HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0845.003 2008-2010 . Y 4)e(4 P frl c i
Hemp Facts
April 19, 2010
Filed under Industrial Hem Facts
* Hemp Fuel: Hemp produces 10 tons of biomass in four months, 4 times the production of corn, which
makes it the only legitimate cost competitive energy crop for charcoal, ethanol, etc.
* Global Warming: Hemp helps reduce global warming and the greenhouse effect if it is grown as an
energy crop. Hemp charcoal is sulfur and acid rain -free, unlike fossil coal.
* Hemp as a Rotation Crop: Since Hemp farming stabilizes and enriches the soil, and provides farmers with
week free fields, without the cost of herbicides, and without competing for the vast farmland, it has value
even if no part of the plant is being harvested and used. Any industrial or monetary benefit beyond this
value is a bonus.
* Hemp Roots: Anchor and Aerate soil. Reduce soil loss because of erosion and mudslides by reducing the
velocity of runoff. Detoxify soil by pulling' metals and toxins (including radioactive elements) from ground.
* Growing Industrial Hemp — Hemp is an Ideal Farm Crop for America, hemp:
1. Requires only 10 -13 inches of water.
2. Grows well in non- arctic climates on any moderate soil.
3. Grows 8 -12 feet within 3 to 4 months.
4. Soil: pH of 6 or greater
5. Nutrients: Needs 80- 1001b. /A of Nitrogen, 35 -50 of phosphate and 52 -70 of patassium.
6. Plant 200 -300 plants per square meter to shade out weeds.
7. Germinates within a week with warm temperatures and good moisture.
8. Harvest should begin as soon as last pollen is shed.
* Hemp Paper: Using hemp could reduce deforestation by half. Hemp is 85% cellulose, which means no
choloride or dioxins are needed to seperate the cellulose. Trees have only 30 %, and require much
chemical input to process into paper.
*Textiles: Major companies such as Ralph Lauren, Patagonia, Armani, Men's Warehouse, Adidas and
Calvin Klein are participating in the growing $80 million hemp clothing industry.
* Plastics: BMW, Chrysler, Ford, GM, Honda, Volkswagon and virtually all European car makers have
begun using hemp based composites for panel and lingings etc.
* Earth Impact: Hemp requires no herbicides, pesticides, fungicides or insecticides to grow well and only
requires moderate amounts of water.
* Hemp Uses: Hemp is a renewable resource for protein, oil, biomass, fuel, cellulose, pulp or fiber. Hemp
can replace anything made from petroleum, wood, fiberglass, trees, soy or corn.
* Building Materials: Hemp hurd foundations are 7 times stronger, 3 times more elastic, and half as heavy
as concrete ones. Hemp fiberboard is twice as strong as wood fiberboard.
* Body Care: Hemp oil's superior EFA content helps rebuild skin cell membranes, and softens them.
* Hemp Sales in the United States of America: The U.S.A. has imported almost $500 million worth of hemp
in 2002, up from $50 million in 1995, and $5 million in 1990. Hemp has a $500 billion estimated worldwide
market.
* Body Care Products: The Body Shop sold an estimated $40 million worth of hemp based products last
year, and Revlon has a new line of hemp -based cosmetics available at Wal -Mart nationwide.
* Hemp Oil: Hemp needs to be processed within 50 miles of harvest to be cost effective, which would create
M� F F Vri'Pi ( S rvt'CA.� area; . 4 f5.3
Comm. No. 7
Ref. To: E D L
Ref. Dote JUN 2 2 2010
US Policy on Drugs
Driven by the Drug War, the U.S. prison population is six to ten times as high as most Western European nations.
The United States is a close second only to Russia in its rate of incarceration per 100,000 people. In 2000, more
than 734,000 people were arrested in this country for marijuana - related offenses alone.
The US war on drugs places great emphasis on arresting people for smoking marijuana. Since 1990, nearly 5.9
million Americans have been arrested on marijuana charges, a greater number than the entire populations of
Alaska, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming
combined. In 2000, state and local law enforcement arrested 734,498 people for marijuana violations. This is an
increase of 800 percent since 1980, and is the highest ever recorded by the FBI.
As has been the case throughout the 1990s, the overwhelming majority of those charged with marijuana
violations in 2000 -- 646,042 Americans (88 %) -- were for simple possession. The remaining 12% (88,456
Americans) were for "sale /manufacture ", an FBI category which includes marijuana grown for personal use or
purely medical purposes. These new FBI statistics indicate that one marijuana smoker is arrested every 45
seconds in America. Taken together, the total number of marijuana arrests for 2000 far exceeded the combined
number of arrests for violent crimes, including murder, manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated
assault.
Like most Americans, people who smoke marijuana also pay taxes, love and support their families, and work
hard to make a better life for their children. Suddenly they are arrested, jailed and treated like criminals solely
because of their recreational drug of choice. State agencies frequently step in and declare children of marijuana
smokers to be "in danger ", and many children are placed into foster homes as a result. This causes enormous
pain, suffering and financial hardship for millions of American families. It also engenders distrust and disrespect
for the law and for the criminal justice system overall. Responsible marijuana smokers present no threat or
danger to America or its children, and there is no reason to treat them as criminals, or to take their children
away. As a society we need to find ways to discourage personal conduct of all kinds that is abusive or harmful to
others. Responsible marijuana smokers are not the problem and it is time to stop arresting them.
Once all the facts are known, it becomes clear that America's marijuana laws need reform. This issue must be
openly debated using only the facts. Groundless claims, meaningless statistics, and exaggerated scare stories that
have been peddled by politicians and prohibitionists for the last 60 years must be rejected.
ANNUAL AMERICAN DEATHS CAUSED BY DRUGS
TOBACCO 400,000
ALCOHOL 100,000
ALL LEGAL DRUGS 20,000
ALL ILLEGAL DRUGS 15,000
CAFFEINE 2,000
ASPIRIN 500
MARIJUANA 0
Source: United States government...
National Institute on Drug Abuse,
Bureau of Mortality Statistics
Like any substance, marijuana can be abused. The most common problem attributed to marijuana is frequent
overuse, which can induce lethargic behaviour, but does not cause serious health problems. Marijuana can cause
short -term memory loss, but only while under the influence. Marijuana does not impair long -term memory.
Marijuana does not lead to harder drugs. Marijuana does not cause brain damage, genetic damage, or damage the
immune system. Unlike alcohol, marijuana does not kill brain cells or induce violent behaviour. Continuous long-
term smoking of marijuana can cause bronchitis, but the chance of contracting bronchitis from casual marijuana
smoking is minuscule. Respiratory health hazards can be totally eliminated by consuming marijuana via non-
smoking methods, i.e., ingesting marijuana via baked foods, tincture, or vaporizer.
A 1997 UCLA School of Medicine study (Volume 155 of the American Journal of Respiratory & Critical Care
Medicine) conducted on 243 marijuana smokers over an 8 -year period reported the following: "Findings from the
long -term study of heavy, habitual marijuana smokers argue against the concept that continuing heavy use of
marijuana is a significant risk factor for the development of chronic lung disease." "Neither the continuing nor the
intermittent marijuana smokers exhibited any significantly different rates of decline in lung function as compared
with those individuals who never smoked marijuana." The study concluded: "No differences were noted between
even quite heavy marijuana smoking and non - smoking of marijuana."
Marijuana does not cause serious health problems like those caused by tobacco or alcohol (e.g., strong addiction,
cancer, heart problems, birth defects, emphysema, liver damage, etc.). Death from a marijuana overdose is
impossible. In all of world history, there has never been a single human death attributed to a health problem
Llos caused by marijuana. and life would be better for most people.
=rOM robert petricci <nimo1767 @gmail.com>
raj : t Print for council
D?: June 22, 2010 12:47:08 AM HST
sara.jackson.steiner@gmail.com
Marijuana facts
1. "Analysis of the demographic and social characteristics of a large sample of applicants seeking approval to use marijuana medically in California
supports an interpretation of long term non problematic use by many who had first tried it as adolescents, and then either continued to use it or
later resumed its use as adults. In general, they have used it at modest levels and in consistent patterns which anecdotally -often assisted their
educational achievement, employment performance, and establishment of a more stable life - style. These data suggest that rather than acting as
a gateway to other drugs, (which many had also tried), cannabis has been exerting a beneficial influence on most."
Source:
Thomas J O'Connell and Cho B Bou- Matar, "Long term marijuana users seeking medical cannabis in California (2001- 2007): demographics,
social characteristics, patterns of cannabis and other drug use of 4117 applicants," Harm Reduction Journal, (November 2007).
pttp',J ha ?'CnrethiC.t onjour al.comf .ontent /Ddfi1- .477 -7 517- 4- 16,pdt
2. The DEA's Administrative Law Judge, Francis Young concluded: In strict medical terms marijuana is far safer than many 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 the supervised routine of medical care."
Source:
US Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, In the Matter of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition,' [Docket #86 -22], (September 6,
1988), p. 57.
ht tc: hwww. io+ wamedicalmariivana .oru/ /pdfsfyounc Ddf
3. "Prohibition has two effects: on one hand it raises supplier costs, disrupts market functioning and prevents open promotion of the product; on the
other, it sacrifices the authorities' ability to tax transactions and regulate operation of the market, product characteristics and promotional activity
of suppliers. The cannabis prevalence rates presented in Figure 1 show clearly that prohibition has failed to prevent widespread use of the drug
and leaves open the possibility that it might be easier to control the harmful use of cannabis by regulation of a legal market than to control illicit
consumption under prohibition. The contrast between the general welcome for tobacco regulation (including bans on smoking in public places)
and the deep suspicion of prohibition policy on cannabis is striking and suggests that a middle course of legalised but limited consumption may
find a public consensus."
Source:
"Pudney, Stephen, "Drugs Policy — What Should We Do About Cannabis ?" Centre for Economic Policy Research (London, United Kingdom:
April 2009), p. 23.
It p: //www.cepr.org/ meets /wkcn /9 /976-papersfpud nev.puf
4. 'Tetrahydrocannabinol is a very safe drug. Laboratory animals (rats, mice, dogs, monkeys) can tolerate doses of up to 1,000 mg/kg (milligrams
per kilogram). This would be equivalent to a 70 kg person swallowing 70 grams of the drug — about 5,000 times more than is required to produce
a high. Despite the widespread illicit use of cannabis there are very few if any instances of people dying from an overdose. In Britain, official
government statistics listed five deaths from cannabis in the period 1993 -1995 but on closer examination these proved to have been deaths due
to inhalation of vomit that could not be directly attributed to cannabis (House of Lords Report, 1998). By comparison with other commonly used
recreational drugs these statistics are impressive.'
Source:
Iversen, Leslie L., PhD, FRS, The Science of Marijuana" (London, England: Oxford University Press, 2000), p. 178, citing House of Lords,
Select Committee on Science and Technology, "Cannabis -- The Scientific and Medical Evidence' (London, England: The Stationery Office,
Parliament, 1998).
5. "Statements in the popular media that the potency of cannabis has increased by ten times or more in recent decades are not support by the data
from either the USA or Europe. As discussed in the body of this report, systematic data are not available in Europe on long -term trends and
analytical and methodological issues complicate the interpretation of the information that is available. Data are stronger for medium and short-
term trends where no major differences are apparent in Europe, although some modest increases are found in some countries. The greatest
long -term changes in potency appear to have occurred in the USA. It should be noted here that before 1980 herbal cannabis potency in the USA
was, according to the available data, very low by European standards.'
Source:
King, Leslie A., European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, "EMCDDA Insights - An Overview of Cannabis Potency in Europe
(Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2004), p. 14.
www. emcdda .europa.eu /attachements.ctr?iatt 33985 EN Insight6.ndf
6. Marijuana - Data
(2009) The public health burden of cannabis use is probably modest compared with that of alcohol, tobacco, and other illicit drugs. A recent
Australian study96 estimated that cannabis use caused 0.2% of total disease burden in Australia -a country with one of the highest reported
rates of cannabis use. Cannabis accounted for 10% of the burden attributable to all illicit drugs (including heroin, cocaine, and amphetamines). It
also accounted for around 10% of the proportion of disease burden attributed to alcohol (2.3 %), but only 2-5% of that attributable to tobacco
(7 %)."
Source:
Hall, Wayne and Degenhardt, Louise, "Adverse health effects of non - medical cannabis use," The Lancet (London, United Kingdom: October 17,
2009) Vol. 374, p. 1389.
htlp:i /press.thelance #.corn /cannabis.odf
7. (2008) Although people may think that the Drug War targets drug smugglers and 'King Pins,' in 2008, 49.8 percent (half) of the 1,702,537 total
arrests for drug abuse violations were for marijuana - a total of 847,863. Of those, 754,224 people were arrested for marijuana possession
alone. By contrast in 2000 a total of 734,497 Americans were arrested for marijuana offenses, of which 646,042 were for possession alone.
US Arrests
Year Total Total Drug Total Marijuana Marijuana Marijuana Possession Total Violent Crime Total Property Crime
Arrests Arrests Arrests Trafficking /Sale Arrests Arrests Arrests Arrests
2008 14,005,615 1,702,537 847,863 93,640 754,224 594,911 1,687,345
2007 14,209,365 1,841,182 872,720 97,583 775,137 597,447 1,610,088
2006 14,380,370 1,889,810 829,627 90,711 738,916 611,523 1,540,297
2005 14,094,186 1,846,351 786,545 90,471 696,074 603,503 1,609,327
2004 14,004,327 1,745,712 771,605 87,286 684,319 590,258 1,649,825
2003 13,639,479 1,678,192 755,186 92,300 662,886 597,026 1,605,127
2002 13,741,438 1,538,813 697,082 83,096 613,986 620,510 1,613,954
2001 13,699,254 1,586,902 723,628 82,519 641,109 627,132 1,618,465
2000 13,980,297 1,579,566 734,497 88,455 646,042 625,132 1,620,928
1999 14,355,600 1,532,200 704,812 84,271 620,541 644,770 1,676,100
1998 14,528,300 1,559,100 682,885 84,191 598,694 675,900 1,805,600
1997 15,284,300 1,583,600 695,201 88,682 606,519 717,750 2,015,600
1996 15,168,100 1,506,200 641,642 94,891 546,751 729,900 2,045,600
1995 15,119,800 1,476,100 588,964 85,614 503,350 796,250 2,128,600
1990 14,195,100 1,089,500 326,850 66,460 260,390 705,500 2,217,800
1980 10,441,000 580,900 401,982 63,318 338,664 475,160 1,863,300
Source:
Crime in America: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2008 (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, 2008), Table 29, from the web at
ht1p: // /www.Jbi .gov /ucrlcius20081datattabie 29,html and Arrest Table: Arrests for Drug Abuse Violations, from the web
http://www.fbi.govlucricius20081arrestslindex.html last accessed Sept. 19, 2009; Crime in America: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2007
(Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, 2008), Table 29, from the web at htto:,iiwww. fbi .coviucr %cius2007 /data /table, 29.html and Arrest Table:
Arrests for Drug Abuse Violations, from the web htto: / /www. fbi. gov; ucr /cius2007.arrestsiindex.html last accessed Sept. 18, 2008; Crime in
America: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2006 (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, 2007), Table 29, from the web at
brgiiwww.fbi.aoviucrIcius2906idataltable 29.htmi and Arrest Table: Arrests for Drug Abuse Violations, from the web
h :ilwww. fbi. roviucr /cius2006iarrests /index.htmi last accessed Sept. 24, 2007; Crime in America: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2005
(Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, 2006), Table 29, from the web at http : / /www,fbi.govlucr!05cius dataitabie 29.html and Arrest Table:
Arrests for Drug Abuse Violations, from the web do ' %.> f' • c F; ri :' "re t -;' •e ht I last accessed Sept. 20, 2006; Crime in the
United States: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2004 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 2005), p. 278, Table 4.1 & p. 280, Table 29;
Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in America: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2003 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 2004), p.
269, Table 4.1 & and p. 270, Table 29; Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in America: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2002 (Washington, DC:
US Government Printing Office, 2003), p. 234, Table 4.1 & and p. 234, Table 29; Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in America: FBI Uniform
Crime Reports 2001 (Washington, DC: US Govemment Printing Office, 2002), p. 232, Table 4.1 & and p. 233, Table 29; Uniform Crime Reports
for the United States 2000 (Washington DC: US Government Printing Office, 2001), pp. 215 -216, Tables 29 and 4.1; Uniform Crime Reports for
the United States 1999 (Washington DC: US Government Printing Office, 2000), pp. 211 -212; Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime
Reports for the United States 1998 (Washington DC: US Government Printing Office, 1999), pp. 209 -210; Crime in America: FBI Uniform Crime
Reports 1997 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1998), p. 221, Table 4.1 & p. 222, Table 29; Crime in America: FBI Uniform
Crime Reports 1996 (Washington, DC: US Govemment Printing Office, 1997), p. 213, Table 4.1 & p. 214, Table 29; FBI, UCR for the US 1995
(Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1996), pp. 207 -208; FBI, UCR for the US 1990 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing
Office, 1991), pp. 173 -174; FBI, UCR for the US 1980 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1981), pp. 189 -191; Bureau of Justice
Statistics, Chart of arrests by age group, number and rates for total offenses, violent offenses, and property offenses, 1970 -2003, Dec. 2004.
8. (2008) According to the federal Potency Monitoring Project, the average potency of marijuana has increased very little since the 1980s. The
Project reports that in 1985, the average THC content of commercial -grade marijuana was 2.84 %, and the average for high -grade sinsemilla in
1985 was 7.17 %. In 1995, the potency of commercial -grade marijuana averaged 3.73%, while the potency of sinsemilla in 1995 averaged
7.51 %. In 2001, commercial -grade marijuana averaged 4.72% THC, and the potency of sinsemilla in 2001 averaged 9.03 %. In the period Dec.
16, 2007 through March 15, 2008, the potency of commercial -grade marijuana varied from 2.14% THC for "loose leaf," 6.4% for "kilobricks," and
7.16% THC for "buds.° The potency of sinsemilla in that period averaged about 10.7% THC.
Source:
Quarterly Report #100, Dec. 16, 2007 - March 15, 2008, University of Mississippi Potency Monitoring Project (Oxford, MS: National Center for
Natural Products Research, a Division of the Research Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2008), Mahmoud A. ElSohly, PhD, Director, NIDA
Marijuana Project (NIDA Contract #N01 DA -5- 7746), p. 6
http:// www. whitehousedruapolicv .aov!odf /FuilPotencyRepo. ts.odf
Quarterly Report #76, Nov. 9, 2001 -Feb. 8, 2002, University of Mississippi Potency Monitoring Project (Oxford, MS: National Center for the
Development of Natural Products, Research Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2002), Mahmoud A. ElSohly, PhD, Director, NIDA Marijuana
Project (NIDA Contract #NO1DA -0- 7707), Table 3, p. 8.
9. (2008) "California, Hawaii, Kentucky, Oregon, Tennessee, Washington, and West Virginia are the primary marijuana cultivation states (M7
states). Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program (DCE /SP) data show that more than 8 million plants were eradicated in 2008, 89
percent (7,136,133 plants of 8,013,308 plants) of which were eradicated in the M7 States."
Source:
National Drug Intelligence Center, "Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2009," (Johnstown, PA: July, 2009), p. 1.
tty1?wk �; !,U' ='E"' •t;l ' ,/r .0133 ': 7 `x'5/'1 1 p.pdf
10. (2007) "The global number of people who used cannabis at least once in 2007 is estimated to be between 143 and 190 million persons. The
highest levels of use remain in the established markets of North America and Western Europe, although there are signs from recent studies that
the levels of use are declining in developed countries, particularly among young people."
Source:
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 'World Drug Report 2009" (United Nations: Vienna, Austria, 2009), p. 89.
h t ' : /'w .0 !dc x ,11 c °nl nt iw. A P R , 09/ 2009 ene w - ndf
11. (2004) "Cannabis remains by far the most commonly used drug in the world. An estimated 162 million people used cannabis in 2004, equivalent
to some 4 per cent of the global population age 15 -64. In relative terms, cannabis use is most prevalent in Oceania, followed by North America
and Africa. While Asia has the lowest prevalence expressed as part of the population, in absolute terms it is the region that is home to some 52
million cannabis users, more than a third of the estimated total. The next largest markets, in absolute terms, are Africa and North America."
Source:
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, °World Drug Report 2006, Volume 1: Analysis' (United Nations: Vienna, Austria, 2006), p. 23.
htto: / /www.unodc.erq!pdf /WDR 2006!wdr2006 volumei pit
12. (2004) "Proponents of criminalization attribute to their preferred drug -control regime a special power to affect user behavior. Our findings cast
doubt on such attributions. Despite widespread lawful availability of cannabis in Amsterdam, there were no differences between the 2 cities
[Amsterdam and San Francisco] in age at onset of use, age at first regular use, or age at the start of maximum use."
Source:
Reinarman, Craig; Cohen, Peter D.A.; Kaal, Hendrien L., °The Limited Relevance of Drug Policy: Cannabis in Amsterdam and in San Francisco,"
American Journal of Public Health (Washington, DC: American Public Health Association, May 2004) Vol 94, No. 5, p. 840.
http: ! /aioh.apharo reprint /94/5'8 36
13. (2002) "Although marijuana grown in the United States was once considered inferior because of a low concentration of THC, advancements in
plant selection and cultivation have resulted in higher THC - containing domestic marijuana. In 1974, the average THC content of illicit marijuana
was Tess than one percent. Today most commercial grade marijuana from Mexico /Columbia and domestic outdoor cultivated marijuana has an
average THC content of about 4 to 6 percent. Between 1998 and 2002, NIDA - sponsored Marijuana Potency Monitoring System (MPMP)
analyzed 4,603 domestic samples. Of those samples, 379 tested over 15 percent THC, 69 samples tested between 20 and 25 percent THC and
four samples tested over 25 percent THC."
Source:
US Drug Enforcement Administration, °Drugs of Abuse° (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, 2009), IZttpJl www .dea.gov.!pubs /abusp;7 pot.htm,
last accessed Oct. 23, 2009.
