Cannabis legislation / legalization

[soleil]

it is interesting to read this post. based on a few of them i am glad to be here and know we'll get along.
its good to see some good changes in the USA since what happened in cali. also shout outs to amsterdam for keeping things the same as well.

for my addition to this post, my family is very pro home grown greens and industrial hemp. im happy to see that there are some good things happening with this lovely green herb. i hope obama does not do anything to stop the legalization in the states in the next 4 yrs.

[Carmody]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by Carmody (here)
To think that this giant war and domination machine will be 'taken down' by Colorado's public and government - is the deal, here.

The State of Colorado and State of Washington... are now squarely in the sights of this thing.

The folks in those two states are about to find out how much of a battle they are into. This will be a very dirty war.

The question in my mind is whether

• this is big guys (the Rockefellers and other such elite) vs little guy (a couple of states), or whether
• there are "big" guys on both sides, both warring and cooperating in a complex dance, or whether
• there are even bigger guys, behind both sides, moving and consolidating their various powers around the globe, manipulating peoples, nations and the elite families for larger purposes that span eons.

... or all of the above .

in my experience - in some way or another...all of the above.

Entering this game, part of that is the knowledge and the acceptance, rather - that it exists. One cannot change anything, until one accepts that the given thing exists, as a preliminary step.

Pushing against the electric fence, repeatedly (after and upon multiple shocks and screams of rage), like a stubborn pig, does not result in much - with regard to being effective. As matter of fact, the fence is designed to handle that specific situation.

[TargeT]

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
I suppose this article may be rattling sabers, but I don't think so. As TargeT said, States are coerced, funds withheld, etc. to bully States into federal compliance. It's all about compliance.

Source: Marijuana legalization victories could be short-lived

(Reuters) - Votes making Colorado and Washington the first U.S. states to legalize marijuana for recreational use could be short-lived victories for pot backers because the federal government will fight them, two former U.S. drug control officials said on Wednesday. They said the federal government could sue to block parts of the measures or send threatening letters to marijuana shops, followed up by street-level clampdowns similar to those targeting medical marijuana dispensaries the government suspects are fronts for drug traffickers.

Dennis

Via the 10th amendment the states absolutely have the right to do what they did; however the 10th amendment has atrophied so much that most people don't even know what it says anymore; I do not see how the federal government could sue anyone (legally) or block anything (legally) though they have done it with Medical Cannabis so I'm sure this will be no different.

As Cam eluded to earlier, it will take a strong governor to back these laws & I have yet to see one (aside from J. Ventura) that would do it (and according to Jesse "they" made sure another Gov. Ventura will never get elected; as his election caught TPTB totally by surprise)

[Humble Janitor]

Posted by GlassSteagallfan (here)
Here are some of the 'big guys'....

...George Soros's henchmen are crowing that the full-scale legalization of marijuana passed by voters in the states of Colorado and Washington, with the support of the Obama administration, sets the precedent needed to "pav[e] the way for the rest of the country and the world to follow."

... Drug Policy Alliance chief Ethan Nadelmann, took credit for drafting, financing, and organizing the initiatives which make those two states "the first political jurisdictions anywhere in the world to approve regulating, taxing and controlling marijuana similar to alcohol." ...

Part of a LaRouche article

So what's the issue then, with Soros that is?

I see conservatives harp on about how "evil" he is and they usually cite sensationalist sources like LaRouche, etc.

[nurgle]

Well At least in Colorado they are going to use the tax revenue towards Public Schools. I think this is smart that they paired those to things together. So if the federal government rolls in and starts fighting this, they could very well look bad in the public eye. The federal government taking money away from the kids' education? (ah oh!) Of course there are many arguments why those two things should be put together, but hey think of the slogans--- SMOKE UP! DO IT FOR THE KIDS!

HA! fun...

Here is the article I saw this in http://nation.time.com/2012/11/09/ma...h-regulations/

[NancyV]

My husband and I live in Washington state and voted for the legalization of marijuana. Neither one of us smokes pot and probably won't in the future, but we know that the government has used drug revenue for decades to fund black ops projects. We both know this from personal experience. I was a DEA contract undercover agent in the early 70's and my husband was a black ops counter terrorist all throughout the 70's and early 80's.

What I found out through working cases for the DEA in Mexico and South America was that only CERTAIN drug lords would be targeted and others were off limits. Why? Because the drug lords who cooperate with the DEA are spared from being destroyed and the ones who are independent and won't cooperate ARE destroyed whenever possible.

