|
This thread mod-approved by Brown Moses This topic needs a D&D thread since there's a lot going on globally in the field of ganja, big changes pending in a number of countries. The US is now up to 8 states with legal weed, but facing a challenge in the likely appointment of drug-warrior Jeff Sessions. Canada has a strong plan to legalize cannabis nationwide, and across Latin America and Europe, and even parts of Asia and Africa, there's talk of medical weed, decriminalization, and even legalization that would've been a fantasy even a few years ago. Let's talk about it.  Ground rules The previous thread got shut down for being lovely, so all we had was the C-Spam US weed election thread, so I got thumbs-up from Brown Moses for some unproductive discursions that will merit probation: - No Libertarian circle-jerking about "my body, my rights" and how the sheeple need to wake up and legalize all drugs. Stick to factual observations of actual policy, thinkpieces, political and social strategy. This was the single-worst source of lovely posting in the prior thread. - No personal testimony, nobody cares if goon WeedlordBonerhitler69 thinks weed is groovy. If you're in this thread it's no surprise that you happen to think weed should be legal. - No flights of fancy about legalizing coke/heroin/LSD, exception being if there's actual pending legislation of interest that informs the thread's understanding of global drug policy World overview Below are Wikipedia's maps for the legal status of recreational cannabis, and of medical cannabis globally. If anyone sees anything blatantly wrong or outdated, let me know and I can ping a graphics guy on Wikimedia who can update them. Medical cannabis Wikipedia map Recreational cannabis Wikipedia map North America - The US has eight legal states plus DC, 14 states plus USVI that have decriminalized (and numerous cities), 23 states with medical marijuana but no legal, and 15 states with low-THC CBD oil legalized on at least some level. That leaves us with only five states and two territories where there's total weed criminalization, and the remaining few have generally had political attempts to loosen things up in recent years.(Wikipedia listing by state and territory) - Canada's new Liberal government is planning to legalize cannabis, probably sometime in 2017, so worth watching closely in this thread. - Mexico decriminalized minor possession of cannabis in 2009, but most of Central America remains pretty conservative except for Costa Rica (semi-decrim gray area), and Belize has been debating decrim. - Most of the Caribbean is still pretty conservative, with the big exception of Jamaica which in 2015 decriminalized small possession and cultivation, and from what I see is strongly considering an actual legal ganja economy. The Cayman Islands also just legalized CBD in 2016.  South America - Basically everywhere outside of the three Guyanas has decriminalized personal possession of cannabis, and Uruguay is famously the first country of the modern era to legalize cannabis entirely, though that seems a slow process down there. - Next ones to watch: Argentina and Chile. Argentina is experiencing a US-style state-by-state legalization of medical cannabis, and Chile has had attempts in its Congress to legalize up to six plants per household for personal use.  Europe - It's a complicated patchwork so I won't go into too much detail, but basically Europe mainly liberalizing in the south, with decrim strongest in places like Italy and Spain, while France and the UK remain sticks in the mud. Something like a dozen+ EU states now allow some form of legal cannabinoid medicine (though not always herbal cannabis), and more (including Ireland) are in serious talks to jump into legalizing medical cannabis.  Africa - I've been trying to suss out if any niche countries in Africa just happen to have legal cannabis (Comoros did for a while during a socialist coup), but as best as I can tell it's technically illegal everywhere, though often unenforced. World-famous Morocco isn't ready to legalize but is at least talking about setting up a medical cannabis industry, but the big influencer to watch for is South Africa, where there's a lot of chatter about potentially loosening at least medical rules on "dagga" but with strong popular support that just might take it all the way to legal.  Asia - As you can see on the map, Asia is really regional, with strict prohibition (at least in theory) in most of the Middle East, Central Asia, and East/Southeast Asia, but a big block of "meh" in South Asia. India, Nepal, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Pakistan have long histories of cannabis use and weren't terribly excited to ban it, doing so mostly under international pressure, and India still allows a number of traditional uses, particularly cannabis milkshakes ("bhang") which are so common at certain major holidays that they just try to regulate it slightly rather than ban it. If lots of Western countries start legalizing cannabis, watch for South Asia to start sliding into "well if you guys don't care about it anymore..."  Oceania - Oceania has a number of countries with massively high rates of cannabis use, with Palau allegedly a global leader. Despite that, laws are mostly pretty strict against cannabis, although again often unenforced. New Zealand is slowly debating medical cannabis, and Australia just in November 2016 legalized a roll-out of medical cannabis nationwide, so that's the hot developing story in the region.  That's the current situation globally, and I'll leave some room in the first posts for a quick history lesson, and if anyone wants to write a breakdown of the complex situation in the USA. TapTheForwardAssist fucked around with this message at 04:14 on Dec 5, 2016 |