14. Marijuana - Effects
'These results can be interpreted in several ways. A statistically reliable negative effect was observed in the domain of learning and forgetting,
suggesting that chronic long -term cannabis use results in a selective memory defect. While the results are compatible with this conclusion, the
effect size for both domains was of a very small magnitude. The 'real life' impact of such a small and selective effect is questionable. In addition,
it is important to note that most users across studies had histories of heavy longterm cannabis consumption. Therefore, these findings are not
likely to generalize to more limited administration of cannabis compounds, as would be seen in a medical setting.'
Source:
Grant, Igor, et al., "Non -Acute (Residual) Neurocognitive Effects Of Cannabis Use: A Meta- Analytic Study," Journal of the International
Neuropsychological Society (Cambridge University Press: July 2003), 9, p. 686.
http://www.csdp.orWresearch/348art2003.ndf
15. 'There are health risks of cannabis use, most particularly when it is used daily over a period of years or decades. Considerable uncertainty
remains about whether these effects are attributable to cannabis use alone, and about what the quantitative relationship is between frequency,
quantity and duration of cannabis use and the risk of experiencing these effects.
On existing patterns of use, cannabis poses a much less serious public health problem than is currently posed by alcohol and tobacco in
Western societies."
Source:
Hall, W., Room, R. & Bondy, S., 'WHO Project on Health Implications of Cannabis Use: A Comparative Appraisal of the Health and
Psychological Consequences of Alcohol, Cannabis, Nicotine and Opiate Use,' (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, March 1998).
J ttc :i /www.druglibrarv.net /schaffer/ hemp /general /who- conclusions.htm
16. The authors of a 1998 World Health Organization report comparing marijuana, alcohol, nicotine and opiates quote the Institute of Medicine's
1982 report stating that there is no evidence that smoking marijuana "exerts a permanently deleterious effect on the normal cardiovascular
system."
Source:
Hall, W., Room, R. & Bondy, S., WHO Project on Health Implications of Cannabis Use: A Comparative Appraisal of the Health and Psychological
Consequences of Alcohol, Cannabis, Nicotine and Opiate Use, August 28, 1995 (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, March 1998).
http : / /www.drualibrarv.net!schaffer /hemp /aenerallwho.robable.htm
17. Some claim that cannabis use leads to "adult amotivation.' The World Health Organization report addresses the issue and states, "it is doubtful
that cannabis use produces a well defined amotivational syndrome." The report also notes that the value of studies which support the "adult
amotivation" theory are 'limited by their small sample sizes° and lack of representative social /cultural groups.
Source:
Hall, W., Room, R. & Bondy, S., WHO Project on Health Implications of Cannabis Use: A Comparative Appraisal of the Health and Psychological
Consequences of Alcohol, Cannabis, Nicotine and Opiate Use, August 28, 1995 (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, March 1998).
http://www.drual.rary.notIschafferThemplgenerailwho - Drobablahtm
18. "A review of the literature suggests that the majority of cannabis users, who use the drug occasionally rather than on a daily basis, will not suffer
any lasting physical or mental harm. Conversely, as with other 'recreational' drugs, there will be some who suffer adverse consequences from
their use of cannabis. Some individuals who have psychotic thought tendencies might risk precipitating psychotic illness. Those who consume
large doses of the drug on a regular basis are likely to have lower educational achievement and lower income, and may suffer physical damage
to the airways. They also run a significant risk of becoming dependent upon continuing use of the drug. There is little evidence, however, that
these adverse effects persist after drug use stops or that any direct cause and effect relationships are involved."
Source:
Iversen, Leslie L., PhD, FRS, "Long -Term Effects of Exposure to Cannabis,' Current Opinion in Pharmacology, Feb. 2005, Vol. 5, No. 1, p. 71.
htio: /;ww +wt/.sa eaccessnow.orQ /downloads %ion % 20term ',o29cannabis %20eftects....
19. The Christchurch Press reported on March 22, 2005, that "The lead researcher in the Christchurch study, Professor David Fergusson, said the
role of cannabis in psychosis was not sufficient on its own to guide legislation. The result suggests heavy use can result in adverse side - effects,'
he said. That can occur with ( heavy use of ) any substance. It can occur with milk.' Fergusson's research, released this month, conduded that
heavy cannabis smokers were 1.5 times more likely to suffer symptoms of psychosis that non - users. The study was the latest in several reports
based on a cohort of about 1000 people born in Christchurch over a four -month period in 1977. An effective way to deal with cannabis use would
be to incrementally reduce penalties and carefully evaluate its impact, Fergusson said. 'Reduce the penalty, like a parking fine. You could then
monitor ( the impact ) after five or six years. If it did not change, you might want to take another step.'
Source:
Bleakley, Louise, "NZ Study Used in UK Drug Review," The Press (Christchurch, New Zealand: March 22, 2005), from the web at
h t //' v w. .r sr / ,R.htrni, last accessed March 28, 2005.
20. A Johns Hopkins study published in May 1999, examined marijuana's effects on cognition on 1,318 participants over a 15 year period.
Researchers reported "no significant differences in cognitive decline between heavy users, light users, and nonusers of cannabis." They also
found "no male - female differences in cognitive decline in relation to cannabis use." These results ... seem to provide strong evidence of the
absence of a long -term residual effect of cannabis use on cognition,' they conduded.
•
Source:
Constantine G. Lyketsos, Elizabeth Garrett, Kung -Yee Liang, and James C. Anthony. (1999). "Cannabis Use and Cognitive Dedine in Persons
under 65 Years of Age," American Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 149, No. 9
http: /; www.ncbi.nlm.nih.ciov /pubmed /1 0221315
21. According to research published in the journal Addiction, "First, the use of cannabis and rates of psychotic symptoms were related to each other,
independently of observed /non - observed fixed covariates and observed time dynamic factors (Table 2). Secondly, the results of structural
equation modelling suggest that the direction of causation is that the use of cannabis leads to increases in levels of psychotic symptoms rather
than psychotic symptoms increasing the use of cannabis. Indeed, there is a suggestion from the model results that increases in psychotic
symptoms may inhibit the use of cannabis."
Source:
Fergusson, David M., John Norwood & Elizabeth M. Ridder, "Tests of Causal Linkages Between Cannabis Use and Psychotic Symptoms,"
Addiction, Vol. 100, No. 3, March 2005, p. 363.
22. "Current marijuana use had a negative effect on global 10 score only in subjects who smoked 5 or more joints per week. A negative effect was
not observed among subjects who had previously been heavy users but were no longer using the substance. We conclude that marijuana does
not have a long -term negative impact on global intelligence. Whether the absence of a residual marijuana effect would also be evident in more
specific cognitive domains such as memory and attention remains to be ascertained."
Source:
Fried, Peter, Barbara Watkinson, Deborah James, and Robert Gray, "Current and former marijuana use: preliminary findings of a longitudinal
study of effects on 10 in young adults," Canadian Medical Association Journal, April 2, 2002, 166(7), p. 887.
Ibttp:r7 i.n Ih ,• ! 6,,, ••' 94 9 4
23. "Although the heavy current users experienced a decrease in 10 score, their scores were still above average at the young adult assessment
(mean 105.1). If we had not assessed preteen 10, these subjects would have appeared to be functioning normally. Only with knowledge of the
change in 10 score does the negative impact of current heavy use become apparent."
Source:
Fried, Peter, Barbara Watkinson, Deborah James, and Robert Gray, "Current and former marijuana use: preliminary findings of a longitudinal
study of effects on 10 in young adults," Canadian Medical Association Journal, April 2, 2002, 166(7), p. 890.
ht1p : / /www.ncbi.nlm.nih.00vpubmed /11949984
24. "In conclusion, our meta - analysis of studies that have attempted to address the question of longer term neurocognitive disturbance in moderate
and heavy cannabis users has failed to demonstrate a substantial, systematic, and detrimental effect of cannabis use on neuropsychological
performance. It was surprising to find such few and small effects given that most of the potential biases inherent in our analyses actually
increased the likelihood of finding a cannabis effect."
Source:
Grant, Igor, et al., "Non -Acute (Residual) Neurocognitive Effects Of Cannabis Use: A Meta- Analytic Study," Journal of the International
Neuropsychological Society (Cambridge University Press: July 2003), 9, p. 687.
trtpa //kvww.cs io.org /researcbr3 8art2QQ3
25. The results of our meta - analytic study failed to reveal a substantial, systematic effect of long -term, regular cannabis consumption on the
neurocognitive functioning of users who were not acutely intoxicated. For six of the eight neurocognitive ability areas that were surveyed. the
confidence intervals for the average effect sizes across studies overlapped zero in each instance, indicating that the effect size could not be
distinguished from zero. The two exceptions were in the domains of learning and forgetting."
Source:
Grant, Igor, et al., "Non -Acute (Residual) Neurocognitive Effects Of Cannabis Use: A Meta - Analytic Study," Journal of the International
Neuropsychological Society (Cambridge University Press: July 2003), 9, p. 685.
h ttl : j' ww+ w .osdp.orgfresearch13-48art2003, Ddf
26. "Although individual lifetime risk of chronic psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia, even in people who use cannabis regularly, is likely to be
low (less than 3 %), cannabis use can be expected to have a substantial effect on psychotic disorders at a population level because exposure to
this drug is so common."
Source:
Moore, Theresa H M; Zammit, Stanley; Lingford - Hughes, Anne; Barnes, Thomas R E; Jones, Peter B; Burke, Margaret; Lewis, Glyn, "Cannabis
use and risk of psychotic or aff ective mental health outcomes: a systematic review," The Lancet (London, United Kingdom: July 28, 2007) Vol
370, p. 327.
htirylAtsivtivd.b€ is.a s sa r (spa zn;;ma,,.octre;sts paper,c ,
27. "... the expected rise in diagnoses of schizophrenia and psychoses did not occur over a 10 year period. This study does not therefore support the
specific causal link between cannabis use and the incidence of psychotic disorders based on the 3 assumptions described in the Introduction.
•
This concurs with other reports indicating that increases in population cannabis use have not been followed by increases in psychotic incidence
(Macleod et al., 2006; Arsenault et al., 2004; Rey and Tennant, 2002)."
Source:
Frisher, Martin; Crome, liana; Orsolina, Martino; and Croft, Peter, 'Assessing the impact of cannabis use on trends in diagnosed schizophrenia in
the United Kingdom from 1996 to 2005," Schizophrenia Research (Nashville, Tennessee: Schizophrenia Intemational Research Society,
September 2009) Vol. 113, Issue 2, p. 126.
http : / /www.ukcia.orgiresearchtkee'e studviAssessinu -tile - impact- of-cannab...
28. When examining the health affects of marijuana use, the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse concluded, 'A careful search of
the literature and testimony of the nation's health officials has not revealed a single human fatality in the United States proven to have resulted
solely from ingestion of marihuana. Experiments with the drug in monkeys demonstrated that the dose required for overdose death was
enormous and for all practical purposes unachievable by humans smoking marihuana. This is in marked contrast to other substances in common
use, most notably alcohol and barbiturate sleeping pills. The WHO reached the same conclusion in 1995.
Source:
Shafer, Raymond P., et al, Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding, Ch. III, (Washington DC: National Commission on Marihuana and Drug
Abuse, 1972);
htt 'l ras gilbrary hetr`SChat e< L_ brary /studie?�incc3'ltt'1
Hall, W., Room, R. & Bondy, S., WHO Project on Health Implications of Cannabis Use: A Comparative Appraisal of the Health and Psychological
Consequences of Alcohol, Cannabis, Nicotine and Opiate Use, August 28, 1995, (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, March
1998).
http://www.drucilibrani.netischafferthernplaeneraUwho-index.htm
29. Marijuana - [hiving
"We found only limited evidence to support the claim that cannabis use increases accident risk. Participants who had driven under the influence
of cannabis in the previous year appeared to be no more likely than drug -free drivers to report that they had had an accident in the previous 12
months. Prima fade, this would seem to suggest that cannabis - intoxicated driving is not a risk factor for non -fatal accidents. In this sense, the
results would support those of Longo et al. (2000b) who found no relationship between recent cannabis use and driver culpability for non -fatal
accidents."
Source:
Jones, Craig; Donnelly, Neil; Swift, Wendy; Weatherburn, Don, 'Driving under the influence of cannabis: The problem and potential
countermeasures," Crime and Justice Bulletin, NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (Syndey, Australia: September 2005). p. 11.
http:// www. iawlink .nsw.aov.autlawlinklbocsar'll bocsar. nsfivwFiies %CJB87.pdfl$filei'CJB87.odf
30. According to a literature review of the effects of alcohol on driving, 'As with cannabis, alcohol use increased variability in lane position and
headway (Casswell, 1979; Ramaekers et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981; Stein et al., 1983) but caused faster speeds (Casswell, 1977; Krueger &
Vollrath, 2000; Peck et al., 1986; Smiley et al., 1987; Stein et al., 1983). Some studies also showed that alcohol use alone and in combination
with cannabis affected visual search behavior (Lamers & Ramaekers, 2001; Moskowitz, Ziedman, & Sharma, 1976). Alcohol consumption
combined with cannabis use also worsened driver performance relative to use of either substance alone. Lane position and headway variability
were more exaggerated (Attwood et al., 1981; Ramaekers et al., 2000; Robbe, 1998) and speeds were faster (Peck et al., 1986).
"Both simulator and road studies showed that relative to alcohol use alone, participants who used cannabis alone or in combination with alcohol
were more aware of their intoxication. Robbe (1998) found that participants who consumed 100 g/kg of cannabis rated their performance worse
and the amount of effort required greater compared to those who consumed alcohol (0.05 BAC). Ramaekers et al. (2000) showed that cannabis
use alone and in combination with alcohol consumption increased self- ratings of intoxication and decreased self- ratings of performance. Lamers
and Ramaekers (2001) found that cannabis use alone (100 g/kg) and in combination with alcohol consumption resulted in lower ratings of
alertness, greater perceptions of effort, and worse ratings of performance."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 978.
31. "Both Australian studies suggest cannabis may actually reduce the responsibility rate and lower crash risk. Put another way, cannabis
consumption either increases driving ability or, more likely, drivers who use cannabis make adjustments in driving style to compensate for any
loss of skill (Drummer, 1995). This is consistent with simulator and road studies that show drivers who consumed cannabis slowed down and
drove more cautiously (see Ward & Dye, 1999; Smiley, 1999. This compensation could help reduce the probability of being at fault in a motor
vehicle accident since drivers have more time to respond and avoid a collision. However, it must be noted that any behavioral compensation may
not be sufficient to cope with the reduced safety margin resulting from the impairment of driver functioning and capacity."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, 'Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 980.
32. "When compared to alcohol, cannabis is detected far less often in accident- involved drivers. Drummer et al. (2003) cited several studies and
found that alcohol was detected in 12.5% to 79% of drivers involved in accidents. With regard to crash risk, a large study conducted by
Borkenstein, Crowther, Shumate, Zeil and Zylman (1964) compared BAC in approximately 6,000 accident- involved drivers and 7,600
nonaccident controls. They determined the crash risk for each BAC by comparing the number of accident - involved drivers with detected levels of
alcohol at each BAC to the number of nonaccident control drivers with the same BAC. They found that crash risk increased sharply as BAC
increased. More specifically, at a BAC of 0.10, drivers were approximately five times more likely to be involved in an accident.
"Similar crash risk results were obtained when data for culpable drivers were evaluated. Drummer (1995) found that drivers with detected levels
of alcohol were 7.6 times more likely to be culpable. Longo et al. (2000) showed that drivers who tested positive for alcohol were 8.0 times more
culpable, and alcohol consumption in combination with cannabis use produced an odds ratio of 5.4. Similar results were also noted by Swann
(2000) and Drummer et al. (2003)."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, 'Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 981.
33. "In conclusion, cannabis impairs driving behaviour. However, this impairment is mediated in that subjects under cannabis treatment appear to
perceive that they are indeed impaired. Where they can compensate, they do, for example, by not overtaking, by slowing down and by focusing
their attention when they know a response will be required. However, such compensation is not possible where events are unexpected or where
continuous attention is required. Effects of driving behaviour are present up to an hour after smoking but do not continue for extended periods."
'Thus, not only is it problematic to estimate the percentage of accident involvements associated with cannabis use alone, there is no evidence
that impairment resulting from cannabis use causes accidents. Attempts to alleviate these problems by calculating risk of culpability for an
accident (rather than the risk of having an accident) suggest that cannabis may actually reduce responsibility for accidents."
Source:
Department for Transport, "Cannabis and driving: a review of the literature and commentary (No.12)," (London, United Kingdom: May 2000).
http:�'www.dtt.gov. uk /pgrr'roadsafetviresearcn /rsrr lti,eme3, cannabisanddri. .
34. "Cannabis is only considered a risk factor for traffic accidents if drivers operate vehicles after consuming the drug. Robbe (1994) found that 30%
to 90% of his participants were willing to drive after consuming a typical dose of cannabis. This is consistent with a recent Australian survey in
which more than 50% of users drove after consuming cannabis (Lenne, Fry, Dietze, & Rumbold, 2000). A self administered questionnaire given
to 508 students in grades 10 to 13 in Ontario, Canada, found that 19.7% reported driving within an hour after using cannabis (Adlaf, Mann, &
Paglia, 2003)."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, 'Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 974 -5.
35. "Both simulator and road studies showed that relative to alcohol use alone, participants who used cannabis alone or in combination with alcohol
were more aware of their intoxication. Robbe (1998) found that participants who consumed 100 g/kg of cannabis rated their performance worse
and the amount of effort required greater compared to those who consumed alcohol (0.05 BAC). Ramaekers et al. (2000) showed that cannabis
use alone and in combination with alcohol consumption increased self- ratings of intoxication and decreased self- ratings of performance. Lamers
and Ramaekers (2001) found that cannabis use alone (100 g/kg) and in combination with alcohol consumption resulted in lower ratings of
alertness, greater perceptions of effort, and worse ratings of performance."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 978.
36. A literature review of the effects of cannabis on driving found, "Another paradigm used to assess crash risk is to use cross - sectional surveys of
reported nonfatal accidents that can be related to the presence of risk factors, such as alcohol and cannabis consumption. Such a methodology
was employed in a provocative dissertation by Laixuthai (1994). This study used data from two large surveys that were nationally representative
of high school students in the United States during 1982 and 1989. Results showed that cannabis use was negatively correlated with nonfatal
accidents, but these results can be attributed to changes in the amount of alcohol consumed. More specifically, the decriminalization of cannabis
and the subsequent reduction in penalty cost, as well as a reduced purchase price of cannabis, made cannabis more appealing and affordable
for young consumers. This resulted in more cannabis use, which substituted for alcohol consumption, leading to less frequent and less heavy
drinking. The reduction in the amount of alcohol consumed resulted in fewer nonfatal accidents."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 980 -1.
37. According to a literature review on the effects of cannabis on driving, "Most of the research on cannabis use has been conducted under
laboratory conditions. The literature reviews by Robbe (1994), Hall, Solowij, and Lemon (1994), Border and Norton (1996), and Solowij (1998)
agreed that the most extensive effect of cannabis is to impair memory and attention. Additional deficits include problems with temporal
processing, (complex) reaction times, and dynamic tracking. These conclusions are generally consistent with the psychopharmacological effects
of cannabis mentioned above, including problems with attention, memory, motor coordination, and alertness.
"A meta - analysis by Kruger and Berghaus (1995) profiled the effects of cannabis and alcohol. They reviewed 197 published studies of alcohol
and 60 studies of cannabis. Their analysis showed that 50% of the reported effects were significant at a BAC of 0.073 g /dI and a THC level of 11
ng /ml. This implies that if the legal BAC threshold for alcohol is 0.08 g /dl, the corresponding level of THC that would impair the same percentage
of tests would be approximately 11 ng /ml."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 975 -6.
38. "Several studies have examined cannabis use in driving simulator and on -road situations. The most comprehensive review was done by Smiley
in 1986 and then again in 1999. Several trends are evident and can be described by three general performance characteristics:
"1. Cannabis increased variability of speed and headway as well as lane position (Attwood, Williams, McBurney, & Frecker, 1981; Ramaekers,
Robbe, & O'Hanlon, 2000; Robbe, 1998; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley, Moskowitz, & Zeidman, 1981; Smiley, Noy, & Tostowaryk, 1987). This was
more pronounced under high workload and unexpected conditions, such as curves and wind gusts.
"2. Cannabis increased the time needed to overtake another vehicle (Dott, 1972 [as cited in Smiley, 1986]) and delayed responses to both
secondary and tracking tasks (Casswell, 1977; Moskowitz, Hulbert, & McGlothlin,
1976; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981).
"3. Cannabis resulted in fewer attempts to overtake another vehide(Dott, 1972) and larger distances required to pass (Ellingstad et al., 1973 [as
cited in Smiley, 1986]). Evidence of increased caution also included slower speeds (Casswell, 1977; Hansteen, Miller, Lonero, Reid, & Jones,
1976; Krueger & Vollrath, 2000; Peck, Biasotti, Boland, Mallory, & Reeve, 1986; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981; Stein, Allen, Cook, &
Karl, 1983) and larger headways (Robbe, 1998; Smiley et al., 1987)."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 977 -8.
39. Marijuana - Legal Issues
The U.S. Penal Code violations for marijuana and possible sentences:
Violation: "1000 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 1,000 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not "less than 10 years or more than life" °No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during the term of
imprisonment imposed therein."
Violation: "100 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 100 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not °less than 5 years and not more than 40 years" "No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during
the term of imprisonment imposed therein."
Violation: "less than 50 kilograms of marihuana, except in the case of 50 or more marihuana plants regardless of weight, 10 kilograms of
hashish, or one kilogram of hashish oil"
Sentence: "not more than 5 years, a fine not to exceed the greater of that authorized in accordance with the provisions of title 18 or $250,000 if
the defendant is an individual or $1 ,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, or both."
