The Russ Belville Show

Listen, ho, all I wanna hear from you is “Yes, Daddy, I got yo page hits!” (Image credit: 123RF Stock Photo)

There is a certain popular marijuana website funded by a company that rakes in money facilitating online sex trafficking of minors – I won’t link to it, because pimping little girls is no joke in my town – whose author won’t stop falsely demonizing Washington’s legalization measure, I-502.

That’s fine, this is America and we all enjoy the First Amendment.  But rather than provide a reasonable discussion of the issue, the author has taken to ad hominem attacks against those who disagree.  Most prevalent in his sights are Marc & Jodie Emery, primarily because the Emerys are well-respected activists who openly support I-502 through their very popular Cannabis Culture magazine and website and the live stream.  Marc’s currently serving five years in US prison in Mississippi, supposedly for seed sales, but really for the purpose of derailing the legalization movement.

Whether or not one agrees with I-502, insulting a federal prisoner who’s donated millions to legalization and helped more people cultivate marijuana in North America than any single person and repeatedly calling his spouse a “trophy wife” while bragging in the comments about how much pussy one gets is not furthering an intelligent dialogue.

I bet it sure rakes in the page hits, though. So does tentacle porn and cute videos of kittens.

Since the author is regurgitating most of the points I read in other people’s writing (unsurprisingly), let’s deconstruct his bullet points of how awful Hempfest will be post-I-502 – with actual sections in the language, rather than conjecture and ad hominem attacks:

…as far as carrying around an ounce of marijuana and not being concerned with arrest? Unless you bought that ounce at a state-licensed store, you’d still get busted.

FALSE. Possession in I-502 is independent of purchase at state stores[i].  In fact, purchase and possession are independent in current criminal law, as well.  I-502 clearly states that possessing an ounce of useable marijuana is not a crime.  The term “useable marijuana” does not define where it must be purchased from[ii].  How clear does it need to be? Possession of useable marijuana under an ounce is not a crime, period.

Where people get hung up is “Yeah, but if there’s no legal place to buy it (store), it can’t be a legal ounce!” Wrong.  After I-502, if you sell an ounce from a non-store, that’s illegal. Selling non-store weed is a crime. Having it is not. Selling is different than possession, that’s why there are two separate crimes on the books* now for it. I-502 removes the possession part at less than one ounce.

Besides, as the Supreme Court has told us, marijuana is fungible – you can’t tell medical from recreational from illegal from soon-to-be-legal.  Nothing in Washington law or I-502 gives police the power to arrest you for not carrying a weed receipt.

If you took Emery at his word and happily passed what you believed to be that gloriously legal joint to your buddy — after all, Marc Emery said it was OK! — then you’d get your ass busted for “distribution.”

EXISTS NOW. How many people have you seen busted for passing a joint at Hempfest currently when cops can now arrest them for two misdemeanors, possession and distribution?  OK, so how many will be busted in 2013 when the possession is legal, and in a place where the city attorney already says he won’t prosecute personal possession, and where he and the mayor will have been onstage at Hempfest openly supporting I-502?

If that bag in your pocket contained a crumb over 40 grams — not that unusual for some of us — you could be busted for felony possession.

EXISTS NOW.  First of all, it is very unusual for most of us who do not sell to leave the house with almost an ounce and a half.  Second, yes, if we say that one ounce is illegal, over one ounce is not (as it is now) – this is a problem?  By god, if I can’t have all the weed I want, nobody gets a legal ounce?

Oh, if you somehow avoid being thrown in the slammer for any of the other new crimes 502 will put on the books — God help you if you accidentally pass the joint to a minor, by the way…

EXISTS NOW.  I understand how this might be upsetting to bloggers in their fifties who like to pass joints to minors, but most of us supporting legalization don’t want to see teenagers smoking pot.

Personally, I think a 21-year-old limit like I-502 proposes sucks.  If you can smoke cigarettes and join the Army, we should be able to trust you to handle a joint, or a beer, for that matter.  However, we all know that an 18-year-old limit for pot will not pass politically so long as 21 is the age for booze.

