Ask Seattle A Question
Questions are no longer being accepted in this category. You can read previous questions and answers below.
Weed Week
68481352_24a8657d88_t

Let's talk about marijuana! Should it be legal? What's it going to take to legalize it? How can you grow it? Where can you buy it? If you get busted, what recourse do you have? We have experts on hand to answer all of these questions and more.

Answers
  • Federal: Illegal, State: Legal
    Sb_5516_press_conference_small

    Hi, NervousNell.  As requested, here's the policy director weighing in.  :-)

    In the U.S., we have a system of "dual sovereignty."  The federal government is one sovereign, and the individual states are each sovereigns as well.  Accordingly, people standing on U.S. soil are simultaneously subjects of two different sovereigns: the federal government, and the state within which he or she is standing.

    Each sovereign gets to create its own laws.  States can create laws on the same subjects that Congress makes laws, and the states' laws can differ from the feds' - as long as they don't run afoul of the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution.  The Supremacy Clause, which is Article VI, Clause 2, says, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby; any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."  This last phrase, "any Thing in the ... Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding" means state laws can't conflict with federal laws that address the same topic.  This is the source of the "federal preemption" doctrine that says that federal laws preempt - or, trump - state laws whenever the two conflict.

    In the context of drug laws, we have even more guidance.  The federal Controlled Substances Act contains its own preemption provision, 21 U.S.C. sec. 903.  That provision says, "No provision of this subchapter shall be construed as indicating an intent on the part of the Congress to occupy the field in which that provision operates, including criminal penalties, to the exclusion of any State law on the same subject matter which would otherwise be within the authority of the State, unless there is a positive conflict between that provision of this subchapter and that State law so that the two cannot consistently stand together."  In other words, states can create laws about marijuana that are different than the federal law as long as they do not create a "positive conflict."

    What's a "positive conflict"?  In County of San Diego v. San Diego NORML, et al., the California Court of Appeals explained that a state marijuana law creates a positive conflict with the federal Controlled Substances Act only when the state law affirmatively requires someone to perform an act that would be a violation of the federal marijuana prohibition.  For example, if Washington were to pass a law that required every farmer to grow at least one acre of marijuana, that law would be subject to federal preemption under 21 U.S.C. sec. 903.  Washington law can't require someone to break federal law.

    But that doesn't mean Washington can't make marijuana legal under state law.  Washington has a Uniform Controlled Substances Act that is roughly parallel to the federal Controlled Substances Act.  The federal provision that prohibits marijuana possession is 21 U.S.C. sec. 844; the Washington provision is RCW 69.50.4013.  Washington could amend RCW 69.50.4013 to exclude marijuana, so that someone who possessed marijuana wouldn't be breaking state law.  This wouldn't mean that anyone would be required to possess marijuana, just that possession wouldn't violate state law.

    This would protect somone possessing marijuana in Washington from being prosecuted under state law, but it wouldn't provide protection from prosecution under the federal law.  However, the practical reality is that the federal government doesn't waste resources on small-scale marijuana offenses.  Thirteen states already have laws providing that possession of a small amount of marijuana is not a crime.

    So, Washington can make marijuana possession legal under state law simply by removing that offense from the state Uniform Controlled Substances Act.  That wouldn't pose any federal preemption problems.  The more interesting question, though, is what would happen if Washington decided to bring marijuana production and distribution under a regulatory system - in a manner similar to alcohol, for example.  Such a system would most likely require someone to break federal law (depositing sales tax in a bank would constitute money laundering, for example) and therefore be vulnerable to a federal preemption challenge.  But how would the political landscape change?  Might a state's expression of its willingness to try something different from our failed experiment with marijuana prohibition catalyze change at the federal level?

  • How many dispensaries are opening in Seattle? Where? and When?
    Newlogo_small
    their are "roughly" 93 facilities in king county alone. There is currently a moretorium being put on any new ones coming in on may 1 2011,until the new bill(sb 5073),( passed by the house and senate), can be straightend out. Which may be in the next 48 hrs, or it could take another year. Gov Gregoire has that ball in her court now. There has been talk of limiting the number, or going to a lottery system for licenses, it's all to be determined in the VERY near future! STAY TUNED!!!!!
  • How much does the war on drugs really cost?
    Cdc_logo_color_smaller_border

    See the Drug War Clock from DrugSense. The short answer: approximately $40 billion -- $40,000,000,000 -- or $500 per second.

