Holland's New Marijuana Laws Are Changing Old Amsterdam

[Jacob Redmond]

The last time Derrick Bergman came to Amsterdam to buy cannabis, he did so behind a locked door with a long, thick curtain obscuring his activity from the canal-lined residential street outside, in the quiet Lastage neighborhood. The secretary of the Netherlands’s Union for the Abolition of Cannabis Prohibition, Bergman comes here to weekly gatherings of a two-month-old—and seriously clandestine—“cannabis social club” called the Tree of Life, because it’s the only place in town he can find one of his favorite strains: Super Silver Haze.

Since 1976, authorities across the Netherlands have chosen to openly ignore that cannabis use is illegal here, and they prosecute no one in possession of less than five grams of marijuana for personal use. The policy, called gedoogbeleid, is known as the “Dutch model,” and it’s why hundreds of “coffee shops” sprung up across Amsterdam and the Netherlands, luring marijuana connoisseurs from across the globe to one of the few places they could roll and smoke a joint without fear. But that’s no longer the case.

Cannabis with more than 15 percent of the THC that makes it intoxicating is now under consideration to be reclassified as one of the “hard drugs” that come with stiff penalties. The government has also forced coffee shops where marijuana is sold to choose between alcohol and pot, prompting many to choose the former. Amsterdam once played host to nearly 300 coffee shops, of more than 1,000 scattered across the country. There are now fewer than 200 in the city and only 617 nationwide. While it’s always been illegal to grow marijuana in the Netherlands, authorities passively allow coffee shops to sell weed, often pretending not to know where the shops’ cannabis comes from.

But no longer. New laws target even the smallest of marijuana growers in Holland. In the past, people could grow up to five plants without fear of retribution. In 2011, the government issued new police guidelines and declared anyone who grew with electric lights, prepared soil, “selected” seeds or ventilation would be considered “professional.” It’s a significant change, as professional growers risk major penalties, including eviction and blacklisting from the government-provided housing in which more than half of the country’s citizens reside.

The result: Coffee shops are increasingly buying buds from criminal organizations willing to absorb the risk of prosecution by growing large amounts of cannabis in shipping containers buried underground, with little regard for quality or mold abatement. “It’s amazing how bad the quality has become,” says Bergman. “And the price is up. It’s what we’ve all predicted.”

That’s why Bergman traveled from his native Eindhoven to Amsterdam on a recent Monday, both to convene with other activists and to pick up five grams (the legal limit) of Super Silver Haze. Because the club is not-for-profit, its members can focus their efforts on finding and buying the best product and providing it to their members at much better prices than the coffee shops.

Modeled after a proliferation of similar establishments in Spain, the social clubs offer a new way to subvert the harsher laws. As in Holland, cannabis is illegal in Spain, but the government doesn’t prosecute anyone for personal consumption and there’s no implicit limit on the number of plants a person can grow, meaning the government doesn’t care if you grow one plant or 15. In fact, signs point to the government not caring at all. Barcelona is developing a reputation as “the new Amsterdam,” meaning the old Amsterdam is losing out on a significant source of revenue: drug tourists.

Inside an Amsterdam coffee shop called The Rookies, 22-year-old John Bell rolls a spliff of tobacco and a strain called Dutch Kashmir, which Bell can’t find in his native Liverpool. Bell has been to Amsterdam 11 times in the past three years, not because it’s hard to find weed in the U.K., but because the quality here is better. He wouldn’t visit the city at all if not for these coffee shops and Amsterdam’s quasi-legal cannabis, adding: “It’s too expensive to drink here, for a proper night out.”

Such drug tourists represent a major element of the city’s economy. The union of coffee shops in Maastricht commissioned research in 2008 that found foreign visitors to the city’s coffee shops spent money in other businesses there as well: €140 million (approximately $170 million) annually. It’s a significant number and one of the reasons government officials in Amsterdam have fought to keep the coffee shops from going out of business.

