cannabisnews.com: Pot Change Illegal Under Federal Law





Pot Change Illegal Under Federal Law
Posted by CN Staff on April 04, 2003 at 18:21:21 PT
By Aidian Holder, Staff Writer
Source: Maneater
The medical marijuana provisions of Proposition 1 violate federal law, but proponents are confident that if the proposal is adopted medical users will be protected. In a week Columbia voters will decide whether to decriminalize marijuana for medical use in the city of Columbia, but federal officials claim that as far as federal drug laws are concerned the vote won’t change anything.
“Marijuana is a Schedule I narcotic,” said Kevin Sabet, senior speech writer for the Office of National Drug Control Policy. “That means it’s been designated by Congress as having no medicinal value.” Schedule I narcotics can be used only for limited medical trials and then only with approval and oversight of the federal Drug Enforcement Administration. But the law may not be that clear-cut. Federal courts have rendered conflicting rulings about the legal protection offered by medical marijuana laws. Medical marijuana advocates nationwide have put forward claims of medical necessity to defend their use of the drug. Although the U.S. Supreme Court found California’s medical marijuana statute didn’t allow the Oakland Cannabis Buyer’s Cooperative to produce or distribute marijuana, federal courts in Florida and California have found that individual patients can use a medical necessity defense. This legal gray area has heartened outspoken medical marijuana proponent and Columbia lawyer Dan Viets. “We can get it upheld,” Viets said. Regardless of the judicial wrangling surrounding the issue, individual medical marijuana users are unlikely to be prosecuted. Viets said local authorities have said they will uphold it. “It’s their job,” Viets said. “If that’s what the voters want, they will enforce it.” Before the law itself can be challenged, someone must find a specific case and take it to court. Viets said that’s not likely to happen. “Who’s going to do that?” he asked. “Is (Missouri Attorney General) Jay Nixon going to drag some cancer patient to court for using marijuana to ease his nausea?” The other provision of the law, which mandates that Columbia police prosecute simple possession of small amounts of marijuana as a municipal infraction instead of a criminal misdemeanor, is acknowledged to be constitutional according to court precedents. In the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative case, Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for an eight to one majority, affirmed that local authorities have the right to mandate how local agencies prosecute crimes. Even though eight states now have medical marijuana laws, the proposed Columbia ordinance is one of a few in the country sponsored by a municipality. National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws spokesman Paul Armanentano said there’s precedent for Columbia’s local ordinance. “A city or municipal law doesn’t have to agree with federal law,” Armanentano said. “It’s not a unique idea.” Though Viets said the ordinance has been carefully written to avoid legal grounds for challenge, he acknowledges that the best way to avoid it is for individual users to keep a low profile and avoid the sort of federal attention that sunk the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative. “I’m not sure that we could successfully defend against a federal case,” Viets said. “But you don’t see many federal cases against AIDS patients smoking medical marijuana.” Source: Maneater, The (Columbia, MO Edu)Author: Aidian Holder, Staff WriterPublished: April 1, 2003Copyright: 2003 The ManeaterContact: forum themaneater.comWebsite: http://www.themaneater.com/Related Articles & Web Site:OCBChttp://www.rxcbc.org/NORMLhttp://www.norml.org/Medical Marijuana Information Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/medical.htmBill: Marijuana OK for Pain Reliefhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15881.shtmlFederal Official Issues Pot Warning http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15868.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #10 posted by malleus2 on April 05, 2003 at 06:56:11 PT
This is Mr. Sabet
http://www.atlantabahai.org/news_ctr/biographies/sabet.htmAll that education...and he can't tell the difference between a narcotic and cannabis.This is one cradle-to-grave, parent-pleasing ambitious little baby bureaucrat at work. Pathetic.If I remember right, he's a Bahai. A faith which has known terrible persecution in the Middle East:http://www.uga.edu/bahai/News/090999-5.htmlHis supposedly compassionate, universal brotherhood religion knows what it is like to be on the sharp and bloody end of government sticks when it comes to persecution. So why does he help persecute sick people? For wanting to feel better? Someone needs to ask this religious hypocrite that question...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by JSM on April 05, 2003 at 05:31:21 PT
Billos
Right on brother, prohibition of cannabis is a moral crusade based on fear, ignorance, and lies - nothing more. Just looks what happens everytime a prohibitionist steps ups and posts here. We know they read these articles and the postings and they - Joyce N., for example - have even posted here on occasion, but they can not face the reality of dealing with facts and having their arguments rebutted every time. So, we no longer see them here where there could be open dialogue, exhange of ideas, and rational discussions on what is a very serious matter. They are afraid, they are losing, and they know it so they hide behind all the updated reefer madness they can concoct. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on April 05, 2003 at 03:18:35 PT
Counterpoint
Billos, I think there's a lot more to it than that. If Fox News' Bill O'Reilly doesn't care if I smoke a joint at home, then there can't be too many who really do. The major pharmaceutical companies are terrified of a plant with this many healing properties which they can't make any money off of. The alcohol companies want to keep their intoxication monopoly. I'm sure there's people in the fuel and fiber industries who would much rather not see legal hemp products. If it's really all about getting high, then why does the DEA care so much about hempen food? The prison-industrial complex doesn't care if you smoke a joint - people in prison smoke it. They just like the laws the way they are so they can ensure their jails will always be at capacity. The police enjoy the hours of slacker overtime they can create just by arresting a peaceful marijuana smoker. The police also enjoy having an easy substance to control - it's much harder to find cocaine or heroin. Cannabis is odiferous and bulky, a much easier target. Without the laws against marijuana, there might be more black people in college than in prison. Sadly, last I heard, the inverse is currently true.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by billos on April 05, 2003 at 03:06:47 PT:
Prohib
I'm more or less convinced that cannabis is illegal because the goody two-shoes that have money and power just plain old don't want people getting high. It's immoral, and one should be in church on Sunday morning instead of celebrating a day off from work with a "toke". The American Family Association has a very strong influence on the government. Then, they become the government. If someone discovered how to get a relatively heathy high from smoking tulips, you wouldn't see anymore bulbs for sale the next year. Getting high is immoral. Period. That, is what it's all about.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by freedom fighter on April 04, 2003 at 23:34:18 PT
I wondered if it's funny??
