BLOG
Why Legalizing Marijuana Protects Young People
Jann Gumbiner, Ph.D. has a post at Psychology Today pondering how young people will be affected by marijuana legalization. She has more questions than answers, but it's interesting to see what concerns come up for a parent who's undecided on the issue.Her conclusion strikes me as quite sensible:As a parent, I ask myself, "what are the dangers to teens?" And, what are the likely scenarios? If pot is still illegal to anyone under 21, how will teens get it? I think the most likely scenario is the same as beer and cigarettes. Older brothers and sisters, with IDs, will legally buy packaged marijuana cigarettes at gas stations and share them with younger ones on Friday night parties. As a parent, I ask myself, "how do I feel about this?" And... after a little thought, I actually feel better knowing my child is with trusted friends, ingesting measured substances than on a corner at night buying an illegal substance from a stranger.Bingo. It's a pretty rational conclusion, but one that can only be reached by accepting the reality that marijuana will be available with or without legalization. Too often, opponents of regulating marijuana sales appear to believe that it only becomes available once it's legal. I'm afraid it's not nearly that simple.As a teenager, I witnessed firsthand a world in which it was easier to get marijuana than alcohol. I don't just say this now because it suits my agenda; it's the truth. If my friends wanted booze for a party, they planned days ahead. If they wanted pot, they just made a phone call. The difference was that old, but very true, cliché that drug dealers donât check ID. That's why research has repeatedly shown that teenagers have easier access to marijuana than beer. What can never be quantified, however, are all the other harms that go along with this vast underground, underage drug economy that continues to thrive thanks to marijuana prohibition.To be clear, I doubt this is the argument that's going to turn things around. If that were true it would have happened already. People donât seem to get this, maybe because those darn kids have a nasty habit of not telling the grown-ups about their pot hook-ups. Instead, I would simply add this to the long list of reasons that legalization will work even better than most people expect. That's right parents. Prepare to be pleasantly surprised.
Drug Czar Blames the Media for Marijuana's Popularity
If you wanna hear drug czar Gil Kerlikowske getting served by random people who hate the drug war, check out this NPR interview. As soon as the phones open, Mr. K gets put on the defensive by a social worker, a physician and various others who aren't too fond of the war on drugs. Right on, radio people.But I think my favorite part is this clueless attempt to explain America's obsession with marijuana:KRIS (Caller): Thank you. I was wondering - I'm 62 years old, and when I was in high school, I didn't even know what marijuana was. And I'm wondering why is it so rampant now, and it never used to be?Mr. KERLIKOWSKE: Well, I wish I had a good answer for that, Rachel. I am - I actually just about two years younger than you are, and so I'm afraid I would put myself in exactly the same mindset. But I think that marijuana is popularized on television shows. It is popularized in media. There is only one antidrug media message out there, and that's the one that the Office of the National Drug Control Policy actually funds, and that - the antidrug.comâ¦Has it occurred to you, sir, that TV shows and the media are talking about marijuana because people are interested in it, not the other way around? It wasn't the press that popularized marijuana, it was the people. But this isnât just about the popularity of pot, either. The reason marijuana is in the news constantly isn't just because everyone loves smoking it. This is happening because our marijuana policy is such a complete disaster that every single one of us is affected by it. If there weren't a massive war against marijuana being fought everyday throughout the country, then there wouldnât be nearly as much to talk about, I assure you.
Maine Votes to Okay Medical Marijuana Dispensaries; Measure Passing With 60% of the Vote
Voters in Maine Tuesday approved Question 5, which will allow the state to license nonprofit organizations to operate medical marijuana dispensaries for qualified patients. In early returns with nearly half the vote tallied, the measure was winning easily, with 60% of the vote. Maine thus becomes the third state to create a system of state-licensed dispensaries, and the first one to do so by a direct vote. Only Rhode Island and New Mexico have similar dispensary provisions. "This is a dramatic step forward, the first time that any stateâs voters have authorized the state government to license medical marijuana dispensaries," said Rob Kampia, executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project in Washington, DC, which drafted the initiative and provided start-up funding for the campaign. "Coming a decade after passage of Maineâs original marijuana law, this is a huge sign that voters are comfortable with these laws, and also a sign that the recent change of policy from the Obama administration is having a major impact." MPP local affiliate Maine Citizens for Patients' Rights led the fight on the ground. Question 5 also expands the list of medical conditions qualifying for protection under Maineâs law to include several conditions that are included in most other medical marijuana states, including intractable pain, agitation of Alzheimerâs disease, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis ("Lou Gehrigâs disease"). Look for a feature article on the Maine victory and the push for state-licensed dispensaries in the Chronicle on Friday.
