Comments on: ABCs Of Pot Legalization Plan

By: Mary

Mary — Tue, 23 Aug 2011 22:09:51 +0000

The fact that the US government holds patents on cannabis for medical use, and the logical conflict represented by the US government’s simultaneous designation of cannabis as a Schedule 1 drug is an oxymoron that has evaded any discussion of cannabis I’ve seen. As of August 20, 2011, the US patent website lists 394 patents granted to date, although many are related to methods of cannabis detection. The most comprehensive, I think, is Patent #6630507, October 7, 2003, “Cannabinoids as Antioxidants and Neuroprotectants”, and refers to cannabinoids use in degenerative diseases including Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s, among many other therapeutic applications.
What’s up with this?
Is the federal government attempting to destroy state mmj programs prior to licensing their cannabis use under the federal patent, or what?
Custom J sure has the right idea – it’s all about money, I’m just curious about the details of the plan to take it from us.
It could be a necessary lag time for pharmaceutical companies to gear up for production of cannabis products.
Any thoughts?

By: Custom J

Custom J — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 13:44:53 +0000

This unfortunately will never fly. Not common sense, compassion nor the will of the people, will ever make a difference on this issue. To much money is being made from the illegality of this plant.

Your president Obama has NO intention of ever listening to science, the sick, his concience nor the will of the people. He only cares about his own personal career. It’s sad to say america is no way near being the land of the free.

By: Michael Seebeck

Michael Seebeck — Wed, 01 Jun 2011 18:31:29 +0000

GSL, any state-level bill would have that problem, which is why RMLWA2012 specifically instructs the state to tell the feds to delist it off of Schedule I as they should have done 15 years ago. The whole point of the wine model is to put production and distribution into a state-regulated system to make it as covered as possible. People understand that regulating it like alcohol is acceptable and feasible, so that’s the route we’re taking.

The real prosecution problem, though, is that state prosecutors refuse to enforce Penal Code 422.6 against the feds when they go after the dispensaries and patients now. Because state prosecutors are beholden to federal money, they do the federal bidding, regardless of their oath to uphold state law. Ask Bonnie Dumais in SD, but she’ll never admit it, and she’s one of the worst offenders. That lack of protecting the rights of the people is the major things prosecutors are derelict in their duty nationwide.

By: GSL

GSL — Tue, 31 May 2011 18:17:27 +0000

It would be a step in the right direction, but this bill would still have the same big problem that medical marijuana faces now: the federal government grants itself a lot of discretion in prosecuting distributors and especially growers of marijuana. Until that changes, pot will only be quasi-legal (at best) in California.