2012 might be the year for marijuana legalization. After California voters narrowly voted down marijuana legalization in 2010 by a 53-46 margin – marijuana advocates will have another shot at it this year – when the “Regulate Marijuana Like Wine Act of 2012” goes on the ballot in November. According to the most recent poll – a whopping 62% of Californians support the act that would essentially legalize marijuana.
The poll also showed that 80% of people in Golden State believe state and federal drug laws have “failed” and a “new approach” needs to be taken. Votes will also be taken in November in Colorado and Washington state for marijuana legalization. Expect the alcohol and tobacco industries to gear up for a fight, as they hope to continue to corner the market on mind-altering substances.
Comments
It would be far better to just stop enforcing these drug laws than to "legalize" and "regulate" weed. I have not read the whole "treat it like wine" bill, but if it includes a generous home grow provision, it could avoid the neo-Prohibition dope police monitors. I do want the large commercial grows controlled to get the crime out of the woods. On the other hand, I want cheap weed available because it is the way safer alternative for those who want to have a recreational drug or good medicine for pain and anxiety. We do not need a new commercial establishment extracting profits from scarcity when this is a most abundant plant.
I don't think it will ever happen. The more research I do on the subject of hemp the more I am convinced that it could have some huge breakthroughs in cancer treatments. Hemp oil to be more specific. I don't think that the powers that be will ever allow a possible cure for cancer to be grown in one's own back yard when at this present time there are more people making a living off of cancer than are dying from it.
We are the real Tea Party, even those of us the feds have identified as criminals thus far, the ones who have been trying to live and work in the medical cannabis field.
Smugglers and criminals, like our original members, we should dump weed into Boston Harbor, ASAP.
There is an industry of innovation waiting, in the greenest sense.
The Stalk Market Report Feb 2, 2012
Thank you Thom for continuing to address this issue of marijuana legalization. I would like to say that I think these state initiative attempts(like the 'Regulating It Like Wine' initiative, if they pass, would do something akin to your conparison of Saskatchewan and Canada Single Payer with the CA assembly bill on single payer. I agree that voters need to promote marijuana and hemp legislation with state and federal officials(I do) as well, but state iniatives definitely allow popular will to sidestep elected officials reluctance to take a stand(like the Dem CA Assembly members who abstained frm voting on single payer this past Tuesday, and Dem Gov J. Brown vetoing a hemp bill while still stating agreement with the bill's purpose in December 2011).
Disclaimer: I am a medical marijuana patient. I use it for stress relief as well as pain relief for occassional back pain sustained while working as a landscaper/day laborer. I am a Green Party of CA registered voter. Also, my surname, from the Hungarian, translates in English to Hemp. Like other cultures, Hungarian last names tend to stress what your family did as its primary work(like Smith in English, or Gandhi(Grocer) in Mohandas' native Indian Language).
I am definitely voting yes in Nov, like I voted yes in 2010 for Prop 19
I
Why has it taken so long???
Centralized moneyed interests are a powerful political force to contend with--and that 'power' doesn't have to be 'fair' or 'rational'--just propagandized enough to keep the sheeple in line with it....
You think somebody could make a movie showing "burning propaganda"? With people view of main stream media,the movie would be a "blockbuster".
Why has it taken so long???
a cheap, abundant, natural herb anyone can grow in their backyard that can compete with big money patented pharma chemicals without nasty side-effects.
Tomas,you`re right,but a bigger reason is USA isn`t a "democracy".A true democracy with people in control(economically & politically) wouldn`t be wasting their resources on "pharma chemicals"!
tayl44 is right, there is no democracy at the national level, but states are a different story, CA in particular.
Scott Kender, http://www.coffeeshop.freeuk.com/ should be your first stop if you travel abroad.
Another tact could be job creation, the coffee shops in Amsterdam all employ numerous employees, and it is in the service sector.
It would be far better to just stop enforcing these drug laws than to "legalize" and "regulate" weed. We do not need a new commercial establishment extracting profits from scarcity when this is a most abundant plant.
WHoooaa! Dude I'm getting waaay too deep. This must be some really good weed.
