Joe Rogan on The True Reason Pot is Illegal

New Orleans City Council Reference to Marijuana

There was a whiff of extra excitement in the air last week when some marijuana enthusiasts read about the New Orleans City Council's decision to make pot possession a municipal offense, giving police the option of issuing a summons rather than arresting and booking an offender on state charges.

The reason for the buzz was that the council's ordinance said possession of marijuana would be a municipal offense unless the drug was "obtained directly or pursuant to a valid prescription or order from a practitioner."

That sounded to some folks as if the council, without any public discussion, had just legalized the use of marijuana for medical purposes in New Orleans.

Not so fast, dude.

Click Here to Read More

Say "High" to Santa for Me!

Greetings and holiday love, one and all. Not that fake ass holiday love that you get from the aggressive charity collector with the bell and the bucket in front of the supermarket, I offer you all the real shit, just like you get from Grandma.

Christmas is my favorite holiday, and not just because of the fact that you exchange gifts with loved ones, and celebrate, but because I’m aware of the original meaning behind it all.

And what would that be?

Buckle up for a good one…

Santa Claus was a magic mushroom.

http://blog.joerogan.net/archives/108

Mexico Decriminalizes Small-Scale Drug Possession

MEXICO CITY — Mexico decriminalized small amounts of marijuana, cocaine and heroin on Friday — a move that prosecutors say makes sense even in the midst of the government's grueling battle against drug traffickers.

Prosecutors said the new law sets clear limits that keep Mexico's corruption-prone police from shaking down casual users and offers addicts free treatment to keep growing domestic drug use in check.

"This is not legalization, this is regulating the issue and giving citizens greater legal certainty," said Bernardo Espino del Castillo of the attorney general's office.

The new law sets out maximum "personal use" amounts for drugs, also including LSD and methamphetamine. People detained with those quantities no longer face criminal prosecution.

Espino del Castillo says, in practice, small users almost never did face charges anyway. Under the previous law, the possession of any amount of drugs was punishable by stiff jail sentences, but there was leeway for addicts caught with smaller amounts.

"We couldn't charge somebody who was in possession of a dose of a drug, there was no way ... because the person would claim they were an addict," he said.

Despite the provisions, police sometimes hauled in suspects and demanded bribes, threatening long jail sentences if people did not pay.

"The bad thing was that it was left up to the discretion of the detective, and it could open the door to corruption or extortion," Espino del Castillo said.

Anyone caught with drug amounts under the new personal-use limit will be encouraged to seek treatment, and for those caught a third time treatment is mandatory.

The maximum amount of marijuana for "personal use" under the new law is 5 grams — the equivalent of about four joints. The limit is a half gram for cocaine, the equivalent of about 4 "lines." For other drugs, the limits are 50 milligrams of heroin, 40 milligrams for methamphetamine and 0.015 milligrams for LSD.

Mexico has emphasized the need to differentiate drug addicts and casual users from the violent traffickers whose turf battles have contributed to the deaths of more than 11,000 people since President Felipe Calderon took office in late 2006.

But one expert saw potential for conflict under the new law.

Javier Oliva, a political scientist at Mexico's National Autonomous University, said the new law posed "a serious contradiction" for the Calderon administration.

"If they decriminalize drugs it could lead the army, which has been given the task of combating this, to say 'What are we doing'?" he said.

Officials said the legal changes could help the government focus more on big-time traffickers.

Espino del Castillo said since Calderon took office, there have been over 15,000 police searches related to small-scale drug dealing or possession, with 95,000 people detained — but only 12 to 15 percent of whom were ever charged with anything.

Most Dollars in DC Contain Cocaine Traces

The US capital has the highest level of banknotes that have traces of cocaine. The largest study of banknotes has found that 95% of dollar bills in Washington DC bear traces of the illegal drug cocaine.

The figure for the US capital is up 20% over two years.

Researchers at the University of Massachusetts in Dartmouth tested notes from more than 30 cities worldwide.

