Big change proposed for federal marijuana law.....

[lwien]

....but not big enough. The bill states that the only strains that would be federally legal are those strains that have less than .3% THC. Not less than 3% but less than .3%, Great news for those that use MJ for seizure control, but for the rest of us, not good at all.
----http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/28/health/federal-marijuana-bill/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

The passage of this bill could very well slow down, in a very big way, the overall legalization of marijuana in general. On the other hand, the passage of this bill could be a very big thing to address those who suffer from illnesses where a high CBD content would offer relief.

Do you want it to pass, or not?

 

[cybrguy]

Yeah, this could be very good for a specific group of individuals and studies but may well be bad for the legalization movement in general. There are MANY components of MJ that have varying effect and efficacy, and trying to pick winners and losers with the law when open research is just getting started is probably a BIG mistake, and destructive to the movement at large.

I think anything this restrictive (like the concentrate only programs) may be worse than nothing for everyone other than those directly benefiting from that particularly narrow approach. A much broader approach needs to be taken.

 

[Gunky]

Where's the helmet?

The beauty of this plant is that it can produce so many flavonoids and terpenes and other interesting molecules. The fact that this is the only dioecious annual - male and female flowers are segregated by plant - makes it very easy to breed new strains that emphasize certain cannabinoids. It's an absolutely marvelous plant that acts like a chemical laboratory. Diversity is a big part of what makes it so great. This stuff is dumb lawmaker grandstanding, lacking in courage or vision.

 

[grokit]

I think it's a good idea. Any legalization of mj is a step forward for the feds, no matter how tiny of a step it is it's still hopefully a foot in the door for better things to come down the line. For instance, industrial hemp has even less than .3% thc, so lets get those fields planted in texas to rescue them from gmo's and drought.

Plus once there's legal mj and hemp out there, it becomes a question of diverting the resources needed to test and differentiate between legal hemp/mj and the enforcement of the illegal variety.

 

[Snappo]

....but not big enough. The bill states that the only strains that would be federally legal are those strains that have less than .3% THC. Not less than 3% but less than .3%, Great news for those that use MJ for seizure control, but for the rest of us, not good at all.
----http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/28/health/federal-marijuana-bill/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

The passage of this bill could very well slow down, in a very big way, the overall legalization of marijuana in general. On the other hand, the passage of this bill could be a very big thing to address those who suffer from illnesses where a high CBD content would offer relief.

Do you want it to pass, or not?

I don't like the bill as proposed. .3% gives the feds a small yet deadly noose with which to hang up MJ progress at the state level indefinitely. I'd rather have the feds continue with their hands-off equivocation and just keep their nasty hooks out of regulatory enforcement, pretty much like they're doing now.

 

[FlyingLow]

I have mixed feelings, but in the end if this takes marijuana of the list of Schedule 1 controlled substances, this will have a positive effect across the nation- I think the the biggest changes will likely be seen in the current non-MJ states.

 

[Skeena]

Just like how they legalized alcohol, but high percent is not allowed ... what a waste of time.

 

[Farid]

I use MMJ high in CBD and THC, but CBD alone has a hell of a bodyload for me. I'm sure there will be people who have seizures who still need THC for relief and to stay functional, in fact I know some people that fall in that category. As long as this proposed change doesn't impact the MMJ community I see it as a (baby)step in the right direction.

Would this impact the legality of keeping large amounts of vaped bud? I doubt it would for me, as my vaped bud probably is more than .3% THC

 

[grokit]

I have mixed feelings, but in the end if this takes marijuana of the list of Schedule 1 controlled substances, this will have a positive effect across the nation- I think the the biggest changes will likely be seen in the current non-MJ states.

This raises a great point, that this narrowly-focused bill cannot become law while mj is on schedule one.
So if this law passes, mj will HAVE to be re-scheduled which will change everything eventually

Just like how they legalized alcohol, but high percent is not allowed ... what a waste of time.

I disagree; for example you're allowed to make your own wine and beer, you just can't operate a hard-liquor still at home. So the analogy holds, that you can grow your own plants but would have to purchase concentrates. This makes sense to me, it's a much more dangerous process so it gets more regulated.

 

[t-dub]

I disagree; for example you're allowed to make your own wine and beer, you just can't operate a hard-liquor still at home.

They make it a bitch but you can get a permit to operate a still at home. See S7 on the FAQ: http://www.ttb.gov/spirits/faq.shtml

Spirits

You may not produce spirits for beverage purposes without paying taxes and without prior approval of paperwork to operate a distilled spirits plant. [See 26 U.S.C. 5601 & 5602 for some of the criminal penalties.] There are numerous requirements that must be met that also make it impractical to produce spirits for personal or beverage use. Some of these requirements are filing an extensive application, filing a bond, providing adequate equipment to measure spirits, providing suitable tanks and pipelines, providing a separate building (other than a dwelling) and maintaining detailed records, and filing reports. All of these requirements are listed in 27 CFR Part 19.

Spirits may be produced for non-beverage purposes for fuel use only without payment of tax, but you also must file an application, receive TTB's approval, and follow requirements, such as construction, use, records and reports.

