• #3
    Prohibition was bad, the war on drugs has been much worse. Legalize everything... just make sure that products have appropriate warning labels.
  • #33
    Now if the legalize weed community can convince employers to eliminate their drug and alcohol policies.

    Does no good to legalize weed only to still have in place drug policies at your job that can get you canned if you come up hot on a piss test.
  • #37
    @cnw95 - Hmmmm....

    Would it be safe for the team if an employee who chronically uses LSD was to be working highline demolitions? Placing charges? Handling detonators?

    Or an alcoholic with the shakes?

    Most company policies are in place for the safety of the entire team.

    Even more company policies are governed by OSHA policies and the D.O.T. policies. Most insurance companies will not insure a company, it's building, stock and equipment or it's employees if strict OSHA and D.O.T standards and drug testing are not in place.

    "OSHA recognizes that impairment by drug or alcohol use can constitute an avoidable workplace hazard and that drug-free workplace programs can help improve worker safety and health and add value to American businesses.

    OSHA strongly supports comprehensive drug-free workforce programs, especially within certain workplace environments, such as those involving safety-sensitive duties like operating machinery.

    A comprehensive drug-free workforce approach includes five components—a policy, supervisor training, employee education, employee assistance, and drug testing.

    Such programs, especially when drug testing is included, must be reasonable and take into consideration employee rights to privacy."

    "Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs"

    "The Department of Transportation's (DOT) rule, 49 CFR Part 40, describes required procedures for conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing for the Federally regulated transportation industry."

    You have to convince the government it's a good idea before you can convince employers.

  • #38
    "You have to convince the government it's a good idea before you can convince employers."

    After reading obamas comments where he stated he didn't believe marijuana is any more dangerous than alcohol, I'd say we are closer than even I'd imagined.

    EVEN some congress members are petitioning Obama to remove weed from the illegal drug list.

    And you are correct about workplace safety regarding drug/alcohol use. I was a rail worker and we had piss tests often. The ONLY way for a rail worker who is intoxicated to escape discipline is to mark off OPERATION REDBLOCK.
  • #40
    The intent is not to encourage people to use the drugs, it's to eliminate the black market. If they are using drugs today they will most likely continue using drugs, if they are not using drugs they will most likely not start using drugs. Either way the damage caused by the drugs is on the packaging and the cartels aren't reaping tens of billions each year in drug money.
  • #51
    @cnw95 An employer can set almost any rule it wants for its employees unless the rule is counter to the law. Companies can fire people for being smokers if they have it in their manuals. The problems we have are when government sets rules for everyone not when an individual sets rules for those who work for him.
    If you know the companies rules and violate them it is your fault you are fired if caught.
  • R Load more replies

  • #14
    If prohibition of alcohol was a bad idea.... why is would this be any better? How can you ban one substance for being dangerous, and decide to un-ban it even though it's dangerous.... but then you ban a substance for being dangerous, and keep the ban even though it poses no threat to health. The logic of our government.... No wonder it takes us so long to pass a budget.....
  • #34
    hard to regulate prices on something you can grow in your backyard. it's just that simple. it was maher or carlin that correctly pointed out that xanax and prozac really don't want to compete against marijuana.
  • #63
    @TRex84 That's part of it, but I can brew beer and wine in my basement, so it's not the whole story. What's funny is the 'Partnership for a Drug Free America' is big alcohol, big tobacco, and big Rx.
  • #79
    @Hillofbeans You may or may not be able to control your drug or alcohol consumption. The vast amount of people who drink alcohol never become alcoholics or who've smoked pot or taken any other recreational drug.

    In my family, we've had two alcoholics and one drug addict. Only the drug addict died before his time. Obviously the majority of my clan have consumed alcohol. This means that percentage-wise, only a very limited number of my relatives have had a problem with it.

    Fewer of us have done drugs. However, some families are not as lucky, or genetically blessed, whatever, and the entire idea that we should encourage the consumption and behavior---including gambling---of products that encourage addiction for those who are unable to use the products in moderation seems to be an American predilection and it is rapidly becoming a government predilection as well, which opens up a whole new can of worms.

