- UID
- 930550
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2013-8-30
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
沙发
楼主 |
发表于 2014-8-21 22:57:05
|
只看该作者
Part II: Speed Legality of cannabis
[Time 2]
The legality of cannabis varies from country to country. Possession ofcannabis is illegal in most countries and has been since the beginning of widespread cannabis prohibition in the late 1930s.However, many countries have decriminalized the possession of small quantities of cannabis, particularly in North America, South America and Europe. Furthermore, possession is legal or effectively legal in the Netherlands,Uruguay and in the US states of Colorado (Colorado Amendment 64) and Washington (Washington Initiative 502) as the federal government has indicated that it will not attempt to block enactment of legalization in those states. On 10 December 2013, Uruguay became the first country in the world to legalize the sale, cultivation, and distribution of cannabis.
The medicinal use of cannabis is legal in a number of countries, including Canada, the Czech Republic and Israel. While federal law in theUnited States bans all sale and possession of cannabis, enforcement varies widely at the state level and some states have established medicinal marijuana programs that contradict federal law—Colorado and Washington have repealed their laws prohibiting the recreational use of cannabis, and have instated a regulatory regime that is contrary to federal statutes.
Some countries have laws that are not as vigorously prosecuted as others, but apart from the countries that offer access to medical marijuana, most countries have various penalties ranging from lenient to very severe. Some infractions are taken more seriously in some countries than others in regard to the cultivation, use, possession or transfer of cannabis for recreational use. A few jurisdictions have lessened penalties for possession of small quantities of cannabis, making it punishable by confiscation and a fine, rather than imprisonment. Some jurisdictions/drug courts use mandatory treatment programs for young or frequent users, with freedom from narcotic drugs as the goal and a few jurisdictions permit cannabis use for medicinal purposes. Drug tests to detect cannabis are increasingly common in many countries and have resulted in jail sentences and loss of employment.[8] However, simple possession can carry long jail sentences in some countries, particularly in parts of East Asia and Southeast Asia, where the sale of cannabis may lead to life imprisonment or even execution.
Currently Bangladesh, North Korea, Czech Republic, Portugal, Uruguay, the Netherlands, and the United States (Washington and Colorado) have the least restrictive cannabis laws while China, Indonesia, Japan, Sweden, Turkey, France, Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea, Philippines and the United Arab Emirates have the strictest cannabis laws.
According to the first ever global study of illicit drug use, published in August 2013 by the Lancet journal, marijuana is the most popularly used illegal drug worldwide.
[431 words]
Source: Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cannabis
MPP: Ready to Roll on Pot in Texas
BY JORDAN SMITH, FRI., FEB. 28, 2014
[Time 3]
Gov. Rick Perry's comments last month, during a panel discussion at the World Economic Forum, about a state's right to legalize marijuana and his alleged longstanding support for a move toward pot decriminalization, touched off a flurry of pot-talk in Texas. Democratic gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis was asked about pot during a meeting with the editorial board of The Dallas Morning News (she's down with medical marijuana, she said; her jury's still out on legalization), and during a televised debate among the four GOP candidates for lite guv, current state Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson said he would support medical marijuana ("If there is medical efficacy ... and the doctor prescribes it, I see nothing wrong with that," he said). Less surprising, author/musician/huckster Kinky Friedman has based his entire run as Democratic candidate for agriculture commissioner on a platform of legalizing marijuana and hemp production in Texas.
Each position has been variably critiqued, mostly in the mainstream media, with the consensus being that some modest form of decriminalization may be possible in the not-too-distant-future – but that legalizing medical marijuana, let alone recreational pot use, remains for now a long-shot pipe dream.
Notably, however, there's at least one powerful activist group which disagrees and is organizing a full-court press to change Texas pot laws: the Marijuana Policy Project, which has been the driving force behind successful bids to legalize medi-pot in 18 states, as well as the 2012 Colorado vote to legalize marijuana for recreational use by adults. For the first time, MPP's co-founder and Executive Director Rob Kampia told the Chronicle, the group is ready to focus effort and attention on changing Texas law – and Kampia says he believes that's doable within the next five years. "We feel like legalizing marijuana in Texas – though people in Texas feel like it's impossible – I think it's possible in five years," Kampia said. And he added that MPP is "about to spend real money on decriminalization and legalization" efforts in the state to make it so.