    In addition to these wasted tax dollars, the effects of the drug war in America this year will include approximately:

    * 1.6 million arrests for drug law violations -- around 13% of all arrests in the country. That's one arrest every 19 seconds.

    * More than 850,000 arrests for cannabis law violations, and 89% of those charged will be for possession only. That's one arrest every 30 seconds.

    * Approximately 25% of America's 2+ million prisoners -- which is more than any industrialized nation ever, in total or per capita -- are sentenced for drug law violations.

    * In some cases, an almost incalculable cost of our drug war is death by murder, as was the case in our state's first medical cannabis murder, which is still being ignored by Pierce County police, who had a history of harassing the murdered patient.

  • Is full sun necessary to grow Phlox?
    Dsc_0339_small

    It depends on the type of Phlox you plan to grow and location you choose.

    For example: Periwinkle Phlox (P. adsugens) and Moss Phlox (P. subulata, aka as Creeping Phlox; Moss Phlox; Moss Pinks) prefer to grow in partial shade. While Garden Phlox (P. paniculata) prefers full sun or it will become leggy and good air cuiculation to prevent mildew. All Phlox need fertile, humus-rich, moist, well-drained soil.

    I have successfully grown P. carolina or P. maculata (depending on the source) 'Miss Lingard' since 1994. The flowers are white, fragrant, and make a beautiful mid-summer showing, especially when planted in a mass of 5 or more plants. An added benefit is that it's mildew resistant.

    If you like Phlox, you might also want to think about planting Lily bulbs.  Check out B & D Lilies www.bdlilies.com, located in Washington State for ideas.

    Finally, check your local nursery, April and May plant sales, or seed catalogs for varieties suited to your light, location, and needs.  I hope this answer helps. 

Questions
Recent Comments
  • Comment on Fnarf's answer…
    N1056685341_4674_small

    Yeahwell, you are talking psychological addiction. World of Warcraft can do the same thing. And I work with a LOT Of pot heads on the campaign and they don't just "hum along" with no reaction to anything. Fuckit, your entire answer is so ridiculous, I don't have the time nor will to tear it apart.

  • Comment on Vivian McPeak's answer…
    Vivphone_small

    Sop true. The closet thing is Sativex, which is being produced by GW Pharmaceuticals. I think the real issue is that the big pharma folks don't want people learning they can self-medicate for a vast plethora of symptoms with a substance that is relatively benign, affordable and sustainable health-wise.

  • Comment on Vivian McPeak's answer…
    Horse_ass2_small

    If pot made money for pharmaceutical companies (the way morphine derivatives and amphetamines do), you'd see them legalized asap, and prescribed to your grandma and your hyperactive toddler too, of course in a much more purified form. It's really strange that they haven't developed anything...

  • Comment on The C.P.C's answer…
    20466_1320486208192_1111899835_947799_2554811_n_small

    great answer C.P.C.

  • Comment on TimBurgess's answer…
    Burgess_media_small

    I just read Alison's commentary on this topic. Ignore my answer and read hers! Very informative, Alison.

  • Comment on Vivian McPeak's answer…
    Vivphone_small

    Well, despite the moniker they are placing by my name I am no expert on anything, but I can give you my opinion. Prohibition has greatly increased the number of employers who drug test their employees. In addition, because of court mandated drug testing, the companies doing the testing have profited greatly. While some employers would continue testing for cannabis, clearly, prohibition has increased testing for cannabis across the board. The interesting thing is that there is no test to determine if someone is intoxicated on cannabis, only whether or not they have ingested it within the last several weeks, or even months. Despite that, many lives have been ruined over a dirty report.

  • Comment on Vivian McPeak's answer…
    Vivphone_small

    Yes, gladly. Hemp produces a quality fiber, in fact hemp is one of the strongest natural fibers in the world. In 1916, it was predicted by the U.S. government that all paper would come from hemp by the 1940's, and that logging of trees would cease. A single acre of hemp equals 4.1 acres of trees. When cannabis/marijuana was outlawed in the 1930's, it was done with the assistance of William Randolph Hearst, who owned huge areas of what was at the time virgin timber.

    At this time all hemp must be imported to America, therefore it is not an affordable building material.

    Today, almost all products that are made of wood could be easily replaced by hemp, from fiber-board to beams. Scientists at Stanford are creating a non-petroleum based building material out of Polymers and Hemp. It takes 20 years to get a stand of trees grown to maturity, it only takes 3 months with hemp.

