Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Truth In Trials Act, Medical Marijuana Protection Bill, Proposed By Bipartisan Group Of Lawmakers


The Huffington Post  |  By  Posted:  Updated: 07/18/2012 3:31 pm
ImportantFunnyTypicalScaryOutrageousAmazingInnovativeFinally
Barney Frank Ron Paul
A bipartisan group of House lawmakersintroduced a bill this week designed to create enhanced legal protections for valid medical marijuana patients prosecuted due to conflicting state and federal laws regarding the legality of the substance.
Under the Truth In Trials Act, sponsored by California Democratic Rep. Sam Farr and co-sponsored by other representatives such as Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Ron Paul (R-Texas), state-licensed medical marijuana users would be given the right to provide an "affirmative defense" in the case of a federal prosecution. This effectively allows them to prove that their actions, while illegal at the federal level, were in fact protected under state law.
"Any person facing prosecution or a proceeding for any marijuana-related offense under any federal law shall have the right to introduce evidence demonstrating that the marijuana-related activities for which the person stands accused were performed in compliance with state law regarding the medical use of marijuana, or that the property which is subject to a proceeding was possessed in compliance with state law regarding the medical use of marijuana," the bill reads.
The legislation also lays out specific language stating that cannabis plants grown legally under state law may not be seized. Under the legislation, marijuana and other property confiscated in the process of a prosecution must also be maintained -- not destroyed -- and returned to the defendant if they are able to prove it was for a use accepted by the state.
The latest version of the Truth In Trials Act comes as federal crackdowns on dispensaries in medical marijuana states continue to surge. Last week, federal officials targeted one of the nation's largest pot shops. The Associated Press reported:
U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag has threatened to seize the Oakland property where Harborside Health Center has operated since 2006, as well as its sister shop in San Jose, executive director and co-founder Steve DeAngelo said Wednesday. His employees found court papers announcing asset forfeiture proceedings against Harborside's landlords taped to the doors at the two locations on Tuesday.
Read more relevant text from the bill below:
(a) Any person facing prosecution or a proceeding for any marijuana-related offense under any Federal law shall have the right to introduce evidence demonstrating that the marijuana-related activities for which the person stands accused were performed in compliance with State law regarding the medical use of marijuana, or that the property which is subject to a proceeding was possessed in compliance with State law regarding the medical use of marijuana.
`(b)(1) It is an affirmative defense to a prosecution or proceeding under any Federal law for marijuana-related activities, which the proponent must establish by a preponderance of the evidence, that those activities comply with State law regarding the medical use of marijuana.
`(2) In a prosecution or a proceeding for a marijuana-related offense under any Federalcriminal law, should a finder of fact determine, based on State law regarding the medical use of marijuana, that a defendant's marijuana-related activity was performed primarily, but not exclusively, for medical purposes, the defendant may be found guilty of an offense only corresponding to the amount of marijuana determined to be for nonmedical purposes.
`(c) Any property seized in connection with a prosecution or proceeding to which this section applies, with respect to which a person successfully makes a defense under this section, shall be returned to the owner not later than 10 days after the court finds the defense is valid, minus such material necessarily destroyed for testing purposes.
`(d) Any marijuana seized under any Federal law shall be retained and not destroyed pending resolution of any forfeiture claim, if not later than 30 days after seizure the owner of the property notifies the Attorney General, or a duly authorized agent of the Attorney General, that a person with an ownership interest in the property is asserting an affirmative defense for the medical use of marijuana.
`(e) No plant may be seized under any Federal law otherwise permitting such seizure if the plant is being grown or stored pursuant to a recommendation by a physician or an order of a State or municipal agency in accordance with State law regarding the medical use of marijuana.
`(f) In this section, the term State includes the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and any other territory or possession of the United States.'
Medical Marijuana States
1 of 20
ALSO ON HUFFPOST:

at No comments:
Labels:

Mason Tvert Responds To Author Jonathan Caulkins' Dire Forecast For Marijuana Legalization


