# AMA Finally Gets It!



## Moldy (Nov 10, 2009)

*AMA Ends 72-Year Policy, Says Marijuana Has Medical Benefits*



By Americans for Safe Access - Tuesday, November 10 2009 Tags: 

<LI class="first taxonomy_term_24">Headline News <LI class=taxonomy_term_1862>American Medical Association <LI class=taxonomy_term_138>MEDICAL MARIJUANA
USA





The American Medical Association voted today to reverse its long-held position that marijuana be retained as a Schedule I substance with no medical value. 
The AMA adopted a report drafted by the AMA Council on Science and Public Health (CSAPH) entitled, "Use of Cannabis for Medicinal Purposes," which affirmed the therapeutic benefits of marijuana and called for further research.
The CSAPH report concluded that, "short term controlled trials indicate that smoked cannabis reduces neuropathic pain, improves appetite and caloric intake especially in patients with reduced muscle mass, and may relieve spasticity and pain in patients with multiple sclerosis." Furthermore, the report urges that "the Schedule I status of marijuana be reviewed with the goal of facilitating clinical research and development of cannabinoid-based medicines, and alternate delivery methods."
The change of position by the largest physician-based group in the country was precipitated in part by a resolution adopted in June of 2008 by the Medical Student Section (MSS) of the AMA in support of the reclassification of marijuana's status as a Schedule I substance. In the past year, the AMA has considered three resolutions dealing with medical marijuana, which also helped to influence the report and its recommendations. The AMA vote on the report took place in Houston, Texas during the organization's annual Interim Meeting of the House of Delegates. The last AMA position, adopted 8 years ago, called for maintaining marijuana as a Schedule I substance, with no medical value.
"It's been 72 years since the AMA has officially recognized that marijuana has both already-demonstrated and future-promising medical utility," said Sunil Aggarwal, Ph.D., the medical student who spearheaded both the passage of the June 2008 resolution by the MSS and one of the CSAPH report's designated expert reviewers. "The AMA has written an extensive, well-documented, evidence-based report that they are seeking to publish in a peer-reviewed journal that will help to educate the medical community about the scientific basis of botanical cannabis-based medicines." Aggarwal is also on the Medical & Scientific Advisory Board of Americans for Safe Access (ASA), the largest medical marijuana advocacy organization in the U.S.
The AMA's about face on medical marijuana follows an announcement by the Obama Administration in October discouraging U.S. Attorneys from taking enforcement actions in medical marijuana states. In February 2008, a resolution was adopted by the American College of Physicians (ACP), the country's second largest physician group and the largest organization of doctors of internal medicine. The ACP resolution called for an "evidence-based review of marijuana's status as a Schedule I controlled substance to determine whether it should be reclassified to a different schedule. "The two largest physician groups in the U.S. have established medical marijuana as a health care issue that must be addressed," said ASA Government Affairs Director Caren Woodson. "Both organizations have underscored the need for change by placing patients above politics."
Though the CSAPH report has not been officially released to the public, AMA documentation indicates that it: "(1) provides a brief historical perspective on the use of cannabis as medicine; (2) examines the current federal and state-based legal envelope relevant to the medical use of cannabis; (3) provides a brief overview of our current understanding of the pharmacology and physiology of the endocannabinoid system; (4) reviews clinical trials on the relative safety and efficacy of smoked cannabis and botanical-based products; and (5) places this information in perspective with respect to the current drug regulatory framework."

sounds like good news to me


----------



## growone (Nov 10, 2009)

i think this is a very big deal, the DEA has wrapped itself in the banner of 'no medical use' forever
it's one more nail in coffin(soon to be coffin) in the current structure of marijuana law
'the times, they are a changing'


----------



## ford442 (Nov 10, 2009)

yep..! awesome! that was the main remaining argument for ex-DEA talking heads.. next they'll say that the FDA has to approve it i imagine...


----------



## SmokeyMcChokey (Nov 10, 2009)

YAY cant wait for the reports to be published in a reputable journal so i can rub it in my advanced anatomy professors face. we had a 45 minute argument about whether there was any valid use for any of the cannabinoids found in cannabis


----------



## dontexist21 (Nov 10, 2009)

I see legalization being pushed up by at least 10 years. We should send the job wanted sections of newspapers to the DEA, help them out a bit.


----------



## growone (Nov 10, 2009)

i thinks this does move things along a bit, but don't underestimate the ability of entrenched interests to delay the inevitable
weed will go from 'no accepted medical use' to 'medically useful, but high potential for abuse', or what ever bogus phrase they will come up with


----------



## zelfna90 (Nov 10, 2009)

it will have to become regulated they already made this public, even if it becomes medical in all states is fine with me


----------



## Phenom420 (Nov 11, 2009)

Yeah sounds nice, but I'm more concerned with the possibility of martial law and the use of HR654 to jail us in FEMA camps much like the something camps the Germans used in WW2.
Lots of this stuff goes on to take our attention away from the real problem at hand....

Id love for it to go legal but we got other laws about to go in that will make this shit POINTLESS.
im talking about out constitution being thrown to the side COMPLETELY, rather than just kinda ignored.


----------



## chopper260 (Nov 11, 2009)

one step closer


----------



## Phenom420 (Nov 11, 2009)

chopper260 said:


> one step closer


yup 1 step closer to taking your attention away from the real issue like your Constitution being removed......


----------



## NewGrowth (Nov 11, 2009)

A doctor Woodward, representing the AMA was the only person to stand against the original marijauna stamp act. The AMA stood opposed to cannabis prohibition laws until threatened by the Interstate Narcotics Commission.

It is good to see that they are not being threatened by the federal government as much now.


----------



## chopper260 (Nov 11, 2009)

Phenom420 said:


> yup 1 step closer to taking your attention away from the real issue like your Constitution being removed......


and the illuminati taking over and ruling the world, and the nwo taking us out of our homes at night and planes falling out of the sky, its y2k all over again


----------



## Phenom420 (Nov 11, 2009)

NewGrowth said:


> A doctor Woodward, representing the AMA was the only person to stand against the original marijauna stamp act. The AMA stood opposed to cannabis prohibition laws until threatened by the Interstate Narcotics Commission.
> 
> It is good to see that they are not being threatened by the federal government as much now.


LMFAO, koolaid tasting good?



chopper260 said:


> and the illuminati taking over and ruling the world, and the nwo taking us out of our homes at night and planes falling out of the sky, its y2k all over again


I love the way you can't think for yourself and just repeat what the others say.

Im out of this thread happy growin.


----------



## Dirty Harry (Nov 11, 2009)

I bet some high up heads of the AMA will get fired, new people fill their spots, and the decision will be reversed. That seems to be the current ways these days when someone says something a government doesn't like to hear.


----------



## Phenom420 (Nov 11, 2009)

Dirty Harry said:


> I bet some high up heads of the AMA will get fired, new people fill their spots, and the decision will be reversed. That seems to be the current ways these days when someone says something a government doesn't like to hear.


WOW someone with their eyes open, better look out the gov doesn't like our kind....
rep in da mail sir!


----------



## Iron Lion Zion (Nov 11, 2009)

Phenom420 said:


> WOW someone with their eyes open, better look out the gov doesn't like our kind....
> rep in da mail sir!


Even so, a statement made by a highly educated, intelligent, group of doctors that represent medicine can't be ignored. Even if they did remove/replace them, they are still doctors who support cannabis. It's still a step forward no matter what happens, just how big of a step will be determined soon I suppose.


----------



## Phenom420 (Nov 11, 2009)

Iron Lion Zion said:


> Even so, a statement made by a highly educated, intelligent, group of doctors that represent medicine can't be ignored. Even if they did remove/replace them, they are still doctors who support cannabis. It's still a step forward no matter what happens, just how big of a step will be determined soon I suppose.


Lot of good doctors are gonna do when martial law is going on, might want to read a bit.


----------



## 420pharms (Nov 11, 2009)

just saw lou dobbs take its almost over the dust is gonna take a while to settle , the most right wing concervative and important people i know want it legal and so do the Boulderites they all see money and view my girls as harmless and wounderful I JUST HOPE THE MEDICAL VALUE GETS REALIZED


----------



## Phenom420 (Nov 11, 2009)

420pharms said:


> just saw lou dobbs take its almost over the dust is gonna take a while to settle , the most right wing concervative and important people i know want it legal and so do the Boulderites they all see money and view my girls as harmless and wounderful I JUST HOPE THE MEDICAL VALUE GETS REALIZED



Complete sentences? Can't get what your going on about.


----------



## NewGrowth (Nov 11, 2009)

Phenom420 said:


> LMFAO, koolaid tasting good?
> 
> I love the way you can't think for yourself and just repeat what the others say.
> 
> Im out of this thread happy growin.


I thought you were leaving. Maybe you should educate yourself before you start acting like an ass.


----------



## olishell (Nov 11, 2009)

Hey Phenom...shouldn't you be out on a ledge somewhere?


----------



## OregonMeds (Nov 21, 2009)

Dirty Harry said:


> I bet some high up heads of the AMA will get fired, new people fill their spots, and the decision will be reversed. That seems to be the current ways these days when someone says something a government doesn't like to hear.


Doesn't matter, cat's out of the bag already so to speak.

It really is just about the last nail in the coffin.


----------



## Dirty Harry (Nov 21, 2009)

OregonMeds said:


> Doesn't matter, cat's out of the bag already so to speak.
> 
> It really is just about the last nail in the coffin.


I hope your right. I do admit I am pessimistic about politics and government. The govt. is supposed to work for the citizens, but all I ever see is them working for themselves and us citizens are a nuisance to them.


----------



## Eire (Nov 23, 2009)

More states than today had legalized marijuana back in the 60's and 70's. This wasn't taxable medical marijuana with conditions for growing and sales. It was just plain legal. Massachusetts (or was is Michigan) allowed an annual smoke-out on the steps and front lawn of the state capital all the way into the 90's. 

Everyone back then thought it was a foregone conclusion too. So the momentum died. Then Reagan declared war on drugs and the long dark night began for marijuana. 

Now we may have good polls and see states legalizing medical marijuana and think it's all downhill from here. But the opponents of legalization are much better organized, funded, brainwashed, and filled with righteous zeal than ever before. They don't need to be in the majority. Hell, they don't even need the law on their side. Otherwise they wouldn't be busting people that are working inside the medical marijuana laws! 

No, we must not rest. It is just now when we are feeling tremors of liberty that the rest of the world is getting ever more antagonistic towards marijuana. In many countries efforts are being made to strengthen prohibition of marijuana. China is an ever more influential opponent of marijuana. Even the hallowed image of Amsterdam is being tarnished with efforts to increase prohibition of marijuana. 

The effects of America's past efforts at influence are now having their delayed effects. Eventually, and especially if we have 'softened' on marijuana those other countries will begin to influence us back. They will call us hypocrites since we asked them to get strict and we loosened up. They will use our own international laws and rules in the united nations to turn our own requirements for anti-drug efforts against us. 

So if we don't have strong laws and widespread acceptance when that wave of influence turns back towards us, then we will fall again into darkness. Now more than ever we need to stick together and keep working at it. We need to find local groups and attend meetings. Sign petitions and spend some time getting them signed by others. Investigate which politicians local and federal support our cause and support them in return. 

And aside from all things, keep spreading the word and be strong. Even if we live where we can finally be legal, we lucky few have as much responsibility as those who are still working for laws in their states. We still feel the need to sneak around like we're being stalked. We still fear enough that we cave too easily when offered a plea instead of standing up to injustice. We certainly don't talk much about marijuana outside our own community. 

