As if this week couldn't get any better, Marijuana doesn't harm lung function.

[kwame k]

CHICAGO (AP) — Smoking a joint once a week or a bit more apparently doesn't harm the lungs, suggests a 20-year study that bolsters evidence that marijuana doesn't do the kind of damage tobacco does.

The results, from one of the largest and longest studies on the health effects of marijuana, are hazier for heavy users — those who smoke two or more joints daily for several years. The data suggest that using marijuana that often might cause a decline in lung function, but there weren't enough heavy users among the 5,000 young adults in the study to draw firm conclusions.

Rest here (http://news.yahoo.com/marijuana-doesnt-harm-lung-function-study-found-210146886.html)

[kwame k]

It does say that it didn't have data on heavy user but I have to imagine that the tar or resin in weed has to adversely affect your lungs.

This is just one of a long list why the shit should be legalized.

Not addictive.

Better for you than pills.

and now this!!!!!!

[qikgts]

but there weren't enough heavy users among the 5,000 young adults in the study to draw firm conclusions.

I don't get it... They couldn't find 5,000 "young adults" that smoke two fatty's a day? They weren't looking in the right places...

[kwame k]

:lmao:

[qikgts]

"THC causes the "high" that users feel. It also helps fight inflammation and may counteract the effects of more irritating chemicals in the drug"

So it's the cause and the cure... lol

[hambon4lif]

CHICAGO (AP) — The results, from one of the largest and longest studies on the health effects of marijuana, are hazier for heavy users — those who smoke two or more joints daily for several years. The data suggest that using marijuana that often might cause a decline in lung function, but there weren't enough heavy users among the 5,000 young adults in the study to draw firm conclusions......I must've been out of town that day.

[kwame k]

"THC causes the "high" that users feel. It also helps fight inflammation and may counteract the effects of more irritating chemicals in the drug"

So it's the cause and the cure... lol


Wow.....let me get stoned and think aboot that one!

[kwame k]

.....I must've been out of town that day.


I know.....hell, I have plenty, I would of donated some for the cause!

[Hardrock69]

THC also kills cancer cells. There was a rather lengthy thread I began some months back that I kept adding to with tons of reefer-related stuff.

[kwame k]

i know but.......I got stoned and forgot where it was;)

[FORD]

Moderation is definitely the qualifier when it comes to pot and lung damage. I know there was one week back in 1989 or 90 when I was really depressed, and so I went through quite a lot of it that week. My lungs physically hurt. That's when I knew I should cut back.

All the evidence I have seen suggests that smoking dope doesn't do anywhere near the damage that smoking tobacco does. But common sense also tells you that sticking something into your face and lighting it on fire is probably going to have some negative effects somewhere down the line.

But then, that's why God made brownies & vaporizers.

[Nitro Express]

Cheech and Chong are still alive so apparently weed won't kill you.

[Hardrock69]

:lmao: @ Kwame

[Angel]

Not addictive.Bullshit, I'm living proof it is. Actually, it is addictive, but because it is stored in fat cells rather than the blood stream, it takes longer to leave your system...resulting in milder withdrawal. I've been smoking on an almost daily basis for over 35 years...you DON'T want to see me if I don't have a toke, worse than any PMS you've ever encountered. ;)

[kwame k]

Bullshit, I'm living proof it is. Actually, it is addictive, but because it is stored in fat cells rather than the blood stream, it takes longer to leave your system...resulting in milder withdrawal. I've been smoking on an almost daily basis for over 35 years...you DON'T want to see me if I don't have a toke, worse than any PMS you've ever encountered. ;)

I guess I have a different meaning of addiction.....I look at, say as a hard core alcoholic, if they were to quit drinking they could going into DT's and die, same as a pill addict or heroin addict.....withdrawl from pot is more psychological than physical.........you're not going to die if you don't smoke a joint.....you may want to kill someone but you can not die from pot withdrawal.....here's a good answer that's along my line of thinking.