Colorado Ski Town of Breckenridge Votes to Legalize It; Measure Passes With 72%
Residents of the Colorado ski town of Breckenridge overwhelmingly voted to legalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana Tuesday. Early returns had the local measure passing with 72% of the vote. That means as of January 1, people in Breckenridge can legally possess up to an ounce of marijuana under local ordinance. The measure also legalizes the possession of marijuana paraphernalia. "This votes demonstrates that Breckenridge citizens overwhelmingly believe that adults should not be punished for making the safer choice to use marijuana instead of alcohol," said Sean McAllister, Breckenridge attorney and chair of Sensible Breckenridge, a local project of the statewide marijuana law reform group Sensible Colorado. "As state and national focus grows on this important issue, the popular ski town of Breckenridge has taken center stage on marijuana reform-- and not just for medical purposes," said Brian Vicente of Sensible Colorado. "With this historic vote, Breckenridge has emerged as a national leader in sensible drug policy" The campaign, which had no formal opposition, received a chorus of local support including endorsements from Breckenridge Town Councilman Jeffrey Bergeron, former. Colorado State Representative and Breckenridge resident, Gary Lindstrom, and the Summit Daily News. Measure 2F was placed on the ballot when over 1400 local supporters signed a petition supporting the reform measure. Under Colorado state law, possession of up to an ounce is decriminalized and punishable by a $100 fine. But Breckenridge police will "still have the ability to exercise discretion," said Chief Rick Holman. âIt's never been something that we've spent a lot of time on, so I don't expect this to be a big change in how we really do business,â he told the Summit Daily News. Breckenridge residents had voted for Amendment 44, a statewide legalization initiative, by the same percentage in 2006. That initiative won only 41% of the vote statewide. Denver became the first city to vote to legalize marijuana possession under municipal ordinance in 2005.
It's High Time We Legalize Marijuana and Hemp!
The War on Drugs is more than a colossal failure, it's a farce and a criminal conspiracy brewed up among a few politicians and business leaders for personal and corporate profit.
Canadian Government Tries to Collect Marijuana Debts
It's usually a good idea to make everyone pay up front:Health Canada is getting tough with patients who use government-certified medical marijuana, demanding full payment in advance before shipping the weed.The move, effective Nov. 30, is designed to halt the rising number of accounts in arrears -- and force more patients to pay off old debts that now total more than $1.2 million. [CTV Toronto]I can't help but find the whole thing rather amusing, but the Canadian government is probably really pissed off about all this. They didnât even want to have a federal medical marijuana program, but the courts forced them to do it. Now they're getting back at everyone by growing some of the worst cannabis in Canada:The marijuana, which has received poor reviews from many users for being harsh and ineffective, has a THC content of about 12.5 per cent. Actually, 12.5% isn't all that bad, but everyone says it's super-gross, which it probably is if you compare it to what the rest of the country is enjoying. Regardless, if I were a seriously ill patient in desperate need of medical marijuana, I'd rather be using Health Canada's product than the famously awful schwag that's grown by the U.S. government.
Outrage: Drug Warrior Congressman Tries to Prohibit Discussion of Legalization
Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) has introduced legislation calling for a thorough evaluation of the U.S. criminal justice system, namely for the purpose of exploring ways to reduce our world-record prison population. As you might guess, simply discussing whether we should keep millions of American behind bars is enough to terrify the drug war's most committed champions.They canât handle the tough questions, so they're trying to make it illegal to even ask. Drug war hall-of-famer Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) today introduced an amendment to Webb's bill that would literally prohibit the commission from talking about legalization or even decriminalization:AMENDMENT intended to be proposed by Mr. GRASSLEYâ¦.SEC. ll. RESTRICTIONS ON AUTHORITY.The Commission shall have no authority to make findings related to current Federal, State, and local criminal justice policies and practices or reform recommendations that involve, support, or otherwise discuss the decriminalization of any offense under the Controlled Substances Act or the legalization of any controlled substance listed under the Controlled Substances Act.These words are a legal blueprint for silencing all criticism of the war on drugs before the experts even get a chance to discuss it. The whole thing flagrantly violates the spirit of the entire inquiry and renders meaningless everything Webb is trying to do. And yes, that's exactly the point. No one has done more than Charles Grassley to make the drug war into the horrible mess that it's become, so you can bet he'll do anything to protect his shameful legacy. If he succeeds, the bill will almost certainly end up protecting bad policies instead of exposing them. We canât let that happen. Click here to tell your Senators to oppose this misguided amendment and let the experts do their job without political interference. A serious evaluation of criminal justice and drug policies is long overdue and that effort means nothing unless all options are debated openly.
