Cannabis Digest Issue 39

FREE Issue #39

WINTER 2014

SENSIBLE BC

MMPR

JOHN CONROY

P. 3

P. 9

P. 17

ISSUE # 39 WINTER 2014

CREDITS Publisher

Ted Smith <hempo101@gmail.com>

CONTENTS

Editor-in-Chief

Andrew Brown <editor@hempology.ca>

Graphics Editor

Owen Smith <rainbowensmyth@gmail.com>

Web Editor

Sensible BC Falls Short............................P.03

Distribution/Ads

Dieter MacPherson <dietermacpherson@gmail.com>

Justin Trudeau..........................................P.04

Jim Mooney <cannabis.digest.advertising@gmail.com>

Editorials............................................P.05

Contributors

Updates, Warnings, Suggestions..........P.06

Gayle Quin Owen Smith Judith Stamps

MMPR Fight.............................................P.09

Ras Kahleb Debbie Stultz-Giffin Diane Walsh Beth Hutchinson

Appeal Court for VCBC Baker..................P.12 Hemp Farming in the USA.......................P.14

Ted Smith

John Conroy.............................................P.17

Al Graham

Message From Beth.................................P.18

Cover by Darin Wheatley

Jamaican Culture vs. Legislation............P.20 For editorial questions, letters, or information on submitting: <editor@hempology.ca>

Wordsearch / Comics..............................P.22

826 Johnson Street V8W 1N3 Phone: 250-381-4220 www.hempology.ca

The Cannabis Digest will not be held responsible for claims made within the pages of the newspaper, nor those made by advertisers. We do not suggest or condone illegal activities, and urge readers to research their country’s laws, and/ or talk to their doctors, before engaging in any activities that could be deemed as illegal or dangerous to one’s health.

Colour the Cover Contest!!!!

Colour in the cover of this issue—with markers, pencil crayons, paint, crayons, or anything spurred by your imagination—and you could win a prize!

1st prize: a 55/45 Hemp/Cotton printed T-shirt 2nd prize: a special prize pack 3rd prize: a Hempology 101 gift pack Bring your entry to the club, or take a picture and email it to <hempo101@gmail.com> by Mar. 15th, 2014 Winners will be contacted shortly after—make sure to include some contact information.

Entries will be judged on originality, effort, and all around hempiness.

Cannabis Digest • Winter 2014

BC is yet to be Sensible

3

Campaign falls short, but will try again

By Judith Stamps In Sept. 2013, cannabis activists in B.C. petitioned to create a future for themselves other than the one imagined for them by their federal government. While the attempt failed numerically, it succeeded in broadening the network of like-minded marijuana activists in B.C. If their work is to continue, it is worth taking a closer look at what happened.

The Sensible BC idea grew out of a series of discussions that activist Dana Larsen had with his associates at End Prohibition, a group within the Federal NDP, in the months prior to Sept. 2012.

These included meetings with solicitor Kirk Tousaw. The first task was to draft legislation that would decriminalize marijuana in B.C. whilst staying within the parameters of provincial law. The result was a draft for the Sensible Policing Act, which called for police to spend their budgets solely on investigating crimes of violence or crimes with victims. The Act called, as well, for the province to apply for a federal exemption that would allow it to regulate and tax the plant.

In Sept. 2012, Larsen held a press conference to announce the campaign.

The timing was good. The Union of BC Municipalities had passed a resolution in support of decriminalizing marijuana.

Eight city councils around the province had endorsed ending prohibition. Following the press conference, Larsen plunged into the abyss. He conducted two solo tours, visiting 110 provincial towns in all. They were cold calls. He rented halls and placed ads in local papers announcing his time of arrival and intention to speak. Sometimes there was an audience; sometimes there wasn’t.

Meanwhile, citizens’ initiatives in Washington and Colorado to legalize marijuana for recreational use had succeeded. They were on their way. And so, it seemed, was B.C. Then manna fell from heaven. Terrace resident and marijuana enthusiast Bob Erb, won a lottery for 25 million dollars. To Sensible BC, he donated $250 thousand.

By Aug. 2013, a network was in place… sort of. During his second tour, Larsen had found volunteers who offered to act as local leaders. Most were unknown to him personally. Facebook pages were established, and some recruits were found through these. Others came through word of mouth. Few of the volunteers knew each other; even fewer had experience. Thus, by day one of the signature collection period, many ridings had coordinators, and some didn’t. Larsen had secured an office in Vancouver, staffed by a few paid organizers with NGO experience. A former HST campaign organizer was paid to oversee B.C.’s Interior and North. The CannaBus, a travelling petition booth, began touring the province.

In Victoria, zone coordinator Cam Birge provided a second miracle—rent, with trimmings, for a downtown office.

Thus began the Sensible Journey, a mass—and somewhat mad—attempt to grapple with the Recall and Initiative Act (RIA) in B.C. It has to be said at the outset that this Act is in its infancy. Citizens’ initiatives—Acts that allow voters to alter existing laws—have been around in North America since the Reform Era of the late 19th century; their accompanying literature would fill a library. By contrast, B.C.’s RIA came into force only

in 1995. Originally proposed in 1990 by Bill Vander Zalm, the idea was put to a referendum and approved by 83 percent of the voters. A populist, Vander Zalm favoured direct democracy. When his party lost its mandate, the provincial NDP inherited the idea and ran with it.

And they wrote the rules.

By Dec. 2013, these rules had bitten the heart of every Sensible BC canvasser who had stood on a sidewalk or knocked on a door. They called for the signatures of 10 percent of the voting public in each of BC’s 85 electoral ridings, to be collected within 90 days: 400 thousand

ers. Moreover, few organizers knew how to train them. There were contradictory ideas about what canvassers needed to do. Sensible BC ads asked them to sign up sympathetic friends. Pragmatists divided “signatures required per riding” by 90 days, and realized they needed hundreds per week. The friend idea worked poorly. The pragmatic plan was more successful, but was carried out by a really small number of super canvassers. The optimists predicted exponential growth, but this occurred on paper only. Stacks of canvasser cards burst their elastic bands; alarming numbers of canvassers never

signatures for a population of 4 million.

By contrast, Washington State’s formula required 250 thousand signatures for a population of 6, 900, 000. Canvassers there had six months to collect, and no distribution requirements. Further, British Columbians could use volunteer canvassers only; Washingtonians could pay them. Typically, canvassers can only petition in public spaces. In B.C., regional shopping malls were off-limits—a deadly restriction in the suburbs. In Washington State, such malls, by law, are public. In sum, their mountain was half the height of BC’s; they had twice as long to climb it; they had no distribution weight on their backs; and they could use professional climbers.

But Fight the HST had climbed the mountain in 2010. So why couldn’t Sensible BC? To collect signatures, they needed first to recruit canvassers.

But there was no coherent plan. In the months prior to the real petition, “prepetition” sheets had been circulated, inviting people to sign up as volunteers or as advocates. Similar forms could be signed online. These early events provided a database of supporters, but they confused signers. After day one, supporters unwittingly launched a campaign to drive canvassers mad. They took to rushing by signing stations with cheery smiles, shouting “I already signed online.”

Then they disappeared. Soon “You can’t sign the petition online” wallpapered the Facebook pages.

The pre-petition campaign did little to bring in masses of committed canvass-

picked them up. Of those that did, too few returned with signatures.

Meanwhile, riding organizers, overwhelmed by the lack of canvasser response, were hard pressed. Some gave up; some tried harder to contact their volunteers. Some joined the ranks of super canvassers and attempted, with a few helpers, to finish their ridings by themselves. Occasionally, this strategy worked.

What Sensible BC needed, and never had, was a core of leaders experienced in the nuts and bolts of petitioning. Still, it must be said that Dana Larsen himself remained an inspiration. He was tenacious, patient with grumblers, and good-

hearted. He answered his own phone, responding personally to messages from the far ends of the universe—even Victoria. He chatted on Facebook. He worked insanely hard.

No understanding of the campaign can be complete without a hard look at the range of public response: hostility, paranoia, and unbounded joy. Overt hostility was rare, but very annoying. At Vancouver’s Translink Stations, for example, canvassers were expelled, re-invited (our mistake) and thereafter harassed. More often, passersby simply quickened their step and spotted something to see elsewhere. Paranoia, on the other hand, was common. “I’m on your side, but I can’t afford to get on a list.” Canvassers heard it everywhere. It was the alphabet soup, the spy version: NSA, DEA, and RCMP. Then there were the signers. Some listened cautiously, and in the end convinced. Most others took one look and said, “Where’s the pen?”

For supporters, there will be more. In 2014, Larsen and Tousaw plan to launch litigation to sort out the issue of what constitutes a public space in BC. During the campaign, Sensible BC canvassers were evicted from BC Ferries terminals.

They were barred from the City of Surrey, which declared itself off-limits to petitions. They received tickets issued by bylaw officers. These are matters that must be resolved, if only because there is more at stake here than a petition by Sensible BC. If British Columbians are to have any chance of success at direct democracy, they will need a place to stand.

So how did it go? Numerically, 20 of BC’s ridings achieved their 10 percent goal or better. A few more were very close. At least half got halfway there.

Is this result good? Considering how few canvassers achieved it, one would have to say it is very good. In addition, much has been accomplished. A public conversation has begun—a positive one.

Especially positive is that many returned to sign after reconsidering. They liked it.

Moreover, the clouds are dispersing: the media has been supportive, the police have been tolerant, and supporters have grown a little bolder. A wider network of activists has been established and plans are astir for phase two. Fans, onlookers, and others should watch this space for further developments.

4

Issue Number 39

Trudeau Jumps on Cannaboat Liberals consider policy reform a priority

By Debbie Stultz-Giffin With the emergence of new political figures nationally and provincially, activists championing a cause chomp at the proverbial bit to ferret out the philosophy and position that he or she may bring to the table in relation to their “issue.” Having been entrenched in cannabis activism and having been a patient advocate for over a decade, I have a tendency to analyze individual politicians’ divulgement about their perceptions of cannabis and drug policy reform.

Trudeaumania flourished in the late ‘60s when Pierre Elliot Trudeau, charismatic and appealing to younger voters, climbed aboard the leadership race of the Liberal Party of Canada. Trudeaumania was still a phenomenon during the subsequent federal election and during his early years as Canada’s PM. Under the Trudeau government, the Le Dain Commission, conducted an Inquiry into the Non-Medical Use of Drugs, from 1969 to 1972.

Gerald Le Dain and his colleagues endorsed the repeal of the prohibition against the simple possession of cannabis and for cultivation for personal use.

This report was reputed to have been thorough and thoughtful, much like the Senate Committee Report chaired by Conservative Senator Claude Pierre Nolin 40 years later. And, like the Senate Committee report advocating legalization in 2002, after the accolades had subdued, its conclusions were largely coldshouldered by the federal government.

Fast forward to 2013, and it’s Trudeau-

mania revisited. Justin Trudeau, the newly minted leader of the LPC, has more in his corner than genetics and political heritage. He also attracts younger voters (a crucial missing demographic from modern-day elections) and he understands the political spotlight.

Trudeau’s sentiments on cannabis were not voiced until he was in K amloops, B.C., at an outdoor assemblage this past summer, when he focused on a sign purporting the decriminalization of cannabis.

He chose to seize the moment to clarify his stance on the need to modernize Canadian cannabis laws.

He later attributed his arrival at this perspective to the NORML Women’s Alliance of Canada, when interviewed by the Huffington Post.

