Cannabis News – Page 73

28 Sep 2013

Morgan Says Marijuana is Safer

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Claiming that medical marijuana would be a safer, non-addictive and more-effective alternative to OxyContin, Orlando attorney John Morgan condemned the prescription pain killer in a speech Friday to argue that many of its users would be far better off smoking pot.

Speaking to the Tiger Bay Club of Central Florida, Morgan said that OxyContin, a commonly prescribed – and abused – pain medication, kills 16,000 people a year and addicts many more. He claimed marijuana – which is illegal in Florida and most states – is comparatively harmless and more effective.

“It is truly a disgrace what goes on,” said Morgan, best known for his Morgan & Morgan personal injury law firm, who chairs a statewide campaign to get a constitutional amendment legalizing medical marijuana on the 2014 Florida ballot. “OxyContin is a poison that is put into our system by pharmaceutical companies that make billions and billions of dollars.”

OxyContin is a brand-name drug whose active ingredient is oxycodone, an opioid analgesic. The Centers for Disease Control reported in February that there were 16,651 opioid analgesics overdose deaths nationally in 2010.

However, a statewide law-enforcement crackdown on illegal sales and use has cut the number of oxycodone-related Florida deaths by 41 percent, to 735 in 2012, according to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Still, oxycodone remains the leading cause of overdose deaths in the state.

Purdue Pharma, which manufactures OxyContin, did not immediately respond Friday to Morgan’s speech.

Morgan’s point was to make marijuana look good by comparison.

“One thing I think most of us accept as truth is medical marijuana works, and it works for a broad variety of illnesses and ailments,” Morgan said. “It’s helpful with ALS, cancer, multiple sclerosis, glaucoma, epilepsy, all sorts of chronic pain.”

Morgan chairs People United for Medical Marijuana, which is running a petition drive to get legalization on the November 2014 ballot. The group surpassed 100,000 signatures last month and has sent the proposed amendment language to Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi. It will then be reviewed by the state Supreme Court for ballot validation. People United would then have to gather at least 683,159 voter signatures.

Morgan has contributed $150,000 of the $248,000 that the campaign raised in the first six months of this year.

After his 35-minute speech, at least four Tiger Bay members approached Morgan privately to say that they or someone they know has cancer or some other ailment and were interested in his message. Morgan said his father, Ramon, used it while he was dying from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and esophageal cancer 20 years ago.

Source: Orlando Sentinel (FL)
Author: Scott Powers, Staff Writer
Published: September 27, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Orlando Sentinel
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/

26 Sep 2013

Can The United Nations Block US MJ Legalization?

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The United Nations International Narcotics Control Board’s latest annual report expressed dismay at the legalization of marijuana in Washington and Colorado and urged “the Government of the United States to take necessary measures to ensure full compliance with the international drug control treaties in its entire territory”. This led many media outlets to report that the U.S. had violated the UN drug control treaties to which it is a signatory. U.S. obligations under the treaties, and indeed the broader international future of marijuana legalization, are complex matters. But the essential points can be summarized in a 4-part Q&A.

1. Is the U.S. currently in violation of the UN treaties it signed agreeing to make marijuana illegal? No. The U.S. federal government is a signatory to the treaty, but the States of Washington and Colorado are not. Countries with federated systems of government like the U.S. and Germany can only make international commitments regarding their national-level policies. Constitutionally, U.S. states are simply not required to make marijuana illegal as it is in federal law. Hence, the U.S. made no such commitment on behalf of the 50 states in signing the UN drug control treaties.

Some UN officials believe that the spirit of the international treaties requires the U.S. federal government to attempt to override state-level marijuana legalization. But in terms of the letter of the treaties, Attorney General Holder’s refusal to challenge Washington and Colorado’s marijuana policies is within bounds.

2. Can the UN punish countries that legalize marijuana? Only to a small degree. The UN International Narcotics Control Board is the keeper of the drug treaties and regularly chastises governments that violate their commitments. This can be embarrassing in international diplomatic circles, but no nation has ever collapsed due to embarrassment.