The Best Place in the World to Buy Marijuana
When it comes to reforming marijuana laws, one of our greatest remaining obstacles is the fact that many people just canât picture what a sensible marijuana policy would look like. The reformer's utopian view of a regulated marijuana economy operates in stark contrast to the pungent smoldering apocalypse that exists in the nightmares of our opposition. It's like we're not even speaking the same language. So I'd like to share a vision of what is possible when cannabis is provided by responsible people: It's a triumphant statement that cannabis, like other valued commodities, can be handled with accountability to the consumer and the public. So much of the ugliness that clouds this issue (drug gangs, violence, environmental harm) is just a symptom of our failure to let the best people supervise it. Through regulation, we encourage responsible business practices and create an environment in which providers will constantly strive to maintain a healthy relationship with their community.The time has come for opponents of legalization to stop obstructing reform and start actively participating in it. Once it's understood that marijuana laws are changing, we must all begin working together to develop a system that addresses as many different concerns as possible. Instead of trying to block any form of legalization, skeptics should be thinking about what distribution model they'd be most comfortable with. The excellent example depicted above can be replicated elsewhere, but only if everyone works together instead of fighting it out to the bitter end.This is what real drug control looks like and there's nothing here for anyone to be afraid of.
British Science vs. Politics Battle Explodes As Top Drug Advisor Fired for Heresy
The British Labor government has created a firestorm of controversy with its firing of Professor David Nutt, head of the Advisory Committee on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) last Friday. Nutt was canned by Home Secretary Alan Johnson after the psychopharmacologist again went public with his criticism of the government for refusing to follow a science- and evidence-based drug policy. As of today, after a weekend of furious back and forth in dozens of newspaper articles, two more members of the ACMD have resigned in protest over the firing, and a mass resignation of the 31-member body may come after a meeting next Monday. Johnson told parliament Monday that he had agreed to a request from the ACMD for an urgent meeting, but he also told parliament he had ordered a review of the ACMD to satisfy ministers that the panel is "discharging its functions" and that it still represents a value to the public. The ACMD's charge is to "make recommendations to government on the control of dangerous or otherwise harmful drugs, including classification and scheduling under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and its regulations," its web page explains. "It considers any substance which is being or appears to be misused and of which is having or appears to be capable of having harmful effects sufficient to cause a social problem. It also carries out in-depth inquiries into aspects of drug use that are causing particular concern in the UK, with the aim of producing considered reports that will be helpful to policy makers and practitioners." Tensions between the ACMD and the Labor government began rising after the government up-scheduled marijuana from a Class C drug (least harmful) back to Class B, where it had been prior to being down-scheduled in 2004. The Labor government ignored the ACMD's recommendation that marijuana remain Class C. Things only got worse when the ACMD recommended that Ecstasy be down-scheduled from Class A (most harmful) to Class B, and the government promptly ignored that advice. At that point, Nutt went public with his criticisms of then Home Secretary Jacqui Smith. He also famously compared the dangers of Ecstasy to those of horse-riding, deeply offending both the horsey set and the Labor government. Smith told Nutt to shut up, and he managed to do so until last week. Last week, in a lecture and briefing paper at the Center for Crime and Justice Studies at King's College London, Nutt accused Smith of "distorting and devaluing" scientific evidence when she decided to reclassify marijuana. He also said that Ecstasy and LSD are less dangerous than alcohol and tobacco. "We have to accept young people like to experiment â with drugs and other potentially harmful activities â and what we should be doing in all of this is to protect them from harm at this stage of their lives," he said. "We therefore have to provide more accurate and credible information. If you think that scaring kids will stop them using, you are probably wrong.