Trudeau’s words to the people in Kamloops were, “In many cases, it’s more dif-

ficult for young people to get their hands on cigarettes than it is to get their hands on weed. Once we regulate it, and require ID to be shown before anyone can buy it for proof of age, we actually are putting a better control on it. Nobody can argue the current approach on drugs is working.

We have to look at something else. I think following [some of the American states’] lead in terms of looking at legalization is a big solution.”

A further catalyst for Tr u d e a u ’s views on cannabis law reform stemmed from his brother, Michel, who died at the age of 23 in an avalanche in B.C. Michel had marijuana possession charges pending at the time of his death.

Trudeau has elevated the ire of the Conservative Party of Canada and the Harper government with his liberated views and enthusiasm for propagating them profusely. He has had several key players in the Conservative caucus attempt to discredit his stance by distorting his words and intentions.

The CPC launched an emotional, over-the-top ad campaign in Oct. focusing on Trudeau’s agenda to legalize and regulate cannabis.

“Justin Trudeau has a famous last name, but he lacks the judgment to be Prime Minister,” the Conservatives said in Oct. “His only policy priority so far is to promote the legalization of marijuana.

He wants to make it available for sale, like alcohol and tobacco. But that would dramatically increase its availability to minors and send the message that recreational drug use is acceptable.”

Maclean’s columnist Paul Wells reported that the advertisement ran in Punjabi and English, targeting immigrant communities. There are reports of the ad being heard from coast to coast.

In the wake of this Conservative party radio ad, Canadian Minister of Health Rona Ambrose announced a new strategy to educate youth about drug use and addiction issues. Taking aim at cannabis in the process, her five-year plan, with an attached price tag of $15 million, is being promoted and flaunted while crucial governmental services are being cut. These include front-line workers in Health Canada who processed exemption paperwork for patients.

Patients have been fearful of legalization, surmising that it inherently equates with the relinquishing of personal cultivation to reconcile their medical requirements. Trudeau is cognisant of the current plight of patients and of the looming reality of the elimination of personal cannabis gardens. When questioned by patient Stephen Stairs at a gathering in Saskatchewan, Trudeau, after admonishing the “Harper Nanny State,” told Stairs that patients should have access to their gardens and continue to be able to produce their own medicine.

After promoting a loosening of the reigns of prohibition, Trudeau went on to profess to socially consuming cannabis with friends since he became a sitting MP. This caused a second swell of negative commentary and hysteria by the CPC in mainstream media.

A plethora of national and provincial politicians lent support and spilled the beans on their prior personal cannabis consumption and shared their views on cannabis law reform almost en masse.

This discussion would be remiss without mentioning the stance of the LPC as reflected on their official website: The Liberal Party of Canada believes in a smart on crime approach, targeting real criminals instead of our youth, to keep our communities safe. Liberals understand the need to consider ending the prohibition of marijuana and addressing the root causes of crime to see real results.

The LPC appear to be adapting to the times by realizing that a meaningful conversation about cannabis is imminent.

With a federal election not on the political landscape until 2015, it may seem pointless to ponder about who you will cast your vote in favour of, but there has lc been a better time to start beating the drum about voting and keeping an eye on those politicians committed to sensible drug polic.

Advertise Here cannabis.digest.advertising@gmail.com

Cannabis Digest • Winter 2014

Publisher’s Note:

Ted Smith

One of the dilemmas in the cannabis movement in Canada has been the tension that is occasionally felt between medical and recreational cannabis users.

We must learn to work together more often if we want to see change happen.

That does not mean we should all have the same agenda, but we do need to make an effort to support others fighting drug prohibition, whether we fully agree with their methods all of the time.

Patients must come first, in my opinion, and hopefully after reading this a few more recreational cannabis lovers will reconsider their position and get more involved in the fight for medical access to this plant. Likewise, hopefully a few patients will realize they need to fight for full legalization if the medical use of this herb is ever to be truly embraced by the medical community.

When I first became an activist, no divisions really existed. Cannabis advocates fought to grow hemp and high-grade herb.

Everyone had an agenda and priorities but, for the most part, we supported each other in the efforts to fight prohibition.

After industrial hemp became legal in Canada, the fight shifted. Hemp farmers did everything possible to distance themselves from activists. The real reason cannabis was made illegal became lost on a

few people as they focused on making money on hemp. Since hemp was a major focus of the activist community, after the laws changed to allow hemp growth in 1997, it seemed like the growing camp of advocates was starting to split up.

Around the same time, dispensaries were beginning to open with the express purpose of helping those in serious medical need. In 2000, the Parker decision forced the federal government to create a program to legally allow patients to use the herb, firmly dividing medical users from those still subject to prosecution. In the middle of that division, however, was a lot of grey area.

For many activists, all use of cannabis is medicine. In their line of thinking, our endocannabinoid system essentially uses the chemicals that we absorb when we consume the cannabis plant to fight free radicals, helping to prevent cancer and a number of other autoimmune diseases.

These activists argue that every time herb is smoked it is healing and therefore medical by nature.

By this argument water is also medicine. Even more so, because everyone would die without water. Fruits and vegetables would also be medicine, though some types would be better medicine than others.

Judges have made rulings in favor of patients based upon Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantee protection of security of the person. While the language used in these decisions has been somewhat vague at times, judges have generally concluded that anyone suffering from a serious chronic disease or disability has a medical necessity that requires treatment.

The courts realize that restricting cannabis to those with terminal medical problems is too strict, yet they have certainly never intended to allow easy access to the herb by watering down the definition of medical necessity.

When medical dispensaries first starting opening in the mid-1990s, there

5 Time to Work Together

was an attempt to create mandates that would ensure members suffered from medical issues that were serious enough that courts and the public would feel sympathetic toward their plight. When the MMAR came into existence, clubs continued to provide medicine to those unable to obtain a license to possess or grow cannabis, but without opening their doors to everyone who claimed a need.

Since the courts and the public are not yet prepared to accept the unrestricted use of cannabis by adults, it is critical these clubs continue to screen their membership in such a way that it is clear the intent is to help those diagnosed with medical problems.

One of the main reasons patients have some sympathy is because despite decades of trying, pharmaceutical companies have not been able to develop drugs that cheaply, effectively, or safely deal with the majority of their health problems, including chronic pain, cancer, Multiple Sclerosis, glaucoma, arthritis or epilepsy. While these drug companies can claim certain successes, the failure of this industry to provide relief to the majority of patients leaves doctors with few good options. Cannabis is one of those options.

Yet many doctors and citizens deny the medical benefits of cannabis. Ignoring the science, these individuals cling to the belief that cannabis is no better than a narcotic, numbing pain and the senses in the same general manner alcohol does.

To these narrow-minded people, patients are using their health problems as an excuse to get high. Worse, they often strongly believe others are using the serious medical problems of patients as a cover for their need to get high.

One of the reasons I took it upon myself to found a medical dispensary was because I thought it was unfair to assume patients alone could build an organization to illegally supply medicine. They needed help, and I certainly did not want to wait until I got sick before fighting for medical access to it.

Another reason I started the VCBC is because I got to know a few young girls, who were very sick, and found cannabis beneficial. One beautiful young girl barely turned 20 before she passed. It seemed to me that patients were the most victimized by the drug war, and that they should be the first we create sanctuary for. Many sick children, young adults, and senior citizens do not have time to change the laws, or even see a court case through to the end. Waiting for political solutions is not an option when it comes to patient care.

Changes to the federal medical cannabis programs are turning many patients back into criminals. Now more than ever, patients need recreational smokers to help fight for the right to grow medicine before it is lost for good. That could be by attending the Apr. 1 rally in Ottawa, donating to the MMAR Coalition Against Repeal, writing letters to the local press, or speaking out in public at every opportunity. Cannabis lovers must realize how important the right to grow your own medicine is, and if we lose it now it could be lost for a long time.

Likewise, patients cannot be satisfied with legal access for some, leaving the rest at the mercy of prohibition. Only the full legalization of cannabis will allow the herb to be embraced by the medical community, for as long as some are considered criminals for using the herb recreationally, it will always be a struggle to get it as medicine because patients will continue to be treated like addicts.

While everyone is obviously going to do what is best for themselves, there are times and places where we need to put down our divisions and work together for the common good. Fighting for a patient’s right to grow medicine is a good common ground that I am sure we can all work on. Together we can make great things happen.

EDITORIAL: Desperate Times, Desperate Measures

Andrew Brown Editor

As we approach Apr. 1, much anxiety looms over medical cannabis patients.

April fool’s day marks the day the federal government has decided would be the best day to pull the plug on the current medical marijuana access program (MMAR)—a program riddled with access problems and bureaucratic mazes (among other things)—to a new corporate model (MMPR) that puts the program into the hands of big business.

Patients won’t be allowed to grow for themselves or designate someone to do it for them, which will put the medicine out of reach due to cost. Average price per gram is being estimated to be around eight dollars, so for a five gram per day prescription it will cost approximately $40 per day, or $1200 per month—ob-

viously not feasible for someone on permanent disability. Many patients have legitimate prescriptions for amounts far greater than that.

The new program simply isn’t an option for many, if not most, patients.

Desperation will ensue and we will be seeing sick and dying Canadians being thrown in the back of police cars and in front of the courts. It is a guarantee that some people will continue to grow for themselves, while some will go to the black market.

The stigma is slowly on the wane, but a Conservative minority is clutching onto the bull’s horns and charging ahead while the rest of the country sparks up.

In Harper’s home province of Alberta, things are especially bad. Medical patient and activist Lisa Kirkman has been forced to go on a hunger strike to bring attention to her reported denial of medical attention from Calgary hospitals. She says that she was “turned away from every ER and Urgent Care department in the city and every single one of my specialist appointments cancelled until further notice,” as Alberta Health Services has banned the use of medical marijuana in hospitals and they are refusing to accept her. It is a fundamental part of our rights as Canadians to have access to medical services.

Let us not forget that in 2002 the Canadian Senate, after a two year study, concluded that cannabis should be legalized. Canadians are more ready than ever for the flood gates to open. As baby boomers are feeling the pains of aging, more and more are turning to cannabis to take off the edge. It is fair to create a system of distribution that eliminates

Health Canada, in fact it is quite welcomed, but personal growing has to be an option, and the compassion club model needs to exist for knowledgeable support to patients—not just a system of “you send me the money, I send you the weed.”

6

Issue Number 39

Updates, Warnings, and Suggestions

By Gayle Quin I hope this issue finds you well and cozy. It was most certainly a crazy start to winter.

Thanks for all the greats costumes on All Hallow’d Eve this year. Folks really got into the spirit of their alter selves. Everyone seemed to have a great time. The hot box was a smokin’ success. And a huge thank you to our wonderful sponsors, The Sacred Herb and Trippys, for the beautiful bongs they donated as prizes.

The most excitement during fall would have to be holding of the Victoria Cannabis Buyers Club’s first ever Annual General Meeting. It was graciously hosted by the Strathcona Hotel in the Sticky Wicket. Kirk Tousaw gave a wonderful talk about the upcoming appeal to Owen Smith’s bakery trial. It was great to hear such a positive attitude. You may read about it in Ted’s feature article of this issue. A heart-felt welcome to Wanda Ferguson, Rob MacIntyre, and Karli Theisen

for accepting roles on the board. It most certainly was an evening with an exciting air about it that I hope remains with us in the coming years. Likewise, thanks to everyone who managed to make it out to the event and vote.

If you couldn’t make it to the AGM and still want to be involved, there are still the monthly committee meetings. A new event committee will be improving the social aspects of the club, so if you like to play games, go for walks, or are a good organizer, then we could use your help or at least input. Dates are posted in the monthly newsletter sent by email and posted in the online forums, and on the whiteboard in the vapour lounge.

