[Smilodon]

I know that is an oxymoron, but this is a paper Eugene from ASA distributed this morning. I thought some might be interested. I have only posted the first paragraph. If you want more the link is at the bottom.

"Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act, was passed by California voters in
1996 on a ballot initiative promoted by those who subscribe to the idea that all drug use
should be legalized and people should be taught how to safely use drugs. This has
become known as “harm reduction.” They recognized that direct legalization would not
meet with voter approval so the focus became the use of crude Marijuana as medicine.
It has become clear, despite the claims of use by critically ill people that only
about 2% of those using crude Marijuana for medicine are critically ill. The vast majority
of those using crude Marijuana as medicine are young and are using the substance to be
under the influence of THC and have no critical medical condition.
Unfortunately these 13 years of relaxed access and use of Marijuana has created
social acceptance for Marijuana use that is now reflected in significant interest in the
media and in national consciousness for legalizing or decriminalizing the use of
Marijuana. This position paper will examine this issue and identify the position of the
California Police Chiefs Association, which is that Marijuana is destructive to our society
and should remain unlawful."

Full Text: http://www.californiapolicechiefs.or..._Marijuana.pdf
************************************************** **

This is somewhat depressing, but gives insight as to what they think, when they do. What do you guys think about this thing.

[steveadams203]

It makes me sick to hear the same regurgitated rhetoric over and over. Police and agents always say "oh well dont give us shit, we dont make the laws, we just enforce them". Yet anytime I read an article relating to medical cannabis or the re-legalization of cannabis it always has police chief or representive for DEA saying what a scourge and disease this plant is on our society and how we have to erradicate it at any cost.

Police dont make the laws, so they shouldnt have a god damned opinion relating to them.

[mikebig 9078]

legalize.sign those petitions.vote

[VooDoo Chile]

Originally Posted by steveadams203

It makes me sick to hear the same regurgitated rhetoric over and over. Police and agents always say "oh well dont give us shit, we dont make the laws, we just enforce them". Yet anytime I read an article relating to medical cannabis or the re-legalization of cannabis it always has police chief or representive for DEA saying what a scourge and disease this plant is on our society and how we have to erradicate it at any cost.

Police dont make the laws, so they shouldnt have a god damned opinion relating to them.

No, they don't make the law. But they do have discretion when it comes to interpreting the laws. And they've made it quite clear how they feel about this time and again. As long as they have that magical federal law to latch onto, the vast majority of them aren't going to see the light. Even if we ever change the federal laws, there's still gonna be some naysayers. C'est la.

[ShiningSkull]

Everyone should read this. Truly scary.

California Police Chiefs Association Position Paper on the
Decriminalization of Marijuana

September, 2009

Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act, was passed by California voters in 1996 on a ballot initiative promoted by those who subscribe to the idea that all drug use should be legalized and people should be taught how to safely use drugs. This has become known as “harm reduction.” They recognized that direct legalization would not meet with voter approval so the focus became the use of crude Marijuana as medicine.

It has become clear, despite the claims of use by critically ill people that only about 2% of those using crude Marijuana for medicine are critically ill. The vast majority of those using crude Marijuana as medicine are young and are using the substance to be under the influence of THC and have no critical medical condition.

Unfortunately these 13 years of relaxed access and use of Marijuana has created social acceptance for Marijuana use that is now reflected in significant interest in the media and in national consciousness for legalizing or decriminalizing the use of Marijuana. This position paper will examine this issue and identify the position of the California Police Chiefs Association, which is that Marijuana is destructive to our society and should remain unlawful.


How did we arrive at this position?

The use of Marijuana for medicinal purposes parallels the use of experimentation with opiates for that purpose. Therefore, examining the development of the use of opiates makes a worthwhile comparison. During the 1880’s many drugs including opiates and cocaine were legal and we saw rampant addiction in the US. There were 400,000 opium addicts in the US, which is twice the per capita rate we see today. Opium was developed as medicine and strong laws regulating use were effective in lowering addiction rates and allowing proper medical oversight and use.

Statistical data indicating the medical conditions identified as the necessity for a Marijuana recommendation would suggest that Marijuana is being abused by people who have no serous medical condition and simply like to be intoxicated on Marijuana. Marijuana is being abused by doctors who recklessly recommend use as their primary medical business. Marijuana is being abused by special interest groups who want to promote legal drug use in the US. The claim that Marijuana is not addictive is false and dangerous. Medical science is now identifying the value of canabanoids in viable medication. This research is moving forward and clinical trials are underway in the US under FDA processes. Additionally these medications are coming to market in Canada and England. The pharmaceutical industry has and will continue to develop viable uses and delivery systems that do not include the use of crude Marijuana in smoked form. The claim that smoking is a good way to deliver medication is ridiculous.

Marijuana as a smoked product has never proven to be medically beneficial and, in fact, is much more likely to harm one’s health; Marijuana smoke is a crude THC delivery system that also sends many harmful substances into the body. In 1999, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) published a review of the available scientific evidence in an effort to assess the potential health benefits of Marijuana and its constituent cannabinoids. The review concluded that smoking Marijuana is not recommended for any long-term medical use, and a subsequent IOM report declared, “Marijuana is not a modern medicine.”

The Carcinogen Identification Committee of the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Science Board identifies chemicals for addition to the list of chemicals known to the state of California to cause cancer (Health and Safety Code 25249.8). The committee serves as the state’s “Qualified Experts” for determining whether a chemical has been clearly shown, through scientifically valid testing according to generally accepted principles, to cause cancer. This committee met on May 29, 2009, and discussed Marijuana (smoke). From reading the transcripts and minutes available on their web site, 33 of the individual compounds found in Marijuana smoke are already listed as Proposition 65 carcinogens. One study introduced to the committee found that four times more Marijuana smoke tar is deposited in a smoker’s lung than tobacco smoke tar is deposited in a smoker’s lung, based on a similar amount of plant material. There is evidence from some epidemiological studies which suggests that cancer can be caused from direct and parental Marijuana smoking. The effect of Marijuana smoke on the T cells, B cells, and killer cells within the body are hurt when you take away someone’s own defense from other cancer-causing agents. For those patients that are going through chemotherapy and have no resistance due to no T cells, no B cells, no immune response whatsoever, the carcinogenicity studies that were presented show that Marijuana smoke is very dangerous to these people.

The thought of decriminalizing Marijuana or allowing taxation of Marijuana is bewildering. The thought that a group of individuals would want to advocate for decriminalization of a substance that the state of California has deemed to be carcinogenic is alarming.

The problem with Marijuana is that it has only been in the recent past that science has had the tools and technology to understand canabanoids and do viable research into medical uses of canabanoids. This effort appropriately belongs in the FDA process.


Claims by Legalization Advocates

• Law enforcement has failed in the war on drugs so drugs should be legalized. This claim is untrue and the term “war on drugs” is misleading. The fact is that drug use among young people has declined and great success has and is being achieved in protecting our society from addictive substances.

• Because drugs are so prevalent in our society, legalization will have little if any impact on availability or use of drugs. This claim is without merit and ignores the fact that most people strive to follow the laws. Making illicit drugs legal will clearly fuel new levels of violence, addiction and crime.

• Taxation of medicinal Marijuana will help balance California’s budget problems. This concept is misguided. There is little hope that all who grow and use Marijuana would report doing so and pay the associated taxes. The use and manufacture of other regulated substances such as alcohol and tobacco are strictly controlled and their private manufacture is limited. Currently, the cultivation, sale, and use of Marijuana are conducted solely by individuals. In theory the revenues received from the taxation of Marijuana will provide fiscal benefit to an ailing California economy. However, the long-term impact to the health care system necessary to aid those that become addicted, as is historically predictable, make this claim deceptive and unjustifiable.

It is important to note that society is having a very difficult time dealing with our two legal drugs; alcohol and tobacco. Alcohol use has been documented that about 65% of the population are regular users and it is attributable to 100,000 deaths per year. Tobacco use has been documented that about 35% of the population are regular users and is attributable to 400,000 deaths per year. When you examine all illegal drugs, it has been documented that 6% of the population are regular users. Yes, 100 millions Americans have tried Marijuana, but most stopped after 1 or 2 times, or after their college career.

The $8 billion collected in tax revenues from the sale of alcohol does little to offset the nearly $200 billion in social costs attributed to its use.

Removing the claim of medical use of Marijuana, the discussion must focus on the legalization or decriminalization of Marijuana for no other reason than to be used to be intoxicated. The use of intoxicating and addictive substances fuels crime and destroys lives by creating addiction and dependency. Children are victims of abuse and neglect at the hands of parents or caretakers who live in addiction.

Young adults are particularly vulnerable to addiction. Relaxed attitudes toward drug use place them at greater risk of addiction. Clearly legalization of Marijuana will lead to great use by those who would not use if it were not legal. This increased use will lead to negative outcomes.

Criminals who deal in illicit drugs will not turn to legal endeavors if illicit drugs are legalized. The claim that drug legalization will eliminate crime associated with drug trafficking is just not true. Much as we see in the use of other controlled substances, people who become addicted to Marijuana and cannot afford to maintain their addiction will turn to crime in order to supply themselves with their drug of choice.

If drugs were legalized, the United States would see significant increases in the number of drug users, the number of drug addicts and the number of people dying from drug-related causes.

Studies show that attitudes about drugs drive youth drug use rates. By trivializing and advocating tolerance for illegal drug use, drug legalization groups send a message to young people that experimentation with dangerous illegal drugs is acceptable.

Drug legalization would increase the occurrence of drug impaired driving. Drugs affect concentration, perception, coordination, and reaction time; many of the skills required for safe driving.


• Affects of Marijuana use

o Children (under 18)
 Education and graduation rates
 College attendance
 Employment
 Treatment for addiction/dependency
 Treatment
 Teen pregnancy
 Involvement in criminal activity
 Use of other addictive substances

o Young adults (18 to 30)
 Employment
 Treatment for addiction/dependency
 Ability to form a stable family relationship
 Use of other addictive substances
 Involvement in criminal activity

o Families
o Communities and neighborhoods
o Environmental damage
o Grow houses
o Drug cartels
o Gang involvement

Conclusion

Marijuana is a powerful and dangerous psychoactive substance. Society and our children do not need another dangerous substance in their lives. Simply stated the use of Marijuana is not and never will be good for the success, education, and well-being of our society.

When a person examines the two known abused drugs in our society, alcohol and tobacco, from a Public Health standpoint, those two substances would be recommended today to be banned. The California Police Chiefs Association clearly understands that this will not occur. But, the discussion of Marijuana is important especially in light of the money being infused by the Drug Alliance and their ability to prey on unsuspecting compassionate people of our great state. The issue should be discussed openly by not only law enforcement personnel but by school, public health, drug treatment, and other concerned professionals concerned about the affects of Marijuana on our constituents.

[kennabis]

how crude

more spin ......

crude

[CarlSagan]

Maybe most mmj smokers are young, but mmj is an effective treatment for ADD ADHD etc, and there are many young people with this diagnosis and drs readily hand out prescriptions for ritalin and other quasi-cocaine pharmacueticals.

...just because he can't or won't understand that marijuana can heal doesn't mean that mmj is "crude," it just means that he is simple-minded

[lwien]

A very big part of their argument is the carcinogenic nature of marijuana smoke and the subsequent dangers of getting cancer.

Solution: Vaporizers. Takes that argument totally out of the equation.

[CarlSagan]

Originally Posted by lwien

A very big part of their argument is the carcinogenic nature of marijuana smoke and the subsequent dangers of getting cancer.

Solution: Vaporizers. Takes that argument totally out of the equation.

yea..that and edibles, topical creams etc, its no different than any other medicine. Widespread ignorance is the enemy of MMJ.

[VooDoo Chile]

Originally Posted by CarlSagan

yea..that and edibles, topical creams etc, its no different than any other medicine. Widespread ignorance is the enemy of MMJ.

As a young adult I find this extremely insulting. But it comes from LEO's, so consider the source.

[tooweirdtolivetooraretodie]

Most leo's have at best, a 2 year Administration of Justice degree or something similar, in some places it's only a Certificate course. They are not required to have completed the course work when they start working. Usually they have a given period of time after starting to earn the degree, up to 3 years with the available extensions. Why would anybody listen to any opinion they have on something that pertains to science and medicine ? It's nice to see where they stand, but predictable considering the low educational standard they're held to. They just want to live long enough to get their pension. They're not paid to think and the people that pay them, don't really want them to. This is why I advocate suing these leo's, even if just in small claims court to financially harass them whenever there is contact over mmj, when it impacts their wallets, their little brains will follow.

P.S.- This mostly applies to local leo's, Fed's generally do have 4 year degrees, though they're not required to be law enforcement related. Furthermore, any of them with doctorate degrees or training in the related scientific fields, wouldn't be field agents.

[Smilodon]

Originally Posted by VooDoo Chile

No, they don't make the law. But they do have discretion when it comes to interpreting the laws. And they've made it quite clear how they feel about this time and again. As long as they have that magical federal law to latch onto, the vast majority of them aren't going to see the light. Even if we ever change the federal laws, there's still gonna be some naysayers. C'est la.

The DA in each City can determine what crimes they wish to prosecute. They set the priorities absent a citizen directive.

We have all had the experience where we see a cop exercise their discretion, even if it was whether or not to write a ticket.

I would like to tell them just to do their job too! It isn't that easy unfortunately. Solid regs will make that difference. At least we will have a yard-stick by which we can measure.

[Smilodon]

Originally Posted by tooweirdtolivetooraretodie

Most leo's have at best, a 2 year Administration of Justice degree or something similar, in some places it's only a Certificate course. They are not required to have completed the course work when they start working. Usually they have a given period of time after starting to earn the degree, up to 3 years with the available extensions. Why would anybody listen to any opinion they have on something that pertains to science and medicine ? It's nice to see where they stand, but predictable considering the low educational standard they're held to. They just want to live long enough to get their pension. They're not paid to think and the people that pay them, don't really want them to. This is why I advocate suing these leo's, even if just in small claims court to financially harass them whenever there is contact over mmj, when it impacts their wallets, their little brains will follow.

LOL, yes, yes!

Paper training LEO.

[koudekirk]

very frightening!

[LemonHerb]

Gotta keep that cash train rollin. How could they pay their salaries if they didn't have the cash cow of drug prohibition?

[steveadams203]

Originally Posted by lwien

A very big part of their argument is the carcinogenic nature of marijuana smoke and the subsequent dangers of getting cancer.

Solution: Vaporizers. Takes that argument totally out of the equation.

Well they cant even make the argument for carcinogenes because there is no solid evidence that cannabis leads to cancer, and all study so far has shown slowed growth in cancer cells when treated by cannabis.

But they dont even bring that to the table, they just use words like "scourge" and "danger to society".

Oh well, who are they aiming towards..? The voting demographic. i.e. the eledery. Old folks are easy to scare, specialy when it comes to drugs.

Their time is running out and they know it, sooner or later they wont have a crowd to play to, and the majority will be in such favor of removing the penalties from cannabis use that they will finally have to find a new pony to demonize.

Oh, and lets get a general consensus here....

HOW MANY OF YOU THINK CANNABIS IS ILLEGAL BECAUSE ITS POTENCY AND HIDDEN AGENDAS (PHARMACEUTICAL, ALCOHOL INDUSTRY, ETC.)?

