Category Archives: Activists/Activism

The U.S. Marijuana Party stands with "Standing Rock"!!!


Standing Rock USMJP

GO TO THIS FACEBOOK PAGE AND SHOW YOUR SOLIDARITY FOR “STANDING ROCK”!

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Standing-Rock-Indian-Reservation/109268902425837

Tribe members make their way back to the camp on Saturday, October 29. The <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/07/us/dakota-access-pipeline-visual-guide/" target="_blank">Dakota Access Pipeline</a> is a $3.7 billion project that would cross four states and change the landscape of the US crude oil supply. Construction of the pipeline will "destroy our burial sites, prayer sites and culturally significant artifacts," the Standing Rock Sioux tribe said.

 

(CNN)Protesters are using a new weapon in their push to block the Dakota Access Pipeline: Facebook.

By Monday, hundreds of thousands of people had checked in at Standing Rock Indian Reservation on the social networking site.

    But many of them weren’t anywhere near the location where demonstrators have been picketing the controversial $3.7 billion pipeline.

     

    https://i1.wp.com/i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.e/interactive/html5-video-media/2016/10/27/pipeline_map_main.png

     

    CONTINUE READING….

    Advertisements

    A personal letter from Shona Banda (Please help Shona Banda!)


     

     

    https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfl1/v/t1.0-9/12809521_1144793475553189_3397047631895080291_n.jpg?oh=8d2f91f06249e7c9e3e5b1ce193884a2&oe=57796DF4

     

     

    Shona Banda’s ~ Live Free or Die·

    Tuesday, March 8, 2016

     

    I want to personally thank you from the bottom of my heart for your contribution that has helped so far in this struggle. The GoFundMe money was raised for legal fees and expenses surrounding the case, the money has been allocated and the site taken down. A new funding site will be made as further legal contributions are needed, and will be handled as the case continues. Legal funds do not account for living expenses. I prefer to work for the money I earn and have been able to get my book “Live Free or Die” ready for a reprinting with a projected date of the first week of April or sooner to be available worldwide.

    I believe in persistence, perseverance, and working hard to achieve goals.

    Many of you have seen what has happened in my life over the course of the last year, when police surrounded my home after my son spoke out in class. You have followed me in the past year as I have attended many court dates, struggled with pain and anguish, and watched me face this court system with my head held high.

    I have a certainty, a clarity in my fight against these unjust laws. I fight with no fear, I hold my head high, knowing I am in truth. Knowing that I have a basic right to life, a basic right to live! I have faced death head on, I have struggled and felt torturous pain inflicted upon me by the barbaric medical system our society clings to and calls normal. I know I can stand tall and proud in truth, knowing it was all foretold.

    Knowing that my journal, of finding how beneficial this cannabis plant was, and being able to share my personal thoughts, feelings, and experiences had to be written and published in 2010. I explain, in detail, my sickness, my life, my family, and how I teach my children; all surrounding the cannabis plant and how this plant made me feel as my body regenerated and healed.

    “Live Free or Die” is a book that has already helped so many worldwide take back their own lives, and folks have been inspired to share their own stories and testimonials to help spread this knowledge.

    Purchasing a signed copy of Live Free or Die helps me and my family in this very hard time, immediately, right now. I wrote this book to help others. I wrote this book to empower anyone who picked it up. I wrote this book to show everyone that LIFE truly matters. History is being made. Now. Own a piece of it, personally signed.

    Purchase your pre-ordered signed copy of “Live Free or Die” here paypal.me/ShonaBanda

    Hardcover $45

    Paperback $35

    Donations of gratuity are also accepted.

    Thank you all for your continued support in this fight.

    Shona Banda ,,

    You can contribute today at https://www.gofundme.com/shonabanda

    www.shonabanda.org

    Email: LFODproject@Gmail.com

    ����R+�!g

     

    MORE INFORMATION

     

     

    FACEBOOK PAGE “LIVE FREE OR DIE”

     

    PLEASE DONATE TO THE GOFUNDME.COM ACCOUNT for Shona Banda’s personal expenses

     

     

     

    SOURCE LINK

    Marijuana Activist, Shona Banda, Who Lost Custody Of Son Says She’s Suing So It Doesn’t Happen To Others


    Shona Banda, shown here after she was booked into jail and then released after posting bond in June, has sued state and Garden City officials, claiming she has a constitutional right to use cannabis to treat her Crohn’s disease. Credit James Dobson / Garden City Telegram

     

    By Dan Margolies

    The Garden City, Kansas, mother who lost custody of her 11-year-old son over her use of cannabis oil says she wants to hold state officials accountable “so this doesn’t happen to people any longer.”

    Shona Banda, who sued state agencies and officials late last week, is representing herself in the action, which asks the court to restore custody of her son, declare that she has a “fundamental right” to use cannabis oil to treat her Crohn’s disease and award unspecified damages.