Thanks to everyone who turned out for Cannabis Caroling this year. It was a small but fun group, with the highlight being singing at the VCBC. Please remember that Ted puts out monthly news e-letters for active members of the VCBC. If you are not receiving them, please make sure he has your current e-mail address. We will be posting them by the front door at the club.

The second semester of lectures will have several guest speakers. They are free to attend and are every Wed. afternoon from Jan. to Mar. from 3-4 pm in CineCenta Theatre at UVic. If you can’t make it, don’t fret, we post them later on Youtube.

Mango lozenges are now available on the menu. It is the same recipe as the goji lozenges except mangoes are used instead of the goji’s. Mangos have lots of digestive enzymes and an affinity for cannabis.

We also have Cannabis infused coconut oil in canning jars with no added vitamine

E, so it can be used topically as well as ingested. Coconut oil has so many health benefits, with numerous books written specifically on the subject. A small list includes: it’s anti-inflammitory, acts as an antioxidant, protects arteries and heart, guards against bladder infections, gum disease and other conditions caused by free radicals, bacteria, and viruses. Topically, coconut oil has been reported to help psoriasis, relieve blisters and hemorrhoids, protect from sunburn, and when infused with fresh garlic is an antifungal/ antibacterial ointment. A good book to read is the Coconut Oil Miracle by Bruce Fife. I like it because it has good recipes as well as useful information.

Cannatories are the next to come.

These cannabis suppositories will be made in four different varieties: cannoil, CBD, Ryanol or hash infused, or mixed into Coca Butter. We had been discussing the idea of suppositories at a product development meeting, and the next week a new member came in with a Doctor’s recommendation for CBD suppositories for brain cancer. The mucous membrane that is the lining of the bowel is highly absorbent, and ingredients are absorbed directly into the bloodstream. We are awaiting the proper packaging materials to arrive so it won’t be long before they are available for sale.

Updated version on how to recuperate from Hepatitis C attacks: I’ve started my mercury detox program again, and the brain is starting to kick in.

Upon being diagnosed with hepatitis C, I was told by my physician to go home and die. I began asking questions, and started reading a lot. This is what I came up with: Think positively. Your liver is regenerative. Figure out what is making you mad and get help if necessary to get over it.

Anger is stored in the liver. Do not eat any fats, especially rancid ones: no nuts, grains, seeds, no meat, alcohol, refined sugar, raw fish or shellfish, or processed food of any kind. Drink lots of pure water, not bottled, take milk thistle herb, eat cannabis, make tea of Dandylion roots and leaves, Oregon Grape root, or Yellow Dock root, Red Clover blossoms and drink at least three cups a day. Get Swedish Bitters and make tea as directed on the bottle. Also use it as a poultice. First cover the skin over the liver with castor oil, then soak a small piece of flannel cloth, not too much but enough to hold one to two tablespoons of the bitters and place over liver. Cover with a plastic wrap and then a towel or another flannel to

keep warm. Leave on for a half to one hour, and do it three times a day. Also coffee and chlorophyll enemas two or three times a week, used alternately, have proven to be useful. Use one pint liquid and retain for 15 minutes. Take vitamine C with non-citrus bioflavonoids 3,000 to 5,000 mg per day. As well as an ascorbic acid flush (vit. C). Use calcium ascorbate to protect the stomach. Put one teaspoon in a little water or juice, have something more to drink as a chaser. Do this until diarrhea occurs and then back off by 1/2 teaspoon, as you need less, increase the time between doses. The idea is to stay at your tolerance level. I was using 50 grams a day. It is intense, but this should be your diet for at least two to three weeks.

There will be heavy detox reactions, but with lots of love and water you’ll get through. A very good book with this information in it is Prescription for Natural Healing by Phyllis and James Balch.

It’s been almost 20 years since that death sentence, and I still thank Dr. Graham for it. It made me stronger and made me fight like I’d never fought before. Knowledge is power.

The VCBC 18th Anniversary Pot Luck will be on Sunday Jan. 19, at 6pm. Can you believe it? It doesn’t feel like very long ago we were celebrating the club’s sweet 16. Wow, thanks for all the support, great times, and memories my fellow members.

Come and help us make some more.

International Medical Marijuana Day is on Mar. 17. Art is starting to miraculously appear at the club and will be on display until bidding in the silent auction ends at 4:20 pm on Mar. 17. It is a lot of fun, a great way to collect original art work, and a very easy way to donate to your favorite non-profit society—the International Hempology 101 Society.

Don’t forget you may bring your friends to view and bid as well.

I’ve saved this for last because I’ve been afraid to start. I don’t know where to start, or if I’ll be able to stop. April 1, 2014, the day our Federal government deems it necessary to turn medical cannabis growers into criminals once again.

I’m so sad and have cried so much I can cry no longer. I feel numb, which is an improvement over the pain I’ve lived through, but still not a welcome feeling.

Ted and I have been asked to plan and execute a National Rally on Parliament Hill for that day. We need lots of help and April is not far away now. Pardon my rant—I warned you I might not be able to stop…Peace and love, Gayle.

Cannabis Digest • Winter 2014

HOSS - GEAR - RED EYE - IOLITE

“Fast, Discrete, Reliable Shipping!”

Cigarellos Shisha Funky Hats Punk Wallets P ipe Tobacco Wood, Metal, and Glass P ipes Blunt Wraps Cuban Cigars ...and the Interior’s BEST Selection of Rolling Papers

Open at 9 am – 7 Days a Week!

259 Tranquille Road, Kamloops, BC V2B 3G2

250-554-1501 or 1-877-420-1116

...and check out our sister store at www.adultztoyz.ca 15% discount for Cannabis Digest readers. Just enter promo code “CBCC”—Good for both stores!

Issue Number 39

Cannabis Digest • Winter 2014

Patients Will Take Their Fight to Ottawa

9

Many will suffer and die from loss of their gardens

By Ted Smith ery step of the way. Good lawyers everything changing around them. just heard on Dec. 6, the leading are not cheap, even when they are Speculation about how clubs will precedent in the area of cannabis War is seldom a simple affair. This on your side. react individually and collectively is extracts will be in favor of patients includes the War on Drugs. This While everyone was preparing a hot topic. No one knows for sure and their caregivers producing and drug war is a fight for power: con- for this impending battle, in Nov. how it will work out for dispensa- using all forms of derivatives. More trol of the economy, control of one’s Health Canada sent letters to all ries. Some clubs are closing, antici- importantly, dispensaries will be the health, control of government re- Designated Growers and patients pating a lack of supply of medicine only viable option aside from the sources. It is a war which forces with a license to possess to explain and an increase in enforcement. street for patients that need extracts, patients to suffer unnecessarily and what the government’s plans are. With mandatory minimum jail sen- as Licensed Producers will not be die prematurely. It is a war that has These letters clearly identified the tences in place, being arrested is a able to legally sell them. to end. fact it was being sent by the Mari- daunting possibility.

Several LPs have publicly exNever before in Canadian history juana Medical Access Program, exPolice departments in some of the pressed an interest in selling various has it been so obvious that prohibi- posing everyone who received a let- larger cities might not be interested cannabis extracts, citing many of tion threatens lives and causes more ter to postal workers, landlords, and in spending resources busting clubs the arguments Owen’s lawyer, Kirk damage than could ever be calculat- in some cases children who were that are providing to those in serious Tousaw, used to prove the Marijuaed. Never before have patients been unaware of their parents’ choice of medical need. The Vancouver Police na Medical Access Regulations are forced to give up their gardens, give medicine. According to these docu- Department released a report in unconstitutional for only allowing up their hope, and in many cases ments, on or before Mar. 31, 2014, Oct. that looked into how dispen- “dried marijuana.” While Health give up their lives, as will occur this all of the plants and dried herb saries operate and whether or not Canada may feel they dodged a spring if the Conservative govern- patients and their caregivers have the police should consider them a bullet in this case by simply writing ment has its way. Never before has it grown must be destroyed. “One way priority. In the report, VPD officers new regulations, they may have inbeen so important to stand up and is to blend the marijuana with wa- concluded that dispensaries typi- stead created a situation where disfight. ter and mix it with cat litter to mask cally do not meet any of the criteria pensaries, like the Victoria CannaAs of Apr. 1, 2014, the federal the odor. This can then be placed in they consider when looking at seri- bis Buyers Club Owen was working government will no longer autho- your regular household garbage.” ous drug offences. Moreover they for, are still the primary source for rize any legal medical-grade cannaSeveral law firms across the coun- said, “criminal enforcement could medical cannabis products. bis to be grown by patients, instead try have jumped on the opportunity be very damaging to employees of The Court of Appeal of BC could forcing those with a doctor’s ap- to file a class action lawsuit against the dispensaries, who are generally overturn Justice Johnson’s decision, proval to purchase their herb from Health Canada for this breach of young, entry-level employees who and rule that the MMAR does large-scale commercial producers. privacy. It seems the discretion pre- could face criminal charges and the not violate the Charter. This would The only hope we have of stopping viously used by program managers possible impact that would have on leave clubs selling derivatives vulthis seems to be with John Conroy has been thrown out of the window other future employment or their nerable. That would still not deter and the team of lawyers he has put as the Conservatives look to gut the ability to travel.”

LPs, who are likely to use research together to use every legal means program. The outrage already felt by There are good reasons to think as a means of producing and dispossible to prevent this from hap- patients has been fueled by this ac- established clubs can prove there is tributing cannabis extracts, no matpening. We must hope for the best tion, as stories of theft and exposure solid legal justification for the con- ter what happens in Owen’s case. and prepare for the worst. resulting from this mailout spread tinued existence of storefront dis- These companies need to conduct The best way to help the legal online. Contact information for all pensaries, especially considering the clinical research if they hope to get battle is simple: fund-raise. The of the law firms involved in legal ac- ongoing trial of Owen Smith and insurance companies to cover medimore money the MMAR Coali- tion against Health Canada at the the matter of cannabis derivatives. cal cannabis, and to be able to protion Against Repeal has, the more end of this article.

Since the decision of the Court of mote their wares. time and thought the lawyers can Meanwhile, dispensaries across Appeal of BC is unlikely to have put into fighting these changes ev- the country are nervously watching been made before Apr. 1, as it was ...continued on p.10

10

Issue Number 39 ...continued from p.9

Exactly who these LPs will be still seems up in the air for the most part. As expected, the first in line was Prairie Plant Systems, the company that held the contract to sell herb for the government for the last decade. Only three companies have obtained full status as Licensed Producers, though dozens have applied and are waiting to go full-tilt on their marketing campaigns.

One of the companies eager to cash in on medical cannabis sales is also eager to see the police arrest everyone else, and may actually be behind the complaint that led to the report by the VPD. Medijean wants to prove to law enforcement they are not criminals by actively supporting the war on drugs. “We are here to help,” said Anton Mattadeen, chief strategy officer of Medijean. “We believe this will be done by providing the best quality medical cannabis available, developing state-of-the-art verification technology that makes it easier for both patients and Law Enforcement personnel, offering contaminant testing for seized marijuana, and supporting Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E.) with a percentage of our profits going to the program.”

He makes it clear how they will promote shutting down dispensaries. “By underlining the clear difference between the quality control associated with real medical marijuana, and the unknown content offered by the illegal marketplace, it creates an obvious boundary. One is designed to be completely focused on helping people with their ailments, while the other is simply an illicit drug being sold for illegal

profit.” This means that dispensaries must start testing and labeling their products, clearly identifying it as medicine and not something simply bought on the street.

