Kids are Smarter than Adults

There is hope for this crummy world after all. In Durango High School a mock election had the students talking about some recent ballot initiatives, including amendment 44, the initiative to decriminilize possession of less than an ounce of pot.

No preliminary results were available, but students overwhelmingly said they favored legalizing marijuana and opposed banning gay marriage.

Freshman Trey Heath, 14, said he supported marijuana legalization.

"I don't believe in smoking marijuana, but if they ban it, people are just going to want to do it more," Heath said.

"What you can't have, you want to have," said another freshman, Franchesca Framer, 15. Furthermore, she said, "everyone does it anyway."

Students said people should be able to marry whomever they want.

"What if a man loves someone who's another man and a woman loves someone who's another woman?" said sophomore Alicia Hansen, 15. "I think it's fine."

Out of the mouths of babes...

The ICSF opposes Amendment 44

A body composed of student government representatives from each of the University of Colorado's three statewide campuses, the ICSF (University of Colorado Intercampus Student Forum) unanimously drafted an anti-Amendment 44 resolution during an Oct. 16 meeting, and will be addressing the public Thursday, Nov. 2 at 10 a.m. on the Auraria campus to demonstrate their stance.

“[The ICSF's] primary interest is fostering excellence in the academic and social environment at the University of Colorado, and we do not feel the passage of Amendment 44 would be compatible with that in any way,” said ICSF member Colin Rose, vice president of the student government Association for the University of Colorado at Denver. “Therefore, we feel compelled to voice our opposition by way of this resolution.”

The reasons that the ICSF gives for opposing the resolution are the comfortable, well-worn rationales that have been spewed forth ever since this inane, expensive and corrupt drug war began.

"There is a clear correlation between marijuana use and schizophrenia," said Evans, citing a study conducted by Patrick Skosnik of Indiana University that was printed in the American Journal of Psychiatry.

They can no longer make racist claims such as "Reefer makes darkies think they are as good as white men" or claim a link between violent crimes and use of the demon weed. So they have toned it down by "proving" that schizophrenia is linked to marijuana use.

I am not a scientist but I do know that correlation does not equal causation. What if marijuana users are self-medicating for undiagnosed schizophrenia? I wonder how many studies are being done about the link between schizophrenia and marijuana from a completely unbiased point of view. It's amazing the number of studies that are being done to "prove" that women are less intelligent than men and that some races are less intelligent than other races, just for starters. You would think that scientists would have better things to do than justify bigotry. Is this really the best way to advance the human race?

I eye the claims about schizophrenia with a lot of suspicion. Science can be abused and manipulated in a way to push a political agenda. Did you know that "Intelligent Design"* is scientific?

Oh here I am going on about the abuse of science when there are prohibitionists to make fun of. ICSF wants to cast doubt on SAFER's assertion that alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana. Do they do this by stating the facts about marijuana? They certainly would have to refrain from comparing the number of overdose deaths due to marijuana and alcohol, since marijuana has never killed anyone. Do they mention that there is no correlation between marijuana and violent crime? Can the same be said for alcohol? No, the facts are no friends of the ICSF and they have to fall back on a dose of good-ole reefer madness with a side order of classic stoner stereotypes.

“I think that [the university students] understand the issue,” said Evans. “Kids that are smoking pot aren't going to do well in school, and [people] don't associate marijuana with academic excellence.”

Everybody "knows" that stoners don't do well in school.

"A lie, repeated often enough, will end up as truth." Dr Paul Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's Minister of Propaganda (1933-1945)

Luckily we have Mason Tvert to counterbalance this insanity.

For Mason Tvert, supporter of Amendment 44 and representative for the Alcohol-MJ Equalization Initiative, the anti-amendment resolution is “disgusting.”

Tvert said that a majority of students, 68 percent of CU's student body, voted in favor of the non-profit Safer Alternative for Enjoyable Recreation's (SAFER) initiative that promotes marijuana as a safer alternative to alcohol.

SAFER's supporters say marijuana is far less addictive than other narcotics and alcohol, and that is safer for long-term use.

“Simply said, [that percentage of students] didn't think that the penalties for marijuana should be any greater than the penalties for alcoholŠand it's unfortunate to see student representatives acting in direct opposition to their student body,” said Tvert during an interview with the Colorado Daily Tuesday. “Right now our policies are pushing students and adults to drink, and I don't think it makes sense to punish those adults who make the rational, safer choice to use marijuana instead of alcohol.”

SAFER has done an incredible job of campaigning for this issue. The way they have defended marijuana with facts and have put this issue forward as a way to try to prevent marijuana from getting into the hands of minors has been outstanding. They are doing a fantastic job of pushing drug law reform and I hope that other activists (including myself) can learn from them. I wonder how these tactics could be used in Saskatchewan.