    “We need to restore actual liberties in this country,” Banda said in a telephone interview with Heartland Health Monitor. “The powers that be have gained way too much control when they think that they can do these kinds of things even with your children.”

    Banda posted a draft of her lawsuit online as long ago as September but later said its filing had been delayed by the inability of her attorneys, one in Lawrence, Kansas, and the other in California, to agree on a mutual schedule.

    In the lawsuit filed last week, however, she is acting on her own behalf. Asked what had become of her attorneys, Banda said the California attorney had a medical emergency “and we were coming on the statute of limitations to file the case. So I had to do what I had to do in order to make this happen.”

    The suit was filed a year to the day after Garden City police raided her home and seized marijuana, cannabis oil and drug-related equipment after her 11-year-old son spoke up about her use of cannabis at a school anti-drug presentation.

    The Kansas Department for Children and Families subsequently took custody of her son, saying the home environment was not safe for him, and the Finney County district attorney filed drug-related criminal charges against her. The charges carry a maximum punishment of 30 years in prison.

    Banda said she would represent herself in court until she could find “adequate representation.”

    Her 20-page lawsuit, filed in federal court, names as defendants the state of Kansas; the Kansas Department for Children and Families; DCF Secretary Phyllis Gilmore; Gov. Sam Brownback; the Garden City Police Department and its police chief, James R. Hawkins; the Garden City School District; and Tyler Stubenhoffer, an employee of the school district.

    The suit alleges that the defendants violated Banda’s constitutional rights under the 9th and 14th amendments and cites an “emerging awareness” of the medical benefits of marijuana and its increasing societal acceptance. However, legal experts say there’s little case law supporting a constitutional right to medical marijuana.

    Under Kansas law, possession of any amount of marijuana is punishable by up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine. A second conviction is punishable by up to 3 ½ years in prison and a $100,000 fine.

    Theresa Freed, a spokeswoman for the Department for Children and Families, could not be reached for comment on Monday. But asked in September about Banda’s then-threatened lawsuit, she said that the department’s mission is to “protect children, promote healthy families and encourage personal responsibility.”

    “Our social workers are trained to assess the safety of a home and make an appropriate recommendation to the court,” Freed said. “Marijuana is an illegal substance in the state of Kansas. It can have both direct and indirect detrimental consequences on families.”

    Banda said her son is in the custody of his father and she has visitation rights. She said, however, that she and the father are getting divorced “and I’m fighting for sole custody of my son.”

    Banda has another son, 19, who lives with her and whom she says “is working and trying to do what he can to be an adult.”

    She acknowledged that the legal odyssey she’s endured over the last year has been “very difficult” but said her younger son was “doing OK.”

    “But it’s been very difficult on our family as a whole, I will say that,” she said.

    Banda has been a highly visible advocate of medical marijuana and self-published a book about her use of cannabis oil to treat her Crohn’s, an inflammatory bowel disease that can cause severe abdominal pain and other symptoms.

    Her lawsuit says she has undergone 17 surgeries over eight years. It says that the cannabis oil she uses to treat her condition had “significantly relieved” debilitating symptoms that had prevented her from working and confined her to her home.

    Dan Margolies, editor of the Heartland Health Monitor team, is based at KCUR. You can reach him on Twitter @DanMargolies.

    CONTINUE READING….

     

    ADDITIONALLY,

    A personal letter from Shona Banda

    ADVOCACY ALERT! (Colorado) WE’RE CHANGING THE CHILD WELFARE CODE!


    Teri Robnett

    21 hrs ·

    ADVOCACY ALERT! WE’RE CHANGING THE CHILD WELFARE CODE!

    I’m excited to announce the introduction of HB16-1385. This bill, sponsored by Rep. Jonathan Singer and Sen. Linda Newell, updates and modernizes the language of the definition of “abuse” or “child abuse or neglect” in the “Colorado Children’s Code” to reflect the ways a child’s welfare can be threatened or harmed by adults through the use of or exposure to substances. It allows for prescription or recommendation of substances for medical purposes during pregnancy under the care and monitoring of a healthcare provider who is aware of the pregnancy. It is meant to give clear guidance as to appropriate child welfare intervention in families when substance use, possession, cultivation, manufacturing, or distribution is a factor. This does not change the criminal code.

    This is the most important and challenging piece of legislation I’ve worked on. In 2013 and 2014, we fought legislation that would have changed the Children’s Code, but in a way we were concerned could be poorly interpreted and put cannabis-consuming parents in further jeopardy. Many might remember the dramatic rally and hearing on April 9, 2014, when we defeated that bill.

    After 2 years of working together, starting with an educational campaign on keeping kids safe from substances called Smart Choices Safe Kids, we’ve finally managed to come to a place that both sides can support. http://smartchoicessafekids.org/

    We won’t be without opposition, however, so it’s important that we come ready with facts and show strong support.