I decided to check out the site which carried the article, I came across an editorial Cartoon about this issue. http://www.themaneater.com/comic.cgi?id=1327 Maybe I am biased but is it funny? Does it tell anything about our society?paz
ff
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by freedom fighter on April 04, 2003 at 23:24:20 PT
Kevin Sabet deserve a
good Schedule I narcotic spanking.. I suppose everday he goes to his office, he goes, “Marijuana is a Schedule I narcotic.” When he leaves his office, he goes, “Marijuana is a Schedule I narcotic”.And when he goes to sleep,(dunno how he does it), he goes, “Marijuana is a Schedule I narcotic”. Such a mindless waste of resource...pazff
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by Virgil on April 04, 2003 at 22:13:31 PT
 A local story
There was a barber in Statesville, NC that was raided fro drrrrugs and when the initial search found nothing, all the occupants were ordered out. A second search found less than a half an ounce of marijuana. Now the guy has a lawsuit for ruining his reputation everything else. The city cannot afford its current level of services and it cannot afford the lawyers or any settlement. Not only is federal cannabis prohibition unconstitutional and a failure and a burden to the human condition, nobody can afford the police state and all their murders, conspiracy, corruption, and other blunders. Very seldom do you see a local story mentioning anything cannabis except arrest of course and there are 6 cities owned by the same company that are interlinked on their websites. Here is the link- http://www.statesville.com/MGBCYIF25ED.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by afterburner on April 04, 2003 at 21:43:35 PT:
Become a Doctor: Run for Congress!
“Marijuana is a Schedule I narcotic,” said Kevin Sabet, senior speech writer for the Office of National Drug Control Policy. “That means it’s been designated by Congress as having no medicinal value.” 
Another way to become a doctor: get elected to Congress. I thought the only 2 ways were to go to medical school and do residency, or to become a police-person. ;)And to think that we actually waste good tax money paying Kevin Sabet, senior speech writer for the Office of National Drug Control Policy, a salary to call cannabis a "narcotic." That's about as medically sound as calling an aspirin a "birth-control pill"! I guess he thinks he's a doctor too, eventhough he wasn't even elected.ego destruction or ego transcendence, that is the question.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by FoM on April 04, 2003 at 20:39:45 PT
Virgil and Everyone
As I read these anti type articles I wish I knew what has gone wrong that people can't use reason in their thinking. Is it money or association with political people like John Walters that motivates them? We have boys dieing in Iraq fighting for freedom. What is freedom? We want freedom and it's only for a medicinal plant. Even the prohibitionist must know by now that Reefer Madness is not true. Freedom should be the right to pursue your own personal happiness and it should not be against the law. If you hurt no one by your actions except maybe yourself why is it against the law? I know they will say that it could upset your spouse. Maybe so but that should be between the couple and not the government.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Virgil on April 04, 2003 at 20:28:01 PT
Don't join the Prohib Cult
The medical marijuana provisions of Proposition 1 violate federal lawHere we have another Prohib Cult lie trying to recruit you to their subversion of liberty. These people can make their own laws or do away with all laws on cannabis. The Cult would have you believe these local laws are illegal by federal decree when it is the federal position that may well be unconstitutional because the federal government only has the rights given it in the words of the Constitution. You know, that document that starts with the three words, WE THE PEOPLE. This is a powerful cult whose mindless followers accept dogma that is laughable to an informed and reasonable person.This is just one of the lies of the Prohib Cult. Do not fall into their darkness or support their evil. They operate outside the Constitution and refuse to have the subject in public discussion and they intimidate those they want to control with their evil threats of arrest,fines and penalties prison, embarrassment, property confiscation.The Prohib Cult is totally evil. Avoid their lies and shun their beliefs. Seek the true reality and restore freedom to WETHEPEOPLE.Bill Moyers' program NOW was about the consolidation of the media. He used the issue of the consolidation itself as an example of how the corporate ineterest are interested in their own goals and not the public whose airwaves they want to control. I think he said 75% of the people were not aware of the consolidation issue that will be decided in June. He has asked for issues that are being excluded by the media and he says the letters are still coming in. Next week he will cover the issues that people have submitted. 
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment