cannabisnews.com: Marijuana Today, What Tomorrow?





Marijuana Today, What Tomorrow?
Posted by CN Staff on September 17, 2002 at 16:00:18 PT
By Kelli Du Fresne 
Source: Nevada Appeal 
I think it's a farce. A ruse at best, that by 2004 it could be legal for a 21-year-old to possess 3 ounces of marijuana and be free of any retribution as long as they stayed home.It would still be illegal to smoke it in public places, illegal to smoke it in your car, illegal to drive under the influence and offer it for sale. And under the eyes of the federal government it remains illegal anyway.
So, what are we creating?A state where it's legal to hole up in your house, get high as a kite and do what?At some point, you'll have to leave and get more food.Researchers say one of the short-term affects of marijuana use is anxiety.So now we have a person, trapped at home smoking pot and growing anxious, paranoid about the back yard crop, and getting the munchies -- give that guy a gun, will ya?He can't go anywhere, do anything. Except, I suppose, sign up for welfare? Which is of course not as much as his neighbor Ed gets. Damn the government to hell!Even if users do manage to maintain within the bounds of society, don't problems with learning, distorted perceptions, trouble with thinking and problem solving and loss of coordination affect the rest of us in some way? Won't taxpayers bear the burden of cancer and the cost of the marijuana to treat the symptoms of chemo therapy? Sounds like a vicious circle. And one that apparently begins at an early age.When 1,000 teens ages 12 to 17 say it's easier to buy pot than it is to buy beer or cigarettes, there's a problem.The survey, done by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, for the past seven years found 27 percent of those surveyed said they could buy marijuana in an hour or less; 8 percent said it would take a few hours.In all seven years, the teens have said the biggest problem they face is drugs. A larger problem in their eyes than peer pressure, sexuality and crime.This year, for the first time, though, 63 percent said they attend drug-free schools. However, 8 percent believe a teacher at school uses; 25 percent reported seeing drugs sold at school; 55 percent said they'd turn someone in if they some them using and 56 percent said they'd report someone they saw selling.The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that by the time they have finished high school, 47 percent of teens have smoked pot; 24 percent have used another illicit drug and 81 percent have drunk alcohol, while 70 percent have smoked cigarettes.To put an end to the circle of use, abuse, disease and death the center suggests parents get involved in their children's lives."Years of research have repeatedly found that parents are the most important resource we have to prevent substance abuse in our teens. In the 2000 survey, half of teens who had not tried marijuana credited their parents with their decision."Are the anti-drug squads making progress? Maybe, but what does legalization of 3 ounces of pot for those 21 or older do to that progress?According to an Associated Press story in Monday's edition, Teresa Jempsa, a school counselor, says the initiative sends the message "it's OK to take drugs." Jempsa asked "If marijuana becomes legal, then what drug is next?"It's a good question that only time will answer.For now, parents can talk to their children, express negative feelings about abuse and use and register to vote and cast a no vote on Question 9 on Nov. 5.Kelli Du Fresne is features editor of the Nevada Appeal.Source: Nevada Appeal (NV)Author: Kelli Du Fresne Published: September 17, 2002Copyright: 2002 Nevada AppealContact: editor nevadaappeal.comWebsite: http://www.nevadaappeal.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:NRLEhttp://www.nrle.org/Marijuana Policy Projecthttp://www.mpp.org/Going to Pot: Nevada Plan to Legalize Marijuana http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14104.shtmlNevadans Asked to Blaze Trail for Legalization http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14051.shtmlIn Nevada, a Joint Venture Finds Supporters http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14026.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #17 posted by aaron bollinger on September 20, 2002 at 10:48:36 PT:
