MSNBC's Rachel Maddow gave a nod to the smashing success of marijuana reform initiatives in Tuesday’s election, observing on her show tonight that "smoking weed is getting more respect from our citizens." As images of shiny nugs sprawled across the screen, Maddow acknowledged the passage of 9 out of 10 marijuana reform initiatives this year.
So while I didn’t particularly care for her delivery, this is really the exact impression we need to make on the mainstream media. The antiquated notion that marijuana reform is politically suicidal cannot possibly be permanently sustained amidst the constant accumulation of evidence to the contrary.
Reading me blog about the evolution of drug war politics is one thing, hearing Rachel Maddow snark about it on MSNBC is quite another. Our mission remains the same, but the landscape is changing all the time.
So while I didn’t particularly care for her delivery, this is really the exact impression we need to make on the mainstream media. The antiquated notion that marijuana reform is politically suicidal cannot possibly be permanently sustained amidst the constant accumulation of evidence to the contrary.
Reading me blog about the evolution of drug war politics is one thing, hearing Rachel Maddow snark about it on MSNBC is quite another. Our mission remains the same, but the landscape is changing all the time.
Looking for the easiest way to join the anti-drug war movement? You've found it!
Not good enough!
As long as people think marijuana regulation is about "smoking marijuana getting more respect" and making it norml, we will continue to lose with most of the country.
But marijuana is not "regulated"...
It's controlled,by the ONDCP/DEA.The FDA is about regulation. One drug outfit is enough.Normalize your government.Get the "control" out of the picture.What you choose to put in your body, is a rights issue.Not a privilege thing.
Get the federal law enforcement out of the picture
Marijuana regulation should be primarily be in the jurisdiction of the state and local governments, not the federal govt, like with alcohol and tobacco which are not controlled by the FDA or ONDCP. It doesn't really matter what Obama thinks about marijuana regulation or how states should regulate it.
Controlled?
"It's controlled,by the ONDCP/DEA."
The marijuana market is anything but controlled by the ONDCP/DEA. A system that allows organized crime to exploit the marijuana market is not under control. As for the FDA approval of marijuana, approval for what? Marijuana is harmful, regulation is about reducing the harm of drug and its marketing influence.
Not Proven Harmful
Anytime someone says "marijuana is harmful", I challenge them to provide irrefutable evidence concluding an instance of marijuana use causes any harm at all.
Marijuana can be abused, just like anything in life, but that doesn't justify the statement, "Marijuana is harmful."
There are risks in using marijuana, but risk is not harm.
The distinction is critical, because U.S. public servants determining acceptable and unacceptable risks undeniably defies the Creator-given, unalienable (please stop saying inalienable) Right to Liberty.
Re: Not Proven Harmful
Marijuana's effects are distorted perceptions, impaired coordination, difficulty in thinking and problem solving, and problems with learning and memory. For some people, these effects have resulted in harm to their own person and others. Smoking marijuana or any other dry organic matter regularly causes respiratory problems. I know it because I've seen people who have been using it for 30 years. If you think it's God's gift to mankind, that's nice. I don't think much of it and to each their own. I just believe it should be tightly regulated like liquor and cigarettes and not sold everywhere like it is now.
Nice Try
Tackle football's effects are distorted perceptions (perceiving too much football), impaired coordination (try driving a car, using a computer, etc. while playing), difficulty in thinking and problem solving (try thinking and solving a non-current-football-play problem), and problems with learning and memory (try learning about any non-current-play subject, and use your memory optimally while trying to avoid a sack).
For some people, these effects have resulted in harm to their own person and others. Playing tackle football or any other intense physical contact sport regularly causes health problems. I know, because I've seen people who have been playing for decades.
I just believe that the U.S. Declaration of Independence makes it painfully clear that we have a Creator-given, unalienable Right to Liberty, and until you provide irrefutable evidence concluding that an instance of marijuana use automatically defies another American's Rights, your desired regulation has no authority in this country. That Right exists to protect individuals from elitists, people who, with all due respect, behave as you do.
Just because marijuana has a direct interaction with the brain does not make it unnatural. Marijuana's effects can correct an unhealthy sober mental state. It's all matter and energy.