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 02:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 14:12 |
|
|
[space saved for world history breakdown]
TapTheForwardAssist fucked around with this message at 05:53 on Dec 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
Here's my attempt to give a rough breakdown on the history of weed in the US. The US has a long history of growing hemp for industrial fiber, thus the famous stoner reference to George Washington growing weed. Much like in Europe, there's really not much evidence that cannabis was used as a psychoactive in the colonial US, likely because (as in Europe) the strains grown weren't high in THC. Europe had a long history of incidentally using cannabis as a pharmaceutical base for lots of minor remedies, but nothing amazing. Unless anyone has any breaking data, the general consensus appears to be that cannabis wasn't really used for getting high for most of US history. This starts to change going into the 1800s due largely to two parallel tracks: the French are exposed to smoking cannabis through their adventures in Egypt and Algeria, and the Brits are exposed to it through their colonization of India. In these two distinct but converging waves, researchers in Europe start to experiment more with cannabis remedies, and a narrow hipster segment of Europeans starts to use cannabis (generally as hashish, eaten or smoked) to get high as an exotic Oriental practice. These trends enter the US by the mid-1800s, so at the same time you start seeing all these opium and coca patent remedies popping up, you also get pharmaceutical products made from cannabis. At the same time, the early bohemian crowd experients with getting high on weed, though from the coverage of the time it looks to be mostly a weird foreign novelty, as in this famous 1884 article about a upper-class twit getting baked:  Reaching towards 1900, stuff has just started to get silly with the sheer weight of abusable drugs on the market; once source I read noted how vacant lots in NYC were strewn with bottles of a coca-based nasal remedy the kids got high off of. Amidst all this abuse, the Pure Food and Drug Act was passed in 1906 in the US, requiring at least proper labeling of all this crazy stuff. Right around then is when individual cities and states first start to require a prescription to get cannabis, with Masachusetts being the first state in 1911. A separate wave of cannabis use started coming in around this time, with the practice of smoking weed filtering up from both Mexico (to the Western states) and the Caribbean (to the South and East Coast via ports). Going into the 1920s especially, a number of states particularly in the West start moving to prescription-only for cannabis, in many cases explicitly mentioning its abuse by Mexicans. Here's a quote from Montana for example: "When some beet field peon takes a few rares of this stuff... he thinks he has just been elected president of Mexico so he starts out to execute all his political enemies." By 1933, 29 states have restricted cannabis to prescription only. By the 1930s, the international community had already started lumping cannabis proscription into their nascent war on drugs, at the particular urging of South Africa, Egypt, and Turkey where cannabis was considered a problem. It was the 30s where the US started to really ramp up public concern about cannabis, Reefer Madness and a host of melodramatic novels come out, and the US government finally steps in with the 1937 Marihuana Tax Act, requiring everyone involved in the cannabis industry (farmers, pharmacists, etc) to get registered and pay a tax. Folks weren't excited about complying with the added paperwork and expense, so cannabis drops off dramatically as a patent medicine and a fiber, except for a brief spurt of industrial fiber production when WWII cut off the supply of rope materials from Asia and US farmers were called upon to produce hemp out of patriotism. In the 1970s, following a decade of surging use of marijuana as a drug, the US passed the Controlled Substances Act. This is the legislation that famously put cannabis under Schedule I, for dangerous drugs of no medical use that are totally prohibited. At the same time President Nixon set up a study about how to deal with the hippy threat, the Shafer Commission, who in 1972 concluded that weed wasn't particularly harmful and should be treated as a public health issue and civil infraction. Advice that Nixon ignored because, hey he's Nixon and he's a dick and hates hippies. A surprisingly large chunk of the country was not thrilled about the 1970 law, and pretty quickly after you see a wave of decriminalization, where individual states simply refused to enforce the federal laws. Oregon was the first to decriminalize cannabis in 1973, followed by a dozen states or so, including some real squares like Nebraska that for whatever reason thought locking people up for weed was pointless. New Mexico and Virginia even established some weak but foresightful legislation to legalize cannabis for certain medical conditions. However, shortly after that we hit the 1980s, the crack epidemic and resulting Reagan War on Drugs and everything went apeshit for a while. It took until the Clinton era for weed to start clawing back the huge political shellacking it had taken since 1970. California was the first to roll out an actually impactful medical marijuana program (and one famous for being pretty open to any condition that weed might conceivably help with). Oregon came over in 1998, and Maine in 1999, but it wasn't until the 2000s that things really got rolling. Some individual municipalities "legalized" marijuana, like Denver in 2005, but 2012 was the real breakwater, when the entire states of Colorado and Washington voted by public initiative to legalize cannabis for recreational purposes. That brings us up to the modern day; counting states where legalization is approved but pending, we have full-legal in Colorado, Washington, Oregon, Alaska, Nevada, Maine, Massachusetts, and California. DC legalized weed but is blocked by Congress from licensing stores so just has a gray market where everyone runs around with really awkward workarounds while cops roll their eyes. Fourteen states have decriminalized cannabis possession down to a civil infraction, as have a number of cities in otherwise strict states (Wichita, Nashville, Toledo, Philadelphia, etc). Around 30 states have medical cannabis, and 15 states (mostly in the South) allow some form of cannabis-based drug, usually CBD oil, but not cannabis itself. At this point, the only states that *don't* have any provision for medical or decriminalized cannabis are Idaho (governor Butch Otter vetoed CBD oil in 2015), Kansas (medical cannabis stalled out in the Lege in 2015), South Dakota (been trying for medical since 2006), Indiana (failed to approve MMJ in 2015, Pence is a dick), and West Virginia (MMJ tried and failed every year since 2010). So really only a sliver of the population is in states where cannabis is totally not tolerated by the state government, but unfortunately everyone is still under a federal law that categorizes weed right up there with heroin. TapTheForwardAssist fucked around with this message at 06:31 on Dec 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:[space saved for US breakdown] I just want to record this for posterity, because it's a pretty apt description of the country right now. Since Jeff Sessions is gonna be AG or whatever, does this mean that states like Mass that legalized marijuana are gonna start cracking down on them? Are states rights less than federal laws in this case?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 02:35
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:I just want to record this for posterity, because it's a pretty apt description of the country right now. Well, it's worth pointing out that a number of US dispensaries, principally in California, have been raided repeatedly by the Federales. Only if it gets descheduled and decriminalized at the national level will anything matter; otherwise, the Feds just look up state records on official dispensaries and marijuana nurseries and raid the poo poo out of them for some extra pocket cash.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 03:22
|
|
|
Doomtalker posted:Well, it's worth pointing out that a number of US dispensaries, principally in California, have been raided repeatedly by the Federales. Only if it gets descheduled and decriminalized at the national level will anything matter; otherwise, the Feds just look up state records on official dispensaries and marijuana nurseries and raid the poo poo out of them for some extra pocket cash. Haven't the Rohrabacher-Farr amendments in the appropriations bills for FY 2015 and 2016 been a deterrent to this, since they bar the Justice Department (and by extension, the DEA) from using federal funds to go after legally operating dispensaries? Obviously, that's kind of a tenuous protection, but it might be one avenue to keep federal enforcement at bay. We might also see a lot of pushback and non-cooperation from states with legal marijuana, especially if (like mine, here in Oregon) they have budget shortfalls in the billion dollar-plus amount and would prefer to keep as many tax revenue streams open as possible. It might only be $40 million in tax revenue so far this year, but if it's from a "sin tax" rather than something politically unpopular like an income tax or vehicle registration fee increase, then it might be something that states feel is worth fighting to hold onto. This past election, too, many municipalities passed local marijuana tax ballots, so the financial incentive to push back may trickle down to the local level, also. Though I also suspect some of it is sour grapes from the more conservative and semi-rural communities around Portland trying to stick it to marijuana users, too, even if it's just making them pay more.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
The big questions for me right now (operating under a "legalization is a matter of time" perspective) mostly pertain to how the pot market itself will play out. Such as what is going to be the legality with regards to employers testing for thc (since currently even in states where it's "Legal" you still can't get a job with it in your system) Then the other part being how the industry as a whole develops, because yes there will be lots of money to be made, but Cannabis is really easy to produce compared to most other cash crops we see. So it will be interesting to see how much of it will be from large scale productions or the local co-op variety and how the laws will shape around that. Curious to know what the actual profits on the substance will be once its more or less everywhere, since a large part of the profit right now comes from its legality moreso than the supply.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 06:42
|
|
|
Doomtalker posted:Well, it's worth pointing out that a number of US dispensaries, principally in California, have been raided repeatedly by the Federales. Only if it gets descheduled and decriminalized at the national level will anything matter; otherwise, the Feds just look up state records on official dispensaries and marijuana nurseries and raid the poo poo out of them for some extra pocket cash. Not to mention the records of medical "recommendations" on users who visit these dispensaries. I would not put a User database out of the realm of reality.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2016 06:53
