In an update to an article published January 18th, titled “3D Printing May Be The Key To Our Freedom” about a printed lower receiver for an AR15, Defense Distributed has improved on the initial model that failed after six shots. The improved version has fired over 600 shots without failure. Also available is a CAD file to print a 30 round magazine for AR15 style rifles. Keep in mind there are many parts for an AR15 that currently would not be feasible to print out of plastic such as the springs, barrel, upper receiver, bolt and firing pin, but these parts are not currently regulated and can be purchased through the mail without an FFL dealer. The ability to make your own gun has been within the realm of anyone who has access to a lathe and milling machine for as long as I can remember and it is perfectly legal to make a gun as long as you don’t make a gun that is currently prohibited, such as a machine gun or a short barrel shotgun. Rep. Steve Israel of New York, is currently trying to ban 3D printing of guns in anticipation of untraceable weapons that do not show up on metal scanners. Similar to the idea of eliminating nuclear weapons, stopping this technology is like trying to put the nuclear genie back in the bottle. Guns simply cannot be un-invented and any attempt to confiscate or eliminate gun ownership is destined to fail. Even if the current 3D gun files available for download could be tracked down and erased, it would not be long before someone else came up with another version. Our government’s attempt to control every aspect of our lives is starting to meet resistance in ways they never imagined. States legalizing marijuana for medicinal and recreational purposes and 3D printable guns are just the beginning. However, I am concerned about The Department of Homeland Security’s recent acquisition of 2 billion rounds of ammunition. What horrible plans do they have in store for us next? Are our elected officials so worried about maintaining control that they would use deadly force against us to stay in power? Is it too late to vote them out? I sure hope not.
http://reason.com/blog/2013/02/27/gun-control-laws-increasingly-irrelevant
http://defcad.org/
http://www.prisonplanet.com/govt-preparing-for-soviet-style-purge-of-americans.html
Randy Johnson
Tag Archives: medical marijuana
This Declaration Of Rights By Dan Richeson Would Be Great To Print Sign and Mail To Congress And President Obama
Submitted on 2013/02/26 at 4:54 PM
Declaration of Rights of Cannabis Users
Mission Statement: To bring an end to cannabis prohibition in 2013 by gathering signatory members through promotion and declaring our rights through the document, “Declaration of Rights of Cannabis Users”. Giving prohibitionists reasonable opportunity to affect appropriate, timely and agreed upon change and, if necessary enforcing our rights in a peaceful way. After April 20 2013 adopting a zero tolerance for acts of brutality and injustice by prohibitionists.
The laws regarding cannabis were born on the wings of lies and pampered by propaganda such that now the tightly held belief systems are going to have to reckon with the desire of all humanity to live with dignity, free from the oppressive tyranny that ignorance and bigotry have spawned.
DECLARATION OF RIGHTS OF CANNABIS USERS
——————
Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
——————
Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,
——————
Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law.
——————–
Whereas for too long now it has been observed that disregard and contempt for human rights has been allowed to exist in the body of politically motivated law that outlaws the possession, cultivation and use of cannabis by adults. The signatories of this Declaration wish to live in peace in this society, have been engaged in constant communication with their elected representatives individually or as part of groups. The actions of the government in this regards demonstrates continued contempt and disregard that we the undersigned feel that we have NO RECOURSE but to regard our government and some of our fellow citizens as hostile towards our declared rights and indifferent to the tyranny, oppression and terrorism that we have too long had to deal with.
——————-
Whereas by this declaration we provide the opportunity and impudence for representatives to engage in good faith negotiations which will lead to peaceful coexistence
———————
Whereas we the undersigned do hereby declare that IT IS OUR RIGHT to cultivate, possess and use cannabis AND that any law that says otherwise will be treated by us as the tool of tyranny.
———————-
Whereas we the undersigned in declaring our desire to realize our liberties and our desire to live in peace also recognize that the point is near where our rights and liberties will have to be defended.
———————-
Whereas we the undersigned are willing to do all we can to avoid conflict we hope that this WARNING also provides our fellow citizens and our representatives the impudence to also seek peace and understanding within our society.
—————-
Sincerely,
[Your name]
Dan Richeson
Where Are The Dissenters
I have been speaking out about the legalization of marijuana for almost a year now and almost all of the comments I have received have been positive with the exception of a couple of people. I’m sure there are more people who read this blog that are opposed to my views. If you believe I am wrong, I would love to hear your reasoning. I’m not intending to start a fight but, I believe we need to have a conversation about our place in society. It can’t be that there is not enough room in this country for both of us. Prohibition harms everyone’s freedom. All we want is the right to live in peace with society. Please end the war against marijuana.
Randy Johnson
Why Do We Go To War
A few days ago, as I ate lunch at the park in front of the Hutchinson County Veterans Memorial. I started wondering what we fight for as a nation and individually, and why we send our sons and daughters to war. Words come to mind like, duty to country, honor, national defense, and security. Today our armed forces are all voluntary, but many of the soldiers honored here were drafted into service. Does that change the reasons we fight? Society needs to be able to assemble armies in its defense, even a conscript army if needed. The survival of our nation and way of life may demand such action. We faced real threats to our sovereignty and security in WWI and WII and so did our allies, but what about Korea and Vietnam? Was our sovereignty and security in danger then, or was that just our attempt to stop communist aggression amid the Cold War? Were we able to achieve those goals? I would call Korea a partial success. South Korea is a democratic country with an economy built on free enterprise and it is prospering. But the Korean people are divided, with their kin to the north governed by a desperate and aggressive despot, who rules his people with fear and punishment. And they are technically still at war with a real threat of the violence ensuing again. If we had not maintained a military presence there, it is very likely all of Korea would be under communist control today. None of our goals were met in Vietnam with the communists taking control of Saigon as we were leaving and yet, today they are a united, peaceful people. Who decides when we go to war and what the motivations are? The reasons to go to war are never simple and may cover any variety of considerations from economics to survival but certainly the preservation of our freedom should be one of the reasons we fight. Our nation was born with a struggle for freedom from the rule of England. Our Declaration of Independence lists a number of violations of basic human rights by the King and extols our right to shed that rule in favor of self-rule as all men are created equal with rights granted to us by God and not men. This was an act of treason under English rule and those who signed that document did so knowing that it put their lives and fortunes at risk, yet those brave men and those who fought by their side, did so willingly. Our Constitution goes further describing our rights as a people, by enumerating them in the bill of rights, to ensure that government would not be able to take them away. These are important rights that ensure that we can live safely and securely among others without the worry of being governed by tyrants.
All of our servicemen take an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. But how many of the recent wars we have been involved in were about a threat to our Constitution or the sovereignty and security of our nation? Were we defending an ally from a threat to their sovereignty or security? Certainly if our country is attacked we should respond in defense. Even preemptive strikes against known threats are justifiable, but all acts of war have consequences. Because of the brutality of war, some of our young will always be killed or wounded. And then there are the mental scars from being witness to the horrors of war. The fear of death or injury and seeing your friends killed or injured are hard to imagine, let alone learn to live with. Just the longing for home to reunite with the ones we love tends to wear on most people. And then there is the memory of the killing of others and watching the enemy suffer or die. Is it any wonder that the suicide rate among our servicemen is so great. War is a terrible thing for both sides of any conflict and even when the hostilities end, the painful memories of war endure. War should always be a last resort.
Our Congressmen and Senators also take the same oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, yet rarely do they face imminent danger in their daily lives. But their responsibility to defend the Constitution is just as important because they write the laws governing all aspects of our lives. They are on the front lines of protecting our freedom in the laws that they vote for or against. Their responsibility to ensure that all laws passed, maintain our freedoms as described in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence cannot be overstated. These documents should be the guiding principle in all laws passed by Congress or signed into law by our President.
Often as I read the news and study current events I am reminded that not all members of Congress share the same reverence and respect for the Constitution of the United States. The recent debates about the right to keep and bear arms are a perfect example of that. Even before the Sandy Hook massacre, our right to keep and bear arms was seriously infringed and it was all done at the hand of Congress and backed up by past and current Presidents and supported by the Supreme Court. My second amendment right to keep and bear arms should be the same in any state or territory of these United States, yet our Congressional leaders have allowed a patchwork of differing laws governing our rights to bear arms to become the law of the land. Even if we follow the safe passage clause of the Firearm Owners Protection Act, we can still be in violation of state or local laws if we are delayed because of car trouble or if we are too tired to continue our journey. In order to pass through a state with restrictive firearm laws a person must unload and lock the gun in the trunk of their car and are not allowed to stop except for food and gas. Would we surrender our right to a trial by jury or our freedom of speech so easily? What about our freedom of religion? Isn’t our right to self-defense one of those rights granted by God? http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/926A And what about the tenth amendment where the powers not delegated to the United States as described in the Constitution are reserved to the states or to the people? Do our Congressional leaders understand that? Where in the Constitution do they get the power to tell states that they cannot experiment with medical marijuana laws or even recreational marijuana laws? Our Congressional leaders should be actively defending our rights, not circumventing state law to keep us under the thumb of oppression. Since Congress authorized the oath of office for all Federal employees, they should know that they are obligated to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, and our rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. We, as Americans, should demand and expect as much from them. Their obligation to preserve our Constitution and freedom should be no less important than that of our sons and daughters that we ask or require to risk life and limb in war.
The Constitution does not provide the wording for this oath, leaving that to the determination of Congress. From 1789 until 1861, this oath was, “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States.” During the 1860s, this oath was altered several times before Congress settled on the text used today, which is set out at 5 U. S. C. § 3331. This oath is now taken by all federal employees, other than the President:
“I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/oath/textoftheoathsofoffice2009.aspx
The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and the Bill of Rights http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution.html
Randy Johnson
itsmycountrytoo.org
Meet Michele Leonhart Drug Enforcement Administrator
This story at rawstory.com by Eric W. Dolan contains a video of The DEA Administrator being grilled about the Federal policy against marijuana.
In a grilling before the House Judiciary Subcommittee, Rep. Jared Polis of Colorado, asked Michele Leonhart if anything is more addictive or harmful than marijuana and she dodged the question several times and kept repeating that all illegal drugs are bad. Please keep in mind this is the person who is directly responsible for determining the schedule that all drugs are in and directly responsible for keeping marijuana in schedule one with heroin and LSD. Her immediate supervisor would be Attorney General Eric Holder. Also keep in mind that she as well as Eric Holder were nominated for their positions by President Obama and their policy will be a direct reflection of his if they want to keep their job. What I’m getting at is that President Obama has the authority and responsibility to stop the raids on medical marijuana that complies with state law by insisting that marijuana be rescheduled. This would also open the door for research into the efficacy of marijuana in the treatment of various diseases. How about it President Obama? Will you give us a serious answer or should we wait for the next puppet show?
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/06/20/top-dea-agent-wont-admit-heroin-more-harmful-than-marijuana/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michele_Leonhart
Randy Johnson
itsmycountrytoo.org
President Obama Could Fix the Medical Marijuana Problem
From what I have been reading, decisions about moving marijuana into a less stringent schedule than schedule 1 are in the hands of the the Attorney General with that authority granted in the Controlled Substance Act. The Attorney General has delegated that authority to the DEA Administrator. So far the DEA has not acknowledged any of the mountains of evidence of the efficacy of marijuana as a medicine. Instead they choose to fight all attempts to reschedule marijuana and ignore all evidence of marijuana’s lack of harm to society and the fact that it is overwhelmingly safer than the two most prominent recreational drugs in America, alcohol and tobacco.
In a Reason.com article written by Mike Riggs on Jan 22nd, http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/22/in-fight-over-marijuans-scheduling-appea
The Washington D.C., U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the DEA acted according to their rules in denying a rescheduling of marijuana. The Court did not consider whether the evidence presented as to marijuana’s efficacy was relevent to the issue but that the DEA had followed its own rules in reaching its decision.
According to the appeals court, the DEA was following its own rules (there are five in all) when it claimed that petitioners for rescheduling marijuana had failed to provide “adequate and well-controlled studies proving efficacy.”
Americans for Safe Access in turn argued “that their petition to reschedule marijuana cites more than two hundred peer-reviewed published studies demonstrating marijuana’s efficacy for various medical uses, and that those studies were largely ignored by the [DEA].”
“At bottom,” the court wrote, “the parties’ dispute in this case turns on the agency’s interpretation of its own regulations. Petitioners construe ‘adequate and well-controlled studies’ to mean peer-reviewed, published studies suggesting marijuana’s medical efficacy. The DEA, in contrast, interprets that factor to require something more scientifically rigorous.”
In other words, The DEA will not reschedule marijuana unless it would meet FDA approval. That is a very unlikely scenario when considering the close ties the FDA has with the pharmaceutical industry. However the decision to reschedule marijuana seems to swing on the opinion of the DEA Administrator of what is considered “adequate and well-controlled” medical studies, and “accepted safety”. Since this authority is delegated to the DEA Administrator by the Attorney General, surely the Attorney General could take that authority back. The office of the Attorney General as well as the office of the DEA Administrator are filled by appointment by the President of the United States. Surely the President would have enough influence over those he appoints to those positions to have them reschedule marijuana, either by Executive action or just replacing them with someone who would. While this would do nothing for the millions of recreational marijuana users. It would stop the raids that deny the sick and dying the medicine they believe improves their lives (palliative and curative), and the punishment of those who supply medical marijuana in compliance with state law. Although the President does not have the authority to legalize marijuana, the responsibilities for the current raids on medical marijuana are all his.
Thanks President Obama
- (b) Evaluation of drugs and other substances
The Attorney General shall, before initiating proceedings under subsection (a) of this section to control a drug or other substance or to remove a drug or other substance entirely from the schedules, and after gathering the necessary data, request from the Secretary a scientific and medical evaluation, and his recommendations, as to whether such drug or other substance should be so controlled or removed as a controlled substance. In making such evaluation and recommendations, the Secretary shall consider the factors listed in paragraphs (2), (3), (6), (7), and (8) of subsection (c) of this section and any scientific or medical considerations involved in paragraphs (1), (4), and (5) of such subsection. The recommendations of the Secretary shall include recommendations with respect to the appropriate schedule, if any, under which such drug or other substance should be listed. The evaluation and the recommendations of the Secretary shall be made in writing and submitted to the Attorney General within a reasonable time. The recommendations of the Secretary to the Attorney General shall be binding on the Attorney General as to such scientific and medical matters, and if the Secretary recommends that a drug or other substance not be controlled, the Attorney General shall not control the drug or other substance. If the Attorney General determines that these facts and all other relevant data constitute substantial evidence of potential for abuse such as to warrant control or substantial evidence that the drug or other substance should be removed entirely from the schedules, he shall initiate proceedings for control or removal, as the case may be, under subsection (a) of this section.
- (c) Factors determinative of control or removal from schedules
In making any finding under subsection (a) of this section or under subsection (b) of section 812 of this title, the Attorney General shall consider the following factors with respect to each drug or other substance proposed to be controlled or removed from the schedules:
- (1) Its actual or relative potential for abuse.
- (2) Scientific evidence of its pharmacological effect, if known.
- (3) The state of current scientific knowledge regarding the drug or other substance.
- (4) Its history and current pattern of abuse.
- (5) The scope, duration, and significance of abuse.
- (6) What, if any, risk there is to the public health.
- (7) Its psychic or physiological dependence liability.
- (8) Whether the substance is an immediate precursor of a substance already controlled under this subchapter. http://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Legislation/ucm148726.htm#cntlsbb
As for the millions of recreational marijuana users, your best bet is to try to influence your Congressional leaders, or replace them with those in favor of legalization. It is very unlikely the Supreme Court would rule against Congress on the legality of marijuana. Without reasonable attempts to change Congress’ stance on marijuana the Supreme Court would be unlikely to even hear evidence.
Randy Johnson
itsmycountrytoo.org
The Disparity of Prosecution in Drug Related Offences is Staggering
A deal worked out by the Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer has released top executives at HSBC from prosecution in a 1.9 billion dollar deal that allows them to escape prosecution for money laundering charges associated with the Mexican and Columbian drug cartels. Their punishment administered by HSBC is that their bonuses will be partially deferred. What a harsh way to treat those who looked the other way and helped as terrorists and murderers laundered billions of dollars over a decade of time. The Justice Department’s reasoning for allowing the non-prosecution fee (bribe) is that prosecuting top executives at HSBC would destabilize the financial institution causing ripples throughout the financial world. In a press release Breuer announced, As a result of the government’s investigation, HSBC has . . . “clawed back” deferred compensation bonuses given to some of its most senior U.S. anti-money laundering and compliance officers, and agreed to partially defer bonus compensation for its most senior officials during the five-year period of the deferred prosecution agreement. The New York Times had this to say, “Federal and state authorities have chosen not to indict HSBC, the London-based bank, on charges of vast and prolonged money laundering, for fear that criminal prosecution would topple the bank and, in the process, endanger the financial system.” The most criminal part in all of this is that the Justice Department did exactly the same thing, they took money to look the other way instead of prosecuting the crime. http://neilrockindpcblog.com/2012/12/18/outrageous-hsbc-settlement-proves-the-drug-war-is-a-joke/
For anyone who has ever been prosecuted for any drug violation or had their property confiscated in this failed war on drugs, this is a slap in the face. The poor and people of color are disproportionately prosecuted and persecuted in this failed war on drugs where their lives are destroyed and property taken. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p11.pdf
Cornell Hood II was sentenced to life in prison for possesing two pounds of marijuana with intent to distribute in Louisiana. Louisiana is a state with a three strikes and your out policy. Sadly Cornell Hood II is not alone. The organization, http://lifeforpot.com/ has documented and tracked multiple cases similar to Hood’s where people are given extremely long sentences for non-violent marijuana charges. http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/581875/louisiana_man_gets_life_sentence…_for_weed
