USA Politics  USA political debate |
| Reply to Thread New Thread |
02-01-2006, 07:00 AM
|
#1 |
|
|
^ I guess the name "Law & Order" says it all. I think you've carried too far in this case.
Some laws are ridiculous. To obey those types of laws just because they are written doesn't necessarily serve society as a whole and certainly doesn't serve the individual, as this case so clearly shows. Please tell me how this individual's personal use of a plant caused harm to anyone else. And please: don't tell me that if he had obeyed the law he would still be alive. No one knows that. But it does seem that if he hadn't been found with one joint and declared his need to use it to minimize his on-going pain then he might still be alive. Yet nothing justifies the fact that he was consigned to a slow and agonizing death -- which was the fate delivered to him by the judge and other's in charge of his safe-keeping. |
|
|
05-27-2006, 07:00 AM
|
#2 |
|
|
Magbie was paralized from the neck down and they put him in jail? Could not they just chain his wheelchair to a table in his apartment? Or was he considered flight risk?
Heck, that will teach him a lesson. Not like he was benefiting society anyways. |
|
|
|
07-06-2006, 07:00 AM
|
#3 |
|
|
More on the Supreme Court decision and background on this case, Ashcroft v. Raich / Gonzalez v. Raich:
http://www.counterpunch.org/gardner11272004.html http://www.mpp.org/raich/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...060600564.html A Defeat For Users Of Medical Marijuana State Laws No Defense, Supreme Court Rules By Charles Lane Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, June 7, 2005; Page A01 The Supreme Court dealt a blow to the medical marijuana movement yesterday, ruling that the federal government can still ban possession of the drug in states that have eliminated sanctions for its use in treating symptoms of illness. By a vote of 6 to 3, the court ruled that Congress's constitutional authority to regulate the interstate market in drugs, licit or illicit, extends to small, homegrown quantities of doctor-recommended marijuana consumed under California's Compassionate Use Act, which was adopted by an overwhelming majority of voters in 1996. ************************************************** ****** There is also a prior thread at wirednewyork that discusses this case in the broader sense as it relates to "Commerce": http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/sh...56&postcount=1 |
|
|
|
08-09-2006, 07:00 AM
|
#4 |
|
|
Score. |
|
|
|
09-23-2006, 07:00 AM
|
#5 |
|
|
Medicinal Marijuana
It seems that the laws against use of marijuana for medicinal purposes will not be lifted anytime soon based on the June 2005 Supreme Court decision wherein the Court ruled (as reported by CNN at http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/06/sc...cal.marijuana/):
"doctors can be blocked from prescribing marijuana for patients suffering from pain caused by cancer or other serious illnesses." Read on to inform yourself of the lengths to which our public "servants" (i.e.: judges) will go to punish those who make the personal choice to use marijuana to alleviate pain: She's Not the Only One Who's Retchin September 23, 2005 http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/2005/09/shes_not_the_on_1.shtml#011093 This week the family of Jonathan Magbie, a 27-year-old quadriplegic who died of acute respiratory failure a year ago while serving time in the D.C. jail on a marijuana charge, sued the city and Greater Southeast Community Hospital for inadequately treating the breathing problems he experienced while in custody. Magbie, who was paralyzed from the neck down in a car accident at age 4, smoked marijuana to relieve the pain associated with his condition. Although he was convicted of possessing just one joint and was eligible for probation, D.C. Superior Court Judge Judith E. Retchin sentenced him to 10 days, partly because he said he planned to continue smoking marijuana. Retchin, who was not named in the suit, said she tried to ensure that the jail was equipped to care for Magbie, who used a ventilator, which the jail did not have, to assist his breathing at night. An official investigation found that, due to "failures of communication," the assurances Retchin received concerned the ability of a federal prison to care for a paraplegic, rather than the ability of the local jail to care for a quadriplegic. The Marijuana Policy Project says Congress shares the blame for Magbie's death, since it overrode a D.C. ballot initiative that would have protected patients like him from prosecution for marijuana possession. Posted by Jacob Sullum at September 23, 2005 03:22 PM |
|
|
|
02-09-2008, 05:28 AM
|
#6 |
|
|
Pot vending machines take root in L.A.