Because the International Narcotics Control Board has power over the production and transport of the legal medical supply of drugs it could in theory punish a country that legalized marijuana by imposing punitive controls on pain medications. But the international humanitarian outcry over such an action would be enormous. Further, the countries that produce the most opiate painkillers are not easy to push around (e.g., Australia, India, The United States). It is thus safe to assume that crimping the medical supply of drugs is a trigger that the Narcotics Control Board is not going to pull.

3. Does the entire UN drug treaty system need to be undone in order for countries to legalize recreational marijuana? No. Marijuana is just one of many psychoactive substances made illegal by the UN drug control treaties. Some drug legalization activists hope that if support for marijuana legalization grows internationally, it will require all UN drug treaties to be revised, thereby granting an opportunity to legalize cocaine, heroin and every other drug at the same time. This is a misreading both of international political sentiment and UN protocol.

Even among nations with some sympathy towards marijuana legalization, there is minimal enthusiasm for allowing, say, the Phillip Morris corporation to sell cocaine legally throughout the world as it does cigarettes. If the price of changing UN treaties regarding marijuana is legalizing all drugs, many otherwise sympathetic nations will vigorously oppose the action.

But as it happens, it’s a moot point because under U.N. protocol, new treaties supersede old treaties. Thus, if the nations of the world ever agree that they want to legalize recreational marijuana, they can write a new treaty focused just on that drug. This would nullify only the marijuana-related provisions of the overall UN drug control framework, leaving the status of other currently illegal drugs unaffected.

4. Wouldn’t a new UN marijuana drug treaty just be a vehicle for the U.S. to push its tough marijuana policies worldwide? Get ready for a surprise. If all nations adopted current U.S. marijuana policy, the result would be significant relaxation of international control over marijuana. Prior to the Obama Administration, a Rand Corporation study found that the level of marijuana enforcement in the U.S. was similar to that of Western Europe. Since Obama was elected, marijuana enforcement intensity has plummeted and the federal government has dropped its longstanding opposition to state-level marijuana decriminalization and legalization efforts.

Last but not least, remember that the only legal recreational marijuana markets in the world are not in the Netherlands or in Portugal but right here in the United States. Transplanting current U.S. marijuana policy worldwide via a new UN treaty would mean somewhat more liberal marijuana control policy in Europe, and dramatically more relaxed policy in most of Africa, the Middle East and Asia.

In short, supporters of marijuana legalization don’t really need to worry about the UN drug control treaties. Whether marijuana legalization sweeps the world or not depends on something far more fundamental: What people around the world decide is the best approach to the drug.

Source: Huffington Post (NY)
Author: Keith Humphreys, Professor of Psychiatry, Stanford University
Published: September 25, 2013
Copyright: 2013 HuffingtonPost.com, LLC
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

23 Sep 2013

D.C. Councilman Pushes Marijuana Legalization

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The first medical marijuana stores opened in Washington, D.C., less than two months ago, but the D.C. Council is already considering legalizing the drug. At-large Councilman David Grosso, an independent, introduced legislation Tuesday to legalize marijuana possession and consumption for adults over 21.

“Most people understand the role that marijuana has played in our community: Unlike what was touted for years during the ‘War on Drugs’ that it’s a gateway drug, really all marijuana’s been is a gateway to arrest and a lifetime of struggling with the justice system,” he says.

If enacted, the law would levy a 10 percent tax on recreational marijuana and 6 percent on medical marijuana. It would also authorize the Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration to issue licenses to recreational marijuana stores.

Grosso believes it would comply with Justice Department guidance issued Aug. 29, which said state-level marijuana legalization will be tolerated if businesses are tightly regulated.

Nobody has approached him to express interest in opening a shop, but about 100 constituents have emailed with supportive messages, he said.

Grosso isn’t the only councilman pushing for marijuana reform. Councilman Tommy Wells, a Democratic candidate for mayor, introduced a decriminalization bill July 10 to reduce penalties for possession of up to an ounce of marijuana to a $100 fine versus the current standard of up to six month in jail and a fine of up to $1,000.

