1. What does SSTB mean? See our glossary of acronyms.
    Dismiss Notice

Cannabis News

Discussion in 'Cannabis News and Activism' started by vtac, Jun 26, 2008.

  1. BigJr48

    BigJr48 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    814
    Location:
    New York, N.Y.
  2. ClearBlueLou

    ClearBlueLou unbearably light in the being....

    Messages:
    942
    Location:
    the Old Confederacy
  3. Summer

    Summer Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,297
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    You misunderstand. This is just to declassify cannabis as a schedule 1 drug @ the fed level & giving the states the right to classify it as they choose. The fed. gov't can't make/change state laws. If this comes to pass, interstate cannabis commerce will be allowed between legal states, but cannot cross state lines with any illegal state. For example, if FL becomes legal cannabis can't be transported over state lines if the surrounding states are illegal; Cali will be able to transport to NV & vice versa.

    Obviously, there are several huge political reasons for him to pass this legislation. Schumer has been my senator for the past 20 & I can assure you that very rarely has he done something just because it's the right thing to do or because the electorate wants it. But regardless of his self-serving motives, if he can bring this to pass, I will just say thank you. And I do thank him for all he's done for NY after 9/11. This said, I wish he'd disappear.
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2019
  4. CarolKing

    CarolKing Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur

    That would work out well for states like California, Oregon and Washington state where I live. I will hope it passes.

    Edit
    Almost forgot about Nevada.
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2019
    Whisper, BigJr48, macbill and 2 others like this.
  5. ClearBlueLou

    ClearBlueLou unbearably light in the being....

    Messages:
    942
    Location:
    the Old Confederacy
    Perhaps I did misunderstand, but I don’t think so.

    Yes, the bill in question can’t *force* the removal of state laws, due to the deluded notion of “states’ rights”...however, it’s a well-established principle that states cannot have laws that conflict with federal law. It is entirely possible, as I see it, for the law - removing cannabis as a controlled substance and opening it to general commerce - to be worded in a way that invalidates state laws that depend in part on the old federal prohibition stance. If states want to write their own laws, they could then produce bills that would pass muster among their *living* citizens, but laws reflecting the old drug-war excuses and pretexts should not survive a federal 180, even though they may. EG: 14th amendment trashed all state laws governing slaves; ditto state alcohol laws following the repeal of the Volstead amendment.

    I’m not saying they would necessarily fall on their own, but the fed has ways to get states in line.

    Schumer has *never* been my representative...he has never impressed me as a voice we need in Congress. If he can in fact clear away federal opposition to cannabis, then bravo and well-done to him. Otherwise, my opinion matches yours.
     
    macbill likes this.
  6. C No Ego

    C No Ego Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,679
    just like Canada the USA needs to drop UN drug law... Canada dropped UN and now entire Country legal... only way out is to drop UN influence in the Country... Fucking Pirates floating abroad running Drug wars
     
    His_Highness, Summer and macbill like this.
  7. ClearBlueLou

    ClearBlueLou unbearably light in the being....

    Messages:
    942
    Location:
    the Old Confederacy
    The UN is not responsible for our drug laws - to the contrary, the UN has always been the creature of the US government. That same government has been the driving force behind cannabis interdiction worldwide for at least the last 100 years.

    Further note on the Schumer descheduling bill and state laws: while some state laws prohibiting cannabis are older than the federal action, the Fed was never shy about pushing the states to adopt such laws, and even punishing them for not ‘cooperating’; to pretend the fed can have no role in rolling back the laws they urged on the states is to be blind toward our own internal politics on the matter.
     
    Last edited: May 12, 2019
    j-bug, BigJr48, Roth and 2 others like this.
  8. C No Ego

    C No Ego Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,679
    UN runs the drug war in the intrastate lines between American States... how else will American police be able to say - hey you with that plant points and Bang! bang you for touching plants !! where the hell is a constitutional allowance for American police to do that Shit? Pirates are doing it
     
  9. ClearBlueLou

    ClearBlueLou unbearably light in the being....

    Messages:
    942
    Location:
    the Old Confederacy
  10. C No Ego

    C No Ego Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,679
    the Evidence is Floating on the uncharted waters of the floating Elite. Pirates... coming to other Countries with their treaties ETC....
    look it up too, Canada had to drop UN drug treaties in order to legalize cannabis nationwide.
     
  11. ClearBlueLou

    ClearBlueLou unbearably light in the being....

