Oak Creek considers medical marijuana moratorium

Advertisement

If you go

What: Oak Creek Town Board meeting

When: 7 p.m. today

Where: Oak Creek Town Hall

Agenda: Items include consideration of a land use change request for the purpose of opening a medical marijuana dispensary and an update on the wastewater treatment plant project.

— The Oak Creek Town Board tonight will consider an emergency 60-day moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries. Officials say the moratorium would give the town time to review and amend its municipal code.

The moratorium would be in response to a request from a group of local medical marijuana providers, led by Jacob Wise, who want to open a dispensary at the corner of Nancy Crawford Boulevard and Sharp Avenue. The Oak Creek Plan­ning Commission on Jan. 20 voted, 4-1, to recommend that the Town Board approve the dispensary request, with several requirements regarding security and advertising at the space.

At tonight’s meeting, scheduled to begin at 7 p.m. in Oak Creek Town Hall, trustees have a broad range of choices before them. Based on the recommendation from the Planning Commission, they can vote to approve the dispensary, add or remove regulations recommended by the commission, deny the application entirely or adopt the moratorium drafted by town attorney Bob Weiss.

The meeting also will include a public hearing regarding the establishment of the dispensary business.

Mayor J Elliott requested that Weiss become involved in the process to give the town legal advice. He said he is worried that without state guidance, the town is left to figure out the procedure on its own.

“I want to talk to our attorney and do it as right as we possibly can the first time,” Elliott said.

On Wed­nesday, a committee of the state Sen­­ate approved a bill that would impose more restrictions on medical marijuana patients and their doctors.

The bill, sponsored by Sen. Chris Romer, D-Denver, passed the Senate Health and Human Services Committee by a vote of 6-1.

The bill includes provisions that prohibit doctors from taking payments from dispensaries or from operating in a dispensary, and it requires regular medical check-ups for medical marijuana license holders.

Wise said renovation of the downtown Oak Creek space is proceeding. The dispensary is planned for a space in the Circle R Building, in a former bank. Wise said crews are painting and preparing the offices despite the possible delay.

“We’re painting and building cabinets,” he said. “As far as we know, everything’s all right.”

Wise agreed to all the recommendations suggested by the Plan­n­ing Com­m­ission, including the installation of security cameras and additional security measures. He said he wants to open the business legally, and the only request he has is to place bulletproof glass over the windows instead of bars, as the Plan­ning Commission requested.

He also said although he thinks the law allows him to deliver medical marijuana to patients who are bedridden, he does not plan to do so except in the case of one cancer patient whom he already is caring for. He said he will refer those delivery requests to another medical marijuana provider.

Comments

mmjPatient22 4 years, 2 months ago

I fully support the part of Sen. Romers bill that separates the doctors from the influence of funds from a dispensary. I feel the same way about doctors being influenced by pharmaceutical companies. Dirty, corrupt doctors are a real shame and having them involved with medical marijuana doesn't help to legitimize the industry one bit. However, requiring patients to forfeit even more money for follow-up doctors visits does nothing more than set up a road block for those patients that are caught up in rough financial times, like a lot of Americans these days. Amendment 20 of our state constitution was enacted for the benefit of one group of people; the patients. The spirit behind Amendment 20 isn't to make drug dealers/growers/doctors/whoeverthehellelse rich from the subsequent industry. That's not to say that there shouldn't be an industry or even that those involved shouldn't be able to profit and/or make a living from their work. But it does mean that there should be extra special attention paid to ensure that patients are not being taken advantage of by those entrusted with their care. Also, the part of the bill that deals with the younger crowd is going to catch some heat but I think it's a good step towards legitimizing cannabis. If someone under 21 truly has a real medical condition that provides them with a need for marijuana as medicine, then there should be no problem with getting 2 different doctors to agree with each other about the existence of the condition.

With national healthcare looming on the horizon, it will be interesting to see what the proposed intervals are for the follow-up doctors visits. Are we talking monthly? Quarterly? Bi-annually? The law already stipulates that the yearly renewal process includes a re-recommendation from a physician. Are they trying to say that medical marijuana patients need to see a physician more than once a year? Why not require self-professed drinkers of alcohol, and smokers of tobacco to go see a doc every three months to check for cancer and/or liver failure?

