Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Medical Cannabis


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#1 Randalizer

Randalizer

    Resin Coated

  • Lifetime Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23738 posts

Posted 05 August 2011 - 11:46 PM

Fuck it. I'm going to make a statement then.

I'm a big believer in decentralizing. Power distribution (both electrical and political), farming/gardening (vermacrop), as well as cannabis. In the US we have had some decentralization in regards to beer making and as a result, we now have more varieties then we did 30 years ago when monolitic companies like Anheiser Busch ruled.

People are going to buy cannabis for their needs and desires. As it stands now in California, the medical scene seems to me to be very cool as the production of the cannabis sold in dispensaries is very decentralized as far as I can tell. I think this is good. The wealth is spread about much more evenly and consumers get a great variety.

The big problem will lie in regulation. If the Feds, allow or are forced by a Judge to, reclassify cannabis, then of course major corporations are going to move in and homogenize the market with the wealth of sales going to a few. :bad:

So the legal status right now is good for variety and decentralization, but people are still getting busted and that is not on at all.

Eventually I feel cannabis, raw cannabis, will be rescheduled by the feds someday and the market will be flooded by coroprate crap. But I think the small growers will still have a place. But who knows. My crystal ball has been nipping at my bud and is a bit cloudy atm. :D

As I've mentioned in other posts, I will be starting a topic on the medical cannabis scene here in California. I have to wait for a few things to get sorted, so expect it in about October/Novemember.

For now and this topic, I would like to open the floor to the medical cannabis scene both here in the states and abroad. How it is working, how it is not. Criticisms, commentary, critiques and general musings are encouraged. :yep:

Edited by Randalizer, 05 August 2011 - 11:49 PM.


#2 Saddam

Saddam

    280-315nm

  • Chat Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6443 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 01:34 AM

Good post Randz, I have been wondering about the suppliers of dispenseries and whether they were mostly private growers or corporates with investors. It's pretty strange to us British that you guys have 2 laws to abide by and they contradict each other with regard to Cannabis cultivation. I'm not sure what risk a licensed medicinal grower faces with regard to federal law or alternatively whether the Police would thoroughly investigate a grower who was robbed at gunpoint?
Your Laws, however contradictory are far advanced to those of the UK and the random sentences given out by British Judges. Only yesterday I read the some guy was sent down for 3 years for 30 plants after admitting conspiracy (wtf?) to cultivate and supply Cannabis. Other people are getting fined or hours of community service for the same amount or more. There is no real consistency and if your Judge is uneducated (with regard to medicinal Cannabis.) and believes the Reefer Madness propaganda the your sentence could be draconian and you're pretty much screwed.
Even if you have a genuine medical reason for use (and history/documentation) you still risk having your door smashed in, your house and grow room ransacked and effectively vandalised, being dragged to a Police van (Regardless of your mental or physical state) and submitted to a Gistapo style interrogation before you a formally charged. Then you've got the lovely wait for your court appearance and possible incarceration.
We have no medicinal legislation whatsoever and this Country is rapidly falling behind the rest of the Western World in this respect.
Half the coalition government wanted to decriminalise Cannabis and promised to do so if elected then u-turned. The other half just want to make everyone's jobs redundant, close all the schools and libraries, restrict the NHS, all in an attempt to reduce a national deficit that they caused in the first place. This is all while they attend public funded multimillion pound events, build new stadiums for the Olympics and spend yet more public money on failed World Cup bribes, I mean bids. They even spent public money on moats and duck ponds. Seriously!
Things have gone from awful to cluster fuck awful.
Morale is low.
Hope this gives you an idea of what we're up against Randz m8.
sincerely
SH
PS Here is a positive smiley to cheer up my depressing post.. lol

Edited by SaddamHussain, 06 August 2011 - 01:45 AM.


