Legalize Marijuana |
Posted by CN Staff on March 19, 2006 at 08:16:57 PT By Richard Smith Source: Student Operated Press Florida -- In 1937, the United States passed the Marihuana Tax Act and banned recreational and medical use of cannabis. In the 69 years since, it has become the most widely used illegal narcotic in the western world. I guess the plan backfired. Since that time, numerous studies have been conducted based on the idea of this sort of plant prohibition. We will look at three. In 1995, based on thirty years of scientific research, editors of the British medical journal Lancet concluded, "the smoking of cannabis, even long term, is not harmful to health." The Americans found the same thing in 1972 when the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse released a report titled "Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding," and concluded that marijuana prohibition is "Philosophically Inappropriate", "Constitutionally Suspect", and "Functionally Inappropriate." Years before that, in 1944, the La Guardia Committee Report, commissioned by New York City Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia to investigate the effects of marijuana, found that the popular claims about the negative effects of marijuana were wildly exaggerated. These studies are important to know about when looking at the DEA’s argument for the keeping Mary Jane illegal. The organization claims on its website “Illegal drugs are illegal because they are harmful” and “Most non violent drug users get treatment, not jail time”. We know from the aforementioned British study that the first statement holds no water, and to debunk the second statement let us look at the laws for simple possession in one of our states. In Arizona possession of a small amount, less than 2 lbs will land you six months to a year and a half in jail. That does not sound like treatment. President Bush has claimed that today’s marijuana is much more potent than the stuff him and his Yale buddies smoked back in the sixties. Hmm, a former coke addict making complaints about the strength of our pot being too high. It seems the hypocrisy in this nation knows no bounds. The cold fact for any anti-marijuana argument is simple. Marijuana kills zero people every year. How can something be dangerous, much too dangerous to allow into the hands of the public, yet has not once killed anyone? We are, ironically, allowed guns. An overdose of this supposedly dangerous drug is “generally no more than that associated with mild to moderate exercise” according to Medical Admissions Criteria. You would be worse off after running a mile than after smoking too much marijuana. There is still, however, a light amongst all this darkness. Alaska has become the first state to decriminalize marijuana and Denver Colorado has become the first city to allow a law to be passed that treats the plant in the exact same respect as alcohol. Nevada will vote in 2006 on the complete legalization as well. It is only a matter of time before this situation of prohibition must be addressed by those in power. Things are drastically changing and more and more people are learning the truth. Were knocking on the door right now and before the decade is out we will be smoking in the living room. In the end, we will win. We will be free to smoke our joints and puff our bongs without fear of retribution by the authorities. Truth will win out over propaganda and the good people of this earth will finally be free again. Source: Student Operated Press (FL) CannabisNews -- Cannabis Archives Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
Comment #10 posted by ekim on March 19, 2006 at 09:58:00 PT |
the host was asked about hemp seed and how to eat them.
the hose went into a long story about being in italy and how many of the linnen like things have been made from hemp-bed spreads and table cloths, the host went on to say that hemp seeds can be used like any nut dish and she commented that she is seeing a huge increase in hemp use in food that is going on all over. [ Post Comment ] |
Comment #9 posted by FoM on March 19, 2006 at 09:55:51 PT |
http://news.search.yahoo.com/search/news?p=war+protest&fr=&c=news_photos [ Post Comment ] |
Comment #8 posted by FoM on March 19, 2006 at 09:54:20 PT |
Max Flowers that picture gives me hope. These young people seeing thru it all are our future. Bless their hearts. [ Post Comment ] |
Comment #7 posted by whig on March 19, 2006 at 09:54:04 PT |
Of course, John Yoo is at Berkeley. http://www.law.berkeley.edu/faculty/yooj/ Consistent with the Yoo Doctrine, Yoo acknowledged during a December 2005 debate at Notre Dame University with professor Doug Cassel that no treaty prevents the President from authorizing the torture of a detainee's child -- including by "crushing the testicles" of the child. When asked whether any law prevents it, Yoo replied that it would depend on why the President was authorizing it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Yoo [ Post Comment ] |
Comment #6 posted by Max Flowers on March 19, 2006 at 09:47:48 PT |
God, that is a beautiful sight (the photo in the link below with students turning their backs on Gonzales). It brought tears to my eyes instantly and gave me a shot of hope. Those college girls have more balls than basically every male member of congress! I wish I could kiss every one of them. They're true patriots. Gonzales is a traitor and a large part of the cancer on this nation. [ Post Comment ] |