"In order to answer this question, we first need a definition of the word, "Addicted". Not too long ago, an addictive substance was something that, when taken long enough, produced gross phsyiogical changes in the way the body worked, so that normal operation of the body was impossible without that substance being injested. And as the substance must, by definition, form a tolerance, higher and higher dosages (up to a point) were needed. This is the definition of "additictive" I'm going to use for this explanation. Addictive is not the same as "habituating". Habituatingsubstances, using this definition, are things you crave, may even come to need, but do not create a gross physiological change in the way your body works (trace neurological/neurochemical changes can and do happen but, they're quite minor, and they aren't always substance-related: stroking a pet for instance, can cause such trace effects).

In the cases of alcohol and barbituates, the addiction, in the sense I describe, is very strong. Stopping these drugs suddenly for extreme addictions usually will require hospitalization, additional medication to treat symptoms of withdrawal and, especially, in the case of barbituates, may result in death. Lesser addictions like heroin or opioids can also cause withdrawl syndromes, although not as strongly as ethanol or barbituates, and opiate withdrawal is not fatal (barring the existence of other factors).

The active ingredient in Cannibis sativa is THC (delta 1 tetrahydrocannibinol). THC is active in very low dosages. Therapeutic THC is typically delivered 5mg tid (three times a day). As addiction in the sense I mean it is a gross process, tiny dosages typically don't generate the large-scale physiological changes a true addiction needs to get revved up (neurological yes; physio no). So most people, scientists and street-users, think of marijuana as non-addictive. A recent study at Columbia University offers potentially contradictory evidence, but it's still only one study and not accepted as universal fact at this time. As such, if you say THC is not clinically addictive, most of the world will agree with you.

Can marijuana be habituating? Absolutely -- but not universally. Just as some people definitely use Marijuana in a manner that can only be described as a habit, some have used marijuana for years but not in a habitual pattern. While the same can be said for alcohol, it seems that alcoholics really do set up a regular pattern of extensive use that I personally don't see nearly as frequently in marijuana users.

In cases of marijuana habituation, I think the causal factors are obscure. With addictive drugs, we can see clear, obvious, repeatable effects in terms of addiction. With marijuana, we see far less predictable results. And why these results are not as predictable is not clear.
The basic fact is that most marijunana uses (maybe all marijuana users) do not display signs of addiction (as defined above)."

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_marijuana_addictive#ixzz1jA427LCf

[ZahZoo]

This is all fine and wonderful supporting information. We have a really long road to go on legalization...

Even in the few areas weed has been decriminalized... it don't benefit many if you want to stay employed in a lot of the big business world.

[kwame k]

This is all fine and wonderful supporting information. We have a really long road to go on legalization...

Even in the few areas weed has been decriminalized... it don't benefit many if you want to stay employed in a lot of the big business world.

True......even though I have my MM card, if I was to be randomly tested I would be fired from my job and, even though I am licensed to have and use pot, it doesn't stop an employer from firing me.

The testing is subjective......to my knowledge, the testing can not show if you are stoned right that second but shows you have THC in your system.

I've always wondered what happens to someone who has a prescription for pills and they get tested.......I'm talking in general and not people in high risk jobs that could injure themselves or kill innocent people.....along the lines of a truck driver or crane operator, that can't operate any machinery on any substance.

Would you get fired from an office job if you were on pain killers for an injury, for instance.

[ZahZoo]

A lot depends on the specific HR policies at a company and obviously the type of job is key.

If you are under medical care that requires any sort of accommodation or restriction of duties... most companies have forms your doctor can submit to cover you. This would be especially important if you operate any type of machinery, vehicles, etc... Company and/or union policies are generally pretty clear and communicated.

I would think if you have a legitimate treatment program going on that involves pain killers or similar... you'd want to notify your employer. Depends on where you work... big corporations have a lot of policies and HR staff for this. Small businesses don't... but if care about your employment and business management is half decent they should work with you.

If you are medicating for anything other than a legit medical condition... well you know the drill.

[Angel]

Up here, they have to prove a bona fide job requirement before testing. Office workers cannot be subjected to testing.

[kwame k]

A lot depends on the specific HR policies at a company and obviously the type of job is key.

If you are under medical care that requires any sort of accommodation or restriction of duties... most companies have forms your doctor can submit to cover you. This would be especially important if you operate any type of machinery, vehicles, etc... Company and/or union policies are generally pretty clear and communicated.

I would think if you have a legitimate treatment program going on that involves pain killers or similar... you'd want to notify your employer. Depends on where you work... big corporations have a lot of policies and HR staff for this. Small businesses don't... but if care about your employment and business management is half decent they should work with you.

If you are medicating for anything other than a legit medical condition... well you know the drill.

The laws here in Michigan are so vague that they don't cover any of this......hell, they forgot to even mention Dispensaries, all together:pullinghair:

I agree that company policies dictates the terms of your employment and that's they way it should be......I'm not trying to defend that or even saying it's unfair. Just kinda amusing and more of a theoretical exercise to kill some time.

Personally, I have my card but would never even think about pushing the issue if I worked for someone else, I know the drill, too;)

I just find it funny that they passed a law so vague and so open that really it's almost meaningless.

[Hardrock69]

I have not been tested in 11 years....hell, before that I worked for a large corporation for 3 years...had to get tested before I was hired, but as soon as I got word I passed the test, I fired the shit up!

Being unemployed right now.....I am not smoking. Have not smoked in 3 months, but no big deal. If I quit....I notice for a few days it is a bit more difficult to fall right asleep at night....but other than that, I do not miss it, nor do I have an real withdrawal symptoms. But then, I have never been "addicted" to anything in my life....except the usual stuff like eating, breathing, sleeping, etc. :D

[Hardrock69]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/01/07/sirota-legalizing-marijuana-is-now-a-mainstream-position/



Sirota: Legalizing marijuana is now a ‘mainstream’ position

The slow drumbeat to legalizing marijuana in America continued Friday evening when Salon.com columnist David Sirota appeared on Current TV’s The Young Turks.

Sirota mentioned a recent Gallup poll in which half of Americans support legalizing marijuana, with 77 percent also backing medical marijuana. With those figures, Sirota and host Cenk Uygur slammed White House and Washington figures still viewing marijuana legalization as a radical idea.

“I think if you look at those numbers like that, what you see is the mainstream, centrist position, is to support legalizing marijuana,” he said. “And the extremists are those who continue to fight the drug war.”

[sadaist]

.you DON'T want to see me if I don't have a toke


We barely want to see you when you have!


;)

[PETE'S BROTHER]

Moderation is definitely the qualifier when it comes to pot and lung damage. I know there was one week back in 1989 or 90 when I was really depressed, and so I went through quite a lot of it that week. My lungs physically hurt. That's when I knew I should cut back.

All the evidence I have seen suggests that smoking dope doesn't do anywhere near the damage that smoking tobacco does. But common sense also tells you that sticking something into your face and lighting it on fire is probably going to have some negative effects somewhere down the line.

But then, that's why God made brownies & vaporizers.

so odd, that was the week i didn't smoke a bunch :hee:

[PETE'S BROTHER]

sorry, i gotta get back to studying for this new test i signed up for :bingesmoking:

[Hardrock69]

so odd, that was the week i didn't smoke a bunch :hee:

That's cause you couldn't find any because HE bought it all up! :hee:

[DONNIEP]

My company has a mandatory drug testing policy for new hires. Thank God I've been there for 15 years...they don't test us old-timers. As far as pot being addictive, I don't know...I can burn one here and there and then not burn one for months - doesn't matter to me. The funny thing is...I just finished a fattie...wish there weren't so many seeds...

[PETE'S BROTHER]

My company has a mandatory drug testing policy for new hires. Thank God I've been there for 15 years...they don't test us old-timers. As far as pot being addictive, I don't know...I can burn one here and there and then not burn one for months - doesn't matter to me. The funny thing is...I just finished a fattie...wish there weren't so many seeds...

seeds? :headlights: what are these "seed" things you speak of? :nono:

[kwame k]

seeds? :headlights: what are these "seed" things you speak of? :nono:

Must be a typo;)

[kwame k]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/01/07/sirota-legalizing-marijuana-is-now-a-mainstream-position/

MM laws are a joke.....just a way to get a fee out of you and self-perpetuate cottage industries.