Machines distribute the drug to people with cards authorizing use  Los Angeles medical-cannabis dispensary owner Vincent Mehdizadeh poses with his new Marijuana vending machine installed at the Herbal Nutrition Center in Los Angeles Tuesday. The Associated Press updated 7:01 a.m. ET, Wed., Jan. 30, 2008 LOS ANGELES - The city that popularized the fast food drive-thru has a new innovation: 24-hour medical marijuana vending machines. Patients suffering from chronic pain, loss of appetite and other ailments that marijuana is said to alleviate can get their pot with a dose of convenience at the Herbal Nutrition Center, where a large machine will dole out the drug around the clock. "Convenient access, lower prices, safety, anonymity," inventor and owner Vincent Mehdizadeh said, extolling the benefits of the machine. But federal drug agents say the invention may need unplugging. "Somebody owns (it), it's on a property and somebody fills it," said DEA Special Agent Jose Martinez. "Once we find out where it's at, we'll look into it and see if they're violating laws." At least three dispensaries in the city, including two belonging to Mehdizadeh, have installed vending machines to distribute the drug to people who carry cards authorizing marijuana use. Mehdizadeh said he spent seven months to develop and patent the black, armored box, which he calls the "PVM," or prescription vending machine. Convenience and privacy A sliding fence protects the tinted windows of his dispensary, barely distinguishing it from a busy thoroughfare of strip malls, automobile dealers and furniture shops. A box resembling a large refrigerator stands inside the nearly empty shop, near a few shelves stocked with vitamins and herbs. A guard in a black T-shirt emblazoned with the word "Security" on the front stands at the door. A poster of Bob Marley decorates a back room. The computerized machine requires fingerprint identification and a prepaid card with a magnetic stripe. Once the card and fingerprint are verified, a bright green envelope with the pot drops down a slot. Mehdizadeh says any user approved for medical marijuana and registered in a computer database at his dispensaries can pre-purchase the drug and then use the machine to pick up. The process provides convenience and privacy for users who may otherwise feel uncomfortable about buying marijuana, Mehdizadeh said. At the Timothy Leary Medical Dispensary in the San Fernando Valley, the vending machine is accessible only during business hours. An employee there said the machine was introduced about five months ago, and provides speedy service. "It helps a lot of patients who are in a lot of pain and don't want to wait around to get help," Robert Schwartz said. "It's been working out great." Mehdizadeh said he sought the advice of doctors, and decided to limit the amount of marijuana per user to an ounce per week. Each purchase from the machine yields 1/8th or 2/8th of an ounce. By eliminating a vendor behind the counter, he said, the machine offers users lower drug prices. The 1/8th ounce packet would cost about $40 — $20 lower than the average price at other dispensaries. 'It's to medicate' A spokesman for a marijuana advocacy group said the machine also benefits dispensary owners. "It limits the number of workers in the store in the event of a raid, and it'll make it harder for theft," said Nathan Sands, of The Compassionate Coalition. Marijuana use is illegal under federal law, which does not recognize the medical marijuana laws in California and 11 other states. The Drug Enforcement Agency and other federal agencies have been actively shutting down major medical marijuana dispensaries throughout the state over the last two years and charging their operators with felony distribution charges. Mehdizadeh said the Herbal Nutrition Center was the target of a federal raid in December. He said no arrests were made and no charges have been filed against him. Kris Hermes, a spokesman for advocacy group Americans for Safe Access, said the machine might benefit those who already know how much and what strain of marijuana they're looking for. But he said others will want to see and smell the drug before they buy it. A man who said he has been authorized to use medical marijuana as part of his anger management therapy said the vending machine's security measures would at least protect against illicit use of the drug. "You have kids that want to get high and that's not what marijuana is for," Robert Miko said. "It's to medicate." ***** BBC Video: How the marijuana-dispensing vending machine works |
|
|
|
02-09-2008, 05:33 AM
|
#7 |
|
|
UN board says marijuana machines illegal