Knowledge and experience regarding how to play tackle football properly (how often to play, how to take a hit, what equipment to wear, etc.) reduces the risk.
Knowledge and experience regarding how to use marijuana properly (how often to experience, what constitutes a moderate amount, what tools to use -- a vaporizer eliminates the harms of smoking) reduces the risk.
In the end, the problem isn't the object or activity abused, it's abuse itself and any of the many forms it takes. We should oppose abuse, but true Liberty prevents us from banning use to achieve that goal.
Tragedy exists no matter what we do, but within crisis lies opportunity. Let us use these opportunities to strengthen our Rights, not defy them.
I really don't care what you do to your body.
"We should oppose abuse, but true Liberty prevents us from banning use to achieve that goal."
Uh... who mentioned anything about banning marijuana?
Banning Marijuana Use
By wanting marijuana to be "tightly regulated", that inevitably involves someone(s) selecting who can and can't use marijuana.
The un-American, all-out ban on use is supported by prohibitionists for the past roughly seven decades.
Your desire isn't for an all-out ban, but a selective one in which someone(s) get to decide who can and can't use marijuana.
The unalienable Right to Liberty prevents you or anyone like you (including our public servants and the public majority) from banning it in whole or in part.
Education, not regulation, is the Liberty-embracing answer to opposing marijuana abuse.
Unalienable Rights?
I don't think business owners have an unalienable right to market and sell those things to minors.
I believe marijuana marketing can be tightly regulated to keep it out of kids hands and discourage use without banning adults from obtaining marijuana, like we do with cigarettes.
Classic Power Play
There is no exception in the U.S. Declaration of Independence with respect to unalienable Rights.
The only limitation is a natural one. An American, no matter how old, can do what he wants as long as he doesn't defy the Rights of another American.
You may disagree with the U.S. Declaration of Independence, but such disagreement raises a question about your patriotism.
The written American foundation exists to oppose government abuse, a form of abuse far more harmful than drug abuse, given the scope of power involved.
There is a revolution going on in the U.S., but most people don't know this, because their image of a revolution basically involves an angry citizenry waving weapons and torches against the government.
U.S. public servants have been revolting against the written American foundation since it was established, with some success.
U.S. public servants don't need guns to achieve their victories. Instead, they proclaim to "We the people" that if the power to defy the written American foundation isn't allowed, children will suffer.
Anyone who opposes their proclamation in defense of the written American foundation is instantly attacked as an insane individual who doesn't care about the children.
Too many people still fall for this power-grabbing strategy.
What American society has understandably struggled with is objectively defining what exactly constitutes a defiance of another's Rights, resulting in an improvisational approach that persecutes those who don't have the power to effectively defend their Rights.
We know that such defiance inevitably involves harm.
The U.S. has laws that punish people for causing harm. To the extent such punishment is truly effective, I'm okay with this.
However, the U.S. also has laws that punish people for doing public-servant-selected activities that have a potential for causing harm (e.g. Controlled Substances Act). These laws undeniably replace the Creator-given, unalienable Right to Liberty with a government-given one, which is not true Liberty.
Taking away true Liberty from children is far more detrimental to those children than anything else.
Even with tight regulation, kids can fairly easily get alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, etc. Such regulation is reasonably ineffective, as proven by the continued abuse of legal and illegal substances.
I favor effective education that teaches our children what marijuana is for better and worse without judging it, understanding that authority figures making a lot of noise against something sends a strong signal to naturally-independence-seeking teens to experience that something.
Any business that markets marijuana to children would highly risk greatly tarnishing their brand, which would likely have disastrous consequences for that business.
Please stop believing that public servant regulation in defiance of the written American foundation is the civilized approach to securing society (including our children).
U.S. public servants are not the rulers of the U.S., and so "We the people" should stop looking to them to rule.
The more people exercise their Rights responsibly, the better society is.
You can't force people to exercise their Rights responsibly, but you can teach them the real value in doing so. I hope I'm right about that, because such teaching is the only Liberty-embracing approach there is.
Without Liberty, there is no happiness. Without happiness, there is no good.