About a third of all visitors to Amsterdam step into one of its coffee shops at some point; nationally, the number is one in five. Banning such visitors would hit tourism revenues hard, chasing off travelers who tend to be well-behaved. “If you’re really a deadbeat hippie punk, a no-money kind of guy, how are you going to afford a ticket to Amsterdam?” Bergman says.

Cities such as Maastricht, on the other hand, have banned foreigners from coffee shops since 2005. The result, insists Bergman and other critics, is a proliferation of street dealers. People still come from neighboring countries to score marijuana, but now they stock up and head back home in a day, instead of spending any time in local hotels and restaurants.

How did Holland get here? Some trace the backlash to 9/11. The world’s global panic about terrorism in the wake of the attacks on New York City and Washington led to a surge in the power of conservative political parties in places as far away as the Netherlands. Ever since Holland’s People’s Party for Liberty and Democracy began to consolidate influence here, its leaders have pushed for zero tolerance drug laws. “Our last prime minister [Jan Peter Balkenende] believed in his heart that weed comes from Satan,” says Mila Jansen, a legendary figure in Amsterdam, who once invented a way to make hash in a washing machine.

Other factors influencing the government crackdown are pressure from outside nations, especially France, which has pushed the International Narcotics Control board to sanction Holland for violating international treaties on drug laws with its permissive pot policy. Ironic, argues Bergman, because the rate of marijuana use is twice as high in France as it is in the Netherlands, and Holland has one of the lowest number of drug-related deaths in Europe.

“Hard drugs are still illegal in Holland, but we also see that there are still many people who want to try drugs on occasion,” said the city’s mayor, Eberhard van der Laan, in a statement provided to Newsweek. “This is a reality we cannot ignore. And this is one of the key principles to our country’s drug policies: Drug use is first and foremost an issue of public health. By not focusing on the criminal aspects of drug use, as is the case in many other countries, we can be more effective when it comes to informing the public, testing drugs and prevention.”

Unfortunately, van der Laan’s federal counterparts don’t agree. They also don’t see that prohibition amounts to little more than, as they say here, “mopping with the tap on.”

Now, activists like Bergman are trying to convince Holland to consider the American model—the legalization and regulation of all components of marijuana cultivation and sale. Citing Oregon’s law, which allows residents to grow as many as four plants, Bergman says: “I’m sort of jealous.”

That’s because America seems to be learning from Holland’s mistakes. Holland’s passive-aggressive policy doesn’t stop illicit activity or drug tourism or make anyone safer, say activists: It actually has the reverse effect. Quasi-legalization leaves too many entry points for criminals to line their own pockets from the drug trade. State by state, the U.S. is legalizing pot with initiatives that clearly spell out who is allowed to manufacture, distribute and consume it. That’s the key to a successful policy, and it’s one Dutch activists are now working to implement in their own country, before things swing too far the other way.

News Moderator: Jacob Redmond 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Holland's New Marijuana Laws Are Changing Old Amsterdam
Author: Courtney Kerrigan andJeff Ashworth
Contact: Contact
Photo Credit: None Found
Website: Newsweek

 

[GangaKing]

That's sad, to see Holland going down hill like this. And France having the balls to preach when it can't keep it's own house in order. What a world!

 

[SW420]

Cannabis with more than 15 percent of the THC that makes it intoxicating is now under consideration to be reclassified as one of the “hard drugs” that come with stiff penalties. The government has also forced coffee shops where marijuana is sold to choose between alcohol and pot, prompting many to choose the former. Amsterdam once played host to nearly 300 coffee shops, of more than 1,000 scattered across the country. There are now fewer than 200 in the city and only 617 nationwide. While it’s always been illegal to grow marijuana in the Netherlands, authorities passively allow coffee shops to sell weed, often pretending not to know where the shops’ cannabis comes from.

This has got to be one of the stupidest laws ever. It's not even like the difference between beer and vodka because vodka can easily have 45 percent alcohol which is about 8 to 10 times the alcohol as beer. But if you go into a liquor store they don't have a different set of laws if you want to buy vodka instead of beer. How can regulatory authorities bitch about the THC content? Higher THC counts are healthier because you don't burn or vape so much of the plant to get the dose you require.

