Oakland, Berkeley, And East Bay News, Events, Restaurants, Music, & Arts
I have a problem with your opening comment which lumps the people you don't like all together under a flawed assumption. That is, that "Science" is a static state of knowledge of what is true, good, and known to be right- by you, the author.
You then go on to interview an authority on the issue of academic and scientific freedom from institutional bias. True science, one might say, an evolving body of evidence. Evidence that could in some future time provide fodder for your opponents no matter what the source or motivation. Is this what you seek to protect?
And if it is; is protecting intellectual and health freedom is only pertinent to your pet issues?
"At some point, these [business] folks will come across this information, so I want to make sure they know how to evaluate it critically and make thoughtful decisions about it."
At some point... some Doctors are going to point out that "business" folks of one area, ARE THE PROBLEM. To say, the Doctor isn't rocking the boat by pointing out the AMA involvement with the HHS-NIH-NIDA-ONDCP and Federal taxes going to "businesses" whom propagate the lies.
Nor does the Doctor place any responsibility in the different Government programs where it is entirely legal for those government programs to lie.. and in fact, required to lie, to fulfill their "Mandate".
Nor does the Doctor mention the illegal campaign contributions to State Official candidates for their Election Campaigns from Federal tax dollars.
I understand the Doctors fear of actually rocking the boat... and here... he is simply trying to 'steer the boat'. All the while understanding most of these for-mentioned paradigms in the Mj prohibition, which, if only the Doctors would come forward with, would take over the course of medically applied THC and Cannabinoids... away from the "businesses" that only wish to utilize the benefits, when and where and if... they chose.
Health concerns regarding marijuana tend to come from a self-fueling group of discredited scientists funded by the pharmaceutical, prison, tobacco, and alcohol industries. They push non-peer-reviewed papers, fraught with conjecture and confounding variables, while relying upon reports issued by others in their own group to further support their own grossly misleading research and clearly biased agendas.
Here's what real science says:
Daily Marijuana Use Is Not Associated with Brain Morphometric Measures in Adolescents or Adults
"No statistically significant differences were found between daily users and nonusers on volume or shape in the regions of interest. Effect sizes suggest that the failure to find differences was not due to a lack of statistical power, but rather was due to the lack of even a modest effect. In sum, the results indicate that, when carefully controlling for alcohol use, gender, age, and other variables, there is no association between marijuana use and standard volumetric or shape measurements of subcortical structures."
The Journal of Neuroscience, 28 January 2015, 35(4): 1505-1512; doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2946-14.2015
I'd like to see some proof that it was "greedy growers and dispensary owners" who defeated Prop. 19. The people who I know who publicly fought Prop. 19, and spent a lot of time and money doing so, were MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENTS, people who value cannabis as a plant with many uses, and who KNEW HOW TO READ. Anyone who values cannabis who read Prop. 19 carefully was horrified at what it would do -- like allowing unlimited taxes on marijuana still GROWING in your house or backyard! And cannabis would have been the ONLY crop subject to such a tax, because the California Constitution protects growing crops from taxation! So, the same people who brought us Prop. 19 are back, as the California Reform Coalition, led by Dale Skye Jones, the "Princess of Pot" who, with her husband Jeff Jones and Mike Grey, went down in flames on a debate on Prop. 19 at the LA HempCon against Lanette Davies, Dragonfly de la Luz, and me. The only decent initiative is, and has always been, Jack Herer's California Cannabis Hemp Initiative: CCHI. In a December 2013 Field Poll, 56 percent of voters read the CCHI ballot summary decided to vote yes on legalization. Before hearing what CCHI would do, the poll showed 55 percent yes, 43 percent no, and 2 percent undecided. After hearing the CCHI summary, the figures shifted to 56 percent yes, 39 percent no, and 6 percent undecided.
Let's just hope no consumers listen to the greedy growers and dispensary owners who helped shoot down our freedom in 2010, just to maintain their quasi-monopolies and outrageously high prices.
um, the line is "early money is like yeast, it makes the DOUGH rise" as in dough as in money.
Geez, get the tired cliche right lol!
The "War on Marijuana" has been a complete and utter failure. It is the largest component of the broader yet equally unsuccessful "War on Drugs" that has cost our country over a trillion dollars.
Instead of The United States wasting Billions upon Billions more of our tax dollars fighting a never ending "War on Marijuana", lets generate Billions of dollars, and improve the deficit instead. It's a no brainer.
The Prohibition of Marijuana has also ruined the lives of many of our loved ones. In numbers greater than any other nation, our loved ones are being sent to jail and are being given permanent criminal records which ruin their chances of employment for the rest of their lives, and for what reason?
Marijuana is much safer to consume than alcohol. Yet do we lock people up for choosing to drink?
Even The President of the United States has used marijuana. Has it hurt his chances at succeeding in life? If he had gotten caught by the police during his college years, he may have very well still been in prison today! Beyond that, he would then be fortunate to even be able to find a minimum wage job that would consider hiring him with a permanent criminal record.Let's end this hypocrisy now!
The government should never attempt to legislate morality by creating victim-less marijuana "crimes" because it simply does not work and costs the taxpayers a fortune.
Marijuana Legalization Nationwide is an inevitable reality that's approaching much sooner than prohibitionists think and there is nothing they can do to stop it!
Legalize Nationwide! Support Each and Every Marijuana Legalization Initiative!
We need Unity in the Community.
As a legitimate cannabis patient,
I just want Safe and AFFORDABLE Access.
I would really like to hear the views of the
Marijuana Anti Prohibition Project on this.
With optimism and a RSVP invitation I attended this meeting, suffering from "walking pneumonia," still I drove up from Santa Cruz to hear and be heard.
I really felt inspired, activated even, during the first part of Mr. Zimmerman's keynote speech; however, as he went on to champion DPA as the tool and "...there will be winners and losers," I started to feel betrayed. Then when he so slickly spoke about 1/3 California voters are ready to approve legalization, 1/3 always will oppose such, and 1/3 are still riding the fence, a bell started ringing in my head...maybe it was just the pneumonia, but my common sense light was starting to strobe: didn't he earlier say over 50% of Californians polled want to see marijuana/cannabis legalized? Don't all the major polls show similar majority support among Californians! So, if over 50% want to see this marvelous plant made a respectable member of California's medical and recreational culture then why all that 1/3 -1/3 - 1/3 hyperbole?
Then there was Mr. Zimmerman's "...elections are not won by committee." comment. Since when? Yes, having a well known, or intelligent front man works wonders; however, for example, President Obama never utters a word publicly that hasn't been vetted by a team of advisors, a committee. I feel Mr. Zimmerman is the front man for Drug Policy Alliance (DPA). Smoothly he wants the rest of us to more or less sit-back and let the potentates at DPA craft what rules they think best for the rest of us. Seeing all the turmoil in other states where DPS has held sway over the main ballot measure's language, I'm more strongly than ever for final wording input from other cannabis legalization groups, instead of the unilateral approach Mr. Zimmerman so subtlety proposes.
Then there was Mr. Zimmerman's "...going to cost four times more than they do.." comment. As Mr. Zimmerman pointed out we already know what the arguments against legalization are, will be. Fine, craft now, ahead of time, instant response "zingers" that we, too, already know are effective counters to the disinformation our opponents will attempt to infect Californians with. This is the "5 P" rule: Proper Planning Prevents Poor Performance.
When presented the opportunity I raised my own personal issue during one of the Q & A periods: the 2016 ballot measure must contain language that places California state law supreme over local county and municipality ordinances. The Brown Act states such, but so far a long list, and growing longer every month of California county board of supervisors, and cities and towns are opting to pass local ordinances that effectively strangle-to-death the ability for cannabis patients and the businesses that supply these patients adequate amounts of medicine. This not only flys in the face of the Brown Act, but effectively says local rule trumps state laws. And, as I see it a number of counties and municipalities are using such obstructive and repressive ordinances as a frame work for even greater restrictions on recreational cannabis, up to and including completely banning such from their county. This isn't being made any easier with California's high court's recent ruling giving the green light to local rule over state law.
Perhaps a better way to demonstrate the absurdity of this is to offer an absurdity: There is a state law making murder illegal; however, it can be argued that "...some people need kill'n," so this or that county could make an ordinance that says "...in _____ county it is legal to kill some people." This ordinance could claim in its defense the precedent established by California's Supreme Court giving counties, etc., the right to side-step, effectively pay no attention to state law, and ignore the will of the people of California so that a small but vocal and organized percentage of that county's citizens could just go out and kill who ever they think need killing. Absurd isn't it; well, that's how California's high court sees local marijuana ordinances: legally able to trump legislated state law and the will of the majority of California voters.
So as not to be seen as just another voice against this or that, I offer that language in the 2016 ballot measure to legalize recreational marijuana in California contain something like: "The rights and privileges now afforded the people of California within this law legalizing recreational use of cannabis can only be challenged at the state level Any and all California counties and or cities or towns who wish to decrease or void such protections must appeal their wishes to the California legislature for an up or down vote on such measures.
Yes, I know the wording in not perfect, still, I'm showing my intent here not to be just another pot-hole in the highway toward full legalization, but willing, if asked to work with those who beyond the hyperbole are willing to work toward crafting a ballot measure that will get that +50% of the California voters who already are in favor of legalization to get off their arse and vote for it.
Otherwise all the grand words in what ever is presented to the voters in 2016 is just so much "Hogwash.", using Dale Sky Jones comment.
No, I do not propose I have all the answers; however, I do not think we should rely on DPA to have all of them either. What's worked in the past for DPA is all well and good, but that's a classic Platonian logic fallacy to think that because it worked in the past it will work now. It might not even be DPA who leads ind developing what will be presented to Californians in 2016, but rather just one of several level-headed members of the team, the committee that congeals the will of the people into a cohesive whole that does protect all of us, that does not leave out any of us.
"Be very afraid of someone who says "Our belief about what is right has to be put aside""
Sounds like the MJ Taliban speaking.
Fact is that California once was a leader in moving ahead on MJ reform. Now we've fallen 'way behind. We need to move forward. MJ reform isn't about catering to a new MJ industry or MJ medical movement but stopping all the destructive drug war stuff, getting potheads out of prison, etc.
Important to keep one's mind on reality.
This comment was removed because it violates our policy against anonymous comments. It will be reposted if the commenter chooses to use his or her real name.
DPA has had its share of failures. Too bad they aren't working well with others (so far). The rest of the conference was so positive, it's a shame to have to read this. DPA needs to sit down at the drafting table with the CCPR coalition.
The groups that have failed over and over need to put their egos and agendas aside and work with a unified effort. DPA is poised to do this in a professional and progressive way.
If these were the top Legalization books of the year, here are my favorites from some other interesting political causes: http://higherprogress.com/2014/12/10/higher-progress-best-books-of-2014/
East Bay Express All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation