• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  
Uncooperative Tom

Drug Prohibition: Still Stupid

Recommended Posts

I have been expecting Sessions to leap in on this, nasty little prick that he is. Defying both common sense and public opinion, he is attempting to drag the USA back into the 50's.

I must say, the Repugnicans are doing a stellar job of alienating every sector one after another. I guess they will eventually be left with support from gun-toting evangelic pedophiles and truck drivers from Minnesota. Oh, and many of the 1% greedheads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got to believe that a substantial portion of Trump’s 35% partake every now and then. I’d guess that most that strongly believe weed should be illegal are already  Trump voters. Once again not growing the base and reinforcing the resistance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sean said:

Was wondering when he would get around to this -

Sessions Ending Obama-Era Policy That Ushered in Legal Weed

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-04/sessions-said-to-kill-obama-policy-that-ushered-in-legal-weed

excerpt -

Attorney General Jeff Sessions is rescinding an Obama-era policy that helped states legalize recreational marijuana, throwing a wet blanket on the fledgling industry during what should have been a celebratory week.

I was wondering whether he would get around to it, since Trump has repeatedly expressed support for Obama's policy.

The problem I hope and expect he will face is that the public isn't behind him. Not even his elk. I've seen firsthand how their attitudes have changed over the past couple of decades. They don't call me nearly as many nasty names as they used to when I say that prohibition is stupid.

For that reason, Sessions may want to be careful what he wishes for. The Cole policy was a lame compromise by a President who was simply not interested in leading on this issue.

"We know the law sux so we're not going to enforce it."

Lame if it doesn't come with "and we're going to try to change it."

Endless non-enforcement while refusing to address the Schedule 1 classification and the problems it causes was/is almost as stupid as just continuing prohibition and enforcing it.

So Sessions is ending a stupid, lame policy that should never have been more than a temporary stopgap measure in the first place. Good riddance. I really hope he hates what happens next.

Trump and Obama agreed to that lame compromise because the law is unenforceable because the people don't support it.

That hasn't changed, and if anything keeps getting worse for Sessions' elk as more and more Americans have experiences like I did, watching cannabis oil work when legal drugs did not on my father.

The article I linked above talks about what happens next...
 

Quote

 

Every criminal prohibition has that same touch to it, doesn't it? It is enacted by US and it always regulates the conduct of THEM. And so, if you understand that is the name of the game, you don't have to ask me, or any of the other people which prohibitions will be abolished and which ones won't because you will always know. The iron law of prohibitions -- all of them -- is that they are passed by an identifiable US to control the conduct of an identifiable THEM.

And a prohibition is absolutely done for when it does what? Comes back and bothers US. If, at any time, in any way, that prohibition comes back and bothers us, we will get rid of it for sure, every doggone time.

 

Enforce away, Jeff. You may end your beloved drug war after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Presidents 42-44 either admit or are alleged to have used recreational drugs including weed. It's a shame that none of them made an effort to prevent the senseless incarceration of otherwise lawful citizens for MJ possession.

This president faces a majority of Americans who now favor the decriminalization and/or legalization of MJ as well as a rapidly growing business which employs over 100K and contributes substantially to State budgets. If he allows Sessions to unchain the dogs of DOJ, the backlash should be huge. Unfortunately, it's really in the hands of Congress enjoys the benefit of the pharma/tobacco/booze lobby's substantial budgets.

Until there is an organized effort by individuals, canna companies and others, it will devolve further before real reform can begin. Such a shame and such an incredible price to pay for political inertia and self interested behavior by politicians. 

The good news is that the age demographics are very skewed. The naysayers are predominately over 50 years old. Millennials are more like 75/80% in favor of legalization. Eventually, everyone who's old enough to have been influenced by Reefer Madness memes will be gone like morning dew in the mid day sun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over at National Review, David French says that Sessions has restored the rule of law, and that Congress and the President should react by changing the law.
 

