cannabisnews.com: Legalizing Pot: Opponents Replace Spokesman
Legalizing Pot: Opponents Replace Spokesman
Posted by CN Staff on October 09, 2002 at 07:28:34 PT
By Ed Vogel, Review-Journal Capital Bureau
Source: Las Vegas Review-Journal
Four days after making a controversial accusation, Clark County Deputy District Attorney Gary Booker was replaced as the chief law enforcement spokesman opposing the movement to legalize marijuana. Sgt. Rick Barela, a 23-year member of the Metropolitan Police Department, was named Tuesday as the top spokesman against Question 9.
Barela said there was a need to make one person the source of information about organized opposition to the marijuana question. Now a public information officer, Barela was a patrol officer and handled marijuana cases. Booker has not responded to phone calls since a Board of Health meeting on Friday when he alleged a man with ties to South American drug cartels was financing Nevadans Against Responsible Law Enforcement. The organization is campaigning for passage of Question 9, which would amend the state Constitution and let adult Nevadans possess 3 ounces or less of marijuana in their homes. Billy Rogers, leader of Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement, criticized Booker for the allegation, contending the group never would take donations from anyone associated with a drug cartel. Rogers demanded an apology from Booker and Sen. Joe Neal, D-North Las Vegas. Neal said the source of the drug cartel information came from a publication owned by perennial presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche. A LaRouche newsletter said billionaire investor George Soros had backed movements in South America that aided the drug suppliers and also donated to the Marijuana Policy Project, the parent organization of Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement. Neal said he believed the publication to be credible. Rogers said Tuesday he felt vindicated by Booker being removed as a spokesman. "I hope this means the opposition will stop trying to scare voters and start discussing the real issues of this campaign," Rogers said. "We would welcome a debate with the new spokesman on the issue of protecting people in the privacy of their homes or under the care of a doctor." Rogers said Booker made several factual errors about marijuana. At one point, Booker said the state Department of Agriculture provided seeds to the 200 people in the state who have legal permission to use marijuana for medical reasons. The state does not provide any seeds. Participants can grow as many as seven marijuana plants, but must acquire their own seeds. Polls by Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement show residents are split on Question 9, Rogers said. The most recent Review-Journal poll showed 55 percent of residents oppose the legal marijuana proposal, while 40 percent back it and 5 percent are undecided. The question needs voter approval Nov. 5 and in 2004 before Nevadans could possess marijuana, which is illegal under federal law. The state Board of Health voted unanimously last week to oppose legal marijuana. Dr. Joey Villaflor, chairman of the board, said he feared more children would gain access to marijuana if it were legal for parents to possess the drug.Note: Marijuana initiative's supporters had criticized statements.Complete Title: Legalizing Pot: Question 9 Opponents Replace SpokesmanSource: Las Vegas Review-Journal (NV)Author: Ed Vogel, Review-Journal Capital Bureau Published: Wednesday, October 09, 2002Copyright: 2002 Las Vegas Review-JournalContact: letters lvrj.comWebsite: http://www.lvrj.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:NRLEhttp://www.nrle.org/Marijuana Policy Projecthttp://www.mpp.org/Question 9 Supporters Demand Neal Apologyhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14384.shtmlCartelling The Truth http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14383.shtmlDA's Drug Cartel Remark Angers Initiative Officialhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14379.shtmlHealth Board Opposes Ballot Question http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14362.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help
Comment #27 posted by DdC on October 09, 2002 at 15:36:49 PT
Did anyone catch this?
Sounds like that paper is a little biased."Give me control over a nation's currency and I care not who makes its laws."