    Messages:
    942
    Location:
    the Old Confederacy
    So that’s a ‘no’ on evidence...is that also your argument?
     
    Roth and Summer like this.
  12. C No Ego

    C No Ego Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,679
    I've got no argument... US constitiution ETC.... where in it where??? nowhere... UN treaties allow Drug law not our constitution.. i'm done with this.. antthr second of my life thinking about this Shit = Fuck that ... no more... onto the medical science man Fuck politics!!
     
    HighMtnSkier likes this.
  13. ClearBlueLou

    ClearBlueLou unbearably light in the being....

    Messages:
    942
    Location:
    the Old Confederacy
    Okay
     
    Summer likes this.
  14. Polarbearboy

    Polarbearboy Tokin' Away Since 1968

  15. OldNewbie

    OldNewbie Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,033
    It's right there in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:
    To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
    Gonzales v. Raich 545 U.S. 1 (2005) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/545/1/
    Even respondents acknowledge the existence of an illicit market in marijuana; indeed, Raich has personally participated in that market, and Monson expresses a willingness to do so in the future. More concretely, one concern prompting inclusion of wheat grown for home consumption in the 1938 Act was that rising market prices could draw such wheat into the interstate market, resulting in lower market prices. Wickard, 317 U.S., at 128. The parallel concern making it appropriate to include marijuana grown for home consumption in the CSA is the likelihood that the high demand in the interstate market will draw such marijuana into that market. While the diversion of homegrown wheat tended to frustrate the federal interest in stabilizing prices by regulating the volume of commercial transactions in the interstate market, the diversion of homegrown marijuana tends to frustrate the federal interest in eliminating commercial transactions in the interstate market in their entirety. In both cases, the regulation is squarely within Congress' commerce power because production of the commodity meant for home consumption, be it wheat or marijuana, has a substantial effect on supply and demand in the national market for that commodity.
    The trippy thing is, the federal government's only Constitutional claim to authority of much of what it does that affects us directly has been approved because of that very clause. While the founders put the power in as a shield to the feds in protecting commerce between the states, the courts have made it a sword for the fed's power over...everything.

     
    C No Ego likes this.
  16. C No Ego

    C No Ego Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,679
    Shit! I wasn't going to reply anymore , damn... anyway- they can only regulate " the smoke of cannabis sativa L" by those laws... the word marijuana to control Hemp/cannabis via reference was created and means- the smoke of cannabis sativa L . literally that is the definition.
    marihuana is tobacco, an entirely different plant species that cannabis - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solanaceae
    cannabis sis this - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabaceae

    so right Away you know there is some Shady shit there
     
    BigJr48 likes this.
  17. cybrguy

    cybrguy I mean really, WTF

    Messages:
    6,976
    Hmmm... I seem to have landed accidentally in the FUCK YOU thread...

    Growing recreational pot at home might not be allowed after all under Illinois legalization proposal, sponsors say

    Chicago Tribune
    Just more than a week after introducing a bill to legalize recreational marijuana in Illinois, sponsors have begun retooling the measure to appease critics.

    In one of the most fundamental changes, sponsors say it is likely they will eliminate a provision to let all adult state residents grow up to five plants at home.

    A member of the leading cannabis advocacy group, Illinois NORML, said if that change is made, the group will have to reconsider whether to support the bill.

    But the change would address concerns from law enforcement that the homegrown provisions would make it difficult to find illegal growers.

    State Sen. Heather Steans and state Rep. Kelly Cassidy, who are sponsors of the measure, as well as state Rep. Toi Hutchinson, confirmed they were strongly considering limiting five homegrown plants to medical marijuana patients only to ensure their access to medicine.


    [​IMG]

    “We know we’re filing an amendment,” Steans said of the homegrown cutback. “I think that is likely.”

    Westchester police Chief Steve Stelter, president of the Illinois Chiefs of Police Association, welcomed the proposed change, saying it will help prevent illegal growing operations.

    “That would make a huge difference,” Stelter said.

    The chiefs would still have concerns about how to legally check to make sure medical marijuana growers limit themselves to five plants, but that is another matter.

    The executive director of the longtime cannabis activist group Illinois NORML, Dan Linn, said he would have to consult with his advisory board on how to react to such a change.

    “We’d have to look at whether we’re still able to support the legislation,” he said.

