After the November elections, Yury Fedotov, executive director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, said he did not "see how [the new laws] can be compatible with existing conventions," according to Reuters.
While they differ on the merits of liberalizing drug laws, Tom Angell of the Marijuana Majority agrees with the senators that there is an inconsistency.
"When the U.S. has legal marijuana, it makes it difficult for U.S. officials to go around the world and say they should continue to prohibit marijuana," he told The Washington Post.
Angell also agrees with the senators' request for the Justice Department to put together by Feb. 15 a plan to compile information on the impact of legalization "disaggregated by state and comparable over time, so that data before and after the legalization of marijuana can be compared."
Feinstein and Grassley, who serve as co-chairs of the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control, have worked together before on anti-drug efforts and released a report in December outlining recommendations on ways to counter illicit activities and corruption surrounding the Afghan drug trade.
http://www.Newsmax.com/Newsfront/Dianne-Feinstein-Chuck-Grassley-marijuana-John-Kerry/2015/01/14/id/618566/#ixzz3Op2dMJ3b
-
Governor: Legalizing pot was bad idea
By Kevin Cirilli - 01/23/15
Colorado’s decision to legalize marijuana was a bad idea, the state’s governor said Friday.
Gov. John Hickenlooper, a Democrat who opposed the 2012 decision by voters to make pot legal, said the state still doesn’t fully know what the unintended consequences of the move will be.
“If I could've waved a wand the day after the election, I would've reversed the election and said, 'This was a bad idea,’ ” Hickenlooper said Friday on CNBC's “Squawk Box.”
“You don't want to be the first person to do something like this,” he said.
He said that he tells other governors to “wait a couple of years” before legalizing marijuana as Colorado continues to navigate an unknown, nonexisting federal regulatory landscape for the industry.
“There's a whole regulatory environment ... that really regulates alcohol,” he said. “We're starting from scratch, and we don't have a federal partner because [marijuana] is still illegal federally.”
In February 2014, the Obama administration released guidelines for the marijuana industry indicating federal officials would not target financial institutions or businesses engaging in selling pot as long as those businesses were compliant with state laws.
Despite the guidelines, banks are reluctant to finance marijuana businesses in states where it is legal because federal law still lists marijuana as an illegal drug. Congress would need to pass a law removing that language.
Marijuana is legal in four states: Colorado, Oregon, Alaska and Washington. Congress has blocked the District of Columbia from legalizing pot, after voters in November cast ballots that they wanted to make the drug legal.
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/230511-colorado-governor-legalizing-pot-was-bad-idea
-
Pediatric Academy Now Says Medical Marijuana May Help Some Ill Kids
BY BILL BRIGGS
Marijuana use should be decriminalized and federal officials should reclassify cannabis as a less dangerous drug to spur vital medical research, the leading group of U.S. pediatricians recommended Monday.
In an update to its 2004 policy statement on pot, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) also recognized marijuana may be a treatment option for kids "with life-limiting or severely debilitating conditions for whom current therapies are inadequate."
That new stance is welcome news to some 200 families with ill children who recently moved to Colorado — where marijuana is legal for adults — in searches for last-ditch cures. Those remedies include the pot strain called Charlotte's Web, which anecdotally has been shown to control seizures in some kids.
"We don't want to marginalize families who feel like this is the only option for their child because of crisis," said Dr. Sharon Levy, chair of AAP's committee on substance abuse and assistant professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. She was one of the statement's co-authors.
Media accounts of medical-marijuana refugees in Colorado have given doctors "reason to suspect" that cannabinoids — the chemical compounds secreted by cannabis flowers — might have anticonvulsant properties, Levy said.
Charlotte's Web, for example, is selectively bred to contain low levels of the cannabinoid THC, which causes people to feel high, but elevated levels of cannabidiol, or CBD, which does not have psychoactive effects. In one medical trial, CBD was shown to be possibly effective in treating people with Parkinson's disease, though more study is needed, scientists have said.
"We understand why a desperate parent might say, 'Look it's going to take 10 years to do this research.' We think that kind of compassionate use should be limited to children who are truly debilitated or at the end of life," Levy said in an interview with NBC News. Asked to list those debilitating illnesses, Levy cited severe seizure disorders.
The AAP remains otherwise opposed to marijuana use among children and adolescents through the age of 21, and it continues to stand against the broader legalization of pot.
"The black market dealer will sell to anyone. We don't. While we can agree with the academy that marijuana may be harmful to children, (cannabis) prohibition has failed to keep our children safe." — Michael Elliott, executive director of the Marijuana Industry Group.
But the pediatricians' group will now suggest that the federal government change marijuana from a Schedule I illegal drug (where it's classified along side heroin) to a Schedule II controlled substance, Levy said. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration lists Adderall or Ritalin as examples of Schedule II drugs.
That change would facilitate a needed, new wave of cannabinoid research, the academy contends.
"There's never been a study of cannabinoids in any form that has included children. With that in mind, the AAP cannot endorse use of cannabinoid medication with children," Levy said. "We do note, though, there have been anecdotal cases that look promising. And that suggests there's a need for study.
"We support reducing the barriers to do that."
In addition, the academy said it now "strongly supports" the decriminalization of marijuana use — and encourages pediatricians "to advocate for laws that prevent harsh criminal penalties for possession or use of marijuana."
The group's revised policies will be published in the March issue of the journal Pediatrics.
In 18 states, the punishments for marijuana possession have been made far less punitive, though pot use remains illegal. While those shifts are not applicable to adolescents, they "are intended to address and reduce the long-term effects that felony charges can have on youth and young adults," the academy noted.
Meanwhile, with medical-marijuana dispensaries operating legally in 23 states and the District of Columbia, the academy remains concerned that the shops are "very lightly regulated, and are run and staffed by people who don't necessarily have a lot of medical training," Levy said.
And the academy is aware of a slight increase in the number of U.S. kids who find and eat pot-infused candies and other treats sold at dispensaries.
During the first half of 2014 in Colorado, 14 children aged 3 to 7 were brought to emergency rooms to be treated for accidental ingestions of marijuana — compared to eight such cases during 2013 and an annual average of four cases from 2008 to 2012, reports the anti-legalization group Smart Approaches to Marijuana.
"A lot of that is quote-unquote medical marijuana that people are buying from medical marijuana shops in the form of cookies and candies, and kids are getting into that," Levy said.
"We've even been seeing some lookalikes to popular products that are very attractive to kids — for example, instead of a Klondike Bar, there's a Krondike Bar," Levy said.
Dispensary employees do check the identifications of patrons to ensure they are 21 or older, and they routinely teach parents and other adults how to properly keep pot and cannabis-infused edibles out of the hands of children, said Michael Elliott, executive director of the Marijuana Industry Group, a trade association.
"Our industry doesn't sell to those who shouldn't have this product. Our industry is involved in numerous public education campaigns and we talk to our customers about responsible use and storage," Elliott said.
"The black market dealer will sell to anyone. We don't. While we can agree with the academy that marijuana may be harmful to children, (cannabis) prohibition has failed to keep our children safe," Elliott added. "Alcohol and cigarettes are also harmful to children, but legal for adults to consume."
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/legal-pot/pediatric-academy-now-says-medical-marijuana-may-help-some-ill-n293176
-
A Marijuana First: Pot Vending Machines Dispense Weed
BY MIRANDA LEITSINGER
Weed history is being made in Seattle: the first vending machines to dispense marijuana flower buds debuted Tuesday.
The machines, called ZaZZZ, are being placed in medical pot dispensaries, which helps to verify customer's age and identity since medical marijuana cards are required to enter the centers, said Greg Patrick, a spokesman for the maker of ZaZZZ, American Green.
Though vending machines appeared for the first time in Colorado last year, those sold only edibles, or cannabis-infused foods, and not the plant's flower buds that are so often associated with smoking pot.
"It's historic, there's just no other way to state it. We saw the repeal of prohibition in the early 20th century and the mark that made on our country and the companies that did it right," Patrick said. "We're in that stage. This will only happen once in our country's history, the repeal of this prohibition."
The machines have a touchscreen where buyers can make orders, play video games and read medical information about the products. They swipe their medical marijuana IDs or driver's licenses to make sure they can legally purchase the goods and must pay in cash or bitcoin since the federal government doesn't allow debit or credit cards to be used in the sale of marijuana.
Like machines that dispense soda or snacks, ZaZZZ intends to speed up the distribution for those who don't want to wait in a line at the dispensary.
"Once you swipe your ID, you can go shopping on the screen," Patrick said. "You can be in and out — literally — in a matter of minutes."
Pot vending maching
ZaZZZ vending machines in Colorado and Washington state, where legal recreational weed sales began last year, can dispense flower buds. But for the time being, American Green has to partner with growers in those states since the Tempe, Arizona-based firm — like others — can't ship medical marijuana product across state lines under federal laws.
Ultimately, American Green hopes to take the machines to other venues outside medical marijuana dispensaries as acceptance and awareness of the products grows. The company said the machine — which doesn't have a glass window that could be broken into — is secure against would-be thiefs.
"That machine is like a miniature little Fort Knox," Patrick said.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/marijuana-first-pot-vending-machines-dispense-weed-n299701
-
Ted Cruz Added to List of 2016 Contenders Who Have Smoked Weed
Wednesday, 04 Feb 2015
By Drew MacKenzie
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz confessed this week that he had smoked pot in his teens — but it turns out that he's just one of several prospective White House candidates who have inhaled.
In previous decades, a politician's admission that he had partaken in illegal substances might have got him kicked off the podium.
To play down the issue, two-term president Bill Clinton even bizarrely claimed that although he had smoked marijuana, he "didn't inhale," a comment which became the butt of late-night jokes.
But with marijuana use becoming legal in Colorado and Washington states, times really are a-changin'.
Long before the 2016 race heats up, Republican and Democrat hopefuls have fessed up to their secret indulgences, opening up in an attempt to prevent their pasts from getting in the way of their futures.
But Republican candidates are more likely to come under close examination over their illicit behavior from their conservative supporters, according to The Hill.
Here's what 10 potential candidates in 2016 from both parties said about their drug use, or lack thereof:
JEB BUSH
The former Florida governor recently told The Boston Globe that he had puffed on some strange looking cigarettes while he was in prep school. "I drank alcohol, and I smoked marijuana when I was at Andover," Bush said, according to The Hill. "It was pretty common."
BEN CARSON
The retired neurosurgeon has never divulged either way whether he's smoked pot. However, he has inferred that he's never touched the stuff by calling it a "gateway drug" and saying it's a "hedonistic activity."
CHRIS CHRISTIE
The New Jersey governor says that he's never inhaled, or for that matter even tried, marijuana. "The answer is no," Christie tweeted when he was asked by a fan of pot-smoking country singer Willie Nelson in 2012 if he had ever imbibed.
HILLARY CLINTON
Although her husband Bill has sort of confessed to smoking pot, the former secretary of state told CNN last year, "I didn't do it when I was young, I'm not going to start now."
TED CRUZ
The tea party firebrand admitted to the Daily Mail that he had smoked weed. "Teenagers are often known for their lack of judgment, and Sen. Cruz was no exception," his spokesman said. "When he was a teenager, he foolishly experimented with marijuana. It was a mistake, and he's never tried it since."
MARCO RUBIO
The Florida senator appears to deny that he's dabbled in pot when he said last year: "If I tell you that I haven't, you won't believe me. And if I tell you that I did, then kids will look up to me and say, 'well, I can smoke marijuana because look how he made it. He did alright so I guess I can do it too.' And the bottom line is that it is a substance that alters your mind. Now when I was (in my teens), I made dumb decisions. I didn't need the help of marijuana or alcohol to further that."
RAND PAUL
The Kentucky senator refuses to admit whether he's taken a toke, but he definitely implies that he has. "Let's just say I wasn't a choir boy when I was in college and that I can recognize that kids make mistakes, and I can say that I made mistakes when I was a kid," Paul said last year, according to The Hill.
MIKE HUCKABEE
Not only has the former Arkansas governor never done drugs, he even opposed dancing while he was in divinity school, according to a BuzzFeed story posted this week.
RICK PERRY
The former Texas governor has emphatically denied he's ever gotten high on pot. "No, thank God!" he told late-night host Jimmy Kimmel when he was asked if he'd ever indulged.
BERNIE SANDERS
The Vermont independent, who caucuses with the Democrats, says he was a pot smoker, but told New York magazine he was no hippie. "My hair was long, but not long for the times. I smoked marijuana but was never part of the drug culture," he said. "That wasn't me."
http://www.Newsmax.com/Politics/pot-smokers-Ted-Cruz-Jeb-Bush-Rand-Paul/2015/02/04/id/622634/#ixzz3Qnu9fg4L
-
Time to blaze one up soon and take a nap! Love my weed....
-
2 House panels OK bill creating pot dispensaries
The measure allows at least 26 licenses to serve medical marijuana patients
By Marcel Honoré
POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Feb 18, 2015
(http://cloudmedia.staradvertiser.com/images/660*420/21-A1-marijuana-plant-pic-KEEP-DARK.jpg)
A bill to allow medical marijuana dispensaries across Hawaii — nearly 15 years after state leaders made medical use of the drug permissible — is still alive in the House.
Members of the chamber's Health and Judiciary committees passed an amended House Bill 321 during their joint hearing Tuesday. With the measure's latest changes, at least 26 dispensary licenses would be offered to applicants to serve Hawaii's nearly 13,000 qualified patients.
Previously, the bill would have required all 26 of those licenses to be filled at a minimum, regardless of demand. Several groups, including the state attorney general's office, had flagged that as an issue in written testimony.
Currently, it's up to all of the state's marijuana patients to grow their own supply, a notion that bill supporters call highly unrealistic. "In order to qualify you have to be really sick" — and many such patients wouldn't be able to cultivate, let alone wait for the marijuana to grow, said Michelle Tippens, a Makiki resident and medical marijuana advocate, after the hearing Tuesday.
The bill, she said, was needed for "availability and functionality" of medical marijuana for those who qualify.
However, in its testimony opposing the measure (similar to other local law enforcement groups), the Hawaii Police Department said that only 12 of that island's more than 5,400 qualified patients were not growing their own medical marijuana. The testimony stated that figure was based on December 2014 statistics, but it didn't specify further.
Lawmakers have introduced bills striving to set up licensing or dispensary systems for several years now without success.
Nonetheless, Rep. Della Au Belatti (D, Moiliili-Makiki-Tantalus), who chairs the Health Committee, said she's confident dispensary advocates could see a framework finally passed into law this year. HB 321, she said, reflects thorough work done by the Legislature's Hawaii Medical Marijuana Dispensary Task Force, which was convened at the University of Hawaii at Manoa's College of Social Sciences after last year's session.
"This last summer there was really a concentrated effort" by the task force's patients, caregivers, law enforcement and state agency representatives to address dispensary issues, Belatti said Tuesday.
Also, Gov. David Ige has expressed support for giving qualified users legal access to the drug, his spokeswoman said Tuesday. Ige did not vote to approve the original 2000 act allowing medical marijuana use when he was a lawmaker because it didn't offer such a mechanism for providing the drug to patients, said Cindy McMillan, Ige's spokeswoman.
The House measure is slated to go next before the Finance Committee.
-
We're looking at this shit all wrong from the political side.
I was watching a news bit about some woman set up houses and charge people who just wanna go there and get high.
We getbiggers need to pool our money and start buying some property in CO.
Let's get rich off this shit. 8)
-
I have yet to see an actual study showing negative effects of legalization, in fact the outcome has been overwhelming positive, which one would expect.
it's really a silly debate to be having, should we allow adults to ingest substances of their choosing? of course, within reason.
If you look at the big picture it's asinine.
-
Alaska becomes third state to legalize recreational marijuana as ballot measure takes effect
Published February 24, 2015
Associated Press
(http://a57.foxnews.com/global.fncstatic.com/static/managed/img/876/493/Alaska%20Marijuana_Cham640360022415.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Feb. 20, 2015: Alaska Cannabis Club CEO Charlo Greene smokes a joint at the medical marijuana dispensary in Anchorage. (AP Photo/Mark Thiessen)
JUNEAU, Alaska – Alaska on Tuesday became the third U.S. state to legalize the recreational use of marijuana, but organizers don't expect any public celebrations since it remains illegal to smoke marijuana in public.
In the state's largest city, Anchorage police officers are ready to start handing out $100 fines to make sure taking a toke remains something to be done behind closed doors.
Placing Alaska in the same category as Washington state and Colorado with legal marijuana was the goal of a coalition including libertarians, rugged individualists and small-government Republicans who prize the privacy rights enshrined in the Alaska state constitution.
When they voted 53-47 percent last November to legalize marijuana use by adults in private places, they left many of the details to lawmakers and regulators to sort out.
That has left confusion on many matters.
The initiative bans smoking in public, but didn't define what that means, and lawmakers left the question to the alcohol regulatory board, which planned to meet early Tuesday to discuss an emergency response.
That's left different communities across the state to adopt different standards of what smoking in public means to them. In Anchorage, officials tried and failed in December to ban a new commercial marijuana industry. But Police Chief Mark Mew said his officers will be strictly enforcing the public smoking ban. He even warned people against smoking on their porches if they live next to a park.
But far to the north, in North Pole, smoking outdoors on private property will be OK as long as it doesn't create a nuisance, officials there said.
Other officials are still discussing a proposed cultivation ban for the Kenai Peninsula.
In some respects, the confusion continues a four-decade reality for Alaskans and their relationship with marijuana.
While the 1975 Alaska Supreme Court decision protected personal marijuana possession and a 1998 initiative legalized medicinal marijuana, state lawmakers twice criminalized any possession over the years, creating an odd legal limbo.
As of Tuesday, adult Alaskans can not only keep and use pot, they can transport, grow it and give it away. A second phase, creating a regulated and taxed marijuana market, won't start until 2016 at the earliest. That's about the same timeline for Oregon, where voters approved legalizing marijuana the same day as Alaska did but the law there doesn't go into effect until July 1. Washington state and Colorado voters legalized marijuana in 2012 and sales have started there.
And while possession is no longer a crime under state law, enjoying pot in public can bring a $100 fine.
That's fine with Dean Smith, a pot-smoker in Juneau who has friends in jail for marijuana offenses. "It's going to stop a lot of people getting arrested for nonviolent crimes," he said.
The initiative's backers warned pot enthusiasts to keep their cool.
"Don't do anything to give your neighbors reason to feel uneasy about this new law. We're in the midst of an enormous social and legal shift," organizers wrote in the Alaska Dispatch News, the state's largest newspaper.
Richard Ziegler, who had been promoting what he called "Idida-toke" in a nod to Alaska's Iditarod Trail Sled Dog Race, reluctantly called off his party.
There's no such pullback for former television reporter Charlo Greene, now CEO of the Alaska Cannabis Club, which is having its grand opening on Tuesday in downtown Anchorage. She's already pushing the limits, promising to give away weed to paying "medical marijuana" patients and other "club members."
Greene -- who quit her job with a four-letter walkoff on live television last year to devote her efforts to passing the initiative -- plans a celebratory toke at 4:20 p.m.
Meanwhile, Alaska Native leaders worry that legalization will bring new temptations to communities already confronting high rates of drug and alcohol abuse, domestic violence and suicide.
"When they start depending on smoking marijuana, I don't know how far they'd go to get the funds they need to support it, to support themselves," said Edward Nick, council member in Manokotak, a remote village of 400 that is predominantly Yup'ik Eskimo.
Both alcohol and drug use are prohibited in Nick's village 350 miles southwest of Anchorage, even inside the privacy of villagers' homes.
But Nick fears that the initiative, in combination with a 1975 state Supreme Court decision that legalized marijuana use inside homes -- could open doors to drug abuse.
Initiative backers promised Native leaders that communities could still have local control under certain conditions. Alaska law gives every community the option to regulate alcohol locally. From northern Barrow to Klawock, 1,291 miles away in southeast Alaska, 108 communities impose local limits on alcohol, and 33 of them ban it altogether.
But the initiative did not provide clear opt-out language for tribal councils and other smaller communities, forcing each one to figure out how to proceed Tuesday.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/02/24/alaska-becomes-third-state-to-legalize-recreational-marijuana-as-ballot-measure/?intcmp=latestnews
-
DC legalizes pot: Last-minute push by GOP reps to blunt legalization goes up in smoke
By Chad Pergram
Published February 26, 2015
FoxNews.com
House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, and Government Oversight Subcommittee Chairman Mark Meadows, R-N.C., rolled a missive over to Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser late Tuesday night. In a little more than 24 hours, Washington, D.C., was set to become the first jurisdiction in the eastern U.S. to decriminalize small amounts of pot. And with marijuana about to become legalized in the nation's capital at 12:01 a.m. Thursday, Chaffetz and Meadows were determined to pre-empt jokers, smokers and midnight tokers in the federal city.
The Chaffetz/Meadows message to Bowser, a Democrat, was blunt.
"If you decide to move forward tomorrow with the legalization of marijuana in the District, you will be doing so in knowing and willful violation of the law," the congressmen warned the mayor. "We strongly suggest you reconsider your position."
It's doubtful that Obama's Justice Department would prosecute Bowser or other city figures. Mike Steel, an aide to House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, deferred comment to the Oversight Committee. Steel said he was unaware of any movement by the House to potentially sue the city.
But the congressional interference has drawn a strong reaction. Democratic Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, Washington, D.C.'s non-voting representative in Congress, claimed her colleagues were being "unnecessarily hostile" toward the capital.
And, in the end, the last-minute warning didn't work. Growing and possessing weed became legal in the city overnight.
But how can two lawmakers from other states have any say in local Washington, D.C., affairs? Let's get into the weed(s).
The District of Columbia has a long and sordid history with the U.S. Congress serving as a super city council. Washington, D.C., is afforded no vote in either the House or Senate -- despite federal taxation of the city's residents. The federal government controls nearly 30 percent of all land in the District of Columbia. And until the mid-'70s, Congress essentially ran the city.
Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the right "to exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever," over Washington, D.C. But 42 years ago, Congress ceded some of that authority to the city, establishing "home rule." That law granted the District of Columbia the right to elect a mayor, a city council and form a local government. D.C. could enact and enforce its own laws like any other city in the country.
However, Congress periodically wades back into Washington's affairs when things heat up. Such has been the case on local issues like abortion, needle exchange programs, education and firearms.
And then along comes Mary.
In November, nearly two-thirds of D.C.'s voters adopted a ballot measure permitting persons age 21 and older to possess up to two ounces of marijuana and grow as many as six cannabis plants. So it should come as no surprise that members of Congress want to hash things out with the city now.
In December, Congress approved a massive, overarching spending bill -- which lawmakers dubbed the CRomnibus -- to fund nearly the entire federal government. Rep. Andy Harris, R-Md., previously authored an amendment short-circuiting D.C.'s marijuana initiative which lawmakers adopted in committee. That provision then made it into the CRomnibus which President Obama signed. So when Bowser indicated the city was moving ahead with its own marijuana initiative, lawmakers got involved.
"Given Congress's broad powers to legislate with regard to the District of Columbia it would be unprecedented for the District to take actions proscribed by legislation passed by Congress and signed by the President," wrote Chaffetz and Meadows.
Chaffetz and Meadows contend Bowser and other D.C. officials are running afoul of the CRomnibus and the Anti-Deficiency Act. The latter is a federal law dating back to 1884 which penalizes government workers who blatantly spend more money in their annual budgets than appropriated by Congress. The lawmakers informed Bowser they were launching an investigation into the city. They demanded a list of city officials involved in the implementation of the ballot initiative as well as those workers who declined to participate.
Harris says the District of Columbia conducted meetings about how to handle marijuana. D.C.'s Police Chief Cathy Lanier was involved in talks with other city officials about implementing the program. Harris says those activities violate the express intent of Congress, banning the expenditure of any funds toward the cannabis initiative.
"I think the attorney general should prosecute people in the District who participate in this under the Anti-Deficiency Act," said Harris. "These people should be very afraid."
Bowser bristled.
"Me being in jail wouldn't be a good thing," said Bowser, arguing that the lawmakers were "bullying" the city.
But Harris thought it was high time for Congress to weigh in.
"We don't take lightly being involved in D.C. home rule," said the Maryland Republican.
The tension between District of Columbia locals and their congressional overlords is as old as the republic. In fact an uprising by an unhappy militia at Philadelphia against the "Congress of Confederation" in 1783 was what drove the founders to form a special federal district. They designed Washington like no other American locale to serve as the seat of government. As J.D. Dickey writes in "Empire of Mud" about the creation of Washington, "the nation's leaders always stood in jeopardy, and the only way to ensure their safety was to keep the locals on a tight leash." As the incipient nation developed, the founders elected to forge its own district where Congress was secure from the riff-raff and make its own federal decisions.
Those who lived in the District of Columbia, well, they were out of luck. In the 1870s, Congress curbed D.C.'s borrowing power. It probed the local "territorial" government. Dickey writes that in the mid-1870s, Sen. Justin Smith Morrill, R-Vt., authored a bill to ban voting by D.C. residents. The Organic Act of 1878 dictated that Congress was the sole governing engine of the nation's capital.
This interface between the federal government and local residents is practically a nucleic acid of the nation's DNA. Controversial issues augment the nexus and explain why the District of Columbia and Congress cross swords today.
One might call this the "politics of contraband," as sung by Glenn Frey in the 1980s song "Smuggler's Blues."
And despite what lawmakers want to do about D.C.'s marijuana provision, it's legal now.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/02/26/last-minute-drive-by-gop-reps-to-blunt-legal-pot-in-dc-goes-up-in-smoke/?intcmp=latestnews
-
Sens. Booker, Gillibrand and Paul unveil federal medical marijuana bill
By Niraj Chokshi
March 10, 2015
Senators are unveiling a bipartisan bill that would prevent the federal government from prosecuting medical marijuana users in states where it is legal.
A historic Senate medical marijuana bill unveiled Tuesday would dramatically reshape the landscape for the plant, nearly 80 years after it was effectively criminalized.
The bill, introduced by Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.), would end the federal prohibition on medical marijuana and eliminate the ambiguity surrounding related state laws. It would untie the hands of veterans’ doctors when it comes to recommending the drug and bankers when it comes to providing business services to the industry. It would also facilitate very limited inter-state trade, expand research and shift marijuana out of the most severe category in the federal government’s drug classification.
“Today, we join together to say enough is enough. Our federal government has long overstepped the boundaries of common sense,” Booker said at a news conference, flanked by advocates and patients, including a young girl, Morgan Jones, who suffered a mild seizure as the senators presented their bill, her mother said. Kate Hintz, a New Yorker, advocates for expanded access to medical marijuana for those, such as her daughter, who suffer from epilepsy and associated seizures.
While the bill’s fate in the Republican-controlled Senate is unclear, it may appeal to a strain of conservative thinking that favors states’ rights. Already, three potential Republican presidential candidates — Paul, Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.) and former Florida governor Jeb Bush — have said that they support states’ rights to legalize the drug, even if they do not personally support such policies.
“We’re going to approach all our colleagues,” Gillibrand said. “This is the first step of a long process of advocacy.”
Advocates see the bill as laying the groundwork for a public, high-level discussion about legalizing the drug, at least for medical use, for which public support has risen in recent decades and years.
In addition to ending the federal prohibition on medical pot, the bill — the Compassionate Access, Research Expansion, and Respect States (CARERS) Act — also would recognize marijuana’s medical benefits by switching its classification from Schedule 1 to Schedule 2, under the federal government’s five-category drug classification system.
The bill would expand research opportunities for the drug and let doctors with the Department of Veterans Affairs to recommend the drug to veterans. It would allow bankers to provide to the marijuana industry the same services they provide to other businesses.
The bill would also expand access to the drug to patients in states that have approved limited medical marijuana laws. While medical marijuana is legal in 23 states and the District of Columbia, a dozen other states have approved use only of strains of the plant with high levels of Cannabidiol, which does not produce the high associated with the drug and is used in treating epileptic seizures. The bill would remove specific strains of CBD oil from the federal definition of marijuana, thereby expanding access for patients.
Several advocacy organizations involved with passing state marijuana laws also were involved in discussions surrounding the crafting of the bill, including the Drug Policy Alliance, Marijuana Policy Project and Americans for Safe Access.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2015/03/10/sens-booker-gillibrand-and-paul-unveil-federal-medical-marijuana-bill/
-
Medical Marijuana Bill Passed by Senate Committee in Alabama
Apr 22, 2015
By Associated Press
MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) - The Senate Judiciary Committee has narrowly approved a bill to allow medicinal marijuana in Alabama.
Committee members approved the bill on a 4-3 vote Wednesday. It now moves to the Alabama Senate where it faces steep odds.
The legislation would allow patients with certain medical conditions, including cancer and AIDS, to buy or grow a small amount of marijuana each month.
Applause broke out from advocates who have unsuccessfully lobbied at the Statehouse for years. Tammy Collazo said she takes a small amount of marijuana to ease the pain of a brain tumor.
Opponents said not enough is known about the effects of marijuana and that people risked harm by taking the drug as medicine.
http://www.wkrg.com/story/28872525/medical-marijuana-bill-passed-by-senate-committee-in-alabama
-
Kind of sad really, we all claim we want smaller government, less intrusion into our lives, and yet in 2015 in many places in the US one cannot obtain marijuana legally to treat symptoms from various illnesses. Putting medicinal marijuana aside, that adults can't legally access it yet can buy a 5th of vodka and a carton of cigarettes makes zero sense to me.. But I live in a state where you cannot sell cars or buy liquor on Sunday so..
-
Kind of sad really, we all claim we want smaller government, less intrusion into our lives, and yet in 2015 in many places in the US one cannot obtain marijuana legally to treat symptoms from various illnesses. Putting medicinal marijuana aside, that adults can't legally access it yet can buy a 5th of vodka and a carton of cigarettes makes zero sense to me.. But I live in a state where you cannot sell cars or buy liquor on Sunday so..
Sunday being a invention of humans, there is no such thing as Sunday and we impose all this nonsense on it. We are a truly stupid bunch of apes.
-
Colorado businessman blames 'stoned' workers for move to SC
Published April 24, 2015
FoxNews.com
(http://a57.foxnews.com/global.fncstatic.com/static/managed/img/fn-latino/health/876/493/marijuana%20pot%20teen.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
A Colorado man who moved his business to South Carolina says the state's decision to legalize pot has left him with a stoned labor pool. (AP)
When workers at his Colorado business went to pot, Mark Brawner said it was enough for him to roll out of the Rockies and head for South Carolina.
Brawner, who ran Little Spider Creations out of an old Denver warehouse for years until this month, told KUSA-TV Thursday he moved because pot was hurting his company. He said employees started to come to work stoned after the state legalized the drug for recreational use in 2012.
“The main reason we pulled out was because of marijuana,” Brawner said. “Marijuana got into our industry. Half the sculptors will come in high. As soon as we’d catch it, they’d be let go. We went through 25 sculptors. Only five of (our sculptors) either were quality or would show up unimpaired.”
“The main reason we pulled out was because of marijuana.”
- Mark Brawner
But Brawner told FoxNews.com Friday his comments got “twisted out of proportion,” although he did not deny relocating to the Myrtle Beach area, where smoking pot is still illegal.
“They had an agenda. They got what they wanted and not what they heard,” he said.