[Baron M.A. Rothschild (1744 - 1812)] "Another weapon I discovered early was the power of the printed word to sway souls to me. The newspaper was soon my gun, my flag - a thing with a soul that could mirror my own." Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini together in the heyday of 1930s fascism. Las Vegas Review-Journal owned by the Stephens Media Group
reviewjournal.com, casinogaming.com, viewnews.com and other Stephens Media Group Web sites
ReviewJournal.com is the Web site for the Las Vegas Review-Journal daily newspaper. The Web site is not an exact reproduction of the newspaper. It contains stories that are written by Review-Journal or Stephens Media Group employees and potentially a few wire stories. Stephen's Media Group
Newspapers
http://www.stephensmedia.com/newspapers/
News Bureaus
http://www.stephensmedia.com/bureaus/
Internet Media Interactive
http://www.stephensmedia.com/internet/
Publishing Stephens Press, LLC
http://www.stephensmedia.com/publishing/
Contact
http://www.stephensmedia.com/contact.htmlGannett Co. Inc. and Stephens Media Group Partner to Launch Hawaii.com
http://www.thetimesharebeat.com/2002/ts/may/0531-02t.htmGannett Co. Inc. is an information company that publishes 95 daily newspapers in the United States, including USA TODAY, the nation's largest selling newspaper, and the Honolulu Advertiser. Gannett owns more than 300 non-daily publications in the USA, including USA Weekend, the widely distributed weekly newspaper magazine. In the United Kingdom, Gannett subsidiary, Newsquest
plc, publishes nearly 300 titles, including 15 daily newspapers. Gannett also operates 22 television stations in the United States and is an Internet leader with sites sponsored by most of its TV stations and newspapers. USATODAY.com is one of the most popular sites on the web. Stephens Media Group, headquartered in Las Vegas, Nevada, owns 16 daily newspapers on the mainland, including the Las Vegas Review-Journal, and operates travel portals and web sites from their cities and communities of operation. Stephens also owns the Hawaii Tribune-Herald in Hilo, West Hawaii Today in Kailua-Kona, and North Hawaii News in Waimea. Washington News Bureau Online A division of Stephens Media Group
http://www.stephensdc.com/666 11th Street., N.W., Suite 535 • Washington, D.C. 20001
Phone: 202 783-1760 • Fax: 202 783-1955
About Stephens Media Group
http://www.stephensmedia.com/
Little Rock News Bureau
http://www.arkansasnews.com
Federal Government Connections
http://www.stephensdc.com/govtools.html
The Stephens Washington News Bureau reports on Congress and the federal government for the newspapers of the Stephens Media Group, most of which are available for on-line browsing here. This site is designed to link users to online government and journalism resources, including many the Stephens Washington Bureau staff find helpful and informative.Oct 5,02 Stephens Media Group Paper makes changes in columnist, presentation/adds Dr. advise starting in Benton,Ark. In time for "expert" testimony against Q9 maybe???
http://www.intercountynews.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=5598784&BRD=2023&PAG=461&dept_id=332509&rfi=6Las Vegas Review-Journal History
Las Vegas' first successful newspaper, the Las Vegas Age, was established in 1905. It was this publication and a combination of later competitors that became the Las Vegas Review-Journal. In 1949, Donald W. Reynolds acquired a majority interest in the Review-Journal from Sherwin ("Scoop") Garside.
http://www.reviewjournal.com/about/print/rjhistory.htmlThe Donald W. Reynolds Foundation is a national philanthropic organization founded in 1954 by the late media entrepreneur for whom it is named. Mr. Reynolds was the founder and principal owner of the Donrey Media Group. The Foundation, headquartered in Las Vegas, Nevada is one of the nations largest private foundations.
http://www.search-institute.org/Newsroom/reynolds.htmlAt the time of Mr. Reynolds' death in 1993, his organization had grown to include 52 daily newspapers, 10 outdoor advertising companies, five cable television companies and one television station. The sale of the Donrey Media Group in 1993 provided for the Foundation's endowment, making it one of the largest private Foundations in the United States. Their headquarters are in Las Vegas, Nevada.
http://www.snpa.org/fileobjects/meeting/reynoldsseminars.htmPublished Articles
http://www.search-institute.org/archives/index.htm
Teenage drug use
http://www.search-institute.org/archives/ptdu.htm
Grant
http://www.search-institute.org/Newsroom/reynolds.htmlThe Elkhorn Manefesto (Shadow of the Swastika) http://www.wealth4freedom.com/Elkhorn.htmlFrom Whom Did the Fascists Get Support? Italian fascism and German Nazism had their admirers within the U.S. business community and the corporate owned press. Bankers, publishers, and industrialists traveled to Rome and Berlin to pay homage, receive medals, and strike profitable deals. Many did their utmost to advance the Nazi war effort, sharing military industrial secrets and engaging in secret transactions with theNazi government, even after the United States entered the war. During the 1920s and early 1930s, major publications like Fortune, the Wall Street Journal, Saturday Evening Post, New York Times, Chicago Tribune, and Christian Science Monitor hailed Mussolini as the man who rescued Italy from anarchy and radicalism. Is it really that hard to believe it can't continue today? Keeping the same cannabis food, fuel, fiber, medicine and booze alternative off the Free Market? With propaganda ministers, publishers and enforcement, not much different...Peace, Love and Liberty or the Fascist D.E.A.th!