Quote

 

Unfortunately even members of Congress sometimes inadequately defend the legislative branch’s constitutional prerogatives. This morning, Colorado Republican senator Cory Gardner declared that Sessions had contradicted personal assurances made before his confirmation and “trampled on the will of the voters in [Colorado] and other states.” No, senator, this is exactly wrong. Congress banned the cultivation, distribution, and sale of marijuana nationwide. Thus it is Congress that tramples on the will of Colorado voters. It is Congress that is violating federalist principles in law enforcement. It’s time to do the right thing the right, constitutional way.

Gardner is positioned exactly where he needs to be to reform America’s drug laws. As a senator, he could introduce or co-sponsor legislation that explicitly decriminalizes marijuana at the federal level and leaves marijuana laws to the states. And there are multiple powerful arguments he could make in support of such a bill.

...

Gardner and other marijuana-sympathetic senators like Rand Paul and Cory Booker should seize this political moment. Republican congressman Tom Garrett Jr. introduced legislation in the House last year that would remove marijuana from Schedule I of the controlled-substances list. National support for legalization is at an all-time high (64 percent, as of late October 2017), and by getting on board, GOP legislators could reach out to new constituencies — young and minority voters — at the same time that they protect civil liberties and advance federalism.

Don’t blame Jeff Sessions for enforcing the law. Instead, write new legislation, pass it through Congress, and put a bill on the president’s desk. It’s time to do the right thing the right, constitutional way.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/4/2018 at 4:26 PM, Student_Driver said:

Clean, While recreation use is not allowed, many think that Israel is a global leader in cannabis research, particularly medicinal science. As you probably know, an Israeli Dr was the first to identify the active ingredient (THC) about 50 years ago.

For some time, I was involved in a cannabis focused investment fund. During that time, one of my colleagues travelled to Israel to meet with some scientists and cannaprenuers. They may not be as advanced in developing recreational and commercial law, but they are strong on the science aspect, IMHO.

Did a quick google on Israel Cannabis and came up with several interesting links. Here's one below.

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/how-booming-israeli-weed-industry-is-changing-american-pot-w499117

With Session's recent moves, the outlook is grim for US Cannabis business owners. Think we'll see some very sensational arrests and then a backlash which -hopefully- will force Congress to act and reform these regressive and oppressive prohibitions on a drug which is much safer than booze and possibly efficacious in treating a gamut of medical issues.

 

My understanding was that a lot of the hype around israeli med research had to do with marketing, but that's a compelling article. 

As a medical card holder and licensed grower in a state that is almost 100% sure to pass recreational in November, this whole thing is getting really interesting right about now.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/4/2018 at 7:41 PM, Student_Driver said:

 

The good news is that the age demographics are very skewed. The naysayers are predominately over 50 years old. Millennials are more like 75/80% in favor of legalization. Eventually, everyone who's old enough to have been influenced by Reefer Madness memes will be gone like morning dew in the mid day sun. 

It's like Trump has a list that says 'things guaranteed to get every young person and minority out to vote in November' and he is going down the list.  What's next...A 'no dancing' law?

flash8.gif

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

It's like Trump has a list that says 'things guaranteed to get every young person and minority out to vote in November' and he is going down the list.  What's next...A 'no dancing' law?

flash8.gif

It is hard to understand why Sessions is taking this line.  One one hand, maybe the best way for a bad law to be changed is to strictly enforce it.

But it sure seems that Trump has everything to lose here, and nothing to gain.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is one theory.  Everyone thinks Trump is an idiot.  Usually it is to their own peril.  Underestimating Trump has been a very very bad strategy.  

He could be pushing the weed thing to create an outrage.  Then he can use that issue to bargain for something else he wants.

And, he could end up being the President that legalized marijuana for the entire country.  Could you fucking imagine that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jzk said:

Here is one theory.  Everyone thinks Trump is an idiot. 

Agree-Agreeing-Captain-kirk-Chuffed-Deli

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jzk said:

It is hard to understand why Sessions is taking this line.  One one hand, maybe the best way for a bad law to be changed is to strictly enforce it.

Sessions is just a drug warrior who hasn't changed his mind about the whole Reefer Madness thing.