  • Comment on Vivian McPeak's answer…
    186269_717777833_423364_n_small

    Could you explain how the timber industry benefits from the criminalisation of pot?

  • Comment on Jessica Baxter's answer…
    Avatar_default

    Also note the hotter the spice, the more the spice will "activate" the THC. So pepper and cinnamon for instance will enhance the effects of your butter.

  • Comment on Jessica Baxter's answer…
    Avatar_default

    That's a really good idea usin ur spices I've even done a hot sauce outta it givin the smokey flavor a purpose :)

  • Comment on TimBurgess's answer…
    1555740p_f4cfe5a2a3-magnum_small

    Will you then file new legislation to do things like stop police raids over reports of marijuana, like we saw last year?

    Because by law, even my littering is more pressing for the police to deal with. But here they are, conducting raids in violation of the law.

  • Comment on shw3nn's answer…
    Gogogophers_small

    "Should I have a gun ready in case it's a criminal burglar breaking in?" Um, no. You'll probably end up shooting a fucking cop or a girl-scout.

  • Comment on NervousNell's answer…
    Cdc_logo_color_smaller_border

    Nell, you may be right, but what we listed is all that qualifies one for medical cannabis in Washington State. The law does not require a medical history to show evidence of need. It's based on someone's current condition, not his or her past condition.

  • Comment on NervousNell's answer…
    Hqjp7cums_477_small

    But it helps when it comes to qualifying for authorization. Getting medical records that show a history helps if one is going to a doctor that isn't the person's primary doctor. At least, I would hope so. The doctors I worked with required a medical history.

  • Comment on Fnarf's answer…
    Icon_small

    Also, the owners of private prisons, which should be illegal.

  • Comment on Axle Foley's answer…
    Newlogo_small
  • Comment on Kevin's answer…
    Kevin_photo_small

    Hard of hard to destroy cannabis plants, pots, soil,
    lights, and all the gear that goes with indoor growing--
    all after police politely knock on the door. Busting in
    like they routinely do, actually increases dangers of
    armed confrontation--since the cops could easily be
    mistaken for another armed gang. In fact, that has
    happened: police have busted in and an elderly
    grandmother (mistaken for a pot dealer) shot at police
    (mistaken for criminals), and was herself shot to
    death.

    The idea that pot growers have automatic weapons and
    would shoot police to protect their crop is preposterous and typical of the fantasies drug warriors
    imagine about their opponents. Think about it for a
    minute: how can the crop be protected with dead police?
    Wouldn't there be a follow-up investigation if a SWAT
    team didn't check in? Why risk a murder rap, and almost
    certainly be apprehended, when the alternative is a
    simple charge for growing?

    That sounds more like desperate meth addicts, which
    police are loathe to go after for the very reasons they
    mis-attribute to pot growers. A classic case of projecting one's own aggressive tendencies, to the other, whom one persecutes.

  • Comment on TimBurgess's answer…
    Burgess_media_small

    Actually, I've been quite clear in my public statements about police practices and accountability. Read my statements here: http://timothyburgess.typepad.com/tim_burgess_city_view_/police_accountability/

  • Comment on cdc's answer…
    Burgess_media_small

    Ben, you may be correct about prosecution decisions incident to arrest on other charges, but my understanding is that the possession only offense won't be prosecuted. Of course, Mr. Holmes' office will have a more precise answer.

    In terms of the impact of mass incarceration in our society, I encourage you to read my comments here: http://timothyburgess.typepad.com/tim_burgess_city_view_/mass-incarceration/

    You'll find my opinions on legalization of marijuana here: http://timothyburgess.typepad.com/tim_burgess_city_view_/marijuana-legalization/

  • Comment on Kevin's answer…
    John_collins_200x300_small

    What is the basis for your assertion that police like to break down doors because it gives them an adrenaline rush? I always thought it was so people couldn't destroy evidence and post up with an automatic weapon, but hey, I guess you could be right.

  • Comment on TimBurgess's answer…
    Avatar_default_small

    Councilmember Burgess, as a former police officer and as the chair of the City Council's public safety committee, you're uniquely situated to speak about the threat to public safety that SPD officers' rogue actions present. What will you do to help us get our police force under control?

  • Comment on Alison Holcomb's answer…
    Sb_5516_press_conference_small

    Mark, you're welcome.

    Protosaurus, the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 (http://www.unodc.org/pdf/convention_1961_en.pdf), amended in 1972, established four Schedules of substances subject to the agreements contained in that treaty. The United States is a signatory (Party). Cannabis and Cannabis resin are listed in Schedule I.

