cannabisnews.com: Pot Clubs










  Pot Clubs

Posted by CN Staff on March 19, 2005 at 11:45:15 PT
Editorial 
Source: Press Democrat 

In 1996, voters, who believed they would be helping people most in need, passed Proposition 215. Under strict guidelines, it was anticipated, a physician would prescribe medical marijuana to people suffering from cancer, AIDS or other serious illnesses, and the prescription would be filled at a designated dispensary.
When the state Legislature failed its responsibility to provide clear direction for police and planning agencies, all those good intentions went up in smoke.These days, people with a variety of ills are able to secure marijuana using a variety of criteria at a variety of office-front pot clubs that won't be confused with the Mayo Clinic. It has become a subculture all its own.In Santa Rosa, unhappy neighbors in the Luther Burbank Gardens neighborhood describe happenings that sound more akin to a '60s head shop - loud music, customers urinating in the bushes, pot being re-sold on the street, streams of young people coming and going.In Ukiah, neighbors complain of the smell of ripening marijuana, leading to a proposed city ordinance that would mandate indoor growing. Meanwhile, the owner of a pot club was arrested for allegedly selling marijuana for profit.A news story about neighbors' complaints in Santa Rosa this week served as a wake-up call to the City Council, surprised to learn that a pot club - one of three in the city - is doing business across the street from City Hall.On the way to adopting its own ordinance, the council wants a report in 60 days on what other cities are doing to regulate pot clubs.What's plain is that California needs Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state Legislature to come forward with a coherent system which regulates how marijuana is bought and sold, eliminates the current abuses and guarantees that the truly sick receive the help they need.The current free-for-all can only mean more neighborhood disasters until voters decide that Proposition 215 has been hijacked by folks who care a lot more about legalizing marijuana than about helping the sick.Note: What began as effort to help sick people has lost its way.Source: Press Democrat, The (CA)Published: Saturday, March 19, 2005Copyright: 2005 The Press DemocratContact: letters pressdemo.comWebsite: http://www.pressdemo.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Medical Marijuana Information Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/medical.htmCouncil Should Let Supreme Court Decide http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20331.shtmlResolve Issues on Medical Pothttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20329.shtml

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help





Comment #18 posted by FoM on March 21, 2005 at 11:27:47 PT
Related News Brief from The Associated Press
March 21, 2005PASADENA, Calif. (AP) - Police and planners don't want medical marijuana dispensaries, so-called "cannabis clubs," in the city, saying they breed crime and degrade neighborhoods.The City Council this week will consider a temporary ban on the pot dispensaries, clubs and cooperatives until there are state or federal regulations for medical marijuana sales.Police and city planners cited a report from Rocklin police Chief Mark Siemens, who compiled a list of complaints from four cities where pot clubs exist. The report said they attract an "underground culture" of street criminals, drug dealers and "dopers."A dispensary in Hayward sold hashish, another in Roseville let people smoke pot inside the facility and a shoe store in Oakland saw business drop when a club opened next door, Siemens said. Additionally, the report noted, Upper Lake residents complained "the people coming to Upper Lake for marijuana look like drug users.""Currently, the state has almost no controls on how (medical marijuana) is dispensed, who can operate dispensaries, or where they can be located," Pasadena planning director Richard Bruckner said.California voters passed Proposition 215 in 1996, giving doctors the right to prescribe marijuana for certain chronic ailments. Five years later, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled distribution of medical marijuana was illegal.State lawmakers responded with legislation reasserting a patient's right to use the drug by necessity, and this was followed by another Supreme Court case, still pending, that will test whether the federal government can prosecute patients with a prescription.Copyright: 2005 Associated Presshttp://www.sanluisobispo.com/mld/sanluisobispo/news/politics/11193726.htm
[ Post Comment ]

 


