Time to Evolve --like #LGTB ->Obama wants to treat marijuana like tobacco but not legalize it.

[riversedge]

I agree. He is sitting on the fence here!

All drugs should be treated as a public health matter


Tweet
Time to Evolve --like #LGTB ->Obama wants to treat marijuana like tobacco but not legalize it. Wait, what? http://www.vox.com/2015/2/27/8120707/barack-obama-marijuana-legalization … #wiunion


http://www.vox.com/2015/2/27/8120707/barack-obama-marijuana-legalization




Sunday, March 1, 2015

President Obama wants to treat marijuana like tobacco but not legalize it. Wait, what?

Updated by German Lopez on February 27, 2015, 12:00 p.m. ET @germanrlopez



https://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/EU9oH5vwaB8cHC5vPcMqCDgW3og=/94x0:1079x657/639x426/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/45785420/President_Obama_marijuana.0.0.png
President Barack Obama speaks to a reporter. KMBC


President Barack Obama on Thursday said he wants to treat marijuana like tobacco, which is legal. But, in a bit of a contradiction, he also suggested he opposes marijuana legalization.

In an interview with Kansas City news station KMBC, Obama said states could change their marijuana laws to discourage pot use in the same way tobacco use is discouraged:

As a general matter, I think that we have to separate out legalization — you know, there's a lot of concern about drug abuse of any sort by our children and the general population — versus the heavy criminalization of non-violent drug offenses. And I think that a lot of states are taking a look to see, do we have proportionality in terms of how we are penalizing the recreational user? We still want to discourage that. But we've been able to discourage tobacco, we've been able to discourage a lot of other bad things that people do, through a public health approach as opposed to an incarceration approach.

The president drew a key distinction in his comments, which echo previous statements he made to CNN. He appears to support marijuana decriminalization, which would remove criminal penalties, particularly prison time, attached to the drug. But he doesn't seem to support marijuana legalization, which would remove even misdemeanor penalties, including small fines, and potentially allow retail outlets to sell pot...........

[fredamae]

1. The Question is: Is Cannabis a Drug?

Or are "we" just stuck in the old stereotypical rut of believing a near century old Idea that those in power/control Told us to believe? My parents/grand-parents Chose to believe the mis-information/myths/REEFER MADNESS FEAR/Hyperbole and passed their "knowledge" to us..but were They correct or just "sheep"?

http://ccguide.org/isitdrug.php

[stillwaiting]

3. It's a drug by the definition of "drug".

However, so is food by the same definition.

I think the bigger question is: Is cannabis/marijuana a DANGEROUS drug?

And, research is quite clear on that matter. It is not.

Marijuana WILL have a physiological effect on users. Again, so will food. So will alcohol. So will tobacco.

And, marijuana has been proven to be safer (much safer) than alcohol, tobacco, and many types of junk food for that matter in regards to individual health outcomes AND in regards to societal costs due to harm against others.

[merrily]

4. For me, the issue is how we treat people who buy, sell and use marijuana.

Marijuana is not a food, beverage or a cosmetic. I think marijuana probably is a drug. But that doesn't mean it should be illegal. Aspirin is a drug. No one goes to jail for buying or selling it or taking 2 or 40 a day. (Though, taking 40 aspirin a day will probably get you a bad ulcer, among other things.)

[riversedge]

15. that is true. It will take generations to change attitudes since Just Say NO has

been so ingrained into our national psych. Yet it needs to start-and indeed it has. If the Feds had a national public health campaign--a sustained effort-- it would help. Meaning mj is ok but hard core drugs not ok.

[merrily]

2. Cigarettes are illegal? (The link got me to a photo. Is it supposed to be a video?)

How can you treat marijuana like cigarettes without legalizing marijuana or un-legalizing cigarettes?

[fredamae]

6. No Photo....

Here is a snippet of what's there:

"Cannabis Is Not A Drug: Accurate Language.

From all the medico-scientific aspects, harmless cannabis is not only wrongly defined as a "drug" in any meaningful (semantic) definition of the word but also, by definition and empirical reality, wrongly proscribed as a "drug" (or other substance) under legislation regulations.

Although dictionaries vary slightly in their definitions of "drug", virtually all refer to, and rely for definition on, a drug's habit-forming, addictive properties. Webster's New World Dictionary, for example, defines "drug" as: "a narcotic, hallucinogen, especially one that is habit-forming." As is confirmed by the aforementioned medico-scientific research, cannabis contains no habit-forming properties in the plant itself or its smoke. Eviden from the most fundamental and widely inferred meaning, by definition based on empirical fact, cannabis is not a drug.



The word 'drug' derives from Old Dutch meaning dried herbs, as used in food, for healing and in the dyeing of textiles. There was no connotation of addiction. (viz: the Wealth of Nations, 1776, Adam Smith; Book One, Chapter One). In the twentieth Century, that meaning has been transformed by the specious pseudo-philosophy of Prohibition.

The invalidity of linking cannabis with "drugs" is further confirmed by the U.S. government's Bureau of Mortality Statistics. The table, below, demonstrates in the most obvious manner that cannabis by any meaningful definition, traditional or modern, is not a drug and cannabis cannot (correctly) be categorised or referred to as a drug.



COMPARISON OF CANNABIS TO OTHER SUBSTANCES
BY OFFICIAL MORTALITY STATISTICS
Sample year 1988. U.S. federal government Bureau of Mortality Statistics.