So we may be legal, but we have yet to achieve liberty. We won't be there until we can declare in public without hushed tone or concern for who might hear that we use marijuana. When we can be friendly with a cop because we expect the law to defend us and not persecute us. When we can offer information on the benefits of marijuana to someone in need without being doubted, suspected, and marked as a 'stupid' stoner. 

Hopefully more people will sue back instead of pleading out. Then the authorities might get the message that it is they who are on the wrong side of us, not the other way around. Then the public might see these district attorneys' offices and commissioners are rogue organizations and vote different people into the jobs, or those who appoint positions will see the wrongs done as avoidable costs and appoint different people. 

Hopefully more people might bring up the conversation of marijuana in mixed company to spread the word not only of the benefits and safety of marijuana but of the comfort we feel and respect that we expect in speaking about it. Then others might see that we are neither stupid nor dense but intelligent, informed, and determined individuals who deserve the same assumption of responsibility in consuming marijuana as those who drink alcohol, smoke a good cigar, take aspirin, or eat food. Of course they should see that the only real difference is that marijuana users can't die from poisoning or an exploded stomach. 

When these things happen and the general population is better aware and informed, when taxes build schools and playgrounds instead of more cops and prisons, when doctors support this cheaper medication so we can afford more preventive visits to their offices, when crime drops and brotherhood grows, we might gain the support that will give our cause the momentum to shatter the barriers between us all. That is worthy work. That is what should get us up from the couch and out to greet a world worth changing. 

So we must keep moving forward and doing what we can to help. Even if that is just bringing up the subject of legalization during Thanksgiving or Christmas dinner. Who knows how many later conversations you will engender and how many converts to our cause that might create. Who knows how many such dominoes it takes to start the cascade that will run through every part of American life and finally return to us to tip over the last brick of opposition. 

I dream of a better world where I can use and discuss the use of marijuana with no stigma, no impact on my career, and no legal worries. I dream of standing tall in the open light of day and declaring my preference for marijuana proudly. I dream that if anyone comes into my house to take my marijuana it will be a robbery and not confiscation. I dream of loving the neighborhood cops who keep us safe instead of fearing them, of being able to invite them into my house and serve them coffee while I smoke a joint and discuss how I can help keep my neighborhood safe from real trouble. 

I dream of freedom and liberty as we all wish it really could be. I dream of an America where we are all on the same side and the same page. Where we can be ourselves without fear or anger. Where we stick together because it makes us strong instead of being driven apart by mutual suspicion because profiteers know that to divide us is to conquer us. That is why I tell you most emphatically that our greatest challenge is not to defend ourselves from attacks by outsiders but from the divisions we bring against ourselves from within. 

So let's make this coming year better than any before. Let's support the wedge of regulate and tax bills that can crack and break asunder the monolithic oppositions to our cause. Let's vow to stand up to the authorities when they illegally persecute us, and sue back instead of taking the pleas they offer. Let's start now to speak up and promote all the good things we know about marijuana. 

I do so vow to continue to press my cause as I have done in converting my brother, a life-long marine to the idea that he fights for my freedom and liberty, not against it. I vow to work for smaller companies that do not drug test rather than big companies that micromanage my private life. I vow to be active and alert and aggressively show that I am not couch-locked when I am not treating my insomnia. I vow to bring up the issues of legalizing marijuana and promoting protection and respect for users whenever I can, especially when I have the opportunity to challenge someone to convert to our cause. 

I vow that this will be a better year than any before, and so will be the next and the next. I vow to stop wishing and start acting, to stop arguing and start persuading, to step over division into unity, to stop being a victim and become the victor. 

GMLOGMD, A.


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 23, 2009)

Just be aware that if weed goes the medical route, there will be very strict regiments put in place for growing standards. It will be treated as a drug, and consequently 99% of all you growers out there will be disqualified from producing it.

Unless you are able to grow in a specific way utilizing medical standards (like Pharma does now), you will become a consumer ONLY.

Complete medical legalization will take weed out of the common growers hands.


----------



## NewGrowth (Nov 23, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Just be aware that if weed goes the medical route, there will be very strict regiments put in place for growing standards. It will be treated as a drug, and consequently 99% of all you growers out there will be disqualified from producing it.
> 
> Unless you are able to grow in a specific way utilizing medical standards (like Pharma does now), you will become a consumer ONLY.
> 
> Complete medical legalization will take weed out of the common growers hands.


I still don't think that would stop me from growing my own


----------



## 2much (Nov 23, 2009)

cracker jax is right, and personaly i dont want the ama telling me what weed i can smoke, this is a civil rights issue also


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 23, 2009)

NewGrowth said:


> I still don't think that would stop me from growing my own


U don't huh... yes u can still grow, but nothing will change for you. U'll still be considered a criminal. 



2much said:


> cracker jax is right, and personaly i dont want the ama telling me what weed i can smoke, this is a civil rights issue also


Yes, there will be a consolidation. The emphasis will be on growing completely disease free weed for medical, for "safety" issues. They will give you MMJ and then thump anyone who tries to subvert it by growing their own.


----------



## Eire (Nov 23, 2009)

Crackerjax, you don't know what you're talking about. You are spouting paranoid fatalism. 

First, the whole reason to get involved is to have a say about what happens. If you don't want to get involved because you think that it won't work out your way anyway then fine, and to hell with you. Keep telling yourself how great you are to be above doing anything useful because you can see failure coming when others waste their efforts and foolishly hope for success. Good for you. 

Second, there is absolutely no chance of what you say happening. The fact is that even if the govt and pharmaceutical got all involved and took over the process they still wouldn't give a rat's ass about people who grow their own. They would only care about people who tried to SELL it. 

Just like beer companies, they know that there are too few people who will opt to grow their own when there's already good quality available at a store. So if there are people that want to brew their own and maybe even share it with friends and neighbors, then it's no big deal. 

Only when some idiot tries to set up a big operation and sell it all over the place would they care, and so would I. I have drunk beer brewed by friends and it's great. But I would never buy it from some yahoo who I don't know because there would be no telling what kind of dangerous crap that idiot might have put into it, or if he didn't allow it to be infected with some bad bacteria or fungus or whatever. So you're damn right that I'd want that imbecile arrested before he poisoned someone. 

So Crackerjax, if you're just being paranoid then you can relax, and do get involved anyway so you can make sure your voice is heard by those who will write future laws. 

On the other hand, if you're just lazy and are making up excuses for not getting up off the couch, then fine but stop being a downer on others who might want to contribute, you jerk. 

Or if you're a drug dealer or a wannabe and are throwing wrenches to protect your business, then you are ruining it all for the rest of us and I hope that you get busted flat, you scumbag. 

Finally, if you are an opponent of marijuana and spend your time trolling these forums for any chance to throw wrenches and imbue negativity then I tell you now that you are wasting your time. We WILL keep moving forward. We WILL keep making progress. We will NEVER give up. And you will LOSE, sucker!


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 24, 2009)

Why the drama? I'm certainly not paranoid, merely experienced on how things get done in this country via politics.

It is LOGICAL to think that MEDICAL marijuana will be strictly controlled in its production.

Do you know actually how "clean" ur harvest is? Ever have it examined under a high powered microscope to see what else is on ur grow?

Out of sight, out of mind may work for you, but it won't in the medical world. How many parasites and spores are on ur grow? The emphasis on MMJ is the first letter M, medical. "clean" will be the buzz word. Regular growers will not be "clean".

It's not paranoia, it's understanding on how things play out.

If I burst ur little bubble, I'm sorry. It doesn't alter the facts though.

Once MMJ becomes the "norm", consolidation will occur, and many many growers will be excluded. It will become an industry based on lab work and clean grow ops that can meet medical standards. Things like inspections and testing of grow ops will be the norm, just as it is today for other things legal and REGULATED.


----------



## Eire (Nov 24, 2009)

There is no drama, just you talking from total ignorance and the mistaken belief that you know how things work when you don't. It's you that are living in a bubble of false confidence in your logic that is completely faulty. 

How clean is a home brew? Alcohol was once prohibited and has had 80 years to "consolidate". So why is it still legal to brew your own? Why hasn't your "logic" panned out the same way? Because you don't know what you're talking about. 

It's a simple cost/benefit analysis. There may well be big corporate agriculture of marijuana, just as there is big corporate production of alcohol. Those corporate interests will definitely keep pressure on to go after those selling black market marijuana just as there is for alcohol. But it is only right for public health and safety that it should be so. I agree with it. 

But the costs of promoting laws and enforcement on people who only grow or brew for their own use is way beyond what it's worth to them, not only in cash but in public displeasure and bad publicity. Once Marijuana is legal and regulated the same as alcohol, people will react the same towards too-tight restrictions on it as they would about alcohol. 

The benefits would also be extremely small because the percentage of those who choose to grow their own marijuana will be the same as that of those who choose to brew their own beer or make their own wine. Hell, they can do the same as they do with beer and wine, sell home kits and they will make more off of that than any benefit they might make from trying to stop it. 

So as you can see, my logic is true and yours is very faulty. You follow nonsensical reasoning that can only be described as paranoid. It's not an insult, it's a clinical appraisal. 

But you are right when you sense some anger and frustration. This is because you are not only wrong, but you are discouraging people from even trying to improve things because of your wrong, overly negative views and defeatist attitude. If it were up to attitudes like yours, we wouldn't even have medical marijuana rights. 

So I ask you, what is the benefit of giving up as you advise? How does that help anything or anyone? How is anything ever going to change if you don't try? How much more will those big corporate interest slant things in their favor if you just lay down for them? How is your approach in any way beneficial? 

If it were just you being a downer and giving up like a coward then I would stand back and let you take yourself down. But you are throwing wrenches into the process for everyone. Who knows if it will come down to a point where if we had just a couple of more people then it would turn our way? If so and downer defeatists like you have chipped away at the movement then we could end up having prohibition reinstated. 

So yeah, it pisses me off when someone not only wants to surrender but also wants to take as many other people with them as possible just to validate their own defeatism. It sucks, buddy. You need to start looking up or at least stop dragging others down to your level.


----------



## Eire (Nov 24, 2009)

And I've re-read your post and it seems that you are coming at it from the point of view of a professional grower who does it for profit. If that's so then say so and stop trying to scare people into thinking that their little patch they grow just for themselves will be treated the same as a bigger, for-profit enterprise. 

And even if we are talking about a bigger, for-profit operation, have you ever heard of micro breweries? It's very profitable for both supplier and restaurants to deal in custom brews. These are gourmet brews that cost more because they are made with special care and they are better. They are also regulated, but that doesn't put them out of business. It's actually another excuse to charge more for them. 

So the same system would grow up around marijuana and if you wanted to grow for sale you could do so. That means that regardless of whether we speak of a home grow for personal use or a micro grow for profit, your predicted scenario is wrong and won't happen. 

So why are you really against legalization? ARE you a dealer? At least then I could understand your motivations. But I would still be pissed that you would try to harm the whole movement for strictly personal gain. That would make you a pretty unworthy member of our community.


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 24, 2009)

How am I discouraging anyone? I'm just not going to paint a Polly Anna picture for ppl to be gulled by.

Do you know what medical standards are?

This is just the beginning and weed may very well succeed as a medical plant, but don't kid urself. It won't be "I can now grow weed all day with impunity", or "I can grow weed and sell it in the medical field.

UHHHH, no, it will morph (as all things do) into a regulated medical commodity and the "ordinary" grower will NOT be included in the equation.

I'm just a realist with lots of experience on how things get done. 

Once MMJ sweeps the country, big AGRI will be called upon by big PHARMA to produce it. They won't be calling you, unless you have a hort degree and a serious and large nursery.