DdCWelcome to Reality...
http://www.angelfire.com/ca7/ddc/index.html Stephens Group???Not sure if this is connected, although it does list several media outlets...
Our investment banking and merchant banking activities operate in close organizational proximity, which helps us to bring a unique perspective to our clients and their businesses and create distinctive opportunities for our clients and for us. Primarily through our parent, Stephens Group Inc., we invest in a wide variety of industries, including oil and gas, publishing and media, health care, financial services, the Internet and e-commerce, technology, agriculture, manufacturing, retailing and others. http://www.stephens.com/about/stephens_group.aspABOUT STEPHENS > OUR HISTORY
Our History
Stephens Inc. is a full service investment banking firm located in Little Rock, Arkansas. Founded in 1933, the Firm serves a broad client base which includes corporations, state and local governments, financial institutions, and individual investors throughout the United States and overseas. The Firm is self-clearing and a member of the New York Stock Exchange. Stephens' expanding services include underwriting municipal and corporate securities, general securities brokerage, money management and international trade financing. We are among the largest investment banks, in terms of excess capital, in the United States. Members of the Stephens family privately hold Stephens Group Inc., the ultimate parent of Stephens Inc.
http://www.stephens.com/about/history.aspLittle Rock? Asa and Me
http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread9898.shtml
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #26 posted by Morgan on October 09, 2002 at 15:27:04 PT
Maybe I'm missing something here...
"Clark County Deputy District Attorney Gary Booker was replaced by Las Vegas Metro Police Sgt. Rick Barela. Barela said Tuesday there was a need to make one person the source of information about organized opposition to Question 9."I'm kind of confused here. He was replaced. But...by who? Is there an organization with a leader, or some kind of council that made this decision? Is it the Board of Health? or is it "Organized opposition to Question 9". (Is this the name of this organized opposition?) Or did Barela just walk in and pistol-whip Booker for being such a dumbass, and told him that he was taking over.?If it's the Nevada Board of Health, isn't it illegal for them to be using taxpayers money to campaign against a political measure?Who's calling the shots here?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #25 posted by nerull on October 09, 2002 at 13:30:40 PT:
Correction
"Hello, I am not sure if you are the proper person to contact about this but, in the Review Journal article titled "LEGALIZING POT: Question 9 opponents replace spokesman" I believe there is a mistake. In the paragraph,
"Booker has not responded to phone calls since a Board of Health meeting on Friday when he alleged a man with ties to South American drug cartels was financing Nevadans Against Responsible Law Enforcement. The organization is campaigning for passage of Question 9, which would amend the state Constitution and let adult Nevadans possess 3 ounces or less of marijuana in their homes." The organization is Nevadans For Responsible Law Enforcement. If "Nevadans Against Responsible Law Enforcement"
is a direct quote from Mr. Booker, then shouldn't it be put in quotations and the following sentence acknowledge the organization's correct title? The way it is printed may lead one to believe that someone at your paper is being a little too partial.Thank You.""The mistake is ours. It should have read Nevadans for Responsible Law
Enforcment.Charles Zobell
Managing Editor
Las Vegas Review-Journal
"Yep, no bias at that paper at all.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #24 posted by DdC on October 09, 2002 at 13:20:56 PT
Thanks malleus...
Godsmack
http://www.cannabinoid.com/wwwboard/politics/binaries/33/33010.gifDaddy's Demon
http://www.cannabinoid.com/boards/politics/media/33/33975.gifWhat corporate bucks will buy...
http://www.cannabinoid.com/boards/politics/media/33/33982.gifGeovis and Dickhead
http://www.cannabinoid.com/wwwboard/politics/binaries/32/32040.jpgBush Crime Family The Village Idiots
http://pub3.ezboard.com/fendingcannabisprohibitionwhyitstimetolegalize.showMessage?topicID=279.topic
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #23 posted by nerull on October 09, 2002 at 13:07:54 PT:
Did anyone catch this?
