If you want smaller government and you want the government out of people’s private lives, you need to support the legalization of marijuana.  It’s the logically consistent viewpoint for a conservative.

I write this in the leadup to the annual 4/20 marijuana marches where otherwise law-abiding citizens who consume, grow or trade the substance will take to the streets nationwide to show their love of pot.

It’s absurd that we have laws making it mandatory to toss someone in jail for six months if they have six plants or more.  And that’s one of the lighter sentences.

Let’s look at some of the data from QMI columnist Thane Burnett’s multi-part feature on pot last December.  The piece was inspired by Washington State and Colorado voting in support of legalization.

In an Angus Reid poll done at the time, 57% of Canadians supported legalization.  Only 39% opposed it.

According to Health Canada, more than 40% of Canadians have used cannabis.  In a poll on the Sun websites – though not scientific, certainly informative – 81% of readers voted for legalization.

Criminal

My view is the law criminalizes commerce.  It criminalizes gardening.  And it criminalizes your right to do what you want with your body so long as you’re not violating anyone else’s liberties.

All the arguments in favour of the status quo – or tighter laws – can be knocked aside with one hand tied behind your back.

They’re mostly about how pot can ruin a person, their family or their wallet.  Or they’re arguments about organized crime.

The first puts pot on par with booze, gambling, or any other supposed vice people can be obsessed with.  Should we make all those illegal? There are many things which, done to excess, can harm a person and their family.  But it’s up to individuals to moderate themselves, not the state.  I believe in personal responsibility, do you?

Now, organized crime arguments are all tertiary.  They’re all, “But if we legalize pot then this other bad thing might happen…” Well guess what? After pot is legalized, drug-related gang fights in the streets will still be illegal.  All the spinoff crimes that the underground drug trade produces will still be illegal.  In fact, they’ll likely decrease.

Many people who smoke, grow and sell marijuana do so in a completely peaceable way.  It’s wrong to make them criminals.

You can come up with all the technical arguments in the world to support the status quo.  But ultimately all you’re saying is you want to infringe on people’s liberties because you don’t like what’s in their garden or pocket, or because they like a joint after a hard day at work instead of a beer.

Don’t forget, billions of tax dollars have been wasted on big government pot intrusion.  It’s time to go from losing billions on pot to gaining billions via consumption taxes.

Some try to argue most drug laws aren’t even enforced anyway so who cares? Two problems with that.

The first is it’s incorrect.  According to Statistics Canada, of the more than 113,000 drug crimes across the country in 2011, 54% were for cannabis possession.  The second problem is we should always be striving to get bad laws off the books.

The NDP and Liberals want to decriminalize, if not outright legalize, the substance.  But they’re not in power.  It’s time for small government proponents to do the same.  Calling all conservatives: Puff, puff, pass the legislation!

Source: Ottawa Sun (CN ON)
Copyright: 2013 Canoe Limited Partnership
Contact: ottsun.oped@sunmedia.ca
Website: http://www.ottawasun.com/
Author: Anthony Furey, QMI Agency

Based on science and concern about young minds and the safety of our citizens, we believe that the crude drugs from the plant Cannabis should be illegal.  There are differing views on this issue.  In our democracy, divergent views are expected.  The more personal the issue, the more passionate and less logical the discussion.

Media articles support marijuana as a medicine.  This complex weed is supposed to cure insomnia, arthritis, glaucoma, nausea, loss of appetite, epilepsy, etc.; and that, if legalized and taxed by government, as with alcohol and tobacco, it could solve our financial woes.

Let’s examine some misinformation used by marijuana proponents, which is mostly based on anecdotal evidence or driven by political agenda.  Before the emotional and political issues drive a mass experimentation, using Americans as guinea pigs, we must scrutinize marijuana.

Marijuana is a crude drug from the Cannabis plant, known to contain more than 700 chemicals.  When smoked, these components produce more cancer-causing compounds than found in tobacco smoke.  Cannabinoids are chemicals found only in the Cannabis plant.  Many are psychotropic: have mind-altering effects and are fat soluble.  They are stored in and alter the brain, reproductive organs and other fat cells.  A nursing mother will pass THC and other cannabinoids to her baby through her milk.

THCis the one chemical that most people associate with marijuana.  It is an intoxicant with some medical properties.  Marijuana is not just THC.  Pure THC is a prescribed medication that has passed rigid Food and Drug Administration requirements to protect public health; whereas, marijuana will never pass any approval process.