Comment #17 posted by FoM on March 19, 2005 at 21:02:23 PT

Here's A Related Article I Have To Snip
Pot Clinics Just Keep Growing Third dispensary planned for same street in S.F.'s Ingleside districtBy Matier & RossMatier & RossSunday, March 20, 2005 
 In San Francisco, the legalized dope business is booming all over town. Among the latest crop of "medical marijuana" dispensaries popping up: -- The Happy Days Herbal Relief Center -- which is run by a former crack addict and ex-con. -- The Holistic Center, which is set to have its grand opening this week on the ground floor of a city-backed welfare hotel that houses a number of recovering drug addicts. -- And a new pot club planned for 1945 Ocean Ave. out in the working-class Ingleside -- just across the street from a competing dope dispensary. It's the third pot club on the street -- all within four blocks of each other. And many of the neighbors aren't happy. Snipped:http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/03/20/MANDR.TMP
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #16 posted by cannaman on March 19, 2005 at 20:21:45 PT

skewed opinion
The author has a biased and extremely simplistic viewpoint also obviously negatively slanted story which only tells a part of the truth and hides the fact that doctors see patients be young or old and if they meet the criteria can obtain cannabis legally for their "serious illness". This guy makes its sound like a person with a broken toenail can go get a prescription for cannabis which simply isnt true. As far as it "becoming a subculture" I would tend to agree we tend to think on a planetary scale, vegetarians alot of us, environmentally aware, health conscious, and natural. He makes this sound like a bad thing that is the art of spin ladies and gentlemen. The writer of that article is pretty good at it. A free for all and 60's head shop I bet he wouldn't know a 60's head shop if he walked into one hopped up on a cappucino or half calf double mocha latte with a cigarette offending everyone around him not to mention his loud cell phone conversation that disturbs the peace of all mankind. Yeah I know his type alright. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #15 posted by Hope on March 19, 2005 at 20:13:44 PT

Taylor
It's disturbing to me that a roll call vote was just skipped over on 254. They voted on the one before and the one after...but just sailed past that one without a vote. What was that about? Another thing Chairman Keel said, that I found odd, was when the Transportaion person said she wanted to do more study on that Occupational License ammendment that she hadn't been aware of, Chairman Keel basically, said that it wasn't necessary. Why not? It was painful to watch anyway and I just couldn't keep watching the thing forever to try and see if anything about skipping the roll call vote was ever mentioned.Not even voting...that can't be good. Do you have any idea if this is customary or what is going on? 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #14 posted by Taylor121 on March 19, 2005 at 17:57:27 PT

Very Impressed
I was very impressed with Austin NORML's Director Judie Niskala's testimony. Well done.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #13 posted by global_warming on March 19, 2005 at 17:53:58 PT

re:comment 21
"It is a huge step forward because the Law Enforcement didn't actually take a stand against it"...I know they will say and argue,. that "we were asleep", those damn liberlels just sneaked under our noses, them foreign and traitorous bastards, they support the insurgents and terrorists of this planet, they will fill the bandwidth with stories that will make you cry, those poor broken hearted mothers, who have lost their children to the demons of addiction, but they will never profess how the current system has evolved to prohibit old people, yes senior citizens, from shopping the market, they will never talk about how all of our senior citizens, are being held captive, yes, captive in a hostile world, where some of us older people who are trying to save a few bucks, look to find the best shopping, and somehow, these experts, who stand up in front of the news camera, can stand up and say that these new laws are for the peoples best interest.The only interest that I see, is the injustice of our profit driven system, that holds old and sickly people captive for money.May you rotten and greedy bastards rot in hell for eternity, for there is a new law, and some simple carpenter had the guts to stand up and say that "1Pe 3:8 Finally, be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another, love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous: When this dust settles, it will be the good hearted human beings that will survive, and these people I will come forward to embrace and lend my hand to re-building this world.peacegw
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #12 posted by Taylor121 on March 19, 2005 at 17:11:59 PT

