MARK CHANDLER, ATTORNEY AT LAW
markchandlerlaw.com/
call now: 502-589-6190
LOUISVILLE AREA SERVICES
KY Marijuana Party
LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — Privacy advocates are questioning whether the Los Angeles Police Department's alleged use of a controversial cellphone tracking technology is legal.
KNX 1070's Claudia Peschiutta reports that police have lauded the effectiveness of the portable StingRay device in tracking down a suspect. However, critics are worried that other citizens' data could be compromised in the process.
Peter Scheer, executive director of the…
On the face of it, this does not appear to be a big story. What is important is the continuing effort to limit State's Rights as well as our own. Forget privacy and Patient Doctor privilege. I see a more ominous future in the DEA's march. Beware of the push for Mental Health evaluation before purchasing guns as has been suggested.
Among only the latest of the states with lawmakers proposing required drug testing for public assistance beneficiaries are Ohio, Kansas, and New Hampshire. But these bills have been popping up in state legislatures and even in Congress since the 2008 recession hit. Pitched as "cost-saving" measures to avoid wasteful spending, the irony is that Florida--the only state to have implemented drug testing for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program--
Official White House Response to Legalize and Regulate Marijuana in a Manner Similar to Alcohol. and 7 other petitions
By Gil Kerlikowske
When the President took office, he directed all of his policymakers to develop policies based on science and research, not ideology or politics. So our concern about marijuana is based on what the science tells us about the drug’s effects.
According to scientists at the National Institutes of Health- the world’s largest source of drug abuse research – marijuana use is associated with addiction, respiratory disease, and cognitive impairment. We know from an array of treatment admission information and Federal data that marijuana use is a significant source for voluntary drug treatment admissions and visits to emergency rooms. Studies also reveal that marijuana potency has almost tripled over the past 20 years, raising serious concerns about what this means for public health – especially among young people who use the drug because research shows their brains continue to develop well into their 20′s. Simply put, it is not a benign drug.
Like many, we are interested in the potential marijuana may have in providing relief to individuals diagnosed with certain serious illnesses. That is why we ardently support ongoing research into determining what components of the marijuana plant can be used as medicine. To date, however, neither the FDA nor the Institute of Medicine have found smoked marijuana to meet the modern standard for safe or effective medicine for any condition.
As a former police chief, I recognize we are not going to arrest our way out of the problem. We also recognize that legalizing marijuana would not provide the answer to any of the health, social, youth education, criminal justice, and community quality of life challenges associated with drug use.
That is why the President’s National Drug Control Strategy is balanced and comprehensive, emphasizing prevention and treatment while at the same time supporting innovative law enforcement efforts that protect public safety and disrupt the supply of drugs entering our communities. Preventing drug use is the most cost-effective way to reduce drug use and its consequences in America. And, as we’ve seen in our work through community coalitions across the country, this approach works in making communities healthier and safer. We’re also focused on expanding access to drug treatment for addicts. Treatment works. In fact, millions of Americans are in successful recovery for drug and alcoholism today. And through our work with innovative drug courts across the Nation, we are improving our criminal justice system to divert non-violent offenders into treatment.
Our commitment to a balanced approach to drug control is real. This last fiscal year alone, the Federal Government spent over $10 billion on drug education and treatment programs compared to just over $9 billion on drug related law enforcement in the U.S.
Thank you for making your voice heard. I encourage you to take a moment to read about the President’s approach to drug control to learn more.
Resources:
Gil Kerlikowske is Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy
Posted: 01/29/2013 12:37 pm EST
PROGRESS KENTUCKY IS ON FACEBOOK AT THIS LINK
WASHINGTON – It’s just January 2013, but in the race to oust Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) after nearly three decades in the Senate, one small super PAC is already exploring all options.
Progress Kentucky, launched in December, was born out of discussions among Democratic activist Shawn Reilly, who now heads the super PAC, and his friends as they debated how to defeat McConnell in 2014.
"Nobody else is doing it. So let’s start a super PAC and make it a grassroots effort," Reilly said, recalling the reasoning process. "Make it of the people of Kentucky and for the people of Kentucky."
Reilly has a progressive background, having worked for Americans Against Escalation in Iraq in its 2007 summer campaign as well as on a number of statewide and local races in Kentucky. Before starting Progress Kentucky, he was a member of the executive committee of the state Democratic Party.
His group’s first order of business is to find candidates to take on McConnell from both the Democratic Party in the general election and the Republican Party in a primary challenge. As Politico reported on Monday, Progress Kentucky is in contact with Tea Party groups across the Bluegrass State to try to convince a credible conservative to run against McConnell in the primary. The group has already sent out a petition to 22 candidates — Democrats, Republicans and independents — to see if anyone is willing to challenge the state’s senior senator.
By actively seeking out candidates, Reilly said, his super PAC is letting them know that they’ll have support if they run. "Hey, if you want to run, you’re going to have some support on the ground here to help you," he said.
It may seem strange that a liberal Democratic organization would be working with Tea Party supporters, but Reilly said there are important areas in which the two groups agree.
"They are just as concerned with [McConnell's] corruption and crony capitalism — some of the things that he’s done over the years in terms of earmarks," Reilly said. "They are just as much concerned about those things as people on the left are. They’re looking for candidates that can deliver that type of message, and we’re looking at potentially supporting those kind of candidates who can deliver that good-government, anti-corruption type of message."
In fact, this would not be the first time that a Democratic group involved itself in a Republican primary campaign with the intent of knocking off the candidate with the better chance of winning the general election.
Last year, Senate Majority PAC, a Democratic super PAC, ran ads attacking Missouri businessman John Brunner in the GOP Senate primary because they thought he could have seriously challenged the vulnerable Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) in the general election. At the same time, McCaskill’s campaign ran ads promoting then-Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.), the seemingly weakest candidate in the Republican field. Akin went on to win the three-way Republican primary and then fulfill Democratic hopes and dreams by laying waste to his own campaign with bizarre comments about rape.
In the 2012 Indiana GOP Senate primary, the super PAC American Bridge 21st Century released numerous memos and online videos attacking then-Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) for not paying taxes in the Hoosier State and for residing primarily in Washington, D.C. These efforts, while not central to Lugar’s primary loss to Indiana state treasurer Richard Mourdock, helped drive negative news against Lugar during the early stages of the race. Mourdock went on to mimic Akin and lose the general election after spouting inappropriate comments about rape.
But McConnell is not Akin or Mourdock. To pull off something like this, Progress Kentucky is going to need money. So far, it is relying largely on grassroots donations and not on the kind of large contributors that most major super PACs use to fill their coffers. The group has a fundraising target of $100,000 by the end of February and hopes to raise up to $2 million to fund television, field and other voter targeting activities.
The group has also been in contact with labor unions in Kentucky and helped to roll out a report by the Public Campaign Action Fund, a campaign finance reform group, tying McConnell’s use of the filibuster to particular campaign donors. Those connections could help Progress Kentucky as it takes on the incumbent Republican senator.
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) suggested the Obama Administration may hve been smuggling guns to jihadist groups in the Middle East in a possible “international Fast and Furious” gun running operation.
If she’d committed murder, Carla could have gotten assistance to feed her children. But because the crime she committed was related to drugs, she can’t.
December 21, 2012 |
Without much prodding she admitted to me that she had retuned to prostitution: “I am putting myself at risk for HIV to get my kids a f—ing happy meal.”
Despite looking high and low for a job, Carla explained, she was still unemployed. Most entry-level jobs felt out of reach with her drug record, but what’s worse, even the state wasn’t willing to throw her a temporary life preserver.
You see, Carla is from one of the 32 states in the country that ban anyone convicted of a drug felony from collecting food stamps. With the release of the Global Burden of Disease Study last week, it bears looking at how we are perpetuating burdens among the most vulnerable Americans with our outdated laws.
If she’d committed rape or murder, Carla could have gotten assistance to feed herself and her children, but because the crime she committed was a drug felony, Carla joined the hundreds of thousands of drug felons who are not eligible.
The 1996 passage of the Welfare Reform Act was supposedly implemented to prevent drug addicts from selling their food stamps for drugs. But that concern is virtually unwarranted today. Unlike old food-stamp coupons, today’s food stamps are distributed electronically, which makes selling or trading them quite difficult.
Nonetheless, the law persists. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, nine states have a lifetime ban for food-stamp eligibly for people convicted of drug felonies. Twenty-three states have a partial ban, such as permitting eligibility for persons convicted of drug possession but not sale, or for persons enrolled in drug treatment programs.
Denying food stamp benefits to people convicted of drug offenses is an excessive and ineffective crime control strategy. The policy increases an individual’s risk of returning to prison by making it more difficult for people to survive after they get out, slowing or possibly even preventing their reintegration into society. People without the financial cushion necessary to get through the initial period of job searching and re-establishing a life have little choice but to turn to illegal means to make ends meet.
What’s more, the food-stamp ban is a law that works against good public health policy. As a doctor who cares predominantly for people who are released from prison, I see the damaging consequences of this ban on food stamps. I have seen patients of mine with diabetes go without food and end up hospitalized with low blood sugar, and still others with HIV skip their antiretrovirals because they don’t have food to take with their pills. Not having access to food is associated with bad health outcomes including worsening diabetes, HIV, depression. Young children face anemia, diabetes, and depression.
Women with children are especially affected. It’s estimated that 70,000 women and their children are banned from obtaining food stamps. This means mothers who are simply trying to feed themselves and their children, and who are trying to get back on their feet after serving their time, are banned from receiving the money to pay for the basics necessary to survive. Meanwhile, 46 million others, including college graduates and PhDs with far more resources, can receive food aid.
No other criminal conviction results in such a ban—not arson, not rape, not even murder.
Carla was arrested at 20 for selling marijuana. At the time, she had also been making money working for her “boyfriend” as a sex worker. Her boyfriend was also arrested for robbery. He could qualify for food stamps upon release. But not Carla. She continues to pay for selling marijuana— a drug which two states have now voted to legalize outright—and the price is health risks for herself and for her children.
thomas vance Published: December 17, 2012 11:30AM
Well the year is ending and we are looking forward to the New Year with hope and anticipation when it comes to marijuana law reform. Several big changes are working their way through the system but there will not be any changes to the drug law situation till after the New Year.
The Senate Judiciary Committee will meet in January to, according to Senator Patrick Leahy Chairman of the committee, hold a hearing in light of recently passed State laws legalizing personal marijuana use. Given the fiscal constraints of Federal Law enforcement, Leahy asked in a letter to the Office of National Drug Control Policy Director Gil Kerlikowske how the administration plans to use Federal resources in light of new laws in Washington and Colorado, as well as what recommendations the agency is making to the Department of Justice. Time to start burying that committee in letters! Listed below are the current committee members. They might change after the new Congress in January but most will remain the same.
Senator Patrick Leahy, D Vermont, Senator Herb Kohl, D Wisconsin, Senator Dianne Feinstein, D California, Senator Chuck Shumer, D NewYork, Senator Dick Durbin D Illinois, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, D Rhode Island, Senator Amy Klobuchar, D Minnesota, Senator Al Franken, D Minnesota, Senator Christopher Coons, D Delaware, Senator Richard Blumenthal, D Connecticut, Senator Chuck Grassley, R Iowa, Senator Orrin Hatch, R Utah, Senator Jon Kyl, R Arizona, Senator Jeff Sessions, R Alabama, Senator Lindsey Graham, R South Carolina, Senator John Cornyn, R Texas, Senator Michal Lee, R Utah, and Senator Tom Coburn, R Oklahoma. When you write them be sure to address your letters and emails to Judicial Committee Member Senator so and so, or address the letters to the committee as a whole. This is important as Senators do not address concerns of the constituents of other Senators and they will tell you to write your own Senator, but as the committee or a member of the committee they should take your letter under consideration.
Published: December 15, 2012
A recent national poll concluded that 43 percent of Americans believe unemployment and job creation is the most important issue facing our country. So it’s no surprise that Republicans and Democrats in Washington claim to be big supporters of creating jobs.
But the truth is D.C. policy-makers on both sides of the aisle stifle jobs and opportunity with regulations and policies that hurt our work force. And often, it flies in the face of common sense. The perfect example of this is the debate over industrial hemp.
Prior to World War II, Kentucky led the nation in providing 94 percent of all industrialized hemp. However, it was outlawed under an umbrella law that made marijuana illegal. This was simply because they are in the same botanical family and look similar.
But there are major differences in the two plants. Marijuana is made up of 20 percent tetrohydrocannabinol (THC), the mind-altering chemical, while industrial hemp plants contain less than 0.3 percent.
Comparing hemp to marijuana is like comparing poppy seeds found on bagels to OxyContin. Poppy seeds are in the same family of opiate — the same family that contains codeine, morphine, OxyContin and even heroin.
Yet, you can buy and consume food containing poppy seeds, as thousands of Americans do each day, without experiencing the narcotic effects the rest of its plant is harvested for.
So, the issue with hemp isn’t that the plant is harmful. It’s that the plant might be mistaken for marijuana.
This presents some challenges for law enforcement. But we can address those challenges. And we can return to growing and producing hemp in Kentucky. And in the process, create jobs and opportunity here.
Let me share an example of the economic potential for industrial hemp.
Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps is based in California and sells products made from hemp plants. David Bronner, the company’s CEO, says it grossed over $50 million in sales this past year. But since the production of industrial hemp is outlawed in America, the company must import 100 percent of the hemp used in their products from other countries.
The company sends hundreds of thousands of U.S. dollars every year to other countries because American farmers are not allowed to grow this plant. The U.S. is the only industrialized nation in the world that does not allow the legal growth of hemp.
Today, hemp products are sold around the U.S. in forms of paper, cosmetics, lotions, auto parts, clothes, cattle feed and so much more. If we were to start using hemp plants again for paper, we could ultimately replace using trees as the main source for our paper supply.
One acre of industrial hemp plants can grow around 15,000 pounds of green hemp in about 110 days. For every ton of hemp converted into paper, we could save 12 trees. It is a renewable, sustainable, environmentally conscious crop.
Back in August, I stood alongside Kentucky Agriculture Commissioner James Comer and a bipartisan group of legislators and promised Kentuckians that I would join the fight to allow the growth and production of industrial hemp. Comer stated that day that the soil and the climate in Kentucky are perfect for the growth of hemp, and that could ultimately allow the commonwealth to be the nation’s top producer.
Recently, Comer revived the long-dormant Kentucky Hemp Commission by calling its first meeting in more than 10 years. This took real leadership and I applaud him for his action. To help get the ball rolling and show our commitment, Bronner wrote a $50,000 check to the commission and I have pledged to match that donation from my personal political action committee.
While Comer and the commission work to address this issue in Kentucky, I have co-sponsored legislation in the U.S. Senate that would require the federal government to honor state laws allowing production of industrial hemp and would exclude industrial hemp from the definition of marijuana.
My vision for the farmers and manufacturers of Kentucky is to see us start growing hemp, creating jobs and leading the nation in this industry again. These jobs will be ripe for the taking, and I want the farmers in Kentucky to be the first in line.
Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2012/12/15/2444391/rand-paul-legalize-hemp-to-aid.html#storylink=cpy
AND HOW THE UNITED NATIONS CONTROLS ALL NARCOTICS INCLUDING (BUT NOT LIMITED TO) CANNABIS AND HEMP.
COULD THIS BE THE REAL REASON WHY THE UNITED STATES HAS NOT ADOPTED NEW LAWS AND LEGAL OPINIONS ON MARIJUANA?
IS IT THE UNITED NATIONS WE SHOULD BE PROTESTING OR OUR OWN GOVERNMENTS? DOES OUR OWN GOVERNMENT EVEN HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER THE MATTER?
THE N W O OVER RIDES OUR OWN COUNTRY’S LAWS, AND RULE OF THE PEOPLE BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE…
HERE IS A LINK TO THE ENTIRE PDF….
SINGLE CONVENTION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS, 1961,
AS AMENDED BY THE 1972 PROTOCOL AMENDING THE
SINGLE CONVENTION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS, 1961
PREAMBLE
The Parties,
Concerned with the health and welfare of mankind,
Recognizing that the medical use of narcotic drugs continues to be indispensable for the relief of pain and suffering and that adequate provision must be made to ensure the availability of narcotic drugs for such purposes,
Recognizing that addiction to narcotic drugs constitutes a serious evil for the individual and is fraught with social and economic danger to mankind,
Conscious of their duty to prevent and combat this evil,
Considering that effective measures against abuse of narcotic drugs require co-ordinated and universal action,
Understanding that such universal action calls for international co-operation guided by the same principles and aimed at common objectives,
Acknowledging the competence of the United Nations in the field of narcotics control and desirous that the international organs concerned should be within the framework of that Organization,
Desiring to conclude a generally acceptable international convention replacing existing treaties on narcotic drugs, limiting such drugs to medical and scientific use, and providing for continuous international co-operation and control for the achievement of such aims and objectives,
Hereby agree as follows:
Article 1
DEFINITIONS
1. Except where otherwise expressly indicated or where the context otherwise requires, the following definitions shall apply throughout the Convention:
a) “Board” means the International Narcotics Control Board,
b) “Cannabis” means the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant (excluding the seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops) from which the resin has not been extracted, by whatever name they may be designated.
c) “Cannabis plant” means any plant of the genus Cannabis,
d) “Cannabis resin” means the separated resin, whether crude or purified, obtained from the cannabis plant.
e) “Coca bush” means the plant of any species of the genus Erythroxylon.
f) “Coca leaf” means the leaf of the coca bush except a leaf from which all ecgonine, cocaine and any other ecgonine alkaloids have been removed.
g) “Commission” means the Commission on Narcotic Drugs of the Council.
h) “Council” means the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations.
i) “Cultivation” means the cultivation of the opium poppy, coca bush or cannabis plant.
j) “Drug” means any of the substances in Schedules I and II, whether natural or synthetic.
k) “General Assembly” means the General Assembly of the United Nations.
1 Note by the Secretariat: The Preamble to the Protocol amending the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, reads as follows:
“The Parties to the Present Protocol,
“Considering the provisions of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, done at New York on 30 March 1961 (hereinafter called the Single Convention),
“Desiring to amend the Single Convention
“Have agreed as follows:”
- 1 –
l) “Illicit traffic” means cultivation or trafficking in drugs contrary to the provisions of this Convention.
m) “Import” and “export” mean in their respective connotations the physical transfer of drugs from one State to another State, or from one territory to another territory of the same State.
n) “Manufacture” means all processes, other than production, by which drugs may be obtained and includes refining as well as the transformation of drugs into other drugs.
o) “Medicinal opium” means opium which has undergone the processes necessary to adapt it for medicinal use.
p) “Opium” means the coagulated juice of the opium poppy.
q) “Opium poppy” means the plant of the species Papaver somniferum L.
r) “Poppy straw” means all parts (except the seeds) of the opium poppy, after mowing.
s) “Preparation” means a mixture, solid or liquid, containing a drug.
t) “Production” means the separation of opium, coca leaves, cannabis and cannabis resin from the plants from which they are obtained.
u) “Schedule I”, “Schedule II”, “Schedule III” and “Schedule IV” mean the correspondingly numbered list of drugs or preparations annexed to this Convention, as amended from time to time in accordance with article 3.
v) “Secretary-General” means the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
w) “Special stocks” means the amounts of drugs held in a country or territory by the Government of such country or territory for special government purposes and to meet exceptional circumstances; and the expression “special purposes” shall be construed accordingly.
x) “Stocks” means the amounts of drugs held in a country or territory and intended for:
i) Consumption in the country or territory for medical and scientific purposes,
ii) Utilization in the country or territory for the manufacture of drugs and other substances, or
iii) Export;
but does not include the amounts of drugs held in the country or territory,
iv) By retail pharmacists or other authorized retail distributors and by institutions or qualified persons in the duly authorized exercise of therapeutic or scientific functions, or
v) As “special stocks”.
y) Territory” means any part of a State which is treated as a separate entity for the application of the system of import certificates and export authorizations provided for in article 31. This definition shall not apply to the term “territory” as used in articles 42 and 46.
2. For the purposes of this Convention a drug shall be regarded as “consumed” when it has been supplied to any person or enterprise for retail distribution, medical use or scientific research; and “consumption” shall be construed accordingly.
Article 2
SUBSTANCES UNDER CONTROL
1. Except as to measures of control which are limited to specified drugs, the drugs in Schedule I are subject to all measures of control applicable to drugs under this Convention and in particular to those prescribed in article 4 c), 19, 20, 21, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 and 37.
2. The drugs in Schedule II are subject to the same measures of control as drugs in Schedule I with the exception of the measures prescribed in article 30, paragraphs 2 and 5, in respect of the retail trade.
3. Preparations other than those in Schedule III are subject to the same measures of control as the drugs which they contain, but estimates (article 19) and statistics (article 20) distinct from those dealing with these drugs shall not be required in the case of such preparations, and article 29, paragraph 2 c) and article 30, paragraph 1 b) ii) need not apply.
4. Preparations in Schedule III are subject to the same measures of control as preparations containing drugs in Schedule II except that article 31, paragraphs 1 b) and 3 to 15 and, as regards their acquisition and retail distribution, article 34, paragraph b), need not apply, and that for the purpose of estimates (article 19) and statistics (article 20) the information required shall be restricted to the quantities of drugs used in the manufacture of such preparations.
- 2 –
5. The drugs in Schedule IV shall also be included in Schedule I and subject to all measures of control applicable to drugs in the latter Schedule, and in addition thereto:
a) A Party shall adopt any special measures of control which in its opinion are necessary having regard to the particularly dangerous properties of a drug so included; and
b) A Party shall, if in its opinion the prevailing conditions in its country render it the most appropriate means of protecting the public health and welfare, prohibit the production, manufacture, export and import of, trade in, possession or use of any such drug except for amounts which may be necessary for medical and scientific research only, including clinical trials therewith to be conducted under or subject to the direct supervision and control of the Party.
6. In addition to the measures of control applicable to all drugs in Schedule I, opium is subject to the provisions of article 19, paragraph 1, subparagraph f), and of articles 21 bis, 23 and 24, the coca leaf to those of articles 26 and 27 and cannabis to those of article 28.
7. The opium poppy, the coca bush, the cannabis plant, poppy straw and cannabis leaves are subject to the control measures prescribed in article 19, paragraph 1, subparagraph e), article 20, paragraph 1, subparagraph g), article 21 bis and in articles 22 to 24; 22, 26 and 27; 22 and 28; 25; and 28, respectively:
8. The Parties shall use their best endeavours to apply to substances which do not fall under this Convention, but which may be used in the illicit manufacture of drugs, such measures of supervision as may be practicable.
9. Parties are not required to apply the provisions of this Convention to drugs which are commonly used in industry for other than medical or scientific purposes, provided that:
a) They ensure by appropriate methods of denaturing or by other means that the drugs so used are not liable to be abused or have ill effects (article 3, paragraph 3) and that the harmful substances cannot in practice be recovered; and
b) They include in the statistical information (article 20) furnished by them the amount of each drug so used.
Article 3
CHANGES IN THE SCOPE OF CONTROL
1. Where a Party or the World Health Organization has information which in its opinion may require an amendment to any of the Schedules, it shall notify the Secretary-General and furnish him with the information in support of the notification.
2. The Secretary-General shall transmit such notification, and any information which he considers relevant, to the Parties, to the Commission, and, where the notification is made by a Party, to the World Health Organization.
3. Where a notification relates to a substance not already in Schedule I or in Schedule II,
i) The Parties shall examine in the light of the available information the possibility of the provisional application to the substance of all measures of control applicable to drugs in Schedule I;
ii) Pending its decision as provided in subparagraph iii) of this paragraph, the Commission may decide that the Parties apply provisionally to that substance all measures of control applicable to drugs in Schedule I. The Parties shall apply such measures provisionally to the substance in question;
iii) If the World Health Organization finds that the substance is liable to similar abuse and productive of similar ill effects as the drugs in Schedule I or Schedule II or is convertible into a drug, it shall communicate that finding to the Commission which may, in accordance with the recommendation of the World Health Organization, decide that the substance shall be added to Schedule I or Schedule II.
- 3 –
4. If the World Health Organization finds that a preparation because of the substances which it contains is not liable to abuse and cannot produce ill effects (paragraph 3) and that the drug therein is not readily recoverable, the Commission may, in accordance with the recommendation of the World Health Organization, add that preparation to Schedule III.
5. If the World Health Organization finds that a drug in Schedule I is particularly liable to abuse and to produce ill effects (paragraph 3) and that such liability is not offset by substantial therapeutic advantages not possessed by substances other than drugs in Schedule IV, the Commission may, in accordance with the recommendation of the World Health Organization, place that drug in Schedule IV.
6. Where a notification relates to a drug already in Schedule I or Schedule II or to a preparation in Schedule III, the Commission, apart from the measure provided for in paragraph 5, may, in accordance with the recommendation of the World Health Organization, amend any of the Schedules by:
a) Transferring a drug from Schedule I to Schedule II or from Schedule II to Schedule I; or
b) Deleting a drug or a preparation as the case may be, from a Schedule.
7. Any decision of the Commission taken pursuant to this article shall be communicated by the Secretary-General to all States Members of the United Nations, to non-member States Parties to this Convention, to the World Health Organization and to the Board. Such decision shall become effective with respect to each Party on the date of its receipt of such communication, and the Parties shall thereupon take such action as may be required under this Convention.
8. a) The decisions of the Commission amending any of the Schedules shall be subject to review by the Council upon the request of any Party filed within ninety days from receipt of notification of the decision. The request for review shall be sent to the Secretary-General together with all relevant information upon which the request for review is based;
b) The Secretary-General shall transmit copies of the request for review and relevant information to the Commission, the World Health Organization and to all the Parties inviting them to submit comments within ninety days. All comments received shall be submitted to the Council for consideration;
c) The Council may confirm, alter or reverse the decision of the Commission, and the decision of the Council shall be final. Notification of the Council’s decision shall be transmitted to all States Members of the United Nations, to non-member States Parties to this Convention, to the Commission, to the World Health Organization, and to the Board;
d) During pendency of the review the original decision of the Commission shall remain in effect.
9. Decisions of the Commission taken in accordance with this article shall not be subject to the review procedure provided for in article 7.
Article 4
GENERAL OBLIGATIONS
The parties shall take such legislative and administrative measures as may be necessary:
a) To give effect to and carry out the provisions of this Convention within their own territories;
b) To co-operate with other States in the execution of the provisions of this Convention; and
c) Subject to the provisions of this Convention, to limit exclusively to medical and scientific purposes the production, manufacture, export, import, distribution of, trade in, use and possession of drugs.
by David Borden, December 10, 2012, 02:54pm
Posted in:
A mostly great piece in Rolling Stone this weekend, "Obama’s Pot Problem," missed the mark on the federal preemption question — can the feds shut down Washington and Colorado’s legalized regulation systems? Tim Dickinson wrote the following on that subject:
[T]he administration appears to have an open-and-shut case: Federal law trumps state law when the two contradict. What’s more, the Supreme Court has spoken on marijuana law: In the 2005 case Gonzales v. Raich contesting medical marijuana in California, the court ruled that the federal government can regulate even tiny quantities of pot – including those grown and sold purely within state borders – because the drug is ultimately connected to interstate commerce. If the courts side with the administration, a judge could issue an immediate injunction blocking Washington and Colorado from regulating or taxing the growing and selling of pot – actions that would be considered trafficking under the Controlled Substances Act.
But a former Bush administration official quoted in the New York Times on Thursday, former DOJ civil division head Gregory Katsas, made the opposite prediction. Katsas was "skeptical" that a preemption lawsuit would succeed, according to the Times. Why? Perhaps because it’s not just that the feds can’t force states to criminalize drug possession, as Kevin Sabet selectively pointed out to Dickinson. It’s also the case that they probably can’t directly force the states to criminalize sales either. The Controlled Substances Act in fact leans against federal preemption of state drug policy, as pointed out in a law professors brief on preemption submitted in a California case this year.
Dickinson also pointed out that federal officials had used threats to prosecute state employees involved in implementing regulations for medical marijuana. In my opinion the US Attorney letters were deliberately vague — scary enough to influence state officials, but in most if not all cases stopping short of explicitly making that threat. A better piece of evidence, I think, is that in 16 years of state medical marijuana laws, no federal prosecutor has ever tried to actually invalidate such a law in court, not even after the Raich ruling. Why not? They must not think they have a slam dunk case. And if preemption is not a slam dunk for medical marijuana, then it’s not a slam dunk when it comes to legalization either, although there are additional arguments to throw against full legalization.
The reality is that no one knows how this will turn out if it goes to court. Raich established that federal police agencies can use their powers in medical marijuana states to continue to criminalize marijuana federally, justified by the Interstate Commerce Clause. But that is not the same as having the power to forbid states from granting exceptions to the states’ own anti-marijuana sales laws, which in legal terms is what the regulatory frameworks do, and plenty of smart lawyers are skeptical that they can do that. This is not a slam dunk either way.
A six-year-old California boy who suffers severe seizures that leave him shaking on the ground and crying for help has finally found some relief, his family says.
