NORML Audio Stash

“This is a town where I could probably kill 200 major careers if I wanted to be a complete prick,” says Allen St. Pierre, executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), which is headquartered on K Street. “Politicians, members of Congress and the Senate, many of their principals—legislative directors, chiefs of staff, communications directors—people in the private sector, Cato Institute, American Enterprise Institute, Brookings, police, any number of notable journalists from television, print, radio, many brand names most Americans would recognize pretty quickly—I’ve smoked with all of them. There is more smoke in DC closets than there is sex.”

This is the killer quote from the Washingtonian Magazine’s “High Society” special that is out today.  In it they have “High Society: Washington’s Love Affair With Marijuana”, which follows a “Nancy Botwin in Weeds”-like woman who quit her marketing job to deliver pot brownies to DC professionals, many of whom are also covered in the piece.

She and other users believe they need to toe a line of secrecy in the nation’s capital. “The perception is still ‘if you’re a pothead, you’re a slacker,’ ” she says. “You don’t want everyone to get so comfortable that it’s an open secret. It’s fine for it to be a closed secret as long as you’re still showing up and getting massive amounts of work done.”

There are also a few side features available on the main site at http://www.washingtonian.com/packages/highsociety/index.html

Download Link: Secret Stash - Register to access
Standard Podcast Feed (27.5MB 64Kbps) | High-Def Podcast Feed (82.5MB 192Kbps)
Download audio file (NORML_SHOW_LIVE_2012-03-01.mp3)

Hemp Headlines

Brought to you by Cannabis Fantastic

1. California court decides nuisance ordinances can’t be used to ban dispensaries
2. Michigan activists protest bills that would tighten medical marijuana regs
3. Rhode Island governor allows three dispensaries to open
4. California lawsuit over federal crackdown thrown out of Sacramento federal court

Daily Toker Tunes

Groovin’ Thursday: Brought to you by The Ganja Jon Show

• Del the Funky Homosapien – “Fallout”

Southern California Scene with Hollywood Hemptress Tere Joyce

• Tere Joyce live from the protest at LA Federal Bldg
• Degé Coutee from the Patients Advocacy Network

Grassroots Activism

• Carlos Negraeff from Calgary Students for Sensible Drug Policy on this weekend’s national conference

Download Link: Secret Stash - Register to access
Standard Podcast Feed (27.5MB 64Kbps) | High-Def Podcast Feed (82.5MB 192Kbps)
Download audio file (NORML_SHOW_LIVE_2012-02-29.mp3)

Hemp Headlines

Brought to you by Cannabis Fantastic

1. Marijuana arrests reduced by 75% following Connecticut decrim passage
2. 23 States seeking to institute drug testing for welfare
3. New Jersey bans all synthetic chemicals that “mimic marijuana”
4. Hemp busted for pot robbery in Humboldt

Daily Toker Tunes

Irie Wednesday: Brought to you by NorCalPurps in the California Bay Area

• Pepper – “Rent”

Cannabis Science with Dr. Mitch Earleywine Radical Rant

• Stop the Pretense and Get Unified Behind I-24

Daniel Ahearn & The Jones
“High Life” (mp3)
from “IODA SXSW Opening Day Bash Sampler 2012″
(ioda)

(Yeah, it’s not really “electric” but it’s a damn fine song!)

More On This Album

Download Link: Secret Stash - Register to access
Standard Podcast Feed (27.5MB 64Kbps) | High-Def Podcast Feed (82.5MB 192Kbps)
Download audio file (NORML_SHOW_LIVE_2012-02-28.mp3)

Hemp Headlines

Brought to you by Cannabis Fantastic

Daily Toker Tunes

Electric Tuesday: Brought to you by Cannabis Cure UK – the reform podcast for the United Kingdom

• Daniel Ahearn & The Jones – “High Life”

Todd’s Toker Topics

• Hypocrites

Radical Rant

• Debunking the Worst Misstatements Against I-502

Of all the despicable fear-mongering being promoted by Patients Against Pragmatism, this one takes the cake:

What’s worse is the ZERO tolerance clause for those under age 21. Drivers in this age bracket will be guilty of DUI if even the smallest amount of cannabis is found in their system. Anything over 0.00 in fact. In other words, a designated driver subjected to second-hand cannabis smoke would be held criminally liable for the activities of others.

First off, let’s refer back to the Karschner et al study in a previous post.  In that study, 25 regular heavy cannabis consumers were tested.  When they walked in the door, eleven of the twenty-five had no detectable levels of THC in blood, even after smoking anywhere from 2 to 10 blunts that day.  Another thirteen had levels below 5ng/mL.  Only one subject was above 5ng that day, and she dropped below 5ng the next day.

That’s first-hand smoking, people.  Almost half of the first-hand smokers would beat this zero tolerance standard (one had no detectable levels after smoking a half ounce that day.)

So, what of the second-hand smoke the designated driver is subject to?

OK, first of all, are we talking “second-hand smoke being exhaled by passengers in the car at the time he’s designated driving”?  If so, he should face the same punishment as someone who lets their passengers drink beer while he’s driving, whatever that punishment is.