But no longer. New laws target even the smallest of marijuana growers in Holland. In the past, people could grow up to five plants without fear of retribution. In 2011, the government issued new police guidelines and declared anyone who grew with electric lights, prepared soil, “selected” seeds or ventilation would be considered “professional.” It’s a significant change, as professional growers risk major penalties, including eviction and blacklisting from the government-provided housing in which more than half of the country’s citizens reside.

People grow lettuce and other non-drug plants indoors with lights, good soil, and selected seeds. If you grow one marijuana plant in your grow facility full of food you are considered a professional grower? Give me break. This is an example of how stupid legislators that know nothing are able to make ridiculous decisions.

The result: Coffee shops are increasingly buying buds from criminal organizations willing to absorb the risk of prosecution by growing large amounts of cannabis in shipping containers buried underground, with little regard for quality or mold abatement. “It’s amazing how bad the quality has become,” says Bergman. “And the price is up. It’s what we’ve all predicted.”

The is all to easy to predict. We who've dealt with prohibition for most of our lives know all too well what happens. The underlying problem is that prohibition is more lucrative for law enforcement than legalization. It's one of the major ways they pay for all the expensive hardware, gear, and equipment they use to detect and prosecute crime.

They make war on a minority of the population who are not strong enough in numbers to defeat them, then they demonize the minority group (cannabis users) through the press, turn the public against that minority, and then prosecute the hell out of them to scare the public (including employers) into treating the minority group as outcasts, derelicts, and dopers. That is how bureaucracy screws its voters over so they extract more money from voters, survive as a bureaucracy, grow a strong enforcement division, and get rich in the process. It's at the expense of the people who would otherwise be working to make America stronger.

The bureaucrats deliberately exploit the people they are supposed to serve and then they bitch about how they are inundated with so many demands. Give people back their power of choice and they won't feel like they have to fight the government every day of their lives.

For example: If Steve Jobs had been drug tested at Apple he'd have been fired. Apple has a strict policy to terminate anyone who even possesses cannabis much less uses it. They only have a provision for medical users and it's not a right -- it's a review based process they can still fire or refuse to hire someone who needs that provision. How many genius business people have been prevented from rising in the ranks at Apple, or in any major corporation, due to cannabis use or especially from a criminal record due to cannabis use?

Modeled after a proliferation of similar establishments in Spain, the social clubs offer a new way to subvert the harsher laws. As in Holland, cannabis is illegal in Spain, but the government doesn’t prosecute anyone for personal consumption and there’s no implicit limit on the number of plants a person can grow, meaning the government doesn’t care if you grow one plant or 15. In fact, signs point to the government not caring at all. Barcelona is developing a reputation as “the new Amsterdam,” meaning the old Amsterdam is losing out on a significant source of revenue: drug tourists.

I was planning a trip there myself as a bud tourist. Looks like Spain is a much better choice. Cancel Holland.

Such drug tourists represent a major element of the city’s economy. The union of coffee shops in Maastricht commissioned research in 2008 that found foreign visitors to the city’s coffee shops spent money in other businesses there as well: €140 million (approximately $170 million) annually. It’s a significant number and one of the reasons government officials in Amsterdam have fought to keep the coffee shops from going out of business.

Notice how that stream of money is now being diverted into the prohibition program. Lot's more busts, lots more money for enforcement. You gotta fight hard to kill this monster once it infiltrates the PD because when the busts, arrests, and money from them start rolling in, it's like heroin to the bureaucrats and enforcement junkies. Even more ironic is that many who enforce and also many bureaucrats who are living from the money they got from prohibition -- to indulge themselves in the substance whose prohibition earned them the money they are now spending.

Cities such as Maastricht, on the other hand, have banned foreigners from coffee shops since 2005. The result, insists Bergman and other critics, is a proliferation of street dealers. People still come from neighboring countries to score marijuana, but now they stock up and head back home in a day, instead of spending any time in local hotels and restaurants.

I'm beginning to think this is a good thing. We can watch Holland deteriorate with an increase of drug dealers and illegal growers. The world can watch and see both sides of prohibition at the same time in this reversal in Holland. Cannabis was NOT a social problem under Holland's previous approach to enforcement. Now it has become one that will definitely get worse in direct proportion to the stiffness of their enforcement.