I had a perspective that included being a full on hippy in the late 60's for about 4 years. I smoked a lot of pot at that time, but the hippy movement changed dramatically around 1970 when cocaine became more prevalent. Cocaine is not by any stretch of the imagination a peace/love inducing drug. So when peace/love hippies started snorting tons of cocaine, the peace/love movement began to quickly devolve with many becoming more hostile, competitive and paranoid. At about the same time the DEA became more active and began to see the benefits of controlling the drug trade.

I quit ALL drugs when I was 25 in 1972 (40 years ago), in fact I became VERY anti drug. About a year after quitting I contacted the DEA and told them I would like to work for them since I had a first hand knowledge of how drugs were smuggled from Mexico and South America, mostly Peru and Colombia, as I had done that myself for a few years. Basically I was totally bored when I quit the drug world since I had lived a dangerous and exciting several years of personally bringing drugs in from Mexico, Colombia, Peru and Europe, and then selling them wholesale for about 3 years. I knew the people in this drug world and I knew how to buy, import and sell on a large scale.

They were very excited to get me, since I was quite knowledgeable and effective, and I began working for them on a contract basis. It took me about a year to realize that although I had thought the drug lords were the REALLY bad guys, the DEA was not any less "bad" because they had full intentions of controlling the drug trade and importation into the USA and not the intention I thought they had of ENDING the drug trade. So I quit after having successfully busted quite a few drug operations. Of course they wanted me to continue, but I was disillusioned. It was the beginning of me starting to wake up to the fact that the lines between so-called "good" and "evil" are basically difficult to discern and even non existent in many cases.

Of course the Feds will likely file lawsuits against Colorado and Washington. Even the super liberal/progressive/socialist Obama cannot support legalized drugs which would cut back on black ops funding. Oregon has had very liberal medical marijuana laws for quite a while but the Feds often target and bust legal growers.

If drugs were legalized and taxed massive amounts of money would be generated, but these funds could not be as easily diverted to all the black ops projects that now thrive on revenue from illegal drugs. Obviously a majority of people want marijuana legalized, at least in the few states that have promoted medical marijuana and legalization, or at the very least decriminalization. But as several have mentioned the prison system is a for profit business and marijuana users and sellers make up a good portion of the prison population. They don't want to lose money so they want MORE people in jail.

Hemp is also a fantastically useful crop which is dangerous to several industries who want to keep the status quo. The fact that hemp is legal in Canada and many other countries but still illegal in the USA is amazing. We truly do live in a controlled country where the corporations, banks and government control products for their own benefit and not for the benefit of the people. Still I am happy that the people in CO and WA made their voices heard about the insane drug laws.

I am more of a conservative than a liberal but both conservative and liberal politicians seem to want to preserve the status quo. I detest both the radical left and the radical right. Obama is a radical left type who is still controlled by others much more powerful than he is. I can't see him going along with legalizing marijuana. He may try to do it, or make liberals think he is trying since he doesn't have to get re-elected, but I would bet that the black ops boys would inform him that he would be a lot safer if he kept his nose out of their piggy bank.

[Carmody]

Posted by TargeT (here)

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
I suppose this article may be rattling sabers, but I don't think so. As TargeT said, States are coerced, funds withheld, etc. to bully States into federal compliance. It's all about compliance.

Source: Marijuana legalization victories could be short-lived

(Reuters) - Votes making Colorado and Washington the first U.S. states to legalize marijuana for recreational use could be short-lived victories for pot backers because the federal government will fight them, two former U.S. drug control officials said on Wednesday. They said the federal government could sue to block parts of the measures or send threatening letters to marijuana shops, followed up by street-level clampdowns similar to those targeting medical marijuana dispensaries the government suspects are fronts for drug traffickers.

Dennis

Via the 10th amendment the states absolutely have the right to do what they did; however the 10th amendment has atrophied so much that most people don't even know what it says anymore; I do not see how the federal government could sue anyone (legally) or block anything (legally) though they have done it with Medical Cannabis so I'm sure this will be no different.

As Cam eluded to earlier, it will take a strong governor to back these laws & I have yet to see one (aside from J. Ventura) that would do it (and according to Jesse "they" made sure another Gov. Ventura will never get elected; as his election caught TPTB totally by surprise)

If the 10th amendment is ...what it is supposed to be, then the state of Colorado and Washington, simply have to say that they will completely IGNORE anything that the 'supreme court' tries to say on the matter.

