cannabisnews.com: Legalize Pot? Not So Fast Legalize Pot? Not So Fast Posted by CN Staff on July 11, 2002 at 08:08:02 PT By Nevada Appeal Editorial Board Source: Nevada Appeal The speed at which pro-marijuana forces are trying to liberalize Nevada's laws is enough to make us dizzy. From one of the strictest anti-marijuana states to legalization in two years? We don't think Nevadans will stand for it, and they shouldn't because it's a bad idea.A group called Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement has successfully collected signatures to put the issue to a vote in November. With 74,740 names, they met the test in 14 of the state's 17 counties -- including Carson City, but not Douglas County. We don't begrudge them the public vote, because that's their right. But we can't see any good coming from legalization of possession of up to 3 ounces of pot by anyone over the age of 21.We opposed medical marijuana in Nevada because we feared it was simply the first step toward legalization.It's hard to tell cancer sufferers and others who get relief from severe, debilitating diseases by smoking marijuana that they are breaking the law. But while the anecdotal evidence seemed plentiful, the scientific proof was slim. And we were more worried about eroding Nevada's tough anti-pot stance.The next time we checked, the 2001 Legislature was reducing pot possession from a felony to a misdemeanor. Again, we protested.The argument seemed to be that judges weren't slapping felonies on first-time offenders anyway. So why bother having a felony law? Because judges and prosecutors need tools to fight crime and protect society.Some marijuana users, we'll concede, may be doing harm only to themselves. Others, though, can be a definite threat to the well-being of the people around them. We like to give judges the ability to distinguish between the two.The Legislature went ahead and lowered the charge, and now along comes the legalization vote. We think that pretty much proves our initial concerns were well-founded.In addition to our basic belief that marijuana should remain a controlled substance, the proposal would allow for possession of up to 3 ounces -- a substantial amount. Add to that the fact marijuana possession remains a federal offense, and there are plenty of reasons for voters to turn down legalization of marijuana.Source: Nevada Appeal (NV)Published: July 11, 2002Copyright: 2002 Nevada AppealContact: appeal tahoe.comWebsite: http://www.nevadaappeal.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Marijuana Policy Projecthttp://www.mpp.org/Marijuana Proposal To Be On Ballothttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13351.shtmlPlan To Ease Marijuana Laws Wins Ballot Positionhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13348.shtmlMarijuana Petition Qualifies for Ballothttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13341.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #10 posted by freedom fighter on July 13, 2002 at 11:06:32 PT Mr. Farmer's another article. http://www.nevadaappeal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Site=NA&Date=20020713&Category=OPINION&ArtNo=207130201&Ref=ARThe political rape of NevadaBy any definition, it was political rape last Tuesday when the U.S. Senate voted 60-39 to build a permanent nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain only 90 miles from Las Vegas, the nation's fastest-growing city.Any pot smokers would be on his side on this issue but it's kinda strange when the author favors putting human beings in cages and are against nuclear dumping! ff [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by goneposthole on July 11, 2002 at 18:49:43 PT Cannabis prohibition benefits Cannabis dealers are able to profit handsomely from the illegal status of cannabis. They seem to like it like that. It does not bother their conscience that they are on the same gravy train as the DEA. Other more toxic and dangerous drugs like tobacco and alcohol are consumed in place of cannabis during cannabis shortages.True or not?Children and young adults use tobacco and alcohol first before cannabis because they are legal. the legal status of these two drugs benefits those two industries. So you see, cannabis prohibition benefits the captains of the alcohol and tobacco industries along with cannabis dealers/growers. The DEA and law enforcement benefit from forfeiture laws.The bloated and corrupt government benefits most of all.What more could one ask ? What fun. [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by illustro on July 11, 2002 at 18:40:40 PT new link ... See below ... The drug legalizers are at it again [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by overtoke on July 11, 2002 at 16:42:50 PT: Prohibition Benefits? Is there some kind of list somewhere that will tell me all the benefits to society Drug Prohibtion offers?I see none.