    Personally, I would legalize everything of an addictive nature with the proviso that should anyone be convicted of a crime involving one of these products, the penalty should be draconian in its financial size and sentencing length. If this sounds cruel, which it will to many who are afflicted with this illness, I don't care, because my sympathies lie more with their potential victims than with the suffering perpetrator.

    Since so many Libertarians talk a good game about responsibility, I believe supporting this suggestion would be sufficient proof that they've meant what they say.
  • R Load more replies

  • #7
    "Not only is the ONDCP the only federal office required by law to oppose rescheduling marijuana even if it is proven to have medical benefits, but it is also prohibited from studying if that could be even be true,"

    That principle, forbidding govt from doing the research needed to find the truth in any issue, is a common practice still.

    That allows corporations to go before congress and say with a straight face that no evidence exists to prove that their product harms anyone.

    It worked for tobacco until alternative funding was secured, or research was done outside the country.
  • #62
    It's what is currently happening with climate science as well. Lots of similarities between big tobacco putting out its own 'science' to combat actual science and big oil/natural gas/coal putting out its own 'science' to combat climate change and the environmental dangers of their products.
  • #66
    I agree completely and another good example is the whole BS surrounding climate change. So many today are convinced that ALL climate change is caused by man. When in fact climate change has been happening long before man existed.
  • R Load more replies

  • #2
    Anslinger campaign is still reverberating..Smdh...why in this country are we constantly having to wait on slow ass idiots to get anything done?
  • #9
    Prohibiting cultivation of a medicinal herb is, was, and always will be asinine.

    Not to mention, impossible.
  • #17
    So much good can come from legalizing medical marijuana that it is just plain ignorance to hold firmly to these outdated laws, but also to refuse scientific testing to prove it by our drug czar! This congressman is right, it's crazy! It is time for a big change! Sweeping reforms as Obama has said about other things. There is no reason to let people go blind from glaucoma when marijuana can completely reverse it it if caught early enough and stop it in it's tracks if caught later! No more people will go blind because of glaucoma with legalized medical marijuana. Many lives could be saved for people with diseases that cause extreme nausea and vomiting. Marijuana is the best anti-nausea and anti-emetic ever found! If these people with multiple diseases could keep up their nutrition, they could better fight the disease. The same goes for chronic pain. People could just throw out all of the narcotic pain killers if it were legal to use marijuana! There's barely a fraction of the side effects from marijuana as there are from narcotic pain meds. So right there is getting rid of glaucoma medication, getting rid of pain medications, getting rid of nausea medications and there is no medicine besides marijuana to prevent vomiting. All of those drugs and their side effects, not to mention addictions, gone! Marijuana is not medically addictive. Marijuana is also not a gateway drug! What did they think the Native Americans were smoking in their evening peace pipes? Tobacco? Marijuana is an indigenous plant to North America. It can still be found in unfettered areas of our country. It should not be labeled as a narcotic, much less a level 1 narcotic! It's time for politicians to catch up with science concerning marijuana! It should be made at least medically legal, though it is much less harmful than alcohol! Prohibition on alcohol did not work and today prohibition on marijuana is working much less. It is making criminals out of otherwise law abiding citizens that go to college and to work everyday, paying their taxes. They also could be paying taxes on marijuana! Prohibition of marijuana is antiquated and useless and we know it through other studies not done or looked at by our drug czar! Legalizing marijuana is not going to increase it's use, it will just keep people from clogging up our court systems! It will save millions in tax payer money trying to convict people of mild marijuana offenses and will increase tax revenue that will be placed on legal marijuana! Where are our politicians brains concerning marijuana? Stuck in the dirt like an ostrich? If they can't see fit to legalize recreational marijuana, at least legalize medical marijuana on the federal level! We can address recreational use later.
  • #86
    @ belinks - maybe so much cartel money floats around that congress is lobbied to do nothing , a good read belinks , the best policy i have read is Portugal's drug policy , up to now in canada you can apply to grow your own medical marijuana , that is changing now , gov't has decided it is in the best interet for corporations to grow it in factories and discontinue the pvt liscensing
  • #91
    That's a shame about getting rid of private licensing and turning it in to industry. That severely limits the hybrids of marijuana that target specific things. I'll look up Portugal's stance. Thanks.
  • #99
    @belinks , yes , so much for the pvt clone's , truly good quality , from what i understand , the entire plant will be ground up and then encapsulated , here's your industrial quality pill , sit back and chill
  • #102
    They already have a THC pill. It doesn't really work. They gave it to my older son after his bone marrow transplant to try to help him eat. Big failure! Only the real thing stopped his nausea and vomiting. We also gave it to our oldest daughter when she was dying. Her hospice nurse was able to turn down her pain pump a lot. It allowed her to have time with friends and family without being drugged up before she died. She had cancer that couldn't be stopped, no matter how hard they tried. My younger son also had a BMT. He was never given marijuana. He wouldn't have used it if we had because it was illegal. He was set on always doing the right thing. His BMT worked, but we lost him to a pulmonary embolism a few days before we were supposed to go home. He died on Christmas Eve at the age of 10. Our daughter died 2 days later at 17. I guess they did go home, just not to their home here. Medical marijuana could have helped all three of them much earlier! One survived with the help of marijuana. I don't care that it was illegal! Just that it helped my son survive!
  • #103
    jesus wept , is there an environmental reason for this ?, such sadness , i have a son and daughter 35 and 34 and now a grandson 4 months old , first one and more than likely the last , take best care there
  • R Load more replies

