The Russ Belville Show

Seattle Hempfest Day 2: The Great I-502 Legalization Debate (Full Video)

83
August 19, 2012
by Russ Belville

I will let you all watch it for yourself and decide. I just have two questions:

1) For Steve Elliott: You mentioned that Washington’s I-502 would, assuming it passes, set a dangerous precedent that other states would copy when they introduce legalization. You also point to other legalization initiatives in Colorado (A-64) and Oregon (M-80) as superior initiatives that you support. How, then, could I-502 become a precedent, unless the other two superior initiatives failed in the election? What would make Oregon and Colorado legalization fail at the ballot box and Washington legalization win at the ballot box in order for it to become a precedent?

2) For Kari Boiter: You mentioned that you were concerned about your impairment and had yourself tested, finding that you were above 10ng/ml, even after sleeping and having not consumed cannabis. Your doctor tested you and found you to not be impaired at that level. Do you drive in Washington State only after having slept an entire night and regardless, do you fear getting pulled over for suspected impairment today in your state? If the nightmare scenario of a profiling cop with a penchant for lying got you to the point of an arrest and a blood draw now and you came up at 10ng/ml or greater, do you think you could beat those charges today?

Print-friendly version of the whole post

: 420 Events, Activism, Legalization, Marijuana, Politics
: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
  • Greenlv

    “We fully recognize the per se DUI marijuana
    provisions in I-502 are arbitrary, unnecessary, and unscientific”- Allen St.
    Pierre

    Alison Holcomb- “With 502 what changes
    is that the piece of evidence (5nanos grams or more in the blood) the judge can
    tell a Jury that test, in and of itself, establishes you guilt beyond a reasonable
    doubt.”

    Kari Boiter said, “I 502 Does not
    remove it from the controlled substance.” and “I do not see in this initiative
    the words ‘probable cause…” and very importantly “Any initiative in the State
    of Washington cannot be changed for two years.”

    Keith Stroup, says we should, “stop
    fighting about the details”, and in the same breath says, “…as you get closer
    to Legalization those details become incredibly important…”

    He then intones, “We change it later”. Calls
    people against i502 are in a “pure position”.

    Steve Elliot, “When you encounter
    ignorance, you educate it, you do not legislate it, you do not in-code
    ignorance into law.” And my favorite, “Marijuana is not legal until you can
    grow it yourself.”

    Any questions?

    • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

      Yes, GreenIv, the judge can tell the jury that 5ng/ml = guilty. Which means the jury can take that instruction as they take other jury instructions and still decide the case for themselves. Judges do not get to make juries’ decisions for them, even in a per se case. So when I-502 passes, use all this energy of yours to educate the public on the chemistry of THC so no jury will ever take that instruction seriously.

      Here’s what I think everyone who’s scared of DUID is missing. YOU CAN AND WILL GET A DUID NOW. Seriously, take Kari. She says she’s at 10ng when she wakes up in the morning. So why is she driving right now (with apologies to Carrie Underwood)?

      1. Right now, she wakes up at 10ng
      2. Right now, she drives
      3. Right now, she can attract a cops’ attention
      4. Right now, she can get pulled over
      5. Right now, cop may think she’s impaired
      6. Right now, cop can give her sobriety test
      7. Right now, she could fail that test
      8. Right now, cop could arrest her for DUID
      9. Right now, cop could take her in for blood draw
      10. Right now, blood draw will come up 10ng/ml
      11. Right now, cop will fill out report with a 10ng blood test attached
      12. Right now, prosecuting attorney will see “stoner failed sobriety test and posted a 10ng/ml blood test” and file DUID charges
      13. Right now, she will go to trial on the DUID and hire an expensive lawyer who will try to keep that 10ng test and sobriety test out of evidence
      14. Right now, that lawyer could fail to suppress the evidence and it goes to trial
      15. Right now, Kari Boiter would have about a 90% chance* of being convicted of a DUID with that kind of evidence.

      So, in essence, Kari and y’all are terrified because it is being brought to your attention for the first time that, yes, you are being actively discriminated on the roadways RIGHT NOW because marijuana is illegal.

      So, the question becomes… do you sacrifice your 10% chance of getting out of a DUID in step #15 of a long series of steps, in exchange for avoiding a guaranteed arrest and 24 hour jail stint when they find your stash in step #5? If you haven’t experienced a DUID sobriety test in the past 13 years of being a medical marijuana patient, why are you suddenly scared now? Any fear that cops are going to wait outside dispensaries and profile is something they can do now.

      Did you catch the part where cops don’t know what the blood test result is? How does the cops’ motivation change at all at steps #3-#11? It’s not like he’s got one of those diabeetus test meters and the cop pricks your finger, a number comes up, and he goes, “Yippee, a 7ng/ml! I got another stoner!” In fact, with a 5ng limit, there’s some bit of pressure for cops not to be clogging the prosecutor’s docket with <5ng/ml cases that will be "below the legal limit".

      *That 90% chance is from the Colorado fights over per se DUID, where prosecutors admitted they have about a 90% conviction rate in cannabis DUID cases as it is right now without per se. I presume other states also have very successful conviction rates in DUID.

    • OH

      Pothead, please dont drive stoned.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Joshua-Schimberg/100001592904089 Joshua Schimberg

    That lady just started her statement by claiming that alcohol prohibition was removed when alcohol was removed from the controlled substances act! Is she really that misinformed/ignorant? Alcohol prohibition was ended in 1933, with the 21st Amendment to our Constitution. The Controlled Substances Act wasn’t passed by Congress until 1970! What is SHE smoking?