READ THIS, IT'S TRUTH BE TOLD
ALL THE THINGS YOU SAID WERE WRITEN IN ANGER. LEARNING DISORDERS ARE NOT BROUGHT ON BY MARIJUANA. PROBLEM SOLVING AND OTHER THINGS OF THE SORT CAN STILL BE USED IF YOU SMOKE WEED. For example, I smoked weed all through highschool. Does that mean I am stupid and sat in my house all day doing nothing? NO! I graduated in the top 10% of my class, in National Honors Society-Magna Cum Laude, and I was a three year graduate. I also carried two jobs in addition to school to save up money for college! i had a night job, and a graveyard shift. Many people that smoke weed have great jobs and go to school. I bet you know a couple yourself, but will never even know because they are normal just like you and me. I now attend Texas Tech and have no time for pot. When I came here, I did not go through 'withdraws.' It is not the pot that controls you, it is you that control the pot. It is all in your will power as a person. If you are weak you may fall in, just like with anything else. However, many people go hame after work and relax, do something they love like read a good book. But, some people smoke a fat joint to relax. It doesn't mean that you have to sit in your house 24/7 and be a loser! The people that do that are lazy, and would do it reguardless of if they had weed or not. We, all know that! Also, smoking marijuana is in NO WAY related to welfare, or anything of the sort. Like I said before, many of the 70 million Americans who have tried weed, have normal jobs and normal lives. The 18 Million that smoke it everyday, also have the same characteristics. Yeah, you have those few that are losers, but everything has those few people that ruin everything. I know more people that smoke weed than don't and out of those Hundreds of people, I may know three or four that are absolute losers, but would be anyway. The other 96 or 97 of them go to school and have jobs. You don't know what you are talking about. How many people have you heard of high on weed that have wrecked a car into something and killed someone? None, because anyone with sense would just wait until the high wears off in an hour or so. However, people that drink kill people everyday!!!! It is the leading cause of accidents on the roads. I bet two or three drunk drivers have wrecked since you have been reading this letter. There may be people dead because drinking does not wear off after an hour or so. You can't just wait-you stay drunk!You make me, along with 70 million Americans angry.. When you learn what you are talking about, then write an article.Countries have done studies on this stuff and learned that letting minor marijuana offenses slip through the cracks saves tax money and puts more real croiminals behind bars. If you are actually reading this, let me ask you this.... Would you rather have a person caught with a couple ounces in jail wasting your tax money, or a person that has Murdered or Raped someone? Lets think logically here!!!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by Hope on September 18, 2002 at 11:16:33 PT
culebra
Excellent letter, culebra. Absolutely excellent!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by John Tyler on September 18, 2002 at 11:09:26 PT
Thoughts
According to an Associated Press story in Monday's edition, Teresa Jempsa, a school counselor, says the initiative sends the message "it's OK to take drugs." Jempsa asked "If marijuana becomes legal, then what drug is next?"
Wait a minute. Prostitution is legal in Nevada, are all girls in Nevada going to become prostitutes? 
These people are getting so hysterical they can't think straight any more. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by culebra on September 18, 2002 at 09:36:20 PT
My LTE...rough, rough ,draft.