Many LPs will be desperate for customers and will see dispensaries as an economic threat that needs to be eliminated or taken over. Clubs like the VCBC are already being called and offered money for the membership list or the chance to directly advertise to members. No doubt many LPs would love to have a store of their own, and while the MMPR in their current form do not allow such a thing, over time that too might change. When it does, you can bet these LPs want compassion clubs to be a distant memory.

Meanwhile many patients see their world crashing down in front of them. Thousands of patients had finally been able to consistently grow enough good medicine that they have been able to maintain, if not improve, their health. For a number of these patients, access to cheap, high-grade herb meant fewer seizures with lessened severity, or stopping the spread of cancer, literally saving lives. Patients and their caregivers that have invested vast amounts of money and time learning to grow medicine and a low cost are not being offered any compensation at all.

While some companies are promising that inexpensive prices will be charged to people with proof of low income, it is hard to say at this point whether that will last long if it ever happens at all.

For several reasons, most of the people currently signed up the the medical cannabis program are unlikely to start buying from one of these new companies. First, many

KNOW YOUR RIGHTS 1. Silence—You can refuse to talk to the police or answer their questions.

You must give your name, birthdate, and address, or show them your ID. You DO NOT have to say anything else.

2. You can say NO if police ask to search any of your things.

3. You can leave unless you are being arrested or detained 4. You have the right to know why you are being detained, and to speak privately to a lawyer—even if you can’t pay.

5. You can only be strip-searched in private, and only by someone of the same sex.

6. You have the right to know the officers’ badge numbers.

7. You can report an officer who abuses me, swears at me, or violates your rights Example of what to say if you are being detained: “Officer, if I am under arrest or being detained, please tell me so...If I am free to go, please tell me so. If I am not free to go, please tell me why...I wish to exercise all my leagal rights, including my right to silence and my right to speak to a lawyer, before I say anything to you. I do not consent to be searched. I wish to be released without delay...Please do not ask me questions, because I will not willingly talk to you until I speak to a lawyer...Thank you for respecting my rights.” *Every situation is different. Use courtesy, and common sense.

Legal Aid BC: 1-866-577-2525 Check out Pivot Legal Society for more info < www.pivotlegal.org>

are so upset at losing their gardens and being forced to buy from these commercial producers that they intend to boycott the MMPR on matter of principle. Second, the price will be much higher than they are used to paying, especially for those growing their own or who can purchase from dispensaries. Finally, mail order is a terrible way of selling cannabis, and most patients would prefer obtaining their medicine soon after getting the money they need to purchase it.

However, there will be many new patients keen to enter this new program, especially if there is no local dispensary to offer an alternative. Some big cities like Calgary and Winnipeg have no clubs, and patients there might welcome the new program. With so much money at stake, no doubt LPs will seek out these markets to establish themselves.

The new system could work and patients could still be allowed to grow their own medicine, but that will only happen in court or with political action. That is why if legal action fails, on Apr. 1 we must take our fight right to Ottawa.

This event on Apr. 1 will be our chance to collectively tell the Conservative government that taking gardens away from patients is unacceptable. It will be hard to control the anger being felt by patients,

with many wanting to do something dramatic to get attention.

We will be trying to focus on the subject, and a retired cabinet maker is building a coffin for the MMAR as a demonstration of the death of those regulations and the premature deaths of many Canadians that will result.

Hopefully this rally will not happen. Hopefully lawyer John Conroy will have successfully stopped Health Canada from shutting down the MMAR entirely, and patients will again have legal protection to grow their own medicine.

If he is not able to stop these changes by Apr. 1, Mr. Conroy has agreed to come to Ottawa with us to protest the MMPR and update those gathered on what is happening with legal challenges. While this war will not end on Apr. 1, we will take the fight directly to the nation’s capital to show how destructive the government’s policy truly is.

j

Appeal Court Grills

But I thought we already won?

In my last article, I tracked the arrival and spread of medicinal cannabis culture in the modern world, spotlighting the development of extract products made to help the general population as well as specific cases, such as children with seizures. In this article I will return to the constitutional challenge for medicinal cannabis extracts that I launched with the Victoria Cannabis Buyers Club four years ago. We recently visited the BC Court of Appeal to restate our argument and defend our lower court victory.

The appeal was filed after my short trial and acquittal in Jan. 2013. Nine months earlier, our argument for extracts had been successful in the BC Supreme Court, effectively legalizing medicinal cannabis extracts for federally licensed patients, and eventually their caregivers, in our province. The judge ruled that my trial should proceed regardless of the constitutional victory because “society’s interests in having the charges against Mr. Smith tried on their merits outweigh the violation of Mr. Smith’s liberty right, at least sufficiently to deny him the judicial stay he seeks.”

We assumed that this was because making edible products for a dispensary is still illegal. Because only about 10 percent of the members of the VCBC have federal licenses, we would have some explaining to do. We’re vigilant, knowing a large community of lovely people who have been diagnosed with permanent physical diseases or disabilities stand behind us, each awaiting a chance to explain how at the end of long painful paths they’ve persevered to find that cannabis works for them. We prepared to appear at trial nine months later.

At the trial in Jan. 2013, I was found not guilty after the Crown chose to present no evidence. The Crown explained that because the judge had ruled the law unconstitutional, their case was “significantly impacted” and by using the common law defense of necessity, I would only win. The judge didn’t look impressed.

Launching the Appeal The Crown then entered their appeal and prepared to ask the higher court to overturn Judge Johnston’s decision and order a new jury trial, one where Johnston’s decision would no longer exist. They did not appeal the solid scientific facts of the case. The Crown appealed on the basis that the law had been misinterpreted in a number of ways by the BC Supreme Court Judge.

The legal equation is made in two stages: Judge Johnston not only had to determine that the law restricting individuals to dried marihuana was in violation of individuals’ Section 7 charter “freedom to make fundamental choices regarding one’s personal health and safety”; but also that this deprivation of life, liberty, or security of the person does not accord with the principles of fundamental justice, the government’s Section 1 charter right. In other words, you can be deprived of your rights if it is for your own good.

Johnston ruled that the distinction in the law that restricts patients to dried marihuana “unnecesarily impairs the security right to choose how to ingest the medicinal ingredients in the safest and most effective manner”. He

Kirk Tousaw Brilliantly Attacks

concurrently ruled that restriction is arbitrary as it does little or nothing to enhance the state’s interests.

While his order legalized these products for people B.C., this appeal is the only response from the federal government regarding the Judge’s ruling, and Health Canada have now introduced a new system that also restricts patients to dried cannabis. Our lawyer Kirk Tousaw prepared a thorough and detailed response to the government’s appeal. Both factums and the appeal can be found on the Cannabis Digest Forums.

I have created this interactive online timeline to help people to understand the trial as it has unfolded. It is a chronological record of all of the articles and videos from the mainstream and private media sources I could find alongside all of the related events. Here is a simplified version.

A Mysterious Memorandum Just two days before we were due to travel to Vancouver’s Court of Appeal, we received a Memorandum from the Appeal Court Judges. Surprisingly, the Memorandum requested that we discuss “Standing”: that is, whether or not I have the right to raise the constitutional argument at all. It said: “Specifically, the division wishes counsel to address the question of how Mr. Smith’s admitted trafficking in marihuana, when he has no authorization to do so in any form under the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations, raises any question of the constitutionality of the restriction in those regulations on the form of marihuana distributed.”

As I am not seriously ill, I do not have a license to possess; as I am not a cannabis grower, I do not have a license to grow for somebody. Under the federal regulations there is no license to make cannabis infused vegetable oils to bake cookies, make lozenges, or fill gel capsules. I considered it my duty to help fill this void by providing edible products to people in bona fide medical need. Besides clubs like the Victoria Cannabis Buyers Club, there still is no secure way for critically ill people to obtain edible cannabis products that have been refined for quality control.

It came as a surprise that after four years of appearances and conferences, and two trials, now we were being told that perhaps we couldn’t have made the challenge at all. My once formidable timeline suddenly seemed quite fragile.

I was assured that there are well-established higher court rulings regarding my right to make the constitutional challenge and that the court of Appeal would need to see these revisited by the Supreme Court be-

fore becoming applicable in my case. However, the possibility of years of delay is still unsettling for many who cannot afford to compound their serious conditions with the anxiety and plausible realities of being arrested.

The Appeal On a cold wintry December morning in Vancouver, I attended the BC Court of Appeal to witness the oral arguments of the two Crown prosecutors and my lawyer, Kirk Tousaw, in front of three Judges. I had spent the evening before at the BC Marijuana Party HQ, between the Vapor Lounge and the Herb Museum in the heart of Vansterdam.

My partner Coco and I had breakfast with Kirk and

Ian Mulgrew, veteran columnist for the Vancouver Sun, in the court restaurant. Ian warned us during breakfast that this experience would be excruciatingly boring and that the court of appeal likes to Punt, avoiding any opportunity to make a decision if possible. The single row of seats at the back of courtroom was full. The three judges entered together, casting stern straight looks at the audience.

They began the day by addressing the “Standing” issue raised in their memorandum. They asked the Crown if I had the right to make the challenge, to which the Crown responded that there was a lot of precedent established that I could. Kirk agreed that the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in 1988 that no one can be convicted under a law that is unconstitutional even if their rights are not infringed.

When asked why I had not been been prosecuted like any other drug trafficker, they stated the position that “after studying the reasons and assessing its case, the Crown concluded that the constitutional ruling significantly impacted on the Crown’s ability to present its case to the jury”. The Crown repeated this point a number of times, even paraphrasing what I would have said on the stand in the jury trial.

They were sure that the jury would be made aware of the Judges’ constitutional ruling from the Voir Dire and would be obliged to decide in accordance with it. This argument raised the question of how much impact the decision in the “Voir Dire” actually has on unlicensed extract producers, who clandestinely operate compassionate kitchens for sick people across the country.

Ian Mulgrew gave his straight impression at the first break. “You’re busted” he said to Punt, seeing the Judges’ focus on the issue of Standing to be an avenue the court may seek to use to dismiss the case altogether.

s Defence in Extract Trial MMAR

Although most of the morning felt like I was watching Boba Fett brood over the chance to offer another carbonite statue to Jabba the Hut, Kirk Tousaw offered brief but decisive flashes of positive energy.

The Crown’s Arguments The Crown had hired two new lawyers—Mr. Leong and Paul Riley. Leong was friendly, soft spoken and respectful, and we chatted at the break and he told me he considered me an “interested spectator.” At a previous court appearance in Victoria, Mr. Leong had told me he wanted me to know that I was no longer being charged and it was a remarkable act to overturn the will of Parliament. During the Appeal, Mr. Leong remained seated, only occasionally turning to survey the room, sometimes with a smile that seemed on the edge of laughter. Paul Riley did all the talking.

They claimed that having edible cannabis products is an unqualified choice of patients, which creates risks because it is an untested and illegal controlled substance. They posited that the trial judge had underestimated the critical abilities that policies attain when working together in a synthesis of catalytic interdependence, namely the triple force of the Food and Drug Act, the Controlled Drugs & Substances Act, and the Medical Marihuana Access Regulations.

They asserted that conventional cannabis-based products that have undergone regulatory approval— such as Sativex and Marinol—are available through prescription from a doctor, making homemade cannabis products unnecessary. Kirk later responded that the MMAR forms make it clear that before you receive a federal licence to receive medical cannabis, “conventional treatments […] have been tried or considered, and have been found to be ineffective or medically inappropriate for the treatment of the applicant.”