“Rest assured that folks are going to be pushing for my bill at any hearing on Wells’ bill,” Grosso says. “I think what will happen is Councilman Wells will have a hearing on decriminalization, and people will show up and say, ‘Hey, this doesn’t go far enough!’ and then I think it would be smart for them to move forward with my bill.”

Although he supports the decriminalization bill, along with a majority of the council, Grosso fears it won’t address the core issues of violence and criminality associated with the current black market for drugs.

“There’s going to be an increase in demand with decriminalization, but there isn’t going to be anywhere safe for people to go purchase marijuana,” Grosso says. “They’re still going to be on the street corners, we’re still going to have problems with violence on the street, with people getting arrested for nonviolent offenses.”

Councilman Marion Barry, a co-sponsor of the decriminalization bill, is “fully supportive” of marijuana legalization, said Grosso, who also introduced a bill that would automatically seal the criminal records of nonviolent marijuana cases. That bill may be adopted independently or as part of the decriminalization bill, he said.

A study released in June by the American Civil Liberties Union showed Washington, D.C., had a higher marijuana arrest rate per capita than any of the 50 states. About 846 in 100,000 district residents were arrested for marijuana possession in 2010, and black residents were 8.05 times more likely to be nabbed.

Congress has the authority to block D.C. laws and did so for years after a 1998 referendum in which city residents voted for medical marijuana.

Grosso says times have changed, however, and he doesn’t believe Congress would block implementation of a council-approved legalization bill.

“The mood is turning, the tide is turning,” he says.

A voter-initiated legalization referendum, he added, isn’t ideal, but it may be successfully pushed by residents next year if the council doesn’t act first.

Source: U.S. News & World Report (US)
Author: Steven Nelson
Published: September 19, 2013
Copyright: 2013 U.S. News & World Report
Website: http://www.usnews.com/

23 Sep 2013

Holder Expands Changes in Drug-Case Policy

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The Justice Department is expanding a major change in federal drug sentencing policy to cover pending drug cases, Attorney General Eric Holder said Thursday.

Last month, Holder said certain low-level, nonviolent drug offenders — those without ties to large-scale organizations, gangs or cartels — no longer will be charged with offenses that impose severe mandatory minimum sentences.

Holder said he now has broadened the new policy to cover defendants who have not yet been convicted in drug cases that could involve lengthy mandatory prison sentences. The policy also may be applied, at the discretion of prosecutors, to a defendant who has entered a guilty plea, but has not yet been sentenced.

Mandatory minimum prison sentences, a legacy of the government’s war on drugs, limit the discretion of judges to impose shorter prison terms.

Holder says the government should reserve the most severe prison terms for serious, high-level or violent drug traffickers.

“Some federal drug statutes that mandate inflexible sentences — regardless of the individual conduct at issue in a particular case — do not serve public safety when they’re applied indiscriminately,” Holder told a criminal justice issues forum of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation.

At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this week, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said that in one case, a first-time offender arrested with less than 2 ounces of cocaine was sentenced to 10 years in prison because of mandatory sentencing guidelines. Paul has drafted legislation along with committee chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., that would give judges wider sentencing discretion as one way to relieve prison overcrowding and bring down the exploding costs of operating prisons.

Source: Associated Press (Wire)
Author: Pete Yost, The Associated Press
Published: September 19, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Associated Press

21 Sep 2013

DEA Marijuana Raids Plummet

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

New data released by the Drug Enforcement Administration reveals the agency has dramatically cut the number of raids on marijuana growers over the past two years, especially in California.

But, as SF Weekly noted, a closer look at the data reveals that the DEA has not become less aggressive. Rather, the agency appears to have been more effective by making fewer raids, but arresting more people and seizing more pot.

While the number of busts has decreased by about 22 percent, the amount of marijuana confiscated and the number of arrests made during raids have increased by about that much. In 2010, authorities pulled 7.4 million plants from 2,272 sites, resulting in 1,591 arrests and 59,928 pounds of pot, according to the DEA. In 2012, authorities confiscated 2.08 million plants from 1,784 sites. But the grand pull during those raids was a whopping 2,045 arrests and 64,920 pounds of pot.

