Drug Dealers as a protected class of citizen? The latest medical pot act gives special housing and employment protections to drug dealers.

Meanwhile, over in the real world, the Minnesota state senate just approved a medical marijuana bill.

Pat, I think you could benefit from some marijuana and maybe chill out.

It’s hypocritical to wail about people who live in severe pain that want a legitimate, proven alleviation from that pain and then to follow the guidance of a man like Rush Limbaugh who has been abusing prescription drugs for years.

If by drug dealers, you mean doctors, sure. You’ve got a point then. And if by addicts, you mean people with cancer, chronic arthritis, AIDs, glaucoma, and other ailments, sure.

But really – in a country where we complicity and tacitly support alcoholism, nicotine addiction, and various other vices, our objection to a natural plant that grows in the dirt is just silly.

“Follow the guidance of Rush?” I think you’re referring to Sibby, because that certainly isn’t me.

So you’re saying that you think someone who grows pot should be given a protection against discriminatory practices equal to that of race, sex, religion, etcetera and so on?

Leave it to the looney left.

According to an AARP poll, 70% of Americans nationwide support the legal use of marijuana with a doctor’s recommendation.

Medical marijuana bills are currently working their way through several state legislatures, and will be voted on, successfully, in several states in the 2010 election.

The only time it’s ever lost when voted on by the people was in 2006, here in SD, when it got 48% of the vote.

In just a few short years, the majority of states, including South Dakota, are going to be medical marijuana states.

On the merits, PP is on the wrong side on this issue.

And his side is on the wrong side of history.

His lack of awareness of that fact is getting to be downright amusing.

Apart from the Rush Limbaugh comment, you refute none of the points I put forward.

But hear me out – prescription narcotics are somehow okay and safer than a natural plant? If anything, prescription drugs are more dangerous, more addictive, and more damaging than marijuana. Marijuana is only considered a class one narcotic because of how widely available it is, not because of it’s effects.

I’m sure you wouldn’t support somebody abusing Vicodin, but you’d be okay with them taking it if a medical doctor prescribed it. Why is marijuana different?

So Pat,

If a member of your family is legally prescribed a narcotic, such as Tylenol with codeine, for pain resulting from an illness, is it okay with you if his landlord to turn him out into the street? How about the pharmacist who fills the prescription?

This is the only topic on your blog about which I find you completely without reason or compassion. Virtually all the facts and all the science are the opposite of your position.

That should have read:

If a member of your family is legally prescribed a narcotic, such as Tylenol with codeine, for pain resulting from an illness, is it okay with you if his landlord turns him out into the street?

Apologies to copy editors everywhere.

Its pretty hard to argue for legalization of medical marijuana when the American Medical Association has recommended that it remain classified as a controlled substance. They’ve sent represenatives to testify in opposition to some of these proposed state laws. So if you believe Pat is out of step on this issue, he’s certainly in good company.

Could an airport be required to keep you as an air traffic ocntroller or any of the positions in the flight tower: “Wow, hey dude, see those two big birds coming in together, totally awesome, dude. Wow, fireworks dude.”

Lee’s one of the few who actually get the point (including Michael); that point being the whole “protected class” issue.

Even throwing out the patients side of things, the measure says that as a landlord or an employer, I cannot deny housing or employment to someone who chooses to grow drugs that would continue to still be illegal at the federal level.

That’s a mighty intrusive measure for the benefit of a group that does not deserve to be a protected class. Most protected classes are as a result of factors that they cannot control, such as the color of their skin.

(With the exception of maybe Bob Newland,) pot grower is not central to anyone’s identity.

I don’t think many people are fooled into believing these efforts aren’t really aimed at making marijuana available for everyone, not just those who supposedly must have it above all other pain medications.

In light of that, I’m still waiting for someone to provide a compelling reason why society will be a much better place if it has more intoxicated people.

So, what’s wrong with making marijuana available for everyone? Make it legal, tax it and save taxpayers money. There are tests available to determine if one is driving under the influence of the devil weed. The cost to society is too great to continue with this failed public policy of imprisoning users.

*It legalizes drug dealing (for up to 5 addicts per drug dealer)

I’ve known a lot of potheads over the years, but not one was unable to quit the day they decided to grow up and get a real job. I’m not sure who these addicts are of whom you speak.

I don’t think many people are fooled into believing these efforts aren’t really aimed at making marijuana available for everyone, not just those who supposedly must have it above all other pain medications.

What would be so bad about that. I wish they would just come out and say it. If we allow alcohol to be legal with all the social ills it can cause (actual addiction, family problems, drunk driving deaths, people walking off clifs, etc.) then there is no real reason for criminalizing pot except for some arbitrary decision by the FDA (who is bought and paid for by big pharma).
I will vote for this measure if it comes to a vote, and I urge all freedom loving americans to do the same.

PP- and you wonder why only 21% of Americans identify themselves as Republicans, because you are so out of touch with reality.

There are claims that a tax on legalized pot would have a large affect on our national budget deficit. There are also claims that legalizing pot would narrow the scope of enforcement, to which I add, if pot was legal they could then just shoot any drug dealers knowing they were taking out the hard drug dealers (serial killers) such as Meth. As a pilot I enjoyed Lee’s take on this, I just hope we don’t think anything of this nature has a chance of infiltrating our already tight infrastructure of controls in place for intoxication. Interesting that this effort continues to hide behind a pity story of helping the lame, blind and innocents with health issues.

Must be scary being a Republican these day. Gay marriage in Iowa. Medical marijuana in several sates. A popular President in office who tries to actually solve problems, not create them.

If you want a return to the 1950s, pick a Republican like Ward Cleaver to lead you–responsible, polite, a good listener, not judgmental. Instead, Pat, your party would rather take the death spiral with Rush and Palin, as fake and phony of people as you’ll ever find.

Where’s the party of Eisenhower, Goldwater, Kemp, Dole and Reagan? True patriots who understood what was really important, who respected the process and their opponents?

If the Republicans continue to concentrate on these social issues that are gaining strength among the young and middle aged, the GOP will be a minority party in post of the USA. Keep pushing out the moderates like Specter. You’ll have your red states like South Dakota, but little else.

So, keep it up, please.

Todd Epp
SD Watch http://www.southdakotawatch.net

Sorry, lots of typos involved above. Speed, not MM, to blame. “these days” and “in most of the USA”.

Todd –

As an attorney, I would think you would appreciate that equal protection under the law should not be extended by states to protect those conducting activities which are illegal under federal law (for purposes of housing and employment in this case).

Legalize pot, then what next? I believe that all who want pot legalized are on a very slippery slope. Have you really thought about the direction this may be taking. I know several drug addicts, they all started with causual use of pot. Pretty soon the buzz they experienced was not enough they needed something bigger stronger better, and soon graduated to more dangerous drugs for their high. Some of these individuals also have some legal issues (could be why Mr. Epp is in favore of legalization of pot, future clients lol) because they ran out of money to fund their habit, and started to steal and hock what ever they could to get their next fix.

I am not saying that this scenario is going to happen to everyone who tries/experiments with pot but it could.

If you want a return to the 1950s, pick a Republican like Ward Cleaver to lead you – responsible, polite, a good listener, not judgmental. – Todd

Unfortunately, Canadians can’t run for office in the US.

Spartan76 – your logic could apply to alcohol or tobacco just as easily as weed, yet both of those substances are illegal. Your anecdote sounds just like my 5th grade DARE officer’s reasoning and is just as useful. Also, how many legal issues would those people have if the drug they started with was legal?

Oops. I meant to say alcohol and tobacco are legal.
Dude needs more caffiene… another legal drug.

Lee, I’m disappointed. To assume that people would show up for work stoned is to assume that because alcohol is legal, people will show up for work drunk.

Indeed, it does happen here and there – but that’s a problem with that individual, not a problem because alcohol is legal. It’s such so naive to assume that if medical marijuana is legalized, people will get stoned for the sake of being stoned (which they already do) – not for medicinal purposes.

If a doctor gave you a prescription for powerful arthritis medication, would you take a bunch before you go to work? You might, but not to the point that it would impair your job.