(Fueling a corrupt prison and nazi-like government agency does not count as a benefit.) [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by overtoke on July 11, 2002 at 16:40:12 PT: Think of the Children Every idea or belief I have is not in my head unless it benefits mankind in some way.No person on the planet is pure. Apparently we do not care a single bit about the health of our bodies. -- 1. We pollute everything we touch. -- 2. Everything we take into our bodies is polluted. -- 3. We eat foods that kill us.We should be focusing on the mind. If people refuse to think in the ways that are beneficial to humanity and the planet then something needs to happen that will allow those peole to change their minds at a more rapid pace.In other words: Smoke Pot Regularly and you might understand some things you may not have otherwise. [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by illustro on July 11, 2002 at 15:20:29 PT From the same paper - even worse WoD propaganda This piece cited, written by a former Govt. employee no less, is so full of WoD propaganda and lies it's almost funny. The only thing missing is a crying mother repeatedly saying "Think of the children!"Other stuff from Farmer: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1162/a08.html http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread9457.shtmlIt's really sad people believe guys like Farmer.illustro The drug legalizers are at it again [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by RavingDave on July 11, 2002 at 12:40:52 PT Dead Fish, Beware! The Legislature went ahead and lowered the charge, and now along comes the legalization vote. We think that pretty much proves our initial concerns were well-founded.What concerns would those be, that when the majority of citizens are given the right to choose, they might choose differently than you?I can't seem to reconcile this overt fear of legalization. Why are these people so afraid of letting others do as they please? No one is talking about legalizing murder, rape, or arson. When you get right down to it, we are talking about legalizing fun. And isn't that already guaranteed in our constitution, under the "pursuit of happiness" clause?Add to that the fact marijuana possession remains a federal offense, and there are plenty of reasons for voters to turn down legalization of marijuana.This is the whole chicken-and-egg problem, all over again. Using the fact that marijuana possession is a federal offense in order to justify it remaining a state offense is tantamount to saying that we shouldn't fly because we weren't born with wings. The only way to change the federal law, considering the idiots in Congress, is for enough states to change their own laws. If at least 26 states speak out on this issue, the majority should finally carry the nation. Isn't that what democracy is all about?Fear all you want, but the tide is turning - and hopefully it'll carry out all the dead fish! [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by DigitalFeonix on July 11, 2002 at 11:14:58 PT Thoughts on use of word "Legalize" This is a comment I posted on another site, but it fits well here too.I've been thinking the slogans and wording of the arguments we use when taking about the WOsD and how people percieve it. Language is very important, using it properly can help us greatly, or hurt us if not. "Legalize Marijuana" It's exactly what we want to do, but people who grew up being brainwashed by the DEA, ONDCP, and DARE equate marijuana with something criminal or evil. These people hear "Legalize Marijuana" and they equate it with "Legalize Crime" or "Legalize Murder" Because of this I think we need to turn it around, and use something like "End Cannabis Prohibition" as our main rallying cry. This way they can equate the prohibition with Prohibition, the great failed experiment that brought us Al Capone. They might then be able to see what the real problem is, by being able to correate the two. Also, the call to action is to stop something they are already doing instead of doing something new (Legalize), much easier for us lazy Americans. And by using "cannabis" it adresses hemp and marijuana at once without scaring people. Although I think we may have to use "End Marijuana Prohibition" because more people know what marijuana is, then know what cannabis is. Just my thoughts on this. and additionally I think that using "End" instead of "Stop" is less likely to offend people by not making it a demand (Stop), to a polite (yet strong) request (End). The prohibitionists have learned how to effectively use the quirks and nuances of the language to their advantage. It's time we learn to use the same dirty tricks on them. [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by MikeEEEEE on July 11, 2002 at 08:45:06 PT War of words In a war of words this kind of crap should be expected. Send letters. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by observer on July 11, 2002 at 08:39:59 PT Note Use of 'Legalize' - Yet Jail Not Mentioned Legalize Pot? Not So Fast ... We don't begrudge them the public vote, because that's their right. But we can't see any good coming from legalization of possession of up to 3 ounces of pot by anyone over the age of 21. ... reasons for voters to turn down legalization of marijuana.Question: Now, why do you suppose this prohibitionist article never mentioned "jail" or "prison" (i.e. the whole point of this measure), but instead punched "legalization" repeatedly? Does that tell you something? It should. Prohibitionists have long tainted the word "legalization" to mean "giving our children crack and heroin." So all they have to do now is scream "Legalizers!" and the herd stops thinking. "Legalize drugs?" the herd bellows, "Never!" But when Americans are explicitly asked if adults who use marijuana should be jailed, the response is different. Lesson: don't play into prohibitionists' hands by shouting "Legalize, man!" and then attempting to defend that. Rather, it is more shrewd to attack the jailing of marijuana smokers, and make prohibitionists defend the jailings. Prohibitionists emphasize "Legalize" for a reason: they want people to forget how the idea of jail is involved. That's why prohibitionists claim that "marijuana smokers are never jailed!" (All the while they are fighting tooth and nail to keep laws that do exactly that.)___Drug War Propaganda http://drugwarpropaganda.selfhost.com/book.htm ... chapter outline, introduction and chapter one now online [ Post Comment ] Post Comment