I read and was quite concerned with the editorial entitled "Marijuana Today, What Tomorrow?" which appeared in your publication last week. It seems that the author has decided to pedal her biased opinions of cannabis consumers as journalism. It read like a typical prohibitionist rant: substitute the word "alcohol" for "marijuana" and it would make as much sense.She seems convinced that smoking cannabis makes a person into a vegetable incapable of sustaining themselves in the most fundamental ways, yet provides no evidence. She asserts a number of ostensibly horrible side effects of cannabis use, but leaves out the names of the vaunted researchers she nebulously mentions. Not to mention the fact that most of these effects are actually by-products of the prohibition of the plant. For instance: could it be that a cannabis user might be rather anxious due to the fact that she could be locked in a metal cage for even having it in some states? Mrs. Du Fresene handily defeats her own argument by pointing out that "...27 percent of those surveyed..find marijuana in an hour or less.". Translation: Prohibition of anything, including the dread Cannabis Sativa, automatically delivers control of it to criminal profiteers that are willing and able to sell whatever they can to your kids. Legalization, or at the very least decriminalization, is the only way to recover some semblance of control over what our kids have available to them. Vote "Yes" on 9 Nevada!****SUGGESTIONS?***** This is my first one LOL.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by RavingDave on September 17, 2002 at 22:32:50 PT
Sounds Like Someone Needs Some Medicine
It sure is a large leap of logic to go from some Joe smoking a joint in his house to the implication of him shooting someone due to paranoia. "Researchers say one of the short-term affects of marijuana use is anxiety."Which researchers? I have used cannabis for years to reduce anxiety. What if I said, "Researchers have shown that aspirin can cause pain." Would this make any sense? Has Ms. Du Fresne ever smoked marijuana? Obviously not, otherwise she would see this ridiculous statement, and subsequent delusional fantasy, for what they are.Oh, and here's a clue for you, Ms. Du Fresne - everyone is already smoking it in Nevada. If you think otherwise, you are far too naive to cast your uninformed vote in November.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by FoM on September 17, 2002 at 18:43:47 PT
p4me
Thank you for posting your letter you sent. I really appreciate when you and others share them with all of us.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by FoM on September 17, 2002 at 18:41:45 PT
p4me
I just posted the first article about the event today. I just saw a segment on CNN Headline News where Valerie was speaking and the crowd was attentive and respectful. It brought tears to my eyes. I hope someone puts a lot of the video that was taken today and makes a special for TV.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by p4me on September 17, 2002 at 18:35:25 PT
I corrected the mistakes in the LTE 
Yes, I corrected my mistakes in the LTE that follows. If dddd can change I guess I can. I will try to always proofread what I have typed before hitting the Post Message button.I cannot wait to see the pictures of SC. We have the federal policy on marijuana to cast a light on the bigger problem of corporate/upper 1% control of the government to the detriment of the people's welfare. Thank you all for shining that light that others may see.1,2
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by p4me on September 17, 2002 at 18:16:23 PT
p4me writes the editor
Here is my letter to the editor. I read the article by Kelli DuFresne titled Marijuana Today, What Tomorrow and found it pitiful. The woman is desperate need of some enlightenment on what the cannabis reform movement is all about and the same would be true of the editor that approved it. American opinion was led by Randolf Hearst in the 30’s because it would compete with his financial interest in timber and he is the one that changed the scientific name of cannabis to a what he wanted to be a slur word, namely marijuana. I suggest that Kelli read the comments of people that are actually informed at cannabisnews.com and begin some a journey to some enlightenment on the subject. Of course she may be chosen by your advertisers in the oil, paper, timber, alcohol, and pill industry to promote nonsense that informed people are not reversing with increasing speed. I suggest that she read the online edition of Jack Herer’s book, The Emperor Wears No Clothes before she writes anything so lame as in this piece. It can be read easily on the web at http://jackherer.com/chapters.htmlShe may also read the comments of her article posted at http://jackherer.com/chapters.html in hopes that she does not embarrass herself in front of any and all informed readers. Then again she may be paid to represent the corporate interest of those that have their way with Congress and the courts with the intent of retaining the ignorant on the side of prohibition with its overly putative laws meant to wring a plea bargain before the courts so there are no trials. Look at federal marijuana convictions and see if 90+% aren’t a result of plea bargaining.And by the way, if you would like to inform your readers of the statistics of the Uniform Crime Report for 2001, it would at least mean that someone knows what those statistics are. You can check at the DOJ website but they have erased some figures for 2000 and not likely to put up 2001 figures any time soon. You could try finding them at the fbi.gov website but it would be a waste of time.If you are trying to inform your readers you need better writers. If you are trying to continue the demonization of cannabis that Hearst started you are doing a fine job.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by prop203 on September 17, 2002 at 17:27:29 PT
Oh No
I think it's a farce. A ruse at best, that by 2004 it could be legal for a 21-year-old to possess 3 ounces of marijuana and be free of any retribution as long as they stayed home. ----- I think its farce that u think what I do in my home is any of your buisness. -----It would still be illegal to smoke it in public places, illegal to smoke it in your car, illegal to drive under the influence and offer it for sale. And under the eyes of the federal government it remains illegal anyway. So, what are we creating? A state where it's legal to hole up in your house, get high as a kite and do what? ----- Is this not a free country. Are u telling me I dont have the right to hole up in my home? -----At some point, you'll have to leave and get more food.---- Ill order pizza or send my wife. whats your point?---- Researchers say one of the short-term affects of marijuana use is anxiety. And? I dont have the right to have anxiety?? So now we have a person, trapped at home smoking pot and growing anxious, paranoid about the back yard crop, and getting the munchies -- give that guy a gun, will ya?---- I fail to see any merit here. I ate a bunch of smarties for lunch now Im all hiped up crawling on the walls and feeling sick to my stomach from the sugar over load. So what we now are moving to criminalize smarties..  This is the equal in ludicrosity to your statement ----- He can't go anywhere, do anything.----- Their is no law saying because ur high u have to stay in your house andI could do anything anyother free american can do.Except, I suppose, sign up for welfare? Which is of course not as much as his neighbor Ed gets. Damn the government to hell!-----Where dose this comment come from?  Just something u felt like throwing in? ------ Even if users do manage to maintain within the bounds of society, don't problems with learning, distorted perceptions, trouble with thinking and problem solving and loss of coordination affect the rest of us in some way?------ So far u have displayed most of these with out smoking anything. I would worry about your self first..  Last time I check the police have something to test your cordination its called a sobriety test... ------ Won't taxpayers bear the burden of cancer and the cost of the marijuana to treat the symptoms of chemo therapy? Sounds like a vicious circle. And one that apparently begins at an early age. ----- I beg you to point me to one test that has shown marijuana to cause cancer ----- When 1,000 teens ages 12 to 17 say it's easier to buy pot than it is to buy beer or cigarettes, there's a problem. ----The problem is the problem u have with marijuana. Aside from that I dont see any problem.-----The survey, done by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, for the past seven years found 27 percent of those surveyed said they could buy marijuana in an hour or less; 8 percent said it would take a few hours.----- Good.. Now take away the thret of going to jail for it and we save millions in tax dollars spent on incarceration... Go figure..----- In all seven years, the teens have said the biggest problem they face is drugs. A larger problem in their eyes than peer pressure, sexuality and crime. ------Yea I would have problems to if I feared for my college and job future for being arested for something as benign as marijuana.-----This year, for the first time, though, 63 percent said they attend drug-free schools. However, 8 percent believe a teacher at school uses; 25 percent reported seeing drugs sold at school; 55 percent said they'd turn someone in if they some them using and 56 percent said they'd report someone they saw selling. The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that by the time they have finished high school, 47 percent of teens have smoked pot; 24 percent have used another illicit drug and 81 percent have drunk alcohol, while 70 percent have smoked cigarettes.--- Oh gosh, the world is ending, what now --- To put an end to the circle of use, abuse, disease and death the center suggests parents get involved in their children's lives.