Jayden David now takes a dose of medical marijuana.
"He’s in pain and suffering and crying," father Jason David said. "You can’t help him no matter what. What are you supposed to do? You have to do whatever it takes to save their life."
Jayden’s seizures were an almost daily nightmare, David told CNN. His son’s life was so crippled by the violent shaking caused by Dravet’s syndrome, a rare form of epilepsy, he couldn’t walk or eat solid food and he had been rushed to the hospital in their hometown of Oakland more than 40 times.
Jayden was even taking 22 pills a day, though nothing improved his condition.
So last year, David gave his son a liquid form of marijuana, which is legal for some medical purposes in California. The results were dramatic, David said.
For the first time since he was four-months-old, Jayden can now make it through a day without a seizure, his father said.
In the past year he has been able to walk, run, swim and play with other children.
His father has also begun to take Jayden off the two dozen anti-seizure pills he had been prescribed, believing they might have kept the boy from developing properly, CNN reported.
Harborside Health Center, a medical marijuana clinic in Oakland, California, said Jayden isn’t the only child patient they help.
Children with severe autism, epilepsy, ADHD and cancer can be helped by medicinal marijuana, executive director Steven DeAngelo said.
12/8/2012 8:59:00 AM
Kentucky State Police commissioner against hemp
By BRUCE SCHREINER
Associated Press
FRANKFORT, Ky. – Kentucky State Police Commissioner Rodney Brewer said his agency is opposed to proposals to grow industrial hemp in Kentucky even though he sees the benefits for the agriculture industry.
Brewer said after a meeting of the newly restarted Kentucky Hemp Commission that state police are concerned the agricultural pluses will be offset by law enforcement minuses such as distinguishing between hemp and its cousin, marijuana.
"It’s incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to the casual observer or even the astute observer to tell the difference between hemp and marijuana as its being grown" he said. He added that problem becomes even more difficult when police use helicopters to search for marijuana fields, a common practice.
Hemp and marijuana are the same species, cannabis sativa, but are genetically distinct. Hemp has a negligible content of THC, the psychoactive compound that gives marijuana users a high.
The commission, led by Agriculture Commissioner James Comer, held its second meeting since it came out of a decade-long dormancy. Comer is aggressively pursuing state legislation that would allow hemp, which is illegal to grow in the United States, to be grown in Kentucky with federal approval.
Comer says the crop could provide agriculture and manufacturing jobs in Kentucky, as it once did during World War II. U.S. retail sales of hemp products exceeded $400 million last year, according to industry estimates.
The versatile crop can be turned into paper, clothing, food, biofuels, lotions and many other products.
MY RESPONSE TO THE ARTICLE (WHICH HASN’T BEEN APPROVED YET (?)).
What "really" bothers me is the fact that it seems the "Police Departments" throughout the state of Kentucky seem to be the only ones that are making waves over the "Hemp" bill. Yes, I said Hemp, not marijuana – That being said I am for repealing the prohibition on both.
Now, there are two problems that may be itching the necks of the police departments. One is that they really can’t tell the difference between the two plants. I do not see that as a problem because first of all they should be educated enough to be able to tell the difference and two, I’m sure there is some kind of quick field test to verify exactly what type of plant that it is by the THC level.
Then again, it would be nearly impossible to grow "good grade" "Marijuana" outdoors if there were Hemp fields anywhere (or everywhere) nearby – Hemp will definitely override the marijuana plants which just might irritate the growers of marijuana and a few of their business partners. Hmmm.
I am pro HEMP and Marijuana (Cannabis). HEMP should be grown in the fields and Cannabis for consumption grown indoors – and BOTH should be legitimately freed !!!!
But I guess there is nothing like a black market plant to line your pants pockets with….
God Bless the Farmers!
ShereeKrider
by Tonya Davis on Sunday, November 25, 2012 at 9:33pm ·
Lawmakers… Please don’t let me die knowing that this plant could have saved me and you denied the same access as 18 states and DC as well as the 4 federal patients. You can stand up for me and many folks like me..
(I just want to say thank you for reposting my Open Letter Note.)
Come on Obama Administration… I need access to the whole plant of cannabis. I do not buy …. sell or grow… I should have the right to grow it like tomatoes for my medicine. I should be able to use its oils and juice its leaf or eat is raw. or smoke a joint whichever I need at the time.End marijuana Prohibition TODAY!!! and also SAVE Americans at the same time. This plant is the only thing that could save my life. Facebooker’s will you share this everywhere please.
This is an open letter to my Ohio legislators.
I have nowhere else to turn. I hope you hear my cries for help and I hope you stand up for me. Representative Bobby Hagan will be Re introducing the Ohio medical compassion act which I hope you will consider cosponsoring in January 2013.
It would merely allow Ohio’s doctors and patients to decide whether or not medical cannabis could benefit them or not. It would allow the department of health to keep an eye on the program and make sure there were no abuses. Anyone that is in the program would be in a database so that you can keep track of this act of compassion.
We also believe that it would save Ohio taxpayers millions of dollars by not arresting, incarcerating and prosecuting folks for making a choice using cannabis as medicine. we also believe that the Obama administration would not bother our program because there would not be storefronts or dispensaries selling the product.
Over 73% of Ohioans support the compassionate use of marijuana..I am not sure you are aware but our sister state of Michigan has a medical cannabis program. We believe that we should have the same rights as those folks just across our border.
Also Colorado and Washington just legalized marijuana for personal use.
My name is Tonya Davis and I’m your constituent. I am a mother, grandmother, sister, daughter. I could be your neighbor, friend, coworker. You have seen me at the Ohio Statehouse over the last decade in a suit rolling around in my wheelchair trying to bring your attention to alternative medication that is actually safer than aspirin. Yes I’m talking about medical cannabis and this has been my choice of medicine. For a long time you said to me to "bring in a doctor that supports this issue" I have! you have said "bring in the science that supports cannabis as medicine" I have.. You have said " get a Republican on board" WE HAVE… we have jumped through the hoops that you have asked us to jump through.
We have a certified petition for the Ohio alternative treatment amendment that was certified by the SOS and the AG October of last year. We currently have house Bill 214 that is being ignored in the health committee because our speaker of the house refuses to give it a hearing. Now I’m asking you to save my life.
My whole life I have begged for help no one ever hears me. I will be heard this time because this is my life I’m fighting for and I’m going to die on my terms.
Our government knows that cannabis is a medicine and that it is a neuro protective and antioxidant. they have patents on it. I am literally fighting for my life and my independence as well as tryin to keep my cognitive thinking okay. By allowing me the same access as the 18 states plus Washington DC as well as the four patients that are currently allowed on federal level …it is not harming anyone.
I deserve that same access even though I am in the state of Ohio. I should not have to go die like a wounded animal in the woods. (going to a state that does have medical cannabis laws) where I have no family and a support system.
I am not a drug addict, suffer from mental illness or have any type of criminal record.
I do have my Ohio doctors support , I have my pharmacist support… I have my out-of-state written recommendation from my cannabinoid specialist . I have lived in same place for the decade ive fought for this issue. Here is a video clip of me and my cannabinoid specialist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gP5QOvkv77Y&feature=share
My neurologist came into my hospital room and told me a year ago that there was nothing that they can do for me anymore except keep me comfortable and treat symptoms. I have massive calcium deposits on my brain. I have pseudo-hypo parathyroidism which has completely disabled me and caused major medical problems such as crippling arthritis ,diseased esophagus, hiatal hernia ….inflamed bowel disease with adhesions wrapped around it…. severe hypocalcaemia…. very high phosphorous.. my blood pressure is all over the map … my heart rate is through the roof. All of this can be proven and backed up. Will you do the right thing and support compassion not corruption?
My future is bleak but I have an opportunity to change things and to protect what brain that is not damaged yet. and most importantly die on my terms.
I CHALLENGE YOU TO SEND THIS TO ALL YOUR COLLEAGUES IN WASHINGTON.
ADDITIONALLY, MS. DAVIS WROTE THE FOLLOWING…..
If anything happens to me I blame my government for not allowing me the same access as my sister state Michigan or the other 17 states and DC …. I want my President to open his heart and allow me to fight for what life I have left with dignity and feel like I belong in this world as well. No ones ever heard me. As a child being abused and molested raped …I tried to tell anyone that would listen I was not heard or protected from age 5 to 12 when someone believed me I was removed to an orphanage. This is just the beginning of how my life spirals I am asking you remove sick people out of this drug war. I can not understand for the life of me how you can do anything you want to smoke a lot of pot do not get caught and you can be president of the United States. But If you do get caught with one joint it can ruin your life. Can we use common sense for drug policy when it comes to cannabis? why can the sister state Michigan get compassion and we don’t? I could go on about my life and I will but not right now. So as you can see there is a way you can save me. If our doctors are smarter now which I believe they are. They are licensed in the state of Ohio… We trust them to write prescriptions / with our lives in their hands anyway why can’t we trust them on determining whether or not their patient can benefit from the use of cannabis as a medicine? DEA will still have their work because people will still break the law. let our law-enforcement get real bad guys those committing domestic violence, violent crimes, home invasions harder drug addictions anything where there is a victim. There has to be a middle ground. I am tired of feeling like I’m a criminal and I don’t deserve to have to live in fear. It is the worst feeling ever. Let me know what you think on the subject. President Obama you are the one president that could change my life forever. What harm does it cause to allow someone like me to use cannabis as a medicine? I should be allowed to use that plant in any form. You could be America’s hero you could be my hero. Please read my open letter to share with your friends I would like you to care enough to stand with me. You all know this drug war is a lie? Have a lot to say tonight. I also want to say I am watching my friends die off one by one and I’m ready when father God calls me home… I don’t have to die right away I believe that with all my heart. Okay I’m done for a while… I may continue my talk if my community is watching ,thank you for being tolerant of me. You guys gave me my voice. Some day you will hear my whole story my life didn’t change until my mid-30s. It’s been a vicious cycle of domestic violence rape home invasion theft..even kidnapping my life has been a nightmare. No one has ever heard me I always fell before things changed. my life is make life movie. I would call it "If Only Heard" I have a strong testimony and willing to share it as well.. God has been a big part of my survival. seems like I had to experience all this to understand so id be a strong servant. my life is in Gods hand as well as our government…
Agriculture Commissioner James Comer took his efforts to legalize industrial hemp production to the Kentucky Farm Bureau annual meeting Thursday in Louisville.http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20121206/NEWS01/312060080/Comer-takes-industrial-hemp-efforts-Ky-Farm-Bureau-convention?nclick_check=1
Oregon medical marijuana advocates in 2006 successfully pushed to give police round-the-clock access to the state’s cardholder registry. Patients with pot figured they wouldn’t be arrested if cops could quickly confirm their status with the program. http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2012/12/medical_marijuana_users_questi.html
YouGov poll is one of the first to ask not whether marijuana use should be legal but what the federal government should do about it now that two states have legalized recreational marijuana use.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/08/marijuana-legalization-and-states-rights/
Illinois considers legalizing marijuana for medical uses http://www.chicagotribune.com/sns-rt-usa-marijuanaillinoisl1e8ms58y-20121128,0,2174223.story
Good day! I just would like to give you a big thumbs up for your great information you have got right here on this post.
I am coming back to your website for more soon.
Backward thinking on hemp; Feds must allow states to restart industry
Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2012/11/25/2420496/backward-thinking-on-hemp-feds.html#storylink=cpy
Kentucky is the center of the universe when it comes to bourbon
260.857 Kentucky Industrial Hemp Commission — Membership
FRANKFORT, Ky. (AP) — Kentucky State Police Commissioner Rodney Brewer said his agency opposes proposals to grow industrial hemp in Kentucky even though he sees the benefits for the agriculture industry.
The federal Office of Drug Control Policy concentrates resources in the Appalachian region because so much marijuana is grown there — often in small plots of fewer than 100 plants that can easily be tended by a single grower. Only California produces more of the clandestine crop than Appalachia.http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-12-05/1-dot-5b-worth-of-marijuana-confiscated-in-appalachia
Marijuana Initiatives Spark States’ Rights Legislation No matter how its members feel about marijuana use, a bipartisan group of House lawmakers wants to ensure that states can move forward with their marijuana laws without federal interference and has introduced legislation to make that happen. http://www.rollcall.com/news/marijuana_initiatives_spark_states_rights_legislation-219708-1.html?pos=hln
FRANKFORT, Ky. (AP) — Federal, state and local law enforcement agencies confiscated more than $1.5 billion worth of marijuana this year in central Appalachia, a region where widespread unemployment may be turning some people to pot farming.http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-12-05/1-dot-5b-worth-of-marijuana-confiscated-in-appalachia
Here is a portion of the PDF above:
2.1. Media freedom: A fundamental right in danger
It is almost a truism that media freedom is “one of the fundamental pillars of
a democratic society”.19 Activities of the European Parliament however
indicate that there is a growing concern with regard to this freedom in the
European legal space. Awareness was already raised by a 2004 report of the
Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and HomeAffairs (LIBE)which notably
addressed issues of media pluralism in Italy and several other Member
States.20 Most recently such concern culminated in the Parliament’s
resolution with regard to media law in Hungary and LIBE’s request to the
Fundamental Rights Agency to issue an annual comparative report on media
freedom in the EU Member States.21 This critical assessment of the current
situation is shared by NGOs which have recorded a fall of several Member
States in rankings of press freedom.22 Most importantly, however, recent
reports by the Council of Europe and the OSCE have highlighted problems,
such as a lack of pluralism due to media concentration, overt political
influence on both public and private broadcasting, disproportionate sanctions
on journalists, misuse of counter-terrorism legislation against the press,
deficient protection of journalistic sources, and failure to investigate violence
Essentially, more charges have been added to Sheriff Chris Eaton’s indictment that he and other deputies aided and abetted each other in assaulting Billy Ray Stinnett on February 24, 2010.
WCLU obtained a copy of the superseding indictment and the two new counts added to the indictment. Those additions read as follows:
COUNT 11
On or about February 24, 2010 in the Western District of Kentucky, defendant Christopher Eaton while acting under color of law, assaulted B.R.S. by striking him in the area of his groin, thereby willfully B.R.S. of a right secured and protected by the Constitution and laws of the United States, specifically, the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, which includes the right to be free from the use of unreasonable force, by one acting under color of law.
And COUNT 12
Between February 24, 2010 and April 24, 2010 in the Western District of Kentucky, defendant Christopher Eaton along with “someone whose initials are T. P. (not charged herein), aiding and abetting one another, while acting in relation to and in contemplation of a matter within the jurisdiction of the FBI, an agency of the United States, did knowingly alter, destroy, conceal and cover up a record, document and tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct and influence the investigation and proper administration of that matter, to wit, deleting photographic evidence which depicted defendant Eaton in the act of assaulting B.R.S.
