cannabisnews.com: Judge Asked To OK Late Pot Petitions Judge Asked To OK Late Pot Petitions Posted by CN Staff on June 25, 2004 at 10:40:24 PT By Matt Pordum, Las Vegas Sun Source: Las Vegas Sun A group trying to put an initiative on the Nov. 2 ballot to legalize possession of up to 1 ounce of marijuana has asked a judge to determine whether the Clark County registrar is "disenfranchising voters" by not accepting 6,000 signatures after the deadline.District Judge Kenneth Cory was to hear the matter today, but according to Larry Lomax, Clark County registrar of voters, unless Cory changes the law there is nothing that can be done. Lomax said under the law he could not accept the 6,000 signatures that the committee overlooked and forgot to turn in by the June 15 deadline.Lomax said the law specifically requires all pages of a state petition to be turned in on the same day, and that day cannot be any later then the third Tuesday of June, which this year was June 15.Lomax said he explained the legalities to Billy Rogers, president of The Southwest Group, the political consulting firm seeking to qualify the petitions."Nothing gives me the authority to accept these 6,000 signatures," Lomax said. "On Friday night I explained to Billy (Rogers) the box of signatures couldn't be accepted. The law tells us what to do, and the judge will have to overrule the law to change this."Rogers, however, says a very simple remedy to the situation exists -- accepting the 6,000 signatures."Ultimately what this comes down to is you have registered voters who signed the petition with the expectation their signature would count, and if a remedy exists in the raw count stage or the verification stage, these signatures should count."Rogers said it took him personally two hours to count the box of 6,000 signatures that never made it to the registrar's office, and believes it would only take 30 minutes for four people to count them. He doesn't feel 30 minutes is a burden, when not counting them equates to disenfranchising registered voters.How the box of 6,000 signatures never made it to the registrar's office is a mystery to Rogers. He said all of the signatures were kept under lock and key in his office until June 14 when they were moved to a counting room. Rogers said five people bundled the petitions into groups of 25, and those bundles were placed in boxes.Rogers said 40,990 signatures from Clark County were turned in for verification on June 15. Upon walking into his office on Saturday, however, he said he was shocked to see a box sitting in his chair. Rogers opened the box to find signed petitions."We don't know if it was a mistake or if it was the result of malicious intent," Rogers said. "All we know is the box shows up on Saturday and I don't have any idea who put the box there. I would say whoever put it there didn't tell me because they made a gross error and didn't want to fess up to it or it was an act of malice."Rogers believes if the signatures were counted one by one in Clark County the issue of the 6,000 signatures that weren't turned in wouldn't be a problem, but in Clark County a random certification method is employed.Rogers said 1,600 signatures are selected from the minimum of 31,360 signatures required and verified accordingly.As of Thursday a raw count determined the committee had enough signatures in 14 counties, but they would still have to be verified.Source: Las Vegas Sun (NV)Author: Matt Pordum, Las Vegas SunPublished: June 25, 2004Copyright: 2004 Las Vegas Sun Inc.Contact: letters lasvegassun.comWebsite: http://www.lasvegassun.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Marijuana Policy Projecthttp://www.mpp.org/Hearing on Missing Marijuana Petition Signatures http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19062.shtmlForgotten Box of Pot Petition Signatures Foundhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19056.shtmlMJ Initiative Backers Forgot 6,000 Signatures http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19055.shtmlLegalization of Marijuana: Initiative in Jeopardyhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19052.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #33 posted by gloovins on July 01, 2004 at 02:35:38 PT here is what you want I think, FoM NEVADA REVISED STATUES (NRS) Pertaing to alcohol:NRS 202.020 Purchase, consumption or possession of alcoholic beverage by minor. 1. Any person under 21 years of age who purchases any alcoholic beverage or any such person who consumes any alcoholic beverage in any saloon, resort or premises where spirituous, malt or fermented liquors or wines are sold is guilty of a misdemeanor. 2. Any person under 21 years of age who, for any reason, possesses any alcoholic beverage in public is guilty of a misdemeanor. 3. This section does not preclude a local governmental entity from enacting by ordinance an additional or broader restriction. 4. For the purposes of this section, possession “in public” includes possession: (a) On any street or highway; (b) In any place open to the public; and (c) In any private business establishment which is in effect open to the public. 