In Florida, a 2010 survey of high school students, reported 21.8 percent of seniors used marijuana in the past month.  This is up from19.7 percent in 2008; thus, today one in five of our high school seniors are being exposed to a drug that can cause much harm.  Additionally, marijuana is listed as the primary substance of abuse for 31.1percent of treatment admissions in Florida.  Over halfwere12-17 years of age.

In December, 2012, the Government Drug Abuse Warning Network Report stated that over 45,000 American youth between the ages of15 to17 entered emergency rooms because of marijuana.  If 100 young people needed emergency room treatment because of a FDA approved drug, pro-marijuana groups and elected officials would demand the drug’s removal from the market.

As reported by the U.S.  Surgeon General, marijuana reduces the immune system’s ability to fight infections, interferes with the reproductive system, affects memory and learning, creates paranoia, and is addictive.  Marijuana reduces the IQ of young users by 8 to10 IQ points, changes depth perception and alters the ability to judge distance.

The National Institute on Drug Abuse reported in December of 2012 that “research from different areas is converging on the fact that regular marijuana use by young people can have long-lasting negative impact on the structure and function of their brains.” Want your child on pot?

Marijuana users are dangerous drivers.  There is no roadside test to detect or to determine impairment.  Highway deaths will increase if marijuana is used more frequently in Florida.

Research shows that cannabinoids in marijuana are mind altering.  They will alter the consciousness and make any disease seem less severe.  The disease is not being treated.

And, the disease can be made worse.  Will the passionate supporters of “medical marijuana” obliterate years of scientific research that has revealed the dangers of marijuana? Will Florida use its citizens as experimental objects? Hopefully, Florida voters will not have to decide.

Source: Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, FL)
Copyright: 2013 Sun-Sentinel Company
Contact: http://drugsense.org/url/mVLAxQfA
Website: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/
Authors: Carlton Turner and Herbert Goldstein

As tens of thousands of people gather to celebrate and smoke marijuana in Denver, police will be out in full force.

But it’s not the pot smoking they’re concerned about at the yearly event, billed as the nation’s largest April 20 celebration. Instead, police say they’re focused on crowd security in light of attacks that killed three at the finish line of the Boston Marathon.

“We’re aware of the events in Boston,” said Denver police spokesman Aaron Kafer, who declined to give specifics about security measures being taken. “Our message to the public is that, if you see something, say something.”

Organizers say the event — which drew 50,000 people last year — could bring a record 80,000 this year, since it’s the first celebration since Colorado and Washington voted to make pot legal for recreational use.

Even with the legalization, Colorado law bans open and public marijuana use. Still, authorities generally look the other way. The smoke hangs thick over a park at the base of the state Capitol, and live music keeps the crowd entertained well past the moment of group smoking at 4:20 p.m.

Group smoke-outs are also planned Saturday from New York to San Francisco. The origins of the number “420″ as a code for pot are murky, but the drug’s users have for decades marked the date 4/20 as a day to use pot together.

Denver’s celebration this year also features the nation’s first open-to-all Cannabis Cup, a marijuana competition patterned after one held in Amsterdam.

Similar to a beer or wine festival, pot growers compete for awards for taste, appearance and potency of their weed. Denver’s event, sponsored by High Times magazine, has sold out more than 5,000 tickets. Snoop Lion, the new reggae- and marijuana-loving persona for the rapper better known as Snoop Dogg, will receive a “Lifetime Achievement Award” from High Times. And the hip-hop group Cypress Hill was set to perform a sold-out concert Saturday evening in Colorado’s iconic Red Rocks Amphitheatre.

The celebration should be especially buoyant this year, organizer Miguel Lopez said, because it marks the first observation since Colorado and Washington voted to defy federal drug law and declare pot OK for adults over 21.

Both states are still waiting for a federal response to the votes and are working on setting up commercial pot sales, which are still limited to people with certain medical conditions. In the meantime, pot users are free to share and use the drug in small amounts.

Lopez said the holiday is more than an excuse to get high — it’s also a political statement by people who want to see the end of marijuana prohibition.

“You don’t have to smoke weed to go to 4/20 rallies. You don’t have to be gay to go to a Pride festival. You don’t have to be Mexican to celebrate Cinco de Mayo,” Lopez said.

“That’s what this is. It’s a celebration, it’s a statement about justice and freedom and this movement.”