http://blog.norml.org/2011/05/10/americas-shameful-prohibition-life-sentences-for-marijuana/
Look what happened to Cameron Douglas, the white son of well-known actor Michael Douglas who was given the longest federal prison sentence ever for simple possession. http://www.drugpolicy.org/news/2012/05/cameron-douglas-son-actor-michael-douglas-given-longest-ever-federal-prison-sentence-im
Or Aaron Sandusky who received a ten-year prison sentence for operating a medical marijuana dispensary. Because he was being tried in federal court, he was not allowed to mention that his activities were legal under California law. So much for “the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth”. http://reason.com/blog/2012/10/12/can-juror-nullification-save-aaron-sandu
http://www.dailybulletin.com/ci_22325286/sandusky-sentenced-10-years-prison
What happened to Chris Williams, a medical marijuana distributor in Montana is equally disturbing. Williams who believed he had done nothing wrong and wanted to challenge federal interference in Montana’s medical marijuana laws was quickly found guilty of all 4 marijuana charges against him because in federal court, evidence suggesting that his activities were legal by Montana law were not allowed. Since the federal government tied firearm possession charges to each of the drug charges, Williams faced 80 years mandatory minimum sentencing on the weapon charges alone, even though he had not handled the firearms. U.S. Attorney Micheal Cotter offered to drop enough charges to allow Williams to serve less than ten years if he would drop his appeal in the case. Williams refused and Cotter came back with a final offer of five years in prison in exchange for dropping all appeals. Since the federal prosecutors had already won their case and were trying to lessen Williams sentence, it would seem that they also believed the mandatory sentencing to be egregiously too harsh. Yet to take five years from a mans life for helping medical marijuana patients acquire their medicine legally under state law still seems wrong to me. But to not allow a defendant to present all evidence relevent to his defense, such as the fact that his activities were legal under state law that was voted in by the citizens of that state is a horrible miscarriage of justice. What is your opinion? http://reason.com/archives/2013/01/02/plead-guilty-or-go-to-prison-for-life
Randy Johnson
itsmycountrytoo.org
The War Against Marijuana Users Is Based On Lies
The war against marijuana and its users is based on lies and misinformation. Laws built on lies should not stand.
The National Commission on Drug Abuse was created by law under the Controlled Substance Act of 1970 to study marijuana to see if it really belonged in the schedule one class of drugs with heroin and LSD. The commission consisted of two members appointed by the President of the Senate and two appointed by the President of the House of Representatives and nine appointed by President Nixon. The 39th Governor of Pennsylvania, Raymond P. Shafer was the chairman. When Richard Nixon appointed people to this commission, he had advised them that marijuana should be treated as heroin and it should be demonized, and he made several attempts to influence the outcome of the report. Nixon reportedly told Schafer,”You’re enough of a pro to know that for you to come out with something that would run counter to what the Congress feels and what the country feels, and what we’re planning to do, would make your commission just look bad as hell.” When the report was released titled “Marijuana A Signal of Misunderstanding”, it denied any relation with marijuana use with the crime and violence portrayed in the propaganda from decades past. The report also found little evidence of physical or psychological harm with casual use. It questioned the constitutionality of marijuana prohibition, advocated removing marijuana from the schedule one category of drugs, and asked that criminal penalties be removed for sale and possession marijuana. The report met stiff resistance in Congress and subcommittee hearings were held in 1974. led by Senator James O. Eastland where experts from other countries presented evidence and it was concluded that marijuana is far more hazardous than previously thought. The original report “Marijuana a Signal of Misunderstanding” was buried and marijuana was labeled as public enemy #1 in the war on drugs.
http://www.csdp.org/publicservice/nixon06.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Commission_on_Marihuana_and_Drug_Abuse
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/nc/ncmenu.htm
http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/21usc/801.htm
It’s also interesting that marijuana is not listed in the DEA list of drugs and chemicals of concern yet they still claim that marijuana is a danger to society.
http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/21usc/801.htm
A U.S. Department of Justice report titled Violence-Related Injuries Treated in Hospital Emergency Departments written by Michael R. Rand reads, “In 14% of the violence-related injuries treated in ED’s in 1994, the ED record indicated that the victim or someone else involved in the incident had been drinking or using drugs. This estimate should be considered a lower bound of the percentage of injuries involving alcohol or drugs. Usually the ED’s did not test patients for intoxication but indicated alcohol or drug involvement if cited by patients or other involved persons or if ER personnel observed the patient under the influence of alcohol or drugs.” “Almost all of the alcohol/drug citations on the hospital records reflected alcohol involvement. Drugs were cited on the hospital record in less than 1% of all violence-related injuries treated.”