They read from the decision in R.v.Mernagh, where the Ontario Appeal Court judges state “there is no right to prefer an illegal treatment over a legal one.” Matt Mernagh had attempted to show that the MMAR program was an illusion because nobody could access it; we are attempting to show that the definition of dried marihuana that is provided to the program participants is essentially an illusion. Although a doctor must prescribe it, patients can choose to have their medicine refined from its inert plant bulk in order to ingest the medicinal ingredients in the safest and most effective manner.

The Crown argued that the Supreme Court had already ruled in R.v.Malmo-Levine that the prohibition against recreational cannabis use is justified out of a preponderance to protect vulnerable groups. They reiterated that it was an unqualified preference of patients that was unsafe.

They read parts of the VCBC Recipe Book and Product Guide and claimed that mild conditions that were listed, like itching, represented our criteria for membership and that this showed that club members weren’t very sick. They asserted that our patient witnesses hadn’t met the standard for life-threatening illness presented in previous constitutional challenges.

Kirk responded that the Crown was limiting the scope of the case to the VCBC, but the club is not the focus of this case. He said that government has elected to keep marihuana beyond the reach of its various agencies set up to protect the public from false or overblown claims, such as through the Natural Health Products Regulation, that deals with these matters in ways other than “unnecessary criminalization.”

They argued that the judge overstated the limitation to mean patients were forced to smoke, asserting that vaporization was a legitimate and safe alternative. Kirk later used the example of the Volcano vaporizer to explain how even a bag of vapor, separated from the plant bulk, could be in violation of the restriction to possessing dried marihuana.

By Owen Smith For half an hour after lunch, Riley restated his argument to the Appeal court Judges. The energy of the room began to sink; the wall on the far side of the room was a putrid green with random blueish brown splatters like something borrowed from a dingy subway bathroom. With just over an hour to present our arguments, the Judges informed Kirk that they would be ending early because of ceremony for a new appeal court Judge. Kirk responded that he would happily wrap up early in order to make the ferry back to Vancouver Island to get home in time for his wife to go out, and the whole room laughed.

The Defence’s Argument Kirk began by showing the Judges three high-resolution colour photographs of the cannabis plant and the resin it produces. The first photograph, taken at a distance, showed a female cannabis flower covered in a short layer of orange-white fuzz; the second was a close-up of a half-dozen trichomes protruding from the surface of the cannabis flower, that make up its fuzzy appearance; the third photograph was of a pile of separated trichome heads.

The photographs had come courtesy of Bubbleman, who along with a few others from Vancouver’s cannabis community, helped to fill the courtroom. Bubbleman is known as the World-Class Hash Master, and is host of Bubbleman’s World on Pot TV. Bubbleman’s photographs illustrated the “golf ball on a tee” structure of the trichome, allowing us to extend the discussion to its scientific base. I have detailed this important aspect of our argument in previous articles (see <cannabisdigest.ca/criminal-trials-or-clinical-trials>) To highlight this aspect of the argument, Bubbleman uses the pizza box analogy: When you order a pizza, you don’t eat the box. The new program will have more cannabis being delivered to patients than pizzas, but unlike Domino’s, Health Canada wants them to eat the pizza and the box. To the Appeal Court, Kirk eloquently described the plant as the messenger, and the medicinal compounds held in the resin glands as the message.

The evidence from Dr. Pate in our trial was that separating the active compounds in the resin glands from the fibrous bulk of the plant reduces the ingestion of unwanted toxic residue held within the plant. Dr. Pate illustrated with the “golf ball on a tee” analogy how the resin glands are prepared structurally to separate with the faintest of agitation. This botanical fact is not recognized by the law, making the distinction between “legal” and “illegal” precarious. Given that licensed patients risk everything by breaking the law—their license, their medicine, maybe their home and even their life—this reality deserves better definition.

The Patient Witnesses Kirk had some time to read from the testimony of Gina Herman, who had bravely told her story to the Judge.

Like many members of the VCBC, she has dramatically restored her quality of life with medicinal cannabis while reducing her dependence on prescription drugs and eliminating their harmful side effects.

Gina’s prescribed dose of oxycontin rose over time from 40 to 240 milligrams to treat her chronic pain.

The psychoactive effects were so severe that her husband and sons would quite frequently report her erratic behavior: “I would just be sitting there by myself and one of the boys would come in from school and I would have been talking to nobody but carrying on a conversation, by myself I guess.” Each member testified that medical cannabis does not make them feel high, but returns them to a pain-free state.

The addictive potential of cannabis is less than that of alcohol or tobacco: The relative potential for dependence on cannabis, expressed as the risk of develop-

ing dependence among those who have ever used the substance, is about nine percent – lower than that of alcohol (15 percent), cocaine (17 percent), heroin (23 percent) or tobacco (32 percent).

The ability of the human body to build a tolerance to opioids makes them even more dangerous. There are ten times more cannabinoid receptors in the human body than opioid receptors. There are no cannabinoid receptors in the areas of the brain that control breathing; opioids in these areas are responsible for overdose death by stopping people from breathing.

Our expert witness at trial made this vital difference in safety between cannabinoid and opioid receptors clear: “[Y ]ou can easily die from morphine overdose, because first you go to sleep, and if the dose is high enough, you stop breathing, and that’s because the opioid receptors responsible for signalling breathing regulation in the brain […] are overwhelmed by the amount of morphine involved. But there’s no breathing receptor regulatory mechanisms involving cannabinoids receptors, for example, so they don’t have that jeopardy.”

Gina had described how eating cannabis helped her withdraw from her former medications. “Shaking, sick to my stomach, headaches, feeling like there was bugs crawling in my skin. I called it the heebie-jeebies.

However, once I got into the VCBC of Canada and started eating the cookies ... I seemed to be able to handle it as long as I had the cookie in me.”

She described how the cannabis products from the VCBC helped restore her quality of life and rebuild her relationship with her family. “I am able to get out now. I’m able to see my granddaughter. I am rebuilding my relationship with my youngest son as he was the hardest affected when all this started building up…

I can now talk to my six-year-old granddaughter in London, Ontario because I’m not starting a sentence and ending out way in left field where I didn’t even know what I was talking about.”

What Happens Next?

The day was over and I left the same way I entered, resolute and happy that the decision was currently helping thousands of people in B.C., regardless of the persistent opposition of Parliament. The appeal court may take many months to review and reveal their decision. If the Court of Appeal is unanimous, then the losing side can (and likely will) appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada to see the case. If the judges are split 2-1 either way, the case will automatically be sent to the Supreme Court of Canada for review. In the meantime, the clock is ticking on the MMAR, as the new MMPR is cued for center stage on Apr. 1 2014.

Jason and Anne from <MMARcoalitionagainstrepeal.com> were in attendance. They are helping spearhead a class-action lawsuit with lawyer John Conroy to prevent all or some of the new regulations (MMPR) from coming into force. They have aligned with Kirk Tousaw to include our arguments on the issue of extraction for this group of federally licensed Canadian medical marijuana users before the Supreme Court of Canada.

This affair has become far larger and more complex than I had ever imagined. Starting from a humble desire to help people who are less fortunate than myself, I have recently become co-host of the P.A.C.E. (People Advocating Cannabis Education) Radio Show on <www.time4hemp.com> I will be interviewing cannabis advocates from the West Coast every second Wednesday evening at 6 p.m. PST. Thank you for following this epic case, and please leave a comment on the Cannabis Digest Forums.

14

Issue Number 39

Hemp Farming Back in the USA Plant rooting itself in American industry one again

By Diane Walsh Solid political support behind optimistic Congressional bills in the U.S. House and Senate and the “Farm Bill,” along the successful initiatives in two states (Washington and Colorado) legalizing marijuana, spells game change.

California has taken the lead in looking to register industrial hemp farmers.

Kentucky is not far behind. All told, these initiatives gradually chip away at draconian federal laws epitomized by the Drug Enforcement Agency’s ongoing definition of marijuana-hemp as a Schedule 1 Controlled Substance.

H.R. 525, the Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2013, amends the Controlled Substances Act to exclude industrial hemp from the definition of marijuana. Senate Bill 359 awaits action from the Senate Judiciary Committee, with 28 co-sponsors.

The Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2013 is on Facebook. Social media plays a vital role in mobilization efforts.

Farmers are rising up all over the country, most noticeably in Colorado, Washington, Oregon, California, Kentucky, Vermont, and Tennessee. Advocates see hemp not only viable as a food source but for everything from cosmetics to building materials. Industrial-hemp expansion in farming and then manufacturing is defined as having ‘boost-potential’ for the US economy.

Assuming its success, the carrot in the bills is that it offers the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Programme designed to help with financing and training for starting up. Since the 2008 Farm Bill expired, money has not been made available.

In June, the U.S. House passed an amendment protecting state rights to grow hemp for research. The House Rules Committee approved an amendment that would allow colleges and universities to cultivate industrial hemp for scholastic and agricultural-research

advancement in states where hemp is already legal under state law.

Senate Bill 954 can be tracked here: <www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s954> On Capitol Hill, SB 954 it is known as “the agricultural reform, food and jobs act of 2013” or “The Farm Bill” for short.

Marijuana Policy Project has put out the

duction is to be handled in cooperation with the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) and the country agricultural commissioners, as would be the case with any other crop.

SB 566 was authored by California Senator Mark Leno, and it is written to allow farmers to cultivate hemp and

call to action asking supporters to stay in close touch with D.C. officials.

Gaining traction, California has legalized industrial hemp farming. In Sept. of this year, Governor Jerry Brown signed the bill legalizing hemp farming under state law, SB 566, known as the California Industrial Farming Act, allowing state registration of hemp farmers waiting for the federal government to remove the ban.

The view held in the state is that enforcement and oversight of hemp pro-

sell seed, fibers, and oil to businesses and manufacturers, pending federal government approval.

The new industrial hemp legalization in California occurred in response to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder’s announcement that the federal government will not interfere in states that want to self-govern to regulate cannabis, clearly hinting that legalization is to be a stateby-state choice on the matter. However, Washington D.C. representatives are

at the mercy of the U.S. Department of Justice’s clarifying whether Holder’s statement regarding cannabis carries over to the hemp industry in addition to medicinal and recreational marijuana.

The conundrum exists specifically because federal law, imposed by the DEA, doesn’t distinguish between marijuana and hemp.

California argues to Capitol Hill that an independent hemp industry will open up new economic opportunities, providing solutions for debt woes in a state known for its agricultural prowess.

Needless to say, their position is that delay is not a good thing.

Eric Steenstra, executive director of the Hemp Industries Association, told the Sacramento Bee: “SB 566 demonstrates California is pushing forward with an industrial hemp law that would not only stimulate much-needed growth in local business and farming sectors, but ultimately lead the nation toward a federal policy change that would open hemp cultivation to hemp farmers around the country.”

“California is poised to grow industrial hemp when the federal government gives states the green light,” said Senator Leno, D-San Francisco.

The mood is clearly positive. In Feb. of 2013, the Wall Street Journal published an article titled, “New Push to Mellow on Hemp” by Arian Campo-Flores, highlighting state and federal efforts backing farmers in calling for excluding the crop from drug laws.

In Oct. 2013, the mainstream media learned that a Colorado farmer is leading with the chin, harvesting the U.S.’s first openly commercial hemp crop in 56 years. 1957 is the official date of the last known commercial harvest. The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 prevents hemp-farming. ...continued on p. 16

16

Issue Number 39 ...cont. from p.14

At the same time, we learn that Colorado spearheads the movement with the passage of Amendment 64, which is designed to assist in enabling farmers to prosper in industrial hemp cultivation.

