To: Keali'i Shilo Case,
Subject: SB73 Important Historical FACTS
Date: Sun Mar 06 19:07:09 MST 2016
Please take a moment to seriously review these important historical facts before casting your vote tomorrow on SB73 and SB89. Cannabis prohibition was never about the plant itself, it was always about repressing the people who used it and it should NEVER have been prohibited to begin with. All claims are backed up with references to the historical evidence.
Indian Hemp Drugs Commission ordered by British Parliament - 1894: Considered one of the most comprehensive and reliable studies of cannabis ever undertaken with 3,281 pages. Its conclusion was drawn from the testimony of 1,193 witnesses, most British civil and medical officers. Eighty-six meetings of the Commission were held with field trips conducted to thirty different Indian cities. In contrast to most subsequent studies, those actually familiar with cannabis - practitioners of Ayurvedic medicine, cultivators, and person in the trade - were sought out and interviewed. The well-reasoned conclusion of the report stand in stark contrast to the steady diet of misinformation offered by the American press and legislators (of the time 1890's to 1930's), found that the moderate use of cannabis "produces no injurious effects on the mind ... no appreciable physical injury ... no moral injury whatever." While warning against excessive use, the report noted "moderate use of this plant is the rule, and that the excessive use is comparatively exceptional." Ref: "Marijuana Smoking in Panama," The Military Surgeon General, Volume 73, December 1933; http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/panama/panama1.htm
LaGuardia Report commissioned by New York Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia - 1939: Found that cannabis use did not cause crime, was not widespread among schoolchildren, and did not lead to the use of hard drugs or addiction. The Report concluded, "The publicity concerning the catastrophic effects of marihuana smoking in New York City is unfounded." Ref: John C. Williams, The Protectors: Harry Anslinger and the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (Newark: University Delaware Press, 1990)
United Nations, Ad Hoc Panel on Drug Abuse convened by President Kennedy - 1962: Found that "the hazards of marijuana use have been exaggerated," and evidence connecting it with sexual deviance and violent crime was "very limited." In a clear critique of Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN - DEA of the time) policy, the panel opined that "long criminal sentences ... are in poor social perspective." Ref: Schaffer Drug Library, http://www.druglibrary.org/special/king/dhu/dhu12.htm
English Advisory Committee on Drug Dependence - 1968: Endorsed the conclusions of the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission and the LaGuardia Report, and specifically found that cannabis is not linked to violent crime, heroin addiction, or psychosis. Ref: Schaffer Drug Library, http://www.druglibrary.org/special/king/dhu/dhu12.htm
Shafer Commission appointed by President Nixon - 1970: In 1970, Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act. Drug warriors pushed to have cannabis permanently listed in Schedule I, but the parade of research pointing in the opposite direction sparked skepticism among legislators. Congress compromised by "temporarily" placing cannabis in Schedule I and empaneling a National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse to recommend appropriate scheduling. The Commission was chaired by former prosecutor and Republican governor of Pennsylvania Raymond Shafer, and was composed mostly of perceived law-and-order advocates appointed by President Nixon. Contrary to expectations, the Shafer Commission produced the most comprehensive review of cannabis ever performed by the federal government. According to the conclusions of the Commission's report, cannabis does not cause violent crimes, addiction, psychosis, or any significant negative impact to our society or individuals. The Shafer Commission refused to confirm placement of cannabis in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act. Instead, it officially recommended that both personal possession and nonprofit transfer of cannabis be completely decriminalized. Ref: The Report of the National Commission of Marihuana and Drug Abuse, "Marihuana: A signal of Misunderstanding," Commissioned by President Richard M. Nixon, March 1972; http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/nc/ncmenu.htm
With all this credible documented historical evidence and exhaustive research about cannabis, why was it suppressed and blatantly dismissed? Why was cannabis demonized the last 100 years? Why were anti-cannabis prohibition laws passed? Simply put, it wasn't about the plant; it was always about the people and political agendas to repress those people with anti-Mexican, anti-Afro-American, anti-hippy, and anti-Vietnam war protesters sentiments.
News Media circa when racism was more socially acceptable.
