Marijuana.com

Lit_Match

House bill would outlaw the sale of marijuana-flavored candy to minors
02.03.07|ASSOCIATED PRESS|By Greg Bluestein

Georgia lawmakers are trying to weed out businesses that sell candy flavored like marijuana to minors.

A measure introduced Friday would ban retailers from selling lollipops, gumdrops or other candy flavored to taste like the drug.

The legislation is aimed at businesses that sell products with drug-inspired names such as "Kronic Kandy" and "Pot Suckers," said state Rep. Judy Manning, R-Marietta.

"I think it's ridiculous," she said. "Why would you give somebody something to eat that's illegal?"

Marketers have called the treats a harmless novelty and many advise retailers to sell the candy only to adults. They say the candies are flavored with hemp essential oil, which gives them the oily, grassy taste of marijuana.

The legislation, however, says the candies promote drug use and give children the "false impression that marijuana is safe and fun." It would ban the sale of "marijuana flavored products" to minors and calls for a fine of up to $1,000 for each offense.

A broader effort was introduced in 2006 by state Sen. Vincent Fort, a Democrat from Atlanta who said he was outraged by the products. His measure would have banned all sales of the candy and punished violators with up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine for the second offense.

The measure never reached a vote in the Republican-controlled Senate.

Manning, a Republican who is vice chair of the House Children and Youth Committee, said her proposal may gain more momentum. "I hope this one will have a better chance," she said.

It could face a challenge from Vote Hemp, a national organization that promotes the use of hemp products. Tom Murphy, the group's national outreach coordinator, said the effort was "understandable" but added he was concerned about its reach.

"We want to make sure that legal hemp foods are not tarnished by this ban," he said.

 

Buzzby

Because it's not illegal? These candies contain no THC and therefore do not violate anti-marijuana laws. The question she should be asking is, "Why would you want to give somebody something to eat that tastes like something illegal?" The answer has two parts: 1) the market economy - filling a demand, 2) there is no legal precedent for prohibition based on flavor. Do we really want a Flavor Enforcement Administration?

__________________

Toking Jedi

Oh, law makers can be so cute sometimes when they go on the rampage. As much as she should ask that question, she's not going to because she's blinded by the climate surrounding drugs, which raises blood pressures and emotion levels. Of course, I'm sure you're familiar with all that, Buzzby.

__________________

reggie_the_dog

In the USA you have the 1st Amendment to the constitution. Its great. It protects these kind of sales from certain threats such as the following.

"The legislation, however, says the candies promote drug use and give children the "false impression that marijuana is safe and fun." It would ban the sale of "marijuana flavored products" to minors and calls for a fine of up to $1,000 for each offense."

Promoting drug use IS CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED FREE SPEECH IN THE USA, where I live now in France it is illegal in French law and Legal according to my rights as a resident of the European Union. This means that the local cops can bust you for running a magazine like high times, but that the European Commission will overturn the ruling. You do not pay a fine, but you burn up lawyers fees and suffer from being shut down for a year or more during the trial etc. as already happend here.

PROMOTING DRUG USE FOR MINORS IS NOT ILLEGAL IN THE USA. It is also extremely hard to prove, unless you specifically say "hey kids, go do drugs".


Additionally you do not give people a false impression when you suggest that marijuana is safe and fun. IT IS SAFE AND FUN!

Buzzby

I'm not aware of anyone bringing a constitutional challenge to such laws, but they've been enacted in several places. Sales is not the same as speech. You can tell someone how to build a nuclear weapon, but you can't sell them the plutonium.

I believe it's called "contributing to the delinquency of a minor" and is quite illegal.

 

reggie_the_dog

I agree that sales are not speech, but in this specific case the opposition raised is that the sales promote illegal drug use, well PROMOTING illegal drug use through selling a LEGAL product is probably covered by free speech (like a Cypress Hill CD), whereas promoting drug use by SELLING DRUGS would surely be illegal.

Promoting drug use for minors, by GIVING OR SELLING THEM DRUGS, is certainly considered "contributing to the delinquency", one could make the argument for papers and pipes as well because you need to be 18 to smoke tobacco in all states but Nevada (I think there is still no age in Nevada).

On the other hand promoting something by saying that you think it is good is usually covered by free speech (I think a teacher telling his students to go use illegal drugs can be repremanded because such an adult is in a "position of trust" and such a demand can be seen as "incitation" to commit a crime, and that can probably be punished like inciting a riot.) At the same time promoting something that SOUNDS like an illegal drug is probably once again covered by free speech in the USA. Consider that "root beer" is marketed to kids but it has the word "beer" in it and that the soda was marketed to replace beer during prohibition and you could say that its use is promoting the use of alcohol, but seeing as it is non-alcoholic it is not illegal.


"I'm not aware of anyone bringing a constitutional challenge to such laws, but they've been enacted in several places. Sales is not the same as speech. You can tell someone how to build a nuclear weapon, but you can't sell them the plutonium."

I am with you on this, in that sales are not necessarily free speech, but I would argue that industrial hemp is not a component needed to produce thc laden cannabis like plutonium is for making bombs.

Also I remember that in CANADA, Marc Emery SOLD high times illegally to get a case to overturn the Canadian ban on advocating drug use. Canada's free speech law was like that of the USA, a right that basically cannot be denied, even to restrict people from advocating breaking the law or to be racist. Here in France the actually right spelled out in the constitution says that free speech is so important that it cannot be infringed upon EXCEPT WHEN THEY GOVERNMENT DEEMS IT CAN BE INFRINGED UPON!!!! talk about an "Animal Farm" kind of law. Luckily I have the European Union treaties of Maastrich and Nice that specify that free speech is more important than any government reason for banning it. Enforcement of European Union law is tricky though, as there is no constitution per say, its more of a guideline to be followed, sort of like the Articles of Confederation, but there is a court called the European Commission that is there to defend my rights as a member of the European Union.
I still risk jail, though, for my books about growing cannabis that I brought over, as well as my high times magazine. I also need to smuggle in a copy of Mein Kamph as it is illegal (according to French law but not European Union law) here but a quite useful resource when teaching about Nazism and World War II.


Also a side note, cherish your freedom of speech in the USA.
People can get huge fines or jail time here just for saying that there was no mass killing of Jewish people during WWII. (I know the holocaust happend, I just think it is overblown to bust someone for talking like a fool in denying that it happened.) It is also a question of hypocracy seeing as the French government does not acknowledge that a "holocaust" occured during colonialism. (ask the colonized if they were not killed, robbed, and forced into being second class in their own lands). In fact our current right wing government passed a law in 2006 saying that history teachers must teach about the POSITIVE POINTS OF COLONIALISM as well as the negative. Luckily the teachers unions stepped in, ordered a strike, and the law was swept under a rug to be ignored (the French do this all the time instead of changing the law, as they have for their drug law that says any ammount of cannabis gets you 10 years in jail. You don't go to jail for use here, you rarely get fined, most of the time you may get scolded, its not even sure that they will take your hash away from you. Hell even big time smugglers found with hundreds of kilos do not do 10 years.)