Call it a reality check, it's not negative, unless you thought somehow MMJ was a doorway for total legalization. It isn't. If anything it will harden the line for some ppl. The attitude will be, that's enough, we now have MMJ medically, so no further legalization is necessary. 

Don't think so? Just wait.....Cracker is very very good at seeing the patterns. You can bank on this one.

The small grower will be cast aside with MMJ. It will be farmed and it will be controlled to lab specifications.

By the way, you never answered my posit. Do you know what's on ur grow? I sure don't. 

MEDICAL ......


----------



## Eire (Nov 24, 2009)

So you think they're going to go door to door looking for every little grow? No, they will regulate those who wish to SELL their product. They can't find and inspect all the personal grows right now when they have a legal mandate to do so. They will have even less motivation when it is legal. 

And if they tried they would get pounded in the courts because it is one thing to go after every little grow you can find when it is illegal, but once it is legal then the law requires assumption of innocence. They would not be allowed to assume you are breaking the law when there is every possibility that you are legal. That is precisely why they can't go door to door looking for personal brews now. 

You think it is different for marijuana? It isn't. You think they will do things differently, they won't. They have every motivation to do things the same. It will actually benefit them to do so. Yes they will regulate for-profit grows, just like they do with beer and wine and it doesn't hurt them. There are plenty of mom and pop micro breweries around. Very often these folks just hope and pray to get popular enough to be bought out by the big guys. It's a win-win for both. 

The big corporations will WANT to do it the same as for beer and wine. They will avoid all the costs of research and experimentation, taste testing, market testing, and all the other investments in a new line of products. Rather, they let the little guy have all his fun doing all that and taking all the risk if it doesn't pan out. 

But those costs are much smaller for a little guy and he can keep trying until he gets it right. Then the big guys can swoop in and buy him out for a very gratifying amount, making him happy as hell. And it would still cost them less than going through all of that preliminary work for themselves. 

So not only do you not have a clue how things work and how they will play out, but you don't even know how business really works. You're talking out of your ass, little buddy. Sorry to pop _your _little bubble. 

Also, no I don't know what would be on my grow if I had one. But I'm not trying to sell it so I'm the only one who has to worry about it and that's my choice. Just like it's the worry and the choice of those who brew their own beer. It's exactly the same in all ways. 

Oh, and how are you discouraging people? You're discouraging people by confusing them with your stupid lose-lose scenarios in which they lose if things stay the way they are and by your foolish illogic they lose if they try to change things. By your thinking there is no good way, everything is bad and will fail. 

So what are they supposed to do? Tell me what people are supposed to support? What system do you support? Or are you just all about telling people why their ideas won't work when you have none of your own? So what's your solution, Mr. Wannabe Genius? Let's hear you say something productive rather than destructive for once. Anyone can throw stones, so you're just another sad sack if that's all you've got.


----------



## ndangerspecimen101 (Nov 24, 2009)

This is truly a federal VS. state issue.. and the federal would never win... some states will always refuse the legality of cannabis no matter how much medical evidence that proves otherwise!


----------



## ndangerspecimen101 (Nov 24, 2009)

...and another thing if people want to argue side effects then I see no bad symptoms other than an overly exuberate smile on patients faces... rather then the psychosis state exhibited by patients smoothered by narcotic pain relievers!


----------



## Eire (Nov 24, 2009)

ndangerspecimen101, you are a voice of reason. And you are correct. At best the Fed would step back and let the states handle it as they will. But that would be a vast improvement. And there is nothing in your logic that supports surrender, true? So the only thing we can do is keep plugging away at it. We can't let the nay-sayers get us down. 

There's no sense in just giving up. I took the easy way and moved to a location that allowed at least medical use. So I will pick up the fight here where it stands and try to help push it even further to give more rights and protection to users. But if I couldn't leave my old state then I still wouldn't have given up. It is always worth it to keep trying to change things. 

Many other people thought the same back when it was still illegal here. They kept up the fight for what they knew was right. Many of them passed away before they ever got to see even a part of their dreams come true. But I'm sure that even at the end they never regretted it or thought they had wasted their lives. It's always worth it to keep trying. Humanity itself would not be where we are if it were otherwise.


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 24, 2009)

I'm talking about MMJ. Isn't that the topic of the thread? Like I told NG, if you want to grow personally for urself, u can ... illegally. We all have that today. We had that in the 60's ... no change there. But if you think ur going to be allowed to legally grow ur own MMJ ... uhhh, no, that's not going to happen. In the beginning, perhaps. As MMJ starts to be brought into the medical and business models however, that will all end, for your own safety I assume the explanation will be.

Beer & wine are not medical. ur getting urself all confused.


----------



## OregonMeds (Nov 24, 2009)

Cracker we are not done at medical this is just the beginning, the majority of weed has and always will be recreational and while there may end up a medical super clean sterile supply for some no doubt there will be lesser qualities also.

You both are going overboard if we could mash you together you'd both make one decent stoner.


----------



## Eire (Nov 24, 2009)

We can right now grow our own legally. We just can't grow quantities for sale. I think it's you who are confusing grows for personal use and grows for sale. 

For personal use the point is that we need more rights and better protection from overzealous authorities. It is very worth it to put effort into that so we can better protect those rights if people do try to use your arguments to stop it. Only if we give up and lay down will we be begging for that to happen. So to take your advice and do nothing will promote the ends you predict. Good work designing and supporting your own little self-fulfilling prophesy. Would it make you feel good to fail as long as you could say you told us so? 

For-profit grows are different, but not the way you claim. Whether you use the word medical or not, both alcohol and marijuana are 'controlled substances'. The difference is that no one ever claimed that alcohol had medical benefits (though it does). So marijuana has the edge there. But even though we need a recommendation for use now, it is conceivable and a short step from prescribed to over the counter sales. 

And I assume your thinking is that they will use the medical application to further restrict it so they have a monopoly. But that would still leave them with a seriously limited consumer base of only those people willing to make the effort to get a recommendation from a doctor. 

That's very limited thinking on your part. I say that once the bigs get involved, they will push to change it from recommendation required to an over the counter but still regulated substance the same as alcohol. That way their customer base is expanded to every adult, which will bring them far more profits. And they will still want the small grower around to be their market laboratory for new strains and other new products, just like micro breweries. 

It's simple business sense. I don't know why you can't see it. You must be blind. 

And you still haven't answered my question. What's the right system according to your view? What do you support? Do you have any solutions or are you still just throwing stones? 

And OregonMeds's, hahaha, thanks for the compliment... I think. 

But we're not going overboard, we're learning through discussion. I know I am anyway. It helps to sharpen my opinions to have them challenged. So I appreciate a good go-round. If it only helps to hone my opinions then great. But if I learn something that actually changes my mind about something then that's really special. 

In this case I think I'm settling for the former, but I'll take it!


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 24, 2009)

OregonMeds said:


> Cracker we are not done at medical this is just the beginning, the majority of weed has and always will be recreational and while there may end up a medical super clean sterile supply for some no doubt there will be lesser qualities also.
> 
> You both are going overboard if we could mash you together you'd both make one decent stoner.


I agree that it is not the end and full legalization is the goal. But let's not put the cart in front of the horse. This thread is about MMJ, and I'm just pointing out some real world realities.

MMJ will eventually, if successful, be controlled as a medical substance. I've already posted what that means.


----------



## Eire (Nov 24, 2009)

I disagree that MMJ is a doomed strategy. Good business sense and an appetite for profits will usher it through the early times of high regulation to later times of less regulation for the reasons I have already stated. You have stated your opinion of how but where is the why? My reasons are the rock solid motivations of profits and business sense. I can see no equivalent motivations to push it in the direction you predict. 

So is full legalization what you support? Do you oppose MMJ because you think it will ruin the chances for full legalization? Do you mean totally unregulated, untaxed legalization? Now who's supporting a pipe dream that will absolutely never happen? Are you against even sales tax? How, would you classify it as food to avoid it? 

Please, lay it out for me. How would your solution actually work? Technically you can't even have a yard sale without charging sales tax. And that would still only apply to sales. Do you think they will try to tax grows for personal use? That makes no sense as it would cost more to go door to door checking for them, so they can't do that.


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 24, 2009)

Wow, I don't know how you could reach those conclusions about me. i never posted anything like that at all.

I'm not opposed to MMJ. I'm just INFORMING you on how it will eventually play out.

It will happen as I say, or it won't happen at all.


----------



## JimmyPot (Nov 24, 2009)

Thought this was going to be you happy about the American music awards results.He He


----------



## NewGrowth (Nov 24, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Wow, I don't know how you could reach those conclusions about me. i never posted anything like that at all.
> 
> I'm not opposed to MMJ. I'm just INFORMING you on how it will eventually play out.
> 
> It will happen as I say, or it won't happen at all.


It seems to be moving more towards the Dutch system right now from what I can see cracker. They are talking about legalizing recreational marijuana for adults over 21yrs in California.

The whole dispensary model is becoming more like the dutch coffee shop scene. Seems similar with cultivation and transportation of large amounts being illegal but the acceptance of large scale distribution out of store-fronts.

Right now there is very little infrastructure in place for a legal system besides the dispensaries. Where the pot is coming from and how it is produced is still a mystery . . . .::


----------



## Eire (Nov 24, 2009)

Wow yourself Crackerjax, read your own posts. You were telling people not to bother trying for MMJ because it would end in tears. Your scenario was that Big Pharma would take control and ruin the whole system. I could just see people reading your posts and then deciding to give up and go back to illegal street purchases. 

You were being a real downer. I was trying to boost morale and engender motivation and involvement to get things done and you came along and basically said don't bother, it's no use anyway, it will end badly. Not only that, but your predictions were crazy wrong. The chance of it working out as you described is so low as to have made you seem a bit nuts. Re-read your posts and if you don't see that then I don't know what to say. My mother used to say "I see, I see, said the blind man when he could not see at all". 

NewGrowth, I agree with you. But I've heard that the Dutch are moving towards more restrictions. I hope they stay free. 

And I also have wondered how the supply chain works in CA. I have asked and been told several different stories, all plausible. Maybe it's a kind of organically changing system. 

Some places say they have a collective grow tended by experienced members. Some say they have a lot of individual members that grow their own and donate their excess. Some have admitted that at times they work with a kind of gray market. There must also be some kind of official supply system because I have seen pre-packaged supplies that must have come from somewhere, and other stuff that is obviously old and brown from storage. 

So yes, it is an interesting question. But I understand that no one really wants to lay it all out and clearly explain because the laws are still very vague and possibly contradictory, so until we get them ironed out then no one is yet safe from those who can interpret them and enforce them any way they wish. 

That's why we need to get and stay involved, so it's we the people who care about it that are helping to hash it out and get the bills and laws written properly. If not, then opponents will infiltrate the process and get the laws and regs written in such ways as to crash the system and make it impossible to function so that we return to a state of prohibition even though we have legal use laws.


----------



## ndangerspecimen101 (Nov 24, 2009)

*ndangerspecimen101, you are a voice of reason. And you are correct. At best the Fed would step back and let the states handle it as they will. But that would be a vast improvement. And there is nothing in your logic that supports surrender, true? So the only thing we can do is keep plugging away at it. We can't let the nay-sayers get us down. 

There's no sense in just giving up. I took the easy way and moved to a location that allowed at least medical use. So I will pick up the fight here where it stands and try to help push it even further to give more rights and protection to users. But if I couldn't leave my old state then I still wouldn't have given up. It is always worth it to keep trying to change things. 