|
|
|
I strongly suspect that New Jersey might legalize it soonish since our despised governor Chris Christie (aka fat reek) is a determined drug warrior and we have (a republican sponsored!) legalization bill sitting in the state house right now that would probably pass if he wasn't blocking it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
I've updated the post below the OP with an effort-post summarizing the history of cannabis in the US. If anyone sees a mistake or needs something changed, ping me here. I'm a decently well-read guy, but when I started reading up on cannabis history I found out that there was a whole lot I didn't know about the course of weed law in the US, so hopefully folks find the post informative.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2016 06:26
|
|
|
Lawman 0 posted:I strongly suspect that New Jersey might legalize it soonish since our despised governor Chris Christie (aka fat reek) is a determined drug warrior and we have (a republican sponsored!) legalization bill sitting in the state house right now that would probably pass if he wasn't blocking it. The other two East Coast states to watch closely in the next two years are Vermont and Rhode Island; both of those lack a ballot initiative process so a weed law change would have to come through the legislature, and both of their legislatures have been tapdancing right around the issue of legalizing weed for about two years now. Here's a good breakdown of the situation in RI: http://www.providencejournal.com/news/20161109/mass-recreational-marijuana-vote-sparks-renewed-push-for-legalization-in-rhode-island
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
Maine is kicking off a month-long $500,000 hand recount of the ballots to figure out if cannabis is legalized. Question 1 won on election day but only by 1% so the opposition ginned up enough support to mandate a recount. The governor is already not thrilled about weed, and has said to the media that *if* the recount comes out in favor *and* if President Trump said it's okay, maybe then Maine can legalize. http://www.ibtimes.com/recreational-marijuana-2016-maine-vote-recount-question-1-begins-2455230
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
So the governor said that even if his state voted for it, he would wait to see it trump said it was okay? Huh
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 04:09
|
|
|
SSJ_naruto_2003 posted:So the governor said that even if his state voted for it, he would wait to see it trump said it was okay? Huh It's Paul LePage: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/paul-lepage-warns-against-deadly-marijuana-legalization_us_5800f855e4b06e0475945215
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
B B posted:It's Paul LePage: It's worth quoting the very first line of the article: "America’s most ignorant governor is at it again." E: it's worth quoting some catchy lines from the pro-weed state rep: quote:“The magical thing he did is he took all the bullshit from the 1980s on and put it in one video,” TapTheForwardAssist fucked around with this message at 05:29 on Dec 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
Forceholy posted:Not to mention the records of medical "recommendations" on users who visit these dispensaries. I would not put a User database out of the realm of reality. For over 1.4 million people? I suppose it's not impossible, but I really don't like to think about that scenario.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 05:31
|
|
|
Though it's not likely to get too far, a member of India's parliament has proposed legalizing and setting up a regulatory framework for ganja: http://swarajyamag.com/insta/will-marijuana-be-legalised-in-india-its-up-for-debate-in-lok-sabha India is one of those countries that only grudgingly cracked down on weed due to their international treaty obligations, and purposely wrote the legislation in a way that allowed them to keep permitting traditional uses like bhang milkshakes made from weed leaves which are really popular at certain holidays. India also doesn't seem in a huge hurry to crack down on ritual weed use by saddhus (holy men). As noted in the OP, South Asia as a region has largely been unenthused about cannabis prohibition and I wouldn't be surprised to see this popping up more as the Western world loosens regulations. In a vague way, it's similar to the post-colonial attitude you see in South America, where laxness on the part of the US is seen as a sign that they can let up pressure on cannabis.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 08:09
|
|
|
Sticking strictly to A Thing Happened, The BMJ (Peer reviewed journal owned by the trade union and registered association for medical Drs in the UK) has taken the stance that the medical unions need to push for an end to the war on drugs in the UK and the regulation of legal drug markets.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
GonadTheBallbarian posted:For over 1.4 million people? I suppose it's not impossible, but I really don't like to think about that scenario. I don't either, but with the upcoming administration proposing a Muslim registry, I would not put it out of the realm of reality.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
