Burnt marijuana smell not proof of drug: Canadian court

OTTAWA (AFP) - A Saskatchewan appeal's court upheld a decision that
the smell of burnt marijuana is not evidence of illegal drug
possession since by definition the proof has gone up in smoke, it said
Wednesday.
(Advertisement)

"The smell of burnt marijuana does not reasonably support the
inference that additional marijuana is present," the three-judge panel
said in newly-released court filings.

Thus, police "did not have reasonable grounds to search" the truck of
Archibald Janvier after his roadside arrest in 2004 for narcotics
possession, the judges said in maintaining his acquittal.

Police had originally stopped Janvier's truck in La Loche,
Saskatchewan, in western Canada, to ticket him for a busted tail
light.

At trial, the arresting officer testified he had smelled the "pungent
odor of burnt marijuana" coming from inside Janvier's truck, charged
him with illegal drug possession, and then searched his vehicle.

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police constable found eight grams of
marijuana in Janvier's coat pocket, boot and truck console, but that
evidence was thrown out.

Archibald's lawyer Ronald Piche successfully argued the warrantless
search and seizure were "unreasonable" because the aroma of burnt
marijuana -- as opposed to raw marijuana -- infers that the drug has
dissipated.

"How can you say you're in possession of something that doesn't
exist," Piche told the daily Saskatoon Star Phoenix.

Senate health committee to discuss medical conditions as possession defense

Marijuana on panel agenda
Senate health committee to discuss medical conditions as defense
By James Carlson
The Capital-Journal
Published Monday, February 11, 2008

A Senate health committee will hear testimony today on a bill that
would allow certain medical conditions as a defense against
prosecution for marijuana possession.

Under the Kansas Medical Marijuana Act, people with a debilitating
disease could present to the judge a "written certification" from
their doctor attesting to the relief marijuana provides.
Print E-mail Comment

"(This bill) doesn't legalize marijuana, it doesn't decriminalize it,"
said Laura Green, director of Kansas Compassionate Care Coalition. "It
just allows a person who has a serious debilitating medical condition
who gets arrested for marijuana to bring it up to a court."

Jon Hauxwell, a physician from Hays, will testify in favor of the
bill. He used to work on a reservation in Montana where he dealt with
substance abuse issues. He said he understands the opposition to this
bill, but he added that the medical community has never allowed those
who abuse a drug to deter doctors from prescribing it to patients in
need. He listed morphine and Ritalin as other legally prescribed drugs
to which patients can get addicted.

"We shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater," Hauxwell said.

Former Attorney General Robert Stephan, a cancer survivor himself,
also will testify in favor of the bill. In August, he came out in
favor of legalizing the drug for medical use.

He said at the time he believes "the state should not pre-empt the
role of the physician when it comes to deciding what is best for ill
Kansans."

The legislation defines a debilitating condition as "cancer, glaucoma,
positive status for human immunodeficiency virus, acquired immune
deficiency syndrome, hepatitis C, amyotrophic" or any other condition
that causes a host of debilitating symptoms.

Current law doesn't allow judges or juries to consider a medical
condition when prescribing punishment for possession of the drug.

"You can't even mention it," Hauxwell said.

The bill faces an uphill battle in a state wary of legislation that
even smells like marijuana legalization. Senate Health Care Strategies
Committee member Sen. Vicki Schmidt, R-Topeka, opposed the
introduction of the bill. She said there was no way of standardizing
dosages of marijuana.

And committee chairwoman Sen. Susan Wagle, R-Wichita, who is in
remission from stage four non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and whose son
survived leukemia, said in a recent article about medical marijuana
that there are other drugs on the market that work.

Ottawa seeks appeal on medical marijuana ruling

Feb 07, 2008 07:32 PM
Maria Babbage
THE CANADIAN PRESS

Ottawa is asking for an appeal of a Federal Court decision that struck
down a key restriction in the government's controversial medical
marijuana program.

The Jan. 10 decision allowed growers to supply medical marijuana to
more than one patient, effectively loosening the government's tight
grip on accessing the drug.

The court erred in concluding that a restriction preventing growers
from supplying the drug to one person is unconstitutional, the
Department of Justice said in court documents filed Jan. 31.

Justice Barry Strayer also erred in concluding that the provision was
forcing medical users to obtain the drug on the black market, the
documents state.