----- Again show me any study that points to disease and death -----  You should really infrom your self before printing such ludicriss articles. -----  "Years of research have repeatedly found that parents are the most important resource we have to prevent substance abuse in our teens. In the 2000 survey, half of teens who had not tried marijuana credited their parents with their decision." Are the anti-drug squads making progress? Maybe, but what does legalization of 3 ounces of pot for those 21 or older do to that progress? ---- Progress of what your opinion is on right and wrong? ---- According to an Associated Press story in Monday's edition, Teresa Jempsa, a school counselor, says the initiative sends the message "it's OK to take drugs." Jempsa asked "If marijuana becomes legal, then what drug is next?" ----- Marijuana is quite diffrent than any other drug.--------- And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed.     Genesis 1:29 ---------- source: The bible ----It's a good question that only time will answer. For now, parents can talk to their children, express negative feelings about abuse and use and register to vote and cast a no vote on Question 9 on Nov. 5. Kelli Du Fresne is features editor of the Nevada Appeal.It such a shame that a editor like u you can be so brainwashed. Its quite scary actually.Prop203-Yes-Arizona
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by mayan on September 17, 2002 at 17:11:08 PT
Commercials Supporting Question 9 
If this woman is any indication of the caliber of our opponents, cannabis will be legal very soon.Here are the two TV commercials supporting question 9 which are currently being aired in Nevada:
http://www.nrle.org/commercials.htmlunrelated -Building on research begun last year by FTW, researcher Paul Thompson has dedicated full-time energy toward producing a remarkably comprehensive 9-11 timeline. This is the most thorough timeline on the Internet to date:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/completetimeline/index.htmBush Planned Iraq 'Regime Change' Before Becoming President: 
http://www.scoop.co.nz/archive/scoop/stories/98/09/200209171310.49858ea1.htmlBush Regime Change Blueprint - The Report:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/archive/scoop/stories/74/a3/200209171845.d4c7eb8f.htmlIn Iraqi War Scenario, Oil Is Key Issue - U.S. Drillers Eye Huge Petroleum Pool: 
http://www.scoop.co.nz/archive/scoop/stories/25/61/200209170052.2dc5066e.htmlHow the U.S. Helped Create Saddam Hussein:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/09.18A.neswk.us.iraq.htm
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by firedog on September 17, 2002 at 16:53:02 PT
Found in the Nevada Appeal, 1932 edition
I think it's a farce. A ruse at best, that by 1935 it could be legal for a 21-year-old to possess 3 bottles of alcohol and be free of any retribution as long as they stayed home. It would still be illegal to drink it in public places, illegal to drink it in your car, illegal to drive under the influence and offer it for sale. And under the eyes of the federal government it remains illegal anyway. So, what are we creating? A state where it's legal to hole up in your house, get drunk as a skunk and do what? At some point, you'll have to leave and get more food. Researchers say one of the short-term affects of alcohol use is violence. So now we have a person, trapped at home drinking alcohol and getting hungry, beating his wife and kids -- give that guy a gun, will ya? He can't go anywhere, do anything. Even if users do manage to maintain within the bounds of society, don't problems with learning, distorted perceptions, trouble with thinking and problem solving and loss of coordination affect the rest of us in some way? Won't taxpayers bear the burden of cancer? Sounds like a vicious circle. And one that apparently begins at an early age. When 1,000 teens ages 12 to 17 say it's easy to buy alcohol and cigarettes, there's a problem. The survey, done by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, for the past seven years found 27 percent of those surveyed said they could get alcohol in an hour or less; 8 percent said it would take a few hours. In all seven years, the teens have said the biggest problem they face is drugs. A larger problem in their eyes than peer pressure, sexuality and crime. The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that by the time they have finished high school, 81 percent have drunk alcohol, 47 percent have used another illicit drug, while 70 percent have smoked cigarettes. To put an end to the circle of use, abuse, disease and death the center suggests parents get involved in their children's lives. "Years of research have repeatedly found that parents are the most important resource we have to prevent substance abuse in our teens. In the 1931 survey, half of teens who had not tried alcohol credited their parents with their decision." Are the anti-alcohol squads making progress? Maybe, but what does legalization of 3 bottles of alcohol for those 21 or older do to that progress? According to an Associated Press story in Monday's edition, Teresa Jempsa, a school counselor, says the initiative sends the message "it's OK to get drunk and pass out." Jempsa asked "If alcohol becomes legal, then what drug is next?" It's a good question that only time will answer. For now, parents can talk to their children, express negative feelings about abuse and use and register to vote and cast a no vote on legalizing alcohol.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by Sam Adams on September 17, 2002 at 16:36:17 PT
this one got to me.....