Forceholy posted:I don't either, but with the upcoming administration proposing a Muslim registry, I would not put it out of the realm of reality. Public opinion polling in the US shows around 50+% approval for recreational cannabis and 70+% approval for medical cannabis; I don't know of any simple polling on Islam to compare that too since most polls appear more nuanced, but suffice to say I imagine that weed is more popular than Muslims in the US. Do we have anyone here who's spun-up on the situation in Australia? Apparently they legalized medical cannabis nationwide and are in the middle of some huge roll-out and clinical trials, but I haven't been following it closely.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:Public opinion polling in the US shows around 50+% approval for recreational cannabis and 70+% approval for medical cannabis; I don't know of any simple polling on Islam to compare that too since most polls appear more nuanced, but suffice to say I imagine that weed is more popular than Muslims in the US. Right, but are raids of patients likely to spark any backlash? I know it's a bit unprecedented, but then again so is the mess we're in now
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:Sticking strictly to A Thing Happened, Along the lines of these kind of reports, the more I've been reading up on cannabis history, the more I've been struck by how often governments have commissioned cannabis reports and ignored them. The Nixon administration is a great example as noted above, where the Shafer Commission basically said "weed's not that bad and criminalizing it does more harm than good" and the expert advice was soundly ignored. On the other hand, Canada is finishing up its own study that's all but assured to legalize weed in the next year or so, and Ireland in early 2017 will put out its conclusions on medical marijuana. At the opposite end, you do have cases like the Netherlands and Portugal. Netherlands in the 1970s decided that weed criminalization was a bad idea and opened up its huge gray area which led to its infamous "coffeeshops". Despite common belief, weed still isn't actually legal in the Netherlands, but the gray area is sweeping enough that they have a reasonably protected cannabis economy. Portugal is another case, maybe even the top case, worth reading about if you're boning up on drug history. Summarizing from memory, going towards 2000 the Portuguese government was trying to figure out how to address its skyrocketing drug problem, but they couldn't get any political consensus amongst the key players. Then in a flash of brilliance, they decided to set up a commission, and pre-emptively agree amongst the parties that no matter what the commission decided, they'd all support it. The commission came back saying "best course of action is to decriminalize all drugs" and that's Portugal today, and it largely seems to be a success. Just a bit of deeper commission history since I mentioned India, the British Indian government held a huge study back in 1894 to find out how big a deal cannabis was, and again unsurprisingly the decision was "not really a problem". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Hemp_Drugs_Commission posted:Viewing the subject generally, it may be added that the moderate use of these drugs is the rule, and that the excessive use is comparatively exceptional. The moderate use practically produces no ill effects. In all but the most exceptional cases, the injury from habitual moderate use is not appreciable. The excessive use may certainly be accepted as very injurious, though it must be admitted that in many excessive consumers the injury is not clearly marked. The injury done by the excessive use is, however, confined almost exclusively to the consumer himself; the effect on society is rarely appreciable. It has been the most striking feature in this inquiry to find how little the effects of hemp drugs have obtruded themselves on observation. The large number of witnesses of all classes who professed never to have seen these effects, the vague statements made by many who professed to have observed them, the very few witnesses who could so recall a case as to give any definite account of it, and the manner in which a large proportion of these cases broke down on the first attempt to examine them, are facts which combine to show most clearly how little injury society has hitherto sustained from hemp drugs
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
GonadTheBallbarian posted:Right, but are raids of patients likely to spark any backlash? I know it's a bit unprecedented, but then again so is the mess we're in now Raids of *patients* seems incredibly cost-ineffective and terrible optics. Not just like "terrible but it's Trump" but more like "extremely unlikely on practical grounds if nothing else". I could see random raids on dispensaries, especially recreational-focused ones, just to shake up the market, but even that is more likely to be random and symbolic rather than a concerted effort because the DEA only has so much budget and local LEOs aren't going to be helping out. If I had to pick up my crystal ball here, I'd guess that we're going to see a few scattered raids on dispensaries, followed by *massive* bitching from the states involved, which will lead to a bunch of legal entanglements and wrangling that doesn't particularly go anywhere. It will have some chilling effect on the weed economy, pushing some folks to avoid starting new weed businesses or expanding them and thus pushing even more of the weed economy into the gray market. I don't expect it'll be chilling enough to prevent people from continuing to vote to legalize weed (recreational or medical), and in some cases might even provide a contrary effect where people are more determined to legalize to flip off the central government. I expect some of Trump's minions to be petulant enough to take random swings at legal weed, but for them not to have enough political capital to truly land a solid blow on the movement. If I turn out to be completely wrong feel free to throw this back in my face in the future, and/or compliment my insight in years to come.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
GonadTheBallbarian posted:For over 1.4 million people? I suppose it's not impossible, but I really don't like to think about that scenario. I'm not sure if you think 1.4 million is a lot but walmart adds that many entries into their databases every hour I think.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
Jamaica is another case with a really interesting history, and a lot of major changes recently. Despite it's weed-loving reputation, Jamaica was way ahead of the curve in banning cannabis, with the 1913 Ganja Law. Recall that the US didn't pass national-level legislation against marijuana until 1937. The most likely source for Jamaica's weed-ways is the large number of Indian laborers the British Empire brought over, which would explain why the Indian term "ganja" is the dominant term on the island. Presumably the powers that be weren't thrilled with their cheap labor getting high, particularly with the habit being shared by both the Indian and black laboring populations, so the Ganja law was supported by both the white elite and the church. Again, this was over a decade before the 1925 League of Nations treaty that put cannabis on the global radar. So the Jamaican government spent a full century using the law to smack around the tokers of the working class. Fast forward to 2015, and kinda out of the blue the Jamaican government decided to decriminalize cannabis to a ticketable offense for two ounces or less. They invited a bunch of leadership down from Colorado to advise them, which must've been a plum junket to land. There's apparently a lot of confusion in Jamaica about whether weed is "legal" now, and I can't blame them because the government is sending some mixed messages. To one degree, they put out word in the media emphasizing that weed is not at all legal yet and that's not their intent and they have treaty obligations... but on the other hand they're establishing a Cannabis Licensing Authority, there's talk of allowing foreigners with MMJ cards from their own states/countries to be recognized in Jamaica, and the government is talking about protecting their "brand" and maybe getting some kind of "denomination of origin" protection for Jamaican ganja. Also some inclarity as to whether the limit of five plants is just a police cutoff, or a full "sure, whatever, go ahead and grow five." In whatever case, Jamaica is making waves after a century of prohibition. Here are a few attempts to clarify the law that still left me confused: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/columns/Setting-the-record-straight-on-the-ganja-law_58632 http://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/news/20160902/confusion-over-ganja-law-continues  TapTheForwardAssist fucked around with this message at 01:12 on Dec 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:Along the lines of these kind of reports, the more I've been reading up on cannabis history, the more I've been struck by how often governments have commissioned cannabis reports and ignored them. The Nixon administration is a great example as noted above, where the Shafer Commission basically said "weed's not that bad and criminalizing it does more harm than good" and the expert advice was soundly ignored. On the other hand, Canada is finishing up its own study that's all but assured to legalize weed in the next year or so, and Ireland in early 2017 will put out its conclusions on medical marijuana. My utterly unrealistic dream is that the US could give authority to regulate scheduling and regulation to an actual medical body with a mandate to maximize public health based on sound scientific reasoning.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
Squalid posted:My utterly unrealistic dream is that the US could give authority to regulate scheduling and regulation to an actual medical body with a mandate to maximize public health based on sound scientific reasoning. If it's any consolation, the Shafer Report, with which President Nixon did wipe his rear end, probably had an influence on a good dozen states decriminalizing weed in the 1970s, and the overall momentum which slowly built up to what we have today. Though honestly I don't see it cited much directly in current weed media, which seems a shame. Though I'd also like to see the 1894 Indian Hemp Commission Report cited just because it's pretty cool and I should probably sit down and read the whole thing sometime. Speaking of Nixon, and speaking of unrealistic dreams, I harbor a secret hope that in a "only Nixon could go to China" weird strategy, the Republicans end up being the ones to de-schedule weed in this administration.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
Can we point out how racist most weed legalization efforts and advocates are?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 05:33
|
|
|
Poppyseed Poundcake posted:Can we point out how racist most weed legalization efforts and advocates are? Sure, if you have facts to back it up. Are you talking here more that key individuals are personally racist, or that legalization efforts are over-focused on the interests and priorities of white people? EDIT: if the answer is "because it's a boutique/identity politics niche issue and instead we should be focused more directly on addressing racial issues" then no, that wouldn't be germane to the thread. TapTheForwardAssist fucked around with this message at 10:28 on Dec 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 06:56
|
|
|
Poppyseed Poundcake posted:Can we point out how racist most weed legalization efforts and advocates are?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 09:48
|
|
|
Actually what he's looking for is us to say OMG how dare you say that weed advocates are racist!!!!!