Prior to the January ruling, medical users could grow their own pot,
but growers like Carasel Harvest Supply Corp. couldn't supply the drug
to more than one user at a time.

The federal government is seeking that the Jan. 10 judgment be set
aside and that it be awarded legal costs.

Lawyers representing medical users, who considered the Jan. 10
decision a victory, also filed for a cross-appeal of the ruling.

They say the court should be monitoring the federal government to
ensure it's not unfairly restricting access to the drug by denying
licences to growers who want to produce medical pot for a number of
users.

Strayer erred in not requiring the court to "retain ongoing
supervisory jurisdiction" over Health Canada or order the government
to periodically report back to the court on its progress, according to
a court document filed Tuesday by Toronto lawyer Ron Marzel.

"The record before the court contained ample evidence that the
government of Canada, the minister of health and Health Canada have,
since 1999, delayed and frustrated reasonable access to medical
cannabis," the document states.

Lawyers for medical users had argued that the restriction preventing
growers from producing medical pot for more than one person at a time
effectively established Health Canada as the country's sole legal
provider.

They said the restriction was unfair and prevented seriously ill
Canadians from obtaining the drug they need to treat their
debilitating illnesses.

The provision had been struck down by the courts before, but was
reinstated by the government which contracted Prairie Plant Systems
Inc. in Flin Flon, Man., to grow the drug for patients.

Previous governments have been uncomfortable with their role as a
cannabis supplier. Former Liberal health minister Anne McLellan, an
unabashed opponent of the program, was reluctant to provide the drug
to patients.

Lawyers representing medical users have accused Ottawa of trying to
buy time until pharmaceutical companies come up with marijuana
products, so it can wash its hands of the program.

The case challenging the restriction began in 2004 and was heard
before the Federal Court in December.

No date has been set for the court to hear the appeal and cross-appeal.

Canadian say yes to legalizing marijuana

according to the Angus Reid poll I just took. a majority of Canadians think Marijuana should be legal in Canada

growing resources

check out these neat compact garden tool sheds fitted for growing your
own medicine.

recourse website on medicinal marijuana

http://www.medicalmarijuanainformation.com/home/

We ( Canada) aren't smart enough to legalize marijuana ( letter to the editor )

NP Network Blogs

THE EDITOR:

Re: 'Medicinal marijuana has many challenges' (Our View, Daily News, Jan. 29).

You are quite right in stating that medical marijuana has many
challenges. Unfortunately, the major one will be overcoming the lies
and propaganda perpetuated by the drug war.

Your statement that the "idea that recreational drug use is in any way
socially acceptable has to be fought" made me wonder where you have
lived all of your life. Alcohol is a drug that is used recreationally
by millions of Canadians every year. Our governments make millions of
dollars off it and you advertise and promote it in your newspaper.
While it is also true that some Canadians are irresponsible with
alcohol, most are not. The same can be said for marijuana users.

The report of the Senate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs was a joy
to read. The nine senators stated very plainly that the war on
marijuana was a failure. Canadian citizens have been harmed far more
from marijuana prohibition than from the plant itself. The Senate
committee recommended outright legalization with people being able to
grow a reasonable number of plants for personal use. While they
realized that it was a bold step, they believed that Canadians had the
intelligence and maturity to welcome such a debate. Unfortunately, the
Senate committee grossly over-estimated the intelligence of our
government in Ottawa.

The only reason marijuana is still illegal today is because too many
people make too much money from the drug war. It is perverse to think
of how much money is wasted in the United States on the drug war,
which is partially funded by a beer company. I'm sure you cannot help
but notice the hypocrisy. The cops, the crooks, and the workers in the
court and prison system all have guaranteed employment. Now the
government wants to build more jails to lock up people who grow even
one plant. It is not hard to see whose buddies will benefit from that
decision. With all of the corruption because of the illegality of
drugs, it is hard most days to tell who the crooks are.

Growing pot poses no security threat at all, but marijuana
prohibition, and the violence that has resulted from it, certainly
does. I find it almost humourous that the public gets so concerned
about children found in homes with grow-ops, that when installed
properly would not pose a threat, but we ignore children living in
mouldy basements or worse due to poverty.

Where is that intelligence and maturity that the Senate committee was
so sure Canadians had?