Ryan Loflin, of Colorado Hemp from Baca County, is currently developing 55 acres. While not massive in production size, this is politically significant, according to Tom Murphy, national outreach coordinator for the advocacy group Vote Hemp. Agriculturally savvy, and wishing to make use of the best harvest timing, Loflin got a jump on it, planting his crop earlier this year, before the implementation of the state’s hemp-growing regulations, which are scheduled to take effect only next year.

He also cleverly recruited 45 volunteers to hand-harvest, not wishing to use a mechanical combine, as it’s thought to harm the plant’s stalk, which can be used in construction materials for inside-seat car parts and many other things. Loflin’s harvest is for hemp seed pressed for oil, to be purchased by Dr. Bronner’s Magic soaps, owned by a David Bonner, a longtime hemp enthusiast. In addition, Loflin’s strategy has the added advantage of securing a network of political supporters who continue to lobby Washington for the movement.

This fact gives an idea of the striking contrast between the draconian state of affairs today and the political climate back in the 1600s. In 1619 the Virginia Assembly passed legislation requiring every farmer to grow hemp!

Fast forward to the modern day: The DEA collapses hemp and marijuana to-

gether, legally speaking. This strategically disadvantages any industrial hemp farming aspirations. At the same time, the DEA is the assigned issuer of permits for anyone or any business to be legally authorized to farm hemp for industrial purposes. Permits to grant permission to grow hemp are an area of toying and bureaucratic game-playing, and they stand as an exhausting and futile expense of energy for farmers.

Yet long ago, hemp was ubiquitous to the economy, exchanged as legal tender in Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Maryland. Production grew until after the U.S. Civil War. It’s well documented that marijuana was sold in medicinal products in the late 1800s. By 1906, lawmakers were motivated to regulate with the Pure Food and Drug Act, which emerged to label products with cannabis.

After the Mexican Revolution of 1910, racists and those against the influx of Mexican immigrants in the US began to mask themselves behind an “antidrug” campaign, which sought to target “menacing Mexican marijuana users” and this was effectively the beginning of the war on drugs that has flourished with a vengeance well into the 20th and 21st centuries.

The dichotomy created enabled the creation of powerful state-agencies and a convenient “us and them” mentality, dividing the people into “good” and “bad” and making work for law enforcement and a culture of the deploying agents.

This was, and is, prohibition at its height.

After the Great Depression, 29 states had outlawed marijuana by 1931, with visceral emphasis on the targeting of Mexicans, who were treated as an “underclass,” and as “racially inferior” to whites.

In 1930, the U.S. saw the creation of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN).

By 1932, the Uniform State Narcotic act looked to place states with the control over the “marijuana problem.” In 1937, the Marijuana Tax Act passed, and Congress criminalized and restricted possession to individuals who paid an excise tax for certain authorized and industrial uses.

Oddly, the Second World War turned things over. The slogan “Hemp for Victory” was heavily promoted by government because marine cordage, parachutes, and other military necessities needed to be produced. The US Dept. of Agriculture urged that hemp be planted, and granted draft deferments to eligible and qualified growers. By 1943, farmers that were registered were able to yield a harvest of 375 thousand acres of hemp.

When the war was over, the political climate reverted to an irrational punishing attitude. In the 1950’s, a first-offense marijuana conviction carried a minimum sentence of two-10 years with a fine of up to $20 thousand.

The 60s saw counterculture and a loosening of views particularly among youth in middle and upper-class white society. In 1968, there was the creation of a new Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, with the Food and Drug Administration merging with the FBN. 1970 saw the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana laws (NORML) founded, and the Shafer Commission. In time, 11 states decriminalized marijuana, and most reduced penalties.

With that—blowback! The DEA was formed in 1973, as if the moment there is a loosening of attitude in the public domain, the state responded with further state sanctions, seeing to the joining

of BNND and the Office of Drug abuse Law enforcement (ODALE).

In the cultural marketplace, again there was a push-back, and in 1974 the High Times publication was founded.

By 1986, we saw the introduction of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act, and Nancy Reagan bumbling about as its chief mouthpiece.

During this time, in law enforcement, 100 marijuana plants was seen as comparable to 100 grams of heroin. There was the development of the “three strikes, you’re out” policy, dictating life sentences for repeat drug offenders and even the argument for the death penalty for so-called drug lords (source: PBS News report).

The 1980s War on Drugs was craftily assisted by concerned parents whose teens were thought to be ruined by pot.

Yet poorer, browner kids tended to be the ones with brushes with the police. George Bush’s War on Drugs, starting in 1989, is well-documented, as is the vast amount of money invested in “tall fences”—apartheid-like Mexico/U.S. border politics targeting drugs as the main source of law enforcement activity in their job.

In 1996, California Proposition 215 allowed the sale and medicinal use of marijuana for patients with aids, cancer, and other debilitating illnesses. This is of course stood in stark conflict with the federal laws, and a siege mentality has characterized the movement as a whole.

Anyone associated with hemp tantamount to being seen as a common criminal ‘until papers scrutinized’ and even at that, cynicism and resentment permeates all aspects of the lobbying effort.

The Clinton Years carried on the same policies, and saw the fine-tuning of intel and weaponization of the state war.

hempology.ca

Cannabis Digest • Winter 2014

17

Master of the Courtroom John Conroy leads fight against MMPR

By Al Graham I can remember sitting around and talking with friends back in 2003 about two court cases that could have brought an end to cannabis prohibition in Canada. At that time people were really hoping for a green Christmas. No not a snowless green Christmas, but one that was full of fresh green cannabis, one that brought us an end to cannabis prohibition as we know it.

While talking with these friends we envisioned businesses that would allow people to grow in a location much like the ones that allow you to brew your own beer or make your own wine. Unfortunately, two days before Christmas, the Supreme Court Judges snatched that from us just like the Grinch who snatched the presents from Whoville.

But just like the Grinch, who found out that he couldn’t stop Christmas from coming, the judges haven’t stopped the people from getting their cannabis.

While many of us where disappointed that cannabis prohibition didn’t end that Christmas, it’s good to know that the man behind that case, B.C. Lawyer John Conroy QC, hasn’t stopped either. Since that day, I have seen and talked with Mr. Conroy a few times which was usually while he was at the Treating Yourself Expo in Toronto. It was good to meet the man who almost won us freedom from cannabis prohibition; he is a man who is fighting to make changes to our cannabis laws but also standing up for cannabis patients across our huge country. This is good news as he is presently involved in another fight before the courts as the lawyer representing the MMAR Coalition Against Repeal.

The Quebec born lawyer came into this world in 1948, and has lived in Quebec, Africa, and British Columbia, where

he now resides. He attended schools in several places within Africa including Makawi which was formerly known as Nyasaland, the Belgian Congo (Zaire) and Southern Rhodesia, now known as Zimbabwe. During his time in Nyasaland, John Conroy was an avid swimmer where he was awarded the Sir Robert Armitage Cup for his efforts after becoming the junior swimming champion.

When he returned to Canada, he graduated with his grade 13, in 1965, while attending school in Abbotsford, B.C. From there he went on to the University of British Columbia where he earned his Bachelor of Physical Education and a Bachelor of Law, in 1971. The first job he got was as a clerk with D.B. MacKinnon of the firm Harper-Grey Easton before being called to the British Columbia Bar in May of 1972.

Since that day, John hasn’t looked back.

In 1975, he started his own law firm where he was on retainer for the Abbotsford Legal Services. He also became their staff lawyer, and five years later became a Director of Prison Legal Services Society of British Columbia. Over the years his associates and the company names have come and gone, but in 1996 to the present, it has been known as Conroy & Company, Barristers & Solicitors.

Since getting the call to the British Columbia Bar Association in 1972, he has been involved in 19 different professional associations and memberships. In fact, he is still a member in four of the associations he joined when he got started.

This would include the Law Society of British Columbia, Vancouver Bar, Canadian Bar, and the British Columbia branch of the Canadian Bar Association.

In 1975, he was a Director with the Abbotsford Community Legal Services before moving up to the one that represents

the prisons in all of British Columbia. In 1992, he helped out where he once called home, Africa, as he became the Representative for the International Society for the Reform of Criminal Law in the Southern Eastern Central African Human Rights Network. He has also been involved with NORML USA, as well as a past president of NORML Canada.

Mr. Conroy’s law company is a “firm specializing in representing and protecting the rights of the individual in both criminal and civil forums.” They offer “assistance in related constitutional and administrative law matters arising out of the administration of sentences of imprisonment in both federal and provincial prisons and conditional release or parole and other similar issues.” The company works to protect “individuals from the abuse of power by governments at all levels and to ensure that those exercising statutory power do so fairly and within their jurisdiction.”

John Conroy is also an author as he has written a book called Canadian Prison Laws which can be found at <www.canadianprisonlaw.com/> Along with writing the book, John has also been involved in articles such as one on Electronic Monitoring on Imprisonment and Release for a special committee to the Parliamentary Committee on Justice and to the Solicitor General.

Not only does John Conroy like to write but he also participates in many discussion groups and has been a speaker at events not only here in Canada, but also in Africa. His speaking topics have covered everything from the history of opiates, when he spoke at the Public’s Public Inquiry for the Heroin Treatment Act in 1978, to talking about early releases, parole, and was even a “delegate to the Second International Conference on the Future of Corrections at Poppwo Poland” back in Oct. 1993.

All of his hard work has not gone unnoticed as he has received a Commemorative Medal for the 125th Anniversary of Canadian Confederations, was appointed Queen’s Council, and also received a Queens Diamond Jubilee Medal, of which he acknowledges Senator Nolin for receiving this medal.

Mr. Conroy has been involved in many court cases, some being very notable, from murder cases to ones that involve

how prisoners are treated in prison. This would include body searches of prisoners without reasonable grounds, to how their visitation rights are being violated.

In total, he has been involved in over fifty very notable cases, but the one that stands out for me as a cannabis advocate, is the one I mentioned in the beginning, the two cases where we were hoping for a green Christmas which are known as R. v. Malmo – Levine and R. v. Caine. These two cases could have changed cannabis prohibition for Canadians, but failed to do so. In a summary of the case Mr. Conroy wrote “this was a constitutional challenge to the inclusion of cannabis in the Narcotic Control Act and Controlled Drugs and Substances Act insofar as it relates to personal possession and use.

It was asserted that this was a violation of a person’s constitutional right to liberty and to the security of one’s person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with principles of fundamental justice. It was an attempt to establish the John Stuart Mill harm principle as a principle of fundamental justice in Canada. It failed and the court found the matter to be valid federal law under the ‘criminal law’ power and that the ‘harm principle’ was not a ‘principle of fundamental justice.”

Mr. Conroy has also been involved in two other high level cases that involved InSite, the Vancouver safe injection location. As the lawyer for the Portland Hotel Society (PHS), the company that is involved in running InSite, along with Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users (VANDU), he was successful in helping to keep it open to help those who are addicted to injection drugs. While the cases were separate they were “heard together to keep the safe injection site (InSite) in Vancouver in operation and to challenge the constitutionality of the drug laws in relation to “addicted” persons. PHS focused primarily on the division of powers of argument based on interjurisdictional immunity and in the alternative s.7 of the Charter but limited that claim to the geographical confines of insite. VANDU, while supporting the division of powers argument, focused primarily on the ....continued on p.18

James Kerr Registered Clinical Counsellor

No Stigma, No Judgment, Just life changing conversation.