*Intelligent Design is my very favorite oxymoron!

I want to protest something

The situation in Colorado interests me greatly. It has been a pretty ugly fight so far, with lies being thrown around by prohibitionists. In the following video, take note of the high horse that the governor of Colorado is sitting on. He says to the camera, "Look at the people standing up here with me and the people shouting us down and not allowing us to speak."

Yes, governor, you are right that pot people are angry. We are shouting and acting inappropriately. Prohibitionists have been lying to the public for years, pulling at the public heart strings and pandering to the publics' fear in a bitter attempt to justify a horribly flawed law. They have indoctrinated school children and locked up so many people all in the name of the War on Drugs. They have demonized marijuana. Harry Ainslinger, the very first US Drug Czar used to claim that "Marijuana makes a negro look at a white woman twice." He also said "Marijuana makes darkies think they are as good as white men." He said it like equality is a bad thing!

Racist, heartless, non-thinking government officials get to have their say and ignore the opinions of the people that they represent. Why doesn't the Governor ask himself why so many people are angry? Why is this so important to so many people? It's just marijuana, surely there are more important things in the world than legalizing this plant.

I get that all the time. "Why do you care so much? It's so easy to get anyway." That is true and it shows the strength of my position. We have been following the same tactics for years and we still have 90% of high school seniors telling us that marijuana is easy to get. Let's cut the bullshit and legalize already.

I wish I could have been there protesting with them. I feel so useless sometimes, writing a shitty blog that nobody reads and feeling like I have no idea how to be an activist. At least waving signs around and yelling would be lots of fun. I just wonder what the public would think after watching that video clip. Would they understand why pot people are angry or is this issue going to get written off as only effecting a small number of people and not very important in the whole grand scheme of things.

Video Link

Nevada gets even closer to pot legalization

Nevada is going even further than Colorado by putting question 7 on the ballot in November's election. The following video summarizes what question 7 will accomplish:

Video Link

Nevada will allow retailers to sell up to an ounce of marijuana in state-regulated outlets. Driving under the influence of marijuana, use of marijuana by minors, selling marijuana to minors and using marijuana in public would still be illegal.

I shouldn't be surprised that Nevada would be the most progressive. None of the other ballot measures go as far as allowing a legal supply of marijuana and it is wonderful to see that activists are fighting the drug war in such an effective way.

There is the predictable backlash from prohibitionists such as "all seven Clark County commissioners, six of 13 Nevada university regents, Washoe District Attorney Dick Gammick and Las Vegas police Lt. Stan Olsen".

In response, the Committee to Regulate and Control Marijuana is taking them to court for breaking a law that states that elected officials may not use tax dollars to oppose a ballot initiative. Read the whole story.

Just another reason to watch the November elections.

Amendment 44 is heating up

I finally understand why the DEA is so upset about the ballot initiative in Colorado that is intended to legalize possession of one ounce of marijuana for adults over 21 years of age. I was concerned that perhaps Federal prohibitions against marijuana would still be enforced. But that is not the case. According to CBS4Denver, it would be impossible for the Feds to enforce the law.

"There aren't enough federal resources on the entire planet to handle ounce size marijuana possession," Jeffrey Sweetin, a DEA agent said. "Your viewers should understand if this passes, we're really legitimately legalizing an ounce of marijuana. They're not going to be prosecuted."

When reading editorials, make note of the claims made by the prohibitionist. Read the following passage and try to figure out why it is suspect:

• It is not true that marijuana is a harmless alternative to alcohol. Alcohol is dangerous when abused, but marijuana can be dangerous, too. Too many people become psychologically addicted to its drug. Some users get into accidents or otherwise endanger themselves. Some become intrigued with harder, more addicting drugs and begin to experiment with them.

Link

The author makes a lot of claims but with no evidence to back them up. Notice that the claims are very vague and difficult to prove. They can not come out and say that marijuana causes more accidents or is more addictive than alcohol because those claims are easily refuted. And we are still hearing about the disproven "gateway" theory. in the same way that some Christians still cling to Intelligent Design, prohibitionists cling to the gateway theory.

They better get those "but what about the children" editiorials published despite the fact that the current laws don't prevent children from using drugs.

I hope that in a months' time when the voters get to cast their ballots I can happily report to my non-existent readers that possession of an ounce of marijuana is no longer illegal in Colorado. In the meantime, I have a bit of advice for prohibitionist-minded editorialists.

Sign your letters. This might give you the appearance of credibility.