Lynne Williams

Nanaimo

Source:National Post

Medical marijuana advocates cry foul

Medical marijuana advocates cry foul

By Shannon Kari, National Post Published: Sunday, February 10, 2008

Companies can fire employees who use marijuana for medical reasons
even if California law allows such use because federal law prohibits
it, the state's Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.

It was more than 35 years ago that the LeDain Commission recommended
marijuana be decriminalized in Canada.

Attempts to suppress or even control its use were failing, possession
laws were enforced on a "selective and discriminatory" basis and its
prohibited status invited "exploitation" by criminal elements,
concluded the Royal Commission in 1972.

It suggested the government regulate cannabis in the same way as
alcohol, which resulted in proposed legislation to decriminalize
possession. The bill died on the order paper when a federal election
was called in 1974, in the same way that a similar bill died 30 years
later.

Today, discussion about reforming the country's marijuana laws is not
on the political landscape. If anything, the country is moving in the
opposite direction.

The government of Stephen Harper has ruled out any changes to the law,
and during a visit to marijuana-friendly Vancouver last week, Liberal
leader Stéphane Dion said his party is not going to advocate for the
end of criminal sanctions for possession.

Another sign that the marijuana lobby has lost political momentum is
the recent announcement by Marc Emery that he is giving up his
extradition fight. The self-professed "Prince of Pot" is negotiating a
plea bargain with U.S. authorities to try to reduce a prison sentence
for selling marijuana seeds over the Internet.

As well, almost 45,000 criminal charges for simple possession continue
to be laid each year, up nearly 20% from a decade ago.

Even the 2,200 people in Canada authorized to possess marijuana for
medical reasons have not been able to convince Health Canada to ease
restrictions to make it easier to access a legal supply of what they
consider to be their medicine.

Late last month, the federal government appealed a Federal Court of
Canada ruling that found medical marijuana regulations to be
unconstitutional for the third time in eight years.

"There is a cycle of ignorance that seems impossible to transcend" in
any discussion about marijuana, suggested Alan Young, a professor at
Osgoode Hall law school in Toronto, who has represented chronically
ill people in a number of medical-marijuana court challenges. "We are
either running on the spot or moving backwards," he said.

Medical-marijuana users have long complained about the bureaucratic
obstacles in dealing with Health Canada, when it involves licences for
legal possession or production of the drug.

Its actions have also repeatedly been criticized by the courts. Part
of the medical-marijuana regulations were struck down in 2003 by the
Ontario Court of Appeal because there was not a sufficient legal
supply of the drug and designated producers were permitted to grow for
only one person with a licence to possess.

In response, Health Canada re-enacted virtually the same restrictions.

As a result, Federal Court Justice Barry Strayer ruled last month that
the new regulations were also unconstitutional.

He noted that fewer than 20% the people with licences to possess
marijuana, acquire it from Prairie Plant Systems Inc., the company
licensed to produce for Health Canada.

Requiring citizens to break the law and access the black market to
acquire their medicine is "contrary to the rule of law," said the
75-year-old judge, who was a senior official in the federal Justice
Department in the late 1970s.

The government's appeal of the decision is part of an ongoing strategy
to marginalize the medical-marijuana program, suggested Mr. Young.
"This is a program the government never wanted to undertake," he said.

For medical users who have licences to produce their own marijuana,
there is also the constant threat of criminal prosecution.

Derek Pedro, a 35-year-old former construction industry employee who
suffers from a connective tissue disorder, said he is still trying to
rebuild his life after five police officers in Hamilton, Ont., raided
his home in January, 2007. Police seized 15 seedlings and charged Mr.
Pedro with production offences, even though he has licences to possess
and to grow marijuana. Eight months later, all charges were withdrawn.
"I am stressed all the time. I start shaking when I see police," Mr.
Pedro said. "I thought I had rights."

Using marijuana has been effective in dealing with his chronic pain
and it has also enabled him to dramatically reduce his intake of such
pharmaceutical drugs as OxyContin, Mr. Pedro said. The marijuana he
produces costs him less than one-sixth the price that Health Canada
charges for the product from Prairie Plant Systems, he noted.

Even the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police agrees there is need
for improvement in access for approved medical-marijuana users.

"We need to find a better way to get that drug to them in a safe and
reliable way," said Fredericton police Chief Barry MacKnight, who
heads the organization's drug-abuse committee.