  • eating_sunshine

    I think both sides made very good arguments. However I don’t think either side was particularly definitive in the cost risk analysis for the average citizen in the state of Washington.
    Its true, you can’t trust the cops on this issue. But I don’t think anyone can predict how this will play out. Maybe resources in the future would be better spent re-teaching the public about jury nullification. Or the fact you don’t have to follow the instructions of the judge; you as a juror can vote anyway you want without having to explain why.

    • jontomas

      You didn’t pay attention. Several states ALREADY instituted per se driving restrictions. NONE have had a spike in arrests, even in rabidly anti-marijuana states like Utah and Georgia. There is no reason to think that more liberal Washington would be an exception to this, and NO reason to vote against I-502. We have nothing to lose and EVERYTHING to gain.

      • Greenlv

        “You didn’t pay attention”
        Kinda of sharp, arrogant and dismissive statement, I think.

        “We have nothing to lose everything to gain”,
        That is an opinion, even if the word everything is done in dramatic all caps.

        • jontomas

          Way to ignore the points – again, and again, and again……

          • Greenlv

            Would that be like you ignoring Kari Boiter’s points above?

            A decision to attack her character and place in the movement might be construed as a devise tactic. She is not a greedy grower, or a gang member, of draped in the blood of the drug war. She is a concerned and intelligent Washington State citizen with a very valid opinion.

            I

          • jontomas

            I never ignore any points, of course. I didn’t attack her character. I have just observed that 99 percent of the “marijuana people” I’ve debated I-502 with have turned out to be greedy growers, dispensary owners, or others who profit in some way from the current war on marijuana consumers.

            Again, that’s not to say all growers and dispensary owners are greedy. It is only people like you that actively campaign to continue the persecution of millions of marijuana consumers that are accurately referred to as such.

            People who do that logically destroy their own “character.”

          • RayChristlTHC

            thanks for your fine comments

          • jontomas

            Thank you. It is sickening that we have to clean these parasites out of our movement, but somebody has to do it.

            I am one of those 20 million Americans who have been made second-class citizens for life because of a marijuana arrest. I will never rest until we end this American Inquisition!

            And the question must be asked. Why would powerful, wealthy prohibitionists (police, prosecutors, prisons, alcohol, pharmaceuticals, drug “treatment,” drug cartels, money laundering banks, etc.) NOT help fund the anti I-502 scalawags?

            It’s simply illogical and absurd to imagine they don’t.

      • http://www.facebook.com/FlyNewsGirl Kari Boiter

        First off, only one of the states you speak of also has a conflicting medical marijuana law. In Nevada, once the per se DUID proposal was implemented, a “significant increase” was seen in both arrests and prosecutions.

        Secondly, even Washington’s non-partisan Office of Financial Management plans on a $4.3 MILLION increase in revenue from I-502′s DUID law alone. OFM plans a 4% increase in the DOL workload due to administrative license suspensions from I-502. They also plan to expend money on law enforcement training for the new DUI enforcement. Why would a NON-PARTISAN agency with no stake in the success or failure of I-502 make these predictions if there was not going to be an increase in DUI cases from I-502?!

        • moldy

          But I live in NV and don’t have an issue with living with this bad law as I don’t give them probable cause to do a blood draw.

          • jontomas

            Exactly. The anti position is all crocodile tears.

        • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

          I looked like crazy to find a definitive stat on Nevada DUID arrests and prosecutions. Unfortunately, Nevada’s per se was instituted in 2003. In 2002, only 3 of 31 law enforcement agencies reported their DUID arrests to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report. In 2003, their input was listed as “incomplete” by the FBI. In 2004, the report covered 31 of 34 agencies (I suppose they created new departments in Nevada?) Anyway, the data we’d need to say something about Nevada, a medical state, and its change in DUID arrests, is not there.

          Furthermore, most agencies do not distinguish between DUIDs. Some report all chemically impaired the same (alcohol + drugs), others separate alcohol and drugs, but not drugs from each other. I have yet to find really good data on cannabis DUI alone – if you’ve got some, please share the links!

          So, let’s suppose there is a 4% increase in workload due to I-502 license suspensions… 4% greater than… what? There were 34,098 DUID arrests in Washington State in 2010. Surely, most must be for alcohol – do we have estimates on how many that would be? How many are for marijuana? Can’t be that many, right, since we’re such safe drivers, and we’re so unimpaired, even when our ng/ml are above 10ng, even after sleeping all night? And since we’re not scared of getting DUIDs now, only if this per se thing passes, right, so there really can’t be that many cannabis DUIDs now.

          Let’s be generous and say 20% – one out of five – of the 2010 DUIDs were for cannabis alone. That’s 6,820 cannabis DUIDs. If the workload it takes to process them increases by 4%, then we’re looking at another 273 cannabis DUIDs post-I-502.

          So, now we have some numbers. Should we pass I-502 and eliminate 8,000 people getting a cannabis possession misdemeanor, knowing it will cause an extra 273 people getting a cannabis DUID?

          But maybe 20% of all DUIDs being for pot is exaggerated. Maybe only 5% of all DUIDs are for pot alone. Now we’re down to 8,000 drug convictions vs. 68 DUIDs. Not to mention striking a blow against prohibition, beginning the states vs. feds fight, yada yada yada.

          Oh, and remember, this is assuming that a 4% increase in revenue projection is valid and corresponds directly to DUID arrests and a whole bunch of other “what ifs” that even the state can’t answer.

          But there is one certainty – 8,000 fewer Washingtonians get lifetime drug convictions on their record when I-502 passes.

          • jontomas

            Thanks, Russ. Folks will learn if they start throwing numbers, they’ve stepped into your briar patch. 8^)

            Here’s a good exercise for everyone to see what a minor issue this really is.

            How many people do you know that were charged with driving impaired by marijuana?