A call to KUSA news director Christy Moreno was not immediately returned.
Little Spider has built Halloween-like props for Six Flags amusement parks, the Dollywood Theme Park in Tennessee, and other haunted house entertainment venues.
The company's a new home is a spacious facility in North Myrtle Beach, S.C. The local Chamber of Commerce lured Brawner to move with a $25,000 grant. In exchange Brawner pledged to create 35 jobs and to make a $2.65 million investment in his business. In Colorado, Little Spider employed 47 sculptors, artists and animators.
The Myrtle Beach Sun News reported that back in Colorado, Brawner had been dealing with a “nasty” local government regulator and too many stoned workers. Those problems made his wife’s entreaties to move more appealing.
Now Brawner would like to take back remarks he made to KUSA like this one:
“A painter doesn’t do production as quick as we want. If you build a house you can build a house to the plans. When we’re asking you to sculpt a giant dinosaur, and it has to have personality and stuff, when you’re high you can’t see it. Your whole body says its good enough, when it’s not. The quality suffers.”
A Colorado business group told the station Little Spider’s departure is the first they heard of a company leaving the state because of legalized marijuana.
Speaking to FoxNews.com, Brawner just wanted his marijuana remarks to go puff.
He declined to say how his comments, which were audio-taped, could have been misconstrued.
“I don’t have anything more to say, not even to make things right,” he said.
Colorado legalized pot in 2013, and the first marijuana shops opened at the beginning of 2014. Washington and Alaska subsequently legalized the drug, and similar measures have been proposed in other states.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/04/24/colorado-businessman-blames-stoned-workers-for-relocating-firm-to-south/
-
Fox News poll: 48 percent favor same-sex marriage, 51 percent say legalize marijuana
By Dana Blanton
Published April 27, 2015
FoxNews.com
. . .
Legalizing Marijuana
For the first time, the Fox News poll finds more than half (51 percent) favor legalizing marijuana, while 44 percent oppose it. That’s little changed from last year when it was 50-43 percent (January 2014).
More voters were opposed than in favor as recently as 2013: 46 percent in favor vs. 49 percent opposed.
By a 15 percentage-point margin, voters under 35 (54 percent) are more likely than those 65+ (39 percent) to favor legalizing marijuana. And by a 10-point margin, men (56 percent) are more likely than women (46 percent) to favor it.
Majorities of Democrats (62 percent) and independents (53 percent) support legalizing marijuana, while a majority of Republicans opposes it (59 percent).
The Fox News poll is based on landline and cell phone interviews with 1,012 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide and was conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) from April 19-21, 2015. The full poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/04/27/fox-news-poll-48-percent-favor-same-sex-marriage-51-percent-say-legalize/?intcmp=latestnews
-
Colorado lawmakers approve medical marijuana for students in school
By Brooke Singman
Published May 05, 2015
FoxNews.com
A first-in-the-nation bill that would allow students to have medical marijuana in school is heading to the Colorado governor’s desk after passing the state legislature late Monday night.
The change in the law was sought to let schoolchildren in Colorado who are living with conditions like epilepsy, cerebral palsy and seizures take doses of low-THC medical marijuana. While marijuana possession and use is legal in Colorado, schools are still drug-free zones -- but bill supporters argued medical marijuana should be treated no differently than other medications.
“We allow children to take all sorts of psychotropic medications, whether it’s Ritalin or opiate painkillers, under supervised circumstances. We should do the same here,” Rep. Jonathan Singer said.
Singer, a Democrat, sponsored what became known as "Jack's Amendment." The amendment was inspired by 14-year-old Colorado boy Jack Splitt, whose personal nurse was reprimanded at his middle school for putting a medical marijuana patch on Jack’s arm that was prescribed by doctors to help his spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy and dystonia. They were told never to return with the patch again.
The bill would allow parents or caregivers, with a doctor’s note, to come into schools and administer marijuana in the form of a patch.
“Jack’s Amendment will assure that children don’t have to choose between going to school and taking their medicine,” Singer said. Singer also sponsored the underlying bill, which was initially intended to regulate marijuana caregivers.
With the Colorado legislative session set to end on Wednesday, lawmakers were racing against the clock to pass the bill.
The legislation cleared the Colorado House with overwhelming support, and unanimously passed the state Senate. Gov. John Hickenlooper, a Democrat, has 30 days to sign or reject the bill. Colorado would become the first state in the nation to allow medical marijuana in the classroom, if the bill is signed.
A spokeswoman for the governor said Tuesday Hickenlooper planned to sign the bill.
But the legislation still could raise concerns. Robert O’Brien, former adviser on the Mitt Romney presidential campaign, said more marijuana in schools is a bad idea.
“Even in a tightly regulated regime, I don’t think more marijuana in the schools is a better idea,” O’Brien told FoxNews.com's "Strategy Room." “The kids need to get the treatment they deserve, if it’s an efficacious treatment, that’s great, but I don’t want that in the schools.”
If the bill is signed, it's unclear exactly what the penalties might be for students, or adults, who don't follow the new rules. But drug-free zone laws can come with tough penalties. Illicit sale in a no-drug school zone in Colorado, for instance, carries an eight-year sentence.
Parents in Maine also are urging lawmakers to allow medical marijuana in their schools, but have not gotten as far as in Colorado.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/05/05/colorado-lawmakers-approve-medical-marijuana-for-students-in-school/
-
:o
Boys who smoke cannabis ‘are four inches shorter’
Youngsters who regularly smoked marijuana were far shorter than their non-smoking peers
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02882/cannabis_2882252b.jpg)
Smoking cannabis regularly stunts growth in prepubescent boys, scientists have found Photo: GETTY IMAGES
Sarah Knapton By Sarah Knapton, Science Editor
19 May 2015
Boys who smoke cannabis before puberty could be stunting their growth by more than four inches, a new study suggests.
Researchers found that youngsters who were addicted to the drug were far shorter than their non-smoking peers.
And they also discovered that rather than being a relaxing pass time, smoking dope actually makes the body more stressed in the long term.
"Marijuana use may provoke a stress response that stimulates onset of puberty but suppresses growth rate,” said study leader Dr Syed Shakeel Raza Rizvi, of the Agriculture University Rawalpindi in Pakistan.
Scientists at the Pir Mehr Ali Shah Agriculture University Rawalpindi in Pakistan studied the levels of certain hormones involved in growth and puberty in the blood of 220 non-smoking and 217 cannabis-addicted boys.
Levels of puberty-related hormones such as testosterone and luteinising hormone (LH) were increased in the cannabis smokers. In contrast, growth hormone levels in the group were decreased.
It was also found that non-smoking boys were on average four kilos heavier and 4.6 inches taller by the age of 20 than the dope smokers.
• Cannabis use shrinks and rewires the brain
•Even casual use of cannabis alters the brain
• Cannabis can be highly addictive, major study finds
The researchers also looked at the effect of smoking cannabis on levels of the stress hormone, cortisol, in 10 cannabis addicts.
They found that dope smokers have significantly higher levels of cortisol than non-smokers.
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02983/cannabis-_2983286b.jpg)
A cannabis plant
Cannabis is the most widely available illicit drug in Europe, and it's estimated that it's been used by 80.5 million Europeans at least once in their life.
The proportion of 11-15 year olds in England who had used cannabis in the last year fell from 13.3 per cent in 2003 to 7 per cent in 2013, around 250,000 youngsters.
The latest report from the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) reveals that the highest prevalence of cannabis use is among 15 to 24-year-olds and is significantly higher among men than women.
Previous studies have looked at the effect of smoking cannabis in adult rats and humans, but this is the first time that the effects have been looked at in prepubescent boys.
Dr Rivzi said the the research may have a wider impact than just health, adding: "Early puberty is associated with younger age of onset of drinking and smoking, and early matures have higher levels of substance abuse because they enter the risk period at an early level of emotional maturity."
The researchers say their findings, presented at the European Congress of Endocrinology in Dublin, will lead to a better understanding of the dangers of drug abuse on growth and development in children.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11613107/Boys-who-smoke-cannabis-are-four-inches-shorter.html
-
Fox News poll: 48 percent favor same-sex marriage, 51 percent say legalize marijuana
the majority of the USA is liberal.
only a few people with their head in the sand can deny it now.
-
Marijuana-infused coffee pods hit store shelves
Published May 18, 2015
FoxNews.com
(http://a57.foxnews.com/global.fncstatic.com/static/managed/img/876/493/ewrewrer3453543.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Cannabis infused coffee is available in loose grounds and convenient single-serving pods. (Fairwinds Manufacturing)
Cannabis-infused coffee is now available in convenient single-use pods for those who want a little more buzz to their a.m. jolt.
Seattle-based Uncle Ike’s Pot Shop now sells pods of premium Catapult coffee at a steep $10 per pod. Each pod works in standard, single-serve coffee makers and contain 10 mg of THC, marijuana’s psychoactive ingredient. The shop previously sold loose grounds infused with marijuana but the pods are “quickly becoming big sellers,” said the shop.
“I liken it to a Red Bull and vodka,” Jennifer Lanzador, Uncle Ike’s sales manager, told Yahoo. “I had more energy, but I still had the relaxation you get from cannabis.”
Fairwinds Manufacturing, the Vancouver company that actually makes the pods for Uncle Ike’s, reported that the pods now account for 60 percent of company sales.
Fairwinds isn't the only company making cannabis-infused coffee.
House of Jane in California has four types of cannabis K-cups: medium roast, dark roast, decaf and mocha café. It also sells marijuana infused coffees, teas and creamers—one of which recently won a best-edible award at one of the world’s largest medical marijuana trade shows HempCon. It is also working on cannabis-infused “Frappuccino”—the drink will not be sold at Starbucks but the team hopes to capitalize on the popularity of the well-known creamy beverage during the hot summer months.
Ed Rosenthal, whose brand is well known for marijuana growing guides and a line of pre-rolled joints, has a line of coffees called Ed Rosenthal’s Select Coffee & Tea.
“Ed’s been wanting to come up with a new product that’s not the standard candy bar,” Rosenthal’s CEO Ross Franklin told Yahoo.
Emily Paxhia, co-founder of Poseidon Asset Management, a California asset manager focusing on marijuana-related investments, says that coffee will give cannabis-infused edibles a wider appeal.
“The more that cannabis can be consumed in forms that are familiar to broader populations, the more interesting it’s going to become to a mass market,” Paxhia said.
http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2015/05/18/marijuana-k-cups-and-coffee-pods-hit-store-shelves/
-
:o
Boys who smoke cannabis ‘are four inches shorter’
Youngsters who regularly smoked marijuana were far shorter than their non-smoking peers
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02882/cannabis_2882252b.jpg)
Smoking cannabis regularly stunts growth in prepubescent boys, scientists have found Photo: GETTY IMAGES
Sarah Knapton By Sarah Knapton, Science Editor
19 May 2015
Boys who smoke cannabis before puberty could be stunting their growth by more than four inches, a new study suggests.
Researchers found that youngsters who were addicted to the drug were far shorter than their non-smoking peers.
And they also discovered that rather than being a relaxing pass time, smoking dope actually makes the body more stressed in the long term.
"Marijuana use may provoke a stress response that stimulates onset of puberty but suppresses growth rate,” said study leader Dr Syed Shakeel Raza Rizvi, of the Agriculture University Rawalpindi in Pakistan.
Scientists at the Pir Mehr Ali Shah Agriculture University Rawalpindi in Pakistan studied the levels of certain hormones involved in growth and puberty in the blood of 220 non-smoking and 217 cannabis-addicted boys.
Levels of puberty-related hormones such as testosterone and luteinising hormone (LH) were increased in the cannabis smokers. In contrast, growth hormone levels in the group were decreased.
It was also found that non-smoking boys were on average four kilos heavier and 4.6 inches taller by the age of 20 than the dope smokers.
• Cannabis use shrinks and rewires the brain
•Even casual use of cannabis alters the brain
• Cannabis can be highly addictive, major study finds
The researchers also looked at the effect of smoking cannabis on levels of the stress hormone, cortisol, in 10 cannabis addicts.
They found that dope smokers have significantly higher levels of cortisol than non-smokers.
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02983/cannabis-_2983286b.jpg)
A cannabis plant
Cannabis is the most widely available illicit drug in Europe, and it's estimated that it's been used by 80.5 million Europeans at least once in their life.
The proportion of 11-15 year olds in England who had used cannabis in the last year fell from 13.3 per cent in 2003 to 7 per cent in 2013, around 250,000 youngsters.
The latest report from the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) reveals that the highest prevalence of cannabis use is among 15 to 24-year-olds and is significantly higher among men than women.
Previous studies have looked at the effect of smoking cannabis in adult rats and humans, but this is the first time that the effects have been looked at in prepubescent boys.
Dr Rivzi said the the research may have a wider impact than just health, adding: "Early puberty is associated with younger age of onset of drinking and smoking, and early matures have higher levels of substance abuse because they enter the risk period at an early level of emotional maturity."
The researchers say their findings, presented at the European Congress of Endocrinology in Dublin, will lead to a better understanding of the dangers of drug abuse on growth and development in children.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11613107/Boys-who-smoke-cannabis-are-four-inches-shorter.html
I would say any child that abuses drugs at that age will have issues, they used addicts did they not?
-
I would say any child that abuses drugs at that age will have issues, they used addicts did they not?
Sounds like it, although the study also found "Even casual use of cannabis alters the brain."
-
Employers Can Fire Medical Marijuana Patients For Private, Off-Duty Use, Colo. Supreme Court Rules
Matt Ferner Matt.Ferner@huffingtonpost.com
Posted: 06/15/2015
(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1696116/images/n-BRANDON-COATS1-large570.jpg)
While medical marijuana is legal in Colorado, employers can still fire patients for using it -- even if they aren't impaired at work.
In a landmark decision Monday morning, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Brandon Coats, a quadriplegic medical marijuana patient from Colorado who was fired by Dish Network in 2010 for using the drug while at home and off-duty, was not protected under the state's "lawful activities statute."
“Although I’m very disappointed today, I hope that my case has brought the issue of use of medical marijuana and employment to light," Coats said in an emailed statement. "If we’re making marijuana legal for medical purposes we need to address issues that come along with it such as employment. Hopefully views on medical marijuana –- like the ones in my specific case -- will change soon.”
The arguments from both Dish's and Coats' attorneys centered on the question of what exactly constitutes "lawful" use of medical marijuana outside of the workplace -- and how such use can be considered lawful when federal law still classifies marijuana as an illegal substance, even though the state of Colorado has legalized its use both medically and recreationally.
"The Supreme Court holds that under... Colorado’s 'lawful activities statute,' the term 'lawful' refers only to those activities that are lawful under both state and federal law," the Colorado court ruled. "Therefore, employees who engage in an activity such as medical marijuana use that is permitted by state law but unlawful under federal law are not protected by the statute."
The court had been considering the case for nearly a year.
"Mr. Coats was never accused or suspected of being under the influence and received satisfactory performance reviews all three years [he worked at the company]," argued Coats' attorney, Michael Evans, in front of the state Supreme Court last year.
Evans went on to argue that Coats' use should fall under the state's Lawful Off-Duty Activities Statute.
"He was fired after an unknown type or amount of THC was found after a mouth swab test," Evans said last year. "Dish knew he was a medical marijuana patient. The mere presence of THC is not proof of impairment."
Evans also argued that the drug testing on Coats did not determine what kind of THC was found in his system, or how much was present. There are active and inactive forms of THC, and inactive forms can remain in a person's body for more than 40 days after use.
But Dish Network attorney Meghan Martinez argued last year that whether or not Coats was ever impaired at the workplace was not the issue. Rather, she said, the issue at hand was the "use" itself. She defined "use" as simply having THC in one's system.
"He tested positive, had THC in his system," Martinez said. "We are alleging that he was using THC at the workplace. The definition of use is in the medical marijuana act [Colorado's Amendment 20]. It's the employment of something, the longstanding possession of something. He smoked marijuana while at home, but he crossed the threshold [to his office] with THC in his system. The use is the effects, it's the THC, it's the whole point of marijuana. So when he came to work, he was using."
Coats was fired from Dish Network, a satellite cable provider company based in Englewood, Colorado, more than five years ago, after testing positive for THC during a random drug test at work. Coats had been a patient on the state registry for about a year at that point, and was using medical marijuana based on a doctor's recommendation. Evans told The Huffington Post that Coats had been a successful employee at the company, where he'd worked for three years serving in the customer service division as a telephone operator.
"We have the proof that he was [a top performer] in his evaluations," Evans told HuffPost in 2014. "I think he was late twice, and that was the extent of any discipline."
And while Dish hasn't claimed that Coats was impaired at work, the company's decision was unequivocal: Coats failed a drug test, so therefore he had to be fired.
Coats first challenged the firing in county court in 2011, but that case was dismissed on the grounds that medical marijuana is not "lawful activity."
Coats appealed that decision, but a state appellate court dealt another blow to his case in July 2013, upholding the trial court's decision in favor of Dish. The appellate judge ruled that when it comes to marijuana, federal law trumps state law.
When Coats was 16, he was a passenger in a vehicle that crashed into a tree. That accident paralyzed over 80 percent of his body, and he has experienced severe involuntary muscle spasms and seizures ever since.
"My spinal cord is broken, so messages don't get back and forth from my brain to my body," Coats told HuffPost. "My legs still work, but they just can't get the signal. Sometimes my whole body can just seize up."
At first, Coats used prescription drugs to combat the spasms, but over time their effectiveness waned. Then his doctors recommended he start using medical marijuana. Coats joined Colorado's medical marijuana registry in 2009, hoping that the cannabis would alleviate his persistent spasms.
Medical marijuana changed his life, Coats said. Smoking a small amount of cannabis each evening proved to be an effective treatment, allowing him to go to work without discomfort the next day.
But like many companies, Dish Network has a zero-tolerance policy when it comes to any drug use, even if that drug is state-legal and used for medical purposes.
"To ensure a safe and productive work environment, Dish Network reserves the right to administer nondiscriminatory, unannounced random drug testing," the company drug policy reads. "No employee shall report to work or be at work with alcohol or with any detectable amount of prohibited drugs in the employee's system. Any violation of this statement of policy will result in disciplinary action up to and including termination."
While the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 protects most employees with serious medical conditions from discrimination, it doesn't protect their use of medical marijuana. And although 23 states and the District of Columbia have legalized marijuana for medical use, very few jurisdictions offer explicit protections for patients. An exception is Arizona, where employers are prohibited from discriminating against an employee who has tested positive for marijuana and is a registered medical marijuana patient, as long as he or she doesn't have a "safety sensitive" job, such as heavy-machinery operator or airline pilot.
In Colorado, Amendment 20, which legalized medical marijuana in the state in 2000, says that employers are not required to "accommodate the medical use of marijuana in any work place." But the law does not explicitly state whether an employer has the right to fire an employee who uses medical marijuana at home.
Evans said that clarity on that point is the "silver lining" of this case.
"There was previously no clear definition on what an employer and employee could do when it came to [medical marijuana]," Evans wrote in an email. "It was a very scary ‘gray’ area for both sides. All of that hard work and risk put into this case was not a waste, because at least now there is clear communication for everyone on that issue from the Court."
Evans also noted that the court issued its decision after the state's legislative session had ended, indicating that it may have been waiting for the state House or Senate to act and fix the "obvious" problem with the law.
"Today’s decision means that until someone in the House or Senate champions the cause, most employees who work in a state with the world’s most powerful medical marijuana laws will have to choose between using medical marijuana and work," he wrote.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/15/brandon-coats-medical-marijuana_n_7585832.html
-
Sounds like it, although the study also found "Even casual use of cannabis alters the brain."
I would be concerned about MJ more so then alcohol in kids, while the effects might be over stated our bodies have an endocannabinoid system, with all sorts of effects on brain differentiation etc.
It does depend on what they mean by alter, it does alter blood flow, receptor activation etc.. but structural?
-
RAND PAUL 1ST MAJOR-PARTY CANDIDATE TO COURT POT DONORS
BY KRISTEN WYATT
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Jun 30, 2015
DENVER (AP) -- Republican presidential hopeful Rand Paul planned Tuesday to court donors from the new marijuana industry, making the Kentucky senator the first major-party presidential candidate to publicly seek support from the legal weed business.
Paul's fundraiser at the Cannabis Business Summit - tickets start at $2,700, the maximum donation allowed for the primary contest - comes as the marijuana industry approaches its first presidential campaign as a legal enterprise.
Though legal weed business owners have been active political donors for years, presidential candidates have so far shied away from holding fundraisers made up entirely of marijuana-related entrepreneurs.
"It really speaks to how important this issue is and how far it's come," said Mason Tvert, a spokesman for the Marijuana Policy Project, a major sponsor of legalization campaigns in Colorado, Washington and other states.
"We're seeing officials at the local, state and now federal level recognize this is now a legitimate industry, just like any other legal industry in many facets," Tvert said.
Paul has embraced state marijuana experiments, while other candidates have either taken a wait-and-see approach or expressly vowed to challenge state legalization efforts.
Paul has joined Democrats in the Senate to sponsor a bill to end the federal prohibition on the use of medical marijuana. He also backs an overhaul of federal drug-sentencing guidelines, along with a measure to allow marijuana businesses to access banking services.
Asked last year whether marijuana should be legal, Paul said, "I haven't really taken a stand on that, but I'm against the federal government telling (states) they can't."
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_GOP_2016_PAUL_MARIJUANA?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-06-30-03-12-53
-
Majority Of Denver Voters Support Marijuana In Bars, Survey Finds
Matt Ferner
National Reporter, The Huffington Post
Posted: 07/09/2015
(http://img.huffingtonpost.com//asset/crop_0_77_5760_2567,scaleFit_630_noupscale/559c67171500006200ff71b9.jpeg?cache=LezwpdbTks)
A majority of Denver voters support recreational marijuana smoking in bars and other public venues in the city, according to a new survey, boosting a new drive to expand legalized pot.
A survey released Thursday by Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling found that 56 percent of likely 2015 voters in Denver would support allowing businesses to permit pot consumption on the premises. Only 40 percent said they were opposed.
The survey appears to support a recently launched petition drive in Denver for a ballot measure that would give businesses the ability to allow for marijuana consumption. The measure would prohibit pot sales at the establishments, so patrons would have to bring their own.
“Denver voters have repeatedly voted in favor of treating marijuana similarly to alcohol,” said Mason Tvert, communications director for Marijuana Policy Project and a key backer of Colorado's 2012 recreational marijuana law. “For the same reasons many adults enjoy having a drink in a social setting, many adults would enjoy using cannabis."
The petition proposes to allow marijuana smoking and vaporizing in spaces that can't be publicly viewed. Smoking would likely be confined to enclosed outdoor areas, so venues can comply with state law that limits indoor smoking.
Marijuana tourism would get a boost from the measure, allowing visitors to Denver, which has become the "epicenter" of the legal marijuana industry, a place to consume their legal weed. Currently, tourists looking to light up have limited options, but are able to consume their weed in some hotels.
Colorado became the first state -- and the first government in the world -- to legalize and regulate recreational marijuana for adults in 2012, with the first retail shops opening in 2014. But state law continues to ban recreational marijuana consumption "openly and publicly." The law doesn't specifically block pot use in private clubs for those 21 and older, and the proposal would help to define private clubs in Denver.
Since Colorado's recreational marijuana law passed, a number of underground, fee-based, bring-your-own-pot clubs have sprung up in and around Denver. Law enforcement has at times cracked down on those gatherings. A handful of recreational marijuana clubs exist outside of Denver.
Activists must collect about 5,000 signatures of registered Denver voters by August in order for the "limited social use" initiative to appear on the November ballot.
Tvert announced the campaign last week, along with Brian Vicente, attorney and co-author of Colorado's recreational marijuana law, and Jane West, a cannabis-related events promoter.
"It would be ridiculous to limit alcohol consumption only to people’s homes," said Tvert. "So why must marijuana use be limited in such a fashion? There’s no rational reason to treat marijuana consumers so differently."
Some state lawmakers agree that the issue needs to be resolved, but they weren't sure the initiative is the best approach.
Democratic state Rep. Dan Pabon, who represents Denver, told HuffPost that it's not clear that this proposal would work without violating state laws. But it at least "invites a much-needed conversation" about where citizens would, and wouldn't, embrace public marijuana use, he said.
"First, people are already doing this anyway," said state Sen. Pat Steadman (D). "It's happening whether we like it or not. It would be best to regulate matters rather than allow the 'wild wild West' situation we have now. I think we should let the free market find solutions, but we have to remove legal barriers before this can happen."
Steadman said he hadn't yet decided if the initiative strikes the right policy balance.
State Rep. Jonathan Singer (D), a vocal supporter of marijuana policy reform in the state, said that adults should absolutely be able to consume cannabis legally and safely in private venues.
"It's ludicrous that we can't have something similar to the bars, restaurants and private clubs we have for alcohol," Singer said.
Singer told HuffPost that he plans to introduce legislation in the upcoming legislative session to address the issue.
PPP surveyed 629 likely Denver voters who intend to vote in the November election, from June 12 to June 15.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/majority-of-denver-voters-support-limited-marijuana-use-in-bars-survey-finds_559dd1dde4b05b1d028fb2da?
-
EDITORIAL: Federal report shows damning and deadly trends
By: The Gazette Editorial Board
Updated: September 17, 2015
In the last year, problems of public health and safety associated with, and caused by, marijuana use have worsened, according to an annual report issued Tuesday by the Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, a federal program charged with providing assistance to federal, state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies operating in areas determined to becritical drug-trafficking regions of the United States. The Gazette’s Editorial Board has summarized key findings from the report and invites you to review the full document here.
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/assets.gazette/clearingTheHaze/2015-09-15_16-15-11.png)
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/assets.gazette/clearingTheHaze/2015-09-15_16-42-27.png)
- Preventing marijuana possession or use on federal property.
Further tarnishing glowing reports from several of Colorado’s state and local elected leaders and other public officials is the glaringly obvious omission of meaning-ful cost-benefit analysis.
Print a $3 Coupon for Probiotic Pearls™
The State of Colorado has not collaborated with municipalities and counties to calculate fully and report all costs associated with marijuana’s regulation and problems stemming from its use.
Until the State of Colorado, counties and municipalities work together to determine the regulatory and social costs of marijuana relative to tax revenues collected, this report provides the best insight into those costs.
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/assets.gazette/clearingTheHaze/2015-09-15_16-26-24.png)
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/assets.gazette/clearingTheHaze/2015-09-15_16-57-41.png)
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/assets.gazette/clearingTheHaze/2015-09-15_17-02-57.png)
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/assets.gazette/clearingTheHaze/2015-09-15_17-00-25.png)
- Preventing the distribution of marijuana to minors
- Preventing the diversion of marijuana from states where it is legal under state law in some form to other states
- Preventing drugged driving and the exacerbation of other adverse public health consequences associated with marijuana use
- Preventing the growing of marijuana on public lands and the attendant public safety and environmental dangers posed by marijuana production on public lands
http://gazette.com/editorial-federal-report-shows-damning-and-deadly-trends/article/1559389
-
Sanders proposes nixing marijuana from federal list of dangerous drugs
Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders spoke of his support for allowing states to legalize marijuana and lowering college tuition at George Mason University on Oct. 28. (WUSA9)
By John Wagner and Christopher Ingraham
October 28, 2015
Presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders announced his support Wednesday for removing marijuana from a list of the most dangerous drugs outlawed by the federal government — a move that would free states to legalize it without impediments from Washington.
The self-described “democratic socialist” senator from Vermont shared his proposal during a nearly two-hour town hall meeting with college students that he said was broadcast on the Internet to about 300 campuses across the country from George Mason University in Fairfax County, Va.
“Too many Americans have seen their lives destroyed because they have criminal records as a result of marijuana use,” Sanders told a live audience of more than 1,700 students, which erupted with applause. “That’s wrong. That has got to change.”
No other presidential candidate has called for marijuana to be completely removed from the schedule of controlled substances regulated by the Drug Enforcement Administration.
Long-shot Democratic hopeful Martin O’Malley, the former governor of Maryland, has said that he would put marijuana on Schedule 2, a less-strict designation. The party’s front-runner, Hillary Rodham Clinton, has repeatedly said she wants to see how legalization experiments in Colorado, Washington and other states play out before committing to any changes at the federal level.
Different marijuana varieties are displayed at a medical marijuana dispensary, Kaya Shack, in Portland, Ore. Sanders’s plan would allow legal marijuana businesses to use banking services. (Gosia Wozniacka/AP)
[In key swing states, weed is polling better than 2016 candidates ]
Sanders’s plan would not automatically make marijuana legal nationwide, but states would be allowed to regulate the drug in the same way that state and local laws now govern sales of alcohol and tobacco. And people who use marijuana in states that legalize it would no longer be at risk of federal prosecution.
His plan would also allow marijuana businesses currently operating in states that have legalized it to use banking services and apply for tax deductions that are currently unavailable to them under federal law.
In a 2013 memo, the Justice Department essentially agreed to look the other way in states where marijuana is legal, provided that the marijuana industry in those states remained in compliance with state laws. But that memo is not legally binding, and a new administration or a new attorney general could easily reverse course.
Marijuana’s current classification is reserved for drugs with no medically accepted use and a “high potential for abuse.”
Many researchers who work in drug policy say that this designation is not appropriate. Last week, the Brookings Institution said that marijuana’s current scheduling status is “stifling medical research.” The American Medical Association has called for marijuana’s scheduling status to be “reviewed with the goal of facilitating the conduct of clinical research.”
Sanders has hinted at his position before, including during a broadcast last week on “Jimmy Kimmel Live” on ABC, during which he said: “I am not unfavorably disposed to moving toward the legalization of marijuana.”
At Wednesday night’s event, Sanders cast the country’s large number of marijuana arrests as part of a “broken” criminal justice system that disproportionately targets blacks and Latinos.
“I will not be a president of a country that has more people in jail than any other country,” Sanders said.
He said the current classification of marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug suggests it is as dangerous as heroin, a notion that Sanders said is “absurd.”
“In the year 2015, it is time for the federal government to allow states to go forward as they best choose,” Sanders said.
In the first debate of Democratic presidential candidates, in Nevada, Clinton said she supports the legalization of medical marijuana and alternatives to imprisoning people for nonviolent drug crimes. But she stopped short of endorsing recreational legalization, saying she wants “to find out a lot more than we know today” about the experiences of states like Colorado and Washington.
Sanders’s proposal is in line with the thinking of a growing number of Americans and a solid majority of Democrats.
According to a Gallup poll released earlier this month, national support for legalizing pot is at an all-time high, with 58 percent of those surveyed supporting such an outcome.
[National support for legal pot is at an all-time high]
Still, the ability of Sanders or any Democratic president to move the needle on federal marijuana policy through a reclassification of the drug is likely to face stiff resistance in a Republican-controlled Congress.
Medical marijuana is now sold in nearly half of the country, and one red state — Alaska — has legalized it for recreational use. Veterans of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are clamoring for access to treat post-traumatic stress disorder. In three swing states — Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida — the loosening of pot laws fares better in polls than any presidential candidate.
But in July, conservative House Republicans killed a bipartisan proposal to create a sub-class for marijuana so that researchers could simply study the substance legally and offer fresh guidance on whether it should continue to be classified alongside drugs such as heroin and ecstasy.
