Article Source: msnbc.com
from:msnbc.comHearing over state medical marijuana law starts
Seeded on Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:18 AM EDT (msnbc.com)
— Filed under: health
- msnbc.com sites & shows:
- TODAY
- Rock Center
- Nightly News
- Meet the Press
- Dateline
- Morning Joe
- Hardball
- Ed
- Maddow
- Last Word
- msnbc tv
Leave a Comment:
The answer to the drug problem is to end the spectacularly failed costly Drug War.
They say the Drug War is over. Don't be fooled. As long as drugs remain criminalized the Drug War will never be over.
When is the U.S. government going to finally realize that it can't legislate morality? Many people believe the answer to solving our drug problem is to simply tell people to say "no" to drugs but after being in practice for decades now the evidence shows this has failed miserably. People have been doing drugs for thousands of years and it's never going to stop. There will always be people who do drugs and those who become addicted.
Didn't we learn from the mistakes of Alcohol Prohibition in the 1920s/30s? It didn't work then, and drug prohibition certainly isn't working now. The failed Drug War has cost the U.S. taxpayers over a trillion dollars and has been in force for over seven decades. And the real tragedy here is all of the violence that has been associated with the Drug War and illegal drug trafficking. Drugs are more readily available and the Drug War has created a black market, gangs in every U.S. state, and powerful violent cartels south of the border and in other countries.
The laws have done more damage to this country than the drugs themselves. We have created more criminals out of drug users/addicts who should really be treated as medical patients. Wouldn't we be better off spending the Drug War funding on education, drug treatment and rehabilitation instead of failed law enforcement and incarceration? And not having to build more prisons?
We need to reevaluate our position on drug use in this country. I firmly believe we should decriminalize all drugs. Legalize marijuana and regulate it like alcohol in regards to the law, and create an atmosphere that doesn't stigmatize the drug user. I would never advocate anyone use dangerous hard drugs like meth, cocaine, heroin, etc. But the fact of life remains people will choose to use such drugs and become addicted. Countries in Europe have tried different strategies that have reduced the problems associated with drug use. Why can't the U.S. take these same approaches? We should adopt programs for hard drugs (meth, coke, heroin,etc.) like the Swiss heroin program (where addicts can get their drugs from medically supervised clinics) which has shown positive results in reducing violent crime and HIV infections and helps drug addicts to become stable and productive members of society.
Locking people up and throwing away the key is not the answer. When someone has a real drug problem and is addicted their main focus will always be to obtain and use drugs, regardless of any law. And putting a mark on someone's permanent record that will follow them for the rest of their lives will only hinder them to become productive members in society in getting jobs, student financial aid, etc.
There are many people against legalizing and/or decriminalizing drugs and have expressed many fears and dooms day scenarios but evidence has revealed this would simply NOT be the result. Portugal decriminalized drugs in 2001 and none of the nightmare scenarios touted by preenactment decriminalization opponents have become a reality.
And what are the ramifications of manufacturing, importing, and selling the drugs right here in the U.S? Wouldn't that create a new industry? Jobs? Tax revenue? And stop funding the violent cartels and eventually take away their power?
These are questions that I think once answered, will solve our drug problems and the days of the Drug War will be history.
But....I heard Marjuana is bad...mmmmkkaaayyy....
I still smoke it to spite the man.
;) I never needed approval...I do what I want!
When are our representatives going to represent the people? When is our federal government going to represent what the people want? When is the federal government going to put it to a vote of all people?
Marijuana would lose a vote of the people. Only 45% of Americans have ever tried marijuana in their lifetimes, and of current users (past month use) only 5% of Americans are current users. 95% of Americans have not used marijuana in the past month.
By way of comparison, there are twice as many practicing homosexuals in the USA than there are pot smokers and they can't get gay marriage legalized nationally, so there's no chance whatsoever that marijuana will pass a vote.
Legalization would not solve any problems faced by pot smokers. Even as a "medicine" it would never be allowed to be smoked in a hospital or much of anywhere else for that matter. Drug-free workplaces would still be free to fire any employee who fails a drug test for marijuana, and the social stigma of 90+ years of drug war would still be prevalent as potheads will still face near-universal rejection.
California, the birthplace of so-called "medical marijuana" had full-blown legalization on their 2010 election ballot. Guess what the outcome of that was? That's right, it failed to pass. If you can't pass full-blown legalization in California, then there's not a chance of a snowball in Hades of a national referendum passing in all 50 States.
lol...your numbers are off about how many people smoke it up...and next time it comes up on the ballot in cali, it's probably gonna be passed. in honor of that day, i'm gonna go load a bowl. see ya.