            I don’t know ANY, and I’ve been kickin’ around the scene more than forty years. This is just the greedy growers’ fig leaf. Someone should tell them that thing’s flappin’ in the breeze.

          • http://www.facebook.com/FlyNewsGirl Kari Boiter

            You can explain it away all you want. A non-partisan agency with no stake in the Yes or No campaign has weighed in. I trust the opinion of professionals who are paid to analzye these measures on a daily basis. The Office of Financial Management’s official report was VERY clear that there will be an increase in DUI prosecutions due to the passage of I-502. To the tune of $4.3 MILLION! Sorry Russ, your campaign mathematics don’t wash with me.

          • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

            What problem did you have with the mathematics – the addition or the multiplication?

            You say “$4.3 million”. That number is meaningless without context. How much does it cost to prosecute a DUID now? If it’s a million per, then there’s 4 extra DUIDs. If it’s 25¢ per, then there’s an extra 17.2 million DUIDs. Context matters.

            When I debate, I like stats and numbers, not conjecture and fear-mongering.

            Please send me a link to this OFM – I’ll admit I haven’t read it all. Because there are all sorts of reasons one might project increase in DUID prosecutions independent from the change in prosecutorial standards. For instance, when you legalize marijuana, you might assume use will go up, both in volume among current users and initiation of new users. With more people smoking more pot, you might assume there will be more people driving under the influence, and with more stoners to catch, there will be more DUIDs even if the actual rate of catching stoners remains constant. (E.g. Assume 400,000 tokers now, cops catch one in 1000, that’s 400 DUIDs. If number of tokers increases to 500,000, but cops still only catch 1 in 1000, there will be 100 more DUIDs.)

            So I don’t dispute there might be more cannabis DUIDs after legalization – there might be even without a per se standard. We can’t really know until we legalize, because marijuana’s Schedule I status prevents researchers from digging into this stuff.

            But a “4% increase in workload” gives us a better context. “Workload” has to be whatever it takes to process cannabis DUIDs now, and that’s going to increase by 4%, presumably because DUIDs go up 4%.

            We know there were 34,098 DUIDs in Washington in 2010, but we don’t know how many are cannabis-only. If we knew that, then we’d know what 4% of that is, and then you could use that to scare people to vote against legalization. I was trying to work some estimates that showed between 68 and 273 new cannabis DUIDs (and I think that was generous).

            If you’re sure of your stand, why not use those numbers? “Russ admits there could be over 270 new cannabis DUIDs next year because of I-502!” If you’re sticking with “ends don’t justify the means”, then the DUID of even one extra toker who doesn’t deserve it is moral stand enough to oppose un-criminalizing 8,000 next year and every year hence.

            Maybe because others might start comparing their chance of being one of the 270 vs. their chance of being one of the 8,000 and their instinct of self-preservation overwhelms their morality?

        • jontomas

          As Russ shows below, you’re blowing hot air. – What difference does it make if those states had medical marijuana or not?
          The point was, arrests are not significantly increased by these laws. And I-502 is the fastest route toward the ideal marijuana policy – for drivers as well.

          • http://www.facebook.com/FlyNewsGirl Kari Boiter

            C’mon jontomas. We all know you’re not THAT dense!

            It makes a HUGE difference because medical marijuana laws directly conflict with zero tolerance laws. If marijuana is not legal in any manner, including medical, than it only makes sense that there would also be a law that says you can’t drive with any marijuana in your system, since you are not legally allowed to possess cannabis in the first place.

            If you are allowed to legally possess cannabis however, as is the case for medical marijuana patients in Washington, and a law is put in place that says you cannot drive with a certain amount of cannabis in your system or in the case of 502, ANY THC in your system even if you are a legally recognized patient, those two laws obviously directly conflict with each other.

            By passing an initiative that takes away the rights of those under 21 who are legally recognized medical patients, I-502 undermines the will of Washington voters, who overwhelmingly approved the use of cannabis for those 18 and over.

          • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

            So you work with Sen Kohl-Welles to pass a bill that exempts patients from per se DUID provisions. You work to make other changes in the law, which, I know, can’t be done for two years. But they can be done, and after two years, the public will have better understanding and be able to react to whatever the data show for driving and cannabis after it’s been studied.

            Surely if the nightmare scenario you outline comes true, the people of Washington will be furious and ready to fix these things come 2014. If 502 is as bad as you think, and the people are as sympathetic to patients as you claim, then they will trip over themselves to help the patients post-502, right?

            Meanwhile, thousands of adults who would have gotten a permanent “drug conviction” on their records, affecting schooling, housing, job, and health outcomes for life, will not.

            Just so we can have accurate figures for our discussion: How many Washington patients are between the ages of 18-20?

            I’m serious. No matter where we go with this discussion, pro or anti, some people will be hurt. Pass 502 and some unimpaired driver will get a DUID and have to spend a lot of money. Defeat 502 and somebody possessing cannabis will get a drug conviction and a night in jail. It would be nice if political decisions harmed no one and helped everyone, but we don’t have that luxury.

            I just see a greater moral good in beginning the undermining of global cannabis prohibition and saving thousands of Washingtonians from a criminal drug record than I see in protecting the 10% chance of getting out of a DUID charge for someone who smokes pot and drives and somehow failed a field sobriety test.

            502 does not “take away the rights of those under 21 who are legally recognized medical patients”. As discussed previously, it is a crime to drive under the influence of any THC in the blood; under 21′s, patient or not, do not have the right to drive under the influence of drugs. If something is a crime with a 90% conviction rate, it does not “take away rights” to make that crime a 99.9% conviction rate.