Eaton, along with deputies Aaron Bennett and Eric Guffey are scheduled for trial on Monday, December 3.
This is an indictment only and all defendants are innocent until proven guilty.
There is much discussion about what is happening with this legislation.
112th Congress, 2011–2012
To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2013 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction,
and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.
Here’s the added clause in question:
“Nothing in the AUMF or the 2012 NDAA shall be construed to deny the availability of the writ of habeas corpus or to deny any Constitutional rights in a court ordained or established by or under Article III of the Constitution for any person who is lawfully in the United States when detained pursuant to the AUMF and who is otherwise entitled to the availability of such writ or such rights.”
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/ndaa-americans-indefinite-detention2012-11#ixzz2DfrztPqV
Use the above link to Twitter your Congressman and tell them to end indefinite detention. It could be you!
The science is alarmingly inconclusive, but the punishment for mothers is severe.
November 23, 2012 |
Employees at US hospitals are testing more and more newborns for cannabis exposure. And, with alarming frequency, they are getting the wrong results. So say a pair of recent studies documenting the unreliability of infant drug testing.
In the most recent trial, published in the September edition of the Journal of Clinical Chemistry , investigators at the University of Utah School of Medicine evaluated the rate of unconfirmed "positive" immunoassay test results in infant and non-infant urine samples over a 52-week period. Shockingly, authors found that positive tests for carboxy THC, a byproduct of THC screened for in immunoassay urine tests, were 59 times less likely to be confirmed in infant urine specimens as compared to non-infant urine samples. Overall, 47 percent of the infant positive immunoassay urine samples evaluated did not test for the presence of carboxy THC when confirmatory assay measures were later performed.
Immunoassay testing – the standard technology used in workplace drug testing – relies on the use of antibodies (proteins that will react to a particular substance or a group of very similar substances) to document whether a specific reaction occurs. Therefore, a positive result on an immunoassay test presumes that a certain quantity of a particular substance may be present in the sample, but it does not actually identify the presence of the substance itself. A more specific chemical test, known as chromatography, must be performed in order to confirm any preliminary analytical test results. Samples that test positive on the presumptive immunoassay test, but then later test negative on the confirmatory test are known as false positives.
False positive test results for cannabis’ carboxy THC metabolite are relatively uncommon in adult specimens. Among newborns’ specimens, however, false positive results for alleged cannabis exposure are disturbingly prevalent.
In April, researchers at the University of North Carolina reported in the journal Clinical Biochemistry that various chemicals present in various baby wash products, such as Johnson’s Head-to-Toe Baby Wash and CVS Baby Wash, frequently cross-react with the immunoassay test to cause false positive results for carboxy THC.
“[The] addition of Head-to-Toe Baby Wash to drug-free urine produced a dose dependent measureable response in the THC immunoassay,” the investigators concluded . “Addition of other commercially available baby soaps gave similar results, and subsequent testing identified specific chemical surfactants that reacted with the THC immunoassay. … Given these consequences, it is important for laboratories and providers to be aware of this potential source for false positive screening results and to consider confirmation before initiating interventions.”
Following the publication of the UNC study, researchers at the University of Utah screened for the presence of baby soap contaminants in infant urine. Surprisingly, they didn’t find any . Rather, they concluded that the disproportionately high rate of false positive test results discovered among their samples were the result of a cross-reaction with some other yet-to-be determined constituent. They cautioned: “Until the compounds contributing to positive urine screen results in infants are identified, we encourage the use of alternative specimens for the detection and investigation of neonatal exposure to cannabinoids. Screen-positive cannabinoid results from infant samples should not be reported without confirmation or appropriate consultation, because they cannot currently be interpreted.”
Yet despite these warnings, in many instances, hospitals fail to confirm the results of presumptive drug tests prior to reporting them to state authorities. (Because confirmatory testing is more expensive the immunoassay testing, many hospitals neglect to send such presumptive positive urine samples to outside labs for follow-up analysis.) Ironically, such confirmatory tests are required for all hospital employees who test positive for illicit substances. But presently, no such guidelines stipulate that similar precautions be taken for newborns or pregnant mothers. Explains Lynn Paltrow, executive director of National Advocates for Pregnant Women : “NAPW has had calls from numerous parents who were subjected to intrusive, threatening, and counterproductive child welfare interventions based on false or innocent positive test results for marijuana. We have learned that pregnant patients receive fewer guarantees of accuracy than do job applicants at that same hospital.”
Regardless of whether or not the drug screen results are confirmed, the sanctions for those subjects who test positive are often swift and severe. Typically, any report of alleged infant exposure to cannabis will trigger a host of serious consequences ranging from the involvement of social services to accusations of child endangerment or neglect. In some instances, mothers whose infants test positive for carboxy THC will lose temporary child custody rights and be mandated to attend a drug treatment program. In other instances they may be civilly prosecuted. At least 18 states address the issue of pregnant women’s drug use in their civil child neglect laws; in 12 states prenatal exposure to any illegal drug is defined by statute as civil child abuse. (One state, South Carolina, authorizes the criminal prosecution of mothers who are alleged to have consumed cannabis, or any other illicit substance, during pregnancy and carry their baby to term.)
Of further concern is the reality that the hospital staff’s decision to drug test infants or pregnant mothers appears to be largely a subjective one. There are no national standards delineating specific criteria for the drug testing of pregnant women, new mothers, or their infants. In fact, the only federal government panel ever convened to advise on the practice urged against its adoption. As a result, race and class largely influence who is tested and who isn’t. A study published in the Journal of Women’s Health reported that "black women and their newborns were 1.5 times more likely to be tested for illicit drugs as non-black women," after controlling for obstetrical conditions and socio-demographic factors, such as single marital status or a lack of health insurance. A separate study published in the New England Journal of Medicine reported similar rates of illicit drug consumption during pregnancy among both black and white women, but found that “black women were reported [to health authorities] at approximately 10 times the rate for white women.”
How many mothers have been accused of child neglect or abuse because of false positive drug test results? Nobody knows for sure. But no doubt some mothers have been penalized solely as a result of the test’s inherent fallibility – and many more are likely to face similar sanctions in the future. That’s because the practice of drug testing infants for cannabis exposure remains a relatively popular even though there exists limited, if any, evidence to justify it.
“No child-health expert would characterize recreational drug use during pregnancy as a good idea,” writes Time.com columnist Maia Szalavitz. “But it’s not at all clear that the benefits, if any, of newborn marijuana screening – particularly given how selectively the tests are administered – justify the potential harm it can cause to families.”
Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform agrees, telling Time.com that the emotional damage caused by removing an infant child from their mothers, as well as the risk of abuse inherent to foster care, far outweigh any risks to the child that may be caused by maternal marijuana use during pregnancy.
In fact, the potential health effects of maternal marijuana use on infant birth weight and early development have been subject to scientific scrutiny for several decades. One of the earliest and most often cited studies on the topic comes from Dr. Melanie Dreher and colleagues, who assessed neonatal outcomes in Jamaica, where it is customary for many women to ingest cannabis, often in tea, during pregnancy to combat symptoms of morning sickness. Writing in the journal Pediatrics in 1994, Dreher and colleagues reported no significant physical or psychological differences in newborns of heavy marijuana-using mothers at three days old, and found that exposed children performed better on a variety of physiological and autonomic tests than non-exposed children at 30 days. (This latter trend was suggested to have been a result of the socio-economic status of the mothers rather than a result of pre-natal pot exposure.)
Separate population studies have reported similar results. A 2002 survey of 12,060 British women reported, “[C]annabis use during pregnancy was unrelated to risk of perinatal death or need for special care.” Researchers added that “frequent or regular use” of cannabis throughout pregnancy may be associated with “small but statistically detectable decrements in birthweight.” However, the association between cannabis use and birthweight failed to be statistically significant after investigators adjusted for confounding factors such as the mothers’ age, pre-pregnancy weight, and the self-reported use of tobacco, alcohol, caffeine, and other illicit drugs.”
THIS STORY CONTINUES THRU THIS LINK….PLEASE CONTINUE READING
Industrial hemp was widely grown in Kentucky until the late 19th century and was re-established briefly in the 1940s to make products for the military.
FRANKFORT, Ky. (Nov. 28, 2012) — Agriculture Commissioner James Comer applauded Christian County Sheriff Livy Leavell Jr. on Wednesday for supporting the production of industrial hemp in Kentucky during the annual conference of the Kentucky Association of Counties in Louisville.
RELATED: Kentucky Industrial Hemp Commission ramps up; receives $100,000 in donations
“Sheriff Leavell’s support is a big step for the industrial hemp initiative,” Comer said. “By having a high-ranking member of Kentucky’s law enforcement community on our side, we can more effectively break down any myths that are still attached to this potential crop. I am so grateful to all the local elected officials for their overwhelming support of this effort. Together, we will bring jobs to Kentucky and new opportunities to our farmers.”
Comer was joined in his remarks to KACo by Katie Moyer, chairperson of the Kentucky Hemp Coalition, and John Riley, a former magistrate from Spencer County. Moyer and Riley are members of the Kentucky Industrial Hemp Commission, which is chaired by Comer.
“I am so proud of my hometown sheriff,” Moyer said. “Sheriff Leavell made the effort to get the facts about industrial hemp — what it is, what it isn’t, and how it can benefit Kentucky’s economy.”
Comer told the assembled county judge/executives, magistrates, sheriffs and other county officials that legislation to allow Kentucky farmers to grow industrial hemp will be one of his top legislative priorities in 2013. The Kentucky Industrial Hemp Commission will meet again before the 2013 session of the Kentucky General Assembly to finalize legislation it hopes will pass during the session.
Industrial hemp would create manufacturing jobs in Kentucky, Comer said, and provide farmers with another crop that would help them continue to make a living on the farm. He said it is important for Kentucky to be first in the nation to establish an industrial hemp production and manufacturing industry.
The industrial hemp initiative also continues to make progress on the national level. Recently elected U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie of northern Kentucky on Tuesday became the 36th co-sponsor of federal legislation that would require the federal government to honor state laws allowing production of industrial hemp. U.S. Sen. Rand Paul of Bowling Green sponsored a companion bill in the U.S. Senate in August.
Industrial hemp was widely grown in Kentucky until the late 19th century and was re-established briefly in the 1940s to make products for the military. A Congressional Research Service study says hemp is contained in as many as 25,000 products in the global market including textiles, automotive applications, furniture, food products, paper, construction materials and personal care products.
By Marc Emery – Sunday, November 25 2012
Ron Paul, my hero and great political and moral influence, gave his farewell speech to Congress on November 14th after 23 years of serving as the lonely, often marginalized, voice of reason and stalwart of constitutional principles in the House of Representatives.
In those years Ron Paul always voted against any financing for the drug war and the drug czar’s office. He sponsored bills to legalize possession of marijuana, industrial hemp, and medical marijuana; a Truth in Trials Act, allowing introduction of state medical marijuana laws in federal trials; bills to end the US military empire abroad, Plan Colombia, the Patriot Act (and not voting for it in the first place), and the School of the Americas at Fort Benning, Georgia (training of foreign military elite in torture and repression). [See the video clips and more links about Ron Paul's position and action on marijuana and the drug war in Marc's December 2011 blog post: "Support Ron Paul for President!"]
Never did Ron Paul ever vote for or support any legislation that restricted our liberties, allowed government secrecy, carried out the war in Iraq, maintained the US military abroad, expanded surveillance of the US people, debased the money, raised taxes, imposed censorship, or any other unconstitutional incursion into the rights of the citizens or the states.
He has been the greatest Congressman in the history of the United States, for he was, and is, the only true patriot to ever have served in the Congress honoring the US Constitution in a devotion that was, thankfully, fanatical and unwavering.
You must watch and/or read Ron Paul’s farewell speech. (Click Here or watch the video below.) It is one of the vital documents of our time. Not a false word is spoken or written. Clearly and plainly, Ron Paul explains what went wrong, why liberty is fundamental to all of human success and progress, asks all the right questions, and lays blame appropriately – at the feet of government and the citizens who enable governments to do so much of the evil that gets done.
When I first read Ayn Rand’s "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal" in October, 1979, and changed the philosophical course of my life to reflect those values, I asked my new friends who had introduced me to the book, "Does anyone in politics actually adhere to these principles? " Yes, he said; "a Congressman named Ron Paul".
In the US presidential election weeks ago, the media seemed to have a field day denigrating the philosophy of Ayn Rand as part of their smear/criticism of Vice-Presidential candidate Paul Ryan. Yet Paul Ryan is a warmonger, a devout Roman Catholic, and an adherent of the drug war. No believer in the supernatural and warfare state/Imperial American Empire could ever be a credible acolyte of Ayn Rand.
Ron Paul is the proper standard to compare Ayn Rand, although there are some differences. Ron Paul is a Christian, true, and he is opposed to abortion – though as a man who has delivered 4,000 babies as an obstetrician-gynecologist physician, it’s at least understandable. But importantly, Ron Paul doesn’t believe any woman should ever be punished for seeking or having an abortion. He doesn’t believe the Constitution allows the federal government to criminalize abortion, and that is why he received virtually no support from the anti-abortion conservatives that Rick Santorum did. Ron Paul’s influences are varied, and include Murray Rothbard, Ludwig Von Mises, Frederick Hayek, and Lysander Spooner; in fact, Ayn Rand is only one of many of Ron Paul’s influences. He is a well-read individual.
I believe Ron Paul left Congress because, plainly, Congress is made up of collectivist statists (kind of a redundancy, I know) and 23 years is enough punishment. Now he is going on a hopefully long tour of universities to speak to students and his people about liberty and the nature of man and politics. I wish him well. I hope he runs for President again in 2016.
Ron Paul was always the best friend we anti-prohibitionists have ever had in Congress. Never once did he ever support any aspect of the drug war. Yet most of the legalization movement chose to ignore him or pay him no respect. It makes me sad in my heart to know that most in our community – and society at large – are politically ignorant, biased, and most often plainly ambivalent when it comes to political activism, and when it came time to support Ron Paul in the primaries in 2008 and 2012, most of our people did not heed the call to help this great man, this once-in-a century man.
Even in his farewell address to Congress, he does not forget us.
His first question is: "Why are sick people who use medical marijuana in prison?"
He also asks amongst his many pertinent questions:
"Why can’t Americans manufacture rope and other products from hemp?"
"Why should there be mandatory sentences, even up to life, for crimes without victims-as our drug laws require?"