5. The term does not include: (a) Possession for an established religious purpose; (b) Possession in the presence of the person’s parent, spouse or legal guardian who is 21 years of age or older; (c) Possession in accordance with a prescription issued by a person statutorily authorized to issue prescriptions; (d) Possession in private clubs or private establishments; or (e) The selling, handling, serving or transporting of alcoholic beverages by a person in the course of his lawful employment by a licensed manufacturer, wholesaler or retailer of alcoholic beverages. [1:272:1947; 1943 NCL § 10594.02]—(NRS A 1967, 482; 1987, 482) NRS 202.030 Minor loitering in place where alcoholic beverages sold. Any person under 21 years of age who shall loiter or remain on the premises of any saloon where spirituous, malt or fermented liquors or wines are sold shall be punished by a fine of not more than $500. Nothing in this section shall apply to: 1. Establishments wherein spirituous, malt or fermented liquors or wines are served only in conjunction with regular meals and where dining tables or booths are provided separate from the bar; or 2. Any grocery store or drugstore where spirituous, malt or fermented liquors or wines are not sold by the drink for consumption on the premises. [1:99:1949; A 1955, 144]—(NRS A 1967, 482) NRS 202.040 False representation by minor to obtain intoxicating liquor. Every minor who shall falsely represent himself to be 21 years of age in order to obtain any intoxicating liquor shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. [Part 1911 C&P § 241; A 1925, 212; NCL § 10188] NRS 202.055 Sale or furnishing of alcoholic beverage to minor; aiding minor to purchase or procure alcoholic beverage; policy to prevent minor from obtaining alcoholic beverage through use of Internet. 1. Every person who knowingly: (a) Sells, gives or otherwise furnishes an alcoholic beverage to any person under 21 years of age; (b) Leaves or deposits any alcoholic beverage in any place with the intent that it will be procured by any person under 21 years of age; or (c) Furnishes, gives, or causes to be given any money or thing of value to any person under 21 years of age with the knowledge that the money or thing of value is to be used by the person under 21 years of age to purchase or procure any alcoholic beverage,Êis guilty of a misdemeanor. 2. Paragraph (a) of subsection 1 does not apply to a parent, guardian or physician of the person under 21 years of age. 3. Every person who sells, gives or otherwise furnishes alcoholic beverages through the use of the Internet shall adopt a policy to prevent a person under 21 years of age from obtaining an alcoholic beverage from the person through the use of the Internet. The policy must include, without limitation, a method for ensuring that the person who delivers the alcoholic beverages obtains the signature of a person who is over the age of 21 years when delivering the beverages and that the packaging or wrapping of the alcoholic beverages when they are shipped is clearly marked with words that describe the alcoholic beverages. A person who fails to adopt a policy pursuant to this subsection is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine of not more than $500. (Added to NRS by 1967, 482; A 1969, 22; 1987, 482; 2001, 2788) So yeah, if you read it, a minor can posses it for religious purposes, or even just in the a private residence or in the presence of a parent or guardian 21 yrs old....sounds pretty damn lax CONSIDERING ALCOHOL KILLS!!(Also noticed you can't serve 80+ proof alcohol there in Nevada -- gee, way to look after your citizens there) [ Post Comment ] Comment #32 posted by FoM on June 26, 2004 at 13:20:39 PT I Found This I was trying to find what the penalties are for selling alcohol to a minor and this link helped me. It's way more lenient then what is in the Nevada Initiative and yet alcohol is really a dangerous drug and cannabis never killed anyone. Aspirin can't boast that either!http://www.thelaw.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=6301#post6301 [ Post Comment ] Comment #31 posted by OverwhelmSam on June 26, 2004 at 06:13:00 PT This Is A Good First Step True, there are harsh penalties set out in this initiative to ensure passage. It's a good first step because at least adults will have legal access to marijuana, and be held responsible for their conduct if they provide marijuana to a minor or drive while under the influence. I'm certain that these penalties will be relaxed as time goes on, and adults learn to conduct themselves responsibly when it comes to marijuana usage.Of course, there's always the few brainless creed who will screw it up for everyone else, and need to be taught a lesson. [ Post Comment ] Comment #30 posted by cloud7 on June 25, 2004 at 22:38:39 PT Some news to warm our souls http://www.mapinc.org/ccnews/v04/n909/a05.html [ Post Comment ] Comment #29 posted by FoM on June 25, 2004 at 22:21:00 PT Michael Moore We