It’d be nice to see an elected official like Lee have a serious discussion about this rather than make pot jokes like a fifteen-year-old.

Legalizing marijuana and allowing medicinal marijuana are two very, very different things.

Dudes:

Obviously, I agree with the American Medical Association that maryjane needs to continue to be classified as a controlled substance, just as Tylenol with codeine is.

And, obviously, the proponents of legalized medical marijuana believe Federal law ought to be changed as well.

And, obviously, air traffic controllers are not allowed to sit at their consoles under the influence of codeine, nor should they be allowed to sit there under the influence of pot.

None are effective arguments against allowing people who are in pain to receive proven relief, with the same restrictions that are common for prescribed narcotics.

“Legalizing marijuana and allowing medicinal marijuana are two very, very different things.”

Good luck explaining that to Conservatives. Maybe we could throw a pizza party to explain it to them, try the medicine first of course (no female politicians invited though, especially dumb pretty ones-Mitt Rommney)

How many times, in how many ways does PP have to clearly and convincingly lose this argument? You’d think after taking this many drubbings, he’d stop posting on it. He used to have his spam filter set so the subject never came up. Maybe he should go back to that? Naw. It’s more fun to take an a** whuppin’ I guess. PP do you really want your loyal, semi-delusional wingnut fans exposed to this much sound logic? (wink)

I’m curious, PP, did you ever read the article I linked to in the last MJ thread? Is that the type of war on (some) drugs you want to see continue? An innocent man’s home invaded and his dogs killed by the police all over a measely box of weed that they knew wasn’t his – all done without a warrant?
Prohibition has been tried before and it didn’t work. All it showed is htat when you criminalize a product that is already enjoyed by millions of people, they’ll still be able to buy it just as easily. The difference is where the revenue ends up.

I am surprised so many of you are actually in favor of this drive. After all, it was defeated at the ballot box. It seems some people are just coming back and asking again. It is time to move on.

Bill –

My friend, the only place that I lose this argument is in the minds of pot heads and their sympathizers.

The argument of offering med mal users and their drug dealing suppliers civil protection as a protected class of citizen for purposes of employment and housing is so over the top and ridiculous, they might actually see an organized opposition to the measure this year instead of the shoulder shrug and derisive comments they’ve gotten in the past because they weren’t worth anything more.

[Dennis Peron, the originator of Proposition 215 (California's pot proposition)] who lives in San Francisco, contended that since stress relief is a medical purpose, too, any adult who uses marijuana does so for medical reasons. ”I believe all marijuana use is medical — except for kids,” Mr. Peron said.

You don’t think Pat is right? Check out what happened in this rare footage from a GOP convention, when some wise guy busted out a bunch of reefers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bM_vLk1I6G4

Ok, Pat. Whatever you say, bud. (This from a guy who wants to protect his bar owner pals from the smoking ban. Pat, there is no known health benefit to tobacco… zero. None. It addicts and kills people.)

(And from a guy who presumably wants federal law changed for humanitarian reasons having to do with fertilized female ova, and argues vehemently for State laws that challenge Federal rulings.)

I don’t get it. But whatever. It does makes your blog pretty interesting.

PP,

Would you unwind your panties about this issue if the State or Federal Government grew the medical marijuana and a pharmacist distributed it based on medical prescriptions?

Or, do you just believe that Marijuana is the Devil’s spawn and should never be used no matter what?

To Smoke Or Not To Smoke – Forget it. PP still thinks weed is a dangerous, addictive drug on the same level as meth and crack.
The only place he wins his ridiculous argument is with those who have a vested interest in either A) people not being able to grow their own pain reliever/destresser/apetite stimulator, or B) People with a vested interest in maintaining our huge prison population and paramilitary anti-drug police force.

Still haven’t read about the mayor of Berwyn Heights, MD, have you Pat?

It already is, and it isn’t grown by some dude in his basement:

http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/ongoing/marinol.html

“Medical” Marijuana – The Facts

* Medical marijuana already exists. It’s called Marinol.

* A pharmaceutical product, Marinol, is widely available through prescription. It comes in the form of a pill and is also being studied by researchers for suitability via other delivery methods, such as an inhaler or patch. The active ingredient of Marinol is synthetic THC, which has been found to relieve the nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy for cancer patients and to assist with loss of appetite with AIDS patients.