Or are we talking about “second-hand smoke that was exhaled by his passengers back at the party before he began designated driving?”  Well, that’s easy enough to debunk, even without turning to science, just by asking yourself one simple question:

If second-hand pot smoke would trip a drug test, don’t you think a whole bunch of employees fired for positive drug tests would have successfully used that excuse in court by now?

As a leading manufacturer of drug testing kits puts it:

Will exposure to passive marijuana second hand smoke result in a positive marijuana test?
The most common excuse for a positive marijuana test is, “I was around some people who were smoking pot.” Research has shown that casual exposure to marijuana smoke will not produce a positive test. A person really has to work at being exposed to “passive” smoke to create a positive test. Very close confinement, without ventilation, with several smokers, for a period of over an hour, may result in a low, but measurable amount of marijuana in urine and blood. This demonstrates that even though the person may not have directly inhaled the smoke from a marijuana cigarette, they inhaled enough second hand smoke to get high.

So, in this one talking point, the opponents of I-502 legalization are telling you we must not legalize the possession of one ounce of weed, a pound of edibles, and four pints of tincture, and we must not create a commercial market for growing, selling, and buying marijuana for adults over 21, because:

• Some young adult below the legal age of cannabis consumption…
• …might be hanging out in a very small room…
• …that isn’t well-ventilated…
• …with several people who are toking a whole lot of weed (and are they of legal age?)…
• …but he/she didn’t smoke any of that weed him/herself
• …and he might get in his car and drive shortly afterward…
• …and then either get in a wreck or attract the attention of a cop…
• …who might suspect the young adult driving is impaired somehow…
• …but not by alcohol…
• …and then subject the young adult to a sobriety test and/or DRE that he/she fails…
• …and then arrests him/her and drives him/her to the hospital for a blood draw…
• …and in the hour that has elapsed plus how ever long he/she was driving before the cop stopped him/her…
• …there are detectable amounts of THC in his/her blood and the young adult is convicted of a DUID.

I suppose if you think preventing a young person from thirteen levels of highly-unlikely “ifs” is worth the certainty of another 10,000 marijuana possession arrests next year, then this line of reasoning makes sense to you.  I think a more reasonable solution for those 13 “ifs” is for the crew to pony up some money for cab or bus fare.

I’m not the only blog-writing toker in the Pacific Northwest taking notice of the latest group of medical marijuana industry players to oppose legalization for the rest of us. Dominic Holden, a former NORML activist and now writer for the Seattle Stranger‘s blog, The Slog, examines the motivations behind the No on I-502 / Patients Against I-502 / Patients Against NAW campaigns:

(The Slog) The medical marijuana industry—threatened by the prospect of legalization harming their business model—was a leading opposition to the 2010 legalization initiative in California. Similarly, medical marijuana activists in Washington have been opposing I-502.

The anti-I-502 campaign was filed by Martinelli and Gil Mobley, a doctor who operates a clinic in federal Way that writes medical marijuana authorizations, and the campaign has the backing of Patients Against I-502. That organization’s advocacy has been led in part by Hempfest director and medical cannabis patient Vivian McPeak along with marijuana defense attorneys Jeffrey Steinborn and Douglas Hiatt. All except Mobley have direct ties to Sensible Washington, a campaign that twice failed to qualify their own legalization initiative that contained no DUI provision and zero regulations.

…and of course, Dr. Gil Mobley will be writing a whole lot fewer $150 – $200 medical marijuana permission slips when any adult 21 and over can get and possess an ounce without one.  (I know, y’all will write to me and say that your financial interest in the issue has no bearing on your opposition to I-502.  I’ll take you at your word, but it is only fair for our readers to be aware of any potential conflict of interest, just as I’d tell them how President Obama takes a lot of campaign cash from Big Pharma.)  And let’s not forget the well-documented animosity felt by Sensible Washington’s proponents when ACLU of Washington (the proponents of I-502) would not endorse Sensible Washington‘s I-1068.

Those activists have been hammering Holden (as they have me) over the dire threat looming if I-502 passes; namely, we’re “throwing medical marijuana patients under the bus” in order to get our “recreational ounce”, because all patients would be re-criminalized as DUID drivers thanks to the 5ng/mL per se DUID standard included in I-502.  Those patients, they’ll tell you, could never drive because they use so much cannabis they’d never be below 5ng/mL.  To bolster their claims, they’ve presented some of the DUID studies that Paul Armentano has done such a great job of condensing.  Unlike Armentano, Holden, and myself, they didn’t bother to read them.

(Seattle Slog) The same scientific study that medical marijuana activists are using to blast a marijuana-legalization initiative, it turns out, debunks their own leading argument.

Yesterday, Anthony Martinelli, the treasurer of a new campaign to oppose pot legalization on the fall ballot, claimed that Initiative 502 would subject sober pot smokers to DUI charges if they’d smoked pot the day or week before. Over the past few months, that talking point has become the primary line of attack to stop legalization in Washington State—and now their campaign is picking up donors. But at the time of our interview, Martinelli couldn’t produce the study to validate his central argument.

