I hope she follows through on this campaign promise.

This is centrist. A small step in the right direction, but centrist

and it would be a huge step in the right direction.

But it won't do anything to help real Americans and will make corporations (drug companies and private prisons) able to profit without competition from the little guys.

millions of Americans would still face criminal prosecution and possible imprisonment

and reclassification has the potential to turn back progress that has been made in states that have voted to legalize (especially recreational)

marijuana should be legally treated like alcohol not cocaine, morphine and oxycontin


that is not progress

Incremental.....

And remember who actually changes laws in the US.

It may not be as progressive as you would like it to be, but it is still progressive.

Right now, there are no human trials b/c of the Sched. 1 classification. Some of us need these trials NOW!

I don't count Pharma and corporate prisons as the public.

It doesn't matter what the support is. Locking people up for dope is immoral. Not allowing people to self medicate when nothing else helps is immoral.

It needs to be unscheduled because IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO, not because focus groups and polls tell us what will be okay.

Ask for the most, then we have some room to bargain. We move the thing progressively no matter what but if we don't set our sights to the best and beyond, we get less of everything.

So you still want people to go to jail over a plant? Sorry, that is not 'progressive'.

No reason we cannot go to the full beneficial extent.

I live across the street from an illegal store that sells it. Hopefully she clarifies her position.

Perhaps you could clarify this statement.

There is, for example, a black fella serving twenty years in a Louisiana prison for holding two joints. Probably less than two grams.

Compassionate conservative Republican Governor Jindal refused to commute sentence as he left office, despite petitions.

Honestly, which is more likely to destroy a life?

Smoking some weed, or going to prison and spending the rest of your life with a felony conviction?

I would hope the clarification would cover this point.

Last edited Fri Aug 12, 2016, 05:40 PM - Edit history (1)

Thank goodness HRC can see further out than her window at home.

I like to pretend some of my sentiments are forbidden rather than merely absurd and unsupported by science as well... it's much more self-validating as such.

Packy = package store, which is the term in much of New England for a liquor store.

Your post can be taken in several ways. I have never seen it destroy lives, be a gateway drug, nor seen in overdose in my life.

I have on the other hand seen it save lives, alleviate chronic pain, increase appetite in patients with wasting syndrome, increase quality of life in endless ways.

The only cases that I have ever seen it injuring people is not because of it's use, but because it is not legal and used as a tool by law enforcement against the poor, people of color, and victims of revenge

I'm pretty pro pot legalization because I don't believe prohibition work.

But I've seen many many people glorify it, spend hours getting high, have poor priorities due to it and in general they have missed opportunities because you can tell they're a stoner now and they don't pursue their dreams.

I know of kid who had scholarships, then did pot, hung out with potheads and they all graduated to harder drugs. This kid is now a handyman, doing coke, he had a full ride to Ohio state. I've seen the drug culture ruin lives.

I see the benefits, but I'm just not a fan.

My wife has horrible pain from a birth defect, I'd like it if she could use pot. But she's in her 30s now. At age 25 I'm glad she didn't get into it.

have addictive personalities, and some suffer from depression because their lives are miserable and they feel they have no control and no way to make it better. In some people both factors influence their choices.

But people who do not have such issues should not be prevented from having beer, smoking a joint, or playing video games jsut because a few people cannot control their tendency to use such activities as a way to escape their own stresses.

Check out Dr. Carl Hart:

http://www.drcarlhart.com/
https://www.amazon.com/s?ie=UTF8&page=1&rh=n%3A283155%2Cp_27%3ACarl%20Hart
Drugs, Society, and Human Behavior
High Price: A Neuroscientist's Journey of Self-Discovery That Challenges Everything You Know About Drugs and Society (P.S.)

I started smoking pot in 1970, and when I found out that the propaganda about pot just wasn't true, I stopped trusting what they said about other drugs as well. So I tried those. It wasn't the pot that moved me on, I started drinking at that time too. It was the lying that then got me interested in those other drugs.

In fact, if the gov stopped lying about it, then more would trust what the gov says and stay away from harder drugs.

Any potentially risky behavior that triggers endorphins or pleasurable feelings, and provides a feeling of release.

See, the problem with any substance or activity abuse is that it is too often "self-medication" for people who are high functioning but extremely unhappy or unable to cope with stress put on them by people who want them to be different. The drug culture provides them with an escape that most "normal" people wouldn't be considering.