How did Holland get here? Some trace the backlash to 9/11. The world’s global panic about terrorism in the wake of the attacks on New York City and Washington led to a surge in the power of conservative political parties in places as far away as the Netherlands. Ever since Holland’s People’s Party for Liberty and Democracy began to consolidate influence here, its leaders have pushed for zero tolerance drug laws. “Our last prime minister [Jan Peter Balkenende] believed in his heart that weed comes from Satan,” says Mila Jansen, a legendary figure in Amsterdam, who once invented a way to make hash in a washing machine.

The irony of that is that, while there are a minority of Christians who believe in prohibition the reality is that the majority do not. Some of my best friends are Christian and not one of them believes in prohibition. Now even my 88 year old dad occasionally uses cannabis with no medical reason for it. This is the same dad who flew into a rage when, as a kid of about 14, had merely suggested that perhaps drugs were not as dangerous as people think.

Other factors influencing the government crackdown are pressure from outside nations, especially France, which has pushed the International Narcotics Control board to sanction Holland for violating international treaties on drug laws with its permissive pot policy. Ironic, argues Bergman, because the rate of marijuana use is twice as high in France as it is in the Netherlands, and Holland has one of the lowest number of drug-related deaths in Europe.

If Holland continues to bow to pressure from France they will also have the kind of problems that France has. Unfortunately Holland has not lived under prohibition long enough to feel the societal burden that criminalizing their constituents will have on their society. Ironic also that you write about right wing activists being responsible for these laws while also citing France in the same paragraph -- a country whose politics don't even have a right wing voice. At least not anything we call "right wing". Their most right wing party is farther left than US Democrats are.

“Hard drugs are still illegal in Holland, but we also see that there are still many people who want to try drugs on occasion,” said the city’s mayor, Eberhard van der Laan, in a statement provided to Newsweek. “This is a reality we cannot ignore. And this is one of the key principles to our country’s drug policies: Drug use is first and foremost an issue of public health. By not focusing on the criminal aspects of drug use, as is the case in many other countries, we can be more effective when it comes to informing the public, testing drugs and prevention.”

So why has Holland toughened up enforcement of criminal policies? Maybe this mayor should run for the PM's job.

Unfortunately, van der Laan’s federal counterparts don't agree. They also don't see that prohibition amounts to little more than, as they say here, “mopping with the tap on.”

It's been well proven that criminalizing the use of drugs makes the social problem with drugs more devastating than the original reasons for taking drugs in the first place. Unfortunately these days we must prove something that common sense would accept prima facie.

Now, activists like Bergman are trying to convince Holland to consider the American model—the legalization and regulation of all components of marijuana cultivation and sale. Citing Oregon’s law, which allows residents to grow as many as four plants, Bergman says: “I’m sort of jealous.”

While the American Model sounds great -- it's pretty lame actually. Washington and Colorado are still at odds with the Federal Government. Obama has not kept his promise to legalize or decriminalize. In the US we probably need a sensible right wing leader to make the decision Obama is afraid to deal with. He says he doesn't have time for it. Right. Possibly the single most impactful decision on American health and Obama doesn't have time for it? I cry foul on that BS.

That’s because America seems to be learning from Holland’s mistakes. Holland’s passive-aggressive policy doesn’t stop illicit activity or drug tourism or make anyone safer, say activists: It actually has the reverse effect. Quasi-legalization leaves too many entry points for criminals to line their own pockets from the drug trade. State by state, the U.S. is legalizing pot with initiatives that clearly spell out who is allowed to manufacture, distribute and consume it. That’s the key to a successful policy, and it’s one Dutch activists are now working to implement in their own country, before things swing too far the other way.

It may look that way from the outside but Americans are still embroiled in stupid arguments by influential people who are poorly informed but think they are making sense. Most of it is like the protests that people OOOOh and AAAAAH about like "there's too much THC in that cannabis". Give me a break. When has the government restricted non-minors from buying booze with higher concentrations of alcohol?