Many other people thought the same back when it was still illegal here. They kept up the fight for what they knew was right. Many of them passed away before they ever got to see even a part of their dreams come true. But I'm sure that even at the end they never regretted it or thought they had wasted their lives. It's always worth it to keep trying. Humanity itself would not be where we are if it were otherwise- EIRE*

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Their will always be the nay-sayers in every topic, what matters is what proves best to resolve problems, to alleviate pain and to rectify or try to bandage the problem! California is at a very revolutionary time and cannabis is on new media coverage on a daily basis, especially regarding dispenseries. It all a matter on how to regulate the issue! Northern Cali. is now a legalized zone for marijuana use and los angeles is its next big territory. It could get cali. out of its financial ruckus, marijuana may save the day


----------



## smokinguns (Nov 24, 2009)

Talked to a few Dr. friends of mine and they knew this was coming. They also told me this will free the way for the AMA to begin clinical trials for the use of Marijuana for cancer paients, which is exactly why this information is being released.


----------



## growone (Nov 24, 2009)

smokinguns said:


> Talked to a few Dr. friends of mine and they knew this was coming. They also told me this will free the way for the AMA to begin clinical trials for the use of Marijuana for cancer paients, which is exactly why this information is being released.


this is way cool, but god it took a long time


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 24, 2009)

NewGrowth said:


> It seems to be moving more towards the Dutch system right now from what I can see cracker. They are talking about legalizing recreational marijuana for adults over 21yrs in California.
> 
> The whole dispensary model is becoming more like the dutch coffee shop scene. Seems similar with cultivation and transportation of large amounts being illegal but the acceptance of large scale distribution out of store-fronts.
> 
> Right now there is very little infrastructure in place for a legal system besides the dispensaries. Where the pot is coming from and how it is produced is still a mystery . . . .::


Hey, I OF COURSE hope it goes all the way to full legality, but I lived through the 70's when it was REALLY about to happen. that was thirty years ago.  Man, I mean everyone said .. THIS IS IT!!! ... nope.

I agree with you, and your analysis on what is happening in the present. I just am posting about what will happen in the future if weed truly goes national and is brought under FDA control (which of course it will). 



Eire..... I was not telling ppl to not get MMJ cards in Cali. You seem to read okay, but your filter is a bit skewed.

I know what I said. There were ppl saying "just go to a doctor, and if he says no, then go to another, and another, until you get one. 

My point was AND STILL IS, to all of you folks out there without a real medical condition, UR going to ruin it for the truly needy. I stand by that post and attitude. Anyone selfishly glomming onto medical weed, who isn't truly sick, is hurting the cause.

Everyone is watching, this is no time to be selfish.


----------



## Eire (Nov 24, 2009)

ndangerspecimen101's: Right on, my friend. I could wish it were already better in SD, but they keep the pressure on pretty heavily. Still I count my blessings that it is as good as it is. I just hope that supporters don't get the idea that it's a done deal and they don't need to keep working at it. 

I remember talking to people from the old days when it was looking good for legalization and that's what happened then. So the opponents were able to run right over the movement and fear-monger everyone into total prohibition. 

I also remember reading the news when Mass (or Mich?) for the first time in many years went ahead and busted the people who participated in the smoke-out at the capital. It was apparently one of the final death-tolls for the legalization movement. 

That's why I've promised myself to avoid that attitude and to actually put some time and effort into helping. I feel that I am in a good situation now that I am legal so that I can attend meetings and speak out without fear of being traced down and busted. I am legal, so why should I fear? 

And if I do get harassed or persecuted then I finally have the legal right to fight back because why should I be put down for being a good, law-abiding citizen with a righteous cause? That's a precious feeling and I want to keep it, spread it around, and help improve our situation even more.


----------



## Eire (Nov 24, 2009)

CrackerJax, I'm sorry if you thought I was going off on you but it really did seem like you were saying to give up because it will just get ruined anyway. If you were truly there 30 years ago then you know that it is just when people are saying 'this is it' is when they start sitting back and stop fighting. It's also when they're about to lose that the opponents get up and become really outspoken and wily in their methods. 

So it is right now that we need to keep fighting and be alert, and not go spreading doomsday scenarios where it will all end in ruin because first that's not true and second, that's exactly how to sabotage the movement so it does again fail like it did then. 

And I still disagree with you that the FDA and big pharma will trash it. Look, it's ALREADY under FDA control. So are alcohol and cigarettes and Twinkies. Who do you think designates it as a controlled substance and decides how 'dangerous' it is? 

And as for the big takeover you describe where big pharma monopolizes the growth and distribution, keeping it out of our hands and regulating quality downward and prices upward, I can see where someone might fear such a thing very much but it's extremely unlikely to happen that way. 

Whether it's big pharma, tobacco, or the alcohol industry that jumps in to take advantage, they all have one common motivation: profits. And I know that can often lead to bad things, but in this case quantity of consumers and quality of product will bring them the most profits if legalization is expanded and they encourage home grows and small micro grow operations. 

So I stick by my assertion that you were wrong and even if it was unintentional you were fear-mongering. 

Finally, here you say that you are not telling people to not get MMJ recommendations. But then you say that people have to doctor hop to find one who gives recommendations, and you say that people without "real" medical conditions are ruining it for everyone else. 

To that I say that first you are indeed telling them not to get recommendations. So you are telling them to remain illegal and keep participating in illegal transactions that can only hurt the cause and when they have the opportunity to become legal. 

Second, there is no need to doctor hop because there are many fine clinics that specialize in MMJ recommendations and they do make efforts to filter out those who obviously see it as a scam. 

And finally, who better than a doctor is able to define what is a real medical condition? Not you, I'm sure. I've had terrible insomnia for most of my adult life. I can go for 3, 4, even 5 days without sleep and I can tell you that it is hellish. My moods swing, my abilities to think and act properly are stunted, and I feel like crap in a hat. But people always told me that it wasn't a "real" medical issue, but just mind over matter. 

And the sleeping aids that are available are not great. Some don't really work, some work too well and leave you dragging ass the next day, and some even make you feel sick and mess with your moods and thoughts in even worse ways. But MMJ gives me the blessings of good sleep along with other great benefits and no bad side effects. So I'm not gonna let anyone else start judging whether or not it's a real condition. That's between me and my doctor as it should be. 

So I say yes, go get that doctor's recommendation and be happy. Further, be proud that you are finally legal and can stand up to those who judge and say yes, I use MMJ and I'm legal. So I do not fear your judgment or the authorities or anyone else because I am legal and that makes ALL the difference!


----------



## NewGrowth (Nov 24, 2009)

Well said Eire.

Jax I think you should visit California, or even Colorado. Things really have changed, medical marijuana is everywhere.

As far as the comments about who "needs" medical marijuana . . . well so far the doctors seem to think quite a few people could benefit from it. The health department is getting 400 new applications a week. More patients never hurt the cause  Conservatives are ranting and raving about all the dispensaries blah blah blah. But guess what!? We voted it into LAW so there is nothign the can do about it. As a result so far the cannabis industry is exploding here in Colorado.


----------



## Eire (Nov 25, 2009)

Thanks NewGrowth! 

Yes Jax, maybe you know someone that you can visit. Talk to some of the people at dispensaries. 

It's great to hear you're getting relief in your area too, NG. Are you having any of the trouble we're having? 

I hear in LA the commissioners are bunched up about there being more dispensaries than Starbucks. I wonder that in this economy they are not holding a parade for anyone opening new businesses. 

Down south they busted pipe shops because they sometimes used the term 'bong' instead of 'pipe' and the difference is that one is drug paraphernalia and the other is for tobacco. But aren't both legal if you have a recommendation? 

And they busted some dispensaries because dispensaries are supposed to be non-profit and the authorities vaguely claimed they could tell by the way that these dispensaries advertised and the way they did business that they were working for profit. But don't non-profits advertise so they can get more money so they can use it to help more people? And they just want donations without helping you in return like dispensaries do. And if your a new dispensary, don't you need to grow at least to the point of being able to pay your employees? I mean, are the employees supposed to work for free? 

I can see that we still have far to go. We need laws to specifically protect patients, collectives, and dispensary systems from unreasonable persecution by authorities. We need more awareness so not only cops and DAs but regular people can get past any preconceptions they might have towards us. We need protection from employer drug testing results that show only marijuana use. And I'm sure I'm overlooking some other very important issues. 

The point is that we may rejoice in our own happy circumstances, but there is definitely more to do. I'm investigating meetings that I might attend as we speak.


----------



## NewGrowth (Nov 25, 2009)

Still a young industry out here. They put a moratorium on any further dispensaries opening in my area. The local sheriff is vocal about his opposition to MMJ and Dispensaries. There is also an idiot at city council that owns two "massage" parlors but thinks MMJ is evil. 

The good part is that it seems to be a local fight and that is fine by me. These local guys are not too swift, and the judges have ruled in favor of patients in pretty much every trial in the state. 

The environment is very high energy because the vibe seems to be getting better despite opposition attempts at blocking the movement from growing. Advocacy groups are popping up all over the state too. GREEN REVOLUTION!


----------



## Bucket head (Nov 25, 2009)

NewGrowth said:


> Still a young industry out here. They put a moratorium on any further dispensaries opening in my area. The local sheriff is vocal about his opposition to MMJ and Dispensaries. There is also an idiot at city council that owns two "massage" parlors but thinks MMJ is evil.
> 
> The good part is that it seems to be a local fight and that is fine by me. These local guys are not too swift, and the judges have ruled in favor of patients in pretty much every trial in the state.
> 
> The environment is very high energy because the vibe seems to be getting better despite opposition attempts at blocking the movement from growing. Advocacy groups are popping up all over the state too. GREEN REVOLUTION!




fuck the haters... they can suck a dick up until they hick-up...lol


----------



## NewGrowth (Nov 25, 2009)

Bucket head said:


> fuck the haters... they can suck a dick up until they hick-up...lol


Yep that is why we got our licenses before the moratorium  hope to open a dispensary here in February


----------



## Bucket head (Nov 25, 2009)

NewGrowth said:


> Yep that is why we got our licenses before the moratorium  hope to open a dispensary here in February




Word man... Overgrow those haters.


----------



## Eire (Nov 25, 2009)

Good going NG. I hope your dispensary does gangbusters. Will you have a lounge area? 

Glad to hear the energy is high too. I'm looking forward to getting into it here. I should have moved here long ago. 

We also have some local resistance as I've described. In SD there's a DA Bonnie Dumanis that's always bugging to bash on us. 

But we will yet pry her loose of our throats. A few months back a guy sued back instead of taking a plea and he won. He was found not guilty in his prosecution and then won his counter suit. So SD had to pay his legal bills and their own which was I think $139K. Then they had to pay him damages of $100K. Then he sued again and they had to go buy him $800 worth of MMJ to replace what they had confiscated. I almost cheered when I read the newspaper article. 

Then just a couple months ago she busted the dispensaries. But things went a little differently. It was still a terror for everyone, but in the past she usually claimed that it was a Fed operation and the SD cops were just riding along and pressing what charges they could in addition to the Feds. But after these raids a Fed spokesperson preempted her and said it was an SD op and they were the ones riding along to protect the rights of the people who were obeying the MMJ laws. So she's hanging in the wind from that. I can only hope she goes from there to under the bus and out of office!


----------



## ndangerspecimen101 (Nov 25, 2009)

*My point was AND STILL IS, to all of you folks out there without a real medical condition, UR going to ruin it for the truly needy. I stand by that post and attitude. Anyone selfishly glomming onto medical weed, who isn't truly sick, is hurting the cause.

Everyone is watching, this is no time to be selfish-CRACKERJAX*

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

This is completely true, in every sense that is the main government concern as in to "audit the use of marijuana" between adolescents and adults, and the sick from the healthy. Another key issue is the way the process of buying the marijuana comes out, as money transactions could cause a downward spiral so to say to de-regulate the main cause of legalizing marijuana and make it a solely a profit maker for those in care of the dispenseries!