Martinelli did send me that study later yesterday afternoon, and I checked it out, but it shows the opposite of what he said it did.

Martinelli is referring to the work performed by Karschner et al where 25 long-term regular cannabis users were studied over a seven day period.  Of those 25 tokers, “most of the participants reported daily or near daily cannabis use in the last 14 days.”  And of those 25 tokers, just one was above 5ng/mL – Participant S was at 7ng – and that was on the day of admission where she admitted she had smoked four blunts that day.  Now, nothing in the study tells me when she was admitted that day, but logic dictates that it would probably have been during the workday.  So, yeah, if you smoke four blunts between waking up and, say, 5pm, you just might be above 5ng/mL.

For comparison’s sake, Participant N is a 21-year-old obese African-American woman who admits to smoking pot starting at age 9.  She admits to smoking a half-ounce per day and had done so that day.  She didn’t even have detectable ng/mL when she checked in.  Participant L, a man who’d smoked an ounce that day tested at only 0.4ng.  The next highest level was only 2ng/mL for Participant W, a morbidly obese woman who’d smoked eight blunts that day.  And the next day after not toking, Participant S was down to 2.9ng and Participant W was down to 1.4ng.

In short: Given 25 tokers who smoked anywhere from 1-10 blunts or from a “dime” to an ounce per day, there was only one who tested above 5ng/mL.  For the vast overwhelming majority of tokers, if you wait 1-4 hours after toking, you’ll never be above 5ng/mL.

Now remember my belief that I-502 calculated the per se DUID provision would win more votes than it loses?  Looks like I was right by an over 5-to-1 margin:

The reason we’re talking about this at all is because strict DUI provisions will help get this thing passed (and help stave off attacks about stoned driving that have helped defeat other pot initiatives, such as Prop 19 in California). A poll last May by Quinlan Rosner Research found that the DUI provision alone prompted 62 percent of voters to say they were more likely to support I-502, and only 11 percent said it would make them less likely to support the initiative.

So if we want to stop arresting 10,000 people for marijuana each year, we need to pass I-502 this fall. And we can ignore ginned up claims by medical marijuana activists that I-502 will ensnare drivers who are sober. For now, they seem to be fighting I-502 because it won’t let them drive high.

Also consider that the people so concerned with the welfare of the patients are asking you to vote against:

• finally providing patients with real protection from arrest instead of just an affirmative defense you need to pay a medical marijuana lawyer upwards of $10,000 to mount in court;
• providing patients who have moderate need a way to be legal without buying an annual $200 permission slip from a medical marijuana clinic;
• creating truly legal retail outlets for patients to acquire medicine aside from quasi-legal medical marijuana dispensaries; and
• establishing a legal way patients could grow and sell marijuana commercially.

Washington’s I-502 is creating a maelstrom of conflict within some fringes of the cannabis community.

The measure would legalize possession of one ounce of marijuana by adults 21+, available at state-licensed stores.  It doesn’t allow for home grow.  It doesn’t change the medical marijuana law.

However, it also contains a new per se DUID provision that would make anyone guilty if they’re tested at above 5ng/mL of active THC in blood.  That’s a level indicative of impairment and recent use for most tokers, but not a few tokers who use with great regularity.  Cops would still have to meet the same strict standard they do now for taking a driver’s blood.

So… would you, if you lived in Washington, vote for it, knowing that while you’re ending 16,000 criminal arrests for cannabis, you’re subjecting a few people to DUID convictions they’ll get while not impaired?  Or would you vote against it, knowing that the next shot at a legalization vote may be years away?  (It was 28 years between California’s last two attempts, six years between Colorado’s.)

Would you vote for it, ending the unscientific, unnecessary, and unjust arrest of tens of thousands for marijuana possession?  Or would you vote against it to prevent an unscientific, unnecessary, and unjust conviction of hundreds of unimpaired drivers?

Does “the good of the many outweigh the needs of the few?”  Or is the protection of even one innocent driver more important than ending low-level marijuana arrests?  Does the right to cannabis outrank the privilege of driving?

It’s a tough question and not an easy one to answer.  Dedicated activists I’ve known my whole career disagree on this.  I am in support, because when it comes down to the bottom line, politics is war by civil means, and I cannot give aid and comfort to the enemy.  I cannot cast a vote knowing I’m voting with the Drug Czar, the cops, the private prison industry, the black market weed dealers, and the Mexican Drug Gangs.

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

Residents of Colorado will have the opportunity to vote in favor of ending marijuana prohibition this November. Today, the “Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol Act” was approved for the ballot by Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler. With this confirmation, Colorado now joins Washington as one of two states where measures specific to legalizing cannabis will appear on the electoral ballot.

The measure is supported by a broad coalition of reform organizations, including NORML, the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, SAFER, Sensible Colorado, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP), Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP), the Drug Policy Alliance, and the Marijuana Policy Project.

Basically put, the initiative will:

• legalize possession of an ounce for those 21 and older;
• legalize possession of three mature plants and three seedlings;
• legalize possession of all the marijuana produced by the three mature plants so long as it stays at the growsite*;
• legalize giving up to an ounce to your adult friend;
• legalize retail marijuana stores;
• legalize commercial marijuana production;
• not change medical marijuana in any way.