And, to instruct their troopers act upon the manner in similar ways as I have outlined.


edit:

Ignoring is a key point here. That the state should ignore all calls to attend to the Supreme court to settle the matter. For simple acceptance of any paperwork in that direction, in that moment, the acceptance of the jurisdiction of the supreme court, in the given matter at hand, is accepted, in the titular and thus real sense, as a cascading eventuality in legal premise.

IF-- a federal official tries to serve summons TO elements of the government OF Colorado or Washington ON this matter, the given government officials involved SHOULD handcuff the given federal representative and bring them to the given state line and simply...toss them out. Without a single word being spoken on the matter, whatsoever.

Then..video record the situation, as it happens, and broadcast that to the world and the rest of the USA. That is the kind of 'open escalation' that it is going to take, to keep such laws in place.

These are dreamy idealizations of what should be done, and probably won't take place at all...as few people have the spine to carry though, when every aspect of their lives and families will be threatened and some killed.

If spine is not shown, if direct acts of direct refusal on a wide public scale are not in evidence... it will be a slow grind via vicious groups operating in the backdrop, to slowly bring down the individuals and all involved. In clandestine and open attacks of both nefarious and planted/falsified acts and evidence.

Once again, count on it, bet on it.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Carmody (here)
If spine is not shown, if direct acts of direct refusal on a wide public scale are not in evidence... it will be a slow grind via vicious groups operating in the backdrop, to slowly bring down the individuals and all involved. In clandestine and open attacks of both nefarious and planted/falsified acts and evidence.

Perhaps this game is not about deciding a clear winner, whether those two states, or the federal government.

Perhaps it is about putting on another display of mud wrestling, intended to further sully the reputation of both state and federal government in the eyes of the populace.

[TargeT]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by Carmody (here)
If spine is not shown, if direct acts of direct refusal on a wide public scale are not in evidence... it will be a slow grind via vicious groups operating in the backdrop, to slowly bring down the individuals and all involved. In clandestine and open attacks of both nefarious and planted/falsified acts and evidence.

Perhaps this game is not about deciding a clear winner, whether those two states, or the federal government.

Perhaps it is about putting on another display of mud wrestling, intended to further sully the reputation of both state and federal government in the eyes of the populace.

This would definitely line up with the "one world government" agenda... and this topic (if it gains more public support) would be a great one to leverage & show the "ineptitude" of the current United States system.

[Hip Hipnotist]

This just in...

http://news.yahoo.com/colo-wash-awai...202557189.html

and a lot more to follow -- guaranteed.

BTW: Many thought provoking responses to the thread.

Lot's of intelligent folks here.

But you knew that. ;-)

[Rocky_Shorz]

Wall Street just realized what it means, MDBX a maker of vending machines for dispensaries, had a huge jump today...

jumped from 6 to 10.80

on only 550 shares...

they know what is about to happen.

an article on Marketwatch hit at the same time...

link

article at 11:30AM...

stock jumped a few hours later, who is the big investors on that one? wouldn't be related to "Smartwatch" who first published the article would it?

that's why California hasn't taken that step...

It'll go from Cartel CIA Controlled to Wall Street Controlled...

Smile for the camera

They've learned even if you think it is ok in the state, the Fed can sweep in at any time to take everything away, crops inventories...

States that have made it legal for medical or otherwise need to bring this forward to change the laws of the lands to control their own on this one.

Can't wait for the TcoTs to have to see POT clicking across their ticker...

[latshaw]

thank you blufire for your post...my sentiments exactly. The more people that are numbed out the more they relinquish their personal power. No judgement here just expressing sad disappointment.

[Dennis Leahy]

Posted by latshaw (here)
thank you blufire for your post...my sentiments exactly. The more people that are numbed out the more they relinquish their personal power. No judgement here just expressing sad disappointment.

In my opinion, I would like this theory a lot better if the federal government "caves in" and legalizes hemp/cannabis/marijuana across the US (and would need to remove support for the international/UN treaty as well.) Then I might believe they were strategically sacrificing a bishop on the chessboard.

If the States went this slowly (next election is not for 2 years, and it is not even a ballot consideration in MN at this point, for example), how long would it take for this devious plan (if it is) to really take effect? 6 years? 12? The economic S**T storm is going to Hit the Big Fan Blades long before even Colorado or Washington start allowing non-medical sales (if they ever do.) To me, this really is a distraction (like the elections) to get us to de-focus from the real problems and any possible strategic moves or solutions that citizens have left.