Aaron C. Davis contributed to this report.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sanders-will-propose-nixing-marijuana-from-federal-list-of-dangerous-drugs/2015/10/28/be8c3adc-7da2-11e5-b575-d8dcfedb4ea1_story.html
-
Ohio Voters to Decide on Legalizing Recreational Marijuana Use
(http://www.newsmax.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=50751e02-8541-453e-ba32-7cabd67f45f0&SiteName=Newsmax&maxsidesize=600)
Image: Ohio Voters to Decide on Legalizing Recreational Marijuana Use (Getty Images)
Tuesday, 03 Nov 2015
Ohio voters will decide on Tuesday whether to become the first U.S. Midwestern state to legalize the recreational use of marijuana, although a rival ballot measure could kill the law before it takes effect.
Issue 3 would add an amendment to the state constitution that legalizes both the personal and medical use of marijuana for those over 21 years old.
If it passes, Ohio would become the fifth and most populous state to legalize the recreational usage of marijuana, following Alaska, Colorado, Washington and Oregon, as well as the District of Columbia. About two dozen states allow its use for medical reasons.
Ohio is considered a political bellwether, with the candidate who wins the state usually winning the presidency. So a victory for recreational marijuana in Ohio is expected to change the national conversation on legalization, said Gary Daniels of the Ohio American Civil Liberties Union.
Seven other states are expected to vote on recreational marijuana legalization next year, according to Danielle Keane, political director for NORML, which advocates for legalization.
Issue 3 also grants exclusive rights for commercial marijuana growth and distribution to 10 facilities across the state. Those facilities are owned by investors in the legalization movement.
Critics of the measure say that creates a monopoly, and responded with a rival ballot measure called Issue 2. That ballot measure would nullify legalization if it creates "an economic monopoly or special privilege" for a private entity.
NORML has endorsed the ballot measure, although with "some hesitancy" because of the limited number of growing sites, Keane said.
Ohio State University constitutional law professor Daniel Tokaji said he believed the legalization measure would fail to pass because of the word "monopoly" in the ballot language.
Recent polls were split down the middle for legalizing recreational use in Ohio.
Ian James, executive director of Responsible Ohio, a political action group that brought the issue to the ballot, said volunteers had knocked on a million doors in the weeks leading up to the election in part to educate voters to vote "no" on Issue 2.
James acknowledged the vote would be close. Mild weather is expected on Tuesday in Ohio, which could help turnout.
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/Ohio-voters-legal-marijuana/2015/11/03/id/700260/#ixzz3qSS33hp0
-
Ohio Says 'No' to Legalizing Marijuana
Tuesday, 03 Nov 2015
Ohio voters on Tuesday rejected a measure that would have made it the first U.S. Midwestern state to legalize the recreational use of marijuana, local media projections said.
Issue 3, which would have added an amendment to the state constitution that legalizes both the personal and medical use of marijuana for those over 21 years old, was defeated by nearly a two-to-one margin, the projections said.
The states that have legalized the recreational usage of marijuana are Alaska, Colorado, Washington and Oregon, as well as the District of Columbia. About two dozen states allow its use for medical reasons.
Ohio is considered a political bellwether, with the candidate who wins the state usually winning the presidency. A victory for recreational marijuana in Ohio could have changed the national conversation on legalization, said Gary Daniels of the Ohio American Civil Liberties Union.
Seven other states are expected to vote on recreational marijuana legalization next year.
Issue 3 would have granted exclusive rights for commercial marijuana growth and distribution to 10 facilities across the state. Those facilities are owned by investors in the legalization movement.
Critics say that creates a monopoly, and responded with a rival ballot measure called Issue 2. That would nullify legalization if it creates "an economic monopoly or special privilege" for a private entity.
NORML has endorsed the legalization measure, although with "some hesitancy" because of the limited number of growing sites, said Danielle Keane, political director for NORML, a legalization advocacy group.
Special: Fix Erectile Dysfunction Faster Than Viagra
Nikhil Bhatnagar, an anesthesiologist from suburban Cleveland, said he and his wife, a pediatric dentist, voted against Issue 3.
"We believe that the increase in tax revenue would be lost in the increased healthcare costs," Bhatnagar said.
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/ohio-votes-no-legalize/2015/11/03/id/700410/#ixzz3qXuUGdK0
-
Clinton Seeks Looser Marijuana Laws, Use Weed for Pain Relief
(http://www.newsmax.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=5e771782-a4c4-41df-a1f6-bc4388ea26de&SiteName=Newsmax&maxsidesize=600)
Image: Clinton Seeks Looser Marijuana Laws, Use Weed for Pain Relief
Saturday, 07 Nov 2015
Hillary Clinton on Saturday called for looser federal regulations governing marijuana, to boost scientific research on a drug that many tout for relieving pain, among other medical benefits, according to media reports.
Speaking at a campaign event in Orangeburg, South Carolina, the Democratic presidential candidate said changing U.S. rules would acknowledge the drug's potential for medical uses and give scientists access to the drug for further investigation.
"Universities, (the) National Institutes of Health can start researching what is the best way to use it, how much of a dose does somebody need, how does it interact with other medications," Clinton said, according to CNN.
Specifically, Clinton called for moving marijuana to Schedule 2 from Schedule 1 under the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. DEA's five levels of "drug scheduling" affect access as well as criminal prosecutions.
Drugs deemed Schedule 1 have "no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse" and "are the most dangerous drugs of all the drug schedules," according to the DEA. A Schedule 2 drug is still "considered dangerous," it has said, and includes oxycodone and cocaine.
While 23 U.S. states have eased access to marijuana for medical use and four of them, plus Washington, D.C., allow "recreational" use, the substance remains prohibited under federal law.
Medical researchers have been cautious about the drug's benefits and risks, in part because of the lack of scientific studies, including data on the long-term effects of its main psychoactive ingredient, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).
"I do support the use of medical marijuana," Clinton said at the event hosted by the South Carolina Legislative Black Caucus, according to NBC. "Even there we need to do a lot more research so that we know exactly how we're going to help people for whom medical marijuana provides relief."
Clinton's proposal is part of her ongoing call to reform the nation's criminal justice system. On Friday, she urged changes to mandatory minimum sentences.
Marijuana advocates, who also cite the drug's economic benefits, are seeking to make it a campaign issue in the 2016 race for the White House.
Clinton's rival U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont has proposed fully legalizing marijuana and removing it from any DEA schedule. Rival Martin O'Malley supports easing access as a Schedule 2 drug.
Stances on marijuana have been mixed among the 15 Republicans vying for their party's presidential nomination.
Unlike prescription medications, marijuana has not been reviewed by the Food and Drug Administration. Researchers have also raised concerns about its impact on teenagers and young adults.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/clinton-loosen-marijuana-laws/2015/11/07/id/701107/#ixzz3r18onM1r
-
How much more prevalent will this be when we legalize the drug across the board?
Girl, 8, tried to smoke pot at Ohio school, cops say
Published November 10, 2015
Associated Press
PATASKALA, Ohio – An 8-year-old girl was caught trying to smoke marijuana by lighting a plastic baggie of it in a restroom at her elementary school, police in central Ohio said.
Cops in Pataskala, east of Columbus, are working to determine where she got it.
The girl reportedly tried to discard the marijuana in a trash can and toilet when a school employee found her last week. Investigators recovered some of the discarded marijuana and a lighter, but no drug paraphernalia.
The girl was suspended, and children's services officials got involved in the case.
Pataskala police Chief Bruce Brooks told The Advocate newspaper in nearby Newark that it's fortunate the girl didn't really understand how to light and smoke the marijuana.
The superintendent said the school district is working with police.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/11/10/girl-8-tried-to-smoke-pot-at-ohio-school-cops-say/?intcmp=hplnws
-
Smoking high-strength cannabis may damage nerve fibres in brain
Study suggests high levels of skunk use may affect the brain’s white matter, making communication between the right and left hemispheres less efficient
Brain white matter scan
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/e30f2176b5e61da1b9f207592045034692156e93/0_20_1176_706/master/1176.jpg?w=700&q=85&auto=format&sharp=10&s=93296505d870ea4eff144ad400452295)
The brain’s white matter seen from the front as obtained by diffusion tensor imaging. Photograph: Institute of Psychiatry
Ian Sample Science editor
@iansample
27 November 2015
High-strength cannabis may damage nerve fibres that handle the flow of messages across the two halves of the brain, scientists claim. Brain scans of people who regularly smoked strong skunk-like cannabis revealed subtle differences in the white matter that connects the left and right hemispheres and carries signals from one side of the brain to the other.
The changes were not seen in those who never used cannabis or smoked only the less potent forms of the drug, the researchers found.
The study is thought to be the first to look at the effects of cannabis potency on brain structure, and suggests that greater use of skunk may cause more damage to the corpus callosum, making communications across the brain’s hemispheres less efficient.
Paola Dazzan, a neurobiologist at the Institute of Psychiatry at King’s College London, said the effects appeared to be linked to the level of active ingredient, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), in cannabis. While traditional forms of cannabis contain 2 to 4 % THC, the more potent varieties (of which there are about 100), can contain 10 to 14% THC, according to the DrugScope charity.
“If you look at the corpus callosum, what we’re seeing is a significant difference in the white matter between those who use high potency cannabis and those who never use the drug, or use the low-potency drug,” said Dazzan. The corpus callosum is rich in cannabinoid receptors, on which the THC chemical acts.
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/37bc940a91a0e7833b2df81457d4f0abdf32abc1/0_31_1176_706/master/1176.jpg?w=620&q=85&auto=format&sharp=10&s=78979a9e220947530b276eaf802cc67e)
A DTI image of the corpus callosum, as seen from the side, is shown in red on and superimposed on a background MRI image of the brain. Facebook Twitter Pinterest
“The difference is there whether you have psychosis or not, and we think this is strictly related to the potency of the cannabis,” she added. Details of the study are reported in the journal Psychological Medicine.
The researchers used two scanning techniques, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), to examine the corpus callosum, the largest region of white matter, in the brains of 56 patients who had reported a first episode of psychosis, and 43 healthy volunteers from the local community.
The scans found that daily users of high-potency cannabis had a slightly greater – by about 2% – “mean diffusivity” in the corpus callosum. “That reflects a problem in the white matter that ultimately makes it less efficient,” Dazzan told the Guardian. “We don’t know exactly what it means for the person, but it suggests there is less efficient transfer of information.”
The study cannot confirm that high levels of THC in cannabis cause changes to white matter. As Dazzan notes, it is may be that people with damaged white matter are more likely to smoke skunk in the first place.
“It is possible that these people already have a different brain and they are more likely to use cannabis. But what we can say is if it’s high potency, and if you smoke frequently, your brain is different from the brain of someone who smokes normal cannabis, and from someone who doesn’t smoke cannabis at all,” she said.
But even with the uncertainty over cause and effect, she urged users and public health workers to change how they think about cannabis use. “When it comes to alcohol, we are used to thinking about how much people drink, and whether they are drinking wine, beer, or whisky. We should think of cannabis in a similar way, in terms of THC and the different contents cannabis can have, and potentially the effects on health will be different,” she said.
“As we have suggested previously, when assessing cannabis use, it is extremely important to gather information on how often and what type of cannabis is being used. These details can help quantify the risk of mental health problems and increase awareness of the type of damage these substances can do to the brain,” she added.
In February, Dazzan and others at the Institute of Psychiatry reported that the ready availability of skunk in south London might be behind a rise in the proportion of new cases of psychosis being attributed to cannabis.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/nov/27/smoking-high-strength-cannabis-skunk-may-damage-nerves-brain
-
Smoking high-strength cannabis may damage nerve fibres in brain
Study suggests high levels of skunk use may affect the brain’s white matter, making communication between the right and left hemispheres less efficient
Brain white matter scan
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/e30f2176b5e61da1b9f207592045034692156e93/0_20_1176_706/master/1176.jpg?w=700&q=85&auto=format&sharp=10&s=93296505d870ea4eff144ad400452295)
The brain’s white matter seen from the front as obtained by diffusion tensor imaging. Photograph: Institute of Psychiatry
Ian Sample Science editor
@iansample
High-strength cannabis may damage nerve fibres that handle the flow of messages across the two halves of the brain, scientists claim. Brain scans of people who regularly smoked strong skunk-like cannabis revealed subtle differences in the white matter that connects the left and right hemispheres and carries signals from one side of the brain to the other.
The changes were not seen in those who never used cannabis or smoked only the less potent forms of the drug, the researchers found.
The study is thought to be the first to look at the effects of cannabis potency on brain structure, and suggests that greater use of skunk may cause more damage to the corpus callosum, making communications across the brain’s hemispheres less efficient.
Paola Dazzan, a neurobiologist at the Institute of Psychiatry at King’s College London, said the effects appeared to be linked to the level of active ingredient, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), in cannabis. While traditional forms of cannabis contain 2 to 4 % THC, the more potent varieties (of which there are about 100), can contain 10 to 14% THC, according to the DrugScope charity.
“If you look at the corpus callosum, what we’re seeing is a significant difference in the white matter between those who use high potency cannabis and those who never use the drug, or use the low-potency drug,” said Dazzan. The corpus callosum is rich in cannabinoid receptors, on which the THC chemical acts.
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/37bc940a91a0e7833b2df81457d4f0abdf32abc1/0_31_1176_706/master/1176.jpg?w=620&q=85&auto=format&sharp=10&s=78979a9e220947530b276eaf802cc67e)
A DTI image of the corpus callosum, as seen from the side, is shown in red on and superimposed on a background MRI image of the brain. Facebook Twitter Pinterest
“The difference is there whether you have psychosis or not, and we think this is strictly related to the potency of the cannabis,” she added. Details of the study are reported in the journal Psychological Medicine.
The researchers used two scanning techniques, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), to examine the corpus callosum, the largest region of white matter, in the brains of 56 patients who had reported a first episode of psychosis, and 43 healthy volunteers from the local community.
The scans found that daily users of high-potency cannabis had a slightly greater – by about 2% – “mean diffusivity” in the corpus callosum. “That reflects a problem in the white matter that ultimately makes it less efficient,” Dazzan told the Guardian. “We don’t know exactly what it means for the person, but it suggests there is less efficient transfer of information.”
The study cannot confirm that high levels of THC in cannabis cause changes to white matter. As Dazzan notes, it is may be that people with damaged white matter are more likely to smoke skunk in the first place.
“It is possible that these people already have a different brain and they are more likely to use cannabis. But what we can say is if it’s high potency, and if you smoke frequently, your brain is different from the brain of someone who smokes normal cannabis, and from someone who doesn’t smoke cannabis at all,” she said.
But even with the uncertainty over cause and effect, she urged users and public health workers to change how they think about cannabis use. “When it comes to alcohol, we are used to thinking about how much people drink, and whether they are drinking wine, beer, or whisky. We should think of cannabis in a similar way, in terms of THC and the different contents cannabis can have, and potentially the effects on health will be different,” she said.
“As we have suggested previously, when assessing cannabis use, it is extremely important to gather information on how often and what type of cannabis is being used. These details can help quantify the risk of mental health problems and increase awareness of the type of damage these substances can do to the brain,” she added.
In February, Dazzan and others at the Institute of Psychiatry reported that the ready availability of skunk in south London might be behind a rise in the proportion of new cases of psychosis being attributed to cannabis.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/nov/27/smoking-high-strength-cannabis-skunk-may-damage-nerves-brain
A couple of things
No other differences were found, that is a huge benefits, ie the claims that it fucks up the brain appear to be greatly overstated, they compared smokers before 15 and after, only difference was mild alteration in the CC, which they infer as inherently negative, it may not be.
The actual study
S. Riguccia1a2 c1, T. R. Marquesa2 †, M. Di Fortia2, H. Taylora2, F. Dell'Acquaa3, V. Mondellia4a5, S. Bonaccorsoa2, A. Simmonsa3, A. S. Davida2a5, P. Girardia1, C. M. Pariantea4a5, R. M. Murraya2a5 and P. Dazzana2a5
a1 Department of Neurosciences, Mental Health and Sensory Organs, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
a2 Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
a3 Centre for Neuroimaging Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
a4 Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
a5 National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Mental Health Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London, London, UK
Abstract
Background The use of cannabis with higher Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol content has been associated with greater risk, and earlier onset, of psychosis. However, the effect of cannabis potency on brain morphology has never been explored. Here, we investigated whether cannabis potency and pattern of use are associated with changes in corpus callosum (CC) microstructural organization, in patients with first-episode psychosis (FEP) and individuals without psychosis, cannabis users and non-users.
Method The CC of 56 FEP (37 cannabis users) and 43 individuals without psychosis (22 cannabis users) was virtually dissected and segmented using diffusion tensor imaging tractography. The diffusion index of fractional anisotropy, mean diffusivity (MD), axial diffusivity (AD) and radial diffusivity was calculated for each segment.
Results Across the whole sample, users of high-potency cannabis had higher total CC MD and higher total CC AD than both low-potency users and those who never used (p = 0.005 and p = 0.004, respectively). Daily users also had higher total CC MD and higher total CC AD than both occasional users and those who never used (p = 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). However, there was no effect of group (patient/individuals without psychosis) or group x potency
interaction for either potency or frequency of use. The within-group analysis showed in fact that the effects of potency and frequency were similar in FEP users and in users without psychosis.
Conclusions Frequent use of high-potency cannabis is associated with disturbed callosal microstructural organization in individuals with and without psychosis. Since high-potency preparations are now replacing traditional herbal drugs in many European countries, raising awareness about the risks of high-potency cannabis is crucial.
Kinda hard to infer that is the only variable here isn't it? small sample size, how are they defining potency? so again, it is drug abusers, you will find altered brain function in caffeine addicts, what does that mean is the question.
This study supports the idea that the negatives are far overblown, they found NO other differences, nothing and regular/occasional users were exact to the controls.
I think the study is right, it does do something to the CC, it increases connectivity, rational thought with creativity, likely due to the hemispheres communicating more intimately.
The cannabinoids need to be seperated from weed also.
-
Congress Quietly Ends Federal Medical Marijuana Prohibition
by Terry Turner - Dec 22, 2015
(http://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Medical-marijuana-sign-CC-Laurie-Avocado.jpg)
Medical-marijuana-sign CC Laurie Avocado
Buried in the 1,600 pages of Congress’ new spending plan is a quiet little passage that radically alters the way America treats medical marijuana.
The provision ends the federal prohibition on medical marijuana and bans federal agents from policing its users or raiding dispensaries in any state or district where it is legal.
The spending plan, and the medical pot provision within it, became law on Friday, with President Obama’s signature.
Thirty-two of the 50 states and the District of Columbia have already legalized some form of marijuana use, or its ingredients, for medication.
Federal law still designates cannabis in any form as an illegal drug and, since federal law takes precedent over the states, federal law enforcement agents have been allowed, until now, to persecute people using or distributing medical marijuana even in states that had legalized it.
This provision shuts down those operations and signals a shift in federal drug policy. For the first time, there was significant Republican support for easing of pot laws
CHECKOUT: 14 Years After Decriminalizing Heroin, Here’s What Portugal Looks Like
“This is a victory for so many,” Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican and co-author of the provision, said after it passed. “The first time in decades that the federal government has curtailed its oppressive prohibition of marijuana.”
Medical marijuana has been used to treat glaucoma, multiple sclerosis, nerve and seizure disorders, and chronic pain. Check out this Special to GNN from last month: Marijuana Fills Dire Medical Needs of Families, States Try to Catch Up.
http://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/congress-quietly-ends-federal-medical-marijuana-prohibition/
-
'Hypocrisy' of legalizing pot undermines America's war on hard-core drugs, general says
By Andrew deGrandpre, Military Times
January 16, 2016
Some U.S. states' softening stance on marijuana is complicating a broad federal effort to curtail the influx of cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine from Latin America, according to the four-star Marine Corps general who oversaw military activity in that region for the last three years.
"The actual legalization does cause us problems because — the hypocrisy," said Gen. John Kelly, who retires next month after completing his final assignment as the head of U.S. Southern Command, which is headquartered in Miami. "... Where you stand is where you sit. So if you're a Latin American, and we're harping on them to do more to stop the flow of drugs, they say: 'Wait a minute. As we look north, the real problem is the demand. So why don't you do more to stop the demand for drugs. ... Why would we do more when you seem to be legalizing this stuff?'"
Gen. John Kelly, who led U.S. Southern Command for three years, calls pot "a gateway" and that legalization within the United States hinders efforts to abate the trafficking of more dangerous drugs. Video by Daniel Woolfolk/Staff
Kelly spoke to Military Times on Jan. 8 at SOUTHCOM's satellite office in the Pentagon. Days later, he passed command of the organization to Adm. Kurt Tidd.
SOUTHCOM deploys U.S. military personnel throughout Central America, South America and the Caribbean, where they partner with other federal agencies in training foreign militaries and law enforcement to counter the region's powerful drug cartels, and improve local governance where criminal organizations operate. Mexico lies outside SOUTHCOM's area of oversight, but the network of illicit activity that begins in Latin America runs directly to the United States' southern border. The notorious Mexican drug lord Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman Loera, whose arrest this month and interview with actor Sean Penn have been the subject of intense media coverage, built a billion-dollar criminal enterprise from the cocaine produced Colombia.
Drug trafficking. Human trafficking. Weapons trafficking. It's all connected, Kelly said.
Most marijuana consumed in the U.S. is grown here or in Mexico, Kelly noted. Its recreational use is legal in Colorado, Oregon, Washington state and Washington, D.C. At least a dozen additional states have decriminalized pot, and more than a dozen others allow people to consume it with a doctor's prescription. Increasingly, those individuals include military veterans who suffer from post-traumatic stress and other service-connected injuries or illnesses. That doesn't bother the general, who led combat forces in Iraq as a one- and two-star general.
"I'm not a doctor," said Kelly, an infantry officer whose military career dates back to the Vietnam era, "but I'm told it has a medical use. So whether it's veterans or anyone else, if it helps those people, then fine. Medicine is medicine. Every medicine is probably illegal unless you take it medicinally."
Marijuana use is up in Latin America, translating to more busts there year over year, according to the U.N.'s Office on Drugs and Crime. Yet most of the pot intercepts made by U.S. personnel in that region are "incidental," Kelly said. And it's often being moved into Latin America.
"If it's heading away from the United States, I don't care about it," he added. "I mean, we take it, we seize it, we take the people and put them in the legal justice system." Rather, the most intense focus is on the movement north of cocaine, heroin and meth. "When I talk drugs," Kelly said, "I talk hard drugs."
Drug cartels reap "insane profits" from the consumption of narcotics and stimulants in North America and Western Europe, Kelly said. And they do business with terrorist organizations. The French, in particular, monitor cocaine trafficking out of Martinique, an island nation in the Caribbean, he noted.
"We know," Kelly said, "that as that cocaine [bound for Europe] moves up through [Africa], ... some of the old al Qaida type organizations allow it to pass but charge a fare just like we know that some large amount of the money that comes out of the United States is laundered by banks and organizations in the Caribbean and Latin America that had relationships with Lebanese banks, and there's a certain skimming that we know goes into certain Islamic terrorist group coffers."
In its most recent report on the global drug trade, the U.N. estimates that cartels dealing in marijuana specifically have lost at least $3 billion in profit — a 20- to 30-percent cut — since Colorado and Washington moved to legalize pot. If a larger state like California were to go the same route, driving down prices in other parts of the U.S., there could be more serious consequences for traffickers in Mexico particularly, it says. What's unclear is how that could affect drug-related violence there.
To Kelly, pot is the gateway to more serious drug use. "There's no doubt," he said. Ripple effects can be seen in that region's horrific violence. El Salvador now has the world's highest murder rate, the worst experienced by any nation in the last two decades, according to the World Bank. That, in turn, drives the flood of migrants seeking refuge in the U.S.
"If Americans understood," Kelly said, "what doing a little blow on the weekends — on a college campus or here on Capitol Hill — was doing to Honduras or El Salvador, or what it's doing to Colombia, I think they'd responsibly realize that this is not a good thing."
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2016/01/16/legalizing-marijuana-hamstrings-war-on-drugs-general-says/78849996/
-
"If Americans understood," Kelly said, "what doing a little blow on the weekends — on a college campus or here on Capitol Hill — was doing to Honduras or El Salvador, or what it's doing to Colombia, I think they'd responsibly realize that this is not a good thing."
Obviously an out of touch person, who has spent too much time and earned too much money in the war on drugs. Americans don't care..
-
Legal Marijuana Sales Hit $5.4 Billion in 2015, Report Says
(http://static01.nyt.com/images/2016/02/04/us/05xp-marijuana/05xp-marijuana-articleLarge.jpg)
Boxes of marijuana in Denver destined for a dispensary.
BENJAMIN RASMUSSEN FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES
By CHRISTINE HAUSER
FEBRUARY 4, 2016
It’s not just heat lamps in closets and nickel bags anymore: Marijuana is getting some respect as legal sales take off.
This week two marijuana analysis and investment firms released a summary of a report that appeared to confirm that the industry has become a gold rush. National legal sales of cannabis grew to $5.4 billion in 2015, up from $4.6 billion in 2014, according to the firms, the ArcView Group, based in San Francisco, and New Frontier, based in Washington.
Demand is expected to remain strong this year, with a forecast of $6.7 billion in legal sales, the report said.
The promises and headwinds of the industry are potentially far-reaching and attracting notice on Wall Street. As more states legalize marijuana sales, analysts are weighing the stock market benefits of new businesses as cannabis goes corporate. Funds are considering the ethics of investing in marijuana. Parents are even debating whether to allow their children to buy the stocks.
And say goodbye to the common resealable bags and heat lamps in the closet. Lucrative legal side businesses are spinning off, like the climate systems for growers built by a company in Boulder, Colo., and the FunkSac odor-proof and child-resistant marijuana bags produced in Denver.
“There is still a certain stigma around it,” said Brandy Keen, a co-founder of Surna, which makes technology for indoor cultivation. “This is an industry that came out of the basement. It grew out of closets and basements and hidden facilities in cinder-block buildings.”
Nonmedicinal adult use accounted for $998 million of the total sales in 2015, up from $351 million in 2014, according to the ArcView/New Frontier report summary. The estimates are based partly on state tax receipts and data on medical and recreational sales.
The report summary said that by 2020, legal market sales were forecast to be $21.8 billion.
The summary, released before a full report scheduled for the end of February, was one of the latest by market analysts to scrutinize the emerging marijuana industry. Merrill Lynch said in a report cited by Philly.com in December that it expected the cannabis market and associated testing technologies to grow if legalized.
GreenWave Advisors said in its latest annual report in November that it estimated revenues of $4.8 billion in 2015, compared with about $3.2 billion in 2014. It expects further growth in 2016 and a “surge” in 2017 and 2018.
The latest report defined three types of legal marijuana use: adult recreational use; medical use of cannabis; and medicinal use of a cannabis product from which the compound that gets a consumer high has been extracted.
It said 2016 would be the “tipping point” at which a majority of states transition from cannabis prohibition to some form of regulated legal market.
John Kagia, New Frontier’s director of industry analytics, said he has spoken at investment meetings about legal marijuana where it was “standing room only” with investors trying to “figure out angles” given the regulatory climate.
Four states and the District of Columbia allow full adult use, and this year, seven more will vote on allowing it: California, Nevada, Arizona, Massachusetts, Maine, Rhode Island and Vermont.
Twenty-three states already permit medical cannabis use, and four others — Florida, Ohio, Missouri and Pennsylvania — are positioned to advance medical laws, the report said.
Some federal regulatory barriers are easing, and federal interest in research into medical marijuana use is growing. But there are headwinds, the report cautioned.
Cannabis businesses face a higher tax burden. They are also unable to use banks because of federal laws, which can hinder efficiency and pose security risks, forcing the businesses to invest heavily in security measures. Increased competition across state lines could pose new challenges as more states legalize the trade.
Marijuana stocks underperformed on the market in 2015 compared with the Nasdaq and Standard & Poor’s indexes, tempering some of the enthusiasm of investors, the report said.
Legalization is also a hot topic of national debate, making the industry vulnerable in an election year.
“Though public opinion is shifting toward embracing cannabis reform, presidential candidates are more reticent to support legalization,” the report said.
The plant’s business potential has deep and roots, as the rapper Snoop Dogg, the country singer Willie Nelson and the actor Tommy Chong have demonstrated by leveraging their celebrity status to establish new brands in the market, the report noted.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/02/05/business/legal-marijuana-sales-2015-report.html?_r=0
-
Woody Harrelson Applies To Open A Marijuana Dispensary
He wants to bring the Hunger Games to Hawaii.
02/06/2016
Andy Campbell
Reporter, The Huffington Post
Woody Harrelson is high on Hawaii.
The actor and marijuana advocate was one of almost 60 applicants vying to open up one of Honolulu County's first medical dispensaries. He'd open under his company name, Simple Organic Living, according to a state Department of Health statement.
The state will review applications and award them to eight applicants in April, about a year after the Hawaii Legislature passed a bill allowing dispensaries to open. Medical marijuana has been legal in the state for more than 15 years, but there had never been a way for patients to obtain it legally.
If selected, the "Cheers" and "Hunger Games" star will be able to open two production centers and two dispensaries, according to The Associated Press. Harrelson could also be up for some significant tax breaks using a loophole. He could set up in an "enterprise zone," which is used to reward employers who set up in economically depressed areas.
But for now, Harrelson appears to be in it for the weed rights. He's an outspoken advocate of marijuana and hemp. He even narrated a documentary called "Grass."
The AP reports:
Dispensaries are set to open in July. Six are allowed on Oahu, four on Hawaii Island, four on Maui and two on Kauai.
Hawaii became the first to legalize medical marijuana through the legislative process 16 years ago. Lawmakers have introduced laws to legalize recreational marijuana; however they don't think they're likely to pass this year.
The applicants included Henk Rogers, the developer of the video game "Tetris," and "Hawaii Stars" producer Dirk Fukushima.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/woody-harrelson-wants-to-open-a-weed-dispensary-in-hawaii_us_56b63595e4b08069c7a77deb
-
Eric Holder Says It's Ridiculous To Treat Weed Like Heroin, But He Can't Do Anything About It Now
Only one of these drugs belongs among the most dangerous substances.
02/24/2016
Nick Wing
Senior Viral Editor, The Huffington Post
(http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/scalefit_630_noupscale/56ce044e1e00002100702b3e.jpeg?cache=mopgvmalqu)
SLAVEN VLASIC VIA GETTY IMAGES
Former Attorney General Eric Holder believes marijuana should no longer be classified as a Schedule I drug, he said in a recently published interview.
Former Attorney General Eric Holder believes marijuana should no longer be considered a Schedule I substance -- a classification reserved for the most dangerous drugs with no medical use -- he said in a recently published interview with PBS's "Frontline."
"You know, we treat marijuana in the same way that we treat heroin now, and that clearly is not appropriate," he said. "So at a minimum, I think Congress needs to do that. Then I think we need to look at what happens in Colorado and what happens in Washington."
Colorado and Washington have legalized recreational marijuana use over the past few years, and Alaska, Oregon and Washington, D.C., have since followed suit. A number of other states have decriminalized possession of small amounts of marijuana.