Of course, there are patients against this legalization as well.  Of course, they are telling you “Initiative 30 is Not “Legalization””  Of course, they want you to support and “SIGN THE REAL COLORADO MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION VIRTUAL PETITION” which, like the actual petition, won’t get legalization anywhere near the ballot.

Yes, Initiative 30 has made the ballot, already, with eight months now to campaign on, but the patients against this legalization want you to follow their timeline:

TIMELINE FOR LEGALIZE2012.com True Legalization Initiative:

Feb. 2012: Collect virtual petition signatures online.**

March 2012: Start collecting physical signatures, if funding is adequate
(about 80,000 valid signatures needed of Colorado registered voters)

Aug. 2012: Turn in signatures to Secretary of State for verification

So, maybe, if funding is adequate, we can campaign on “true legalization” for a couple of months before the election.  Certainly it won’t take very much time to convince a 50%+1 majority of voters to approve the “true legalization” that includes:

• Replace the racist words “marijuana” and “marihuana” with the scientifically-accurate word “cannabis”;***
• legalize possession of marijuana by 18-year-olds, many of whom are still in high school;  (good luck selling that to the soccer moms)
• ban blood, urine, hair, saliva testing, and breathalyzers (the unclear language may ban that in all circumstances, not just cannabis);  (good luck selling that to the driving public)
• allow possession for personal use with no clear definition of how much that is, if any limit;  (good luck getting people to vote for no limits)
• “Treat commercial cannabis as an agricultural product either equally or less restrictively than grapes, tomatoes or other harmless botanical plants;”  (good luck convincing soccer moms that we’re going to treat pot like we treat fruits that don’t get your kid high)
• Repeal all criminal laws on marijuana;
• Create an affirmative defense; (to what, all the criminal laws that were just repealed?)
• Create a commercial cannabis industry that is completely self-regulated; (yeah, industries that self-regulate are good… ask Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Mining, et al.)

Every time I see this backlash by patients who want “true legalization”, I’m reminded how easy it is to have that principle when you’ve been protected from arrest since 2000.

Now I believe the “patients for true legalization” are sincere and acting in good faith.  What I think they don’t understand is that they’re fighting to cross the finish line before the race has even started.  I’d love for marijuana to go from “a gram is a crime” to “grow-your-own-field legalization” in one election, but that’s not how it’s going to happen****.  It’s going to evolve slowly over time, from the decrim of the 70′s to the medical of the 90′s to the limited legalization we’re proposing in the 10′s, and, hopefully sooner than later, will blossom into the fuller legalization these “treat it like tomatoes” people are hoping for.

But that evolution – that race – doesn’t begin until the people fighting for full legalization are no longer “criminals trying to get away with smoking dope”.  When we get the limited legalization, we are no longer criminals without rights; we are a lobby of legal consumers seeking to expand our rights.

Since RMLA is already on the ballot, there is no chance of petition confusion, so if they want to keep moving forward with “true legalization”, have at it.  If a miracle occurs and they make the ballot, having a “treat it like tomatoes” initiative will make the “treat it like alcohol” initiative seem even more mainstream.  I have no problem with people not voting for limited legalization or working to vote on a different legalization.

But if you are working to defeat any legalization, you are as much my enemy as the Drug Czar.

* Did you notice any limits on that?  Neither did I.  ”Two hundred pounds of pot?  Why, officer, that’s what was produced by my three mature plants when I harvested them in Jul ’13 + Sep ’13 + Nov ’13 + Jan ’14… What’s that, I don’t have any plants now?  Right, because I harvested them, and I’ve decided two hundred pounds was enough and I need not grow any more.”

** Which, by the way, are worth nada when it comes to getting legalization on the ballot.  Good thing we’re wasting a month on that!

*** There is nothing “racist” about the word “marijuana”. “Marijuana” is the Mexican slang term for the dried buds of cannabis flowers used for smoking and is no more “racist” in Spanish than “weed” is in English.  Now some racists used the word in the early 1900′s to avail themselves of racist sentiment by changing the familiar “cannabis” to the unfamiliar “marijuana”, but that makes the actual word “marijuana” no more racist than if we’d used “huevos” to scare Americans about the dangers of salmonella from eating cooked chicken embryos.  Plus, “cannabis” is as scientifically accurate as saying baseball players like eating “sunflowers” or I’m enjoying a bucket of buttered “maize” at the movies.  ”Cannabis” is the whole plant.  Hemp and marijuana are things that come from cannabis.

**** Yeah, I know that’s how alcohol prohibition ended.  But that was a) only a 13-year prohibition, not 75, b) a substance that already had centuries of cultural norms and regulations in place before, c) never had to face the coordinated and omnipresent media against it, d) had plenty of people in power and influence who were acknowledged users, and e) had a majority of people who used supporting it.