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 25, 2009)

NewGrowth said:


> It seems to be moving more towards the Dutch system right now from what I can see cracker. They are talking about legalizing recreational marijuana for adults over 21yrs in California.
> 
> The whole dispensary model is becoming more like the dutch coffee shop scene. Seems similar with cultivation and transportation of large amounts being illegal but the acceptance of large scale distribution out of store-fronts.
> 
> Right now there is very little infrastructure in place for a legal system besides the dispensaries. Where the pot is coming from and how it is produced is still a mystery . . . .::





ndangerspecimen101 said:


> *My point was AND STILL IS, to all of you folks out there without a real medical condition, UR going to ruin it for the truly needy. I stand by that post and attitude. Anyone selfishly glomming onto medical weed, who isn't truly sick, is hurting the cause.
> 
> Everyone is watching, this is no time to be selfish-CRACKERJAX*
> 
> ...


Thank you, that's all i was saying, but some folks don't get it.

Medical is just that... MEDICAL. If and hopefully when it goes national, it will follow the route of all drugs, through the FDA. There will be a winnowing out process of growers and only those capable of producing very clean and stable weed will be allowed to grow by CONTRACT. If you don't have a Contract with the FDA, guess what? You'll be in the same boat U are today, illegal.

That's all.


----------



## Eire (Nov 25, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Thank you, that's all i was saying, but some folks don't get it.
> 
> Medical is just that... MEDICAL. If and hopefully when it goes national, it will follow the route of all drugs, through the FDA. There will be a winnowing out process of growers and only those capable of producing very clean and stable weed will be allowed to grow by CONTRACT. If you don't have a Contract with the FDA, guess what? You'll be in the same boat U are today, illegal.
> 
> That's all.



Jax, I'm sorry dude but flat out, Federal regulation of MMJ will not make home grows illegal. That's paranoid and stupid. 

Look, a home brewer has no concern about impurities or alcohol level. But if he wants to sell locally them he must conform to local regulations for such. He may need to modify his recipe, fill out forms, and have inspections. But he can do what he wants. If he is blessed to be bought out by a big brewer then they will further modify the recipe and the brewing methods to conform to federal standards. 

But still the home brewer for personal use is exempt ad legal! It benefits everyone including the big corporations and the federal government that it be so! 

Now before you go writing a reply ask yourself if you really, really need to be right in this case. Because I tell you truly that I don't. I just wish, I pray that you might have something to teach me even if it would embarrass me. That's because I want to grow as a person and learning does that. And growing the balls to admit that I was wrong also does that. 

So you can be right, and you can grow as a person, by just admitting that you were once in the past wrong, before you changed your mind. Then I hope that you will feel positive optimism instead of negative pessimism. You can start being hopeful about change and not fearful of it. The truth will set you free, my friend. 

Look, I'll start and admit that I am acting from one of my faults right now. I am not one to hammer a nail halfway down. I do not hunt to wound animals. When I fish I do not catch and release. I follow a goal with obsession. It's not always pleasant. It's not always pretty. I don't always succeed. 

But perhaps this time I can turn a paranoid nay-sayer into a hopeful supporter of some changes of which we have all dreamed. Maybe I can help you. Maybe I can make a friend who knows that I will not watch him fall without reaching out my hand because I wouldn't do it back when he was a stranger. 

Or maybe I'll make a bitter enemy that resents me because I would not allow him even the tiniest bit of cover under which to hide and nurse his wounded pride. 

That's a risk I will take because I'm strong enough to take the loss and hopeful enough to try for the win. I hope you can understand that it is both of our weaknesses that have brought us here. For my part, I am sorry. 

<-])


----------



## Eire (Nov 25, 2009)

I write silly stuff for fun and distraction. I don't usually show it around. I wrote a commercial for a fictional cannabis charity. I know it's strange. But my thoughts that led to it and the commercial itself may be somehow pertinent or helpful, so I'll post it. And I'll be ready for the razzing if you all so wish it. 

I hear that the San Diego DA's office thinks that all dispensaries are for-profit and thus illegal. They site the advertisements of some dispensaries as examples of for-profit activity. I assume they have other reasons as well. But the point is that the San Diego DA's office believes that the goal of dispensaries is to keep the money for themselves. 

I began thinking of these two issues of advertising and business growth on one hand and the net results for the goals of any non-profit charity. In the case of advertising I found no reason why any non-profit would fail to advertise. Who doesn't remember some celebrity telling how many cups of coffee it would take to feed a family of seven? 

Besides, they must gain public awareness somehow, they must grow to at least pay their workers, they must grow as an organization so that they can help more people, they must maximize their income so they can also help the most people. So there is every reason for a non-profit to advertise. The Red Cross, March of Dimes, and an endless list of other non-profits would never have been able to help as many people as they have if they could not advertise and grow as an organization and yes, a non-profit business. 

That left me with the question of what are the net results, the goals of these non-profit dispensaries. I assume they are contributing a percentage of their income to help those to whom they give care and from whom they have gathered that income. I also assume that they contribute another percentage to organizations that help address the issues of others that are in similar need. I assume NORML and the ASA as well as many others use contributions to further assist those who can benefit from safe access to medical marijuana. 

But I wonder if they might benefit from their own local charity that will specifically help all those who suffer in California. They could all contribute a percentage of their income to this charity, less for new dispensaries who do not yet generate enough contributions and more for the established organizations. Then this charity would invest in medical cannabis research, research into non-drug related hemp products and businesses that can enhance California's financial strength and business community, and efforts to enhance public acceptance of this remarkable and valuable plant. 

For instance, their first investment might be an advertisement to promote the it's own causes just like those ads we remember. For fun, I have written the script below. It could be something entirely different, but this is my take. 

Fade in on an older gentleman wearing a medical smock and stethoscope, standing on dirt in an empty lot somewhere in California. "Hello," he says, smiling "My name is Will Willington, and I'd like to speak to you about Medical Marijuana." 

Will turns and gestures, and is joined by a youngish middle-aged man, dressed simply and clean-cut. "This is Johnathan Doeson. He has insomnia." 

"It's really terrible." Johnathan states, "It effected my relationships, my career, my ability to function. Other medications didn't help or had side effects." 

Will turns and gestures again. He is joined by an elderly woman. "This is Martha Marida. She has arthritis." 

"It helps with the pain." Martha claims, looking earnestly and sweetly hopeful into the camera. 

Another man in a wheelchair rolls up and claims "My bones hurt! It helps!" 

A woman walks up, bald with a bandanna on her head. "I get nauseous." She says. "I need to eat." 

A crowd gathers and they all speak. You can't here an individual one, but they are all claiming help in need. 

Will turns to the crowd and raises his hands for silence. Then he turns back to the camera. 

"We are the California Compassion Collective." He states. "We are a charity devoted to assisting California residents and businesses gain the most benefit from all aspects of the cannabis plant." He pauses to let it sink in, then continues. 

"We aren't asking for your money. This is not about donations. We are a charity funded directly by those who we seek to help." Again he pauses, then continues. 

"What we are asking from you is your compassion and understanding. Dispensaries exist to provide the quality medication that your friends, family, and neighbors need. And in doing so they contribute to the economy and to your local business community. They are proud to be your friends and neighbors." Will allows another pause. 

"These dispensaries and their members only want you to understand that they are genuine in their desire to contribute to a better life for everyone. They have a commitment to compassion, and they need your compassion to better succeed at those goals. They need you to write to your leaders local and state level to tell them that you support the legitimate operation of medical marijuana dispensaries. Tell them to stop raiding and terrorizing these law-abiding non-profit organizations, and start writing better laws to properly protect and regulate this worthy industry." Yet another pause. 

Then Will steps in closer to the camera and shares "We need to stop the costly cycle of arrests and lawsuits back and forth between our leaders and those who provide help for those in need." 

Will steps back with the crowd of people and says more loudly "So go to ccc.org and learn who needs to hear from you. We all thank you." 

And the crowd erupts with a collective "Thank You!" 

Fade out. 

<-])


----------



## Iron Lion Zion (Nov 26, 2009)

Eire said:


> Good business sense and an appetite for profits will usher it through the early times of high regulation to later times of less regulation for the reasons I have already stated. My reasons are the rock solid motivations of profits and business sense.


I agree with this.
While MMJ might start out similar to how he mentioned it, I have a feeling the $$ will be too easily made off of it and something better will arise.
The way I see it panning out (potentially):
States are allowed to make their own decisions based on marijuana - More states jump on the bandwagon - Some stay off, and continue to punish people - The states that accept it start making too much $$ off of it - Those that didn't, see this, and follow suit.

Even if it goes to the MMJ route, the fact that doctors are backing it, and assuming politicians realize that they are not medical professionals, MMJ will end up as a state issue (as mentioned) and the potential for profit will all but remove the regulatory "hiccups" that Cracker is suggesting.

The reason I think it will become a state issue is because, as Obama has already shown us, by allowing the states to decide, he takes the pressure off of himself/whoever is president, and places it on the state governments to decide.

Again, this is just my wishful thinking as well as my guess as to how this will all pan out. If it even does.


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 26, 2009)

That's nice, when's the last time you bought home made aspirin?

FDA .... medical .... the future .... home grown

One of these doesn't fit. Can you guess which one?


----------



## Eire (Nov 26, 2009)

You're still talking about selling it, you idiot. Everything is regulated if you want to sell it. Personal use is not. But you want to sell your home grow, or beer, or homemade dream catchers then it will be regulated at least as far as taxing sales. Your talking about home grows as if everyone is a dealer, maybe like you. Maybe that's why you can't get it through your head that everything changes when you want to sell it.


----------



## ndangerspecimen101 (Nov 26, 2009)

Im sort of caught between crackerjax and eire... for the simple fact that if it does really get legailized in some states then the term and whole/cause of marijuana would be strictly for medical use, such as many amphetamines and opiates are scheduled as such within the FDA's power. If you don't have a license than you can illicit the sale and production thereof... but things turn ugly as this is product that is easily obtained and can be produced with relative ease. The law at the moment does give users the right to grow up to a few plants for personal use but when the law defines wholly as a medical dictum of regulations then things turn gray... and voices get mangled, definitions lose their potency, and then tables turn from one side to the other... trying to not contradict eachother but soon fall back to the same place. This debate can be fought until voices whimper to whispers!


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 26, 2009)

It's because Eire is talking about the present and I'm talking about the future. 

He thinks its going to stay similar to what is happening now. It won't. 

Weed will eventually be regulated by the FDA and when it does, it will create stricter guidelines on who can supply the MEDICINE.


Scenario: Contract

Now let's say Mr. X who has a nice 1000 sq ft of growing space with a great set up & equipment and years of growing experience.

He wants to grow for the new MMJ consortium established by the FDA (since it will be national).

But someone else shows up. Oh, I'll just pick one out of many from a hat and go with Pfizer. 

But then someone else shows up. A 3rd generation farmer with 5000 acres available.

and so on and so on.

Who gets the contract?

If it goes national & federal, it will go big business. Some current growers may make the cut, but the vast majority will be winnowed out. The product is actually irrelevant, this is the pattern of all things small that get large.


----------



## ndangerspecimen101 (Nov 26, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> It's because Eire is talking about the present and I'm talking about the future.
> 
> He thinks its going to stay similar to what is happening now. It won't.
> 
> ...


It would definitely go to the big boys, and its a crying shame!

Although, their would be private contractors but thats where a misinformed decision could lay frail and may actually damage the cause of it all.

Why do you have this overwhelming feeling that this may occur? Is it from traditional collective thought or by formal talks of this occuring?