Prohibition is Toxic
If cannabis were an appreciable fraction as toxic as tobacco or as inebriating as alcohol there might be some logic in restricting it like distilled spirits.
And having enjoyed it since 1968, when subsequently my asthma "miraculously" subsided, I would like to add that its bronchodilator effects are real, along with the ability to prevent lung cancer from the smoke. Using a Volcano even eliminates the smoke.
I believe Cannabis should be available wherever tobacco or alcoholic beverages are sold, with the same restrictions as wine.
Please
Please do some research from unbiased resources: marijuana is not nearly as harmful as tobacco or alcohol, and while the government should be able to inform citizens of possible harm from the use of any substance, it has no right to control the private use of any substance as long as it does no harm to others.
Pot hysteria
Pot is god's gift to suffering humanity. Having endured two head-to-toe attacks of rheumatoid arthritis, I would have been dead long ago without pot's ameliorating effects and its blessed effects as a sleep aid. Without sleep, the RA is exacerbated and threatens to finish me off. Without sleep, I could never have been able to keep my job, play music, help my daughter with her new business, grandmother her children. When someone brought me some pot, after I had made the private decision to end a life of non-stop pain (it's nothing like mere local RA. which I'd also experience; poly RA is a whole new world of deep, relentless pain), after just the first night, I knew I could live. Remarkable. People's gods must be waiting to make those who deny us this gift pay for their cruelty. The problem has always been that it's free, or would be if the government would stop intruding. This federal government creates over fifty new "crimes" a year, with which to oppress the people. Land of the Free? Pot has been used safely by ordinary people for thousands of years. Craven politicians are the blockage now. It takes the people to do the right and decent thing.
Shame on you Rachel
I saw Rachels delivery too...she's upset that Prop8 didn't win in Cal and now she wants to whine that it's not fair that marijuana initiatives passed while her interests didn't,as if good Americans being thrown in prison for living a different lifestyle isn't as relevant as a persons right to marry who they choose.
I like Rachel but she doesn't seem to understand how much in common marijuana law reformers have with the gay community's fight for equality.
We've been there Rachel...we know what it's like to work hard on getting the issue on the ballot only to have crooked govt officials invalidate the signatures only to have them found valid after the election.We know what it's like not to be allowed the same speaking platforms as other groups.We know what it's like to have initiatives passed overwhelmingly only to have law enforcement ignore the will of the people.
Rachel...and all gay activists...we have to work together,our causes have suffered the same setbacks and our cause are both noble causes and what is just plain right.
I'm so sick of the MSM treating marijuana reform as a joke.
I went to the Boston Globe online page the day after the election and the story about Question 2's win had a comment section...many people with supportive comments were complaining about their comments being removed.
I suggest everyone go to the Globe site today and click on the opinion piece "A misguided joint initiative " wher the author is upset with the success of questio 2 and suggests that the state get rid of the initiative process...he thinks the citizens are too stupid to decide what laws they want.Please go to the site and let em have it!
"I'm so sick of the MSM treating marijuana reform as a joke."
"I'm so sick of the MSM treating marijuana reform as a joke."
Man, you better stock up on marijuana to treat your nausea. Marijuana reform groups are about hempfest rallies and legalizing marijuana so Ashton Kutcher types can get stoned and stoners are funny to the majority of society (see Cheech n' Chong). So if these reform groups are primarily fighting for the interests of consumers, guess who will be selected as the media posterchild? The goateed, tattooed, college-age kid smoking a bong, not Peter Lewis, CEO of Progressive Insurance, sitting in his nice leather chair.... or George Washington.
Ashton?
I support reform because I believe in living in a free country and defending the constitution just as I did during my 22 years in US Army Special Forces...thats green beret to you Archie Bunker.
Really?
"Marijuana reform groups are about hempfest rallies and legalizing marijuana so Ashton Kutcher types can get stoned..."
What an obnoxious generalization. Recall that this whole conversation started because reformers passed 9 initiatives in this election. That's what marijuana reform is about, not rallies and Ashton Kutcher.