Colorado’s weekend celebrations drew plenty of marijuana activists from out of state.

“Never have I ever imagined I could do this on American soil,” said Eddie Ramirez, an Austin, Texas, pot user who attended a “420 Happy Hour” Friday at a downtown Denver hotel. “Being a smoker my whole life, this has been on my bucket list — go scuba diving, go deep-sea fishing and go to the Cannabis Cup.”

One place pot-smoking won’t be as evident this year is the University of Colorado in Boulder. The school once was home to the nation’s largest group smoke-out on April 20. More than 10,000 people showed up in 2010, and in 2011 Playboy magazine cited the celebration and named the campus the nation’s No. 1 party school.

Last year, school officials closed the site of the party, Norlin Quad, on April 20. They planned to rope off the area again this year.

Lopez conceded that many don’t appreciate the April 20 smoke-outs. But he insisted they at least force marijuana critics to talk about the drug and consider its legal status.

“Not everybody likes everything in America. That’s one of the great things, that we can express ourselves,” Lopez said.

Source: The Associated Press

Link: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/04/20/denver-pot-holiday/2098755/

Here’s something you won’t see happen on Saturday: Christy Clark or Adrian Dix’s campaign buses rolling up to the north lawn of the Vancouver Art Gallery to the cheers of thousands of marijuana activists. Neither Mr. Dix nor Ms. Clark will push their way through the happy crowds and skunk-scented smoke, glad-handing potential voters. It is even less likely that either will make their way to the stage brandishing a freshly rolled spliff, spark it up and declare 4/20 officially “on.”

Neither will inhale deeply, nor extol the virtues of weed, nor pass the dutchie to the left-hand side. And you certainly won’t hear them making speeches calling for the decriminalization, legalization, or the regulation and taxation of pot.

A pair of polls released this week suggests that the party leaders are lagging behind their constituents when it comes to attitudes about the decriminalization and eventual legalization of marijuana in B.C.

In fact, if the poll numbers are right, not driving the campaign buses on to the art gallery lawn with Bob Marley blaring from the speakers and waving marijuana-leaf flags out the windows might be something of a missed opportunity.

The first poll comes from the Sensible Change Society of B.C., a group headed by one-time federal NDP candidate Dana Larsen, who withdrew from the 2008 race after a video showing him with a mouthful of joints surfaced on the Web. Three years later, Mr. Larsen ran for the leadership of the BC NDP and won just 2.7 per cent of the vote.

Mr. Larsen has proposed what he calls “The Sensible Policing Act,” which would, first, direct police to ignore minor marijuana offences, and second, call on the federal government to repeal the prohibition on marijuana so the province could legally regulate pot the same way it regulates alcohol and tobacco.

The poll shows that roughly 70 per cent of respondents support both parts of the plan. It also shows that just under half of those surveyed say they would be more likely to support a political leader who called for marijuana reform.

A second poll, also timed to coincide with the annual 4/20 “cannabis celebration,” shows that nearly three-quarters of British Columbians would support further research into the regulation and taxation of marijuana. The Ipsos Reid poll shows significant support for leaders who would endorse such research.

In both polls, support for marijuana reform crosses all political stripes, geographic boundaries, age groups and levels of education.

This is, of course, not a new issue in our province. Stop the Violence B.C., a coalition of law enforcement, health and academic experts which commissioned the Ipsos Reid poll, has been arguing for marijuana reform since the coalition was founded in 2011.

Along with many others, Stop the Violence contends that regulating and taxing marijuana production and distribution would take the profits out of the hands of criminal gangs, and result in not only safer streets but also in a potential tax windfall for the province.

But so far, even with numbers that show support for reform, even with the arguments that regulation would curb violence and contribute significantly to provincial coffers, both Christy Clark and Adrian Dix have ducked the issue. When questioned, both have repeatedly pointed to the fact that drug enforcement is a federal responsibility.

Dana Larsen notes that neither leader has had trouble commenting on other issues that are regulated by the federal government.

“We take action and talk about federal issues all the time, whether it’s the Coast Guard station being closed or pipelines, or the long-gun registry back in 2003, so there’s really no reason the province can’t take action on this issue as well,” Mr. Larsen said in an interview.

Indeed, “Pressing for new Coast Guard resources to be placed in Vancouver” even appears in the Liberal Party’s platform.