0

JusWondering 4 years, 2 months ago

mmj: In your many posts with absolute fervor and passion on the subject you espouse with many quotes, links and commentary (please do not re-hash these points) that MMJ is medicinal yet you say: "Why not require self-professed drinkers of alcohol, and smokers of tobacco to go see a doc every three months to check for cancer and/or liver failure?" Seriously?

Big difference here. Are you not trying to show the benefits of the plant as medicinal and not recreational? If so then this sentence really puts a hole in your many postings. Careful what you say... it could be interpretted incorrectly, unless your ultimate desire is for approval of recreational use.

It would be extremely rare to find anyone that would be as passioniate as you are about the medicinal benefits of taking a drink or lighting up so this comparison is a fallacy, and not realistic. Tobacco, specifically the nicotine, has medicinal benefits; I seem to remember one study on its treatment of alzheimer's but I do not know of one contemporary scientific study speaking of the benefits of lighting up.

Perhaps a more fair comparison is to those things you rail against in your many posts (prescription medications). It is not at all unusual, in fact it is the norm, for an individual using these controlled substances (MMJ is a controlled substance with rules on how it can be legally distributed) to re-visit these substances with their physician regularly to ensure that the desired efffect is still being obtained? I would know of very rare situations where a physician would prescribe something and then say to their patient "take two of these every day or as needed and I will see you in a year."

To me the regulary physician visits (even up to monthly) are about establishing credibility and I cannot see why anyone would be against it. So it costs you $50 to see the doc... if it is truly medicinal I just can't see the negative here.

0

Scott Wedel 4 years, 2 months ago

The irony is that if the State of Colorado tries to overly regulate dispensaries then it'll just keep the patient/caregiver/grower relationship out of public view where all sorts of improper stuff can happen.

That's a brilliant way to deal with a problem. Just push it out of sight.

0

freerider 4 years, 2 months ago

mmj 22 ....I'm wondering why you don't start a petition to legalize in Routt County ?? seems like that would be a better use of your time rather than wasting it trying to educate the ignorant and the arrogant here on the pilot website...do you really think you have won any battles with Dukey Boy or Aichy Breaky , seeUski , JLM or any of the other Neanderthals that live in Routt county ?? Breckenridge and Nederland are paving the way for victories here in Colorado , the dominoes are falling . Politicians need to just get out of the way on this one as we can win our states rights back over the FED ,which is just as imporatant or more important to win that battle as to win the marijuana battle. It would be a lot more satisfying a victory rather than trying to win the hearts ands minds of the stupid arrogant posters ...just a thougfht ...I bet it's about a 50/50 chance here in Routt county ...Amendment 43 lost to about a 60/40 tally a few years ago but things have changed and it's probably worth a shot . You can rant all you want about MMJ but it really comes down to freedom of choice and the power of the vote still works...or you can endlessly post pro-marijuana rants here forever that fall upon deaf and dumb ears ....I for one would support it and so would about half the community . Legalization takes the power away from drug cartels and the FED , marijuana should be free to grow for anybody that wants it....it's stupid to put guidelines and get physicians involved in this ...it's just a ploy for the Fed to keep control over us....I personnaly don't want to live in a dictatorship where the dictators are complete idiots and will only serve the CORPORATIONS