#3 Saddam

Saddam

    280-315nm

  • Chat Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6443 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 03:01 AM

..Gestapo. Sorry , it's late and brain my not function. lol

#4 namkha

namkha

    Resin Coated

  • Lifetime Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6186 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 04:10 AM

good stuff Randalizer, let's hope Danzig is back by October to give you loads of shit about your disgracefully tolerant Californian laws
www.therealseedcompany.com

"Look, we understood we couldn't make it illegal to be young or poor or black in the United States, but we could criminalize their common pleasure. We understood that drugs were not the health problem we were making them out to be, but it was such a perfect issue...that we couldn't resist it." - John Ehrlichman, White House counsel to President Nixon on the rationale of the War on Drugs.

"[Nixon] emphasized that you have to face the fact that the whole problem is really the blacks" Haldeman, his Chief of Staff wrote, "The key is to devise a system that recognizes this while not appearing to."

#5 Randalizer

Randalizer

    Resin Coated

  • Lifetime Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23738 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 05:11 AM

One can only hope. :rolleyes: Actually Danzig seems to like me. At least I'm not on his ignore list. I think he wants to avoid getting into a debate with me on the value of the Medical Cannabis scene here. I think he is trying to avoid upsetting me. ;) lol

Mr Husain:

Cheers mate! Glad you liked the post. From what little I know, the reason why so many dispensaries popped up when the legal climate relaxed, was due to growers (and business savvy growers friends) wanting to open up shop. Most are fairly small time except for places like Harborside (in Oakland California) and probably businesses in Southern California.

The two law system is a hold over from the colonial days. When the US was forming, it was full of folks from all parts of the world (although mostly Europe and latter China). As such there was a lot of differing views on how to do things. The compromise was giving states autonomy (enshrined in the Constitution). This has been gradually eroded over the years.

If a local dispensary were to be held up it would fall under the jurisdiction of the local cops, except for unusual circumstances. Local cops treat dispensaries like any other tax paying business. While it is kind of you to say our laws are advanced, due to state autonomy there are some real problems in some states with justice being equally applied. We have our bad spots and trouble cops just like anywhere else. If a dispensary runs afoul of the Feds and their laws, all bets are off. The Feds are not nice people in that respect. And some states still have some very draconian laws on the books regarding cannabis and cannabis products.

So chin up Saddam. You folks have some amazing people over there doing very good work. I suspect it will coalesce and gel when you least suspect it. ;)

#6 I_L_M_G

I_L_M_G

    I_Love_My_Grow

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1120 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 07:47 AM

I'd like to throw my 2p in here. I've been a cannabis user for nearly 15 years. Before I go any further for the record the UK position upsets and angers me greatly. So I shall try not to rant.

I saw yesterday that baby p's killer has been released after 3 years. 3 fucking years of a 6 year sentence! Yet we face a 3 year sentence for production with intent. There isn't even the slightest reason to even debate the merits of that. It's a no brainer.

I have been a chronic pain sufferer for nearly 15 years too. And i really mean pain BIG pain.

This last week I have had to go out and walk around on crutches to go through the benefits system as I lost my job a weeks or so ago because of the disease.

A few days later I am in the worst agony of my life. I get off the chart pain most days buy this time round I've had to make another chart to describe this level of pain. I have never experienced anything like it. 10 back pain just from the movement of breathing and assisted suicide on my mind more than my growing obsession. I can't remember the last time I even laughed.

The reason I am saying this is because as I recently stated the system in the UK is insane. Words can't describe the total insanity of it all. Instead of being allowed to grow a fucking plant to help I am now on slow release morphine which do nothing and I'm on highly addictive zopiclone to help me sleep. None of which are necessary and both are highly addictive.

Anybody who is willing to stop and think about this can see how cruel it all is. I feel so badly let down by my country over this. The state is leaving me to languish in my own living hell and is giving me hard drugs I don't want.

I'm not saying cannabis will cure my pain, but it helps me sleep better than zopiclone and helps with the pain more than morphine which makes me sick in high doses and does nothing at lower doses.

This stuff makes me very very upset and angry. Understandably I hope. I could go on, but for all the time I've been on the cannabis scene not a single person has had a breakthrough with the law in the UK and it's getting worse for reasons beyond my comprehension.

There seems there is little anyone can do to stop the draconian machine from feeding itself into cannabis oblivion. The more we try the tighter the noose gets.

The system in the UK has cannabis psycosis not the 6m users! I'm not proud of my country anymore and have considered leaving many times.

[/rant]

#7 Ishmael

Ishmael

    thanks for the avatar Deez

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10824 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 08:17 AM

One can only hope. :rolleyes: Actually Danzig seems to like me. At least I'm not on his ignore list. I think he wants to avoid getting into a debate with me on the value of the Medical Cannabis scene here. I think he is trying to avoid upsetting me. ;) lol


Clearly you scare the shit out of him.

As to your point about decentralisation and the danger of legalisation homogenizing everything - I think it would be impossible to regulate cannabis as it grows so freely and easily. In fact I often wonder whether this is one reason why the drive to legalise it tends to get bogged down once parties try to draw up legislation. Legal dope would become a very very cheap drug, very hard to keep under any kind of control. A campaign to naturalise it by openly growing it in every possible public space would produce a situation in which a very potent highly pleasurable drug was widely available in an uncontrolled way for next to nothing. This would be bad for the economy. Currently income from cannabis supply is not taxed, but it does flow back into the economy, and must amount to a huge sum. Legalisation would cut that income right down, and whilst medical supply of controlled, standardised cannabis extract would go on and be taxable, the vast majority of users, including medical users, would either grow their own or avail themselves of the freely available wild or semi-wild stuff. Imagine if you were allowed to grow it the way we grow potatoes in the back garden. One year for seed production, a bit of digging, and the next crop would give you enough for a lifetime and more.

Because there is usually an economical explanation for the behaviour of the powers that rule us, I would say we need to consider whether the main reason it doesn't get legalised is the fear of producing a highly desirable commodity that, by virtue of its natural capacity for proliferation, escapes the economy entirely and produces a web of economical anarchy with a built-in anti-state force of its own.

"I was like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me."

Isaac Newton


#8 namkha

namkha

    Resin Coated

  • Lifetime Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6186 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 08:27 AM

As to your point about decentralisation and the danger of legalisation homogenizing everything - I think it would be impossible to regulate cannabis as it grows so freely and easily.


the British Empire managed just fine in Imperial India, and cannabis grows wild all across Pakistan, the Himalaya, and Northeast India

the British raised a substantial tax revenue from ganja grown in Bengal, Malwa etc. as well as charas produced within Imperial India, and imported from Chinese Turkestan (Xinjiang)

Legal dope would become a very very cheap drug, very hard to keep under any kind of control.
Imagine if you were allowed to grow it the way we grow potatoes in the back garden. One year for seed production, a bit of digging, and the next crop would give you enough for a lifetime and more.


how could legalised dope be very cheap?

what's cheaper to run - a business where you pay no tax whatsoever, have no lawyers or advertising costs to pay, etc. or a business where you pay tax, advertising, accountants etc.?

if you are lucky it will be 2/3rd of the price it is now, but not much less than that (see Jeffrey Miron's work)

I would say we need to consider whether the main reason it doesn't get legalised is the fear of producing a highly desirable commodity that, by virtue of its natural capacity for proliferation, escapes the economy entirely and produces a web of economical anarchy with a built-in anti-state force of its own.


sounds like prohibition to me

Edited by namkha, 06 August 2011 - 08:29 AM.

www.therealseedcompany.com

"Look, we understood we couldn't make it illegal to be young or poor or black in the United States, but we could criminalize their common pleasure. We understood that drugs were not the health problem we were making them out to be, but it was such a perfect issue...that we couldn't resist it." - John Ehrlichman, White House counsel to President Nixon on the rationale of the War on Drugs.

"[Nixon] emphasized that you have to face the fact that the whole problem is really the blacks" Haldeman, his Chief of Staff wrote, "The key is to devise a system that recognizes this while not appearing to."

#9 Ishmael

Ishmael

    thanks for the avatar Deez

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10824 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 08:40 AM

Points taken namkha, but the historical differences now are the recent development in the art and science of growing, and the ability of this p[articular plant to escape modern means of government control.

It is so easy to produce that one gardener could flood a local market easily. A campaign of growing could bring the price down to zero. This stuff is as easy to grow as peas - imagine if every pea grown in back gardens had the power to give you a lovely stoned evening - that's the power of this amazing plant.

Also the ability of western democracies to directly and forcibly oppress people (for instance by forbidding growing except by licensing) has become much more limited - they have better subtler cheaper means of control than sending in the dragoons - and without blanket legislation and demonisation of the plant I think it could escape the economy entirely. Yes this would be quite like the current growing subculture but the difference is that the cannabis subculture currently pumps money back into the economy because prohibition keeps prices high, whilst if it became legal the explosion in growing, supported by the collective wisdom of groups like this one, together with a campaign to near-naturalise the plant, make it so widely available that it would have virtually no price at all. Like conkers, say!

"I was like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me."

Isaac Newton


#10 Randalizer

Randalizer

    Resin Coated

  • Lifetime Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23738 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 08:43 AM

how could legalised dope be very cheap?

what's cheaper to run - a business where you pay no tax whatsoever, have no lawyers or advertising costs to pay, etc. or a business where you pay tax, advertising, accountants etc.?

if you are lucky it will be 2/3rd of the price it is now, but not much less than that (see Jeffrey Miron's work)


You sort of get this with the dispensaries here. They have overhead. Security, permits, taxes, rent, etc. Their prices though do manage to be all over the place. $25 an 1/8 on up to $70 an 1/8 (but usually 4 grams, weighed right in fromt of you from a fresh jar of bud). Of course the stuff you want is top dollar.

Street prices are a little better, and a lot because of the dispensaries, but then you get the sketchy street deal factor. Which as I understand isn't bad. The quality is good and no one cares that much.


It is so easy to produce that one gardener could flood a local market easily.



Depends on the market. ;) We smoke a lot of cannabis here in California.

Also the ability of western democracies to directly and forcibly oppress people (for instance by forbidding growing except by licensing) has become much more limited -


At the moment but surveillance technology is getting better. Smart meters and sophisticated software will be able to get at noticably large gardens. However this could drive the diversification even more. Also it won't be that hard to out maneuver electrical consumption surveillance software.

Edited by Randalizer, 06 August 2011 - 08:49 AM.


#11 Ishmael

Ishmael

    thanks for the avatar Deez

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10824 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 08:49 AM

What I mean is, it's so damn easy to grow and so powerful in terms of bangs per plant that there would soon be no point in running a business to produce and supply it. There are no conker supply businesses despite quite a large demand.

There is also a considerable voting constituency that would be interested in growing cannabis and that would object to its production being limited to licensed growers. It would be hard to sustain draconian legislation against personal growers if licensed producers were widespread.

The end result I am suggesting is that legalisation would lose the economy a lot of action, as a potent, pleasurable and harmless drug could be had as freely as conkers.

"I was like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me."

Isaac Newton


#12 Ishmael

Ishmael

    thanks for the avatar Deez

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10824 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 08:53 AM

Yes there's better and better surveillance technology, but I think a government would find it hard long-term to try to forbid people from doing back garden and countryside grows if they were allowing companies to produce the stuff. You have the germs of this situation in the US - what you need now is a campaign to grow as much as possible as widely as possible to make an economically-based attack on the corporate entities trying to control production.

"I was like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me."

Isaac Newton


#13 I_L_M_G

I_L_M_G

    I_Love_My_Grow

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1120 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 08:55 AM

I totally agree with ishmaels excellently worded sentiment here. I heard years ago that there are companies waiting in the wings with patents on ready made spliffs etc. Ready for the day when legalisation happens. I'm for normalisation personally with no restrictions at all.

Also I wondered if one of the other reasons for continued prohibition is the ability to administer a reliable roadside impairment test. I think we could see chaos on the roads overnight with the end of prohibition.

But none of it really adds up to me as to why prohibition prevails. I see no justifiable reason. In fact I have never seen any explanation offered at all ever. A plausible one that is.

