cannabisnews.com: Alaskans Can End Wrong, Ineffective Marijuana Ban





Alaskans Can End Wrong, Ineffective Marijuana Ban
Posted by FoM on October 27, 2000 at 19:35:12 PT
Commentary By Jennifer Rudinger 
Source: Anchorage Daily News
Millions of Americans who are highly productive and stable secretly choose marijuana over martinis, saying that marijuana is less toxic to their bodies than alcohol. But while the government classifies both substances as drugs, mysteriously one is legal while the other is not. The scientific evidence does not justify this distinction. The National Academy of Sciences has concluded that marijuana is one of the least dangerous drugs, legal or otherwise. More than a dozen commissions in the U.S. and other countries have found that its dangers have been exaggerated and that moderate use is rarely harmful. 
On the other hand, alcohol is a leading cause of disease, violence and accidents. So why has the U.S. government arrested millions of adults who prefer marijuana? Shouldn't adults have the right to choose marijuana over martinis? As with alcohol, the best way to control any harmful effects of marijuana is with a detailed set of regulations. For example, just as it is (and should be) illegal for an individual to drive a car under the influence of alcohol, so too it is (and should be) illegal for an individual to drive a car under the influence of marijuana or any other psychoactive drug. However, the use of blanket criminal prohibitions for adults is profoundly wrong in principle and generally ineffective in practice. Blanket criminal prohibition is profoundly wrong in principle because the government has no business using its police powers to punish adults for what they decide to do with their own minds and bodies. On the most basic level, the state has no legitimate power to send people to prison for eating too much red meat, even if an excess of red meat demonstrably leads to premature heart attacks and strokes. The police power of the state is legitimately used to prevent one citizen from injuring another, and to punish him if he does; it is illegitimately used to prevent adults from managing their own bodies and minds, or to punish them when they do. The principle here articulated is not a recently invented one. To the contrary, it is America's obsession with criminalization that is relatively recent. This approach began in 1914 when Congress passed the Harrison Act, soon followed by hundreds of federal and state laws imposing criminal penalties for possession, sale and purchase of a wide variety of substances -- including alcohol. The stated purposes of such laws were to make drugs less available, to interdict supplies and to deter commercial transactions. But the laws of prohibition accomplished none of these purposes. Alcohol prohibition was abandoned as a failure almost 70 years ago. However, criminal prohibition of other drugs continued, and with the passage of the federal Marijuana Stamp Act in 1937, marijuana became prohibited as well. Alaska's own history of marijuana prohibition is rather schizophrenic. In 1975, the Alaska Supreme Court found in Ravin v. State that Alaskans' constitutional right to privacy protects the possession of small quantities of marijuana for personal, private use by adults in their homes. However, in 1990, Alaskans recriminalized marijuana for any use whatsoever, leaving law enforcement officers at a loss to reconcile this new state prohibition with the constitutional right to privacy still protected under Ravin. Most recently, in 1998, Alaskan voters reconsidered this blanket prohibition, became informed about the benefits of marijuana for patients with certain debilitating illnesses, and approved a ballot measure allowing for the regulated medicinal use of marijuana. But today, chronically ill Alaskans continue to suffer because state law still prohibits them from obtaining marijuana for medicinal use. In approving medicinal use of marijuana two years ago, Alaskans exercised common sense and compassion. That same common sense and compassion dictate that people should not be made criminals simply for choosing marijuana over martinis. If Ballot Measure 5 passes, the Legislature will adopt reasonable regulations implementing the new law in a way that protects public safety while also protecting the rights of adults to choose marijuana over more harmful substances like alcohol. It's time to regulate and tax marijuana the same way we regulate and tax alcohol. Please get the facts, get informed and vote YES on Ballot Measure 5. Jennifer Rudinger is executive director of the Alaska Civil Liberties Union Anchorage. Letters To The Editor:Pot Excuses Easy To Imagine: I don't think hemp is an evil thing. It probably could be used as a resourceful alternative to many types of fabrics and materials. However, I am still going to vote no on Proposition 5. Why? Because I am already tired of listening to cigarette smokers whine and complain about the after-effects of something they decided to do to themselves. I can hear it already . . . "but I didn't know inhaling marijuana smoke was dangerous to my health; I had no idea there would be side effects!" "Honest, officer, I didn't think I was too stoned to drive my car on these icy roads." "I just use it every now and then, I didn't think little Johnny knew where I kept it or