They say the rise observed in the US may be due to increased drug use caused by higher stress levels linked to the global economic downturn.

Bank notes can pick up traces of cocaine directly from users snorting it through rolled up bills or when cash is stacked together.

Stress factor?

Besides Washington, other big US cities such as Baltimore, Boston and Detroit had the highest average cocaine levels on their dollar bills.

Dr Yuegang Zuo, who led the research, said: "To my surprise, we're finding more and more cocaine in banknotes.

"I'm not sure why we've seen this apparent increase, but it could be related to the economic downturn, with stressed people turning to cocaine."

Other countries where notes were tested were Canada, Brazil, China and Japan.

China had the lowest rates, with only 12% of its bills contaminated.

In the US the cleanest bills were collected from Salt Lake City, home of the religious group, the Mormons.

Obama Signs Bill That Could Prohibit Flavored Blunts & Wraps

Some readers have stated concerns that the language quoted only references “cigarettes” specifically and not blunts or wraps. I have found that the specific context of this section does only target cigarettes, however the bill does give the FDA power to apply similar restrictions to any tobacco product. This most likely means that flavored blunts and wraps are not a priority under the bill and will not be disappearing from stores immediately.

President Obama signed the “Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act” into law which is aimed to give the FDA more control over what tobacco companies can put into their products and how the products can be marketed. One important part of the new law was aimed at restricting flavored tobacco that anti-smoking groups say target kids. These flavored tobacco products include blunts and wraps which are used by many marijuana smokers to roll marijuana filled cigars. The part of the bill that limits these flavors reads:

“A cigarette or any of its component parts (including the tobacco, filter, or
paper) shall not contain, as a constituent (including a smoke constituent) or
additive, an artificial or natural flavor (other than tobacco or menthol) or an
herb or spice, including strawberry, grape, orange, clove, cinnamon, pineapple,
vanilla, coconut, licorice, cocoa, chocolate, cherry, or coffee, that is a
characterizing flavor of the tobacco product or tobacco smoke.”

Tobacco companies like Philly and Swisher have no doubt profited for years from the illegal marijuana industry. Marijuana users commonly purchase legal cigars to empty the tobacco and refill with marijuana. Many other tobacco companies produce “blunt wraps” which do not contain any tobacco making the rolling process easier. The “unflavored” types of these products are still legal under the new law, however the various flavors are usually preferred by most marijuana users.

It is unclear if marijuana smokers were specifically targeted under this bill or when these popular products will be pulled from stores. It is also unclear if the thousands or millions of marijuana users effected will be stocking up on these products because of the tendency for blunts to become stale after long periods of storage.

Administration Canning 'War on Drugs'?

Word Play

The Obama administration continues to change the way it describes some of the nation's toughest problems. The latest phrase to go: "the war on drugs."

The Wall Street Journal says drug czar Gil Kerlikowske feels it is a barrier to dealing with the nation's drug issues: "Regardless of how you try to explain to people it's a 'war on drugs' or a 'war on a product,' people see a war as a war on them. We're not at war with people in this country."

Kerlikowske says the administration is likely to deal with drugs as a matter of public health rather than criminal justice alone — favoring treatment over incarceration.

The president has already shelved the phrase "global War on Terror." And we reported back in March on Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano's avoidance of the word "terrorism" — in favor of "man-caused disasters."

Governator Asks: What If Pot's Legal and Taxed?

As California struggles to find cash, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Tuesday it's time to study whether to legalize and tax marijuana for recreational use.

The Republican governor did not support legalization – and the federal government still bans marijuana use – but advocates hailed the fact that Schwarzenegger endorsed studying a once-taboo political subject.

"Well, I think it's not time for (legalization), but I think it's time for a debate," Schwarzenegger said. "I think all of those ideas of creating extra revenues, I'm always for an open debate on it. And I think we ought to study very carefully what other countries are doing that have legalized marijuana and other drugs, what effect did it have on those countries?"