    This bill will have its first hearing by the House Public Health Care and Human Services Committee on Tuesday, April 5, at 1:30pm in House Committee Room 0107. Mark your calendar and plan to be there to show your support!

    http://www.leg.state.co.us/…/8CBD4ED6CD3F82C587257F2400659B…

    http://statebillinfo.com/bills/bills/16/1385_01.pdf

    Court official hears allegations against marijuana activist


    Bill Downing (right) appeared in court in Brighton with his attorneys Steven S. Epstein, left, and John G. Swomley.

    Downing says he’s being singled out over cannabis-oil sale

    By Milton J. Valencia Globe Staff  January 19, 2016

    One of the state’s leading proponents for the legalization of marijuana — who now faces possible criminal drug distribution charges for selling a cannabis-based oil — told a clerk magistrate Tuesday that he believed he was selling a legal product known as CBD, recognized across the country for its medical benefits.

    “I [believed it] then, and I still do now,” a defiant Bill Downing said under questioning during a hearing at Boston Municipal Court in Brighton.

    Boston police have sought to charge Downing, 57, with nine counts of distribution of a Class D drug, marijuana, or a Class C drug, THC, out of a store he operated in Allston, called CBD Please. Downing sold a liquid form of CBD by the gram to undercover Boston police officers on several occasions in late 2014 and early 2015.

    When Downing testified, he cited the manufacturer’s guide for the product he was selling, which reads, “100 percent legal in all 50 states.” His lawyers argued that police singled Downing out, even though other companies in Massachusetts have sold the same product.

    State chemists who tested the CBD sold by Downing to the undercover officers found traces of THC, the psychoactive element in marijuana, but chemists differed on whether to classify the product as a Class C or a Class D drug.

    View Story

    Police seek charges against marijuana legalization advocate

    Bill Downing’s lawyer says it’s retaliation for criticism of the state’s regulation of the medical marijuana industry.

    Clerk Magistrate Stephen Borelli will now decide whether police had probable cause to charge Downing, and whether the case should proceed in court.

    During a hearing Tuesday, Lawyers for Downing said Boston police targeted their client for his loud criticism of the state’s medical marijuana industry. Downing formerly operated the Reading-based Yankee Care Givers to provide cannabis products to medical marijuana patients, but state officials shut that business down, saying he could not provide the products to more than one patient under medical marijuana laws approved in 2012.

    Downing, a member of the board of directors for the Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition, has also helped organize the annual marijuana rally on the Boston Common, and he is the treasurer for Bay State Repeal, one of the groups that pushed to put a marijuana legalization measure on the 2016 ballot.

    In December 2014, Downing opened CDB Please to sell non-psychoactive cannabis-based products for medical use. He said in press releases and in published news reports at the time that he wanted to provide as much support for medical marijuana use that is allowed under state law.

    Kenneth Conley, a Boston police detective, testified during the hearing Tuesday that his superiors wanted him to investigate Downing after reading about the business in the Boston Globe in December 2014.

    Conley said he went to the store in an undercover role, and inquired about CDB oil.

    “I told him I wasn’t feeling well, lower back pain,” Conley said. “I told him I was having trouble sleeping and I didn’t like smoking marijuana, and he told me the best thing for me was the oil.”

    Conley said he paid $40 for the gram of oil. On other occasions, undercover police officers paid $30, or $25.

    Conley said a state chemist detected THC when testing the oil. Authorities later seized hundreds of grams of oil and other products, such as hemp shampoo and conditioner, during a raid of Downing’s business and home.

    Lawyers for Downing argued that the THC levels in the products are so minimal that the products are exempt from the state law that criminalizes products containing more than 2½ percent THC. One of the lawyers, John Swomley, noted that the chemists had to test nearly the entire gram of liquid oil each time to detect any THC.

    Another lawyer, Stephen Epstein, said the CDB Downing sold came from Colorado, and it would not be classified as a controlled substance under US law.

    “It’s speculation . . . to believe there was any useable amount of [THC] in anything that tested positive for THC,” he said. Downing “was undertaking a lawful business. What he was doing was perfectly legal, and no crime was committed.”

    Borelli invited the lawyers to submit further legal arguments in writing, and said he could issue a decision next week.

    Milton J. Valencia can be reached at mvalencia@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @miltonvalencia.

    CONTINUE READING…

    "I don’t want to fucking give this United States government one fucking dollar of taxes…" — Jack Herer, "The Emperor of Hemp", September 12th, 2009


    Rev. Mary Spears explains the legalization vs. repeal initiatives and why REPEAL is the only way to proceed.

     

    "I don’t want to fucking give this United States
    government one fucking dollar of taxes…"
    Jack Herer, "The Emperor of Hemp", September 12th, 2009
    (Portland Hempstalk Festival–his final speech.)
    http://overgrow.ning.com/profiles/blogs/the-fallacy-of-the-legalize-and-tax-cannabis-initiatives

     

    By ElectroPig Von Fökkengrüüven in Overgrow The World v2.0

    The Fallacy of the "Legalize and Tax Cannabis" initiatives.