The scare here is that most people who smoke pot (over a third) are aged 18-25.  Many first smoke pot in college.  And woe to the 21-year-old college senior who passes the joint to the 20-year-old college junior, he’s committed a crime!

Well, look, if there is going to be an age limit, there is going to be punishment for breaking that age limit, isn’t there?  The lesson here for college kids smoking pot is don’t get caught passing joints… just like now!  But at least after I-502, the college kid over 21 can go buy and smoke a legal joint!

Print-friendly version of the whole post | Print-friendly version of just this page of the post

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

  • Steve Elliott ~alapoet~

    Really lame, Russ… even for you. :)

    • RadicalRuss

      Thank you for taking the time away from getting more pussy than a guy in prison to read my writing.

      • The Dwarf

        Nice story Russ.

        • notSpicoli

           Let me reply to your question about the dui-c provision for medical cannabis users here because I won’t do so on the TOT where you posed your question.

          I was able to have a part i getting such a provision included in the last medcial cannabis s bill and as part of a stand alone bill. (Neither passed,) In the Senate bill it stated, “Disallows conviction of DUI for qualifying patients based solely on the presence, or presence in a certain concentration, of components or metabolites of cannabis. Proof of actual impairment is required.”

          However, it didn’t make it out of the judiciary committee because they said that this is already the law, i.e., probable cause precedes a blood draw; proof of impairment–then a blood draw or breathalyzer. 

          As lawyer Allison Holcomb points out, “A blood draw cannot be taken from a driver until all three of the following conditions have been met: (1) probable cause for an arrest, (2) reasonable belief of driving while impaired (typically established through field sobriety tests), and (3) reasonable belief the impairment is caused specifically by drugs, and not alcohol.”

      • AmKon Dot Net

        How does he afford all the prostidudes? Oh right he’s a “medical” profiteer.

    • garretoverstreet

      What’s lame about it Steve?  You mean there are facts and points that you can’t argue (again)?  I find it absolutely frustrating that you choose to use childish remarks rather than actually explain yourself.  Try debating sometime, it helps get your point across a little better.  Honestly, you have a steel-trapped mind and refuse to see anyone else’s point of view.  You still have yet to respond to my rebuttal on your own blog, which leads me to believe you have no response.

    • AmKon Dot Net

      Ha…Just saw your hempfest 2013 article. Truly pathetic. Passing a joint is already illegal why is there no problem with arrests now?

  • notSpicoli

    Thanks, Russ. Steve Elliott is the Rush Limbaugh of marijuana journalism, if he were a journalist. The good news is that his website consists mostly of the same small group of commenters  that form and anti-502 circle jerk composed of a bunch of bully boys.

    • RadicalRuss

      Please, don’t insult Mr. Limbaugh.  I think a more apt comparison is Perez Hilton.

  • John Novak

    If 502 is so great and you believe it with all your heart, then you recreational smokers in Washington State need to stop smoking black and grey market pot right now and wait for your “502” ounce. In fact, once you have your “502” ounce, you can all go to your own rooms and smoke together at the same time every day… 5:02. Because you all want to be “legal”, right? 

    Guess what? We legalized pot back in 1998 and it made world-wide headlines! Washington State is recognized around the world for it’s cannabis friendly laws and our kick ass weed. You can have up to 24 ounces and grow 15 plants of your own! Not only that, you can purchase your very own cannabis in a pot store! 

    Just ask the cops, they’ll be happy to tell you how easy it is for just anyone to get a card!

    Oh yeah…and if you are worried about driving stoned, you should be because we have laws on the books right now that will nail you if you drive impaired!

    YAY! WHoohoo! PARTY! Hempfest and High Times Cannabis Cups! Come visit Washington State and smoke the best in the NW! 

    So if you aren’t getting stoned in Washington now, what are you waiting for? Bad attitude? Lazy?