Schwarzenegger was at a fire safety event in Davis when he answered a question about a recent Field Poll showing 56 percent of registered voters support legalizing and taxing marijuana to raise revenue for cash-strapped California. Voters in 1996 authorized marijuana for medical purposes.

Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, has written legislation to allow the legal sale of marijuana to adults 21 years and older for recreational use. His Assembly Bill 390 would charge cannabis wholesalers initial and annual flat fees, while retailers would pay $50 per ounce to the state.

The proposal would ban cannabis near schools and prohibit smoking marijuana in public places.

Marijuana legalization would raise an estimated $1.34 billion annually in tax revenue, according to a February estimate by the Board of Equalization. That amount could be offset by a reduction in cigarette or alcohol sales if consumers use marijuana as a substitute.

Besides raising additional tax revenue, the state could save money on law enforcement costs, Ammiano believes. But he shelved the bill until next year because it remains controversial in the Capitol, according to his spokesman, Quintin Mecke.

"We're certainly in full agreement with the governor," Mecke said. "I think it's a great opportunity. I think he's also being very realistic about understanding sort of the overall context, not only economically but otherwise."

Schwarzenegger previously has shown a casual attitude toward marijuana. He was filmed smoking a joint in the 1977 film, "Pumping Iron." And he told the British version of GQ in 2007, "That is not a drug. It's a leaf." Spokesman Aaron McLear downplayed the governor's comment as a joke at the time.

Even if California were to legalize marijuana, the state would hit a roadblock with the federal government, which prohibits its use. Ammiano hopes for a shift in federal policy, but President Barack Obama said in March he doesn't think legalization is a good strategy.

Any study would find plenty of arguments, judging by responses Tuesday.

Assemblyman Chuck DeVore, R-Irvine, said he's open to a study, but he remains opposed to legalization. He warned that society could bear significant burdens. He downplayed enforcement and incarceration savings because he believes drug courts are already effective in removing low-level offenders from the system.

"Studies have shown there is impairment with marijuana use," DeVore said. "People can get paranoid, can lose some of their initiative to work, and we don't live in some idealized libertarian society where every person is responsible completely to himself. We live in a society where the cost of your poor decisions are borne by your fellow taxpayers."

But Bruce Mirken of the Marijuana Policy Project said studies show alcohol has worse effects on users than marijuana in terms of addiction and long-term effects. His group believes marijuana should be regulated and taxed just like alcoholic beverages.

"There are reams of scientific data that show marijuana is less harmful than alcohol," Mirken said. "Just look at the brain of an alcoholic. In an autopsy, you wouldn't need a microscope to see the damage. Marijuana doesn't do anything like that."

Schwarzenegger said he would like to see results from Europe as part of a study.

The Austrian parliament last year authorized cultivation of medical marijuana. But Schwarzenegger talked with a police officer in his hometown of Graz and found the liberalization was not fully supported, McLear said.

"It could very well be that everyone is happy with that decision and then we could move to that," Schwarzenegger said. "If not, we shouldn't do it. But just because of raising revenues … we have to be careful not to make mistakes at the same time."

Gays vs Pot Heads

I am not one to judge another group of people. So please do not take this post wrong. I do not agree with the gay life style. I think it is gross, but that is my opinion. It gives me no right to tell homosexuals how to live though. I believe they deserve equal rights like everyone else.

Now what I find disturbing though is state after state is legalizing same sex marriages, but marijuana is still illegal. What is the message there? It is ok to take a dick in your ass but not smoke weed?

I hear so much about morals about the legalization issue and the message we would send to our children. I just feel that there is plenty of messages we send to our children that we never ever think twice about.

I never understood how in a free country, we pick and choose just like Christians do from the bible on what we feel is politically correct at that given time.

My Latest Letter to the White House

Why is it ok for a company to sell cigarettes and the government keeps taxing it higher and higher when they know people are addicted but it is not ok for people to smoke marijuana?