"Why haven’t we given up on the drug war since it’s an obvious failure and violates the people’s rights? Has nobody noticed that the authorities can’t even keep drugs out of prisons? How can making our entire society a prison solve the problem?"
"Why do we sacrifice so much getting needlessly involved in border disputes and civil strife around the world and ignore the root cause of the most deadly border in the world – the one between Mexico and the US?"
At 78, Ron Paul is still in great health, so I hope he has many years, decades I should hope, to remind us of where we should be going, and how we can get there, and why we must put heart and soul (and money) into that effort.
It’s such a disappointment that Canada has no equivalent giant in politics, no great statesman philosopher politician to give the people a clear vision of liberty and freedom. All we really have is second- and third-rate statists at best, grubby thugs at worse, in institutions under the dictatorial thumb of a soulless Prime Minister and wholly inadequate Premiers.
Ron Paul. The great man of the people has left the building.
Secretary of State
Secretary Grimes Expands Efforts to Protect Election Integrity
Press Release Date:
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Contact Information:
Lynn Sowards Zellen
Director of Communications
Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes
(502) 330-9839
Email: lynn.zellen@ky.gov
Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes, Kentucky’s Chief Election Official, is rallying forces to prevent vote fraud in the November 6th General Election. Today, members of the Kentucky Election Integrity Task Force, headed by Grimes, met in the State Capitol to coordinate efforts to protect the integrity of the election. As part of Grimes’ initiative to broaden the approach to combating election fraud, West Virginia Secretary of State Natalie Tennant, who is confronting similar issues in her state, also attended the meeting.
Because there are federal races on the ballot, in addition to the offices of Secretary Grimes and Attorney General Jack Conway, the United States Attorney’s offices in the Eastern and Western Districts are members of the Task Force. In addition, as a result of meetings with county clerks across the state and observations from past elections, Secretary Grimes is expanding Kentucky’s traditional defenses against vote fraud. Among other things, Grimes invited the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Kentucky Commonwealth Attorneys Association, Kentucky County Attorneys Association, Kentucky County Clerks Association, Kentucky Sheriff’s Association, Kentucky State Police and Kentucky Democratic and Republican Parties to join the Task Force.
“The need to preserve the integrity of elections is not specific to a particular county or state,” said Grimes, “and we welcome input and cooperation from all officials who share our commitment to protecting the right to vote. By bringing new members into the task force, we gain not only feet on the ground on Election Day, but also fresh ideas and perspectives on how to ensure our elections remain free and fair.” According to Assistant United States Attorney Ken Taylor, who has prosecuted election violations in Eastern Kentucky for the past decade, this year’s Task Force is “by far the most aggressive and active group I have seen.”
Noting the history of vote buying in Kentucky, Grimes warned would-be election manipulators that “our elections are not for sale.” And Tennant commended the Task Force for expanding efforts to protect the election process and showing that “unscrupulous people cannot chip away at our democracy.”
In addition to the Task Force members, Rep. Darryl Owens, Chair of the Elections, Constitutional Amendments and Intergovernmental Affairs Committee, Franklin County Sheriff Pat Melton and members of the State Board of Elections were on hand for the meeting and press conference.
Grimes, along with United States Attorneys David Hale and Kerry Harvey, encourages citizens to be alert on Election Day and report any suspicious activity. “Voters form the front lines of our fraud-prevention efforts,” said Grimes. “With their help, I am confident the integrity of our election process will be upheld.”
Leading up to the election, citizens may contact their county clerk or the State Board of Elections at 800-246-1399 or 502-573-7100 to express concerns or request election information. On Election Day, citizens can contact the Attorney General’s Election Fraud Hotline at 1-800-328-VOTE. The Hotline is open throughout the year during normal business hours and from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. (EST) on Election Day. Conway encourages citizens to report election irregularities and said that, “Working together, we can ensure a fair and honest election for all Kentuckians on November 6th.”
Members of the news media covering the election are reminded that they may be in the voting room for the limited purpose of filming the voting process. However, as per OAG 88-76, the media may not conduct interviews with voters inside the voting room, record the identity of voters, or disrupt the voting process, a Class A misdemeanor. See KRS 117.236.
###
From Barney Frank to Ron Paul, these elected leaders are challenging the government’s pointless war on marijuana
October 9, 2012 3:16 PM ET
This month marks the 75th anniversary of marijuana prohibition in America – and the evidence suggests that the government ban may finally be on its way out. Last year, for the first time ever in this country, a Gallup poll found that a majority of Americans think marijuana should be legal, and several states have legalization bills on their ballots this fall.
Nine Signs That Pot Legalization Is Coming Soon
Despite this changing landscape, most national politicians have been slow to adapt their stances on weed. But there are a number of political power players fighting to reform the pot policies that lock up more than 800,000 Americans per year. This fall, two third-party presidential candidates – Green Party nominee Jill Stein and Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson – favor legalization. And while winning is a very long shot for either of them, there are a growing number of elected officials – both Republicans and Democrats – on the right side of this issue. Read on for 10 of the strongest reform advocates in office today:
Rep. Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts)
Frank, who plans to retire next year after three decades in Congress, has never been afraid to back marijuana reform. In response to the federal war on state medical marijuana programs, Frank recently introduced legislation to prohibit such interference. The States Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act would specify that no part of the Controlled Substances Act "shall prohibit or otherwise restrict" medical marijuana in states where it has been made legal or prescribed medically. It also calls for a review of marijuana’s Schedule I classification – which defines the plant as dangerous and not medically valuable – in favor of the less-restrictive Schedule III category. Unfortunately, since being referred to committee in May, the bill has seemingly stalled.
In the meantime, Frank has continued to speak out for both medical and non-medical marijuana users. "If there’s an activity that I could engage in without hurting anyone else, as an adult, but other people if they engage in it may abuse it, please don’t prevent me from doing it," Frank said last month. "Whether you want to do these things or not ought to be your own choice."
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas)
Paul, another retiring congressman, is one of the most prominent voices for drug law reform. A sharp critic of the War on Drugs and its violations of civil liberties, Paul sees ending pot prohibition as part of his libertarian philosophy. Campaigning in the Republican presidential primary, he vowed to pardon all non-violent drug offenders if elected – a stance that made him very popular with young voters. Along with Barney Frank, Paul co-sponsored the Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2011, which would have amended the Controlled Substances Act to remove marijuana from the Schedule I category, leaving legalization and regulation up to the states. The bill is viewed as unlikely to pass.
Rep. Sam Farr (D-California)
Farr has been a leading legislative voice for medical marijuana patients’ rights at trial. "The federal government has tilted the scales of justice towards conviction by denying medical marijuana defendants the right to present all of the evidence at trial," he recently said. In 2009 and again this summer, Farr introduced the Truth in Trials Act, which would grant medical marijuana patients the ability to present courtroom evidence on their prescription-authorized use of the drug. The bill was promptly referred to the Judiciary Committee, and will likely die before making it to a vote. Nevertheless, Farr has thrown his weight behind other medical marijuana legislation, including the Rohrabacher-Hinchey-Farr-McClintock Medical Marijuana Amendment to bar federal funding for federal raids and the Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2011.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-California)
A staunch Republican, Rohrabacher has called out President Obama for escalating the war on pot and has criticized federal pot prohibition as a drain on resources and an infringement on states rights. "I don’t believe that you protect people by throwing them in cages," Rohrabacher said last fall. "For us to be taking people for smoking a weed and putting them in prison or jail for that is a travesty. It’s against everything our founding fathers believed in and somehow we got away from that."
In May, Rohrabacher co-sponsored the bipartisan Rohrabacher-Hinchey-Farr-McClintock Medical Marijuana Amendment, which would have forbidden the Justice Department from using federal funding for raids on state-approved medical marijuana operations. (A week later, the House struck it down in a roll call vote.) Last year, he supported California’s unsuccessful legalization initiative, the Regulate Marijuana Like Wine Act; he has also co-sponsored the recent Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act, the States Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act and the Truth in Trials Act.
Rep. Barbara Lee (D-California)
This August, Lee introduced the Medical Marijuana Property Rights Protection Act to defend medical marijuana operators from losing their property – a tactic the federal government has used in both threats and reality. "The people of California have made it legal for patients to have safe access to medicinal marijuana, and as a result thousands of small business owners have invested millions of dollars in building their companies, creating jobs and paying their taxes," Lee said. "We should be protecting and implementing the will of voters, not undermining our democracy by prosecuting small business owners who pay taxes and comply with the laws of their states in providing medicine to patients in need." The bill has struggled to move since being referred to committee on August 14. Lee also co-sponsored the States Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act, the Ending Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2011 and the Truth in Trials Act.
Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colorado)
In 2010, when the feds raided a number of medical marijuana operations in Colorado, Polis spoke up in defense of his constituents. In a letter to Eric Holder, Polis urged the attorney general to enforce the Justice Department’s written guidelines, which discourage federal interference with legal medical marijuana operations at the state level. Polis also co-sponsored the Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act and the Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act – but it was his showdown this June with Drug Enforcement Agency head Michele Leonhart that really earned him his stripes. When Leonhart testified before a House judiciary subcommittee, Polis pressed her on whether drugs like crack and heroin are more or less dangerous than marijuana. Leonhart contended that "all illegal drugs are bad," refusing to acknowledge any distinction between pot and harder substances. "If you don’t know, you can look this up," Polis retorted. "You should know this as the chief administrator for the Drug Enforcement Agency." Video of the exchange went viral, providing a clear example of the irrational beliefs behind pot prohibition.
Rep. Early Blumenauer (D-Oregon)
As a speaker at the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws conference in 2010, Blumenauer told attendees they had reached their "decade of decision." Despite his past statements in favor of marijuana legalization, he is one of the weaker advocates on this list after failing to back Oregon’s legalization initiative, Measure 80, which will be on the ballot in November. However, Blumenauer has continued to speak out for drug reform, and he has co-sponsored many of the recent pro-pot bills, including the Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act, the States Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act and the Truth in Trials Act.
Gov. Dannel Malloy (D-Connecticut)
Last year, Connecticut’s governor signed a marijuana decriminalization bill into law. Instead of facing a $1,000 fine and possible jail time, marijuana offenders now must pay $150 for their first offense and between $200 and $500 for subsequent violations. This spring, Malloy also signed a new law making Connecticut the country’s 17th state to legalize medical marijuana. (As his opponents often point out, Connecticut’s governor has a personal stake in marijuana policy reform: His son, now in his twenties, has had multiple legal run-ins allegedly involving marijuana.)
Gov. Pete Shumlin (D-Vermont)
When Vermont legalized medical marijuana in 2004, the legislation had one gaping loophole: It did not allow for dispensaries. To assist the patients who were now legally allowed to use medical marijuana but forced to grow their own or buy on the black market, Shumlin signed a bill last summer authorizing up to four medical marijuana dispensaries in Vermont. And late last year, Shumlin joined two other governors – Washington’s Christine Gregoire (a Democrat) and Rhode Island’s Lincoln Chafee (an Independent) – in petitioning the Drug Enforcement Agency to reclassify marijuana, moving it out of the highly restrictive, non-medical Schedule I category to at least Schedule II, which would recognize marijuana’s medical benefits. (Shumlin has been harder on so-called synthetic marijuana, recently signing a ban on chemicals commonly found in the substances. "We’re not talking about a plant that is grown, like marijuana," he said. "This junk will kill you.")
Rep. John Conyers (D-Michigan)
In 2008, while serving as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Conyers slammed the Drug Enforcement Agency and its leader, Michele Leonhart, for executing pot raids on California’s regulated medical marijuana program. Pulling few punches, he made clear his opinion that dispensary-busting was an inappropriate response by the DEA and a waste of resources. "Please explain what role, if any, emerging scientific data plays in your decision-making process to conduct enforcement raids on individuals authorized to use or provide medical cannabis under state law," he wrote in a pointed letter to Leonhart. At a press conference last summer, Conyers went further, arguing for the decriminalization of marijuana for recreational use. He also co-sponsored Frank’s Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act.
Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-10-best-politicians-on-pot-20121009#ixzz29Cuh4pRY
Oakland, Calif., is trying to keep the federal government from seizing its biggest medical-marijuana dispensary.
On Wednesday, the city took a bold step: It sued the feds, arguing that the U.S. attorney for Northern California is barred from seizing the property by the five-year statute of limitations on civil forfeiture.
Sure, it’s illegal to sell medical marijuana under federal law, but President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder have said publicly they wouldn’t pursue people who are in compliance with state law. A 2009 Justice Department memo gave the same guidance to U.S. attorneys.
California, of course, permits the sale of medical marijuana, and Oakland strictly regulates and taxes its dispensaries. Harborside Health Center, the property at issue here, has been open since 2006 and sells more than $20 million of pot annually, according to its owner.
The lawsuit argues that the Justice Department can’t snatch up Harborside Health Center, because of the doctrine of estoppel, which says, in essence, you can’t say one thing and do another. U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag has said Harborside has grown into a large-scale operation that isn’t legal even under California law.
Law Blog caught up with Cedric Chao, who is representing Oakland. When he’s not suing the federal government, Mr. Chao is co-chairman of Morrison & Foerster LLP’s international litigation and arbitration practice.
Law Blog: So this is the first case of its type?
Cedric Chao: We’re not aware of a city pushing back on a forfeiture action against a medical cannabis dispensary.
LB: We noticed you refer to medical marijuana as “cannabis” throughout the lawsuit. Any reason?
CC: No, but people refer to it both ways.
LB: You argue that DOJ can’t go after Harborside because it opened six years ago — exceeding the five-year statute of limitations. Isn’t there a good argument that, since Harborside continued to break federal law until this year, the clock shouldn’t start ticking until after the dispensary stopped selling medical cannabis?
CC: Well there’s actually a case out there in the Sixth Circuit that addresses this issue. In the context of a gambling operation, it held that the statute of limitations began on the first discovery of illegal conduct by the government and that the government was not allowed to claim that the statute of limitations was reset every single day.
LB: I guess the government can’t credibly argue it wasn’t aware of the Oakland dispensaries until now.
CC: They had websites, they had advertisements, they wanted the patient population to know they had safe access to medical cannabis.
LB: But the fact remains. Medical marijuana is illegal under federal law. How do you convince a federal judge that just because the attorney general tells his troops not to go after certain individuals that means it’s OK to break federal law?
CC: Seventeen states plus the District of Columbia have agreed that it is lawful to sell cannabis for medical purposes, so, clearly, there’s a division of thought. And clearly the top officials of our government also believed there were medical benefits to cannabis, otherwise they would not have said publicity that DOJ’s resources will not be used to prosecute where patients, caregivers and dispensaries are acting in conformity with state law. They well knew that people were hanging on their every word. So how is it, after their words and actions and people acting in reliance on those, can they reverse course and say, “Never mind?”
