Law: Choosing Between the Lesser of Two Evils.

How do we decide when something should be outlawed? How do we decide that something is wrong? Those two questions are not one in the same. Take the issues of premarital sex, alcohol consumption, smoking, excessive Twinkie feasting, etc, all of which render consequences far greater than that of ingesting marijuana, which the decision was made to outlaw, long ago. Why is that? The toxicity of smoking, alcohol, and Twinkies should be obvious, and as far as premarital sex goes, although in and of itself, it is not toxic, the results can be quite stressful to society, financially and socially. However, we do not outlaw those behaviors because the cost would far exceed the benefits, as is the case with marijuana, yet very little is done to decriminalize this plant.

The study, Lost Taxes and Other Costs of Marijuana Laws by Jon Gettman published in Forbes magazine estimates the overall retail value of the felonious marijuana market is $113 billion. That's right, oftentimes viscous criminals; rake in the cash, while we, the taxpayers, pay out approximately $41 billion per year to enforce the prohibition of this semi-toxic substance. I say semi-toxic because marijuana is known for its medicinal properties as well as its toxicity. Twinkies, as far as I know, are pure toxicity, and the same can be said for smoking. Most of the prescription drugs on the market, are far more toxic than marijuana, and probably have less medicinal value, yet we don't outlaw them.

Government reports indicate that the nation's marijuana laws cost taxpayers $41.8 billion annually. This calculation is based on (a) a reconciliation of estimates of the annual supply of marijuana in the United States and estimates of its overall value and (b) Office of Management and Budget (OMB) data on the share of the Gross Domestic Product diverted by regulatory taxes to US Government budgets. Government reports from the Office of National Drug Control Policy, the Library of Congress, and other sources indicate that the supply of marijuana in the United States is 14,349 metric tons, or 31.1 million pounds. Various price indexes from public and private sources produce a retail price of $7.87/gr or $3,570/lb, setting the overall retail value of the illicit marijuana market at $113 billion.

Since President Barack Obama took office stating that he will not use federal marijuana laws to override state laws, as the Bush administration did, requests for Medical marijuana have increased 300%. President Obama said he saw no difference between using medical marijuana and other pain control drugs. Considering the side effects, the addiction and the "street value" of certain pain control substances, medical marijauna looks benign in comparison.

What if, instead of allowing hardened criminals, access to the billions of dollars the marijuana industry brings in, we, the taxpayers had benefit of that money to execute our own "war" on drugs and addiction? If we took, even half the revenue generated, from taxing and regulating the marijuana industry, and invested it into drug prevention education, and drug rehabilitation programs, we could eventually decrease drug use and at the same time, reduce the amount of crime associated with marijuana, making more resources - including severely limited prison space, - available for housing more dangerous criminals and the funds and manpower to combat other crimes.

Without an official cost-benefit analysis of existing prohibition policy and legislation, what is our government's justification for pouring so much money into what appears to be a relatively innocuous substance? Especially, when pharmaceutical companies are allowed to distort scientific evidence to get dangerous drugs approved.

Read more...

When Governments Start Going After the Weak it's Not a Good Sign.

Notice the t-shirt on one of the agents involved in the federal raid on the sick and the dying in the photo at left. Could it be that Blackwater contractors are now taking on the truly dangerous ...dying cancer patients?

Now, I don't want to jump to any conclusions, however, the photo at left was pulled from an LA Times news report on a federal raid at the Culver City medical marijuana dispensary on August 1.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Victor B. Kenton authorized the seizure of "controlled substances, including marijuana; derivatives thereof, and edible products containing marijuana . . . receipts, notes, ledgers, records . . . reflecting the proceeds of those activities . . . electronic equipment . . . photographs, negatives, videotapes, films, addresses and/or telephone books . . . records, documents, programs, applications. . . ." according to the LA Times article, and this action comes on the same day an appellate court in San Diego rules that federal law does not preempt California's medical pot law.

"Marijuana remains a controlled substance, and it is illegal under federal law to possess, dispense or cultivate marijuana in any form," -- Sarah Pullen, a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles office of the agency.

As one commenter pointed out, the Controlled Substances Act, Schedule I excludes substances that have "an accepted use in medical treatment in the United States".
So, why are we busting medical marijuana patients with valid doctor's prescriptions? Why all the bravado? I mean, come on...what are they trying to prove? Some of these people can barely lift their head off their pillow.

Perhaps, easily grown, inexpensive marijuana threatens the Pharmaceutical industry's potential profit margin. Perhaps, the "Rambo" tactics are meant to send a clear message. Perhaps, "Big Brother"..."Big Business"..."The Man" is sitting on a big secret(s), a secret(s), that if it ever got out, could decorpocratize America.