Comment #5 posted by jose melendez on March 19, 2006 at 09:21:17 PT |
from: http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/gonzales.htm Future American lawyers to be proud of... [U.S. Attorney General] Alberto Gonzales spoke before law students at Georgetown Law School today [2006-03-07], attempting to justify illegal, unauthorized surveillance of US citizens, but during the course of his speech the students in class did something pretty ballsy and brave. They got up from their seats and turned their backs to him. To make matters worse for Gonzales, additional students came into the room, wearing black cowls and carrying a simple banner, written on a sheet. Fortunately for him, it was a brief speech ... followed by a panel discussion which basically ripped his argument in half. And, as one of the people on the panel said: When you're a law student, they tell you that if you can't argue the law, argue the facts. They also tell you if you can't argue the facts, argue the law. If you can't argue either, apparently, the solution is to go on a public relations offensive and make it a political issue... to say over and over again "it's lawful", and to think that the American people will somehow come to believe this if we say it often enough. In light of this, I'm proud of the very civil civil disobedience that was shown here today. [ Post Comment ] |
Comment #4 posted by jose melendez on March 19, 2006 at 09:17:19 PT |
from: World Food Summit: Five Years Later Remarks by Antonio Maria Costa Executive Director, UN ODCCP, Vienna Under-Secretary General Rome, 11 June, 2002 http://www.unodc.org/unodc/speech_2002-06-11_1.html The situation in Central Asia today is another important example. Today’s Afghanistan illustrates the extent to which the lack of economic alternatives, is forcing local people to resort to drugs cultivation. We all know that over time Afghanistan has become the source of 70% of the world’s production of opium: an illegal activity, fought quite forcefully by the new Interim Administration (AIA). Why such heavy dependence on illicit crops in Afghanistan? For several reasons. Because of the lack of seeds, equipment and irrigation facilities, and because of lack of export markets for licit crops. Furthermore, during more than two decades of war, despair and destruction, practically the only money available to Afghan farmers has come from drug traffickers. They have provided the credit needed before the planting season, repaid with opium after the harvest. In Afghanistan, the lack of credit can be remedied rapidly: indeed, we are now working hard at developing innovative micro-banking facilities. - - - from: http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles9/Edwards_Iraq-Qaeda-Lie.htm Nicholas Kristof notes in (the) New York Times that “the big winner” of US security strategy in Afghanistan “was the Taliban, which is now mounting a resurgence”. In the two years since the war, opium production in the demolished country has soared 19-fold and become the major source of the world's heroin. Antonio Maria Costa, executive director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, writes in a “grim new report” on Afghanistan: "There is a palpable risk that Afghanistan will again turn into a failed state, this time in the hands of drug cartels and narco-terrorists." (Nicholas D. Kristof, ‘A Scary Afghan Road’, The New York Times, November 15, 2003) - - - compare to: Cole explained that he reversed his personal feelings on the war on drugs in 1973. His new stance on drug use came after about nine years on the New Jersey State Police department, three of which were spent as an undercover narcotics investigator. Cole did not retire, however, until after spending 26 years with the New Jersey State Police. "I had an epiphany," said Cole. "I found that I liked the people I was working on better than those I was working for. They seemed less likely to turn their backs on me." http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v06/n329/a08.html [ Post Comment ] |
Comment #3 posted by ekim on March 19, 2006 at 08:39:27 PT |
Mar 19 06 BBC Worldwide “Have Your Say: Can The War on Drugs Be Won?" 09:00 AM Jack Cole Medford Massachusetts USA
This is sure to be a lively and informative discussion between Law Enforcement Against Prohibition Executive Director, Jack Cole, and Mr. Antonio Marie Costa, Executive Director of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime. To get involved in the discussion before and during the show, go to the BBC website at: http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=1261&start=0&&&edition=2&ttl=20060309175453. The show is broadcast to 65 countries. Be sure to check for the air time in your time zone.
[ Post Comment ] |
Comment #2 posted by Graehstone on March 19, 2006 at 08:39:26 PT |
... "Free at last, free at last, thank God Almighty, free at last!" [ Post Comment ] |
Comment #1 posted by FoM on March 19, 2006 at 08:39:26 PT |
I looked up the bio of this young writer. He is 28 years old with a 7 year old son and lives in Colorado. This is the generation that will do the foot work like people did in the 60s. Young people like him, not politically motivated, are the Indigo Children to me. [ Post Comment ] |
Post Comment | |