"Booker has not responded to phone calls since a Board of Health meeting on Friday when he alleged a man with ties to South American drug cartels was financing Nevadans Against Responsible Law Enforcement. The organization is campaigning for passage of Question 9, which would amend the state Constitution and let adult Nevadans possess 3 ounces or less of marijuana in their homes.""Nevadans Against Responsible Law Enforcement"Sounds like that paper is a little biased.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #22 posted by malleus on October 09, 2002 at 12:58:00 PT
DdC, thank you
That old Nostrodamus quatrain can be taken any number of ways, but given what's happened these last months, I am beginning to wonder if ol' Nostie had a lot of things right.He sure seems he was on target about the "Village Idiot" rising to power.A coworker has a photo of Bush and The Pope on her wall. On one side of the platform they are sitting on, Bush is seemingly reading with great difficulty from a paper he's holding, while the The Pope is slumped in a chair, his head resting on his hands and face half covered. The cartoon balloon above him shows his thoughts:"God! He's as dumb as they said he was!"
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #21 posted by DdC on October 09, 2002 at 11:55:58 PT
Definition of Tragedy
President George Bush was visiting an elementary school. One of the classes he visited was a 4th grade class, which was in the middle of a discussion related to words and their meanings. The teacher asked the President if he would like to lead the class in the discussion of the word, "tragedy." So our illustrious leader asked the class for an example of a "tragedy."One little boy stands up and offers, "If my best friend, who lives next door, is playing in the street and a car comes along and runs him over, that would be a tragedy.""No," says Bush, "that would be an accident."A little girl raises her hand: "If a school bus carrying 50 children drove off a cliff, killing everyone involved, that would be a tragedy.""I'm afraid not," explains the President. "That's what we would call a GREAT LOSS." The room goes silent. No other children volunteer.President Bush searches the room. "Isn't there someone here who can give me an example of a tragedy?"Finally, way in the back of the room, Lil' Johnny raises his hand. In a quiet voice he says, "If Air Force One, carrying Mr. & Mrs. Bush, was struck by a missile and blown up to smithereens, that would be a tragedy."Fantastic!" exclaims Bush. "That's right. And can you tell me WHY that would be a tragedy?""Well," said Lil' Johnny, "because it wouldn't be an accident and it certainly would be no great loss."
The Village Idiot
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #20 posted by Nasarius on October 09, 2002 at 11:53:26 PT
Cartoon
>>That's one scary cartoon. Too bad some people believe everything they see and every word printed in the newspapers as gospel truth. I once saw a van take a left turn into the middle guard rail on a superhighway. A door opened and a bottle of beer rolled out onto the highway. This is real, not some artist's political imagination.Exactly. Are these people insane enough to support cannabis prohibition because of impairment? Alcohol is significantly worse for driving, according to each and every study comparing the two. They should be promoting marijuana as an alternative to alcohol that will cut down on drunk driving. I can only assume that the cartoonist either 1) also supports alcohol prohibition, or 2) is a self-deluded hypocrite.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #19 posted by FoM on October 09, 2002 at 10:47:26 PT
afterburner
I really think very deeply about marijuana legalization. I have this conviction that I don't want to do anything that could bring harm to another individual. I guess I feel that being serious about what this all means is important for me and us to understand. This isn't about everyone wanting to light up a doobie in the center of a big city. It's about jailing people for using a plant. We must stop trying to prevent problems by jailing people instead of holding a person responsible for their own actions after the fact but not before. In a free society protecting ourselves from ourselves isn't the way it should be. They worry about people smoking and having an accident. Maybe we should blame high speed cars and highways. Maybe we should blame too many cars on the road because both parents need to work to live. We have to stop blaming and start dealing with the reality of what life is like now in this very complex and diverse society and world.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #18 posted by afterburner on October 09, 2002 at 10:38:46 PT:
p4me: re/ Nevada opposition
Since when is being a legal marketplace a bad thing in the United States of America, world champion of Capitalism?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #17 posted by afterburner on October 09, 2002 at 10:32:06 PT:
FoM: guilt by association.