    Article 28 of the Convention (cannabis), read in conjunction with Article 23 (opium poppies), specifically allows Parties to create government agencies which may license cannabis producers. In the U.S., that agency is the DEA, and the DEA has licensed the University of Mississippi to produce cannabis. Ol' Miss currently has the government monopoly on cannabis production in the U.S. For more information: http://www.aclu.org/drug-law-reform/matter-lyle-craker.

    Article 28 also specifically excludes industrial hemp (generally recognized as cannabis containing a THC concentration of less than 0.3%).

  • Comment on shw3nn's answer…
    Icon_small

    One plainclothes officer isn't going to break down the door without backup. And you don't have to open the door for or let in anyone who doesn't have a warrant.

  • Comment on TimBurgess's answer…
    Avatar_default_small

    City policy? It's *the law*.

    You completely dodged my question. Clearly our police are not making it their lowest priority, because until they're over-funded and looking for busywork, every such arrest ties up resources that could be used on other -- higher priority -- law enforcement duties.

    Surely when you wrote, "if officers discover marijuana," you meant, "if officers discover something that they suspect is marijuana." They won't know unless they investigate, and every second they spend investigating the possibility of piddly little pot crimes is a second they are *not* spending investigating serious crime: crimes against people and property crimes. I realize we could say the same of any low-priority crimes, but this one is *the lowest* priority.

    Is there any justification for our police investigating suspicion of possession of marijuana by an adult, much less spending several hours filling out the paperwork that goes with arresting an adult for simple possession? If not, why must we put up with them doing so? Who's in charge?

  • Comment on shw3nn's answer…
    John_collins_200x300_small

    You could ask for their badge number, then call the police and have them verify that they are a police officer.

  • Comment on Kevin's answer…
    Kevin_photo_small

    An interesting question. I doubt police department would produce a brochure on undetectable grows, since they would not know in advance who would get the brochure. Generally police do not act as consultants for individual situations, even if for a legal purpose.

    You might be able to arrange a police visit, through your attorney. That way, they would know in advance that your grow is legal, and so would not target as an illegal grow. As a side benefit, you might ask them such questions while they are there. But to my knowledge, this hasn't occurred yet.

    The biggest security problem is the human factor.

    Smell is the second biggest security problem.

  • Comment on shw3nn's answer…
    Demon

    Captain, say it's not a group then. If it's just one guy in plainclothes not a uniform and he says he's police do I have to believe him and let him in? I don't have any way to find out if it's for real. He could show an ID or a badge, but I don't have a real one to compare to, and fake ID's were easy to get when I was 20 and fake badges were easy to get when I was 10.

    Should I call 911? Should I just ignore them and hope the door doesn't get knocked down? Should I have a gun ready in case it's a criminal burglar breaking in?

  • Comment on Kevin's answer…
    Demon

    Kevin, I'm not asking about them helping me after a burglary, I'm asking, if they will help a legal medical marijuana patient avoid dangerous breakins by helping them make sure their plants are not detectable from outside. They already did it something similar by coming out to say, "you shouldn't leave that ladder out near the window," and "those bushes should be trimmed back so there is a clear sight line," but they didn't tell my neighbors, "hey, you must be trying to hide something," they just figured everything was cool, I guess, because they didn't have any reason to think there was trouble.

    If someone asks for help keeping their medical marijuana garden unnoticeable, to avoid neighborhood crime, will police help or will they get a search warrant, tear the house apart, and steal their car?

  • Comment on Kevin's answer…
    Kevin_photo_small

    The slickest way to make lots of cuttings is tissue culture. Little plant material is needed, the cutting space is small, and once rooted the cuttings can be held in stasis for months until they are needed.

    For a small number of cuttings, probably the best method is air layering. Google that phrase or search on YouTube and you will get plenty of instruction. Generally, if the branches extend horizontally, place a branch in a container (with two slits) and fill with soil. Water with rooting hormones. Once the roots form, slice the branch and re-pot the cutting.

    Another excellent way is aeroponic chambers such as Turbo-clone machine.

    Please feel free to call me at: 547 2202.

  • Comment on shw3nn's answer…
    Spaceship_small

    Have you considered installing a peep hole and asking the "officer" to hold his ID up to the lens so that you can read his ID BEFORE YOU COMPLY WITH HIS LAWFUL INSTRUCTION?