Spirit Lake (Iowa) Beacon - 1910: "Under its influence, the sedate Mexican becomes noisy as a cowboy and has to be lassoed and put in a calaboose." Ref: Isaac Campos, Home Grown: Marijuana and the Origins of Mexico's War on Drugs (UNC Press, 2012 Pages 39-66)
The Marysville (Ohio) Tribune - 1910: "Mixed with tobacco the Mexicans revel in it ... Saturated with this drug, they forget all of the ills and cares of life, are reckless and pugnacious, and will fight on the smallest provocation or no provocation at all." Ref: Isaac Campos, Home Grown: Marijuana and the Origins of Mexico's War on Drugs (UNC Press, 2012 Pages 39-66)
The Literary Digest - 1936: "While whites often buy 'reefers ‘in Negro night clubs, planning to smoke them elsewhere, sometimes they manage to gain entry into a mixed-color party ... 'reefer parties' take place in Harlem." Ref: "The Literary Digest," October 24, 1936; http://www.druglibrary.org/mags/literarydigest36.htm
In the US Senate circa 1913-1914.
Texas Senator claimed, "All Mexicans are crazy, and this stuff (marihuana) is what makes them crazy." Ref: Dale Gieringer, PhD, "The 100th Anniversary of California's War on Pot," http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dale-gieringer-phd/california-war-on-pot_b_3837914.html
Montana Senator stated, "Give one of those Mexican beet-field workers a couple of puffs on a marijuana cigarette and he thinks he's in the bullring at Barcelona." Ref: Dale Gieringer, PhD, "The 100th Anniversary of California's War on Pot," http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dale-gieringer-phd/california-war-on-pot_b_3837914.html
The first US Laws were passed due to a lack of knowledge about cannabis, no scientific or historical research. It was to repress the "Mexicans." Ref: Dale Gieringer, PhD, "The 100th Anniversary of California's War on Pot," http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dale-gieringer-phd/california-war-on-pot_b_3837914.html
Government Agencies 1926.
U.S. Bureau of Plant Industry - 1926: Reported cannabis use by Mexicans "do not jibe very well with the effects of cannabis ... which simply causes temporary elation, followed by depression and heavy sleep." Ref: http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/history/conspiracy.htm#_ftn103
The American Medical Association - 1926: Sent an investigator to the southern border of the US. He reported there is no evidence worthy belief that marihuana is a habit-forming weed or drug." Ref: http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/history/conspiracy.htm#_ftn103
US Presidential Office 1970.
US President Richard M. Nixon ran on a platform of law and order creating the Shafer Commission (above). Nixon had warned Shafer not to advocate cannabis reform saying, "If they get the idea you're a bunch of do-gooders that are going to come out with a quote that's 'soft on marijuana' report, that'll destroy it right off the bat." It being his "law and order" platform. Nixon was even more direct with his Chief of Staff, Bob Haldemann saying, "I want a g*dd*mn strong statement about marijuana. Can I get that out of this son of a b*tch*ng, uh, domestic council ... I mean one on marijuana that just tears the @ss out of them?" "Them" referring to the hippies and anti-Vietnam war protestors who were known users of cannabis at the time. Nixon was quoted as saying to Art Linkbetter, "radical demonstrators ... they're all on drugs, virtually all." Nixon's top aide was later quoted as saying, "Look, we understood we couldn't make it illegal to be young, poor or black in the United States but we could criminalize their common pleasure." Ref: The Report of the National Commission of Marihuana and Drug Abuse, "Marihuana: A signal of Misunderstanding," Commissioned by President Richard M. Nixon, March 1972; http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/nc/ncmenu.htm
Please stop this historical ignorance here today by voting YES on SB0073 and NO on SB89 to liberate as much whole plant cannabis as possible for medical reasons. Please understand that we have been misled about cannabis our entire lives in an effort to repress the people who use it. Are we going to repress those who suffer?
When you consider these historic facts, please also consider two-year old Paloma Sledge who needs more THC in her treatment than SB89 will allow ( http://www.standard.net/Government/2016/03/06/Utah-s-medical-marijuana-bills-to-be-debated-Monday.html).
Also, additional science describing how our endocannabinoid system and how cannabis is the most cannabinoid rich plant (including THC) in existence ( http://www.vice.com/read/how-and-why-your-brian-makes-its-own-cannabinoids?utm_source=vicetwitterus) PS. Vice is new History 2 channel, a credible source, renamed.