* Unlike smoked marijuana–which contains more than 400 different chemicals, including most of the hazardous chemicals found in tobacco smoke-Marinol has been studied and approved by the medical community and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the nation’s watchdog over unsafe and harmful food and drug products. Since the passage of the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act, any drug that is marketed in the United States must undergo rigorous scientific testing. The approval process mandated by this act ensures that claims of safety and therapeutic value are supported by clinical evidence and keeps unsafe, ineffective and dangerous drugs off the market.

* There are no FDA-approved medications that are smoked. For one thing, smoking is generally a poor way to deliver medicine. It is difficult to administer safe, regulated dosages of medicines in smoked form. Secondly, the harmful chemicals and carcinogens that are byproducts of smoking create entirely new health problems. There are four times the level of tar in a marijuana cigarette, for example, than in a tobacco cigarette

* Morphine, for example, has proven to be a medically valuable drug, but the FDA does not endorse the smoking of opium or heroin. Instead, scientists have extracted active ingredients from opium, which are sold as pharmaceutical products like morphine, codeine, hydrocodone or oxycodone. In a similar vein, the FDA has not approved smoking marijuana for medicinal purposes, but has approved the active ingredient-THC-in the form of scientifically regulated Marinol.

* The DEA helped facilitate the research on Marinol. The National Cancer Institute approached the DEA in the early 1980s regarding their study of THC’s in relieving nausea and vomiting. As a result, the DEA facilitated the registration and provided regulatory support and guidance for the study.

* The DEA recognizes the importance of listening to science. That’s why the DEA has registered seven research initiatives to continue researching the effects of smoked marijuana as medicine. For example, under one program established by the State of California, researchers are studying the potential use of marijuana and its ingredients on conditions such as multiple sclerosis and pain. At this time, however, neither the medical community nor the scientific community has found sufficient data to conclude that smoked marijuana is the best approach to dealing with these important medical issues.

* The most comprehensive, scientifically rigorous review of studies of smoked marijuana was conducted by the Institute of Medicine, an organization chartered by the National Academy of Sciences. In a report released in 1999, the Institute did not recommend the use of smoked marijuana, but did conclude that active ingredients in marijuana could be isolated and developed into a variety of pharmaceuticals, such as Marinol.

* In the meantime, the DEA is working with pain management groups, such as Last Acts, to make sure that those who need access to safe, effective pain medication can get the best medication available.

Some Anonymous Dude, perhaps you can explain to me specifically how and why more intoxicated people will make our society better.

Some Anonymous Dude, perhaps you can explain to me specifically how and why more intoxicated people will make our society better.

What makes you think there will be more intoxicated people? If someone wants to get intoxicated, they’ll either get drunk or high. It probably won’t add to the number of people intoxicated, nor will it add to the ranks of potheads. In fact, I’d bet good money on that.
What specific benefits do we see as a society from the drug war?

Pat,

Yes…and organically grown marijuana can be grown in the patient’s back yard for little or no cost. Not so with Marinol. Home-grown THC can be delivered in food and in tea, as well as via smoking.

Potheads are not the root of the issue. Money is the root of the issue. We can’t have patients growing their own medicine. If citizens are in pain, the government wants its cut from the treatment.

Michael –

The entire thrust of this post is less about the medical pot issue (on which I don’t think I left any doubt about my position) – and more on the creation of a special protected class of citizenry.

I – and I’ll venture most anyone else who employs people – don’t think someone should receive special civil rights because they feel the need to grow pot.

Micheal- That’s what the FDA wants to do with orgainic farmers now, criminalize them for using their own seeds and REAL manure fertilizer. The shame!

The entire thrust of this post is less about the medical pot issue and more on the creation of a special protected class of citizenry.

If tobacco smokers aren’t a protected class of citizens, then potheads shouldn’t be either. On that I can agree. However, what landlord (just as an example) would kick someone out of an apartment for using MJ legally – especially a cancer patient?