â Nutt's briefing paper included a ranking of various licit and illicit drugs by comparative harm. Heroin and cocaine were ranked the most harmful in Nutt's scheme, with alcohol fifth, marijuana ninth, LSD fourteenth, and Ecstasy eighteenth. "We need a full and open discussion of the evidence and a mature debate about what the drug laws are for â and whether they are doing their job," Nutt said. That was too much for Home Minister Alan Johnson. He told parliament Monday that Smith had warned Nutt not to publicly disagree with ministry decisions again. "Well, it has happened again," said Johnson. "On Thursday October 29 Professor Nutt chose, without prior notification to my department, to initiate a debate on drug policy in the national media, returning to the February decisions, and accusing my predecessor or distorting and devaluing scientific research. As a result, I have lost confidence in Professor Nutt's ability to be my principal adviser on drugs." Prime Minister Gordon Brown is standing behind Johnson. An official spokesman said the firing was based on the "important principle" that advisers should present advice to ministers but not speak out against their policy decisions. "It would be regrettable if there were other resignations, but this is an important point of principle," the spokesman added. "The government is absolutely committed to the importance of having independent advice and evidence presented by advisory bodies." Nutt defended himself and attacked the government in a London Sunday times opinion piece. "My sacking has cast a huge shadow over the relationship of science to policy," he wrote. "Several of the science experts from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) have resigned in protest and it seems likely that many others will follow suit. This means the Home Office no longer has a functioning advisory group, which is very unfortunate given the ever-increasing problems of drugs and the emergence of new ones. Also it seems unlikely that any 'true' scientist â one who can only speak the truth â will be able to work for this, or future, Home Secretaries. One of the ACMD members who resigned, chemist Les King, said ministers were putting inappropriate pressure on scientists to make drug policy decisions based on politicalânot scientificâreasons. "It's being asked to rubber stamp a predetermined position," he said, warning that others could leave the council over the brouhaha. "If sufficient members do resign, the committee will no longer be able to operate," King said. Scientist and Labor MP Robert Winston said Nutt had a "very reasonable" point about the relative dangers of legal and illegal drugs, and that he was disappointed by the firing. "I think that if governments appoint expert advice they shouldn't dismiss it so lightly," he said. "I think it shows a rather poor understanding of the value of science."
Marijuana Debate! Former Judge vs. Several Complete Idiots
The debate over legalization is heating up in California, and from the looks of things, the two sides arenât even speaking the same language. Here's Judge James Gray speaking from experience about the advantages of regulating marijuana:And here's the best response the opposition could put together:Stay tuned, folks. There will be plenty more stupid crap where that came from, I assure you. But if those tired old clichés were worth anything anymore, legalization wouldnât be on the tip of every tongue in California and beyond. This conversation is an inherent victory for us, while our opposition's response is just another embarrassment for them.
Efforts to Stop Drugs at the Border Have Become a Joke
You know that border fence we've spent billions of dollars building? Yeah, it's not really helping so much:SAN MIGUEL, Ariz. â A pickup truck in Mexico pulls up to the 5-foot vehicle barriers that make up part of the multibillion-dollar border fence. A retractable ramp is extended from the truck, forming a bridge up and over the barriers.Then, a second pickup â this one loaded with a ton of marijuana â rolls over the bridge and into the U.S.With gadgetry such as custom-built ramps as well as ultralight planes, false doors and good old-fashioned duct tape, smugglers have demonstrated unbounded creativity when it comes to sneaking drugs across the Mexican border. And the U.S. government acknowledges there is only so much it can do to stop the flow. [AP]Unfortunately, our brave drug soldiers are convinced that expensive and futile interdiction efforts are better than nothing:"We have to keep it at a manageable level so society can continue to operate," said Elizabeth Kempshall, agent in charge of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration's office in Arizona.They're literally insisting that society will collapse if they don't keep doing this. It's awfully silly when you consider that almost all the drugs are already getting through anyway. If that stuff were going to destroy our society, it would have happened already.But don't bother trying to explain that to the drug warriors, because they're too busy thinking of new ways to waste money in an attempt to "win" something:"This is a war of technology, and I believe that the only way we are going to win it is if our technology is better than theirs," said Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard.The fact that our approach to substance abuse has evolved into a "war of technology" is just ridiculous. We'll never get anywhere with this nonsense no matter how many times we double down on our investment. It's plainly absurd to suggest that we can outspend our opponents when the game makes them obscenely rich while costing us billions.It's like arguing that the secret to winning with scratch-off tickets is to constantly buy more and more of them.