0

mmjPatient22 4 years, 2 months ago

Ok, let me see if I can be a little more frank about things. First of all, when I was making the comparison between booze&cigs and marijuana, I was pointing more to the "health concern" aspect. If they are going to require marijuana patients to get check up exams because of the dangers that cannabis may present to them, why aren't they making the very same thing a requisite for those that openly endanger their health with tobacco and alcohol(things that are very limited in what they have to offer medicinally)? Telling me that I have to spend an extra $600 a year on follow-up doctors visits(on top of the price of the medicine itself) is only going to accomplish one thing. I'd be forced to abandon the state-approved medical marijuana program and find my meds in the same old places I used to find them(not in dispensaries). That's not what amendment 20 is about. Amendment 20 is about keeping patients out of jail. If I'm purchasing illegal black-market marijuana(for recreational or medicinal purposes) my chances of ending up in jail and/or having my record tarnished for it increase dramatically. Most of what I talk about on here is in regards to the current legislation that regulates my medicine. The fact that there is legislation that provides for this is something that I don't take for granted. However, to speak to the heart of legislating cannabis and the last 7 decades of prohibition, I think that America's policies towards pot are ridiculous, based on nothing but lies and do nothing but promote further violence and misfortune for those that get caught up in the system. The issue of cannabis being illegal is far reaching and the subsequent affects are readily seen in many facets of American life. Our prison systems(mostly built to house non-violent drug offenders) are mostly privatized and set up to run as "for profit" organizations. I don't know if this strikes anyone else as mortifying but it sure as hell torques me the wrong way. The general attitude of past generations of Americans has been, "it's ok to go get hammered drunk," and, "better make sure that your medicine cabinet is well stocked with everything that your doctor tells you that you need to be taking to achieve normalcy." But nowadays you can't watch 15 minutes of network television without being regaled with a roster of side effects that you can expect to experience when you take the latest "_-ezyne" or "_-icol." And if it's not the drug companies telling you how great life could be with all of your new side effects, it's some lawyer schmuckatelli that's forming a class-action suit against one of the drug clowns for making a drug that hurt someone. That being said, I offer an open invitation to anyone that reads this to present a single, solitary piece of verifiable documentation that lists marijuana as the direct cause of someone's death. I've yet to see this anywhere and no one else has either. But if you think you can be the first, then by all means, let 'er rip.

0

mmjPatient22 4 years, 2 months ago

and freerider-

Thanks, I guess. I've often thought about composing some piece of marijuana reform legislation but I've found that my ignorance of correct legal-eese and the proper procedure for such things has stood in my way. It's not that I don't have the desire to write something up but more that I'm waiting for a more opportune time to engage with the people that can more readily assist with such an undertaking. Things are fairly busy right now within the realm of marijuana law and to congest the system with yet another piece of seemingly insignificant local legislation, while there are things that are still yet undecided at much broader levels, would be jumping the gun a little bit(at least in my opinion). The marijuana situation in this country is rapidly changing and it might not take all that long to flip things around the way they should be. Also, it's not so much that I have some grand illusion that I'm going to convert a single one of the prohibitionists that get on here and offer their side of things. My only hope, in incessantly rebutting and commenting on this site, is to prevent the further spread of the lies that got marijuana prohibited in the first place. Ignorance is a mighty force when left unchecked. Wars have been started because of ignorance and I'm doing my part to end this one. And I couldn't agree with you more that our country has far greater issues to deal with than marijuana. Jobs, economy, healthcare, housing....we all know the routine by now. I'm not trying to detract from any of those things or their importance or merit as individual issues. They're all important issues and I'm well aware of all of them. Nonetheless, this being a comment section for an article that's mostly about cannabis and all, I'm going to go ahead and stay off of those topics, unless it's specifically in regard to how they pertain to the main subject at hand.

0

muck 4 years, 2 months ago

JUSTWONDERING.............. "To me the regulary physician visits (even up to monthly) are about establishing credibility and I cannot see why anyone would be against it. So it costs you $50 to see the doc... if it is truly medicinal I just can't see the negative here".

Well justwondering maybe we are not in favor of legalization as much as we are wanting to expose the lies! The complete basic criminal lies that established "marijuana" as a dangerous, physcotic driven, man killing, drug. NEVER once in the hearings in 1937, was it viewed harmful to your pysical health. It was pure 100% false LIES!

Are you aware of what was said to congress justwondering?? Look it up and you will find you have no case!!! No debate! Nothing to say in favor of making it stay illegal! If we stick the the FACT of WHY it was made illegal. I will own you!