really want to see the movie and hope it will make it to a closer city. If it doesn't I hope to see it even if it is a distance to drive. I will buy it when it is released on DVD for sure. ekim, Thank you. You are so kind. [ Post Comment ] Comment #28 posted by BGreen on June 25, 2004 at 22:11:58 PT Springfield Sold Out All Showings of F' 9/11 for tonight and was well on the way to selling out for tomorrow, too. I've got my tickets already for this weekend.Remember that a certain attorney general is from Springfield, and it's dangerous to have so many enemies in your own hometown.It's true that Moore may be preaching to the choir, but sometimes even the choir has to get fired up to get out of bed on Sunday morning.The Reverend Bud Green [ Post Comment ] Comment #27 posted by FoM on June 25, 2004 at 21:55:49 PT Michael Moore is on Conan Right Now! It's really good! [ Post Comment ] Comment #26 posted by ekim on June 25, 2004 at 21:49:06 PT ok Michael make the movie Fom thanks for all you are doing. I believe in what is happing here on this screen. Good going to all that live here.I wish that if All the Billy Rogers can hear us, please let us know. Like the great Carl said "billions and billions" man Billy the people here have brain stormed on NV. a Card Deck with the names and faces of those in the Drug War. one on logos and Hemp History exhibit right in Vegas showing Medical breakthroughs and modern Hemp plastic and auto parts and clothing and fabrics along with latest in wholesome foods made from Hemp. With hundred of thousands of conventioneers from all over the World it would be a great opportunity besides educating NV voters as jobs take center stage.Virg thanks for remembering Bill Buckley Jr i am looking at my 1996 copy that Mr Buckley sent me as i had written him regarding a person that was raked over the coals on a possession charge. I feel good in side to think he took time to write me. Dr Szasz was right on back then with the crusaders touch on demonizing.Kapt do you think that model can be written that would fit most States.E did you see that Diane and Orin want Fed mandtory for gang arrests. There is much suffering thank you for calling on humans to be human. http://www.minorml.org [ Post Comment ] Comment #25 posted by Virgil on June 25, 2004 at 21:35:58 PT 'Fahrenheit 9/11' and Cannabis Prohibition On the front page of ProjectCensored.org they list 3 webistes. One is for MoveOn.org and one is for LipMagazine.org. The last one under website of the week has been up some time with the other two. It is for http://www.globalissues.org/. ProjectCensored says Global Issues “looks into global issues that affect everyone and aims to show how most issues are interrelated.” We have CP and the Iraq War/occupation because people are so asleep.DU tonight is flooded with reports by people that took to sold out theaters across the country to tell of the tears and laughs from everyone in a strange unison and the applause that broke out at the end of the movie. One theater took to opening up another screen one reel behind the original showing.It is clear the Moore’s film will be #1 for the weekend. I am interested in seeing if the movie and its aftershock can move the elections in Canada away from the Liberals and Conservatives that have the task of preserving corporate power. The NDP is now at 21%, which shows some awakening by the people in Canada. A bump to 22% would be great for anyone that wants normalization concerning cannabis and normalization means Free Cannabis For Everyone. There will be another test to see if the Crown will pursue a cannabis case concerning a post Oct. 7, 2003 court ruling this Wednesday.But to connect Michael Moore’s film, I would ask people to read the piece tiltled “ Thank You, Michael Moore” by the editor of Truthout, William Rivers Pitt. This movie will help end CP because it has an effect on the Great Awakening we need to end this dreadful crime against humanity known as cannabis prohibition. Let me say that there was a little of Eric Clapton’s “Cocaine” in the movie to draw on its use by Bu$h. I hope you read the whole article at http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/0625041.shtml because it builds to this last paragraph speaking of an awakening - Michael Moore has unleashed a wolf within Mr. Bush's fences. There is no getting around it. Perhaps, now that it is far too late, we as a nation will wake up. On the day of that awakening, those of us who never stopped standing, never stopped marching, learned to live without sleep, learned to live in a nation that scorned truth for televised fantasy, those patriots I was with tonight in that theater can pause for breath. We can sit upon the grass on a bright day, strip our sleeves, and show our scars. [ Post Comment ] Comment #24 posted by FoM on June 25, 2004 at 19:51:32 PT mayan I really don't know who Billy Rogers is. I know he was involved in the other Initiative in Nevada. I wonder why this happened. I still believe that in the end we will win not because of Initiatives but by Judges