that he would become addicted to it." Come on people, stop the stupid excuses before they happen, vote against legalizing dopes in Alaska. -- Jason Long Anchorage Pot Articles Miss Key Law Issue: The articles "Alaska's top crop" (Oct. 15) and "Details cloud debates for, against Prop. 5" (Oct. 16) failed to mention an important aspect pertaining to our current debate over the legalization status of marijuana in Alaska. ADN reporters S.J. Komarnitsky and Liz Ruskin both attempted to delineate a chronology of events regarding the convoluted history of marijuana legalization in Alaska. Unfortunately, and in my opinion, irresponsibly, neither reported the fact that the 1990 recriminalization law was specifically deemed unconstitutional in a Superior Court in 1993 (State vs. McNeil). McNeil's possession conviction was reversed because the 1990 initiative was "inadequate to overrule" the 1975 Alaska Supreme Court decision in Ravin vs. State. Our Supreme Court has not reversed Ravin, and the basis of their decision, the privacy clause of Alaska's constitution, has never been amended or deleted. In addition to reminding readers that state prosecutors accepted the court's opinion (while never ceasing enforcement of the unconstitutional prohibition), the reporters should have asked authorities how they justify an estimated enforcement expense of $6 million last year alone in light of the McNeil case. While reporters apparently don't think our courts have any bearing, readers should wonder why they pay so much money to prohibit behavior our courts deem lawful. -- H. Thompson Prentzel III Fairbanks Imperfect Solution Beats None: The Daily News comes out against legalizing hemp/marijuana ("Proposition 5," Oct. 18). All sides say the initiative is "imperfect." So what? Some would say the Civil War was an "imperfect" solution to slavery. Would we still be waiting for relief from injustice if the Daily News was in charge? If we were in some backwards state, would the Daily News keep homosexuals in prison waiting for a perfect solution? We just sent another $1.3 billion in drug war money to Columbia so those people could continue killing each other on our behalf. That's what I call imperfect. It's a slippery slope from disapproving of someone's use of marijuana to putting that person in prison when they don't do what you want them to do. Most of these people have hurt no one and are political prisoners of the drug war. Hemp/marijuana should be relegalized as it was prior to the temperance movement that gave us that other peculiar notion, prohibition. Your editorial asks, "If drug felonies can be quashed by initiative, why not other crimes?" I hope so. Any victimless crime or injustice should be "quashed" by whatever means possible; or is the Daily News suggesting that the ignorant citizens will take leave of their senses and let murderers out of prison to run wild in the streets? -- John Recktenwald Anchorage Pot More Dangerous Than Ever: Marijuana is not the most dangerous drug in the world. That's why Alaska statutes list it as a Schedule VIA drug as opposed to heroin, a Schedule IA, or cocaine, a Schedule IIA. Our lawmakers wisely took this into account when they wrote the laws, and the penalties also reflect this. Marijuana's potency, however, has been genetically increased so that the percent of THC, its active ingredient, has grown in the past generation from 1-2 percent to 30-40 percent. Marijuana now has more THC than refined marijuana, or hashish, a Schedule IIIA drug, had when the laws were written. Pot users store excess fat-soluble THC in their brains and reproductive organs, the two fattiest portions of the human body. Although it won't kill outright, marijuana is a mind-altering drug, responsible for much death and destruction. This occurs by impairing one's driving ability and decision-making toward social behavior or the law. Furthermore, users go to great lengths to get their substance of choice. Don't be concerned about harsh criminal penalties for simply smoking pot -- they don't exist. Only the most deserving repeat commercial marijuana dealers spend time in prison. Instead, worry about our state when all our kids think it's OK to smoke this poison and thousands of new druggies migrate to Alaska. -- Tony Hawk Willow Letters To The Editor: Anchorage Daily Newshttp://www.adn.com/letters/0,2654,,00.htmlSource: Anchorage Daily News (AK)Author: Jennifer RudingerPublished: October 27, 2000Copyright: 2000 The Anchorage Daily News Contact: letters adn.com Website: http://www.adn.com/ Related Articles & Web Sites:Free Hemp in AlaskaAl Anders, Chair2603 Spenard RoadAnchorage, Alaska 99503 (907) 278-HEMP E-mail: freehempinak gci.netVisit their web site: http://www.freehempinak.orgHemp 2000R.L. Marcy, ChairP.O. Box 90055Anchorage, AK 99509907-376-2232 (p)Fax: 907-376-0530 (f)E-mail: marcy hemp2000.orgVisit their web site: http://www.hemp2000.org Hemp At The Root of Radio Ad Battlehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread7467.shtmlPot Helps With Epilepsy http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread7459.shtmlHemp Backers Can't Move Mayorhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread7455.shtml
END SNIP -->
Snipped
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #9 posted by mungojelly on October 31, 2000 at 04:29:36 PT:
Hah! Of course!