    Overgrow The World

    April 21, 2010

    I have listened and understood the words of the late Jack Herer, and I am amazed how few people who say they believe in what Jack was saying truly understand the real reasons why he so horrified at the idea of creating new cannabis taxes. Let me explain quickly: THEY ARE NOT NEEDED AT ALL! As a matter of fact, nothing could be further from the truth!

    Now I’m sure that many of you don’t believe me. If that is the case, then you also didn’t understand what Jack meant, or perhaps you simply weren’t paying attention, choosing to hear what you agreed with and ignoring what you didn’t understand, or simply weren’t interested in.

    The first "ignored fact" is that the vast majority of the "illicit market" for cannabis is underground, hence, completely untaxed. There is a small fallacy to this statement, however, as even those "underground economies" still purchase their supplies, tools and equipment from "legitimate businesses" and those businesses all pay taxes of one form or another. Cannabis growers order pizza, buy gas, hire electricians and plumbers, et cetera. In this admittedly roundabout way, cannabis already is taxed, albeit to a very small degreee in comparison to the total size of the market as it stands, and to the potential which is known to exist.

    Let’s say that cannabis/hemp were re-legalized prohibition was repealed today, and it was done so without the creation of any new tax codes specifically for cannabis. Most think that this would be a bad thing, as it wouldn’t be "exploiting the market" without creating new tax codes, new agencies, new enforcement regimes. Unfortunately, the people who believe that have been lied to, and it’s time that they learned the truth.

    In actual fact, if cannabis were re-legalized prohibition was repealed today and taxes weren’t considered in the equation in any way, it would still be beneficial to society in terms of savings alone. We’d save money on policing, of which estimates range that between 40-60% of all police costs are directly due to "drug prohibition." Logic follows that with police not bogged down with grandmothers taking a puff to slow their glaucoma, they would then be able to concentrate their resources on combating real crimes. Things like rape, murder, fraud, home invasion and theft, assault and battery, arson, financial crimes, environmental crimes (of which cannabis/hemp prohibition is one of the leading causes, in fact), and many more REAL crimes with REAL victims.

    Taken a step further, lawyers would then be freed up to work on real crimes as well. So would prosecutors. So would judges, court stenographers, prison staff and more. WIthout locking away non-violent "criminals" who have harmed noone else–and this is the scary part for corporations–the "warehousing of otherwise productive humans for profit" would suddenly become far less profitable for the prison-industrial complex to continue, and prohibitionary statute development might begin to fade. With less "legal reasons" to imprison people for essentially minding their own business, more people would not have the lives and futures destroyed.

    So let’s say that there were no new taxes created upon re-legalization of cannabis/hemp, and we ONLY consider the tens or hundreds of billions SAVED by no longer wasting time attacking people in their homes for posession or for growing a few plants for their own consumption. Are not those billions of dollars saved a tremendous enough benefit to justify the immediate repeal of cannabis/hemp prohibition? Could saving those billions of dollars not be immediately transferred into lower taxes, or public debt reduction? Would those savings alone not be of tremendous, immediate and long-term social value?

    Now let’s consider the tax idea on it’s own merit.

    With re-legalization repeal of cannabis/hemp prohibition, there would immediately follow the creation of new businesses to exploit what is widely known to be a global market for cannaibs and hemp products. Each of those businesses would be subject to business income taxes that currently do not exist. WIthout a single character added to business tax statutes, the net result would be the establishment of "new revenue" from those "new businesses."

    Of course, those businesses would need people to man storefronts, deliver products, develop products, design packaging, grow the raw materials, process the raw materials, et cetera. These jobs would all be legitimate jobs in the real job market. Each of those jobs would be subject to existing income tax statutes. It’s not hard to see how those "new jobs" would in turn be utilized as "new tax revenue sources" which previously did not exist. Again, without a single line of new codes written, a brand new revenue stream has been obtained.

    Each of those new employees and businesses would need supplies, equipment, computers, energy sources, and services. All of those businesses and individuals would then use their incomes to purchase those items or services they needed, either to operate or enhance their businesses, or simply to make their lives at home a little better. All of those products would be purchased at existing retailers and/or wholesalers that exist in the current "legitimate marketplace." All (or the vast majority) of those purchases would be subject to sales taxes at state/provincial and federal levels. Again, not a single comma added to the existing statutes required, but "new revenue" has effectively been attained.

    Now let’s take the cannabis market ITSELF.

    All of those newly created and legitimate businesses would provide products that people either wanted or needed, be they for medical purposes or for recreational uses. All of those products would then be subject to state/provincial and federal sales taxes. With each sale would then come "new revenues" which do not exist today. Again–are you starting to notice a pattern yet?–without the addition of a single line of code to any existing tax codes.