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 26, 2009)

MMJ is in its infancy, and I'm glad it's made real headway. It's friggin fantastic!! 

But ... the avenue it has taken is medical, as opposed to full legalization/decriminalization for the general public.

This could just be the crack in the door we all need to get to legalization, but that's an unknown and hard to quantify.

MMJ would be HUGE if it went national. That's when the big boys, the professional big boys will step up to the plate. I've seen some "regular" nurseries that would make your jaw drop. Some unbelievable stuff going on out there in Big AG land. Life and business is competition based, for better or worse (mostly better). 

If it goes nation wide, the game will change. Mom & Pop just won't cut it. Heck, the demand alone would keep many big farmers busy in every state of the union. It would be huge.


----------



## ndangerspecimen101 (Nov 26, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> MMJ is in its infancy, and I'm glad it's made real headway. It's friggin fantastic!!
> 
> But ... the avenue it has taken is medical, as opposed to full legalization/decriminalization for the general public.
> 
> ...


and thats the sort of competitive business that the DEA is looking at! Private sectors would mostly likely have to give up that power and most dispensies to as most are privately run and the profit is somehow not generated into the state...


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 26, 2009)

Oh, there will be profit pouring back to govt., make no mistake, or it simply won't happen.

Money is the grease of govt., and none of it is produced by them. 

Next thing you know there will be weed lobbyists in Washington.


----------



## ford442 (Nov 26, 2009)

i think its interesting about Israel working on a national medi-pot policy since they are one of our allies...

---

Yesterday, Israel&#8217;s Ministry of Health was ordered to finalize within four months a detailed bill that would regulate the production and marketing of medical marijuana in that country.
Additional measures recommended by a government health committee included making sure that medical marijuana remains affordable for patients and implementing safeguards to prevent the drug from reaching illegal users and merchants.
Once again, Israel&#8217;s government has shown a desire to promote the wellbeing of patients who can benefit from medical marijuana&#8212;something our federal government continues to avoid.


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 26, 2009)

They should be air dropping 50lb bales of weed over Palestine. that would stop the attacks.


----------



## smokinguns (Nov 26, 2009)

Perhaps sooner than later all the closet smokers can come out and admit they are tokers and have been for years. Seems I know more people that smoke than don't. And, the ones that don't smoke, they would but can't because of random testing at thier jobs. I'm thinkijng the averages on who smokes and who does not are way, way off. What do you guys think?


----------



## smokinguns (Nov 26, 2009)

Here's a thought. Take two test subjects, place them in seperate rooms and have one take shots and the other smoke. Then, subject each of them to a series of test much like the ones we have all seen on the effects of booze. Have them read, stand, balance, drive and so on. I think the results would be very interesting however, I'm sure the federal goverment would not like the results very much.


----------



## ndangerspecimen101 (Nov 26, 2009)

*Next thing you know there will be weed lobbyists in Washington.*



Rolling on the floor!


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 26, 2009)

Those studies have been done, and I don't think even a police officer would tell you that booze is less harmful.

But, smoking weed does affect you physically so for driving at least, it's still a no go. Ppl can hardly drive now sober ...


----------



## ndangerspecimen101 (Nov 26, 2009)

*They should be air dropping 50lb bales of weed over Palestine. that would stop the attacks. *

Like a scoop of god's air brushing over the land, marijuana would calm things if your looking at it in a humorous way


----------



## ndangerspecimen101 (Nov 26, 2009)

Texting is accounting for most of the accidents now... its proven a driver is more impaired while texting then under the influence of marijuana!


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 26, 2009)

Exactly.....

Hamas officer to underling :

Abdul, Where are the last shipment of rockets from Iran?

Underling: Uhh, I don't know. hey did you ever notice that if you open and shut ur eyes really quickly, it's like a old time movie? try it?!! It's kewl!!

Shot rings out ....


----------



## ndangerspecimen101 (Nov 26, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Exactly.....
> 
> Hamas officer to underling :
> 
> ...




A shuttering camera effect, I love when the government in some form admits its wrong!


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 26, 2009)

No one admits anything until their power wanes, and they're off the front page.


----------



## NewGrowth (Nov 26, 2009)

Jax usually I respect your opinion but I think you are really far off in your predictions. We are a long way from having the FDA regulate Marijuana as a medicine.

I really don't understand why you feel the need to be right about something you are so far away and disconnected from. It is pretty obvious that the industry is BRAND NEW, IMO any predictions made for such a young market are asinine; especially when the person making the prediction lives in such an ANTI-pot state.

Things are changing for the better wether you believe it or not. Your arguments of "medical necessity" have been rehashed by the conservative nay-sayers in my state for years. The point is the Judges continue to rule in favor of patients and doctors regardless of their said "illness". Their reason being . . . cops, judges, and lawyers are not doctors and therefore the consensus is they should not be the ones deciding who can have MMJ.

I also find it very hard to believe that the FDA would be successful at keeping cannabis in the hands of only commercial growers. Too many people grow their own pot now days it would be like trying to shut down everyones home-brew operation in the country.

Like I stated before you should visit one of the MMJ states like California or Colorado where the dispensary model is going strong. Talk to a dispensary owner, talk to some patients. Otherwise you are talking out your ass based on little real world experience in the industry.


----------



## ndangerspecimen101 (Nov 26, 2009)

_*Jax usually I respect your opinion but I think you are really far off in your predictions. We are a long way from having the FDA regulate *__*marijuana*_* as a medicine.*

I've only been on this thread for some few minutes now and its crackerjax emphasis on the "future" not at the immediate moment, the whole fda regulation of marijuana is something in the future when it may go national. You have to realize that, read a few of his post and you'll catch his drift!


----------



## Eire (Nov 26, 2009)

Great discussion, everyone. But I'd still like to know why Jax can not separate in his mind small personal use home grows from bigger grows intended for sale? 

I understand that there is much to worry about and work at as the movement grows. Jax has made some good points about that. But why, why does he keep returning to the idea that the Fed will help big AG by outlawing and going after small personal use home grows? Why does he keep assuming that there are no grows for any other reason than sales and profit? 

And why does he stick to predicting disaster and never points the way to any kind of acceptable solution? If it's going to be so bad, how do we avoid that, Jax? Or are we just all doomed and reduced to discussing how much that sucks?


----------



## Purple^stars (Nov 26, 2009)

This is really good news! Happy Thanksgiving rollitup.


----------



## ndangerspecimen101 (Nov 26, 2009)

Eire said:


> Great discussion, everyone. But I'd still like to know why Jax can not separate in his mind small personal use home grows from bigger grows intended for sale?
> 
> I understand that there is much to worry about and work at as the movement grows. Jax has made some good points about that. But why, why does he keep returning to the idea that the Fed will help big AG by outlawing and going after small personal use home grows? Why does he keep assuming that there are no grows for any other reason than sales and profit?
> 
> And why does he stick to predicting disaster and never points the way to any kind of acceptable solution? If it's going to be so bad, how do we avoid that, Jax? Or are we just all doomed and reduced to discussing how much that sucks?


It is sort of an "over stipulation of the idea" that the DEA would actually confine and take away the priviledge of personal home grown operations. But the barter system can be one cruel system, especially in the american economy!


----------



## Eire (Nov 26, 2009)

In my view you gotta get the basics straight and not confuse them before you can reasonably discuss the various issues. To that end as I see it there are three groups of individuals who support any kind of legalization. 

First there are those who just want to purchase and use it legally so they have no worries about troubles that may occur if they were illegal. 

Second there are those who wish to have a small, private grow for personal use because they like growing and/or wish to save money and/or want to maintain a stable supply of a know quality and/or want to keep their private activities private. 

Third there are those who want to be involved in the production and sale of marijuana. 

Each person has their own reasons and motivations for supporting various tactics and goals for legalization. That's totally normal and acceptable. 

The question is how can we promote legalization so that we can best protect the interests of everyone involved? 

Will promoting medical marijuana lead to the downfall of small to medium scale production and sales as it seems Jax is predicting? 

Does this mean that we should support only full legalization or nothing? If so, then how do we successfully promote full legalization when the majority is barely willing to accept medical marijuana? If not, how can we support medical marijuana so that we can keep small and medium operations viable? 

It seems obvious that medical marijuana is the quickest and easiest way to satisfy the first two groups of individuals. But if it leads to a de-facto ban on the third, should the first two give up what they can get now in order to protect the third group at some distant future time? 

Once we have decided which way to go, then we must discuss all the problems we might face and how to address them and possibly head them off before they occur. 

But the bottom line is that there must be a way, we must make a way to move forward with an eye on all these issues. We can't just decide that it's hopeless and give up. That is not an option.


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 27, 2009)

If the Federal govt EVER gives the nod to National MMJ, it will be because there is a tax to be collected form it. Home growers would subvert the taxes. It would be MUCH EASIER for the Govt. to have large corporate growers in charge of production. Maximizing taxes is what it's all about in Govt. It's the easy way to go, and that's exactly the pattern of govt. Path of least resistance. 

I'm certainly not against the small grower. I am one... 

BUT, if weed goes national and is considered a medical drug, well, I just know big AG & PHarma will tag team. 

Full blown legalization? Then you can figure that Big Tobacco will get the nod from the govt. for production.

There just isn't any pattern of "more individual rights" emanating from the US Govt. It's the other way around lately...


----------



## Eire (Nov 27, 2009)

I agree with you entirely here. 

But I also think that Fed involvement is inevitable. So the bigs who want to market it will push to re-classify it to the same level as beer and wine for their own benefit. The AMA is already preparing the way. That way, their consumer base will not be as limited as it is under medical codes. So it is likely to remain medical only so long as it is only in the hands of the states. 

Plus, the bigs would also benefit by following the example of beer and wine where small micros do all the hard work of inventing new recipes and creating local markets for them. Then the bigs can buy out the micros and it is a financial win-win for both. 

I realize that it could go the other way. I'm not betting for or against it at this point. But if we want it to go our way then we have gotta make sure we stay involved. 

On another note, today I was surprised to find that many people think it is good to stall further reform in CA right now. They want to give the current system time to flesh out and settle a bit, give the govt time to appreciate the extra tax income, and they want some people to get flush and influential from it so that there are some heavyweights to deal with if the govt tries to get hinky (yes, even though it's supposed to be non-profit, ha). 

I also heard that there are indeed some big corps moving in (I forget who specifically, but probably big AG & Pharma) and they're telling the govt to tread carefully or else. 

This is all mostly just talk I heard, but it made me say hmmmm.


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 28, 2009)

If there's big profit available, big corp's will show up. 

Right now MMJ is a "cottage" industry. National acceptance will change all that. 

That's been my main point in these posts....


----------



## Eire (Nov 28, 2009)

True, true. I just don't think it will stay medical once it goes national.


----------



## growone (Nov 28, 2009)

love this thread, i'm beginning to think we may see some major federal change within a year or 2
i had been thinking it was going to be a state thing, there would be slow progress, and eventually there would be some federal changes
but the AMA is so 'joined at the hip' with the medical/federal bureaucracy, they don't make major moves without some kind of ok
so i'm beginning to think there is more progress on this front than i would have expected a few months ago


----------



## Eire (Nov 28, 2009)

Yes, I just read an article on cannabisnews.org where they posit that within 5 years a majority of all Americans will favor legalization. Right now there's a majority in the West but not in the East. But they said that support is growing by 2 percent per year.


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 28, 2009)

Constitutionally, the process should entail changes being made at the state level first (like what's happening now). If enough states follow MMj, then the tipping point will have been reached.


----------



## growone (Nov 28, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Constitutionally, the process should entail changes being made at the state level first (like what's happening now). If enough states follow MMj, then the tipping point will have been reached.