SPEED KILLS - WEED HEALS ("Hey!, I think I just coined a new phrase." " Or maybe I heard it somewhere before." " Man I don't know, I'm stoned")
Doug,you`re right,states is a different story,they can be worser.(look at CA economics) I live in third world FL,Castro would be right at home here with the governor we have.Thanks for the info/link. The best thing for job creation is "sharing the work" and expand/increase unemployment benefits for the workers in the off time. Anti,sound like you love to learn the "hard way".If this system made people feel better than using drugs,there would be no drug use.But the system make people feel bad and drugs make people feel good any with the negative effects,it`s still better than the system of slavery.You stop drugs when you have a better system!
Michigan passed a medical marijuana law last year and it's been a hassle. The powers that be are challengig it at every turn. So, Michigan lawyer Matthew Abel has started a petition to legalize marijuana outright. Looks like the civil rights hating conservatives may have over played their hands in Michigan. The medical marijuana act passed with an overwhelming majority. We'll see how this petition plays out. I think that decriminalizing pot would be sufficient enough. Actually, decriminalizing it would be preferred. If pot becomes a controlled substance than it's just going to become another industry with a high buy in price that excludes all but the rich. If pot is merely decriminalized -- a kind of legal neutral -- one could just grow and enjoy marijuana and only be subject to federal drug laws.
Well, the private prison industry would probably oppose legalization as well. It would cut into their bottom line.
There weren't any notable social problems from marijuana before it was criminalized.
I once knew a man who began smoking it before World War 1. When they criminalized it, he took up gardening as a hobby...and grew it in a greenhouse in his backyard.
He also began growing beautiful orchids and eventually made a really good living with the orchids. He never sold the pot. He wasn't adverse to giving it away, though.
He died decades ago....in his 90's.
Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"
There are many societies in Amazonial, South America that use powerful hallucinogens readily available and yet there is no drug or addiction problem.
Drugs should be decriminalized.
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html
If a thing is crminalized, any method is allowed by law enforcement against it.
A spy network in the US is provided by the drug war "patriots' out there 'fighting crime'.
The network has been acheived and maintained and is among you, spying on you.
They don't need permission to tap your phones, you are all criminals, it's a Drug War.
The best part for them is the network into the population, the 'enemy'.
anony,anybody oppose to nature/natural will lose. Our unnatural capitalist system create abusing drug use,who is the enemy?
There are many societies in Amazonial, South America that use powerful hallucinogens readily available and yet there is no drug or addiction problem.
Drugs should be decriminalized.
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html
can't disagree with that. although i mihgt go a step further and criminalize pharmas.
ambien. helps you sleep.... right into your car. go for a sleepdrive. forget it ever happened. criminalize that bastich.
accutane. clean up your acne. then commit suicide. die with a clean face...open casket. criminalize that bastich.
all anti-depressant chemicals that cause people to commit suicide. doh! criminalize those bastiches.
list goes on.
Researchers in New Zealand found that those who used cannabis by the age of 15 were more than three times (300%) more likely to develop schizophrenia.
http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/streetdrugs.html
A recent Dutch study showed that teenagers who indulge in cannabis as few as five times in their life significantly increase their risk of psychotic symptoms.
* A Swedish study of 50,000 military conscripts found heavy use of cannabis increased the risk of suicide by four times (400%). A Victorian study of 2332 adolescents found weekly use increased the risk of suicide attempts among females by five times. Weekly use as a teenager doubled the risk of depression and anxiety. Daily use at the age of 20 boosted the risk of depression and anxiety by five times (500%).
I'm fairly certain that most people in the Thom Hartmann community, and specifically Thom himself need to read these links.
In my experience, cannabis users are far more sane than the rest of the population. The money invested in Prohibition is intent upon preserving the myths. Cal, your posts are generally uninformed and naive. If you were onto something here, we would have abundant evidence in case studies and an epidemic of schizophrenia. You do a serious disservice to those who are afflicted with this sideshow. Weed has nothing to do with the onset of schizophrenia.
Researchers in New Zealand found that those who used cannabis by the age of 15 were more than three times (300%) more likely to develop schizophrenia.
On the 'early onset' myth:
Source: (TIME) The Link Between Marijuana and Schizophrenia
By Maia Szalavitz Wednesday, July 21, 2010
In recent months, new research has explored some of these issues. One study led by Dr. Serge Sevy, an associate professor of psychiatry at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City, looked at 100 patients between the ages of 16 and 40 with schizophrenia, half of whom smoked marijuana. Sevy and colleagues found that among the marijuana users, 75% had begun smoking before the onset of schizophrenia and that their disease appeared about two years earlier than in those who did not use the drug. But when the researchers controlled for other factors known to influence schizophrenia risk, including gender, education and socioeconomic status, the association between disease onset and marijuana disappeared.