Also, both the Colorado and Washington governors have come out with the VERY wimpy stance that they will kowtow to whatever the feds tell them - not the stance that they will defend their State's 10th amendment rights. Those two governors handed the feds the ball.

I do agree that...
...if was 18 years old to twentysomething, and pot smoking was not only legal but pot was this strong (some modern cannabis is nearly 25% THC), you could take me off the list of active activists. Yes, there are some people like Michael Phelps that can take a few tokes (I really have no idea how much) and still win a handful of olympic gold medals, but the average person (like I was) who smokes becomes less motivated (like I did.) If it was legalized, that's the main reason I would not smoke it. I would, however, have it handy as a medicine to fight off the cancers that many of us will be fighting off. And, I will continue to make plenty of noise about legalizing hemp/cannabis/marijuana for 20,000 other reasons besides getting high (and agree that those that want to smoke should be able to do so - with no tax beyond sales tax.)

Dennis

[modwiz]

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)

Posted by latshaw (here)
thank you blufire for your post...my sentiments exactly. The more people that are numbed out the more they relinquish their personal power. No judgement here just expressing sad disappointment.

In my opinion, I would like this theory a lot better if the federal government "caves in" and legalizes hemp/cannabis/marijuana across the US (and would need to remove support for the international/UN treaty as well.) Then I might believe they were strategically sacrificing a bishop on the chessboard.

If the States went this slowly (next election is not for 2 years, and it is not even a ballot consideration in MN at this point, for example), how long would it take for this devious plan (if it is) to really take effect? 6 years? 12? The economic S**T storm is going to Hit the Big Fan Blades long before even Colorado or Washington start allowing non-medical sales (if they ever do.) To me, this really is a distraction (like the elections) to get us to de-focus from the real problems and any possible strategic moves or solutions that citizens have left.

Also, both the Colorado and Washington governors have come out with the VERY wimpy stance that they will kowtow to whatever the feds tell them - not the stance that they will defend their State's 10th amendment rights. Those two governors handed the feds the ball.

I do agree that...
...if was 18 years old to twentysomething, and pot smoking was not only legal but pot was this strong (some modern cannabis is nearly 25% THC), you could take me off the list of active activists. Yes, there are some people like Michael Phelps that can take a few tokes (I really have no idea how much) and still win a handful of olympic gold medals, but the average person (like I was) who smokes becomes less motivated (like I did.) If it was legalized, that's the main reason I would not smoke it. I would, however, have it handy as a medicine to fight off the cancers that many of us will be fighting off. And, I will continue to make plenty of noise about legalizing hemp/cannabis/marijuana for 20,000 other reasons besides getting high (and agree that those that want to smoke should be able to do so - with no tax beyond sales tax.)

Dennis

No matter how bad pot smoking is for you, going to prison is incalculably worse. That is the reason it should be legal, so that people with problems do not end up with being a criminal as another one. Any other argument misses this very important point. I know people who overcame heroin addiction and went on to productive lives. I do not know of any felons who did.

I don't know any politicians either.

[modwiz]

Posted by latshaw (here)
thank you blufire for your post...my sentiments exactly. The more people that are numbed out the more they relinquish their personal power. No judgement here just expressing sad disappointment.

Being in prison is the ultimate relinquishing of power. Never lose sight of that when it comes to the legality of drug usage. To forget this crucial point is to hand our power and freedom over to the government. When we question the legality of drug use we question the right to be free to make decisions about our private lives. The government makes note of that ambiguity and imposes harsh drug laws that feed the prison-industrial complex.

[Rocky_Shorz]

Posted by Rocky_Shorz (here)
Wall Street just realized what it means, MDBX a maker of vending machines for dispensaries, had a huge jump today...

jumped from 6 to 10.80

on only 550 shares...

they know what is about to happen.

an article on Marketwatch hit at the same time...

link

article at 11:30AM...

stock jumped a few hours later, who is the big investors on that one? wouldn't be related to "Smartwatch" who first published the article would it?

that's why California hasn't taken that step...

It'll go from Cartel CIA Controlled to Wall Street Controlled...

Smile for the camera

They've learned even if you think it is ok in the state, the Fed can sweep in at any time to take everything away, crops inventories...