As for the NDP, Mr. Larsen suspects that while the party may be sympathetic, it would be folly to tackle an issue as controversial as marijuana legalization during an election campaign.

Professor Neil Boyd, who teaches criminology at Simon Fraser University, agrees that making marijuana reform an issue during a provincial election campaign is difficult.

But like Mr. Larsen, Prof. Boyd says the province can play a part. “The province does have power over the administration of justice and could certainly decide not to spend, for example, the $10-million a year it currently spends enforcing marijuana possession laws,” he said.

Given that it happens to fall on Saturday, and in the middle of an election campaign, organizers of this year’s 4/20 rally estimate it will be the biggest gathering of its kind Vancouver has ever seen.

But it may have little impact once the smoke clears.

Source: Globe and Mail

Link: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/marijuana-reform-high-on-electorates-list/article11436140/

Author: STEPHEN QUINN

Proposed legislation cites federal law in defining when a child is endangered by a caregiver’s use or possession of drugs, potentially trumping Colorado law and making it illegal to possess, smoke or grow pot near children or in their homes.

Senate Bill 278, which was introduced Thursday and assigned to the Senate Health and Human Services Committee, would create a legal definition of a drug-endangered child in the context of abuse and neglect.

Under the proposal, any child whose well-being is endangered by the use, possession, distribution or manufacture of a controlled substance could be a victim of child abuse or neglect.

That definition could include the use and possession of marijuana, which is legal under Colorado law, but still considered illegal under the federal Controlled Substances Act, which the bill cites.

Colorado’s passage of Amendment 64 in November legalized the use and limited possession of the drug by people 21 and older. It also allows people to grow six plants in their homes.

The bill is intended to create consistency in practice between law enforcement, child welfare services and other agencies, said one of its sponsors, Sen. Linda Newell, D-Littleton.

With the legalization of medical and recreational marijuana and Colorado’s recent ranking as the second worst state for prescription drug abuse, the bill will spark a complicated and important conversation, Newell said.

“This bill is not without its complications,” Newell said. “It is really difficult to find that delicate balance between making sure the kids are protected, but at the same time not overstepping and having unintentional consequences for a family who is providing a very safe home.”

Under the bill, children who test positive for either a Schedule I or Schedule II controlled substance could also be considered endangered and possible victims of abuse or neglect.

Infants who test positive for Schedule II drugs at birth will not be considered endangered if their mothers were prescribed the drugs. Schedule II drugs include commonly prescribed opiates, such as codeine. That portion of the bill cites Colorado law and does not include infants who test positive for marijuana at birth.

The name appeared out of nowhere, unfamiliar to the players who have worked for months to influence how recreational marijuana will be regulated in Colorado.

On March 28, someone named Matt Taylor hired high-powered lobbying firm Axiom Strategies to work on “marijuana issues,” records show. Taylor has since expanded his lobbying team to rival that of anyone with a stake in adult-use marijuana legalized by Amendment 64 in November.

“No one knows who he is, and with a name like that, no one has been able to find out much,” said Joe Megyesy, who lobbies for a law firm that specializes in marijuana and for the Marijuana Policy Project, the main funder of the Amendment 64 campaign. “I haven’t seen anything like it — but we’ve never seen anything like Amendment 64.”

Colorado’s marijuana mystery man, it turns out, describes himself as a former Marine and failed race-car driver who made his wealth in home heating oil on the East Coast and wants to get in on the ground floor of a budding industry worth untold millions in his home state.

Big Spender

The appearance of a new, big-spending character comes at a key moment as Colorado enters unchartered territory of legalized pot. Disparate interests and unlikely alliances are trying to shape the rules that will determine who can enter a highly lucrative business and how the market will be structured.

Marijuana interests — led by medical marijuana business groups and dispensaries — already have paid at least $137,475 to lobbyists in the fiscal year that began in June, a Denver Post analysis found.

And the real battle has not begun: Bills in the General Assembly to establish rules for recreational pot have yet to be introduced, and fewer than three weeks remain in the session.

One issue has proven especially controversial: whether to let recreational pot stores and commercial growers operate independently.

Snipped

Complete Article: http://www.denverpost.com/news/marijuana/ci_23058748/

Source: Denver Post (CO)
Author: Eric Gorski, The Denver Post
Published: April 19, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Denver Post
Website: http://www.denverpost.com/
Contact: openforum@denverpost.com

On Saturday April 20^th, activists and cannabis enthusiasts will gather in cities across Canada, including Vancouver, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Toronto, Ottawa, Halifax and Yellowknife. It is hoped the events will be a watershed moment for cannabis law reform as Canadians seek to follow their American counterparts and end the social injustice of cannabis prohibition.