"Frontline" conducted the wide-ranging interview on drug policy last year after Holder's departure from the administration, and released it Tuesday along with the program's most recent documentary on the heroin crisis.
Holder has signaled support for rescheduling marijuana in the past, as far back as 2014, when he was still attorney general. During an interview with Katie Couric, he similarly questioned the wisdom of keeping marijuana in the same category as heroin, a drug that is rightly considered to have a high potential for abuse and dependence.
But while the nation's former chief law enforcement officer has expressed disagreement with marijuana's current scheduling, he has been hesitant to propose aggressive action to change it.
At a congressional hearing in 2014, Holder said he'd be "more than glad to work with Congress" to reclassify weed. He echoed those comments in his "Frontline" interview, saying any move to adjust the federal classification of marijuana would have to come from Congress. President Barack Obama has taken a similar stance, while current Attorney General Loretta Lynch has been relatively silent on rescheduling efforts.
But some legal experts say the executive branch -- and more specifically, the attorney general -- actually has the power to reschedule a drug unilaterally. Here's a quick and easy breakdown of how that would work, via the Brookings Institution.
(http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/scalefit_630_noupscale/56ce11d41e00002100702b5e.jpeg)
Tom Angell, chairman of the advocacy group Marijuana Majority, believes Holder could have done more to address rescheduling as attorney general.
“It’s nice to have Holder’s support for this sensible policy change, but it would have been a lot better if he’d exercised the power to get marijuana rescheduling done while he was still in office," Angell said. "We know that Holder and President Obama are good friends, so I hope the former attorney general encourages his former boss and his successor Loretta Lynch to follow through during these final months of the administration and get the job done."
Moving marijuana into a lower schedule wouldn't make it legal under federal law, but it would, among other changes, open the door for further scientific research that advocates say would lead to a fuller understanding of the drug's medical benefits.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/eric-holder-marijuana-rescheduling_us_56ce0329e4b041136f193350?section=politics
-
Medical marijuana bill heading to Utah House after passing 17-12 in Senate
BY MARK GREEN AND BEN WINSLOW
FEBRUARY 25, 2016
SALT LAKE CITY -- Against all odds, a medical marijuana bill is advancing in the Utah State Legislature.
The Utah State Senate voted 17-12 to approve Senate Bill 73, sponsored by Sen. Mark Madsen, R-Saratoga Springs. It allows patients with certain ailments (such as cancer, AIDS, epilepsy and chronic pain) to use marijuana edibles, extracts and oils under the direction of a doctor.
Madsen said during Thursday's debate his latest version of the bill clears up the definition of "cannabis", and adds child-proofing standards, dosing regulations and other considerations.
FOX 13 News' Ben Winslow reports a huge cheer erupted among those watching from the gallery as the vote was passed, and the topic has been the subject of several heated debates this legislative session.
Some supporters of the bill, like Enedina Stanger, were emotional after the vote.
"I am so excited, this is such a miracle, this is all because of God," Stanger said through tears. "It was a hard battle, but it was just because of the miracles and by the love of human beings that we got this through today. I'm so excited."
http://fox13now.com/2016/02/25/medical-marijuana-bill-heading-to-utah-house-after-passing-17-12-in-senate/
-
Marijuana Activists to Light Up in Front of White House Saturday
High (after)noon.
PR 01, 2016 | By CHRIS DEATON
A group of marijuana activists advocating for the decriminalization of marijuana will light up across the street from the White House Saturday afternoon.
The Reschedule 4/20 event -- so-named for the push to reschedule cannabis from a Schedule 1 drug -- is being put on by the D.C. Cannabis Campaign, and advertises "civil disobedience: mass cannabis consumption" beginning at 4:20 p.m.
"Join us in demanding President Obama use his authority to stop the marijuana arrests, pardon offenders, give partients access to their medicine, and deschedule cannabis," a poster for the smoke show reads.
According to a Facebook event page, nearly 400 people have RSVP'd.
While the spectacle has attracted some interest, it's also invited criticism from at least one activist. ThinkProgress has more:
Saturday afternoon, a large group of marijuana activists and advocates will consume cannabis en masse outside the White House in hopes of spurring federal reform. But Tom Angell, founder of Marijuana Majority, argues lighting up in front of the first family's abode isn't a good look for the movement.
"Smoking in a public park where families and children are vacationing is not going to be the way to encourage the president or member of Congress to do what we need them to do," Angell told ThinkProgress. "It also sends a message to those voters from all around the country who are visiting D.C. that legalizing means huge clouds of smoke in public parks."
Needless to say, toking marijuana on federal property or D.C. public land is decidedly not legal. However, the hosts have a more optimistic outlook for certain edible consumables.
"Do you think the National Park Service will go after your brownies, gummies, rice crispy treats, or cookies? Doubtful," DCMJ.org's website reads. "[W]e encourage people who do not want to smoke or vape their cannabis to eat it as a form of protest. So in the misquoted words of Marie Antoinette, LET THEM EAT CAKE!"
http://www.weeklystandard.com/marijuana-activists-to-light-up-in-front-of-white-house-saturday/article/2001817
-
According to a Facebook event page, nearly 400 people have RSVP'd.
LOL. Let's just assume fewer than 400 will show up and get arrested for smoking pot.
Easy to click "attending". Let's see how many of these stoners show up.
-
In Spokane County, marijuana outsells wine, milk and bread — but not beer
Updated April 11, 2016
Monthly sales topped $5 million for the first time in March, according to state figures.
By Kip Hill
The Spokesman-Review
Legal marijuana sales in Spokane County topped retail sales of wine and kitchen staples such as bread and milk last year.
That’s according to sales numbers from the Washington Liquor and Cannabis Board and a survey of household expenses by the U.S. Census Bureau.
Not all marijuana sold in Spokane County is consumed by county residents. State law allows the 17 state-licensed pot shops in the area to sell to anyone older than 21, regardless of where they live.
But with monthly sales topping $5 million for the first time in March, retailers in the county are selling marijuana at an ever-quickening pace — on track to top receipts at area bookstores, museums and live-music venues, according to figures released by the Washington Department of Revenue.
Spokane County marijuana retailers reported a little more than $43 million in sales last year, according to the state Liquor and Cannabis Board. That’s an average $225.64 per household.
By comparison, retail beer sales were $232.70 per Spokane County household last year, according to the Consumer Expenditure Survey administered by the Census Bureau. The average household spent $154.85 on wine, $155.37 on milk and $109.71 on bread in 2015.
The calculated marijuana average ignores the “80/20 rule” — 20 percent of people are responsible for 80 percent of an effect, said Brian Smith, Liquor and Cannabis Board spokesman. An independent study by the Rand Corp. in 2013 found the rule applied to Washington’s nascent marijuana market — that roughly one-fifth of the population accounted for the vast majority of marijuana sales.
The Liquor and Cannabis Board tracks marijuana sales of $2.8 million a day statewide, Smith said. “That seems pretty robust,” he said.
Grant Forsyth, chief economist at Avista and an adviser on industry trends to local governments, said it’s difficult with available data to compare spending on marijuana with other household items. The federal government administers the Consumer Expenses Survey and also classifies marijuana as a controlled substance, hindering efforts to study the purchase of pot with the same rigor as other household expenditures.
“We don’t have a lot of consumption data, so it’s hard to see how the market is going to evolve,” Forsyth said.
Smith said comparing total marijuana revenues to receipts reported by the Department of Revenue might provide a clearer comparison of marijuana’s economic effect on the region.
For the third quarter of 2015 — July through September — marijuana sales in Spokane County reached $12.4 million. That’s slightly less than bookstore revenue of $12.6 million and is below the $15.8 million from arts, entertainment and recreation, including live-music venues and museums, during that period — the most recent for which the comparative data are available.
Marijuana sales rose further in the county in the first quarter of 2016 to $14.5 million. That includes a slight decline in sales in January over December. Total revenues are likely to continue to increase, as medical-marijuana dispensaries will come under Liquor and Cannabis Board control in July.
Because state laws were rewritten last year to enable tax-revenue sharing with local governments based on sales, more revenue means more money for cities and counties.
Spokane County can expect to receive $442,917 from the state in excise taxes on marijuana this year, according to the most recent Liquor and Cannabis Board estimates. The city of Spokane will be allotted $123,011; Spokane Valley, with its moratorium on new businesses, will be capped at $75,824.
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/in-spokane-county-marijuana-outsells-wine-milk-and-bread-but-not-beer/
-
Walgreens Broaches Possible Health Benefits Of Medical Marijuana
National brands haven’t taken a stance on weed yet, but they’ve been forced to acknowledge it.
04/30/2016
Andy Campbell
Reporter, The Huffington Post
Walgreens wants to talk about marijuana.
In what appears to be an unprecedented move for a company its size, Walgreens published a discussion of the possible health benefits of medical marijuana on its health and wellness blog this week.
In the post, titled “Clarifying Clinical Cannabis,” a resident pharmacist at the company takes a look at medical marijuana’s side effects, the debate about its medicinal properties and its legality:
“Research has indicated it may impair your lungs, memory and judgment. However, research has also shown marijuana provides pain relief in ways traditional pain medicines don’t. Medical marijuana can improve appetite and relieve nausea in those who have cancer and it may help relieve symptoms such as muscle stiffness in people who have multiple sclerosis.”
It’s not exactly clear what the company’s intentions are. Its parent company, Walgreen Co., isn’t ready to say it’s throwing its hat in the ring of an industry whose recreational and medical sales topped out at $5.4 billion in 2015.
“The content is strictly informative, and nowhere do we take any stance on the issue,” Jim Cohn, a spokesman for Walgreen Co., told The Huffington Post. “It was developed to address some of the questions we’ve received from patients and customers through various channels.”
Indeed, Americans want to talk about weed. Recent polling by CBS News suggests 56 percent of Americans want marijuana to be legalized across the board, and half of Americans have tried it.
Corporations, however, have tiptoed around the issue, especially when it comes to marijuana’s touted health applications. Companies like Target have faced fierce backlash for speaking out about hot-button issues at all. It’s interesting, then, that a pharmacy chain is joining the discussion about medical marijuana.
Advocates say it’s a low-risk move.
“In the corporate world one assumes the biggest risk for an institution like Walgreens is a backlash from the consuming public — but fear of the backlash from American consumers hasn’t been a realistic concern for a long time,” Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, told HuffPost.
He went on:
“More than half of the public now resides in jurisdictions where the physician-supervised use of cannabis therapy for qualifying patients is legal, and over 85 percent of voters acknowledge that cannabis is a safe and effective treatment that ought to be permitted. Therefore, it is hardly surprising that those within the public health sphere are now publicly acknowledging and responding to this reality,” he said in an email.
While Walgreen may balk at the idea that its blog post represents a big change in national discourse, the company has always been tactful in its communications with consumers. In 2014 it scrapped a plan to move its headquarters to Switzerland to take advantage of low corporate tax rates — a move that would have cost taxpayers $4 billion over the following five years — in response to public pressure.
Its blog post was published on Tumblr, which targets marijuana’s most favorable audience: Young people. Seventy-one percent of adults under 35 think marijuana use should be legal, according to the CBS poll.
In any case, it’ll be a while before you’ll be picking up an ounce of purple haze at Walgreens or Duane Reade. Twenty-four states have legalized marijuana for medical use, and Washington, D.C., and four other states have legalized recreational use, but it’s still banned federally.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/walgreens-medical-marijuana_us_5724dcabe4b0f309baf107c7
-
Poll: Voters Say Marijuana Should Be Legal for Vets With PTSD
(http://www.newsmax.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=b90cff60-8c51-47fe-8513-14490bb61dfc&SiteName=Newsmax&maxsidesize=600)
Image: Poll: Voters Say Marijuana Should Be Legal for Vets With PTSD (Photo by NELSON ALMEIDA/AFP/Getty Images)
By Sandy Fitzgerald | Monday, 06 Jun 2016
American voters overwhelmingly agree that Veterans Administration doctors should be able to prescribe marijuana in pill form for veterans who suffer from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, a new Quinnipiac University poll shows.
According to the poll conducted between May 24-30, of 1,561 registered voters nationwide:
•87-9 percent overall agree.
•82-13 percent from military households agree.
•79 percent or higher from all parties agreed.
Voters also agreed overwhelmingly that adults should be able to use medical marijuana if prescribed from a doctor but agreed more on the issue of legalizing marijuana altogether:
•89-9 percent allowing adults to legally use medical marijuana.
•54-41 percent, making marijuana legal.
•Men support general legalization 60-37 percent.
•Women support, 48-46 percent.
•Republicans oppose, 62-36 percent.
•Voters over 65 years old oppose 57-37 percent.
The poll carried a margin of error of 2.5 percentage points.
http://www.newsmax.com/US/voters-marijuana-legal-vets/2016/06/06/id/732428/#ixzz4ApjGJaYg
-
First medical marijuana dispensary to open in Florida
Published July 26, 2016
Associated Press
(http://a57.foxnews.com/images.foxnews.com/content/fox-news/health/2016/07/26/first-medical-marijuana-dispensary-to-open-in-florida/_jcr_content/par/featured-media/media-0.img.jpg/876/493/1469548745432.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
The first medical marijuana dispensary in Florida is slated to open.
Trulieve, the approved organization in northwest Florida, is set to open a dispensary in Tallahassee on Tuesday, one week after being given dispensing authorization by Florida's health department.
The state's Office of Compassionate Use, which was formed to oversee state regulation of medical marijuana, projects that there will be dispensing locations in 19 cities by the time all six organizations are up and running.
The Legislature gave limited approval to medical marijuana in 2014, with many expecting it to be available early in 2015. The process was beset by administrative delays.
Patients suffering from cancer, epilepsy, chronic seizures and chronic muscle spasms can order medical marijuana by contacting their physician, as long as both are in a state registry.
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2016/07/26/first-medical-marijuana-dispensary-to-open-in-florida.html
-
9 States to Vote on Legalizing Marijuana in November
(http://www.newsmax.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=4fa8e7db-4704-484e-b462-d86ea111c881&SiteName=Newsmax&maxsidesize=600)
Image: 9 States to Vote on Legalizing Marijuana in November
By Cathy Burke | Thursday, 04 Aug 2016
Ballot measures to liberalize laws involving marijuana use will be on the ballot in nine states this November – and supporters and critics are stockpiling money for the fight ahead, The Hill reports.
Arizona, California, Maine, Massachusetts and Nevada all will have measures on the ballot to legalize marijuana for recreational purposes. Arkansas, Florida, Montana and Missouri, will decide whether to allow doctors to prescribe marijuana for medicinal use.
"What we have now on our side is actual experience in states like Colorado and Washington," Aaron Smith, executive director of the National Cannabis Industry Association, based in Denver, tells The Hill, referring to the states where pot is legal for recreational use.
"Now voters can actually see how these programs are working in these states. Before, there were prophecies of doom and gloom."
But it will come down to money.
"There's a real question about whether the movement can really raise enough money to support the [get-out-the-vote] efforts and the ad campaigns to ensure victory," Tom Angell, the founder of Marijuana Majority. "If we do see a significant number of losses, or a big loss in an important state like California, that could seriously interrupt our momentum."
In California, seven groups supporting Proposition 64 have raised more than $8 million, according to the most recent filings with the Secretary of State's office, The Hill reports.
The measure legalizing marijuana for medical use in Florida has attracted $3.8 million in contributions, most of it from trial attorney John Morgan, The Hill reports.
On the anti-legalization side, Smart Approaches to Marijuana, a group founded by Kevin Sabet, director of the Drug Policy Institute at the University of Florida, former Rhode Island Democratic Rep. Patrick Kennedy and conservative columnist David Frum, has raised more than $2 million to oppose legalization measures in Arizona, California, Nevada, Massachusetts and Maine, The Hill reports.
And the family that founded the Publix supermarket chain in Florida has chipped in $800,000 to the campaign against medical marijuana there, The Hill reports.
"We're worried about the creation of the next Big Tobacco," Sabet tells The Hill. "It's about money. It's about Silicon Valley and Wall Street millionaires making a lot of money."
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Legalizing-Marijuana-Ballot-November/2016/08/04/id/742121/#ixzz4GO1Zqj4v
-
Smoking Marijuana Reduces Motivation to Work
(http://www.newsmax.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=ac443d3f-5e75-42f2-a755-a7f997cf7b6e&SiteName=Newsmax&maxsidesize=600)
Image: Smoking Marijuana Reduces Motivation to Work
(Copyright Fotolia)
By Sylvia Booth Hubbard | Friday, 02 Sep 2016
If you smoke marijuana, you may be setting yourself up to be a loser. A British study found that smoking a single joint made people less willing to work for money. It is the first study to demonstrate the short-term effects of marijuana in humans.
Occasional cannabis users inhaled the equivalent of one cigarette through a balloon. They were then asked to choose between two computer tasks involving pressing the space bar with the little finger of their non-dominant hand for up to 21 seconds.
The test was designed to measure their motivation to work for money — an option that required little effort for a minimal amount of money, and a second that required more effort for up to four times the money.
The same group repeated the test at a later time, but inhaled a vapor that contained no marijuana, and the results of both sessions were compared.
"Repeatedly pressing keys with a single finger isn't difficult but it takes a reasonable amount of effort, making it a useful test of motivation," explained senior author Val Curran of University College London (UCL).
"We found that people on cannabis were significantly less likely to choose the high-effort option.
"On average, volunteers on placebo chose the high-effort option 50 percent of the time for a £2 reward, whereas volunteers on cannabis only chose the high-effort option 42 percent of the time."
The results may be due to levels of dopamine, the "feel good" chemical produced in the brain that's also linked to motivation. A earlier study at UCL found that levels of dopamine are lower in heavy users and those who began the drug at a younger age.
"Although cannabis is commonly thought to reduce motivation, this is the first time it has been reliably tested and quantified using an appropriate sample size and methodology," said lead author Dr. Will Law
The study was published in Psychopharmacology.
Marijuana use continues to rise in the United States. A recent survey found that the percentage of adult users rose from 21.9 million to 31.9 million between 2002 and 2014.
http://www.newsmax.com/Health/Health-News/smoking-marijuana-reduces-motivation/2016/09/02/id/746435/
-
Smoking Marijuana Reduces Motivation to Work
(http://www.newsmax.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=ac443d3f-5e75-42f2-a755-a7f997cf7b6e&SiteName=Newsmax&maxsidesize=600)
Image: Smoking Marijuana Reduces Motivation to Work
(Copyright Fotolia)
By Sylvia Booth Hubbard | Friday, 02 Sep 2016
If you smoke marijuana, you may be setting yourself up to be a loser. A British study found that smoking a single joint made people less willing to work for money. It is the first study to demonstrate the short-term effects of marijuana in humans.
Occasional cannabis users inhaled the equivalent of one cigarette through a balloon. They were then asked to choose between two computer tasks involving pressing the space bar with the little finger of their non-dominant hand for up to 21 seconds.
The test was designed to measure their motivation to work for money — an option that required little effort for a minimal amount of money, and a second that required more effort for up to four times the money.
The same group repeated the test at a later time, but inhaled a vapor that contained no marijuana, and the results of both sessions were compared.
"Repeatedly pressing keys with a single finger isn't difficult but it takes a reasonable amount of effort, making it a useful test of motivation," explained senior author Val Curran of University College London (UCL).
"We found that people on cannabis were significantly less likely to choose the high-effort option.
"On average, volunteers on placebo chose the high-effort option 50 percent of the time for a £2 reward, whereas volunteers on cannabis only chose the high-effort option 42 percent of the time."
The results may be due to levels of dopamine, the "feel good" chemical produced in the brain that's also linked to motivation. A earlier study at UCL found that levels of dopamine are lower in heavy users and those who began the drug at a younger age.
"Although cannabis is commonly thought to reduce motivation, this is the first time it has been reliably tested and quantified using an appropriate sample size and methodology," said lead author Dr. Will Law
The study was published in Psychopharmacology.
Marijuana use continues to rise in the United States. A recent survey found that the percentage of adult users rose from 21.9 million to 31.9 million between 2002 and 2014.
http://www.newsmax.com/Health/Health-News/smoking-marijuana-reduces-motivation/2016/09/02/id/746435/
It is interesting you girl that MJ is a psychotic yet has an anti-psychotic effect on dopamine, reducing it.
It is also odd that it reduces boredom yet reduces dopamine, makes no sense.
-
Chelsea Clinton Claims Marijuana Kills People
Posted on September 28, 2016 by Sean Adl-Tabatabai in News, US
(http://cdns.yournewswire.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Chelsea-Clinton-marijuana-kills-people-700x350.jpg)
Chelsea Clinton has claimed that marijuana kills people
Chelsea Clinton has gone on the record and denounced marijuana as a potentially lethal drug that she says may be killing people who take it for medical purposes.
Chelsea made a recent appearance at Youngstown State University campaigning for her mother, Hillary Clinton. She told the crowd of students that there are “public health concerns” associated with cannabis consumption due to recent deaths in Colorado.
Hightimes.com reports:
“We also have anecdotal evidence now from Colorado where some of the people who were taking marijuana for those purposes, the coroner believes, after they died, there was drug interactions with other things they were taking,” she said.
Although there is no documented evidence that marijuana has ever contributed to the death of a single human being in the thousands of years it has been used by civilizations across the globe, prohibitionists often dig deep into their sagging bags of propaganda to convince the average citizen that the effects of cannabis can be both devastating and deadly. But this is the first we have heard of marijuana potentially interacting with other drugs and causing people to suffer their untimely demise.
A recent article on InhaleMD indicates that while there can be some minor interactions when consuming cannabis in conjunction with other medications and food, there is no evidence to suggest that these types of concoctions can result in death.
“Cannabis is not known to produce any lethal interactions with other substances, including foods and beverages,” the article reads. “In fact, as natural and synthetic drugs go, cannabis is exceptionally gentle, with negative effects typically limited to: anxiety, dry mouth, increased thirst, [and] sore throat.”
The article, which was penned by Dr. Jordan Tishler, an expert in the field of cannabis medicine, goes on to explain that while marijuana “isn’t physically harmful,” when mixing it with alcohol, antidepressants, antihistamines and muscle relaxants, the stoned effects can be often amplified—giving the user the feeling of being more intoxicated or in a deeper state of relaxation.
But it does not appear that anyone has died as a direct result of mixing marijuana with other drugs, as Clinton seems to have implied in her speech over the weekend.
Using marijuana is combination with other substances is “substantially safer than blending most other types of medications,” the article continues.
Chelsea Clinton did, however, take the opportunity to reiterate her mother’s stance on states’ rights and the pursuit of more medical marijuana research. But, her comments, once again, seemed to imply that marijuana could be what the federal government claims—a dangerous drug.
“We just need so much more data than we have so that people who might benefit have the chance to benefit, people who might be in danger are protected,” Clinton said. “So absolutely, my mom strongly supports the need for more rigorous study and then subjecting it, as we do kind of everything else that might have a medicinal purpose, to FDA approval, scrutiny and ultimately regulation.”
Hillary Clinton has said throughout the majority of her campaign that she plans to remove cannabis from its Schedule I listing if she is elected into the presidency this November.
http://yournewswire.com/chelsea-clinton-claims-marijuana-kills-people/
-
(https://s15.postimg.org/6ot12lay3/636110065511938891_charlo_greene.jpg)
Former Alaska reporter faces 54 years in jail for pot club
(NEWSER) — Charlo Greene made headlines in 2014 when the then 26-year-old memorably quit her TV reporting gig on air while announcing her intention to push for the legalization of marijuana in Alaska: She said, "F--- it, I quit," before walking out of view. But as the Guardian reports, her ensuing off-screen plight has been largely ignored, even though she faces more than a half-century in prison. That's because Greene, whose legal name is Charlene Egbe, isn't just a cannabis advocate but the owner of the Alaska Cannabis Club, which she created on April 20, 2014, a full six months before Alaska voted to legalize the adult use of cannabis. In other words, she was receiving "donations" for marijuana through club "memberships" before it was legal to do so.
Police raided the club twice and detectives made several undercover purchases, and though Greene wasn't directly involved in them, state prosecutors are charging her because the club is registered under her name. She's pleaded not guilty to charges of "misconduct involving a controlled substance," and the original indictment listed eight offenses that amounted to a possible 24 years in jail. The Guardian broke the news to Greene that six offenses have since been added, raising the total to 54 years. In the Weed Blog, Greene calls this a "modern-day lynching," and tells High Times that she hopes the cannabis community rallies behind her. "I need help more than ever," she says. "Now that I could lose the rest of my life because of cannabis, it feels like the people I fought for have abandoned me."
-
Pets on Pot: The Newest Customer Base for Medical Marijuana
By LAURA M. HOLSON
OCT. 8, 2016
(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2016/10/09/fashion/09PETSPOT-slide-UEBE/09PETSPOT-slide-UEBE-blog427.jpg)
When Lisa Mastramico needed relief for her ailing tabby, Little Kitty, she turned to an unlikely source: marijuana.
At 12 years old, the cat had arthritis. For a long while she spent her days hiding in a closet, where Ms. Mastramico had built her a bed of plush blankets. After trying various supplements that proved ineffectual, she went to a meeting for Women Grow, an industry group for cannabis entrepreneurs.
She was not sold on the idea right away. “My concern was that it’s not my place to get my cat high,” said Ms. Mastramico, the director of a public access television network in Long Beach, Calif.
But with Little Kitty becoming increasingly isolated, it was time to give it a try. She got a medical marijuana card and purchased two edible oils made for pets and derived from cannabis that she squirts into her pet’s mouth.
Little Kitty doesn’t hide anymore. In fact, she’s more like her old self: sunbathing on the living room carpet, playing with Ms. Mastramico’s other cat, Valentina. “When I’ve given it to her, she’s never acted high: falling face-first into her food bowl, chowing down,” Ms. Mastramico said. “She comes out and socializes, wants to be in your lap, wants to be petted. It’s a very noticeable difference.”
Other animal lovers who have turned to cannabis-based products to alleviate a host of pet maladies, including seizures, inflammation, anxiety and pain, are reporting similar results. Although they have not been approved by regulators, marijuana-based treatments are being used not only for cats and dogs, but for pigs, horses and domesticated wild animals.
Maria Ellis Perez, 55, a mold inspector from Pompano Beach, Fla., gives Treatibles chews made from hemp to one of her pets, a domesticated female skunk named Ricochet. At age 12, Ricochet limps and has cataracts. At one point, she had grown so withdrawn that she refused to eat. “We thought it was her time,” Ms. Ellis Perez said.
Receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.
But after a few days of nibbling hemp, Ricochet seemed more content. “She was turning her head and looking up with the good eye,” Ms. Ellis Perez said. “She showed up for breakfast.”
The Food and Drug Administration has not approved cannabis for pets, in part because there is little research showing its effectiveness. Veterinarians are not allowed to write prescriptions for the products and, in states where marijuana is illegal, are wary of discussing the idea. Last year, a proposed state law was defeated in Nevada that would have made it possible for veterinarians to prescribe cannabis to pets with chronic illnesses. Still, users swear by the products.
Cate Norton, 36, who lives in Springfield, Vt., and works at an animal rescue center, said she drives her two Rottweilers, Ruby and Leia, to a veterinarian in Hanover, N.H., where medical marijuana is permitted. “My vet would like to do it but can’t legally touch it,” she said.
Ms. Norton gives 3-year-old Leia a hemp-based product called Canna-Pet for seizures and anxiety. In the eight months of treatment, she said, “there has been a great reduction in the severity of her seizures.”
To understand the effect of cannabis on animals, it helps to know a little of the science. The cannabis plant contains dozens of cannabinoids, among them THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) and CBD (cannabidiol). THC has the psychoactive properties that make people feel high but are toxic to animals.
CBD, on the other hand, offers the benefits without the buzz. Industrial hemp, used to make textiles and paper, is used in pet products, too, because its THC levels are negligible.
“Dogs are very sensitive to the effects of THC,” said Steve Blauvelt, a veterinarian in Bend, Ore. With the recent legalization of marijuana in some states, more pets have ended up in veterinary hospitals panting and in distress after digging into their owners’ stashes or pilfering a pot-laced cookie from the counter.
“Most pet owners who end up bringing their animal in are in denial,” Dr. Blauvelt said. But eventually, he said, “they come clean and say their dog ate one of their brownies.”
Pallas Weber, 53, a video editor in Los Angeles, was skeptical about giving cannabis to Emmett, a 12-year-old chow-shepherd mix who got a diagnosis of bone cancer in 2012, resulting in an amputated front left leg. But the painkiller her veterinarian prescribed left him too woozy to support his 75-pound frame on his other legs.
So last June, Ms. Weber bought Emmett a cannabis-based tincture called VETCBD, which is sold at California dispensaries. Four months later, she has reduced the painkillers, and Emmett moves with some of his old swagger. She uses it for Emmett’s anxiety, too, giving him an extra dose on the Fourth of July to keep him from diving headfirst into the closet. “Fireworks really freak him out,” she said.
Stephen Katz, the New York State assemblyman who is also a veterinarian, has teamed up with the University of Pennsylvania’s school of veterinary medicine to conduct clinical trials of Therabis, a trio of hemp-based powders he created for anxiety, mobility and itching.
“I had a lot of clients who did a lot of flying,” he said. “They wanted tranquilizers so they could carry their dogs in their lap.” He worried, though, about the harsh effect of sedatives on the dogs’ cardiovascular and respiratory systems and thought his clients’ animals would benefit from hemp.
At his practice in the Bronx, he said, he treats a number of pit bulls suffering from allergies and separation anxiety. “Those dogs scratch an itch down to the bone,” he said. The products’ cost is on par with prescription drugs, he said: about $20 to $40 a month.
Pet owners in California, where medical marijuana has been legal for two decades, are at the forefront of the trend. Rachel Martin, 32, a dog trainer, uses VETCBD for a variety of her dogs’ ailments. “All of them have very complex and detailed medical issues,” she said. A Jack Russell terrier named Shadow has had multiple surgeries; Sophie, a rat terrier, had a diagnosis of cancer; and Petri, a Chihuahua-mix, suffers from fear-based anxiety.
Ms. Weber had to get a medical marijuana card to buy products for her dog Emmett. That led her to an awkward conversation with a physician who solely prescribes medical marijuana for people.
“I went to the weed doctor and said, ‘I need a card so I can get it for my dog who had cancer,’” said Ms. Weber, who said she doesn’t smoke pot or drink. “He said, ‘I don’t have a solution for that.’ So I told him I had insomnia.”
Maureen McCormick, 54, lives in Newport Beach, Calif., and was persuaded of marijuana’s benefits after relatives used cannabis products for their own aches and pains. She thought they would benefit her 14-year-old cat, Bart, who has arthritis in his front legs. “I told the doctor I had a knee that aches, and my shoulder, too,” she said. “I also said I want to use it for my cat.” She got the card in July.
Ms. McCormick is using a tincture by Treatwell, a California company that also makes edibles for humans. So far, though, she said she has not seen much progress in Bart. “It’s frustrating, because cats are more challenging than dogs,” Ms. McCormick said. She has adjusted the dose three times, working with Melinda Hayes, 39, the founder of Sweet Leaf Shoppe, a medical cannabis delivery service based in Los Angeles.