Read more...

Medical Marijuana One Step Away from FDA Development Process

WASHINGTON D.C. – A U.S. Department of Justice-appointed judge submitted her final recommendation to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) on May 15, calling on the agency to end a forty-year government monopoly on the supply of research -grade marijuana available for Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved studies. With this monopoly broken, new studies could lead to medical marijuana’s availability in pharmacies as a legal, prescription drug. DEA Deputy Administrator Michele Leonhart must now accept the judge’s recommendation in order for the ruling to take effect, though she has no deadline for doing so and may choose to reject the recommendation.

“Medical marijuana is one step away from the FDA development process, where it should be. Science, not politics, needs to determine whether medical marijuana should be made legal, and the DEA has so far tried to block the scientific process,” said University of Massachusetts-Amherst Professor Lyle Craker, who six years ago petitioned DEA for a license to grow research-grade marijuana for use in privately-funded, FDA-approved studies that aim to develop the plant into a legal, prescription medicine. “I hope that the Deputy Administrator acts quickly to allow this critical research to move forward.”

On May 15, DEA Administrative Law Judge Mary Ellen Bittner submitted her recommendation to the DEA’s Deputy Administrator in which she found that it is “in the public interest” to end the federal monopoly on the supply of marijuana that can be used in FDA-approved research, held by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA).

Following nine days of hearings, testimony and evidence from both sides, including from researchers who reported that the government denied their requests for marijuana for use in FDA-approved research protocols, Judge Bittner concluded that, “NIDA’s system for evaluating requests for marijuana has resulted in some researchers who hold DEA registrations and requisite approval from [HHS and FDA] being unable to conduct their research because NIDA has refused to provide them with marijuana. I therefore find that the existing supply is not adequate.” She added, “Respondent’s registration to cultivate marijuana would be in the public interest.”

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) represents Craker in the proceedings, and pointed to the groundswell of support for medical research and calls for marijuana to go through the FDA development process without delay to determine whether it could be made available to patients in pharmacies.

“The DEA has forced patients to get their medicine from the street corner instead of from pharmacies by blocking the very research that would put the medical marijuana issue through proper regulatory channels,” said Allen Hopper, legal director of the ACLU Drug Law Reform Project. “The time has come for the government to stop putting politics before science and to allow the research, not the politicians, to decide whether medical marijuana should be made legal.”

Legal papers filed throughout the proceedings pointed to the fact that marijuana is the only Schedule I drug the DEA has prohibited from being produced by private laboratories for scientific research. Other controlled substances, including LSD, MDMA (also known as "Ecstasy"), heroin and cocaine, are available to researchers from DEA-licensed private laboratories.

In contrast, NIDA has remained scientists’ sole source of marijuana, despite the agency’s repeated refusal to make marijuana available for privately-funded, FDA-approved research that seeks to develop smoked or vaporized marijuana into a legal, prescription medicine. During the legal proceedings, the ACLU and others argued that such research conflicts with NIDA’s core mission, which is to study the harmful, not potentially medicinal, effects of drugs of abuse. In addition, researchers report that marijuana available through NIDA is of low quality and variety and is not optimized to meet FDA standards for prescription drug development.

Professor Craker’s proposed facility to grow high-quality medical marijuana for research purposes will be funded by the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), a non-profit pharmaceutical company with plans to develop marijuana into a fully legal, prescription medication.

“For decades, we’ve been told by the politicians that marijuana has no proven medical value while scientists have been denied the ability to prove otherwise,” said Rick Doblin, Ph.D., president and founder of MAPS. “Judge Bittner’s recommendation marks a shift in this debate. I look forward to facilitating for marijuana the same rigorous, scientific research required to bring all other prescription medicines to market.”

Thirty-eight members of the U.S. House of Representatives, Massachusetts Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and Edward Kennedy (D-MA), and a broad range of scientific, medical and public health organizations have joined Professor Craker in challenging the federal government’s policy of blocking administrative channels and obstructing research that could lead to the development of marijuana as a prescription medicine. These organizations include the Lymphoma Foundation of America, the National Association for Public Health Policy, the Multiple Sclerosis Foundation, as well as several state medical and nurses’ associations.

Despite federal prohibition, 13 states have enacted legislation protecting patients who use medical marijuana with a physician’s recommendation from prosecution under state law, and national polls consistently find that roughly 75 percent of Americans support the use of medical marijuana.

Read more...