As SF Weekly noted, the shift is likely due in part to the DEA’s disbandment of its nearly 30-year-old Campaign Against Marijuana Planting, or CAMP program. Allen St. Pierre, executive director of marijuana policy reform group NORML, told The Huffington Post that he believes technology may be driving the increase in arrests.

“Before, they would get the cannabis, but rarely get any arrests,” St. Pierre explained. “But with new technology — satellites, drones, cameras, etc. — they have a much better opportunity to get a bit of a body count, so to speak.”

A DEA spokesman wasn’t immediately available for comment.

St. Pierre, generally an outspoken critic against the DEA, hailed the agency’s shift.

“This is positive news, but I think it may have more to do with the pressure for forfeiture, which is always in the background for law enforcement. If authorities find assets, cash, etc., they get to largely keep those items through civil forfeiture process,” St. Pierre said. “The real vexation of law enforcement should be drugs like meth. But unfortunately — perversely — they are incentivised by the federal government to go after cannabis. But hopefully this trend will continue and we’ll start to see a real reprioritization.”

Source: Huffington Post (NY)
Author: Robin Wilkey
Published: September 19, 2013
Copyright: 2013 HuffingtonPost.com, LLC
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

19 Sep 2013

Legal Marijuana: Will Most States Head That Way?

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Is it possible that most US states will legalize marijuana for recreational use? Already, Washington State and Colorado are working out detailed regulations for such use after voters last year approved the possession and consumption of personal amounts of pot. And 20 states, plus the District of Columbia, have allowed marijuana for medicinal purposes.

It’s been 17 years since California voters shocked the world by allowing doctors to write prescriptions for pot and almost exactly 31 years since Ronald Reagan assured the nation that “we’re going to win the war” on marijuana and other illicit drugs.

Now this summer, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has signaled that it will mostly leave to states the responsibility to regulate individuals’ use of pot. And a majority of Americans – 52 percent, according to the Pew Research Center, now agree with that ubiquitous reggae plea: “Le-ga-lize it.”

Yes, people are still being arrested for selling, even consuming, outlawed street drugs, and many members of society are still troubled by, among other things, new psychoactive compounds like the club drug “Molly,” which has been blamed for several recent deaths.

And specifically regarding marijuana, the federal government still categorizes it as more harmful than cocaine.

Nevertheless, some policy experts predict that 1 out of 5 states will have legal recreational marijuana for American adults by 2016, and even some legalization critics like columnist David Frum have conceded that before long, half of US states will probably sanction recreational use.

To be sure, some suggest those time frames may be a bit heady, especially given the relatively slow pace of medical-marijuana expansion. But such predictions are also hard to discount, given rapidly shifting attitudes, often across political lines, about pot.

“There’s a lot of political forces at play here, and there’s a sense that the DOJ’s announcement, which does represent a pretty big policy shift, doesn’t tackle everything,” says Robert Mikos, a marijuana law expert at Vanderbilt University Law School in Nashville, Tenn.

Source: Christian Science Monitor (US)
Author: Patrik Jonsson, Staff Writer
Published: September 17, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Christian Science Publishing Society
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.csmonitor.com/

19 Sep 2013

Canada’s new Medical Marijuana rules cut Homegrowers, Pharmacists Out

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

After two years of study and discussion, the federal government has finalized new rules for medical marijuana and granted a reprieve to pharmacists who opposed the rules in their draft form.

Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq rolled out the regulations today for formal publication in the Canada Gazette on Wednesday.

Under the new regime, the government will no longer produce or distribute medical pot and medical marijuana users will no longer be allowed to grow the product at home.

Health Canada said since the medical marijuana program was introduced in 2001, it has expanded to 30,000 people from the original 500 authorized to use the product.

“This rapid increase has had unintended consequences for public health, safety and security as a result of allowing individuals to produce marijuana in their homes,” the department said in a news release.

“Under the new regulations, production will no longer take place in homes and municipal zoning laws will need to be respected, which will further enhance public safety.”

Under the new regulations, the government will allow patients to buy prescribed amounts only from licensed growers who will be required to meet strict conditions.

