Point 1) The current program does not adequately meet patient needs, for there is nowhere to purchase medicine. OCTA provides medicine at cost to pharmacies.

Point 2) OCTA conforms to international treaties governing drug crops. International treaties carry the force of law – law of the land, as the Constitution puts it.

Point 3) The provision in OCTA that repeals OMMA repeals all marijuana laws. You can’t be suggesting that the courts would leave standing a provision that repeals all marijuana laws while simultaneously proposing they wouldn’t allow taxed and regulated sales to stand. In order for them to keep the “no more OMMA” part, they have to keep the whole “no more marijuana laws” part. It’s not written in a way where they could work it like a Chinese buffet and take some of column A but none of column B.

Repeal of all marijuana laws is necessary to comport with treaty. A medical marijuana law, OMMA or any other in existence, does not follow the mandate of the 1962 Single Convention Treaty on Narcotic Drugs.

If the “OCTA goes down”, then so would the provision that repeals all marijuana laws, and OMMA would be left exactly as it is.

Finally, OCTA has been vetted thoroughly over fifteen years by many legal experts and activists. What I find compelling is how some people in the medical marijuana community are so resistant to the push to tax and regulate cannabis for all adults. Many of these critics are wholly supportive of a plan to institute California-style dispensaries, so it’s not the marijuana sales running afoul of federal interventions they oppose.

I just don’t understand the notion that a state could pass a medical marijuana law that runs counter to federal law and potentially allow medical sales, and the feds would hate it and come bust it and rule against it in the Supreme Court, but somehow the state law stays in effect…

…but then turn around and say if the same state passes a all-adults marijuana law that runs counter to federal law and allows all-adults sales, and the feds would hate it and come bust it and rule against it in the Supreme Court, but this time that state law will be ruled invalid and the previous state law that was allowed to be in effect will be invalid, too.

I don’t get that reasoning. Especially when a successfully passed OCTA would end the need for plant limits, possession limits, cards, registration fees every year, finding a grower, seeing a doctor once a year, worrying about break-ins at gardens, and would give everyone the right to buy and possess quality-controlled, potency-measured, scientifically-studied, low-cost medicine, and that purchase helps fund state programs that could help the neediest patients even more?

Until cannabis is regulated and allowed for all adults, there will always be a black market which inflates the price of medicine and brings violence, robberies, and arrests to patients. Cannabis prohibition hurts not only the patients in Oregon but those people nationwide suffering in medical and non-medical states alike. The action won’t happen at the federal level; it must come from the states. Oregon will be that pioneering state once again – the home of the bottle bill, the public beaches, and marijuana decriminalization – Oregon will be the state that shows the rest of the states the legal key that unlocks prohibition.

The only problem with OCTA in the end will be the Federal Scheduling of Marijuana. It trumps OCTA, and any other legalization efforts, every single time.

I am not saying decrim doesn’t come and go, and that is part of the OCTA problem, as it dismantles the OMMA law in the first paragraph, and when OCTA goes down….OMMA will already be gone.A decade of gone gone in a minute because the supporters of OCTA refuse to vet this action properly and change the first paragraph superceding the OMMA law.

It sounds to me like someone is upset about something so they are trying to cause trouble for someone else. Even “IF” the people in question are drug dealers, is there any reason to insult them even more by talking about ridiculous things like facial sores? You are 18 kid have you had acne before? So quick to pass judgment on someone without thinking of the consequences of your actions.

The real thing that needs to be addressed is that there obviously isn’t anything for the teenagers to do in Vancouver…because they are more interested in stirring up drama with sick, innocent people. It might not be today, it might not be tonight, tomorrow, next month or next year but you will regret what you have done to this woman. You will remember it, and you will regret it.

2006, Washington Post: Dr. Donald Tashkin at UCLA Med Ctr finds that even heavy chronic marijuana smokers do not have an increased risk of head, neck, or lung cancers compared to non-smokers, and those who smoke both cannabis and tobacco have lower cancer risk than those who smoke tobacco alone.

There is no credible evidence whatsoever indicating any health risks from second-hand marijuana smoke.

Heavy chronic marijuana smokers do suffer from an increased rate of bronchitis.

Marijuana is not “addictive”, at least in the heroin/cocaine/meth/alcohol/nicotine sense. Some users (about 9%) can develop symptoms of “dependence”, which when cannabis is ceased can lead to irritability, insomnia, and restlessness. Not exactly a puking, shaking, sweating junkie trying to kick heroin. NIDA rated the “addictiveness” of cannabis to be about as severe as caffeine.

According to some sources, marijuana is addictive and can cause death (maybe not through OD, it’s just like how cigarettes can’t cause direct death but does cause death through cancer). And no, this research was not done on wikipedia, it was researched on a .gov site and a few creditable medial sites. Marijuana can give respiratory illnesses to smokers. Also, marijuana smoke can be ‘second hand’, like cigarette smoke.