Ms. Hayes, who opened her dispensary in 2014, started working with pet owners and their animals last year after consulting with cannabis product makers. “It’s a lot of going back and forth,” she said.
She said she now aids 40 animals, and about half of her calls these days are about pet care. “I go as often as I can to meet the pet,” Ms, Hayes said. “Owners look at their loved ones through rose-colored glasses. People can verbalize their reactions. Animals cannot.”
She also gives cannabis products to her own pets: her boxer-terrier mix, Diva, who tore a ligament in her right knee; Snoop, her pitbull-Shih Tzu mix, who has allergies and anxiety; and Tug, a box turtle who suffers from disorders of the shell and the bones. Ultimately, Ms. Hayes wants to have a full-service storefront where people can take their pets for consultations and care.
“This way,” she said, “I can combine my two favorite things: dogs and pot.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/09/fashion/pets-medical-marijuana-dogs-cats.html?_r=0
-
Heavy Pot Use Increases Risk of Bone Disease
(http://www.newsmax.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=ba89ac13-1955-4053-aada-e7fc105db6c6&SiteName=Newsmax&maxsidesize=600)
Image: Heavy Pot Use Increases Risk of Bone Disease
Friday, 14 Oct 2016
Smoking large amounts of cannabis over a long period of time could lead to reduced bone density and a higher risk of fractures according to new UK research.
Carried out by the University of Edinburgh, UK, the study is the first to look at bone health amongst cannabis users.
For their research the team recruited 170 people who smoked cannabis regularly for recreational purposes and 114 who didn't use the drug at all.
The researchers defined heavy users as those who reported smoking cannabis on 5000 or more occasions in their lifetime, although in the study the average heavy cannabis user had taken the drug more than 47,000 times.
Those who had taken the drug about 1000 times were described as moderate users.
Whether heavy, moderate or non-users, all participants had their bone density measured using a specialized x-ray technique called a DEXA scan.
The results showed that the bone density of heavy cannabis users was about 5 percent lower than cigarette smokers who did not use cannabis, which the researchers say could put heavy users at an increased risk of developing osteoporosis later in life. The researchers also found that when compared to non-users, heavy users also experienced more fractures, however no difference was found between moderate users and non-users.
Perhaps surprisingly, as cannabis is known to increase appetite, the study also found that the heavy users had a lower body weight and a reduced body mass index (BMI), with the researchers suggesting that large amounts of the drug over a long period of time may actually reduce and not increase the appetite. That finding is also bad news for bone health, and could be one of the contributing factors to the lower bone density seen in this group of users.
Lead researcher Professor Stuart Ralston commented on the results saying, "We have known for a while that the components of cannabis can affect bone cell function but we had no idea up until now of what this might mean to people who use cannabis on a regular basis."
However the team did add that further research is needed to better understand the link between cannabis use and its negative effect on bone density.
The study, which was funded by Arthritis Research UK, is published in the American Journal of Medicine.
http://www.newsmax.com/Health-News/heavy-pot-use-increases/2016/10/14/id/753368/
-
Most pet owners who end up bringing their animal in are in denial,” Dr. Blauvelt said. But eventually, he said, “they come clean and say their dog ate one of their brownies.”
Dogs shouldn't be allowed chocolate under any circumstances.
-
9 States Are Voting On Marijuana On Election Day. Here’s Where They Stand Right Now.
Follow along here as voters decide.
11/08/2016
Matt Ferner
National Reporter, The Huffington Post
Nick Wing
Senior Viral Editor, The Huffington Post
TVIRBICKIS/GETTY IMAGES
Marijuana legalization is on the ballot in a diverse set of states on Nov. 8.
Millions of voters across the United States are considering measures to roll back longstanding restrictions on marijuana this Election Day.
By the end of Tuesday night, five more states could fully legalize weed, which would put nearly one-quarter of the nation’s population in areas that have rejected prohibition and decided to tax and regulate the plant. An additional four states are voting on whether to legalize marijuana for medical use. If approved, pot would become legal in some form in 29 states and Washington D.C.
Marijuana policy reformers say this could be a watershed moment for their movement.
“Nov. 8 is the most important day in the history of the marijuana legalization movement,” Tom Angell, chairman of drug policy reform group Marijuana Majority, told The Huffington Post. “The stakes couldn’t be higher. Big wins will dramatically accelerate our push to finally end federal marijuana prohibition, perhaps as soon as 2017. But on the other hand, huge losses could interrupt the momentum we’ve been building for the last several years.”
Nov. 8 is the most important day in the history of the marijuana legalization movement.
Tom Angell, chairman of Marijuana Majority
National support for the legalization of marijuana has risen dramatically in recent years, reaching historic highs in multiple polls just last month. Acceptance of marijuana use has also been rising steadily, as the “Reefer Madness” hysteria of years past has begun to look increasingly absurd. States like Colorado have established regulated marijuana marketplaces, and successes there have debunked some lawmakers and law enforcers’ predictions that such polices would result in disaster.
The federal government still considers marijuana to be among the “most dangerous” drugs, alongside heroin and LSD, and argues that it has no “current accepted medical use.” But as the marijuana industry grows and as legalization spreads across the country, the movement’s increased political clout could help chip away at the federal ban.
While the measures proposed in each of these states are different, they’ll produce similar outcomes if approved. In states considering recreational measures, voters are deciding whether the possession, cultivation, use and sale of marijuana should be legal for adults 21 and over. In states considering medical measures, they’re voting to legalize marijuana only for qualifying patients.
The following states will vote on marijuana on Tuesday. We’ll keep this story updated throughout the election as results come in.
Recreational Marijuana Measures
Arizona
Medical marijuana has been legal in Arizona since 2010, but the push for broader legalization has been seen as one of the marijuana movement’s toughest battles. For months, polls in the state have shown voters largely split on Proposition 205, with two of the most recent polls suggesting a very slim lead for voters in favor of legalization.
California
With the sixth-largest economy in the world and about 40 million residents, the marijuana legalization movement has held up California as one of its biggest prizes. It was the first state to establish a legal medical marijuana program about 20 years ago, and since then, about two dozen states have followed.
In 2010, the state had the opportunity to become the first state to legalize recreational marijuana, but voters ultimately rejected that ballot initiative.
For most of 2016, polls found high support for Proposition 64, with recent polls hovering at just below 60 percent in favor of allowing California to join the ranks of Colorado, the District of Columbia, and three other Pacific states ―Washington, Oregon and Alaska ― in legalizing marijuana for recreational purposes.
Maine
Maine has been a leader on marijuana policy for decades, and has been in a good position to roll back prohibition on the East Coast. In 1976, the state legislature voted to decriminalize possession of small amounts of weed, and in 1999, voters approved marijuana for medical use.
The latest polling on Question 1, a measure to legalize retail sales and recreational use statewide, placed support at around 50 percent, with nearly 10 percent of likely voters still undecided.
Massachusetts
The latest polls showed growing support for a measure to legalize marijuana in Massachusetts, leading advocates to see it as one of the most likely states to do so.
More than 60 percent of likely voters supported Question 4, according to one recent survey, with 34 percent opposed. Voters in Massachusetts previously approved medical marijuana in 2012 by a similar margin, four years after a successful 2008 effort to decriminalize possession of small amounts of weed.
Nevada
Recent Nevada polls showed support for Question 2 hovering around 50 percent, making it more of a nail-biter for proponents of marijuana legalization. Supporters of the measure include multiple Democratic state lawmakers and some unions, while opponents include a group of Republican state lawmakers.
Las Vegas casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson almost single-handedly funded the opposition campaign, giving it over $3 million, or roughly 97 percent of the total money the campaign raised, according to the Adelson-owned Las Vegas Review-Journal.
Medical Marijuana Measures
Arkansas
The latest polling on Issue 6, a measure to bring medical marijuana to deep-red Arkansas and the South on Election Day, showed support at around 50 percent ― further complicated by an aggressive opposition campaign and controversy surrounding a separate ballot initiative on medical marijuana.
Florida
Recent polling showed Floridians likely approve medical marijuana on Tuesday, leading to hopes that it could become the first state in the South to legalize weed for any purpose (polls close earlier in Florida than in Arkansas). One survey conducted in late October showed support for the state’s Amendment 2 at over 70 percent.
Florida’s campaign for medical marijuana attracted a number of high-profile supporters hoping the state’s voters would do what they failed to do in 2014, when they rejected a similar measure. But anti-drug groups and donors ― including Adelson, who donated $1,500,000 to oppose Amendment 2 ― were intent on pushing back against the apparent momentum.
Montana
Montana first legalized medical marijuana back in 2004, but five years ago, state lawmakers severely gutted that medical marijuana program, prompting a dramatic decline in medical marijuana providers for state-registered patients.
Some polling suggested a lack of support for Initiative 182, a measure to repeal limitations installed by state lawmakers and establish a robust program in the state once again.
North Dakota
Prior to Tuesday, there wasn’t any recent polling available on North Dakota’s Measure 5. In 2014, 47 percent of voters said they supported the legalization of medical marijuana, though they hadn’t gotten the chance to vote on it until this election.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/marijuana-legalization-9-states_us_5820c74ce4b0e80b02cba484
-
Marijuana wins big on election night
By Christopher Ingraham
November 8, 2016
Voters in California, Massachusetts and Nevada approved recreational marijuana initiatives while an initiative in Maine was leading in the polls Wednesday morning. The 2016 election has proved to be the biggest electoral victory for marijuana reform since 2012. (Daron Taylor/The Washington Post)
Voters in California, Massachusetts and Nevada approved recreational marijuana initiatives Tuesday night, and several other states passed medical marijuana provisions, in what is turning out to be the biggest electoral victory for marijuana reform since 2012, when Colorado and Washington first approved the drug's recreational use.
In addition to the states above, local outlets in Maine are declaring victory for that state's legalization measure, but with 91 percent of precincts reporting just a few thousand votes separate the "Yes" and "No" columns.
A similar legalization measure in Arizona did not gain sufficient support to pass, with 52 percent of voters rejecting it.
On the medical side, voters in Florida, North Dakota and Arkansas have approved medical marijuana initiatives. Voters in in Montana also rolled back restrictions on an existing medical pot law.
Reformers were jubilant. “This represents a monumental victory for the marijuana reform movement,” said Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, in a statement. “With California’s leadership now, the end of marijuana prohibition nationally, and even internationally, is fast approaching.”
Five states have marijuana legalization initiatives on their ballots. Here's what they can learn from Washington, Colorado and Oregon, states where marijuana use has already been legalized. (Daron Taylor, Danielle Kunitz/The Washington Post)
California has long been seen as a bellwether by both supporters and opponents of marijuana reform. The state is home to about 12 percent of the U.S. population. Given the size of the state's economy and the economic impact of the marijuana industry there, California's adoption of legal marijuana could prompt federal authorities to rethink their decades-long prohibition on the use of marijuana.
[A casino magnate is spending millions to fight legal marijuana in three states]
In a recent interview with Bill Maher, President Obama said that passage of the legalization measures on Tuesday could make the current federal approach to the drug “untenable.”
Still, the likelihood of a Trump White House leaves a lot of uncertainty about the fate of marijuana measures in the next four years. Under Obama, federal authorities largely took a hands-off approach to state-level legalization efforts. But an incoming administration more skeptical of drug reform could easily reverse that approach.
“The prospect of Rudy Giuliani or Chris Christie as attorney general does not bode well,” the Drug Policy Alliance's Nadelmann said in an interview. “There are various ways in which a hostile White House could trip things up.”
Nadelmann pointed to the success of marijuana measures in the midst of an evident Republican wave as a sign that support for legalization now cuts deeply across party lines. And citing Trump's often contradictory statements on marijuana and drug use in the past, Nadelmann added that “Donald Trump personally could probably go any which way on this.”
With today's votes, legal marijuana is also making significant inroads in the Northeast. “Marijuana legalization has arrived on the East Coast,” said Tom Angell of the marijuana reform group Marijuana Majority in an email. “What Colorado and other states have already done is generating revenue, creating jobs and reducing crime, so it’s not surprising that voters in more places are eager to end prohibition.”
Opponents of legalization said they were disappointed by the outcomes. “We were outspent greatly in both California and Massachusetts, so this loss is disappointing, but not wholly unexpected,” said Kevin Sabet of the anti-legalization group Smart Approaches to Marijuana in a statement. “Despite having gained considerable ground in the last few weeks, the out-of-state interests determined to make money off of legalization put in too much money to overcome.”
Votes on medical marijuana in Florida and North Dakota were decisive. Florida's Amendment 2 passed with 71 percent support, according to the Associated Press. In North Dakota, the AP reports that 64 percent of voters approving of the medical marijuana measure.
[One striking chart shows why pharma companies are fighting legal marijuana]
Two years ago, a medical marijuana measure in Florida earned 58 percent of the vote, just shy of the 60 percent threshold needed for passage. Then, as now, opposition to the measure was fueled by multimillion-dollar donations from Sheldon Adelson, the Las Vegas casino magnate and GOP donor. In 2014 Adelson spent $5.5 million to defeat the measure. This year he's spent $1.5 million in Florida, and several million more to defeat recreational marijuana measures in other states.
“This is a major tipping point,” said Tom Angell of Florida's vote. “With Florida's decision, a majority of states in the U.S. now have laws allowing patients to find relief with medical marijuana, and these protections and programs are no longer concentrated in certain regions of the country like the West and Northeast.”
The victory in North Dakota is something of a surprise as no polling was done on the measure.
The Florida amendment has the potential to be one of the more permissive medical marijuana regimes in the nation. In addition to diseases like HIV, cancer and PTSD, the measure also allows doctors to recommend medical pot for “other debilitating medical conditions of the same kind or class as or comparable to those enumerated, and for which a physician believes that the medical use of marijuana would likely outweigh the potential health risks for a patient.” While the 2014 measure allowed doctors to prescribe marijuana for any illness they believed it would be useful for, the new measure requires they show the illness is severe — though the wording gives physicians considerable leeway in determining which conditions would meet those criteria.
The medical pot measure in North Dakota allows doctors to recommend the drug for a number of severe medical conditions.
With the passage of Amendment 2, Florida will become the first Southern state to enact a robust medical marijuana regime. Medical marijuana is already legal in 25 other states and the District.
“Better late than never,” said Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the drug reform group Drug Policy Alliance, in a statement. “Most states outside the South already have legal medical marijuana, but the overwhelming victory today in Florida is likely to accelerate the momentum for reform throughout the region.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/08/medical-marijuana-sails-to-victory-in-florida/
-
Little-known illness tied to smoking weed on the rise
CBS News
Jonathan Lapook
NEW YORK -- For more than two years, Lance Crowder was having severe abdominal pain and vomiting, and no local doctor could figure out why. Finally, an emergency room physician in Indianapolis had an idea.
“The first question he asked was if I was taking hot showers to find relief. When he asked me that question, I basically fell into tears because I knew he had an answer,” Crowder said.
The answer was cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome, or CHS. It’s caused by heavy, long-term use of various forms of marijuana. For unclear reasons, the nausea and vomiting are relieved by hot showers or baths.
“They’ll often present to the emergency department three, four, five different times before we can sort this out,” said Dr. Kennon Heard, an emergency room physician in Aurora, Colorado.
lapook-marijuana-1228en-transfer.jpg© Provided by CBS Interactive Inc. lapook-marijuana-1228en-transfer.jpg
He co-authored a study showing that since 2009, when medical marijuana became widely available, emergency room visits diagnoses for CHS in two Colorado hospitals nearly doubled. In 2012, the state legalized recreational marijuana.
“It is certainly something that, before legalization, we almost never saw,” Heard said. “Now we are seeing it quite frequently.”
Outside of Colorado, when patients do end up in an emergency room, the diagnosis is often missed. Partly because doctors don’t know about CHS, and partly because patients don’t want to admit to using a substance that’s illegal.
CHS can lead to dehydration and kidney failure, but usually resolves within days of stopping drug use. That’s what happened with Crowder, who has been off all forms of marijuana for seven months.
“Now all kinds of ambition has come back. I desire so much more in life and, at 37 years old, it’s a little late to do it, but better now than never,” he said.
CHS has only been recognized for about the past decade, and nobody knows exactly how many people suffer from it. But as more states move towards the legalization of marijuana, emergency room physicians like Dr. Heard are eager to make sure both doctors and patients have CHS on their radar.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/little-known-illness-tied-to-smoking-weed-on-the-rise/ar-BBxF7iw?ocid=spartandhp
-
Pro-Pot Group to Hand Out Free Weed on Inauguration Day in DC
(http://cdn.newsmax.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=c761c790-14e8-448f-a2f7-53e01f266b8b&SiteName=Newsmax&maxsidesize=600)
Image: Pro-Pot Group to Hand Out Free Weed on Inauguration Day in DC
By Joe Crowe | Wednesday, 04 Jan 2017
A group that supports the legalization of marijuana will hand out free joints in Washington, D.C. on Inauguration Day Jan. 20, according to CBS affiliate, WUSA-9 TV.
The DC Cannabis Coalition will start the handouts at 8 a.m., then the group will march to the National Mall. The giveaway will be legal on District of Columbia land, the report said.
"The main message is it’s time to legalize cannabis at the federal level," Adam Eidinger said. He founded DCMJ, a group of District of Columbia residents that helped get Initiative 71 passed in February 2015, which made it legal to possess, grow, or give away two ounces or less of marijuana in the district, but not to sell it.
“We don’t want any money exchanged whatsoever, this is really a true gift to people who come to Washington, D.C.,” Eidinger said.
The group will give away 4,200 joints. The plan is to light the joints at 4 minutes and 20 seconds into Donald Trump's speech —“420” is a code term that means marijuana.
Eidinger believes that Trump’s pick for attorney general, Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, will roll back any successes at legalization.
“We are looking at a guy who as recently as April said that they are going to enforce federal law on marijuana all across the country. He said marijuana is dangerous,” Eidinger said.
At the event, the organizers will inform the users that they will be resisting arrest if they light up on federal property.
“We are going to tell them that if they smoke on federal property, they are resisting arrest. But that’s a form of civil disobedience. I think it’s a good protest. If someone wants to do it, they are risking arrest, but it’s a protest and you know what, the National Mall is a place for protest,” Eidinger said.
The event is not meant as a protest against Trump or to disrupt the ceremony, Eidinger said.
“If there’s people from Texas, some Cowboys fan, who is walking down the street in a big cowboy hat and a fur coat and he walks up to our demonstration, I want him to feel welcome coming to D.C.”
WTOP in Washington also spoke to Eidinger, who told that site, “I imagine there’ll be the smell of marijuana throughout the Inauguration.”
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Marijuana-Free-Weed-Inauguration/2017/01/04/id/766763/
-
As various states move towards the legalization of marijuana, doctors are noticing the increase of a particular illness that is associated with regular use of the drug. Emergency rooms have been seeing an influx of patients with the same symptoms – severe abdominal pain and intense vomiting – and this increase is particularly high in certain states that have already legalized the use of marijuana.
While some doctors have been perplexed by these symptoms, the disease does have a name: cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome, or CHS. The illness is believed to be caused by regular and long-term use of marijuana.
There seems to be a direct correlation between CHS and states that have passed marijuana legalization measures. One study shows that CHS diagnoses nearly doubled at two of Colorado's hospitals since 2009 – the year that it was decided that Colorado needed a state-regulated medical marijuana distribution system.
CHS was first identified ten years ago, but there is still not much known about the illness. Dr. Kennon Heard explained, "The most likely cause is that people using marijuana frequently and in high doses have changes in the receptors in their body, and those receptors become dysregulated in some way, and it starts causing pain."
In terms of treatment, doctors have found that the symptoms of CHS are often relieved with hot showers and baths. The use of a hot bath can also serve as a diagnostic tool for doctors who are looking to identify a patient's illness. Additionally, patients are often given an IV of fluids to help reduce the vomiting. However, the only way to "cure" CHS is to severely reduce the intake of marijuana, or stop using altogether.
https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/marijuana-related-illness-increases-legalized-211922824.html
-
Israel marijuana: Users to face fine rather than criminal charge
5 March 2017
The Israeli government has taken steps to reduce the penalties for personal marijuana use.
It backed plans to issue fines initially, and only resort to criminal charges for repeat offenders.
Selling, buying and producing the drug will remain illegal and the move must still be ratified by parliament.
According to the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, almost 9% of Israelis use cannabis, though some experts believe the figure to be higher.
The move follows recommendations by a committee set up to study the issue, and moves by a number of US states and European nations to decriminalise use of the drug.
"On the one hand we are opening ourselves up to the future. On the other hand, we understand the dangers and will try to balance the two," Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told his cabinet ahead of the vote.
Israeli Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked said: "Israel cannot shut its eyes to the changes being made across the world in respect to marijuana consumption and its effects."
Meanwhile, Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan added that the move was "an important step on the way to implementing a new policy that will emphasise education and treatment instead of criminal enforcement".
Under the new system, first-time personal users who are caught and confess will be fined 1,000 shekels (£220; $270), with this doubling on the second occasion.
Probation will apply the third time and only a fourth case would lead to criminal charges.
Israel is one of the world leaders in research into medical use of marijuana.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39175040
-
Legalized marijuana turns Colorado resort town into homeless magnet
By Joseph J. Kolb
Published May 17, 2017
Fox News
From his sidewalk vantage point in front of an outdoor equipment store in downtown Durango, Colo., Matthew Marinseck has seen a transformation in this mountain resort town.
The picturesque town near the New Mexico border, once a vibrant, upscale community dotted with luxury hotels, is being overrun by panhandlers – thanks, in part, to the legalization of marijuana.
The town suddenly became a haven for recreational pot users, drawing in transients, panhandlers and a large number of homeless drug addicts, according to officials and business owners. Many are coming from New Mexico, Arizona and even New York.
“Legalized marijuana has drawn a lot of kids here from other states and the impact has not all been good,” said Marinseck, 58, while holding a cardboard sign asking for “help.”
COLORADO BOOKS 9TH MONTH OF $100M-PLUS POT SALES AMID THREAT OF TRUMP ADMIN. CRACKDOWN
Several people holding cardboard signs could be seen along the streets of Durango now. Some just ask for marijuana, or imply that’s what they want with a photo of a green pot leaf. But it’s not just pot users being drawn to Durango.
“[The] city really started freaking out when they started seeing needles in the streets” said Marinseck, a self-avowed former hippie.
Caleb Preston, a store manager in a gift shop and a former “street entertainer,” said the homeless and panhandling issue in Durango has gotten out of hand since the state legalized marijuana.
“Just this year there has been a major influx of people between 20 to 30 who are just hanging out on the streets,” Preston said. “The problem is while many are pretty mellow, there are many more who are violent.”
Preston said he’s become accustomed to kicking out vagrants who perch themselves in front of his store.
DENVER MARIJUANA INDUSTRY IS EATING INTO AREA'S RESTAURANT JOBS
“Most of the kids here are from out of state, and I would say it has a lot to do with the legalized pot,” said Preston.
He said he’s also noticed an uptick in crime in the area. Shoplifting, he said, has become a major problem in Durango and business owners are becoming fed up.
The city’s Business Improvement District held a meeting May 12 to review the results of a survey completed by local businesses on how to address the panhandling issue, which has become an urgent matter as the city enters its busy summer tourist season.
Among the suggestions were stricter laws for panhandling and loitering, strategic placement of obstacles such as bistro tables and flower boxes to discourage sitting and lying on sidewalks. They also proposed launching a campaign discouraging tourists to give money to the pan handlers. A rudimentary effort is already in place with handwritten signs encouraging donations be made to charities that help the homeless rather than handing panhandlers’ money directly.
Tim Walsworth, executive director of Durango Business Improvement District, said he is frustrated. He said he has to walk a tightrope between the civil liberties of the homeless population and the reputation and attractiveness of the downtown area, which for years has been a hot tourist destination.
“We’re hoping to discourage the transient and professional panhandlers that are impacting the perceived safety and cleanliness of our downtown, as well as help those who are truly in need,” Walsworth said in a statement.
Conspicuously absent from the busy downtown: The presence of police patrols.
Durango Police Chief Kamran Afzal said he has only been on the job for a month and is still assessing where the needs are in the town. With a department of 50 officers and only five per shift who cover 20 square miles, the challenge is daunting, he said. He said the property crime rate is 12 percent higher than the national average.
FEDERAL CRACKDOWN ON LEGAL WEED COMING?
“At this point, since I’m new here, I can’t definitively say this number is related to our homeless population,” Afzal said.
But he would not go so far as to say that the rise in panhandlers is directly attributed to the legalization of marijuana.
“We are going to look at the behavior of individuals who cause discomfort for residents and visitors,” he said, through a Community Engagement Team. But, he said, the tricky part is figuring out when panhandlers cross the line to criminals.
Panhandlers like Marinseck may not exactly pose a threat to pedestrians shopping at the boutiques, souvenir stores or microbreweries in downtown Durango. But they don’t exactly evoke the wholesome image the business district wants to project.
Still, the city recently settled a lawsuit with the American Civil Liberties Union allowing the homeless population to panhandle.
A clerk at a local hotel who declined to give her name told Fox News that since marijuana has become legal in Colorado, the quality of life in Durango has worsened.
She said she’s frequently harassed when she goes to the supermarket or local WalMart. Some of the local parks, she said, have been taken over by the homeless.
“I’ve lived here my entire life and don’t feel safe here anymore,” the clerk said. “If it wasn’t so beautiful here, I would probably move.”
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/05/17/legalized-marijuana-turns-colorado-resort-town-into-homeless-magnet.html
-
Dem Sen Booker Introduces Bill to Legalize Marijuana Nationwide
by PAM KEY
1 Aug 2017
Tuesday in a Facebook video Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) introduced the Marijuana Justice Act, that would remove marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act which would make it legal at the federal level.
The bill also “retroactively expunges” the criminal records of people convicted federally for marijuana use and possession.
Booker said, “When you see these marijuana arrests happening so much in our country, targeting certain communities — poor communities, minority communities — targeting people with an illness, targeting dispositionally our veterans, you see the injustice of it all.”
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/08/01/dem-sen-booker-introduces-bill-to-legalize-marijuana-nationwide/
-
Nevada could be first state to set up marijuana lounges
BY REID WILSON - 09/13/17
Nevada could become the first state to allow users of recreational marijuana to light up in clubs and lounges, a state legal body said this week, opening a new front in what is already a booming pot business.
The state Legislative Counsel Bureau said Monday that state law does not prohibit city or county governments from operating a lounge or facility in which patrons may use marijuana.
Cities and counties are allowed to adopt their own rules governing those businesses and decide whether they are required to obtain special permits, the bureau said.
The ruling means tourists and visitors may soon have a place to consume marijuana in public. Pot smoking is banned under state law in Nevada's hotels and casinos.
None of the four other states where marijuana is legal for recreational use — Washington, Colorado, Alaska and Oregon — currently allow so-called pot lounges. All four states restrict marijuana use to private residences. The three other states where legislators and regulators are finalizing rules in advance of legalized marijuana — California, Massachusetts and Maine — are not currently considering legal pot lounges.
Legalization advocates say pot lounges are a logical step, especially if states where marijuana is allowed hope to connect their pot industry to tourism.
“Allowing regulated social use areas is a good solution that recognizes cannabis consumers' rights to congregate just like alcohol drinkers can in bars while also protecting nonconsumers' rights not to inhale secondhand smoke,” said Tom Angell, the founder of Marijuana Majority, a pro-legalization group. “It should be a no-brainer, especially in tourist towns like Las Vegas where visitors don't have private residences they can go back to to imbibe.”
The Nevada legislator who spearheaded much of the legalization movement, state Sen. Tick Segerblom (D), has said he thinks marijuana will attract new tourists to the state.
“We’re going to really market this thing around the world,” Segerblom told The Hill in a recent interview.
But legalization skeptics say the growing prevalence of marijuana stores, and lounges where those products can be consumed, increase the risk of crime associated with the nascent industry.
“The people of Nevada wanted folks not to go to jail for using marijuana,” said Kevin Sabet, who heads the anti-legalization group Smart Approaches to Marijuana. “I don’t think they envisioned pot clubs in their neighborhood.”
“Data show that areas around marijuana stores have higher crime and issues with second-hand smoke and other nuisances. I can't imagine pot clubs will be a good thing for the state,” Sabet said.
Cities will still have to pass their own ordinances governing marijuana lounges after the state legislature killed a measure that would have legalized them earlier this year. Gov. Brian Sandoval (R) told the Las Vegas Review-Journal on Tuesday he is no fan of the prospect of lounges.
“I did not support them previously,” Sandoval told the paper. “I don’t support them now.”
Sandoval did not support the ballot measure legalizing marijuana last year, but he has said he will work with the federal Justice Department to allow legal marijuana now that it has passed. Sandoval and other governors of states that have legalized pot have been concerned that the Trump administration may reverse a long-standing Obama administration agreement that deemphasized prosecutions of marijuana-related businesses in their states.
“I don’t know what direction the Justice Department is going to go, but it is going to raise some legal issues,” Sandoval told The Hill in a recent interview. “I want a model system.”
Nevada became the fifth state to allow marijuana use for recreational purposes on July 1, just eight months after state voters approved a ballot measure. California, Maine and Massachusetts, where voters also passed legalization measures, will begin legal pot sales next year.
http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/350467-nevada-could-be-first-state-to-set-up-marijuana-lounges
-
Nevada could be first state to set up marijuana lounges
BY REID WILSON - 09/13/17
Nevada could become the first state to allow users of recreational marijuana to light up in clubs and lounges, a state legal body said this week, opening a new front in what is already a booming pot business.
The state Legislative Counsel Bureau said Monday that state law does not prohibit city or county governments from operating a lounge or facility in which patrons may use marijuana.
Cities and counties are allowed to adopt their own rules governing those businesses and decide whether they are required to obtain special permits, the bureau said.
The ruling means tourists and visitors may soon have a place to consume marijuana in public. Pot smoking is banned under state law in Nevada's hotels and casinos.
None of the four other states where marijuana is legal for recreational use — Washington, Colorado, Alaska and Oregon — currently allow so-called pot lounges. All four states restrict marijuana use to private residences. The three other states where legislators and regulators are finalizing rules in advance of legalized marijuana — California, Massachusetts and Maine — are not currently considering legal pot lounges.
Legalization advocates say pot lounges are a logical step, especially if states where marijuana is allowed hope to connect their pot industry to tourism.
“Allowing regulated social use areas is a good solution that recognizes cannabis consumers' rights to congregate just like alcohol drinkers can in bars while also protecting nonconsumers' rights not to inhale secondhand smoke,” said Tom Angell, the founder of Marijuana Majority, a pro-legalization group. “It should be a no-brainer, especially in tourist towns like Las Vegas where visitors don't have private residences they can go back to to imbibe.”
The Nevada legislator who spearheaded much of the legalization movement, state Sen. Tick Segerblom (D), has said he thinks marijuana will attract new tourists to the state.
“We’re going to really market this thing around the world,” Segerblom told The Hill in a recent interview.
But legalization skeptics say the growing prevalence of marijuana stores, and lounges where those products can be consumed, increase the risk of crime associated with the nascent industry.
“The people of Nevada wanted folks not to go to jail for using marijuana,” said Kevin Sabet, who heads the anti-legalization group Smart Approaches to Marijuana. “I don’t think they envisioned pot clubs in their neighborhood.”