            Yes, 99.9%. Despite all the No on I-502′s saying per se DUID means automatic guilty, it does not. There still exists jury nullification. Recently in Montana and in Kansas, prosecutors were unable to seat a jury to prosecute a minor marijuana possession charge, as the jury pool members overwhelmingly objected to the waste of their time over pot. Surely if the public is as sympathetic to patients as you claim, it will easy to get jurors to nullify DUID cases, especially the poor 19-year-old patient with a 1ng test, right?

  • http://www.facebook.com/FlyNewsGirl Kari Boiter

    Hello Russ,

    Since you seem to be such a big fan of mine, without ever having met me, I suppose I should give your blog a hit or two.

    You are doing a great job of obfuscating the DUI issue. However, even Alison Holcomb conceded that I am correct when I say that the 10 ng/ml active THC result that I recieved after a full night’s sleep would be just one kernel of evidence under today’s law. If I-502 is passed, that test result would be definitive proof that I committed a crime.

    So no, I am not afraid of driving to work unimpaired now because our current law requires proof of actual impairment for me to be convicted of a crime. That is where 502 is fundamentally different. I assume you know that though, since it was just last year when referring to a 5 ng/ml cannabis DUI proposal in Colorado that you said, “Let’s judge driving impairment by demonstration and not by body chemistry.”

    Say what you will, but let’s try to “disagree without being disagreeable.”

    • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

      I didn’t think my question was disagreeable at all. I wanted to know why you weren’t afraid of a DUID today. You’re looking at a very tough trial if you’re caught with over 10ng today, and it’s going to cost a lot of money to prove you’re unimpaired.

      Now, as for judging driving impairment – your side keeps coming back to the fact that per se DUID doesn’t judge impairment. You’re right. I’m not disputing that. You can go back through my millions of words and find, many times, me expressing that per se DUID for cannabis is unscientific, unjust, and unnecessary. That’s not in question between you and I – we completely agree on that.

      Where we disagree is on how and where to fight our battles. You’re taking a hard line, no compromise stand in the face of a politically pragmatic question. I can understand why you do, but I wonder if you supported Washington’s or Oregon’s original medical marijuana laws? After all, Washington had a vague “60 day supply” that endangered patients when asshole cops would decide whatever you had was more than “60 day supply”. Oregon’s law has a completely unscientific standard that defines a mature plant as greater than 12 inches, and you’re a felon if you have too many mature plants, which has hurt patients when their seedlings go through a weekend growth spurt.

      So, was it wrong for us to vote in those medical laws with such vague, arbitrary, unscientific language?

      And what of the medical marijuana laws in NJ, AZ, DC, and DE… should we not support those because they lacked home grow?

      I was trying to be respectful in my blog questions to you and I’d be just as respectful if you’d agree to appear on our show. But I am worried for you, because if your baseline is 10ng, you’re probably much greater than that on any given day, and if a cop pulls you over now, thinking you’re impaired now, and you failed a sobriety test now, and you got arrested now, and you got a blood test now that’s at 20ng, 30ng, 50ng… do you *really* think you’re going to prove you weren’t impaired and beat a DUID charge?

      • http://www.facebook.com/FlyNewsGirl Kari Boiter

        None of the “vague, arbitrary or unscientific” language in any of the previous medical marijuana initiatives (or any other legalization initiative) included a NEW law being put on the books to prosecute cannabis users. The end of prohibition will not come about through initiatives that put new prohibitions in place.

        If we agree that per se DUID does not measure impairment and it is unjust, unfair and unnecessary, why do you take issue with me taking a stand against a bill that includes per se DUID? If one is subject to the same treatment under today’s laws as they would be under per se DUiD, why do you call the policy “unjust?”

        You also say I am taking a hard line, no compromise stance when in reality I am willing to comprimise on many things (like homegrows and tax structure and possession limits). I am simply doing what NORML and you have told people to do for years: fight the implementation of arbitrary and unjust laws that will be used to persecute cannabis users.

        • jontomas

          Alison Holcomb gave a very reasoned and detailed explanation of how states that put per se laws on the books have NOT had a spike in DUI arrests for marijuana, AND showed how it was probable I-502 would lead to LESS of those arrests.

          You haven’t given anything but your fear as basis for your belief these arrests will increase. Holcomb clearly won the debate on this point.
          The anti group is crying crocodile tears. As we saw in California, they are primarily the greedy growers, dispensaries and others who profit from the current war on marijuana consumers. They would find fault with ANY initiative.

          I-502 will drive a stake through the heart of the crumbling national prohibition. After the dust settles, average quality marijuana will sell for around $50 an ounce. This will mean the end of these quick fortunes being made. Those interests that are shouting against I-502 don’t care about the continuing persecution of marijuana consumers. – They’re just trying to fool consumers into voting to continue the witch hunt against themselves – anything, to keep the bloody gold mine operating.

          No REAL marijuana reformer would ever vote against I-502, or ANY re-legalization initiative.

          • Greenlv

            Nonsense.

            Kari Boiter is a ‘greed grower’ now too? Steve Elliot, as well?
            And neither of them are ‘real’ reformers because they have a different point of view then you? All those Washington State citizens against i502, there were many, many at Hempfest. Did you attend? All of them just want to ‘keep the blood money coming’?

            With us, or against us, marginalized and demonized, sad Patriot Act tactics.
            I502 is Bad Law and Will Not Pass.

          • jontomas

            Sorry, but Elliot and Boiter clearly gave the best they had and came up woefully short. Just like you just did (for the ten thousandth time), you have no real points – just personal attack and fear.

          • Greenlv

            Just attacked me personally, you did, I have not.
            You attempt to sell your opinions as fact.

            I have the exact same points and opinion, as they do not waiver.