Hope
It is a huge step forward because the Law Enforcement didn't actually take a stand against it, unlike 2003. So I think that alone speaks wonders. I'm watching the video right now from the hearing and I like what I'm hearing. Assuming the committee votes, I sincerely believe this is going to go to the House floor.http://www.house.state.tx.us/fx/av/committee79/50315p09.ram
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #11 posted by Hope on March 19, 2005 at 16:37:15 PT

Thank you, Taylor
I wondered how it could have passed out of committee with no one voting. What I read said something to effect of "no opposition" and a bunch of law enforcement and prosecutors being there and not saying anything against the bill. Guess they didn't have to. Their just being there probably spoke volumes.Marijuana prohibition is a big money maker for Law Enforcement. It's important to their budgets to keep it demonized. They don't care who or what it hurts...as long as it isn't their budgets.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #10 posted by Toker00 on March 19, 2005 at 16:35:19 PT

It's kinda odd, GW
Cigarittes are legal, they kill hundreds of thousands of people a year, they make Multi-millions in profit for the Elite who don't care about the death rates: the Medical Equipment and Supply Korpses profit, Doctors profit, Lawyers profit, Pharmacuetical Korpses profit, Packaging Korpses profit, Black Market profits (I would imagine only to a small degree), Retail stores profit, and so forth. Maybe if Cannabis killed or sickened, the Elite would consider legalizing, because as it stands, only the Kriminal Justice system and the Black Market profit. Maybe Cannabis just wouldn't make enough profits for enough of the Elite. Not enough COLATERAL DAMAGE.Peace. Legalize, then Revolutionize!  
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #9 posted by FoM on March 19, 2005 at 16:26:54 PT

Hey Taylor
Good to have you back. We're here and still hoping for good things!
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #8 posted by Taylor121 on March 19, 2005 at 16:14:35 PT

Back from Out of Town, HB 254 still alive I see
I'm back from out of town. Glad to see HB 254 is still alive, but I think some of the former comments were misleading. The bill is still pending in committee. They have not voted it out of committee yet. Amendments were made that would require a drug treatment class and a drivers license suspension. No surprise here.The bill is still a huge step forward, and ppppppthe amendments do not take us a step back. Currently you already get your drivers license suspended for possession if they find it in the car. So this is no different and really just comes from Federal blackmail. The bill would be great if it passed. Don't let up on the pressure!http://capwiz.com/norml2/issues/alert/?alertid=6847791&type=SThttp://www.mpp.org/TX/action.htmlTexans, follow the links above and send your letters in. If you have already, spread the links to someone else that hasn't sent one yet!
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #7 posted by global_warming on March 19, 2005 at 15:34:48 PT

I Can't See because that $ is blocking my view
Friday, March 18, 2005Major credit card companies will no longer allow the purchase of cigarettes over the InternetBy Michael Gormley / Associated Press WriterALBANY, N.Y. -- Major credit card companies will no longer handle Internet sales of cigarettes under a nationwide agreement announced Thursday.The move is aimed at illegal dealers that are trying to avoid sales taxes or sell to underage customers.The thriving trade of Internet tobacco undercuts local businesses that sell cigarettes and often avoids sales tax for states and cities, allowing smokers to buy cigarettes considerably cheaper online.The agreement among virtually all credit card companies, state officials from around the country, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is effective immediately."The way the system works now, tobacco can get into the hands of minors," said Bob Cooper, spokesman for the Idaho attorney general's office. "And these sales are depriving the states of revenue."Smokers would still be able to buy cigarettes over the Internet, but they would not be allowed to use their credit cards, including Visa, MasterCard, American Express and Discover. Instead, they would have to use checks, money orders or some other payment system that would probably hold up delivery.The long-unchecked practice of buying cigarettes and chewing tobacco over the Internet across state lines is illegal in New York and many other states, but enforcement has been difficult.The ATF estimated that millions of dollars from illegal cigarette sales are diverted each year to terrorists and criminal organizations. And states lose more than $1 billion a year in tax revenue from Internet tobacco sales, said Sheree Mixell, ATF spokeswoman."We welcome the help," said Michael Bouchard, the bureau's assistant director for field operations.The negotiations were led by the attorneys general from New York, California and Oregon, and joined by those from Colorado, Idaho, Louisiana, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Vermont and Wisconsin.------ On the Net: ATF: http://www.atf.gov New York attorney general: http://www.oag.state.ny.us
Major credit card companies will no longer allow the purchase of cigarettes over
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #6 posted by mayan on March 19, 2005 at 13:47:17 PT