I do think changing the law could be an unintended consequence of stricter enforcement, but we may not see much change in enforcement from the statements of the two US Attorneys who would be doing the actual prosecuting. They basically reacted to the memo the same way they reacted to Cole's. "Yeah, we have discretion. We know. Thanks."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vermont might legalize possession

Quote

The bill does not legalize buying and selling pot. A previous effort that would have created a market for recreational marijuana was vetoed last year by Republican Gov. Phil Scott. The bill approved Thursday is supposed to be a compromise with the governor's office, according to the Burlington Free Press, but Scott has not yet indicated whether he will sign the bill.

Immaculate possession, I suppose. Phil Scott doesn't want to create a market. And we don't already have one. People will just engage in immaculate possession.

Quote

Legislators as geographically and ideologically diverse as Rep. Rob Blum (R-Iowa) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) reacted to Sessions' announcement by calling for the feds to leave state-legal weed alone. And Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) announced he would delay nominations for Justice Department officials until Sessions offered a better explanation about what the policy shift will mean for states that have already legalized weed.

They're all free to clarify for Sessions what the law is on that subject. By passing one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone knows his history.

Quote

"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others."- Harry Anslinger, first Drug Czar.

That was then.
 

Quote

 

Here's the lesson in pharmacology and history Rep. Alford presented to some of his constituents: "Any way you say it, marijuana is an entry drug into the higher drugs," Alford said. "What you really need to do is go back in the '30s, when they outlawed all types of drugs...What was the reason why they did that?"

Gee, Rep. Alford, I guess we just don't know!

"One of the reasons why, I hate to say it, was that the African Americans, they were basically users and they basically responded the worst off to those drugs just because of their character makeup, their genetics and that. And so basically what we're trying to do is we're trying to do a complete reverse with people not remembering what has happened in the past."

 

Oh no. Only prohibition is standing between us and out of control black people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jocal505 said:
1 hour ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

The "walk a line, touch your nose, watch my finger" type should work about as well for cannabis intoxication.

Do you have any qualifications to make this statement?

Yes. I inhaled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Yes. I inhaled.

So did I. But it didn't make me a toxicologist.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oregonian Overproduction
 

Quote

 

Williams doesn't appear to be threatening an immediate crackdown, and casual pot users are probably under no threat of federal prosecution. But he doesn't like the way Oregon is handling legalization, and he's doing the sort of fearmongering that officials tend to do when they're preparing to act:

We also know that even recreational marijuana permitted under state law carries ill-effects on public health and safety, as Colorado's experience shows. Since 2013, marijuana-related traffic deaths have doubled in Colorado. Marijuana-related emergency and hospital admissions have increased 35 percent. And youth marijuana use is up 12 percent, 55 percent higher than the national average. We must do everything in our power to avoid similar trends here in Oregon.

Funny, he notices those trends but fails to mention that Colorado has also seen a decline in opioid-related deaths since the state legalized marijuana, a contrast to the overdose crisis that the Justice Department is allegedly very concerned about. Medical marijuana use in New Mexico is also associated with reduced use of opioids. Perhaps Williams should consider the lives potentially being saved by all that pot being exported to other states?

While he's at it, maybe he should read Reason's Jacob Sullum explain that marijuana-related traffic deaths in Colorado have not in fact doubled and that marijuana use among teens in Colorado is actually going down, not up.

 

Gotta grab every power in sight to avoid those imaginary trends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Norway is aiming to decriminalise drugs. The UK should choose legalisation

In 2001 Portugal decriminalised all drugs. Last month the Norwegian parliament made clear its intentions to follow this lead. Republican senators across the Atlantic are openly defending the legalisation of marijuana. It’s high time the British government realised that it’s hopelessly out of step with sensible drug policy.

 

Decriminalisation ends criminal penalties for possessing small amounts of a drug for personal use, but all other aspects of the drug market remain illegal. For Norwegian advocates of harm reduction, this might seem like a big step forward. They are probably right.