            Insane DUI and No Home Growing is not a ‘Limited Legalization, (as russ referred to it) that I, as a Washington State citizen will vote for.
            I think i502 is poorly written law and am outraged by its duplicitous rhetoric. I think telling me I may buy an ounce from a State sanctioned store, but I may not grow at home is insult to the whole cannabis culture and to any awake person.

            You make it to Hempfest this year ‘jontomas’? It was a blast. It was great music, beautiful women, fantastic food, bomb grass all about, on a fabulous sunny days.

            Oh, as the pipes passed around it was painfully obvious to everyone who did attend Hempfest, the word is way out on i502.

            Just as russ said-
            “volunteers for the Yes on I-502 campaign who endured boos, catcalls, jeers, taunts, angry shouts, and rude treatment at Seattle Hempfest.

            i502 is Bad Law and Will Not Pass.

          • jontomas

            You are lost in your own, desperate fantasy that is required to support the continued war on marjiuana consumers. The antis had their day, gave it their best shot – and lost.

            Time to move on.

          • Greenlv

            ‘Desperate’ would to be to clamor for any crumb of ‘limited legalization’ no matter the cost and capitulation to corruption, seems to me.

            Apparently you did not make it to Hempfest this year, ‘jontomas’.

            I am not alone.

            i502 is Bad Law and Will Not Pass.

          • jontomas

            What difference does it make whether I was at Hempfest or not? You sure pick some oddball ways to count coup.

            Allowing all adults to possess up to an ounce of marijuana, instead of arresting them and giving them a criminal record is a “crumb?”

            That’s a “crumb” that millions of starving, U.S. marijuana consumers would feel ecstatic to dine on.

            Nothing can stop an idea whose time has come. The time for ending the fraudulent, monstrously destructive marijuana prohibition is clearly now.

            You’re rather pathetic standing there trying to hold back the tide.

          • Greenlv

            It’s in Washington State.
            See ya at Toke of the Town, paid propagandist, you and russ enjoy your love in. radical, gets no more traffic or content.

          • http://twitter.com/AmKonDotNet AmKon Dot Net

            You won’t be missed.

          • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

            Clamor for crumbs? I’m sorry, could you translate that into Spanish for me so I can explain it better to the mothers of 50,000 Mexicans who’ve died over our “crumbs”?

          • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

            Yes, and wasn’t it the head of No on I-502 who was quoted in the local paper as deriding Seattle Hempfest as “250,000 attendees and maybe 60 voters”?

            You keep bringing up “no home grow”. You can’t use that as a reason to oppose because you already don’t have that right. I-502 changes that in no way, as you keep pointing out, so it is a moot point in arguing whether or not to oppose it.

            As for the volunteers at Hempfest for I-502, yes, they endured terrible treatment. Mostly from Hempfest staff and from the two booths paid for by dispensary money that were set up on either side of theirs, the volunteers from which would angrily shout over the pro-502 conversations.

            But don’t be fooled into thinking No was the dominant theme of Hempfest. The No on I-502 crowd are certainly vocal and dedicated, but most of the people I observed cheered pro-legalization and pro-502 (sorry, redundant) speakers all day and gave puzzled looks to the anti-502 speakers, who were being loudly cheered by the same cadre of that small vocal group.

            Because in the larger discussion, I-502 is called a legalization bill on every other media outlet. Pro legalization groups call it that and the traditional law enforcement opponents call it that, too. To the general public, the hub-bub about per se DUIDs sounds like some of the people who smoke a lot of pot are worried about being busted while driving high, and may even push a few voters off the fence in support of something the “stoners” are afraid of.

            In that way, Hempfest’s treatment of I-502 may be a blessing in disguise.

          • Greenlv

            Why are you not running for office, you twist and turn so professionally.

            Fractured base, Russ, deal with it.

            Real great ad with that Soccer-Mom, you think that will close em?

            i502 is Bad Law and Will Not Pass

          • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

            I am a pot-smoking atheist who supports legalized drugs and prostitution. I don’t think I have a shot at elected office.

            I am trying to deal with the fractured base, GreenIv. One way in which I do that is not by suggesting anybody have fist fights with the people they disagree with.

            The campaign ads for I-502 are the best television ads for marijuana legalization on the Washington ballot anyone has ever seen. 100% fact.

            Do you have substantive comments or questions to add to the discussion?

          • Greenlv

            Fist-fight might do you good, russ.

            “The campaign ads for I-502 are the best television ads for marijuana legalization on the Washington ballot anyone has ever seen. 100% fact.”

            That is an opinion, maybe there are. I can tell you they are laughed at locally, just jeered by regular folks not even pot, post all over the FB.

            I have been adding substantive comments, and opinion to the discussion. Perhaps you don’t like people to dis-agree with you? If you’d like I can stop adding content and traffic to your sight? Just ask me, I’ll go away and you can be right all the time.

          • jontomas

            What a load of garbage.

          • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

            Well, if you’re going to keep fomenting violence, maybe you should leave. I know I don’t need any more fist fights than I endured in my martial arts training.

            The reason they are the best ads is because they are the only ads. I was taunting the fact that this is the first time there have been any legalization ads in Washington State.

          • Greenlv

            Hyperbole, about the fist-fight, russ.
            Was that even written on this politically correct site? Pathetic cuckold diversion, just a way to derail someone with opinion other then your narrow, neutered and compliant view.

            Perhaps you could get a refund from whatever martial arts training you received? It was pathetic, as is clear from your sloppy physical stature and the obvious moral bankruptcy.
            “The reason they are the best ads is because they are the only ads.”
            Even you can see how stupid you sound, right?
            Like Cops with a new DUI law won’t set revenue records for the State. So plainly stupid even a true believer like you aught to be able to see past his indentured programing. If you would vote for i502 knowing it ‘sucks’ is arbitrary and unscientific, if you would support encoding ignorance into law, then you have no moral compass.
            Celebrity wanna-be russ. Seeking acclaim and notoriety at the expense of truth is pathetic. The fact that you are a self-proclaimed expert that bought himself a microphone, is commendable. But, the fact that you use this soap-box to knowingly support that you know to be a Lie, in spite of any greater good, is damnable.
            You get no more free content, or traffic from me, radical.
            i502 is Bad Law and Will Not Pass.

          • OH

            Giving equal time to people who are effectively prohibitionists, is stupid, it was a stupid idea – in my opinion. In this day and age, to assume that someone is sincere and that they deserve some kind of equal treatment – even though they are acting in such a way as to try to thwart what you are doing and discredit you – its just like the Democrats who thought it would be cute to strut out all this bi-partisan BULLSH–.

          • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

            Just as russ said-
            “volunteers for the Yes on I-502 campaign who endured boos, catcalls, jeers, taunts, angry shouts, and rude treatment at Seattle Hempfest.

            Yeah – by the Hempfest Staff and the No on I-502 booths paid for by dispensaries. Generally speaking, the public at Hempfest was very pro-502 and cheered the speakers who promoted it.

          • Greenlv

            You mean the people that built and brought you this for twenty plus years?
            That all? The people you need to pass i502 that you flush without a thought.

            You can’t be a sell-out, russ. You were never in. Just a mouth who found a cause.

        • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

          But 502 doesn’t put a new law on the books to prosecute cannabis users; cannabis users get DUIDs now. 502 changes the prosecutorial standard for DUID, but DUID has always been illegal. It’s not a new prohibition: you’re not allowed to drive under the influence now.

          If you want to fight the arbitrary and unjust laws, you’re going to have to learn to pick your battles better. Prohibition is far more arbitrary and unjust than a per se DUID standard that, in fact, will be fairly accurate for brand new and occasional pot smokers. Do we at least agree on that – the DUID research from Grotenherman, Karchner, Huestis, et al, while it is inconclusive for chronic pot smokers like us, it does show that the occasional pot smoker is at or above 5ng/ml only within 1-4 hours of toking? We don’t see anybody above 5ng after the first day, even heavy chronic users?

          I appreciate your verve and you bring reasonable discussion to the debate, so I hope you know I’m really trying to understand here. I’d prefer legalization without per se DUID (and I get to vote on that, yay!) but given all the people I know who are heavy tokers now, who drive now, and who never get pulled over now, I’m just not scared enough of a DUID for it to be a deal-breaker to toppling the first domino in ending prohibition. The risk/reward ratio doesn’t point me toward voting no.

  • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

    Right now, Ryan, you are going to be convicted of a DUID if you are >5ng, have a failed sobriety test, and testimony of a cop. They have 90% conviction rates in these kinds of cases.

    And no, you’re not “just plain guilty”. Your >5ng means the judge instructs the jury that evidence in and of itself (per se) equates to guilt. However, juries are always free to nullify and reject that law. if you’re so upset about the per se DUID, work on educating the public so they can’t seat a jury that will convict a DUID.

    But for me it’s simple: I don’t vote the same way as the Drug Czar.

  • Chad

    Bottom line, you don’t get pulled over nowadays for having a peace sign bumper sticker. Those complaining about the DUI issue are really complaining that they can’t break the speed limit or otherwise drive badly, like all the nonsmokers on the road. Is it unfair, sure, but just suck it up and drive well or get off the road. I drove around Texas for a year and a half with a pot legalization bumper sticker and never got stopped or otherwise harassed. You can’t expect me to believe it’s different out west.

  • http://www.tokeofthetown.com/ Steve Elliott ~alapoet~

    Russ, I don’t expect the Colorado and Oregon initiatives to fail at the ballot box — which was, in fact, my point. They are, on balance, good legislation and set a reasonably good precedent.

    The Washington initiative, I-502, is not. It doesn’t need to pass, it doesn’t need to be emulated, and it should be quickly forgotten.

    • Mountain-lover

      Right Steve Let’s just “forget” about legalization cause it’s not good enough.With your stance, You are just as bad as the DEA, the Drugs czar, the Doj , and the criminals that profit off of prohibition.

      • Greenlv

        Seems to me Steve Elliot has dedicated his life to reform and legalization.

        I doubt he will quickly ‘forget’ about it. This is the kind of rhetoric that make no progress. Demonize someone who has fought, and will continue to do so at level few ever do? That helps?

        It is the same conscious he followed to become a ‘reformer’, many years before it became fashionable, that leads him to oppose i502. For this same conviction of character, now that it stands at odds with your understand, he is dismissed and demonized? That is ridiculous.

        • jontomas

          Many who have “dedicated their lives” to reform have sold out, cashed in, and betrayed the movement. Nothing new here.

    • jontomas

      How easily you dismiss the importance of I-502. Oregon’s initiative has light support, and in these corrupt political times, any number of dirty tricks could thwart Colorado’s effort. It could EASILY happen that Washington’s initiative could be the ONLY one that passes. Just one initiative passing will drive a stake through the heart of the crumbling marijuana prohibition.

      If we lose that chance for four years because of the misguided, fear-mongering tunnel vision of you antis, millions more Americans will be persecuted, and hundreds will DIE because of your insane actions.

      Marijuana reform is about ENDING MARIJUANA PROHIBITION. Get out of our way.
      You had your chance to make your case, and you clearly came up short. I hope this is the last time anyone gives you prohibition profiteers a platform to spew your deception.

      • Greenlv

        You dismiss the corrupt nature of i502.