And, just in case you didn’t read the last one, here’s another article about a rather prominent victim of the drug war: http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/07/mayor.warrant/

Last time this was up for a vote my father was dying of cancer. My 70+ year old mother looked at me and said “I’m voting for medical marijuana”. This lifelong conservative Republican knew in her heart that she wanted any tool there was to help my father feel better. And that’s what it comes down to.

Sometimes when I read the posts here I think some of you have been waaaay too influenced by the “reefer madness” type of hysteria.

Do any of you know how or why marijuana was made illegal? Contrary to popular belief, pot was not made illegal due to any scientific study or proof of actual problems caused by it. Pot was made illegal mainly because of two men: Harry J Anslinger – the 1st head of the Bureau of Narcotics and William Randolf Huerst. Anslinger was ambitious, and needed a cause to get him publicity. He’s credited with the following quotes:

“There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.”

“Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”

“Marihuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing”

“You smoke a joint and you’re likely to kill your brother.”

“Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind.”

And Huerst was trying to keep cheap hemp paper from cutting into to his timber paper business. So he made sure all his newspapers published horrible scare stories about this noxious weed and contributed tons of money to the crusade against pot.

I’ve known (and know) a lot of people who indulged periodically; including doctors, lawyers, politicians and regular PTA parents.

This is the silliest thing in the world to try and demonize.

Not as silly as making “pot grower” a protected class for employment and housing.

Not a single person would qualify for medical marijuana under this measure without a physician’s recommendation that it was in the patient’s best interest to use it.

For any true conservative, that’s all you need to know. Vote yes.

Of course, they leave out the part where nearly anyone can grow it and provide it for “medical use.”

Which is the part that Liberals seems to just glean over, as if we’re not all going to notice.

Pat, maybe that’s the free market part.

It does say that you have to be registered to be a caregiver, Pat and that you can only serve 5 clients. Did you miss that part? How big do you think the market is in SD? i.e. how many patients are there who would qualify?

Of course, they leave out the part where nearly anyone can grow it and provide it for “medical use.”

Which is the part that Liberals seems to just glean over, as if we’re not all going to notice.

I wish they’s drop the whole medical thing. It’s a good start toward legalization, but nobody’s fooled by it.
Recently, the government of British Columbia stopped enforcing its laws against recreational pot use. Last I checked, they haven’t burned the place to the ground and they don’t have a bunch of zombie potheads roaming the streets looking for doritos. In fact, the earth is still turning.

Dude. That would sure make the bill a lot shorter, wouldn’t it.

It would definitely make it shorter. “We will no longer enforce our laws agains the use of MJ, or the possession of less than an ounce. If you feds still want to bother with it, you can do it yourselves.”

It would still clamp down on the major importers of mexican weed, but it wouldn’t stop people from growing a little in their basement for personal use. I doubt the DEA is going to bother with some guy growing a plant or two.

“Last I checked, they haven’t burned the place to the ground and they don’t have a bunch of zombie potheads roaming the streets looking for doritos.”

They call them ‘crisps’ over there.

Another interesting article about the drug war in Portugal, if your mind is open to it:

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html

“They call them ‘crisps’ over there.”

Detroit, “them” who?

The potheads or the doritos?

PP, have you ever been crisp?

Oh come on Pat, it helped get Bill Clinton elected!

“They call them ‘crisps’ over there.”

The potheads or the doritos?

Actually, the British call chips “crisps” and french fries “chips”. It’s terribly confusing. Why can’t they just speak ‘Murrican like us?

Potheads are called “crispy critters”.

marijuana is an herb not a drug u fuckin moron!! grows naturally from mother earth and has NO CHEMICAL as u would find in cocaine,meth etc so b4 u run your cocksucker about keeping medical marijuana illegal…my boyfriend and I think its f’n awesome…..take tha bottle of jack daniels outta yur mouth and stop talkin from it u idiot!!

I’m suuuure that this person suffers from a debilitating disease that requires the constant use of dope. Not.

Proof positive that excessive drug use affects the brain of teen aged addicts.

Oh well. The world needs people with a diminished mental capacity too. SOMEONE has to dig ditches and pump gas when they’re not busy robbing convenience stores to buy their next fix.