Posted on 09/17/2007 7:17:18 PM PDT by neverdem
Not True
Cannabis has been decriminalized in California and many other states since the 1970s. Not legalized, but no arrest made and a small fine levied for conviction of possession of an ounce or less.
There are a lot of things that have occurred in California that could accurately be called disasters but decriminalization of marijuana certainly is not one of them. And none of the horrible things that the opponents of medical marijuana predicted has happened either and it's been almost 10 years since it passed.
I personally take great comfort in the DEA raids on the doctors, clinics and patients and their caregivers. After all, if our government was really fighting a war on terror (aka Islamic facists who want to destroy us), the feds would use every means possible to protect U.S. citizens from those threats.
The simple fact that the federal government is able or willing to deploy such a large amount of money and heavily-armed personnel in the selective pursuit of sickly pot smokers, most of whom are sanctioned as legal by their own states, would seem to indicate how committed they are to picking on non-violent citizens rather than keeping us safe from Islamic bombs.
Plus, we have the added bonus of a congress that can legally declare any substance a 'dangerous drug' as long as the political climate is ripe.
It's really reassuring to know that our brilliant politicians can do this without any so-called facts from all of those doctors and research scientists . I mean, what would those brainy science types know about chemistry or drugs, anyway?(sarcasm off)
The same type of people who buy beer rather than brewing their own or buy tobacco products rather than growing their own.
New York State and City Sue Merck Over Vioxx
FReepmail me if you want on or off my health and science ping list.
Isn’t this the third time this damn article has been posted?
Searching under "The Limits of Frederalism," all I get is one posting. What's the problem, with federalism?
So do I.
The promotion of drug abuse in the popular culture has been chemical warfare against the young people of this country since the 1960's.
I think marijuana should be legalized completely for adults over 21.
"Medical" marijuana is a huge crock of shiite.
Do the Feds have a right to be involved? All marijuana is an imported product not indigenous to North America.
The promotion of drug abuse in the popular culture has been chemical warfare against the young people of this country since the 1960’s.
I think marijuana should be legalized completely for adults over 21.
“Medical” marijuana is a huge crock of shiite.
Do the Feds have a right to be involved?
All marijuana is an imported product not indigenous to North America.
Thank God for the war on drugs! After all, we’ve been fighting that war for nigh onto forty years now, and it’s worked so well, you can’t hardly find any of those bad ol’ drugs in America any more.
Nice convoluted rant. However, you could have said the same thing by merely stating that prohibition has failed in every instance tried, whether it be alcohol or drugs. The government has no business in the drug business. As far as you saying that the question is not whether it is constitutional is a very ignorant statement and is a slippery slope indeed.
Once you have the card, you can posses marijuana, you know for the “depression” you are suffering. Now here is the real kicker. If you call up the “mobile meds dispensary” they will deliver right to your door, for a small “donation” of course. You just put your “donation” in the jar and take delivery of your “medication”.
It’s little more that dope dealing in the open.
We could use the FDR-era judge’s claim that a farmer growing his own wheat for his own consumption is subject to “interstate commerce” regulation because
if he weren’t growing his own, he’d have to buy it through interstate commerce.
Those two cases ended 60 years of Supreme Court deference to Capitol Hill on the issue of whether the Constitution actually permitted the Congress to enact the laws it was passing. Some legal scholars thought it possible that the court might look for an opportunity to overturn Wickard v. Filburn, the notorious 1942 ruling which said that under the Interstate Commerce Clause, Congress can regulate the wheat a man grows on his own land for his own use.
Don’t forget machine guns! ;-D
My terminally ill wife and her medical team disagree with you and I have seen first hand the benefits of medical marijuana. But I'm sure you are right. What would we know about it, anyway?
Do you really believe this, or do you just like to make things up?
IBrp!
hehehehe
Why don't you try the same argument on Justice Scalia (I recommend a more respectful tone) and learn just who it is who is ignorant.
Then why do you find 2355 citations when you enter endocannabinoid system or endocannabinoid receptors or endocannabinoids into PubMed, which is a service of the National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health? Endocannabinoid is a contraction of endogenous and cannabinoid, in the same way endorphin is a contraction of endogenous and morphine. Would you deny patients morphine and similar analgesics?
If you want my personal opinion, decriminalize. For get regulating, it is’nt suitable for human consumption under FDA rules. And, it’s a liability. If people want the stuff, let them grow it in their back yard. If they want to sell it to each other, thats fine too, just pay your income taxes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.