Or do you beleive the ludicrous remarks made by Jonathan Aslinger in 1937, who personally prusued criminalization of marihuana: "This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.”

or maybe it was: “Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”

nope it must have been: “…the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races.”

You want us to think anything they say or do will be "establishing credibility"?

Or is it your gonna save us from ourselves?

0

muck 4 years, 2 months ago

My choice is what I choose to do. If I’m causing no harm it shouldn’t bother you. Your choice is who you choose to be. If you’re causing no harm, you’re all right with me” – Ben Harper

0

muck 4 years, 2 months ago

At a cost of billions of dollars a year. Ask yourself, is our governement winning this 73 year old war?

October 2 1937, Lexington Hotel in Denver Colorado

Samual R. Caldwell 58 year old white poor un-employed laborer was the 1st person arrested in the United States, (the same day the law took effect) under Aslingers Marijuana WAR.

Judge Foster Symes declared at his trial: "i consider marijuan the worst of all narcotics, far worse than the use of cocaine and morphine". and then was sentenced to 4 Years of hard labor, 1000.00 in fines (for 1937, thats like 50,000.00 today) and no parole!

ALL for TWO MARIJUANA joints.

And dont forget WHY............ because "This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.” so says Aslinger!!

0

JusWondering 4 years, 2 months ago

Muck, muck, muck... your argument is not with me and to be honest I could care less what some ignoramus said nearly 73 years ago... get over it. This is the same era where ignorant individuals (I am being kind) would string up a black man and KILL him for simply looking at a white girl. Fortunately we, as a nation, have evolved past that. So, please do not re-post the same diatribe that you have on other posts... it is wasted on me.

Recreational products that affect one's sensory processing, motor skills or cognitive abilities to the extremes of MJ are regulated; as they should be. Period. This regulation is in place for the community as a whole, not your individual rights. Why would you/should you expect any less??!!!!!!

0

Duke_bets 4 years, 2 months ago

The DEA raided a medical marijuana factory in Denver. That was yesterday. The main cause for the raid would be that the shop might be a cover up for a trafficking operation. 2-3 weeks ago people were shooting each other at another pot shop in Denver.

I've stated it many times.............Drugs support crime. I don't care that stoners like to get stoned. But, please don't promote the use of drugs and please don't call it medicine.

I'll bring this point up again.............Does any one know of an example where a medical marijuana patients' first use of the drug came from a prescription. No! Dopers are dopers. It's a recreational buzz. Nothing more nothing less.

0

mmjPatient22 4 years, 2 months ago

So, even if a law was enacted under false pretenses and based on nothing but lies....you wouldn't care? Tell me where the logic is in banning an entire species of plant, even the sub-species that have little, to no psychoactive properties? I'm sure we'd all love to hear your reason(s) for why it's ok for a government to pass laws that are based on lies.

And as for cannabis being a substance that takes effects on one's "sensory processing, motor skills or cognitive abilities" to so-called "extremes,"..... Well, I'm just a little curious as to where you gathered your data that supports fantastic bit of fiction. I've heard of countless stories of alcohol poisoning, drug overdosing and even a few stories of nicotine overdose. I've seen people that were drunk enough to abandon walking for crawling. I've seen the horrifying effects that other drugs, like heroin, crack and meth, can have on the people that let their lives be run by those drugs. However, I've NEVER seen a pothead/stoner/MMJ patient end up in the emergency room for smoking one too many joints. I've NEVER heard a story that ended in, "...and the autopsy report says it was all that THC in his system that killed him." And I've NEVER heard of a deprived downtown area being given up to cannabis-addicts that are strung out on reefer to the point where they live in cardboard shacks and push grocery carts around all day looking for cans. And I'll tell you what else I've seen. I've seen historical documentation that proves the existence and use of cannabis(for a variety of uses) that dates back thousands of years. Ancient peoples were well aware of the wonders of cannabis and they used it safely for thousands of years before this "marijuana" was ever deemed evil by the likes of Harry Anslinger. What changed? What happened that, all of a sudden in 1937, made those in power believe that this ancient plant, known as cannabis, was evil and needed to be eradicated from the face of the earth? Do you know something that we don't?