Patrick
What's plain is that California needs Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state Legislature to come forward with a coherent system which regulates how marijuana is bought and sold, eliminates the current abuses and guarantees that the truly sick receive the help they need.You're right, Patrick. The only solution is to end prohibition.THE WAY OUT IS THE WAY IN...Autopsy: No Arabs on Flight 77:
http://www.sierratimes.com/03/07/02/article_tro.htmNo Arabs on Flight 77: Part II -The Passengers:
http://www.sierratimes.com/03/07/07/article_tro_flight77.htm9/11 Truth LA:
http://www.911truthla.us/9/11 Was an Inside Job - A Call to All True Patriots:
http://www.911sharethetruth.com/
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #5 posted by FoM on March 19, 2005 at 13:40:31 PT

Patrick
It doesn't make sense to me because I don't think like a politician or the government. This issue is slowly coming to a boiling point. The games the government plays with the citizens of the USA are becoming very obvious. We will see and know soon where we are headed. It isn't over til the fat lady sings. We're still waiting.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #4 posted by Patrick on March 19, 2005 at 13:31:53 PT

FoM
None of it makes sense. The medical history of cannabis goes back thousands of years. What doesn’t make sense is how some racist succeeded in making cannabis illegal over 70 years ago and still to this day millions of lives are subjected to criminal prosecution and persecution for using a plant that provides known and well documented relief without the side effect of overdose?I voted for Prop 215 because I wanted people that needed cannabis to stay alive have a way to obtain it without being thrown in jail. I knew full well Prop 215 was not a license for me or anyone else to use cannabis recreationally. That is another story all together. Basically, my understanding is that if you allow someone to do something that is the meaning of that something being legal? Likewise doesn’t telling people you can’t do it make it illegal? The Feds said no cannabis period and the State voted yes to medical cannabis. And now it’s before the Supreme Court in Raich vs Ashcroft. What will happen next?But for the author to claim that Prop 215 is being hijacked, smells to me of an under lying bent towards prohibiting cannabis yet again. So no it just doesn’t make any sense at all. When it comes to cannabis the facts have never mattered to politicians. Facts take a back seat to the belief that cannabis must remain illegal at all costs. That’s what doesn’t make any sense to me. It's just wrong.

[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #3 posted by FoM on March 19, 2005 at 13:16:05 PT

California Laws from NORML
http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?wtm_view=&Group_ID=4525
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #2 posted by FoM on March 19, 2005 at 13:02:27 PT

Patrick
I can't be sure because I wasn't involved in Prop 215. I didn't have a computer until late in 96. I think it was to make medical marijuana available for sick people and allow them not to be prosecuted but it wasn't legalization because a state law isn't the same as federal law and it's illegal under federal law. Does this make sense?
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #1 posted by Patrick on March 19, 2005 at 12:52:41 PT

What's plain?
Is the faulty logic at the end of this editorial? The writer says that the Governor should come forward come forward with a coherent system which regulates how marijuana is bought and sold, eliminates the current abuses and guarantees that the truly sick receive the help they need.TRANSLATION: The author wants to make it legal!Then, in the next breath, criticizes the effort to help the sick as having “lost its way” further missing the point completely by saying “Proposition 215 has been hijacked by folks who care a lot more about legalizing marijuana than about helping the sick.” Correct me if I am wrong but wasn’t Prop 215 a step towards making cannabis legal so that we can truly help the sick instead of subjecting them to arrest?

[ Post Comment ]






  Post Comment