Really
9 initiatives passed, 7 of which were in Massachusetts, Hawaii, and Berkeley, CA. I guarantee to you that pot activists across the country organized far more than 9 hempfest smokeouts.
Ok
Local activists organize events on a volunteer basis all over the country all the time. These events aren't organized or funded by the major reform organizations. It's wildly unfair to say categorically that "marijuana reforms organizations are about hempfest rallies" when we're not the ones putting them on.
We attend the bigger events whenever possible for outreach purposes, but you're making it sound like this is our main preoccupation and that's false.
Really?
"These events aren't organized or funded by the major reform organizations."
Seattle Hempfest is the largest public consumption event in the nation and is sponsored by major reform groups like NORML and attended by people like Rob Kampia of MPP, Allen St. Piere of NORML, and Phil Smith of your group. One of the NORML Board of Directors, Dominic Holden, and founder of the Washington State NORML Chapter is the director of this annual event.
In my opinion, these events in all their counterculture glory only bring ridicule on the reform movement as whole, which is counterproductive to both increasing the speed of reform and gaining more mainstream media acceptance. It seems our focus is on achieving mainstream acceptance for marijuana use rather than mainstream acceptance for regulating the market to protect our communities, and I don't believe this is necessary considering that most people find cigarettes bad and yet the trend has been to tightly regulate them. In the Netherlands marijuana consumption has not achieved mainstream acceptance (drinkers far outnumber stoners more than in the US) even though their approach is to regulate retail distribution.
Seattle
Seattle Hempfest is a huge event. The massive turnout makes it an important opportunity for reformers to connect with the public. SH is self-sponsored by its own independent non-profit. Many of the people involved also volunteer for NORML and other groups, but the funding is overwhelmingly, if not exclusively, derived from vendors and advertisements and Hempfest staff are not paid. Neither are the bands.
I've attended once and was extremely impressed by the level of volunteerism, effective security, and overall suburb management. But again, this is a once a year event. It does not define the reform movement.
That's just one example
"But again, this is a once a year event. It does not define the reform movement."
Seattle Hempfest is just one out of many events celebrating public consumption of marijuana that NORML and its chapters have organized or been heavily involved with. However, the mainstream media isn't going to associate a reform group with the excellent volunteerism and profession security at these events. It's going to label your group Pro-Pot and show on TV the guy with dreadlocks standing next to the NORML banner, because in politics you are defined by who your associations, whether you like it or not.
Reality...try it sometime
I guarantee that every hemp rally sends at least one person away knowing that he has been lied to by the government and causing him to support reform.Seems the Freedom Rally did some good if you look at the map of how Mass voted.
Hempfests attract only the converted
You don't go to these events unless you already think the laws are bullshit.
The Peter Lewis' are coming out
"The goateed, tattooed, college-age kid smoking a bong, not Peter Lewis, CEO of Progressive Insurance, sitting in his nice leather chair..."
I attended NORML's 37th Annual Conference, my first. I expected a lot of 'Cheech and Chong' types but the majority of the people there seemed like clean cut business people. It seems the "goateed, tattooed, college-age kid smoking a bong," has come out of the closet and probably likes it illegal because of the risks. With only 500 NORML attendees, a record for them, it seems it is needed that more 'boring' insurance types come clean. I know this because:
I am a clean-cut, successful business man, and I like to consume cannabis. I am not lazy and sit around like stoners in the mist. And I hold down a very difficult job. I am responsible, and would never use drugs at work. But like alcohol, it's nice to have a toke on weekends or afterwork. When I'm under the influence of cannabis, I like to work on my computer, workout, go on a hike. I enjoy music and writting more when I'm high on pot. The effect puts me at peace and helps me be more creative. I am not hooked on trying any other drug because of using marijuana. I specifically like pot, not 'drugs' and just getting high. And I know a lot of 'clean cut' people just like myself who are not hip kids.
Rachel
I think the marijuana reform community should call on Rachel Maddow to invite a representative from leap and DCRNet on her show.
Stop the Drug War (DRCNet) Rules!