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/VRITHED.PDF
The United States Government also owns a patent (6630507) on marijuana that describes in detail the medical benefits associated with marijuana.
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6630507.html
“If this plant were discovered in the Amazon today, scientists would be falling all over each other to be the first to bring it to market,” said Dr. Donald Abrams, chief of oncology at the University of California San Francisco, which has also found science behind marijuana’s efficacy.
The United States Government has known that marijuana has curative powers over cancer since 1974 yet hid this from the public to continue this failed war on marijuana and its users.
U.S. KNEW IN ’74… AND AGAIN IN ’96!
This wasn’t always the case. In fact, the first ever experiment documenting pot’s anti-tumor effects took place in 1974 at the Medical College of Virginia at the behest of the U.S. government. The results of that study, immortalized in an August 18, 1974 Washington Post newspaper feature, were that “THC slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent.”
Despite these favorable preliminary findings, U.S. government officials banished the study, and refused to fund any follow up research until conducting a similar – though secret – study in the mid-1990s. That study, conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program to the tune of $2 million concluded that mice and rats administered high doses of THC over long periods had greater protection against malignant tumors than untreated controls. However, rather than publicize their findings, government researchers shelved the results – which only became public one year later after a draft copy of its findings were leaked in 1997 to the journal AIDS Treatment News, which in turn forwarded the story to the national media.
Nevertheless, in the nearly eight years since the completion of the National Toxicology trial, the U.S. government has yet to fund a single additional study examining pot’s potential as an anti-cancer agent.
Have they no shame or humility?
Please call or write to your leaders in Washington, DC and tell them you want an end to the prohibition of marijuana.
Randy Johnson
itsmycountrytoo.org
Please Leave Medical Marijuana Alone
This was mailed to all members of Congress and the President Christmas Eve 2012. I will post replies as I get them.
Thanks and Merry Christmas
Randy Johnson
The continued war against medical marijuana defies logic on so many levels it is very hard to understand why the United States Government has taken its position on this issue. In July of 2011 the DEA ruled again that marijuana is dangerous and has no known medical use, yet past investigations and mountains of evidence refute these claims.
In 1972 NORML petitioned the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs to have marijuana rescheduled from a Schedule 1 drug. After 16 years of stonewalling by the United States Government a hearing was finally scheduled in September 1988. DEA Administrative Law Judge Francis Young after hearing extensive testimony from patients and doctors on the medical benefits of marijuana proclaimed “In strict medical terms marijuana is far safer than many of the foods we commonly consume. For example eating 10 raw potatoes can result in a toxic response. By comparison it is physically impossible to eat enough marijuana to induce death. Marijuana in its natural form is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis marijuana can be safely used within a supervised routine of medical care.” It was determined that marijuana was effective in controlling nausea associated with chemotherapy and also pain and spasms associated with Multiple Sclerosis. She recommended that marijuana be rescheduled to a Schedule 2 drug and that still has not happened. (Marijuana Rescheduling Petition Docket No. 86-22)
When the Controlled Substances Act became law in 1970 part of the law authorized a special federal commission to complete a comprehensive study into all aspects of marijuana use to confirm that marijuana should remain a schedule 1 drug. After 2 years of study it was claimed to be the most comprehensive study of marijuana ever done in the United States. On March 22, 1972 Richard Nixon was presented the report from the study entitled “Marijuana; A Signal of Misunderstanding”. The study refuted the claims by politicians and law enforcement of the negative effects and crime associated with marijuana. It claimed in plain language that marijuana use was not associated with violent behavior and even went on to say that it tends to pacify its users. The report stated that there is little evidence of any physiological or psychological damage to individuals from casual use and emphasized the fact that the overwhelming majority of marijuana users do not progress to other drugs. It also recommended that marijuana be rescheduled and that private possession and use should not be criminalized. It even called for Congress to remove all criminal penalties for possession, use, and sale of the drug. These recommendations were ignored by Richard Nixon and Congress who over the next few months declared war on drugs and labeled marijuana “Public Enemy Number One”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Commission_on_Marihuana_and_Drug_Abuse
http://cannabis.net/politics/richard-nixon.html
Justice Gustin Reichbach of the New York state Supreme Court who just died July 14th, had been suffering from pancreatic cancer and he claimed marijuana gave him relief from nausea associated with chemotherapy in a moving op-ed piece in the New York Times this last May. “Because criminalizing an effective medical technique affects the fair administration of justice, I feel obliged to speak out as both a judge and a cancer patient suffering with a fatal disease. I implore the governor and the Legislature of New York, always considered a leader among states, to join the forward and humane thinking of 16 other states and pass the medical marijuana bill this year. Medical science has not yet found a cure, but it is barbaric to deny us access to one substance that has proved to ameliorate our suffering.” http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/17/opinion/a-judges-plea-for-medical-marijuana.html
Dr. Donald Tashkin has done an extensive 30 year study of marijuana on pulmonary function at the University of California and reviewed several other similar studies and come to the conclusion that using marijuana does not increase the occurrence of COPD nor does it increase the risks of head, neck or lung cancer even in heavy use. Video testimony by Dr. Tashkin can be seen at http://mmar.ca/multimedia.html. Dr. Tashkin has also stated that he favors the legalization of marijuana. The DEA is still quoting Dr Tashkin’s original hypothesis about marijuana use from about 20 years ago when he stated that marijuana has many of the same carcinogens as tobacco and believed marijuana may cause cancer. Dr Tashkin no longer believes that is true. In fact marijuana has been shown to have a mild cancer fighting effect.
According to http://www.reuters.com/ an Israeli company named Tikun Olam has developed a strain of marijuana called Avidekel with very low THC content but high in CBD (Cannabidiol) that has anti-inflammatory benefits without the psychoactive effects. Ruth Galily who works for the company and has been studying CBD for more than 12 years said CBD has impressive anti-inflammatory properties and can be used for treating diseases such as Rheumatoid Arthritis, Colitis, liver inflammation, heart disease and diabetes and has no side effects. Marijuana is used in Israel to treat Parkinson’s, multiple sclerosis, cancer, Crohn’s disease, and post-traumatic stress disorder.http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/03/us-israel-marijuana-idUSBRE8620FU20120703
According to Time Healthland http://healthland.time.com/2012/06/14/10-reasons-to-revisit-marijuana-policy-now/ recent studies conclude marijuana is effective in treating opioid resistant pain associated with cancer, the spasticity associated with multiple sclerosis and post-traumatic stress disorder. Another study concluded CBD another component of marijuana can treat schizophrenia as effective as prescription drugs without the side effects. Also THC and CBD have shown cancer fighting abilities against lung cancer.In the same article studies have found no link to crime associated with medical-marijuana dispensaries and real marijuana is probably far safer than the synthetic cannabinoids sold such as K2 or Spice.
A study titled Ganja in Jamaica- A Medical Anthropological Study of Chronic Marijuana Use by Vera Rubin and Lambros Comitas and sponsored by the National Institute of Mental Health Center for Studies of Narcotic and Drug Abuse found no relation of marijuana use to crime except marijuana arrest, no impairment of motor skills, smokers and nonsmokers had identical work records and a battery of psychological test found no impairment of sensory and perceptual-motor performance, tests of concept formation, abstracting ability and cognitive style and tests of memory. Also the study found that the use of hard drugs is unknown among working class Jamaicans. These studies were confirmed by the 1980 Cannabis in Costa Rica- A study in Chronic Marijuana Use which found no discernible damage to the native population’s chronic marijuana users.
The American Medical Association House of Delegates as of October 16th 2011 is calling for the rescheduling of marijuana to allow for research into medical benefits of marijuana. Melvin Sterling, MD a California Medical Association delegate stated “Schedule 1 is very appropriate for heroin and other noxious substances that have no place in medicine, but cannabinoids are useful drugs. There is compelling research that cannabinoids are helpful in treating the spasticity associated with multiple sclerosis and in persistent nausea associated with chemotherapy and they may have other uses yet undiscovered. Why are they undiscovered? Because it’s a schedule 1 drug.” The AMA House of Delegates stopped short of endorsing state-based medical marijuana programs and the legalization of marijuana or admitting marijuana meets standards for prescription drugs.
Amednews.com ran an article by Alicia Gallegos June 16 2012 about a handful of governors petitioning the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration to have marijuana reclassified. Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin, Washington State Governor Chris Gregoire and Rhodde Island Governor Lincoln Chefee had signed the petition as of Dec 2011. Colorado Governor John Hinkenlooper’s administration has made a similar request. According to Gregoire, poll after poll shows an overwhelming majority of Americans now see medical marijuana as legitimate with an ever-growing number of doctors telling thousands of patients that they might find relief in the use of marijuana. http://www.amaassn.org/amednews/2012/01/16/gvsc0116.htm#top
According to The Sacramento Bee http://www.sacbee.com/, over a dozen years, California’s historic experiment in medical marijuana research brought new science to the debate on marijuana’s place in medicine. State-funded studies costing $8.7 million found that marijuana may offer broad benefits for pain from nerve damage from injuries, HIV strokes and other conditions. Between 2002 and 2012, 7 completed trials, 5 published and 2 pending show that marijuana does have therapeutic value. According to Dr. Igor Grant a neuropsychiatrist who served as director of the Center for Medical Cannabis Research “ Every one of the studies showed a benefit, The convergence of evidence makes me convinced there is a medical benefit here, and there may be a niche for cannabis.” Grant said the listing of marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug on par with heroin and LSD is completely at odds with existing science.http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/12/4625608/california-pot-research-backs.html
In an article at http://newsfeed.time.com/ : According to a U.N. report on global drug use, cannabis was the world’s most widely produced, trafficked, and consumed drug in the world in 2010. Marijuana boasts somewhere between 119 million and 224 million users in the adult population of the world (18 or older). And there are no signs to indicate the popularity of marijuana will fall anytime soon. Cannabis is consumed in some fashion in all countries, the report says, and it is grown in most. Though the use of the drug is stabilizing in North America, and Oceania, smoking pot is on the rise in West and Central Africa, Southern Africa, South Asia and Central Asia. In 2010, marijuana use was most prevalent in Australia and New Zealand. The U.S. and Canada came in second, followed by Spain, France, Italy, and the Czech Republic. Nigeria, Zambia, and Madagascar were tied for fourth place. Read more: http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/06/29/marijuana-now-the-most-popular-drug-in-the-world/
With marijuana now being the worlds’ most popular recreational drug and evidence shows that it is far safer than the other most popular recreational drugs, tobacco and alcohol. Why does our government insist on refusing to allow 18 states to continue the medical marijuana experiment without the harassment of otherwise law-abiding citizens? These states voted in their right to access medical marijuana by due process and yet the Federal Government refuses to honor the will of the American people. There is really no good reason to keep marijuana illegal for recreational purposes, let alone forbidding the sick and dying the things that bring them relief. To forbid the sick and dying the things that bring them relief is nothing short of barbaric.
Marijuana prohibition has not stopped or even diminished its use. Many people enjoy using marijuana and historical evidence has failed to show that marijuana has caused appreciable damage to its users or society. While this may still be debatable about marijuana and I believe it is high time we had that debate, the evidence against alcohol and tobacco are no longer in question. Why not give people a safer alternative to the worst recreational drugs on the planet, alcohol and tobacco when considered by the number of people killed by these drugs every year and the damage to society from the violent crime associated with alcohol, and let people choose for themselves the safest recreational drug on the planet that is now the most popular drug in the world. While I am thrilled that people who are suffering find both palliative and curative relief with marijuana, I still believe that needing a doctor’s note to buy marijuana is like needing a prescription to buy beer. People who use and sell alcohol should remember the effect prohibition of alcohol had on America and Americans and be glad their freedom was restored. Our freedom should be no less important.
Beginning this article I mentioned that it is hard to understand our government’s reasons for its stance against medical marijuana use. It is not a lack of evidence supporting the use of marijuana for medical reasons and it can’t be that they are worried about our health, because marijuana is not nearly as harmful as tobacco or alcohol and some of the over the counter medicines available, when considered by the number of fatalities associated with each drug every year. And with millions of people currently using marijuana and scarce evidence of any damage to society or individual users, who and what are they protecting us from? Juvenile use would be easier to control if the people selling marijuana were required to check IDs to make sure customers were of appropriate age.
The only thing that makes any sense to me is that marijuana as a plant cannot be controlled and that our government may be protecting the Pharmaceutical Industry, the Alcohol Industry, the Tobacco Industry and others from competition with marijuana and hemp. These are industrial giants with enormous influence on our elected officials who are supposed to be charged with protecting our freedom. My question to them is, Have We Been Sold Out?
Randy Johnson
itsmycountrytoo.org
itsmycountrytoo.org 