0

mmjPatient22 4 years, 2 months ago

Hey dookie- I don't suppose you know why the violence springs up in the first place, do you? Hmmm....Well, a brief look at the prohibition of alcohol might provide a little insight.

And for your information(you ignorant, biased old fart), it wasn't a marijuana factory that's part of some big marijuana crime syndicate. It was a testing facility that determined THC content, potency and other characteristics of different strains of cannabis. Nice try though. http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_14290771

0

Duke_bets 4 years, 2 months ago

mmj - 'Biased old fart' coming from you supports my position on the issue. $10,000 worth of smoke was confiscated from this testing factory. The DEA raided it because they suspected a cover up for a trafficking operation. Testing factory, pot farm, medical marijauna distributor...........Call it what you want.

And, you always seem to ignore my #1 question. Medical marijuana is prescribed to lifetime stoners. Right? Nobody started smoking dope because of skin cancer or chronic back pain.

To answer your question, violence primarily springs up with criminal activity and the use or need for drugs.

0

mmjPatient22 4 years, 2 months ago

So, the only lab of it's type in Colorado is involved in trafficking? Boy, I can't wait for the evidence on that to surface. Just because the DEA goes on a raid doesn't mean that they're right. Bear in mind that the DEA point of contact had no comments on the reason(s) for the raid and everything that is assumed before a trial is nothing more than speculation. Having cannabis as the primary thing that your business revolves around does not automatically mean that your business is involved in mass distribution or trafficking. However, due to the nature of the business, they probably received innumerable "samples" for testing. Does that automatically implicate them in trafficking?....Well, to a minor degree, yes. Does that mean that they were a part of some big drug ring? C'mon, be realistic. And you're only half right on the lifetime stoner issue. Plus, regardless of right or wrong about any of it, the citizenry of this state have the RIGHT to access cannabis as medicine. Not you or anyone else is going to get that voted off of our state constitution. This whole thing is going to be a lot easier for you to come to terms with when you finally understand that it's my RIGHT as a resident of this state to use cannabis as medicine. Where do you get off thinking that you have some right to tell me or anyone else what to do, or not do, with regards to cannabis(medicinally or recreationally)? And the violence wouldn't exist if people were allowed to freely access/propagate/distribute cannabis. Plus, if you personally knew a single stoner(which I highly doubt that you do) you'd know that stoners are more non-violent than most non-tokers. I dare you to refute that.

0

JusWondering 4 years, 2 months ago

Our government enacts laws based on lies and inaccurate data all the time. There is a process to handle overturning these laws for the betterment of society as a whole (isn't that one of the reasons we have the justices in the Supreme Court?).

"Extremes" is relative. In my mind I was thinking of a sugar buzz or caffeine buzz versus being strung out on any other regulated substance.

The buzz I get from caffeine is not the same of the sensory deprivation of MJ. This I do know for a fact. Perhaps a poor choice of words, but nonetheless relative.

Now, about THC being the direct cause of death. No, I do not have a statistic (nor did I really look), but I do not see that as having any relevance to my point either. My point was not a life/death causation issue but more of one relating to abilities impaired and the regulation of medicinal substances that have an extreme (as defined above) effect on your abilities to act within the norms of society, or are we back to recreational use? If so, until the Supreme Court in its infinite wisdom overturns the law that you are beating your chest about the fact is it is illegal. Period. If you don't like it then get the law changed. Until then you have no legal right to use the substance for recreational purposes and any medicinal usage should be regulated as other medically prescribed (yes I realize that is not the exact correct term) substance with regular visits to a .

0

muck 4 years, 2 months ago

justwondering.......

So you think that alcohol that is legal and causes more deaths and addictions is ok because its legal? Here lets take your word and change them and see if it makes sense.

Recreational products that affect one's sensory processing, motor skills or cognitive abilities to the extremes of alcohol are somewhat regulated; as they should be. Period. This regulation is in place for the community as a whole, not your individual rights. Why would you/should you expect any less???

In a preliminary estimate, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said 43,300 people died in motor vehicle crashes in 2006, down slightly from 43,443 the previous year. The number of people injured fell more sharply, to 2.5 million from 2.7 million, a 6 percent decline.

So because alcohol is legal. And you don't want to face the FACTS of WHY marijuana was criminalized in 1937 you think that "WE" have evolved passed that or we should get over that?? What part are you talking about? The RACIST LIES? You thinks Its ok to create a law at the expense of RACE, and because it is 73 years old and the people of the time were complete idiots, and would be a violation of our law today to create such a racist law you are ok with that???? We should just well "get over it"? Accept it?? Be "ok" that it still exisits? Just look the other way?

Racisist Fear causing monger Like to Protection of Corporate Profits Belives in Yellow Journalism and propaganda Ignorant, Incompetent, and/or is a Corrupt politician Personal Career Advancement and Greed

These are the actual reasons marijuana is illegal.

Many people assume that marijuana was made illegal through some kind of process involving scientific, medical, and government hearings; that it was to protect the citizens from what was determined to be a dangerous drug.

Now i know you don't care about repost! But i would bet my bottom dollar! Last red cent!! You have a benificial hand in the marijuana being against the law!! For anyone to support it!! Or is it that you wanna save us from ourselves!! A HOLY SAVIOR are ya??

0

muck 4 years, 2 months ago

"Our government enacts laws based on lies and inaccurate data all the time. There is a process to handle overturning these laws for the betterment of society as a whole (isn't that one of the reasons we have the justices in the Supreme Court?)."

sorta like 1937 RACIST LAW OF CRIMINALIZATION OF "MARIHUANA" as so it was spelled in law in 1937

0

muck 4 years, 2 months ago

oh justwondering you for got RACISM! Thats another reason they overturn laws. Like oh slavery? Right??

0

muck 4 years, 2 months ago

justwondering answer this question.....

If race were not a factor in the decision in 1937, do you think it would have still been made illegal??

Also, in 1932 when prohibition ended, guess who was incharge of the anti-alcohol division for the United States Government and was now out of a job?? Yep you guess it! JOHNATHON ASLINGER!!

Can you see the puzzle here?? LIES TO INTIMITATE! LIES FOR FEAR!! LIES FOR SELF REWARDING BEINFITS!! Just like you!!!

0

JusWondering 4 years, 2 months ago

Muck, you are dillusional. I guess it was my fault for trying to engage in a real thought provoking conversation. Seems to be your M-O. When you can't come up with anything else you go back to "racisim and lies". I guess the best thing is to let you rant and rave and bite my tongue. THE END

0

muck 4 years, 2 months ago

Justwondering please! I beg of you! Tell me. Look it up. Go to any library or use the computer. Harry Johnathan Aslingerr, 1937 Marijuan law. LOOK IT UP FOR GOD SAKES!!! Then you can come back and tell me that WHAT was said in testimony to congress. Don't give me some MOMBO JUMBO about "today, marijuan is bad for you because it make you do stuff and that is why it illegal and because our government says it is". FOR GOD SAKES WHY, JUST THE FACTS, not your personal interpretation or wish to keep it illegal so you keep your job and make your house payment because of your PERSONAL CAREER ADVANCMENTS warrant a long law enforcement career tied to its criminalization.

FACTS (at least his desire) that convinced congress to criminalize: “Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”- Harry Johnathan Aslinger
1937 testimony to congress

NOT because a forgien country tried to use it on us as a weapon! (Bush) NOT because it makes your brain look like some yummy eggs. (Reagan) NOT because you are gonna kill someone! (they did say that) NOT because you will destroy your family in a hellish rage! (even though they said that) NOT because you will turn into a martian! (you think that ) NOT because it will make worms dig holes in your head (JLM thinks this) NOT because it causes CANCER! (this scare came with ronnie in the 80s) NOT because if a smoker sees an axe and he is going to kill his parents! (NIXON) NOT because you are a blood thursty killer. (even though they said that)

But you can't face the truth can you! THE TRUTH! PLEASE! WHAT IS THE REAL REASON! FROM 1937! NOT NOW! 1937! THE ACTUALL REASONS! 1937!

ALL LIES SISTER AND YOU CANT HIDE CAN YOU! LOOK IT UP!! LIES!

0

muck 4 years, 2 months ago

So i was justwondering...........

A long time ago alcohol was legal an abundant (old west, late 1800's). Then the church groups came along and "demondized" alcohol and we had Prohibition. Now for some reason the devil would get you if you drank alcohol and it would make you a ravenous murder. So in 1917 the TEMPERANCE movement (womens christian movement) convinced congress to attempt to criminalize. The bill passes in 1919. So from 1919-1933 alcohol was the devil.

Then a CHRISTMAS miracle! A word that changes all laws! Mankind would not be the same! Alcohol was not the devil! It would not do those evil killing things (another lie) It was ok because we could make it TAXABLE! OH YES! We can tax it? Now if we can tax it, there is no way it is bad for you right?

But Marijuana....... Its the devil right!!

“…the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races.” Harry J. Aslinger 1937 congress testimony

Now we cannot go back right!! Fix laws that were made. They are in place for a reason right. WHAT ABOUT ALCOHOL?? and guess what........ its still bad for you!!

IDIOTS!!!

0

muck 4 years, 2 months ago

The "Volstead Act", the popular name for the National Prohibition Act, passed through Congress over President Woodrow Wilson's veto on October 28, 1919 and established the legal definition of intoxicating liquor.[1] Though the Volstead Act prohibited the sale of alcohol, it did little to enforce the law. The illegal production and distribution of liquor, or bootlegging, became rampant, and the national government did not have the means or desire to enforce every border, lake, river, and speakeasy in America. By 1925, in New York City alone, there were anywhere from 30,000 to 100,000 speakeasy clubs.[2]

Prohibition became increasingly unpopular during the Great Depression, especially in large cities.

WOW MAYBE HISTORY WILL REPEAT IT SELF??

0

muck 4 years, 2 months ago

wikipedia.......... It appeared that Anslinger was also responsible for racial themes in articles against marijuana in the 1930s:[citation needed]

"Colored students at the Univ. of Minn. partying with (white) female students, smoking [marijuana] and getting their sympathy with stories of racial persecution. Result: pregnancy"[11][12] "Two Negros took a girl fourteen years old and kept her for two days under the influence of hemp. Upon recovery she was found to be suffering from syphilis."[12][13] What Anslinger used was language from police reports about illegal drug use. Police reports are typically written with a concise language including such details as age, gender, race, ethnic group, type of crime etc.[citation needed] Anslinger, for example, pointed at the former big bootleggers of alcohol, something that many interpret as the Italian/Jewish mafia, as responsible for a big part of the organized illegal trade with opium and cocaine from mid 1930s.[citation needed] "The first Federal law-enforcement administrator to recognize the signs of a national criminal syndication and sound the alarm was Harry J. Anslinger, Commissioner of the Bureau of Narcotics in the Treasury" (Ronald Reagan 1986)[14]

When Anslinger was interviewed in 1954 about drug abuse (see below), he did not mention anything about race or sex. In his book The Protectors (1964) Anslinger has a chapter called "Jazz and Junk Don't Mix" about the black jazz musicians Billie Holliday and Charlie Parker, who both died after years of heavy drug abuse:

"Jazz entertainers are neither fish nor fowl. They do not get the million-dollar protection Hollywood and Broadway can afford for their stars who have become addicted - and there are many more than will ever be revealed. Perhaps this is because jazz, once considered a decadent kind of music, has only token respectability. Jazz grew up next door to crime, so to speak. Clubs of dubious reputation were, for a long time, the only places where it could be heard. But the times bring changes, and as Billy Holiday was a victim of time and change, so too was Charlie Parker, a man whose music, like Billie's is still widely imitated. Most musicians credit Parker among others as spearheading what is called modern jazz."(p.157)

GEEEE JUST WONDERING WHY WOULD I BRING UP RACIAL STUFF?? IDIOT

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.