As well, the association has supported changes to the marijuana
possession laws so that police could impose fines if appropriate.
"Police officers must have the discretion to decide whether to issue a
ticket or to send it to court," stressed Chief MacKnight, who does not
support outright legalization of what he described as a harmful drug.

The tens of thousands of possession charges laid each year are likely
a result of cases where individuals face a number of other charges as
well and not someone "standing on the corner smoking a joint," Chief
MacKnight said.

The ongoing criminal prohibition against marijuana is a useful tool
for police, because it can be used as a pretext to search cars and
homes for evidence of more serious crimes, said Vancouver defence
lawyer Simon Buck.

While the public may approve of these tactics when police find weapons
or other illegal items, it is impossible to know how many times these
searches come up empty-handed, Mr. Buck said. "You never hear about
those cases," he noted.

Source: Today's National Post

In Cannabis he trusts

Source:http://www.themonitor.com/news/marijuana_8702___article.html/zuniga_use.html

Jackie Leatherman
February 3, 2008 - 2:51PM

EDINBURG — He calls himself the Rev. Adam E. Zuniga.

His religion is illegal.

According to his business card, he is ordained by the Shemshemet Ministry, which teaches the Cannabis Sacrament.

“It’s a means to my survival, spiritually,” he says.

For Zuniga, his Eucharist is pot. But he doesn’t call it that.

“Please refer to it as cannabis. I don’t refer to propaganda names. It’s sacrament. It’s herb. It is a plant.”

In July 2003, the 27-year-old had just wrapped up working security in the U.S. Air Force, and was awaiting an instructor position at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio.

That’s when a car accident changed his life. He hydroplaned while driving in the rain and collided with several trees.

Prior to the accident, Zuniga says he dabbled in marijuana use in high school, but switched to cigarettes when he joined the Air Force.

After shattering several bones in his left arm and tearing ligaments in his right leg during the car accident, he found himself chasing the strong pain medicine he was prescribed with beer, and still feeling the pain.

It took one year before a friend finally convinced him that he had become addicted to prescription medicine.

Right about that time, his girlfriend, a nursing major, turned in a research paper at the University of Texas-Pan American on cannabis and its medical affects.

Through his own research, Zuniga discovered the drug could help him.

What he didn’t expect was that it would also help him spiritually, too.

“I don’t just want to smoke cannabis. I want to live my life comfortably,” he said. “It’s not just ‘quote unquote’ pot.”

Shemshemet Ministry
Today, Zuniga uses a cane. Doctors tell him it’s just a matter of time before he’ll need a full knee replacement.

An anthropology student at UTPA, he lists “The Allegory of the Cave” by Plato and “Constantine’s Sword: the Church and the Jews” by James Carroll — a controversial book that argues the historical fight of the church’s battle against Jews — as some of his favorite reads on his Facebook page.

It doesn’t take long to tell Zuniga has emphatically researched the history of all religions and the role that natural, now-prohibited drugs have played in them. He knows his stuff.

Though his studies, he stumbled upon the Shemshemet Ministry.

The organization’s Web site states: “Celebrating our constitutional right to practice religion in the USA.”

It further states that the ministry provides education in spirituality that will “help to protect you from arrest, prosecution and/or conviction of ‘marijuana’ charges — wherever you live — starting as soon as you sign-up, become ordained and receive your ministry documents.”

Zuniga says God made the marijuana plant and his body, which allows for the two to combine.
He advocates that natural drugs currently prohibited by law — including hallucinogenic mushrooms — should be legalized. He says his practice is a basic human rights issue. What he does with his own body, and in his own home, is his business, he says; he isn’t hurting anyone else.

“It is about the greater whole,” he said. “I’m fighting for everyone, just like the military. I want people to realize that they have a right to question.”

Hidalgo County Sheriff Lupe Treviño, who’s taught criminal justice courses at UTPA, says Zuniga’s assertions aren’t based on any legal fact or right. It is illegal to possess marijuana in Texas, and like in every other state but 10, its use for medicinal purposes is prohibited. The severity of the charges someone like Zuniga could face depends on the amount in possession, Treviño said.

“Obviously, he is very well misinformed,” the sheriff said. “He is putting himself in peril of being arrested for possession of marijuana.”

“Nirvana”
In 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court declared medical marijuana patients are subject to federal prosecution even if they live in a state that allows medicinal use of marijuana. There are several grassroots groups like the Shemshemet Ministry that uphold the use of medicinal marijuana, including the credible national organization Americans for Safe Access, but their cause has struggled.

