Mendo Support for MMJ slipping?

A Ukiah Daily Journal reader poll shows continuing support for
Cal's medical marijuana law, but by a slipping margin. In 1996,
Mendocino County voted 64%-36% for Prop. 215. This poll shows
support down to 57-42. Although this isn't a scientifically accurate
poll, it may reflect growing dissatisfaction with abuses by MJ
growers. On the other hand, this margin is close to that of
Mendocino's Measure G private use of MJ initiative, which passed
58-42 in 2000, so maybe things aren't that different.
Following is a longish letter to the UDJ by former NORML director
Richard Cowan, opining that the problem isn't the pot growers, but
the laws. The editors and another writer reply that 'legalized' MMJ
has become a scam and is out of control. But then MJ was already
out of control before Prop 215 came along.
- D. Gieringer, Cal NORML

http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/
UDJ Poll Results

If the medical marijuana
legalization measure was
on the ballot today,
would you vote for it?

A. YES
57.28 %
B. NO
42.71 %

Marijuana growers abused, not pot laws
Ukiah Daily Journal Staff
Article Last Updated: 08/25/2007 10:52:03 PM PDT

To the Editor:

I am a former National Director of NORML and I publish MarijuanaNews.com.

This article from Marijuana News may help explain my views more completely:

Medical Marijuana Endgame: " So go ahead and die.' That would be all
right?" "Congress has made that value judgment." Not Really, But The
Bush Administration Has. The American People Have Not! At
http://www.marijuananews.com.

Your editorial "Marijuana Law Still Being Abused" ignores two
possible explanations for why some jurors refused to convict a grower
in a county where there is very strong support for cannabis, medical
and otherwise.

First, if you will actually read Prop. 215, which won despite the
people having been told by the then A. G. Dan Lungren that it would
legalize' marijuana, you will see that there are no limits on the
number of plants that a patient can grow. Absent any proof of sales,
the jurors may have opted for a strict interpretation of the law.

Alternatively, they may have been exercising their ancient right to
refuse to convict someone for violating a law which they believe to
be unjust. This principle, called Jury Nullification, should be very
dear to newspaper editors, inasmuch as the landmark case in American
history, the 1735 trial of John Peter Zenger, involved freedom of the
press. Zenger was defended by no less than Alexander Hamilton.

You say, "(W)e believe the vast majority who voted for Prop. 215 did
not mean for it to allow any local resident to start growing enormous
quantities of marijuana for people in San Francisco."

However, the text clearly states that the purpose of the Act is "To
ensure that seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and
use marijuana for medical purposes" and "To encourage the federal and
state governments to implement a plan to provide for the safe and
affordable distribution of marijuana to all patients in medical need
of marijuana."

The state government has completely failed to meet this mandate, and
the federal government has chosen the Drug War over the needs of the
sick and dying. Hence the present situation.

Your insistence that the law only allows patients to grow a few
plants for their own use is simply not consistent with the stated
purpose of the Act, because it is totally unworkable. Those most in
need, the poorest and the sickest of our fellow Californians would
suffer greatly from your interpretation of the Act.

You also propose "a new statewide ballot measure to amend Prop. 215
to specify exactly -- and limit -- what a caregiver is, how many
plants can be grown by one person, and provide for local governments
to regulate medical marijuana as they see fit as long as patients
have access to marijuana?"

Why do you think that the people will vote as you wish this time,
when they ignored the entire state establishment 11 years ago? Polls
indicate that the majority might vote for the complete legalization
of cannabis for adults, which would make the medical issue irrelevant
except for seriously ill children, who also throw up after chemo.

However, it is virtually certain that Californians would support a
program that really would put the interests of the patients first,
such as a licensed distribution system, supplied by licensed growers.
In such a context, arbitrary plant limits would be meaningless, and
would simply increase costs for the patients.

I am also disturbed by your assertion that "anyone who takes even one
thin dime in return, is nothing more than a drug dealer." Other "drug
dealers," such as doctors, pharmacists, pharmaceutical companies,
(Check the price of Marinol!) are allowed to make a profit.

Of course, everyone involved in maintaining marijuana prohibition is
allowed to make money, including police, prosecutors, prison guards
and especially newspaper editors.

Finally, your proposal that medical marijuana "can be provided
through local government growing programs in places like county jail
gardens" struck me as bizarre. What other medicines could be provided
by prisoners? However, I remembered that you want to lock up all of
your neighbors who know how to grow marijuana.

If that happened, it would be a great boon to organized crime. It
would also be socially and economically ruinous to Mendocino County,
and would further swamp the State's dysfunctional criminal justice
system.

California has built more than 30 prisons since 1980, but our inmate
population, is now nearly 180,000, twice the intended capacity of the
prisons. Perhaps the prisons could also publish our newspapers. At
least they might have a better understanding of the limits of the
criminal justice system.

Such are the victories' in our endless war on marijuana.

Richard Cowan

Palm Springs

Editor's response: I'm guessing that in Palm Springs you don't have
people crawling over each other to get to the pot gardens in their
neighborhoods, shooting each other, or polluting lands and streams
with dumped fuel oil from illegal generating facilities. I'm guessing
that in Palm Springs your pot supplies are likely grown right here in
Mendocino County and packaged nicely for you. Those people who
stemmed and seeded it were not overflowing the Palm Springs soup
kitchens and I'm guessing they wouldn't be allowed to stand around
the corners in your town all during September and October, or camp in
your shopping mall parking lots and in your parks. The people in this
county have seen the results of legalized medical marijuana gone out
of control. We are as compassionate as the next community, but we
know a scam when we see one.

Who was that guy?
Ukiah Daily Journal Staff
Article Last Updated: 09/05/2007 08:37:51 AM PDT

Who was that guy?

To the Editor:

Who was that crazy guy and why is he writing from Palm Springs? His
rambling essay shows how disconnected he is to the issues of that we
have here in Ukiah. It was amazing how he could tie all the world's
problems together and claim they are caused by those who would
restrict his freedom to grow an unlimited amount of pot plants. (I'm
still trying to figure out how a court case in 1735, which is before
the Constitution was even written is connected with Freedom of
Speech.) I was so entertained, it was almost a disappointment when he
pulled out the old reliable Medical card. But when he got started in
on his compassion for the dying, I'm thinking "who does he think he's
fooling?"

It has become abundantly clear that those who re growing are also
selling. That's why they don't want a limit on plants. They are not
terminally ill, they're not even interested in those who are, unless
they are willing to buy their weed. His repeated statement that
legalization of marijuana has overwhelming approval across the board
is a lie. Prop. 215 did not win by an overwhelming majority, the
majority that gave it a narrow margin came primarily from the coast.
And the subsequent abuse by growers, many of whom are criminals drawn
into our county with the lure of an easy profit, has caused many
citizens to regret Prop. 215 ever passed. It goes way beyond my
imagination to think of the typical seniors suffering from ill
health, suddenly taking up smoking

a weed. Could it be possible that Mr. Cowan and others who are
vehemently opposed to setting limits on the amount of plants are less
interested in any "freedoms" and more afraid of loosing their profit?

As a final note, I appreciate the editor's thoughtful response. It
was reasonable, accurate and even considerate after she had just been
accused of being the grand conspirator. It seems apparent to me that
Mr. Cowan is one of those who feel that anyone who is not agreeing
with him must be conspiring against him. That, I believe, is one of
the first signs of schizophrenia.

Ken Marshall

Ukiah

--
California NORML, 2215-R Market St. #278, San Francisco CA 94114 -
http://www.canorml.org

Come to NORML's 36th Annual National Conference
October 12-13, 2007 - Los Angeles, CA
Act now for discount rooms and reduced registration costs...
Special 'Student' and 'Senior Citizen' discounts available
http://www.norml.org / 888-67-NORML
National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Attachment: http://drugsense.org/temp/21sLgO40fQYjcM.html