I pray the feds never get thier hands on legalization.

I agree 100%. I don't trust our government now, imagine when/if they take over it, it will be totally monopolized. Lol forget home grows, you'll probably need an equivalent of a liquor license or something to grow your own, at a ridiculous price tag of a 100k or more.

 

You do know you can brew all your own beer/wine at home without a license. You just cant sell it tax-free. You can grow all your own tobacco too. Just cant sell it. You need a license to sell it, not make it.




"<a name="Return">Until </a> 1978, it was illegal to home-brew liquour or beer-and the rules on wine-making were somewhat ambiguous. *But a growing number of oenophiles and beer connoisseurs wanted to make their own, and they helped pressure Congress to decriminalize home-brews across the country. Today, federal rules say a household with two adults can brew up to 200 gallons of wine and the same amount of beer each year. (A few states have their own laws prohibiting the practice.) The 1978 law didn't legalize moonshining, though; you still can't brew spirits for private consumption. It is kosher, however, to own a still and process alcohol-but only if you're using the alcohol as fuel and you have a permit from the ATF. (In some states, you can purchase a legal version of moonshine from commercial distillers.)
[Read more at http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/ex... ]




FYI The feds are already involved.. See Schedule 1 narcotics






WTF is up with the cursor.. Stuck in "link mode"


They need to get it off schedule 1 and put an age limit on it. 21 and treat it like beer or wine.

 

I agree. The state thing is fine except that if you move (like I have recently) you can't get employed in places where it's still illegal. That's bull. I don't even care if it's legal I just want the fact that I chose that over percocet to not keep me from finding employment. So yeah...age requirement, tax it...don't give a damn. They tax alcohol and cigarettes too and I can afford those.


Just my humble opinion. :3

 

I mean it'd be nice to never have to worry that federal law could still screw you up no matter where you are in the US even colorado or washington.
Obama said hed let states experiment with rec They can't go against the people forever it's a movement

 

See the feds are in this conundrum because they claim on one hand that it is so dangerous and addictive, and on the other hand hold a patent on cannabis as a benign but powerful medicine.


US Patent 6630507
Held by:
The US Dept of Health and Human Services

Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants

Cannabinoids have been found to have antioxidant properties, unrelated to NMDA receptor antagonism. This new found property makes cannabinoids useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age-related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and HIV dementia. Nonpsychoactive cannabinoids, such as cannabidoil, are particularly advantageous to use because they avoid toxicity that is encountered with psychoactive cannabinoids at high doses useful in the method of the present invention.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

It is an object of this invention to provide a new class of antioxidant drugs, that have particular application as neuroprotectants, although they are generally useful in the treatment of many oxidation associated diseases.
The pharmaceutical compositions of the present invention have potent antioxidant and/or free radical scavenging properties, that prevent or reduce oxidative damage in biological systems, such as occurs in ischemic/reperfusion injury, or in chronic neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's disease, HIV dementia, and many other oxidation associated diseases.
DEFINITIONS

“Oxidative associated diseases” refers to pathological conditions that result at least in part from the production of or exposure to free radicals, particularly oxyradicals, or reactive oxygen species. It is evident to those of skill in the art that most pathological conditions are multifactorial, and that assigning or identifying the predominant causal factors for any particular condition is frequently difficult. For these reasons, the term “free radical associated disease” encompasses pathological states that are recognized as conditions in which free radicals or ROS contribute to the pathology of the disease, or wherein administration of a free radical inhibitor (e.g. desferroxamine), scavenger (e.g. tocopherol, glutathione) or catalyst (e.g. superoxide dismutase, catalase) is shown to produce detectable benefit by decreasing symptoms, increasing survival, or providing other detectable clinical benefits in treating or preventing the pathological state.