Thank you Mr. Prentzel! Of course the 1990 prohibition was again ruled unconstitutional. I had never thought to question this assertion by the antis that a supreme court judgement of constitutional law had been overruled by an act of a congress. We really do have to assume that everything the antis say is a lie. The fact that no one contradicts what they say is not an indication that they are speaking truth, but only that they have succeeded in silencing their critics. 
mungojelly
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #8 posted by Mr Larry on October 29, 2000 at 23:22:16 PT
garys' toes
 I wonder if Gary would start to rethink his call to behead drug offenders after he saw one of his own kids heads get lopped off. If Garys' suggestions were carried to their logical conclusion,then Gary would probably lose his own head in the new "War on Idiots". I think Gary might be better off without his head
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #7 posted by freedom fighter on October 29, 2000 at 16:45:00 PT
strange postings   ADN part 4
garyIn Response To readerE-Mail: xyz yahoo.comSunday October 29, 2000 at 14:18 I wish I am an illusionist when Will Foster of Okla. went to prison for 93 years for growing 50 plants. He sold none. There is a man in Al. who is serving life sentence because he brought a pound from a narc. There is a man serving life sentence somewhere in U.S. because they found a seed in his car and he had three strikes! And finally, not too long ago, a 65 old man in your state is serving 60ish years in your state because he contribute to your TOP CROP of the state. I wish I am an illusionist and am able to make it go away. Agreeing with your dictionary, 100 million folks said that this law is no longer a crime. Unless, you are willing to pull a rabbit out of a hat and start putting 100 mill in prisons. readerIn Response To garyE-Mail: mlapinskas mailcity.comSunday October 29, 2000 at 11:37 Definition of criminal= adj. pertaining to or committing a crime Noun..a person guilty of committing a crime. (from The New American Webster Handy College Dictionary.) To address another part of your post possesion of small amounts of marijuana is a Class B misdemeanor...up to 1/2 pound of marijuana is an A misdemeanor. So your idea of sending a person to PRISON for smoking is a lot of smoke and mirrors. People that wind up in prison are most likely sentanced for a crime that has punishment of jail over one year thus a FELONY. Felony with marijuana is achieved by sales, delivery, or possession within 500 ft. of a school. So try to be a bit more accurate. People are not sent to prison for smoking a joint. Why would the justice system waste time on a joint. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #6 posted by freedom fighter on October 29, 2000 at 12:54:18 PT
FoM
Can please you switch the postings I made so it will read part 1, 2, 3. I posted it because these postings might be removed from that site. Thanks FoM! 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #5 posted by freedom fighter on October 29, 2000 at 12:47:02 PT
Strange postings part 3
J. A. GatesIn Response To Gary, Karla & Amaroq,E-Mail: zjohngates hotmail.comSunday October 29, 2000 at 2:07 Gary, I truly think as long as drugs are around that there will be violence from it weather legal or not. If you break the law you’re a criminal. Being a criminal doesn’t make you a bad person. I believe you have good people that do this as rebellion or just to escape. I do have a problem with teaching kids not to respect the law. This is my view. Karla, did you look up the web site? It didn’t say 39.9 % of pot smokers were violent, it said 39.9 % of violent criminals arrested had pot in their system. Look it up. Amaroq, you never asked. William Jackson, he was 15 and I was 16, I was there! I saw him die. If you want I’ll e-mail his grave location. You are naive! Get your head out of the sand and join the real worldgaryIn Response To J.A. GatesE-Mail: xyz yahoo.comSunday October 29, 2000 at 7:55 Are you saying that drugs will always be around? I understand that you think violence will happen even if the drugs were legal. But, can we use history to educate ourselves? Back in 1937, when the drugs were legal, we did not have people killing others because of drugs. Our government made this up. What do the drugs have to do with criminal activities? Prohibition! I am a criminal when I have a criminal intent to cause damages to a victim. When I lit up my joint, I have no criminal intent to cause you or anybody any harm. This is