This year, the annual nationwide 420 celebrations are entirely sponsored by lottery winner Bob Erb.

When Bob Erb started buying lottery tickets in the early 1970s, ending the war against cannabis may have seemed more likely than hitting the jackpot.

On November 2, 2012, four decades of playing the lottery paid off: Bob Erb won a $25,000,000 jackpot. Two days later, Canadian laws regarding cannabis changed too as mandatory minimum sentencing for cannabis offences came into effect.

To some, winning the lottery would mean retiring from a life-long career of cannabis activism. But to a man who describes the criminalization of cannabis as the “biggest social injustice” of his lifetime, the money meant a chance to do more.

Bob Erb has championed social justice issues, including cannabis law reform, for decades. He has seen firsthand the harm and waste caused by cannabis prohibition, and has set about making change. Particularly, he has tried to create change from within: in 2001 he ran as a Marijuana Party candidate in the BC provincial election and the following year he ran for mayor. Both times his message was clear: its time for a change on cannabis.

Looking to the future, Bob has pledged one million dollars to fund national campaigns to end the criminal prohibition of cannabis and enact positive regulations regarding use, production and consumer safety. His goal is to see a pro-reform party elected in the next Canadian federal election.

So far, Bob Erb’s contributions to the cannabis reform movement can be felt nationwide. In February he had a conference in his hometown of Terrace, BC. The conference brought together activists and policy experts from across Canada to discuss strategy for the future.

As a result of the conference, Bob committed one million dollars to legalize cannabis in Canada and pledged support to various reform organizations including Sensible BC, the NORML Women’s Alliance of Canada, NORML Canada, Stop the Violence BC and the 420 rallies.

This Saturday, tens of thousands of Canadians will gather from coast to coast advocating cannabis law reform. Hopefully, individuals will feel part of something bigger than themselves or the local rally they attended.

Bob Erb’s generosity has jump-started a national campaign to elect a new government ready to undertake modern approach to cannabis regulation. Advocates are confident cannabis law reform will be an issue in the next federal election. This year’s 420 rallies will be a call to voters and the beginning of a movement in the name of Bob Erb.

Link: http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/lottery-winner-to-pledge-1000000-to-legalize-cannabis-1780452.htm

Eighteen states (plus the District of Columbia) allow cannabis use for certain medical conditions. Despite that, scientists have a harder time doing research on the potential medical benefits of marijuana than they do on “harder” drugs like ecstasy or magic mushrooms. The public may think of pot use as no big deal, but federal laws make it difficult for researchers to obtain legal supplies. Clinical researchers can get permission from the DEA to grow or create restricted compounds like LSD, MDMA or psilocybin in the lab; not so with cannabis.

The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 placed marijuana in the most restrictive use category, Schedule I, deeming it a drug with no medicinal value and high potential for abuse. To do clinical research with marijuana, you need a DEA license, and you need to get your study approved by the FDA. When it comes to actually obtaining research-grade marijuana, though, you have to go through the National Institute on Drug Abuse, a process that has proved problematic for some researchers determined to study the potential medical benefits of pot.

“Marijuana is a linchpin in the War on Drugs,” explains Brad Burge, the director of communications for the Multidisciplinary Association of Psychedelic Research (MAPS), an organization currently embroiled in a lawsuit with the DEA over the right to establish a medical marijuana farm. “There’s a lot of investment in marijuana remaining illegal.”

Anecdotal evidence suggests that marijuana can reduce chronic pain, reduce muscle spasms in patients with multiple sclerosis and perhaps even help treat symptoms of PTSD. The small amount of clinical research out there also supports the idea that marijuana could be an effective treatment for pain. A 2007 study found that smoking cannabis reduced chronic pain in HIV-positive patients by 34 percent. Results from a Canadian study in 2010 further supported the theory that it can reduce the intensity of neuropathic pain–pain caused by damage to the nervous system–and help patients sleep.

Both the American Medical Association and the American College of Physicians have called for more research into the therapeutic uses of marijuana and for the U.S. government to reconsider its classification as a Schedule I substance.

The University of Mississippi grows and harvests cannabis for studies funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, yet because NIDA’s congressionally mandated mission is to research the harmful effects of controlled substances and stop drug abuse, the institute isn’t interested in helping establish marijuana as a medicine.

“If you’re going to run a trial to show this is going to have positive effects, they’re essentially not going to allow it,” Lyle Craker, a professor and horticulturist at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, says.

The federal government’s position on marijuana, according to a January 2011 document featured prominently on the DEA’s homepage, is that
The clear weight of the currently available evidence supports [Schedule I] classification, including evidence that smoked marijuana has a high potential for abuse, has no accepted medicinal value in treatment in the United States, and evidence that there is a general lack of accepted safety for its use even under medical supervision… Specifically, smoked marijuana has not withstood the rigors of science–it is not medicine, and it is not safe.

Burge tells a different story. “The United States government has gone to great lengths to prevent [medical] research on whole-plant marijuana,” he says, though research into isolated components of the plant has gone on.

“We have an FDA-approved protocol, but the only way to actually get marijuana for the study, the only federally approved source, is at University of Mississippi,” he says. “NIDA refused to sell us the marijuana for this study.”

According to NIDA, the agency can provide research-grade marijuana to projects that have received funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), or to a non NIH-funded project that has an approved Investigational New Drug application on file with the FDA; has proper DEA registration; and has been approved as scientifically valid by a Health and Human Services scientific review panel.

The agency describes its position on cannabis research as such:
NIDA as well as other Institutes and Centers within the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have supported and will continue to support research on both the adverse effects and therapeutic uses for marijuana provided the research applications meet accepted standards of scientific design and, on the basis of peer review, public health significance, and Institute priorities.

Because MAPS only needs supplies, not funding, the organization, with the help of Lyle Craker, has been trying to establish a private medical marijuana farm to supply cannabis for research for the past 12 years. The organization is currently suing the DEA for denying its license even after a DEA judge ruled in 2009 that such a license would serve the public interest.

Meanwhile, MAPS has applied to buy pot from the NIDA for a study on PTSD. In 2011, the scientific review panel from the Department of Health and Human Services rejected the application, citing concerns with the study’s design, though the protocol had already been approved by the FDA and has since been approved by the University of Arizona’s institutional review boards. MAPS has added a few safety procedures and plans on resubmitting the protocol to the HHS scientific review panel, but MAPS founder Rick Dobiln says he is “not hopeful since the core elements of the protocol design remain the same.”

Not everyone has had solely negative experiences with the bodies that control the flow of research-grade marijuana. The process just requires some bureaucratic legerdemain.

In 1992, Doblin approached Donald Abrams, a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco and the chief of Hematology/Oncology at San Francisco General Hospital, and suggested he look into doing a clinical trial on the benefits of cannabis for HIV patients.

“Having gone to college in the ’60s myself, I thought it might be worth investigating,” Abrams says. “Little did I know how difficult that would be.” First, he attempted to study the role cannabis could play in treating patients suffering from HIV Wasting Syndrome, a condition that caused patients to lose weight and basically wither away and die without even getting an infection. But NIDA failed to approve his request for funding.

Continue reading article @ http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-04/why-its-so-hard-scientists-study-pot?page=1
Author: Shaunacy Ferro
Source: Popular Science

The 42nd Annual Hash Bash in Ann Arbor

The 42nd Annual Hash Bash in Ann Arbor was the highlight of a flurry of activities around marijuana the past few weeks.  A reported 3,000 people were at the University of Michigan Quadrangle for the Bash – part pep rally, part political effort and part toke-down.

State Rep.  Jeff Irwin, D-Ann Arbor, was one of many speakers at the well-organized and well-run event, which included local and national activists.  Mason Tyvert, who works for the Washington, D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project, and who headed up the legalization campaign team in Colorado, spoke; other speakers included National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws founder Keith Stroup and seed geneticist D.J.  Short.

Irwin got the crowd cheering when he said, “I believe we should legalize marijuana.  …  The good news today, on the 42nd anniversary of Hash Bash, is we’re winning.  We’re winning the battle against marijuana prohibition.”

He cited electoral victories for legalization in Washington state and Colorado as evidence of the changing tide.  Then he talked about how activist involvement had made a difference in softening some of the more draconian measures in bills passed by the Michigan state Legislature last December regarding medical marijuana, adding that he would introduce a decriminalization bill in the state Legislature.  Irwin asked for help in pressing other legislators to support decriminalization.

“We’re going to end the drug war,” Irwin said.  “We’re going to legalize marijuana here in Michigan.  The amount of blood and treasure that we’ve spilled in this failed drug war are an embarrassment to our country.”

The Hash Bash came on the heels of a Pew Research Center poll showing that 52 percent of Americans believe marijuana should be legalized.  Speaker after speaker referenced the poll that, for the first time, showed a simple majority in favor of legalization.  In the past, polls have shown a plurality of Americans in support of legalization but never a majority.

“It smells like freedom,” said Tyvert.  “This is not just the tipping point; this is the tip of the iceberg.”

No fool’s day: Things aren’t quite so friendly for the herb in the Michigan state Legislature, where folks still seem to look at certified medical marijuana patients as possibly criminal.  Bills passed in December 2012, which went into effect April 1, 2013, put strictures on medical marijuana in Michigan.  HB4856 stipulates that marijuana transported in vehicles has to be in a container in the trunk.  If the vehicle has no trunk, then marijuana must be “enclosed in a case that is not readily accessible from the interior of the vehicle.” That seems to follow the model of alcohol law, which prohibits open containers inside cars; however it doesn’t seem to regard marijuana as medicine because I don’t know of any laws forbidding carrying any kind of medicine inside a car.

That thinking seems to follow the same path with HB4851, which requires doctors who recommend marijuana use to establish a “bona fide physician-patient relationship” that involves reviewing patient records.  This is all well and good, except it seems as if it’s more a view that medical marijuana patients are criminal.

Its ( unstated ) aim seems to be restricting access to patients seeking cannabis as a medical solution.  For instance, in last week’s Higher Ground column, I discussed a medical marijuana patient who was addicted to painkillers.  His pain management doctor knew nothing about marijuana and would not recommend it for him.  The patient found another doctor who would.  He then got off the prescribed opiates he was addicted to.  He went back to his pain doctor and showed that he was off the drugs.  Now, the doctor understands that marijuana can be useful.  Still, with little training or understanding of marijuana, and legal issues remaining unsettled, many doctors are loath to recommend it.

A couple of years ago I reported about an HIV doctor who had been recommending marijuana for patients.  After State Attorney General Bill Schuette said that federal law trumped state law, the doctor stopped recommending marijuana for fear of prosecution.  In another case, a patient who had previously been recommended to use medicinal cannabis went back to his doctor for recertification.  The doctor wouldn’t do it because he had been told that if he recommended marijuana to his patients he could no longer work at that clinic.

Doctors are being ostensibly pressured to eschew a course of treatment for fear of retribution should they prescribe – or even recommend – a substance that is purportedly “legal.”

There currently exists a punitive atmosphere toward physicians who choose a “legal” medical protocol, which effectively places undue hardships on patients who may be forced to “shop” for doctors who are even open to the idea that marijuana is a useful therapy.

Another part of the same bill allows outdoor grows.  However, the garden must be enclosed on all sides and not visible to the unaided eye.  The enclosure must be locked and anchored to the ground.  Anyone planning to grow marijuana should be warned to take a close look at the law – as there are specific materials required for use in making the enclosures.

April 1 was actually a good day in Rhode Island: A law that was passed last year decriminalizing possession of as much as 1 ounce of marijuana went into effect.  The law, first introduced in 2010, makes possession a civil offense punishable by a $150 fine.

Getting spacey with time: We all know that time is relative, and that marijuana users’ time perception may get a little rubbery while under the influence.  It seems like the federal government has fallen into that time-vortex when it comes to having anything to say about last November’s legalization votes in Colorado and Washington.

U.S.  Attorney General Eric Holder has said at least a few times since late in 2012 that the Obama administration would “soon” have something to say on the subject.  Last month, Holder said the administration was “still considering” its response.  I’m wondering what “soon” means to those folks.  Maybe they’ve inhaled and don’t realize that it’s been five months since the historic votes.  On the other hand, they have been busy with the fiscal cliff and the sequester – not to mention North Korea threatening to toss a nuclear weapon at its neighbor.  So maybe we just have to hold our breath a little longer.  As the old western swing song says, “Anytime you’re thinking ’bout me.  That’s the time I’ll be thinkin’ of you.” …  Anytime, Mr.  Holder.

We may not have to wait for him.  Last Friday, rumors began circulating about a proposed bipartisan bill in Congress that would protect marijuana users and businesses from federal laws as long as they are compliant with state laws.  Like I said, anytime.