ruling in our favor. So far it has been that way it seems. Initiatives are good but winning in a court situation seems to have a powerful impact. There again that's just me thinking out loud.You're welcome about the National Review article. [ Post Comment ] Comment #23 posted by mayan on June 25, 2004 at 18:05:21 PT Billy Rogers I really like Billy Rogers but it is hard to feel any sympathy for him right now. It may or may not have been his fault but I am pretty pissed, regardless. He was in charge. Right before the last failed Nevada initiative I heard him interviewed on 'Coast to Coast' with Art Bell. It was a brilliant show as he is a very eloquent speaker! I know he has worked very hard for our cause and can only hope that this foul-up can,in some way, be redeemed.Thanks, FoM & Virgil, for the info on the upcoming 'National Review'! Can't wait to get it!The way out is the way in...Sibel Edmonds sues Ashcroft again for actions tied to 9/11 evidence: http://tomflocco.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=66 THE PART OF THE 9/11 STORY MICHAEL MOORE MISSED! http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/whatmichaelmooremissed.htmlDude, there's more to the story: http://www.911skeptics.blogspot.com/Ticket buyers turn out en masse for ‘Fahrenheit’: http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2004/June/25/local/stories/03local.htm [ Post Comment ] Comment #22 posted by Virgil on June 25, 2004 at 16:25:36 PT Comment3 The National Review of July 12 will have a marijuana leaf on the cover and slam CP for the failure and fraud it is. The National Review is the flagship of the Conservative cause, not to be confused with the fundamentalist that dominate the Republican Party. This is huge as the true Conservative is hugely mad at Bush for running up the deficit with no end in sight. The National Review is the work of Bill Buckley who I believe to be one of Yale's Skull and Bones members. He was a good friend of Reagan and Reagan offered him the job of ambassador to South Africa. Here is a link to there opening shot at the drug war with a piece of February 12, 1996 titled "The War on Drugs is Lost"- http://www.nationalreview.com/12feb96/drug.html [ Post Comment ] Comment #21 posted by gloovins on June 25, 2004 at 13:47:25 PT The NV initiative Okay, my take on the upcoming possible ballot question is this: Last time they lost by 11% and they gleaned from that there is suffiecent support for this IF the initiative gets tough on those who supply to minors and drive dangerously under the influence -- then many of the anti's ammunition against it, the old, tired "What about our kids??" and "What about dangerous driving under the influence of the demon weed?!" have their wind taken from their sails, see?The proponents just wanted to take away the antis BS campaign retorts, see?Personally, I have no problem with it. It's just going to make the vendor of the legal cannabis be REAL tight on how old positivly their patrons are. Simple as that. 1-10 years in the pokey is enough incentive. Now, you could make the argument that alcohol does not have this same penalty I'm sure there in the land of Vegas & FREE drinks (if your gambling). Just fyi, you cannot "give away free" alcohol in the Detroit casinos. Michigan law prohibits it, prob a liability issue -- but Nevada should know one thing:Alcohol killsCannabis heals.So why make it 1-10 yrs for supplying to a minor but serving liquid toxins that kill DAILY is lesser offence? MMM I smell a drunken legislator, personally....just my gloovy little take.Pass the initiative, Nevada -- its 2004 & time [ Post Comment ] Comment #20 posted by kaptinemo on June 25, 2004 at 13:25:34 PT: "Appeasement for prohibitionists", indeed. VitaminT has voiced what I've been noticing for some time. Namely, the presence of 'poison pills' such as the proposed punishments in this Nevada bill and in most of the legislation proposed regarding anything approaching normalization of cannabis laws. Most of these seem derived from some prohibs' desk.From the late and unlamented Canuck C-10 bill to most of the legislation proposed here in the States, you find this pattern happening again and again: bills being 'injected' with 'viruses' that only serve to make the legislation a diseased hollow mockery of the original intent. The introduction of these punitive 'viruses' can serve only one purpose, and often does. Namely, the eventual dissolution of the bill as it is objected to (quite rightly) from our camp and civil liberties allies. All too often, these 'viruses' have 'signatures' that point back to the camp of the antis, for they are the only ones so feverishly, monomaniacally obsessed with punishment, as it IS their literal 'bread & butter'. They just *have* to get their kicks in, somehow. [ Post Comment ] Comment #19 posted by FoM on June 25, 2004 at 13:13:28 PT I Am Frustrated That's the way I feel today. This mess up has me almost depressed. I don't like politics because no one ever wins or is 100 percent right. I see things from how I want the world to be. That is my weakness. I am idealistic but being realistic is the way I should look at it all. [ Post Comment ] Comment #18 posted by Agog on June 25, 2004 at 12:57:43 PT Cooler Heads & Fact Finding Hi All,Interesting thread of comments. Kap is definitely right that there are critical pieces of information missing here.Like..How did the box with the signatures just "show up" after the deadline? two explanations, deliberate intent, or serious negligence + embarassment/fear... hopefully it was the latter.Regarding the weaknesses of the proposed initiative. It isn't perfect, but have you ever seen a perfect piece of legislation? They are crafted with the intent of creating a broad base of appeal (majority votes) Granted, this is a direct citizen initiative rather than two house legislation, but the goal first and foremost is passage. At least if it is on the books there is a baseline which can be modified/amended as time and circumstances dictate.Agog [ Post Comment ] Comment #17 posted by FoM on June 25, 2004 at 12:38:10 PT EJ I Totally Understand I couldn't agree more with you more. [ Post Comment ] Comment #16 posted by E_Johnson on June 25, 2004 at 12:17:53 PT FoM this is how I feel about kids and drugs I knew a lot of addicts in high school and every one of them came from a really bad home or had a mental illness like severe depression that was not being diagnosed or treated.I think the fear of kids doing drugs is really an excuse and a cover up for the disastrous state of parenting in America.Diane Sawyer did a hidden camera show by agreement with a mother with "troubled children" and the hidden camera showed that this supposedly victimized innocent mother was really a domineering monster who alternately neglected and microcontrolled her boys, never showed them normal approval or affection, and verbally abused them and threatened them with abandonment.The camera showed that what the viewers first believed was a brave single mother valiantly struggling to help her two troubled boys was in reality a vindictive mentally disturbed woman driving her two children insane by constant bullying and withholding of affection and approval.I never knew a kid in high school who became a drug addict who did not have something like that or something else as bad waiting for him or her at home FoM.We have to change the dialog.Of course we don't WANT kids to do drugs.But focusing on the drugs as the real problem is wrong.As proof that this paradigm is wrong, I offer the fact that so far, it hasn't worked at all. [ Post Comment ] Comment #15 posted by VitaminT on June 25, 2004 at 12:13:05 PT Richard Paul Zuckerm If someone who is 18 y.o. sells a joint to his friend who is 17-1/2 y.o. then he would face 1-10 years in prison and life in prison if he does it twice.IMO that's WAY too harsh! The average convicted rapist does 6 years. The average convicted murderer does 11 years.I'm for legal pot and strong penalties for selling to minors but the law should allow for consideration of the actual circumstances of each case, and NOT just lock 'em up and throw away the key. This reads like an appeasement for prohibitionists [ Post Comment ] Comment #14 posted by FoM on June 25, 2004 at 12:01:55 PT Richard Paul Zuckerm I don't know really. Maybe I'm reading it wrong. Maybe it is ok. [ Post Comment ] Comment #13 posted by Richard Paul Zuckerm on June 25, 2004 at 11:56:34 PT: WHAT'S THE PROBLEM, FoM? IT IS FOR ADULTS, ONLY! If the posting by ubas is correct, then the Cannabis Initiative is restricted to adults. What is the problem, then, FoM? Do you expect the age restriction threshhold to start at 35 years old? [ Post Comment ] Comment #12 posted by kaptinemo on June 25, 2004 at 11:54:59 PT: Cooler heads needed here Folks, I am in no more possession of all the facts than anyone else reading the latest from Nevada. But before we go pointing fingers, might it be more productive to find out how this happened? A large chunk of the story is missing. [ Post Comment ] Comment #11 posted by FoM on June 25, 2004 at 11:51:06 PT Agog Thanks. I was only in Nevada once so I know very little about it except you can gamble there. [ Post Comment ] Comment #10 posted by Agog on June 25, 2004 at 11:47:42 PT FOM - Importance of Nevada Hi FOM,Our neighbor Nevada is important for a couple of reasons:1. They have a strong history of independence/states rights2. Along with that history is a "frontier" mentality, distrust of "The Feds" and pretty much a live and let live credo, evidenced by legalized gambling / prostitution. Neither of which have caused the sky to fall just yet. In fact Las Vegas is still exploding in terms of population, building etc.3. Outside of Las Vegas and Reno the state is damn near deserted. The state legislature is still very parochial, and small and it doesn't take a long time to pretty much get to know the power base. Translated: One or two skilled individuals can actually make a meaningful change.Of the lower 48, it probably offers the greatest combination of factors conducive to a change of this magnitude.Those