Douglas Laycock, a professor emeritus at the The University of Texas at Austin, said there is no definition of when a religion becomes a religion: “it is a question of sincerity.”

“There is a very long history of religious use of hallucinogens,” he said.

But Laycock seem skeptical that the government would ever recognize marijuana use as a religious practice.

He said in the late 1960s Congress passed the Controlled Substance Act, which allowed Native Americans to use peyote — a small cactus that when eaten has powerful hallucinogenic affects.

And Ras Tafarians, a black Zionist movement that emerged in Jamaica in the 1930s, is known for using marijuana for spiritual purposes, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

They have been on court for years advocating their rights to use pot to practice their religion and have lost, Laycock said.

“If (marijuana) were exempt (from law for religious practice), how would the government ever enforce the marijuana laws?” Laycock said. “Every one would say they are a Ras Tafarian.”

Zuniga said when he “practices,” he uses the time for meditation and insight on historical and current global issues, as well as his own life. It allows him to reach deeper questioning, he said.

He said his first religious experience with cannabis came to him in winter 2005. He realized “the creation” says humans came from dirt, which is from where cannabis comes. So, when he puts the herb into his body and exhales the smoke, he is merely furthering the circle of life and releasing the organism back into Earth, a part of which he will be again when he is dead and buried.

“For me, it is a living organism that has the ability to show me that there is something that transcends me,” he said.

“It helps me to become a better human being. … I am reaching what Buddha called Nirvana.”

Community gardens for medical marijuana users? NEAT Idea.

Source:http://starbulletin.com/2008/02/04/editorial/editorial02.html

A state legislator from Maui has proposed a facility where patients using marijuana for medical purposes could grow their own under state protection. While well-intended, such a facility would invite a raid by the Bush administration's Department of Justice and probably would be unnecessary under a more compassionate federal government.

Rep. Joe Bertram would authorize the state Department of Health to create a facility on his island where a patient or caregiver would be given space to grow as many as 98 plants at a time. Such a facility would wave a red flag to federal zealots who stubbornly regard marijuana as a dangerous drug with no medical value.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that the federal government may prosecute medical users of marijuana, even in the 12 states, including Hawaii, where marijuana is permitted for medical use. The Justice Department has been raiding California medical dispensary facilities since then, while Hawaii, which has no marijuana facilities, has kept a relatively low profile.

The state Narcotics Enforcement Division administers the medical marijuana law, and its chief, Keith Kamata, says the growing facility would violate federal law. More than 4,000 Hawaii patients have medical marijuana cards and such a facility would give them false assurance that their therapy with marijuana would be protected.

A better approach would be to improve protection to doctors recommending marijuana treatment for such ailments as nausea, vomiting and AIDS. Existing state law also could be revised to expand the "adequate supply" of marijuana, now limited to three mature plants, four immature plants and one ounce of usable marijuana.

USA Federal government stands in the way of a state-run medical marijuana distribution

SOURCE:http://www.nevadaappeal.com/article/20080204/NEWS/440177627
By Dave Frank
February 4, 2008, 4:01 AM


The water, the lights, the seeds, the soil. The problem could be several things.

Some patients will learn how to grow, said Claude Miller, a Nevada medical marijuana consultant. Some won't.

"There's patients who can't grow a flower," he said. "Much less medical marijuana."

That's part of the reason he started his business. Many of the 900 patients in Nevada's program know little about the plant when they register.

But those patients, despite a provision in state law, must grow their marijuana themselves or find a state-approved "caregiver" who will grow it for them.

"(Marijuana) is a godsend and it really helps people," said Miller, who supports medical marijuana only under a tightly regulated system.

Patients, however, will not be able to get the drug like other prescriptions the state recognizes unless the federal government changes its stance.

Following a 2000 ballot initiative, the state Legislature wrote the constitutional amendment into law including a section that ordered the University of Nevada School of Medicine to research marijuana and develop a program to distribute it to patients.

The 2001 law says the Legislature understands the state's "obligation" to research a distribution program, but also says it must do it with the permission from the federal government.

The ballot initiative, approved by 65 percent of voters, called for "appropriate methods for supply of the plant to patients authorized to use it." These patients include residents diagnosed with illnesses such as cancer, glaucoma and AIDS.