Download Link: Secret Stash - Register to access
Standard Podcast Feed (27.5MB 64Kbps) | High-Def Podcast Feed (82.5MB 192Kbps)
Download audio file (NORML_SHOW_LIVE_2012-02-24.mp3)

Hemp Headlines

Brought to you by Cannabis Fantastic

Daily Toker Tunes

Rockin’ Friday: Brought to you by Urb Thrasher from Urb Age Designs

• Prong – The Banishment

Cultivator’s Corner with High Times’ Sr. Cultivation Editor Danny Danko

• Danny recounts the HIGH TIMES Medical Cannabis Cup Los Angeles

Radical Rant

• The Legality of The Many Outweighs The Privileges of The Few

Download Link: Secret Stash - Register to access
Standard Podcast Feed (27.5MB 64Kbps) | High-Def Podcast Feed (82.5MB 192Kbps)
Download audio file (NORML_SHOW_LIVE_2012-02-24.mp3)

Hemp Headlines

Brought to you by Cannabis Fantastic

1. Elijah Dukes, former Washington Nationals MLB player, busted again for weed
2. lakeport California struggling with cultivation initiative
3. New report says 1 in 5 teens drove after smoking pot

Daily Toker Tunes

Groovin’ Thursday: Brought to you by The Ganja Jon Show

• Cypress x Rusko – “Roll It Light It”

Law Enforcement Against Prohibition Speaker’s Corner

• Patrick Heintz, former Massachusetts prison counselor

Grassroots Activism

• Sam Chapman – U of Oregon SSDP, on Saturday’s Oregon Legalization Summit

NORML has officially endorsed the New Approach Washington I-502 marijuana legalization measure.

UPDATE:  If you’ve perused the Patients Against I-502 website, you’ll find NORML Board Member Jeff Steinborn listed as opposing I-502.  You’ll also find that group, which claims this NORML Board Member as a supporter, highlighting his opposition to I-502.  Now, that’s funny, because according to the recorded vote of the NORML Board of Directors:

• YES – Paul Kuhn (head of Tennessee NORML)
• YES - Norm Kent (board of Florida NORML)
• YES – Dan Viets (head of Missouri NORML)
• YES – Dale Gieringer (head of California NORML)
• YES – Steve Dillon (former head of Indiana NORML)
• YES – Greta Gaines (new board member, allied with Tennessee NORML)
• YES – Madeline Martinez (head of Oregon NORML and World Famous Cannabis Cafe)
• YES – Bill Panzer (co-author of California’s Prop 215)
• YES – George Rohrbacher (former Washington rep and allied with Washington NORML)
• YES – Keith Saunders (former head of MassCann/NORML)
• YES – Allen St. Pierre (NORML Executive Director)
• YES – Keith Stroup (NORML Legal Counsel)
• YES – Jeff Steinborn (NORML Legal Committee attorney in Washington)

Now, the “Patients Against Pragmatism” will whine that it’s a 15-member board, and that’s a 13-0 vote, so where’s the other two?  They’ve tried to intimate* that the two abstentions due to absence included Steinborn, but that’s just not true.  The two abstentions had submitted their votes by proxy and they were never entered, because if it’s 13-0, there’s no need to enter them; it doesn’t change the outcome.  However, let the record show:

• YES – Dr. Lester Grinspoon (father of modern medical marijuana, vote proxied to Keith Stroup)
• YES – Richard Wolfe (former NORML Director, vote proxied to Dale Gieringer)

* “We also must add, two abstentions does not equate to a unanimous decision. A unanimous decision is a yes vote from every single member of the board. Who was the other absent member? Could they perhaps have concerns about endorsing a faulty initiative that will cause unimpaired drivers to be convicted of DUI? Could that be why they were also absent? So their reputation, like Jeff’s, is not associated with such hijinks?”

This presents a dilemma for me, as some of my most respected colleagues and good friends in the movement in Washington State are opposed to I-502 and working for grassroots efforts to place other legalization initiatives on the ballot.

Their primary concerns with I-502 is the oft-discussed-on-this-blog 5ng/mL per se DUID standard of THC in blood, the zero tolerance DUID for those under 21, and the lack of home growing provisions that hand a monopoly on marijuana production and sales to the state, a move that will likely be challenged by the feds and perhaps not implemented by a state that was gun-shy on even opening medical dispensaries, lest a state worker get busted by the feds.

Let’s start with the monopoly over weed.  Currently, nobody but patients can grow their own marijuana in Washington State.  After I-502, patients will still be able to grow their own and the state will be able to grow its own the state will license private producers to grow and sell to state stores.  So, no fewer people get to legally grow weed with I-502 and current weed growers could become legit businesses.  Nobody is forcing you to buy and smoke the state store weed.  People who are growing weed illegally now will still do so.  So there’s no change for your illegal source of weed and potentially a new legal source of weed.  Plus, with competition, your illegal source of weed will become cheaper* as the growers fight to keep up with the scale of production the state’s licensed growers can muster.  Finally, keep in mind that Washington State had until last election a state monopoly on distribution of alcohol.  Business interests lobbied to get that law changed, so now there is business competition in alcohol.  Why couldn’t that happen down the road for marijuana?