I'm thinking of what's likely to be a major federal move. I'm not sure how the drug scheduling system works, but I think there may be a major change without legislation. Glad to hear from anybody more informed if this is not the case.


----------



## CrackerJax (Nov 28, 2009)

Except for national defense and national highways, all things should be worked out at the state level. That's what the founding fathers envisioned. It's what is happening right now.


----------



## OregonMeds (Nov 28, 2009)

Things are happening in the background but I'm not in the loop either:
Allen St. Pierre, the executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, said he was astonished recently to be invited to contribute thoughts to the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Obama's drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske, was police chief in Seattle, where voters officially made enforcement of marijuana laws the lowest priority. 
"I've been thrown out of the ONDCP many times," St. Pierre said. "Never invited to actually participate." 

Another history making moment...


----------



## growone (Nov 28, 2009)

OregonMeds said:


> Things are happening in the background but I'm not in the loop either:
> Allen St. Pierre, the executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, said he was astonished recently to be invited to contribute thoughts to the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Obama's drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske, was police chief in Seattle, where voters officially made enforcement of marijuana laws the lowest priority.
> "I've been thrown out of the ONDCP many times," St. Pierre said. "Never invited to actually participate."
> 
> Another history making moment...


yeah, this is the stuff i'm seeing
i've no inside knowledge, but from the looks of it, a deal is being cut
my guess is there is going to be some rescheduling soon with MM more freely accessible in the clinical setting


----------



## ndangerspecimen101 (Dec 1, 2009)

Eire said:


> In my view you gotta get the basics straight and not confuse them before you can reasonably discuss the various issues. To that end as I see it there are three groups of individuals who support any kind of legalization.
> 
> First there are those who just want to purchase and use it legally so they have no worries about troubles that may occur if they were illegal.
> 
> ...


Whoa but you totally refrained from keeping the 4th straw handy! Where do the medical patients come in?


----------



## ndangerspecimen101 (Dec 1, 2009)

_Things are happening in the background but I'm not in the loop either:
Allen St. Pierre, the executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of marijuana Laws, said he was astonished recently to be invited to contribute thoughts to the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Obama's drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske, was police chief in Seattle, where voters officially made enforcement of marijuana laws the lowest priority. 
"I've been thrown out of the ONDCP many times," St. Pierre said. "Never invited to actually participate." 

Another history making moment..._

_To Bring someone of great ridicule of the game, who knows the stragedy very well could be of great contribute to the cause, I see big changes, but time will only tell in this case of opposing voices and standards!_


----------



## Eire (Dec 2, 2009)

ndangerspecimen101 said:


> Whoa but you totally refrained from keeping the 4th straw handy! Where do the medical patients come in?


MMJ patients can fit any of these cats just like recreational users. An MMJ patient might just want her meds without worry or hassle, or he might enjoy gardening and raising his own, or she might want to be involved in the whole process. 

So SD just came out with some guidelines for dispensaries and cooperatives. CA state will have a bill for full legalization on the 2010 ballot and is already working to get it on the 2012 ballot also, in case 2010 fails. That's good. 

Meanwhile the local & state agencies still seem set against collective grows and any grow that is bigger than a small indoor patch. So no one can make a big legal grow, which has skewed the supply & demand towards criminal elements. This could be foolishness or it could be making way for big corporate grows. 

On the other hand, these circumstances favor the small legal grow because it puts their production at a premium price as long as it remains small and is of a high quality. So small grows can earn a decent supplementary income for now. But this is likely a closing window of opportunity. 

Who knows how it may work out over time. It still scares me to think that the tide will turn on us before we reach victory. But for now small is all. 

Hmmm, I wonder how big small can really be? Hehehe


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 3, 2009)

I'll just point out the obvious already. In case anyone hasn't noticed, Obama is President and the Dem's control both houses.

If not now? When???? What's the hold up?

Waiting till the power to implement it wanes? (????)


----------



## OregonMeds (Dec 3, 2009)

Waiting for the day he doesn't need anyones help from the house or senate or republicans or democrats for anything else any longer maybe? It is still in many circles considered political suicide you know? Might be one of the the last thing he does, and rightly so...


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 3, 2009)

It's hardly suicide? Pick up the papers son, it's the next big thing!! The country is ready for it? 

heck, the country is AGAINST health care, but that's not stopping a completely lopsided one party monster socialized tax program.

Weed is too tough next to Health care? NONSENSE!!

At this point if he decided weed was the fall back position, the country would applaud.

Faced with tax oblivion and economic permanent mediocrity, or legal weed ... which would you choose?


----------



## Eire (Dec 4, 2009)

In politics nothing is often the best thing to do. Unless you want something done. 

)


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 4, 2009)

We'll never have a more politically favorable time than right now however. If not now ... when??


----------



## Bucket head (Dec 6, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> We'll never have a more politically favorable time than right now however. If not now ... when??



this is true...


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 6, 2009)

Yes, whatever your political leaning are.... this is a simple reality check. The time to get weed legalized/decrim'd is closing. 

It's GO TIME right now! Stoner issues cross all party lines. If not now? When??


----------



## growone (Dec 6, 2009)

CrackerJax said:


> Yes, whatever your political leaning are.... this is a simple reality check. The time to get weed legalized/decrim'd is closing.
> 
> It's GO TIME right now! Stoner issues cross all party lines. If not now? When??


here's my simple point of view, just my way of looking at it
it's not about us, the people that want the simple, legal right to use MJ as we see fit
it's about the people that really don't want it, and the will to enforce laws that plainly becoming more obviously stupid day by day
and that will is failing, just a question of time, and probably not much more time


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 6, 2009)

Public opinion of weed as basically harmless is at an all time high. 

Like I said before, most Americans are against GOVT. health care, but this doesn't stop Congress from plowing ahead.

If they want a street fight on weed, we should give it to them! Let's start calling Congress and Obama out on weed. They act like we don't exist...


----------



## Eire (Dec 6, 2009)

Hooray, Crackerjack! Let's all promise ourselves to do something. If you want to write your reps, call them, send letters to your local papers, whatever. Do it now and repeat every couple of weeks. The squeaky wheel gets the grease! 

BTW, 75% of Americans want health care reform. They just can't decide how they want it reformed. But legal marijuana is an issue of basic liberty. Let's gain the liberty to live our own lives. Then we can discuss how to best ensure that we keep living.


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 6, 2009)

Oh, they have decided what they don't want ... the govt. being in charge of something so important. Reform is easily done by the private sector, but the govt. won't allow it for obvious reasons. They want it for themselves. 

They are also coincidentally NOT putting themselves or their entire staff under the same laws. They will keep their platinum private health care on our dime.

After all, they are royalty. Right?? Can you smell the hypocrisy?


----------



## Eire (Dec 6, 2009)

Well someone has to tell the highwaymen to stop taking our money and then letting us die anyway. Letting them enact reform on their own is like telling criminals to write their own laws. Free market forces don't work in this particular industry because the consumer does not have the choice to stop buying a bad product and thus inspiring better products. It's pay now and die later or pay even more later and still die. Free Market Capitalism is like everything else in the world in that it is great except when it isn't. 

But I'm not sure that issue is right for this thread. We are talking about MMJ and MJ legalization in this one, right? I'm confused because we are also talking about the AMA here.


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 7, 2009)

Well, it's all medical, and we already know what we need to do for weed...

Ur right, it's about choice. Right now it is the govt. who is restricting ur choice.

They by the way have (federal employees)the highest amount of choices of anyone in the country. Can u smell the hypocrisy?


----------



## OregonMeds (Dec 7, 2009)

"But I'm not sure that issue is right for this thread. We are talking about MMJ and MJ legalization in this one, right? I'm confused because we are also talking about the AMA here. "

Look at the title of this thread. It'll come to you, just take your time.


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 7, 2009)

I get it, no worries, but as I said, we know what must be done.

The time is now!! Write your Fed reps, let them know how Obama is letting us all down!! If we don't get this passed soon, it isn't going to happen. Then the political blade will slice the other way and states may get caught in the lurch .. meaning us.


----------



## Eire (Dec 7, 2009)

Yes, we have to keep the pressure on forward motion. I think that's why the tax initiative is palatable right now, because we need the states to settle into it before harsher opponents get elected. 

Perhaps that's why Obama is standing back after taking the Fed pressure off of MMJ, he is giving the states time to get their own priorities in order and settle into systems of use and taxation. Once a majority of states have accepted use and have regulated taxation, then it will be hard for the Fed to fight them and easier for it to follow suit. 

This is how it is supposed to work, anyway. The Fed is supposed to follow the states and not lead them. It goes all the way back to the Federalist papers that the states need a level of autonomy by which they can create and proof policies that are different from Federal regulations and thus guide the Fed to better policies. 

This is how our system evolves and improves itself even as it grows. An all-powerful Fed can only lead to national atrophy and political deadlock. 

Is that going too deep on the analysis?


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 7, 2009)

I sure hope ur right, but if the 2010 election go as predicted Obama will be hamstrung.


----------



## jweedy (Dec 7, 2009)

*Everyone knows its way better than ANY prescription drunk out there and alcohol and tobacco. its those giants that are keeping it illegal!!*


----------



## Eire (Dec 7, 2009)

Yes, the election will have strong effects. But who knows, maybe the new people will have a better attitude about marijuana. This seems like one issue that actually has good reasons for support on both the right and left of American politics. So I have some hope anyway. 

The giant corporations suck, true. Maybe health care reform will help. Big pharma can replace lost profits from their chemical drugs with MMJ profits. Then they'd want to make it over-the-counter to sell more. 

Besides, the election might surprise us. Things have been unpredictable for several election cycles already.


----------



## Eire (Dec 7, 2009)

There's a public Q&A forum at 7pm tomorrow in San Diego with K. Lance Rogers, the attorney who just won the first trial in SD that allowed an MMJ defense. Eugene Davidovich wrote: 

"For profit or not, it did not matter on December 1, 2009. In the case of
the People vs. Jackson the jury decided "very quickly" and "conclusively"
that due to the "medical marijuana affirmative defense", they could not
convict anyone in a collective or cooperative of "selling marijuana" because
selling marijuana is not strictly forbidden in the law that allows for an
affirmative defense. " 

I think that's pretty good news. The SD DA has been a real ball-busting be-atch. One of the people who testified that they belonged to this collective and the defendant was running it according to the law, was NOT allowed to testify that they were also an attorney at the SD DA office! Shee-eesh! I'm so glad they lost! 

;-])


----------



## OregonMeds (Dec 7, 2009)

Can someone WITH REAL LAW KNOWLEDGE please explain:
Does the decision in SD listed above only set firm legal precedence in the same state and something you can weakly refer to in other states defenses, or does this send a crushing blow nationally against prosecution for sales in collectives?

I don't mean to shout I just want to avoid opinions and get the truth.


----------



## Eire (Dec 7, 2009)

It's the former. But the effects in SD are expected to be huge.


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 8, 2009)

It works both ways actually. It can come from either direction. If enough states defy the fed's, then a critical mass can be accomplished nationally against Congress' wishes.

Conversely, and much easier is the fed's can simply tell the states they can do whatever they think is best and let the buds fall where they may.


----------



## Eire (Dec 8, 2009)

Right, I just meant that it works best when the Fed is not being a douche.


----------



## CrackerJax (Dec 8, 2009)

The founding fathers intended the states to figure out all of the "life" details. The Fed's were only supposed to be a skeleton of war armor and world good will, depending on the call. 

This has been subverted and we now have a war/tax/rebuild juggernaut Goliath in charge.