SUBSTANCE............................................NUMBER OF DEATHS PER ANNUM.
TOBACCO................................................................................ 340,000 to 425,000
ALCOHOL (not including 50% of all highway deaths
And 65% of all murders).......................................................150,000 +
ASPIRIN (Including deliberate overdoses) ................................................180 to 1,000 +
CAFFEINE (From stress, ulcers, triggering irregular heartbeats etc) ..................1,000 to 10,000
LEGAL DRUG OVERDOSE (Deliberate or accidental from legal, prescribed
Patent medicines and / or mixing with alcohol) ......14,000 to 27,000
ILLICIT DRUG OVERDOSE (Deliberate or accidental from all illegal drugs).........3,8000 to 5,200
THEOPHYLLINE (Prescribed asthma drug) ..........................................................50




CANNABIS
...................................................................
0



To those people in whose (financial) interests it is to perpetuate the Prohibition of Cannabis the semantically incorrect use of the word "drug" where cannabis is concerned, is a premeditated misuse of terminology. This serves strategy advantageous to Prohibitionists, and comprises a simple but effective mechanism of disinformation, by putting the harmless herb into an unjustifiable association with addictive and harmful drugs.

The reality is clear: cannabis and those pernicious substances, the drugs, are wholly unalike. As the word "drug" is wrong and inapplicable to cannabis, it is necessary to establish a correct word, veracious vocabulary, which is fitting."
http://ccguide.org/isitdrug.php

[merrily]

10. Anything can be addictive. Caffeine is addictive. So is nicotine. So is liquor.

Anything that works to relieve pain or energize you or calm you or may you feel good can be addictive, including aspirin. (I used to have chronic headaches. I took two aspirin or two Excedrin every four hours that I was awake for years.)

I don't think debating whether marijuana is addictive or not gets us anywhere. Some addictive substances are highly regulated, some are not regulated at all.

I think whether and how marijuana should be regulated is the more direct and productive argument.

BTW, in my prior post, I was not using the word "drug" with the connotation of addiction. And dictionary definitions are not especially relevant when there is a statutory definition. Marijuana certainly falls within the statutory definition.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/321

[fredamae]

11. If I understand

the argument at all..cannabis does not affect the same part of the brain...as alcohol, tobacco, caffeine.....

[merrily]

12. That isn't my argument.

My argument is that none of that is especially relevant.

[fredamae]

13. Yes, "We" know that

but our law and policy makers (prohibitionists) Still "use" these arguments as well as Federal Laws based upon CSA Scheduling still on the books as cause to continue prohibition....right?

So, while many who disagree with this argument...we still need to engage, based upon this argument unless and until We completely Dis-credit them And their excuses, imo.
Or...what am I missing?

[merrily]

14. Again, it fits the statutory definition of "drug." I disagree that you need to engage in it.

I think there is plenty of evidence that things that are potentially more harmful, physically, emotionally and mentally, are not regulated at all. As I said, you get get a bleeding ulcer and die from too much aspirin.

I think if you get bogged down in the addiction argument, you only play into the hands of the prohibitionists and waste time and energy. You and I both know their actions are not based on potential harm or potential addiction.

[fredamae]

16. Well, I wish lawmakers in OR

would drop that argument...but the "It's For The Kids" and "Harm to Society" and "Drug Addiction/Abuse" are still very much alive.
To their credit, many in the legislature are evolving but (I can only assume) the corp lobbyists still convince them to keep relying on the Same old arguments that science has long discredited.

I agree we shouldn't "have" to engage but when the Lawmakers themselves present This argument out of the gate and put the bs on the table.......What then and how then do you suggest we respond?

[merrily]

17. Point out the kinds of things I have been pointing out on this thread. That the real issue can't be

harm to the individual or society because too many substances that are far more harmful to individuals and society are legal, like tobacco and booze. Besides, nothing explains why medical marijuana is not allowed.

When someone is lying to me, I point out that they are lying. I don't debate the accuracy of the sub-points of the lie.

I think I would also present them with factual findings made by legislatures of states that have decriminalized, like Massachusetts, along with facts and figures of tax revenues in places like Colorado.

[on point]

5. More backbone failure. Obama heading in wrong direction. Legalize it already. Don't waffle.

All studies show it to be FAR less harmful than alcohol, which is the proper comparison, not tobacco.

This is just part of the protestant morality which was against anything that wasn't for the religion or working hard.

[merrily]

7. At the very least, marijuana should be freely available with a doc's prescription.

Can that be abused? Sure, what can't? Morphine and methadone can. So can oxycodone, hydocodone, oxycontin. But, we still let docs use them to relieve pain. It would be inhuman not to.

[fredamae]

8. It should be Removed from

Any criminal and legal anything...it Must be De-Scheduled from the Federal CSA, imo. If not, then they will find a way, under "legalization" to continue some form of prohibition, punitive charges, fines and other nonsense over consuming plant matter and for many...the threat of incarceration.

[fredamae]

9. 114% Safer than Booze

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2967285/Marijuana-significantly-SAFER-thought-Cannabis-114-deadly-alcohol-claims-study.html

[frankfacts]

18. The most violent addicts are those addicted to power

Of those, the most violent are addicted to prohibition

[Fumesucker]

19. Remember folks, it is Republicans who have difficulty with science..

Democrats are the rational ones who base policy decisions on science...