The federal government, however, rejects the opinion of the 12 states with medical marijuana programs.

"Smoked marijuana has not withstood the rigors of science," according to the Web site of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. "(It) is not medicine, and it is not safe."

Federal authority

Federal policy, supported by the past three presidents, has stalled research and development of a state distribution program.

Dr. Dave Lupan, an associate dean at the state school of medicine, said the university has made "no progress whatsoever" on the legislature's mandate. It will stay that way at least until there is a new president, he said.

It is unlikely the policy will change under the next administration, though. Republican presidential candidates John McCain and Mitt Romney do not support legalizing medical marijuana. Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are undecided.

But the university would have more problems than policy if it tried to start a program. Not only does the federal government have no interest in the school's research, Lupan said, the state has given no money for it.

"It's not only a matter of bucking federal government authority," he said, but of finding doctors to work for free.

The federal government itself has had medical marijuana evaluated several times. A 1999 federally-commissioned study by the Institute of Medicine reported, "the accumulated data indicates a potential therapeutic value for cannabinoid drugs, particularly for symptoms such as pain relief, control of nausea and vomiting and appetite stimulation."

The Federal Drug Administration, however, said in 2006 the medical use of the drug is not supported by science.

Green and black thumbs

A change in federal policy that led to state distribution could, according to supporters, help many patients.

Jennifer Bartlett, who manages the current state program through the Nevada Department of Agriculture, said "there are some who can't grow it, and it's a struggle."

She has not endorsed state distribution, however, and said many patients have no problems growing their own marijuana or finding a caregiver.

A state program would help all patients, though, not just those who have difficulty growing it, said Dan Hart, who managed the group that led the medical marijuana ballot initiative.

The state could make sure the medicine was good quality, he said, and this also would particularly help patients with a debilitating disease.

But some medical marijuana advocates, such as Chandler Laughlin, said the state should not be involved with marijuana and that a state-run program is a bad idea.

The Silver City resident and radio host did say many patients like him can't grow high quality marijuana.

"I have a black thumb," he said.

Bruce Mirken, who supports marijuana legalization, said a state-run program could make it easier for the state to both guarantee effective use for patients and track illegal use by others.

It can't be difficult for patients to get the medicine they need under the current program, he said.

"You could grow your own tomatoes, but if all your plants die, you don't have a salad that day," said Mirken, a representative for the Marijuana Policy Project, which has unsuccessfully pushed ballot initiatives in Nevada to partially legalize marijuana.

A model program

If Nevada eventually does set up a distribution program, it probably won't be the first state to do it.

New Mexico, which legalized medical marijuana in April, is working on the rules its department of health would need to run a distribution program.

This will allow patients to get the drug the way other patients get their medicine, said Reena Szczepanski, director of the anti-drug prohibition New Mexico Drug Policy Alliance. It would help prevent patients from going to the black market, she said.

But New Mexico's system might not work for Nevada, because of the state's sparsely populated areas. She said a state-run system where the drug is distributed through pharmacies might be better for Nevada.

The federal government itself has the only active government-run distribution program in the country. The Compassionate Investigational New Drug program was started in 1978 and closed to new patients by President George H.W. Bush in 1991. A few people are still in the program, though, and they get monthly supplies of marijuana grown at the University of Mississippi.

Miller, head of Nevada Medical Marijuana Consultants, said a state-run distribution program could be good for Nevada, but the state should be careful not to legalize it or regulate it the way California does, with marijuana available at licensed clubs.

"We don't want a bunch of drug-dealing thugs in this," he said.

But Miller, who became a patient after a spine surgery, said the drug is more safe and effective for many people who would otherwise be prescribed pain killers. Those people, he said, deserve to have their medicine.

Opponents, he said, don't understand the research or the state's program.

"We're not just a bunch of yahoos smoking reefer," he said.

Check out this Link: CAMP- Christians Against Marijuana Prohibition

Christians Against Marijuana Prohibition

*** Welcome Friends of CAMP ***

love comes from Jesus It is written...

This page was blessed with the task of informing the people of the outright lies being propagandized by the Federal Government. The prohibition of marijuana is an affront to the Bible and all who worship the one true God. As an example in Genesis 1:29 the bible clearly states "...I give every green plant for food. And it was so."

Until the U.S. government decided God was wrong.

check out more of this website...

http://members.aol.com/ubermurph/CAMP.htm