----------



## ford442 (Dec 8, 2009)

i keep wondering - where are the farmers in all this - are they not aware of how much they could be earning growing good grade hemp? or possibly even pot? 
i can see them not wanting to grow druuhhhgs on their land, but clearly hemp is not a drug and has been THE mainstay of farming virtually since the dawn of time.. is it WAY more profitable to grow than corn and the likes..


----------



## Dirty Harry (Dec 8, 2009)

ford442 said:


> i keep wondering - where are the farmers in all this - are they not aware of how much they could be earning growing good grade hemp? or possibly even pot?
> i can see them not wanting to grow druuhhhgs on their land, but clearly hemp is not a drug and has been THE mainstay of farming virtually since the dawn of time.. is it WAY more profitable to grow than corn and the likes..


I live in corn growing country. Corn and soybeans. With all the problems the farmers currently have with the economy, I don't think they will even look at this crop (In the USA) until all the grey areas are worked out and industrial HEMP is 100% legal.
I also wonder what the costs would be for a farmer to switch to a hemp crop. I take it the typical planters and combines won't do the job and there would be a need for heavy investment in new equipment. With a typical corn combine running $600,000 to a million dollars new, no bank would touch a loan for that unless the hemp market is locked in as legit and legal.


----------



## OregonMeds (Dec 8, 2009)

The farmers of old were mostly thrown off their land years ago when the economy favored big agriculture and banks repossessed most small farms. Now there aren't enough of them to push anything.

The fault lies with Willie Nelson because his Farm Aid concerts weren't good enough.


----------



## Eire (Dec 8, 2009)

I'm sorry dude, but there are very few family farms left in America. It's nearly all giant corporate farms. So when you talk about farmers, you are really talking about big corporate CEOs. The small farmers are sure not going to risk their farms now after they have miraculously survived the big Agra takeover of the last few decades. 

As for big Agra, they work closely with the Fed, so I'm sure that has great impact on them. I would bet that they are working towards a situation where they can get into it in one or more states without pissing off the Fed who can still bust them for it.


----------



## ford442 (Dec 9, 2009)

ok.. good points! i meant though just that they should be arguing the point of getting hemp 100% legal for their own benefit.. wouldn't the corporate farms get tons of added profit from hemp..? from what i've heard it would be a worthwhile investment to switch over - it sells for a high price and it helps the soil rather than killing it like tobacco..


----------



## Dirty Harry (Dec 9, 2009)

Eire said:


> I'm sorry dude, but there are very few family farms left in America. It's nearly all giant corporate farms...


Unfortunately your right, but also fortunately I live in an area where the family farmers still exist. We have a number of "Century Farms", farms that have been family farmed for 100+ years.
But you are right, a lot of family farmers are no longer in the business due to corporate farms. The good old days of owning some land and making a living off of it (farming) are pretty much history.

P.S. I wonder if hemp can be used to make ethanol gasoline? That is the thing in my area. A lot of corn is going into the gas tank, and of course that increases the cost of feed corn for live stock farmers because the cost of corn goes up with the demand. They say switch grass can be used, but IMHO, I think hemp would be better. I think it is kind of dumb that we are using a food product to make fuel, and that increases the cost of any food for everyone.


----------



## ford442 (Dec 9, 2009)

here's some info on that subject - http://www.hempcar.org/petvshemp.shtml


----------



## Moldy (Dec 10, 2009)

CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) &#8212; Backers of a move to legalize marijuana in Nevada filed paperwork Wednesday creating an advocacy group aimed at qualifying an initiative for the 2012 election.
Nevadans for Sensible Marijuana Laws are seeking passage of a law to tax and regulate marijuana in Nevada. Voters rejected other pot initiatives in 2002 and 2006, and a similar attempt failed to qualify for the 2004 ballot.
Nevadans sanctioned medical marijuana use with passage of a constitutional amendment in 1998 and again in 2000, but voters in 2002 defeated a proposal to allow personal possession of up to 3 ounces.
Another measure allowing adults to legally possess up to 1 ounce was rejected in 2006, but backers of that effort were encouraged by the support and pledged then to try again in Nevada.
The 2006 measure failed 56 percent to 44 percent, buoyed by strong opposition from law enforcement. It also directed the state Department of Taxation to set up procedures to license and regulate pot growers, distributors and retailers.
The Marijuana Policy Project, a Washington, D.C., advocacy group, backed both prior initiatives. It is supporting the latest effort.

Just thought I'd add this... ​


----------



## OregonMeds (Dec 10, 2009)

Id' be amazed if it were legalized in Nevada before federal. They have some of the strictest punishments around, always have.

Plus not just law enforcement but the casino industry which is disproportionatly powerful and dead set against it because people will gamble away loosing for hours on alcohol but weed only threatens their bottom line. Every person that chooses weed over alcohol is just business lost to them.


----------



## ford442 (Dec 10, 2009)

well.. what if the casinos were selling joints for chips or something? if they are the supplier they could make almost 100% profit on weed as well as booze.. charge as much as they want like disneyland.. the more stoned the better - too much booze and they puke or pass out and stop gaming, but not with weed.. and remember that Nevada already tolerates prostitution - http://www.ehow.com/how_4731453_become-a-prostitute.html


----------



## OregonMeds (Dec 10, 2009)

Yes if it were made to benefit them somehow sure. What I'm saying though is the casinos already know for a fact that people on alcohol will bet more and longer and are more likely to gamble at all in the first place than someone on weed. It's just the different nature of the drug and any test will prove that out. They'd have to make money on it more than the gambling losses and did you know that gambling profits in Vegas are bigger than the entire entertainment budget everyone in America has for movies, concerts, plays, sports, etc all combined? Over 50% of the entertainment budget nationwide it's just unimaginable but true.


----------



## Moldy (Dec 11, 2009)

I'm a MMJ patient here in NV. Casinos tolerate cannabis now. The gamming industry began feeling a pinch in the late 1990's, the timing was right for MMJ and at that time they reduced the penalties for minor possession. Many peeps from CA were not coming over the hill in fear of arrest. I think the casinos put a lot of pressure on the lawmakers here and then they saw the light. Pot and gambling go together perfectly, I can attest to that. I don't think the casinos have considered a legal market. They should. I say coffee shops right next to the buffets if they had any creativity. It would be win-win and a new tourist boom. Weed, whores, and gambling, what else could you wish for! And in the Reno area we've got great outdoors stuff year around, Tahoe, ski resorts, golf resorts, etc.


----------



## OregonMeds (Dec 11, 2009)

Wow, I didn't know that.

What do you mean by tolerate? They don't call the cops or throw you out of the casino if a maid smells pot in your room or security smells stickyness in your pocket? You can just keep on keeping on? Wasn't it a felony for just a joint a while ago?


I think it's time to take a vacation if that's the case.


----------



## Moldy (Dec 11, 2009)

> Wow, I didn't know that.
> 
> What do you mean by tolerate? They don't call the cops or throw you out of the casino if a maid smells pot in your room or security smells stickyness in your pocket? You can just keep on keeping on? Wasn't it a felony for just a joint a while ago?


Yeah, I moved to N. NV about 18 years ago and it was scary as hell. I heard stories of people getting a year for a seed, you know, crap like that. A lot of the change came when some Olympic snow boarders were busted for a small amount weed and were pictured in leg shackles on the front page of Reno Gazette. The out cry from many groups about how backwards NV was got the business community (casinos) active and thanks to Marc Emery we got MMJ a few years later. 

I have walked down the room halls of the Hilton in Reno and smelled pot coming from more than 3 different rooms. You could actually tell they were different strains by the smell. As long as you pick a smoking room you'll be okay. Don't know what they do in Vegas but it's pretty cool up north now. Below was taken from the Norml web site showing penalties for weed in the state. We now have two hydro stores in Reno and one in Truckee, that should tell you something.











*




*​

*Incarceration *
*




*
*Fine*​*Possession*Age 21 years or over, less than 1 oz (first offense)misdemeanorrehabilitation/
treatment $600Age 21 years or over, less than 1 oz (second offense)misdemeanorrehabilitation/
treatment $1,000Age 21 years or over, less than 1 oz (third offense) gross misdemeanor1 year$2,000Age 21 years or over, less than 1 oz (fourth offense)class E felony1 - 4 years$5,000Age less than 21 years less than 1 oz (first and second offense) class E felony1 - 4 years**$5,000Age less than 21 years less than 1 oz (third offense) class E felony1 - 4 years$5,000**Probation usually granted for 1st and 2nd offenses.


Medical use permitted if less than 1 oz or 3 to 4 plants. *Sale or Cultivation*Less than 100 lbs (first offense)felony1 - 6 years$20,000Less than 100 lbs (second offense)felony2 &#8211; 10 years​



$20,000Less than 100 lbs (subsequent offense)felony3 - 15 years​

$20,000100 to 2,000 lbsfelony5 years$25,0002,000 to 10,000 lbsfelony2 - 20 years$50,000More than 10,000 lbsfelonylife***$200,000To a minor (first offense)felony1 - 20 yearsvariableTo a minor (second offense)felonylifevariableWithin 1,000 feet of school or other specifed areasfelonydouble penaltydouble penalty***Parole possible after 5 years.


Medical use permitted if less than 1 oz (3 to 4 plants). *Miscellaneous* (paraphernalia, license suspensions, drug tax stamps, etc...)Paraphernalia possession misdemeanor6 months$1,000Paraphernalia salefelony1 - 4 years$5,000*Details*​

Possession of marijuana by persons 21 years of age or older is a misdemeanor and is punishable by a fine of $600 or possible drug treatment. For a second offense, the fine increases to $1,000. For a third offense, the punishment is up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $2,000. A fourth offense changes the classification to a felony and is punishable by 1 - 4 years in prison and a fine of up to $5,000.
Possession of marijuana by persons under 21 years of age of
*Assembly Bill 453*
allows for medical use of marijuana in Nevada and went into effect October 2001 (Word doc).​ 
less than one ounce of marijuana is a felony, punishable by 1 - 4 years in prison and a fine of up to $5,000. Probation is usually granted in lieu of imprisonment for first and second offenses, for third offenses, there is a presumption of imprisonment.
Cultivation, delivery or sale of less than 100 pounds of marijuana is punishable by 1 - 6 years in prison and a fine of up to $20,000 for the first offense. For a second offense, the penalty increases to 2 - 10 years in prison and a fine up to $20,000. For a third or subsequent offense, the penalty increases to 3 - 15 years in prison and a fine up to $20,000. Cultivation, delivery or sale of 100 pounds or more is punishable by up to five years in prison and a fine up to $25,000. For amounts of 2,000 pounds or greater, the penalty increases to 2 - 20 years in prison and a fine up to $50,000. For amounts greater than 10,000 pounds the penalty can be up to life in prison, with the possibility for parole after a minimum of five years and a fine up to $200,000.
It is an affirmative defense to any charge of possession, delivery or production of marijuana that the person is engaged in the medical use of marijuana if the amount is no more than one ounce of usable marijuana, three mature plants or four immature plants.
Any sale to a minor is punishable by 1 - 20 years in prison for the first offense, and up to life for a second offense. Sale within 1,000 feet of a school, video arcade, public pool or youth center doubles the possible penalty.
Possession of paraphernalia is punishable by up to six months in jail and a fine up to $1,000. Sale of paraphernalia is punishable by 1 - 4 years in prison and a fine up to $5,000.





*Decriminalization:* The state has decriminalized marijuana to some degree. Typically, decriminalization means no prison time or criminal record for first-time possession of a small amount for personal consumption. The conduct is treated like a minor traffic violation.


----------



## edwardtheclean (Feb 13, 2010)

its just common sense


----------

