Indiana prosecutors discuss stance against legalizing marijuana LINK
After listening to the press conference in Indiana concerning the legalization of Marijuana and their reasons for not doing so, that was my first thought…They are like Deer in headlights, they are stuck on stupid and don’t know which way to go, BUT they have some valid points!
The first person who stepped up with an opinion was Luke Niforatos, of SAM or Smart Approaches to Marijuana , a DC Group started by Kevin Sabet. Luke lives in Denver, Colorado and said that the “quality of life plummeted” and they want legalization stopped. SAM pushes for scientific research of Marijuana. Luke states that Marijuana traffic fatalities have risen and mental illness including Schizophrenia, suicide, depression, have increased. It is all about a profit driven industry with highly intoxicating THC products and edibles which are targeting our Children.
While I know that he is exaggerating the bad side of it such as traffic fatalities and overdoses, it is a fact that Cannabis dispensaries are for the most part unregulated and can produce any strength of THC in any form they choose such as “buds”, oils, edibles, etc., and as long as you are of legal age to enter the premises you are legal to buy and use these products. If the right to grow had happened first, you wouldn’t have had a zillion people running for the corner dispensary to get 30% THC products…They would have been growing it in the backyard or the basement at a much lower rate of THC, for the most part.
If this had been accomplished first then the marketing would have been a much smoother transition through the proper legal channels of medical and pharmaceutical uses, as well as other healthcare products on the open market. Because of the hold that the Federal Government has on the Cannabis plant via the CSA it has made a fiasco of the legal (not legal) Cannabis market. The only way to straighten it out is to do what should have been done already and that is to repeal Cannabis from the CSA and let individual States set the growing standard for individuals – although I do not like the idea of a “standard” number of plants I suppose it is necessary in order to differentiate between individual grows and those intended to go to market. Those who enter the marketplace with Hemp/Cannabis would be subjected to the FDA and all other rules of marketing. If it is intended to be a pharmaceutical then it has to be regulated as one. In the meantime, the plant in your own yard can go into your own salad at dinnertime or your own pipe before bed. Then the pharmaceutical companies and other healthcare companies would have the time they need to produce a product that would have been correctly regulated. All the while causing no harm to the right of all Citizens to enjoy Cannabis plants in their yard.
It is also a fact that Cannabis is a profit driven industry now, all across the U.S. and beyond. Just look at the Cannabis Stock Market! Look at the USPTO! Business is booming everywhere and according to the Federal Statutes Marijuana/Cannabis is a Schedule I Drug and is illegal to use or possess.
You can’t move forward if you do not know which way to go.
Since about 2008 I have set at my desk and watch the “Marijuana” movement take shape across the United States. I have looked at it from a personal and from a U.S. Marijuana Party perspective, so to speak. Like Newton’s law dictates, for every action there is an equal yet opposite reaction and that will always hold true. So naturally there are going to be some fallbacks to the Cannabis movement.
The biggest mistake, in my opinion, that has been made is that everyone pushed for marketed Cannabis via dispensaries and medical physicians instead of demanding the right to grow a plant on your own property.
The Commerce Clause is the source of federal drug prohibition laws under the Controlled Substances Act. In a recent medical marijuana case, Gonzales v. Raich, the Supreme Court rejected the argument that the ban on growing medical marijuana for personal use exceeded Congress’ powers under the Commerce Clause. Even if no goods were sold or transported across state lines, the Court found that there could be an indirect effect on interstate commerce. The Court relied heavily on a New Deal case, Wickard v. Filburn, which held that the government may regulate personal cultivation and consumption of crops because the aggregate effect of individual consumption could have an indirect effect on interstate commerce.
The Federal Government needs to step up and straighten out the mess that has been created… and NOT by persecuting and prosecuting patients and recreational users in order to profit from their prison industrial complex, but to do right by the people and give this plant back to us! THEN open the market to Cannabis products as they should be! If they need a reference point, here it is:
The 9th edition of the USP, came out during an era (considered by many) to be the high point for medical Cannabis use. The era of persecution (which led to the anti-medical marihuana laws) had not yet begun and, technologically speaking, most of the manufacturing problems associated with botanical drugs had long ago been worked out. Note that standardization of the potency via psychological testing (on dogs) was now required by the U.S.P. LINK