why this law does not work. As long we continue to have this law, we will have people not respecting the LAW. Your 40% stat. represent only 1% of the entire pot smoking population. J. A. GatesIn Response To GaryE-Mail: zjohngates hotmail.comSunday October 29, 2000 at 9:14 Back in 1937 people didn’t know about illegal drugs. It’s apples and oranges but I wasn’t here when it was legal so I can’t say your right or wrong on that. A criminal is one who breaks a law set by the government. Smoking pot is illegal so you are criminal. I’m not saying you’re a violent one, but you are one. I wish there were a demography that would show the percentage of violent criminals who used drugs to the number of all people who uses drugs. I think it’s higher then 1% but it may even be lower. Without the numbers I go with my gut which says no. garyIn Response To J.A. GatesE-Mail: xyz yahoo.comSunday October 29, 2000 at 10:19 Putting someone in prison is a violent thing to do. And some time it is necessary, but why would you want me, a non-violent criminalized smoker to be in prison? From your posting, it appears you need to brush up your history. It is there for everyone to read. It is on the books. This is no excuse to keep criminalizing someone based on not knowing what happened in 1937. This is when this law was passed. Okay, maybe you are right about this 1%, assume 10% then, does it give us the right to criminalize the other 90%. How is that for logic, if its 100% of the pot population, do you think we would be debating about it? Let us just admit that the law itself cause more harm and damages than the use of cannabis itself. Don ListonIn Response To garyE-Mail: listond alaska.netSunday October 29, 2000 at 10:40 This poster has referred us to a false email address. I posted an email to his address and it was rejected as "recipient unknown." I suggest that ADN remove him and all his messages from the forum. There is a security risk to other posters implied by communicating with anyone who posts false informationgaryIn Response To don listonE-Mail: xyz yahoo.comSunday October 29, 2000 at 11:27 Yes, you are right, it is not my real email and why should I? One of your poster thought it was a good idea to start beheading me. Are you afraid of Truth? I am afraid to post real email address for you might try to break my door to censor me. All the postings I posted were very civil and I posed no security risk because what information I have posed so far represented truth. Truth have nothing to fear but fear itself. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by freedom fighter on October 29, 2000 at 12:43:54 PT
Strange postings Part 2
garyIn Response To JA! GatesE-Mail: xyz yahoo.comSaturday October 28, 2000 at 8:50 If I used my full name, you will come and try to behead my head off. If Saudi Arabia is such a wonderful country to live in, move over there! If this sick law passes in U.S., I can only promise you another civil war in this country! Oh, you sound so perfect, sinless. Go ahead and pick the first stone and throw   the whore. I know that the world does not run around me, neither does it run around you pal! Take your kids to Saudi Arabia, see if your daughters will like it!   least you agreed that the CHILDREN will bear this stupidity. Is this a perfect "society's values"? and who made you my brother's keeper? garyIn Response To armaroqE-Mail: xyz yahoo.comSaturday October 28, 2000 at 9:24 Armaoq, one thing that JA Gates did not point out that if this was true, would one thinks that the prohibition is the cause of this foolish business of building booby traps around plants that cost 2 cents to grow each day? Did you know that the Law enforcers have killed growers this year too? He claimed that kids are dying of cannabis. I have yet to hear or see one person smoking this stuff to stumble over and died from it. Eat ten raw potatoes and you can die from it. Drink,eat,consume,smoke the whole plant, you will sleep to see another day. Let's start banning the potatoes!! J. A. GatesIn Response To Karla and GaryE-Mail: zjohngates hotmail.comSaturday October 28, 2000 at 17:23 None of the choices (corrupt police, drug war or drugs) are good. They all deal with greed for the most part and aren’t healthy for any community. Where I grew up everyone has given up and drugs have taken over, that’s why it’s so violent. I want my kids to have a better childhood then I did. I know you think pot is not really the “criminals drug”, but 39.9% of violent males federally arrested and tested for drugs are on pot. Go to