    • AmKon Dot Net

      Encouraging more abuse of the medical marijuana system? And you wonder why people think its a joke?

    • RadicalRuss

      Thank you for your comment.  You’ve demonstrated “I Gots Mine” better than I ever could.

      You didn’t legalize anything in 1998.  In fact, you’re still the only medical marijuana state where your recommendation doesn’t protect you from arrest.  The pot stores you have are illegal under state law.  By the grace of Seattle’s lowest-enforcement priority and local officials who look the other way, there are functioning pot markets.

      And I thought I could only have 24 ounces and 15 plants if I was suffering from cancer, AIDS, glaucoma, seizures, spasticity, cachexia, pain, and/or nausea?  I don’t suffer any of those conditions, so I guess I’m not a patient, I’m a criminal.

      And if the patients have their way, I’ll be a criminal for a few more years…

    • notSpicoli

      How can you say that we cannabis friendly laws when possession of up to 40 grams it is still a misdemeanor, a mandatory 24 minimum jail sentence, and a fine of up to $1000? Relative to some states, yes, but certainly not compared to others.

  • Greenlv

    You are backing a bad law Russ and you know it. Just like you dismissed Ed Rosenthal on his opinion of i502, he’s wrong too? No valid opinion from Ed? You know more then him too? 

    So, just anyone has the gaul to disagree is dissed or demonized? All the people involved in the Seattle Hempfest and this movement decades before you became ‘radical’ are just wrong and stupid? Don’t you get the outrage? From Steve and others at Emery and other out-of-state proponents of this insane law that is not ‘Legalization’ but is a Lie? NO Home Growing, insane DUI laws? Even you know better, ‘radical’.

    • AmKon Dot Net

      I-502 legalizes possession for adults, it does not legalize homegrown production or distribution. You can argue all you want about how the law is imperfect, most of us will probably agree on every point. That does not diminish the overall goal of this law which is to reduce drug offenders in prison, generate tax revenue, and tell the feds to fuck themselves. The law will be liberalized in the future but until we pass something the law will never change.

      The DUID claim is just scaremongering nothing changes. If you are driving erratically a cop can pull you over now, give you a sobriety test, and take you to jail if you fail. There will be another step after failing the sobriety test and some may even be below that 5ng/mL limit and not get a DUID as a result. Point being- those who would be getting arrested for DUID NOW are the ones who will be going to jail in the future. Patients/users who have developed tolerances shouldn’t be worried because they drive fine, right? Don’t crash your car, don’t get drug tested. Not really very hard.

      • Greenlv

        The Seattle Hempfest is remaining Neutral because it is Respecting the large number of people who have attended, vended, and created the event for 21 years who do not agree with i502. Many of us are against what we see as a road to eroded liberty and think calling i502 ‘legalization’ is media Lie. You “understand the DUI is unscientific:” but would still make it law? Can you not see that this is a total deal breaker for many people who live in Washington State where public transportation is lacking, cops are Nazi troopers and car-culture dominates? Who wants, or can afford, to got to court to fight what would become a financial institution of DUI’s? The Northwest growing scene in Legendary, and you want us to call anything ‘legalization’ when it would be still a Crime to Grow at Home? This is not back then, this is now, and ‘Legalization’ will be what we settle for. Colorado and Oregon are way closer to getting this right, Right now! But we in Washington are supposed to roll-over to State power for a supposed ‘greater good’? No good can come from that kind of capitulation. 502 is Bad Law…

        • AmKon Dot Net

          Eroded liberty? How are you less free after this law passes compared to now? You still won’t be pulled over for DUID or arrested. We cannot wait another 2+ years for another form of legalization to be voted upon, and the next one will likely be even more restrictive. The other more reasonable legalization initiatives have no money and will never make it on the ballot, ever. If there isn’t a DUID epidemic now I fail to see how there would be one afterwards. Police would still have to prove you were impaired before taking blood, which they can do now after failed tests. Medical production would still be legal, and in the not so distant future personal use will also be legal. Hemp will also be legalized! Oregon’s is definitely the best but I hope all 3 pass. The current law is worse pass I-502.