That's one scary cartoon. Too bad some people believe everything they see and every word printed in the newspapers as gospel truth. I once saw a van take a left turn into the middle guard rail on a superhighway. A door opened and a bottle of beer rolled out onto the highway. This is real, not some artist's political imagination.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #16 posted by FoM on October 09, 2002 at 10:13:23 PT
Why We're Waiting For News
The Secret of Worldwide Drug Prohibition: The Varieties and Uses of Drug ProhibitionVOLUME 7 NUMBER 2 FALL 2002By Harry G. LevineGovernments prohibit drug use not only for the reasons usually stated, but also because prohibition expands police powers, creates enticing campaign rhetoric and can attract foreign aid. Therefore, although criticism of worldwide drug prohibition is on the rise, don’t expect retrenchment anytime soon. Read: http://www.independent.org/tii/media/pdf/tir72levine.pdf
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #15 posted by FoM on October 09, 2002 at 10:06:50 PT
We Just Sent a Check to NRLE
I hope everyone who can sends just a little money to help with Question 9. We have the powers that be fighting us tooth and nail. Just look at the cartoon from the LVRJ for today. This is so very important.http://www.cannabinoid.com/boards/drugpolicy/media/3/3117.gif
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #14 posted by malleus on October 09, 2002 at 09:58:17 PT
Hiding the family 'mistake'.
The latest concerning Mr. Booker is truly heartwarming. Many years ago, as a kid, I'd go to friend's houses to play. At one place they had some poor kid suffering from Down's Syndrome. Whenever company would come over, the kid would be put in his room to hide the kind of odd behavioral displays that he was prone to.Looks like the antis have just put Mr. Booker in *his* room. But I'd still keep pointing to the statements this idiot made as being indicative of the kind of 'proof' antis keep pointing to as justification for their actions. After all, *we* didn't force him to seek out the bs of Mr. LaRouche.BTW, did he get a subscription to LaRouche's rag? ? And was that subscription a personal one, or did he use taxpayer funds for it? I'm sure many Nevadans would like to know *who paid for* the dreck that was used as official documentation behind their attempts to scuttle the referendum.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #13 posted by druid on October 09, 2002 at 09:52:21 PT:
more NRLE info
We here at the Marijuana Policy Project are supposedly being funded by
Colombian drug cartels -- or at least that is what the opponents of
our Nevada ballot initiative would have you believe.Our privately funded polling shows that Nevada voters are split 50/50
on our ballot initiative ... which might explain why Nevada police,
prosecutors, and the state Board of Health are thrashing about ... and
lying ... saying anything they can to scare voters away from passing
the first law to end marijuana prohibition in the history of the
nation.We absolutely must get our message to the voters to combat our
opponents' lies, and the only cost-effective way to do this is on TV.
It costs only one penny to show one TV ad to each Nevada voter one
time. Would you please visit http://www.NRLE.org to donate $10 or more
to our TV ad campaign?This campaign has been getting ugly, and the face of our opposition
shows that it will only get uglier. Check out the beginning of this
article from yesterday's Las Vegas Sun, the third-largest newspaper in
Nevada: "A chief deputy district attorney in Clark County has suggested
a drug cartel is behind the effort to legalize possession of up
to 3 ounces of marijuana in Nevada. But a spokesman who is pushing approval of the constitutional
amendment called the statement of prosecutor Gary Booker "an
outright lie, slanderous and libelous." Billy Rogers, spokesman for Nevadans for Responsible Law
Enforcement, said Booker "ought to have his mouth washed out
with soap." Booker and more than 15 other witnesses appeared before the
state Board of Health Friday to urge its opposition to
Question 9 on the November ballot. The board agreed, saying the
legalization of marijuana was a "clear and present danger to the
public safety and health" of Nevada. The witnesses included a Las Vegas mother whose son is in prison
for committing murder while under the influence of marijuana and
cocaine, a mother who said her baby almost died from second-hand
marijuana smoke and a former user who said he hallucinated on
the drug. Rogers, who represents the group that gathered the signatures
that put the question on the ballot, was not invited to testify. Board chairman Dr. Joey Villaflor said the legalization would
lead to more young children using the drug and would increase
traffic accidents and domestic violence cases. He said because
of impurities, marijuana would be a 'health hazard" and increase
the problems of those who suffered from chronic lung illnesses. Booker, chief of the Clark County district attorney's Vehicular
Crimes Unit, suggested the marijuana campaign was tied to people
connected with organized crime -- "In a word 'cartel'."When our opponents were pressed to cite the source for their claim,
they pointed to a publication by Lyndon LaRouche, the discredited
perennial presidential candidate who spent five years in prison for
fundraising irregularities. In an attempt to defend themselves, our
opponents lamely claimed they believe LaRouche's accusations because
MPP has not sued him yet (as if we even read his newsletter). Of
course, our opponents have it all backwards: Drug cartels support
prohibition -- and oppose regulation -- because a legally regulated
market would put them out of business. (See
http://www.NRLE.org/news/lvs100702.html ,
http://www.NRLE.org/news/lvrj100802.html , and
http://www.NRLE.org/news/lvrj100802-2.html for the story.)