Wow, what a pack of liars. I thought medical marijuana was supposed to be for diagnoses of glaucoma, or nausea from cancer therapy, but what have we here instead? A bunch of pothead frauds, that's what we've got.
Do you know what the ratio between young and elderly marijuana cardholders might be?
http://www.marijuana.com/current-events/148608-mt-medical-marijuana-card-holder-statistics-montana.html
In Montana, 85% of "medical marijuana" cardholders are under the age of 30. The total number of applicants claiming glaucoma, AIDS and cancer combined make less than 3% of the cardholders.
It's readily apparent to even casual observation that between 80% and 90% of people claiming to 'need' marijuana are bald-faced liars just looking to get stoned.
Exactly MeanGene, which is why the educated and intelligent among us should demand that it be legalized for everyone, just like alcohol. Well, probably alcohol is the one that should be more monitored than marijuana, since alcohol is poison to the body systemically and to the liver, while marijuana is not poison to the body, nor is it addicting. Just think of the money we could save in not having so many alcoholics, and just having those who might smoke pot too much to keep their jobs, where some of us know better and do not smoke on the job. Wait, isn't that the same thing the intelligent do on alcohol????? They don't drink on the job or drink too much, right? The only difference is the alcoholic will eventually kill themselves from the alcohol, but the marijuana smoker never will. So, in the end, you are right! They are liars in trying to get to the stuff which is safer and not poisonous. They care more about their bodies and the effects on society than the ones who want to so very very much to keep marijuana illegal based on lack of education to the subject and lack care to the population. They only care for corporate big wigs and extreme political right who certainly want to protect their rights to money by stepping on the wishes of the people of this country and keeping down the one thing that would eat into their profits. Certainly that is better than those who are just looking to get drunk. I prefer the stoned over the drunk any day.
Potheads aren't educated. They're school dropouts. The pot makes their memories fail and they can't hack school because of it. Potheads are not capable of learning basic tasks and are unemployable, which is why most potheads when arrested don't list any occupation on their booking docs. They don't have any occupations. They're deadheads.
Stoners are evil people. Go into a head shop and feast your eyes on the curved knives for human sacrifice. Check out the skull-shaped bongs and the fixation on human bones which all potheads have. They're murderous killers, psychotic and they're all exactly like Jared Loughner. They'll kill you in a heartbeat if you ever get near them.
*Raised eyebrows* This sounds to me like the pot calling the kettle black, only, in this case, the pot is not a pot user. Your assumptions reveal much about your lack of information. I suggest you back up your claims with scientific proof. Your research will educate you differently. It is up to you to believe scientific research or to believe simply what you have managed to assume based on lack of gaining information on what you write. That is how we operate and know not to believe anything you say on this subject.
I love you mean Gene....But i crave your bones....
Damn stoners....
I really wonder who graduated from college in these postings and has the ideology of believing in education. *Raises her hand*
Class of 2011....
I am 41...got a degree....I am ready for the world.
Class of 2008, age 50, science degree, ten years to get it. I wonder about MeanGene up there.
MeanGene would be an Electronics Engineer with FCC License and Top Secret security clearances completely unavailable to potheads.
I build 911 dispatch centers for a living. When you pick up the phone and dial 911, I'm the kind of guy who makes it all come together to get police, fire and ambulance communicating to save your ass.
A pothead couldn't do my job. Ever. I have to pass background checks for every police agency I build a 911 dispatch comm system for. I get fingerprinted and retina scanned and photographed. Folded, spindled and mutilated all the way, and nobody, but nobody, who has smoked pot would gain the trust of such a background check.
It's all about trust. Can you trust someone who smokes pot in violation of Federal Law? Of course not, because that's a willful criminal. An anarchist, not to put too fine a point on it.
After all, a person who decides which laws he shall obey and which laws he feels no need to obey is a person who takes the law into his own hands. That is an anarchist by definition.
Don't even try to pretend to be smarter than I am, by the way. That's not actually possible.
in other words, he's obsolete these days...it's all going wifi or fiber optics these days...
and by your definitions, you're calling our founding fathers anarchists. way to go.
Is there anyone who can back up MeanGene's claims with research? In my opinion, I think not, but I am always open to facts vs ill backed assumptions.
No he doesn't nor will he ever have any research to back up his outlandish claims.
I had to read his posts after all ready ignoring him. It's good to see I made the right choice in doing so because he so full of it.