Prison isn’t rehab, and a criminal record is a hammer blow to an ex-user’s career prospects. By contrast, decriminalisation makes it easier for problematic users to seek treatment, which leads to decreased use among vulnerable groups. This is what happened in Portugal, as shown by multiple studies – and may explain Portugal’s extremely low rate of overdose deaths. Portugal’s decriminalisation has also reduced the number of HIV-positive people addicted to drugs. This is a huge win for public health.

Decriminalisation was not the only option on the table for Norway, however. As Sveinung Stensland, deputy chairman of the Norwegian parliamentary health committee, put it: “It is important to emphasise that we do not legalise cannabis and other drugs, but we decriminalise.” That’s a shame: Norway would be better off if politicians opted for legalisation.

Decriminalisation is not a panacea: street dealers face no competition from regulated alternatives, and there is a risk that supply to the black market will at best remain unchanged. When the London borough of Lambeth, where I live, experimented with partial decriminalisation (or “de-penalisation”) between 2001 and 2002, a surge in street dealing depressed house prices, most prominently in areas with the highest concentrations of dealing. Lower house prices may sound like good news, but they fell because dealing reduced the local quality of life. The consequences of underground drug markets are well known: more violence, more crime and more dangerous drugs.

 

Commentators such as Peter Hitchens wrongly believe that these issues are the result of British police not fighting the war on drugs harshly enough – especially for cannabis. It’s true that our prohibition is lenient in comparison with some parts of the US. But I imagine most of the 11,970 people in prison for drug offences in 2016 would have raised their eyebrows at the suggestion that we operate under “de facto decriminalisation”.

xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">

There’s appetite to reform the UK’s drug laws, but it has to be done right

Unlike decriminalisation, a legalised, regulated market would drive many street dealers out of existence. This is especially important for underage drug users because, unlike regulated shops and pharmacies, street dealers don’t ask for ID. They also tend to be unreliable sources of information on recommended dosage, and black market drugs are rarely pure. When I go to the pub, I know whether I’m getting beer or vodka; drug buyers on the street can only hope they’re getting what they’re paying for. The UK-based drug testing organisation The Loop has reported finding drugs laced with everything from concrete to crushed-up malaria tablets at music festivals.

Legalisation also opens up the opportunity for significant tax revenue, which could be used to fund treatment and addiction services properly. Recent estimates have suggested that a legal UK cannabis market alone could be worth nearly £7bn a year, raising £1.05bn in tax. And while decriminalisation is a blunt tool for all drugs, legalisation allows the government to tailor regulations to suit the potential harm levels of different substances. We don’t regulate alcohol in the same way as cigarettes, and we shouldn’t treat cannabis and MDMA in the same way as heroin.

Read more

Some parts of the world have attempted to compromise between decriminalisation and legalisation, with poor results. When I lived in Washington DC for a year after graduating, it was legal to grow and possess cannabis for personal consumption, but illegal to sell it. Within two weeks of arriving, I was offered a $20 bottle of water with a “free gift” of cannabis, on my morning commute.

There’s appetite to reform the UK’s drug laws, but it has to be done right. The public are ahead of politicians, with recent polling showing that more people support a legal, regulated cannabis market than oppose it. The government’s silence on this crucial issue is deafening. A few British politicians from across the spectrum, such as Paul Flynn, Nick Clegg and Crispin Blunt, agree with the public. I wish more would.

In the wake of Norway’s decision to decriminalise drugs, politicians from all parties should use this opportunity to take a different approach to our drug policy. By opting for legalisation, we can take the market out of the hands of criminals and raise some money for treating vulnerable users while we’re at it.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/18/norway-decriminalised-drugs-uk-chose-legalisation-policy?CMP=share_btn_tw

Sensible decision, prohibition has failed to eliminate anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump the Deregulator is Slashing Spending!

Quote

President Donald Trump is planning to slash the budget of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, in what marks his administration’s second attempt to gut the top office responsible for coordinating the federal response to the opioid crisis.

Actually, that's fake news an uncertain report.

I only wish it were true.

Moving a couple of federal grant programs to other agencies is just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now