Right on -- Maddow should definitely have these guys on her show! It's about time we started seeing the reform community's stars mixing it up with the other talking heads. Hopefully an Obama administration will inspire more thorough discussions of hot, progressive politics complete with representatives of drug reform groups.
- Kate
"pot hysteria" is an eloquent post
and the post that points out that gay rights and marijuana legalization (or should that be drug legalization in general, another tough question) are both righteous causes and should work together is on the money, in my opinion. But I'm don't think the leadership or community promoting either issue will go for it, not wanting to antagonize some of their supporters by dealing with "unrelated" issues. In my view all denials of basic human rights are related.
Other than those in favor of
Other than those in favor of allowing the medical use of cannabis, which have become popular pretty much everywhere, it seems that the initiatives can get passed if they are modest in scope and more symbolic than substantive.
Make adult marijuana possession the lowest law enforcement priority, as if it isn't already far down on the list in those jurisdictions where these laws pass. These things are so vaguely worded that they seem more like a "sense of the people" initiative than anything else. Massachusetts Question 2, which removes the threat of arrest or jail for something that rarely results in arrest or jail, anyway.
The most significant and substantive of the measures, California Prop 5, went down in flames.
rachelrachel
Rarely???
You've got to be joking...rarely??
Apparently you didn't hear about the record number of arrests?You have never heard that the prison population consists of a majority of drug offenders and that most of them are for minor violations?
Not in Massachusetts
As things are right now, before this new initiative goes into effect, there is no jail term at all for the first offense of marijuana possession in Massachusetts. You get six months probation. For a second offense, there is a maximum of six months in jail. That means that if you plead guilty, they'll let you off with probation. Maybe they'll make you pee into a cup.
When laws as lenient as that, cops are in most circumstances not going to take the trouble to arrest the suspect, handcuff him, take him downtown, photograph him, fingerprint him, fill out all kinds of paperwork, show up in court to testify, etc. They've got better things to do with their time. If a couple of young people are hiding behind the bushes blowing weed, they'll probably either ignore it, tell the kids to be a little more discreet, give them a stern lecture, or maybe take the stuff away from them. I'm not saying they always do that, but in most jurisdictions that's typical.
If they stop somebody for say, drunk driving, and they search him, and they find a baggie of pot, sure, they'll add the pot charge to the list of the other charges.
Here's a little report done that gives us some numbers:
http://norml.org/pdf_files/state_arrests_2004/NORML_MA_Marijuana_Arrests...
In 2002 (if you have some more current numbers, let me know) there were 7626 arrests for marijuana possession, 118 MJ arrests for every 100,000 residents (that's a little more than one in a thousand) and 0.85 out of every hundred arrests. Considering how common pot smoking is, I'd say that arrests for it are pretty rare. The report doesn't give us figures on how many were charged with marijuana possession along with some other offense.
Also, I don't know where you get this notion that the "prison population consists of a majority of drug offenders." According to the Bureau of Prison Statistics
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/corrtyp.htm
This makes about 20% drug offenders in prison, not the "majority" that you claim.
The prisons are not filled up with people whose only crime is carrying a less-than-an-ounce baggie of pot.
rachelrachel
Scott
Maybe you can educate this misguided individual...or have I been supporting an unneccessary cause all this time?
Where do you live?
I don't know where you're from, but here in Northern Michigan cops will definitely arrest you just for smoking weed. Every arrest they make gets them brownie points from the conservative anti-drug/alcohol/anything Judge Haley and his "drug court" program. Every arrest they make gets them more money from jail fees, court costs, probation costs, etc. They have nothing else to do but look for "a couple of young people are hiding behind the bushes blowing weed."
And they make you do more than just "pee in a cup" a couple of times. For two solid years it's DAILY pbt's, two or three piss tests a week, mandatory twice a week AA/NA meetings, counseling programs, and show up in front of a judge one a month. All of that, with the exception of AA costs money. And if you screw up, or are late to anything just once, you get thrown in county jail for 6 months. Believe it. First offense. Traverse City, MI. I don't need any government statistics, I have real life experience, buddy.
And even 20% of a prison population being drug offenders is WAY too much. Even if most of those people were drug dealers, legalizing it would take them right out of business.
