cannabisnews.com: On Marijuana, Let The States Decide
function share_this(num) {
tit=encodeURIComponent('On Marijuana, Let The States Decide');
url=encodeURIComponent('http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/24/thread24879.shtml');
site = new Array(5);
site[0]='http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u='+url+'&title='+tit;
site[1]='http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit.php?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
site[2]='http://digg.com/submit?topic=political_opinion&media=video&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
site[3]='http://reddit.com/submit?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
site[4]='http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&noui&jump=close&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
window.open(site[num],'sharer','toolbar=0,status=0,width=620,height=500');
return false;
}
On Marijuana, Let The States Decide
Posted by CN Staff on June 17, 2009 at 16:51:33 PT
Editorial
Source: Seattle Times
Seattle, WA -- In 2003, Seattle voters approved a ballot measure to make marijuana possession the lowest police priority. Seattle has lived with this rule for more than five years. It is not perfect, but it is a more tolerable rule than the city had before.We offer the rule to the nation. If "lowest police priority" seems like a muddled concept, it may be that in this case clarity is not a virtue.
It may be like the gays-in-the-military issue 15 years ago. In logic, "don't ask, don't tell" made no sense, but in practice it was more tolerable than what went before. The military had a chance to test it, knowing that by and by, those who wanted to go further would press their case, which they have.Marijuana is a different issue, and the ultimate answer is not so clear. Few want to publicly endorse marijuana. Then again, millions smoke it already. Their purchases feed vast criminal syndicates that our government spends billions to try and stamp out — an effort doomed to defeat by the forces of supply and demand.How to manage the problem? Some states have effectively decriminalized small amounts of marijuana. Others, including Washington, have permitted an approved supply for approved medical purposes.There is muddle in all this: What is an approved purpose? What is an approved supply? Who is the user supposed to get it from? Above all, how can any of this be done when it is against federal law?The answer to the last question comes from Attorney General Eric Holder: Growing medical marijuana is still illegal, but federal agents will not raid them.It is the right policy. The Obama administration should continue to stay back, and let the states, and cities like Seattle, discover what works.Note: On the issue of marijuana law, clear logic is not as important as what works.Source: Seattle Times (WA)Published: Wednesday, June 17, 2009Copyright: 2009 The Seattle Times CompanyContact: opinion seatimes.comWebsite: http://www.seattletimes.com/URL: http://drugsense.org/url/XSMGDV0fCannabisNews -- Cannabis Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/cannabis.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help
Comment #18 posted by rchandar on June 19, 2009 at 13:45:22 PT:
BGreen
I admit, too, they've got guts. The speech today by Khamenei was a puppet speech. I'm going to buck what the bloggers on MSNBC are saying and support, tentatively, revolution.(Though I honestly don't know. Obama is a wily character, he may accomplish through negotiation what protest doesn't).--rchandar
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #17 posted by rchandar on June 19, 2009 at 10:09:50 PT:
kapitanemo
Hmmm... what you're saying is true, though we should not let down our guard......when I was a kid, I would watch that movie, "Gandhi." What, being an Indian and all, I was very proud. The notion that one man, without an army or bullets, fighting the most powerful nation in the world, could demand--and get--freedom--very convincing. I still like the stature of such a man--God willing, Mousavi will rise to such a stature......er, let's face facts. Gandhi was supported, unconditionally, by the entire India. He knew that. Then, Hitler basically destroyed Britain's ability to maintain any kind of "empire." But that wasn't all--my father repeatedly points to this. The only reason India and Pakistan got their Independence was because Winston Churchill lost the election in 1945. Otherwise, Churchill was committed to keeping India--an enormous source of revenue.In context: We have to grow the movement, and not by lighting up. It's not a philosophical thing; it's a human/civil rights thing. A lot of good things have come out of the last 10 years: studies, science research, even media. The foremost thing which must be attacked--not simply through rock/pop music, but also through meetings where we can discuss the "culture war" that points at us--is the absolute supremacy of WoD on our daily lives. The notion that the society we created is infallible, which it isn't. The corporate standards that determine appearance, ideation, friendship, love--these must all change, too. It's not a matter of being united, but of changing the face of our culture, which unfortunately is still basically borrowed from the days of Ronald and Nancy Reagan.We, the "children of Ronnie," demand change.from the movie: "No, please! I want to change their minds, not kill them for weaknesses we all possess."--rchandar
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #16 posted by kaptinemo on June 19, 2009 at 06:41:28 PT:
Steamrollers don't care.
The time has come. The bills are due. Uncle Sam is flat busted broke. In truth, he has been for some time, it's just getting harder to hide now. He needs revenue, and badly. Re-legalizing and taxing cannabis would be a revenue net gain instead of the continual revenue loss that is the DrugWar. It literally is a no-brainer; you'd have to be devoid of one not to see it.Of course, professional prohibs certainly tend to act as if they were missing some gray matter, but the truth is many see the pitfall directly ahead of them and are doing their level best to dig their heels in. It's why we're in the 3rd stage of the Gandhi Progression ("First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, they they fight you, then you win"). They are fighting us, and they aren't doing too well at it. Too many years of having it easy have made them like a prizefighter who's gotten soft and fat, whereas we've been forced to be lean and mean, thanks to them. It's no contest when all they can come back to are stale old talking points and outright lies, shrieked with ever rising volume at a populace that is getting demonstrably bored with it all, and more than just a little annoyed, now that a gigantic steamroller is heading their way, in the form of the ever-contracting economy.It's too late now; prohibs can argue with a reformer and ignore their inescapable iron-clad logic, but that steamroller has no brakes, they were broken off long ago, and it's bearing down on the prohibs with inexorable slowness. It doesn't care if they ignore it; it'll crush them, anyway. And that's what will happen. And they've only themselves to blame...