    • The Dwarf

      Again the home grow issue isn’t a good enough reason to keep arresting people.  When it’s legal here in Texas I will grow my own weed or try to for a little while.  But what I am not going to do is vote no on having a legal once just cause there is no home grow.

    • RadicalRuss

      Yes, I am dismissing Ed Rosenthal and anyone else who is scaremongering about I-502.  But I am not the one dissing or demonizing.  I disagree with everyone who is involved with Hempfest who is against I-502.  But I don’t call them “clueless Canadian prisoners in Mississippi”, “celebrity trophy wife”, or insinuate that their contrary opinion is due to some extortion or conspiracy.  In fact, I still consider Viv, Douglas, and many others my friends and allies.  Sometimes friends and allies still disagree.

      I have dedicated myself to ending the practice of arresting people for marijuana and telling the truth about the fight to accomplish that.  And the truth is scaremongering tactics like “no patients will ever be able to drive” and “there’ll be no legal weed because there will be no pot stores” and “cops will be shooting hippie fish in a barrel” and other demonstrable lies are as “sky is falling if we legalize” as what I hear from the Drug Warriors.
      Oh no, cops will be assholes (like they are now)!  Oh no, this doesn’t legalize growing (like it is now)!  Oh no, I’ve finally become cognizant of the fact that driving around town with extremely elevated THC levels in my blood could get me in trouble (like you can now)!  Oh no, I can’t smoke pot with minors (this is a problem?)

      I thought Hempfest was about ending arrests for people for possessing weed.  I-502 does that.  All the other complaints are about things that are illegal now – you do know it is illegal to drive under the influence of marijuana, right?  And that even a 1.6ng/ml has gotten people DUID convictions, something that will be below the “legal limit” after I-502?

      And by the way, I’ve been “Radical” since 1984.  But I have only been involved with marijuana activism since 2005.  Perhaps that’s good, as I haven’t spent decades fostering paranoid suspicions about the intent of other activists.  The “what about Ed Rosenthal?” appeal to authority works both ways… shall I list the prominent activists who support I-502?  Many of them born and raised in Washington State?

      I’ve seen this play before, back in 2010 just south of me.  There was ‘outrage’ by many notable activists about the terrible Prop 19, how its passage would portend federal raids, asshole cops who profile, 5×5 gardens just aren’t big enough, this isn’t “true legalization” and we can wait around and organize “real legalization” in 2012.

      You’ve noticed California has no legalization on the ballot in 2012, right?  And federal raids, right?  If Hempfest wanted better legalization on the ballot, perhaps its organizers should band together with like-minded activists and get their version of legalization on the ballot, not fight the legalization that did.  That would be the sensible thing to do.

      Oh, yeah, right… I forgot 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008… for legalization to work, it has to make the ballot and people other than Hempfest attendees need to vote for it.

      • Greenlv

        You dismiss the opinion of Ed Rosenthal because you know better? Dismiss? Really? There are not many people period, from Washington or anywhere else on Earth, that have the experience and wisdom in this area Ed does. You certainly do not, Russ.

        But heck, you have been ‘involved with marijuana activism since 2005’ and you have been ‘radical’ since 84, (whatever that means), Right?

        That about the time you saw a chance to attach yourself to a cause and become a True Believer? So ardent, and instantly so wise, that you can dismiss those that broke the ground you presently perch your evangelistic soap-boxstand on? 

        You said it yourself Russ,”Oh no, this doesn’t legalize growing”   ‘Right.
        Then that is not ‘Legalization’, but a media Lie. The DUI is a sick deal-breaker, I really wish you would be honest about that, cause you know it is way out of line. To the degree you protest so much, with data and graphs to support it. But you know it is arbitrary and unscientific, and you would support it anyway. The bigger agenda places a percentage people and patients below the greater good you seek. I do understand. I disagree. 