In previous versions of the regulations, pharmacies were to distribute the product just like other medications, provoking concern from pharmacists, who expressed concerns about dispensing a product without sufficient research. They also cited security concerns.

The final version removes the pharmacists from the loop, leaving patients to rely on mail order for their medical marijuana.

“While the courts have said that there must be reasonable access to a legal source of marijuana for medical purposes, we believe that this must be done in a controlled fashion in order to protect public safety,” Aglukkaq said in a statement.

“These changes will strengthen the safety of Canadian communities while making sure patients can access what they need to treat serious illnesses.”

She used similar reasoning last week when she introduced new hurdles for the creation of supervised drug-injection sites in response to a court ruling.

Physicians and pharmacists alike questioned the regulatory changes, saying there is little evidence that medical marijuana is either effective or safe.

The umbrella group representing the country’s colleges of physicians and surgeons said the changes won’t protect people.

“We believe that the new federal medical marijuana regulations put patients and the general public at risk,” Dr. Rocco Gerace, president of the Federation of Medical Regulatory Authorities of Canada, said in a statement.

“Physicians should not be asked to prescribe or dispense substances or treatments for which there is little or no evidence of clinical efficacy or safety.”

In December, the president of the Canadian Medical Association, Dr. Anna Reid, described the proposed marijuana rules as “akin to asking doctors to write prescriptions while blindfolded.”

“Not only does prescribing drugs that haven’t been clinically tested fly in the face of medical training and ethics, but marijuana’s potential benefits and adverse effects have not been rigorously tested.”

The Canadian Pharmacists Association responded in February to a set of draft rules.

“There is little information available on safety, effectiveness, dosage, drug interactions or long-term health risks,” the association said in its letter to Health Canada.

“Pharmacists, physicians and nurse practitioners need evidence-based information to support safe and effective prescribing and dispensing of (medical marijuana).”

The association said it didn’t know how many pharmacies would be willing to participate a revamped system.

“While the distribution process would be regulated, there remains the concern with pharmacists dispensing a product that does not have adequate safety and effectiveness evidence. In addition, the potential security risks to pharmacies due to robberies would need to be considered.”

19 Sep 2013

Denver Council Passes Historic Retail MJ Rules

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Denver City Council Monday night passed a historic bill that sets the rules and regulations for the retail marijuana industry in the state’s largest city. Most other big municipalities around Colorado have taken a time-out from setting their own regulations with many opting out to see how Denver’s system will work. Denver also was the first to take on medical marijuana regulations.

“The whole world is watching, not just the country,” said Councilman Charlie Brown, who led the council committee on the issue. “There will be some changes. It is a work in progress. We did what we could, but this is a huge unknown.”

Brown said he wants to hold another meeting with Denver’s police chief, the manager of parks and recreation and some municipal judges to talk about how to enforce the laws against public marijuana consumption.

Several council members were upset after a free marijuana giveaway Sept. 9 in Denver’s Civic Center park that included public pot smoking, which is against the law. No one was arrested or cited for the violations.

“When people are blatantly flaunting our laws and putting it in our face, that is not what we want for the city,” Brown said.

Now, he said, it is up to Congress to pass legislation that will allow a normal banking relationship within this industry. He cited a bill being sponsored by U.S. Rep. Ed Perlmutter, D-Golden.

Snipped

Complete Article: http://drugsense.org/url/xSBbf7UW

Source: Denver Post (CO)
Author: Jeremy P. Meyer, The Denver Post
Published: September 17, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Denver Post
Website: http://www.denverpost.com/
Contact: [email protected]

17 Sep 2013

Thousands Cited for Having Pot on Federal Land

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Karen Strand didn’t think she’d get in trouble for having a small container of medical marijuana when she went hiking in Olympic National Park this summer.

President Barack Obama, she remembered, had said the federal government had “bigger fish to fry” than people who follow state marijuana laws, and Washington state had just legalized pot.

But a ranger pulled her over on a remote gravel road, and Strand wound up as one of at least 27,700 people cited for having pot on federal land since 2009, according to an Associated Press analysis of federal court data. The number of citations is small compared to the hundreds of millions of visitors to national parks, forests and monuments each year.

But it nevertheless illustrates one of the many issues Washington, Colorado and other states face in complying with last month’s Justice Department memo that requires them to address eight federal law enforcement priorities if they want to regulate marijuana. Among those priorities is keeping marijuana use and possession off federal property.

State officials have no plans to license pot gardens or stores on federal land, but beyond that, they say, it’s not clear what they can do to discourage backpackers or campers from bringing a few joints into Rocky Mountain or Mount Rainier National Park.

“It’s not one of the big topics we’ve talked a lot about,” said Jaime Smith, a spokeswoman for Washington Gov. Jay Inslee.

Other concerns on the DOJ’s list include keeping marijuana away from kids and cartels, preventing drugged driving and pot-related gun violence, and keeping unregulated marijuana grows from spoiling federal land.

Thousands of people receive tickets every year charging them with having pot on U.S. property — a federal misdemeanor punishable by up to 6 months in jail and a $5,000 fine. The charges typically don’t result in jail time, but often do require at least one court appearance. They are frequently negotiated down to an infraction, akin to a traffic ticket, and a fine of up to a few hundred dollars.

Through the first seven months of this year, at least 146 people had been cited in Washington for having pot on federal land, which makes up nearly one-third of the state. At least 135 had been cited in Colorado. Washington’s figure is slightly below the same period for the past few years, while Colorado’s is roughly on track.

The number of people cited nationally has dropped, from 6,282 in 2009 to 5,772 in 2012, and is on pace to hit about 5,300 this year, according to data from the U.S. Courts Central Violations Bureau. The citations were issued at national parks, seashores, forests, military bases and monuments. There were even 10 tickets issued at the Pentagon.

Officials say the actual numbers are likely greater: Park rangers and other federal agents sometimes simply write on the ticket that the offender had a controlled substance, without specifying the drug.

Defendants say being prosecuted for having tiny amounts of pot on U.S. land — especially in Washington, Colorado and states with medical marijuana laws — belies the administration’s assertions that going after people who comply with state marijuana laws is not a priority. The DOJ first announced that position in a 2009 memo, though the fine print also made clear that pot isn’t welcome on federal property.

Strand, 36, was pulled over for having a broken taillight, and the ranger reported that he could smell fresh pot. She was ticketed for having 2 grams — far less than the ounce, or 28 grams, allowed by Washington’s recreational pot law, or the 24 ounces allowed by the state’s medical marijuana law.

“It is exceptionally confusing,” she said.

One morning this month, Strand sat in a small, crowded room at the federal courthouse in Tacoma for her initial appearance on charges of marijuana possession and drug paraphernalia — a pipe.

Near her sat her husband as well as several other people caught with weed on federal land, including a 21-year-old man who was accused of having 0.1 grams during a traffic stop on a highway that skirts Mount Rainier National Park.

“I just thought it was legal now,” Jonah Hunt said. “I didn’t know I was on federal land.”

Barbara Sievers, the assistant U.S. attorney handling the cases, informed the defendants their charges would not be dismissed.

“Regardless of whatever happened in the state, it’s federal law, and it’s federal property,” she said.

Former school teacher Melanie Cease, of Seattle, said a park ranger approached her one day in June at a secluded campsite in Olympic National Park. He came to make sure her dog was on a leash, but then saw an empty pipe on the picnic table.

With his hand on his gun, she said, the ranger demanded she turn over whatever pot she had. Cease, 48, was cited for having a “trace amount,” according to the ranger’s report.

“I’ve never been arrested in my life, and now I’m being threatened with six months in jail and a $5,000 fine for using my medicine?” she said. “It was my understanding the government was not going to mess with individual patients.”

Strand and Cease both pleaded not guilty, and their cases were set for trial in October.

Strand and her husband, Thomas, said they remain troubled by what they said felt like harassment from the park ranger. He repeatedly placed his hand on his gun when speaking to them, they said.

“It’s a beautiful place up there,” Thomas Strand said. “And I don’t know if I’ll ever go back.”

Source: Associated Press (Wire)
Author: Gene Johnson, The Associated Press
Published: September 16, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Associated Press