New York: Legalization Measures Possess Majority Support

  • by Paul Armentano, NORML Deputy Director February 18, 2014

    Most New York state voters support regulating the adult use of cannabis, while a super-majority endorse legalizing the plant for therapeutic purposes, according to a recently released Quinnipiac University poll.

    Fifty-seven percent of respondents support “allowing adults in New York State to legally possess small amounts of marijuana for personal use.” Only 39 percent of respondents opposed the idea.

    Respondents most likely to favor legalization include those age 18 to 29 (83 percent), Democrats (65 percent), those age 30 to 49 (61 percent), and men (63 percent). Support is significant lower among women (51 percent), Republicans (39 percent), and those over the age of 65 (38 percent).

    On the issue of legalizing cannabis for therapeutic purposes, voter support rose to 88 percent — with the issue receiving super-majority support from respondents of every age and political affiliation.

    In separate questions, only 13 percent of respondents say that they believe that cannabis is “more dangerous” than alcohol, and fewer than half believe that it is a ‘gateway’ to other illicit substance use.

    The survey possesses a margin of error of +/- 2.5 percentage points.

    Legislation to legalize the possession, cultivation, and retail sale of the plant — the “Marihuana Regulation and Taxation Act” — is pending in both the New York state Senate and the Assembly. Separate legislation to allow qualified patients to possess and purchase cannabis for therapeutic purposes also remains pending.

    In January, Democrat Gov. Andrew Cuomo — who had previously expressed opposition to allowing for the medical use of cannabis — announced plans to use his executive powers to revive a dormant research program that would allow for the use of government-grown marijuana in select hospitals. However, efforts to reestablish similar programs in other states have not been effective.

    25 Responses to “New York: Legalization Measures Possess Majority Support”

    1. If people were more informed on this topic it would be a lot easier to pass

    2. mexweed says:

      PS After double-drawtube toke, shotguns can be done by covering the VapeCrater with a finger and forwarding air to somebody through the tube system.

    3. mexweed says:

      What if “DRUG TEST FOR TOBACCO” aimed to find out, not whether the person sometimes (legally) used tobacco, but whether they were one of those catastrophic (yet all too typical) pack-a-day puffaholics taking a break from work 20 times a day for 9 more hits (180 a day)(yes I too find that hard to believe but I HAVE SEEN THEM)– in which case admittedly the next move be not dismissal but a humane appropriate treatment (HAT).

      Technology has caught up with the $igarette morbidity problem and we have the solutions now!

      Such an individual should

      (a) entirely or partly SUBSTITUTE cannabis or other herbs for tobacco, and

      (b) eliminate forever the rolled-up H-ot B-urning O-verdose M-onoxide paper “$igarette” format, but try SUBSTITUTING as many as possible of the following:

      * E-Cigarettes (employer should explicitly tolerate indoor use); exchangeable fluid cartridges with and without nicotine or flavorings)

      * Plug-in vaporizer for sifted particulate dried herbs, any species

      * Vape Pens– now reportedly successfully duplicate for cannabis what e-cigs do for tobacco

      * Cheap Handmade Long-Flexible-Drawtube One-Hitter– can be used to vaporize 25-mg servings in screened crater: just hold heat source the correct distance BELOW the opening while sucking, so that air entering is VAPE TEMP 385F/197C or thereabouts for cannabis, fifty points lower for most tobaccos, under 300F for hops etc.

      * Double-Drawtube One-Hitter– once the big excuse for paper roll “joints” was that they promoted a “sharing” activity– all that talk about “puff, pass” etc. With a DD1H two partners can:

      (A) load in 25 mg, like for any regular single toke

      (B) hold lighter flame far enough below

      (C) each suck twice as slow

      (D) each take half as much air

      (E) likely to be twice as mild per partner, health protective

      (F) serve twice as many tokes if needed

      * The above options permit Moderate Occupational Herb Use (MOHU)– with so much dosage-restriction safety built in, any employer should see advantage in encouraging it considering recent Surgeon General Report estimated $289-BIL. yearly damage to US economy from “smoking”-related illness, including medical costs and lost productivity.