Oxidative associated diseases include, without limitation, free radical associated diseases, such as ischemia, ischemic reperfusion injury, inflammatory diseases, systemic lupus erythematosis, myocardial ischemia or infarction, cerebrovascular accidents (such as a thromboembolic or hemorrhagic stroke) that can lead to ischemia or an infarct in the brain, operative ischemia, traumatic hemorrhage (for example a hypovolemic stroke that can lead to CNS hypoxia or anoxia), spinal cord trauma, Down's syndrome, Crohn's disease, autoimmune diseases (e.g. rheumatoid arthritis or diabetes), cataract formation, uveitis, emphysema, gastric ulcers, oxygen toxicity, neoplasia, undesired cellular apoptosis, radiation sickness, and others.
The present invention is believed to be particularly beneficial in the treatment of oxidative associated diseases of the CNS, because of the ability of the cannabinoids to cross the blood brain barrier and exert their antioxidant effects in the brain. In particular embodiments, the pharmaceutical composition of the present invention is used for preventing, arresting, or treating neurological damage in Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease and HIV dementia; autoimmune neurodegeneration of the type that can occur in encephalitis, and hypoxic or anoxic neuronal damage that can result from apnea, respiratory arrest or cardiac arrest, and anoxia caused by drowning, brain surgery or trauma (such as concussion or spinal cord shock).

http://www.google.com/patents/US6630507

 

Th problem with only state deciding is some states may never want it legal. And also those not in legal/medical states are left waiting while so many other states have easy, safe, and legal access. I want to wake up one morning and find out it's fully legal federally in all states, just like with gay marriage. It's 2015 for christs sake, it's appalling that most of us are left waiting for a day that should have com already. They should legalize it fully right now and treat it like alcohol. If I want I can go an buy some mass produced commercial bud, go buy high quality bud from "micro growers", or grow my own on my own property. I'm almost 25 years old, I should be able to stop by a shop and pick up a few grams on my way home from work.

 

The government wants to keep making money off low level offenders by court fines, probation, and keeping incarceration rates high so the police can get extra tax payer money, all because they know people will find it cheaper than a dispensary.I believe that is why it is still illegal, because they feel the money they make now its better than legalization.

 

You're 100% correct because the people running the government profit from locking up the public....




http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1vjq0j_americas-...





(And this doesnt even touch on prison labor http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/10/prison-la... )

 

You're 100% correct. I'm from the NE...duh, but been living in Col.
It is SO curropt in the NE. A company pays off the righy guy, and gets the contract to grow for entire states. It's not wait till the FEDS get thier hands on it. In the NE, they own it! Republicans, conservatives or whatever get in office...IF they keep cannabis legal (Romney would not have kept it, as the pharma cos own his balls) this is how it will remain. I've not really kept track, or tabs on the NE, but I believe Mass, and Maine are pretty good.
These politicians sit around, collect suitcases of $, while they sip on the drug that cause the most deaths. Cannabis='s schedule I (same as PCP, X, etc, while coke is a schedule ii, and it can be used medically) Schedule i means there are NO medicinal value! REALLY????? FUCKING IDIOTS, CURROPT FUCKERS

 

Yip. Look at Florida. 58% of voters were in favor, than ANOTHER fucking idiot Bush amended the state construction to need 60%. Thats some MAJOR corruption! Florida is the pharma cos #1 state! If that's not proof Bush, and the Florida gov isn't TOTALLY curropt, i don't know what is. Free country my ass. It's a beautiful EXTREMELY useful plant.

 

Sad truth...Feds have had control the entire time. Need a pres with balls. Clinton said he made a mistake by not legalizing. At least Obama has left it alone, except in cases of tax, or international crimes. No "real" busts at dispensaries in Col to make any splash

 

Anyone who reads anything other than a government "study" can easily see that its prohibition is completely unfounded and counter productive. More and more people are starting to see the many benefits of cannabis via easy internet access. Just about every major poll (with exception to fox news idiots) is in favor of full legalization and treating it like alcohol.
It is one of the many situations where the public is years ahead of the legislation. Eventually the support will become overwhelming to a point that ignoring it is the best way out the office door. We are already starting to see this more and more. People are tired of the "war on weed", and are refusing to elect politicians that continue to publicly support it.

 

LMAO, is FOX still saying the polls are AGAINST legalization? The movement is FINALLY becoming strong enough to where politicians will HAVE to at least SAY they're in favot for legalization. Are any of you old enough, or know your history enough to remember "no more taxes" they're all so full of shit, and pockets full of $$$$ so when they are elected they are still with the "controllers" Big pharma, oil, lumber anything that is GOOD for the environment, but bad for thier bank accounts. I can go forever w/this, but I have things to do this month

 

It's all bitter-sweet experience. A double edged sword, a Venn diagram, an hourglass, mom dad and child, time space and energy, mic-robes organ-ism and en-tities etc..

Its all vibrations, just go with the flow and learn from bad times rather than being consumed by it.

Failure is one of the greatest teachers. Many are just too bitch to face the real truth, not half truths, not false truths, I'm talking freedom truth.
Many are still perceiving reality as 3rd dimensional you see.

 

But yeah fuck feds. Fuck autocorrect too, annoying as shit man.

 

Crime is driven by the illegal drug trade; not usage. If drugs were legal a majority of violent crime would disappear. By driving the market underground the sellers and buyers must conduct their business in a way that involves significantly more risk. This drives up the price of the product, so buyers have to commit crimes, namely theft, to fund their purchases. The sellers need to form gangs to maintain and defend their prime real estate, from other gangs, so they have the best corner to sell their product and to protect their cash. Drug dealers cannot use banks. The gangs also provide the "police" support that these sellers can't otherwise be provided by the government police forces, since their products are illegal.

The war on drugs also promotes a war on the general public in the eyes of law enforcement. Everyone is a possible "dangerous drug dealer". It gives police incentive to violate your rights. Some police have gotten into the habit of outright theft under "civil asset laws". You don't even need to be suspected of anything for them to take whatever they want. And if you're suspected of dealing drugs, no matter how little, they send in the SWAT team like you're Scarface. The police make many mistakes and innocent people, children, and pets, end up maimed or dead. Many times the responsible officers are not held accountable after an "internal investigation". This creates a great distrust in law enforcement, especially in lower income areas where the people do not have the means to fight back legally, and the officers take on the role of a bully just looking to bust anyone for anything in the eyes of the public.

If you legalize drugs and move them into legitimate store fronts, you kill the gang culture and the rates of drug related murders, rapes, and theft significantly plummet. Theft of drugs from a legitimate business can be investigated by real cops instead of needing to be initiated by gang retaliation methods. This also frees police up to investigate crimes with actual victims like murders, rapes, assaults, and thefts.

Legitimate businesses are taxed, and check ID. You don't hear about Jack Daniels or Budweiser dealers in HS bathrooms. They are also regulated. Illegal drugs could be mixed with dangerous or lethal chemicals, and dangerous substitutes are created to subvert drug tests. Legal drugs are tested for quality and purity, eliminating overdoses and deaths. Our loved ones should be given rehabilitation care and education, not a prison sentence that will ensure that they remain a drain on society, or a death sentence because of bad drugs, or the mistake of starting them in the first place.

The money that would be saved in the drug war, plus the taxable income, and the introduction of a completely new industry would create a huge financial gain. The argument that if drugs are legal, everyone would do them is a folly. I certainly would not start doing hard drugs if they were suddenly legal, and I don't know anyone that would. The people that are doing these drugs are going to do them regardless of their legality.
In legalizing them you can take the billions of annually saved funds from the drug war and taxable income and funnel that into drug education methods and treatment programs that are proven to work better than the current cycle of continually locking these people up.

It only took 13 years to learn our lesson that alcohol prohibition didn't work. Why haven't we learned our lesson in the over 70 disastrous years fighting the drug war yet?