    The Fallacy of "New Government Regulatory Jobs"

    People keep being told that "new jobs" will be created in the "new regulatory framework" that "will be needed", but they haven’t thought this through. Some have partly thought it through, thinking that since a percentage of those worker’s incomes will be clawed back by income taxes–say 25%–that means that those jobs are "cheaper" than "real jobs". That’s actually not quite right.

    When you look the "real economy", or in other words, the economy from which all government income is derived via the millions of tax codes which exist to take our incomes from us all, any position in this "real economy" is one which is subject to taxation, and therefore, is generally to be considered a contributing position.

    On the other hand, when you look at "government jobs" which are wholly funded by "real people" with "real jobs" in the "real economy", every government position which exists–no matter what country or what level of government–is a drain on society, and must be so, as "we hired them to work for us."

    Now let’s take a simple example that we’ve all heard a million times: "Joe The Plumber."

    If Joe was working in his own shop, or for someone else in their business, he would be a contributing factor in the "real economy" in the amount of taxation on his income, we’ll use 25% for illustration purposes. This means that 25% of his income is diverted to "public employees and projects" needed for society to function as it currently exists.

    Now let’s take Joe’s situation if he were a government employee…let’s say he’s employed by the local Public Utilities Comission. Now Joe’s income is wholly funded by tax dollars, and thus, is a drain on society. We’ve established an income tax rate of 25%, so we can now say that Joe is "cheaper" because now his services now only costs us 75% of what they would, had he remained in his private sector job.

    Here is the "minor error" in that logic: Joe has moved from the "real economy" to the "government economy". In making that move, the "real economy" has lost 100% of a "real job", while the government has gained an employee "at a discount of only 75% of their private sector wages." When you add that up, you see quite clearly that Joe’s "new job" is effectively now a 175% loss to society as a whole.

    Joe’s still making the same amount of money. We’re still paying him the same amount of money when he does his work…but now he is NOT contributing to the "real economy" at all, while he is draining 75% of his wages from unnaportioned taxation of the people who are forced to pay his salary, whether they partake of his services or not.

    Unfortunately, this also applies to every "equivalent government position" that exists in the world. Accountants cost 175% of what they would cost in the "real economy." So do welders, secretaries, cafeteria cooks, lawyers…ALL of them! If they work for the government, they are at a much higher cost than their equivalent "real world" positions in the real economy.

    We need to keep this in mind whenever we hear talk of " new regulations" because that almost always means "new regulatory bodies", and that DEFINITELY always means "new government employees" which are going to cost us dearly if we allow such things to occur.

    If we are forced to accept some form of taxation in order to move closer to the full repeal of cannabis/hemp prohibition, so be it…let’s move a little closer…but the second we have a positive change under our belts, we must NOT become complacent! We must continue to fight for the full repeal of cannabis/hemp prohibition until the batttle is decisively won.

    Once we have some "half-assed reasonable legislation" in place, we can guage what are the worst parts of those enacted bills and target them one by one until they’re all gone, and then, we will have our ofn freedom, and freedom for what is arguably the most important plant known on this planet.

    At the Hempstalk Festival, during Jack Herer’s final public speech, he said (among other things):

    "I don’t want to fucking give this United States government one fucking dollar of taxes…"

    Obviously, he understood my thinking…or perhaps, I simply learned enough to come to an understanding of his.

    What about you?

    EDIT:  I have since come up with the complete solution to the perils of prohibition in THREE WORDS:

    1) DESCHEDULE.
    2) REPEAL.
    3) DONE!!!

    If you remember only three words in your lifetime, THOSE are the ones that WILL end cannabis/hemp prohibition.

    If we continue to be led by propagandists and prohibitionists into accepting ever-longer-names for prohibition, while believing we are "moving closer to freedom", we’ll never get there…it’ll just keep getting more complex, more costly, and more damaging to society as a whole…as it has for decades already.

    If we allow our politicians to "reschedule" cannabis, this COULD mean an outright statutory BAN on ALL cannabis use, medicinal or otherwise, for the length of time it would take "to conduct safety studies."  We already know that if they keep finding proof cannabis is non-toxic, anti-oxidant, neuroprotectant, et cetera, we also already know that these "safety studies" will be completed in an absolute minimum of 4-6 years, to an absolute maximum of…NEVER!

    "Decriminalization" is NOT repeal.  It’s still illegal.

    "Legalization" simply tells the politicians and courts that we believe the fix to bad legislation conveived of in fraud can only be fixed not by deleting it from the recored entirely, but by making it more complex…but keeping it all on the books for future "quick-n-easy" readoption when prison investors want higher revenues to do their profit-taking from.

    "Re-legalization" is just two letters prepended to the above.

    "Tax and regulate" tells OUR EMPLOYEES that "we owe them new taxes for not wasting our money attacking us."  If we keep buying into the scam, they’ll get it, too!

    "Regulate like [insert commodity of the hour here]" is just another way to justify the creation of a new regulatory body, hire new "government employees", raise taxes, lower rights and freedoms, all while telling the wilfully ignorant population that "they are free."  They ain’t.  They won’t be.

    "REPEAL" means:  The statutes are GONE.  Deleted.  History.  Erased.  Terminated.  Removed from the "law" journals.  NEVER TO RETURN.

    The ridiculous proposition that "if we want it legal again, we have to create new taxes" is also a prime example of idiotic propaganda foisted upon a wilfully ignorant population.  Only two seconds of thought tells you the truth of the situation…we do NOT need to "appease our employees" when we finally force them to stop wasting our money.  Not wasting all those billions of dollars every year should be, and IS, reward enough to everyone all on it’s own!

    When we find out we’ve got a crooked mechanic who’s bee charging us for spark plug changes on every visit that we didn’t really need, and were nothing more than a waste of OUR money…we don’t praise them and give them permanent bonuses, do we?  So where did the idea come from, that in order for our employees to simply do their job with a litle more brainpower behind their actions, that we need to give them more money and hire more people?  Reality has to sink in eventually, folks!  Even through the infinitely thick skulls of "politicians."  They might be as dense as the core of a neutron star, but they still have ear holes!  SO START SPEAKING UP!!!

    Either we DEMAND the full repeal of prohibition, or we will continue on with it forever, just with a different name, and higher taxes…and let’s face it, folks:  OUR EMPLOYEES will be completely happy to rename what they’re doing to us and call it whatever we want to call it, if we’re dumb enough to allow it to continue.  Are we really so blind as to STILL not see the truth for what it is?

    Want it over?  MAKE it over!

    1) DESCHEDULE.
    2) REPEAL.
    3) DONE!!!

    It really is just as simple as that.

    * That solves prohibition on a national level…we still need to remove cannabis/hemp from the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs in order to end prohibition GLOBALLY.

    Views: 3521

    Tags: Herer, Jack, PROHIBITION, REPEAL, Rick, Simpson, cannabis, freedom, health, human, More…

     

    By ElectroPig Von Fökkengrüüven in Overgrow The World v2.0

    The Fallacy of the "Legalize and Tax Cannabis" initiatives.

    Overgrow The World

    April 21, 2010

     

    Jack Herer’s last speech at Portland Hempstalk Festival 2009–HIS FINAL SPEECH BEFORE HE DIED…MAY HE NEVER BE FORGOTTEN!

     

    MY PERSONAL COMMENT:  SOMETIMES (MOST OFTEN) OLD NEWS IS THE BEST NEWS – SMK.

    Pissing our life away…


     

    ohhhh-so-beautiful

     

     

    As Gatewood Galbraith once said, "Our Father’s and Grandfather’s did not go to the beaches of Normandy so that their children could piss in a cup to get a job"…

    Corporate "Drug Testing" aided by Pharmaceutical Companies who develop and produce these tests have taken our very right to be able to work away.  So long as they are allowed to do this our country will never be truly free and we will have not won ANY war.

    The drug testing laws have forced us to be liar’s, cheater’s and last but most important – unemployed. 

    There is virtually no "blue collar" job for which there is not drug testing.

    Everyone already knows how unfair it is to the casual marijuana smoker as the cannabinoids remain in your body for an extended length of time – which in and of itself is a GOOD thing, but Corporate Fascist have condemed us to be "worthless", for corporate use…

    Some smaller businesses may be ignorant of the fact that the "1988 Drug Free Workplace Act (DFWA)" DOES NOT require the majority of these businesses conduct drug testing.  Other’s are part of the corporate majority who will adhere to drug testing to try to lower their insurance premiums and "slap the hands" of anyone who would like to use marijuana either for personal or medical reasons.  They do this in order to continue the "Elkhorn Manifesto" regime to keep cannabis out of the hands of those who would attempt to put an end to the oil based society which we now "enjoy".

    It’s all about where the profit is and how far they are willing to go to keep it.

    The slaves were never set free.  Everyone just became "equal" in color and was run off of their farms and into the Industrial Revolution.
    The slaves are us.  All of us.

    Until we can get the drug testing laws eradicated we will continue on as slaves long after the "law" has been changed regarding the use of marijuana/cannabis.

    It may not be in the government’s best interest to keep paying for incarceration for use, but it IS in corporate America’s best interest to keep the cannabis off the shelf.  

    Thats life in America…let the "private sector" handle it…

     

    Drug-Free Workplaces do NOT have to test for marijuana (Updated)  – November 21, 2012  by Russ Belville

     

    Why Employers Drug Test

     

    Obama Administration Pushes Drug Testing in Workplace, But Not For Everybody

     

    WASHINGTON — The government wants businesses to drug test their workers to boost productivity and reduce health care costs, according to the 2012 National Drug Control Report released Tuesday.

     

    @ShereeKrider 7.1.13

    Talking Marijuana with Dr. Jeffrey Miron


    June 17, 2013 by Brett Wilkins in Civil Liberties, Crime & Punishment, Drugs, Featured, The Best of Moral Low Ground, U.S. Government

     

    Moral Low Ground editor-in-chief Brett Wilkins recently interviewed Dr. Jeffrey Miron about marijuana prohibition, medical marijuana and the market implications of legalization. This article was originally published in the Medical Marijuana Review.

    (Photo: Dr. Jeffrey Miron)

    (Photo: Dr. Jeffrey Miron)

    Why is a Harvard University economics professor proclaiming “marijuana should be legalized for just about everything”? Does he see prices for medical marijuana sliding down due to increased competition from private companies? We decided to find out by interviewing Dr. Jeffrey Miron, senior lecturer and the Director of Undergraduate Studies in Economics at Harvard University, as well as a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute, the nation’s leading libertarian think-tank.

    As an unabashed and outspoken champion of individual liberty, Dr. Miron has stirred the pot by publicly advocating for the legalization of all drugs, a move he says would save tens of billions of dollars annually for federal, state and local governments. We recently spoke with Dr. Miron about the future of medical marijuana, the economics of newly minted canna-businesses and the Obama’s administration approach to the war on drugs.

    MediRevew: You have written that “just as the harms of alcohol prohibition were worse than the harms of alcohol itself, the adverse effects of marijuana prohibition are worse than the unwanted consequences of marijuana use,” and that legalization is the better policy. What’s the biggest obstacle to legalization?

    Miron: I think the big obstacle to legalization is the entrenched interests of people whose job it is to continue prohibiting marijuana, whether that’s local vice squads, federal agencies like the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Drug Czar’s office or the White House. And there are some entrenched interests that people don’t always think about.

    One example is the treatment sector. A lot of people are coerced into getting drug abuse treatment because they’re, say, caught in a routine traffic stop with marijuana in their car, and they’re able to get that arrest to go away if they go through some court-ordered treatment. But they’re not people who need drug abuse treatment, so there’s a lot of extra demand created for the treatment sector. So this sector also has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.”

    MediReview: Given President Obama’s campaign promise of a hands-off approach to medical marijuana and the Justice Department’s Ogden Memo (directing federal resources only against medical marijuana providers who violate state law), what do you make of the Obama administration’s crackdown on medical marijuana?

    Miron: I think that the administration, first of all, focuses on the electoral consequences. I don’t think they’ve seen it so far as in their interest to be soft on medical marijuana, or on any drugs. It seemed that way at the beginning, but that changed rather quickly. [The administration] knows that it would give the Republicans an issue if it came down strongly in favor of medical marijuana, or supported the recreational legalizations in Colorado and Washington. And so I think they just don’t want to go there. They want to let public opinion shift so much on its own. They’re sort of going along with public opinion, not trying to make public opinion.

    MediReview: Public opinion is generally very much in favor of medical marijuana, and according to polls, a majority of Americans now even support recreational legalization. Do you feel that full legalization is inevitable?

    Miron: Well, I hope that’s right, but I’m not positive that’s right. Pendulums can swing one way, and then sometimes the other way. There are certainly examples where public opinion has gone in one direction and then the other on lots of public policy issues, including drugs. So I don’t think we should assume it’s inevitable.

    I think it’s plausible that marijuana will continue to move in the direction of medicalization and legalization. But if you’re sitting in Washington and you have the White House drug czar’s office right down the hall from you, and you have the DEA right there, and you have some Congressmen who are still screaming for prohibition, I think it’s pretty hard. And the federal government can interfere quite a bit with the decisions by states to try to medicalize and legalize.

    The other reason why I don’t think we should assume [legalization] is inevitable is that very few major party politicians, on both sides of the aisle, are totally comfortable with the idea of letting states do what they want. The existing major parties don’t want to let states deviate from federal policy. Any federal politician who endorses letting states deviate is in trouble.

    MediReview: If legalization does occur, do you foresee Big Pharma cornering the market on medical marijuana in the same way Big Agriculture dominates farming?

    Miron: I’m not sure I would use the word ‘cornered.’ I think that in a fully legal market, we would likely see a substantial share of [marijuana] that was produced and sold by a relatively small number of companies, as we do with cars or beer or tobacco. But as long as the regulation of that industry is moderate at most, there will still be ample room for smaller firms to succeed. We see competition in the beer industry from overseas. We see lots of microbreweries.

    [But] if you have a lot of regulation, then you’re going to limit the ability of the small producer to survive in the marketplace. An excellent example of that is the tobacco industry. It’s so costly, and there are all sorts of lawsuits and so many restrictions on advertising that it’s very hard for any newcomer to get into the tobacco industry in a profitable way, and so the big companies do rule that industry. But I don’t think we should be that concerned if a lot of the medical marijuana market is taken over by a relatively small number of companies… That’s just the way markets seem to work. And as long as there’s not too much regulation there will still be plenty of competition.

    MediReview: Is this good for consumers? Do you see market forces and increased competition driving prices down?