They really meant it: Meanwhile, things seem to be moving along in the legalized states.  That is if you consider the 25 percent tax in Washington state and the 38 percent tax they’re considering in Colorado ( in the Denver area ) to be moving along.  They must have really meant it when they said they wanted to “tax and regulate” the substance.  Then again, the Colorado law allows folks to grow their own in an “enclosed, locked space.” Am I having deja vu here?

Source: Metro Times (Detroit, MI)
Column: Higher Ground
Copyright: 2013 C.E.G.W./Times-Shamrock
Contact: letters@metrotimes.com
Website: http://www.metrotimes.com
Author: Larry Gabriel

National and local advocates for marijuana policy reform are using a new poll to kick off a major push for the legalization or decriminalization of cannabis in the District — one that could include the pursuit of a ballot initiative in 2014.

The poll was sponsored by the Marijuana Policy Project, the Drug Policy Alliance and financed by Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, a company that had backed legalization referendums in four states. Public Policy Polling conducted the automated telephone poll on April 10 and 11, reaching 1,621 registered voters.

It showed two-thirds of D.C. registered voters would at least partially support a legalization referendum similar to the ones passed last year in Colorado and Washington state. Three-quarters of poll respondents favored the decriminalization approach adopted by several states and municipalities, which would turn the possession of small amounts of marijuana from a criminal offense to something more akin to a traffic ticket.

A January 2010 Washington Post survey found residents more closely split when asked whether they favored legalizing the possession of marijuana for personal use, with 46 percent in favor to 48 percent opposed. The Post poll, which carried a three-point margin of error, showed white residents were much more likely to favor legalization (60-35) than black residents (37-55).

The new poll, which did not report a margin of error, found a racial disparity, but a less dramatic one. Both white and black residents favored Colorado/Washington-style legalization, though by different degrees — 77-19 for whites, 53-38 for blacks. Same goes for the decriminalization question, which was supported by 85 percent of white residents and 69 percent of black residents.

There is evidence that national attitudes on marijuana policy have changed in recent years. A Pew Research Center poll released earlier this month found a majority of Americans favored legalization, marking a dramatic shift from even a decade ago, when closer to two-thirds of national poll respondents opposed legalization.

Adam Eidinger, a longtime local activist who is employed by Dr. Bronner’s, said the time has come for city leaders to change District law to reflect popular opinion. ”It’s a popular issue, and up until now the council has ignored it,” he said. “Maybe now they’ll realize the citizens want to to decriminalize at the very least.”

Officials with the Marijuana Policy Project and Drug Policy Alliance said they will be lobbying the D.C. Council in the coming months to pursue legislative changes. Mason Tvert, MPP’s communications director, said his group “will be talking to community leaders and elected officials about various options for adopting a more sensible marijuana policy in the District.” Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, said decriminalization would be a “no-brainer” but legislators “should do more.”

“There is an opportunity to make a clean break from the past and treat drug use as a health issue instead of a criminal justice issue,” Piper said.

The new push comes just as the city’s first medical marijuana dispensary is set to open. But city legislators, most notably Council Chairman Phil Mendelson, have been wary of pursuing wide scale decriminalization or legalization — or even a more liberal medical marijuana regime — citing the likelihood that federal marijuana laws will remain in effect and the potential response from the city’s congressional overseers.

“There is a good argument for decriminalizing a drug that is widely used and that results in a lot of arrest records and not having an effect on violent crime,” Mendelson said in December, but “I don’t think this is the time for the District to be discussing that.”

Eidinger said Tuesday that he is prepared to mount a ballot initiative should the council fail to act. He has founded DCMJ — a skeleton organization consisting, he says, “basically me and a few other people in the city who are interested in advancing the issue.”

“The idea is that we need to create a grassroots organization in the city that is going to advance this ballot initiative if we have to do it,” Eidinger said. “Meanwhile, [MPP and DPA] will be accelerating their lobbying. I think it’s unnecessary if the council does their jobs.”

Piper, of the Drug Policy Alliance, acknowledged “internal and external discussions about doing a ballot measure” but “our preference is to work with the council on a set of reforms to reduce incarceration, racial disparities, and drug overdoses.”

Source: Washington Post (DC)
Author: Mike DeBonis
Published: April 17, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Washington Post Company
Contact: letters@washpost.com
Website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/