The State gets money, doctors get money and dispensaries get money.

[sadaist]

MM laws are a joke.....just a way to get a fee out of you and self-perpetuate cottage industries.

The State gets money, doctors get money and dispensaries get money.


Snoop Dogg was just cited in Texas for having pot. Funny thing is...in CA he has a prescription for MM. WTF?

[ODShowtime]

I am so sick of worrying about a random drug test at the beginning of every month just so some drug test company can make a profit. I'm a CPA and quite frankly such tests are below my dignity. And yet I'm still subjected to the threat.

I don't know how society expects me to respect any of its laws when I have to deal with bullshit like this. I'll follow my own system of beliefs thank you. I'm at least as qualified to decide morality as any of the morons we've elected to rule us. At least I don't lie and steal for a living.

[kwame k]

Snoop Dogg was just cited in Texas for having pot. Funny thing is...in CA he has a prescription for MM. WTF?

Doesn't matter.....if the State your in doesn't recognize the State that issued the MM card, you're fucked!

It's still a federal offense even if you do have your card:(

[kwame k]

I am so sick of worrying about a random drug test at the beginning of every month just so some drug test company can make a profit. I'm a CPA and quite frankly such tests are below my dignity. And yet I'm still subjected to the threat.

I don't know how society expects me to respect any of its laws when I have to deal with bullshit like this. I'll follow my own system of beliefs thank you. I'm at least as qualified to decide morality as any of the morons we've elected to rule us. At least I don't lie and steal for a living.

Funny thing is......the GOP, the party of small government, wants more government to dictate their "morality" on you:(

Ironic, isn't it?

CPA? How could you possibly injure yourself? Stab yourself with a pencil:headlights:

[ZahZoo]

Watched a few episodes of Marijuana Wars on Discovery/History recently... thought it was somewhat silly in one episode. Their sales manager was going off on the team because sales were down... then they show some scenes in "purchasing" and talk about getting weed & hash samples and giving them to the staff. Then back to the sales Pep-Talk... I'm sitting there thinking... how the fuck does one motivate a marketing team who's all high on premium weed and hash..? Go figure.

Came to the conclusion after they claimed monthly sales of $1.2 million... that despite all the talk of "patients" and few well placed scenes of some person suffering from MS picking up a "prescription"... these fuckers are just big time dealers that found a way to make it legit. Watching their CEO doing bong hit wake & bakes before heading into the office just undercut their whole "we're doing this to help people in need"... crap. I could see through the Big Bamboo smoke screen...

[Angel]

We barely want to see you when you have!


;)Asshole! But, I asked for it myself - the old Canuck Cunt that I am ;)

[sadaist]

Asshole! But, I asked for it myself - the old Canuck Cunt that I am ;)



I'm sorry. You set it up so perfect that I couldn't help myself. :)



...and I did say "barely". Not a definitive NO. So I get a pass on a technicality I think.

[Hardrock69]

Canada's Liberal Party has voted to legalize pot:

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/01/15/liberal-vote-legalize-marijuana_n_1207388.html


Liberal Convention 2012: Federal Grits Vote To Legalize Marijuana

First Posted: 01/15/2012 10:23 am Updated: 01/17/2012 2:38 pm


Seventy-seven per cent of delegates at the Liberals' biennial convention told their party's leadership Sunday morning that they want a future Liberal government to legalize marijuana.

Their interim leader Bob Rae acknowledged the war on drugs hasn’t worked, but told reporters the party's caucus would have to study the implications of the resolution.

"Frankly, the status quo doesn't work and that's what needs to change,” Rae said. “The Liberal party is saying that the current laws do not work and that we need a new direction.”

“It’s now up to us to take that resolution and see exactly what it will mean in terms of policy, because there are some practical questions that we have to look at,” Rae added, noting in French that one such issue would be how to control the supply of legalized pot.

