neki je govora da bo švica novembra tega leta legalizirala/dekriminalizirala hemp
The Federal Constitution is amended as follows:
Article 105a (new) Hemp
1st The consumption of psychoactive substances of the hemp plant as well as their possession and purchase for their own are unpunished.
2nd The cultivation of hemp psychoaktivem for their own criminal is free.
3rd The federal government shall adopt rules on cultivation, production, import and export of and trafficking in psychotropic substances of the hemp plant.
4th The federal government will take reasonable steps to ensure that minors are adequately met. Advertising for psychoactive substances of the hemp plant as well as advertising for dealing with such substances are prohibited.
The drafting of necessary laws or regulations in detail is the responsibility of the Parliament. While this must be the above-mentioned article implement, but has some leeway here. For example, it is clear that where now no longer be allowed to smoke, no sure future hemp smoking.
Federal referenda, 30 November Drug policy in the People's bench Hanfinitiative and referendum against the Narcotics Act. The Swiss vote on 30 November on a new drug policy.
The Swiss vote on 30 November on a new drug policy. At the end of November, the Hanfinitiative and the referendum against the revised Law on Narcotics vote. The sovereign can therefore separately for cannabis decriminalization and legal roots of the Four Pillars drug policy approach (including medical heroin charge) observations. Federal referenda, 30 November se The Swiss voters tend not to know, radical solutions. Thus, it is also in the drug policy in the late 1990s, both popular for more repression ( "Youth without Drugs") as well as vice versa for far-reaching criminal exemption ( "Droleg") clearly rejected. Beelendet images of open drug scenes, said the sovereign 1999, however, clearly yes to reverse federal decision on the medical heroin charge. Since then, the Swiss based drug policy on pragmatism and a sense Notrecht. Because the experiment, since the 1980s, developed policies on the four pillars of prevention, treatment, harm reduction and repression by law to enshrine, has so far failed - not the voters, but at the parliament. Display . . The ruins Well it's four years ago that the National Assembly session in the summer of 2004, the Federal template for a revision of the Narcotics Act (BetmG) bachab has skillfully - he joined not only on the template. The Federal Council subsequently withdrew from the responsibility and left it to the Parliament, the ruins themselves clean up. On the basis of a parliamentary initiative nationalrätlichen Health Commission is also done - but under exclusion of cannabis controversial issue. This was in a referendum initiative so that voters now coming on 30th November on two separate templates are can have a partial revision of the Narcotics Act (BetmG), which the Four Pillars drug policy concept enshrined in law, as well as on the so-called Hanfinitiative what the decriminalization of cannabis when required. The position of the NZZ The position of the NZZ zz. The NZZ recommends both the revised narcotics law as well as the Hanfinitiative for adoption. From experience that there is a drug-free society will never give, followed by the realization that a just built bans on drug policy must fail. Otherwise, as our opponents of the two templates weismachen want to exist in reality, not just addiction and abstinence, but in between lies a broad field of risk to highly risky consumption of psychoactive substances - are now illegal drugs, drugs, alcohol or Tobacco. Thus, the strict separation between legal and illegal substances unhelpful, the addiction problem at the root to grasp. Experts recommend that the policy has long been a sensible balance between the respect for the citizenship and the right of society to security and order are looking for. The revised narcotics law as well as the Hanfinitiative thus, at least in the right direction. A purely on abstinence, prohibitions and repression established drug policy on the other hand, the bottom line leads to higher social costs - and it is unliberal, because in this concept for the people responsible for closing is no more space. Firstly, the Narcotics Act: With this revision, the Commission for Social Security and Health of the National Council the supposedly "undisputed" elements of the 2004 revision of failed new hang up. The presentation describes the coarse measures of the Four Pillars policy and determines the distribution of tasks between the federal government (coordination, monitoring) and Canton (implementation) notes. Furthermore, the treatment of heroin definitely be enshrined in law - the federal decision this term expires at the end of 2009. The new template allows the medical use of narcotic drugs, such as cannabinoids agents at multiple sclerosis. Regarding the criminal provisions of the revision, however, sees no far-reaching changes. There are tighter in the protection of minors and vice versa mitigating circumstances for dependent retail dealer: From a criminal liberalization, as the opponents complain, you can take this mini revision no talk of that. The presentation was in the National final with 114 against 68 votes approved, the Senate unanimously said yes. The fractions of FDP, CVP, SP and Greens stood behind the revision, while by the EDU and the SVP has taken the referendum. For the opponents, the "liberalization" too far, the goal of abstinence (which is explicitly included in the article purpose was) too little will be taken into account. Specifically, the opponents reject any charge of narcotics to addicts from. They fear a compulsion to set up drug focal points in the cantons and also criticize the prosecution of trade through the revision would be difficult. On the other hand, the proponents of the submission to the success of the Swiss drug policy, both in terms of the health of those affected as well as the security and order in public spaces is concerned. The heroin supply and medical services for low-addicts (Fixerstübli, syringes, etc.) would have the negative consequences of drug use markedly reduced. Hanfinitiative Before the cannabis issue has been pressed the Parliament - despite pressure from the people's initiative "for a sensible policy with hemp-effective protection of minors" (Hanfinitiative), which was filed in January 2006. The members of the Health Commission wanted through an indirect counter-proposal from the criminal free use of cannabis for adults to BetmG record, but it is the resistance of the National Commission sister failed. Federal Parliament and thus recommend the Hanfinitiative without a counter-proposal to rejection. The desire one wants to use, possession, cultivation and acquisition of cannabis entkriminalisieren, on the other hand, the federal government to regulate production and trade and to ensure the protection of minors. The initiative is according to the Federal Council with international commitments, provided that the terms of regulation of production and trade is a solution within the meaning of the so-called prioritization at the prosecution would be pursued. The wording in Hanfinitiative The wording in Hanfinitiative The federal se people's initiative "for a sensible policy with hemp-effective protection of minors' demands following the Federal Supplement: Article 105a (new) Hemp 1 The consumption of psychoactive substances of the hemp plant as well as their possession and purchase for their own are unpunished. 2 The cultivation of hemp psychoaktivem for their own criminal is free. 3 The federal government shall adopt rules on cultivation, production, import and export of and trafficking in psychotropic substances of the hemp plant. 4 The federal government will take reasonable steps to ensure that minors are adequately met. Advertising for psychoactive substances of the hemp plant as well as advertising for dealing with such substances are prohibited. The cross-initiative committee "Pro minors - against drug crime" argues with the ineffectiveness of bans, only to the high costs resulted in the prosecution and also promoted organized crime. Production, trafficking and consumption of cannabis could be legal only in a controlled environment, the initiative also quit the arbitrariness in the enforcement of the cantons. On the other hand, the opponents argue, the initiative trivialize the use of cannabis and send wrong signals to the youth from. They also warn against problems that may arise for parents and teachers alone. The National Council said representatives of the SVP, the CVP and a majority of the FDP group against the initiative - the liberal later, however, have their delegates to the just-Yes Parole decided. For the initiative to put SP, Green and minorities from the bourgeois series. In the Senate joined the initiative on a lot of understanding among representatives of all parties. The Council decided but with a narrow majority, rejected the initiative - although he whose contents still a few years earlier had advocated.
plants growing out of my ass