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #12 posted by Had Enough on October 09, 2002 at 09:29:20 PT
Calm Before the Storm
Always calm before the storm. In the following weeks expect to hear a barrage of misinformation polluting the airwaves, especially in Nevada.I believe Mr. Roger is prepared. I like how he eloquently stated, "I hope this means the opposition will stop trying to scare voters and start discussing the real issues of this campaign," Rogers said. "We would welcome a debate with the new spokesman on the issue of protecting people in the privacy of their homes or under the care of a doctor." He could have said negative things but I’m sure he knows he will catch more flies with honey instead of vinegar. At the same time he probably has plans to go for that jugular vain at the proper time. Timing is everything.It looks like the replacing of Mr. Booker is another “thrashing of a dinosaurs tail”. He was looking very foolish. I figured as long as he was spokesman, his rhetoric would be easily picked apart. It wasn't hard to displace his mis-information. Now he has been replaced. Too bad.Polls have to be considered. Keep in mind that areas and type of people who are contacted can shift polls. If some group wants a poll to show favoritism, they just contact people who they think will poll their way. Also if a poll is not in their favor, an older poll in their favor will be used.VOTE VOTE VOTEDo not forget our friends at http://www.nrle.org They need money, a lot of it and now. Send them anything. Every bit helps.Nevada is taking a big step for man and one huge gigantic leap for mankind.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #11 posted by druid on October 09, 2002 at 09:11:15 PT:
Stop the RAVE act
***Stop the House RAVE Act***Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) has introduced a House version of the RAVE Act.
It
is almost exactly the same as the Senate version. The House Judiciary
Committee will most likely be voting on the bill NEXT WEEK (the week of
the 7th). If it passes out of Committee as is, the RAVE Act could
become
law THIS YEAR, which means federal prosecutors will have the power they
need to shut down raves, hemp festivals, hip hop concerts, and other
events they don't like.We are asking voters to call their Representative on Monday, October
7th,
as part of a national call-in day to stop the RAVE Act.What to Do:1) Please forward this e-mail to your friends, family, and co-workers.2) Find out if your Representative is on the House Judiciary Committee
by
going to:
http://www.house.gov/judiciary/members.htm. Not sure who your
Representative is? Find out at: http://www.house.gov/writerep/3) If your Representative is on the House Judiciary Committee call them
on
Monday, October 7th and tell them to VOTE AGAINST THE RAVE ACT. THE
RAVE
ACT IS A THREAT TO PUBLIC HEALTH, FREE SPEECH, AND INNOCENT BUSINESS
OWNERS. You can contact your Representative by calling the Capitol
Switchboard at 202-224-3121.4) If you haven't faxed your Senators about the RAVE Act, please do so
by
going to:
http://actioncenter.drugpolicy.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=1287
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #10 posted by p4me on October 09, 2002 at 09:02:25 PT
Who trusts a poll or anything from a US newspaper?