Source:
21 USC Part D - Offenses and Penalties 1/22/02 http://www.usdagovidealpubs!csa:841.htm#b
40. In May of 1998, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, National Working Group on Addictions Policy released policy a discussion document
which recommended, 'The severity of punishment for a cannabis possession charge should be reduced. Specifically, cannabis possession
should be converted to a civil violation under the Contraventions Act." The paper further noted that, "The available evidence indicates that
removal of jail as a sentencing option would lead to considerable cost savings without leading to increases in rates of cannabis use."
Source:
Single, Eric, Cannabis Control in Canada: Options Regarding Possession (Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, May 1998).
h i:y t €' +tl %'l I' / ri fr= 'r /`_•br r /studies/cart al .h`m
41. 'There is no evidence that the depenalization component of the 1976 policy, per se, increased levels of cannabis use. On the other hand, the
later growth in commercial access to cannabis, after de facto legalization, was accompanied by steep increases in use, even among youth. In
interpreting that association, three points deserve emphasis. First, the association may not be causal; we have already seen that recent
increases occurred in the United States and Oslo despite very different policies. Second, throughout most of the first two decades of the 1976
policy, Dutch use levels have remained at or below those in the United States. And third, it remains to be seen whether prevalence levels will
drop again in response to the reduction to a 5 -g limit, and to recent government efforts to dose down coffee shops and more aggressively
enforce the regulations."
Source:
MacCoun, Robert and Reuter, Peter, "Interpreting Dutch Cannabis Policy: Reasoning by Analogy in the Legalization Debate," Science (New
York, NY: American Association for the Advancement of Science, October 3, 1997), pp. 50 -51.
http : /iwww. science -nag, o rg,'cgilreprint /278/5335147,odf
42. "In California and Ohio, surveys before and after decriminalisation showed that cannabis use increased, but not at a greater rate than in US
states which had not decriminalised cannabis. Single (1989) also reviewed data from two large US national surveys of drug use in the 1970s that
compared rates of cannabis use in states which had and had not decriminalised cannabis. He found that the prevalence of cannabis use
increased in all states, with a larger increase in those states which had not decriminalised (Single, 1989)."
Source:
Donnelly, Neil; Hall, Wayne; Christie, Paul, "Cannabis Expiation Notice Scheme on levels and patterns of cannabis use in South Australia:
evidence from the National Drug Strategy Household Surveys 1985 - 1995," Department of Health and Aged Care (Canberra, Australia: May
1998), p. 12.
http :i;www.heaith.uov.aulinternet mainlpuci skiing. nstiContentl332D63EE'OEOEOC33Cr 257037 00041 D I File,'rn ono37.Gdf
43. The available evidence suggests that removal of the prohibition against possession itself (decriminalization) does not increase cannabis use. In
addition to the Dutch experience from 1976 to 1983, we have similar findings from analysis of weaker decriminalization (with fines retained for
the offense of simple possession of small quantities) in 12 US states (Single, 1989) and South Australia and the Australian Capital Territory (Hall,
1997; McGeorge & Aitken, 1997). The fact that Italy and Spain, which have decriminalized possession for all psychoactive drugs, have
marijuana use rates comparable to those of neighboring countries provides further support."
Source:
MacCoun, Robert and Reuter, Peter, "Evaluating alternative cannabis regimes," British Journal of Psychiatry (London, United Kingdom:
American Royal College of Psychiatrists, February, 2001) Vol. 178, p. 127.
1"ltfp:ill3jr3.reosytch.c rgicgilrL - if
44. The Canadian Senate's Special Committee on Illegal Drugs recommended in its 2002 final report on cannabis policy that "the Government of
Canada amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to create a criminal exemption scheme. This legislation should stipulate the conditions
for obtaining licenses as well as for producing and selling cannabis; criminal penalties for illegal trafficking and export; and the preservation of
criminal penalties for all activities falling outside the scope of the exemption scheme.°
Source:
"Cannabis: Our Position for a Canadian Public Policy,' report of the Canadian Senate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs (Ottawa, Canada:
Senate of Canada, September 2002), p. 46.
http:i www .oarl.ac.ca?37111oaribuslconm us lsenatelcom elilie elrep eisu m...
45. "Our conclusion is that the present taw on cannabis produces more harm than it prevents. It is very expensive of the time and resources of the
criminal justice system and especially of the police. It inevitably bears more heavily on young people in the streets of inner cities, who are also
more likely to be from minority ethnic communities, and as such is inimical to police- community relations. tt criminalizes large numbers of
otherwise law- abiding, mainly young, people to the detriment of their futures. It has become a proxy for the control of public order; and it inhibits
accurate education about the relative risks of different drugs including the risks of cannabis itself.'
Source:
Police Foundation of the United Kingdom, "Drugs and the Law: Report of the Independent Inquiry into the Misuse of Drugs Act of 1971", April 4,
2000. The Police Foundation, based in London, England, is a nonprofit organization presided over by Charles, Crown Prince of Wales, which
promotes research, debate and publication to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of policing in the UK.
46. Commissioned by President Nixon in 1972, the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse concluded that "Marihuana's relative
potential for harm to the vast majority of individual users and its actual impact on society does not justify a social policy designed to seek out and
firmly punish those who use it. This judgment is based on prevalent use patterns, on behavior exhibited by the vast majority of users and on our
interpretations of existing medical and scientific data. This position also is consistent with the estimate by law enforcement personnel that the
elimination of use is unattainable."
Source:
Shafer, Raymond P., et al, Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding, Ch. V, (Washington DC: National Commission on Marihuana and Drug
Abuse, 1972).
http:i/drugt brarv.nerlschaferi !hrarv. /studiesincincrec.htm
47. (cannabis and memory) "Nevertheless, when considering all 15 studies (i.e., those that met both strict and more relaxed criteria) we only noted
that regular cannabis users performed worse on memory tests, but that the magnitude of the effect was very small. The small magnitude of
effect sizes from observations of chronic users of cannabis suggests that cannabis compounds, if found to have therapeutic value, should have
a good margin of safety from a neurocognitive standpoint under the more limited conditions of exposure that would likely obtain in a medical
setting."
Source:
Grant, Igor, et al., °Non -Acute (Residual) Neurocognitive Effects Of Cannabis Use: A Meta- Analytic Study," Journal of the International
Neuropsychologicaf Society (Cambridge University Press: July 2003), 9, pp. 687 -8.
ht, ilwww.csci.p,oto researct3f3i8a;t2003.od
•
48. Since 1969, government - appointed commissions in the United States, Canada, England, Australia, and the Netherlands concluded, after
reviewing the scientific evidence, that marijuana's dangers had previously been greatly exaggerated, and urged lawmakers to drastically reduce
or eliminate penalties for marijuana possession.
Source:
Advisory Committee on Drug Dependence, Cannabis (London, England: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1969); Canadian Government
Commission of Inquiry, The Non - Medical Use of Drugs (Ottawa, Canada: Information Canada, 1970); The National Commission on Marihuana
and Drug Abuse, Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding, (Nixon - Shafer Report) (Washington, DC: USGPO, 1972); Werkgroep Verdovende
Middelen, Background and Risks of Drug Use (The Hague, The Netherlands: Staatsuigeverij, 1972); Senate Standing Committee on Social
Welfare, Drug Problems in Australia -An Intoxicated Society (Canberra, Australia: Australian Government Publishing Service, 1977); Advisory
Council on the Misuse of Drugs, The classification of cannabis under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971' (London, England, UK: Home Office,
March 2002), available on the web from http:` /druos.homeotfice.gov.uk /publication search /acmd/ /cannabis class - mi... ; House of Commons Home
Affairs Committee Third Report, "The Government's Drugs Policy: Is It Working ?" (London, England, UK: Parliament, May 9, 2002), from the web
at http;tlwww. publicat ions. pad iamertuK/ pa// cr200102 /croselecticmhaff/318.31,.. and "Cannabis: Our Position for a Canadian Public Policy,"
report of the Canadian Senate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs (Ottawa, Canada: Senate of Canada, September 2002).
49. "To prove their compliance with this policy, patients are subjected to blood and urine toxicology screening until [organ] transplantation. If a
patient tests positive for a prohibited substance after signing this substance abuse policy, he or she will no longer be considered a candidate for
liver transplantation at any center in Region 10.
"Substance abuse policies are necessary to help ensure that potential liver transplant recipients will be reliable stewards of the new organ.
Despite this, concern exists that substance abuse policies may have an inappropriate and disproportionate impact on marijuana users. Firstly,
many in the general public would argue that marijuana users should not have limited access to transplantation, particularly within the context of
medical marijuana (6, 11). As an example, in May 2008, significant press coverage was given to the case of Timothy Garon, who reportedly died
after having been refused a liver transplant, in part, because of his use of medical marijuana (12). Secondly, current toxicology screening
methods produce a positive toxicology screen for cannabinoids up to two months after the patient's last use (13). In contrast, other toxicology
screening tests such as those for cocaine and alcohol become negative shortly after use. As a result, it may be more difficult for chronic
marijuana users to demonstrate abstinence prior to life- ending decompensation of their liver disease."
"Overall, the survival of marijuana users, as defined by this manuscript, with chronic liver disease who present for transplant evaluation is not
significantly different from marijuana non- users."
Source:
Ranneya, D. N.; Ackera, W. B.; Al- Holoua, S. N.; Ehrlichmana, L.; Leea, D. S.; Lewina, S. A.; Nguyena, C.; Petersona, S. F.; Sella, K.; Kubusa,
J.; Reidb, D.; and Englesbea, M. J., "Marijuana Use in Potential Liver Transplant Candidates," American Joumal of Transplantation (Edmonton,
Alberta: 2009) Vol. 8, Issue 2, pp. 280 and 284.
ht tt p : / /www3.interscience.wi!ey.com/ - binrfulitext-121545468 /PDFSTART
50. The World Health Organization noted that, while some studies indicate that adolescents who use marijuana might be more likely to drop out of
high school and experience job instability in young adulthood, 'the apparent strength of these cross - sectional studies ... has been exaggerated
because those adolescents who are most likely to use cannabis have lower academic aspirations and poorer high school performance prior to
using cannabis, than their peers who do not."
Source:
Hall, W., Room, R., & Bondy, S., WHO Project on Health Implications of Cannabis Use: A Comparative Appraisal of the Health and
Psychological Consequences of Alcohol, Cannabis, Nicotine and Opiate Use August 28, 1995 (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization,
1998).
http: / /www.druglibrary .ref /schaffer/ emo/ge: era!/who ro ;ab1:.e.htm
51. When examining the relationship between marijuana use and violent crime, the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse concluded,
"Rather than inducing violent or aggressive behavior through its purported effects of lowering inhibitions, weakening impulse control and
heightening aggressive tendencies, marihuana was usually found to inhibit the expression of aggressive impulses by pacifying the user,
interfering with muscular coordination, reducing psychomotor activities and generally producing states of drowsiness lethargy, timidity and
passivity."
Source:
Shafer, Raymond P., et al, Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding, Ch. 111, (Washington DC: National Commission on Marihuana and Drug
Abuse, 1972).
htt / druq'sibrarti.net/schaffer /L ibrarv/studies / /ncincc3.htm
52. In an ethnographic study of adolescents who were regular marijuana users, researchers at the University of British Columbia, concluded,
"Thematic analysis revealed that these teens differentiated themselves from recreational users and positioned their use of marijuana for relief by
emphasizing their inability to find other ways to deal with their health problems, the sophisticated ways in which they titrated their intake, and the
benefits that they experienced. These teens used marijuana to gain relief from difficult feelings (including depression, anxiety and stress), sleep
difficulties, problems with concentration and physical pain. Most were not overly concerned about the risks associated with using marijuana,
•
maintaining that their use of marijuana was not in excess' and that their use fit into the realm of 'normal.'
Conclusion: Marijuana is perceived by some teens to be the only available alternative for teens experiencing difficult health problems when
medical treatments have failed or when they lack access to appropriate health care."
Source:
Bottorff, Joan L , Johnson, Joy L, Moffat, Barbara M, and Mulvogue, Tamsin, °Relief- oriented use of marijuana by teens," Joumal of Substance
Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy (Vancouver, BC: April 2009), pp. 4 -7.
http: // /www. subst anceabuseophey.co€rucontentlodf /1747 - 597 X 4 - 7.odt
53. "Nonetheless, and contrary to our expectations, we found no positive associations between marijuana use and lung or UAT cancers ... Despite
several lines of evidence suggesting the biological plausibility of marijuana use being carcinogenic (1), it is possible that marijuana use does not
increase cancer risk, as suggested in the recent commentary by Melamede."
Source:
Mia Hashibe, Hal Morgenstern, Yan Cui, Donald P. Tashkin, Zuo -Feng Zhang, Wendy Cozen, Thomas M. Mack, and Sander Greenland,
"Marijuana Use and the Risk of Lung and Upper Aerodigestive Tract Cancers: Results of a Population -Based Case - Control Study," Cancer
Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention (October 2006), p. 1833.
http:i/ cebo. aacrioumais.ora /content / 15/10/ ull. odf
54. Adolescents - Monitoring the Future Report
"A study of the effects of decriminalization by several states during the late 1970s found no evidence of any impact on the use of marijuana
among young people, nor on attitudes and beliefs concerning its use. However, it should be noted that decriminalization falls well short of the
full legalization posited in the questions here. Moreover, the situation today is very different than it was in the late 1970s, with much more peer
disapproval and more rigorous enforcement of drug laws. More recent studies suggest that there may be an impact of decriminalization, such
that 'youths living in decriminalized states are significantly more likely to report currently using marijuana.'"
Source:
Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2009). Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975-
2008: Volume I, Secondary school students (NIH Publication No. 09- 7402). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse. p. 362.
http : / /www.monitoringthefut +ure.org /pubs /monoaraphs /volt 2008.pdf
55. Most 12th graders felt that they would be little affected personally by the legalization of either the sale or the use of marijuana. About three fifths
(61 %) of the respondents said that they would not use the drug even if it were legal to buy and use, while others indicated they would use it
about as often as they do now (15 %) or less often (1.4 %). Only 5.5% said they would use it more often than they do at present, while another
8.9% thought they would try it. (Nine percent said they did not know how their behavior would be affected if marijuana were legalized.) Still, this
amounts to 14.4 %, or about one in seven who state that they would try marijuana, or their use would increase, if marijuana were legalized."
Source:
Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2009). Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975-
2008: Volume 1, Secondary school students (NIH Publication No. 09- 7402). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse. p. 362.
http : / /www.monitorin.thefuture.or ./ ubsinono _raohs / /vo,1 2008. ,cif
56. As shown in Table 8 -8, about equal proportions of 12th graders in 2008 believed that marijuana use should be (a) entirely legal (29 %); (b) a
minor violation like a parking ticket, but not a crime (30%); or (c) a crime (28 %). (The remaining 13% said they'dont know.')
"Asked whether they thought it should be legal to sell marijuana if it were legal to use it, just over half (56%) said 'yes.' However, four fifths of
those answering 'yes' (46% of all respondents) would permit the sale only to adults. Only a small minority (10%) favored the sale to anyone,
regardless of age, while 31 % said that sale should not be legal even if use were made legal, and 13% said they 'don't know.'"
Source:
Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2009). Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975-
2008: Volume I, Secondary school students (NIH Publication No. 09- 7402). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse. p. 362.
ht t.:/ /www.monitorin.thefuture.or /.ubs /mono ra hs /von 1 2008..df
57. "Ever since the study began in 1975, between 83% and 90% of seniors each year have said that they could get marijuana fairly easily or very
easily if they wanted some. It has been considerably less accessible to younger adolescents. Still, in 2008 nearly two fifths of 8th graders (39 %)
and two thirds of 10th graders (67 %) reported it as being accessible. This compares to 84% for seniors."
Source:
Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2009). Monitoring the Future national results on adolescent drug use:
Overview of key findings, 2008 (NIH Publication No. 09- 7401). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, p. 12.
http:i /monitoring thefuture. org / pubs /monociraphs /overview2008. pdf
58. "Annual marijuana prevalence peaked among 12th graders in 1979 at 51 %, following a rise that began during the 1960s. Then use declined fairly
steadily for 13 years, bottoming at 22% in 1992 —a decline of more than half. The 1990s, however, saw a resurgence of use. After a
considerable increase (one that actually began among 8th graders a year earlier than among 10th and 12th graders), annual prevalence rates
peaked in 1996 at 8th grade and in 1997 at 10th and 12th grades. After 1996 there was a continuing gradual dedine among 8th graders through
2007, with a pause in 2005. Considering the small increase in 2008, use now is down from the 1996 peak level by about two fifths. In the upper
grades, only a very modest decline occurred between 1997 and 2002, followed by a continuing gradual decline. In 10th grade, the decline
continued through 2008; while for 12th graders, it hatted in 2007 and then use rose slightly in 2008."
Source:
Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2009). Monitoring the Future national results on adolescent drug use:
Overview of key findings, 2008 (N1H Publication No. 09- 7401). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, p. 12.
►�ttp / /m Etas ng'hefutu�e rgpubs'rroro �a rs overvipsv2 €
59. Institute of Medicine - Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base -1999
At this point, our knowledge about the biology of marijuana and cannabinoids allows us to make some general conclusions:
Cannabinoids likely have a natural role in pain modulation, control of movement, and memory.
• The natural role of cannabinoids in immune systems is likely multi- faceted and remains unclear.
• The brain develops tolerance to cannabinoids.
• Animal research demonstrates the potential for dependence, but this potential is observed under a narrower range of conditions than with
benzodiazepines, opiates, cocaine, or nicotine.
• Withdrawal symptoms can be observed in animals but appear to be mild compared to opiates or benzodiazepines, such as diazepam (Valium)."
Source:
Janet E. Joy, Stanley J. Watson, Jr., and John A Benson, Jr., "Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base," Division of Neuroscience
and Behavioral Research, Institute of Medicine (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999), p. 3.
http :llbooks.na .edu /openbook.php ?record id =6376 &pane =3
60. (2003) Researchers examining the effectiveness of the ONDCP's Youth Anti -Drug Media Campaign reported in late 2003 that, 'The NSPY
[National Survey of Parents and Youth] did not find significant reductions in marijuana use either leading up to or after the Marijuana campaign
for youth 12 to 18 years old between 2002 and 2003. Indeed there was evidence for an increase in past month and past year use among the
target audience of 14- to 16- year -olds, although it appears that the increase was already in place in the last half of 2002, before the launch of the
Marijuana Initiative. It will be worthwhile to track whether the nonsignificant decline from the second half of 2002 through the first half of 2003 is
the beginning of a true trend. There was a significant decrease in lifetime marijuana use among youth 16 to 18 years of age from 2002 to 2003;
however, since this significant decrease was not replicated in either the directly relevant past year or past month time periods, it is difficult to
ascribe the change to the campaign."
Source:
Hornik, Robert, David Maklan, Diane Cadell, Carlin Henry Barmada, Lela Jacobsohn, Vani R. Henderson, Anca Romantan, Jeffrey Niederdeppe,
Robert Orwin, Sanjeev Sridharan, Adam Chu, Carol Morin, Kristie Taylor, Diane Steele, "Evaluation of the National Youth Anti -Drug Media
Campaign: 2003 Report of Findings," Delivered to National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and
Human Services By Westat & the Annenberg School for Communication, Contract No. N01 DA -8 -5063, December 22, 2003, p. 4 -15.
itt" w' sr a h ' e.. v . ! ex; renort. df
61. In March 1999, the Institute of Medicine issued a report on various aspects of marijuana, including the so- called Gateway Theory (the theory that
using marijuana leads people to use harder drugs like cocaine and heroin). The IOM stated: "There is no conclusive evidence that the drug
effects of marijuana are causally linked to the subsequent abuse of other illicit drugs."
Source:
Janet E. Joy, Stanley J. Watson, Jr., and John A Benson, Jr., "Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base,' Division of Neuroscience
and Behavioral Research, Institute of Medicine (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999), p. 6.
http: / /books.nap.edulopenbook .oho ?isbn = (?309071550 &paoe=6
62. A 1999 federal report conducted by the Institute of Medicine found that, For most people, the primary adverse effect of acute marijuana use is
diminished psychomotor performance. It is, therefore, inadvisable to operate any vehicle or potentially dangerous equipment while under the
influence of marijuana, THC, or any cannabinoid drug with comparable effects."
Source:
Janet E. Joy, Stanley J. Watson, Jr., and John A Benson, Jr., "Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base," Division of Neuroscience
and Behavioral Research, Institute of Medicine (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999), p. 125 -126.
httr }:i /books.nau.eduloDenbook.ohp ?record id= 6376 &gage =125
63. The Institute of Medicine's 1999 report on marijuana explained that marijuana has been mistaken for a gateway drug in the past because
"Patterns in progression of drug use from adolescence to adulthood are strikingly regular. Because it is the most widely used illicit drug,
marijuana is predictably the first illicit drug most people encounter. Not surprisingly, most users of other illicit drugs have used marijuana first. In
fact, most drug users begin with alcohol and nicotine before marijuana, usually before they are of legal age.'
Source:
Janet E. Joy, Stanley J. Watson, Jr., and John A Benson, Jr., 'Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base," Division of Neuroscience
and Behavioral Research, Institute of Medicine (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999), p. 99.
} . /;•c k i . . 1 !.,'fl' ' s k. si. 2r - . r _ .rd '.=•,
and 60 studies of cannabis. Their analysis showed that 50% of the reported effects were significant at a BAC of 0.073 g /dl and a THC level of 11
ng /ml. This implies that if the legal BAC threshold for alcohol is 0.08 g/dI, the corresponding level of THC that would impair the same percentage
of tests would be approximately 11 ng/ml."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 975-6.
38. "Several studies have examined cannabis use in driving simulator and on -road situations. The most comprehensive review was done by Smiley
in 1986 and then again in 1999. Several trends are evident and can be described by three general performance characteristics:
"1. Cannabis increased variability of speed and headway as well as lane position (Attwood, Wililams, McBumey, & Frecker, 1981; Ramaekers,
Robbe, & O'Hanlon, 2000; Robbe, 1998; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley, Moskowitz, & Zeidman, 1981; Smiley, Noy, & Tostowaryk, 1987). This was
more pronounced under high workload and unexpected conditions, such as curves and wind gusts.