        Politician like to use words, hide their meanings, dismiss people and plumb pick information to support a position. When you running for office, Russ? 

        • RadicalRuss

          I would dismiss the opinion of Jesus Christ himself if he were telling me to vote the same way as the Drug Czar and continue arresting adults for personal possession of marijuana.

          Just because somebody has been a “true believer” longer than someone else does not make them right.  Apparently the “true believers” have had numerous attempts to get “true legalization” on the ballot and they have failed every time.

          I love how everyone has this definition as to what “legalization” means.  So I decided to actually look it up:

          Princeton calls it “the act of making lawful”.  Wikipedia calls it “the process of removing a legal prohibition against something which is currently not legal.”  Jurisdictionary says “When a particular behavior, previously illegal, is legalized, there remains no criminal punishment for the behavior, i.e., individuals are free to participate in the behavior without fear of criminal prosecution.”

          Hmm.  Possessing an ounce is not currently legal.  I-502 is an act that makes that lawful.  There is no criminal punishment for the behavior.  Sounds like legalization to me!

          Is it “legalization of personal cultuivation”?  No.  But it is “legalization of personal possession”, quite clearly:

          “20(3) The possession, by a person twenty-one years of age or older, of useable marijuana or marijuana-infused products in amounts that do not exceed those set forth in section 15(3) of this act is not a violation of this section, this chapter, or any other provision of Washington state law.”

          You can call that legalization, limited legalization, decriminalization (though it’s not; decrim = admin penalties, not criminal), or anything else you like.  When it passes, I can smoke a joint in my house, and if a cop knocks on the door, I can answer it with my joint dangling from my lips, and he can’t do a damn thing about it.  I’m voting for that.

          • Greenlv

            Hmm. Growing in my home is not currently legal. i502 is an act that further criminalizes, other behaviors of mine, like driving. An arbitrary DUI that does not prove impairment, and a lie about it being legal? As it cannot be grown, but only bought from a state sanctioned store. Does not sound like legalization to me!

            Calling it ‘limited legalization’ is the only olive brach of civility and understanding I have received from any ardent i502 supporter and I actually appreciate the honesty. You didn’t even chant ‘greedy grower’ at me.

            502 would make standard procedure, for a documented out-of-line police force, the tool of pot DUI’s. It will be used to intimidate and incarcerate peaceful people. Unfortunately, that is what I think would happen. This would be super brutal on the 18-21 as 502 gives them no protection at all. Or the patient driving to the store who is guilty of a DUI that did not prove any impairment.

             I cannot vote for that.

          • RadicalRuss

            Yes, growing is not legal.  Won’t be after I-502.  Next?

            No, it does not further criminalize your behaviors.  Driving under the influence of THC, even .000001ng/ml, is illegal now.  What it does is provide a more certain prosecution of the crime you’re committing now.

            Let me make that more clear:  Current Washington DUID law makes it a crime to be driving a motor vehicle under even the slightest influence of illegal drugs, period.  The standards by which a cop can compel a blood draw now are the same as they will be after I-502.  Nothing in the driver/cop interaction changes one iota under I-502… except his inability to give you a misdemeanor charge on the spot for possessing <1 ounce and take you to jail for a mandatory 24 hours.

            Again:  If a cop wants to be a profiling asshole, pull you over for the taillight being broken, claim he smells marijuana, make you walk the line, claim you failed and takes you in for a blood draw, he can do that NOW.  And if your ng/ml is anywhere near 5, you're likely to be successfully prosecuted for a DUID NOW.  And it will still cost you a five-figure defense lawyer NOW.  Do you really think it is just the slam-dunk for a prosecutor that is informing the DUI investigations of the cop?

            Too many legalizers suffer from "clinician's bias".  If you were a doctor who didn't drink and knew nobody who drank, and night after night the only exposure to alcohol were the puking drunks who got in fights, beat someone up, or wrecked their cars, you'd be likely to think alcohol is the worst thing ever, terribly dangerous to anyone who touches it.  You don't see the vast majority who have a few drinks, have a good time, and nothing bad happens.