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 14:23
|
|
|
DC is weird. Jurisdictionally, the District is a mess, and you need to be sure you're not subject to LE by the wrong federal authority. Smoke a joint on the Mall, you're hosed. Across Constitution Avenue at a bar, you're fine.Poppyseed Poundcake posted:Can we point out how racist most weed legalization efforts and advocates are? Sure, if you want to lose support of sympathetic people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 15:06
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:If it's any consolation, the Shafer Report, with which President Nixon did wipe his rear end, probably had an influence on a good dozen states decriminalizing weed in the 1970s, and the overall momentum which slowly built up to what we have today. Though honestly I don't see it cited much directly in current weed media, which seems a shame. Though I'd also like to see the 1894 Indian Hemp Commission Report cited just because it's pretty cool and I should probably sit down and read the whole thing sometime. That would certainly be interesting, but after the Duterte interaction I'm not so optimistic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
Great thread, and I'll be following. Background: Wife and I moved to CO 2 years ago for (my, non-weed) startup job prospect. She is now a badged retail dispensary worker and I just, as of 5pm, finished my first week at a new job, as a systems engineer for a cannabis ERP company (inventory, tracking, so on). I had a long chat with the company big wheels after Trump got elected. Their vibe is "Full steam ahead. Those assholes love money and they will not touch state legalization or up federal enforcement" Based on their confidence, i took the job. Big risk having a 100% weed-funded household, but also a lot of excitement and potential. If there's a bubble, I got in on the good side of it. Theory is that if they do anything, fed legalization + a federal tax on top so they get their slice of the pie. My super cynical take: They don't need illegal weed probable cause to detain/shoot minorities any more, so we're over the hump. Will be hanging out in here for sure, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
A lot of people are optimistic the Rohrabacher-Farr amendment will keep getting renewed and that is a serious kibosh on the DEA. The latest DEA report basically says that juries won't even give prosecutors the time of day if they bring a weed case in front of them echoing what prosecutors have said in Texas: https://www.leafly.com/news/politics/dea-annual-report-finds-decline-smuggling-teen-use-prosecution quote:“While marijuana remains illegal under federal law, many states have passed laws allowing the cultivation, possession, and use of marijuana within their respective states. Due to these varying state laws, as well as an abundance of media attention surrounding claims of possible medical benefits, the general public has been introduced to contradictory and often inaccurate information regarding the legality and benefits of marijuana use.” That, the report concludes, “has made enforcement and prosecution for marijuana-related offenses more difficult, especially in states that have approved marijuana legalization.”
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
Depends on the rules committee! Any news on how that'll go yet? e. Also Ireland passed medical out of nowhere GonadTheBallbarian fucked around with this message at 03:54 on Dec 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 03:47
|
|
|
GonadTheBallbarian posted:e. Also Ireland passed medical out of nowhere It's not finalized yet, but it's been approved by the Dáil and it looks to be cruising pretty smoothly through the process: http://www.ibtimes.com/ireland-marijuana-legalization-lawmakers-approve-medical-cannabis-bill-2455111
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:It's not finalized yet, but it's been approved by the Dáil and it looks to be cruising pretty smoothly through the process: http://www.ibtimes.com/ireland-marijuana-legalization-lawmakers-approve-medical-cannabis-bill-2455111 Yeah it took an Irish mammy starting a march from Cork for medical, as her kid has drug-resistant epilepsy. Lone marches have a history of ballooning by the time they reach Dublin, so the health minister met her on her first day of marching and said something would be done lmao. They'll never approve recreational in my opinion. That same Irish mother would probably call someone with a spliff an irredeemable junkie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 12:57
|
|
|
That may be, but a recent survey shows 48% of the Irish supporting legalized recreational: http://www.thejournal.ie/cannabis-recreational-use-ireland-poll-3115926-Dec2016/
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 14:12 |
|
|
Seeing cannabis products be used effectively instead of opiates for palliative care and such may swing some people, hopefully; IIRC Ireland's had a bit of a heroin explosion lately.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2016 17:57
|
|