LB: So you’re doing this case pro bono?
CC: Yes.
LB: It’s a controversial issue. Do you worry about getting pegged as the cannabis lawyer?
CC: As a lawyer, you take an oath and you have a client and you do the best for your client. This issue has important public ramifications, and if I didn’t think it was important, I wouldn’t take it.
LB: Thanks, Cedric.
Granby, CT
Some stand for freedom, others oppose it. Each brings us in a different direction. For those of us who enjoy our freedom we thank people like Marc who has a global vision of standards. The United states constitution was founded on common law jurisdiction. This is essentially a contract of protection for the people. The states of America have adapted the Uniform Commercial Code which governs international contracts of protection. The Uniform Commercial Code or UCC particular to 1-103.6 indicates statutory jurisdiction in Admiralty Courts such as the US courts must have standards in accordance with common law jurisdiction reserving rights and remedy there of. The ability to extort a person into a plea bargain is not merit to cause injury to Marcs life or take away the freedom from others lives that he generates living freely. Marcs actions have not hurt any one and there is no justification to injure many lives in this case. Marc amongst other things is to thank for bringing freedom of the press to Canada with the opening of his book store and petitioning of the public as true democracy makes possible. Marc is a patriot of every country and should be treated as such. To do anything else is of a criminal nature.
Release and pardon Marc Emery
Marc Emery is a Canadian businessman and political activist who owned and operated Cannabis Culture Magazine, Pot-TV, the BC Marijuana Party, and Marc Emery’s Cannabis Culture Headquarters (previously the BCMP Bookstore, and HEMP BC before that.)
He was also the world’s most famous marijuana seed retailer and the biggest financial supporter of the marijuana movement world-wide until the US Drug Enforcement Administration and Canadian law enforcement arrested him in Canada and shut down Marc Emery Direct Seeds in July 2005.
Marc is currently imprisoned in Yazoo City medium-security prison in Yazoo City, Mississippi after being extradited on May 20th, 2010 by the Canadian government. He was sentenced on September 10th in Seattle federal court to 5 years in prison for "distribution of marijuana" seeds, though the US Drug Enforcement Administration admitted it was actually for his political activism and financing the marijuana movement (see below for that DEA document).
FACTS ABOUT MARC EMERY:
• Marc Emery is a Canadian citizen who never went to the USA as a seed seller.
• Marc Emery operated his seed business in Canada at all times, with no American branches or employees.
• Marc Emery declared his income from marijuana seed sales on his income tax, and paid over $580,000 to the Federal and Provincial governments from 1999 to 2005.
• Marc Emery is the leader of the British Columbia Marijuana Party, a registered political party that has regularly participated in elections.
• Marc Emery has never been arrested or convicted of manufacturing or distributing marijuana in Canada, as he only sold seeds.
• Marc Emery gave away all of the profits from his seed business to drug law reform lobbyists, political parties, global protests and rallies, court litigation, medical marijuana initiatives, drug rehabilitation clinics, and other legitimate legal activities and organizations.
• Marc Emery helped found the United States Marijuana Party, state-level political parties, and international political parties in countries such as Israel and New Zealand.
• Marc Emery has been known as a book seller and activist in Canada for 30 years, fighting against censorship laws and other social issues long before he became a drug law reform activist.
• Marc Emery has been a media figure for 20 years with regards to marijuana and drug law reform. He is very well-known to Canadian, American and international news media organizations.
• Marc Emery operated his business in full transparency and honesty since its inception in 1994, even sending his marijuana seed catalogue inside his magazine "Cannabis Culture" to each Member of Parliament in Canada every two months for years.
Marc openly ran "Marc Emery Direct Marijuana Seeds" from a store in downtown Vancouver and through mail-order from 1994 to 2005, with the goal to fund anti-prohibition and pro-marijuana activists and organizations across North America and the world.
Marc always paid all provincial and federal taxes on his income and made no secret to anyone of his seed-selling business. Marc was raided by police for selling seeds and bongs in 1996 and again in 1997 and 1998, but despite the seizure of his stock by police, the Canadian courts sentenced Emery only to fines and no jail time.
Canadian police then pressured the American Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to launch a cross-border attack against Marc. They arranged to have him charged under America’s much more severe laws against seeds.
Marc was arrested in Canada by American agents in 2005, and originally faced a minimum 30-year sentence in the US, with the possibility of life behind bars. After years of legal efforts, and ensuring his two co-accused received no prison time, Marc made a plea-bargain for a five-year sentence in the US. Marc had originally secured a deal with US officials to serve his five-year sentence in Canada, but the Conservative Government of Canada refused to allow this, and forced him to be extradited to the US.
The US Drug Enforcement Administration admitted on the day of Marc Emery’s arrest that his investigation and extradition were politically motivated, designed to target the marijuana legalization efforts and organizations that Emery spearheaded and financed for over a decade.
Here is the original text of DEA Administrator Karen Tandy’s statement released on July 29th, 2005 (also available in its original letterhead form by clicking here):
"Today’s DEA arrest of Marc Scott Emery, publisher of Cannabis Culture Magazine, and the founder of a marijuana legalization group — is a significant blow not only to the marijuana trafficking trade in the U.S. and Canada, but also to the marijuana legalization movement.
His marijuana trade and propagandist marijuana magazine have generated nearly $5 million a year in profits that bolstered his trafficking efforts, but those have gone up in smoke today.
Emery and his organization had been designated as one of the Attorney General’s most wanted international drug trafficking organizational targets — one of only 46 in the world and the only one from Canada.
Hundreds of thousands of dollars of Emery’s illicit profits are known to have been channeled to marijuana legalization groups active in the United States and Canada. Drug legalization lobbyists now have one less pot of money to rely on."
On May 10th, 2010, Marc was ordered extradited by Justice Minister Rob Nicholson. He was taken to the USA on May 20th. Marc was forced to endure three weeks of complete solitary confinement for recording a "prison podcast" over the phone for release on the internet. You can listen to his 2009 "Prison Pot-casts" by clicking here.
Release and pardon Marc Emery
Kindest of regards
Christopher Seekins
http://www.gorillagrow.org
CEO Harmony World Wide
Updated: 10:38 am | Published: 12:27 am
Reported by: Jonelle Merrill
Written by: Jonelle Merrill
Gavel (ABC 4 News)
Stephan Cook, 22, brought the lawsuit against several law enforcement officers in Sanpete County and Ephraim City, claiming that they performed a forced catheterization on him, after he refused a drug test in 2008 while attending Snow College.
As the plaintiff in the case, Cook claims the incident in question started on a quiet side road in Ephraim where he was parked smoking cigarettes inside a car with friends. Cook says police officers approached the car, suspecting the young men were smoking marijuana.
"When they approached us, they said it smelled like marijuana, but we said no, we’re smoking cigarettes and we just put the cigarettes out like you asked us to," says Cook.
Cook refused to offer a urine sample after the cops demanded it numerous times. He adds that he repeatedly asked for an attorney to be present.
After obtaining what Cook’s attorneys call a "botched" search warrant, he was forced by police to be catheterized at Sanpete County Hospital.
"The nurse told the officers to hold my shoulders while they catherized me, and after that they took me straight to jail," said Cook.
According to the attorneys, Sanpete County Hospital still has not produced the urine sample as evidence, or even a record of Cook coming to the hospital. They say it further adds to their belief that the law enforcement agencies involved did not follow correct procedure.
Criminal defense attorney Lindsay Jarvis calls the forced catheterization the ultimate violation of her client’s civil rights. "I would say anybody who’s in that position would feel as though they were sexually assaulted – yes. You’ve got a female nurse who is unbuttoning his pants while another individual holds him down. And then, they stick an object into his private parts."
Peter Stirba, defense counsel for the Sanpete County officers issued this statement in response to the dismissal of the lawsuit: "The officers’ behavior was fully justified and certainly was not violative of any of Mr. Cook’s constitutional rights."
Cook’s mother who is a fellow police officer for a different city strongly opposes the defense counsel’s statement, calling this a matter of police brutality.
"This is a story of contemptive cops. He (Stephan) wouldn’t voluntarily pee, and they were gonna do whatever it took to get his urine – period," said Stephan Cook’s mother Holly Ziegenhorn.
Cook wants to keep fighting and move forward with an appeal. He says he does not want another person to have to go through what he did. "I never wanted this to happen. I’m willing to stand up for everybody else who can’t," said Cook.
“The death penalty? It’s easy. Give me a break. It’s easy. Abortion? Absolutely easy,” Scalia told the AEI faithful.
[...]
“Nobody ever thought the Constitution prevented restrictions on abortion,” Scalia added. “Homosexual sodomy? Come on. For 200 years, it was criminal in every state.”
Scalia’s mantra is that the Constitution is not to be treated as a living, breathing document whose promise of Liberty evolves with its people, but rather an iron-clad relic that should be read as it was set down, and in only that way.
This illuminating talk from Scalia comes as several marriage equality cases stand ready to be taken up by the Supreme Court, a number that will directly challenge the federal law that bans the government from recognizing same-sex marriages, the Defense of Marriage Act.
Another case on the Supreme Court’s docket in the coming months, likely after the November elections it would now seem, will be the Proposition 8 case where a federal judge and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decided that the voting majority of California violated state and federal guarantees of equal protection in 2008 by defining away the right to marry a same-sex partner.
Scalia, a Reagan appointee, has sat on the bench for much of the life of the gay rights struggle. He has consistently found cause to rule against gay rights. Most notably, Scalia dissented in Lawrence v. Texas, the case that would serve to eventually make unenforceable state level bans on sodomy.
In the dissent Scalia, while terming the sodomy ban “facially neutral” even though the Texas ban applied solely to homosexual acts, wrote:
Today’s opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct…. [T]he Court has taken sides in the culture war, departing from its role of assuring, as neutral observer, that the democratic rules of engagement are observed.
While this may give us a rather face-slapping clue as to Scalia’s overall opinion of gay rights, the case may be of particular interest in that, with his dissent, Scalia found room to criticize the Court’s majority for its concern over the criminalization of sodomy leading to discrimination, citing that this ignored the will of the people:
So imbued is the Court with the law profession’s anti-anti-homosexual culture, that it is seemingly unaware that the attitudes of that culture are not obviously “mainstream”; that in most States what the Court calls “discrimination” against those who engage in homosexual acts is perfectly legal.
Proposition 8′s defenders have harped, seemingly to play a tune to which a conservative judiciary might hum, that the voting people of California, through the democratic process, decided against gay marriage and therefore the will of the people should stand — this of course sidesteps the fact that minority rights will nearly always and by their nature find disfavor at a majority poll.
While Scalia’s approach to law, his “textualist” attitude, seems to give him easy answers on topics like abortion restriction and, to quote again “homosexual sodomy,” one can’t help but feel that a judge who knows how he will rule before he has heard the individual cases at hand might be going in with a level of bias that is, to say the least, concerning.
However, for those of us familiar with Scalia’s views on a variety of topics, none perhaps more eyebrow-raising than his refrain that sex discrimination is Constitutionally sound, Scalia’s latest volley against reason and equality, and his apparent admission that being a Supreme Court justice is “easy” when it comes to issues like these, will not be a surprise.
Equal rights proponents were never looking to Scalia for affirmation, but then Scalia’s celebrity has already been cemented among religious conservatives, legislators like Scott Brown, and Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney who has said he would be looking to appoint similarly minded judges.
Scalia’s latest AEI talk serves, then, as a healthy reminder of what that would mean for America.
By: Beth Summers
With a population of 16,200, Danville is the smallest city ever to host a VP debate. Downtown is six blocks long, and surrounded by rolling green hills and farmhouses like innkeeper Angie Martin’s. Earlier this year, Martin and her husband Roy turned their home, still a working farm, into a bed and breakfast. With its dairy goats, pigs, chickens and guinea fowl, the couple is more accustomed to hosting parents of college students or farming hobbyists than members of the press, but they don’t seem particularly fazed by the invasion of some 3,200 credentialed media.
Maybe it’s because they’ve seen it all before. Twelve years ago, former Vice President Dick Cheney and Sen. Joe Lieberman faced off on the same stage where Vice President Joe Biden and Rep. Paul Ryan are set to debate Thursday night. Centre College, a private liberal arts school with a student body of just under 1,500, will again play VP debate host, the first time a place has been selected twice to do so. (Washington University holds the record for presidential debates, having hosted three.)
So why choose a tiny town, in the middle of a state known more for horse racing and bourbon distilleries than for its swing voters, as the site for an event as big as the vice presidential debate? And why do it twice?
"It sounds so self-congratulatory, but we’re good at this stuff," says Centre College President John Roush. He points to the debate venue, a 1,500-seat concert hall designed by the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, as evidence: "The Vienna Philharmonic toured in Fall of 2010. They came to two places in America — Carnegie Hall in New York City, and here." Indeed, the Los Angeles Times referred to Centre that year as "a college that consistently punches above its weight."
Across the way from the performing arts building, the school’s 120,000-foot athletic center has been transformed into a makeshift press filing hub equipped with more than 500 work stations. As co-chair of the debate steering committee, Centre history professor Clarence Wyatt is overseeing all of the debate preparations. That ranges from transforming the gymnasium to ensuring that the debate hall’s air conditioning is powerful enough to offset the hot TV lights but calm enough to keep the candidates’ hair in place. Wyatt, who played the same role in the 2000 debate, says everything is bigger and more complex this time around. Twelve years ago, 28.5 million people tuned in to watch; Thursday’s TV audience is expected at upwards of 70 million.
"As a TV show, this is second only to the summer Olympics and the Superbowl in its complexity," Wyatt says.
And then there’s the security. Concrete blockades and metal fences line the outskirts of the college. Roads to and from downtown are closed off. The closer you get to campus, the thicker the presence of local and state police, as well as Secret Service officers. None of this was around in 2000, which was pre-9/11. It’s a "different world" in terms of security now, Wyatt notes.
Martin, whose family also runs an insurance business in downtown Danville, worries that the street closures could keep customers away.
"It puts a burden on the arena of businesses in the proximity of Centre," she says, but then quickly adds, "Is it outweighed by the prestige of having the debate here? Yes."
College officials say they feel more prepared this year. "We’ve had far fewer surprises this time around," Wyatt says. He recalls an incident from 2000 when he and his colleagues were caught off guard by a last-minute influx of campaign surrogates and corporate jets and no provisions made to transport them to the college. One of the managers at the aviation field took matters into her own hands and began ferrying the senior party leaders into town in her station wagon — including then-Senator Joe Biden, who was acting as a surrogate for the former vice presidential hopeful Joe Lieberman.