It's Not Just Marijuana. DEA is at War With Other Medicines Too.
The Washington Post has a disturbing piece that ought to broaden recent discussion of the conflict between the drug war and legitimate medical treatments. The DEA is taking legal medicines away from elderly people who need them:Heightened efforts by the Drug Enforcement Administration to crack down on narcotics abuse are producing a troubling side effect by denying some hospice and elderly patients needed pain medication, according to two Senate Democrats and a coalition of pharmacists and geriatric experts.â¦Terence McCormally, a doctor who cares for patients in nursing homes in Northern Virginia, said the tug of war reflects "the tension between the war on drugs and the war on pain.""For the doctor and the nurse, it's a nuisance," he said, "but for the patient it is needless suffering."Our efforts to control the lives of people who take drugs for fun have led us to destroy the lives of people who take drugs for serious medical conditions. The harsh reality here is that the best medicines often become popular with people they weren't intended for. That's going to happen no matter what you do. But if every effective pain reliever is overly restricted, then the medicine's primary purpose of relieving pain can never be achieved. The drug war has gone blind even to the most basic functions that drugs are supposed to serve in our society. As efforts to prevent diversion and recreational use continue their inevitable failure, we face a very real threat that desperate drug war bureaucrats will legislate many of our best medicines out of existence.
A Historic Hearing on Marijuana Legalization in Sacramento Today
Wednesday was a historic day at the California state capitol. For the first time since the state banned marijuana in 1913, marijuana legalization was the topic of a hearing in the state legislature. The hearing was organized by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco), head of the Assembly's Public Safety Committee, to discuss his marijuana legalization bill, AB 390. For three hours, proponents and opponents of reform clashed before an overflowing hearing room--the hearing was so popular capitol employees had to add a monitor in the hallway for those who couldn't get into the session. Both supporters and foes of legalization were well represented, and they mostly followed their predictable scripts. To this observer, law enforcement's dire warnings and objections sounded increasingly threadbare and shopworn and the arguments of legalizers especially compelling, but then, I agree with the legalizers. I think what is important about Wednesday's hearing is not so much what was said--we've heard it all before, on both sides--as where it was said and in what context. Just a few days ago, they were talking legalization at the statehouse in Boston; now, they're doing it at the statehouse in Sacramento. Nobody expects the California bill to pass this year, but the fact that legalization is finally getting a serious hearing is a sign of progress. I'll be reporting on the hearing and the preceding press conference in more detail later this week for the Drug War Chronicle. Check out the article on Friday.
A Marijuana Blog That's the Opposite of All the Others
A very unique new marijuana blog is just starting to get noticed on the web and I want to make sure everyone gets a chance to check it out in case it disappears (which I predict could take place soon, unfortunately). It's called Marijuana in the News and there is seriously nothing else like it anywhere on the web.What makes Marijuana in the News so special? The author bitterly detests marijuana. The whole thing is a rambling hatefest against reform, literally the precise opposite of what you'll find here. I predict it will become semi-popular, but only among marijuana reform activists who take sadistic pleasure in pissing themselves off. So go pay 'em a visit, enjoy yourself, and feel free to drop the author a friendly note in the comment section, cause it's looking pretty lonely in there. Be nice though, because reform is all about making the world a happier place where people hug and hold hands instead of arguing on the internet. Love thy neighbor, I say, even if thy neighbor wants to arrest people with AIDS.
Obama Isn't Plotting to Legalize Marijuana. But Everyone Else Is.