Then there is the fact that I-502 only allows you to possess a mere one ounce and only purchased† and purchase it from a state shop, which will probably be enjoined by the federal government. You still can’t home grow.  However, that one ounce legalization changes everything, not just in Washington State, but nationwide. Legalization is no longer a concept; it’s a reality. The mere smell of weed is no longer a probable cause for cops to harass you. Possession of a dime bag and a pipe will no longer get you a mandatory 2-day jail stay and mandatory $500 fine and a “drug criminal” record that follows you around. For patients traveling with less than an ounce, they get true protection from arrest, not the “affirmative defense” (a.k.a. “get arrested and show your medical papers to the judge”) they currently have.  Some of those patients with less need who don’t grow may even be able to save some money and forgo getting their doctor’s annual “permission slip”. Other states considering legalization will see the sky doesn’t fall. The feds challenging Washington’s state stores brings the prohibition fight back to the courts for the state’s rights showdown we need to move the issue forward.

I still want to see the legalization of home growing – every adult should be allowed to grow their own marijuana for personal use.  But it will be much easier to convince the people or the legislature that people should be allowed to cultivate the marijuana they’re legally allowed to possess and the state legally grows licenses the growing of than to secure the right to home cultivation of something that is currently illegal that only criminals grow.

Sometimes I hear, especially in regard to the 5ng/mL per se DUID standard, that I-502 is “throwing patients under the bus”.  And let me just re-iterate that this standard is unscientific, unnecessary, and unjust.  But let’s also re-iterate that the majority of tokers won’t be above 5ng/mL if they haven’t toked within 1-4 hours.  And remember that the marijuana prohibition we have now is unscientific, unnecessary, and unjust.  Medical marijuana supporters in other states have approved all sorts of unscientific (“a mature plant is one greater than 12″ tall”), unnecessary (“plants and medicine must never be seen in public view”), and unjust (“states that don’t recognize PTSD as a qualifying condition”) regulations because the alternative was to continue to see patients get arrested.  In the thirteen years since Washington passed Measure 692, I estimate there have been over 180,000 marijuana arrests. There are 630,000 annual marijuana users in Washington State. It’s estimated that only 60-100 thousand of them are patients.

So why is it that when we want to protect the majority of healthy tokers from arrest in 2012, it’s “throwing patients under the bus”, but when we wanted to protect just the minority of sick tokers from arrest in 1998, it wasn’t “healthy tokers not allowed on the bus”?  Why is it OK to approve all sorts of unscientific, unnecessary, and unjust regulations as the lesser evil to arresting sick tokers, but it’s not OK as a lesser evil to arresting healthy tokers?  Nobody is throwing the patients under the bus. I-502 is just asking that the healthy tokers not have to sit in the back of the bus anymore and that the sick tokers ride one if they don’t drive well.

Opponents of I-502 who support legalization say this isn’t the right bill, that their legalization is the better option.  I heard the same thing during the campaign for Prop 19 in California. That took $1.5 million to get on the ballot. It got 46.5% of the vote. During the campaign, the “Patients against Prop 19″ told us all Prop 19 was a bad law that would create corporate control of weed and hurt patients. “We’ll put a better initiative on the ballot in 2012, a presidential year!” they told us.  Well, it’s 2012. California is not likely to have legalization on the ballot. The initiative furthest along, Regulate Marijuana Like Wine, has 30,000 sigs and $80,000 dollars (or maybe I have that reversed, regardless, way less than the 750,000 sigs and $1.5 million it needs by April 20 filing deadline [irony]).

I-502 is not the legalization I would write. I would include home growing. I’d not have a state monopoly. I’d have no per se DUID measures. I’d make the legal age 18. I’d have no limits on how much you could possess or grow.  But I don’t have the ability to get that on the ballot. Neither do any of the grassroots legalization orgs listed in opposition to I-502 (and please, prove me wrong, but since 1996, no marijuana reform has made the ballot without billionaire backing except Prop 19, and that took one millionaire sinking his whole life savings into it.)  And even if I did get it on the ballot, it would fail miserably, as the voters aren’t ready for that degree of marijuana freedom.  It is not going to go from “deadly dangerous Schedule I drug that will lead your kids to heroin addiction and cause chaos on the freeways” to “as free as cigars” in one vote.

So we can complain about I-502′s flaws and vote against it, just like the DEA, the cops, and the Mexican drug cartels want you to vote, and we can direct our limited volunteer time, money, talent, and focus on other initiatives that will divide and confuse the electorate and dilute our base.  Or we can get behind the initiative that has made the ballot, that does have major financial support, that does have unprecedented big-name law enforcement support, and is polling above 55% and we can vote to become the first state in America to legalize marijuana.