Rae insisted he was at ease defending the principles of the resolution and that he would work with the membership on the issue in the months and years ahead as the party drafts its next election platform.

“I accept that it is the will of the party that was expressed and as leader we will continue to work together,” Rae said.

During a debate on the floor of the Ottawa convention hall, one Liberal delegate, a police officer, told the crowd Canada’s drug policy was misguided.

“This country does not need more prisons, it needs less criminals,” he said.

The resolution, which was brought forward by the party's youth wing, calls upon a Liberal federal government to legalize, regulate and tax marijuana production, distribution and use while enacting “strict penalties for illegal trafficking, illegal importation and exportation, and impaired driving.”

The resolution also calls for significant investments in prevention and education programs on the harms of marijuana and amnesty for Canadians convicted of simple possession in the past.

Samuel Lavoie, the president of the Young Liberals of Canada, said he wasn’t sure the resolution would make it into the Liberal party’s next election platform, but that he hoped it would not be ignored.

“I think everyone in the party, not only the interim leader (Rae), but everyone in the party, recognizes that there were 3,000 Liberals here this weekend and that this is a motion which, however controversial, passed with more than 75% of support, so I think it would be difficult for anyone to just ignore the result and the will of the membership,” he said.

Liberals should stop being scared of any soft on crime label the Conservative party might give them, Lavoie added.

“The Conservative staffers in the Prime Minister’s office will never vote for the Liberal party,” Lavoie said. “We are talking to Canadians, the fact is this is a sensible policy, an evidence-based policy that is very easy to defend and polls show that we have a majority of support amongst Canadians. There is a cross-partisan support amongst non-conservative voters for this. So we feel like this is something that will get us votes not lose us votes,” he said.

More than 1,400 delegates took part in the vote. If Liberal members re-affirm the motion in two years during another policy process, the Liberal leader will still have the right to veto any part of the election platform under current rules.

[ThrillsNSpills]

THC also kills cancer cells. There was a rather lengthy thread I began some months back that I kept adding to with tons of reefer-related stuff.

yeah, a study from Harvard from 2007, and it was lung cancer cells.
Hard to believe, isn't it.
Especially when we were told 1 joint equalled 20 cigarettes or something years ago.

Problem here is that anything that adds acid to the body makes your body more susceptible to the big C.
Makes me wonder who paid for the study and for what end.

[hambon4lif]

Canada's Liberal Party has voted to legalize pot:Hell Yeah, eh!
That's what the fuck I'm talkin' aboot! :thumb:

[kwame k]

Outstanding!

Guess it's time to learn my new National Anthem!

O Canada!
Our home and native land!
True patriot love in all thy sons command.
With glowing hearts we see thee rise,
The True North strong and free!
From far and wide,
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
God keep our land glorious and free!
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

[PETE'S BROTHER]

Outstanding!

Guess it's time to learn my new National Anthem!

O Canada!
Our home and native land!
True patriot love in all thy sons command.
With glowing hearts we see thee rise,
The True North strong and free!
From far and wide,
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
God keep our land glorious and free!
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

can ya play it on the drums? :hee:

[kwame k]

:biggrin:

Sure!

[Hardrock69]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9031855/Its-time-to-end-the-failed-war-on-drugs.html

It’s time to end the failed war on drugs
Treating addicts as criminals has done absolutely nothing to address this crisis, writes Richard Branson.



By Richard Branson

6:26AM GMT 23 Jan 2012

Just as prohibition of alcohol failed in the United States in the 1920s, the war on drugs has failed globally. Over the past 50 years, more than $1 trillion has been spent fighting this battle, and all we have to show for it is increased drug use, overflowing jails, billions of pounds and dollars of taxpayers’ money wasted, and thriving crime syndicates. It is time for a new approach.

Too many of our leaders worldwide are ignoring policy reforms that could rapidly reduce violence and organised crime, cut down on theft, improve public health and reduce the use of illicit drugs. They are failing to act because the reforms that are needed centre on decriminalising drug use and treating it as a health problem. They are scared to take a stand that might seem “soft”.