"2. Cannabis increased the time needed to overtake another vehicle (Dott, 1972 [as cited in Smiley, 1986]) and delayed responses to both
secondary and tracking tasks (Casswell, 1977; Moskowitz, Hulbert, & McGlothlin,
1976; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981).
"3. Cannabis resulted in fewer attempts to overtake another vehide(Dott, 1972) and larger distances required to pass (Ellingstad et al., 1973 [as
cited in Smiley, 1986]). Evidence of increased caution also included slower speeds (Casswell, 1977; Hansteen, Miler, Lonero, Reid, & Jones,
1976; Krueger & Vollrath, 2000; Peck, Biasotti, Boland, Mallory, & Reeve, 1986; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981; Stein, Allen, Cook, &
Karl, 1983) and larger headways (Robbe, 1998; Smiley et al., 1987)."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 977 -8.
39. Marijuana - Legal Issues
The U.S. Penal Code violations for marijuana and possible sentences:
Violation: "1000 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 1,000 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not 'less than 10 years or more than life" 'No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during the term of
imprisonment imposed therein."
Violation: "100 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 100 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not "less than 5 years and not more than 40 years" "No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during
the term of imprisonment imposed therein."
Violation: "less than 50 kilograms of marihuana, except in the case of 50 or more marihuana plants regardless of weight, 10 kilograms of
hashish, or one kilogram of hashish oil"
Sentence: "not more than 5 years, a fine not to exceed the greater of that authorized in accordance with the provisions of title 18 or $250,000 if
the defendant is an individual or $1,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, or both."
Source:
21 USC Part D - Offenses and Penalties 1/22/02 http :J1www.usdoj.gov /dea /Rubs /csa/841.htm#b
40. In May of 1998, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, National Working Group on Addictions Policy released policy a discussion document
which recommended, "The severity of punishment for a cannabis possession charge should be reduced. Specifically, cannabis possession
should be converted to a civil violation under the Contraventions Act." The paper further noted that, "The available evidence indicates that
removal of jail as a sentencing option would lead to considerable cost savings without leading to increases in rates of cannabis use."
Source:
Single, Eric, Cannabis Control in Canada: Options Regarding Possession (Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, May 1998).
ttp : / /www.dru /Library /studieslcanfinal ?.hum
41. "There is no evidence that the depenalization component of the 1976 policy, per se, increased levels of cannabis use. On the other hand, the
later growth in commercial access to cannabis, after de facto legalization, was accompanied by steep increases in use, even among youth. In
interpreting that association, three points deserve emphasis. First, the association may not be causal; we have already seen that recent
increases occurred in the United States and Oslo despite very different policies. Second, throughout most of the first two decades of the 1976
policy, Dutch use levels have remained at or below those in the United States. And third, it remains to be seen whether prevalence levels will
drop again in response to the reduction to a 5-g limit, and to recent government efforts to close down coffee shops and more aggressively
enforce the regulations."
Source:
■acCoun, Robert and Reuter, Peter, "Interpreting Dutch Cannabis Policy: Reasoning by Analogy in the Legalization Debate," Science (New
and 60 studies of cannabis. Their analysis showed that 50% of the reported effects were significant at a BAC of 0.073 g /dl and a THC level of 11
ng /ml. This implies that if the legal BAC threshold for alcohol is 0.08 g/d1, the corresponding level of THC that would impair the same percentage
of tests would be approximately 11 ng/ml."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 975 -6.
38. "Several studies have examined cannabis use in driving simulator and on -road situations. The most comprehensive review was done by Smiley
in 1986 and then again in 1999. Several trends are evident and can be described by three general performance characteristics:
"1. Cannabis increased variability of speed and headway as well as lane position (Attwood, Wdlams, McBurney, & Frecker, 1981; Ramaekers,
Robbe, & O'Hanlon, 2000; Robbe, 1998; Sexton et al, 2000; Smiley, Moskowitz, & Zeidman, 1981; Smiley, Noy, & Tostowaryk, 1987). This was
more pronounced under high workload and unexpected conditions, such as curves and wind gusts.
"2. Cannabis increased the time needed to overtake another vehicle (Dott, 1972 [as cited in Smiley, 1986]) and delayed responses to both
secondary and tracking tasks ( Casswell, 1977; Moskowitz, Hulbert, & McGlothlin,
1976; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981).
"3. Cannabis resulted in fewer attempts to overtake another vehide(Dott, 1972) and larger distances required to pass (Ellingstad et al., 1973 [as
cited in Smiley, 1986]). Evidence of increased caution also included slower speeds (Casswell, 1977; Hansteen, Nilk:r, Lonero, Reid, & Jones,
1976; Krueger & Vollrath, 2000; Peck, Biasotti, Boland, Mallory, & Reeve, 1986; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981; Stein, Allen, Cook, &
Karl, 1983) and larger headways (Robbe, 1998; Smiley et al., 1987)."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 977 -8.
39. Marijuana - Legal Issues
The U.S. Penal Code violations for marijuana and possible sentences:
Violation: "1000 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 1,000 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: riot 'less than 10 years or more than life" "No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during the term of
imprisonment imposed therein."
Violation: "100 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 100 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not "less than 5 years and not more than 40 years" "No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during
the term of imprisonment imposed therein."
Violation: "less than 50 kilograms of marihuana, except in the case of 50 or more marihuana plants regardless of weight, 10 kilograms of
hashish, or one kilogram of hashish oil"
Sentence: "not more than 5 years, a fine not to exceed the greater of that authorized in accordance with the provisions of title 18 or $250,000 if
the defendant is an individual or $1,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, or both."
Source:
21 USC Part D - Offenses and Penalties 1/22/02 http: rwww. usdoj .gov /dea/pubs /csa. /841.htm#b
40. In May of 1998, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, National Working Group on Addictions Policy released policy a discussion document
which recommended, "The severity of punishment for a cannabis possession charge should be reduced. Specifically, cannabis possession
should be converted to a civil violation under the Contraventions Act." The paper further noted that, "The available evidence indicates that
removal of jail as a sentencing option would lead to considerable cost savings without leading to increases in rates of cannabis use."
Source:
Single, Eric, Cannabis Control in Canada: Options Regarding Possession (Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, May 1998).
htfo: ii www, druglibrarv.netischaffer/l .ibrarylstudieslcanfinal2. htm
41. "There is no evidence that the depenalization component of the 1976 policy, per se, increased levels of cannabis use. On the other hand, the
later growth in commercial access to cannabis, after de facto legalization, was accompanied by steep increases in use, even among youth. In
interpreting that association, three points deserve emphasis. First, the association may not be causal; we have already seen that recent
increases occurred in the United States and Oslo despite very different polities. Second, throughout most of the first two decades of the 1976
policy, Dutch use levels have remained at or below those in the United States. And third, it remains to be seen whether prevalence levels will
drop again in response to the reduction to a 5-g limit, and to recent government efforts to dose down coffee shops and more aggressively
enforce the regulations."
Source:
MacCoun, Robert and Reuter, Peter, °.Interpreting Dutch Cannabis Policy: Reasoning by Analogy in the Legalization Debate," Science (New
and 60 studies of cannabis. Their analysis showed that 50% of the reported effects were significant at a BAC of 0.073 g/dl and a THC level of 11
ng /ml. This implies that if the legal BAC threshold for alcohol is 0.08 g/dl, the corresponding level of THC that would impair the same percentage
of tests would be approximately 11 ng/mt•
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, °Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 975-6.
38. "Several studies have examined cannabis use in driving simulator and on -road situations. The most comprehensive review was done by Smiley
in 1986 and then again in 1999. Several trends are evident and can be described by three general performance characteristics:
"1. Cannabis increased variability of speed and headway as well as lane position (Attwood, Williams, McBumey, & Frecker, 1981; Ramaekers,
Robbe, & O'Hanlon, 2000; Robbe, 1998; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley, Moskowitz, & Zeidman, 1981; Smiley, Noy, & Tostowaryk, 1987). This was
more pronounced under high workload and unexpected conditions, such as curves and wind gusts.
"2. Cannabis increased the time needed to overtake another vehicle (Dott, 1972 [as cited in Smiley, 1986]) and delayed responses to both
secondary and tracking tasks (Casswell, 1977; Moskowitz, Hulbert, & McGlothlin,
1976; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981).
"3. Cannabis resulted in fewer attempts to overtake another vehide(Dott, 1972) and larger distances required to pass (Ellingstad et al, 1973 [as
cited in Smiley, 1986]). Evidence of increased caution also included slower speeds (Casswell, 1977; Hansteen, Miler, Lonero, Reid, & Jones,
1976; Krueger & Vollrath, 2000; Peck, Biasotti, Boland, Mallory, & Reeve, 1986; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981; Stein, Allen, Cook, &
Karl, 1983) and larger headways ( Robbe, 1998; Smiley et al., 1987).'
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 977 -8.
39. Marijuana - Legal Issues
The U.S. Penal Code violations for marijuana and possible sentences:
Violation: "1000 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 1,000 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not "less than 10 years or more than life" No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during the term of
imprisonment imposed therein.'
Violation: '100 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 100 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not 'less than 5 years and not more than 40 years "No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during
the term of imprisonment imposed therein.'
Violation: "less than 50 kilograms of marihuana, except in the case of 50 or more marihuana plants regardless of weight, 10 kilograms of
hashish, or one kilogram of hashish oil
Sentence: "not more than 5 years, a fine not to exceed the greater of that authorized in accordance with the provisions of title 18 or $250,000 if
the defendant is an individual or $1,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, or both.'
Source:
21 USC Part D - Offenses and Penalties 1/22/02 httpJ/ www. usdoygov /deaipubs/csa /841.htm;fb
40. In May of 1998, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, National Working Group on Addictions Policy released policy a discussion document
which recommended, 'The severity of punishment for a cannabis possession Charge should be reduced. Specifically, cannabis possession
should be converted to a civil violation under the Contraventions Act." The paper further noted that, "The available evidence indicates that
removal of jail as a sentencing option would lead to considerable cost savings without leading to increases in rates of cannabis use."
Source:
Single, Eric, Cannabis Control in Canada: Options Regarding Possession (Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, May 1998).
http://www.druglibraoinet/schaffer/Library/stild ifLS_ ifaatOn . htm
41. "There is no evidence that the depenalization component of the 1976 policy, per se, increased levels of cannabis use. On the other hand, the
later growth in commercial access to cannabis, after de facto legalization, was accompanied by steep increases in use, even among youth. In
interpreting that association, three points deserve emphasis. First, the association may not be causal; we have already seen that recent
increases occurred in the United States and Oslo despite very different polices. Second, throughout most of the first two decades of the 1976
policy, Dutch use levels have remained at or below those in the United States. And third, it remains to be seen whether prevalence levels will
drop again in response to the reduction to a 5 -g limit, and to recent government efforts to dose down coffee shops and more aggressively
enforce the regulations.'
Source:
MacCoun, Robert and Reuter, Peter, °Interpreting Dutch Cannabis Policy: Reasoning by Analogy in the Legalization Debate," Science (New
and 60 studies of cannabis. Their analysis showed that 50% of the reported effects were significant at a BAC of 0.073 g /dl and a THC level of 11
ng /ml. This implies that if the legal BAC threshold for alcohol is 0.08 g/dl, the corresponding level of THC that would impair the same percentage
of tests would be approximately 11 ng/ml.'
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 975 -6.
38. "Several studies have examined cannabis use in driving simulator and on -road situations. The most comprehensive review was done by Smiley
in 1986 and then again in 1999. Several trends are evident and can be described by three general performance characteristics:
"1. Cannabis increased variability of speed and headway as weft as lane position (Attwood, Wilhams, McBurney, & Frecker, 1981; Ramaekers,
Robbe, & O'Hanlon, 2000; Robbe, 1998; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley, Moskowitz, & Zeidman, 1981; Smiley, Noy, & Tostowaryk, 1987). This was
more pronounced under high workload and unexpected conditions, such as curves and wind gusts.
"2. Cannabis increased the time needed to overtake another vetude (Doff, 1972 [as cited in Smiley, 1986]) and delayed responses to both
secondary and tracking tasks (Casswell, 1977; Moskowitz, Hulbert, & McGlothlin,
1976; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981).
"3. Cannabis resulted in fewer attempts to overtake another vehide(Dott, 1972) and larger distances required to pass (Ellingstad et al., 1973 [as
cited in Smiley, 1986]). Evidence of increased caution also included slower speeds (Casswell, 1977; Hansteen, Miller, Lonero, Reid, & Jones,
1976; Krueger & Vollrath, 2000; Peck, Biasotti, Boland, Mallory, & Reeve, 1986; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981; Stein, Allen, Cook, &
Karl, 1983) and larger headways ( Robbe, 1998; Smiley et al., 1987)."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 977 -8.
39. Marijuana - Legal Issues
The U.S. Penal Code violations for marijuana and possible sentences:
Violation: "1000 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount ol marihuana, or 1,000 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not 'less than 10 years or more than life' No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during the term of
imprisonment imposed therein.'
Violation: "100 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 100 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not less than 5 years and not more than 40 years" "No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during
the term of imprisonment imposed therein.'
Violation: "less than 50 kilograms of marihuana, except in the case of 50 or more marihuana plants regardless of weight, 10 kilograms of
hashish, or one kilogram of hashish oil"
Sentence: "not more than 5 years, a fine not to exceed the greater of that authorized in accordance with the provisions of title 18 or $250,000 if
the defendant is an individual or $1 ,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, or both."
Source:
21 USC Part D - Offenses and Penalties 1/22/02 http:/ iwww. usdoi .aov /deaipubs!csa. /841.htm #b
40. In May of 1998, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, National Working Group on Addictions Policy released policy a discussion document
which recommended, "The severity of punishment for a cannabis possession charge should be reduced. Specifically, cannabis possession
should be converted to a civil violation under the Contraventions Act.' The paper further noted that, 'The available evidence indicates that
removal of jail as a sentencing option would lead to considerable cost savings without leading to increases in rates of cannabis use."
Source:
Single, Eric, Cannabis Control in Canada: Options Regarding Possession (Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, May 1998).
htto:/ /www.druglihrarv.net /schaffer/i ibraryistudiesicanfinal2.htm
41. 'There is no evidence that the depenalization component of the 1976 policy, per se, increased levels of cannabis use. On the other hand, the
later growth in commercial access to cannabis, after de facto legalization, was accompanied by steep increases in use, even among youth. In
interpreting that association, three points deserve emphasis. First, the association may not be causal; we have already seen that recent
increases occurred in the United States and Oslo despite very different policies. Second, throughout most of the first two decades of the 1976
policy, Dutch use levels have remained at or below those in the United States. And third, it remains to be seen whether prevalence levels will
drop again in response to the reduction to a 5-g limit, and to recent government efforts to close down coffee shops and more aggressively
enforce the regulations.'
Source:
MacCoun, Robert and Reuter, Peter, 'Interpreting Dutch Cannabis Policy: Reasoning by Analogy in the Legalization Debate," Science (New
and 60 studies of cannabis. Their analysis showed that 50% of the reported effects were significant at a BAC of 0.073 g /dl and a THC level of 11
ng /ml. This implies that if the legal BAC threshold for alcohol is 0.08 g/dl, the corresponding level of THC that would impair the same percentage
of tests would be approximately 11 ng/ml."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 975-6.
38. "Several studies have examined cannabis use in driving simulator and on -road situations. The most comprehensive review was done by Smiley
in 1986 and then again in 1999. Several trends are evident and can be described by three general performance characteristics:
"1. Cannabis increased variability of speed and headway as well as lane position (Attwood, Williams, McBurney, & Frecker, 1981; Ramaekers,
Robbe, & O'Hanlon, 2000; Robbe, 1998; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley, Moskowitz, & Zeidman, 1981; Smiley, Noy, & Tostowaryk, 1987). This was
more pronounced under high workload and unexpected conditions, such as curves and wind gusts.
"2. Cannabis increased the time needed to overtake another vehicle (Dott, 1972 [as cited in Smiley, 1986]) and delayed responses to both
secondary and tracking tasks ( Casswell, 1977; Moskowitz, Hulbert, & McGlothlin,
1976; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981).
"3. Cannabis resulted in fewer attempts to overtake another vehide(Dott, 1972) and larger distances required to pass (Ellingstad et al., 1973 as
cited in Smiley, 1986]). Evidence of increased caution also included slower speeds (Casswell, 1977; Hansteen, Miler, Lonero, Reid, & Jones,
1976; Krueger & Vollrath, 2000; Peck, Biasotti, Boland, Mallory, & Reeve, 1986; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et at, 1981; Stein, Allen, Cook, &
Karl, 1983) and larger headways (Robbe, 1998; Smiley et al., 1987).'
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, 'Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 977 -8.
39. Mariluana - Leaal Issues
The U.S. Penal Code violations for marijuana and possible sentences:
Violation: "1000 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 1,000 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not less than 10 years or more than life" 'No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during the term of
imprisonment imposed therein.'
Violation: "100 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 100 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not 'less than 5 years and not more than 40 years "No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during
the term of imprisonment imposed therein."
Violation: "less than 50 kilograms of marihuana, except in the case of 50 or more marihuana plants regardless of weight, 10 kilograms of
hashish, or one kilogram of hashish oi{"
Sentence: "not more than 5 years, a fine not to exceed the greater of that authorized in accordance with the provisions of title 18 or $250,000 if
the defendant is an individual or $1,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, or both.'
Source:
21 USC Part D - Offenses and Penalties 1/22/02 http:i iwww. usdoj .gov /dea'nubsfcsa1841.htm#b
40. In May of 1998, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, National Working Group on Addictions Policy released policy a discussion document
which recommended, 'The severity of punishment for a cannabis possession charge should be reduced. Specifically, cannabis possession
should be converted to a civil violation under the Contraventions Act.' The paper further noted that, 'The available evidence indicates that
removal of jail as a sentencing option would lead to considerable cost savings without leading to increases in rates of cannabis use."
Source:
Single, Eric, Cannabis Control in Canada: Options Regarding Possession (Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, May 1998).
http:'rwww druglibrarv. net /schatfer /Library /studies /canfnal2.htm
41. There is no evidence that the depenalization component of the 1976 policy, per se, increased levels of cannabis use. On the other hand, the
later growth in commercial access to cannabis, after de facto legalization, was accompanied by steep increases in use, even among youth. In
interpreting that association, three points deserve emphasis. First, the association may not be causal; we have already seen that recent
increases occurred in the United States and Oslo despite very different policies. Second, throughout most of the first two decades of the 1976
policy, Dutch use levels have remained at or below those in the United States. And third, it remelts to be seen whether prevalence levels will
drop again in response to the reduction to a 5 -g limit, and to recent government efforts to close down coffee shops and more aggressively
enforce the regulations.'
Source:
MacCoun, Robert and Reuter, Peter, interpreting Dutch Cannabis Policy: Reasoning by Analogy in the Legalization Debate," Science (New
and 60 studies of cannabis. Their analysis showed that 50% of the reported effects were significant at a BAC of 0.073 g /dI and a THC level of 11
ng /ml. This implies that if the legal BAC threshold for alcohol is 0.08 g/dl, the corresponding level of THC that would impair the same percentage
of tests would be approximately 11 ng/ml."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 975 -6.
38. "Several studies have examined cannabis use in driving simulator and on -road situations. The most comprehensive review was done by Smiley
in 1986 and then again in 1999. Several trends are evident and can be described by three general performance characteristics:
"1. Cannabis increased variability of speed and headway as well as lane position (Attwood, Wilbrams, McBumey, & Frecker, 1981; Ramaekers,
Robbe, & O'Hanlon, 2000; Robbe, 1998; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley, Moskowitz, & Zeidrnan, 1981; Smiley, Noy, & Tostowaryk, 1987). This was
more pronounced under high workload and unexpected conditions, such as curves and wind gusts.
"2. Cannabis increased the time needed to overtake another vehicle (Dott, 1972 [as cited in Smiley, 1986]) and delayed responses to both
secondary and tracking tasks (Casswell, 1977; Moskowitz, Hulbert, & McGlothlin,
1976; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981).
"3. Cannabis resulted in fewer attempts to overtake another vehide(Dott, 1972) and larger distances required to pass (Ellingstad et al., 1973 [as
cited in Smiley, 1986]). Evidence of increased caution also included slower speeds ( Casswell, 1977; Hansteen, Miller, Lonero, Reid, & Jones,
1976; Krueger & Vollrath, 2000; Peck, Biasotti, Boland, Mallory, & Reeve, 1986; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981; Stein, Allen, Cook, &
Karl, 1983) and larger headways (Robbe, 1998; Smiley et al., 1987)."
Source:
Labarge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 977 -8.
39. Mariivana - Legal Issues
The U.S. Penal Code violations for marijuana and possible sentences:
Violation: "1000 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 1,000 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not 'less than 10 years or more than life" "No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during the term of
imprisonment imposed therein."
Violation: "100 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 100 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not "less than 5 years and not more than 40 years" "No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during
the term of imprisonment imposed therein."
Violation: "less than 50 kilograms of marihuana, except in the case of 50 or more marihuana plants regardless of weight, 10 kilograms of
hashish, or one kilogram of hashish oir
Sentence: "not more than 5 years, a fine not to exceed the greater of that authorized in accordance with the provisions of title 18 or $250,000 if
the defendant is an individual or $1,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, or both."
Source:
21 USC Part D - Offenses and Penalties 1/22/02 http://www.usdoigovidean)ubsicsal841.htmitb
40. In May of 1998, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, National Working Group on Addictions Policy released policy a discussion document
which recommended, 'The severity of punishment for a cannabis possession charge should be reduced. Specifically, cannabis possession
should be converted to a civil violation under the Contraventions Act." The paper further noted that, "The available evidence indicates that
removal of jail as a sentencing option would lead to considerable cost savings without leading to increases in rates of cannabis use."
Source:
Single, Eric, Cannabis Control in Canada: Options Regarding Possession (Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, May 1998).
tttp / /www.drk:glibranv.net%schaffer !Library /studies /canfinah.ihtm
41. "There is no evidence that the depenalization component of the 1976 policy, per se, increased levels of cannabis use. On the other hand, the
later growth in commercial access to cannabis, after de facto legalization, was accompanied by steep increases in use, even among youth. In
interpreting that association, three points deserve emphasis. First, the association may not be causal; we have already seen that recent
increases occurred in the United States and Oslo despite very different policies. Second, throughout most of the first two decades of the 1976
policy, Dutch use levels have remained at or below those in the United States. And third, it remains to be seen whether prevalence levels will
drop again in response to the reduction to a 5-g limit, and to recent government efforts to dose down coffee shops and more aggressively
enforce the regulations."
Source:
MacCoun, Robert and Reuter, Peter, °Interpreting Dutch Cannabis Policy: Reasoning by Analogy in the Legalization Debate," Science (New
and 60 studies of cannabis. Their analysis showed that 50% of the reported effects were significant at a BAC of 0.073 Oil and a THC level of 11
ng /mI. This implies that if the legal BAC threshold for alcohol is 0.08 g/dI, the corresponding level of THC that would impair the same percentage
of tests would be approximately 11 ng/ml."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 975 -6.
38. "Several studies have examined cannabis use in driving simulator and on -road situations. The most comprehensive review was done by Smiley
in 1986 and then again in 1999. Several trends are evident and can be described by three general performance characteristics:
"1. Cannabis increased variability of speed and headway as well as lane position (Attwood, Williams, McBurney, & Frecker, 1981; Ramaekers,
Robbe, & O'Hanlon, 2000; Robbe, 1998; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley, Moskowitz, & Zeidman, 1981; Smiley, Noy, & Tostowaryk, 1987). This was
more pronounced under high workload and unexpected conditions, such as curves and wind gusts.
"2. Cannabis increased the time needed to overtake another vehicle (Dott, 1972 [as cited in Smiley, 1986]) and delayed responses to both
secondary and tracking tasks (Gasmen, 1977; Moskowitz, Hulbert, & McGlothlin,
1976; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981).
"3. Cannabis resulted in fewer attempts to overtake another vehide(Dott, 1972) and larger distances required to pass (Ellingstad et al., 1973 [as
cited in Smiley, 1986]). Evidence of increased caution also included slower speeds (Casswell, 1977; Hansteen, Miller, Lonero, Reid, & Jones,
1976; Krueger & Vollrath, 2000; Peck, Biasotti, Boland, Mallory, & Reeve, 1986; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981; Stein, Allen, Cook, &
Karl, 1983) and larger headways (Robbe, 1998; Smiley et al., 1987)."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 977 -8.
39. Marijuana - Legal issues
The U.S. Penal Code violations for marijuana and possible sentences:
Violation: "1000 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 1,000 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not "less than 10 years or more than life' "No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during the term of
imprisonment imposed therein."
Violation: "100 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 100 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not "less than 5 years and not more than 40 years" "No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during
the term of imprisonment imposed therein."
Violation: "less than 50 kilograms of marihuana, except in the case of 50 or more marihuana plants regardless of weight, 10 kilograms of
hashish, or one kilogram of hashish or
Sentence: "not more than 5 years, a fine not to exceed the greater of that authorized in accordance with the provisions of title 18 or $250,000 if
the defendant is an individual or $1,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, or both."
Source:
21 USC Part D - Offenses and Penalties 1/22/02 http: /i www.usdojgov /dea /pubs /csa 841.htm #b
40. In May of 1998, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, National Working Group on Addictions Policy released policy a discussion document
which recommended, 'The severity of punishment for a cannabis possession charge should be reduced. Specifically, cannabis possession
should be converted to a civil violation under the Contraventions Act." The paper further noted that, "The available evidence indicates that
removal of jail as a sentencing option would lead to considerable cost savings without leading to increases in rates of cannabis use."
Source:
Single, Eric, Cannabis Control in Canada: Options Regarding Possession (Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, May 1998).
http:/ /'www.druglibrary.net /schaffer /l ibrary/studieslcarfinal2.htm
41. 'There is no evidence that the depenalization component of the 1976 policy, per se, increased levels of cannabis use. On the other hand, the
later growth in commercial access to cannabis, after de facto legalization, was accompanied by steep increases in use, even among youth. In
interpreting that association, three points deserve emphasis. First, the association may not be causal; we have already seen that recent
increases occurred in the United States and Oslo despite very different polides. Second, throughout most of the first two decades of the 1976
policy, Dutch use levels have remained at or below those in the United States. And third, it remains to be seen whether prevalence levels will
drop again in response to the reduction to a 5-g limit, and to recent govemment efforts to dose down coffee shops and more aggressively
enforce the regulations.'
Source:
MacCoun, Robert and Reuter, Peter, °Interpreting Dutch Cannabis Policy: Reasoning by Analogy in the Legalization Debate," Science (New
and 60 studies of cannabis. Their analysis showed that 50% of the reported effects were significant at a BAC of 0.073 g/dI and a THC level of 11
ng /ml. This implies that if the legal BAC threshold for alcohol is 0.08 g/d1, the corresponding level of THC that would impair the same percentage
of tests would be approximately 11 ng/ml.•
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 975 -6.
38. "Several studies have examined cannabis use in driving simulator and on -road situations. The most comprehensive review was done by Smiley
in 1986 and then again in 1999. Several trends are evident and can be described by three general performance characteristics:
"1. Cannabis increased variability of speed and headway as well as lane position (Attwood, WIliams, McBurney, & Frecker, 1981; Ramaekers,
Robbe, & O'Hanlon, 2000; Robbe, 1998; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley, Moskowitz, & Zeidman, 1981; Smiley, Noy, & Tostowaryk, 1987). This was
more pronounced under high workload and unexpected conditions, such as curves and wind gusts.
"2. Cannabis increased the time needed to overtake another vehicle (Doff, 1972 [as cited in Smiley, 19861) and delayed responses to both
secondary and tracking tasks (Cassweit, 1977; Moskowitz, Hulbert, & McGlothlin,
1976; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981).
"3. Cannabis resulted in fewer attempts to overtake another vehide(Dott, 1972) and larger distances required to pass (Ellingstad et al., 1973 [as
cited in Smiley, 1986)). Evidence of increased caution also included slower speeds (Casswetl, 1977; Hansteen, Mbar, Lonero, Reid, & Jones,
1976; Krueger & Vollrath, 2000; Peck, Biasotti, Boland, Mallory, & Reeve, 1986; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981; Stein, Allen, Cook, &
Karl, 1983) and larger headways (Robbe, 1998; Smiley et al., 1987)."
Source:
Labarge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 977 -8.
39. Marijuana - Legal Issues
The U.S. Penal Code violations for marijuana and possible sentences:
Violation: "1000 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 1,000 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not °less than 10 years or more than life" "No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during the term of
imprisonment imposed therein.'
Violation: '100 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 100 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight.'
Sentence: not 'less than 5 years and not more than 40 years' "No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during
the term of imprisonment imposed therein.'
Violation: "less than 50 kilograms of marihuana, except in the case of 50 or more marihuana plants regardless of weight, 10 kilograms of
hashish, or one kilogram of hashish oil"
Sentence: "not more than 5 years, a fine not to exceed the greater of that authorized in accordance with the provisions of title 18 or $250,000 if
the defendant is an individual or $1,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, or both."
Source:
21 USC Part D - Offenses and Penalties 1/22/02 http:? iwww. usdoigov /deaipubsicsai841.htmitb
40. In May of 1998, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, National Working Group on Addictions Policy released policy a discussion document
which recommended, "The severity of punishment for a cannabis possession charge should be reduced. Specifically, cannabis possession
should be converted to a civil violation under the Contraventions Act." The paper further noted that, The available evidence indicates that
removal of jail as a sentencing option would lead to considerable cost savings without leading to increases in rates of cannabis use.'
Source:
Single, Eric, Cannabis Control in Canada: Options Regarding Possession (Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, May 1998).
t,122 www drugiibrary nPtr'sckharf rr ihr�rvlstt na
dies ='�anf anhtm
41. "There is no evidence that the depenalization component of the 1976 policy, per se, increased levels of cannabis use. On the other hand, the
later growth in commercial access to cannabis, after de facto legalization, was accompanied by steep increases in use, even among youth. In
interpreting that association, three points deserve emphasis. First, the association may not be causal; we have already seen that recent
increases occurred in the United States and Oslo despite very different policies. Second, throughout most of the first two decades of the 1976
policy, Dutch use levels have remained at or below those in the United States. And third, it remains to be seen whether prevalence levels will
drop again in response to the reduction to a 5-g limit, and to recent government efforts to close down coffee shops and more aggressively
enforce the regulations."
Source:
MacCoun, Robert and Reuter. Peter, "Interpreting Dutch Cannabis Policy: Reasoning by Analogy in the Legalization Debate," Science (New
and 60 studies of cannabis. Their analysis showed that 50% of the reported effects were significant at a BAC of 0.073 g /dI and a THC level of 11
ng /mI. This implies that if the legal BAC threshold for alcohol is 0.08 g/dl, the corresponding level of THC that would impair the same percentage
of tests would be approximately 11 ng/ml."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 975 -6.
38. "Several studies have examined cannabis use in driving simulator and on -road situations. The most comprehensive review was done by Smiley
in 1986 and then again in 1999. Several trends are evident and can be described by three general performance characteristics:
"1. Cannabis increased variability of speed and headway as well as lane position (Attwood, Williams, McBurney, & Frecker, 1981; Ramaekers,
Robbe, & O'Hanlon, 2000; Robbe, 1998; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley, Moskowitz, & Zeidman, 1981; Smiley, Noy, & Tostowaryk, 1987). This was
more pronounced under high workload and unexpected conditions, such as curves and wind gusts.
"2. Cannabis increased the time needed to overtake another vehicle (Dott, 1972 [as cited in Smiley, 1986]) and delayed responses to both
secondary and tracking tasks (Casswell, 1977; Moskowitz, Hulbert, & McGlothlin,
1976; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981).
"3. Cannabis resulted in fewer attempts to overtake another vehide(Dott, 1972) and larger distances required to pass (Ellingstad et al., 1973 [as
cited in Smiley, 1986]). Evidence of increased caution also included slower speeds (Casswell, 1977; Hansteen, Miller, Lonero, Reid, & Jones,
1976; Krueger & Vollrath, 2000; Peck, Biasotti, Boland, Mallory, & Reeve, 1986; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981; Stein, Allen, Cook, &
Karl, 1983) and larger headways (Robbe, 1998; Smiley et al., 1987)."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 977 -8.
39. Marijuana - Legal Issues
The U.S. Penal Code violations for marijuana and possible sentences:
Violation: "1000 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 1,000 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not 'less than 10 years or more than life' "No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during the term of
imprisonment imposed therein."
Violation: "100 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 100 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not 'less than 5 years and not more than 40 years" "No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during
the term of imprisonment imposed therein."
Violation: "less than 50 kilograms of marihuana, except in the case of 50 or more marihuana plants regardless of weight, 10 kilograms of
hashish, or one kilogram of hashish oil
Sentence: "not more than 5 years, a fine not to exceed the greater of that authorized in accordance with the provisions of title 18 or $250,000 if
the defendant is an individual or $1,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, or both."
Source:
21 USG Part D - Offenses and Penalties 1/22/02 http:/ /www.usdoj.gov!dea /put s(csa 841.htm4b
40. In May of 1998, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, National Working Group on Addictions Policy released policy a discussion document
which recommended, "The severity of punishment for a cannabis possession charge should be reduced. Specifically, cannabis possession
should be converted to a civil violation under the Contraventions Act." The paper further noted that, "The available evidence indicates that
removal of jail as a sentencing option would Lead to considerable cost savings without leading to increases in rates of cannabis use.°
Source:
Single, Eric, Cannabis Control in Canada: Options Regarding Possession (Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, May 1998).
www. drudlibrarv. net /schaffer /l. ibrary!studieslcanfinal ?.htm
41. "There is no evidence that the depenalization component of the 1976 policy, per se, increased levels of cannabis use. On the other hand, the
later growth in commercial access to cannabis, after de facto legalization, was accompanied by steep increases in use, even among youth. In
interpreting that association, three points deserve emphasis. First, the association may not be causal; we have already seen that recent
increases occurred in the United States and Oslo despite very different policies. Second, throughout most of the first two decades of the 1976
policy, Dutch use levels have remained at or below those in the United States. And third, it remains to be seen whether prevalence levels will
drop again in response to the reduction to a 5 -g limit, and to recent government efforts to dose down coffee shops and more aggressively
enforce the regulations.°
Source:
MacCoun, Robert and Reuter, Peter, °Interpreting Dutch Cannabis Policy: Reasoning by Analogy in the Legalization Debate,' Science (New
s '
Chronology of Cannabis
12,000BC: Hemp was first used for paper and medicine by Emperor Shen
2737 BC: Cannabis referred to as a "superior" herb in the world's first medical text, or pharmacopoeia, Shen
Nung's Pen Ts'ao, in China
1500 BC: Cannabis - smoking Scythians sweep through Europe and Asia, settling and inventing the scythe.
1400 BC: Cultural and religious use of ganja or cannabis, and charas or hashish (resin) recorded used by
Hindus in India.
c600 BC: Zend- Avesta, Indian scripture, speaks of hemp's intoxicating resin.
c500 BC: Gautama Buddha said to have survived by eating hempseed. Cannabis used in Germany
(Hochdorf Hallstatt D wagon burial site).
450 BC: Herodotus records Scythians and Thracians as consuming cannabis and making fine linens of
hemp.
300 BC: Carthage and Rome struggle for political and commercial power over hemp and spice trade routes
in the Mediterranean.
100 BC: Chinese make paper from hemp and mulberry.
70 BC: Roman Emperor Nero's surgeon, Dioscorides, praises cannabis for making the stoutest cords and for
its medicinal properties.
c30 AD: Jesus teaches :Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the
mouth, this defileth a man (Matthew 15:11). The Gospels refer to the New Wine and declare that it is best
when the clusters are ripe.
100 AD: Roman surgeon Dioscorides names the plant cannabis sativa and describes various medicinal
uses. Pliny reported of industrial uses and wrote a manual on farming hemp.
400 AD: Cannabis cultivated for the first time in the UK at Old Buckenham Mere
500 AD: First botanical drawing of hemp in Constantinopolitanus
600 AD: Germans, Franks, Vikings etc all use hemp fiber.
800 AD: Mohammed allows cannabis but forbids the use of alcohol.
1000 AD: The English word "hempe" first listed in a dictionary. Moslems produce hashish medicine and
social use.
1150 AD: Moslems use hemp to start Europe's first paper mill. Most of the paper is made from hemp for the
next 750 years, including Bibles.
1379 AD: Emir Soudon Sheikhouni of Joneima prohibits cannabis consumption amongst the poor, destroys
the crops, and punishes offenders by pulling out their teeth.
14 AD48: Inquisitor Pope Innocent VIII outlaws hashish.
1494 AD: Hemp paper industry starts in England.
1545 AD: Hemp agriculture arrives in China.
1554 AD: The Spanish grow hemp in Peru.
1563 AD: English Queen Elizabeth l decree that land owners with more than 60 acres must grow hemp or be
fined 5 pounds.
1564 AD: King Philip of Spain orders hemp grown throughout his empire from modern Arhentina to Oregon.
1600 AD: Dutch achieve the "Golden Age° through hemp commerce. Explorers find "wild hempe" in North
and 60 studies of cannabis. Their analysis showed that 50% of the reported effects were significant at a BAC of 0.073 g/dI and a THC level of 11
ng /ml. This implies that if the legal BAC threshold for alcohol is 0.08 g/dl, the corresponding level of THC that would impair the same percentage
of tests would be approximately 11 ng/ml."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 975 -6.
38. "Several studies have examined cannabis use in driving simulator and on -road situations. The most comprehensive review was done by Smiley
in 1986 and then again in 1999. Several trends are evident and can be described by three general performance characteristics:
"1. Cannabis increased variability of speed and headway as well as lane position (Attwood, Williams, McBurney, & Frecker, 1981; Ramaekers,
Robbe, & O'Hanion, 2000; Robbe, 1998; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley, Moskowitz, & Zeidman, 1981; Smiley, Noy, & Tostowaryk, 1987). This was
more pronounced under high workload and unexpected conditions, such as curves and wind gusts.
"2. Cannabis increased the time needed to overtake another vehide (Dolt, 1972 [as cited in Smiley, 1986]) and delayed responses to both
secondary and tracking tasks (Casswell, 1977; Moskowitz, Hulbert, & McGlothlin,
1976; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981).
"3. Cannabis resulted in fewer attempts to overtake another vehide(Dott, 1972) and larger distances required to pass (Ellingstad et al., 1973 [as
cited in Smiley, 1986]). Evidence of increased caution also included slower speeds ( Casswell, 1977; Hansteen, Miler, Lonero, Reid, & Jones,
1976; Krueger & Vollrath, 2000; Peck, Biasotti, Boland, Mallory, & Reeve, 1986; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981; Stein, Allen, Cook, &
Karl, 1983) and larger headways (Robbe, 1998; Smiley et al., 1987)."
Source:
Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy," Journal
of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 977 -8.
39. Marijuana - Legal Issues
The U.S. Penal Code violations for marijuana and possible sentences:
Violation: "1000 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 1,000 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not "less than 10 years or more than life" °No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during the term of
imprisonment imposed therein."
Violation: "100 kilograms or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, or 100 or more marihuana plants
regardless of weight."
Sentence: not °less than 5 years and not more than 40 years" No person sentenced under this subparagraph shall be eligible for parole during
the term of imprisonment imposed therein."
Violation: "less than 50 kilograms of marihuana, except in the case of 50 or more marihuana plants regardless of weight, 10 kilograms of
hashish, or one kilogram of hashish oil"
Sentence: "not more than 5 years, a fine not to exceed the greater of that authorized in accordance with the provisions of title 18 or $250,000 if
the defendant is an individual or $1,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, or both."
Source:
21 USC Part D - Offenses and Penalties 1/22/02 httpJ/www.!4sdoj.aovidea /rubs ?csa- 841.htm#b
40. In May of 1998, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, National Working Group on Addictions Policy released policy a discussion document
which recommended, "The severity of punishment for a cannabis possession charge should be reduced. Specifically, cannabis possession
should be converted to a civil violation under the Contraventions Act." The paper further noted that, `The available evidence indicates that
removal of jail as a sentencing option would lead to considerable cost savings without leading to increases in rates of cannabis use.°
Source:
Single, Eric, Cannabis Control in Canada: Options Regarding Possession (Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, May 1998).
i / ww w. dructlibrarv. netischafferlLibrary /studiesicanfinal2.htm
41. "There is no evidence that the depenalization component of the 1976 policy, per se, increased levels of cannabis use. On the other hand, the
later growth in commercial access to cannabis, after de facto legalization, was accompanied by steep increases in use, even among youth. In
interpreting that association, three points deserve emphasis. First, the association may not be causal; we have already seen that recent
increases occurred in the United States and Oslo despite very different policies. Second, throughout most of the first two decades of the 1976
policy, Dutch use levels have remained at or below those in the United States. And third, it remains to be seen whether prevalence levels will
drop again in response to the reduction to a 5-g limit, and to recent government efforts to dose down coffee shops and more aggressively
enforce the regulations.°
Source:
MacCoun, Robert and Reuter, Peter, °Interpreting Dutch Cannabis Policy: Reasoning by Analogy in the Legalization Debate," Science (New
America.
1606 AD: The British take cannabis to Canada for maritime uses.
1611 AD: The British start growing cannabis in Virginia.
1619 AD: Virginia colony makes hemp cultivation mandatory, followed by most other colonies. Europe pays
hemp bounties.
1621 AD: The Anatomy of Melancholy claims cannabis is a treatment for depression.
1631 AD: Hemp used as money throughout American colonies.
1632 AD: The Pilgrims take cannabis to New England.
1637 AD: The General Court at Hartford, Conneticut, orders that all families plant one teaspoon of cannabis
seeds.
1639 AD: Massachusetts Courts follow Hartford.
1753 AD: Cannabis Sativa classified by Linneaus.
1763 AD: New English Dictionary says cannabis root applied to skin eases inflammation.
1776 AD: Declaration of Independence drafted on hemp paper.
1791 AD: President Washington sets duties on hemp to encourage domestic industry. "Make the most of the
Indian Hemp Seed" President George Washington. (Library of USA Congress 1794 vol. 33 p.270).
President Jefferson calls hemp a necessity and urges farmers to grow hemp instead of tobacco.
1800 AD: Cotton gins make cheaper fiber than hemp. Napoleon prohibits his men in Egypt from using
cannabis, but to little effect.
1835 AD: The Club de Hashichines is founded.
1839 AD: Homeopathy journal 'American Provers' Union' publishes first report on effects of cannabis.
1840 AD: "Prohibition... goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control mans' appetite
through legislation and makes a crime out of things that are not even crimes... A prohibition law strikes a
blow at the very principles upon which our Government was founded" Abraham Lincoln (December
1840)
1841 AD: Dr. W.B.O'Shaughnessy, "On the Preparation of the Indian Hemp or Ganja" introduces cannabis to
western science.
1845 AD: Psychologist and inventor of modern psychopharmacology and psychotimimetric drug treatment,
Jacques - Joseph Moreau de Tours documents physical and mental benefits of cannabis.
1850 AD: Petrochemical age begins. Toxic sulphite and chlorine processes make paper from trees:
steamships replace (hemp) sails; tropical fibers introduced.. USA census records 8327 hemp plantations of
over 2000 acres each.
1854 AD: Bayard Taylor essay Visions of Hashish.
1857 AD: Fitz Hugh Ludlow publishes "The Hasheesh Eater"
1857 AD: Smith Brothers of Edinburgh market cannabis indica extracts.
1860 AD: First governmental commission study of cannabis and hashish conducted by Ohio State Medical
Society. It catalogues the conditions for which cannabis is beneficial: neuralgia, nervous rheumatism, mania,
whooping cough, asthma, chronic bronchitis, muscular spasms, epilepsy, infantile convulsions, palsy, uterine
hemorrhage, dysmenorrhea, hysteria, alcohol withdrawal and loss of appetite.
1868 AD: The Emir of Egypt makes the possession of cannabis a capital offence.
1869 AD: Tales of Hashish by A_C_ Kimmens
M
1870 AD: Cannabis listed in US Pharmacopoeia as a medicine.
1870 AD: South Africa worried about cannabis use among Indian workers, passes a law forbidding the
smoking, use or possession of hemp by Indians.
1876 AD: Hashish served at American Centennial Exposition.
1877 AD: The Sultan of Turkey makes cannabis illegal, to little effect.
1894 AD: British Indian Hemp Drugs Commission studies social use of cannabis and comes out
firmly against its prohibition.
1895 AD: First known use of the name "marijuana" for smoking, by Pancho Villa's supporters in Sonora,
Mexico.
1909 AD: Shanghai Conference: first international meeting on drugs is held to discuss opium. The USA
passes an act to prohibit the buying or selling of opium for non - medicinal purposes.
1910 AD: African - American "reefer" use reported in Jazz Clubs in New Orleans, said to be influencing white
people. Mexicans smoking marijuana in Texas. South Africa prohibits cannabis.
1911 AD: Hindus reported to be using ganja in San Francisco.
1911 AD: South Africa bans cannabis.
1912 AD: "Essay on Hasheesh" by Victor Rolson. Possibilities of putting controls on cannabis use is first
raised.
1912 AD: Hague Conference; second international meeting on drugs. 46 nations discuss opium, morphine,
* * * * * ** * * * * ** and cannabis. The Hague Convention for the Suppression of Opium and Other Drugs, was
drawn up, requiring parties to confine to medical and legitimate purposes the manufacture, sale and use of
opium, * * * * * *, morphine and * * * * * * *; Cannabis was not included. (From Mandeson, D. From Mr Sin to Mr Big,
A history of Australian Drug Laws, Oxford University Press Melbourne 1995)
1912 AD: First suggestions that cannabis should be banned internationally, at the First Opium Conference.
1915 AD: Utah State, then California and Texas outlaw cannabis. * * * * * ** banned in the USA.
1916 AD: USDA Bulletin 404 calls for a new program of expansion of hemp to replace uses of timber by
industry.
1919 AD: Texas outlaws cannabis. Alcohol is prohibited throughout the USA. Cannabis is still legal in most
States.
1920 AD: DuPont experiments with petrochemicals. Gang war takes over the alcohol industry, homicides
increase drastically.
1923 AD: South African delegate at League of Nations calls for international controls on cannabis, claiming
that it makes mine workers less active. Britain insists on further research.
1923 AD: Louisiana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington outlaw cannabis.
1924 AD: At the Second International Opiates conference Egyptian delegate claims serious problems are
associated with hashish use and calls for immediate international controls. Sub - committee listens to Egypt
and Turkey. Cannabis declared a narcotic. Cannabis Ruderalis identified by Lamarck.
1927 AD: New York outlaws cannabis.
1928 AD: UK Dangerous Drugs Act (September 28th) 1925 becomes law and makes cannabis illegal.
1929 AD: The Panama Canal Zone Report concludes that there is no evidence that cannabis use is habit -
forming or deleterious, recommending no action be taken against cannabis use or sale.
1929 AD: South West states make cannabis illegal as part of a move to oust Mexican immigrants.
1930 AD: Henry Ford makes his motor cars out of hemp with hemp paint and hemp fuel. New machines
invented to break hemp, process the fiber and convert the pulp or hurds into paper, plastics etc. 1200 hash
bars in New York City. Racist fears of Mexicans, Asians and African - Americans lead the cry for cannabis to
be outlawed.
1930's AD: New mechanized hemp harvesting methods invented
1930 AD: Louis Armstrong arrested in Los Angeles for possession of cannabis.
1931 AD: Federal Bureau of Narcotics formed with Anslinger at the head. By now 29 US states have banned
non - prescription cannabis
1934 AD: Anslinger refers to "ginger- haired * * * * * *s" in FBI official circulars.
1936 AD: South Western states call for FBI to ban cannabis.
1937 AD: Marijuana Tax Act forbids hemp farming. The Act was based on the Machine Gun Transfer Act
which made it illegal to pass on machine guns without a government stamp — there being no such stamps
available. By applying this strategy to marijuana, Anslinger was able to effectively ban hemp without
contravening constitutional rights.
1937 AD: DuPont files patents for nylon, plastics and a new bleaching process for paper. Anslinger testifies to
congress that Marijuana is the most violence - causing drug known to man. The objections of the American
Medical Association are ignored. The Marijuana Transfer Tax Bill (14th April) introduced to US House, Ways
and Means Committee, passed December, prohibits industrial and medical uses and calls flowering tops a
narcotic. Violations attract 200 dollar fines. Birdseed, rope and cordage are exempted from tax.
1937 AD: DuPont patents plastics, seizing the opportunity created by cannabis hemp prohibition
1939 AD: LaGuardia Report started
1941 AD: Cannabis dropped from USA Pharmacopoeia
1941 AD: Henry Ford's car is made from and runs on cannabis.
1943 AD: Hemp for Victory program urges farmers to grow hemp to help war effort.
1943 AD: US Military Surgeon magazine declares that smoking cannabis is no more harmful than smoking
tobacco.
1944 AD: New York Academy of Medicine reports marijuana use does not cause violent behavior, provoke
insanity, lead to addiction or promote opiate usage. Anslinger describes the authors as dangerous and
strange.
1944 AD: New York Mayor's La Guardia Report "The Marijuana problem in the City of New York" concludes
that smoking marijuana does not lead to addiction in the medical sense of the word, that juvenile delinquency
is not associated with marijuana smoking and that the publicity concerning the catastrophic effects of
marijuana smoking in New York is unfounded.
Back to the top
1944 AD: Anslinger threatens doctors who carry out cannabis research with imprisonment.
1945 AD: USA `Newsweek' reports over 100,000 Americans use cannabis.
1948 AD: Anslinger now says cannabis users are peaceful and that cannabis could be used during a
communist invasion, to weaken American will to fight.
1948 AD: United Nation's Universal Declaration of Human Rights
1948 AD: Hollywood star Robert Mitchum arrested for cannabis.
1951 AD: UN Bulletin of Narcotic Drugs states over 200 million cannabis users in the world.
1952 AD: First UK cannabis arrest at Number 11 Club, Soho, London.
1955 AD: Hemp farming outlawed again.
1960 AD: Hippies, Vietnam Veterans, pop fans adopt cannabis.
1961 AD: UN Treaty 406 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs seeks to outlaw cannabis use and cannabis
cultivation worldwide and eradicate cannabis smoking within 30 years (by 1991). USA representative is
Anslinger.
1962 AD: President Kennedy sacks Anslinger. Kennedy using cannabis as a pain relief.
1963 AD: Kennedy assassinated.
1964 AD: Thelin Brothers open first US 'Head Shop'.
1964 AD: THC, tetrahydracannabinol, first isolated
1966 AD: Donovan becomes first UK celebrity to be busted for cannabis.
1967 AD: SOMA Times Petition in the UK urges legalization of cannabis. The Beatles sign it. 3,000 people
hold a 'smoke -in' in Hyde Park.. Keith Richards and Mick Jagger of the Rolling Stones are arrested and
imprisoned for cannabis. This prompts a Times editorial `Who breaks a butterfly on a wheel ?'. The
convictions are quashed on appeal.. In the UK 2,393 persons arrested for cannabis offences.. In the USA
over 3,000 joints mailed to addresses at random by Abbie Hoffman and the Yippies.
1968 AD: John Lennon arrested for cannabis possession.
1968 AD: 1 November, UK Government Wootton Report recommends cannabis possession should not be an
offence. "Having reviewed all the material available to us we find ourselves in agreement with the conclusion
reached by the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission appointed by the Government of India (1893 -94) and the
New York Mayor's Committee (1944 — LaGuardia) that the long -term consumption of cannabis in moderate
doses has no harmful effects."
1968 AD: Campaign to stop US soldiers in Vietnam from taking cannabis — they switch to " " "`.
1969 AD: James Callaghan, UK Labour Prime Minister, rejects the findings of the Wootton Report.
1969 AD: George Harrison arrested for cannabis.
1970 AD: Social use of cannabis receives widespread acceptance despite illegality; policy of
decriminalization sweeps across USA and Britain.
1970 AD: LeDain Report (Canada) recommended that serious consideration be given to the legalization of
personal possession of marijuana. It finds that cannabis use increases self - confidence, feelings of creativity
and sensual awareness, facilitates concentration and self- acceptance, reduces tension, hostility and
aggression and may produce psychological but not physical dependence. The report recommends that
possession laws be repealed
1970 AD: R. Keith Stroup founds NORML 'National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws', in UDSA.
1970 AD: USA Marijuana Transfer Tax declared unconstitutional.
1971 AD: British Misuse of Drugs Act classifies cannabis as a Class B drug with stiff sentencing. This bans
the medical use of cannabis, ignoring the Wootton Report.
1971 AD: UN Convention on Psycho topic Substances
1972 AD: US President Richard Nixon says 'I am against legalizing marijuana'.
1972 AD: Baan Commission presents report to Dutch Minister of Health and suggests that cannabis trade
below a quarter of a kilo ought to be considered as a misdemeanor only.
1973 AD: Oregon considering legalization
1973 AD: US Shafer Commission, appointed by Nixon, declares that personal use of marijuana should be
decriminalized as should casual distribution of small amounts for no or insignificant remuneration
1973 AD: UN Convention of Psychotropic Substances: cannabis is a narcotic.
1974 AD: US Senate report on Marijuana- Hashish Epidemic and its Impact on US Security claims that
cannabis use cause brain damage, a- motivation and genetic and reproductive defects
1975 AD: Hundreds of US doctors call for more research on cannabis.
1975 AD: Alaska legalizes cannabis for personal use. Limit on amount is one ounce.
1975 AD: After 3 years of campaigning to abolish penal sanctions for the consumption of drugs, Pannella
forces the police to arrest him, by smoking a joint in public.
1975 AD: Jamaica Studies reveal good health amongst prolific cannabis users. "No impairment of
physiological, sensory and perceptual performance, tests of concept formation, abstracting ability, and
cognitive style, and tests of memory."
1976 AD: Holland adopts tolerant attitude to cannabis and many coffee shops and youth centers allowed to
sell cannabis.
1976 AD: USA New York Times (Jan 5) declares 'Scientists find nothing really harmful about pot'.
1976 AD: Ford administration bans medical research on cannabis. Research on synthetic cannabis
analogues allowed to continue. Robert Randal is the first US citizen to receive cannabis from Federal
supplies made under the Investigational New Drug (IND) Program.
1976 AD: DuPont declares cannabis is less harmful than alcohol or tobacco and calls for its
decriminalization.
1977 AD: President Carter thinks cannabis should be legalized.
1977 AD: The Australian Senate Standing Committee on Social Welfare (the Baume Committee)
recommends treating drug use as a social / medical rather than legal problem. Also that criminal sanction of
possession of cannabis be replaced by fines while retaining penalties for possession of hashish, oil and
purified THC.
1978 AD: New Mexico allows cannabis sale for medical use.
1978 AD: The New South Wales Joint Parliamentary Committee upon Drugs recommends eliminating
criminal sanctions for personal use of cannabis, implementing bond and probation penalties for first
offenders and expunging records upon successful completion of these punishments. Also suggest retaining
penalties for trafficking in cannabis.
1980 AD: Paul McCartney arrested for cannabis and spends 10 days in prison in Japan.
1980 AD: Costa Rica study reports good health in cannabis users.
1980 AD: May 10, Smokey Bears in Hyde Park
1981 AD: The Coptic Study claims 'No harm to human brain or intelligence' through cannabis use.
1982 AD: An Analysis of Marijuana Policy, National Research Council of the National Academy of Science,
concludes that "a policy of prohibition of supply is preferable only to a policy of complete prohibition of supply
and use"
1983 AD: In the UK over 20,000 convictions for possession.
1983 AD: The USA government (Reagan / Bush)orders American Universities to destroy all 1966 -76
research work on cannabis.
1985 AD: Winters and DiFranza reveal radioactive material in tobacco may account for half the lung cancer
deaths; no radioactive material in cannabis.
1986 AD: 8 July, UK Drug Trafficking Offences Act introduced to enable confiscation of assets from drug
dealers
1987 AD: The USA Merck Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy says: "Cannabis can be used on an episodic but
continual basis without evidence of social or psychic dysfunction. In many users the term dependence with its
obvious connotations, probably is mis- applied... The chief opposition to the drug rests on a moral and
political, and not toxicologic, foundation ".
1988 AD: 6 September : DEA chief administrative judge, Judge Young, rules the US government should
allow the medicinal use of cannabis. He says "Marijuana in its natural form, is one of the safest
therapeutically active substances known to man ". DEA rejects report.
1988 AD: 20 December, UN Convention against illicit traffic in narcotic and psychotropic substances, Vienna,
includes cannabis
1988 AD: UK 23,229 people arrested for cannabis offences.
1989 AD: Presidents Reagan and Bush declare war on cannabis; shops selling smoking apparatus
outlawed. Urine testing introduced. Recriminalization, asset and property seizure, armed forces, prison
camps, 'Just Say No' campaign, PFDA, DARE, tobacco and nuclear subsidies. Price — per — ounce cannabis
worth more than gold. Worldwide prohibition entices organized crime to take control of the cannabis market
and make huge profits. Reagan declares victory in War on Drugs. Secretary of State James A Baker reports
global war on narcotic production is 'clearly not being won'.
1990 AD: Jack Herer, in his book `The Emperor Wears No Clothes' offers $10,000 reward to anyone who can
disprove his assertion that hemp can 'save the planet'.
1990 AD: Alaska recriminalizes cannabis possession
1990's AD: USA voters pass regional measures to allow medicinal use of cannabis. Interest in this and other
uses of hemp add new support to campaign for the legal right to social / recreational use of cannabis.
1991 AD: THC receptors found in the brain.
1991 AD: UK 40,000 people arrested for cannabis.
1991 AD: 'Mr. Marijuana', Howard Marks, arrested, taken from Spain to USA, and given 25 years
imprisonment for trafficking in cannabis.
1991 AD: UK Judge Pickles advocates legalization of drugs..
1991 AD: UK MP Tony Banks (labor) advocates legalization of cannabis.
1991 AD: IND program dropped in USA.
1992 AD: January 22, Califomia Research Advisory Panel reports that prohibition has a more harmful effect
on society and the individual than illegal drugs themselves.
1992 AD: February 19, UK Government issue licenses to grow cannabis for industrial uses or scientific
research
1992 AD: "Medicines often produce side effects. Sometimes they are physically unpleasant. Cannabis too
has discomforting side effects, but these are not physical they are political "... The Economist March 28th
1992
1992 AD: USA over 340,000 arrests for cannabis.
1992 AD: Australia licenses hemp farm.
1992 AD: US Investigational New Drug (IND) Program dropped.
1992 AD: USA President Clinton admits he smoked cannabis but did not inhale. Howard Marks admits that
he smoked cannabis but never exhaled.
1992 AD: 17 European Cities sign Frankfurt Charter agreeing to tolerate social use of cannabis.
1992 AD: USA Jim Montgomery, a paraplegic who smoked cannabis to relieve muscle spasm, busted for two
ounces of marijuana in Oklahoma, arrested and sentenced to life plus 16 years.
1993 AD: Britain eases restrictions on hemp farming. Hemp core is first British company to get a license.
Hemp clothes sold in High Street shops. February 19th.
1993 AD: Commander John Grieve of the Metropolitan Police calls for decriminalization of cannabis.
1993 AD: Raymond Kendall, Head of Interpol, calls for decriminalization of cannabis.
1993 AD: British Law Lord, Lord Woolf calls for legalization of cannabis
1993 AD: 22 British MP's call for the establishment of a Royal Commission.
1993 AD: 44 British MP's call for a Royal Commission.
1993 AD: German High Court in Kruhe rules that cannabis prohibition is unconstitutional.
1993 AD: 19 British MP's `welcome' the German court ruling.
1993 AD: 55 British MP's call for cannabis to be recognized and allowed for treatment of Multiple Sclerosis.
1993 AD: British Home Secretary Michael Howard declares 'War on drugs' and increases maximum fine for
possession of cannabis to 2,500.
1993 AD: Over 72,000 UK citizens arrested for cannabis offences.
1993 AD: Canada permits a hemp farm in Ontario province.
1995 AD: Holland lowers the amount one can possess without prosecution to 5 grams (from 30) as a result of
powerful international pressures from neighboring countries.
1995 AD: UK Channel 4 Pot Night (March) and BBC Panorama's High Risk (April).
1995 AD: UK Home secretary Michael Howard increases penalties for cannabis offenses.
1995 AD: Clare Short MP (Labor) calls for a Royal Commission on Cannabis and is reprimanded by her party
bosses. (October)
1995 AD: European Cannabis Consumers' Union founded in Amsterdam.
1995 AD: USA Dan Perron forms Cannabis Buyers Club to distribute cannabis to the sick.
1995 AD: The European Council which defines political guidelines, orders a study of drug legislation and
practice in the Union.
1995 AD: September 16, First CHIC (Cannabis Hemp Information Club) conference in London.
1995 AD: Under the Clinton administration 1,450,751 people had been arrested for cannabis, 86 being for
possession only
1995 AD: November 11, British journal of the medical profession, The Lancet, states that "The smoking of
cannabis, even long term, is not harmful to health ".
1995 AD: Dutch Policy in the Netherlands Studies
1995 AD: Henrion Commission Report, the official French State Commission in charge of drug policy
supports decriminalization of cannabis and calls for a two -year trial period of regulated retail trade in
cannabis. The French Government rejects these proposals.
1996 AD: Victoria (Australia) State Council urges decriminalization of cannabis.
1996 AD: May 17, Sow the Seeds Day, London. 1996 AD: CLCIA announce parliamentary candidates in
forthcoming General Election
1996 AD: UK Liberal Democrats Party calls for a Royal Commission on cannabis.
1996 AD: Lord McCluskey calls for consideration of decriminalization in UK.
1996 AD: The Institute for the Study of Drug Dependence — Drug Notes — Cannabis 1996, p.8 says:
"All that can be said definitely is that 1) Cannabis use generally precedes the use of other illegal drugs. 2)
Cannabis use does not necessarily (or even usually) lead to the use of other illicit drugs."
1996 AD: UK Janet Paraskeno, magistrate and director of National Youth Agency calls for `legalization and
not decriminalization'.
1996 AD: George Howarth MP (Labor) says his parties do not want a Royal Commission because it might
conclude that cannabis should be legalized which a Labor Government would not do anyway.
1996 AD: The Parliament of Luxembourg passes a motion calling for a program 'of common measures for the
liberalization of cannabis and its derivatives' along with Belgium and the Netherlands, and the harmonization
of drug laws in Benelux countries.
1996 AD: UK Cannabis Awareness Month (September) on 68th anniversary of the law.
1996 AD: Ireland announces their plans to use cannabis as fuel to replace the use of the dwindling supplies
of peat
1996 AD: Dutch town council at Delfzij decides to sell cannabis through their own coffee shop. They name
the shop `Paradox'. Profits used to provide information campaigns against 'soft drugs' in Dutch schools.
Meanwhile the Dutch close many coffee shops, bowing to pressures from Germany and France.,br 1996 AD:
The Canton of Zurich calls for legalization of cannabis.
1996 AD: UK Crown Prosecution Service dropping cases of possession and cultivation against some ill
people (MS) as `not in the public interest to proceed'.
1996 AD: California and Arizona pass Propositions allowing the use of cannabis in the treatment of certain
illnesses, Clinton is re- elected and the FBI threaten Doctors with prosecution.
1996 AD: A Swiss man, Zimmermann, is given a life sentence in the Maldives, for importing three cannabis
seeds, found in his luggage as he flew in from India.
1996 AD: Legalize Ganja Jamaica formed.
1996 AD: In the New Zealand general election the legalize cannabis candidate in Mittertond received 30f the
vote. Overall they received 1.4f the votes, insufficient to gain a seat under proportional representation.
1996 AD: 100 Italian MP's call for legalization of cannabis in Italy.
1996 AD: The Sunday Times, 1 Dec, says that out of 45 UK judges questioned 16 wanted to see cannabis
legalized.
1996 AD: CLCIA offices are destroyed by fire
1996 AD: June, Scottish Nationalist conference votes to allow cultivation for personal use and research into
medical uses of cannabis
Sates "Relatively few adverse clinical effects from the chronic use of marijuana have been documented in
humans. However, the criminalization of marijuana use may itself be a health hazard, since it may expose the
users to violence and criminal activity."
1997 AD: An 8 -year study at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) School of Medicine,
concluded that long -term smokers of cannabis do not experience a greater annual decline in lung functions
than non - smokers.
Researchers said: "Findings from the present long -term follow -up study of heavy, habitual marijuana smokers
argue against the concept that the continuing heavy use of marijuana is a significant factor for the
development of [chronic lung disease]"
"No difference were noted between even quite heavy marijuana smoking and nonsmoking of marijuana."
Volume 155 of the American Journal of Respiratory and Clinical Care Medicine
1997 AD: Januaryl6, A court in Texas, USA, sentences medical marijuana user, William J. Foster to 93 years
imprisonment for cultivation of one plant.
1997 AD: Two Swiss Cantons decide to legalize possession of cannabis in small amounts and ask the
national Government to do the same.
1997 AD: The German State of Schlewig- Holstein legalizes possession of up to 5 grams of cannabis.
1997 AD: After appeals for clemency from the Swiss Government and letters from CLCIA supporters, the
Maldives releases Zimmermann, the man given life for three seeds.
1997 AD: Norwich City Council ban the CLCIA from more stalls because seeds had been given out at
previous stalls, the seed being fishing bait. After a letter campaign the council agrees that CLCIA can have
the stall provided they agree not to give out `anything which can be used to grow or take an illegal
substance'.
1997 AD: In the USA a $2 million study to prove cannabis smoking can cause cancer fails and announces
that it does not. The release of the report is delayed due to `lack of supplies'.
1997 AD: Paul Flynn MP introduces an early Day Motion calling on the Government to recognize the
medicinal uses of cannabis and to make it available in tablet form, also congratulating the citizens of
California and Arizona.
1997 AD: February 11, USA Federal Government Authorities, led by Barry R. McCaffrey, Director of National
Drug Control Policy, resists the medical supply or cannabis in California and Arizona, threatening to
prosecute Doctor's who prescribe or supply it.
1997 AD: UK Legalize Cannabis Party, sponsored by the CLCIA, nominates Howard Marks as Parliamentary
Candidate for Legalizing Cannabis in the General Election. He receives an average 1.3f the vote over the
four constituencies where he stands.
1997 AD: The UK elects a new Labor Government and the Prime Minister, Tony Blair, says he will not
legalize cannabis.
1997 AD: Scottish Kirk (Church) comes out in favor of legalizing cannabis
1997 AD: Rob Christopher, founder of CHIC — the Cannabis Hemp Information Club — in London, changes
his name to Free Rob Cannabis and invites arrest by distributing cannabis cookies on the steps of the
Department of Heath in London. He is not arrested.
1997 AD: USA marines use helicopters to destroy marijuana crops in Hawaii despite objections from the
people.
1997 AD: The Kaiser Permanente Study (USA) — "Marijuana Use and Mortality" April 1997 American Journal
of Public Health concludes "Relatively few adverse clinical effects from the chronic use of marijuana have
been documented in humans. However, the criminalization of marijuana use may itself be a health hazard,
since it may expose the users to violence and criminal activity."
1997 AD: Researchers at the University of California (UCLA) School of Medicine announced the results of an
8 — year study into the effects of Tong -term cannabis smoking on the lungs. In Volume 155 of the American
Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Dr. D.P. Tashkin reported: "Findings from the present long-
term, follow -up study of heavy, habitual marijuana smokers argue against the concept that continuing heavy
use of marijuana is a significant risk factor for the development of [chronic lung disease. ..Neither the
continuing nor the intermittent marijuana smokers exhibited any significantly different rates of decline in [lung
function] " as compared with those individuals who never smoked marijuana. Researchers added: "No
differences were noted between even quite heavy marijuana smoking and nonsmoking of marijuana."
1997 AD: June, A plaque placed on a park bench in Chapelfield Gardens in Norwich, commemorates
Howard Marks stand as a Legalize Cannabis Candidate
1997 AD: July, The British Medical Association (BMA) recommends the provision of medicinal cannabis in
the UK.
1997 AD: July, The Attorney General and Minister for Industrial Relations, Australia, JW Shaw QC MLC,
announced the end of prison sentences for young cannabis offenders, saying that "I believe many parents
would see the imprisonment of their son or daughter for using cannabis as particularly harmful."
1997 AD: July, SYDNEY MORNING HERALD July 21 1997 p5 reports "A survey of a traditionally
conservative NSW electorate has shown overwhelming community support for the decriminalization of
cannabis." New South Wales then decriminalizes possession of cannabis — up to 5 plants, 30 grams of leaf, 3
grams of resin and 2 grams of oil.
1997 AD: August, UK, After the shooting of a five -year old boy in Bolton in a drug - related attack, Labor MP
Brian tddon calls for a Royal Commission on drugs with a view to decriminalization. The Sun conducts a poll
that showed that over 40f its readers are in favor of decriminalization. Labor Home Office spokesman George
Howarth says on Radio 4 News that cannabis causes harm and that Labor will never have dialogue on
legalization and that the only solution is to stamp it out.
1997 AD: On September 19th, Marco Pannella is sentenced by the Rome Court to 4 months imprisonment
commuted to 8 months on probation, for distributing hashish at the Porta Portese.
1997 AD: September, Sir Paul McCartney, ex- Beatle, reconfirms his call to decriminalize cannabis.
1997 AD: September 28th, UK newspaper The Independent on Sunday, starts their committed campaign to
decriminalize cannabis backed by over 100 names of celebrities, doctors, academics etc.
1997 AD: September 28th, A picnic in Chapelfield Gardens, Norwich, to commemorate the sad prohibition
laws is attended by over 100 people and cannabis is openly smoked on film by TV cameras. On this the 69th
anniversary of the Dangerous Drugs Act, Rob Christopher and some 300 others gather in Hyde Park,
London, to distribute cannabis cakes free to medical users. Rob then unsuccessfully attempted to turn himself
in to the police.
1997 AD: October 8, Lord Bingham of Cornhill, the most senior judge in England and Wales backed calls for
a public debate on the legalization of cannabis. Just days after Jack Straw, the Home Secretary, ruled out
moves to legalize cannabis
1997 AD: November 5, EU Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties suggests that soft drugs should be
legalized
1997 AD: December 3, The French secretary of State for Public Health, Bernard Kouchner, in favor of the
supply of * * * * ** to people suffering from severe * * **** addiction. He also supports the medical application of
cannabis, according to an interview with Dr Kouchner MD in the newspaper Liberation.
1997 AD: December 11, Independent on Sunday holds their "Should cannabis be decriminalized ?"
conference in Westminster, London. Although all the MPs have been invited only 5 turn up. The conference
was overwhelmingly in favor of legalization
1997 AD: December 19th, DEA formally asked the Department of Health and Human Services to conduct 'a
scientific and medical evaluation of the available data and provide a scheduling recommendation" for
marijuana and other cannabinoid drugs. This DEA request of HHS means that the DEA has for the first time
made its own determination that sufficient grounds exist to remove marijuana from Schedule I of the
Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Schedule 1 is supposed to be limited to hard drugs with addictive
propensities and with no legitimate medical usage.
1997 AD: December 20, British Home Secretary, Jack Straw (Labor) is told by the Daily Mirror that his son,
William, sold 10 pounds worth of cannabis to a reporter Dawn Alford. Straw immediately escorts his own son
to a police station to turn himself in. The lad is cautioned several weeks later.
1998 AD: March, Madrid — European and American scientists defended medical marihuana at an
International Symposium on Cannabis and the Brain held at the Foundation Ramon Areces. According to
them, the plant is effective in treating people with cancer and multiple sclerosis, but is not addictive.
1998 AD: Australia, March, Victoria's police commissioner, Mr Neil Comrie, has admitted the fight against
drugs has failed and is set to introduce a radical statewide plan to keep drug users out of courts.
1998 AD: Conservative MP David Prior becomes the third British MP to publicly admit having smoked
cannabis. He is against legalization.
1998 AD: MORE than 100 French artists and intellectuals signed a petition admitting to taking soft drugs and
offering themselves for prosecution.
1998 AD: March 28 About 20,000 people marched from Hyde Park to Trafalgar Square in the Decriminalize
Cannabis March organized by the Independent on Sunday, CLCIA and others. Speakers in the Square
included Howard Marks,Rosie Boycott, Paul Flynn MP and Caroline Coon. The new UK Anti -Drugs
Coordinator, Keith Hallawell, arrogantly stated that the march was a Red Herring (irrelevant).
1998 AD: UK, Times 24 March 1998, A judge allowed a liver transplant patient to go free after he admitted
growing and using cannabis to ease his pain. Sympathizing with him, Judge John Hopkin said: "I accept
that's why you were growing it; to relieve the considerable pain you must suffer. That is against the taw as it
stands at the present time, but there is very substantial mitigation in your case." Richard Gifford, 49, a father of
6 was given a two year conditional discharge at Nottingham crown court after pleading guilty to producing
and possessing cannabis. The judge said "Whether this substance should be obtained by prescription is a
matter for parliament, but it does seem from a number of cases that appear before me that it is benefit to a
number of persons." Paddy Tipping, PPS to Jack Straw, the Home secretary said the government has no
plans to decriminalize cannabis "People like Judge Hopkin say the acknowledge there is a valuable medical
effect, but there has been no compelling research done to suggest that ".
1998 AD: April, Czech Republic — President Vaclav Havel vetoes a law banning possession of drugs for
personal use and sent it back to Parliament, citing human rights concerns. "The President reached the
opinion that the law would lead to the prosecution of victims rather than culprits," said spokesman Ladislav
Spacek. Drug experts have warned that the legislation could lead to an increase in crime and drug prices
and a decline in the willingness of addicts to be cured. — Reuters
1998 AD: 4 April, A man accused of growing and giving cannabis to his wife, a multiple sclerosis sufferer,
was cleared by a jury's majority verdict of cultivating, cultivating with intent to supply, and supplying cannabis.
Cab driver Alan Blythe, 52, of Runcorn, Cheshire, had used the defense of duress of circumstances, which
the jury at Warrington Crown Court accepted. He claimed he had grown the cannabis and supplied it to his
wife Judith, 48, because he was afraid that without it the acute symptoms of MS could trigger her suicide. The
jury ignored the judge's suggestion that Mr Blythe had failed to prove duress of circumstances for the charge
of cultivation. But they followed this advice in relation to possession, for which Mr Blythe was fined 100.
1998 AD: 21 April, Belgium officially decriminalizes cannabis after a decision by Minister de Clerk of Justice.
That is you will not be prosecuted for possession for personal consumption.
1998 AD: SAN FRANCISCO April 22, 1998 — A San Francisco marijuana club reopened under another
name just a day after a court order shut down its predecessor.
1998 AD: Italy decriminalizes possession of drugs and permits small scale cultivation of cannabis for own
use.
1998 AD: Danny Tungate polled 7.6f the vote as a Legalize Cannabis Candidate in the UK local elections,
Catton Grove ward, Norwich
1998 AD: June 12, The UK Government has granted a license to grow and possess cannabis for the
purposes of medical trials, to Dr Geoffrey Guy of GW Pharmaceuticals. The crop at a secret location in south-
east England, is guarded by electrified razor -wire fences, security cameras and guard dogs.
1998 AD: Whilst US Federal Authorities make threats and arrests of Californian doctors who recommend
cannabis and force the closure of most medical marijuana clubs in the state, Oakland by -pass federal law by
appointing medical marijuana suppliers as deputies thereby making them immune from arrest.
1998 AD: Germany, A petition of 30 thousand signatures organized by the "Selbsthilfegruppe Cannabis als
Medizin" in Berlin was handed in to the Senat of Berlin in March 1998. All governing parties (CDU, SPD, PDS
and Bndnis 90 / Die Grnen) discussed the issue and unanimously support it!
The signatures being collected currently, will be handed to the "Petitionsausschuss des Deutschen
Bundestages" together with the 30 thousand from Berlin.. ACM, Arbeitsgemeinschaft Cannabis als Medizin
(Association for Cannabis as Medicine ) 1998 AD: June 5; Colin Davies acquitted of cultivation in the UK after
informing the jury of his medical need and despite instructions from the judge that they had to rule on law and
evidence alone. See Rights of Jurors.
1998 AD: A group of Welsh Cannabis Smokers headed by Chris Rawley lays prosecution papers upon Jack
Straw, Tony Blair, Lord Bingham, a Crown Court Judge and Tenby Magistrates, in the process of a public
prosecution for crimes against humanity and peace, and crimes against children, for upholding an illegal
prohibition of cannabis.
1998 AD: September 5, Release and The Lindesmith lnstituteorganise the symposium "Options for Control in
the 21st Century', with experts from around the world gathering in London.
1998 AD: October, CLCIA Chairman challenges local Judge on cannabis safety
1998 AD: November 11, UK. The House of Lords rule that based upon the evidence presented for them the
Government should make cannabis available to the sick without further delay, but that they are against
legalization for recreational use. Jack Straw, Home Secretary, immediately rejects the House of Lord's Report
saying that cannabis will not be made available until a suitable pharmaceutical standard preparation has
been thoroughly tested.
1998 AD: November, "We.. say that on the medical evidence available, moderate indulgence in cannabis has
little ill -effect on health, and that decisions to ban or legalize cannabis should be based on other
considerations. ": The Lancet, vol 352, number 9140, November 14 1998
1998 AD: December 24: Prince Charles tells a sufferer of Multiple Sclerosis that he has heard that cannabis
can help.
1999 AD: January 21, USA: Medicinal Marijuana Advocate, Steve Kubby and Wile Busted
1999 AD: February 23, UK: 55- year -old arthritis sufferer jailed for one year for using cannabis to relieve his
pain.
1999 AD: March 4, ALASKA: Medical Marijuana Law Starts
1999 AD: March 15, USA: Federal Judge Gives OK to Pot Case
1999 AD: March 21, USA: Government Study Labels Marijuana A Useful Medicine
1999 AD: March 21, Only 8 People Can Legally Use Pot As Medicine
1999 AD: March 23, GERMANY: Health Minister Supports Medical Marihuana
1999 AD: March 30, CANADA: Pot Users Take Fewer Road Risks Than Drunks Study Says
1999 AD: April 1, USA: Farmers Lobby to Legalize the Growing of Hemp
1999 AD: April 7, USA: Florida Supreme Court Hears Medical Marijuana Case
1999 AD: March, The LEGALISE CANNABIS ALLIANCE becomes an official political party in the UK. 1999
AD: April 9, UK: Pro - Cannabis Lobby To Stand in Norwich
1999 AD: April 23, SWITZERLAND: Legalizing Cannabis
1999 AD: May 1, Many thousands march for legalization around the world
1999 AD: May 6, UK: Local Election Results, May 6 1999, Legalize Cannabis Alliance candidates poll
average 3.5BR >1999 AD: May 10, USA: NV Assembly Bill Eases Marijuana Penalties
1999 AD: May 20, UK Government objects to cannabis bill 95 MPs support MM bill. Eric Mann's parole
revoked to silence him.
1999 AD: June 9, CANADA: Two Patients Get Federal Go -Ahead To Smoke Pot
1999 AD: June 11, US Kentucky: Hemp Museum Opens Doors To History Of Versatile Plant
1999 AD: June 11, NEW ZEALAND: Advice To Review Dope Law Repeated
1999 AD: June 13, UK: Cannabis Inhalers In First Legal Health Test
1999 AD: June 21, CANADA: Compassion Club To Grow Pot In Homes Of Members
1999 AD: June 21, SCOTLAND: Doctors Back Legalizing Cannabis
1999 AD: June 24, JAMAICA: Official Encourages Cultivation Of Hemp
1999 AD: June 30, UK: Jails Chief Says Drug Test Regime Is Useless
1999 AD: September 6, UK: MS Patients Recruited To Test Cannabis Pill
1999 AD: Oct. 14, Kingston, Jamaica, The Jamaican Senate has unanimously approved a resolution
establishing a commission to explore the decriminalization of marijuana.
1999 AD: Nov 25, The Legalize Cannabis Alliance candidate in the Kensington and Chelsea By- election,
Colin Paisley gained 141 votes, 8th out of 18 candidates.
2000 AD: Jan 12, CANADA: Hepatitis C Patient Wins Right To Smoke Pot
2000 AD: March 6, UK: First Conference Of The Legalize Cannabis Alliance
2000 AD: March 25, UK: Inquiry Calls For Softer Line On Hard Drugs - But Blair Says No
2000 AD: March 29, SWITZERLAND: Swiss Parliament Legalizes Cannabis
2000 AD: March 30, Malaysian Gets Life For Growing Cannabis Plant
2000 AD: April 4, MALAWI: Minister Steps Up Campaign To Legalize Marijuana
2000 AD: May 4, The Legalize Cannabis Alliance fields 5 candidates in Norwich local elections (Sarah
Homes, Mick Pryce, Hugh Robertson, Trevor Smith, Tina Smith), one in Peterborough (Marcus Davies).
Derrick Large receives over 400 votes in the Romsey by- election won by a Liberal Democrat.
2000 AD: May 6, Hundreds of thousands of people march for the end of the War on Cannabis
2000 AD: June 28, CANADA: Medical Pot Grower Cleared
2000 AD: June 28, NETHERLANDS: Dutch cannabis vote irks cabinet
2000 AD: July 17, USA CA: Federal Judge Clears Way for Oakland Club to Distribute Pot to
Seriously III Patients
2000 AD: July 31, CANADA: Pot Prohibition Unconstitutional, Rules Court Of Appeals
2000 AD: August 1: UK: Rheumatoid Arthritis Treatment From Cannabis
2000 AD: August 15, USA CA: Appeals Court Approves Marijuana As Medicine
2000 AD: September 6, EUROPE: Dutch, Swiss and German Governments To Act on Marijuana
2000 AD: September 8, USA CA: Doctors' Rights Backed Under Pot Law
2000 AD: September 9, GUAM: High Court Ruling Backs Rastafarian's Sacrament — Cannabis
2000 AD: September 14, USA CA: Feds Rule Doctors May Recommend Pot
2000 AD: September 28, UK: MS Sufferer Cleared Of Cannabis Charge
2000 AD: October, Canadian Government Will Legalize Medical Marijuana Use
2000 AD: October 20, UK: Cannabis Less Harmful Than Aspirin, Says Scientist
2000 AD: November 24, USA: CA: Study Of Pot's Benefits To AIDS Patients Gets DEA's Blessing
2000 AD: December 22, CANADA: Legal Marijuana Operation Opens
2001 AD: 4 January, CANADA: Firm Grows Medical Pot In Mine Shaft
2001 AD: 19 January, BELGIUM: Seen Decriminalizing Cannabis Use
2001 AD: 10 March, SWITZERLAND: Move To Legalize Cannabis
2001 AD: 21 March, MEXICO: Leader Backs Call To Legalize Drugs
2001 AD: 22 March, UK: Lords Urge Legal Use Of Cannabis
2001 AD: 7 April, CANADA: Gravely III To Get Medical Pot
2001 AD: 26 April, USA: Legalize Marijuana, New Mexico Governor Urges
2001 AD: 11 June, Pot Smokers Just As Healthy — Study
2001 AD: 25 June, UK: Home Secretary Praises Cannabis Scheme
2001 AD: 1 July, UK: Drug Czar Recants: Cannabis Use Does Not Lead To ******
2001 AD: 4 July, CANADA: Legal- Marijuana Users To Get Photo Id Cards
2001 AD: 5 July, UK: In One Part Of London, Police Turn Blind Eye To Marijuana To Target Harder Crime
2001 AD: 19 August, FIJI: Marijuana a Fiji Election Issue: A Fijian high chief has said his people should be
shot dead if found planting marijuana
2001 AD: 13 September, FRANCE: Koucher Opposes Drugs Law
2001 AD: 20 October, THE NETHERLANDS: Dutch Government Plans To Put Cannabis On Prescription
2001 AD: 14 December, INDONESIA: Marijuana Trafficker Gets Death Sentence
2001 AD: 16 December, UK: Study Finds No Cannabis Link To Hard Drugs
2002 AD: 25 January, NORWAY: Commission Set To CaII For Decriminalization
2002 AD: 16 February, KENYA: Hashish Traffickers Jailed For 45 Years
2002 AD: 9 March, UK: Lib Dems back radical drug reforms
2002 AD: 12 March, CANADA: Doctors Want Marijuana Decriminalized
2002 AD: 14 March, UK: Reclassify Cannabis, Says Official Report
2002 AD: 1 June, MEXICO: Chihuahua Considers Legalizing Pot
2002 AD: 29 June, PHILIPPINES: Death For Marijuana
2002 AD: 10 July, David Blunkett's Announcement of reclassification of Cannabis, and Oliver Letwin's reply
in Parliament
2002 AD: July, Australian Police Close Cannabis Cafe.
2002 AD: July, UK Drugs Tsar Hellawell Resigns Over Plans To Reclassify Cannabis Possession.
2002 AD: July, Canadian Judge Says Medical Cannabis Is Not Illegal.
2002 AD: August, Israeli Government Approves Use Of Cannabis By Terminally III.
2002 AD: October, Cohn Davies Who Opened The Dutch Experience Cannabis Cafe In Stockport, UK, Is
Sentenced To Three Years In Prison For Cannabis Offences.
2002 AD: November, Kenya Considers Legalizing Bhang.
2002 AD: November, UK Doctors Announce Cannabis Extracts Used In Trials On MS And Pain Patients
Proving Effective.
2002 AD: November, Czech Doctors Claim Cannabis Helps Sufferers of Parkinson's Disease.
2002 AD: December, US Study Defies Gateway Theory That Cannabis Use Leads To Use Of Hard Drugs.
2002 AD: December, Canadian Judge Orders Police To Return Medical Cannabis.
2002 AD: December UK, Oakland, US, City Authorities Deputize Medical Marijuana Club Founders.
2003 AD: February, US Jurors Become Angry That Trial Judge Had Not Informed Them That Ed Rosenthal
Was Deputized by City Authorities in Oakland, after they convicted him of cultivation.
2003 AD: February, UN Narcotics Control Board Questions Canada's Policy On Use Of Marijuana.
2003 AD: February, US Police Arrest 55 Suppliers Of Cannabis Paraphernalia.
2003 AD: March, Pharmacies in The Netherlands Sell Medical Cannabis More Expensive Than Many Coffee
shops.
2003 AD: March, Danish Drug Dealers Go On Strike
2003 AD: March, JAMAICA: Bill To Legalize Ganja For Private Use
2003 AD: April, RUSSIA: Nostalgic Small Town Puts Cannabis On Its Flag
2007 AD: Hemp and Marijuana remain Illegal to possess and cultivate for medicine and natural resources. In
some countries, there is even a death penalty for growing or possessing over a certain amount.
Some of the more well known people who do or have used marijuana Do you think they belong in prison
with the other millions of Americans that are there for marijuana? If not do we really have two sets of
laws? ....if you like someone even admire them does that mean they should not be in prison? But the
rest of us should?
