Feed aggregator

US OH: OPED: Voters Becoming Wise To Medical-marijuana Ruse

MAP - Cannabis - Thu, 05/23/2013 - 07:00

Columbus Dispatch, 23 May 2013 - California voters passed the country's first medical-marijuana law in 1996, but many are having second thoughts. Last year, five California cities voted on initiatives to allow marijuana dispensaries, and all five voted no. Oregon also voted down dispensaries. These liberal West Coast states have seen medical marijuana up close, and learned it's barely medical at all. That shouldn't surprise anyone. The idea that smoking pot is medicine didn't come from doctors or groups representing the seriously ill. Neither the American Cancer Society nor the National Multiple Sclerosis Society supports it, and the American Medical Association and American Academy of Pediatrics strongly oppose it.

Seattle Council Committee Approves Regulations for Recreational Marijuana

The Joint Blog - Thu, 05/23/2013 - 04:02

A Seattle City Council committee has approved a proposal which would make Seattle the first city in the U.S. to establish zoning regulations which would explicitly allow for recreational marijuana retail outlets and cultivation centers.

Under the proposal, marijuana retail outlets, as well as large-scale cultivation centers, would be authorized, though limited in their size and location.

Licensed cultivators would be limited to 45 plants per household. Larger grow-operations would be limited to a location no larger than 50,000 square feet, and, as with retail outlets, would be limited to certain parts of the city.

For example, retail outlets wouldn’t be allowed near schools and residential neighborhoods. Large cultivation centers would be limited mostly to industrial zones.

Although the regulations – which are expected to be approved by the full city council – are seen by many cannabis reform advocates as too restrictive, it’s still a historic occurrence that a city as large as Seattle is showing a willingness to embrace recreational marijuana.

Those interested can find the proposal in its entirety by clicking here.

- TheJointBlog

The post Seattle Council Committee Approves Regulations for Recreational Marijuana appeared first on The Joint Blog.

Lawmaker Working to Legalize Medical Cannabis in South Carolina

The Joint Blog - Thu, 05/23/2013 - 04:00

The South Carolina state flag.

South Carolina State Representative Todd Rutherford attempted this afternoon to add an amendment into a controlled substances bill which would have legalized medical cannabis in the state. The amendment would have authorized the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control to license farmers to cultivate cannabis, which would be distributed to patients who receive a recommendation from their physician.

Unfortunately, the amendment was removed, with those opposed arguing not against its merit, but that it was irrelevant to the bill.

Representative Rutherford has stated that he’ll continue to work towards legalizing medical marijuana in the state, and will likely file legislation in the near future.

“Its time for legalization has come and gone”, stated Rutherford, “South Carolina just needs to get on board.”

- TheJointBlog

The post Lawmaker Working to Legalize Medical Cannabis in South Carolina appeared first on The Joint Blog.

Alabama Lawmakers Laugh It Up At Medical Marijuana Patients

Toke Signals - Thu, 05/23/2013 - 01:48

Alabama lawmakers must think it’s pretty funny when sick and dying people are begging for the only medicine that works. At the end of each legislative session, The Shroud Award — a black garment mounted on cardboard — is traditionally given in the House of Representatives to the “deadest bill” of the session. Rep. Patricia [...]

New Polling Finds that 63% of Oregon Voters Support Legalizing Marijuana

The Joint Blog - Thu, 05/23/2013 - 01:26

New polling conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosney Research has found that an incredible 63% of voters in Oregon support legalizing, taxing and regulating marijuana, with only 34% being in opposition. Of the 63% in support, a surprisingly high 51% consider themselves to be “strongly in favor” of such a move.

In addition, the polling found that 57% would vote in favor of a 2014 initiative modeled after last year’s narrowly failed effort, Measure 80. Proponents of Measure 80 have stated that they plan to run initiatives aiming for the 2014 ballot, unless the state’s legislature approves legalization this year.

Last month DHM Research released polling which also found a majority of Oregonians to be in favor of legalization. The poll found that 81% believe that, regardless of their personal views, legalization is inevitable.

The results of these polls are exciting, and should serve as a source of inspiration to activists throughout the state.

- TheJointBlog

The post New Polling Finds that 63% of Oregon Voters Support Legalizing Marijuana appeared first on The Joint Blog.

Michigan: Medical Marijuana Act Trumps Per Se Driving Law

NORML Blog - Wed, 05/22/2013 - 22:34

A Michigan traffic safety law that prohibits the operation of a motor vehicle by persons who possess any presence of THC in their blood, regardless of whether or not they are behaviorally impaired by the substance, may not be strictly applied to state-qualified medical cannabis patients. So decided the Michigan Supreme Court on Tuesday in the case People v Koon.

In a unanimous opinion, the Court determined that legal protections extended to state-qualified patients under the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act, enacted by voters in 2008, supersede the state’s zero tolerance, internal possession law. As a result, the Court determined that state prosecutors must establish that authorized patients charged under the statute are actually impaired by their cannabis use in order to gain a DUI criminal conviction.

According to the syllabus of the Opinion:

“The MMMA [Michigan Medical Marihuana Act] does not define what it means to be ‘under the influence,’ but the phrase clearly contemplates something more than having any amount of marijuana in one’s system and requires some effect on the person. Thus, the MMMA’s protections extend to a registered patient who internally possesses marijuana while operating a vehicle unless the patient is under the influence of marijuana. The immunity from prosecution provided under the MMMA to a registered patient who drives with indications of marijuana in his or her system but is not otherwise under the influence of marijuana inescapably conflicts with MCL 257.625(8) [the state's zero tolerance per se DUI law], which prohibits a person from driving with any amount of marijuana in her or system.”

The state’s zero tolerance per se drug law remains applicable to non-patients. Under such laws, motorists are guilty per se (in fact) of a criminal traffic safety violation if they engage in the act of driving while detectable levels of certain controlled substances or, in some cases, their inert metabolites (byproducts) are present in the defendants’ blood or urine. Proof of actual impairment is not a requirement for a conviction under the law.

To date, ten states — Arizona, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Rhode Island, Utah, and Wisconsin — have enacted legislation imposing zero tolerance per se thresholds for the presence of cannabinoids and/or their metabolites. (State-authorized medical cannabis patients in Arizona and Rhode Island are exempt from prosecution under these per se statutes unless the state can provide additional evidence of psychomotor impairment.)

Five additional states impose non-zero-tolerant per se thresholds for cannabinoids in blood: Montana (5ng/ml — law takes effect on October 1, 2013), Pennsylvania (1ng/ml), Ohio (2ng/ml), Nevada (2ng/ml) and Washington (5ng/ml). Most recently, Colorado lawmakers approved legislation stating that the presence of THC/blood levels above 5ng/ml “gives rise to permissible inference that the defendant was under the influence.” State-qualified patients in Colorado, Montana, and Nevada are not provided legal exemptions from these statutes, although legislation is presently pending in Nevada to do so.

NORML believes that it is inadvisable to infer behavioral impairment based on the presence of blood/cannabinoid levels alone — a position that we outline here, here, and in public testimony here.

Such caution is similarly expressed by the United States National Highway Transportation and Safety Administration, which acknowledges: “It is difficult to establish a relationship between a person’s THC blood or plasma concentration and performance impairing effects. … It is inadvisable to try and predict effects based on blood THC concentrations alone.”

A 2013 review of per se drugged driving laws and their impact on road safety found “no evidence that per se drugged driving laws reduce traffic fatalities.”