Tag Cloud
Friday, May 24, 2013
Opinion: Sacramento's marijuana problem
by R.V. Scheide, published on October 18, 2012 at 6:08 PM
Storyline: Economy and Politics
Community Tags
cannabis
marijuana
medical marijuana
opinion
politics
prop 215
sacramento city council
Loading images
Old habits die hard. In 1996, a majority of California voters approved Proposition 215, which legalized the medicinal use of marijuana. Culturally, the state turned a corner. Among other things, citizens could now turn to a health-care alternative they could grow on their own property. Medical-marijuana users were no longer to be treated as criminals. But 14 years later, some people still don’t get it.
Take the Sacramento City Council, for example.
On Oct. 16, the council voted 8-1 to draft an ordinance outlawing outdoor marijuana gardens within city limits. According to the council, the ordinance is necessary because outdoor marijuana gardens have become magnets for crime. Plus, the pungent smell of an outdoor crop in full bloom disturbs some of the citizenry.
The problem is, these rationalizations for bypassing state law depend on a mindset that considers medical-marijuana users second-class citizens, if not criminals.
Consider the claim that outdoor marijuana gardens are magnets for crime. There is no doubt that certain criminal elements target gardens that appear vulnerable. Occasionally, gunplay and death result when citizens defend their crops, which can be worth up to $2,000 per plant. Is the council contending you can’t have anything of value on your property? What about the cash you keep in your safe? The Lexus you park in the street? Your bicycle?
Moreover, it isn’t the responsibility of growers to fight this crime. That’s the Sacramento Police Department’s job, one for which they are compensated well by taxpayers, including medical-marijuana users. Aren’t medical-marijuana users entitled to equal protection under the law? Or are they second-class citizens?
The City Council appears to be unaware that lower-income medical-marijuana users depend on their outdoor gardens to provide enough medicine to last an entire year. An outdoor garden of six plants can be raised for as little as $300 per year, not counting the labor the grower put into the garden.
No problem, says the council, they can just move their crop indoors. But the electric bill alone for an equivalent indoor garden can be as high as $300 per month. And that’s only if you or your landlord are willing to put up with the inevitable damage a hydroponic garden is going to do to the house. Most landlords aren’t, which means most low-income medical-marijuana users are out of luck.
Then they’ll be forced to go to their friendly local medical-marijuana collective, where the prices for medicinal-grade marijuana are considerably higher than the cost of growing your own, outdoors or indoors. If they’re fortunate, the collective will have a decent compassionate-care program that offers discounts on low-grade medicine for low-income patients.
If not, then they’ll just have to take the pain. Or the nausea. Or the anxiety.
So, what about the smell? It’s true that marijuana has a very distinct odor, especially during the outdoor harvest season, which is happening right now. But is it truly repugnant? Should we also ban driving on bad air days? Criminalize oleander? Exterminate all the skunks? (They don’t call it skunk bud for nothing.)
There’s no doubt that for some people, the odor evokes memories of an age where movies such as "Reefer Madness" were taken seriously and life sentences for hopheads were the norm. It’s an era they wished had never passed.
But it has passed. Medical marijuana is the new normal. Get used to it. Lots of things in life stink.
Flag Article As:
Conversation Express your views,
debate, and be heard with those in your area closest
to the issue.
Leave a Comment
My understanding is that prop 215 does not allow the sale of marijuana for profit. And "collective" implies that customers are cooperatively buying supplies in bulk and contributing labor, you know, collectively.
Growing your own is one solution. But i would like to see some research on why non-profit, collectively grown pot is so expensive. For the ones that need medical marijuana the most, maintaining a garden often is just not an option.
Last I checked, patients can't usually self-diagnose themselves and prescribe their own medications. And pot docs who will basically approve anyone for a 215 card are all over the place; that's no secret.
This is at root the State of Californias fault for not embracing the law we 59% voted in. California politicians have ignored billions in tax revenue and commerce and demonitzing its voters, by ignoring the rights we are entitled to through H&S code 11362.5. It seems to me, even though we voted the law in by a huge margin(59%) the remaining 41% is, in essence, getting their way by complaining and chastising sick folks. Of course there are those who are not ill and still have a recommendation to use cannabis. This too is the fault of our state government. California was the groundbreaker in the Medical Cannabis Movement, but we are not the model for this. Cali needs to look to Colorado for guidance. HEY JERRY BROWN!!!! Does your federal funding supercede the rights of your voters or for that fact the revenue brought in by legal medical cannabis?????? You speak for us man, come on bro......you started this in Oakland now solidify it in Sacramento
If you want low cost pot, get away from the whole medicinal thing. Focus on how it really doesn't cause any significant physiological damage, its natural qualities, etc.