[332 words]
[Time 4]
MPP rolls out its efforts March 1, with the hiring of lobbyist Randal Kuykendall (of Congress Avenue Consulting, and a veteran lobbyist for the Texas Municipal Police Association, among other law-enforcement and related entities) and a commitment to spend $200,000 a year to push for change. The group will work with criminal justice reformers and organizations from across the state, Kampia said, and in 2015 intends to have introduced "three perfect bills" – one each addressing decriminalization, medical marijuana, and legalization – "and we'll see how far each of the three bills go," he said. "Maybe all three don't pass in the first session, but I know there is a lot of energy behind these bills."
There also seems to be a considerable base of support, among both Republicans and Democrats, according to a poll MPP commissioned of Texas voters in late Sep¬tem¬ber 2013. That poll, conducted by Public Policy Polling, reveals broad support among men and women of both parties for legalization of medical marijuana and for pot decriminalization – 67% of Democrats support legal medi-pot as do 50% of Repub¬licans, while 66% of Democrats and 55% of Republicans support decriminalization of possession of up to one ounce of pot. As for legalization, 70% of Democrats "strongly" or "somewhat" support a measure like that which passed in Colorado, while 48% of Republicans said the same. Those are numbers MPP can work with, Kampia said.
Indeed, over the 15 years that Kampia has been working on marijuana decriminalization and legalization efforts, he said he's heard one thing over and over: "People in the state in question believe change is not possible in their state, but is possible in other states," he said. And what Kampia knows from experience is that all things are possible – given the right amount of time and pressure, even Texas can transform into a progressive drug law-reform diamond. "We're in – and we're in for the long haul," he said. "We're ready to go."
[324 words]
Source: The Austin Chronicle
http://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2014-02-28/mpp-ready-to-roll-on-pot-in-texas/
Milton Friedman, 500+ Economists Call for Marijuana Regulation Debate:
[Time 5]
New Report Projects $10-14 Billion Annual Savings and Revenues
Savings/Revenues Projected in New Study by Harvard Economist Could
Pay For:
**Implementing Required Port Security Plans in Just One Year
**Securing Soviet-Era “Loose Nukes” in Under Three Years
Replacing marijuana prohibition with a system of taxation and regulation similar to that used for alcoholic beverages would produce combined savings and tax revenues of between $10 billion and $14 billion per year, finds a June 2005 report by Dr. Jeffrey Miron, visiting professor of economics at Harvard University.
The report has been endorsed by more than 530 distinguished economists, who have signed an open letter to President Bush and other public officials calling for “an open and honest debate about marijuana prohibition,” adding, “We believe such a debate will favor a regime in which marijuana is legal but taxed and regulated like other goods.”
Chief among the endorsing economists are three Nobel Laureates in economics: Dr. Milton Friedman of the Hoover Institute, Dr. George Akerlof of the University of California at Berkeley, and Dr. Vernon Smith of George
Mason University.
Dr. Miron’s paper, “The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition,” concludes:
**Replacing marijuana prohibition with a system of legal regulation would save approximately $7.7 billion in government expenditures on prohibition enforcement — $2.4 billion at the federal level and $5.3 billion at the state and local levels.
[223 words]
[Time 6]
**Revenue from taxation of marijuana sales would range from $2.4 billion per year if marijuana were taxed like ordinary consumer goods to $6.2 billion if it were taxed like alcohol or tobacco.
These impacts are considerable, according to the Marijuana Policy Project in Washington, D.C. For example, $14 billion in annual combined annual savings and revenues would cover the securing of all “loose nukes” in the former Soviet Union (estimated by former Assistant Secretary of Defense Lawrence Korb at $30 billion) in less than three years. Just one year’s savings would cover the full cost of anti-terrorism port security measures required by the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002. The Coast Guard has estimated these costs, covering 3,150 port facilities and 9,200 vessels, at $7.3 billion total.
“As Milton Friedman and over 500 economists have now said, it’s time for a serious debate about whether marijuana prohibition makes any sense,” said Rob Kampia, executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project in Washington, D.C. “We know that prohibition hasn’t kept marijuana away from kids, since year after year 85% of high school seniors tell government survey-takers that marijuana is ‘easy to get.’ Conservatives, especially, are beginning to ask whether we’re getting our money’s worth or simply throwing away billions of tax dollars that might be used to protect America from real threats like those unsecured Soviet-era nukes.”
[226 words]
Source: Prohibition Costs
http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/
|
|