Whenever matters of marijuana policy make their way into the national spotlight, you can count on coming across some really ridiculous analysis from folks who havenât exactly been paying attention. There are many ways to misunderstand the marijuana debate, my favorite of which might be the theory that -- even though it's all over the news -- it's actually part of a secret conspiracy.Here, we have the editorial board of The Washington Post speculating that Obama's recent medical marijuana announcement could be part of a plan to legalize marijuana without anyone noticing: Yet this policy shift leaves significant questions unaddressed, including whether the Justice Department's decision essentially constitutes a first step toward legalizing marijuana. Such an immense policy decision should not be ushered in surreptitiously, but should be tackled head-on, with a full-throated public debate about the possible benefits and consequences.This is just completely delusional on multiple levels:1. The administration leaked the story to the AP on a Sunday night, which is the opposite of secretive. That's what you do when you want a week's worth of intensive media coverage.2. Telling the DEA not to arrest sick people is a far cry from supporting legalization for everyone. It's very possible â and very common â for people to support the former and not the latter. For exampleâ¦3. The Obama Administration is opposed to legalization. They've said so before and after last week's medical marijuana announcement. That question is not "unaddressed" even remotely.4. There's a "full-throated public debate" about marijuana legalization going on right now. And The Washington Post has been participating in it with numerous recent stories and editorials. You want us to send more op-eds? I can't even begin to fathom how The Post came up with this craziness, but if they want more debate, I'm ready to rock. I'll show up at your office tomorrow morning with 15 awesome ideas for marijuana stories that I guarantee you The New York Times hasnât thought of yet. And I ask for nothing in return, except some acknowledgement that marijuana legalization is not a secret conspiracy, but rather a defining issue at this moment in American politics.Update: Pete Guither has more.
Former Drug Czar Lies About His History of Attacking Medical Marijuana
Wow, just watch this video of former drug czar Barry McCaffrey denying that a federal war on medical marijuana ever took place:Literally every word that leaves McCaffrey's mouth throughout the segment is wildly and demonstrably false as illustrated here by Cato's Tim Lynch. Such staggering dishonesty from a former drug czar shouldnât surprise me, I know, but there's something about the intensity and specificity of McCaffery's claims that just chills the blood. I feel like he crossed a line here, in that even drug czars typically attempt to cloak their fabrications within some sort of contrived fact-like narrative. Really though, what we're seeing here is the emergence of an interesting and increasingly common phenomenon: the once proud drug war cheerleader who now has no recollection of any drug war ever taking place. The closer we get to finally banishing this colossal mess into the bowels of history where it belongs, the harder it will be to find anyone who admits having been involved in any of it. The federal war on medical marijuana was McCaffrey's legacy, so it's perfectly fitting that he would come unhinged after a week of listening to the whole country celebrate its collapse. As galling as his denials may feel to those who've born the brunt of this brutal crusade, we could instead interpret this bizarre behavior as a tacit acknowledgment that what he did was wrong. It's probably the best we're ever going to get.
It's Official: The Media is in Love With Marijuana Legalization
It all started last winter when, after decades of spoon-feeding the American public an infinite litany of anti-pot propaganda pieces, the press rather spontaneously discovered that it's better for business to talk about legalization instead. In an industry that was virtually devoid of voices for reform just a couple years ago, one can now scarcely find a prominent political pundit with anything nice to say about our marijuana laws.This segment from This Week with George Stephanopoulos might be the best example yet:Here, let's try to paraphrase that:George Will: Legalizing marijuana will destroy the drug cartels.John Podesta: It'll be legal once everyone figures out it can pay for health care.Laura Ingram: Cancer patients, botox, whatever. Gimme some brownies!Al Hunt: Now that my kids are all grown-up, I suppose I'm cool with it.Cynthia Tucker: Really, we need to rethink all our drug laws, not just marijuana. That's about as solid a bipartisan consensus as you'll ever see on a Sunday talk show, and you've gotta wonder how much longer the war on marijuana can survive in a political climate like this.
Our Side: San Diego ASA Protests State Narcs Lobby Awards
San Diego's ASA chapter protested outside the California Narcotics Officers Association awards ceremony this week. As well they should -- CNOA is a statewide drug police union that has a nasty habit of publishing some of the most warped propaganda about the drug war I've seen. Larger copies of the protest photos, and more of them, online here.
Heroin Maintenance Comes to Denmark
Heroin maintenance is coming to Denmark. And it's about time -- how about here too? The evidence is in, and it's only ideology that stands in the way of saving lives that now are being needlessly lost. In the meanwhile, watch the video from the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union and the Danish Street Lawyers about the new program:
Nice Article on Wisconsin's Medical Marijuana Bill and the Movement Supporting It
The Jacki Rickert Medical Marijuana Act, a bill named after a well-known Wisconsin medical marijuana patient and activist, was mentioned here last week. Check out another article about from two days ago in the Express Milwaukee newspaper, Medical Marijuana Advocates Won't Wait. Good article -- and good title, why should they have to wait?