But exploring ways to decriminalise drugs is anything but soft. It would free up crime-fighting resources to go after violent organised crime, and get more people the help they need to get off drugs. It’s time to get tough on misguided policies and end the war on drugs.

I was fortunate to be part of the Global Commission for Drug Policy, along with the former US Secretary of State George Shultz, former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, President Cardoso of Brazil and the likes of the former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbor, and the former chairman of President Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, Paul Volcker. We studied international drug policy over the past 50 years, and found that it has totally failed to stop the growth and diversification of the drug trade. Between 1998 and 2008, opiate use increased by more than 34 per cent, even as prison populations swelled and profits for drug traffickers soared.

As these grim trends show, the two strategies at the core of drug control policy have been ineffective. First, prohibition and enforcement efforts have failed to dent the production and distribution of drugs in any part of the world. Second, the threat of arrest and punishment has had no significant deterrent effect on drug use.



Unless this issue is tackled now, countless individuals and families will continue to suffer, no matter how much money is spent. We need a debate on how policy can cut consumption and reduce harm, rather than inflammatory scaremongering. It is not about supporting drug use; it is about solving a crisis.

Drugs are dangerous and ruin lives. They need to be regulated. But we should work to reduce the crime, health and social problems associated with drug markets in whatever way is most effective. Broad criminalisation should end; new policy options should be explored and evaluated; drug users in need should get treatment; young people should be dissuaded from drug use via education; and violent criminals should be the target of law enforcement. We should stop ineffective initiatives like arresting and punishing citizens who have addiction problems.

The next step is simple: countries should be encouraged to experiment with new policies. We have models to follow. In Switzerland, the authorities employed a host of harm-reduction therapies, and successfully disrupted the criminal drug market. In Portugal, decriminalisation for users of all drugs 10 years ago led to a significant reduction in heroin use and decreased levels of property crime, HIV infection and violence. Replacing incarceration with therapy also helped create safer communities and saved the country money – since prison is far more expensive than treatment. Following examples such as these and embracing a regulated drugs market that is tightly controlled and complemented by treatment – not incarceration – for those with drug problems will cost taxpayers a lot less.

Even with these examples, we do not yet know what will work best. New policies should be evaluated according to the scientific evidence. But we can say now that these policies should focus on the rights of citizens and on protecting public health. Drug policy should be a comprehensive issue for families, schools, civil society and health care providers, not just law enforcement.

To evaluate such policies, we should stop measuring their success according to such indicators as numbers of arrests, prosecutions and drug seizures, which turn out to have little impact on levels of drug use or crime. We should instead measure the outcomes in the same way that a business would measure the results of a new ad campaign. That means studying things like the number of victims of drug-related violence and intimidation, levels of corruption connected to the drug market, the amount of crime connected to drug use, and the prevalence of dependence, drug-related mortality and HIV infection.

Many political leaders and public figures acknowledge privately that repressive strategies have only made the drug problem worse. It took 14 years for America’s leaders to repeal Prohibition. After 50 years of the failed drug war, it is time for today’s leaders to find the courage to speak out.

For all the successes I’ve had in business, I’ve also learnt to accept when things go wrong, work out why, and try to find a better way. The war on drugs is a failed enterprise. We need to have the courage to learn the lessons and move on.

[kwame k]

It does need to stop....the problem is it's a self sustaining billion dollar industry.

From the cops, lawyers, jails, rehabs, pharmaceutical companies and on and on.......too much money to lose for what?

Treating people or staying the fuck out of our lives.....like that has ever mattered.

I do think it'll be decriminalization in our lifetime, though.

[Yount]

Let's not insult the herb and call it marijuana. Call it cannabis. I'm pretty sure in 1937 when they passed the law to criminalize it (as well as hemp), the anti-dopers called it marijuana to make it sound a little more scary. In fact I think it was passed through under the title Proposition 20 or some shit like that wasn't it so nobody would notice?
Cannabliss

[kwame k]

Message received and understood:lmao:

[Yount]

Cannabis should be viewed for what it is - an herb. We should be encouraged to cook with it.