here's my LTEDear Editor,Kelli Du Fresne uses some rather creative logic to oppose the Question 9 marijuana initiative. In citing the high rate of youth smoking, she blames the failures of current prohibition policy on those who are trying to change it.During alcohol prohibition in the 1920's, youth alcoholism and youth violence shot up. It's not hard to figure out why 80 years of cannabis prohibition has resulted in a similar problem. Kelli mentions that high schoolers say it's easier to buy marijuana than tobacco or alcohol. By making cannabis illegal, we have channeled distribution into the hands of criminals who have no qualms selling to minors! Perhaps she should check the results of a recent World Health Organization survey that compared marijuana use in Netherlands, where it's been legal for over 25 years, with the U.S., which has the most punitive marijuana policy in the world. Adult usage in the two countries is nearly the same, while teenage usage in the U.S. is nearly DOUBLE that of Holland. Moreover, the use of harder drugs like cocaine and heroin is also lower in Holland.She also makes the misrepresentation that marijuana use causes cancer. This is totally false. There has never been a single case of lung cancer attributed to the use of marijuana - not one. Since cannabis is far less addictive that tobacco, users smoke much less of the plant material and are not exposed to the high degree of tars of cigarette smoking. (Also, just for the record, actuarial studies show that cigarette smokers that die of cancer actually SAVE the health care system money, they die younger and faster than non-smokers.)  Also for the record, check the CDC statistics on deaths per year: it's 400,000 for tobacco, 120,000 for alcohol, 5,000 for cocaine and heroin, and 0 for marijuana. No one has EVER died from using marijuana!In a sad testament to your paper's low standard of journalism, Kelli, like most liars, contradicts herself. At one point, her article actually states "To put an end to the circle of use, abuse, disease and death the center suggests parents get involved in their children's lives."  Regardless, Kelli prefers the status quo of "saving the children" by arresting them and screwing up their lives as much as possible.  Under the Higher Education Act of 1998, any drug conviction results in the loss of all federal student loans and scholarships. Is this a fair policy for America, considering that George Bush, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, and Clarence Thomas have all used marijuana?I am thankful that after 80 years of marijuana prohibition, some newspapers have had the intelligence and journalistic integrity to respond to drug abuse in a thoughtful, sophisticated manner. As the CDC surveys shows, 80 years of basing our drug policy on ridicule and scorn have led us to some pretty poor results.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by Dan B on September 17, 2002 at 16:25:32 PT:
She's an EDITOR!
Oh my God! If this idiot can get a job as an editor, imagine the amazing employment possibilities ahead for people like me who actually know how to use their brains and write!Oh wait . . . I forgot. The media aren't interested in hiring people who can think for themselves.Dan B
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by Dan B on September 17, 2002 at 16:22:32 PT
Of all arguments against this measure . . .
. . . this has to be the stupidest of all. Does this person have a working brain? Apparently not. The vision this person has of cannabis smokers holing up inside their homes for fear of going outside, even to the extent that they won't go out and get groceries for fear of being nabbed as soon as they step foot outside their doors, is as lamebrained as they get. Kelli Du Fresne must be one stupid peron to have come up with such a ridiculous scenario, and even more stupid if she thinks this will fly as an argument. Why? Because if she is worried about cannabis smokers staying holed up in their homes after it is legal, what must she think they are doing now, when it is illegal? Does she think that people who want to smoke cannabis now simply can't because it is illegal? Or does she think that cannabis smokers feel free to smoke cannabis wherever they want to? Perhaps she thinks that all cannabis smokers in the state of Nevada live in underground caves and only come out at night when the coast is clear. Is that the kind of low-level mentality we are working against? Is this the extent of logic for the majority of the population in this country?No wonder the pols have such an easy time turning us into a fascist police state.Dan B
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by leafhopper on September 17, 2002 at 16:21:00 PT
What's wrong with her?
One really has to wonder whether there are some serious psychological underpinnings to this woman's rage. It takes more than government propaganda to create a lunatic like this. Perhaps she was abused as a child.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on September 17, 2002 at 16:08:44 PT
Fox News Alert
Santa Cruz Giveaway will be on Fox News at :22 past the current hour.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment