cannabisnews.com: Pot Issue Brought To Senate by State 





Pot Issue Brought To Senate by State 
Posted by CN Staff on March 22, 2005 at 07:59:12 PT
By Sean Cockerham, Anchorage Daily News
Source: Anchorage Daily News 
Juneau, Alaska -- State officials, desperate to overturn Alaska court rulings that at-home pot is legal here, took their case to the Legislature on Monday. Assistant attorney general Dean Guaneli told the Senate Health and Social Services Committee that the state has hit a dead end in the courts. The Alaska Supreme Court has refused to hear arguments for criminalizing small amounts of pot, and the governor has made the issue a priority, he said.
"This is the only forum left for this subject," Guaneli told the legislators.The Senate committee Monday began hearings on Gov. Frank Murkowski's attempt to overrule the court ruling that adult Alaskans have the right to possess up to four ounces of marijuana for personal use in their homes."Alaska is unique in that it is the only state in which marijuana use by adults is legal" under state law, Guaneli said, adding that it is still illegal under federal law.The state Supreme Court in September let stand a lower court ruling that at-home adult possession of pot is protected under the strong right to privacy from government interference guaranteed in the Alaska Constitution.The governor's strategy is to introduce evidence at the legislative hearings about the harms of pot to create a "legislative record" of expert testimony. The state would then use that record and the Legislature's intent in passing the bill the next time a pot case went to court.Murkowski's hope is to get the courts to agree the state has an overriding interest in outlawing marijuana in spite of the constitutional protection. Snipped:Complete Article: http://www.freedomtoexhale.com/state.htmSource: Anchorage Daily News (AK)Author: Sean Cockerham, Anchorage Daily NewsPublished: March 22, 2005Copyright: 2005 The Anchorage Daily News Contact: letters adn.com Website: http://www.adn.com/ Related Articles & Web Site:Regulate Marijuana in Alaskahttp://regulatemarijuanainalaska.org/Two Groups Speak Out Against Marijuana Billhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20388.shtmlPot Measure Would Test Court Rulingshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20198.shtmlGovernor Moves To Change Pot Lawhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20151.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #31 posted by Hope on March 23, 2005 at 23:19:37 PT
Everyone should listen to that hearing.
It was kind of like watching a beautiful sunrise after a dark threatening night.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #30 posted by Hope on March 23, 2005 at 23:11:12 PT
Once again, Taylor, thank you for this....
"It takes all of us to rise above the falsehoods and have the light of truth, no, the illuminationg GLORY of the truth about cannabis shine right through every dark hole in this country. Every ear that the prohibitionist poison will be cleansed by our words, and we will not stop until it is legal for adults in every state in the union!"
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #29 posted by FoM on March 23, 2005 at 23:09:09 PT
A Comment About The Hearing
It was very hard to listen to all the propaganda at the beginning but then the truth started to surface in the testimonies. I hope others listen to it. I am very proud of all of the intelligent comments. Thank you good people for standing up against the Bill!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #28 posted by Hope on March 23, 2005 at 23:09:00 PT
Taylor, I honestly think you are right!
"I honestly think that our movement has reached a point where it just can't be squelched and victory is inevitable."
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #27 posted by Hope on March 23, 2005 at 23:07:01 PT
More testimony a week from this Friday!
Testimony from our side. I hope these hearings stay online. I want to listen to them again and again, the ones from our guys. They were so encouraging...so passionate...so right.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #26 posted by Taylor121 on March 23, 2005 at 22:56:50 PT
Thanks Hope
and you're right, if there is one thing our movement has behind it, it is passion. I think my little speech is just an example of the passion that we have behind our minority. I honestly think that our movement has reached a point where it just can't be squelched and victory is inevitable. The question is when. Hopefully soon.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #25 posted by Hope on March 23, 2005 at 22:49:08 PT
Taylor...Wonderful!
You are so right!I just love what you said, "It takes all of us to rise above the falsehoods and have the light of truth, no, the illuminationg GLORY of the truth about cannabis shine right through every dark hole in this country. Every ear that the prohibitionist poison will be cleansed by our words, and we will not stop until it is legal for adults in every state in the union!"
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #24 posted by Hope on March 23, 2005 at 22:43:42 PT
Something I notice from listening...
Most, if not all of the people against us have a note to their voice that indicates they are very, very mean spirited.Our guys sound good...and so passionate.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #23 posted by Taylor121 on March 23, 2005 at 22:41:42 PT
Logic is the answer to Professional Lying
If you just study your basic informal logical fallacies, it is amazing how far off these guys are from valid claims. It is sickening for me to listen to this since I do happen to study logic (and philosophy for that matter). They are professionals though Hope, it is their job and they are literally experts at data manupulation, making fallacy sound like truth, and spreading falsehoods across this great nation of ours. It takes all of us to rise above the falsehoods and have the light of truth, no, the illuminationg GLORY of the truth about cannabis shine right through every dark hole in this country. Every ear that the prohibitionist poison will be cleansed by our words, and we will not stop until it is legal for adults in every state in the union!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #22 posted by Hope on March 23, 2005 at 22:30:11 PT
Thankfully...
I can soon go to bed with the sound of reason,
intelligence, and compassion being the latest thing I hear from the media this morning. The Director of the Public Defenders Agency is the sanest speaker of the day, so far. Sadly, at the end, she was maligned by a senator. I don't understand why.Our side sounds great. I'm pleased. Except that none of these good words were reported in the press.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by Hope on March 23, 2005 at 22:12:00 PT
Finally!
A speaker that chooses not to lie and prevaricate!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #20 posted by Hope on March 23, 2005 at 22:09:28 PT
The arrogance of these guys is so irritating!
To think they think they should control every aspect of our lives and choices really irritates me. How dare they?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by Hope on March 23, 2005 at 21:44:38 PT
Oh boy...now he's done gone to lying outright!
No clinical data saying marijuana isn't as dangerous as he claims....that's just a lie...then he says..."not that I know of."One is rather an overbearing badass type and jumps in and rescues the floundering guy when he sees him going under. Abusing people and power is worse than "abusing" a plant.*sigh*If you don't have a good effect from marijuana...leave it alone...but these guys aren't saying that all this crap they are talking about is happening right now under prohibition and prohibition is ruining people's lives. They are saying prohibition is good! Now the senators are wishing the the overbearing badass guy would shut up.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by FoM on March 23, 2005 at 21:39:42 PT
I'm Still Listening Too
I haven't heard them talk about the consequences of getting caught with Cannabis in any amount. At the least it would be a bad experience putting a person outside the boundaries of law that are set by the government. The worst is possible jail, fines, forfeiture and the natural fear of authority that cannabis prohibition creates.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by Hope on March 23, 2005 at 21:33:17 PT
Right, FoM
They're articulate and their spiel has the sound of science to it...but listening closely...it's just their ideas and they love prohibition and their jobs. They ought to consider how harmful and dangerous prohibition is. Comparing the two...it's just hideous to continue marijuana prohibition. They sound good...if you don't know what they're talking about. As far as all that talk about Marijuana Anonymous, I was a member of Overeaters Anonymous, but I don't think food should be prohibited. From where the button is on the scale of how far into the hearings we are, and the antimarijuana people are still talking...it doesn't appear that there will be time for any speakers from the antiprohibition group.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by FoM on March 23, 2005 at 21:14:58 PT
Hope
It's crazy and it makes me really wonder if they can twist the truth about cannabis what other issues of importance to others are being twisted too?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by Hope on March 23, 2005 at 21:09:21 PT
FoM...thanks
I'm listening, too.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by FoM on March 23, 2005 at 20:57:14 PT
Thanks Hope
We have to buy the video but I am listening to the audio now. I hope this link works ok.http://www.ktoo.org/gavel/archive.cfm?audio=7619&request=AFDCD340139C084D085CFA4FC81F3998
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by Hope on March 23, 2005 at 20:51:02 PT
Alaska
No mention, even hidden in paper in other government stories, but...I did find video and audio of today's hearings. 
http://www.ktoo.org/gavel/schedule.cfmGo to: Senate Health, Education and Social Services Committee So far it's more testimony from the anti side...that didn't get to testify yesterday. (bunch of insinuations and wild eyed theories intended to provoke hysteria about the young people)
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by Hope on March 23, 2005 at 19:59:37 PT
John Tyler
I think you're right about the constitution and the need to ammend it if they want to change it. The odd thing about all this is that it seems to be about reading information into the record so that it can be used in the next cannabis case instead of making a law. It's unclear and a little wispy around the edges, it seems to me. Quoted from the article above: " The governor's strategy is to introduce evidence at the legislative hearings about the harms of pot to create a "legislative record" of expert testimony. The state would then use that record and the Legislature's intent in passing the bill the next time a pot case went to court.Murkowski's hope is to get the courts to agree the state has an overriding interest in outlawing marijuana in spite of the constitutional protection."It looks like they're trying to over ride the constitution or something. It's not clear to me at all what they are up to, except that it's "no good".
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by Hope on March 23, 2005 at 19:53:44 PT
Wolfgang ...about the UK review
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v05/n490/a08.html?397 
NZ Study Used in UK Drug ReviewExcerpt from article: The lead researcher in the Christchurch study, Professor David Fergusson, said the role of cannabis in psychosis was not sufficient on its own to guide legislation. "The result suggests heavy use can result in adverse side-effects," he said. "That can occur with ( heavy use of ) any substance. It can occur with milk." 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by John Tyler on March 23, 2005 at 19:46:25 PT
constitutional change
Correct me if I am wrong, but when I took high school civics I thought that the state legislature could not pass laws that went against the state’s constitution. It was considered unconstitutional and the state Supreme Court will rule so. To change things in the constitution an amendment was required not a regular law.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by WolfgangWylde on March 23, 2005 at 03:16:03 PT
At any rate, this is what they're aiming for...
UK: Cannabis Dangers Prompt Review Of 'Soft' LawTHE Government is to review its decision to downgrade cannabis after mounting scientific evidence that the drug could be more harmful than thought. Charles Clarke ordered the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs last night to review its conclusion that high cannabis use was not associated with health problems. The councils findings were the basis for a Home Office decision to downgrade cannabis from a Class B drug to Class C from January 2004, which meant that possession was no longer an arrestable offence. In a letter to Professor Sir Michael Rawlins, the council chairman, the Home Secretary noted that two recent studies had linked cannabis with increased mental health problems. One, by Professor Jim van Os, of Maastricht University, in 2004, concluded: Cannabis use moderately increases the risk of psychotic symptoms in young people but has a much stronger effect in those with . . . predisposition for psychosis. The study of 2,437 people aged between 14 and 24 found that half of those who were psychologically vulnerable and smoked cannabis developed psychotic symptoms over a four-year period. This was twice the rate among those who did not use cannabis. In his letter, Mr Clarke implies that the findings have emerged since cannabis was reclassified. The two studies that he refers to are new, but both authors have been publishing similar findings for several years. The second study is by Professor David Fergusson, of the University of Otago, who collected data over 25 years on a group of 1,055 people born in 1977. At the ages of 18, 21 and 25 they were questioned about their use of cannabis. He concluded that, even when all possible confounding factors were taken into account, there was a clear increase in rates of psychotic symptoms after the start of regular use, with daily users of cannabis having rates over 150 per cent those of non-users. In the journal Addiction, Professor Fergusson wrote: These findings add to a growing body of evidence from different sources, all of which suggest that heavy use of cannabis may lead to increased risk of psychotic symptoms. The advisory council has resisted pleas from the medical profession to reconsider its opinion in the light of such research. But Mr Clarke said that he could no longer ignore the evidence. He also asked the council to examine Dutch proposals for a higher classification of strong variants of cannabis, known as skunk. The Home Office said that the council would be expected to start a review at its meeting on May 19 and to report by early 2006. Mr Clarkes decision was broadly welcomed last night, although some commentators questioned the timing in the run-up to a general election.Professor Robin Murray, a consultant psychiatrist at the Institute of Psychiatry at Kings College London, said: Anybody who knows anything about this subject will be pleased. The councils original decision was based on research conducted in 2001, but there have been six studies since then showing a clear link between prolonged cannabis use and psychosis. The problem with the earlier report was that the council took evidence from psychiatrists who knew about addiction, but not psychiatrists, who know about psychosis. David Davis, the Shadow Home Secretary, described the review as a humiliating recognition of the failure of a central plank of Labours drugs policy. He added: The latest psychological evidence shows that cannabis is a serious threat to the health of young people and a gateway to harder drugs. But Brian Paddick, Deputy Assistant Commissioner of the Metroplitan Police, architect of the experiment that led to reclassification, was sceptical about giving stronger cannabis a higher classification. It would be difficult to ask operational police officers to make a decision on the street as to what sort of cannabis a person had on them, he said. 
 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by FoM on March 22, 2005 at 18:39:21 PT
Mayan
Thanks for the article!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by mayan on March 22, 2005 at 18:23:07 PT
scumbags
"This is the only forum left for this subject," Guaneli told the legislators.The only forum left where you can piss on the Alaska State Constitution! What scumbags.unrelated...Commentary: Tough love for medical marijuana
http://about.upi.com/products/perspectives/UPI-20050322-024344-2159R
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by Hope on March 22, 2005 at 17:33:45 PT
People from our side...the side of reason,
Will testify tomorrow.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by WolfgangWylde on March 22, 2005 at 17:19:44 PT
I wouldn't be surprised...
...if no one from our side is permitted to testify.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by Sukoi on March 22, 2005 at 14:56:14 PT
OT: This is interesting
WEBSITE ROUSES INFORMANTS' FEAR, INVESTIGATORS' IREhttp://www.mapinc.org/norml/v05/n479/a03.htmHere is the web site mentioned in the article:Who’s a Rathttp://www.whosarat.com/
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by FoM on March 22, 2005 at 12:17:36 PT
NORML: Bill To Recriminalize Marijuana in Alaska 
WHAT: Bill To Recriminalize Marijuana in Alaska To Receive Hearing Next Week!WHERE: Alaska Senate Health, Education, and Social Services Committee State CapitolWHEN: Monday, March 21, 2005 and Wednesday, March 23, 2005Next week, on March 21 and again on March 23, the Senate Health, Education, and Social Services Committee will hold hearings on Senate Bill 74, which would would make it a felony to possess marijuana in one's own home, despite the fact that Alaskan courts have twice ruled that marijuana possession in a person's home is protected by the state constitution. This bill was personally introduced by Governor Murkowski, and unless the Alaska Senate hears overwhelming opposition to the proposal from Alaska voters, it will likely pass into law.If you have not done so already, please take a moment today to write your Senator and tell him or her to oppose Senate Bill 74. Pre-written letters are available online from NORML at: http://capwiz.com/norml2/issues/alert/?alertid=6852266&type=STIn addition, if your Senator serves on the Health, Education, and Social Services Committee, it is vital that you call him or her TODAY to voice your opposition to this harmful and unconstitutional bill. The committee is expected to vote on this proposal immediately following the hearing.The following Senators serve on the Health, Education, and Social Services Committee:Senator Fred Dyson (R-AK I), Chair - (907) 465-2199 Senator Gary Wilken (R-AK E), Vice-Chair - (907) 465-3709 Senator Kim Elton (D-AK B) - (907) 465-4947 Senator Lyda N. Green (R-AK G) - (907) 465-6600 Senator Donald C. Olson (D-AK T) - (907) 465-3707To help support NORML's state legislative efforts, please donate today at: https://secure.norml.org/join/Thank you again for your support of NORML's legislative efforts in Alaska.Regards,Kris Krane, Associate Director NORML 
http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/20/thread20368.shtml#1
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Sam S on March 22, 2005 at 11:20:09 PT:
legislative record
If the "legislative record" could simply be filled with truthful evidence instead of "witch hunt" lies, it would be a no-brainer to keep private use legal. This is actually a good chance to introduce truth into the legal record. We'll keep our fingers crossed.Sam S
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by dongenero on March 22, 2005 at 08:34:30 PT
could be the final straw....
"The governor's strategy is to introduce evidence at the legislative hearings about the harms of pot to create a "legislative record" of expert testimony. The state would then use that record and the Legislature's intent in passing the bill the next time a pot case went to court."I think if this happened and the testimony presented is truthful(big IF, I know), it would be the final straw breaking the back of cannabis prohibition.
The lies would be revealed. Let's start with the IOM's 1999 study.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment