greens medicinal marijuana policy

[grace]

thanks for the imput grace, its highly appriciated

 

the public consumption of cannabis will never be allowed. well it might, but if it does it will fall into the category of tobacco in that respect and since smoking cigarettes has all but been banned while out in public, i dont see cannabis consumption being allowed

 

Im all for recreational people getting licenses too. the only differences i would impose is that they dont need to see a doctor and instead of $5 plant insurance they'd have to pay $20-50 per plant and wouldnt be covered by insurance unless they sought it out from a private company. But this policy is about keeping the medicinal and recreational use/cultivation of cannabis totally seperate from each other in order to prevent the argument for legalization via medicinal cannabis. That is a major hurdle that always gets tripped over when someone pushes for medicinal marijuana which is why the second point i made in the overview was to declare them totally different issues...

 

I agree WDC, they are separate issues and that can easily be reflected in legislation and with pricing/taxing measures similar to alcohol and tobacco.

 

Medical users may need ongoing supplies, quality control, subsidised supplies and possibly need their use and conditions monitored by a GP. This all costs money and while many medical users work some are on disability and are unable to work.

 

I think we may alienate and lose support from recreational users if they are out there working, paying taxes and paying for subsidised supplies etc yet still subjected to criminal laws and arrested or sent to prison. Decriminalisation could avoid some of those problems.

 

It needs to cut both ways imo

 

Otherwsie we just end up with what happens overseas ... heaps of recreational users going off to doctors ... lying about some pain in the back or whatever then being caught out and we all look bad and then the government comes down hard on everyone.

 

I agree that medical use needs to be addressed as a matter of priority though.

 

Recreational users probably need to write up their own policy

 

Good luck with it WDC ... you're doing a great job

 

grace

[tomm01]

I also don't agree to random checks coz; they'd have the right to search your whole home but I think it's just one of those things we'd have to put up with, same with recreational use being completely separate. It's just something to make the government know that we're responsible & rational.

I think there needs to be mention about helping with anxiety and depression. The current medicines are largely ineffective and Xanax, Valium etc are addictive.

One question, if this gets put forward or whatever is there a way that we vote for it? Or support it whatever. ( I know nothing about politics really ) Voted first time last year and it confused me but I did vote for the greens!

Edited September 7, 2008 by tomm01

[mull]

Trying to be flexible with the random inspection idea wdc..

 

Idea reminds of shooters licence. Cops can randomly check your registered gun in safe now, and do.

Suppose thats similar to them watching drivers for breaking road rules.

 

Sure, if it turns out the government ever allows personal growers a lic, there'll be some sort of checks done.

Not really sure why tho, do they check home brewers garages? Home brew can be used medicinally, sold, kids can swig it and it can even cause fatality..

 

Proposed 'random' exemptions:

 

-No use randomly coming for the first 2 weeks of the dark period 12/12. I wont let them in to break light discipline.

Even after then, anytime in the dark period (no doubt their business hours) would have to be extremely brief and not well lit.

 

-If they are coming from outside, they better bring a clean set of bug/pollen free clothes and shoes to change into, to inspect the indoor. Or no entry.

They might even require a shower, which can be provided at a cost and will require 7 days written notification.

 

--

 

Sure can think of more.. mostly medical.

 

 

Also like to back up Fraz on the docs and harm reduction.

[tomm01]

-If they are coming from outside, they better bring a clean set of bug/pollen free clothes and shoes to change into, to inspect the indoor. Or no entry.

They might even require a shower, which can be provided at a cost and will require 7 days written notification.

Yeh, sterile clothing cover and shoes, unless it's outdoor obviously.

But I wonder would it not be better to propose these things afterwards? (if they accept it) because otherwise they'll look at it and go, this will cost too much *aim for bin*

[Frazz]

You may already have this WDC and for everyone else too, its a proverbial gold-mine of info

 

Schaffer Library of Drug Policy

 

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/

 

Look @ this good stuff they got too ..

[tomm01]

Look @ this good stuff they got too ..

I love that poster.

Hey WDC I just read an article that stated that "a smoked plant product will not satisfy the requirements for registration as a "therapeutic good""

 

I don't know if there's a loop hole around that or whatever, or if you'll have to show reference to articles that prove marijuana smoke does not endanger lungs or that there is other methods like vapourising, but I just thought I'd mention that in case.

 

Good work btw, please post soon we want to know any updates!

[andybotwin]

...Recreational users probably need to write up their own policy ...

 

 

grace

 

 

Is this actually worth pursuing WDC, is there ANY reason to think the Greens would be interested?

[loylty gets u nothing]

by tha sounds of this

i will remain an illegal grower..

im still getting me head around

tha fact that people want to have there grow checked

that still is a major invasion of privacy

and wont be happening in my house!!

i dont care

i have core beliefs...

all the best in tha qwest guys

my wife will still pass on any info needed

but unfortunately ill withdraw from this

take care and stayu safe

bil

[grace]

by tha sounds of this

i will remain an illegal grower..

im still getting me head around

tha fact that people want to have there grow checked

that still is a major invasion of privacy

and wont be happening in my house!!

i dont care

i have core beliefs...

all the best in tha qwest guys

my wife will still pass on any info needed

but unfortunately ill withdraw from this

take care and stayu safe

bil

 

I agree bil,

The police don't check people's beer fridge or wine cellars

or medical cabinets for that matter.

Why should it be any different here.

I would only agree to checks if there was "real evidence" that it was being sold to minors

or people were operating a commerical business with a licence

and that does not include sharing with good friends

grace

[WantDaChronic]

billo i can see why you'd want to remain an illegal grower, but i think if given the option of letting someone inside your house to count your plant numbers and weigh your stash or going to prison if you are caught with those very same plants it would be stupid to pass up the inspections. sure its an invasion of privacy, but if you want to legally be able to cultivate narcotics at home you'll have to go along with all the restrictions put in place to prevent illicit access to them

 

and before another person says they dont do those checks for home brewers, etc. i think they should be doing them. I have quite a few relatives that make their own beers and wines and the sizes of their operations range from a couple of huge drums to a double garage lined with the drums staked 3 high i see nothing wrong at all with the small setups which are just for personal use, but my uncle who has the double garage sells his beer to his kid's friends for a little bit cheaper than what they could buy if for at the shops. some weekends when there is a party on he might sell a few hundred litres of beer and he doesnt for one second think to ask if there will be minors at the party who could have access to it. he also doesnt care that his beer is atleast 3x as strong as the beer being sold at the shops if those checks were put in place there is no way he could supply heaps of people in his area with cheap piss and the other family members of mine would be fine to make their own...

 

is there ANY reason to think the Greens would be interested?

the greens are not interested in any policy which promotes drug use. to them that means making it legal to use drugs. about as far as they are willing to go is to remove any punishment for the personal use and possession of cannabis, but they still would like to send us to drug treatment places if we are caught with it

 

Hey WDC I just read an article that stated that "a smoked plant product will not satisfy the requirements for registration as a "therapeutic good""

 

I don't know if there's a loop hole around that or whatever, or if you'll have to show reference to articles that prove marijuana smoke does not endanger lungs or that there is other methods like vapourising, but I just thought I'd mention that in case.

for every study i produce that says cannabis smoke isnt harmful to the lungs the opposition could pull one out saying that it is. unfortunately thats the nature of the beast, but since we can all agree that smoking anything cant be healthy for you, i wrote up a harm minimization section for the policy recommending the use of vaporizors and that instructions be given on how to cook with cannabis. being apart of the policy i wrote it will kind of be hard to knock back, especially if those options are investigated

 

Schaffer Library of Drug Policy

 

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/

thanks frazzle, i'll be sure to have a look around there after i finish this reply

 

I also don't agree to random checks coz; they'd have the right to search your whole home but I think it's just one of those things we'd have to put up with, same with recreational use being completely separate. It's just something to make the government know that we're responsible & rational.

I think as the national agency has to determine what areas we can grow in, only those areas could be searched it would be a little unfair to have them go through your entire house if say you are only allowed to grow in your garage or a single bedroom. i think the only exception to the rule would be if it was totally obvious you were living beyond your means, had sachels or cash laying around, etc. and even then i doubt the person doing the inspection could do anything other than inform the police.

 

I sent a copy of the policy off to the greens yesterday. it might have been a bit premature but i wanted to show that we are serious about this so much so that i said that while i would prefer the greens to introduce a policy like this, if by the end of the month they haven't, im sending copies to every politician and media outlet in australia as this goes much further than mere politics. I hope that lights a fire under their arses, but i imagine that once the policy is wide spread enough and everything has been confirmed as factually accurate it should atleast start a heated debate in the media