 

[Gunky]

I disagree; for example you're allowed to make your own wine and beer, you just can't operate a hard-liquor still at home. So the analogy holds, that you can grow your own plants but would have to purchase concentrates. This makes sense to me, it's a much more dangerous process so it gets more regulated.

The thing is making ice-water hash (bubble hash) is stupid easy, not dangerous in the least, and forms a natural part of every small grower's routine because about a third of the trichomes on the plant are located on leafy material not suitable for smoking. If you outlaw this you immediately create a class of criminals.

 

[Magic9]

I want it to pass for the kids/people it could help now. As far as our movement goes, it's detrimental. The closer we get, the more concessions we'll see from the anti- group. I think they are only making these concessions to hold off the tide until pharma companies can better isolate and extract certain compounds.

I will not settle for anything less than full decriminalization.

 

[CarolKing]

I just wish the Feds would decriminalize cannabis. On one hand these families desperately need help with their loved ones seizures and I hope this passes for them. On the other hand I don't want them screwing around with the states medical marijuana.

It seems like when the Feds mess around with stuff they tend to fuck it up.
Still, I have thought we should legalize marijuana forever. why is tobacco so good for you, yet pot isn’t?

You have to vote some of these ass holes out of office. That's vapor not smoke.

 

[samantabha]

This was in my Sunday Milwaukee Journal Sentinal (as I sat down to vape & breakfast). I laughed. So marijuana is schedule 1 (no medical benefit) while newspapers blandly debate how medical marijuana gets shipped interstate? And check out the juxtaposition of the announcement for the MS seminar (turns out the main guy, Dr. Khatri, used to be my neurologist). Does anyone get the feeling that we're living inside one MASSIVE contradiction? Like, everyone knows it's ok, but nobody is supposed to know it's ok? As for why the piece on the efficacy of using chickens to reduce your backyard tick count, I'll leave that up to someone else to interpret.

 

[lwien]

As for why the piece on the efficacy of using chickens to reduce your backyard tick count, I'll leave that up to someone else to interpret.

That's the headline that caught my attention.

 

[grokit]

Less ticks and free eggs, that's a win-win in my book

 

[samantabha]

LMAO

 

[CarolKing]

Th
By Niraj Chokshi March 9 at 3:49 PM

e historic medical marijuana bill a trio of senators plan to unveil on Tuesday has a bit of something for everyone.

The bill, which activists describe as a first for the Senate, would end the federal prohibition on medical marijuana and implement a number of critical reforms that advocates of both medical and recreational marijuana have been seeking for years, according to several people familiar with the details of the proposal. It would reclassify the drug in the eyes of the Drug Enforcement Administration, allow for limited inter-state transport of the plant, expand access to cannabis for research, and make it easier for doctors to recommend the drug to veterans and easier for banks to provide services to the industry.

“It’s the most comprehensive medical marijuana bill in Congress,” said Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, one of several groups consulted for the bill. The Compassionate Access, Research Expansion, and Respect States (CARERS) act grew out of an amendment proposed last year by Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and is being introduced by those two senators in conjunction with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.).

 

[CarolKing]

A sweeping Senate bill introduced Tuesday seeks to significantly roll back the federal government's war on medical marijuana.

The first part of the document they have it spelled marihuana, then they change it to marijuana.
CK

 

[cybrguy]

We knew, or at least I knew that Cory would be doing good and big things in the Senate. This is a great early bill for him, and for us. It is dangerous to get too hopeful with this Congress, but I am that already. Can't help myself. Please don't crush my dreams...

It may help that the early worshiper of Aqua Buddha is along for this ride. A little rethuglican cover couldn't hurt.

 

[Vicki]

I have a gut feeling the Republicans will shoot it down. Rand Paul isn't enough support.

 

[cybrguy]

I understand that view and you are likely right, but why should that be? Aren't there plenty of republicans who get high? Who have medical issues that could be resolved or at least helped my MJ? Seems to me we may even have a few in here, tho I won't be naming names...

It drives me CRAZY that the party leaders are so able at getting rank and file republicans to vote against their own interests. CRAZY I tell ya!!!!

Hmmm... I see it's time for a hit. LOL

 

[Toastface_Killah]

Honestly, if it gets shut down I don't think anyone could truthfully say they are surprised when and if it is some dickhead(s) on the rights doing, but at the same time I fully believe cannabis is one of the only bipartisan issues we have right now in the US. There does not seem to be many issues currently in this extremely polarized political climate that actually have prominent members on both sides like there is regarding the issue of cannabis reform (even with there obviously being less support on the right) being vocal about law reform. And with CPAC polls showing over 63 percent of Young conservatives favor legalization, as someone that is an extreme pessimist, I actually believe things are ready to become better..

 

[tiukauleh]

i thought this would be big news but haven't seen it mentioned here (or did i miss it?).
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidkroll/2015/03/11/is-congress-planning-to-legalize-marijuana/

mod note: This post and the following two have been merged from a separate thread.

 

[t-dub]

I stand with Rand . . .