Why is it ok for the government, those who say they know morals better than the normal average citizen, to sell a addictive drug like cigarettes but it is not ok for people to sell marijuana?

Why? Why is it ok for the government to be hypocrites??????

The Legalization Issue

Even Time Magazine Thinks It's Time to Legalize

Why Legalizing Marijuana Makes Sense

For the past several years, I've been harboring a fantasy, a last political crusade for the baby-boom generation. We, who started on the path of righteousness, marching for civil rights and against the war in Vietnam, need to find an appropriately high-minded approach to life's exit ramp. In this case, I mean the high-minded part literally. And so, a deal: give us drugs, after a certain age — say, 80 — all drugs, any drugs we want. In return, we will give you our driver's licenses. (I mean, can you imagine how terrifying a nation of decrepit, solipsistic 90-year-old boomers behind the wheel would be?) We'll let you proceed with your lives — much of which will be spent paying for our retirement, in any case — without having to hear us complain about our every ache and reflux. We'll be too busy exploring altered states of consciousness. I even have a slogan for the campaign: "Tune in, turn on, drop dead."

A fantasy, I suppose. But, beneath the furious roil of the economic crisis, a national conversation has quietly begun about the irrationality of our drug laws. It is going on in state legislatures, like New York's, where the draconian Rockefeller drug laws are up for review; in other states, from California to Massachusetts, various forms of marijuana decriminalization are being enacted. And it has reached the floor of Congress, where Senators Jim Webb and Arlen Specter have proposed a major prison-reform package, which would directly address drug-sentencing policy. (See pictures of stoner cinema.)

There are also more puckish signs of a zeitgeist shift. A few weeks ago, the White House decided to stage a forum in which the President would answer questions submitted by the public; 92,000 people responded — and most of them seemed obsessed with the legalization of marijuana. The two most popular questions about "green jobs and energy," for example, were about pot. The President dismissed the outpouring — appropriately, I guess — as online ballot-stuffing and dismissed the legalization question with a simple: "No." (Read: "Can Marijuana Help Rescue California's Economy?")

This was a rare instance of Barack Obama reacting reflexively, without attempting to think creatively, about a serious policy question. He was, in fact, taking the traditional path of least resistance: an unexpected answer on marijuana would have launched a tabloid firestorm, diverting attention from the budget fight and all those bailouts. In fact, the default fate of any politician who publicly considers the legalization of marijuana is to be cast into the outer darkness. Such a person is assumed to be stoned all the time, unworthy of being taken seriously. Such a person would be lacerated by the assorted boozehounds and pill poppers of talk radio. The hypocrisy inherent in the American conversation about stimulants is staggering.

But there are big issues here, issues of economy and simple justice, especially on the sentencing side. As Webb pointed out in a cover story in Parade magazine, the U.S. is, by far, the most "criminal" country in the world, with 5% of the world's population and 25% of its prisoners. We spend $68 billion per year on corrections, and one-third of those being corrected are serving time for nonviolent drug crimes. We spend about $150 billion on policing and courts, and 47.5% of all arrests are marijuana-related. That is an awful lot of money, most of it nonfederal, that could be spent on better schools or infrastructure — or simply returned to the public. (See the top 10 ballot measures.)

At the same time, there is an enormous potential windfall in the taxation of marijuana. It is estimated that pot is the largest cash crop in California, with annual revenues approaching $14 billion. A 10% pot tax would yield $1.4 billion in California alone. And that's probably a fraction of the revenues that would be available — and of the economic impact, with thousands of new jobs in agriculture, packaging, marketing and advertising. A veritable marijuana economic-stimulus package! (Read: "Is Pot Good For You?")

