During my long medical career, I campaigned against nicotine, excessive alcohol and drug use. I use none. Marijuana, however, must be legalized. Its effects are certainly less than alcohol. Medically, marijuana has shown good effect in cancer and AIDS therapy, PTSD help, chronic pain, seizures, migraines, gastrointestinal problems and other illness, all denied by the DEA and rarely allowed as evidence in courts. It has been used for thousands of years in many countries. It appears well tolerated with little evidence of intense addiction (unlike alcohol). [continues 92 words]
Re Caution In Pot Adoption Urged At Summit (April 18): Our published research, carried out in four Canadian provinces with adult, socially integrated, regular marijuana users, indicates that informal social controls are already widespread among users. We found that users were careful to smoke marijuana at times and places that did not interfere with other important activities, such as work and school. Much like most cigarette smokers, they also did not use in situations that might offend others. In other words, social norms about appropriate use, along with an awareness of health and safety issues, are already in place. [continues 66 words]
While the Chicago Sun-Times' Editorial Board begins commendably enough Thursday by asking Gov. Bruce Rauner to sign the extension for the medical cannabis pilot program, it then asks people who suffer from posttraumatic stress disorder to wait an indefinite period of time for relief from addiction and overdosing on opioid pain killers, which are the staples of most regimens of current treatments for PTSD. While the Editorial Board gave some credence to the realities of PTSD, it is not possible to say PTSD exists and then ask people to wait for non-opioid relief for it unless there's doubt that PTSD is a real condition. [continues 175 words]
SPRINGFIELD -- In a sign Illinois' new medical marijuana law could be a gold mine for investors, a politically connected Glenview attorney is hoarding pot-related company names in hopes of cashing in if the business takes off. Sam Borek, a former college roommate of the lawmaker who sponsored the state's new law, says he reserved the company names to either sell them to others, or to start his own companies. Included in his list of at least three dozen potential corporations and limited liability companies are Illinois Medical Marijuana Sales Inc., Illinois Cannabis Realty Inc. and Cannabis Medical Centers of Illinois Inc. [continues 678 words]
"One cannot wage war under present conditions without the support of public opinion, which is tremendously molded by the press and other forms of propaganda" - Douglas MacArthur The casual reader may find some sense in The Register-Guard's March 3 editorial, "Allow local pot sales bans." But I didn't, because the editors continue to rely on information generated from the firmly entrenched, propagandistic cartel for a federal drugs prohibition. There are some basics that need to be understood about cannabis, its history and its prohibition by the federal government: [continues 550 words]
I appreciated The Register-Guard's decision to print Brian Michaels' Feb. 6 column, "Phobia of legalizing marijuana afflicts America." I mentioned to Michaels once about seeing all the "Don't Tread On Me" flags at ranch and farm gates in south-central Oregon. I told him I thought those good folks are at opposite ends of the same circle with cannabis legalization advocates, when they should be standing shoulder to shoulder. His response was a wry remark: "When those don't-tread-on-me people realize that the government is a bigger problem than the hippies, we've won." [continues 90 words]
Perhaps I am more ambivalent than I should be about the legalization of marijuana. I lean toward letting the law remain as it is, but my hostility toward the nanny state pulls me in the direction of individual responsibility and letting the chips fall where they may. Therein lies my concern, though. Letting the chips fall where they may could lead society to pick up the pieces of shattered lives. Largely, the same class of people now most invested in and vocal about drug legalization in the United States are the same who advocated the loosening of sexual mores during the sexual revolution of the late 1960s and early '70s. The white, upper income, educated elites had a lot invested in breaking down social mores in their pursuit of unchecked and unbridled hedonism. [continues 468 words]
Approached from the federal view, pot prohibition is a rousing success. With a veritable alphabet soup of government agencies involved in preventing marijuana from getting into the hands of U.S. adults, the drug war is a bureaucrat's dream. A massive bureaucracy that creates the very problems it was created to eliminate can go on forever. Why does alcohol have a monopoly on legal intoxication? If we compare the number of fatal alcohol poisonings per year to the number of fatal pot poisonings, you see alcohol causes approximately 80,000 deaths annually (according to the CDC) and marijuana zero. [continues 77 words]
As usual the Democrat-Herald editors get it right on pot. Your April 6 editorial, "Oregon needs panel to start writing pot bill," is pretty close to spot on. When cannabis gets properly relegalized in Oregon, our prospering craft beer industry is the perfect business model. It's about time to end the monopoly alcohol holds on legal intoxication. Marijuana is a provably safer alternative. Oregonians are historically innovative (once they overcome burdensome prejudices) and legalization needs to be sensibly manifested. Our grandparents wisely ended alcohol prohibition. It's time we end cannabis prohibition. Whether accomplished legislatively or through citizen initiative, legalization will happen. Allan Erickson, Eugene (April 6) [end]
When I woke up on Dec. 6 I was surprised to find the sky was still there. It didn't fall as predicted after Washington became the first state to once again have legal marijuana. Oregon didn't fare as well. Measure 80 was defeated, but not by much. In Lane County 60 percent of voters said yes to legal weed (thank you, Lane County!). The statewide tally of 47 percent shines when we consider that the campaign raised only $60,000 while more than $6 million was received from supporters in Washington for their proposal, Initiative 502. [continues 678 words]