* I realize that if you are making a living dealing weed illegally, this does not sound like a positive to you.  Sorry, but nobody deserves to profit from prohibition – not lawyers, prisons, drug rehabs, cops, governments, marijuana bloggers like me, or even gals and dudes who throw a light up in the closet and sell dime bags to friends just to break even on the electricity bill.  While prohibition exists this profiteering is inevitable and for the consumer, the illegal grower is the only savior of the genetics and purveyor of the product we’ve got.  But that grower should never stand in the way of ending the criminality of his consumer just to maintain his or her bottom line.  If I’m fighting to put myself out of a job in the name of freedom, you should, too.  (Actually, I think with legalization, both our jobs will flourish like never before… it’s not as if microbrews are becoming less popular and alcohol-themed writing doesn’t dominate sitcoms and the box-office…)

† Thanks to Paul Armentano for this correction.  He points me to an e-mail to him, dated January 31, 2011, from New Approach Washington’s Alison Holcomb where she explains, ”The decriminalization of possession of marijuana is a stand-alone protection, and there are no requirements relating to how the marijuana was obtained.  The only limitation is the amounts:  one ounce useable marijuana, 16 oz. marijuana-infused product in solid form, 72 oz. of marijuana-infused product in liquid form, or any combination thereof [Sec 20 Para (3)].”

(3) The possession, by a person twenty-one years of age or older, of useable marijuana or marijuana-infused products in amounts that do not exceed those set forth in section 15(3) of this act is not a violation of this section, this chapter, or any other provision of Washington state law.

In other words, possession of an ounce is legal, period.  Selling that ounce to someone is illegal.  Buying that ounce from someone is illegal.  Getting that ounce anywhere other than a state store is illegal.  Growing that ounce is illegal.  But once you possess it, it is legal.  Shaky reasoning?  Well, it’s no more shaky than presuming you’re a caregiver for one patient at a time who lines up in a queue at your storefront, and that shaky reasoning supports Washington’s medical dispensary industry.  I’ll take legal possession of an ounce over criminal possession of an ounce any day.

Further corrections made to reflect changes on the “state monopoly” comments per clarification from Alison Holcomb in the comments – my apologies for my mistake in interpretation.

The manger of a Dominos is in trouble with the law for delivering more than pizza. A North Carolina Domino’s Pizza manager was selling marijuana out of the Holly Springs Dominos.

The police became aware of his activities from a confidential informant that said 29-year-old Benjamin Crook was selling marijuana. The informant then purchased marijuana from Mr. Crook a few times in January and a few times this month. The marijuana was placed inside plastic bags that were then placed in empty pizza boxes and sold for cash at the pizza chain.

The restaurant manager was arrested yesterday and charged with possession with an intent to distribute, delivering marijuana, selling marijuana and maintaining a dwelling to sell a controlled substance.

Investigators had also gone through his trash at him home, found what they are calling evidence of drug activity, and obtained a search warrant. According to those warrants, police seized just 21.8 grams of marijuana from his locker at Dominos and another 18 grams of marijuana in the store safe.

No comment from Domino’s so far on the incident.

External Links:

http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/02/21/1873316/dominos-manager-charged-with-selling.html

In Warsaw, Poland, several activist and a Polish politician, Janusz Palikot, lit up and smoked marijuana openly in front of Parliament today to help push the agenda for liberalizing the country’s drug laws. He threatened to smoke marijuana inside of a Parliament session last year, but on threat of arrest, he lit incense instead as he spoke about legalizing cannabis in Poland and introduced a bill to establish decriminalized amounts of cannabis as personal use. The bill was not passed.

In Poland, possession of marijuana can get you up to three years in jail. Police who knew about the protest today arrested three people before the event with a substance they say they are waiting to have tested. Those arrested say it was the herb marjoram.

With Palikot and a few others lighting up a joint and passing it around, dozens surrounded them with the chant “Grow it, Smoke it, Legalize it”. The police did not arrest those smoking, and said they were not convinced they really had marijuana, although those attending the event say you could smell burning marijuana not only from the protesters, but coming from several of those int he crowd as well.

Cannabis activists in Poland say they consider their countries harsh stance on cannabis hypocrisy since Poland is a major vodka producer. The head of the Polish Drug Policy Network, a group campaigning to decriminalize soft drug use called Poland’s current laws “outdated and wrongheaded.” saying vodka is far more dangerous to society. Other activists called today’s protest during a light snow fall the beginning of the country’s citizens who smoke weed to come out of the closet and show that smoking pot is as normal as drinking a beer.

Marijuana was tolerated during the communist era with few laws restricting it’s use. With Solidarity’s victory over communism, the Catholic church took a strong role in guiding public policy, and laws criminalizing drug use have since then become more and more restrictive and punitive. Janusz Palikot, who led the demonstration is the head of the left-wing party, has served in the Parliament since he was elected in 2005 and is a wealthy businessman.

External Links:

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/polish-activists-smoke-pot-front-parliament-15712843

http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/polish-activists-light-up-in-bid-to-legalize-pot-1.3537738

Download Link: Secret Stash - Register to access
Standard Podcast Feed (27.5MB 64Kbps) | High-Def Podcast Feed (82.5MB 192Kbps)
Download audio file (NORML_SHOW_LIVE_2012-02-22.mp3)

Hemp Headlines

Brought to you by Cannabis Fantastic

1. UFC’s Nick Diaz fighting his positive marijuana test disqualification
2. NBA’s Baron Davis says pic is him “kissing three-point sign”, not “smoking a joint”
3. Raid of dispensary operation in Vallejo, CA
4. Berkeley shuttering dispensaries

Daily Toker Tunes

Irie Wednesday: Brought to you by NorCalPurps in the California Bay Area

• Rebelution – “Sky’s The Limit”

Cannabis Science with Dr. Mitch Earleywine

• The myth of failing a drug test because of second-hand marijuana smoke

Radical Rant

• Patients Against Pragmatism Distort I-502 Legalization

Keith Stroup forwarded to me today this wonderful find from the archives of NORML. It’s a 1975 ad satirizing the old Charles Atlas “98lb Weakling” comic ads those of us of a certain middle age remember well. (Hat tip to Ethan Persoff at http://www.ep.tc)

Click image for a full size copy

And for a little bonus, the “Marijuana Mystery” comic from 1991!