are my best guesses. HTHAgog [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by FoM on June 25, 2004 at 11:45:48 PT Richard Paul Zuckerm ubas just posted what I am worried about. I don't want children to do drugs. When I look at how young lives could be wrecked I step back and can't agree only because it might benefit adults. Youthful indiscretions could destroy some young lives and my conscience just stops me because it worries me so. [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by medicinal toker on June 25, 2004 at 11:36:03 PT Rogers needs to accept responsibility! What ever haoppened to personal responsibility? There will always be an asterisk after this one, win or lose. Why should MPP get special treatment? No one but Rogers is to blame for this. No gremlin hid the petitions until the date had past. This is embaerassing, especially from a group that prides itself on its supposed professionalism and rejecting the counterculture aspects of cannabis. The illusion of professionalism is gone now.Rather than pointing fingers, Rogers should accept the responsibility for screwing up. This reflects poorly on all cannabis activists. [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by Richard Paul Zuckerm on June 25, 2004 at 11:30:29 PT: ARE KIDS PROHIBITED UNDER THIS INITIATIVE? I can't believe there is no age limit for the Cannabis legalization Initiative! Are you sure, FoM? [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by ubas on June 25, 2004 at 11:26:35 PT NV Init Text The legislature shall: (a) Establish penalties for the possession or use of marijuana by a person who has not attained the age of 21 years.(b) Establish penalties for a person who does not own or work at an establishment that is licensed to sell marijuana if the person is convicted of distributing or selling marijuana....(d) Establish a penalty of one to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000 for a person who has attained the age of 18 years who does not own or work at an establishment that is licensed to sell marijuana if the person is convicted of a first offense of distributing or selling marijuana to a minor, and a maximum penalty of life in prison for a second or subsequent offense of distributing or selling marijuana to a minor. [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by FoM on June 25, 2004 at 11:20:44 PT Richard Paul Zuckerm The only reason I oppose the Initiative is because what could happen to kids. If one young person over 18 sells a little pot to someone under 18 they could go to jail for a long time. [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by Richard Paul Zuckerm on June 25, 2004 at 11:16:47 PT: Why do you oppose the initiative, FoM? Are you a Republican or Democrat? I suppose you approve of the Rockefeller Group and Rothschilds causing wars, imposing upon Americans their pharmaceuticals as if we Americans are expermimental labe rats? Huh, FoM?And would you prefer the United States Central Intelligence Agency continue laundering over $600 Billion of drug money thru Wall Street, every year, with impunity, tax free, in violation of the federal drug laws, while Americans suffer increasing intrustions on freedom?If you would not prefer legalization of Marihuana in Nevada, then what would be your preference, more Cannabis laws, FoM? Who are you, FoM? [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by FoM on June 25, 2004 at 11:13:35 PT A Special Note from Ethan Nadelmann A Special Note from Ethan Nadelmann about Ending Marijuana Prohibition in the United StatesDear Fellow Reformer,The upcoming issue of National Review, America’s leading conservative magazine, features a cover story by me on ending marijuana prohibition in this country. It directly engages the principal arguments made by marijuana prohibitionists, analyzes growing public support for decriminalization and legalization, and suggests the process by which marijuana prohibition may ultimately end.It's been quite some time since a major American publication put this issue and perspective on its cover. I am particularly delighted that it is a leading conservative magazine since so many people believe that it will take a "Nixon goes to China" sort of political leadership to ultimately end marijuana prohibition in the United States.Please look for and read my cover story, "An End to Marijuana Prohibition," in the July 12 issue of National Review.PS: It’s the issue with the big marijuana leaf on the cover. [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by FoM on June 25, 2004 at 10:50:56 PT A Question I always have wondered why Nevada is such an important state as far as reforming Cannabis laws that they would try another Initiative. Does anyone know why Nevada is so important? [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by FoM on June 25, 2004 at 10:46:45 PT Just a Comment Even though I really am not for the new Nevada Initiative I respect those who think it is wise but I am so embarassed for all of us. That's what has me so upset. [ Post Comment ] Post Comment