It's almost like these questions were designed to make the freedom fighters look good. A huge set-up for all of us to say, 'We told you so,' no doubt about it.

I mean, "Has adult cannabis use decreased since it became illegal in 1918?" If for no other reason that it wasn't a big deal back in the day, the answer will be no.

They could have phrased questions like, "Has cannabis use rate increases coincided with cannabis treatment admissions?" Questions like that would have been an obvious loss for us since although the reason for it is mandatory treatment, the state usually doesn't take that into account.

This is great news and I can't wait to hear the findings. Anything short of a complete victory for us would be stunning.

After that, it's just a matter of whether the Rhode Island legislatures put the findings into legislation. We've seen it before with the Schaeffer Commission, but at least this is the state where they overrode the governor with bipartisan support from both houses.

If they need any help let me be the first to offer. Who is going to do this study? Is this going to be another bullshit spin on the same old story? I will have to wait and see before I believe this is going to be an honest study. The Rhode Island Senate may be good people, they are asking good questions. Let us all pray !

I like weed.

maybe one of these days I'll have to eat some of my words about useless pols. I could deal with that.

The findings of La Guardia Committee report released in 1944 are still relevant today. As are the findings of the Shafer Commission released in 1972. We really don't need any more studies, reports, committees, blah, blah, blah. This is past ridiculous.

By the way, does anybody monitor the comments on this site? Why is spam allowed?

The so-called "war on drugs" is being waged against ALL of us, not just pot smokers. What's good about the war on heroin? What's good about the war on meth? Or don't the rest of us deserve to have rights, too?

The tireless efforts of LEAP and others notwithstanding how soon do you realistically think that could happen? What does public opinion say about it? Should people not push marijuana only referendums in your view?
Marijuana has been badly demonized in America, other illegal drugs have been demonized even worse. If marijuana is legalized, many people will realize (or already have) how misled they have been about weed and that should make them take a closer look at the actual effects of other illegal drugs, as distinct from the severe effects of making them illegal.
It's infinitely depressing being on the wrong side of cannabis prohibition, I don't even want to imagine what it must be like to enjoy a drug that has more draconian penalties for users. But the time may well be now for marijuana only referendums, and that certainly doesn't appear to be the case for legalizing any other drug. At least under conditions of prohibition, and black market pricing, there are enough users of heroin, cocaine, meth, etc who cause enough violence, that they play into the hands of prohibitionists, which is another reason cannabis policy deserves separate scrutiny.
-newageblues

The Honolulu Star Bulletin reported today on their website that among the bills slated to be vetoed enmasse is one strikingly similar to R.I. 's. Where the legislators in that fair eastern state are engaged in reasonable discourse, in Hawaii not a shot was fired. We have had a Med MJ law on the books for years and still patients must get medicine from dealers who also spread the chronic cancer of ICE, meth-amphetamine. Here Med MJ is a non issue as Fed Law blah, blah, blah...Thank you Gov Lingle. I hope my comments on their article page will at least get some readers to learn that there really is another way.

Well, I certainly don't need any more studies either to know that both alcohol use and the prohibition of cannabis are much bigger problems than cannabis. But on the other hand both the commission studies mentioned are pretty old by now, an updated look does sound reasonable to me. A current study would be more effective in convincing people still on the fence, and legislators looking for cover, than studies 30-60 some years old, no matter how well those studies were done.
-newageblues