    NORML did support the legalization of marijuana in the state of Washington, which prohibits homegrown pot for the general population, but many other states do allow homegrown, Linn said.

    Tribune coverage: Marijuana in Illinois »

    “People say to pass the best bill you can and come back later to try and make it better,” Linn said. “But we’ve had significant problems with the (existing) medical cannabis program that we still have not been able to fix.”

    The change would come in an amendment to the Cannabis Regulation and Taxation Act that sponsors hope to introduce in the next week or two. The timing is urgent, since lawmakers only have until May 31 to pass the bill in this legislative session. If approved, the measure would allow licensed dealers to sell cannabis beginning Jan. 1, 2020.

    Sponsors of the bill held months of meetings and negotiations with numerous stakeholders, including law enforcement, industry members and representatives of Gov. J.B. Pritzker. The parties have continued giving feedback of all sorts since the governor unveiled the proposal May 5.

    Sixty members of the House, a slight majority of the 118-member body, have signed a resolution asking to slow the legalization process. But Cassidy maintained that the bill is not in trouble.

    “We introduced it anticipating there will be a round of changes,” Cassidy said. “We’ve gotten a lot of good feedback.”

    The first hearing on the new legalization bill is set for Wednesday in Springfield.
    ------------------------------------
    While this would be a major disappointment, I would not want it to kill any of the bills support. Let's get it passed and work on changing it over time. Much easier to amend an existing bill than to get one passed...
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2019 at 3:57 PM
    Summer and His_Highness like this.
  18. C No Ego

    C No Ego Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,679
    Last edited: May 17, 2019 at 11:41 AM
  19. C No Ego

    C No Ego Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,679
  20. cybrguy

    cybrguy I mean really, WTF

    Messages:
    6,976
    Uh, are we getting a little ahead of ourselves?

    Illinois' marijuana market could rival Colorado's in the coming years, report finds

    Ally Marotti
    The cannabis industry in the U.S. has long been centered around states like Colorado and Oregon, but now, marijuana sales in Illinois and its neighboring states east of the Mississippi River are poised to rival those out west.

    The U.S. cannabis market is heading for massive growth, with sales that are expected to reach $22.7 billion by 2023, including $16.8 billion in recreational sales, according to a report out Tuesday from Chicago-based cannabis research firm Brightfield Group. Political support is growing around legalization efforts, and medical programs are expanding around the country.

    In Illinois, lawmakers are working to capture some of those potential recreational sales. They hope to pass a bill by the end of May that would legalize recreational use of the still federally illegal drug by January.

    Currently, the top five markets are west of the Mississippi, with Colorado, Oregon and Washington making up 42 percent of total U.S. sales, according to the Brightfield report. Sales in Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey and New York together make up 11 percent.

    By 2023, those market shares are expected to flip, Brightfield predicted, with the eastern states making up 34 percent of the market, and the western states dropping to 20 percent.


    [​IMG]

    “A lot of it comes down to population density,” said Bethany Gomez, managing director of Brightfield Group. “There’s much more opportunity in these areas that have larger populations and the market size can be larger … Illinois is going to be huge.”

    California is expected to remain on top, with one-fifth of total demand. But Illinois and Michigan are expected to rival Colorado and Nevada.

    States in the Midwest and along the East Coast are more populous than those out west, offering greater potential for long-term growth among cannabis companies, according to the report. Their marijuana programs have so far limited the number of licenses issued to operators. That has created a “fertile environment for scale and consolidation,” and added value for big-time investors, according to the report.

    Though some argue that the caps on licenses have kept out smaller operators, they have also given rise to about a dozen large, well-capitalized cannabis companies that operate in several states. Chicago-based companies like Green Thumb Industries, Grassroots and Cresco Labs are among the highest valued companies in the industry, according to the report.

    “As these big players establish themselves in the medical marijuana markets in the East, we can expect to see explosive growth from scale once these states become legal recreational markets,” according to the report.


    [​IMG]

    Illinois’ medical program has also expanded, adding more than 12,500 patients since February, when the state dropped fingerprint and background check requirements for patients, allowed people prescribed opioids access to medical marijuana, and started granting provisional access while medical card applications are reviewed.

    The report’s findings hinge on politics and other unforeseen factors. Lawmakers are already working to amend the Illinois bill, introduced earlier this month. Vermont remains the only state to legalize marijuana legislatively so far.
     

Support FC, visit our trusted friends and sponsors