  • #23
    Any new way to create revenue for the good of all should be looked into..... not surprised the sponsor of the bill is a Democrat. Anyone in jail for a marijuana conviction should be released!
  • #10
    I wish they would just legalize it everywhere.....come on capitalist throughout the land...there's plenty of good money to be made....supplying the stoners with the tools of the apologies to Country Joe
  • #41
    My lungs are shot from my years as a welder I wore an respirator yet it still messed me up I have broken the law to smoke pot to catch my breath eat stop nausea it's hard to know that I'm dying and at times breaking the law is the only way for me to breath at times
  • #59
    I'm so sorry for your plight... I consider it a serious injustice as well...

    "The war on drugs means that comfortable politicians and political appointees sitting in their cushioned chairs should have absolute power to decree what people on their death beds are permitted to take to kill their pain." -- James Bovard
  • #101
    @DogLady_1 I figure life is just that life. Here one mint gone the next. That Hearst guy the aka "News Paper King" this guy tried to stop Orson Wells stopped from making Citizen Kane. He had the power to make both bodies of Congress to make pot illegal
    He had the movie "Reefer Madness" made. in the 1930's.. He wanted Hemp to make paper.
    Now ppl like me who need it are at risk of jail prison fines etc. Several cops in the town I live in have given weed to me. My mum and aunt + several others went to school together several if their kids are cops so they've helped me.
    Sooner or later it's going to be leagel every state. Pot smokers are smart we smoke cough puke & feel better Here's the smart part we all get out milk cerial all sweets sour candy jelly donuts etc..... Pot smokers get all munchy foods before they blaz up.
  • #15
    It is immoral that we are at the mercy of Richards Nixons 'executive order' in 1973 Creating the DEA and scheduling marijuana as a schedule 1 with no medical value and more dangerous than methamphetamine or Oxy-Contin (close enough to synthetic heroin for the most part).

    As most of our history of medicines is plant derived, the fact we can't even (for all practical purposes)'study' this plant and the US Governments legal mandate is to prevent it's study, is just plain evil.