            Likewise, if you are a medical marijuana patient, or their lawyer, doctor, or advocate, for the years before medmj you were a "felon" and your great use and cultivation of marijuana may have led to encounters with the criminal justice system that really sucked.  You then meet other patients with similar stories of being oppressed by "the man".  Soon we're trading stories of this asshole cop – did you hear what he did?  Before you know it, every cop is an asshole fiendishly scheming to destroy any person he meets related to marijuana.  But like the alcohol ER doc, you're not interfacing with the majority of (front line) cops who think prohibition sucks, too, and want it to go away (e.g., my two cousins in the Canyon County (Idaho) Sheriff's Dept… not exactly hardcore pot lovin' liberals there!)  

            Then it's legislators, doing bad things to medical marijuana, maybe even offering drastic changes.  Then governors who veto things you liked.  After a while, nobody is to be trusted, not even kindly Rick Steves who risked his image and standing and career to be pro-legalization, and certainly not ex-cops like John McCay or Norm Stamper!

            So, the true believers, unable to trust that anybody but themselves could possibly have the best interests of cannabis consumers at heart – there must be a sinister conspiratorial agenda! – build their TILT initiatives (Treat It Like Tomatoes) and beg for signatures, support, and money that never appears from anyone but their own cadre of true believers, because serious people with serious money and serious political clout look at TILT, the polling on TILT, and realize they'd be pouring money into a project that's going to lose with a sub 40% vote.  Then they organize to defeat the initiative that did make it, because The Bad People wrote it and if it passes it will do Bad Things, and promise that next year, boy howdy, we'll get real legalization on the ballot… in an off-year election, no less.

            (Which reminds me… why is it the legislature could never ever be trusted to adjust the per se DUID statute or eventually legalize home grow or be counted on to set reasonable limits on cannabis post I-502, but post-TILT, where every criminal penalty for pot is removed without replacing it with any regulations whatsoever, we can trust the legislature to set up the regulatory structure?)

          • Greenlv

            “Yes, growing is not legal.  Won’t be after I-502.” 


            So we agree i502 is ‘limited legalization’ at best. And are to be grateful and complicit to this scrap from masters table?

            Perhaps in the arena of politics you are right, Russ. We should just roll over and call something by a name we know it is not. Be grateful for a measure of progress.  But, I’m not a politician, and I will vote with the conviction of my understanding. 

            i502 has a DUI that would make “I smell weed, Sir” a standard line from every officer making his newly mandated pot DUI quota. Get this ‘radical’ that ain’t that way it has been, ever, in Washington, period. Fact. After this media blitz maybe it will be either way, but I will not support a law so we can go to court to counter a claim of impairment.

            It allows the State into a position of ridiculous taxation and control. And you are OK with what it does to people 18-21? Unconscionable.

            i502 calls itself ‘legalization’ but does not allow a person to Grow at Home. There is no glib ‘Next’ that I can swallow after that Lie. 

            i502 is insulting, to my culture, to my understanding of truth, can you understand that? 


          • notSpicoli

            “i502 is insulting, to my culture, to my understanding of truth, can you understand that?”

            The same word could have come out of the mouth of Gil K., William Bennett, Lamar Smith and every other rabid prohibitionist. And if they were Washington residents, would be voting with you. Then they will mock us and say, “See, the people do not want legal marijuana,” and you will say, “That’s not what my no vote meant.”

    • notSpicoli

      I invite everyone to view Grrenlv’s diqus profile and see the strength of his character and intellect. One of the top TOT bully boys.

      • Greenlv

        I would invite anyone to the same.

    • Matthew Meyer

      You are the one backing the bad law, Greenlv: prohibition.

      Do you really think voters will reject conservative 502, but next round go for a tomato model?

      Please let me know if I’m missing something.

      • Greenlv

        This would pass now if there was any provision for Home Growing and stuck to the DUI laws that are already on the books, as the pro 502 crowd love to chant. 

        Why the soccer-mom sell-out? It didn’t need to happen. If anyone is jaded it is the prop19 vets who underestimated the Northwest and shot the whole movement in the foot by conceding to what they know is corrupt. 

        • Matthew Meyer

          I dunno, I still don’t get it.

          Why not vote for 502 now, and work to add home growing and remove the DUI next time? 

          Do you think it will be easier to get that passed some other time if this is defeated? I don’t understand your vision of how this will unfold in time.

          • Greenlv

            I think repealing or altering a law would be more difficult then getting it passed in the first place. Particularly if the law if making a lot of money, like pot DUI’s would. I also know that the de-criminalization is happening now, and wonder why anyone would want the state involved, we just got them out of liquor in Washington State. The NO Home growing I find down right insulting, flat-out. I can buy an ounce but I cannot grow one? I cannot vote for that. I think no good can come from that kind of conscience complicity with what one knows to be corrupt, like an admitted arbitrary and unscientific DUI that does not prove impairment.

          • Gothic Prophet

            Are you serious, Greenlv?  It’s far easier to modify an existing law than it is to get one on the books in the first place!  To modify an existing law, you can organize people to pressure the legislature or craft an initiative and try to get it on the ballot; I-502 actually made it to the ballot and if it fails, WA is unlikely to see any progress in the area of reform for many more years.  Just look at Cali… No on Prop 19 people were spouting off that 2012 would be a better year because of the Presidential election, a better initiative would make it to the ballot, etc.

            Well Cali fell for it and rejected Prop 19, and now the Feds, and locals, are cracking down even harder because they use Prop 19s failure as an excuse to say the people of Cali are having “buyers remorse” with their Medical program.  No initiative made it to the ballot in Cali.

            If you’re serious about protecting patients, then support Legalization; even if it’s flawed.

          • Greenlv

            No DUI provision has ever been removed or altered other then to be more strict ever in history.

          • RadicalRuss

            GreenIv is right, but misleading.
            First, until recently the only DUID standards were for alcohol, which does have a dose-dependent relationship to impairment.  True enough, it started at 0.10, then as science showed people may be impaired at lower levels, it was revised downwards to 0.08.

            Second, the only per se DUID for cannabis that has been lowered is Pennsylvania, which has gone from 5ng/ml to 1ng/ml (effectively 0, since tests only detect down to 2).  The other states with DUID for cannabis set them at 0 or 2, which really can’t be lowered.

            But why does this mean that a per se DUID cannabis limit would never be erased or raised?

            When pot’s legal and traffic stats stay the same or go down, we’ll have a hell of an argument for removing the penalty.  We could even start a citizen initiative petition to do that (two years later than I-502, I know).  When it’s legal and UW and WSU are studying it, they can provide verifiable data showing we’re not a danger.  The legislature could (once again) try to craft an exception for patients.  There are all sorts of ways the statute could be changed.

          • RadicalRuss

            Pot DUIDs do not “make a lot of money”.  Aside from some towing / impound fee, maybe a driving class, how are you figuring that there is an economic incentive for lawmakers to maintain a per se DUID?

            Because as I see it, there is a lot of money made by cops from prohibition.  Asset forfeiture comes to mind, something that I don’t think happens for DUIDs.  Federal Byrne Grants, where cops get money for drug arrests, but not DUID arrests, come to mind.

            But let me ask you this GeenIv… should we have voted for Oregon and Washington’s medical marijuana laws?

            After all, Oregon’s law contains a completely arbitrary and unscientific definition of a mature plant as one that is greater than twelve inches that in no way proves maturity.  Plant limits distinguish between mature and immature, and if you have one more than your six mature plants, you’re a felon, per se, with no affirmative defense in court.  Patients who grow could have seven 11″ seedlings on Friday, and come back from a trip Monday with a felony in their grow room.  And you just know asshole cops will use the medical marijuana registry to figure out who the patients are with grows, stake them out, and come by for a “compliance check” when they see you’ve been out of town for a few days!