States that have made it legal for medical or otherwise need to bring this forward to change the laws of the lands to control their own on this one.

Can't wait for the TcoTs to have to see POT clicking across their ticker...

bought in around 11 dumped at $200... not a bad week...

[Twinsel]

From now on lesser visitors to the Netherlands from Colorado i guess

[baddbob]

Finally a step out of the dark ages where Marijuana had roots in hell.
After the recreational use of marijuana was made legal in both Washington state and Colorado, people have been wondering what states, if any, will allow their citizens to smoke pot in the privacy of their own homes. Tommy Chong, best known for his role in the comedy duo Cheech and Chong, has made statements on the subject.

talks start @ 1:22

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=CfYgIt7aeCw

Read more here;
http://www.ibtimes.com/tommy-chong-c...old-days-video

[DeDukshyn]

Excellent frank discussion ... great stuff, Thanks

[KiwiElf]

Cannabis prohibition estimated to cost NZ taxpayers $500m
Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party (ALCP), Fuseworks May 16, 2013, 11:38 am

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-sto...axpayers-500m/

Maintaining cannabis prohibition in New Zealand is estimated to cost the taxpayer $500 million annually. Add to that the tax revenue which could be generated from licensed cannabis distributors and producers and it is clear that ALCP policy would easily add over $1 billion to the government's operational budget each year, benefiting all New Zealanders.

Already, jurisdictions in The Netherlands, Spain, Portugal and Colorado State are regulating cannabis, allowing locals and foreigners to buy or possess small amounts of the product. They have managed to establish the industry, despite the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotics.

Not only would a regulated marketplace for cannabis generate revenue for government, it would do so at the same time as drastically cutting government spending. Regulation of cannabis would also allow small business owners to earn a decent income and provide employment opportunities for numerous staff members.

Medical research has comprehensively shown that cannabis is safe and has therapeutic benefits for hundreds of medical conditions. Medical Marijuana producers could establish a significant presence in New Zealand reducing the cost of importing cannabis medicines like Sativex (http://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/RIss/Sativex.asp). Cannabinoids have been described as the "wonder-drug of the 21st century" by the Harvard Medical School. Allowing cannabis medicines to be produced in New Zealand would reduce Pharmac's expenditure, freeing up funds to subsidise specialised drugs for more specific treatments.

In 1938, the Hemp Industry was the first agricultural crop to be valued in the billions of dollars. The same year prohibition of hemp lead to the rise of synthetic and petro-chemical products, at huge cost to the environment. Returning to hemp products, which have over 20,000 known uses, would reverse the tide of environmental degradation, deforestation and pesticide use.

Entire houses can be constructed from hemp-crete, hemp fibre boards and hemp plastics. Hemp houses are naturally warm, dry and healthy to live in. New Zealand;s housing shortage could easily be addressed by building homes out of affordable hemp materials. Fuels made from hemp can generate electricity and power our motor vehicles, while maintaining a neutral carbon footprint.

Hemp farming should be promoted in New Zealand, to create employment and train young people in establishing successful, environmentally sustainable businesses. Hemp products have a huge export market especially in the United States when its production is currently illegal. New Zealand farmers should apply to the Ministry of Health for a Hemp Licence. (http://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/r...ndustrial-hemp)

Regulating cannabis would take the market away from gangs and make it harder for youth to access, while allowing adults to make free choices about their cannabis use. Medical marijuana will reduce cancer rates and help treat many illnesses. Hemp Food nutrition will improve health and prevent disease. Hemp will be used for fuels, construction and manufacturing bio-plastics, insulating New Zealand's economy from international fluctuation in the price of oil.

ALCP are not a party that only cares about one issue, as outlined above, we believe our policy will have positive impacts across a wide range of government sectors. Our policy would have a range of social, economic and environmental benefits across society. ALCP support personal responsibility, civil liberties and true justice. Our policy endorses Common Law and the Treaty of Waitangi and seeks a proper and just balance between the power of the state and the rights and dignity of the individual.

It is impossible to estimate how valuable the hemp industry will become for our economy but it is clear that ALCP policy will deliver billions of dollars in revenue to the taxpayer, reduce crime and access to hard drugs while providing employment and skills training. The overall value of the Cannabis, Industrial Hemp and Medical Marijuana industries would total in the tens of billions of dollars annually, with no limit to growth in the industry. Unlike traditional resources, hemp is renewable and carbon neutral allowing economic growth and environmental sustainability to occur simultaneously.