The most recent Review-Journal poll showed 55 percent of residents oppose the legal marijuana proposal, while 40 percent back it and 5 percent are undecided.Well maybe the Review-Journal has an agenda. This poll came out on September 1, 2002. Maybe when they saw the other polls showing Free Cannabis Forces winning they stopped polling so they could say "Our last survey." They could not give any clues and say "On our survey of September 1st." Here is a link to NORML's record and the date of publishing is at the bottom in an information section: http://www.mapinc.org/norml/v02/n1626/a01.htm?134I like to think that NORML has better numbers because they don't call the police station asking for poll opinions. Anyway the October 3rd release- http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=5424- says the Free Cannabis Forces register with a 56% against the brainwashed prohibitionist with a mere 43%.The KLASTV.com, channel 8 Los Vegas, poll is still up and running at http://www.klas-tv.com/Global/story.asp?S=868267. It does not show votes cast. Yes for legalization-73%, Nope to Dope-24%, Don't know-2%,Won't vote-1%.I say it will pass with 60% approval and I wonder why they want to tell us the old numbers when the new numbers clearly show which direction this thing is going.There are only 9 iniatives on the ballot and they can be seen here: http://sos.state.nv.us/nvelection/2002_bq/index.htmThe condensed version of question 9 has a link to a full version PDF file here. I am going to copy it here because it presents the arguements pro and con, with con seeming to be an appropriate word for prohibition. It follows and comes from here: http://sos.state.nv.us/nvelection/2002_bq/bq9.htmDean Heller
Nevada Secretary of StateBallot Question #9Amendment to the Nevada ConstitutionAn Initiative relating to the use and possession of up to three ounces of marijuana, the distribution of marijuana, and other matters related thereto. CONDENSATION (ballot question)Shall the Nevada Constitution be amended to allow the use and possession of three ounces or less of marijuana by persons aged 21 years or older, to require the Legislature to provide or maintain penalties for using, distributing, selling or possessing marijuana under certain circumstances, and to provide a system of regulation for the cultivation, taxation, sale and distribution of marijuana?
Yes — No —EXPLANATION
The proposed amendment to the Nevada Constitution would amend sections of the Nevada Constitution that currently authorize the use of marijuana for medical purposes. The proposed amendment would allow any persons who has attained the age of 21 years to use or possess three ounces or less of marijuana without being subject to arrest, civil or criminal penalty or seizure, or forfeiture of assets. The constitutional amendment also requires the Legislature to provide or maintain penalties for driving dangerously or operating heavy machinery while under the influence of marijuana; for distributing or selling marijuana to persons under age 21 years; for persons under the age of 21 years using and possessing marijuana; for using marijuana in a vehicle or public place; and for distributing, selling, using or possessing marijuana on the premises of a jail, prison, or public school. The proposal also requires establishment of a system of regulation for the cultivation, taxation, sale and distribution of marijuana, including the distribution of marijuana at low cost to those medically authorized to use it. Under this system, all advertising of marijuana is prohibited. The purchase of marijuana from licensed establishments is authorized under this proposal. The transportation of marijuana in or out of state is prohibited unless federal law permits such transport. The license fees and taxes at wholesale are proposed to be the same as those for cigarettes and tobacco related products, respectively. The retail sales tax for marijuana is proposed to be the same as those of other products generally. ARGUMENTS FOR PASSAGE
Proponents of the proposal argue that it is a waste of tax dollars to arrest people for small amounts of marijuana, and, if passed, this proposal will allow law enforcement and the courts to focus resources on more serious crimes. Proponents further argue that marijuana has fewer harmful side effects than alcohol and tobacco, which are already legal and regulated by the state.Proponents argue that the system of regulation and taxation required by the proposed amendment could potentially generate substantial tax revenues for the state of Nevada, including additional tax dollars to cover the costs to establish the program. In addition, state control of distribution may replace the current illegal market for marijuana. Medical marijuana is legal now in Nevada and this proposed constitutional amendment would require the Legislature to authorize appropriate methods of supply and distribution of marijuana for medical purposes at a low cost to patients authorized to use or possess it. Proponents argue that this would allow seriously ill patients who may not otherwise be able to afford medical marijuana to enjoy the medical benefits of marijuana.Finally, proponents argue that the requirement that penalties still be imposed for the irresponsible use of marijuana, such as in vehicles or public places or by those under the age of 21 years, including the distribution or sale to such minors, strikes the appropriate balance between legalization and prohibition. A "Yes" vote would amend the Nevada Constitution to allow the legal use and possession of three ounces or less of marijuana by persons 21 years of age or older, while requiring penalties for misuse and the establishment of a system of regulation, for the cultivation, taxation, sale, and distribution. ARGUMENTS AGAINST PASSAGE