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #15 posted by FoM on June 18, 2009 at 05:31:15 PT
BGreen
For me to watch CNN it takes a series like they are having on marijuana. When it comes to watching any news channel it is only MSNBC. I never and I mean never watch Fox. I actually wish it didn't come with the DirecTV package we get.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #14 posted by FoM on June 18, 2009 at 04:49:16 PT
Paint with light
I agree with you what caused the failure of marijuana reform back in the 70s. To this very day I will only stand up for marijuana because I don't want to lose again. If we don't study history and learn from it we could very well repeat it and I don't want that to happen again.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #13 posted by FoM on June 18, 2009 at 04:29:20 PT
Dr. Gupta on AC360
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oFWnjkV7zI
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #12 posted by BGreen on June 18, 2009 at 00:33:41 PT
Seriously re: Iran
I just can't help but thinking if the supporters of not-Bush would have had the guts to stand up in 2000 to protest a stolen election, we could have avoided war, terror, torture and the near economic destruction of the world.Even if we would have grown a pair and stood up in 2004 against an election stolen by a rouge regime and headed by a dictator, we could have spared the world a lot of pain and suffering.Our movement has heard the cry of "they can't arrest us all if we join together," but the protesters in Iran have proven the validity of this message.I'm impressed and humbled (and just a little ashamed.)The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #11 posted by BGreen on June 18, 2009 at 00:02:07 PT
You're right, Paint With Light
Now, if only I could have the same hairline. LOLThe Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #10 posted by Paint with light on June 17, 2009 at 22:47:06 PT
sudden realization
While I was making my last post I realized an unusual parralel between now and the 70's when a lot of us thought cannabis would be legalized.Iran.I have often thought it was the taking of the hostages by the students in Iran combined with the Rolling Stone Party incident fall-out that changed Carter from the proponent to the opponent.It somehow seems strange that on AC360 the stories of legal cannabis and Iranian turmoil once again share the airwaves.Legal like alcohol, or tomatoes.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #9 posted by Paint with light on June 17, 2009 at 22:32:07 PT
Would anyone have believed?
I did feel the "addiction factor" was not explained quite well enough, but over all I was surprised and pleased by Dr. Gupta's remarks.If I had said as recent as four months ago that a legislative body would collectively vote ~166-3 to allow dispensaries on the east coast, and that Dr Gupta would treat cannabis fairly on CNN, I can imagine the negative responces.I am glad for everyone here and everywhere that things are changing at the present pace.Even at this pace it is easy for those of us here(including me) to say, one minute longer is too long.So many lives have been lost, shortened, and shattered by this senseless prohibition.I don't see the positive movement slowing down, but I don't want to feel too confident right now.In 1971 I was handing out and leaving in public places ~4 X 11 sheets of paper that had in large print "Free Marijuana".These came from NORML and had in finer print a promotion for NORML and an invitation to get involved and help support NORML.I still have a few in my prohibition collection.At that time I thought cannabis would be legal by 1976.I was wrong.I hope I am not wrong this time.Maybe by the end of the year, if things keep up at this pace, we can all at least celebrate the end of the most productive and progressive year our movement has seen in a long long time.Pop a cork on a bong.Legal like alcohol.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #8 posted by HempWorld on June 17, 2009 at 21:28:41 PT
Gupta
did change his tune, to my, and many others on this forum's surprise.Except that Gupta, had a frown, maybe he thought this could be the end of his career at CNN.I hope not!
On a mission from God with Sanjay!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #7 posted by BGreen on June 17, 2009 at 21:28:33 PT
OK, this mistake isn't my fault
I'm seeing references to the Gupta op-ed as being from 2006, but the byline on the time website says: Why I Would Vote No On PotBy Sanjay Gupta Thursday, Jan. 08, 2009No matter when he wrote it, he wrote it none the less.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #6 posted by BGreen on June 17, 2009 at 21:18:48 PT
What????
I didn't see this video of Dr. Gupta.You mean the same Dr. who wrote the op-ed for Time magazine on Jan. 8, 2009 entitled "Why I Would Vote No On Pot" has changed his tune?Is that possible?I'm shocked.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #5 posted by charmed quark on June 17, 2009 at 21:03:34 PT
Gupta
Shocking - a totally accurate review of the current scientific knowledge.Even discussed neuropathic pain.And titration and vaporization!The only thing I felt he left out was the safety of cannabis compared to existing treatments.I never expected such an accurate discussion. I'm in shock.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #4 posted by FoM on June 17, 2009 at 20:16:18 PT
RevRayGreen
He basically said that cannabis is easier to control the amount needed better by smoking or vaporizing then by a Marinol pill. That's not exactly what he said but that's what he meant.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #3 posted by RevRayGreen on June 17, 2009 at 20:07:23 PT
Yes, I am in shock
Gupta knows the healing benefits. If Multiple Sclerosis medicine/patients are something he specializes in......he can't deny someone sick. I wish he endorsed more oral ingestion cooked in food along with vaporizors.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #2 posted by FoM on June 17, 2009 at 19:59:34 PT
Dr. Sanjay Gupta
I cannot believe how well informed Dr. Gupta was this time. I really can't. I never expected him to be that fair. The times they are a changin.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #1 posted by HempWorld on June 17, 2009 at 19:44:47 PT
Great Anderson Pooper, you did it ...
The bottom line, as was mentioned on CNN by Anderson's reporter after his interview with Paul Stanford, my good friend, "legalized recreational drug"That's it folks now watch Sanjay rip it to shreds ...
Legalize It!
[ Post Comment ]
Post Comment