So why not do it? There are serious moral arguments, both secular and religious. There are those who believe — with some good reason — that the accretion of legalized vices is debilitating, that we are a less virtuous society since gambling spilled out from Las Vegas to "riverboats" and state lotteries across the country. There is a medical argument, though not a very convincing one: alcohol is more dangerous in a variety of ways, including the tendency of some drunks to get violent. One could argue that the abuse of McDonald's has a greater potential health-care cost than the abuse of marijuana. (Although it's true that with legalization, those two might not be unrelated.) Obviously, marijuana can be abused. But the costs of criminalization have proved to be enormous, perhaps unsustainable. Would legalization be any worse?

In any case, the drug-reform discussion comes just at the right moment. We boomers are getting older every day. You're not going to want us on the highways. Make us your best offer.

My Exchange with David Vitters Office on Marijuana

Here is an exchange between myself and the office of Senator Vitter. He is our local rep and a hypocrite who takes money from private corporations. He has taken thousands from tele com companies for the privatization of the Internet.....

From: Senator_Vitter@vitter.senate.gov
Subject: Responding to your message
To: dantheman@504productions.com
Date: Friday, March 27, 2009, 9:45 AM

Dear Mr. Carrone,

Thank you for contacting me in support of legalizing personal marijuana use. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.

As you know, legislation has been introduced in Congress that would remove federal criminal penalties for personal marijuana use. The Act to Remove Federal Penalties for the Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults would prohibit any federal criminal penalties for the possession of 100 grams or less of marijuana for personal use.

While marijuana use may not cause the same destructive addictiveness of "hard" drugs like cocaine or heroin, I do not support legalizing the personal use of marijuana. I am concerned that legalizing the personal use of marijuana would send the wrong message to young people and could lead to increased use of other drugs and more drug addiction.

Though we disagree on this issue, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about any issue important to you.

Sincerely,
Senator David Vitter
United States Senator

My Reply:

Like cigarettes and alcohol is not the wrong message to young people? More deaths occur from those two substances than any illegal drug.

I also feel that recent violence on the border is proof that the war on drugs is a complete failure. Legalizing for personal use for adults would cut down some of that border violence.

For one, the cartels will not be sending marijuana because the best marijuana is grown domestically.

For two, some adults who use "harder" drugs may not and just smoke marijuana. Which would cut the demand for harder drugs.

America is the biggest consumer of drugs in the world. It is 40 billion dollars a year that goes to Mexico that could be in our economy. How are you planning to cut the demand for drugs from Americans? Build more prisons? That says the people are at fault for wanting to get high. If you go after the cartels, it will most prob be a war as big as Iraq.

All I am saying is that as an intelligent human being, you must set aside your personal "moral values" and see the bigger picture. Your morals is not helping this nation. Plus you have no right to mention morals since you were committing adultery. What kind of "message" is that to send our children? It is ok to hire a prostitute to cheat on your wife then accept no responsibility for such an act?

Create, Experience and Love,
Dan the Man

Thanks to the American Government

Hillary Clinton recently stated that America shares responsibility for what is happening in Mexico due to our "failed drug policies". These failed policies have allowed the current conflicts on the border to become a reality of everyday life for those who live there. These same policies have enabled the growth of these Drug Cartels to what they are now.

The issue is that America is the biggest consumer of drugs on the planet. That is hard to believe since we have had a "War on Drugs" for more than 20 years.

After watching the town meeting that was via the Internet, I now know that they have no plans to stop persecuting people for using a plant that grows naturally. They actually laughed at the highly voted question. Even though decriminalization would help stop some of the violence at the border.

As Chris Rock said, they do not want you doing your drugs, they want you doing their drugs.........

But they will shove another pill down ya throat. "Do you have this symptom? Take this if you have this." It is ok for you to take their synthetic drugs that kill people. Drugs that are suppose to stop things, but cause the same things it is supposed to be stopping. What kind of logic is that? You are not suppose to make worse what you are taking medicine for when you take said medicine. It is not rocket science.

This country is one big hypocritical lie. We are not a country where you can achieve your dreams. It is a country where only through extreme sacrifice will you may have a chance at those dreams. It is a country that tries to preach morals about sex and drugs, but then sell these things to our children. A country that says no to drugs, but then deals over priced & taxed cigarettes to the people.