"[It was] one of those moments that captures how this small town in central Kentucky rises to the occasion to host an international event," Wyatt says.
Danville was recently ranked one of the 25 best places to retire in the country by Money Magazine, but it has not been immune from the recession. At the time of the Cheney-Lieberman debate, unemployment in Boyle County (Danville is the county seat) was just over 4 percent. Today it’s up to 10 percent. The town has seen losses in the manufacturing sector, and several plants have closed. But health care remains a big employer, with the largest hospital south of Lexington stationed just blocks from Centre’s campus. The college itself is also a big source of jobs.
Hosting the debate helped the local economy in 2000, Wyatt says, and he predicts it will again. "I can’t give you a specific number, but just logically, having every hotel room in the community and surrounding area being taken up — all the vendors from pipe and drape to telephones to catering — we had a very significant nice little spurt. And in longer terms, one of the things it helped do is raise the visibility of the community," he says.
Another thing that’s changed here since its last debate: the availability of alcohol. In 2000, Danville was a dry city — selling alcohol was prohibited. Anheuser-Busch was an official debate sponsor, but could only sell soft drinks at its four-post tent outside the hall. In 2010, the city voted to go "wet," and things are different this year, as evidenced by the Kentucky Distillers’ Association representatives poised to distribute samples of bourbon Wednesday night.
Pundits anticipate a spirited clash between Ryan and Biden Thursday night – just as they did in advance of the Cheney-Lieberman debate. But it didn’t happen; as TIME magazine put it at the time: "[T]he shocker was in the, well, civilized nature of it all." And this year, as in 2000, both the candidates and debate moderator Martha Raddatz will be seated rather than standing, a format then-moderator Bernard Shaw said forced civility: "It’s hard to be discourteous to your opponent when he’s sitting at the same table with you."
We’ll know soon enough whether history will repeat itself. And if the debate fails to impress, there’s always the goats.
The largest growth was for minority children, who took medications to treat schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and depression at three times the rate of white children in 2010.
In addition, the report found unexplained geographical differences in how minority children are treated for mental illnesses. For example, minority children in Bath County in Eastern Kentucky are taking antipsychotic medications at a rate nearly 26 times higher than minority children in Christian County in Western Kentucky. Yet the report found little difference in white children in those two counties. The study also revealed wide geographical variances in prescriptions for drugs meant to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD. Poor children in Western Kentucky received much larger quantities of ADHD drugs than their counterparts in Eastern Kentucky. For example, Henderson County children take medications to treat ADHD at a rate 11 times higher than children in Leslie County.
The study, conducted by the University of Kentucky Center for Business and Economic Research, examined the top 50 drugs prescribed in the Medicaid program from 2000 to 2010 by grams, number of prescriptions and total costs.
The state-federal health insurance program for the poor and disabled has spent $6.6 billion on medications over that time period. Medicaid serves approximately 700,000 people in Kentucky. Michael Childress, who authored the study, said it does not make any conclusions about why there are such variances in prescriptions for ADHD or why so many minority children are prescribed antipsychotic medications.
"This report provides data that should cause people to ask questions and to seek out answers," Childress said. "Health providers and people in these communities need to look at this data and start asking questions about what some of this data shows." Cabinet for Health and Family Services Secretary Audrey Tayse Haynes called some of the report’s findings "disturbing."
"We’re taking a hard look at behavioral health in children and youth in this state," Haynes said. "Clearly, we need to have some education and training with our providers about prescribing habits. These are powerful drugs. There is a place for them in the treatment of children. But we also want to make sure that it’s not just medical therapy that they are receiving but also behavioral therapy."
Haynes said the cabinet is pulling more data from the Medicaid program in an effort to answer some of the questions prompted by the report. The cabinet has been concerned about the rise of antipsychotic medications in children for some time, Haynes said. Cabinet staff attended a conference on the topic in Washington D.C. earlier this year. And after receiving a briefing on the UK report last week, Haynes appointed a work group within the cabinet to examine disparities in prescription habits and the rise in antipsychotic medications.
"What we have seen nationally is that kids in foster care are more often prescribed these medications," Haynes said. A combination of many factors is driving the uptick in use of antispychotic medications such as Risperidone, Seroquel and Zyprexan in children, clinicians say. Dr. Paul Glaser, a pediatrician and child and adult psychiatrist and associate professor at the University of Kentucky Medical School, said the increase may show that Kentucky is finally treating child and adolescent mental illness.
"Kentucky has been way behind in the treatment of childhood mental health disorders and I think we are finally catching up to the rest of the country," Glaser said. "We are catching these diseases earlier, which means there is less damage to the brain and better long-term outcomes for the patient."
However, the vast majority of powerful antipscyhotic medications are prescribed to children by pediatricians or family care doctors, not psychiatrists, said Dr. Owen Nichols, the president and CEO of NorthKey Community Care, a northern Kentucky community mental health center.
There are too few mental health professionals in Kentucky and too few child psychiatrists, Nichols and Glaser said. "They are easily prescribed by individuals that don’t necessarily have a behavioral health background," Nichols said. "For years, our primary care doctors did not prescribe them because they were higher-risk medications.
But now the drugs are much safer, so we’re seeing a lot more doctors prescribe them." Nichols said he would like to see Medicaid refer a child to a mental health professional if the program detects that the child is being prescribed more than one medication or multiple medications for a mental illness. Many diagnosis, such as anxiety disorder, are sometimes better treated through behavioral intervention rather than medication. In fact, medication can make some mental health disorders more difficult to treat, Nichols said.
"This trend is not unique to psychiatric medications," Nichols said of the increase in antipsychotic medications. "The United States is just one of two countries that allows for medications to be advertised on television. After that change, we have seen a steady increase in all medications." Haynes said the cabinet will drill deeper into the data to determine whether children are receiving mental health treatment along with medications.
She also cautioned that portions of the study rely on the number of grams of medications prescribed per Medicaid patient. But some antipsychotic medications have more grams per dosage than others, which could skew county-by-county statistics. That’s also true with ADHD drugs, but the cabinet will further examine why those drugs are more prevalent in Western Kentucky. Glaser said it’s difficult to say why ADHD drugs would be more common in one part of the state over another part of the state. The rate of ADHD is fairly consistent across the population, he said.
Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/10/10/3860983/use-of-antipsychotic-drugs-up.html#storylink=cpy
LISA LEFF | October 10, 2012
The city of Oakland filed a federal lawsuit in San Francisco that seeks to prevent the U.S. Department of Justice from using its property seizure powers to get Harborside Health Center evicted. The suit, thought to be the first a local government has brought on behalf of a pot shop, alleges the Justice Department knew about Harborside for years and exceeded the legal deadline for taking action against it.
It also claims federal officials are overstepping their authority by interfering with the process Oakland has established for licensing and monitoring dispensaries to make sure they operate in accordance with state law, City Attorney Barbara Parker said.
"We find it to be a very important issue from the standpoint of public health and public safety," Parker said. "We spent a lot of time, money, developing the regulatory scheme, issuing the permits, using our resources to do the inspections."
The Oakland City Council approved the filing of the lawsuit, she said.
Harborside serves about 100,000 medical marijuana users a year, sells about $20 million worth of pot and marijuana products, and pays $3 million in federal, state and local taxes annually, of which about $1.2 million goes to Oakland, executive director Steve DeAngelo said. He called the city’s intervention "heartening and encouraging."
U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag initiated a forfeiture proceeding in July on the property Harborside has rented in downtown Oakland since 2006, as well as its sister shop in San Jose. Haag said at the time that the dispensaries violate federal law by selling marijuana, even though medical marijuana is legal in California.
The owners of both properties have gone to state court to force out the dispensaries, but DeAngelo has counter-sued and so far been able to stay in business, said his lawyer, Henry Wykowski. DeAngelo, who has four years remaining on his Oakland lease, also is fighting the U.S. attorney’s claims, and a hearing before a federal magistrate is scheduled for Nov. 1, Wykowski said.
Over the past year, Haag and California’s three other federal prosecutors have brought similar actions against landlords throughout the state that lease space to dispensaries, most of which have been evicted or closed on their own.
By Tim Ghianni
NASHVILLE, Tennessee | Thu Oct 4, 2012
In a briefing for reporters, the CDC said five people had died so far and 35 had fallen sick from fungal meningitis in six states. The outbreak was first reported in Tennessee, where three people have died and 25 of the cases have been reported.
The other confirmed deaths were in Virginia and Maryland.
"We do know there were over 700 patients in Tennessee who were exposed," said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in Nashville, who said the number was provided to him by Tennessee state health officials.
The CDC said it had not yet determined the rate of infection among those patients who received the potentially tainted steroid. The rate of infection is an important barometer of the potential for the outbreak to spread.
"At the moment, fortunately, the attack rate looks pretty low – less than 1 percent — but we are still in the early days of defining this thing," Schaffner said.
The steroid is administered to patients, usually by injection, primarily to control back pain.
All the cases have so far been traced to three lots of Methylprednisolene Acetate from a pharmaceutical compounding plant in Massachusetts, according to the briefing.
The company, New England Compounding Center Inc, or NECC, in Framingham, Massachusetts, prepared the medication, which has been voluntarily recalled. The company has also voluntarily surrendered its license.
Attempts to view the NECC website prompted a "temporarily unavailable" message, and company officials could not be reached by phone for comment.
"We are encouraging all health facilities to immediately cease use of any product produced by NECC," Dr. Madeleine Biondolillo, Massachusetts public health director of safety, told reporters in a conference call from Boston.
A fungus linked to the steroid medication has been identified in specimens from five patients, according to the CDC’s Dr. Benjamin Park.
‘FAIRLY LONG INCUBATION PERIOD’
The Massachusetts Health Department said there were 17,676 vials of medication in each of the three lots under investigation. They were sent out July through September and have a shelf life of 180 days.
The CDC said the fungal contamination was detected in the examination of one of the sealed vials taken at that company.
Patients who received the injections were at risk of developing fungal meningitis for at least a month after their last exposure, Schaffner said.
"There is a fairly long incubation period. … That hasn’t run out yet for many patients," Schaffner said.
"Over the next few weeks, we are going to see a progressive accumulation of cases," he said.
Fungal meningitis is rare and life-threatening, but is not contagious from person to person. Meningitis can be passed to humans from steroid medications that weaken the immune system. Symptoms include a sudden onset of fever, headache, stiff neck, nausea, and vomiting, according to the CDC web site.
In addition to the 25 cases so far in Tennessee, one has been reported in North Carolina, two in Florida, four in Virginia, two in Maryland and one in Indiana, according to CDC’s Park.
About 75 facilities could have received the steroid in the 23 states. They are California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Texas and West Virginia, according to Park.
One facility in Indiana, St. Mary’s Health, said on Thursday that 560 patients had received the recalled medication. They received the steroid at the Surgicare Cross Pointe clinic in Evansville, said St. Mary’s spokeswoman Laura Forbes.
She said one of the 560 patients had been diagnosed with meningitis and was in the hospital and 10 to 15 others had been advised to seek further medical care.
In Tennessee, the worst-hit state, some patients are "really critically ill" and in intensive care units, said Dr. Marion Kainer of the state health department. She declined to say how many were critical.
A compounding pharmacy takes medications from pharmaceuticals manufacturers and makes them into specific dosages and strengths for use by doctors.
The drug ingredients are regulated by the FDA, but compounders are regulated by state agencies, the industry’s trade association said.
The Massachusetts Health Department said there had been several complaints against NECC. Complaints in 2002 and 2003 about the processing of medication resulted in an agreement with government agencies in 2006 to correct deficiencies
In 2011, there was another inspection of the facility and no deficiencies were found. In March 2012, another complaint was made about the potency of a product used in eye surgery procedures. That investigation is continuing, the state health department said.
(Additional reporting by Deena Beasley, Mary Wisniewski and Susan Guyett; Writing by Greg McCune; Editing by Cynthia Johnston and Peter Cooney)
AFFIDAVIT OF FACT
AND NOTICE OF INTENT AND CLAIM OF RIGHT
TO CULTIVATE, POSSESS, USE, TRANSPORT AND DISTRIBUTE HEMP
1. You are hereby given lawful notice that the plant called Hemp (Cannabis genus) is a vital natural-resource for food, clothing, medicine, fuel, and paper; a religious sacrament, as well as being a “Strategic and Critical Material” for “military”, “essential civilian”, and “industrial” purposes as documented in Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, & F attached hereto, and as such is “accessible” and “protected” under International Law cited herein.
2. You are hereby given lawful notice of Affiants intent to cultivate, possess, use, distribute and transport the plant known as Hemp (Cannabis genus).
3. Affiant claims the right to carry out the foregoing intent under sanction of the following constitutionally ratified treaties (Pursuant to U.S. Const. Art. VI. Sec. 2):
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 11, Sections 1 & 2, Dec. 16, 1966,
International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, Article 12, Section 1, Dec. 16, 1966, http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/cescr.htm
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 18, Section 1, Dec. 16, 1966, http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm
United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the crime of Genocide, Article II (c), Dec. 9, 1948, http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/genocide.htm
4. The International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, in Article 11, Sections 1 & 2, states:
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions. The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the realization of this right…
2. The States Parties to the present Covenant, recognizing the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger, shall take, individually and through international co-operation, the measures, including specific programs, which are needed:
(a) To improve methods of production, conservation and distribution of food by making full use of technical and scientific knowledge, by disseminating knowledge of the principles of nutrition and by developing or reforming agrarian systems in such a way as to achieve the most efficient development and utilization of natural resources;
(b) Taking into account the problems of both food-importing and food-exporting countries, to ensure an equitable distribution of world food supplies in relation to need.
4a. The interpretation for the right to adequate food, as given by the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights in General Comment Number 12 states:
The right to adequate food is realized when every man, woman and child…has physical and economic access at all times to adequate food or means for its procurement.
The Committee considers that the core content of the right to adequate food implies:
The availability of food in a quantity and quality sufficient to satisfy the dietary needs of individuals…Dietary needs implies that the diet as a whole contains a mix of nutrients for physical and mental growth, development and maintenance…Availability refers to the possibilities…for feeding oneself directly from productive land or other natural resources…
Violations of the right to food can occur through…adoption of legislation or policies which are manifestly incompatible with pre-existing legal obligations relating to the right to food; SEE: http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/%28Symbol%29/3d02758c707031d58025677f003b73b9?Opendocument
4b. Affiant submit’s the following Exhibits as sufficient supporting evidence that Hemp qualifies as an “adequate food resource” and is therefore “accessible” under Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights:
Pursuant to Presidential Executive Order 12919, the “NATIONAL DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS” order, Section 901 (e) & (l), attached hereto as Exhibit A, “Hemp” is defined as a “food resource” and qualifies as a ‘‘Strategic and Critical Material’’.