“Data show that areas around marijuana stores have higher crime and issues with second-hand smoke and other nuisances. I can't imagine pot clubs will be a good thing for the state,” Sabet said.
Cities will still have to pass their own ordinances governing marijuana lounges after the state legislature killed a measure that would have legalized them earlier this year. Gov. Brian Sandoval (R) told the Las Vegas Review-Journal on Tuesday he is no fan of the prospect of lounges.
“I did not support them previously,” Sandoval told the paper. “I don’t support them now.”
Sandoval did not support the ballot measure legalizing marijuana last year, but he has said he will work with the federal Justice Department to allow legal marijuana now that it has passed. Sandoval and other governors of states that have legalized pot have been concerned that the Trump administration may reverse a long-standing Obama administration agreement that deemphasized prosecutions of marijuana-related businesses in their states.
“I don’t know what direction the Justice Department is going to go, but it is going to raise some legal issues,” Sandoval told The Hill in a recent interview. “I want a model system.”
Nevada became the fifth state to allow marijuana use for recreational purposes on July 1, just eight months after state voters approved a ballot measure. California, Maine and Massachusetts, where voters also passed legalization measures, will begin legal pot sales next year.
http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/350467-nevada-could-be-first-state-to-set-up-marijuana-lounges
my initial thought was "Bad idea, last thing we need is a public place where people are more inclined to operate a vehicle after smoking potentially potent pot. " Then I remembered bars and nightclubs
-
my initial thought was "Bad idea, last thing we need is a public place where people are more inclined to operate a vehicle after smoking potentially potent pot. " Then I remembered bars and nightclubs
Was talking to a nurse from Canada recently and she told me about these drug parks where users can go use, get clean needles, have access to medical professionals, and no fear of prosecution. Supposedly cuts down on deaths and the number of addicts.
-
Was talking to a nurse from Canada recently and she told me about these drug parks where users can go use, get clean needles, have access to medical professionals, and no fear of prosecution. Supposedly cuts down on deaths and the number of addicts.
I don't see how providing a place to shoot up would impact number of addicts to the negative. Any theory on why that place would reduce number of addicts?
-
I don't see how providing a place to shoot up would impact number of addicts to the negative. Any theory on why that place would reduce number of addicts?
I asked that same question. She wasn't sure, but they provide counseling, etc. for users, so maybe that has something to do with it. Seems to me it just enables users, but what do I know? (Very little.)
-
:o
Major drug bust in affluent Georgia homes yields $7M in marijuana, 9 arrests, officials say
By Lucia I. Suarez Sang, Fox News
(http://a57.foxnews.com/images.foxnews.com/content/fox-news/us/2017/10/12/major-drug-bust-in-affluent-georgia-homes-yields-7m-in-marijuana-9-arrests-officials-say/_jcr_content/par/featured_image/media-0.img.jpg/931/524/1507821291060.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
The basements in six Georgia homes were converted into indoor greenhouses for marijuana production, cops say. (Hall County's MANS)
Georgia police discovered a "highly" sophisticated indoor pot operation in a Gainesville home, where a basement was converted into a greenhouse holding more than 500 marijuana plants, officials told Fox News.
“The photos really don’t do it justice,” Lt. Dan Scalia, who is in charge of the Hall County Multi-Agency Narcotics Squad, told Fox News on Thursday. “Some of the plants were taller than me.”
The home was part of a large-scale indoor marijuana growing network in northeast Georgia, officials said. Five other homes were searched, and authorities said they seized more than 300 pounds of marijuana and more than 1,500 plants totaling an estimated value of $7,168,900.
“It's the biggest drug network that I have ever been a part of,” Scalia said.
(http://a57.foxnews.com/images.foxnews.com/content/fox-news/us/2017/10/12/major-drug-bust-in-affluent-georgia-homes-yields-7m-in-marijuana-9-arrests-officials-say/_jcr_content/article-text/article-par-4/inline_spotlight_ima/image.img.jpg/612/344/1507821068628.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Authorities reported seizing more than $7 million in marijuana in Georgia. (Hall County Multi-Agency Narcotics Squad)
The investigation began in early September after the narcotics squad received a tip about a possible grow house in the area. A three-week investigation led them to uncover a major network of interconnected homes, Scalia said.
Nine people have been arrested in connection with the operation.
Minh Luong, 53, of Gainesville; Phi Ngoc Luong, 25, of Hoschton; Henry Nguyen, 48, of Gainesville; Hang Nguyen, 53, of Duluth; and Thao Phoung Nguyen, 26, of Hoschton, were taken into custody on Sept. 18.
Trung Bui, 47, of Flowery Branch; Nam Van Dao, 46, of Gainesville; and Thu Thai Phan, 50, and Binh Van Hoang 52, both of Flowery Branch, were taken into custody several days later.
(http://a57.foxnews.com/images.foxnews.com/content/fox-news/us/2017/10/12/major-drug-bust-in-affluent-georgia-homes-yields-7m-in-marijuana-9-arrests-officials-say/_jcr_content/article-text/article-par-8/inline_spotlight_ima/image.img.jpg/612/344/1507821104275.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Top, left to right: Nam Van Dao, Phi Ngoc Luong, Minh Luong, Thi Thi Phan. Bottom, left to right: Bin Van Hoang, Thao Phoung Nguyen, Hang Nguyen, Henry Nguyen. A mugshot for Trung Bui was not available. (Hall County Multi-Agency Narcotics Squad)
All nine suspects were charged with manufacturing, trafficking and possession of marijuana with intent to distribute.
Additional arrest warrants were issued for Vinh To, 63; Sen Thi Do, 46; and Dung Nguyen, 47, all of Flowery Branch.
Scalia said the suspects were very stealthy in how they ran the operation – keeping a low profile, being considered good neighbors and maintaining the homes. He said basements were modified with special heat lamps and a custom ventilation system.
(http://a57.foxnews.com/images.foxnews.com/content/fox-news/us/2017/10/12/major-drug-bust-in-affluent-georgia-homes-yields-7m-in-marijuana-9-arrests-officials-say/_jcr_content/article-text/article-par-11/inline_spotlight_ima/image.img.jpg/612/344/1507819309243.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Authorities seized more than 300 pounds of marijuana and more than 1,500 plants. (Hall County Multi-Agency Narcotics Squad)
“Nothing [suspect] was visible on the outside of the homes,” he added. “The basements were modified to handle the capacity.”
Scalia said the narcotics squad is working to determine how long the network has been operational and where the drugs were being distributed to.
The FBI North Georgia Major Offender Task Force and the Georgia National Guard Counter Drug Task Force aided Hall County’s squad.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/12/major-drug-bust-in-affluent-georgia-homes-yields-7m-in-marijuana-9-arrests-officials-say.html
-
Really just too dumb to do that in Georgia of all places. And IDK if there's some "how-to" circulating among Vietnamese or what, because this is their thing in nearly every case.
Many will set it up to give some path of denial to the actual owner of the home, meaning that it becomes a race to figure out who takes the hit. Whoever does the work of growing learns to spot signs of surveillance from a safe distance before going anywhere near the site, and they can roll in relative safety compared to a typical operation.
-
But the "some of the plants were taller than me" part sounds like these guys weren't too experienced at doing indoor grows.
-
Strangely Enough, New Research Suggests That Weed May Be Addictive
Erik McLaren
22 October, 2017
New research from Brigman Young University suggests that prolonged cannabis use may alter brain chemistry and lead to addiction. The study investigated the effects of THC saturation on GABA cells that are critical to the brains reward circuit, that until now have been understudied. The results could be troubling for cannabis enthusiasts, but they’re not exactly definitive.
This was a study on mice, which doesn’t mean it’s useless, but mice and people are different. Researchers looked at an area of the brain called ventral tegmental area. Inside the VTA gamma-aminobutyric acid regulates how much dopamine and serotonin flood the brain. The scientists found mice injected with multiple THC shots over a week had problems with their GABA compared to mice who only had one THC shot.
This suggests that prolonged cannabis use alters the way the brain keeps serotonin and dopamine levels in check. If problems with GABA cells are repeatable and also occur in humans, it could be an indication of how and why people suffer from what has been coined “cannabis use disorder”. Cannabis use disorder is defined as continued use despite adverse outcomes or mental distress.
It’s important to understand that prolonged use of almost any substance can alter brain chemistry over time. Something like coffee can cause changes in the brain, as can sugar. Almost any pleasurable activity triggers a release of serotonin, dopamine, and GABA. This includes sex, masturbation and even non-physical bonding. These changes aren’t necessarily harmless.
But who gets to decide the definition of ‘cannabis use disorder’?
It’s certainly possible to have an unhealthy relationship with weed, but almost 84 percent of cases of cannabis use disorder began with referrals from law enforcement, not a doctor.
Keep in mind, this was not some suspiciously pharmaceutical funded study. The authors declared that they have no competing financial interests.
Research suggests weed may in fact be addictive 2 of 1 Strangely Enough, New Research Suggests That Weed May Be Addictive
Most people who report any kind of dependency on weed have smoked daily for ten years, and have tried and failed to quit. And, as more and more research is being done on cannabis, we’re learning more and more that weed withdrawal is a real chemical process in the brain. If the results from this most recent study in mice are also true in humans, it deepens our understanding of how it may be irresponsible to promote cannabis as harmless. That being said, the intensity of dependence is not comparable to that of other substances.
This research is basically in line with that old adage “everything in moderation”. For heavy cannabis enthusiasts, this might be finally a reason to take a tolerance break, which isn’t all that bad of an idea. After all, tolerance breaks are scientifically proven to give you a better high.
https://herb.co/2017/10/22/weed-may-be-addictive/
-
Epileptic 12-Year-Old Girl Sues US Over Marijuana Law
By Cathy Burke | Monday, 13 Nov 2017
Attorney General Jeff Sessions is being sued by a 12-year-old girl with epilepsy over the nation's marijuana policy.
Texas-born Alexis Bortell has filed a suit in New York claiming the federal prohibition on marijuana is unconstitutional.
"She just wants to be like everybody else," Alexis' father, Dean Bortell, told NBC News.
"When she grows up she wants to be free to choose where she lives and what she does for a living. She wants to be treated like an American citizen and not just a state citizen. She doesn't want to have to fear going to jail every time she sees a police officer."
The youngster, who uses a strain of cannabis oil called Haleigh's Hope to help with her seizures, had to move from Texas to Colorado because her traditional medicine was not helping — and the family wanted to be able to legally obtain cannabis oils to help treat the sixth-grader.
"As the seizures got worse, we had to move to Colorado to get cannabis because it's illegal in Texas," Alexis told Fox affiliate in Colorado.
In her complaint filed in the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of New York in July, the girl's lawyer, Michael Hiller, argues the youngster ran the gamut of prescription pills, all of which failed to control her seizures before she was left with two options: brain surgery or cannabis, NBC News reported.
A drop of liquid THC twice a day has kept her seizure-free for two-and-a-half years.
"I'd say it's a lot better than brain surgery," which doctors had previously offered, the youngster told the Fox affiliate.
Alexis and her family hope if the suit is successful, she can finally return her Texas home, NBC News reported.
"She's a little kid that survived big-world knocks and is still standing," Dean Bortell told NBC News.
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/epilepsy-medicinal-marijuana-constitution-federal-law/2017/11/13/id/825881/
-
:o
A 9-Year-Old Accidentally Shared Her Grandpa's Marijuana Gummies With Her Fifth-Grade Class
(https://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/mm/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftimedotcom.files.wordpress.com%2F2018%2F01%2Fgummy-candy.jpeg&w=800&q=85)
Getty Images
By JAMIE DUCHARME
A group of New Mexico elementary school students got more than a sugar high after one fifth-grade student mistakenly shared a box of medical marijuana edibles at school.
A 9-year-old girl came to school with what looked like typical gummy candies, but were actually edibles laced with THC, one of the psychoactive chemicals found in cannabis, according to Ebubekir Orsun, the principal at the Albuquerque School of Excellence.
Officials at the school only learned of the mix-up, which happened earlier this month, after the student went to the school nurse feeling sick and complaining of dizziness.
Kristi Del Curto, the school’s dean of elementary students, told the Albuquerque Journal reports that officials took the labeled package out of the trash, “and as soon as we looked at it, we said, ‘Nope, that is not candy.’”
The candies reportedly belonged to the student’s grandfather. Neither she, nor the three other students who ate them, had lasting symptoms, though some of the students did get “giggly,” according to the Journal.
School representatives posted a reminder for students and parents on Facebook last Thursday.
“We would like our community to be alert with drugs and any edibles that may or could be in different formats,” the post reads. “We kindly ask our parents and community members not to talk explicitly about drugs/medicine when students are present (unintentionally to tempt or encourage students to use drugs).”
With medical marijuana now permitted in 29 states, including New Mexico, and recreational marijuana legal in an additional eight, a number of public health officials have voiced concerns about children accidentally ingesting edibles, particularly those packaged as kid-friendly treats such as candy, brownies and cookies.
The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment argued that edibles put young children at risk of accidental poisoning, and noted that calls to poison control centers and visits to Colorado pediatric hospitals related to marijuana poisoning increased after medical marijuana became readily available. “These findings suggest that greater availability of marijuana, particularly in edible products, can increase risks to young children,” they wrote in a 2015 perspective piece published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
http://time.com/5114582/thc-edibles-new-mexico/
-
Fox News Poll: Support for legalizing marijuana hits record high
By Victoria Balara | Fox News
With recreational use of marijuana now legal in nine states plus Washington D.C., the latest Fox News Poll finds a record number of voters nationally favor legalization.
The poll shows 59 percent of voters support legalizing marijuana. That’s up from 51 percent in 2015, and 46 percent in 2013 (the first time this question was asked on a Fox News Poll). In addition, only 26 percent favored making “smoking marijuana” legal in 2001.
Thirty-two percent now oppose legalizing pot, down from a high of 49 percent in 2013.
CLICK TO READ THE FULL POLL RESULTS
“This is a massive shift in opinion over a very short period. As more states legalize marijuana without the negative consequences opponents have warned about, support will likely continue to increase,” says Democratic pollster Chris Anderson, who conducts the Fox News Poll with Daron Shaw, his Republican counterpart.
Millennials (72 percent) are more likely than Gen Xers (60 percent) and baby boomers (52 percent) to support legalization.
Two-thirds of Democrats (68 percent) and independents (67 percent) favor legalization. Republicans split 46-46 percent. In 2015, 59 percent of Republicans were against it.
Majorities of very conservative voters (61 percent) and white evangelical Christians (53 percent) oppose legalization. However, opposition among those groups is down 14 and 16 points, respectively, from five years ago.
“When you look at the growing percentage of people who say they support legalizing marijuana, especially among those under 30 years of age, it’s obvious why the Democrats are anxious to get pot initiatives on the ballot in statewide elections,” says Shaw.
Despite the largely positive sentiments, the drug may face a legal battle with the Trump administration; Attorney General Jeff Sessions rescinded Obama-era marijuana policies by issuing a memo January 4 allowing U.S. attorneys to decide how aggressively to enforce federal laws in states where it has been legalized.
The Fox News poll is based on landline and cellphone interviews with 1,002 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide and was conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) from January 21-23, 2018. The poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points for all registered voters.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/07/fox-news-poll-support-for-legalizing-marijuana-hits-record-high.html
-
pot should be legalized
-
pot should be legalized
It's going to happen.
-
Confusing times for potheads.
Las Vegas airport sets up marijuana disposal bins for travelers to dump their pot
By Michael Bartiromo | Fox News
(http://a57.foxnews.com/images.foxnews.com/content/fox-news/travel/2018/02/23/las-vegas-airport-sets-up-marijuana-disposal-bins-for-travelers-to-dump-their-pot/_jcr_content/par/featured_image/media-0.img.jpg/1862/1048/1519394910482.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Tourists leaving Las Vegas can now dispose of any leftover marijuana at McCarran airport. (AP/Regina Garcia Cano)
Tourists leaving Las Vegas can now dispose of their leftover, legally-purchased marijuana at specially designated bins outside the McCarran International Airport, rather than hastily smoking it before the flight, or just donating it to a chill bro on the way out of town.
The green receptacles — of which there are 13 so far — have been bolted to the ground in “high-traffic” areas outside the airport and its car rental area, The Las Vegas Sun is reporting. The Department of Aviation moved to install the bins, or amnesty boxes, after Clark County instituted a ban on marijuana possession and advertising at McCarran back in September.
A Message from GOODRX
No fees. No registration. No obligations.
Save on your prescriptions
"The amnesty boxes are offered as a way to help people comply with this ordinance," airport spokesperson Christine Crews told the Associated Press.
The sale of recreational marijuana has been legal in Nevada since July 2017. Possession of up to one ounce of marijuana, or up to 1/8 ounce of concentrated marijuana, was legalized the previous January, according to the Sun.
In 2017, tourists who neglected to dispose of their leftover marijuana before arriving at McCarran would have to deal with the Las Vegas Metro Police, who would ultimately determine if the tourist was carrying a felony amount. However, Officer Aden Ocampo-Gomez of the Las Vegas police force said no citations have been issued stemming from the airport's new ordinances on marijuana possession and advertising, passed in September.
The bins, or amnesty boxes, were installed last week in response to September's new ordinances on carrying pot onto Department of Aviation-owned properties. (AP/Regina Garcia Cano)
Airport spokesperson Christina Crews added that the amnesty boxes will be monitored to prevent tampering.
“The drawer pulls out; you drop your stuff in and you close it. You can’t really get your hand in there. If you start tampering with them, you’d be detected pretty quickly,” she told the Sun.
A contractor has also been hired to collect and dispose of the receptacles’ contents multiple times per week.
The county aviation department said it plans to install at least seven additional amnesty boxes at McCarran and nearby airports, but possibly more.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2018/02/23/las-vegas-airport-sets-up-marijuana-disposal-bins-for-travelers-to-dump-their-pot.html
-
I've now concluded after hearing from the NRA and many of our Republican representatives on mass shootings that Marijuana should absolutely be legal
-
Confusing times for potheads.
Las Vegas airport sets up marijuana disposal bins for travelers to dump their pot
By Michael Bartiromo | Fox News
(http://a57.foxnews.com/images.foxnews.com/content/fox-news/travel/2018/02/23/las-vegas-airport-sets-up-marijuana-disposal-bins-for-travelers-to-dump-their-pot/_jcr_content/par/featured_image/media-0.img.jpg/1862/1048/1519394910482.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Tourists leaving Las Vegas can now dispose of any leftover marijuana at McCarran airport. (AP/Regina Garcia Cano)
Tourists leaving Las Vegas can now dispose of their leftover, legally-purchased marijuana at specially designated bins outside the McCarran International Airport, rather than hastily smoking it before the flight, or just donating it to a chill bro on the way out of town.
The green receptacles — of which there are 13 so far — have been bolted to the ground in “high-traffic” areas outside the airport and its car rental area, The Las Vegas Sun is reporting. The Department of Aviation moved to install the bins, or amnesty boxes, after Clark County instituted a ban on marijuana possession and advertising at McCarran back in September.
A Message from GOODRX
No fees. No registration. No obligations.
Save on your prescriptions
"The amnesty boxes are offered as a way to help people comply with this ordinance," airport spokesperson Christine Crews told the Associated Press.
The sale of recreational marijuana has been legal in Nevada since July 2017. Possession of up to one ounce of marijuana, or up to 1/8 ounce of concentrated marijuana, was legalized the previous January, according to the Sun.
In 2017, tourists who neglected to dispose of their leftover marijuana before arriving at McCarran would have to deal with the Las Vegas Metro Police, who would ultimately determine if the tourist was carrying a felony amount. However, Officer Aden Ocampo-Gomez of the Las Vegas police force said no citations have been issued stemming from the airport's new ordinances on marijuana possession and advertising, passed in September.
The bins, or amnesty boxes, were installed last week in response to September's new ordinances on carrying pot onto Department of Aviation-owned properties. (AP/Regina Garcia Cano)
Airport spokesperson Christina Crews added that the amnesty boxes will be monitored to prevent tampering.
“The drawer pulls out; you drop your stuff in and you close it. You can’t really get your hand in there. If you start tampering with them, you’d be detected pretty quickly,” she told the Sun.
A contractor has also been hired to collect and dispose of the receptacles’ contents multiple times per week.
The county aviation department said it plans to install at least seven additional amnesty boxes at McCarran and nearby airports, but possibly more.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2018/02/23/las-vegas-airport-sets-up-marijuana-disposal-bins-for-travelers-to-dump-their-pot.html
They have something similar art the Portland Airport. TSA doesn't give a shit unless you are being blatant about it or trying to bring a couple of kilos on the plane. they say it in so many words on their site i think. The occasional users will dump their stash in there and the others will bring it on their carry on.
-
They have something similar art the Portland Airport. TSA doesn't give a shit unless you are being blatant about it or trying to bring a couple of kilos on the plane. they say it in so many words on their site i think. The occasional users will dump their stash in there and the others will bring it on their carry on.
If I was a pothead I would make regular trips to these bins and hang out. Bring a book. And wait. :)
-
If I was a pothead I would make regular trips to these bins and hang out. Bring a book. And wait. :)
A shuttle driver at the Portland Sheraton told me people weed all the time because they forget about it until he drops them off. lol
-
A shuttle driver at the Portland Sheraton told me people weed all the time because they forget about it until he drops them off. lol
Shuttle driver probably intends to work that job till retirement. :)
-
Nevada Makes $30 Million In Marijuana Taxes During First Six Months Of Sales
Mona Zhang , CONTRIBUTOR
FEB 26, 2018
I cover cannabis policy, business, and culture
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
(https://thumbor.forbes.com/thumbor/960x0/smart/https%3A%2F%2Fspecials-images.forbesimg.com%2Fdam%2Fimageserve%2F805212192%2F960x0.jpg%3Ffit%3Dscale)
A customer pays for cannabis products at Essence Vegas Cannabis Dispensary after the start of recreational marijuana sales began on July 1, 2017 in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Photo by Ethan Miller/Getty Images)
The Silver State’s marijuana industry is still in its infancy, but the cannabis market has raked in more than $30 million in tax revenue for the state so far. Retailers in Nevada have sold more than $195 million in cannabis during the first six months of its adult-use market.
Unlike other states (including California, Maine and Massachusetts) that legalized recreational marijuana in 2016, Nevada implemented its program a full six months ahead of the new year. The state charges a 15% tax on wholesale marijuana and a 10% tax on retail sales. That netted the state nearly $3.7 million in tax revenue for July 2017 – its first month of recreational sales. Tax revenue hit a peak of nearly $5.84 million in October 2017.
The state has seen its marijuana sales soar past Colorado's cannabis sales during the first months of its legal market. Cannabis analytics firm New Frontier projects Nevada’s state-legal marijuana market to be worth $622 million by 2020.
Much of the market’s success can be attributed to the tourist-friendly Las Vegas. McCarran International Airport, which serves Las Vegas, recently installed about 20 marijuana “amnesty boxes” on its premises. The boxes allow tourists to safely dispose of cannabis before boarding a flight. Local laws also prohibit marijuana on airport property.
While there has been some political wrangling over how that marijuana money gets distributed, the state is sending a good chunk of it towards education. Other cannabis-legal states have done the same – in Colorado, wholesale pot taxes are set aside for a public school fund, in addition to paying for regulatory oversight, youth drug prevention, and substance abuse treatment.
All of that tax revenue has caused some cash-strapped states to consider legalizing marijuana. The potential of legal cannabis to help balance the budget has been key to the legalization debate in Connecticut. While state Governor Dannel Malloy has been an opponent to legalizing cannabis, he included the possibility of recreational legalization as an option to consider for balancing the budget.
But lawmakers who are considering cannabis reform as a means to help fill state coffers should reconsider their motivations. Andrew Freedman, Colorado’s first marijuana czar (who now has his own consulting business) told me in 2016 that potential tax revenue shouldn’t factor into the legalization discussion: “People truly overestimate what you can do with marijuana money,” he said.
“At the end of the day, the debate shouldn’t be about tax revenue. ‘Should we lock up fewer people for marijuana?’ vs. ‘Is this going to create more of a burden on public safety?’—that’s where the debate should be.”
https://www.forbes.com/sites/monazhang/2018/02/26/nevada-makes-30-million-in-marijuana-taxes-during-first-six-months-of-sales/#553758ac3a7f
-
:o
Major drug bust in affluent Georgia homes yields $7M in marijuana, 9 arrests, officials say
By Lucia I. Suarez Sang, Fox News
(http://a57.foxnews.com/images.foxnews.com/content/fox-news/us/2017/10/12/major-drug-bust-in-affluent-georgia-homes-yields-7m-in-marijuana-9-arrests-officials-say/_jcr_content/par/featured_image/media-0.img.jpg/931/524/1507821291060.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
The basements in six Georgia homes were converted into indoor greenhouses for marijuana production, cops say. (Hall County's MANS)
Georgia police discovered a "highly" sophisticated indoor pot operation in a Gainesville home, where a basement was converted into a greenhouse holding more than 500 marijuana plants, officials told Fox News.
“The photos really don’t do it justice,” Lt. Dan Scalia, who is in charge of the Hall County Multi-Agency Narcotics Squad, told Fox News on Thursday. “Some of the plants were taller than me.”
The home was part of a large-scale indoor marijuana growing network in northeast Georgia, officials said. Five other homes were searched, and authorities said they seized more than 300 pounds of marijuana and more than 1,500 plants totaling an estimated value of $7,168,900.
“It's the biggest drug network that I have ever been a part of,” Scalia said.
(http://a57.foxnews.com/images.foxnews.com/content/fox-news/us/2017/10/12/major-drug-bust-in-affluent-georgia-homes-yields-7m-in-marijuana-9-arrests-officials-say/_jcr_content/article-text/article-par-4/inline_spotlight_ima/image.img.jpg/612/344/1507821068628.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Authorities reported seizing more than $7 million in marijuana in Georgia. (Hall County Multi-Agency Narcotics Squad)
The investigation began in early September after the narcotics squad received a tip about a possible grow house in the area. A three-week investigation led them to uncover a major network of interconnected homes, Scalia said.
Nine people have been arrested in connection with the operation.
Minh Luong, 53, of Gainesville; Phi Ngoc Luong, 25, of Hoschton; Henry Nguyen, 48, of Gainesville; Hang Nguyen, 53, of Duluth; and Thao Phoung Nguyen, 26, of Hoschton, were taken into custody on Sept. 18.
Trung Bui, 47, of Flowery Branch; Nam Van Dao, 46, of Gainesville; and Thu Thai Phan, 50, and Binh Van Hoang 52, both of Flowery Branch, were taken into custody several days later.
(http://a57.foxnews.com/images.foxnews.com/content/fox-news/us/2017/10/12/major-drug-bust-in-affluent-georgia-homes-yields-7m-in-marijuana-9-arrests-officials-say/_jcr_content/article-text/article-par-8/inline_spotlight_ima/image.img.jpg/612/344/1507821104275.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Top, left to right: Nam Van Dao, Phi Ngoc Luong, Minh Luong, Thi Thi Phan. Bottom, left to right: Bin Van Hoang, Thao Phoung Nguyen, Hang Nguyen, Henry Nguyen. A mugshot for Trung Bui was not available. (Hall County Multi-Agency Narcotics Squad)
All nine suspects were charged with manufacturing, trafficking and possession of marijuana with intent to distribute.
Additional arrest warrants were issued for Vinh To, 63; Sen Thi Do, 46; and Dung Nguyen, 47, all of Flowery Branch.
Scalia said the suspects were very stealthy in how they ran the operation – keeping a low profile, being considered good neighbors and maintaining the homes. He said basements were modified with special heat lamps and a custom ventilation system.
(http://a57.foxnews.com/images.foxnews.com/content/fox-news/us/2017/10/12/major-drug-bust-in-affluent-georgia-homes-yields-7m-in-marijuana-9-arrests-officials-say/_jcr_content/article-text/article-par-11/inline_spotlight_ima/image.img.jpg/612/344/1507819309243.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Authorities seized more than 300 pounds of marijuana and more than 1,500 plants. (Hall County Multi-Agency Narcotics Squad)
“Nothing [suspect] was visible on the outside of the homes,” he added. “The basements were modified to handle the capacity.”
Scalia said the narcotics squad is working to determine how long the network has been operational and where the drugs were being distributed to.
The FBI North Georgia Major Offender Task Force and the Georgia National Guard Counter Drug Task Force aided Hall County’s squad.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/12/major-drug-bust-in-affluent-georgia-homes-yields-7m-in-marijuana-9-arrests-officials-say.html
Huge case of this has surfaced to record. Involving the Chinese (i beleve) and will post as it develops a little further.
Problem for them, is that they allowed many (and I mean many) individual cases to exist on a single trail. Maybe they became intoxicated by the smoke of money -- forget the marijuana.
-
(KCRA) Hundreds of federal and local law enforcement agents have seized roughly 100 Northern California houses purchased with money wired to the United States by a Chinese-based crime organization and used to grow massive amounts of marijuana illegally, authorities said Wednesday. The raids culminate a months-long investigation focusing on dozens of Chinese nationals who bought homes in seven counties. Most of the buyers were in the country legally and came from as far away as Georgia, Illinois New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania, U.S. Attorney McGregor Scott said.
(KCRA)
-
Fresh Off the Boat! (...and right to the vice!)
:P :P
No, we've only ourselves to blame for all of it. 100% serious.
-
is it strange that some people on this site are anti drivers license for illegal immigrants but pro marijuana? Is is hypocritical to say in one thread the law is the law when it comes to drivers license for illegals, and pro marijuana? Asking for a friend?
-
is it strange that some people on this site are anti drivers license for illegal immigrants but pro marijuana? Is is hypocritical to say in one thread the law is the law when it comes to drivers license for illegals, and pro marijuana? Asking for a friend?
DE isn't pro-marijuana, tmk.
-
DE isn't pro-marijuana, tmk.
Don't try and confuse him with the facts.
-
Don't try and confuse him with the facts.
Yes, and with all due respect, the idea of comparing an inside issue (marijuana use by Americans) with one that comes entirely from outside (illegal entry into the country) doesn't sound too consistent.
-
Yes, and with all due respect, the idea of comparing an inside issue (marijuana use by Americans) with one that comes entirely from outside (illegal entry into the country) doesn't sound too consistent.
Yeah, I agree. It was a stretch
-
Trump, Gardner strike deal on legalized marijuana, ending standoff over Justice nominees
By Seung Min Kim April 13, 2018
President Trump has promised a top Senate Republican that he will support congressional efforts to protect states that have legalized marijuana — defusing a months-long standoff between Sen. Cory Gardner and the administration over Justice Department nominees.
In January, the Colorado Republican said he would block all DOJ nominations after Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a memo that heightened the prospect of a federal marijuana crackdown in states that had legalized the substance. Gardner’s home state made recreational marijuana legal in 2014.
In a phone call late Wednesday, Trump told Gardner that despite the DOJ memo, the marijuana industry in Colorado will not be targeted, the senator said in a statement Friday. Satisfied, the first-term senator is now backing down from his nominee blockade.