www.usdoj.gov/dea/stats/drugstats.htm#adultmale you will see the statistics. Gary, think about it, if growers wouldn’t shoot at the cops, they wouldn’t die. garyIn Response To J. A. GatesE-Mail: xyz yahoo.comSaturday October 28, 2000 at 18:39 Thanks for telling us where you are coming from. I know what violence is like. Are you willing to concede that it came from prohibition era? The violence did not came from when the drugs were legal. Can we agree that because we have so long try to criminalize, demonize the usage of pot that more bad evil criminal people use it simply because it was prohibited? We have growers that were armed and cops shot them. Why are the growers arming themselves? Prohibition? Would a grower be armed if it is legal? Please believe this, You, sir, have right to teach your children to not partake any drugs. However, can we not impose it on others? I love my children as much as I would with yours. I would gladly give up my life so your children live and I smoke pot. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by freedom fighter on October 29, 2000 at 12:40:59 PT
Strange postings  ADN Part 1
garyIn Response To ruthE-Mail: xyz yahoo.comWednesday October 25, 2000 at 17:24 Ruth, 1200 pot prisoners times 30-35,000$ a year to babysit them. It cost 36 mil $ now. I wonder how much next year? I am an outsider so I probably would not be much of an influence. I am sure that your state can figure out that if national wide, 50% of high schoolers have   one time or another tried pot, in 10 years, your state will be supporting 100 million $$ a year on a pot prison industry. We all can agree that the Children will be the one to bear this? J. A. GatesIn Response To garyE-Mail: zjohngates hotmail.comWednesday October 25, 2000 at 20:07 Gary, 360 murders 80-95,000$ a year to baby-sit them. The cost 34.2 mil $ now and for ever. Cost, add it up. You don't let criminals go free. If you do something illegal, you must pay your dues no matter if it is a fine or time. If you let CRIMINALS get away with what they know is illegal (and pot smokers are criminals), you have defile the law. I love my children, apparently you don’t! garyIn Response To JA GatesE-Mail: xyz yahoo.comThursday October 26, 2000 at 16:03 What? Mere 360 murderers sitting in your prisons?? Just how many unsolved murders did your state have? And tell me, sir, just how does a pothead step on your toes? Where are the damages?? Oh, you are gonna tell me that these potheads committed the 360 solved murders. Oh, 1200 potheads vs your 360 murders and so many more unsolved. 100 mil. folks in U.S. including your state, have declare the law moot and voided. We are sorry for slapping your face for 86 years. How many more years do you want us to keep slapping? 1200 gardeners vs 360 murderers. I do not understand this! So, with your 36 mil + my 40 mil equals 76 mil this year. So we agree that OUR CHILDREN will bear this in next 10 years? Why did you presume I do not love my kids? J. A. GatesIn Response To gary (use your whole name, I do)E-Mail: zjohngates hotmail.comThursday October 26, 2000 at 18:56 Potheads step on my toes because they drag society down in it's value. I want my children’s society to be lifted up instead. Your sarcasm shows your ignorance or unwillingness to face the truth. Potheads are criminals, as is murders; both violated the law. Let’s implement some other countries laws if you want to reduce money spent on them. I like Saudi Arabia, execute the drug dealers, bet the 1200 criminals would really drop. Our children would be better off and not allot of money spent. Lastly, you don’t love your children if you teach them that the law doesn’t matter and criminal actions are OK. You would be the 1st to call 911 if it was a crime against you. That’s called a hypocrite! 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by Dr. Ganj on October 28, 2000 at 16:13:03 PT
Alaskan Thunder Buds
Heck, if it goes legal, I might move up there so I can ship it worldwide with impunity! Imagine a *HUGE* warehouse filled with SUPER GANJ!! Yeah, I'll move!! 
http://www.freehempinak.org/
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by Thomas on October 28, 2000 at 10:14:26 PT
What Planet are Some of these People From?
Who is going to move all the way to Alaska so they can smoke pot legally?? Not me. It's too damn cold up there. These people are the proverbial chicken little.
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment


Name: Optional Password: 
E-Mail: 
Subject: 
Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]
Link URL: 
Link Title: