Skip to main content

Latest

Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle
Chronicle

Weekly: Blogging @ the Speakeasy

"Sentencing Postponed in the Charlie Lynch Trial," "Opposing Medical Marijuana is Politically Risky," "Poking Around in a Teenager's Panties is a Sick Crime (Unless It's a Drug Search)," "Wow, These 4/20 Celebrations Are Surprisingly Safe," "If You Think the Drug War Protects Young People, Read This," "Obama's Fraudulent Pledge to Respect Medical Marijuana Laws," "Supreme Court Restricts Warrantless Vehicle Searches," "The Mainstream Media Wishes You a Happy 4/20," "Baptist Pastor Assaulted After Refusing Police Search."
Chronicle

Appeal: It's Time to STOP Wasting Time, Money & Lives

With an economic crisis requiring sensible budget cuts, a Constitution-friendly administration and more people joining the drug policy reform movement than ever before, StoptheDrugWar.org has a unique opportunity to make our case.
Chronicle
Blog

Sentencing Postponed in the Charlie Lynch Trial


I spent all afternoon getting geared up to go ballistic over this, only to learn that nothing happened:
The sentencing of Morro Bay, California medical marijuana dispensary owner Charles Lynch has been delayed yet again, this time until June 11. According to Reason.tv producer Ted Balaker, who has followed the Lynch saga from its start, the mood in the courtroom was guardedly optimistic, especially as Judge George H. Wu openly expressed his sympathy for Lynch.

"To be blunt, if I could find a way out, I would," said Wu, referring to mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines that insist Lynch get at least five years in prison. However, Wu summarily dismissed the notion of disregarding the guidelines, claiming it would simply be a "monumental waste of time" because such a decision would be overruled by a higher court. [Reason]
I'm not sure what this postponement means. It's definitely not a bad thing, though. If nothing else, it gives us more time to contact DOJ and the White House in support of Charlie. Please do exactly that. Here's some background for those that need it:



Blog

Opposing Medical Marijuana is Politically Risky

This new poll from New Hampshire casts further doubt on the rapidly unraveling notion that politicians must support harsh marijuana policies to get votes:

The Granite State Poll conducted by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center showed that 45 percent of residents said they were more likely to vote for a Senate candidate who supports legalizing marijuana for medicinal purposes.

The poll showed that 24 percent of residents said they would be less likely to vote for such a candidate. Another 26 percent said it would make no difference. [WMUR]

Clearly, supporting medical marijuana legalization is by far the safest choice for New Hampshire politicians. The margins are likely smaller in many states, but I bet you'd see a clear preference for pro-medical marijuana candidates throughout most of the country.

It's exactly this type of data that matters at this stage in our efforts. We've crossed a threshold in terms of educating our political culture about this issue. They know who we are and what we want. Our biggest challenge is demonstrating that political trends in fact favor reform decisively on certain issues and that opposition to something like medical marijuana will fairly reliably get you in trouble at the polls.

The numbers are already on our side, but I suspect we'll have to start being more aggressive to drive the point home. When we start launching vicious swiftboat-style attack ads accusing our opponents of wanting to arrest cancer patients, they'll suddenly become a lot more interested in what the polls say.