[hambon4lif]

I usually bake with it.;)

[kwame k]

Not necessarily should it be viewed as just an herb.........

Hemp has a ton of industrial worth....

Paper alone would cut the costs of the paper industry by damn near half [equipment, labor, transportation, milling and refining costs] let alone the environmental impact. It's fast growing, renewable and has hundreds of applications, too. Farmers could harvest hemp on existing lands. Have a harvest yearly.....clothes, hell any type of fabric, the extracted oils or soy type based products, the list is endless.

The acreage it takes to make paper from wood versus the acreage it takes to make it from hemp....hemp wins. It's better, too! The old WWII saying......Hemp for Victory! Something like that:thumb:

[kwame k]

I usually bake with it.;)

I'm usually baked from it:)

[chi-town324]

i work for a large company and had pre employment testing ...i do know that if i am injured on the job, and sent to a hospital, i will be immediately tested at the hospital. If i refuse or test positive i can be terminated. It's just not worth the risk...although when i retire...

[Hardrock69]

Ok. State of Washington learned from past mistakes. In 2008, they had a ballot initiative to legalize pot. They did not have the required number of signatures by the deadline to turn the petition in, so it did not get on the ballot for the elections.

This time out, they have more than enough signatures and have turned in the paperwork on time.

http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20120127/BLOG13/120129831


Marijuana legalization measure ready for the ballot
By Jerry Cornfield

Friday, January 27, 2012 | 3:23 pm

An initiative making it legal for adults to grow, smoke and sell marijuana has qualified for the November ballot.

The expected announcement came today from the Secretary of State's Office.

Sponsors of Initiative 502 submitted 354,608 signatures and needed at least 241,153 of them to be of valid voters. A signature-check using a random sample determined that sponsors had nearly 278,000 valid signatures, according to agency spokesman David Ammons.

This is an initiative to the Legislature which means lawmakers could go ahead and adopt it themselves then send it to the governor for signing. No one anticipates that will happen so voters will get to decide.

Under the measure, marijuana would be regulated and taxed in the same manner as alcohol. For more info, go to the online home of the sponsors, http://newapproachwa.org/content/initiative



Am keeping my fingers crossed, as States tend to act like lemmings. It takes one or two to take the lead on some issue, then more will follow.

We WILL see what happens in November. Funny. The Mayan's End Of The World date will not be able to prevent the elections from happening, lol.

[neuralfraud]

Nice article and all but has noone seemed to notice the FREQUENCY mentioned? one OR MAYBE two per WEEK?

Look, smoke cigarettes! only one or 2 a week won't hurt you.. but ya, who does that? Now why dont you tell us how smoking 2 packs of joints a day stacks up to 2 packs of marlboro's and we'll have some objective information!

[Hardrock69]

http://news.yahoo.com/pot-legalization-efforts-forge-ahead-key-u-states-175321189.html


(Reuters) - Efforts to legalize marijuana for recreational use are gaining momentum in Washington state and Colorado, despite fierce opposition from the federal government and a decades-long cultural battle over America's most commonly used illicit drug.

Officials in Washington state on Friday said an initiative to legalize pot has enough signatures to qualify for the ballot in November. In Colorado, officials are likely this week to make a similar determination about an initiative there.

Supporters are prepared to possibly spend millions of dollars ahead of the November ballot, when they hope a strong voter turnout, particularly among youth, for the U.S. presidential election will aid their cause.

"Whether it's make or break depends on what public opinion does after 2012, but in terms of voter turnout this is the best year to do it," said Alison Holcomb, director of New Approach Washington, the initiative's sponsor.

While 16 states, including Washington and Colorado, along with the nation's capital, now allow marijuana use for medical purposes, cannabis remains an illegal narcotic under U.S. law - and public opinion is sharply divided on the merits of full legalization.

California voters turned back a ballot initiative to legalize marijuana for recreational use in 2010, in part because of concerns about how production and sale of the drug would be regulated.

Since then, the U.S. Department of Justice has cracked down on medical cannabis operations in California, Washington state and elsewhere, raiding dispensaries and growing operations and threatening landlords with prosecution.

"Our highest priority are the folks that violate both state and federal law," said Rusty Payne, spokesman for the Drug Enforcement Administration. "There are places that have made a lot of money who claim to be nonprofit, and they have faced both local and federal scrutiny."

Undeterred, supporters of the Washington state initiative say it represents the "grown-up" approach to legalization.

Sales would only be allowed to adults 21 and older through marijuana-only stores licensed by the state Liquor Control Board, which would also oversee production and processing of the drug. Laws on drunken driving would be amended to include maximum blood content thresholds for THC, the main psychoactive element in pot plants.

Colorado already has a robust regulatory system for medical marijuana that includes a registry of over 80,000 card-carrying patients and rules governing how physicians and distributors operate. Here, too, legalization advocates are stressing a rational regulatory approach.

"Voters aren't being asked to imagine as much as they are in other states, they have seen that marijuana can be regulated and it doesn't result in significant problems," said Mason Tvert, co-director of the Colorado-based Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol.

Organizers of the Washington effort have collected over $1.1 million in campaign funds, with $250,000 of that coming from Progressive Insurance chairman Peter Lewis, public disclosure records show.

Loren Collingwood, senior researcher for the nonpartisan Washington Poll run by the University of Washington, said the initiative could pass, but that backers must spend between $2 million and $4 million to run a competitive campaign.

A poll done by the university in October found 48 percent of Washington residents support the idea of pot legalization, but that was not tied to any particular initiative.

"If young voters turn out in droves like they did in 2008 or even start to approach those numbers ... then I think this will pass, but they very well may not," Collingwood said.

NATIONAL SHIFT

Pot legalization supporters have argued for decades that prohibition has failed to curb pot use, and that the policy enriches drug cartels, hurts casual users and deprives governments of a potentially lucrative source of tax revenue.

Now, they see momentum on their side, pointing to an October Gallup Poll that found a record 50 percent of Americans support legalizing marijuana use, up from 36 percent five years before.

The poll also found 62 percent of those between the ages of 18 and 29 back legalization, and that the young are driving the shift in attitudes.

"There's a set of factors that suggest both the Washington and Colorado initiates have a better chance of winning than any of the initiatives that have happened before," said Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance.

"But that said, even with a majority of likely voters in both states saying they favor legal marijuana, we know in the final stretch there's always a small percentage that get nervous or scared off or fearful of change," he said.

Opponents of legalization, meanwhile, say it would simply promote the use of a sometimes-addictive drug that has been linked to short-term memory loss and other behavioral problems such as lack of motivation.

Legalization "is not good for states and citizens who live in those states, and it's certainly not good for the outlook of children who live in those states," said Calivina Fay, head of the Florida-based Drug Free America Foundation.

One study published in 2011 by researchers with the University of Colorado Denver found 39 out of 80 teens in a Denver substance abuse program had at least once obtained pot from someone with a medical marijuana license.

LOCAL OPPOSITION

For supporters of legalization, the medical marijuana trade has been a mixed blessing. Critics say dispensaries, in addition to serving the truly sick, supply recreational users who have no real medical problems despite claims of backaches or pain.

In Washington state, about 30 or 40 cities have passed moratoriums on collective medical marijuana gardens allowed under state law, said Jim Doherty, legal consultant for the Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington. Some residents see medical marijuana sales as a nuisance, he said.

Meanwhile, Seattle has over 100 medical marijuana shops, said City Attorney Peter Holmes, who supports full legalization.

"Right now in Seattle, we're feeling that it's a bit unfair that we are being tolerant of medical marijuana users, when other localities are not, because we tend to become suppliers for the whole state rather than our own citizens," Holmes said.

Holcomb, the director of the Washington state initiative campaign, acknowledged some voters view a large share of medical pot users as illicit recreational tokers. But she said her campaign will turn the argument around, when it seeks to convince voters full legalization is good for the state.

"You're ending that hypocrisy and restoring respect for the law," she said.

(Reporting By Alex Dobuzinskis; Editing by Jonathan Weber)