The Huffington Post  |  By  Posted:  Updated: 07/18/2012 2:32 pm
AmazingInspiringFunnyScaryHotCrazyImportantWeird
Mason Tvert Marijuana
DENVER, CO - APRIL 20: A supporter of legalizedmarijuana holds up a small blunt as thousands gathered to celebrate the state's medicinal marijuana laws and collectively light up at 4:20 p.m. in Civic Center Park April 20, 2012 in Denver, Colorado on Colorado goes to the polls November 6 to vote on a controversial ballot initiative that would permit possession of up to an ounce of marijuana for those 21 and older. (Photo by Marc Piscotty/Getty Images)
During an event at the American Enterprise Institute, a panel of experts offered some dire warnings about the results of marijuana legalization, now being considered by three states: Colorado, Washington and, as of last week, Oregon.
A recent piece by The Los Angeles Times described the event where Jonathan Caulkins, co-author of "Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs To Know" and a RAND academic consultant, offered a gloomy forecast for marijuana's legalization.
Caulkins said prices of marijuana could plummet following legalization making thedrug less risky to produce and sell, so Caulkins believes that outlawing the drug is important because it drives up prices and therefore curbs use. He also says that Colorado's Amendment 64 would allow residents to obtain a grower's license "fairly easily" making Colorado a good home for exporters of the drug.
So, The Huffington Post chatted with Mason Tvert, co-director of the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol, the group behind Amendment 64 which seeks to legalize and regulate marijuana for recreational use for adults and will appear on Colorado ballots this November, and asked Tvert to discuss the issues brought up in the L.A. Times story.
"It's surprising and disappointing to hear academics make such bold claims without a shred of evidence to substantiate them," Tvert said to The Huffington Post via e-mail. "It is especially disappointing since people truly respect RAND as a research organization. Unless they retract these assertions, you will undoubtedly see our opponents citing this fanciful and baseless speculation as 'fact' in the future. Fortunately, RAND has shown a willingness to retract marijuana-related research, as they did when law enforcement complained about their research showing that medical marijuana dispensaries did not lead to increases in crime." Below are Tvert's responses to the various issues brought up by the panel.
On licensing and distribution after legalization:
Amendment 64 explicitly states that licensed marijuana cultivation facilities can only provide marijuana to licensed retail stores and product manufacturers. It is illegal to transport marijuana out of Colorado right now, and it will remain just as illegal to do so if Amendment 64 is adopted by the voters. 

On tracking the growing and selling of marijuana under Amendment 64:
Under a prohibition model, the production and distribution of marijuana is entirely uncontrolled. Authorities do not know who is growing it, where, or when, and they certainly do not know where it goes from there. Under the system proposed by Amendment 64, regulators and law enforcement officials would be directly involved in the process, ensuring it is produced and distributed in accordance with the law. The Colorado Department of Revenue is currently implementing a system of medical marijuana regulation that entails tracking all marijuana from 'seed to sale.' The same agency will oversee the regulation of non-medical marijuana if Amendment 64 is adopted, and it will in all likelihood extend that strict process to all marijuana production and sales.
On marijuana prices plummeting and use of the drug increasing due to legalization:
Despite the price of marijuana decreasing in Colorado over the past couple years, there have been no reports of prices going down in other states as a result. There is no evidence to suggest that would change if Amendment 64 is adopted. As these college professors noted, our federal government's strategy for limiting marijuana use is to keep the prices high. But this has done nothing to make marijuana less available, and it has made it more available to teens. Meanwhile, the federal government reports that the use of marijuana by high-school students in Colorado has decreased significantly since the state began regulating medical marijuana. Thisbucks the trend of increased use among students nationwide, where marijuana is entirely unregulated.
On marijuana being more widely available after legalization:
Marijuana is currently universally available, and it will remain that way regardless of whether Amendment 64 is adopted. The question is whether we would prefer marijuana be strictly controlled and sold by licensed businesses in a tightly regulated market, or whether we want to continue with the current system in which it is strictly uncontrolled and sold by criminal enterprises in the underground market. I would prefer the former, and I think Colorado voters will demonstrate this November that they do, too.
Amendment 64 does appear to be quite popular amongst Colorado voters. A recent Rasmussen Reports poll from earlier in June showed 61 percent of likely Colorado voters are in favor of legalizing marijuana.
That is the highest percentage of Colorado voter support that any marijuana legalization poll has shown to date. In December of 2011, a similar poll from Public Policy Polling showed only 49 percent in favor of general legalization of marijuana.
The marijuana legalization initiative also recently received support from both Republicans and Democrats -- in March, 56 percent of the delegates at the Denver County Republican Assembly voted to support the legislation, and in April, theColorado Democratic Party officially endorsed Amendment 64 and added a marijuana legalization plank to the current party platform.
ALSO ON HUFFPOST:
Medical Marijuana States
1 of 20
at No comments:
Labels:

Tuesday, July 10, 2012

Former Cops Agree: Legalization Is the Path to Controlling Drugs


642
8
By NEILL FRANKLIN
, Retired Cop and Executive Director of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
July 9, 2012
About Neill Franklin:
Neill Franklin, executive director of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, is a retired narcotics cop from Baltimore.
Is it time to scale back the failed and harmful war on drugs? No, it's time to end it once and for all.
As a 34-year veteran law enforcement officer who has done undercover narcotics work, I fully understand the harm that drug abuse can cause. I've seen it on the streets of Baltimore far too many times to count. But making drugs illegal and harshly punishing those who use or sell them hasn't solved the problem. We make more than 1.6 million drug arrests a year in the United States, but it hasn't made drugs appreciably harder to get, especially for our kids. We've spent over $1 trillion waging the drug war since President Richard Nixon first declared it in 1971, yet 47 percent of Americans admit to using illegal drugs.
But the drug war isn't just ineffective; it's much worse than that. Banning drugs has created an enormous black market in which those who control the illegal trade never hesitate to use violence to protect their tax-free profits. Drug cartels in Mexico have killed nearly 60,000 people over the past six years. If drugs were legal and regulated, instead of completely prohibited, none of these criminal organizations would have any interest in the drug trade. Think about it: When is the last time you heard about gangsters shooting each other to control the alcohol market? Probably sometime prior to 1933, which is when we ended the failed experiment of alcohol prohibition.
I seriously doubt that drug use will rise significantly under legalization; everyone who wants to use these substances already has easy access to them under our ineffective war on drugs. But once we stop wasting so much money arresting, prosecuting, and incarcerating people for drugs, we can better fund treatment and prevention programs that actually work. And, once the drug trade is regulated, we'll be able to make sure users know the exact potency and purity of the substances they are ingesting, giving them a form of quality control that is simply impossible under prohibition and which will reduce overdose deaths significantly.
Ending the war on drugs doesn't mean that our drug problem will disappear overnight; it just means that it will make our drug problem much easier to manage once we start using a true medical approach instead of sending cops like me to arrest people who are struggling with the health problem of substance abuse.
Tags:
 
drugs
at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Friday, June 29, 2012

Uruguay moves to legalize marijuana 1 Clearly the 40-year-old ‘War on Drugs’ has been a failure; a view shared by many countries



ted-woloshyn
BY  ,TORONTO SUN
FIRST POSTED: | UPDATED: 
Calling it an anti-crime measure, Uruguayan President Jose Mujica wants his country to legalize marijuana.
The government would be the sole producers and distributors of pot in Uruguay.
Mujica argues the traditional approach of interdiction hasn’t worked, that increasing drug violence has become a serious concern and that marijuana is less harmful than the black market to his country.
Under Uruguay’s proposed law, people will only be able to purchase marijuana through state-run agencies, which Mujica says would oversee the quality and quantity.
The law, which must still pass the Congress, would see the government selling controlled amounts of marijuana — reportedly about 40 cigarettes — to citizens who are 18 years of age or older, thereby depriving criminal gangs of their profits.
Taxes from the sale of pot would be used to fund rehabilitation centres.
Mujica also feels if users have legal access to marijuana, they will stay away from hard drugs like cocaine.
Of course, those opposed to the legalization of marijuana will argue it’s a gateway drug that leads to harder drugs such as cocaine.
But there is as much evidence that this is not the case, that many people who move on to hard drugs would do so without pot use. They are just wired that way.
Clearly the 40-year-old “War on Drugs” has been a failure; a view shared by many countries, such as Mexico, Columbia and Guatemala.
Columbian President Juan Manuel Santos says he is “not against legalization,” while Mexican president Felipe Calderon has spoken in a much more direct and harsher tone, stating if Americans are “determined and resigned to consuming drugs, they should seek market alternatives in order to cancel the stratospheric profits.” In his country, $15 billion a year is taken in by drug cartels through the sale of marijuana alone.
What would the financial benefits to legalizing marijuana in the U.S. be?
Although it’s difficult to accurately determine a precise amount, Jeffrey Miron, a Harvard economist and independent authority on the financial aspects of marijuana, estimates its legalization could produce $20 billion in tax revenue and law enforcement cost savings annually.
Opponents argue financial savings should not be the determining factor in the decision, nor the only criteria used.
But the attitudes of Americans are changing.
Five years ago, they opposed the idea of legalization by a ratio of 2:1.
But the most recent Gallup poll shows 50% are now in favour of legalizing pot while 46% are against.
The idea is no longer a radical one.
Pot has already been decriminalized in 11 U.S. states.
People see the hypocrisy of paying for the incarceration of ordinary citizens for possessing or selling marijuana, while organized crime thrives on its sale.
In Uruguay, Defence Minister Eleuterio Fernandez Huidobro said, “We think a ban on certain drugs is creating more problems in society than the drug itself.” President Mujica believes this type of experiment is best done by smaller countries, as a kind of small market test.
Whether Uruguay’s “experiment” works, or is accepted by other countries even if it does, remains to be seen.
But you have to give Mujica credit for at least trying to address the problem.
— Woloshyn hosts “Saturday with Ted” from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. on Newstalk 1010 
at No comments:
Labels:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)