Other stupid things like up in Canada the government recently attacked one of the licensed providers for selling pot with too much THC. The THC was tested by the company and it came out as about 15 percent. Someone got a batch of the same stuff that tested for 17 percent. Who would complain about that? What makes that unsafe? Nothing. Users are used to testing new product and most titrate by inhalation (smoke or vapor) so that if the 2 percent difference (most users (if not all) would not detect a difference of 2 percent if you blindfolded them so they didn't know. I could go on and on but the point I'm making should be obvious. Stupid arguments by people who don't understand the issues are also involved in regulation and should not be.

Taking scientists straight from the pharmaceutical world seldom helps because they are trained to create molecules that strip out everything in a plant but the specific ingredient that has been identified as the "active ingredient". They don't understand the mentality of holistic medicine though they consider their knowledge and training vastly superior to those in alternative medicine. Therefore most of them refuse to learn from their holistically trained counterparts.

Unfortunately these kind of people have much more power over the legislative process because of their heft. Manufacturing drugs is arguably the most lucrative business on the planet and, in spite of that fact, the manufacturers are afraid of a less expensive, grow it yourself, alternative. Why? Because it's vastly superior to most of the drugs that treat similar conditions and it's mainly superior only in it's whole form. So far every drug that has been synthesized from Cannabis, such as Sativex, or emulating cannabinoids, such as Nabilone, are not as useful or effective as a nicely grown bud of cannabis.

Sativex is outrageously expensive. One 25mg vial costs about 370.00 and up. One vial provides ten - 2.5 mg oral sprays. They consider 1 days dose to be about 8 to 12 sprays. That's 300.00 to 350.00 per day folks. I obtained a prescription for it but cannot justify paying that much for it. That same 300 buys me almost 2 ounces of medical cannabis (testing 24.x percent THC) that contains 1/2 an ounce (>14 grams) of pure THC. At 2 grams per day that's a months supply for the price of 1 day supply of Sativex.

Three vials of Sativex, totalling 25 mg per vial, amounts to a mere 75 mgm of THC and slightly less CBD. The thing that it has most going for it is the CBD. Sativex has equal amounts CBD and THC. I've never seen cannabis with both 24 percent THC and 24 percent CBD though I've seen cannabis with roughly equal amounts of each of the two cannabinoids.

That's the only upside I can see with it but I can't see how it's worth it considering I can buy candies with 25 mg THC for about 7.00 to 10.00. All I'd need to do is add other candies with CBD's to bring the CBD roughly equal with the THC level. Still it would not cost me more than 50 dollars (and probably WAY less) by buying candies to get the same amount of THC and CBD's as Sativex.

It's people like the creators of Sativex that are also influencing our legislative process. They could easily sell their product a lot cheaper and make it more accessible but they are not thinking in those terms. They focussed on just one affliction (MS), one that's so painful that you'd gladly go bankrupt just to escape the pain. They have a captive market with Sativex. They are profiting in much the same way as heroin dealers. They know that getting rid of pain when someone has MS is something they'll commit crimes, if they have to, just to ease their pain and functionality.

Again these are the kind of people that are creating much of the legislation we lobby for. No wonder the American model is a disaster despite the great progress they are making. We have a president who didn't keep his word. We voted him in because he knew he could grab more of the younger vote by making some noise about legalizing cannabis. However he let everyone down on that point. In fact he even introduced more punitive responses.

Personally I think the Portugal approach has been by far the best model. They have legalized all drugs and treat drug dependence strictly as a social issue. Drug use has dropped dramatically and so has crime. The budget for drug abuse is entirely thrown into the health plan where it belongs. Bureaucrats should be looking at how much money cannabis can save them in health care costs. How much it would save in doctors visits for minor aches and pains that people without cannabis for temporary relief would be running to the doctor instead.

Ten Years Ago Portugal Legalized All Drugs -- What Happened Next? | Alternet

Ceasing to criminalize people who want to improve their health, their sense of well-being, and their ability to function normally is the most obvious solution. Criminalizing it is possibly the most damaging social error we've ever made. Some just want a form of recreation that is not as toxic as any other drug including caffeine.