(See TIME's special on preventing mental illness disorders.)
Gender alone accounted for a large proportion of the risk of early onset in Sevy's study, which included 69 men and 31 women.
"Males in general have earlier age of onset of schizophrenia," says Sevy. In men, the disease tends to take hold around age 19, while in women it isn't typically seen until 22 — irrespective of marijuana use. But, typically, teenage boys are four times more likely than girls to be heavy pot smokers, which may create an illusory association between the drug and onset of the disease.
So the question about any research on schizophrenia and marijuana is: did the study include more women than men? Did the study include more heavy marijuana smokers who were men than who were women?
There is an art and a science to getting surveys right, and if people start out with wanting to find a certain result, they can violate the rules and find it.
Also, you should watch out with surveys that started to research one thing, and then come up with conclusions that were not part of original the subject of the study.
God this gets tedious. It is almost as bad as the debunking required to expose the what causes the gay and why it is bad for you mythology of "science." Were there any pathology connected to pot smoking, we would have epidemic levels of evidence. It is by far the safest alternative to sobriety, and a lot of sober folk drink a lot of sugared sodas that really are bad for us. There is a ton of money in the War on Drugs and busting smelly weed is a lot easier than controlling the powders and meth. Were they focussed on the latter, I would have some respect for the public policy even if I think it is all about therapeutic intervention with addicts instead of creating an illegal profit through Prohibition.
Just ignore weed, please. Nobody gets hurt that way and nobody makes money either.
Well said DRC. That's a nice post. A good summary of the topic, with some well placed words, kept short, simple, and to the point. Just the way I like it " Word "
On an episode of Current TV's Vanguard series titled "The War on Weed", one segment dealt with a weekend in the fall when Seattle has an open pot-fest ... literally a big open air smoke-in. The segment even included a speech or two at the festival from some of Seattle's politicians who hate the pot laws (and the expense of enforcement and prosecutions) as much as we do. A good time was had by all !
Another segment of the episode dealt with Colorado and the states implementation of the medical marijuana laws. The state earns so much tax money from the medical pot stores that I doubt Colorado would just stand by and allow the feds to come in and shut down the stores, like has been threatened in California.
The for-profit prison industry is one of the main reasons we still have these stupid pot laws. Alchohol is legal, but can kill with a single binge ... as many parents of college students have found out the hard way.
The only incidents I have ever heard of where someone was 'stoned' to death involved the throwing of rocks !
It kills me to walk down the street and watch all the ciggies being smoked while I dodge the smoke. If someone were smoking a doobie, I would benefit from the second-hand smoke. Tobacco kills, weed heals.
It is by far the safest alternative to sobriety, ......
I am endless fascinated by flea baggers trotting out the tired old "but alcohol is bad" argument. Here's the thing about that entire line of reasoning, It doesn't matter!
Throwing out death tolls from tobacco smoke, drunk driving and liver disease makes perfect sense as an argument for making those things illegal. It makes zero sense when trying to convince somebody to make pot legal. Don't you understand that "It will kill fewer people than cigarettes!" could apply to anything? You could pass a law that lets 12 year olds carry concealed guns to school and it'd kill fewer people than drunk driving.
If the argument is that pot is the safer choice, then by that rationale, it's also safer than hugging a cactus or kissing a rattlesnake. Is someone obligating you to choose between the two? There's not a third option of just not doing either of them? This has baffled me for years, I still don't understand it, and I've heard it. A lot. It is as if the legalization of one unhealthy activity obligates us to legalize every single thing that's less lethal than that.
You have to remember that the people who have the power to change these laws are old, rich, stuffy white guys who for the most part don't smoke weed. When they hear rebuttals like this, they're picturing a six year old kid stomping his foot and screaming at his mother, "Why can't I play that game? Jimmy's mom lets him play GTA, and that's way worse!"
The end result is still that you're arguing for the right to make things worse than they were before.
Unfortunately for the majority of posters to this board, smoking just three joints a day do as much damage to the lungs as twenty cigarettes, something it seems like the young men of the Thom Hartmann community WELL exceed.
