T
The420Guy
Guest
In November, the D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project aired an interesting
television ad, comparing Nevada teens to teens in Amsterdam.
On one side, the split-screen ad featured somber Nevada teens wearing
T-shirts reading 67 percent. The other side spotlighted some cheery Dutch
kids wearing T-shirts that read 28 percent.
The message: Two-thirds of Nevada high school seniors have taken a toke of
marijuana, while more than two-thirds of Dutch teens haven't. While some
could see the ad as anti-drug because it draws alarm to teen drug use, the
MPP is a group that staunchly supports the legalization of marijuana.
Its view is this: marijuana is not legal in the Netherlands, but its
government makes a conscious decision not to enforce marijuana possession
laws. The Dutch government has placed restrictions on marijuana's sale and
use, including age restrictions. Regulating marijuana by taking it off the
street makes it harder for kids to obtain marijuana, said Krissy Oechslin,
MPP's assistant director of communications.
"The Netherlands is a good example of how regulating the sale and use of
marijuana can reduce teen use, as opposed to the U.S., which refuses to
regulate marijuana and basically creates a free-for-all where anyone can
get it," Oechslin said. "Drug dealers don't card people who want to buy
from them."
Like with most dishonorable rankings, Nevada's percentage was one of the
worst in the country with teen marijuana use -- an obvious reason MPP
targeted the Silver State.
"The numbers of lifetime use of marijuana by teens is particularly shocking
with Nevada," Oechslin said. "We chose Nevada's 67 percent because it is
such a great contrast with the Netherlands."
The MPP only aired the ad in Reno, but Oechslin said the group is currently
evaluating its success and impact. Based on the findings, the MPP will
decide whether to run the ad elsewhere in the state. The group would not
disclose the cost of the campaign.
Oechslin noted that her organization has no immediate political plans in
Nevada for the 2004 election season. The ad was simply a public education
campaign.
Last year, the MPP lead the surge to legalize marijuana in Nevada,
funneling $2 million into promoting Question 9. The ballot initiative -- if
it was successful in 2002 and again in 2004 -- would have nixed the threat
of arrest for responsible marijuana use, or possession of up to three
ounces. It also looked to implement a government system to obtain marijuana
through a regulated market, and impose penalties for marijuana abuse, such
as driving under the influence and providing it to minors.
The campaign failed as 61 percent Nevada voters were against the measure.
Pubdate: Thu, 25 Dec 2003
Source: Las Vegas City Life (NV)
Webpage: Lasvegascitylife.com
news03.txt
Copyright: 2003sLas Vegas City Life
Contact: obrien@lvpress.com
Website: Lasvegascitylife.com
television ad, comparing Nevada teens to teens in Amsterdam.
On one side, the split-screen ad featured somber Nevada teens wearing
T-shirts reading 67 percent. The other side spotlighted some cheery Dutch
kids wearing T-shirts that read 28 percent.
The message: Two-thirds of Nevada high school seniors have taken a toke of
marijuana, while more than two-thirds of Dutch teens haven't. While some
could see the ad as anti-drug because it draws alarm to teen drug use, the
MPP is a group that staunchly supports the legalization of marijuana.
Its view is this: marijuana is not legal in the Netherlands, but its
government makes a conscious decision not to enforce marijuana possession
laws. The Dutch government has placed restrictions on marijuana's sale and
use, including age restrictions. Regulating marijuana by taking it off the
street makes it harder for kids to obtain marijuana, said Krissy Oechslin,
MPP's assistant director of communications.
"The Netherlands is a good example of how regulating the sale and use of
marijuana can reduce teen use, as opposed to the U.S., which refuses to
regulate marijuana and basically creates a free-for-all where anyone can
get it," Oechslin said. "Drug dealers don't card people who want to buy
from them."
Like with most dishonorable rankings, Nevada's percentage was one of the
worst in the country with teen marijuana use -- an obvious reason MPP
targeted the Silver State.
"The numbers of lifetime use of marijuana by teens is particularly shocking
with Nevada," Oechslin said. "We chose Nevada's 67 percent because it is
such a great contrast with the Netherlands."
The MPP only aired the ad in Reno, but Oechslin said the group is currently
evaluating its success and impact. Based on the findings, the MPP will
decide whether to run the ad elsewhere in the state. The group would not
disclose the cost of the campaign.
Oechslin noted that her organization has no immediate political plans in
Nevada for the 2004 election season. The ad was simply a public education
campaign.
Last year, the MPP lead the surge to legalize marijuana in Nevada,
funneling $2 million into promoting Question 9. The ballot initiative -- if
it was successful in 2002 and again in 2004 -- would have nixed the threat
of arrest for responsible marijuana use, or possession of up to three
ounces. It also looked to implement a government system to obtain marijuana
through a regulated market, and impose penalties for marijuana abuse, such
as driving under the influence and providing it to minors.
The campaign failed as 61 percent Nevada voters were against the measure.
Pubdate: Thu, 25 Dec 2003
Source: Las Vegas City Life (NV)
Webpage: Lasvegascitylife.com
news03.txt
Copyright: 2003sLas Vegas City Life
Contact: obrien@lvpress.com
Website: Lasvegascitylife.com