#14 namkha

namkha

    Resin Coated

  • Lifetime Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6186 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 08:57 AM

Points taken namkha, but the historical differences now are the recent development in the art and science of growing, and the ability of this p[articular plant to escape modern means of government control.

It is so easy to produce that one gardener could flood a local market easily. A campaign of growing could bring the price down to zero. This stuff is as easy to grow as peas - imagine if every pea grown in back gardens had the power to give you a lovely stoned evening - that's the power of this amazing plant.

Also the ability of western democracies to directly and forcibly oppress people (for instance by forbidding growing except by licensing) has become much more limited - they have better subtler cheaper means of control than sending in the dragoons - and without blanket legislation and demonisation of the plant I think it could escape the economy entirely. Yes this would be quite like the current growing subculture but the difference is that the cannabis subculture currently pumps money back into the economy because prohibition keeps prices high, whilst if it became legal the explosion in growing, supported by the collective wisdom of groups like this one, together with a campaign to near-naturalise the plant, make it so widely available that it would have virtually no price at all. Like conkers, say!


you are labouring under various illusions

first is that prohibition has created a meaningful level of scarcity --- i.e that it has actually kept a lid on the cannabis market... that will get taken off when the law is changed

where is the evidence for that?

have you been reading too much Peter Hitchens Ishmael?

and then the idea about flooding the market with wild dope

the area of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh that is covered in wild cannabis is no doubt way, way larger than the UK

the plant grows wild in vast, vast swathes - oceans of the stuff - from the Hindu Kush, through Islamabad, the Punjab on through the Himalaya, Uttar Pradesh, all the way through Bengal and Bangladesh and Assam in the northeast, and stretching south from the Himalaya through Madya Pradesh

it was and is bloody everywhere in a way and on a scale that any UK guerilla planting campaign could not even begin to emulate

and the British continued to raise a tax revenue on licensed ganja and charas trade and production

the challenges they faced in that tax farming exercise came from smugglers avoiding the bonded warehouse system, not from people using wild cannabis for bhang, ganja or handrubbed charas...

people did use wild cannabis for drugs in India and Pakistan, and still do... just as they did and still can grow their own...

Edited by namkha, 06 August 2011 - 09:05 AM.

www.therealseedcompany.com

"Look, we understood we couldn't make it illegal to be young or poor or black in the United States, but we could criminalize their common pleasure. We understood that drugs were not the health problem we were making them out to be, but it was such a perfect issue...that we couldn't resist it." - John Ehrlichman, White House counsel to President Nixon on the rationale of the War on Drugs.

"[Nixon] emphasized that you have to face the fact that the whole problem is really the blacks" Haldeman, his Chief of Staff wrote, "The key is to devise a system that recognizes this while not appearing to."

#15 namkha

namkha

    Resin Coated

  • Lifetime Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6186 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 08:58 AM

would object to its production being limited to licensed growers. It would be hard to sustain draconian legislation against personal growers if licensed producers were widespread.


who said anything about preventing personal growers?

the Californian propositions all allow for personal grows of several m2

Italy has already decriminalised personal growing -

any sane proposal for reform is going to have to allow personal growing - with agreed limits (defined by something like numbers of plants, yield, or area used etc.)

likewise, any sane post-prohibition scenario is going to have punish any large scale personal production beyond agreed limits (if not then personal growers would be being given a commercial advantage over legit businesses)

Edited by namkha, 06 August 2011 - 09:02 AM.

www.therealseedcompany.com

"Look, we understood we couldn't make it illegal to be young or poor or black in the United States, but we could criminalize their common pleasure. We understood that drugs were not the health problem we were making them out to be, but it was such a perfect issue...that we couldn't resist it." - John Ehrlichman, White House counsel to President Nixon on the rationale of the War on Drugs.

"[Nixon] emphasized that you have to face the fact that the whole problem is really the blacks" Haldeman, his Chief of Staff wrote, "The key is to devise a system that recognizes this while not appearing to."


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users