Opponents of the proposal argue that marijuana is a "gateway" drug. Decriminalization will increase the number of marijuana users who will likely move on to "harder drugs" like heroine or cocaine. Opponents argue that it is not appropriate to amend the Nevada Constitution to create a right to use and possess marijuana and note that Nevada law already allows for the medical use of marijuana.Opponents argue that any savings resulting from the refocusing of law enforcement resources will be outweighed by increased health costs similar to those resulting from tobacco use. The increased tax revenues for the state will similarly be outweighed by the cost to establish and run another state agency to regulate the cultivation, sale, taxation and distribution of marijuana to authorized persons. According to opponents, decriminalizing possession and use of three ounces or less serves no purpose other than to further a political agenda to legalize all drugs. Opponents argue that decriminalization will lead to more crime, more substance abuse and more citizens of this state who are addicted to marijuana and other controlled substances. Because of this increased negative effect, the tourism industry in Nevada will be negatively impacted, as Nevada will become the nation's marketplace for drug sale and usage. In addition, opponents argue that because production and distribution of marijuana would still be illegal under current federal law, effective regulation will be impossible to enact and enforce. A "No" vote would not amend the Nevada Constitution to allow the legal use and possession of three ounces or less of marijuana by persons 21 years of age or older, nor require penalties for misuse or the establishment of a system of regulation for the cultivation, taxation, sale, and distribution. FISCAL NOTE
Financial Impact-No adverse fiscal impact.DAD-D,1,2FULL TEXT OF THE MEASURE - PDFCopyright © 1996-2002
Page last updated on Fri, 13 Sep 2002 16:3
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #9 posted by goneposthole on October 09, 2002 at 08:44:00 PT
Drug War beast on way to laboratory
Fill it full of formaldehyde.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #8 posted by FoM on October 09, 2002 at 08:42:48 PT
Erie Calm
I have been looking for news to post for a while now and it is strangely slow for the middle of the week. With John Walters arriving in Arizona then Nevada over the next few days I have a feeling the news will be heavy but for now it has this erie calm.
What's New
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #7 posted by goneposthole on October 09, 2002 at 08:35:02 PT
Maybe
Along with the proverbial jugular, canulate the carotid on this beast, hook him to an ecg to tabulate the final results.Open the chest cavity to determine what kind of disease infected this beast of a drug war.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #6 posted by FoM on October 09, 2002 at 08:20:45 PT
Political Cartoon from LVRJ for October 9, 2002
http://www.cannabinoid.com/boards/drugpolicy/media/3/3117.gif
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #5 posted by Dark Star on October 09, 2002 at 08:17:43 PT
Strategy Change
The opposition is in disarray. It is time to go for the proverbial jugular. Complacency is the enemy.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #4 posted by BGreen on October 09, 2002 at 08:16:56 PT
They released their own poll results on 9/23/02
Polls seem to say what the people sponsoring them want them to.
Survey: 55 percent reject legalization of small amounts of pot
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #3 posted by FoM on October 09, 2002 at 08:02:54 PT
Last Poll Results for Nevada Initiative
The petition effort that placed the initiative on the ballot garnered more than 109,000 signatures or nearly double the required number. A September 26 poll by the NBC affiliate in Las Vegas showed a majority of voters supporting the measure, with 55 percent in favor and 43 percent opposed. Nevada Voters To Gamble on Legalizing Pot: http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread14353.shtml
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #2 posted by knox42897 on October 09, 2002 at 07:51:37 PT:
Next.....
This is incredible instead of just giving an apology they get a new spokesman. Now even the anti's don't want Booker. Funny this happened with Andy Anderson from NCOPS and he joined the NRLE. Booker don't even think about it the NRLE doesn't want your kind.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #1 posted by TecHnoCult on October 09, 2002 at 07:47:49 PT
Change again?
The most recent Review-Journal poll showed 55 percent of residents oppose the legal marijuana proposal, while 40 percent back it and 5 percent are undecided. Did it change again, or did the writer just not take the time to verify his information?THC
[ Post Comment ]
Post Comment