We live in a country that has convinced people to invest their life savings in the stock market and then allow this market to fail, taking those life savings from the people. Then turns around and takes tax payers hard working money and uses it to bail out these mega corporations who created the failure on Wall Street that took the peoples life savings in the first place. So not only did they get your life savings, but you are now in debt to the bankers of this country for the next 20 years.

His next big idea is for the government to use tax payer money to help investors and banks to take on these toxic loans. The deal though is a bit shady. If a loan is 100 dollars, it can be sold for 88 dollars. The investor will pay 6 bucks. The Treasury will throw in 6 bucks. The tax payer will foot the remainder of what is left. If this loan is paid in full, the profit will go to the private investor, but now if this loan defaults, it is the tax payer left holding the bill to pay. So the tax payer is screwed any way it goes. Now imagine billions in these loans going belly up. Obama's plan will bankrupt America once and for all.

Thanks American Government for looking out for the little man.

I am disgusted anymore. I love this nation and the people in it of all races. It is the diversity of America that makes us Americans & one of the greatest countries to live in. But what they are doing to the people of this nation is just sad. I am so afraid that America's future can be seen if you just go to the border and take a peek over into Mexico...

Full 60 Minute Segment About the Mexican Drug War

Can MySpace Get You Arrested

Mexico's Drug Wars

America's War on Personal Freedoms Bites Them in the Ass

So America's big war on drugs is now starting to bite us in the ass...see the video below. I have always thought allowing people to drink or smoke cigarettes but not let people smoke pot was pretty hypocritical. I also always thought I had a right to privacy and that what goes on in my home is no ones business if I am hurting no one else.

The "War on Drugs" is just a fancy name for the war on personal freedoms.

Do you really think after 20 years of failed policies to stop drugs they will ever stop the flow of drugs? I don't. It is a billion dollar business. You can't stop that with the demand from America for the drugs. America holds the strongest stance against drugs in the world but we consume the most drugs than any other country in the world. This is why this "war" is futile.

So our guns go their way, their drugs come our way....could easily stop it by just legalizing the drugs and taking hold of what they are killing each other over. That be too easy for our government though. They rather the killings continue another two years.

Oh yea, btw, the border war has been going on for 2 years and is just now coming to surface......makes ya wonder, huh?

Chavez says Obama Same as Bush on Drug War

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on Saturday condemned a US report on global counternarcotics, saying President Barack Obama is continuing the policies of his predecessor, George W. Bush.

"Is there a new government in the United States or is it Bush still in power? Obama seems to be a continuation of the Bush era. But it doesn't matter to me. Regardless of US imperialism, this revolution will continue its course," Chavez said in a speech.

"The Obama administration has again attacked Venezuela. He said that Venezuela and I, even citing my name, do not cooperate in the fight against drug trafficking. The country that most supports drug trafficking on this planet is the United States.

"The United States is the world's leading consumer of drugs. Why can't they stop drugs from coming into their country? Obama, you take care of your business and I'll take care of mine. Don't mess with me, Mr Obama," he added.

The US Department of State noted in its global counternarcotics report on Friday that Venezuela continues to be a major transit point for drug trafficking in the region and refuses to cooperate with US drug interdiction programs.

"Geography, corruption, a weak judicial system, incompetent and in some cases complicit security forces, and lack of international counternarcotics cooperation make (Venezuela) vulnerable to illicit drug transshipments," the report said.

But Chavez shot back, saying his government "has beaten back the drug trade like never before. The DEA (US Drug Enforcement Agency) supported drug trafficking and overthrowing the government."

Venezuela suspended a bilateral counternarcotics agreement with the United States in 2005, accusing DEA agents of acting as spies.

The US has since refuse to provide Venezuela with an annual certification granted to countries that cooperate in the fight against drugs.

Marijuana Inc - Full Documentary