“Since the campaign, President Trump has consistently supported states’ rights to decide for themselves how best to approach marijuana,” Gardner said Friday. “Late Wednesday, I received a commitment from the President that the Department of Justice’s rescission of the Cole memo will not impact Colorado’s legal marijuana industry.”
He added: “Furthermore, President Trump has assured me that he will support a federalism-based legislative solution to fix this states’ rights issue once and for all. Because of these commitments, I have informed the Administration that I will be lifting my remaining holds on Department of Justice nominees.”
Gardner, who heads the campaign operation charged with hanging on to the Republicans’ Senate majority, was irate in January when Sessions revoked guidance from the Obama administration, known as the Cole memo, that had discouraged prosecutors from enforcing federal marijuana laws in states that had legalized the drug.
Especially infuriating, from Gardner’s perspective, was that Sessions had pledged during his confirmation process for attorney general he would leave states that had legalized marijuana alone, according to the senator.
The January memo from Sessions stated prosecutors should use their discretion in weighing whether charges were warranted, rather than abiding by the Obama-era guidance.
Trump has held a sharply different view from Sessions on the issue. During the presidential campaign, Trump said in an interview with KUSA-TV in Colorado that he said “it’s up to the states” on the marijuana issue.
Trump “does respect Colorado’s right to decide for themselves how to best approach this issue,” White House legislative affairs director Marc Short said in an interview Friday.
Gardner held up about 20 Justice nominees, a significant number considering Senate Republicans and the White House have for months accused Democrats of slowing down consideration of other Trump picks.
“Clearly, we’ve expressed our frustration with the delay with a lot of our nominees and feel that too often, senators hijack a nominee for a policy solution,” Short said. “So we’re reluctant to reward that sort of behavior. But at the same time, we’re anxious to get our team at the Department of Justice.”
A bill has not been finalized, but Gardner has been talking quietly with other senators about a legislative fix that would, in effect, make clear the federal government cannot interfere with states that have voted to legalize marijuana.
“My colleagues and I are continuing to work diligently on a bipartisan legislative solution that can pass Congress and head to the President’s desk to deliver on his campaign position,” Gardner said.
In addition to Gardner’s holds, DOJ has faced notable bipartisan pushback from Capitol Hill when it comes to marijuana.
Sens. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) and Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.) wrote to Sessions this week, urging him to back off efforts to curtail medical marijuana research at the Drug Enforcement Administration. The Washington Post reported in August that Sessions’s DOJ was effectively hamstringing the agency’s research efforts by making it harder to grow marijuana.
Separately, former House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) announced this week he is joining the board of directors for a cannabis company and engaged in efforts to allow veterans to access marijuana for medicinal use. He has opposed decriminalizing the substance as an elected official.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-gardner-strike-deal-on-legalized-marijuana-ending-standoff-over-justice-nominees/2018/04/13/2ac3b35a-3f3a-11e8-912d-16c9e9b37800_story.html?utm_term=.9dd8de72d4ac
-
Ex-Speaker John Boehner Joins Marijuana Firm’s Advisory Board
By Jennifer Kaplan
April 11, 2018
The U.S. marijuana industry has a new spokesman: John Boehner.
The Republican former Speaker of the House has joined the advisory board of Acreage Holdings, a company that cultivates, processes and dispenses cannabis in 11 U.S. states. Boehner’s endorsement, after saying nine years ago he was “unalterably opposed” to legalization, could be considered a watershed event: Marijuana has gone mainstream.
“Over the last 10 or 15 years, the American people’s attitudes have changed dramatically,” he said in an interview. “I find myself in that same position.”
Sixty-four percent of Americans, including a majority of both Republicans and Democrats, want to legalize it, according to an October Gallup survey. That’s the most since the pollster began asking the question in 1969, when 12 percent of the population favored legalization.
Former Massachusetts Governor William Weld will join Boehner on the advisory board of Acreage, which holds 35 licenses for cannabis businesses in the U.S. Boehner, 68, was first elected to the House of Representatives from Southwest Ohio in 1990. He was Speaker from 2011 to 2015, when he resigned amid problems with an increasingly fractious Republican caucus.
Since then, he’s served as a board member for tobacco company Reynolds American Inc. and adviser for global law firm Squire Patton Boggs US LLP. Weld, 72, who was governor from 1991 to 1997, was the Libertarian Party’s candidate for vice president in 2016.
‘Immensely Positive’
“We view this advocacy that we get from these two gentlemen as immensely positive for the industry,” said George Allen, Acreage’s president.
The politicians are a sign of a watershed moment for the industry, according to Vahan Ajamian, an analyst at Beacon Securities Ltd.
“It is difficult to overstate the impact of this monumental event for the U.S. cannabis sector,” he said in a note Wednesday after Bloomberg broke the news.
The two former Republican politicians join Acreage as current officeholders vacillate on their support for weed. President Donald Trump has gone back and forth, while Attorney General Jeff Sessions is a longtime opponent. The Justice Department in January rescinded the Obama-era policies that allowed state legal pot markets to flourish.
Both Boehner and Weld say they’ve never tried the drug, but adult recreational use is legal in nine states and Washington, D.C. That means more than one in five American adults can partake. Twenty additional states allow for some form of medical marijuana. The legal market is expected to reach $75 billion by 2030, according to the investment bank Cowen & Co.
Still, the drug remains federally illegal and is classified as a Schedule I narcotic, the harshest of five government ratings.
Supported Referendum
Weld said he’s been in favor of medical marijuana since 1992 and supported the referendum that legalized recreational pot use in his home state in 2016.
“I was a little bit ahead of the field there,” he said in an interview.
Even so, his belief in the functionality of the plant has grown, he said, especially when it comes to easing the opioid crisis.
“Cannabis could be perceived as an exit drug, not a gateway drug,” he said.
Boehner said his perspective shifted after he saw the plant’s efficacy in helping a close friend deal with debilitating back pain. Marijuana’s potential use as a treatment for veterans helped sway him, too. Plus he’s been studying the problems of the U.S. criminal justice system for years.
“When you look at the number of people in our state and federal penitentiaries, who are there for possession of small amounts of cannabis, you begin to really scratch your head,” Boehner said. “We have literally filled up our jails with people who are nonviolent and frankly do not belong there.”
10th Amendment
On top of all those reasons to support the plant, Boehner and Weld say the debate over legalization is, at its core, a discussion of the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which allows states to do what they want.
“If some states don’t want marijuana to be legal, that’s their prerogative,” Weld said. “But that shouldn’t be dictated by the nanny state in Washington.”
Despite the GOP mostly lauding the amendment, Republican politicians have been split on the cannabis issue. Sessions’ harsh words for marijuana, and his decision to roll back Obama-era protections, didn’t deter Boehner or Weld’s decisions to get involved with the industry, they said.
“When I saw the announcement, I almost chuckled to myself,” Boehner said, referring to the policy reversal. “I don’t know why they decided to do this. It could be that the attorney general is trying to force the Congress to act.”
Winding Road
The politicians’ years in public office may help the company navigate the winding road to federal legalization.
“When it comes to an issue like this, that has what I’ll call murky legal issues and political issues, we’re there to provide advice to Acreage in terms of how they work with state and federal governments, how they work with local governments and advice on what states look promising,” Boehner said.
Neither Boehner nor Weld has made a financial investment in Acreage, though Weld says he’s considering it.
“Millennials who will inherit the kingdom before long, they are even more positive about cannabis than the populous at large,” Weld said. “You can look at the trend of millennial opinion and you can see the future.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-11/ex-speaker-john-boehner-joins-marijuana-firm-s-advisory-board
-
Politics at its worst. Blocking nominees regardless of qualifications in order to get a pass for his state. Now I'm all for de criminalizing marijuana, but this kind of politics is whats wrong with washington
-
These California Women Are Trailblazing The Legal Weed Industry
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/women-of-color-fight-for-equity-in-californias-emerging-legal-weed-industry_us_5acfcc17e4b077c89ce6c487
-
Former NBA, NFL athletes estimate marijuana use among players is higher than 80%
Scott Gleeson, USA TODAY Sports
Published April 20, 2018
Twenty-nine states and Washington D.C, have legalized the use of medical marijuana and on top of that, nine states have legalized recreational pot. But the question is, why was it illegal in the first place? Just the FAQs
Former NBA player Kenyon Martin, the No. 1 pick in the 2000 draft, said in an interview with Bleacher Report published Friday that he believes “85% of the league” smoked marijuana during his career.
Former tight end Martellus Bennett thought the number was even higher in the NFL, where injuries and physical pain are more prevalent.
"I want to say about 89% (of the NFL used marijuana)," Bennett told Bleacher Report in a separate interview among former NFL players.
Marijuana is one of the NBA and NFL's banned substances, with a failed drug test leading to a suspension and fine — even for players in states where marijuana is legal. Former NFL player John Moffitt noted that the league is essentially "looking away" by only testing once a year.
Matt Barnes, another former NBA player who retired after the 2016-17 season, said he smoked pot before games throughout his 14-year career. He also said there was hypocrisy among NBA teams' top brass when it came to marijuana use.
"The GMs, coaches, presidents (were smoking). I mean, it goes deeper than what you think," Barnes said. "Some of the people that are cracking whips and suspending us are smoking weed."
Former NFL defensive lineman Shaun Smith said he used to smoke "two blunts before every game" over the span of his 10 seasons in the league. He echoed Barnes' point.
"Shoot, coaches do it. Personnel does it, people upstairs do it," Smith said. "Quarterbacks, guys that are your captains, leaders of the team smoke.
"Everybody has their reason. They do it for their pain."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2018/04/20/former-nba-nfl-athletes-estimate-marijuana-use-players-high/536254002/
-
Former NFL defensive lineman Shaun Smith said he used to smoke "two blunts before every game" over the span of his 10 seasons in the league.
This guy had "Smoke Two Joints" on is mind when he gave that quote. You just know it. Get some new material already.
::) lmao
-
Okay, a few little tips thrown down for fun. I don't think, necessarily, anyone should use/grow pot. But it'd be dumb to believe no GBers do, and that one or two may follow this thread. This is a safety concern more than anything else, so it needs to be said. And as long as those few things are true, then it's in the best interest to cover a few issues on the subject. So, from an above post:
(http://a57.foxnews.com/images.foxnews.com/content/fox-news/us/2017/10/12/major-drug-bust-in-affluent-georgia-homes-yields-7m-in-marijuana-9-arrests-officials-say/_jcr_content/par/featured_image/media-0.img.jpg/931/524/1507821291060.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Don't put your light/lights on the ceiling. That's a common, but very dumb mistake. To begin with, your chance to detect electrical trouble is reduced with it/them placed up high. If that's "not good enough" for you, then you should know your plants will fulfill their potential with light much closer to them. A complete, 180 degree difference.
Put the energy required into cooling the plants in a reasonable way, to have the light as close to them as possible. You'll find it shouldn't be unreasonable to maintain a good temp at about six inches from the tallest points. You'll notice, this way, your plants won't stretch for light, meaning much less stem will be created. That's what you should want, if you expect them to use their energy for flowering. I'm sure you do, unless you're in the hemp business. They've only so much of that energy to spend, then, is what you should know.
You should (in effect) want maximum wattage per foot in the immediate range of the plant's growth, to say that a light source on the ceiling isn't the way to go - and it's possibly very dangerous as well. Don't take the lead from people in the above stories - they're clueless. The Asians are scoring on the world, though, and it's disgraceful.
-
High times for pot profit seekers
Steve Kurtz By Steve Kurtz, Kristine Kotta | Fox News
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/05/08/high-times-for-pot-profit-seekers.html
-
Kamala Harris backs Booker bill to legalize marijuana
BY ARIS FOLLEY - 05/10/18
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), a potential 2020 White House contender, is joining Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), who is also speculated to be a possible presidential candidate, in the fight to legalize marijuana under federal law.
Harris announced Thursday that she will be co-sponsoring the Marijuana Justice Act, which Booker introduced in August.
The legislation would eliminate marijuana's status as a Schedule 1 drug under the Controlled Substance Act. The move would also require federal courts to expunge the records of Americans who have prior marijuana convictions related to use or possession.
“It’s the right thing to do. And I know this as a former prosecutor. I know it as a senator,” Harris said in a video announcing her decision with NowThis. “I just look at what we want as a country and where we need to be instead of where we’ve been.
“African-Americans use marijuana at roughly the same rate as whites but are approximately four times more likely to be arrested for possession,” Harris said. “The fact is marijuana laws are not applied and enforced the same way for all people.”
Harris believes the move to decriminalize marijuana will prevent the Justice Department from enforcing laws that are “unjust and unfair.”
“The war on drugs was a war on communities,” Harris said, adding that police should be dealing with more serious drugs and crimes. “Not somebody smoking a joint.”
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) in February announced that she would co-sponsor the act with Booker. Gillibrand is also considered to be a potential 2020 Democratic presidential candidate, as is Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who backs the bill as well.
So far, nine states and Washington, D.C. have legalized the drug for recreational use for adults over the age of 21. Michigan will hold a vote to legalize recreational pot this year, potentially making it the 10th state and first in the Midwest to legalize.
http://thehill.com/regulation/legislation/387101-kamala-harris-backs-booker-bill-to-legalize-marijuana
-
Joint effort: cannabis lobby heads to Washington to woo US lawmakers
Industry leaders descended on the capital this week amid hopes the country at large is slowly embracing legalization
Sabrina Siddiqui in Washington
@SabrinaSiddiqui
Thu 24 May 2018 06
More than 200 cannabis industry leaders descended upon Washington this week in the hopes of persuading the US Congress to embrace the growing movement for marijuana legalization.
The marijuana business owners and advocates bustled between the hallways of the House and Senate, meeting with hundreds of congressional offices and rallying on the Capitol lawn over a three-day lobbying tour organized by the National Cannabis Industry Association.
The event, which brought members representing 23 states and the District of Columbia, was not the first of its kind. But the advocates hailed a new front in the battle for federal marijuana reform against the backdrop of a rapid evolution on how the issue is perceived in the nation’s capital.
“There’s an air of legitimacy around our group that makes me hopeful that the stigma is going to fall away,” said Blake Mensing, a cannabis attorney from Massachusetts who helps clients obtain local permits and state licenses for adult use cannabis businesses.
With public opinion polls showing record support among Americans for marijuana legalization, it’s little surprise that the high has spread to Congress.
Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have taken a flurry of actions in recent months that signal the shifting tides.
Mitch McConnell, the Republican Senate majority leader, fast-tracked a bill in April that would legalize industrial hemp. The historical ban on hemp, which is derived from the cannabis plant, has long imposed barriers on the agriculture industry.
McConnell found an ally in his daily sparring partner Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, who announced his support for the proposal this month.
The marijuana industry’s efforts include pushing for legislation that would grant legal marijuana businesses access to financial services, among other measures to prevent the federal government from prosecuting businesses that are in compliance with state laws.
“The states have already proven that replacing the criminal marijuana markets with tightly regulated and transparent small businesses is working,” said Aaron Smith, executive director of the National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA). “Now the responsibility falls on Congress to reform federal laws so that the legal cannabis industry can be treated fairly, like any other legitimate business sector.”
To further its case, the NCIA released a report highlighting economic benefits in the five states – Alaska, Colorado, Nevada, Oregon and Washington – that taxed and regulated the commercial production and sale of marijuana in 2017.
Those states collected more than $790m in state tax revenue that year, the report found, with tax revenue reaching $247m in Colorado alone. The analysis also cited a 445% increase in the number of marijuana industry job postings in 2017, according to the job placement firm ZipRecruiter, compared with an increase of 18% the year before.
Even longtime foes of marijuana legalization efforts have joined the bandwagon.
Last month the former House speaker John Boehner sent shockwaves through Washington by joining the board of Acreage Holdings, a firm that cultivates, processes and dispenses marijuana in 11 US states. The move marked a stunning reversal for the Ohio Republican, who once said he was “unalterably opposed” to decriminalizing marijuana.
In a statement provided to the Guardian, Boehner said there were a number of issues that had prompted the change. “My thinking, like that of millions of other Americans, has evolved as I’ve learned more about the issue,” he said, pointing to the use of medical marijuana to treat patients of opioid addiction and the country’s veterans.
Descheduling the drug, Boehner added, “will reduce the conflict between federal policy and state programs”.
Even Donald Trump’s administration has shown signs of easing its proposed crackdown on states that have legalized marijuana.
The US attorney general, Jeff Sessions, rescinded an Obama-era policy of non-interference with marijuana-friendly state laws, raising alarms of a forthcoming federal crackdown.
The move prompted Senator Cory Gardner, a Republican from Colorado, to block all of Trump’s nominees to the justice department in a bid to compel the administration to reverse course. Last month, the president agreed his administration would not target the marijuana industry in Gardner’s home state, ending a three-month standoff.
Sessions even acknowledged the potential for some benefits from medical marijuana in a recent Senate hearing.
Charles Smith, a New York attorney and cannabis regulatory and compliance consultant, said the Trump administration had largely maintained the status quo on the drug.
“The rescinding of the [Obama-era] guidance did cause a chilling effect,” he added. “There were deals lost, there were investors that backed out.
“But we haven’t seen it on the ground where they’re carrying out enforcement actions, despite what the attorney general has said.”
Some critics nonetheless view the evolution of Boehner and other former proponents of so-called ‘tough-on-crime’ policies as cashing in on what is now a burgeoning industry.
Shanita Penny, president of the board of directors at the Minority Cannabis Business Association, said: “It’s not enough to just participate in this industry from a stance of wanting to make money.”
Penny reiterated a similar message to lawmakers this week as she implored action on criminal justice reform.
Penny’s group is focused on removing barriers that prohibit those with previous marijuana convictions from participating in the industry as a patient, employee or operator. Among the most pressing issues, from their vantage point, is reinvesting in the communities that have been disproportionately affected by the mandatory sentencing laws of years past.
“You have to be willing to look at the harm that was done to communities that were over-policed, that were over-sentenced, that was destroyed because of the war on drugs and be ready to do some of the work to heal,” Penny said.
“We need the industry to start thinking about social responsibility and not let this be something that we address in hindsight.”
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/may/24/cannabis-industry-lobby-washington-legalization
-
I don't smoke pot ( or ciggs, cigars) or drink any booze or use any rec drugs.
I even competed in NON-tested NPC shows without using any steroids in the 90's.
I've tried drinking, pot, etc and never experiences any great high or buzz.
I personally have no desire to use any rec drugs or booze.
Having said THAT, I see no reason to make pot legal and make tax $$ from sales.
My main issue with any drug use or drinking is having tax payers on the hook for rehab treatments.
If you get addicted , too bad. The person decided to use the drugs ( or booze), they can be responsible for their rehab.
with all dur respect.. I think it is archaic to keep marijuana illegal.
-
(http://www.miamiherald.com/latest-news/lznp8v/picture211955979/alternates/LANDSCAPE_1140/Marijuana%20Older%20Adults.JPG)
David Sloan, who is a multiple sclerosis patient and user of medical marijuana, exhales smoke from medical cannabis concentrate given to him with help from his caregiver, at Sloan's home in Highlands Ranch, south of Denver, in this photo from 2015. Brennan Linsley AP
STATE POLITICS
Judge strikes down Legislature's ban on smoking medical marijuana
BY ELIZABETH KOH
Herald/Times Tallahassee Bureau
May 25, 2018
A Leon County circuit court judge ruled Friday afternoon that the state’s ban on smoking medical marijuana is unconstitutional, setting up continued legal fights as the state appeals the decision.
In a 22-page order, Judge Karen Gievers said that the Legislature's ban on smoking medical cannabis conflicted with the intent of a constitutional amendment that had broadly legalized the drug for medical use after voters approved it in 2016.
She concurred with arguments made last Wednesday by Jon Mills, an attorney for the plaintiffs, contending the definition approved by voters included "all types of medical marijuana," including forms that can be smoked. Mills had also argued that the amendment implicitly recognized smoking in private by recognizing that there was no right to smoke it in public places.
Gievers, in striking down the ban, invoked both George Washington and Thomas Jefferson in her decision and highlighted Washington's characterization of the constitution as a "sacred obligation."
"Just as no person is above the law, the legislature must heed the constitutional rights Floridians placed in the Constitution in 2016," she wrote. "The conflicting, overreaching 2017 statute, while presumably adopted in good faith and with good intentions, cannot be allowed to overrule the authority of the people to protect rights in the Constitution."
Devin Galetta, a spokesman for the state Department of Health, said it would appeal the verdict, resulting in an automatic stay. The notice of the appeal was filed Friday night.
"This ruling goes against what the legislature outlined when they wrote and approved Florida’s law to implement the constitutional amendment that was approved by an overwhelmingly bipartisan majority," he wrote.
About 71 percent of Florida voters had approved Amendment 2 in 2016, authorizing the use of marijuana as a medical treatment for people with debilitating conditions. But in a bill implementing the amendment the following year, lawmakers limited the scope of its use to only oils, sprays, tinctures, vaping and edibles.
Lawmakers excluded smoking as a method for medical treatment, arguing that smoking would be a "backdoor attempt" at allowing recreational use.
Gievers heard arguments in a one-day trial last week for the case, which was brought against the state last July by John Morgan, an Orlando attorney who also financed the campaign behind the successful constitutional amendment.
His suit, filed on behalf of two patients and two advocacy organizations, asked the court to invalidate the implementing law passed by the Florida Legislature and signed by Gov. Rick Scott.
Defense lawyers for the state Department of Health and the Office of Medical Marijuana Use had argued that the implementing law was constitutional because the state "has a role in setting parameters and it can absolutely base those parameters on health and safety concerns."
Ben Pollara, who managed the political campaign that helped push the constitutional amendment, said the ruling was a victory both for Florida patients and for voters who supported the amendment.
"The court reaffirmed the will of the voters pretty explicitly," he said. "There's no reason the state should continue to expend resources on [an appeal]."
But the verdict changes little immediately for patients — smokeable forms of medical marijuana are not legally available, and Gievers said last week that she expected whatever decision she made to be appealed. Morgan said, depending on the First District Court of Appeal's response to the state's appeal, he will seek to expedite it to the state Supreme Court on behalf of the patients named in the lawsuit.
"The voters of Florida wanted this," he said. "It was clear in the intent language and in the ballot language. ... Smoked marijuana is the most effective and quickest delivery system, period."
He cautioned that Scott, who is running for the U.S. Senate, should reconsider continuing to fight for the smoking ban.
"What I would say to Rick Scott and [Attorney General] Pam Bondi is, 'If you decide to appeal this verdict, I think Rick Scott will lose the U.S. Senate race on this issue alone,' " he said.
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article211954564.html
-
Record-High Number Of Americans Support Legalizing Marijuana
Sixty-six percent are on board with legal weed, according to a new Gallup poll.
By Lydia O’Connor
10/22/2018
Roughly two-thirds of Americans support legalizing marijuana, marking a record-high approval rate, according to a Gallup poll released Monday.
Sixty-six percent of survey respondents support legalizing weed ― a stance more and more Americans have taken this stance since 2000, when 31 percent endorsed legalization.
The survey found that support for legalization among Americans 55 and older had also increased, jumping from 50 percent to 59 percent since last year. Support across the East, West, South and Midwest regions is now about equal.
“Like support for gay marriage ― and in prior years, interracial marriage ― support for marijuana legalization has generally only expanded, even if slowly, over the course of multiple decades ― raising the question of where the ceiling in support might be,” Gallup’s Justin McCarthy wrote.
Legal weed is now supported by a majority of Americans across various demographics.
The record-high support comes in spite of Attorney General Jeff Sessions rolling back Obama-era legislation on marijuana usage and paving the way for federal crackdowns on states that have legalized the drug. Twenty-nine states and Washington, D.C., have passed laws authorizing use of recreational marijuana, medical marijuana or both.
The substance remains federally classified as a Schedule I drug that has “no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse,” despite broad research findings to the contrary. And although there are no recorded instances of anyone dying from a fatal dose of marijuana alone, the federal government considers it to be more dangerous than cocaine, methamphetamine and fentanyl.
The Gallup poll was conducted from Oct. 1 to Oct. 10, just before Canada became the second country in the world to legalize marijuana. Meanwhile, in the U.S., voters in four states are considering ballot measures in the upcoming midterm elections that would allow recreational or medical marijuana use.
Past Gallup polling has indicated support for legalizing marijuana across political demographics. For the first time, the majority of Republicans joined Democrats last year in supporting legalization.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/record-high-number-of-americans-support-legalizing-marijuana_us_5bce01d9e4b055bc94835cd6
-
It's legal in Canada and I sampled myself some the other day, as I was visiting. It's of great quality/potency, if somewhat pricey. But it's legal nationwide, coast to coast, and I have to admit I want the same thing for the U.S.
-
It's legal in Canada and I sampled myself some the other day, as I was visiting. It's of great quality/potency, if somewhat pricey. But it's legal nationwide, coast to coast, and I have to admit I want the same thing for the U.S.
One thing we agree on
-
I don't smoke pot ( or ciggs, cigars) or drink any booze or use any rec drugs.
I even competed in NON-tested NPC shows without using any steroids in the 90's.
I've tried drinking, pot, etc and never experiences any great high or buzz.
I personally have no desire to use any rec drugs or booze.
Having said THAT, I see no reason to make pot legal and make tax $$ from sales.
My main issue with any drug use or drinking is having tax payers on the hook for rehab treatments.
If you get addicted , too bad. The person decided to use the drugs ( or booze), they can be responsible for their rehab.
People are addicted anyway.
More money to help fund rehabs, hence more rehabilitated people.
-
Michigan Officially Legalizes Marijuana For Recreational Use
But it will likely be a few years before Michiganders can legally buy cannabis at retail stores.
By Nick Wing
POLITICS 12/06/2018
Legal marijuana has officially come to the Midwest.
Under a new measure taking effect Thursday in Michigan, people ages 21 and older in the state can legally possess and use cannabis for recreational purposes. Michigan voters approved the initiative in November with 56 percent of the vote.
Michigan’s Proposal 1 allows for the possession and transportation of up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana ― including up to 15 grams of marijuana concentrate ― and the possession of up to 10 ounces in a nonpublic place. Residents can also grow up to 12 plants at home, though those plants cannot be visible from a public place.
The new law strictly prohibits the public consumption of cannabis. Driving while under the influence of marijuana also remains illegal.
Although the measure calls for state policymakers to begin developing rules and regulations to guide the creation of Michigan’s recreational marijuana industry, officials say retail stores aren’t likely to open until 2020. Proposal 1 also legalized the cultivation of industrial hemp, nonintoxicating strains of cannabis that can be used to make textiles, biofuels and foods.
In response to November’s vote, incoming Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) has also said she intends to grant clemency to some of the thousands of people locked up in state prison for marijuana-related convictions.
With the enactment of Proposal 1, Michigan becomes the 10th state in the U.S. ― and the first in the Midwest region ― to legalize marijuana for recreational use. Michigan voters had previously approved medical marijuana in 2008, and it is one of the more than 30 states to have legalized cannabis for that purpose.
Marijuana legalization has spread rapidly across the U.S. since 2012, when Colorado and Washington became the first two states to pass measures okaying recreational cannabis. But up until now, that movement had been limited to states in New England and the West Coast, as well as Washington, D.C.
Despite the shifting legal landscape of marijuana at the state level, the plant is still a Schedule I substance under federal law, alongside drugs like heroin and LSD. But the American public appears to be increasingly skeptical of that longstanding framework. A full two in three Americans now support legalization, and polling has suggested the issue is becoming increasingly bipartisan.
With Michigan now having joined the ranks of legal marijuana states, it’s only a matter of time before others follow suit, said Matthew Schweich, deputy director of the Marijuana Policy Project, which played a leading role in the organizing support for Proposal 1.
“When it comes to marijuana policy in America, Michigan is ahead of the curve,” said Schweich. “It will serve as a strong example for the many other states that are currently considering similar reforms.”
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/michigan-legalize-marijuana-recreational-use_us_5c07fcb8e4b0bf813ef362ad
-
Michigan Officially Legalizes Marijuana For Recreational Use
But it will likely be a few years before Michiganders can legally buy cannabis at retail stores.
By Nick Wing
POLITICS 12/06/2018
Legal marijuana has officially come to the Midwest.
Under a new measure taking effect Thursday in Michigan, people ages 21 and older in the state can legally possess and use cannabis for recreational purposes. Michigan voters approved the initiative in November with 56 percent of the vote.
Michigan’s Proposal 1 allows for the possession and transportation of up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana ― including up to 15 grams of marijuana concentrate ― and the possession of up to 10 ounces in a nonpublic place. Residents can also grow up to 12 plants at home, though those plants cannot be visible from a public place.
The new law strictly prohibits the public consumption of cannabis. Driving while under the influence of marijuana also remains illegal.
Although the measure calls for state policymakers to begin developing rules and regulations to guide the creation of Michigan’s recreational marijuana industry, officials say retail stores aren’t likely to open until 2020. Proposal 1 also legalized the cultivation of industrial hemp, nonintoxicating strains of cannabis that can be used to make textiles, biofuels and foods.
In response to November’s vote, incoming Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) has also said she intends to grant clemency to some of the thousands of people locked up in state prison for marijuana-related convictions.
With the enactment of Proposal 1, Michigan becomes the 10th state in the U.S. ― and the first in the Midwest region ― to legalize marijuana for recreational use. Michigan voters had previously approved medical marijuana in 2008, and it is one of the more than 30 states to have legalized cannabis for that purpose.
Marijuana legalization has spread rapidly across the U.S. since 2012, when Colorado and Washington became the first two states to pass measures okaying recreational cannabis. But up until now, that movement had been limited to states in New England and the West Coast, as well as Washington, D.C.
Despite the shifting legal landscape of marijuana at the state level, the plant is still a Schedule I substance under federal law, alongside drugs like heroin and LSD. But the American public appears to be increasingly skeptical of that longstanding framework. A full two in three Americans now support legalization, and polling has suggested the issue is becoming increasingly bipartisan.
With Michigan now having joined the ranks of legal marijuana states, it’s only a matter of time before others follow suit, said Matthew Schweich, deputy director of the Marijuana Policy Project, which played a leading role in the organizing support for Proposal 1.
“When it comes to marijuana policy in America, Michigan is ahead of the curve,” said Schweich. “It will serve as a strong example for the many other states that are currently considering similar reforms.”
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/michigan-legalize-marijuana-recreational-use_us_5c07fcb8e4b0bf813ef362ad
It's nice to see states adjusting the the 20th century... now if only they and the federal government would come into the 21st century
-
What's ironic, the federal government being ok with CBD (2014 Farm bill, and the pending 2019 Farm bill), but some states till having issues with making it fully legal, versus, the Federal government not ok with Marijuana but many states ok with it.
-
Legal marijuana industry had banner year in 2018
GILLIAN FLACCUS
Associated Press•December 27, 2018
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — The last year was a 12-month champagne toast for the legal marijuana industry as the global market exploded and cannabis pushed its way further into the financial and cultural mainstream.
Liberal California became the largest legal U.S. marketplace, while conservative Utah and Oklahoma embraced medical marijuana. Canada ushered in broad legalization , and Mexico's Supreme Court set the stage for that country to follow.
U.S. drug regulators approved the first marijuana-based pharmaceutical to treat kids with a form of epilepsy, and billions of investment dollars poured into cannabis companies. Even main street brands like Coca-Cola said they are considering joining the party.