The kids you talk about had other problems dealing with reality you probably didn't see. Pressures to be something they weren't. Self-esteem problems they hid. Emotional confusion and pain they couldn't address.

And - having raised a troubled teen - I've found in most cases, those bright teens with a terrific future had already started abusing other substances in secret and you "saw" the pot because it was illegal and harder to get than bumming cigarettes, stealing the family alcohol, or hanging out with/having sex with anyone who told them what they wanted to hear.

Ask yourself - why would a very small percentage of "good kids" start hanging out with the bad kids and start slaking off and smoking pot?
FCS, I was a f'n orchestra nerd in the 70's, then joined the Navy - a good quarter of the kids in orchestra and fellow sailors I went through service school with smoked pot on the side, and it never affected their talent, their future careers, their personal safety, their families...
In the Navy, it only mattered when they started random drug tests instead of drug testing only when there was an incident. Thanks Nancy - "Just Say No!"

Y'know, I never smoked pot, even though two of my best friends (one ended up in Julliard and on to a professional career, one ended up with a MS in Civil Engineering at UW) regularly participated in an almost ritual "Friday Night Smokers" - pot, alcohol, and cigarettes - that had been started by an extended group of acquaintances and fellow students when we were seniors in high school.
Looking back at where everyone was by the 10th reunion (the only one I went to - damn, they're boring, especially when there was a graduating class of over 700...) I think maybe 2% of that particular group never amounted to anything, but everyone else seems to have survived.

Pot abuse isn't a "Gateway" drug into a destructive sub-culture. There were other emotional forces that are in the process of messing up teenage lives way before they get into pot.

Haele

And alcohol is perfectly legal.

Addiction is a psychological problem, and people can get addicted to many substances.

The vast majority of cannabis users do so with no such dire consequences.

Case in point: me, cancer patient.

The stupid thing is that without human trials due to this idiotic Sched. 1, people don't know how much to take. Not to mention pot proved to be anti-tumor, anti-metastasis in animal trials but there the testing stopped.

Instead, we have chemo that's federally approved which may cause further cancer and in my case, severe neuropathy, common with chemo.

I talked with a guy who is a recovering addict. He said that he was first, a guy who couldn't get enough of the strongest coffee available. So, he added OTC stimulants to his formula. Eventually he discovered cocaine. He just craved stimulants.

Pot as a gateway is a fallacy. People always start out with the most conveniently available substance. Alcohol, cigarettes, and apparently even caffiene are the real gateway drugs.

or something else! even if there was no such thing as cannabis!

Glad she sees the bigger picture than what is just outside her window.

Finish your sentences.

You said "...then what is just outside her window." What is just outside her window?

Give em time.

Of course you do, it just bothers you too much to stay on topic.

Where I live, it is very much a force for good. Any medicine can be abused if it is taken to the point of addiction or escapism.

Cannabis needs to be studied and brought into the light. It is strong medicine. We need to know more about its efficacy and effects.

Legal painkillers such as; morphine, methadone, Buprenorphine, hydrocodone, and oxycodone have destroyed many, many lives.

What have you seen? Please explain, because I'm not sure how you've come to the conclusion that Marijuana destroys lives and now I am waiting to be educated

government and law enforcement, as well as giving organized crime a powerful foothold in US society.

Just like now.

You can abuse any of these. When I drank wine, I would stop at 1 or 1-1/2 glasses. Some people can't stop.

Is this store selling what is incorrectly referred to as "synthetic marijuana," which is not marijuana at all?

Synthetic cannabinoids (Redirected from Synthetic marijuana)

Synthetic marijuana, that crap is no where close to marijuana. It's like if they called gasoline synthetic alcohol, or something, I'm not good at metaphors. That garbage was being sold where I live and it was all over the papers for awhile.

Peace

"Clearly, you must be smoking something" to think pot destroys lives!

Come on DU, you are getting slack!

Seriously, you have a principled position. But I happen to think it is dead wrong.

No doubt, you have objective evidence to support your allegation yes?

You may have seen a few things you've interpreted that way, but you don't really know what you've seen.

But you know, pot kills etc..

Time needs a new copy editor. Kick for Hillary's progressive stance.

(or not)

several other painful and chronic medical conditions. To say that it has no medical value is a proven lie! The reason the DEA doesn't want to go down this road is that 90% of their interdiction is pot and they would have to lay off a lot of agents. Their budget would get a big haircut as would every law enforcement agency. Pot is their cash cow and that is why people like me suffer as long as it is kept illegal.

There are two main anti-pot lobby groups in the US. Their primary funding source? The pharmaceutical industry.

Black market dealers, the Pharmaceutical industry, and the for-profit Prison industry. Illegal cannabis has been a gravy train for them.

to make it harder on People in poverty, people of color and anyone who might vote Democratically from voting

Many states, especially in the south, don't allow you to vote if you have a felony conviction on your record. And of course, if you are in prison serving time, well you certainly won't be voting.

This is a well documented strategy to keep minorities, especially African Americans from voting and out of the political process.

Voting against him, many who were also smoking marijuana, get felony convictions, thereby diluting the Dem/youth vote.

At SOME point the political will of the people has to overcome the money/special interests. Right?

Right???

I live in a border town. Legalization would absolutely destroy the local economy. Between the money poured into the border patrol for interdiction, the money dumped into the local prison industrial complex (we have FIVE local prisons) and the informal marijuana trade our local economy absolutely depends on the status quo. I'm serious. This is what rescheduling/decriminalization/legalization is up against.

So...in order to protect the business BUILT ON DESTROYING LIVES OVER A PLANT - you would continue this bullshit so Private FUCKING Prisons in your border town can still run and employ local bullies to harass and oppress people???

I am HOPING This is a BULLSHIT post - troll type thing....got me, of course.


If your local economy is based on putting teenagers in prison for decades, ruining entire families, CREATING the Mexican cartels that dip people in acid feet 1st or flay them alive and the deaths of 10s of 1000s since we started this FUCKING STUPID WAR - then FUCK YOUR LOCAL ECONOMY.

I was providing context. I am in full support of the reform of marijuana laws -- looking forward to it in fact. BTW, I'm on the northern border.

He was just telling the awful truth.

We must subjugate human beings in order to preserve our economy.

It is a statement that describes, from first hand observation, the construct that supports the status quo while describing the forces that are arrayed against the reform of marijuana laws. It is actually more similar to the argument made by coal mining economies against clean energy (and before anyone freaks out, I am in full throttled support of clean energies too.) I consider it constructive to understand the viewpoint of folks on the "other side" in order to more effectively communicate with them.

Which is basically, we should continue an unconstitutional, inhumane, and idiotic law in order to preserve some sort of economic well-being. The standard of living for law enforcement professionals, or plantation owners of the South if you will, is more paramount than respecting the constitutional/human rights of the citizenry.

I appreciate the clarification.

SOCIETY and improving their world.

time to get used to the change, rather than being seen as a top down decision before much of the country supports it.

Of course things like Hydrocodone and Oxycontin are schedule II and when people addicted to it can't get a refill they turn to the street heroin. Thus, they end up getting hooked on heroin (a class I), get arrested for possession, and thrown in jail. Hmmm.

EPA has chemical co. execs, same with Dept of Ag, the list goes on.

Since marijuana and it's extracts are now in wide medical use, it's fairly clear that the scientific community knows some things the DEA doesn't know and/or doesn't want to know!

Good for Hillary, to be on the evidence-based side of the issue!

Eventually, maybe in the Jetsons future, we will stop treating addiction as a criminal problem and start treating it as a mental health problem. Marijuana plays no role in addiction, but it gets lumped in with all the other addictive drugs. Nobody should go to jail for smoking weed. Or smoking anything, for that matter.

In any case, if it can't kill you, it shouldn't be a schedule 1 drug.

not re-classified as a Schedule-2

alcohol is much more harmful than weed yet is not considered a controlled substance. Marijuana shouldn't either

it should be legal for medical patients and recreationally for all adults

I don't see how you can have a system where a substance is stringently controlled and regulated by the DEA as a C-2 medication and, at the same time, legally available for recreational consumption

classifying marijuana the same as OxyContin and Percocet doesn't seem like much of a victory in the struggle against prohibition. In fact, it could end up getting the DEA more involved than it currently is in legal medical states

remove it from the list, don't re-classify it

get the fucking DEA out of it and allow pot to be sold and regulated similar to alcohol

There are a lot of good reasons why it should be either rescheduled VERY low on the list, or removed from scheduling altogether possibly. A wave of legalization sweeping through is just one of the reasons. There are a ton of better moral reasons though.

Great post. Keep it up.

Take a look at all the items currently scheduled as less dangerous than pot. Even methamphetamines, which are far more dangerous and addictive are schedule II. Anabolic steroids are schedule 3, valium is a schedule 4!


schedule I

Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Schedule I drugs are the most dangerous drugs of all the drug schedules with potentially severe psychological or physical dependence. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are:

heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote

Schedule II

Schedule II drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with a high potential for abuse, with use potentially leading to severe psychological or physical dependence. These drugs are also considered dangerous. Some examples of Schedule II drugs are:

Combination products with less than 15 milligrams of hydrocodone per dosage unit (Vicodin), cocaine, methamphetamine, methadone, hydromorphone (Dilaudid), meperidine (Demerol), oxycodone (OxyContin), fentanyl, Dexedrine, Adderall, and Ritalin

Schedule III

Schedule III drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with a moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence. Schedule III drugs abuse potential is less than Schedule I and Schedule II drugs but more than Schedule IV. Some examples of Schedule III drugs are:

Products containing less than 90 milligrams of codeine per dosage unit (Tylenol with codeine), ketamine, anabolic steroids, testosterone

Schedule IV

Schedule IV drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with a low potential for abuse and low risk of dependence. Some examples of Schedule IV drugs are:

Xanax, Soma, Darvon, Darvocet, Valium, Ativan, Talwin, Ambien, Tramadol

Schedule V

Schedule V drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with lower potential for abuse than Schedule IV and consist of preparations containing limited quantities of certain narcotics. Schedule V drugs are generally used for antidiarrheal, antitussive, and analgesic purposes. Some examples of Schedule V drugs are:

cough preparations with less than 200 milligrams of codeine or per 100 milliliters (Robitussin AC), Lomotil, Motofen, Lyrica, Parepectolin

a C-nothing


just like alcohol

I read the explanations of the levels....if I were a policy wonk (Hilary is, that's a good thing), I would probably have thought the same way.

The only reason to do it slowly is to make sure the business set up around it can change slowly and find a way to profit.

Anything that's already got an infrastructure established won't change quickly.

have already legalized it. We are not yet at the tipping point.

Last edited Fri Aug 12, 2016, 10:44 AM - Edit history (1)

Make a profit, while making it illegal for everyone else, keeping the prison complex happy. This is something on which I deeply disagree with Sec Clinton.

This is why I come to DU - to get ideas and information I would not normally come up with myself.


Thank you, AllyCat

Schedule II is not legalization and many people are prosecuted and thrown in jail/prison every day for Schedule II drug possession

plus, I don't see how the DEA would allow any kind of recreational market for a controlled substance when they have enforcement authority over it

does anyone really think the DEA is going to allow people to produce (grow) their own C-II controlled substance at home?

this is not a step in the right direction IMO

This is exactly the problem. Move it to schedule II and it becomes equivalent to cocaine instead of heroin. Bold step.

If it is to be treated like alcohol (age restriction, regulated and taxed) then it needs to be scheduled like alcohol.

Very cool!

Another myth, busted.

being an "authoritarian" she wouldn't have the authority.
If it were that easy why hasn't POTUS pulled that string yet?

Deny that one? A HUGE red state with a lot of oil? You lose.

This is very little to celebrate

for a convenient time!

Instead of the usual 4:20?

Oh I crack myself up.

Their money, power, and control depend on it.

Think of all the police departments, for-profit prisons, and drug enforcement officials who would lose most of their reason for being if the most commonly used illegal drug were no longer illegal. If they admit that it is not the devil weed after all, then eventually it will become legal everywhere, and the foot soldiers and generals in the War on Drugs will have to find useful employment instead.

Think of all the black and Hispanic kids and adults who would no longer have a permanent criminal record hung around their necks to keep them from getting student loans or decent jobs if carrying or smoking a small amount of weed or carrying "drug paraphernalia" (i.e., a pot pipe) no longer exposed them to federal criminal charges! How in the world could police departments effectively assert their power over the minority communities they occupy if they don't have such an all-purpose weapon in their arsenal?

As a cancer patient, I've legally tried weed, capsules and medibles from the dispensary in my state. The effect is the same no matter what you smoke or ingest. Big Pharma can't figure out how to capitalize on MMJ since growing your own, buying from small companies who provide mmj to dispensaries or cafes, or making your own oil products will give you the same effect.

If Big Pharma were smart, they'd jump on the bandwagon and demand clinical trials and then get into this new gold rush. Instead, I believe they're the ones preventing MJ from a schedule change.

been thinking that a lot

peace everyone
kp

It really depends on the strain. There's a large variety of plants, each with different medical applications. Some have high THC, usually for recreational users. Some cultivars are tuned to balance THC:CBD ratios for different therapeutic purposes.

a "laboratory of democracy!"

Just to be cute.

so don't tell me it has no medical benefits. Total bullshit. MJ has also proven anti-tumor and anti-metastasis for colon and certain breast cancers in animal studies ca. mid-2000's. But we are still waiting for human trials and none to be had due to this Sched. 1 BS. I'm sure Big Pharma won't allow it in their DEA revolving door brains.

She is having the debt of gratitude toward the private prison complex and corporations who are supplying them with all kinds of things to keep prisons running.

Like most campaign "promises" it will disappear like a puff of smoke after November 8th.

*Warning! A long, possibly rambling post is to follow!*

Clinton saying she would be interested in rescheduling isn't a particularly surprising development considering she said she would be interested in rescheduling marijuana to Schedule II back in a February debate (Click here). All progress should be applauded, but my personal opinion is that this doesn't quite go far enough.

I first became interested in cannabis in my early 20's when I became sick with ulcerative colitis. There were a lot of promising anecdotal stories on the internet about how cannabis helps with that condition. Still, I wasn't 100% sold on the idea and didn't pursue it through the medical outlets here (I did years later, and the doctor I was working with seemed very uninterested in pursuing that avenue. I did not push nor shop for a different doctor.)

It was around 2010 when Sensiblewashington.org popped up and introduced Initiative 1068 AKA the Marijuana Reform Act. I didn't know what to think at first, but it started a conversation at least. It started enough of a conversation that one of the government committees held a 'should we legalize cannabis' public forum that was livestreamed. I pored through that video and that's where I my opinions on cannabis were really cemented. I heard stories from certain legislators and why there were skeptical. I heard stories from medical user citizens talking about how the current system wasn't adequate. There was one younger lady in particular with crohn's disease which struck a chord with me, perhaps due to age, perhaps due to similar ailment.

That's when I decided I had to do a little bit more. I cleaned myself up a bit and cared about something for the first time in a long time. It was by and large a great experience even though there were a few people whom really didn't agree with it. I could dialog with them about why I felt how I felt. Connecting with people was important and I wish I could experience passionate, polite signature collecting again. While the initiative fell short, the seeds were firmly planted and a two years later legalization had passed in Washington state.

It wasn't until 2014 that I actually tried cannabis. It's been helpful on the ulcerative colitis front and is used as a medicine first and foremost. There were a few other positive things that happened along the way. I no longer felt the need to lean on alcohol to get me through the tough times which means I no longer crave alcohol like I used to.

While alcohol turned me into an absolute self-destructive monster with little control, I feel that cannabis has made me a more thoughtful individual, which I appreciate. There are negatives, but I'd say the positives far outweigh the negatives, especially if you've got an illness which may be helped through it.

So don't be afraid of cannabis (and I'm sure very few of you are).

I just wish progress would come a bit faster on the national front. I'm not sure that Schedule II is enough. Will schedule II make it so that the DEA leaves pot alone in states that have legal cannabis? I'm skeptical. The DEA thrives on keeping pot illegal. Cannabis is an easy target for them. It's similar to police officers that run speed traps all day and meeting ticket quotas instead of actually trying to investigate petty crimes that have taken place.

Also, I'm not sure that rescheduling the schedule II will do anything to make banking accessible to pot shops. This is a real concern for a growing industry. So we've got 4-5 states that have legalized pot right now. That's millions of people paying cash for cannabis. That cash can't be deposited into banks, which is a burden on pot businesses. It also makes the cannabis business ripe for money laundering. This should be fixed as soon as possible, but it likely won't until a large state like California joins the fold because politicians generally don't like to take stands unless they absolutely have to.

So... That's why I support either unscheduling cannabis or putting it in the one of the lowest tiers possible. We're past the point where Schedule II would be very beneficial in my opinion except for pharma profiteering.

My apologies for such a long post. It's just a topic that is very near and dear to me. If I can sway anyone with a well-reasoned argument I'm going to try my best. Have a great day, folks!

Until the checks come from Pharma and alcohol companies

wants to keep it schedule I because it is a cottage industry to them.

It helps them to have their employees pay for their swimming pools, scotch whiskey, country club dues, etc.

Follow the money.

and the other states decriminalize possession, which many already have, could you just mail order it? Or could you just travel to the mountains for vacation?