        Lies and slander in the name of a supposed greater good is OK then? Call Steve Elliot and Kati Boiter ‘greedy growers’, and criminal, and anti-refomer and demonize anyone with a different opinion then you? Is that not Patriot-act tactics?

        “Get out of our way”
        Seems to be a bit self-aggandizingand zealot driven to me.

        Freedom of speech and opinion will continue to find outlets no matter of any persons hope for oppression, suppression, dissent or dictation of opinion.

        • jontomas

          I tell it like it is. The callous self-interest driving the antis is clear as day.
          NONE of this would be happening if we had done the right thing and capped medical marijuana at $50 an ounce in the beginning.

          • Greenlv

            “You tell it like it is”
            That is an opinion, yours.

            25 percent tax at every change of the hands. I502 would not dent the prices paid now, might even go up.

          • jontomas

            Wow. You can’t even understand a three sentence post.

          • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

            The fear of the taxes (25% x 3) is realized by beginning with a prohibition-based valuation of marijuana. To get the $400-$500 ounce being touted you’d have to start with a $205-$256 ounce production cost. (As my math teacher taught me, show your work:

            Production:
            $204.80

            Tax 1 @ 25%
            $51.20
            $256.00

            Tax 2 @ 25%
            $64.00
            $320.00

            Tax 3 @ 25%
            $80.00
            $400.00

            Production:
            $256.00

            Tax 1 @ 25%
            $64.00
            $320.00

            Tax 2 @ 25%
            $80.00
            $400.00

            Tax 3 @ 25%
            $100.00
            $500.00

            Now, if you figure people can grow decent weed and get paid at $100 per ounce, the retail cost would end up at about $195.

            Tax
            $100.00

            Tax 1 @ 25%
            $25.00
            $125.00

            Tax 2 @ 25%
            $31.25
            $156.25

            Tax 3 @ 25%
            $39.06
            $195.31

          • Greenlv

            Uh, huh. So two hundred dollar ounces then? Kinda like now. Not heading down to that fifty your partner ‘jontomas’ was quoting?

          • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

            Jeez, man, $50, $200, whatever. LEGAL! And no doctor’s permission slip required.

          • Greenlv

            don’t you mean ‘limited legalization’ russ, Didn’t you agree with me that i502 is limited legalization? Hmmm.

          • http://twitter.com/AmKonDotNet AmKon Dot Net

            Limited legalization is still legalization and infinitely better than what we have now.

          • jontomas

            Right. For everyone but prohibitionists and greedy growers. Hmmm………

          • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

            Legalization is a process. I-502 is legalization of personal possession, commercial cultivation, and commercial distribution. It maintains prohibition on personal cultivation. Limited medical cultivation will remain untouched.

            Hmmmm?

          • http://www.facebook.com/trixter.phillips Trixter Phillips

            So you concede that it is legalization. Now drop the subject, change your dirty diaper, clean yourself up, put on your big kid pants, wipe your nose, and join the rest of the adults legalizing cannabis or go sit at the little kids table.

          • jontomas

            My statement here was about capping medical marijuana, not how the market will set the price for recreational pot. Anyway, yes, I have said before that after re-legalization, average quality marijuana will sell for around $50 an ounce.

            Passing I-502, will cause the end of marijuana prohibition nationwide. With that, all the absurd restrictions will quickly fall away. Few driving rules, the allowing of home growing, etc.

            The magic number is $100 an ounce. If the price plus taxes exceeds that amount, people will just grow their own. That will reduce demand which will, in turn, bring prices down to a rational level. Assuming hefty taxes, that puts marijuana in the $50 an ounce range.

            It’s just a plant.

          • Greenlv

            “…price plus taxes exceeds that amount, people will just grow their own”

            But that would be illegal under i502, right?

          • jontomas

            Your selective blindness is so convenient. I said:

            >”Passing I-502, will cause the end of marijuana prohibition nationwide. With that, all the absurd restrictions will quickly fall away.”

      • http://www.facebook.com/FlyNewsGirl Kari Boiter

        You are correct. Marijuana reform is about ENDING marijuana prohibition. Unfortunately, Initiative 502 puts a NEW LAW (aka prohibition) on the books that can and will be used to continue to arrest, jail and convict cannabis users. No other marijuana reform proposal in history has put a NEW law on the books agaibst cannabis users. The point of ending prohibition is removing laws against cannabis, not enacting new ones.

        • jontomas

          Sorry. You already tried that fear-mongering at Hempfest and were clearly destroyed on the points. States that ALREADY put per se restrictions (many MUCH more rabidly anti-marijuna than Washington) have had NO increase in these arrests. That’s because they are primarily based on observing impaired driving. Since no significant impaired driving occurs with marijuana, no large numbers of arrests occur.

          Marijuana reform is a PROCESS, not an EVENT. I-502 goes 90 percent down the road toward the ideal marijuana policy. Only a fool would reject that incredible progress that will, in all probability, spell the end of marijuana prohibition – nationwide!

          • Greenlv

            Kari Boiter is a fear monger?
            Perhaps you don’t know who you address?

            Strange, to me, that you are such a renowned reformer, but do not respect the people that broke the ground this movement stands on.

          • jontomas

            Funny. I have never seen her name in the reformers’ hall of fame.
            So, all I have to go by is what she says, and that is extremely unimpressive.

          • http://www.facebook.com/FlyNewsGirl Kari Boiter

            Reformers hall of fame? Please tell me all about this fictitious group of yours, jontomas.

            And do let me know when you are invited to take part in a debate on precedent-setting legislation, so I can tell you how extremely unimpressive you are. Jerk.

        • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

          No, you cannot call the changing of the standards by which one is judged for a cannabis DUID a “NEW LAW (aka prohibition)”. It is currently against the law to drive with active cannabis in your system, so I-502 is not adding a new prohibition against that activity.

          • Greenlv

            Keep twisting russ.

          • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

            If you have a charge to level at me, please do so. “Keep twisting” doesn’t mean anything to me when Chubby Checker is not playing.

          • http://www.facebook.com/FlyNewsGirl Kari Boiter

            No, it is not against the law to drive with active THC in your system. There is NOTHING in the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) or Washington Administrative Code (WAC) which says ANYTHING about THC, active or otherwise.

            What the law says is that it is illegal to drive while impaired by any drug. It is Initiative 502 that would add the words THC, cannabis and marijuana to our RCW. So yes, they are creating a new and unnecessary prohibition on THC, cannabis and marijuana by adding those terms to the RCW. If creating new cannabis laws that did not exist before is not prohibition, I don’t know what is.

          • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

            You’re making a distinction that lacks any difference. It is against the law to drive while impaired by any drug. Active THC in your bloodstream is impairing, even if only to the slightest degree. Therefore, driving with active THC in your bloodstream is against the law.

          • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

            RCW 46.61.502
            Driving under the influence.

            (1) A person is guilty of driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug if the person drives a vehicle within this state:

            (a) And the person has, within two hours after driving, an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or higher as shown by analysis of the person’s breath or blood made under RCW 46.61.506; or

            (b) While the person is under the influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor or any drug;

            RCW 69.50.101Definitions.
            Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, definitions of terms shall be as indicated where used in this chapter:

            (l) “Drug” means (1) a controlled substance recognized as a drug in the official United States pharmacopoeia/national formulary or the official homeopathic pharmacopoeia of the United States, or any supplement to them; (2) controlled substances intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease in individuals or animals; (3) controlled substances (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of individuals or animals; and (4) controlled substances intended for use as a component of any article specified in (1), (2), or (3) of this subsection. The term does not include devices or their components, parts, or accessories.

            (d) “Controlled substance” means a drug, substance, or immediate precursor included in Schedules I through V as set forth in federal or state laws, or federal or board rules.

            Code of Federal Regulations Section 1308.11 Schedule I.

            a) Schedule I shall consist of the drugs and other substances, by whatever official name, common or usual name, chemical name, or brand name designated, listed in this section.

            (d) Hallucinogenic substances.

            (31) Tetrahydrocannabinols – Meaning tetrahydrocannabinols naturally contained in a plant of the genus Cannabis (cannabis plant), as well as synthetic equivalents of the substances contained in the cannabis plant, or in the resinous extractives of such plant

            So, the federal Controlled Substances Act places THC in Schedule I, RCW 69.50.101(l) says that a “drug” is a controlled substance, and RCW 46.61.502(1)(b) says you’re guilty of the crime of driving under the influence if you are under the influence or affected by any drug. And having active THC in your bloodstream – not inactive metabolites – means you are under its influence, even if only to the tiniest degree.

            Sorry, to me I read that as “driving with THC in your blood in Washington State is a crime”. Now.

    • http://radicalruss.com/ RadicalRuss

      If you expect Colorado and Oregon to pass, then there is no logical possibility that Washington passing can “set a precedent”. That, in fact, was my point. Unless all three pass and Washington’s passes with greater numbers than Colorado and Oregon.

      I think the best precedent that can be set is a trifecta. Three states vote on legalization and three states pass it and the federal government has a three-front war on its hands. Should only Oregon and Colorado pass, we still have a good fight, but Washington has the greatest political power (Wash = 12 EV, Colo = 9 EV, Oregon = 7 EV).

      Plus, at this point, Washington and Colorado are the best-funded, best-polling, and have greatest support. Oregon is in serious need of funding for the campaign. Should both Oregon and Washington not pass while Colorado does pass, it is all alone fighting the feds. All activism money will pour in there and the whole West Coast is stuck without anything viable until 2016 at the soonest.

      Legalization opportunities are too rare to pass up. Believe me, I fought and argued like hell about I-502′s inclusion of per se DUID long ago when it was being floated as a possible inclusion to the initiative. But I and others lost that battle. Now it is on the ballot, and my choices are to vote with all the legalization organizations, or vote with the Drug Czar and all the Washington Sheriffs, or not voting.

      Well, assuming I was a Washington voter. As it is, I get to vote by mail from home for legalization that includes personal cultivation and possession with no defined limits. I sure hope it wins!

  • OH

    Washington State needs the revenue, soon we will lose our public resources, they will get privatized, we need that revenue.
    Al Capone is going to get that revenue if we dont. The DEA has no way to protect Americans from Al Capone – the DEA CANT deal with Al Capone – but AL CAPONE CAN AND WILL DEAL WITH THE DEA!!!! Al Capone has drug-war plans that include victory – total victory – total enslavement of the USA!!
    Al Capone comes in, says “silver or lead”. Not the nice silver, not silver you can enjoy – silver chains of death – silver chains you cant do anything day or night but dream oh if only I could get this sh– off of me, off of my neighborhood, off of my country!!!
    You betrayers, do you realize, it isnt long before Al Capone comes to your pot-shop and says “you work for me now”.
    I want you freaks, you betrayers, understand you are not liked, alot of people will not tell you to your face, you are probably the worst people I have ever heard of, you are nihilists or worse, and I dont buy for a second that you are sincere in any way, I dont believe you when you say what you supposedly believe, youre no better whatsoever than A BUNCH OF BILL BENNETTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • freetheleaf

    NEVER on I-502

    • http://twitter.com/AmKonDotNet AmKon Dot Net

      So you gonna be voting for that initiative that isn’t on the ballot?