Steve L. - Traverse City, MI
two separate states, both starting with an "M"
Steve L. =
We're talking about Massachusetts, you idiot, not Michigan. Are you smart enough to know that these are two separate states? Obviously not.
Just a little friendly advice, why don't you read the posts before you respond to them? This is a discussion of an initiative that was passed in MASSACHUSETTS, not some other state. Yes, they both start with an 'M,' but they're not the same.
rachelrachel
IDIOT?
How many people have I seen write abusive responses to people when they are the ones making non-supported assumptons? Assuming that a United states citizen does not know the names and locations of the majority of the states, is what I find to be rediculous! Grow up! Or maybe I should say, learn manners!
Rachel’s Dilemma
Rachel Maddow seemed surprised that marijuana is more popular than the gay rights movement. I’m not. Cannabis is an acquired taste, while gayness is genetic. Being genetic, gayness is forever limited to a small fraction of the population, while repeal of marijuana prohibition is favored by more than 40-percent, medical cannabis by more than 60-percent, and so forth. There’s really no comparison at all. And besides, no one smokes a gay person, so how can they get addicted?
Still, gay rights and drug reform both gained impetus in the early 70s, and each face the same core elements of political opposition, oppression and persecution. Having common enemies automatically makes all of us potent allies in the apparently endless battle against stupidity.
Rachel needs to consider the ratings leap she would get by incorporating drug reform on her programs. Her audience is liberal, and let’s face it, liberals love drugs. Conservatives love drugs too, just different drugs, or sometimes the same ones, or all of them.
A few months ago, AlterNet discovered it was getting its highest numbers of hits on stories involving drugs and sex. So they altered their content accordingly. Take the hint, Rachel: Go Rachel! Beat O’Reilly!
Giordano
Rachels dillema
I wrote directly to Rachel yesterday and suggested she invite leap on her show.
Smoke
I have heard of gay men smoking each other. And I hear most of them do get a-dick-ted. I'm just sayin'.
There's No Shame On Rachel
I think to say Rachel Maddow gave a nod to marijuana was misleading. The title of this should be "Maddow Shakes Head in Disbelief". She was clearly shaken that in several states, smoking pot is ok, but being in love with someone of the same sex can not be tolerated. As a Massachusetts resident who did vote yes on question 2, largely because of easing the court systems, what happened in California (let alone FL,AZ) with prop 8 is reprehensible and more important in my mind than getting caught with pot. This huge state let a majority vote on the rights of a minority and that really seems unconstitutional to me. I hope the gay rights activists in that state are able to stop this injustice. Rachel has the right to be upset when the state of California, where she grew up, just announced that she's a second class citizen, yet if you want to get stoned, no problem. What really blows my mind is the minority that was fighting for these rights 40 years ago are the ones that pushed it over the top. Very sad.
An " ILLEGAL" Plant
consfearacy
Let`s take our children to a sports game or Monday night football and bow at the altar of Alcohol. Glory be. A little dried out plant material is a different story now. Marijuana prohibition is rooted in bigotry and rascists ideology of the early 30`s geared towards the Mexicans. History is not hard to uncover. Uncovering the eyes of the modern day public to this obscenity is an unfolding issue. Human caging over a plant is cave man behavior.
Don't say one thing a do another.
In my eyes, if you drink, smoke tabacco, use asprin (or any other headache med), drink a cup of coffee (caffinated) or any number of things that alter your body chemistry. i would like to know how you justify saying that someone else cannot use cannabis (just so you know that is the real name).
Do you go to your doctor everytime you have a headache, just so he can tell you it is alright to take an asprin? NO! I thought not. If you are feeling a little sluggish do you ask a Dr. for a cup of coffee or an energy drink, Didn't think so.
Remember Cannabis is a plant. you put a seed in the ground, feed and water it and it grows. This isn't some chemical that is made in a lab. it's natural. I would rather place my trust in a plant that has been here since man can remember, than something coooked up in a chemist lab.
Don't be a hippocrit!
As far as the "children" are conserned, THAT IS WHAT PARENTS ARE FOR!!!!!!
Educate your children and you will find they will understand.
Post new comment