According to an excerpt from “Hempseed Nutrition” by Lynn Osburn, attached hereto as Exhibit B, a scientific analysis of hemp seed nutrition reveals that “Cannabis hemp seeds contain all the essential amino acids and essential fatty acids necessary to maintain healthy human life. No other single plant source provides complete protein in such an easily digestible form, nor has the oils essential to life in as perfect a ratio for human health and vitality. Hempseed is the highest of any plant in essential fatty acids.”.
4c. Affiant submit’s the following Exhibits as sufficient supporting evidence that Hemp qualifies as an adequate resource for “clothing”, “military”, “essential civilian” and “industrial” purposes, as well as other necessary resources for attaining an “adequate standard of living” including “paper” and biomass for “fuel” and is therefore further “accessible” under Article 11, Section 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights:
The transcript of a 1942 USDA film entitled “Hemp for Victory”, attached hereto as Exhibit C, states that “For thousands of years… this plant had been grown for cordage and cloth… For the sailor, no less than the hangman, hemp was indispensable…Indeed the very word canvas comes from the Arabic word for hemp…All such plants will presently be turning out products spun from American-grown hemp: twine of various kinds for tying and upholsters work; rope for marine rigging and towing; for hay forks, derricks, and heavy duty tackle; light duty fire hose; thread for shoes for millions of American soldiers; and parachute webbing for our paratroopers…hemp for mooring ships; hemp for tow lines; hemp for tackle and gear; hemp for countless naval uses both on ship and shore. ”.
According to a Popular Mechanics Magazine article, VOL. 69 February, 1938 NO. 2, pp. 238-240, entitled “NEW BILLION-DOLLAR CROP”, attached hereto as Exhibit D, states that “Hemp is the standard fiber of the world. It has great tensile strength and durability. It is used to produce more than 5,000 textile products, ranging from rope to fine laces, and the woody "hurds" remaining after the fiber has been removed contain more than seventy-seven per cent cellulose, and can be used to produce more than 25,000 products, ranging from dynamite to Cellophane…The natural materials in hemp make it an economical source of pulp for any grade of paper manufactured, and the high percentage of alpha cellulose promises an unlimited supply of raw material for the thousands of cellulose products our chemists have developed…All of these products, now imported, can be produced from home- grown hemp. Fish nets, bow strings, canvas, strong rope, overalls, damask tablecloths, fine linen garments, towels, bed linen and thousands of other everyday items can be grown on American farms. ”.
According to an Excerpt from "Energy Farming in America," by Lynn Osburn, attached hereto as Exhibit E, “BIOMASS CONVERSION to fuel has proven economically feasible, first in laboratory tests and by continuous operation of pilot plants in field tests since 1973. HEMP IS THE NUMBER ONE biomass producer on planet earth: 10 tons per acre in approximately four months.”
5. The International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, in Article 12, Section 1, states:
The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.
5a. The United Nations Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, in their General Comment Number 14, interprets the right to health to mean the following:
The right to health contains both freedoms and entitlements. The freedoms include the right to control one’s health and body… and the right to be free from interference… The entitlements include the right to a system of health protection which provides equality of opportunity for people to enjoy the highest attainable level of health… The Committee considers that indigenous peoples have the right to specific measures to improve their access to health services and care. These health services should be culturally appropriate, taking into account traditional preventive care, healing practices and medicines. States should provide resources for indigenous peoples to design, deliver and control such services so that they may enjoy the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. The vital medicinal plants, animals and minerals necessary to the full enjoyment of health of indigenous peoples should also be protected… In this respect, the Committee considers that development-related activities that lead to the displacement of indigenous peoples against their will from their traditional territories and environment, denying them their sources of nutrition and breaking their symbiotic relationship with their lands, has a deleterious effect on their health. By virtue of article 2.2 and article 3, the Covenant proscribes any discrimination in access to health care and underlying determinants of health, as well as to means and entitlements for their procurement. SEE: http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/%28symbol%29/E.C.12.2000.4.En
5b. Affiant submits the following Exhibit as sufficient supporting evidence that Hemp qualifies as a “traditional healing practice“, “medicine“ and “vital medicinal plant” that is “necessary to the full enjoyment of health” and therefore is “accessible” and “protected” under Article 12, Section 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights:
Lester Grinspoon, M.D. and Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, in an article entitled “History of Cannabis as a Medicine” published on August 16, 2005, attached hereto as Exhibit F, documents the historical, technical and scientific knowledge of Cannabis’s extensive use as a medicine. Grinspoon quotes DEA Administrative law Judge Francis L. Young in a decision rendered on September 6, 1988, which states: “marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man…”
6. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in Article 18, Section 1, states:
Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.
6a. The United Nations Human Rights Committee, in their General Comment Number 22, interprets the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion to mean the following:
The right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion (which includes the freedom to hold beliefs) in article 18.1 is far-reaching and profound;
Article 18 is not limited in its application to traditional religions or to religions and beliefs with institutional characteristics or practices analogous to those of traditional religions. The Committee therefore views with concern any tendency to discriminate against any religion or belief for any reason, including the fact that they are newly established, or represent religious minorities that may be the subject of hostility on the part of a predominant religious community…
The freedom to manifest religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching encompasses a broad range of acts. The concept of worship extends to ritual and ceremonial acts giving direct expression to belief, as well as various practices integral to such acts, including the building of places of worship, the use of ritual formulae and objects, also such customs as the observance of dietary regulations, the wearing of distinctive clothing or headcoverings, and participation in rituals associated with certain stages of life. SEE: http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/0/9a30112c27d1167cc12563ed004d8f15
6b. Affiant believes that Hemp (Cannabis genus) is equivalent to the “plant of renown” mentioned in Ezekiel 34:29 and the “tree of life” mentioned in Revelation 22:1-2 of the bible, which state:
And I will raise up for them a plant of renown, and they shall be no more consumed with hunger in the land, neither bear the shame of the heathen any more. — Ezekiel 34:29
On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit…And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. — Revelation 22:1-2
6c. Affiant believes in accordance with Genesis 1:29-30 of the bible, which states:
Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food…everything that has the breath of life in it–I give every green plant for food." — Genesis 1:29-30
6d. Affiant believes that Hemp (Cannabis genus) is a sacred “plant of renown” and “tree of life” given by the Creator to be used for the feeding, clothing, and healing of the nations of the Earth.
6e. Affiant claims the right to manifest his foregoing belief in practice, through the act of cultivating, possessing, using, distributing and transporting Hemp (Cannabis genus).
7. The United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the crime of Genocide, in Article II (c), states:
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.
7a. The Report of the Preparatory Commission for the International Criminal Court of July 6, 2000, in Article 6 (c), interprets what elements constitute “Genocide“ through “Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction”, and states:
The term “conditions of life” may include, but is not necessarily restricted to, deliberate deprivation of resources indispensable for survival, such as food or medical services, or systematic expulsion from homes.
SEE: http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N00/724/27/PDF/N0072427.pdf?OpenElement
7b. You are hereby given lawful notice that the plant called Hemp (Cannabis genus) is a critical food staple in Affiants vegetarian diet, as well as being a vital resource for Affiants clothing, medicine, paper, fuel as well other central necessities to Affiants way of life, and is therefore indispensable for Affiants health, adequate standard of living, spiritual practice and long-term physical survival.
7c. Any action against Affiant and his family to confiscate Hemp harvests, blockade Hemp foodstuffs or other resources, any use of coercive measures to deter Hemp cultivation, possession, use, distribution, or transportation, including expulsion from homes or forced relocation into detention camps, will be considered a deliberate attack on Affiant and his families ability to sustain life and therefore an act of genocide pursuant to Article II (c) of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the crime of Genocide.
8. You are hereby given lawful notice that Affiant grants you thirty (30) days to rebut the facts stated herein; If you fail to rebut the facts stated in this affidavit within the granted amount of time then Affiant will assume that you are in agreement with said facts, and that you acknowledge Affiants claim of right and intent to act as stated herein, as being valid and lawfully sanctioned.
9. Affiant affirms under the penalty of perjury under all constitutional Laws of the State of California and the 50 States of the American Union, that all that is written in this affidavit is true and correct to the best of Affiants knowledge and understanding.
Signed and Sealed:_____________________________ Dated:___________
Natural Person – In Propria Persona – Conrad Justice Kiczensk
i
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED – WITHOUT PREJUDICE
State of California
Lake County
Subscribed and affirmed before me on this ____________ day of ______________, 20________, by Conrad Justice Kiczenski, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the Person who appeared before me. Witness my hand and official Seal.
Signature:__________________________________
Seal:
Posted by RadicalJusticeMan at 9:28 AM
Written by Alex Newman
Following the adoption of a new state law on jury nullification in June, a New Hampshire jury nullified its first major felony marijuana case on September 14 when jurors decided to free Doug Darrell, a 59-year-old father of four grown children who was growing illegal plants in his backyard. Activists hailed the decision as a significant victory for the jury nullification movement, which aims to revive awareness about the power inherent in juries to protect citizens from overzealous prosecutors and bad laws by nullifying cases.
Darrell, a Rastafarian piano tuner and woodworker who has been married for almost four decades, was arrested after a National Guard helicopter spotted some marijuana plants on his property in Barnstead. State prosecutors charged him with cultivation, a felony that could have carried up to seven years in prison.
It was clear that he had been growing the marijuana — nobody disputed that. Eventually Darrell was offered a deal that would have allowed him to avoid jail time and fines in exchange for a misdemeanor guilty plea. He refused, however, citing his religion and its view that marijuana is a sacrament. So the case went to trial.
Jurors, led by liberty-minded activist Cathleen Converse of the Free State Project, decided Darrell should be set free. “Mr. Darrell is a peaceful man, he never deals with the darker elements of society and he grows for his own personal religious and medicinal use,” Converse said during an exclusive interview with Free Talk Live, a freedom-oriented talk-radio program. “I knew that my community would be poorer rather than better off had he been convicted.”
So, to prevent that, she helped convince other jurors to do as the defense suggested: vote their conscience and declare Darrell a free man. “Many of us wondered what kind of precedent this would set,” Converse continued. “But after chewing on all of the possibilities and re-reading the definition of nullification, we all decided that the only fair thing to do was to vote with our consciences and acquit the defendant of all charges.”
Jury nullification, of course, is a time-tested practice that goes back to before the American Declaration of Independence. Essentially, it occurs when members of a jury decide to free somebody even though prosecutors prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused did indeed violate a criminal statute.
Juries have historically relied on nullification for various reasons including to reject unjust or unconstitutional laws, to free defendants in cases where laws have been misapplied by overzealous officials, and more. During alcohol prohibition it became commonplace as jurors refused en masse to convict their compatriots for drinking illegal substances.
Before that, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Jay informed a jury in 1794 that jurors have “a right to take upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy.” Numerous other Supreme Court justices and Founding Fathers have touted the practice, too. And despite being largely overlooked today, activists across America are trying hard to build awareness about it.
In June, those nullification advocates secured a major victory. New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch signed HB 146 into law allowing defendants to inform jurors about the jury’s “right to judge the application of the law in relationship to the facts in controversy.” That law does not officially take effect until January, but it has already made waves throughout the state’s judiciary system.
“It’s a really important development,” Darrell’s defense attorney Mark Sisti told the New Hampshire Union Leader, adding that most state residents have no problem with moderate marijuana use by adults and that legislatures across America are rethinking their laws on the controversial plant. “We’re moving along a path we should have been on years ago.”
Sisti acknowledged, though, that the judge’s decision to instruct the jury about nullification was crucial to the victory. Judge James O’Neill, following the state’s model jury instruction on nullification, told jurors that "even if you find that the State has proven each and every element of the offense charged beyond a reasonable doubt, you may still find the defendant not guilty if you have a conscientious feeling that a not guilty verdict would be a fair result in this case."
While warning that jury nullification is not a “get-out-of-jail-free card,” Sisti celebrated the ruling and the clearing of his client. "Cases like this shouldn’t be brought," he was quoted as saying. "And when they are brought, I think that safety valve, that nullification safety valve, is very important. Other states had better start waking up, because without it, people are going to be convicted of very serious charges through hypocrisy. The jury’s going to think they can’t do anything else, and that’s wrong."
The prosecutor who brought charges against Darrell for his illegal plants also admitted that the judge’s decision to instruct the jury on nullification was key to the government’s defeat, but she tried to downplay its effect going forward. “I don’t see it as being that significant in changing our practice and the practice of the court,” the prosecutor told the Union Leader.
Cathleen Converse, the juror who reportedly helped push the case for nullification, however, is among a growing number of Americans who believe that there should be a victim for something to be considered a crime. “Mr. Darrell seemed to be the only victim here,” she explained after the acquittal. “Almost everyone said this just shouldn’t have happened to these peaceful people.”
In New Hampshire — the official state motto is “Live Free or Die” — such views have become increasingly influential. That’s in part due to the birth of the Free State Project, an ongoing plan to have thousands of liberty-minded people from across America move to the Granite State to build a more libertarian society. FSP activists have already elected more than a few lawmakers, and their influence continued to grow.
"So far, over 12,750 participants have pledged to relocate to the state, and more than 1,000 have already moved, over a dozen of which are currently elected members of the New Hampshire House of Representatives," said Free State Project President Carla Gericke in a press release touting the acquittal. "Once here, participants are free to pursue their own causes and I’m excited to see that progress is being made."
While the Darrell case probably will not be shutting down the unconstitutional, trillion-dollar federal drug war anytime soon, analysts said it was an important milestone in several respects. For one, it illustrates the growing opposition to imprisoning people for drug use, which has been a key contributor to the fact that the United States has far more prisoners per capita than any other nation in the world. Well over a dozen states have already nullified federal marijuana laws.
More importantly, perhaps, the acquittal of Doug Darrell represents a significant revival of jury nullification. The centuries-old practice has always been a critical tool in the fight against government tyranny. So, with the victory in New Hampshire and many more anticipated in the near future, liberty-minded activists across America are hoping the trend spreads quickly to other states.
Related articles:
New Hampshire Passes Jury Nullification Law
Former Drug Warrior Persecuted for Activism Uses Arrest to Push Jury Nullification
Judge Sentences Politically Incorrect Juror to More Jury Duty
State Lawmakers Blast Obama’s War on Medical Marijuana
A Brilliant Exposition on the Effectiveness of Nullification
Drug War a “Failure,” Says N.J. GOP Gov. Chris Christie
The Other Unconstitutional War
bunkerville is discussing. 
Thanks for the link.