"I have been working on this for decades, and this was the year that the movement crested," said U.S. Rep. Earl Blumenauer, an Oregon Democrat working to overturn the federal ban on pot. "It's clear that this is all coming to a head."
With buzz building across the globe, the momentum will continue into 2019.
Luxembourg is poised to become the first European country to legalize recreational marijuana, and South Africa is moving in that direction. Thailand legalized medicinal use of marijuana on Tuesday, and other Southeastern Asian countries may follow South Korea's lead in legalizing cannabidiol, or CBD. It's a non-psychoactive compound found in marijuana and hemp plants and used for treatment of certain medical problems.
"It's not just the U.S. now. It's spreading," said Ben Curren, CEO of Green Bits, a San Jose, California, company that develops software for marijuana retailers and businesses.
Curren's firm is one of many that blossomed as the industry grew. He started the company in 2014 with two friends. Now, he has 85 employees, and the company's software processes $2.5 billion in sales transactions a year for more than 1,000 U.S. retail stores and dispensaries.
Green Bits raised $17 million in April, pulling in money from investment firms including Snoop Dogg's Casa Verde Capital. Curren hopes to expand internationally by 2020.
"A lot of the problem is keeping up with growth," he said.
Legal marijuana was a $10.4 billion industry in the U.S. in 2018 with a quarter-million jobs devoted just to the handling of marijuana plants, said Beau Whitney, vice president and senior economist at New Frontier Data, a leading cannabis market research and data analysis firm. There are many other jobs that don't involve direct work with the plants but they are harder to quantify, Whitney said.
Investors poured $10 billion into cannabis in North America in 2018, twice what was invested in the last three years combined, he said, and the combined North American market is expected to reach more than $16 billion in 2019.
"Investors are getting much savvier when it comes to this space because even just a couple of years ago, you'd throw money at it and hope that something would stick," he said. "But now investors are much more discerning."
Increasingly, U.S. lawmakers see that success and want it for their states.
Nearly two-thirds of U.S. states now have legalized some form of medical marijuana.
Voters in November made Michigan the 10th state — and first in the Midwest — to legalize recreational marijuana. Governors in New York and New Jersey are pushing for a similar law in their states next year, and momentum for broad legalization is building in Pennsylvania and Illinois.
"Let's legalize the adult use of recreational marijuana once and for all," New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo said last week.
State lawmakers in Nebraska just formed a campaign committee to put a medical cannabis initiative to voters in 2020. Nebraska shares a border with Colorado, one of the first two states to legalize recreational marijuana, and Iowa, which recently started a limited medical marijuana program.
"Attitudes have been rapidly evolving and changing. I know that my attitude toward it has also changed," said Nebraska state Sen. Adam Morfeld, a Democrat. "Seeing the medical benefits and seeing other states implement it ... has convinced me that it's not the dangerous drug it's made out to be."
With all its success, the U.S. marijuana industry continues to be undercut by a robust black market and federal law that treats marijuana as a controlled substance like heroin. Financial institutions are skittish about cannabis businesses, even in U.S. states where they are legal, and investors until recently have been reluctant to put their money behind pot.
Marijuana businesses can't deduct their business expenses on their federal taxes and face huge challenges getting insurance and finding real estate for their brick-and-mortar operations.
"Until you have complete federal legalization, you're going to be living with that structure," said Marc Press, a New Jersey attorney who advises cannabis businesses.
At the start of the year, the industry was chilled when then-U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions rescinded a policy shielding state-licensed medical marijuana operators from federal drug prosecutions. Ultimately the move had minimal impact because federal prosecutors showed little interest in going after legal operators.
Sessions, a staunch marijuana opponent, later lost his job while President Donald Trump said he was inclined to support an effort by U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner, a Colorado Republican, to relax the federal prohibition.
In November, Democrats won control of the U.S. House and want to use it next year to pass legislation that eases federal restrictions on the legal marijuana industry without removing it from the controlled substances list.
Gardner and Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren have proposed legislation allowing state-approved commercial cannabis activity under federal law. The bill also would let states and Indian tribes determine how best to regulate marijuana commerce within their boundaries without fear of federal intervention.
If those provisions become law, they could open up banking for the marijuana industry nationwide and make it easier for cannabis companies to secure capital.
Blumenauer's "blueprint" to legalize marijuana also calls for the federal government to provide medical marijuana for veterans, more equitable taxation for marijuana businesses and rolling back federal prohibitions on marijuana research, among other things.
"We have elected the most pro-cannabis Congress in history and more important, some of the people who were roadblocks to our work ... are gone," Blumenauer said. "If we're able to jump-start it in the House, I think there will be support in the Senate, particularly if we deal with things that are important, like veterans' access and banking."
https://www.yahoo.com/news/legal-marijuana-industry-had-banner-2018-060708442--finance.html
-
Too much weed? Oregon's got a marijuana surplus and officials aren't happy
Sophie Quinton, Stateline Updated July 15, 2019
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2019/07/12/oregon-legalized-recreational-marijuana-now-fears-weed-pot-surplus/1703278001/
-
Hawaii Decriminalizes Cannabis
Sara Brittany Somerset Contributor
Vices
Jul 10, 2019
I cover marijuana, global affairs and the intersection of the two.
Honolulu, Hawaii-- The state of Hawaii decriminalized cannabis yesterday. Bill HB1383, decriminalizes possession of a personal amount of cannabis and provides retroactive expungement for individuals with similar past possession offenses.
The new law maintains a $130 fine; however, the looming penalty of jail time is no longer a threat for possession of up to three grams of cannabis -- the most minuscule possession threshold in any decriminalized state.
While simple possession is no longer considered a crime, it differs from legalization. Possession of more than three grams, or selling cannabis for non-medical reasons, is still considered criminal activity and therefore subject to arrest and potential prosecution.
The measure also creates a task force to study other states' cannabis laws.
Record expungement is not automatic, as in the state of llinois -- it potentially requires a written application process.
"While any progress is great, this stands to be the least progressive decriminalization statue, among states with them, in the whole," says Troy Smit of the National Organization to Reform Marijuana Laws (NORML).
Hawaii’s legislature approved the bill and forwarded it to Democratic Governor David Ige to sign off on, in May. Ige did not approve or veto the bill, effectively allowing it to become law on Tuesday.
Some opponents of cannabis legalization prefer decriminalization as a way to reallocate law enforcement resources to police more pressing criminal activity. However, they are against cannabis corporations or "Big Cannabis," and are afraid of the plant becoming too easily accessible to minors. An adult purchasing pot for people who are underage could be just as easy as providing teenagers with alcohol.
Some legalization advocates think it is problematic that decriminalization keeps sales of adult use marijuana illegal. Without the opportunity to purchase cannabis legally, the illicit market and dangers associated with it --such as organized crime-- continues to flourish.
However, despite the fact that cannabis is fully legal California, the illicit market there continues to proliferate.
Cannabis legalization is not garnering much support in Hawaii’s legislature.
While Hawaii's government currently does not currently seem keen to legalize cannabis, for now it has accepted decriminalization.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarabrittanysomerset/2019/07/10/hawaii-decriminalizes-cannabis/#439ba3021a7c
-
Very interested to see how the vote turns out.
Legalized Marijuana and the Crime Question
June 25, 2010 - 11:33 AM | by: Dan Springer
It's an argument you hear frequently from marijuana advocates: 'Legalize the drug, take the profit away, squeeze out the drug dealers and lower crime.' To be sure, the drug cartels would be impacted as would the entire drug underworld.
But while some see major improvements, others predict higher usage rates and even more problems associated with the drug. One thing we know is that the drug trade in Mexico has gotten much more violent. Officials say 15,000 murders have been tied to the Mexican drug wars since 2006.
Norm Stamper, the former Seattle police chief who supports legalization says, "50-70 percent of Mexican drug cartel money represent marijuana sales. That (legalization) would deal a huge blow to them." But most of law enforcement has serious reservations.
Drug Czars past and present oppose the California ballot initiative that would legalize small amounts of marijuana. John Walters, who served in that capacity under President Bush, says "The danger here is, when we don't take this seriously we encourage consumption and consumption drives up the cost and provides more money for these criminal groups to expand their capacity to do harm."
Walters calls medical marijuana a fraud which has led to more pot smoking. California was the first to test those waters in 1996 and since then 13 states have followed suit.
And violence still surrounds the drug even where it is considered "medicine." Just last night there were two murders at a medical marijuana dispensary in Los Angeles.
Critics also point to the Netherlands which legalized marijuana long ago. As the country got known as a place to use drugs, there was an explosion of so-called coffee shops which are really just places to purchase and smoke marijuana.
They have become such a nuisance and attracted so much crime that officials have shut down thousands over the last few years.
Another debate surrounding legalization is over the clash that would exist between state and federal drug laws. Only an act of Congress could make marijuana legal under federal law.
The D.E.A., F.B.I. and other federal agencies have continued to enforce national drug laws even in states with medical marijuana. Although, while the Bush Administration took a hard line approach to the issue, President Obama has sent slightly different signals. Last year his attorney general Eric Holder instructed agents to stop pot dispensary raids if the outlets were operating within state law.
But Obama opposes outright legalization. His drug czar Gil Kerlikowski says, "We will have more criminal justice costs, more social costs, and the taxes, whatever taxes may be collected, and that's a very vague number, wouldn't begin to pay for all those costs."
Legalization would lead to a host of other sticky issues. Among them, drugs in the workplace. Courts have upheld the right of employers to require a drug-free work environment in states that allow medical marijuana. Would that change at all if pot were legal.
And what about custody cases? Judges, when deciding which home is more suitable for raising children can factor in drug use even when that drug use is allowed under state law.
So as Californians get ready to vote on the issue in November, people around the country are watching.
http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/06/25/legalized-marijuana-and-the-crime-question/?test=latestnews
From my understanding weed imports from Mexico have fallen off a cliff since legalization. This has been one area where I have been on the opposite side of conservatives who have been proven wrong on this issue.
-
From my understanding weed imports from Mexico have fallen off a cliff since legalization. This has been one area where I have been on the opposite side of conservatives who have been proven wrong on this issue.
Legalized marijuana is like the same sex marriage issue several years ago: inevitable. All it's going to take is a move by Trump to decriminalize it (or stop prosecuting it) at the federal level and the dominoes will fall.
-
The government is using marijuana legalization as a back door to taking your gun rights. ;)
-
The government is using marijuana legalization as a back door to taking your gun rights. ;)
Doubt it, or you just joking?
-
Senate Schedules Hearing On Marijuana Business Banking Access
Tom Angell Contributor
Jul 16, 2019
In one of the clearest signs of marijuana reform's growing momentum on Capitol Hill, a Republican-controlled Senate committee has scheduled a hearing for next week that will examine cannabis businesses' lack of access to banking services.
The formal discussion in the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs on Tuesday comes as legislation aimed at resolving the marijuana industry's financial services problems is gaining momentum. A House cannabis banking bill that cleared that chamber's Financial Services Committee with a bipartisan vote in March now has 206 cosponsors—nearly half the body—while companion Senate legislation has 32 out of 100 senators signed on.
The move for a hearing is somewhat of a surprise, as Chairman Mike Crapo (R-ID) had refused to commit to schedule time for the issue when asked in April, saying that "as long as cannabis is illegal under federal law, it seems to me to be difficult for us to resolve" the financial services piece.
But pressure has increased, with 50 state banking associations, the National Association of State Treasurers, the top financial regulators of 25 states, a majority of state attorneys general and bipartisan governors of 20 states all endorsing the legislation—the Secure And Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act—and calling on Congress to act on it.
Advocates point out that preventing banks from servicing state-licensed marijuana growers and retailers forces those businesses to operate on a cash-only basis, which creates public safety risks by making them targets for robberies.
While a House floor vote had been expected on the issue prior to the upcoming August recess, time is running short and no further action has yet been scheduled. That said, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) last week noted bipartisan support for the legislation.
“There’s an issue when it comes to banking, making sure you’re able to having accountability within that,” he said. “I’ve heard a lot of bipartisanship in there.”
A separate House-passed spending bill also contains a provision seeking to prevent federal financial regulators from punishing banks for working with state-legal marijuana businesses, but its language is seen as less robust than the standalone legislation, which is sponsored by Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-CO) in the House and Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) in the Senate.
“House Democrats have a robust agenda which has made it tough to get time on the legislative calendar," a spokesperson for Perlmutter said in an email. "But as we continue to talk with people, we keep gaining more and more support and look forward to a strong vote on the floor of the House soon.”
Witnesses at the newly scheduled Senate hearing—titled "Challenges for Cannabis and Banking: Outside Perspectives"—will include representatives of the Credit Union National Association (CUNA), Citywide Banks and prohibitionist group Smart Approaches to Marijuana.
“At its heart, cannabis banking is a public safety issue. It’s an $8.3 billion industry that’s currently being forced to operate almost entirely in cash," CUNA President and CEO Jim Nussle said. "While 33 states, territories and DC have legalized cannabis, it’s been overwhelmingly difficult to provide these businesses financial services because handling transactions are currently considered money laundering. Credit unions have been leading the way in helping to get this money off the streets. We are dedicated to finding a solution to this ongoing challenge that impacts every community around the country, and look forward to working with Senate leaders during this hearing and with Congress at large.”
Also testifying will be John Lord, CEO of marijuana retail chain LivWell Enlightened Health and chairman of the industry advocacy group the Cannabis Trade Federation (CTF).
Neal Levine, CEO of CTF, said in a statement that he hoped the organization's testimony will "contribute to the growing momentum behind meaningful and historic cannabis policy reform."
“This hearing is yet another sign that Congress is taking the cannabis banking problem seriously and intends to take action to correct it,” he said. “Cannabis businesses operating legally under state and local laws should have the same access to banking and financial services as any other type of business."
Merkley and Sen. Cory Gardner (R-CO), the bill's chief GOP cosponsor, will appear at the hearing as well.
Michael Correia, government relations director for the National Cannabis Industry Association, called the hearing "yet another signal of the bill’s popularity."
"Chairman Crapo has been clear that he does not support marijuana," he said. "However, this clearly shows that he understands this issue is a banking problem that has serious public safety implications."
Beyond financial services access, support on broader marijuana issues is growing in Congress.
Last week, a House Judiciary subcommittee held a first-ever hearing on ending federal cannabis prohibition at which lawmakers and witnesses expressed a near consensus that far-reaching reforms are needed but voiced some disagreement over specific provisions of pending bills.
Last month, the House approved amendments to protect state, territory and tribal marijuana laws from Justice Department interference and last week passed a measure to let military veterans who work in the cannabis industry apply for government-backed home loans.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomangell/2019/07/16/senate-schedules-hearing-on-marijuana-business-banking-access/#7b1240f14962
-
From my understanding weed imports from Mexico have fallen off a cliff since legalization. This has been one area where I have been on the opposite side of conservatives who have been proven wrong on this issue.
Really? I thought they dropped because coca and meth were much more profitable.
-
Really? I thought they dropped because coca and meth were much more profitable.
Even if that is the case, there’s still huge demand for marijuana in this country and a lot of money to be made.
-
Doubt it, or you just joking?
No joke. It's one of the questions they ask on the paperwork when you buy a gun. If you admit to using marijuana, a federally illegal drug, you won't be sold the gun. Several states have laws in place that if you get a permit to buy marijuana, you lose the right to own guns. It's a pretty common topic in gun owner circles.
-
Can you imagine how much damage was caused by allowing someone like this to accumulate billions in the black market?
El Chapo's $12.6B fortune ordered forfeited: What to know about the multibillion-dollar drug empire | Fox Business
https://www.foxbusiness.com/features/el-chapo-sentenced-forfeit-fortune-what-to-know
-
Apparently Mexico is paying for the wall. ;D
This whole idea that weed is illegal federally but enforced selectively is just plain strange, really. If it was left as a state's right issue I could wrap my head around it.
-
Apparently Mexico is paying for the wall. ;D
This whole idea that weed is illegal federally but enforced selectively is just plain strange, really. If it was left as a state's right issue I could wrap my head around it.
Yeah it's not going to last much longer. Soon you will be able to buy a joint at 7-11.
-
Yeah it's not going to last much longer. Soon you will be able to buy a joint at 7-11.
The tax revenue incentives for municipalities is too great especially considering most of them are busted.
-
No joke. It's one of the questions they ask on the paperwork when you buy a gun. If you admit to using marijuana, a federally illegal drug, you won't be sold the gun. Several states have laws in place that if you get a permit to buy marijuana, you lose the right to own guns. It's a pretty common topic in gun owner circles.
That's whacked.
-
Wednesday’s Hot Clicks: Mike Tyson Says He Smokes $40,000 Worth of Weed Every Month
By DAN GARTLAND August 14, 2019
You can probably see the cloud of smoke from space
Mike Tyson is taking full advantage of legalized marijuana. Full advantage.
Not only is Tyson growing his own marijuana on a massive ranch in the Mojave Desert, he’s also smoking a great deal of it.
On a recent episode of his “Hotboxin’ with Mike Tyson” podcast, the former heavyweight champ said he and his buddies smoke about $40,000 worth of weed every month at Tyson Ranch.
Co-host Eben Britton, a former NFL offensive lineman, said they smoke “ten tons of weed a month on the ranch,” so clearly there’s a bit of embellishment going on.
The ranch is currently used to grow Tyson’s own strains of marijuana, which can be purchased at dispensaries in California and Las Vegas. Tyson intends to develop the ranch into a full-blown weed resort, complete with a hotel, camp sites and classrooms for learning how to grow your own pot.
While the resort project isn’t off the ground yet, Tyson’s business appears to be booming. He said the ranch sells about $500,000 worth of weed every month. Smoking $40,000 worth is a pretty significant dent, then. There’s a reason why Crack Commandment #4 is “never get high on your own supply.”
https://www.si.com/extra-mustard/2019/08/14/wednesday-hot-clicks-mike-tyson-weed-ranch-california
-
New York lawmakers reach deal to legalize marijuana
BY JOSEPH CHOI - 03/24/21
New York lawmakers have reportedly reached an agreement to legalize recreational marijuana in the state.
According to Bloomberg, the state is prepared to legalize recreational marijuana use for people aged 21 and older.
The deal would reportedly include a 13 percent tax on sales and would provide licenses to dispensaries.
Nine percent of the 13 percent pot tax would go to the state, Bloomberg notes, while the remaining 4 percent would go to local governments. The New York governor’s office estimates that a legal cannabis program in the state could bring in around $350 million annually, it added.
“It is my understanding that the three-way agreement has been reached and that bill drafting is in the process of finishing a bill that we all have said we support,” state Senate Finance Committee Chairwoman Liz Krueger (D) told the news outlet.
Business leaders warn of consequences to proposed New York tax hikes
White House defends dismissal of staffers over marijuana use
Krueger added that she expects lawmakers to vote on the measure as early as next week.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) said early Wednesday that a deal on marijuana legalization was close to being made, Bloomberg notes, adding that it is one of his budget priorities.
In February, Virginia lawmakers passed a bill to legalize recreational marijuana, though the legalization would not go into effect until 2024. Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam (D) has yet to sign the bill, with state lawmakers hoping he will send it back with amendments that would speed up the bill's implementation.
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/544752-new-york-lawmakers-reach-deal-to-legalize-marijuana
-
We are going to see more of this in the next few years. I wouldn't be surprised if it becomes federally legal this year.
-
Anything to keep people from assembling or revolting while the theft continues. Cheap calories, endless virtual entertainment and legal drugs.
Another thing - weed that is going around now is A LOT stronger than it used to be. The new high test stuff flat out blunts all drive and hope for life and the gummies are like a death ray. ;D
-
Anything to keep people from assembling or revolting while the theft continues. Cheap calories, endless virtual entertainment and legal drugs.
Another thing - weed that is going around now is A LOT stronger than it used to be. The new high test stuff flat out blunts all drive and hope for life and the gummies are like a death ray. ;D
Whether they make it legal or not it's still out there. At least they can generate tax revenue from it.
-
Whether they make it legal or not it's still out there. At least they can generate tax revenue from it.
I hate the damn smell so much - never did it no interest at all. Legal or not - not going to start this crap.
-
Whether they make it legal or not it's still out there. At least they can generate tax revenue from it.
That premise is a joke with open borders. There is weed everywhere. It did not make existing dealers disappear.
-
North Dakota OKs Marijuana Legalization Petition Format
North Dakota Secretary of State Al Jaeger has approved the formatting of a petition for a proposed ballot measure to legalize recreational marijuana in the state.
By Associated Press
April 22, 2022
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/north-dakota/articles/2022-04-22/north-dakota-oks-marijuana-legalization-petition-format
-
It's been legal for recreational use here in NM for over a year.
The dispensaries opened on April 1st of 2022.
So far it has given a good boost in sales and created jobs.
Dispensaries opening up all over the place and they have a line out the door all day long.
I think it should be legal from a federal level.
If alcohol is legal, there is no reason why weed shouldn't be.
-
It's been legal for recreational use here in NM for over a year.
The dispensaries opened on April 1st of 2022.
So far it has given a good boost in sales and created jobs.
Dispensaries opening up all over the place and they have a line out the door all day long.
I think it should be legal from a federal level.
If alcohol is legal, there is no reason why weed shouldn't be.
It's definitely going to happen. Just a matter of time.
-
Why Federal Legalization of Cannabis Is Finally Here
By Eric SpitzSeptember 06, 2022
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/09/06/why_federal_legalization_of_cannabis_is_finally_here_148146.html
-
Why Federal Legalization of Cannabis Is Finally Here
By Eric SpitzSeptember 06, 2022
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/09/06/why_federal_legalization_of_cannabis_is_finally_here_148146.html
It's doing great here in NM.
Thousands of jobs in the lower range areas that have been hard to obtain the last 10-20 years.
Increased traffic from other states to purchase goods and services.
The state already has over 20 million in tax dollars. Which for a state this small in population is huge.
Still a lot of older people and religious folks demonizing it, but there is a lot of new data being obtained about the benefits of cannabis for medical reasons and making it legal from a recreational level makes it easier to obtain without dealing with doctors. Which drives down medical costs and insurance costs. There are two university's doing some very in-depth studies on the social and economic changes since it was made legal. Almost all aspects have been positive, with a few negative ones based on lack of ambition and diet related issues. Apparently, it really can make you lazy and eat a lot of junk food. ;D
There have been a handful of traffic related deaths, but when you compare it to alcohol, it's insane how docile cannabis is, on every single level.
It's been a win/win here.
-
It's doing great here in NM.
Thousands of jobs in the lower range areas that have been hard to obtain the last 10-20 years.
Increased traffic from other states to purchase goods and services.
The state already has over 20 million in tax dollars. Which for a state this small in population is huge.
Still a lot of older people and religious folks demonizing it, but there is a lot of new data being obtained about the benefits of cannabis for medical reasons and making it legal from a recreational level makes it easier to obtain without dealing with doctors. Which drives down medical costs and insurance costs. There are two university's doing some very in-depth studies on the social and economic changes since it was made legal. Almost all aspects have been positive, with a few negative ones based on lack of ambition and diet related issues. Apparently, it really can make you lazy and eat a lot of junk food. ;D
There have been a handful of traffic related deaths, but when you compare it to alcohol, it's insane how docile cannabis is, on every single level.
It's been a win/win here.
Maybe we should have made cigarettes illegal and marijuana legal many years ago? You could never take any of the carcinogens in cigarettes and sell them on the shelf as standalone ingestible products.
-
What Biden’s marijuana order does and doesn’t do
BY NATHANIEL WEIXEL - 10/07/22
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3678474-what-bidens-marijuana-order-does-and-doesnt-do/
-
This is America’s surprising youth drug crisis
Legalized drug crisis is harming young people far more than most realize
By Kevin A. Sabet, Ph.D. | Fox News
Published May 9, 2023
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/this-is-americas-surprising-youth-drug-crisis
-
It's doing great here in NM.
Thousands of jobs in the lower range areas that have been hard to obtain the last 10-20 years.
Increased traffic from other states to purchase goods and services.
The state already has over 20 million in tax dollars. Which for a state this small in population is huge.
Still a lot of older people and religious folks demonizing it, but there is a lot of new data being obtained about the benefits of cannabis for medical reasons and making it legal from a recreational level makes it easier to obtain without dealing with doctors. Which drives down medical costs and insurance costs. There are two university's doing some very in-depth studies on the social and economic changes since it was made legal. Almost all aspects have been positive, with a few negative ones based on lack of ambition and diet related issues. Apparently, it really can make you lazy and eat a lot of junk food. ;D
There have been a handful of traffic related deaths, but when you compare it to alcohol, it's insane how docile cannabis is, on every single level.
It's been a win/win here.
I recently drove across the desert west and half the businesses there appear to be dispensaries. At some point there has to be too many. I'm sure Del Taco is doing record numbers though, haha.
Side note...Albuquerque is a pretty rough town. Second side note...the reservation lands look pretty...well...ghetto trailertastic.
-
I recently drove across the desert west and half the businesses there appear to be dispensaries. At some point there has to be too many. I'm sure Del Taco is doing record numbers though, haha.
Side note...Albuquerque is a pretty rough town. Second side note...the reservation lands look pretty...well...ghetto trailertastic.
Reminds me of the time many years ago when I was driving through New Mexico and wanted to have lunch at the Rio Grande. Followed the map (before GPS). Took forever. When I got there it was a little trickle that you could jump over.
Now when I think about Albuquerque I also think about Breaking Bad. ;D
-
Reminds me of the time many years ago when I was driving through New Mexico and wanted to have lunch at the Rio Grande. Followed the map (before GPS). Took forever. When I got there it was a little trickle that you could jump over.
Now when I think about Albuquerque I also think about Breaking Bad. ;D
That's like the Colorado River....it's just a wide stream south of the Hoover Dam at the bridge crossing on I-40. Of course my idea of a real river is the Mississippi or the Ohio.
Albuquerque was the only city other than LA that had razor wire on top of security gates at storage units....and their homeless people were absolutely scary and they were out super early in the AM doing their thing.
-
ATF: Pot Users Can't Legally Own Firearms Regardless Of State Laws
BY TYLER DURDEN
SUNDAY, JUN 04, 2023
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/atf-pot-users-cant-legally-own-firearms-regardless-state-laws
-
Pot users cannot legally own firearms regardless of Minnesota state laws
BY TYLER DURDEN
SUNDAY, JUN 04, 2023
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/atf-pot-users-cant-legally-own-firearms-regardless-state-laws
"Minnesota residents who use marijuana cannot legally own firearms despite the recent legalization of cannabis for recreational use." The recreational or adult-use of cannabis has been approved in DC (oh, the irony) and 23 states. Until it is legalized on a federal level, users of cannabis are prohibited from shipping, transporting, receiving or possessing firearms and ammunition the ATF reported.
-
Massive Study Links Heavy Marijuana Use To Psychotic Symptoms, Bipolar Disorder, Depression
LAUREL DUGGAN
SOCIAL ISSUES AND CULTURE REPORTER
July 07, 2023
https://dailycaller.com/2023/07/07/massive-study-heavy-marijuana-use-psychotic-symptoms-bipolar-disorder-depression/?utm_source=referral&utm_medium=offthepress&utm_campaign=home
-
ER Visits for Cannabis Use Among Children, Teens Spiked During Pandemic: CDC
US NEWS
Katabella Roberts
July 14 2023https://www.theepochtimes.com/er-visits-for-cannabis-use-among-children-teens-spiked-during-pandemic-cdc_5398365.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=offthepress&src_src=partner&src_cmp=offthepress
-
Brazen NYers are smoking weed everywhere—Saks, subway, US Open
By Jeanette Settembre and Joshua Rhett Miller
August 31, 2023
https://nypost.com/2023/08/31/brazen-new-yorkers-are-smoking-weed-at-saks-subway-us-open/
-
Brazen NYers are smoking weed everywhere—Saks, subway, US Open
By Jeanette Settembre and Joshua Rhett Miller
August 31, 2023
https://nypost.com/2023/08/31/brazen-new-yorkers-are-smoking-weed-at-saks-subway-us-open/
Its horrible. smells like pot everywhere
-
Ohio votes to legalize recreational marijuana
Vote makes Ohio the 24th state to legalize adult-use marijuana
Haley BeMiller
Columbus Dispatch
https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/elections/2023/11/06/ohio-issue-2-live-election-results-2023-state-votes-on-recreational-marijuana/71205541007/
-
ATF: Pot Users Can't Legally Own Firearms Regardless Of State Laws
BY TYLER DURDEN
SUNDAY, JUN 04, 2023
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/atf-pot-users-cant-legally-own-firearms-regardless-state-laws
Have two and don’t give a fuck!
-
GOP Chair Comer Supports DC Regulating Marijuana ‘If That is What the City Wants’
Comer made the comments after a closed-door meeting with the DC mayor
Published 12/06/23
House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., on Wednesday reportedly told reporters he would support permitting Washington, D.C., to tax and regulate legalized marijuana.
The Kentucky lawmaker added that he would support the measure "if that is what the city wants."
https://themessenger.com/politics/gop-chair-comer-supports-dc-regulating-marijuana-if-that-is-what-the-city-wants
-
Biden pardons all Americans on federal marijuana use charges
by Anna Giaritelli, Homeland Security Reporter
December 22, 2023
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/biden-pardons-americans-federal-marijuan-use-charges
-
Map: Where marijuana will be legal in 2024
BY ADDY BINK - 12/29/23
https://thehill.com/homenews/nexstar_media_wire/4371873-map-where-marijuana-will-be-legal-in-2024/
-
Three years after decriminalization, Oregon frets over drug use
Romain FONSEGRIVES
February 1, 2024
https://news.yahoo.com/three-years-decriminalization-oregon-frets-012720089.html
-
Three years after decriminalization, Oregon frets over drug use
Romain FONSEGRIVES
February 1, 2024
https://news.yahoo.com/three-years-decriminalization-oregon-frets-012720089.html
Just to be clear, nowhere in the article you linked does it mention marijuana. This thread's title is specifically about legalized marijuana and crime. Your linked article is exclusively about 'hard drugs' such as cocaine, heroin, ecstasy, and fentanyl which according to the media is considered by some to be an epidemic and not just in Oregon.
Note: "The Oregon Medical Marijuana Act legalized the use of marijuana to treat certain debilitating medical conditions in 1998. Marijuana became legal for recreational use for anyone aged 21 or older in 2014, according to the Control, Regulation, and Taxation of Marijuana and Industrial Hemp Act." https://oregonstatecannabis.org/laws
-
Daily weed smokers 25% more likely to have heart attack, 42% higher stroke risk: AHA
By Adriana Diaz
Published March 11, 2024
https://nypost.com/2024/03/11/lifestyle/daily-weed-smokers-25-more-likely-to-have-heart-attack-42-higher-stroke-risk-aha/
-
Oregon governor to sign bill recriminalizing drug use
By Daniel Trotta
March 8, 2024
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/oregon-governor-sign-bill-recriminalizing-drug-use-2024-03-09/
-
Oregon governor to sign bill recriminalizing drug use
By Daniel Trotta
March 8, 2024
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/oregon-governor-sign-bill-recriminalizing-drug-use-2024-03-09/
Really? Who would have thought? ;D