|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:[ This is a cool project, because I know there's at least one thing about a lot of "current" coverage maps that's been bugging me for a while now: North Carolina's "decrim" status. Yes, possession of 0.5oz of plant matter or less means you won't face any jail time if you're caught; at most, you'll face a $200 fine. But it still goes on your criminal record as a misdemeanor drug offense. It is still a criminal penalty, not a civil one, and unless I'm just grossly misunderstanding what decriminalization entails, I'm not sure how NC qualifies as a decrim state when you still face criminal penalties that bar you from all sorts of work, federal aid, etc.
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2015 16:05
|
|
on cannabis coverage]
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 08:50 |
|
|
District Selectman posted:I know, I've done it in fact! I walk around Denver vaping all the time, did it in Philly too. I'm saying you can get away with it, but it's not technically legal, and having a weed bar would be different and better!  I want there to be a public place to socialize with other people who are getting high too. And have it all be out in the open and above water legally thank you very much.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
Justus posted:
But think about the children!!!
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
Leave them at the bar down the street.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
Knight of Arboria posted:This is a cool project, because I know there's at least one thing about a lot of "current" coverage maps that's been bugging me for a while now: North Carolina's "decrim" status. I can bring that issue up at the WikiProject Cannabis board to see how other folks feel about it. I agree that to me "decriminalization" means "no longer a crime, but rather an infraction", so just reducing sentences I don't think is good enough. For me personally, if any given aspect is made a civil infraction, like possession of under X amount is a ticket, but any using it, selling it, any more than that, is a crime, I'd still consider that decrim. The problem is that some newspapers call it "decriminalization" when they actually mean "reducing draconian penalties to misdemeanors", and it's actually pretty common for media to say "decriminalization" when they actually mean "full legalization", so while it may seem pretty obvious to us there's some flex in the term in media circles. The other sticky issue that makes states hard to categorize: there are a couple states that "legalized" CBD oil... but only in the context of allowing trials at a specific number of universities in the state. I don't consider that to be really legalizing CBD so much as conducting testing on it in defiance of federal regs, or actually in some cases they've written their "legalizing" to say "clinical trials approved by the FDA" so really not changing much of anything at all. Alabama is marked as CBD on the map, but the reality is: "In 2014, Alabama passed Carly's Law allowing federally-approved clinical trials of CBD oil to treat children with seizures at the University of Alabama at Birmingham." So in my book Alabama should be the Illegal color. I'd moved Oklahoma to the CBD category on the template since it seemed they'd legalize it in general for child seizures, but looking at more articles it appears to be "clinical trials" as well, so I'll move it back to the "Illegal" category until we can get a WikiProject consensus as to whether trials should move a state into the CBD category. And also whether a state can ever be checked off as "decriminalized" if there are no cannabis offenses that are non-crimes. If anyone is interested in writing an article for any of the states we're missing, I'd be happy to help you get it composed and formatted. General offer open for anyone here that wants to add/expand an article on cannabis politics and social issues. We could also use some help expanding our number of "Cannabis in [X Country]" articles; we didn't even have a "Cannabis in Jamaica" article until I started one a month ago, and it really needs expanding.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
Knight of Arboria posted:This is a cool project, because I know there's at least one thing about a lot of "current" coverage maps that's been bugging me for a while now: North Carolina's "decrim" status. Okay, looked at the NORML page, and it appears there's a method to their madness: quote:
So NORML's cutoff for decriminalization is that there is some way of punishing possession that doesn't involve jail time. There's a couple ways to look at this: you can either favor nudging weaksauce-decrim and "trials only" CBD into the full check-in-the box, and argue that it makes the map look better since it shows steady progress in the right direction. Or you can nudge them downwards into the Illegal category since their allowances are so weak, having the map show the country as having a bigger disparity between states. Not sure which direction would really be the most objective, but I would venture to guess NORML checks weaksauce-decrim off the list because, hey, it shows *some* sort of progress is the most benighted states.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2015 12:23
|
|
|
The last poll of Missouri put it at 45% for full legalization, and signatures are being collected for the ballot measure for 2016 that would amend the constitution. Could pass by a few hairs...
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2015 12:46
|
|
|
Apparently it's not definitive yet, but the Menominee Indian tribe whose reservation is in Wisconsin just voted to legalize medical *and* recreational cannabis. It's an "advisory vote" by the entire membership of the tribe, so the actual tribal legislators still have to decide what to actually do about this, but still a promising sign. The vote came out with 77% in favor of legalizing medical, and 58% for legalizing recreational. Given that the Feds basically said "sure, sovereign reservations can do whatever" and that they have a clear majority of members in favor of both, I'd imagine their elected legislators have to take at least some steps on this. http://www.theweedblog.com/menominee-indian-tribe-votes-to-legalize-medical-and-recreational-marijuana/
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2015 13:45
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:Apparently it's not definitive yet, but the Menominee Indian tribe whose reservation is in Wisconsin just voted to legalize medical *and* recreational cannabis. It's an "advisory vote" by the entire membership of the tribe, so the actual tribal legislators still have to decide what to actually do about this, but still a promising sign. Gonna be SOOO many cop cars posted right outside this reservation soon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
Would be interesting to see some of the big Native American casinos legalize it on their land. "Come get high with us and gamble your money away."
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
hangedman1984 posted:Gonna be SOOO many cop cars posted right outside this reservation soon. Some of the Fed folks are already claiming that the right to grow/sell/consume cannabis on reservations applies only to tribal members, and not to non-Indians, so will be interesting to see how that shakes out. IANAL, but that sounds like a relatively easy position to attack.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Teflon Don posted:The last poll of Missouri put it at 45% for full legalization, and signatures are being collected for the ballot measure for 2016 that would amend the constitution. Could pass by a few hairs... Man, I somehow didn't see that Missouri had passed any decrim measures, and I live in Springfield, MO. It sucks that it's still a criminal offense, but at least people won't be going to jail (unless they have a prior offense). Anyway, 45% is much higher than I thought it would be, and I would be tickled pink if it passed here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:I can bring that issue up at the WikiProject Cannabis board to see how other folks feel about it. I agree that to me "decriminalization" means "no longer a crime, but rather an infraction", so just reducing sentences I don't think is good enough. For me personally, if any given aspect is made a civil infraction, like possession of under X amount is a ticket, but any using it, selling it, any more than that, is a crime, I'd still consider that decrim. The problem is that some newspapers call it "decriminalization" when they actually mean "reducing draconian penalties to misdemeanors", and it's actually pretty common for media to say "decriminalization" when they actually mean "full legalization", so while it may seem pretty obvious to us there's some flex in the term in media circles. Perhaps the people who edit the Associated Press Style Manual and the New York Times Manual of Style should be lobbied to promote consistent usage of relevant language?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
Beaters posted:Perhaps the people who edit the Associated Press Style Manual and the New York Times Manual of Style should be lobbied to promote consistent usage of relevant language? It's not just the media. Half the people I talk to think it means just no jail time the other half thinks it means absolutely no penalty whatsoever but it just can't be taxed. I'm more inclined to believe the first definition.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:Some of the Fed folks are already claiming that the right to grow/sell/consume cannabis on reservations applies only to tribal members, and not to non-Indians, so will be interesting to see how that shakes out. IANAL, but that sounds like a relatively easy position to attack. Not really. There's precedent for something like that already with peyote.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:Some of the Fed folks are already claiming that the right to grow/sell/consume cannabis on reservations applies only to tribal members, and not to non-Indians, so will be interesting to see how that shakes out. IANAL, but that sounds like a relatively easy position to attack. Well there is already a lot of jurisprudence reflecting this. i.e. you can be prosecuted for breaking American Federal law in a foreign country. Since reservations are considered independent nations, and marijuana is illegal federally, it would be pretty trivial for the federal justice department to prosecute users. However, the federal government has no interest in that, unless you are trafficking or something. And there has already been rulings about states enforcing federal laws (they can't). So Sheriff Joe in Minnesota isn't going to be able to fish for people who broke federal law in another nation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Not really. There's precedent for something like that already with peyote. Not really; the peyote exception is based on religious freedom acts whereas the marijuana issue is based more on tribal sovereignty. Religious freedom exceptions almost by definition only apply to those who belong to the concerned religious group. quote:Well there is already a lot of jurisprudence reflecting this. i.e. you can be prosecuted for breaking American Federal law in a foreign country. I've heard about stuff like this, but only in the context of using it to prosecute sex tourists. I've never heard of, say, an American in Amsterdam being prosecuted upon return for smoking weed. Has that ever happened?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2015 15:48
|
|
|
FreshlyShaven posted:[...] Not sure about sex tourists, but I seem to recall an invasion of Panama because the local strong man was allowing drug smuggling out of the country. Didn't Noriega do about 20 years for that?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
Beaters posted:Not sure about sex tourists, but I seem to recall an invasion of Panama because the local strong man was allowing drug smuggling out of the country. Didn't Noriega do about 20 years for that? That was part of the charges that the US sent him to prison for, but I'm pretty sure a lot of the reason that they actually invaded Panama was that he had originally been set up by the CIA to be compliant with US interests and all the death squads and vote rigging were making us look bad. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 20:06 on Aug 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
FreshlyShaven posted:
No and I don't even know if consuming marijuana is illegal, just possession and distribution. And I don't know if you can prosecute someone for having possessed it at one point.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
http://nypost.com/2015/08/04/weaponized-weed-that-makes-people-strip-naked-wreaking-havoc-in-nyc/ Hey guys did you know WEAPONIZED WEED can make you into a helpless but alarming looking crazy person? Great rhetoric there officer. gently caress off, no one would go near novel chemical brain poisons if real drugs were legal and available.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 04:00
|
|
|
That poo poo is not even that great. People who don't do drugs: a never ending stream of dumb poo poo. I'm glad pop music is pissing off narco warriors.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
Moxie posted:http://nypost.com/2015/08/04/weaponized-weed-that-makes-people-strip-naked-wreaking-havoc-in-nyc/ I laughed out loud. This article is ridiculous. Are these people ever going to get tired of the "DRUGS MAKE YOU HULK OUT AND BEAT UP LIKE A DOZEN COPS AT A TIME!!!" trope?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
Weed: Responsible for millions of dead cops* *in GTA5, couch lock is dangerous beast
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
Maybe you've killed cops. But have you ever killed cops...ON WEED?
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 10:18
|
|
|
Y'know guys, I was thinking, isn't it time we: Bring back the war on drugs? http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/editorials/2015/09/08/bring-back-war-drugs/h2wWV7ojkje4P5dwIbmgPK/story.html You can't make this poo poo up. KingEup fucked around with this message at 09:17 on Sep 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 09:08
|
|
|
KingEup posted:Y'know guys, I was thinking, isn't it time we: You know, I disagree with all of their conclusions as to how to deal with it, and I don't think it's a drop in the bucket compared with abuse / overdose of legal opiates, but there are way too many people dying from heroin and it is getting a lot worse. Right now I'm in a sleepy little town with about 10k people. We have on average at least one overdose a week, and the other day I saw a junkie who just shot up - in a park right downtown, in broad daylight. Massachusetts is working on dealing with it as a health issue, so are we and I hope we get a handle on it because (combined with pharmaceuticals) it's ruining a lot of lives. I mean it's dumb to look at the issue and go "hmm yes, let's restart 40 years of bad policy that doesn't work", but it's a difficult issue that needs to be addressed, and it has gotten markedly worse just over the last few years. No one is looking at the epidemic of caffeine deaths and suggesting we ban caffeine and go after the suppliers though. I don't think that's realistic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 10:22
|
|
|
Broken Machine posted:You know, I disagree with all of their conclusions as to how to deal with it, and I don't think it's a drop in the bucket compared with abuse / overdose of legal opiates, but there are way too many people dying from heroin and it is getting a lot worse. Right now I'm in a sleepy little town with about 10k people. We have on average at least one overdose a week, and the other day I saw a junkie who just shot up - in a park right downtown, in broad daylight. Did someone say public injecting? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cco4BT-KDK8
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 10:43
|
|
|
Broken Machine posted:"hmm yes, let's restart 40 years of bad policy that doesn't work"
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 11:08
|
|
|
OniPanda posted:Restart? Other than the softening stance on weed, they have pursuing the war on drugs as viciously as they ever have. And poo poo has actually gotten worse, what with civil asset forfeiture. Maybe it's just the wars over the past decade coloring my perceptions or whatever but after almost eight years of Obama, it seems as though the war on drugs has been at a low. I think many of those responsible for enforcement of drug laws are taking another look at the drug problem and rethinking it as a health issue, particularly with respect to decriminalizing consumption of drugs, rather than focusing on the cartels or other supply / demand reduction methods that don't work. With the growth of online drug markets and widespread research chemicals, along with other factors the drugs appear to be winning on that front. Not that it's so much the result of official policy changes, but the availability of most drugs, and abuse of research chemicals seem to be up considerably. Bath salts are worse than meth. Heroin deaths are approaching prescription opiate levels. Policymakers need to figure out how to adapt to those realities and advance policies that help. and I think more are realizing that all the time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 12:12
|
|
|
OniPanda posted:And poo poo has actually gotten worse, what with civil asset forfeiture. That's literally been used since Prohibition.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 12:35
|
|
|
computer parts posted:That's literally been used since Prohibition. Yeah you're right, fallin into the same trap of "hearing about it more = it's happening more." Now that Leonhart is no longer the head of the DEA, maybe we'll actually see some softening on the war on drugs and sense will make it through. I don't exactly have my hopes up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 14:54
|
|
|
I talked to my state reps, they all agree that it's best to keep them all illegal and "give the police more tools". I'm honestly afraid to know what kind of tools they are thinking of. We already have legalized robbery, no knock warrants, one of the highest prescription drug od/abuse rates in the country (now turning to heroin), Our prisons are understaffed, over 300 people quit recently, one prison has 140 vacancies with guards working 6 days on, 3 days off, sometimes with16 hour shifts. Over half the jails are overcrowded, and the prisons operating at 98.5% capacity. But yeah, just keep on keeping on, it's fine guys.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 15:25
|
|
|
Broken Machine posted:Maybe it's just the wars over the past decade coloring my perceptions or whatever but after almost eight years of Obama, it seems as though the war on drugs has been at a low. I think many of those responsible for enforcement of drug laws are taking another look at the drug problem and rethinking it as a health issue, particularly with respect to decriminalizing consumption of drugs, rather than focusing on the cartels or other supply / demand reduction methods that don't work. With the growth of online drug markets and widespread research chemicals, along with other factors the drugs appear to be winning on that front. Not that it's so much the result of official policy changes, but the availability of most drugs, and abuse of research chemicals seem to be up considerably. Bath salts are worse than meth. Heroin deaths are approaching prescription opiate levels. Policymakers need to figure out how to adapt to those realities and advance policies that help. and I think more are realizing that all the time. Rhetoric has shifted considerably in the past decade but laws haven't. Getting caught with 100 dollars worth of opiate pills in MA can still get you sent to prison for decades. If anything, we need to follow Portugal's example and remove any criminal penalties for drug possession. Heroin is growing in popularity because a) these are areas that have traditionally had low exposure to hard drugs like opiates, b) many doctors are refusing to write prescriptions for opiates so those addicted to Oxy or Percocet now have to get their fix from street heroin and c) there is a lot of boredom and unemployment in these areas, making opiate use an attractive way of killing time/boredom. And research chemicals have little to do with the rise in opiate addiction.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
FreshlyShaven posted:Rhetoric has shifted considerably in the past decade but laws haven't. Getting caught with 100 dollars worth of opiate pills in MA can still get you sent to prison for decades. They're in the process of changing the laws, and have already done a lot. Officers now have good access to naloxone, and addicts have an easier time getting maintenance and treatment if they end up in jails. There's a pilot program in Gloucester that's offering free treatment to addicts, no questions asked. The legislature is working on reforming laws to prioritize treatment over punishment, and there are pilot programs in place in some areas. They're working on it. quote:And research chemicals have little to do with the rise in opiate addiction. Not directly, but rcs are helping push legalization / decrim of many drugs. Meth isn't good, but when faced with the alternative of people taking novel amphetamines instead to pass a drug test, it changes things. If someone who has been a functional meth addict takes bath salts and goes psychotic, or causes permanent damage to themselves and others, far above what they were doing on meth, lawmakers start thinking about what they can do to reduce the harm. I think synthetic cannabinoids have similarly helped cannabis decrim. With opiates, it's a bit different as they're out of your system in a few days but people thinking about harm reduction is causing them to reconsider their stances.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
Broken Machine posted:You know, I disagree with all of their conclusions as to how to deal with it, and I don't think it's a drop in the bucket compared with abuse / overdose of legal opiates, but there are way too many people dying from heroin and it is getting a lot worse. quote:Public alarm about heroin also seems only loosely related to trends in use. Contrary to the impression you might get from all the talk of a “heroin epidemic,” MTF data indicate that use of the drug by young people has not risen in recent years. Broken Machine posted:No one is looking at the epidemic of caffeine deaths and suggesting we ban caffeine and go after the suppliers though. I don't think that's realistic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
As I said earlier, it's still a lesser problem than prescription drug abuse, but deaths due to heroin are way up. From the data you posted, deaths went from 4,397 in 2011 to 8,257 in 2013. That's almost double in two years. Usage rates may not have changed much, but availability is up and deaths are way up. quote:Did we read the same article? The FDA is seriously leaning on suppliers of pure caffeine and some caffeinated products. Asking politely for companies to please stop selling concentrated caffeine is pretty different from attempting to ban or shut down / raid manufacturers. Point being that caffeine can be a dangerous drug, but happens to be one that's viewed positively by society. It illustrates how arbitrary our drug policies are; no one would consider attempting to ban it in response.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 17:51
|
|
|
I don't know man, 4k more deaths in 2013 than in 2011, a 100% increase, seems pretty significant, especially when combined with an almost 100% increase in users since 2007.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
Good news for those of us in Colorado - thanks to TABOR, recreational cannabis will be mostly tax free on Sept 16. http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/10/news/colorado-pot-tax-holiday/
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 08:50 |
|
|
Why?!? Just take my loving money! Oh, just for that one day. For some reason I read your post as "starting on..." Maybe I should smoke less.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 00:38
|
|