            And Washington’s law was passed with a “60 day supply” for patients. We gave the cops a tool to harass law-abiding patients!  The asshole cops just decided that whatever you had was more than a “60 day supply” and would bust you for it!  Of course, that terribly vague and anti-patient language did get changed to twenty-four ounces… who did that again?… oh, yes, the legislature!

            As for the argument that I-502, if it succeeds, would set a terrible precedent other states would follow… OK, so you opposed Arizona, New Jersey, D.C., and Delaware medical marijuana laws, right?  Because they set a precedent for no home grows for patients, so you could never vote for that, right? In fact, every other medical marijuana law but California’s set a precedent for there to be a short list of conditions for patients to qualify for not being caged and most set up a state registry system.

            Somehow, when it comes to protecting patients, we can accept all sorts of arbitrary limits, unscientific language, bad precedents, and giving tools to asshole cops.  But when it comes to protecting the rest of us who don’t get 15 plants and 24 ounces, it’s just unacceptable.

          • Greenlv

            “Pot DUIDs do not “make a lot of money”.”Not yet, post i502 they would, standard quotas for the new cottage industry. 

            This is not then, this is now. The soccer-mom sell-out did not need to happen. We would have been fine without the ‘arbitrary and unscientific’ DUI that NORML backed. No Home Growing an insulting nod to State power. You can buy it from us, but you cannot grow it. Couple dumb moves that will be the dividing death-blow to i502.

          • Greenlv

            A new law that took effect Aug. 1 in Washington allows State Patrol troopers to have blood drawn from drunken driving suspects, even if they won’t give it voluntarily.

            Patrol spokesman Bob Calkins says this allows repeat drunken driving cases to be handled as felonies from the time of arrest. Felony DUI carries a 5-year sentence, versus 1-year for misdemeanor DUI.

            Troopers don’t draw blood themselves, but use a medical professional. They can/will be able to draw anyones blood…… even if you object to it….you have no choice

  • AmKon Dot Net

    So how’s that initiative that allows home growing? Oh right you didn’t make it on the ballot because you stopped collecting signatures. Fail.

  • RadicalRuss

    Thank you for your comment.  You’ve demonstrated “I Gots Mine” better than I ever could.

    You didn’t legalize anything in 1998.  In fact, you’re still the only medical marijuana state where your recommendation doesn’t protect you from arrest.  The pot stores you have are illegal under state law.  By the grace of Seattle’s lowest-enforcement priority and local officials who look the other way, there are functioning pot markets.

    And I thought I could only have 24 ounces and 15 plants if I was suffering from cancer, AIDS, glaucoma, seizures, spasticity, cachexia, pain, and/or nausea?  I don’t suffer any of those conditions, so I guess I’m not a patient, I’m a criminal.

    And if the patients have their way, I’ll be a criminal for a few more years…

  • Joshua Schimberg

    Great article Russ, and I love how you use actual facts and language from the initiative and current laws, instead of resorting to petty, childish, name calling. 

  • Tiger Weedz

    You ever wander why most of 502s major support comes from out of state? Or have you read it & found any section that actually legalizes cannabis? Probrably not, Huh? Moron.

    • cary g

      Amen to that! Russ & the Emerys are a bunch of cunts.

      • RadicalRuss

        Again demonstrating some wonderful command of intelligent debate.

    • AmKon Dot Net

      Yeah, one ounce legalized for personal possession?

    • RadicalRuss

      Sec 20(3), the part about possession of marijuana in the amounts listed in Sec 15 shall not be a crime under any provision of Washington State law.

      As for out-of-state: it was written and proposed and vetted by longtime Washington residents. It is supported by a great many Washington residents.

      I’ll be happy to explain it for you without name-calling, if you like.

  • cary g

    I wonder how long it will take for Marc to dump Jodie’s ass when he gets out of prison? I say less than two years.

    • RadicalRuss

      Wow, you really bring a lot to the debate, don’t you?