    For instance, JUST with Epilepsy, this isn't a flash in the pan.
    The first known reference to the anti-seizure potential of cannabis, according to a number of academic papers, comes from an Arabic treatise from 1464 that describes how the epileptic son of a high-ranking official in Baghdad was cured by regular administration of hashish.
    After returning from India, Dr. O’Shaughnassy lectured extensively in Great Britain in the 1840s on the properties of hemp and its use as a medicine in Europe became widespread.
    Sir John Russell Reynolds, the personal physician to Queen Victoria, wrote in The Lancet in 1890 on the many therapeutic uses of cannabis, saying “I have found hemp very useful” for treating epilepsy.
    In America, a publication called the Philadelphia Medical Times ran an article titled “Cannabis indica in the treatment of epilepsy” in 1878.
    In 1949, two doctors tested marijuana compounds with six severely epileptic children. The substance controlled seizures as well as traditional drugs with three of the children, and stopped or nearly stopped all seizures in two.

    “The Future for epileptics appears very bright,” an article about the findings in the Salt Lake City Telegram said.“Because of not only one new drug, but a whole field of new compounds to combat epileptic seizures.”
  • #26
    Marijuana, when the propaganda was put before Congress, was more addictive than heroin, led to permanent insanity, caused uncontrollable fits of laughter, uncontrollable acts of violence, and led to sexual depravity. 80 years later we still have that insanity, which is the same for all drug laws, insane.
  • #53
    You are technically correct about the DEA. But Marijuana was made illegal many years before and all Nixon did was change the agency that enforced the law. Blaming him for the law is disingenuous.
    The 50 years following World War II became a generational battle. Congress established mandatory sentencing laws, including the Boggs Act in 1952 and the Narcotics Control Act in 1956.
    See the full history at:
  • #109

    Yet, during the late 1800's you could buy morphine (with a syringe and everything) and cocaine from the Sears catalog.
  • #22

    Alcohol is not 'decriminalized', alcohol is legal.

    There's a world of difference between 'legal' and 'decriminalized'.
  • #54
    Marijuana should fall under the FDA for proper labeling and testing. It should thus be legal everywhere.
  • R Load more replies

  • #50
    Laws and regulations that force ignorance are so common in our country it is pathetic. This one is probably among the worst.
    I consider our politicians to be great campaigners but idiotic legislators. Our country suffered the effects of prohibition almost a century ago with the Volstead act. Prohibition of alcohol led to the development of the Mafia and all attendant problems. We ended prohibition. That was smart. Not much later as a result of a stupid movie "Reefer Madness" prohibition against drug use started again. It developed into the war on drugs - PROHIBITION.
    Should anyone be surprised at the result. Criminal gangs fighting to control areas so the could sell the drugs. Drug smuggling. Murders. Billions spent with no practical effect.
    The only ones that can be proud of the war on drugs are the politicians and the group of people making money from the government because of that war.
    Politicians, some are not really idiot legislators. But the list is small.
  • #112
    I sometimes wonder why street and motocycle gangs, as well as drug cartels in other countries seem to flourish with little, if any, intervention by law enforcement (who only seem to pick on the users). I don't doubt there is money changing hands in every city and state across America.
  • #30
    It is way past time to treat pot smokers as criminals while those that keep it that way enjoy getting wasted on Crown Royal and Martinis.
  • R Load more replies

  • #6
    freedom to use science - not ideology

    {This right here is the scary part apart from morality, from common sense.....from ethics? I am for legalizing pot but science apart from ethical guidance is possibly worse.....}
  • #19
    Ethical considerations, agreed. Moral considerations, not so much, permits endless debate from various ideological perspectives. This deserves proper study just like any other medical trials, although millions are already aware of benefits and side effects. The problem is the legal drug cartel, Big Pharma, who will scream bloody murder when this cuts into their already ridiculously insane profits.
  • #56
    The problem with ethical guidance is there is no real standard. Think of Mike Huckabee on one end and Choom Leader Obama on the other. NO CONSENSUS POSSIBLE.
  • #104
    I think that the beneficial as well as the adverse affects of Marijuana definitely should be researched as thoroughly as possible. Marijuana has been known to have certain medicinal benefits, such as relieving glaucoma, decreasing adverse side affects (such as loss of appetite, nausea, for example) of chemotherapy and/or radiation treatments, and extremely untractable epilepsy that cannot be put under control through regular medications or even surgery, to mention afew.

    It's agreed that our war on drugs has had disastrous results, and needs to be ended.
  • R Load more comments...