      * For DIY handcrafting guides search “Long-Drawtube One-Hitter”.

    4. TheOracle says:

      @Demonhype, I’m all for putting a stake through the heart of the drug-testing industry. It’s a gigantic farce to purport drug-testing identifies people who are likely to rob the company blind to support their addictions. That simply does not hold up. Employees who will Never test positive steal from companies all the time, and for various reasons: to get back at the company for something, because they don’t pay a living wage in the first place, just to make a buck, whatever. If mere drug-testing for nicotine and whatever were the answer, that would be the panacea, and there would be no need for surveillance, audits or stings.

      I agree, you have to hit them in the pocketbook, wean them off the government subsidies.

      I firmly believe that we need much better cleansing and flush drinks to flush out the marijuana metabolites and some chemicals that will adhere to the metabolites and flush them out faster, and not be detectable in the assay tests, dip-in-the piss tests and other piss tests. The marijuana community needs to get ahead of the piss testers on all fronts, subsidies removed and rendering the piss tests as useless because of the new flushes and drinks to protect cannabis consumers.

      Why would companies continue to pay for tests that are useless if I can buy a high-tech cleanse drink a day before having to take a piss test for a job and the piss test is negative for weed?

      The cannabis community needs to use some of its millions to go high-tech on cleanses, really high-tech. Where are our canna-geniuses?

    5. Demonhype says:

      @TheOracle: “How about this for agitprop: Operation What a Pisser?!” I LOVE the way you think! I was just thinking of a letter writing campaign to companies that drug test, informing them of the facts and that drug testing is no longer getting them any public relation points–quite the opposite–coupled with a massive effort on our parts to avoid spending money in companies/stores/businesses that drug test (something I’ve been doing for years). And perhaps a letter writing campaign to companies that don’t drug test to congratulate them on their wise decision, back it up with some information just in case the piss-sniffers show up at their doors with the hard sell, with an assurance that they will always have our business if they continue to respect the rights of their workers.

      Now this piss-mailing idea is good too, with the emphasis on sending it to legislators. But what are the specific demands? Perhaps that the government stop allowing private businesses to deduct the cost of drug testing from their taxes, to remove the tax breaks for engaging in essentially free taxpayer-funded drug testing services, and/or eliminate the taxpayer-funded subsidization of worker’s comp insurance that goes on in some states?

      I think both could work, in conjunction with each other, and we need to get a lot of ideas like this on how to pressure private and public entities to abandon drug testing. As the Drug War dies, legalization becomes increasingly widespread, support for the Drug War’s failed policies flatlines, and more and more people are willing to talk about these issues outside of a “Just Say No” context, I think we can take advantage of the times to press the agenda of ending drug testing for once and for all.

      And yes, they’ve been expanding drug testing to tobacco. I do not think that will last, especially if we push this issue. The only reason they’ve been able to force drug testing as far as they have is because they’re “getting the bad guys/drug addicts”, and we do have a precedent for banning physical violations of employees by employers as a condition of employment/continued employment. It’s called the Employee Polygraph Protection Act, and if you know a damn thing about polygraphs you’ll probably have an idea why it’s illegal for your employer to force you to take a polygraph test. Because it has about the same validity as a drug test.

      Then there are the many states that are making it illegal for your employer to require your username and password for your private email and internet accounts to allow your employer to monitor your activity on your own time. Why should that be illegal while intimate physical search and seizure is not, especially since it’s for the same reason: so your employer can ensure you’re not doing anything they don’t personally like on your own personal time.

      If we can push this conversation and make the truth about the fraud of drug testing more widespread, the drug testing industry’s desperate attempt to stay relevant by expanding to tobacco won’t mean anything. Seriously, even the drug testing industry has seen which way the wind is blowing many years ago, which is why it expanded to things like tobacco, in order to create a precedent for testing for legal substances in an attempt to keep its industry in business.

      Anyway, I think if we can keep the pressure up to eliminate subsidies for drug testing, lob as many lawsuits against drug testing as possible in places that MJ is legal, raise awareness among the public about the truth of drug testing and make it clear to employers that drug testing is a detriment to their ability to turn a buck, we can overcome this BS.

    Leave a Reply