As always it seems that the short term financial benefits of prohibition are the only thing the politicians are focussed on. If Steve Jobs had been caught and prosecuted for cannabis use he'd probably have been prevented from taking Apple public unless he resigned his post as a director.

How many are there, whose life was destroyed by a criminal record only because they got caught? They have committed no crime greater than the one Steve Jobs or president Obama has himself committed when he admitted to using pot as well as inhaling it? How many great companies, athletes, artists, and so on, have not been created for this very reason?

How many have been prevented from great achievements because they medicated as a teenager? Perfectly harmless people now prevented from many of the kinds of achievements they'd have been genius at were they not disqualified by a criminal record.

A criminal record where the only victim was the person with the cannabis. Their victimization occurred only because a ruthless and insidious group of bureaucrats who are too money hungry to act in the public interest saw a lucrative opportunity. An opportunity that comes at the expense of destroying or seriously limiting the future of a significant percentage of the population.

We are punished because the drugs the establishment has made are not as well designed as naturally occurring cannabis. They demonize and prevent the public from discovering this important fact for financial gain. Greed is the problem not cannabis.

PS. Damn I'm sorry I did not realize I'd ranted so long. Please forgive the wordiness. I'd distill it but that would take longer and I have to get some things done. Please don't copy this entire post if you comment on part of it.

 

[DrRootswell]

One step forward 2 steps back. Now in Ohio we have this group of Johnny come latelies rich white men who could really give a shit less about us and our last 40 years struggle for decency and reasonableness, to be citizens for crying out loud who want to hijack the whole thing for personal gain and add to their already bloated wallets at our expense. Support NORML do not support Allegedly ResponsibleOhio, who are a bunch of frigging thieves with interests in only creating a monopoly and cashing in without any of the struggle and suffering we have endured.

 

[Radogast]

Just a small note about alcohol percentage...many states in the US treat wine and beer differently from " hard liqour"
Different licenses for restaurants, different age limits for who can be in bars of go to concerts where hard layout is sold, what can be songs at sorts venues, etc.

I support your passion. The argument that different strengths of alcohol after not treated differently is weak.

It is a shame Holland's centuries long tradition of live and let live is weakening.

 

[SW420]

Just a small note about alcohol percentage...many states in the US treat wine and beer differently from " hard liqour"
Different licenses for restaurants, different age limits for who can be in bars of go to concerts where hard layout is sold, what can be songs at sorts venues, etc.

I support your passion. The argument that different strengths of alcohol after not treated differently is weak.

It is a shame Holland's centuries long tradition of live and let live is weakening.

Ya I gave that argument some thought but I didn't bother to say anything because it's not a parallel argument. As long as I am of legal age in a jurisdiction I can possess legally purchased alcohol products of any concentration -- even pure alcohol is not illegal to possess if you are of legal age. There are a few states that have banned everclear alcohol even though you can buy vodka with the same proof and no restriction. So that actually makes my argument stronger.

When you make reference to serving alcohol to the public the reasons for those restrictions are about safety in handling, storing, and serving the products. This is not about banning high alcohol content products because they contain more alcohol. It's about making sure that establishments that are safely storing and serving the products.

In the jurisdiction I'm currently in you must put in a full sprinkler system if you are serving highly flammable products like hard liquor. You don't need the degree of fire prevention statutes in a beer and wine only facility. Facilities that sell beer/wine normally allow minors to sit with adults.

Facilities with full liquor licenses normally do not allow minors in the bar section of these facilities. Again it's about safety not about banning the sale of 90 proof vodka. It's about safe handling, transporting, storing, and serving it. A child could die from a shot of 190 proof. No child is going to die from 24 percent thc vs 15 percent thc.

None of these issues apply with cannabis because it is not intoxicating. There isn't a different level of danger with 24 percent or 15 percent THC. Actually I take that back. The weed with the lower concentration means I have to inhale a lot more of the plant by products to get the same pain reduction. I think this makes a good case that the 24 percent is actually safer from a health perspective.