E: cannabismentalhealth@gmail.com T: 250 580 9050 W: cannabismentalhealth.com

18

Issue Number 39 ...cont. from p.17

gross disproportionate effects of the enforcement of the laws in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver amounting to a violation of s.7 not limiting the claim to the geographical boundaries of the safe injection site itself. The Court dismissed the division of powers argument on federal paramountcy grounds, but declared s.4(1), the possession section of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to be unconstitutional as being arbitrary, overbroad and grossly disproportionate in its effects contrary to s.7 of the Charter. In particular, the Court found that it prohibited the management of addiction and its associated risks at Insite. Also that it treated all consumption of controlled substances, whether addictive or not, and whether by an addict or not, in the same manner. The Court found that instead of being rationally connected to a reasonable apprehension of harm, the blanket prohibition contributes to the very harm it seeks to prevent and is inconsistent the State’s interest in fostering individual and community health, and preventing death and disease.” The last sentences in this quote I find interesting. If this is true with injection drug

users could the same be said for medical cannabis consumers?

The Crown did appeal the ruling but lost in their appeal request. From the summary of the case, John Conroy wrote that “the Court dismissed the Crown appeal and VANDU’s cross appeal, but ordered the Minister of Health to grant an exemption to Insite. It said that the Doctrine of Interjurisdictional Immunity did not apply. The court found that the Minister’s failure to grant the s.56 exemption violated s.7 of the Charter.

Consequently an order in the nature of mandamus was granted to compel the exemption.” For those of us who believe that addiction is a health issue and not a criminal one, this was huge victory. The hard work that Mr. Conroy put into this case has now allowed other centres such as Ottawa, London, and Montreal to begin to possibly open up their own safe injection sites.

Many, if not all of the cannabis patients in Canada, are hoping for Mr. Conroy to have a victory just as large for them as he was able to get for those dealing with injection drug addictions.

As the lead lawyer for the MMAR Coalition Against Repeal in their court injunction request, therapeutic cannabis patients are hoping that Mr. Conroy will

be able to put the date of Mar. 31 for the repeal of their licenses on hold. This would allow patients to continue to grow their medication while he challenges the new MMPR before the courts.

On Nov. 29 on behalf of four complainants from B.C., John Conroy submitted a request before the federal court for an injunction to put a hold on the existing program. The class action lawsuit that has been filed says “that the changes to the Medical Marihuana laws taking away the right to personally produce or have a caregiver do so, prohibiting dwelling house and outdoor production and limiting possession to “dried marihuana” only and other restrictions violate the constitutional rights of patients”.

As you read the document you’ll find that it “seeks constitutional declarations that all medically approved patients have the constitutional right to not only produce their medicine for themselves but if they are unable to do so, to have a caregiver do so for them, and to use Cannabis in any of its effective forms and not be limited to just ‘dried marihuana’.” The suit also “alleges that the new Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations (MMPR) are unconstitutional to the extent that they omit the right to continue to personally produce

or have a caregiver do so and unreasonably limit the s.7 Charter constitutional rights of medically approved patients in the Narcotic Control Regulations, as in the Medical Marihuana Access Regulations and the Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations by limiting possession, sale and provision to ‘dried marihuana’ only, contrary to the decision of the British Columbia Supreme Court in R. v. Smith 2012 BCSC 544” that is still on appeal before the British Columbia Court of Appeal.

As you can see this suit includes the right for patients to have access to not only dried cannabis but also alternatives such as oils, crèmes and bake goods plus other alternative ways of using cannabis.

It also asks that patients or caregivers be allowed to continue to produce in a “dwelling house” and outdoors.

If you want to be added to the list of members of this action email John Conroy’s office at <reception@johnconroy. com> and they will make sure that you are involved.

To learn more about John Conroy QC, his past cases as well as the MMAR Coalition Against Repeal Class Action Lawsuit please go to <www.johnconroy.com>

A Message from Beth

A young woman’s final thoughts on cannabis

By Beth Hutchinson This ducument was found by Beth’s father a week after she passed away. These are notes for a video she was making.

I’d really rather not have to make this video as I’ve always been quiet about my condition, however, I wish to voice my outrage at Health Canada before I have no voice at all. No one in 3 years has ever suspected I have had 4 Grade IV Glioblastomas and 4 brain surgeries to remove them. I often joke that I’ve had more surgeries in the past few years than I’ve been to the dentist. My experience with Western medication and conventional treatment has had some ups but many downs. It was when I was told at 17 years old that there was nothing more that could be done in order to treat my cancer that my father took the initiative to start researching other options. It was on April 20th, 2011 that he announced to me at dinner that he thought I should consider taking cannabis. Since 4/20 is an infamous day in the cannabis community, I naturally thought he was kidding.

When he showed me the research that

j

was going on internationally I felt for the first time in a while some hope.

It took a long time for Health Canada to process my paperwork. I had been given a lifespan of 6 months and Health Canada took far longer than that. If it had not been for compassionate clubs in Vancouver I’d have been without medication completely. I was also surprised to not receive an actual health Canada ID card along with my documents. I phoned to find out why this was and was told that it was because they’d recently not been able to make enough cards for everyone needing cannabis. As drivers licenses, compassionate cards, care cards, and many other forms of ID are being made every day I was not pleased with this answer. Upon telling them that I was aware that they had not printed these cards for two years I was finally told that the two passport style photos I’d sent in were in fact purely for identification reasons. It made me feel like a criminal. A criminal for seeking a cure for cancer.

I frequently find myself in an interesting place when the topic of cannabis arises. Many people are uninformed and misled like I was a few years ago. They

assume that cannabis can kill you, yet don’t realize that there is nothing on record of someone dying because of a pot overdose. They believe it is addicting but don’t realize that only 9% of people get addicted, the same percentage as people getting addicted to Starbucks. They also think it turns people into trouble makers or dangerous people. I take high amounts of cannabis daily and the only thing I’m a danger to is cake. People also tell me that it must have been dangerous for it to be criminalized in the first place. The initial reason was that it was such a profitable crop that it was threatening the lumber industry. Even George Washington grew hemp. I’ve also been faced with people telling me that pot addicts can’t become successful people. I had a 4.0 GPA, was in 2 school shows and helped direct a third, worked 2 jobs and got into UBC and UVic all while taking cannabis. Not to mention that some of the most famous musicians of the past and present frequently partook in smoking pot. The illusion that marijuana is a dangerous, harmful substance needs to be shattered.

Even if you don’t like cannabis, the facts are there. As logical people we need to

ask ourselves why substances like nicotine and alcohol that frequently lead to violence and death are legal when cannabis is not.

Whether you agree that cannabis is more beneficial than harmful or not one thing that I hope can be agreed upon is that medication should not be denied to sick people. The cost for me to take a medicinal plant that helps with my sleep, anxiety, nausea, headaches, appetite, and pain will rocket from $300 a month to $3000 for no logical reasons. By April next year we may not be able to afford my medication. If Health Canada is allowed to make these changes I may be denied the medication that is helping me more than anything I’ve taken provided by a pharmaceutical company. Something is wrong within our health system and government and as a nation we need to speak out against it. I may be someone who has a terminal disease, but it is our government that is truly sick.

Beth Hutchinson 04 March 1993 - 25 October 2013

MedPot.net Forums Hawkesbury, Ontario

Welcome - Bienvenu(e)

“One of the best Cannabis and other drug news forums in the world!”

Visit www.medpot.net/forums

Cannabis Digest â&#x20AC;˘ Winter 2014

20

Issue Number 39

Jamaican Culture vs. Legislation The Decriminalization of Small Quantities of Ganja Is a Must

By Robert Gordon (Ras Kahleb) All throughout Jamaica’s roughly 360year history under the British Westminster constitutional system, the Cannabis culture has been suppressed, and those who have indulged in it badly oppressed.

It is the view of a few that, on some slave plantations throughout the Caribbean, Cannabis cultures may have existed clandestinely, especially since African spiritual practices, which included magic and divination, were both feared and made illegal by the planters—but not through legislation. Presently, the Cannabis culture in Jamaica persists, and in a pretty vibrant way. Of all the medicinal herbs that exist in Jamaica—and there are plenty—Ganja is the single most soughtafter herb that is easily accessible to locals and visitors alike. Today, Ganja tours are even becoming more frequent than ever before, offering visitors a relaxing aroma therapeutic experience. However, after 50 years of Jamaican independence, the illegality of Ganja is still aggressively enforced by a brutal neo-colonial justice system despite future plans for its decriminalization. Although politicians and legislatures are again having talks and discussions about the illegal status of Cannabis in the country, aims for its legalization by the Jamaican government seem to be farfetched. But why is this?

Do Jamaican politicians feel America would unleash her wrath on the country if Ganja were to be decriminalized?

According to Jamaica’s past Solicitor General, Michael Hylton, this may well be the case, as he once stated that: “[I]f Jamaica were to decriminalise marijuana for personal use, there would be a distinct risk that the country would be subject to the sanctions associated with decertifica-

tion,” ( Jamaica Observer, 2003). The Solicitor General also told the committee, almost in a warning way that, “Jamaica is currently a party to three international conventions concerning illicit drugs: The Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961 and amended in 1972, which Jamaica acceded to on Oct. 6, 1989 […] The Convention on Psychiatropic Substances of 1971, in which Jamaica acceded to on Oct. 6, 1989 […] The United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 1988 that Jamaica acceded to on the Dec. 29, 1995 […] All three conventions adopt a restrictive approach to marijuana use and, in the interest of brevity, illustrated how implementation of the Ganja Commission’s first recommendation would cause Jamaica to be in breach of the Single Narcotics Convention” (Ibid).

I argue that the fear of the U.S. has been instilled in the Jamaican politicians who also seem to be in support of U.S. interests in the region for the purpose of receiving benefits. But as a result of recent successful legalizing legislation passed in Washington and Colorado, Jamaican Minister of Justice Mark Golding said in an interview with The Gleaner, “We think that it is possible to adjust the laws that now exist to make this negative social implication of treating them [persons found with small quantities of ganja] as outright criminal offenses attracting criminal records, without violating our international obligations and we are working towards that presently” (The Gleaner, 16/09/13). Furthermore, Golding declared an important step to be taken toward the decriminalization of small quantities of ganja when he recently stated, “I brought a submission to Cabinet seeking approval of amendments to the

criminal records expungement legislation to provide for (among other things) the automatic expungement of criminal records for convictions for possession of small quantities (or smoking) of ganja” (Ibid). The Justice Minister also added, “Cabinet approved that submission and drafting instructions were then issued to the Office of Parliamentary Counsel for the bill to be prepared” (Ibid).

It was during an international conference in Jamaica held in June this year, aimed at pushing Jamaica’s ganja legislation in the right direction, that renowned attorney-at-law Lord Anthony Gifford told the Jamaica Observer that, “The Government has shown some sympathy to some decriminalisation measures and expunging from criminal records but, as in all things, things don’t happen until the people move and this conference will be a valuable tool for agitation” ( Jamaica Observer, 15/06/13). Gifford further added, “We need to mobilise opinion, and I think Jamaican opinion is very favourable on the whole issue of the legalisation of ganja, but we need to get up, stand up, stand up for our rights,” (Ibid). According to Paul Chang, who is the chairman of the Ganja Law Reform Coalition (GLRC), on the topic of legalization and medicinal ganja, “We have a vibrant tourist market, a large part of which comes here to consume cannabis, and we would have to draft our reform legislation to allow licensed medical cannabis patients with permits issued by their home jurisdictions a method to legally access and consume their medicine in Jamaica” (The Gleaner, 09/08/13). Furthermore, in his support of the global shift toward a softening of the legal stance on Ganja, Chang said that, “In 2013, over 90 percent of Americans polled in favour of legal medical cannabis, and in May 2013, for the first time since United States national polling on the issue started, the majority of Americans polled in favour of total legalisation of cannabis for recreational use” (Ibid). In a brief conversation with Sister Mitzie Williams, who is a recent director of the GLRC and Chair of a Rastafari umbrella organization, the Ethio-African Union Diaspora Millennium Council (EAUDMC), on the topic of legalization of Ganja in Jamaica, she stated that, “[S]itting as a director of the GLRC, I would have to be representing the Rastafari community in its lasting effort to decriminalize Ganja in Jamaica and to legalize it as a holy sacrament unto Rastafari.” She further added that a meeting was presently being scheduled with the EAUDMC to discuss further objectives.

On this very topic, American Reverend Karl Johnson told The Gleaner newspaper one Sunday that “it is time for Jamaica to do just that” as he commented on the recent aim of the Jamaican Government to decriminalize small quantities of Ganja. He further added, “the fallout from the recent ballot initiatives passed in both Washington and Colorado to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana is being felt well beyond the borders of the two U.S. states” (Atlanta BlackStar, 10/12/2012).

Historically, it was in 1913 that the colonial government of Jamaica, with the influence of elitist groups including the Christian church, passed legislation making Ganja use and cultivation a punishable crime. Since then, criminal-

ization of the existing Cannabis culture practiced by the people at least since emancipation, has led to countless numbers of criminal convictions of Jamaicans, including youth, over the span of several generations. Important to highlight are the negative impacts of a Cannabis conviction in a third-world country like Jamaica, which has an increasingly poor economy. Besides being heavily fined for a parcel of Ganja weighing one ounce or more, respectable citizens can also serve lengthy prison sentences. Unfortunately, for many Cannabis convicts in Jamaica and the Caribbean, the inability to gain employment increases sevenfold. In addition a conviction and criminal record leaves the poor rural and urban Jamaican youth with zero opportunity to obtain a visiting visa for another country, and this actually leaves tens of thousands of youth landlocked, with little hope of ever escaping poverty.

When Jamaican politicians could no longer afford to import guns and ammunition into the country as a result of the rapid increase in both violent crimes and national insecurity, they retreated.

Though there may have been a drastic decline in the importation of guns by politicians in Jamaica by the mid 1980s, it was by the early 1990s that ordinary Jamaicans who had criminal linkages with corrupt politicians begin to re-import rifles of choice into the island for the purpose of political dominance and fighting bloody turf wars. Ganja farmers were then coerced into planting larger amounts and were promised a fortune.

Ganja production increased on the island as there was a constant market and demand for Jamaican Ganja in cities like Los Angeles, New York, and Miami, and countries such as Haiti, Colombia, and Nicaragua. Investigations have also discovered that most guns illegally imported to Jamaica were from the U.S. and this article suggests that hard cash alone was not used as payment, but also tons of Ganja as well. Furthermore, in their efforts to gain more power and wealth, Jamaican politicians used high-ranking members of criminal gangs and the police force to guard and protect their “guns for Ganja” trade that was quickly developing between the above mentioned cities and countries.

Evidently, both the hierarchy in Jamaica and other countries, along with well-organized criminal gangs are to be blamed for the present legal status of Ganja on the island. Jamaica is also presently the major port for the transshipment of Cocaine and Heroin to the region, and this has negatively affected the international image of the country and its inhabitants. However, because of international pressure, Peter Tosh’s wish for the full legalization of Ganja in Jamaica expressed in his song “Legalize It” still appears out of reach, especially since this holy herb as sacrament has not yet been decriminalized for spiritual and recreational uses and purposes. Aluta continua—the struggle continues.

j

Cannabis Digest â&#x20AC;˘ Winter 2014

21

Issue Number 39

22

HEMPOLOGY 101 CROSSWORD

By Dieter MacPherson

Check out Georgia’s website to see some of her other comics, read her blog, and help her spread the good word by picking up a copy of her book of the Happy Hippie comics.

Crossword Answers

Crossword Answers: Across 2.MontelWilliams 4.BillClinton 6.Oprah 7.WilliamShakespear 10.MichaelBloomberg 11.JonStewart 14.RichardBranson 17.MayaAngelou 18.ChristopherColumbus 19.SanjayGupta 20.OliverStone 21.MorganFreeman 22.StephenKing Down 1.WilliamO’Shaughnessy 3.CarlSagan 5.BarackObama 8.TedTurner 9.MattDamon 12.BillMaher 13.MarthaStewart 15.JoanOfArc 16.StephenColbert

j

advertise with us E

FRE

#32 ue 12 Iss ring 20

FREE Issue #33 2012

Summer

j

FREE Issue #34 Fall 2012

Sp

Issu

SPRI

FREE

e #3

NG

6

Bus. card: $30 1/8 page: $50

2013

1/4 page: $80 1/2 page $150 Full page: $250

B

.

T.O G IN PIN . 11 P VA G N CO MIN TAX MA L S IAL P. 12 NS SENSTIBLE R IAGH ETR MERRN Y AU 8BC IBBUYER LE B C S’ CLUB INC .

E BC P.23P. E GAYLE QUIN P. 6 A K P. 1 SE NS IBL P. 6 B M 6 P. 12 P. ERN D AGH SE CAS AS P. 8 E 0P C -1 P. 3 H A LI FA IL L

20% Discount with 1-year commitment XR A ID

P. 16

With such reasonable ad rates, you’ll wonder why you didn’t advertise sooner! Help us spread the good word while getting exposure for your business in a 10,000 print run that finds its way across Canada and beyond.

Contact <cannabis.digest.advertising@gmail.com> to set up your ad or find out more details **all advertisers receive a bundle of newspapers delivered to their door at no cost

j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j

Cannabis Digest • Winter 2014

CANNABIS CLUBS ACROSS CANADA AND THE U.S.A

23

Cannabis dispensaries in Canada, due to a lack of regulation, all operate under unique and individual mandates. As such, the membership requirements of each dispensary differ. We recommend travelling with a copy of your original proof of condition (doctor’s note) which the VCBC staff will be happy to provide. It is also recommended to research the dispensaries in the region you will be visiting and try to establish contact, if possible, before yourvisit. Please be discreet and polite when contacting another dispensary—you are representing the VCBC too!

Keep in mind: Some dispensaries have problems with supply and accessibility. The VCBC cannot guarantee that another dispensary will have supply or accept your card as proof of condition. Please help grow this network and support your local clubs by encouraging quality gardeners to direct their product to local dispensaries, or by growing yourself.

RedMed British Columbia Ontario 231 Abbott St., Vancouver Tel: 604-559-9444 VICTORIA BUYERS’ CLUB OF CANADA (VCBC) C.A.L.M. 826 Johnson St., Victoria Tel: 250-381-4220 Toronto, Ontario Canna Clinic Email: hempo101@gmail.com Tel: 416-367-3459 Fax: 416-367-4679 758 East Broadway, Vancouver www.cbc-canada.ca Email: info@cannabisclub.ca Tel: 604-558-2454 Website: www.cannabisclub.ca NORTH ISLAND COMPASSION CLUB Pacific CannaMed Society Tel:250-871-5207 TORONTO COMPASSION CENTRE 1259 Kingsway, Vancouver Tel: 416-668-6337 Fax: 416-461-7116 Tel: 604-5583225 OCEAN GROWN MEDICINAL SOCIETY Email: postmaster@torontocompassioncentre.org 1725 Cook St Unit 1, Victoria www.torontocompassioncentre.org Tel: 778-265-1009 MEDCANNACCESS T.A.G.G.S Tel: 416-253-1021 Fax: 416-253-1428 11696 - 224th St., Maple Ridge, BC VANCOUVER ISLAND COMPASSION SOCIETY Email: info@medcannaccess.org Tel: 604-477-0557 Fax:604-477-0575 853 Cormorant St., Victoria www.medcannaccess.org Email: taggs420@live.com Tel:250-381-8427 Fax: 250-381-8423 RAINBOW MEDICAL CANNABIS CANADA NELSON COMPASSION CLUB BC COMPASSION CLUB SOCIETY Toronto, Ontario #203-602 Josephine St. Nelsom, BC 2995 Commercial Drive, Vancouver Tel: 416-927-8639 Tel: 250-354-4206 Tel:604-875-0448 Fax: 604-875-6083 www.rainbowmedicinalcannabis.ca Email: nelsoncompassion@yahoo.ca Email: info@thecompassionclub.org website: www.thecompassionclub.org MEDICAL COMPASSION CLINIC BE KIND OKANAGAN GROWERS AND 66 Wellesley St E 2nd Fl, Toronto Ontario COMPASSION CLUB. GREEN CROSS SOCIETY OF B.C. Tel: 647-291-0420 288 Hwy. #33 West Rutland, BC (Kelowna) 2127 Kingsway, Vancouver www.medicalcompassionclinic.com Tel: 778-753-5959 Fax: 778-753-5755 Tel: 778-785-0370 Fax:778-785-0477 Vernon Location: www.greencrossofbc.org KINGSTON COMPASSION CLUB SOCIETY Email: bekindok@hotmail.com #409 800 Princess St Kingston Ontario K7L 1G3 www.okanagancompassionclub.com VANCOUVER MEDICINAL CANNABIS DISPENSARY Tel: 613-547-2459 Fax: 613-280-1341 880 East Hastings St. Website: www.kingstoncompassion.org WESTCOAST MEDICANN Tel: 604-255-1844 Fax: 604-255-1845 2931 Cambie St., Vancouver, BC. West End location: 1182 Thurlow St. Québec Tel: 604-558-2266 Email: c.dispensary@gmail.com www.westcoastmedicann.com www.cannabisdispensary.ca MONTREAL COMPASSION CLUB Tel: 514-523-9961 Fax: 514-523-0637 PAIN MANAGEMNT SOCIETY YALETOWN MEDICAL DISPENSARY Email: centrecompassion@gmail.com 2137 Commercial Drive. Vancouver 1281 Howe St., Vancouver www.clubcompassion.net Tel: 604-215-4551 Fax: 1-888-684-6906 TEL: (604) 566-9051 FAX: (604) 558-2879 www.painmanagementsociety.org www.yaletownmedicaldispensary.com Maritimes VAN CITY MEDICINAL SOCIETY 1594 Kingsway, Vancouver Tel: (604) 875-0002 Email: vcmsofficial@gmail.com MED POT NOW SOCIETY 4170 Fraser St. , Vancouver Tel: (604) 569-2119 www.medpotnow.com THE HEALING TREE 529 East Hastings St., Vancouver Tel: 604-569-1091 http://delta9medical.ca/

EDEN MEDICINAL SOCIETY 161 E. PENDER, Vancouver Tel: 604-568-9337 637 E. HASTINGS, Vancouver Tel: 604-568-9337 www.myeden.ca

Alberta M.A.C.R.O.S. 4121-118 Avenue NW, Edmonton, Alberta Tel: 780-457-6824 Website: www.macros.ca

THCC—FARM ASSISTS Tel: (902) 495-0420 http://thccsociety.wix.com/home **To add your club to this list, please contact: <editor@hempology.ca>

WARNING

E BRITANNIQUE - CANADA DUTY PAI

The Surgeon General...

Said Nuthin’ About Smokin’ The Competition.

Check Us Out Online at: www.thesmokezone.com Enter our contests Nanaimo, BC

The ORIGINAL

50 V I C T O R I A C R E S C E N T