In the still growing brains of the young Thom Hartmann audience, it can stunt basic emotional development and promote paranoia. And for the few on this board who do work and pay taxes, they are far more likely to come down with illnesses and miss work than non-users, costing society at large millions of dollars every year in lost productivity.
While many of you are in denial about the huge mental health damage you are inflicting upon yourselves, the fact remains proven that you are at higher risk for the emergence of schizophrenia.
Schizophrenia.com cites 30 studies that show a connection.
Open your eyes, put down the bong, and read the evidence.
You are an ignorant slut. Your misinformation has nothing but propaganda behind it. Yes, there is money in keeping weed illegal, but there are a lot of us who know better and whose health is just fine. Go suck on whatever crap you prefer, but stop supporting these stupid, expensive and harmful laws.
The people who are going nuts in America are not smoking weed.
One of the largest contributors against the California marijuana legalization proposition was the for-profit prison industry ... they were afraid to lose future "customers".
At the age of 43 I was arrested for my first offense, posession of less than an ounce of pot and spent 34 months in prison for it. Destroyed my life. The arrest, not the pot. If there is a bright side to prison it is that a person DOES get caught up on their reading. One of the things I discovered though was the fact that if an inmate escapes from a private prison he cannot be charged with escape. When he does there will be no Amber Alert style TV coverage nationwide, no Federal Marshall search for the first 72 hrs at least! After that only a Federal Offender will warrant Marshall attention. When all the inmates in these prisons become aware of this there will be hell to pay. The American People should be aware of this. Although the largest part of those inmates are non-violent drug offenders there are also many very dangerous and violent people there. The War on Drugs is really a war on the poor and a good way to deny millions of them the right to vote and change the law being used to oppress them. This is better than the Gulags how?
The 9th Amendment (the Free Choice Amendment I call it)among other things, protects my right to do as I like with my body. It took a Constitutional Amendment to outlaw alcohol-Cannabis is different because.....??????
"It's a sufficient trigger in those individuals to tip them over. (But) we actually can't tell who those vulnerable individuals are."
"Many" researchers "feel"...? This is the sort of non-scientific "coincidence means causality" argument that infuriates me and feeds the fears of conservatards.
If you're not sure where the risk lies, how do you know WHAT the trigger is?
I can see a similar study that shows that speaking arabic makes one more likely to die from a missle strike or a study saying that people with orange fingers crave Cheetos. Where are the millions of weed-induced schizophrenics that must exist?
Who said that?!
The 'science' quoted above is akin to the anti-gay crap that gets funded by haters. There is a lot of money involved in illegality. DARE we think for ourselves?
I still don't see how you can legally outlaw a plant. You can't patent a plant. It's not "synthetic". It's a plant. Alcohol is derived through a process. It would make much more sense to be able to outlaw alcohol. I think that it is unconstitutional to outlaw any plant when it is something that mother nature herself has invented. As far as it being "dangerous" just look at the miriad of chemicals under your kitchen and bathroom sink and tell me which is more dangerous. For crying out loud, toothpaste is poisonous.
Nonetheless, it has been done. Absurd is no disqualification in Wonderland.
I still don't see how you can legally outlaw a plant. You can't patent a plant. It's not "synthetic". It's a plant. Alcohol is derived through a process. It would make much more sense to be able to outlaw alcohol. I think that it is unconstitutional to outlaw any plant when it is something that mother nature herself has invented. As far as it being "dangerous" just look at the miriad of chemicals under your kitchen and bathroom sink and tell me which is more dangerous. For crying out loud, toothpaste is poisonous.
Tell Monsanto that you can't patent a plant. I'm sure Monsant-herb is killer...literally.
If you smoke Monsant-herb, do you become roundup-resistant ?
If you smoke Monsant-herb, do you become roundup-resistant ?
No, but you get so high you think human DNA is a commodity and corporations are people.
I love that people concerned with foreign aid and NPR funding typically don't blink an eye at wars, including the so-called "war on drugs."
High: The True Tale of American Marijuana
Greed, bigotry and fear can drive people to have priorities severely out of whack.
This bud's for you.
I would say let's 'occupy marijuana",but we have more importants things to do,like 'occupy the Fed'.
Here we might be able to pull of multi-tasking.