Regarding the editorial: "Hooray for medical pot fees" (Oct. 9): I fail to understand The Oregonian's continued belief in cannabis prohibition. I remind these editors that in 1998, recriminalization was rejected the same year that voters approved the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act. Oregonians apparently know what Oregonian editors don't -- marijuana is safe for adults and should not be illegal for adults. Oregonians also accept cannabis as medicine. Considering there are hundreds of thousands of our state's citizens consuming pot and forced to buy it on the black market, I would think intelligent, business-minded (and freedom-loving) adults would embrace regulation over the failure of Prohibition (again). I advocate expanding the Oregon Medical Marijuana Program, lowering fees and adding conditions like PTSD. Also, vote yes on Measure 80. Tell the feds the gig is up. Cannabis is not the fraud -- Prohibition II is. Eugene [end]
When The Register-Guard endorsed a no vote on Measure 80 in its Oct. 3 editorial, "Marijuana legalization: No, Measure 80 over-reaches, under-regulates," the editors erred in favor of big, over-reaching government. No policy in our nation wreaks as much havoc as does the drug war. In fact it is an international travesty that drives nearly 10 percent of annual global trade into the coffers of international drug syndicates or cartels. The drug war has created an incarceration system so huge that former federal drug czar Barry McCaffrey called it the "new gulag." [continues 693 words]
Redding's City Council meetings have become a three-ring circus of arrogance, futility and political bias. Is the irony just lost on me? Or is it hypocritical that the conservative City Council threw the California medical marijuana law under the federal bus, especially when conservatives are always complaining about the feds' eternal encroachment? Here was the chance for those "representatives" to keep their powder dry, honor California law, and be what they say they are - but instead, they swung like a bar-room door. [continues 78 words]
I've just read the Times article "Feds threaten prosecution if medical-pot changes occur" [page one, April 15], and I'm shocked! Well, not really. If Washington's (or any of the states with medical-cannabis laws in place) lawmakers had any fortitude, they wouldn't be intimidated. The federal prohibition of cannabis is so corrupt and lacking in any substantial fact or science that anyone with a computer and Internet access can easily learn the truth of the matter in minutes. If the government cannot protect its citizens, what then is its role? [continues 154 words]
I wish to comment on House Bill 161, which would repeal the marijuana law. I was a school bus driver for 40 years. All drivers had to submit to random alcohol and drug tests when law officials showed up. (That goes for CDL drivers.) If you tested positive, you were fired. If our legislators just choose to draw up a new law or rewrite the present law, these people will just find another way to take advantage of it as they would with the present law. I would also like to know what law will law officials cite to prosecute these people. The federal law that Montana's elected officials just thumb their nose at, the new state law or the laws drawn up by about every town and city in Montana from Anaconda to Zortman? Yup, we are crazy! Kermit Erickson Sidney [end]
Thanks to Metro Times for publishing Larry Gabriel's column, "Crisis on the corner: Should we legalize drugs to save the hood?" (Jan. 19). When we reach the point in public drug policy discussion that we actually put the drug war (Prohibition II) under the microscope, its associated harms will be seen to be far more damaging to our social fabric than any amount of drugs -- legal or illegal. Michigan State sociology professor Carl Taylor's moaning does not belie the fact that only because of the drug war do we have police in cities and towns across the U.S. raiding private homes like armed thugs. While they may be armed with weapons and search warrants, their cause is corrupt and a serious threat to liberty's principles. For cases less drastic than what we have happening to us at the hands of our own government in our nation today, our founders felt compelled to boot out the British. [continues 115 words]
Editor, the Tribune: Many thanks to the Tribune for a much-needed editorial, "Mexico and the drug war," on Jan. 22. Many salient points were made and important questions raised, but the problem is those in charge don't and won't listen or even discuss the topic publicly. When first appointed as our nation's chief of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, former Seattle police Chief Gil Kerlikowske admitted the word "legalization" wasn't even in his vocabulary. In such a context, I doubt our drug czar will ever publicly debate the issue or ever hold an unscripted interview with journalists. [continues 125 words]
Editor: Rather than debate the pros and cons of cannabis, I encourage Chief DiPino and Ocean City residents to investigate the origins of this Cannabis Prohibition that they are such cheerleaders for. There is no science or fact included in the original banning of pot. Rather what there is is a trail of racist sensationalism and fabricated tales of mayhem caused by the degenerate races under the influence of the demon weed. For justice to prevail our laws need to be based on reality. Cannabis Prohibition is a policy based exclusively (and provably) on lies and yet it serves as official government policy. Fraud is fraud Allan Erickson Eugene, Ore. [end]
I've just read the Dec. 12 story about Vietnam veteran charged with marijuana possession. Really? A 61-year-old veteran with post-traumatic stress disorder and cancer is prosecuted for his health-care practices and the criminal justice system deems him a worthy target for prosecution. I'm sorry, but that's disgusting on many levels. What is particularly disturbing is that Gary Muntz is being persecuted under a set of policies that are totally fraudulent. The prohibition against cannabis (marijuana) is founded completely upon lies. The fruit of this prohibition gives us cases like Muntz's. There is no resemblance to justice here. And not a lick of common sense present. There is, however, the sad reality of a government hell-bent upon asserting its authority. The government is lying about cannabis, and it is time for the fraud to end. Allan Erickson [end]
In his letter "Impaired is impaired," (Dec. 9), Terrell Faulk makes some good points about driving under the influence. Unfortunately for the politicians, all the studies done on cannabis and driving (even from our own National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) point out that people drive more cautiously while under the influence of cannabis. Caution and driving go hand in hand. Unfortunately for us, politicians rarely care about knowing the facts, especially about cannabis. What I do suggest is that studies be done. [continues 80 words]