    Miron: I personally don’t think that prices are going to change dramatically. I wouldn’t be shocked if they went down by noticeable amounts, maybe 25 percent, perhaps even 50 percent, but I suspect that they won’t go down much at all. There are two reasons why.

    One, I don’t think that current marijuana prohibition in the US is actually all that strong. I think that the amount of money that’s being spent trying to raise the price of marijuana relative to the size of the market is pretty miniscule. Therefore, they’re not having much effect in raising the cost.

    Second, if you look at data and compare [marijuana] prices in the US to places where it’s almost entirely legal… they’re not that different. If you look at places like California where it’s very close to being legalized, prices aren’t that different from other places in the country. So I think that prices may go down, but they’re not going to go down a ton.

    MediReview: Three years ago, you said that we can’t be sure if marijuana is effective medicine because DEA rules make it virtually impossible to carry out proper scientific trials. Consistent with its Schedule I classification, the federal government continues to emphatically insist marijuana has no accepted medical use. Do you think this is an accurate assessment?

    Miron: The federal government continues to insist that smoked marijuana has no non-medical benefits, and in particular has no superior benefits compared to synthetic products or derivative products made from marijuana, such as Marinol… There certainly are legitimate studies and accepted evidence that some products like Marinol may be effective.

    MediReview: You once said that the anecdotal evidence of medical marijuana’s effectiveness was “stunning.” Can you give examples?

    Miron: Qualitatively, there are people who were resistant to the idea of using medical marijuana, but they were suffering from a serious condition… for which marijuana was widely thought to be useful and efficacious. And finally they were convinced by relatives or friends to try it and they did and then saw dramatic improvement.

    But unfortunately, those people then became nervous that somehow it was still wrong to use marijuana or they were worried that they were putting their grandchildren in jeopardy by having them score marijuana for them at their local high school, and so they stopped, and when they did, their symptoms got worse again. So is that a perfectly controlled experiment? No. But is it a quasi-controlled experiment? Is that a little bit like an experiment? Yes, because you have a before, during and after. So that’s what I mean by anecdotal evidence, and it’s very suggestive.

    MediReview: You also once said that the medical marijuana approach to legalization seems “sneaky.” What did you mean by that?

    Miron: I do think has a real problem in that the way it’s implemented in many states looks like it’s just backdoor legalization. Many doctors seem to write [recommendations] without much compunction… and so that gives critics some basis in fact to say, “This is not just about helping sick people, this is about recreational use, and medicalization is helping to allow recreational use.”

    Now, I have no objection to recreational use. I think [marijuana] should be legal for absolutely everything… And medicalization certainly has some benefits, because it means more people are able to purchase marijuana without the risk of going to jail, but it also has its unfortunate side effects of looking hypocritical, of looking like not telling the truth.

    If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

    Tagged Cato Institute, harvard university, Jeffrey Miron, Jeffrey Miron drugs, marijuana, marijuana legalization, Marinol, medical marijuana, obama marijuana, public opinion marijuana

    CONTINUE READING…

    The Marijuana Community Is Very Happy To See ‘Operation Cannabis’


    The Marijuana Community Is Very Happy To See ‘Operation Cannabis’

     

    On April 8th Ninjasmoker and I were sitting at my pad smoking and blogging like usual. Ninjasmoker was on Twitter and saw that the great Steve Elliot had posted a new article about ‘OpCannabis’. We both went to Toke of the Town to check it out. It was funny, because we both finished reading the article at the same time and looked up at each other like we had seen a ghost. Team Vendetta, which is made up of members of the hardworking group Anonymous, announced the launch of phase one of ‘OpCannabis’ or ‘Operation Cannabis’ (I have heard it referred to as both, I apologize in advance if that’s not correct). The event is also in conjunction with Occupy.

    Ninjasmoker and I were both delighted to see such an announcement, because we have always been fans of Anonymous. The only people that need to fear Anonymous are those that have something to hide. I don’t have anything to hide except where I keep my stash, so I have always supported their work! And if they really wanted to know where my stash was, I would probably tell them because again, I’m a huge fan.

    I wanted to write this article to express to Team Vendetta that the ENTIRE marijuana community is behind what you are doing, and we are all very eager to help. Since the announcement on April 8th on Toke of the Town, and the follow up announcement that I posted April 10th, everyone I talk to from the mj community asks about Anonymous and points out how significant their operation is. If anyone doesn’t believe me, note that the Toke article had over 9k Facebook shares, and countless others on other sites.

    We will wait to hear from you guys again, and know that The Weed Blog will always post press releases about Team Vendetta’s OpCannabis pursuits. Below is the latest info that I received, which is a radio interview from Blog Talk Radio with Team Vendetta talking about Operation Cannabis.  Follow Operation Cannabis:

    Twitter: @AnonOpCannabis

    #Occupy420
    #April20
    #OpCannabis
    #TeamVendetta
    Facebook

    ORIGINAL LINK TO STORY