"Marijuana Mystery" Comic sample from 1991

Download Link: Secret Stash - Register to access
Standard Podcast Feed (27.5MB 64Kbps) | High-Def Podcast Feed (82.5MB 192Kbps)
Download audio file (NORML_SHOW_LIVE_2012-02-21.mp3)

Hemp Headlines

Brought to you by Cannabis Fantastic

1. Ron Paul calls for industrial hemp in North Dakota
2. Domino’s Pizza manager busted for selling boxes of weed
3. Shivirtri Festival beings in India
4. Idaho media hyping teenage marijuana use numbers

Daily Toker Tunes

Electric Tuesday: Brought to you by Cannabis Cure UK – the reform podcast for the United Kingdom

• Satta Spliff – “Put It Ina Rizla”

NORML Newsmakers

• Dale Gieringer, California NORML – Report on the federal crackdown on medical marijuana

Radical Rant

• Guest Opinion: Wayne Reiss on the FDA Approval of Cannabis is a Red Herring

Troy Demello, 36, and Karen Michalec, 40 both of the Eugene area were arrested on Sunday in connection with delivering pounds of marijuana to Utah. On Saturday, they were stopped near Unity, Oregon, a tiny town of less than 200 and a short distance from the Idaho border. The deputy that stopped them could smell marijuana and asked them about it. Both of the people in the vehicle said they were card holders and had three pounds of marijuana on them, the legal amount for them to possess, a pound and a half each.

The deputy released them, but called the sheriff of Malheur county, the next county over, to report the situation. County investigators spotted the car in their county and watched as it met up with a vehicle from Utah. The two vehicles spent the night in Ontario and the next morning, the car from Utah was stopped as it headed into Idaho. Both the occupants were arrested.

The Oregon residents who had the police encounter the day before were stopped as they traveled back through Oregon on Highway 26, shortly after the Utah car was stopped and detained.

Even though the Oregon couple had cards and could possess and transport, it is still illegal for them to trade or give the marijuana away to individuals without an Oregon medical marijuana card. They were jailed and charged with unlawful manufacturing of marijuana, unlawful delivery of marijuana and unlawful possession of marijuana and are currently in a Malheur County jail.

External Links:

http://www.argusobserver.com/news/oregon-pair-arrested-on-marijuana-charges/article_a21ff87e-57ff-11e1-836f-001871e3ce6c.html

A middle-class school student in Atlanta, Georgia is suing his middle school for being forced to strip in front of his classmates who said that he had marijuana in is possession. The student says, in a lawsuit filed on Wednesday, that he is still suffering emotional distress over the incident.

The student, identified only as DH in documents, testified that officials at the Eddie White Academy school had stripped-searched three other students back in February of last year after suspecting that they possessed marijuana. One of those students accused DH of having the suspected marijuana. He was brought to the vice principal’s office and while the three other classmates watched, officials checked his pockets and back back. They found nothing. One of the students said that hey were lying about him having marijuana and DH begged them to finish the search in the privacy of a bathroom, according to the lawsuit. The strip search continued, no marijuana was found.  The student says he is teased with other classmates taunting him by calling him “superman”, the underwear he happened to be wearing that day.

The student is suing the Clayton County school district for unspecified punitive and compensatory damages. Also named as the defendants are the school administrator, the county sheriff’s department and the schools resource officer, neither of which work at the school anymore.

A lawsuit in 2009 that reached the US Supreme Court ruling found that officials are not allowed to do even a partial strip search of a student with probable cause. And there was a similar case ten years ago in Atlanta where a federal appeals court found a mass strip search of students was unconstitutional, violating their fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure, so they may very well have a solid lawsuit.

External Links:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/15/student-sues-ga-school-di_n_1279253.html

(LionizeMusic.com) Bands who combine Clutch-style boogie rock with reggae dub aren’t exactly a thriving subgenre in the alternative music world. In fact, we’re not even sure there’s been a genre pegged for the kind of multifaceted rock that Lionize crank out on Superczar And The Vulture, but we’re about to peg it with one. Boogie-dub. Bow-worthy, bass-drenched boogie-dub with off-kilter lyrics that would make Neil Fallon double-check his notes for potential copyright infringement while the members and ex-members of bands like Bad Brains and the Clash—and even classic rockers like Canned Heat and Savoy Brown—shake their heads and wish they’d thought of that.

SONG LINK
Download audio file (Lionize – Superczar.mp3)

Download Link: Secret Stash - Register to access