Best to just ignore MeanGene, Cheryl. You would be saving yourself a lot of grief and time.
OneDirtyRat, I rarely put anyone on ignore. In fact, I have only done it once. However, I do understand your reasoning to save time and the wasting of it.
On a side note, I wonder when there will be a million man march on Washington over this issue. There probably should be one, for our own good and demand for someone to represent us, like they are supposed to do.
Which claim do you care to disprove? Everything I've claimed I can back up. I've researched this and have everything bookmarked, every fact and figure against marijuana there is.
Here's one, let's have some fun.
http://archives.drugabuse.gov/NIDA_notes/NNvol19N5/Marijuana.html
According to a RAND institute study, High School Students who had smoked pot earned significantly less income than those who had not. How much less? The smart kids who never smoked weed when resurveyed at age 29 were averaging $32,000 annually compared to a mere $20,940 for heavy potheads. That's right, their incomes were cut by 1/3rd because they were stupified by pot.
Figure over the course of working from age 18 to age 65 (47 years) and losing over $10,000 per year for being a pothead, that weed is going to cost nearly half a million bucks in lost earning potential.
Whoever said there was an economic fix in legalizing marijuana was an idiot. Any potential tax revenues realized from the sales of marijuana will be a pittance compared to the lost productivity and the crashed economics of a nation full of useless poverty-riddled stoners.
I smoke weed and I graduated an Honor student....
Piss off mean Gene...I do not care for your disparaging talk.
Cheryl:
I believe that is what it's going to take to get our government to give the people what they want when it comes to the drug war and legalizing pot. But let's make it a 30 million man/woman march. Let's get all of the pot smokers together and march on Washington. I wonder if that could ever be done or possible?
I don't usually ignore people either but there are few those that spew such nonsense that I find that I have no choice but to ignore them. Otherwise I would pull my hair out trying to debate them because their arguements are so far out there.
Well, Hairfarmer, that whole graduating honor student thing is an admission that you smoked pot as a minor. That's the norm for potheads, as the average age of initiation to the demon weed is 17 years of age.
http://oas.samhsa.gov/MJinitiation/chapter1.htm
Legalization will not be happening for kiddies under the age of 18. That's a non-starter.
My first medal was from High School. Perfect attendance. I never missed one class, unlike potheads who have greater incidences of absenteeism. I was a perfectionist then and I remain a perfectionist now. I do not tolerate error, nor do I tolerate any deviation from specifications. Potheads are deviants.
Go ahead and admit to your employer what you've admitted here. Tell them you smoke weed. See how long your imperfection is tolerated before you get fired.
Perhaps I do smoke weed with my "employer"...Perhaps I am self-employed....Perhaps...You are a square, and a troll?
Quick...Call 911 and tell them Mean Gene needs help...His ego has gotten so heavy that it crushed all his humanity....Oh my lord Gene...I think I will go smoke weed and then enjoy my day off....Perhaps I will go hang out with pot-headed anarchists who do what they like...Unlike most sheep that bow to the will of the man.
Good day sir...I say good day! ;0
http://archives.drugabuse.gov/NIDA_notes/NNvol19N5/Marijuana.html
yeah, that was fun.
Perhaps potheads are "self-employed" because they can't pass a drug screening to get a job so they say they're "self-employed" when really they're unemployable. I sure wouldn't hire one. I've seen some get fired over stupid things, like when they cause industrial accidents because they've got the attention span of a fruit fly.
The last one was in our garage bays, when a pothead dropped a cop car off of the floor jack and it busted his arm. He went to Concentra health care to get his arm set and to investigate the accident, and part of most accident investigations is a drug test.
Do you know what the accident investigation conclusion always is when marijuana is detected in a worker's drug test? That's right, worker's fault for being stoned on the job. No workers comp, fired for cause, and no unemployment insurance either.
Medical Marijuana won't change that. Testing positive for marijuana closes a lot of doors and it won't matter what the law has to say about it. No employer is going to want a pothead on the job. Heck, some won't even hire tobacco smokers anymore. My employer tests for nicotine, and anybody who smokes or uses chewing tobacco gets fired, which is the way it ought to be.
ohhhhh....! he probably wasn't stoned at the time, genius. THC stays in the body for up to 30 days, but the effects of smoking a bowl of marijuana lasts for, at the most, 3 to 4 hours, with an average of an hour or two.
so far the only deviant around here I see is you. what's next? if you're too fat, you're fired! damn it, your test came up positive for big macs! no worker's comp for you!!!
loonies.