-AND-

HOW MANY OF YOU THINK CANNABIS IS ILLEGAL BECAUSE OF HEMP AND THE MANY USES THAT HEMP COULD BENEFIT SOCIETY (SUCH AS FOOD, GAS, TEXTILES, BUILDING MATERIAL, ETC...)?

[kennabis]

which leo stinks?!?...

[lwien]

Originally Posted by steveadams203

Oh well, who are they aiming towards..? The voting demographic. i.e. the eledery. Old folks are easy to scare, specialy when it comes to drugs.

Which is really kind of odd, 'cause it's us old baby boomers who were the original hippies.

[Geist]

The police are commenting on relationships? One of LEs favorite sayings is, join the force get a divorce. They'll laugh
about it, and tell you how many times they've been divorced. Then brag about the benefits of groupies.

The age comment reminds me of my previous doctor. He insisted my health issues were something common and not
cancer because of my age. I'm paying the price for that kind stupidity.

I'm wondering if LE was reading or thinking about themselves(alcoholism) when they wrote how bad it is to use cannabis? Going after
cannabis, when alcohol abuse is so high in LE? I've got a list ;) though very incomplete.

The affects of being a police officer:
* Higher rates of alcoholism (gate way, they may need something stronger for their stress)
* Abuse of other addictive substances(including prescriptions, and illegal substances)
* Treatment for addiction/dependency
* Ability to form a stable family relationship
* Higher rates of divorce
* Domestic violence
* Child abuse
* Involvement in criminal activity
* Abuse of power
Physical/mental affects:
* Stress
* Depression
* High blood pressure
* Anxiety
* Suicide

I'd list employment, if they weren't so damn protected.


I love the statement about alcohol, and that it'd never be illegal. Well, among many other reasons, it's their favorite public drug, duh! I have
an idea....We have a real issue with alcoholics enforcing the law, I challenge them to create a no alcohol policy for all LE. No exceptions.
I have no doubt the self righteous hypocrites will cry about their rights. I also want breathalyzers installed in LE motor vehicles, it must be
filmed(the cars already have cameras) so they don't defeat the device. I know it'd never happen but it'd be interesting to push for a sober force
policy(this includes off duty consumption) Also, no more practicing medicine without a license...claiming they can tell who's sick and who isn't
just by looking at them...f`n absurd.

Edit:
If cannabis is so bad, then why does LE not mind if you've used it after a certain period of time when applying for a job? How can they hire "criminals"?
When needed, they'll ignore a lot of what they consider to be criminal activity.

[VooDoo Chile]

Originally Posted by tooweirdtolivetooraretodie

Most leo's have at best, a 2 year Administration of Justice degree or something similar, in some places it's only a Certificate course. They are not required to have completed the course work when they start working. Usually they have a given period of time after starting to earn the degree, up to 3 years with the available extensions. Why would anybody listen to any opinion they have on something that pertains to science and medicine ? It's nice to see where they stand, but predictable considering the low educational standard they're held to. They just want to live long enough to get their pension. They're not paid to think and the people that pay them, don't really want them to. This is why I advocate suing these leo's, even if just in small claims court to financially harass them whenever there is contact over mmj, when it impacts their wallets, their little brains will follow.

P.S.- This mostly applies to local leo's, Fed's generally do have 4 year degrees, though they're not required to be law enforcement related. Furthermore, any of them with doctorate degrees or training in the related scientific fields, wouldn't be field agents.

Sad, but true!

[cephas]

Do we know for whom this paper is intended to be read?

I would guess other LEO's, but is it also being sent to City council's and DA's?

[ShiningSkull]

Originally Posted by cephas

Do we know for whom this paper is intended to be read?

I would guess other LEO's, but is it also being sent to City council's and DA's?

It's a position paper of theirs, for anybody who wants to know what they stand for. That would include the people you mention, I think.