Equating it with medicine is a terrible idea. What, do we want big pharma taking control of its production and distribution? If that happens, we'll all pine for the days of the "low cost" $350.00 ounce of the good stuff (or whatever it's going for these days).
1. I spoke with City Police PIO Andrew this past August re crime data on outdoor grows. I can't find the story I wrote on SN&R's site (!!!), but the take home was basically that A) the city doesn't keep track of complaints/citations for outdoor grows, mostly because of 215 cards, but also because there were very few complaints at all; and B) The only time weed grows are documented are in cases where there are big pot deals going down, felony dealing.
Ultimately, he basically communicated that outdoor grows were not a problem.
Fast forward eight weeks to Tuesday, and a police deputy was whistling a different tune--Sandy Sheedys--at the council meeting. She said it was a major problem--but this is completely anecdotal, since the department doesn't have the data to back it up.
2. Owner of All About Wellness says he hopes to reopen on January 1 when/if Obama is elected.
As far as I know, folks aren't making other "medicines" themselves, since big pharma charges too much for them.
So, why is that okay for pot?
Sorry, but it stinks and attracts crime and lots of folks who don't have time to work because they're high. Until you can refute that, it doesn't really matter how many bars are still open next to schools.
Legalization of pot and calling it a medicine are actually at odds with one another, if low cost smoke is the goal of all of this.
Signed
grasshopper
(not marijuana grass lol but the student (myself) wanting to learn to write from the teacher/ master (R.V. Scheide)
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof....shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges of every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
Cultivation of marijuana is a federal crime. Some people apparently only care about following the U.S. Constitution when they agree with it and ignore or object to its binding authority when they disagree with it. There is a long line of such objectors: Bull Conner, George Wallace, the KKK and the Confederate States of America who objected, variously, to federal civil rights laws, federal voting rights laws and the Emancipation Proclamation and who were unwilling to accept that federal law is the "Law of the Land," notwithingstanding "Laws of any State to the Contrary."
For those of you who are displeased with the fact that federal law with regard to marijuana must be obeyed notwithstanding state law on marijuana dispensaries, I have some basic civics advice for you: elect congressional representatives and presidents who will change the federal statutes to which you object. In the mean time, obey the Law of the Land and stop treating the U.S. Consitution like so much tissue paper.
As Attorney General, Jerry Brown instructed California law enforcement to follow Prop. 215, That has worked fine, until the Feds got re-involved.
I think to compare medical marijuana to Jim Crow in the context of Federalism is hyperbole.
It's not even necessary to have a valid diagnosis; any one of numerous symptoms that normal people experience every day will get you a card. Enforcement of laws against use or cultivation is practically non-existent except for obvious large scale operations.
So what's the real problem? Is it that people can't grow and smoke pot anywhere, anytime, without the illusion that there aren't going to be any consequences?
The fault lies with differing federal and state views on the subject, but that's where we're at at the moment.
As with most medicines, it's important to limit use by folks who don't require its medicinal qualities (things like, "it makes me less stressed out" don't really count).
Seems the author wants it both ways. It's a medicine, but it shouldn't be regulated. How does that work? Even homeopathic substances, which are under reduced if not non-existent regulation, don't claim to do much if anything, and don't get anyone nearly as high as the more expensive varieties of medicinal pot do.
When grown outside in a dense patch, pot can also stink in the later stages of its growth. And asserting that there isn't an element of crime and significant recreational usage about it, is simply not acknowledging the facts.
Lots of us experience anxiety in life. Perhaps that's life's way of saying that something is not right and needs to be addressed. Perhaps smoking pot just makes it easier for some users to not think about it for another day?
I'm not minimizing pot's medicinal qualities. It's clear that it can be valuable under some circumstances. But as it stands the recreational and medicinal uses of pot are clearly being blurred—look at all the doctors out there who rubber stamp cannabis card applications, we've all seen that in action. There's clearly another side of this that lots of anti-cannabis advocates can't help but notice.
But, dang, a patch of pot is kind of smelly too. Even if you like the smell.
I agree with Owen Howlett. Either it's a medicine and needs to be regulated, or it's not and then it'd probably be totally illegal (whether that's right or not is a separate discussion).
Of course, if it's a medicine then insurance should cover its use. But those on a lower income probably don't have insurance, either, so there's that.
http://lighting.com/research-leds-stage-greenhouse/
Alternatively, use one of those nifty kitchen garden windows:
http://www.doorandwindow.com/windows/styles/garden/