Barack Obarna, president - elect. Bill Clinton, 42nd president of the U.S. John Kerry,, U.S. Senator and
2004 Democratic nominee for president. John Edwards, multi- millionaire, former U.S. Senator, and 2004
Democratic nominee for vice president. Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, 2008 Republican nominee for
vice president. .r +. H me Secretary Jacqui Smith. Transport Secretary Ruth Kellv.and and Chancellor
Alistair Darling. Josh Howard, NBA all -star. New York Governor David Paterson. Former Vice President,
Nobel Peace Prize winner, and Oscar winner Al Gore. Former Sen. Bill Bradley, who smoked while
playing professional basketball. S preme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. former Speaker of the House
Newt Gingrich, and former New York Governor George Pataki. Billionaire and New York City Mayor
Michael Bloomberg. G.W. Bush has circuitously but fairly clearly admitted having smoked
marijuana Okay for him but the comon man should have his life and family ruined for the same
I'd like to add Carl Sagan to the list
We can go to medical marijuana users as well. Monte) Williams, heavily decorated navy veteran and talk
show host. Documented on his own website as using medical marijuana for treatment for his MS....
Here's the link to his note about it:
(.+ i .4A•t -in; • gasitingAetion
How about star athletes There are a lot of them Not the lazy types the currant drug war portrays
Mark Matthew Stepnoski, originally from Erie, Pennsylvania, first made a name for himself at the University
of Pittsburgh where he was named Kodak All- American, Walter Camp All- American, and was a finalist for
the Outland Trophy, an award given to nation's top offensive /defensive lineman. From 1989 to 2001 he
was one of the NFL's top lineman, splitting his career between the Dallas Cowboys and Houston/
Tennessee Oilers. During his career he amassed numerous accolades including five consecutive Pro
Bowl appearances and two Super Bowl rings with the Dallas Cowboys. Mark was also named second
team center on the NFL All- Decade team for the 1990s.
Since retiring from football in 2001, Mark has dedicated himself to reforming America's misguided
marijuana policy. In addition to his role on NORML's advisory board, Mark recently served as President of
Texas NORML.
Various credible reports from veteran players retiring from the NBA over past decade make clear that
somewhere between half to two-thirds of active NBA professional basketball players are routine partakers
of cannabis. And the primary reason for use is that it helps increase focus and also moderate potential
over - aggression while engaged in this high speed, often high impact sport.
Kary Mullis, nobel prize- winner in chemistry for his invention of Polymerase Chain Reactions the PCR
process
Richard Feynman — Nobel Prize winner in physics and one of my personal heroes. He was an important
member of the Manhattan Project and wrote the definitive report on the Challenger disaster. If you don't
know that story, you should read about it.
TV newsman John Stuart Movie maker Steven Spielberg William F. Buckley: jai ': :. ,g53.2/
1088602098.shtml
Willie Nelson he's been at it since 1954 Bill Maher admits to smoking MJ at least once every
show Graig Ferguson Cheech and Chong Cheech recently beat Anderson Cooper on
championship jeopardy....Tom Brokaw admits he smoked it back in his earlier days. He says he didn't like
it, but he went on to be successful!
Harrison Ford Bing Crosby Sir Richard Branson — Billionaire tycoon and all around great guy Jge_
— Actor, Comedian, Film Producer aaay Coop, Former law enforcement officer, businessman,
film producer, family man
�$ itf ailyr• '. . , k'new /article- 4717 0/R chard -: anson -- mit, s! •. e ru.s- son.html
Freddy Fender served time in Angola prison for marijuana possession. Two years before his death, Hoyt
Axton was arrestested for marijuana possession John Wayne admitted to smoking it once,
pilgrim better hang him....Add Al Gore to the list. http: /fwww realchange.orgigore.htm (about half way
down)
Pierre Berton, possibly the most important Canadian author of all time.h / /www.ctv.calservieti
ArticleNews /story /CTVNews11101857330289 96
Robert Mitchum, Hollywood Actor; James Brown (Ltp://www.anecdotage,comiinclex.plp?aid=11481)
Kiefer Sutherland ( p : / /www.anecdotage.com /index.p_hp ?aid =1398
Bob Dylan Bob Marley Jack Black and Kyle Gass
Rick Steves: Successful Travel Writer and NORML Advisory Board memberJp: / /www.youtube.com/
tcb_?v=-1. gHGOVsfA,
Newt Gingrich, Pablo Picasso, Jack Nicholson, Francis Ford Coppola, Farrelly Brothers, Baudelaire, Paul
MacCartney, John Lennon, Steve Jobs, Tom Petty, Rodney Dangerfield, Bill Murray, and George Lucas.
Peter Lewis, billionaire founder of Progressive Insurance, who has been described as a functioning
pothead. Along with George Soros, he contributes millions to legalization efforts.
link: jitl ;lwr+rw.aim.org/ media- monitorfwho -iL- peter iewls
ALL of the Beatles (music legends) / Sean Penn, Oliver Stone (director extraordinaire) / Hunter S.
Thompson (journalist /legend) / Ken Kesey (novelist) / Al Franken (actor/writer /Senator) / Madonna (pop
superstar) / Drew Carey (comedian /Price is Right host) (h/tp: / /www.quardian.co.uls /world /200343106/
�;� i�nce. relig ?on;,
Mens Warehouse owner — George Zimmer, Billionaire John Sperling — owner of the apollo
group Both of these guys are still smoking. John Sperling uses medically. and Ted Turner, owner of
turner networks.
I tried to think of a single career group that didn't have its own share of marijuana users, and I couldn't
come up with a single one. You find smokers in politicians, businesspeople, salespeople, artists, athletes,
academics, construction workers, store clerks, secretaries, factory workers, everyone smokes.... Even men
of god use cannabis
Millions of successful parents and career men and women have — and continue to — smoke pot. Just in my
immediate friend circle, 1 know (very good) teachers who get high on the regular, (very successful) lawyers
who smoke weekly if not more often, guys who make mid -six figures as restaurant owners who are high all
the time, and on and on.
Those are the folks who — the ones who quietly live their lives while smoking marijuana. Of course, such
people can't "come out" due to the perfectly reasonable fear of having their dogs shot by some swat raid,
and then spending some time in a cage with rapists and murderers
Marijuana and hemp activist Woody Harrelson
p: / /en,wikipadia,org /wikiNV•ody Harrelson
And I would like to mention another issue. The overcrowding of prisons could be greatly reduced by
releasing prisoners incarcerated for violating marijuana laws. Don't be disconnected these are someones
mother, father, brother or sister that are in jail for smoking.
Here is a list of nearly 3,000 folks who came out of the closet and admitted to the wwworld they're pot
heads.... "success" is all relative...
The Cannabis Consumers Campaign
http://www.cannabisconsumers.on-1/
From Forbes magazine....People who use marijuana
Carl Sagan.... World renowned Astronomer
Who said "the illegality of cannabis is outrageous, an impediment to full utilization of a drug which helps
produce the serenity and insight, sensitivity and fellowship so desperately needed in this increasingly mad
and dangerous world."
Barack Obama ...Almost every American President before Barry, from Washington to Clinton to Bush, has
had a pot addled past. " Anyone who wonders what kind of future a pothead can have should take a hard
look at Barack Obama. Not only can you grow up to be ridiculously smart, you can grow up to be President.
Sir Richard Branson ...the 236th richest person in the world, founder of the Virgin empire, made his entire
multi - billion dollar fortune from absolutely nothing. Has publicly stated that there's nothing wrong with
smoking pot.
Michael Bloomberg ...The Mayor of New York's last name is associated with 'business' and 'success', not
'failure' and 'the munchies'. But if you're one of those idiots who believes a pothead could never amount to
anything, you'd have never guessed this was the way Bloomberg would turn out. Did he smoke pot when he
was younger? In his own words You bet I did. And 1 enjoyed it!"
Ted Turner a billionaire — He single - handedly invented the 24 -hour news cycle with CNN, was named
Time's Man of the Year in 1991, is the largest private land owner in America, and also owns a few other TV
stations, and the Atlanta Braves. So... Not what you'd expect from a guy who grew pot in his college dorm
MOM.
Arnold Schwarzenegger...The Governator is actually on video smoking weed. In the classic documentary
Pumping Iron, he is seen smoking, and loving, a joint. Since his election to office, he has presided over
California's medical marijuana renaissance. Gives them legal access to some of the best weed in the
country, and even allows them to grow plants in their own home. According to Arnold, marijuana "is not a
drug, it's a leaf."
Mark Stepnoski...two-time Super Bowl champion. Who confirmed "responsible use" of marijuana during his
pro career." After a game you need something to relax," said Stepnoski. "I'd rather smoke than take
painkillers."
Stephen King...I haven't included many creative types on this list, but writing 1,000 page novels. You can't
just 'jam out' The Stand. Over the course of his career, both his output and his success have been
unparalleled. He's authored upwards of 50 novels and short stories which have sold a collective 500 million
copies worldwide. He's also been one of the most vocal proponents for the legalization of marijuana, calling
laws against the drug "ridiculous,"
Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps ....sure has a lot of motivation to be the best with 14 medals All those
millions spent on adds to tell us pot heads are not motivated went up in smoke what a waste of time and
money motivated people smoke pot and unmotivated people smoke pot good people smoke pot and
bad people smoke pot marijuana use does not define a person....contrary to the propaganda put out by
crazed zealots and paid for by taxpayers we could sure use those moneys for a better purpose
Ricky Williams...is another great NFL player who has spoken out about the benefits of marijuana,despite it
costing him endorsements and almost his entire football career. Williams was briefly a spokesperson for the
antidepressant Paxil, which he was prescribed to treat his social anxiety disorder. That endorsement deal
ended when Williams told ESPN that "marijuana is 10 times better for me than Paxil."
Ross Rebagliati, Canadian snowboarder and 1998 Olympic gold medalist
Montel Williams...The talk show prince discovered pot late in life. Back in 1999 he was diagnosed with
Multiple Sclerosis, and couldn't find anything to suppress his symptoms. He tried all sorts of pain killers;
none worked, and all had horrible side effects. He decided to try marijuana and it worked wonders for him!
Years later, he is one of MS's most recognizable faces, one of medical marijuana's staunchest defenders,
and still managed to host his own talk show until 2008.
Rick Steves, author of 27 top selling European travel guides, host of his own TV show and radio show, and
a very outspoken pothead. He's a member of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws,
and credits pot for turning him into a better travel writer.
Aaron Sorkin...His work on The West Wing, both as writer and producer, earned him multiple Emmy Awards,
and countless nominations for other awards.
Willie Nelson..millions of productive Americans who use marijuana.
"I personally know boxers, body builders, cyclists, runners and athletes from all walks of life that train and
compete with the assistance of marijuana," said WWE wrestler Rob Van Dam.
Some of the best cricket players of all time, like Phil Tufnell and Sir tan Botham, have admitted to regularly
using marijuana to deal with the stress and muscle aches common to all athletes. In 2001, half of South
Africa's cricket team was punished after being caught toking up with the team physiotherapist.
Regular marijuana use didn't impede the ability of basketball legends like Rasheed Wallace, Charles
Oakley or Kareem Abdul - Jabbar. Indeed, Oakley has claimed that over half of NBA players smoke pot
before each game. Since these players are top athletes whose career depends on them being at peak
performance for every game, it stands to reason that perhaps they are using marijuana because it provides
some benefit to their abilities on the court.
Cannabis can actually enhance and improve human abilities. Discovering how toking up possibly helps the
world's greatest athletes to better their performance could also teach us how this plant can better serve us
all.
'
Famous people that smoke weed.
Almost every single one of these names have admited to smoking cannabis.
If all these famous people do it, including presidents, why is it still illegal. If a presidant can do something,
why cant we?
• Abbie Hoffman
• Abraham Lincoln. On a Hohner box cover but disputed.
• Al Gore.
• Aldous Huxley
• Aleister Crowley
- Alexander Dumas
• Alice B. Toklas
• Allen Ginsberg. Poet.
• Alexis Korner. Musician.
• Andy Warhol. Artist.
• Annita Roddock. Founder The Body Shop'.
• Anjelica Huston. Hollywood actress. Jack Nicholson's girlfriend for 17 years. Pro -drug statements by her
in Peter McWilliams book, 'Ain't Nobody's Business if You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in Our
Free Country.
• Arthur Conan Doyle. Author, creator 'Sherlock Holmes'.
• Aswad. Musicians.
• Beatles.
• Bill Clinton.
• Bill Gates. Not confirmed, just very strongly hinted at in the Playboy interview
• Bill Murray Arrested for possession
• Bob Denver.
• Bob Dylan. Poet, singer, song writer.
• Bob Marley. Poet, singer, song writer.
• The Bishop of Monmouth.
• Brian Eno. Singer, song writer. Signed 'Independent' list.
• Boy George.
• British Lords & MP's - too many to list .
• Buddy Rich.
• Cab Calloway. Jazz musician.
• Carl Sagan. Author.
• Caroline Coon. Artist, founder 'Release', manager of the Clash.
• Carl Segan . Author.
• Carlos Santana. Musician, guitarist.
• Carrie Fischer.
• Cary Grant.
• Cary Mullis. Nobel Laurate, Biology
• Charles Beaudelaire
• Charles Dickens. Claims but no evdience.
• Cheech Marin.
• Chris Armstrong. Footballer, tested positive.
• Chris Conrad.
• Chris Farley. 60's singer.
• Chris Rock.
• Conan O'Brian.
• Count Basie. Jazz legend.
• Dame Ruth Runsiman. Author; Police Federation Report (March 2000) advising liberlization.
• Dave Gilmour . Musician ; Pink Floyd.
• Dave'Tinki Wink Thompson - TV personality (UK); the Teliie Tubbie that was sacked.
• Diego Rivera.
• Dion Fortune.
• Dioscorides.
• Dizzy Gillespie.
• Douglas Adams. Author.
• Dr Francis Crick. Nobel Prize winner.
• Dr Lester Grinspoon.
• Dr Mark Porter. TV doctor who says cannabis is not more harmful than alcohol.
• Dr Anne Biezanek (authoress)
• Dr R.D.Laing.
• Dr John Marks
• Dr W.B. O'Shaugnessy.
• Drew Barrymore.
- Duke Ellington.
• Eddie Ellison. Ex head of Scotland Yard Drug Squad.
• Edgar Allen Poe. Author, multi -drug user.
• Elvis Presley. Singer, FBI informer.
• Emperor Liu Chi -nu.
• Emperor Shen -Nung.
• Ernest Hemmingway. Author.
• Errol Flynn.
• Fela Kuti. Musician. Afro /jazz king.
• Felix Dennis. Publisher.
• Fitz Hugh Ludlow.
• Fran Healey. Musician; Travis.
• Francis Ford Coppella.
• Francis Rabelais.
• Francis Wilkinson. Ex Chief Constable of Gwent Police.
• Fredreich Nietzshe.
• Ganesh - Hindu God.
• Gary Johnson.
• Gene Krupa.
• George Clinton. Ex President's brother.
• George W Bush. Possibly the greatest living hypocrite.
• George Gurdjieff.
• George Melly. Jazz musician (early sponsor of Legalise Cannabis Campaign, Uk).
• George Michael. Singer.
• George Washington.
• George Soros.
• Gerard de Nerval.
• Gilberto Gil. Brazilian musical icon.
• The Greatful Dead.
• Hasan I- Sabah.
• Heinrich Khunrath.
• Helen Petrova Blavatsky.
• Henri Michaux.
• Herman Hesse.
• Hiero the Second.
• Howard Marks. Author, cannabis smuggller.
• Howard Stern, Admitted it on the radio.
• Hue T'o.
• Hunter S. Thompson. Smoked weed and snorted coke with George Bush.
• Ian Botham. Convicted Cricket legend.
• Irvine Welsh.
• Kurt Cobain.
• Jabir lbn el- Hayyan.
• Jack Herer. Author 'The Emporor Wears No Cloths'
• Jack Kerouac. Author ' On the Road'.
• Jack Nicholson. Film actor.
• Jackie Gleason.
• Jackson Pollock.
• Jane Fonda. Actress.
• James Brown. Singer, song writer.
• Janis Joplin. Singer, song writer.
• Jesse OVentura.
• Jerry Lee Lewis. Musician, song writer.
• Jimmy Dorsey.
• Pharoahs of Egypt. Traces in body samples.
• Phil Donohue.
• Phil Tufnell. Former test cricketer, now media celeb.
• Peter Fonda. Actor; 'Easy Rider'.
• Peter Sellers. Actor, comedian.
• Peter Tosh. Musician.
• Philip K. Dick. Science fiction author.
• Pierre Burton.
• Pierre Elliot Trudeau.
• Pink Floyd; Syd Barret and Roger Waters.
• Prince Charles. Heir to the Throne. Quoted while visiting a hospital; 'I understand cannabis is good for
medical use .
• Prince William.
- Prince Harry.
• Pythagoras.
• Queen Arnegunde.
• Queen Victoria. Used it for medical purposes_
• Ram Dass.
• Ray Charles. Musician.
• Rev Kenneth Leech.
• Richard Branson. 'Virgin'. Entreprenur.
• Richard Feynman, Nobel Prize Laureate physicist, founder of quantum electrodynamics.
• Richard Prior.
• Richard Wilson. Actor; 'One Foot in the Grave.
• Rimbaud. Author.
• Robert Burns. Mentioned it in a poem.
• Robert 'King' Carter. Grower.
• Robert Anton Wilson. Author.
• Robert Mitchum. Jailed 90 days for possession of marijuana, 1949.
• Roger McGough. 60's Liverpool poet.
• Rolling Stones. Rock band.
• Ronnie Scot. Jazz dub owner, musician, busted on stage 1958, at his club in Soho, London.
• S Club 7. Super clean' pop band, busted in Soho, very embarrassing.
• Salvador Dali. Artist.
• Samuel Beckett.
• Samuel Taylor Coleridge. Poet.
• Shen Nung. One of the fathers of Chinese medicine. 2700 B.0 .
• Sinead O'Connor. Singer.
• Sidi -Hidi.
• Sigmun Freud. Shrink.
• Sonny Bono.
• Super Furry Animals. Welsh band who wrote a song about Howard Marks.
• Stephen King.
• Sting /Gordon Sumners.
• Tariq Ali. Activist Writer.
• Tenessee Williams. Author.
• Terence McKenna. Author.
• Terry Gilliam. Actor, comedian;Monty Python.
• The Who. Rock band.
• Thelonius Monk.
• Thomas Jefferson.
• Timothy Leary.
• Tom Lehrer.
• Top Tories. Senior members of the shadow cabinet.
• Tony Elliot. Publisher, 'Time Out.
• Tracy Blevins. Artist.
• Tuppy Gore.
• UB40. Band.
• Victor Hugo.
• Vincent Van Gogh. Artist.
• Walt Disney. Cartoonist.
• Walter Benjamin.
• Jimmy Hendrix. Rock guitarist, singe, song writer
• Jim Morrison. Musician, songwriter; The Doors.
• Joan of Arc. Accused of using 'witch herbs' (another name for cannabis).
• Joan Rivers.
• Joe Strummer. Musician, singer, songer writer; The Clash.
• John Belushi.
• John Denver.
• John F Kennedy. Popular US president (assassinated).
• John Keats. Poet.
• John Lennon. Musician, song writer; The Beatles.
• John Le Mesurier. Tried it but said its not for him.
• Johnny Cash.
• John Peel. DJ, BBC broadcaster.
• John Sinclair.
• Judge John L. Kane. Chief Judge from the US District Court
• Julie Christie. Actress.
• Jules Verne.
• John Wayne. 'I tried it once but it didn't do anything to me.'
• Kelsey Grammar.
• Ken Livingston. Mayor of London - supports decriminalisation but does not smoke or support the use of
recreational drugs.
• Kirk Douglas. Actor.
• Kurt Cobain.
• Larry Adler. Harmonica player and
friend of George Gershwin. May have written a song about it.
• Lenny Bruce. Comedian.
• Lewis Carroll. Author 'Alice in Wonderland'.
• Linda St Clair
• Little Richard. Musician.
• Lord Avebury.
• Lord Byron. Poet.
• Lord Deedes.
• Lord Tony Gifford. QC, civil rights lawyer.
• Louis Armstrong. Oh what a wonderful world'.
• Louis Hebert.
• Mark Thomas . Comedian.
• Marlon Brando. Actor.
• Martin Sheen.
• Mary Shelly. Author 'Frankinstein'.
• Mary Tyler Moore.
• Mick Jagger. Singer, song writer, The Rolling Stones.
• Michael Mansfield QC. Lawyer.
• Jade Jagger.
• JC 100. Fastest rapper in the west.
• JT Moore. Legendary white rasta guitarist.
• Mike Tyson.
• Miles Davis. Jazz /rock drummer.
• Mo Mowlan. Genuine honest politician.
• Modigliani. Sculptor.
• Montgomery Clift. Mentioned in his biography.
• Neil Diamond.
• Nick Hornby. Author.
• Niel Young. Musician.
• Norman Mailer. Author.
• Oasis. Rock band.
• Oliver Stone.
• Oscar Wilde. Poet.
• Pablo Picasso. Artist.
• Pancho Villa. Mexican bandit revolutionary.
• Paul Flynn. Uk Member of Parliament.
• Paul McCartney. Musician, song writer; The Beatles.
• Paul Simon. Musician, song writer.
• Whitney Houstonn. Busted at Hawaii airport but ran away.
• William Burroughs. Author, poet, artist.
• Will Self. Author. Did smack on Blairs plane.
• William Shakespeare. Playwright.
• William Straw. UK Home Sec Jack Straw's son. Cautioned for supplying undercover journalists in pub
'shocker'.
• Willie Nelson.
• Winston Churchill. British Prime Minister, poet, artist & multi drug user.
• Woody Harrelson. Actor. Features in a book on growing medical marijuana .
• Zoroaster. Persian prophet.