Fri Feb 8, 4:49 PM ET VIENNA, Austria - Marijuana vending machines in Los Angeles violate international treaties and should be shut down, the U.N.-affiliated drug control board said Friday. "The International Narcotics Control Board is deeply concerned about reports that computerized vending machines to dispense cannabis (marijuana) have been put into operation in Los Angeles," Philip O. Emafo, president of the board, said in a statement. At least three Los Angeles medical marijuana dispensaries have installed vending machines to distribute the drug to people who carry cards authorizing marijuana use. The drug is said to alleviate chronic pain, loss of appetite and other ailments. Supporters say the machines, which dispense 1/8th or 2/8th of an ounce of marijuana at a time, offers users lower drug prices and increases security. Marijuana use is illegal under U.S. law, which does not recognize the medical marijuana laws in California and 11 other states. The Drug Enforcement Agency and other U.S. agencies have been shutting down major medical marijuana dispensaries throughout California in the last two years and charging their operators with felony distribution charges. "We know that the use of cannabis is illegal under federal law of the United States and we trust the authorities will stop such activities, which contravene the international drug control treaties," Emafo said. In its statement, the Vienna-based drug board also said scientific research about the therapeutic usefulness of cannabis or cannabis extracts was still in progress and had not produced much evidence. The board is an independent monitoring body for the implementation of the United Nations international drug control conventions. |
|
|
|
02-09-2008, 04:31 PM
|
#8 |
|
|
I can't believe that the courts can't see that there are people that use this NATURAL drug to help them with the severe pain of illnesses that are slowly killing them. It's okay to prescrive Vicodin to people that have a tooth pulled but a person going through radiation can't ease their pain?????? I mean all these pain killers that are given out make you loopy too, so what's to say they won't ban those in the future also?
|
|
|
|
02-09-2008, 04:43 PM
|
#9 |
|
|
I mean all these pain killers that are given out make you loopy too, so what's to say they won't ban those in the future also? |
|
|
|
02-09-2008, 04:47 PM
|
#10 |
|
|
Too much money in it. |
|
|
|
02-09-2008, 04:50 PM
|
#11 |
|
|
Essentially they are doing the same thing with our food. Allowing or even time suggesting we injest things that are extremely harmful for our longterm health.
Keep people ill and you'll have customers for life... |
|
|
|
02-09-2008, 05:06 PM
|
#12 |
|
|
Essentially they are doing the same thing with our food. Allowing or even time suggesting we injest things that are extremely harmful for our longterm health. 
|
|
|
|
02-11-2008, 04:34 PM
|
#13 |
|
|
Whatever.
The thing that gets me is all the money that is being spent on fighting this "scourge" when all it does is boost the price of it up. BTW, as for it being "natural", don't get on that schtick. Lots of things are "natural" and that does not make them any better for you than "artificial". A snakebite is still a snakebite, and Heroin, a natural derivitive/product of poppies, is a life sucker. MOST of our drugs start from natural sources, even the perscription meds, so just be careful when taking that angle in an argument/defense of MJ. Bottom line is, is this a substance that causes enough problems in the US to spend as much time, money and effort as we do to "fix" it? |
|
|
|
02-12-2008, 05:54 AM
|
#14 |
|
|
Oh please, Ninja. That natural/unnatural argument is nonsense.
To answer your question: positively NO. |
|
|
|
02-12-2008, 03:37 PM
|
#15 |
|
|
Oh please, Ninja. That natural/unnatural argument is nonsense. It is the latest marketing fad. Most of the worlds drugs, medicines, and poisons all are or have had natural roots, so to start screaming "Science is evil" at anything on the basis of pulling it from the ground versus pulling it from a test tube is just plain paranoia. |
|
|
|
02-12-2008, 06:29 PM
|
#16 |
|
|
You guys should be using scientific studies and clinical data if you want to have a debate in keeping with the spirit of the thread. I'll start you off.
***** FDA on Medical Marijuana: Science or Politics? by Joanne Silberner Listen Now [3 min 48 sec]  The FDA says there are no scientific studies supporting the safety or efficacy of marijuana for general medical use. Rod Rolle/Getty Images All Things Considered, April 21, 2006 · The Food and Drug Administration has issued a statement saying there are no scientific studies to support the use of marijuana for medical purposes. But critics say the FDA is bowing to powerful political pressure. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the Office of National Drug Control Policy have long held that marijuana should not be legalized for any reason. And last year the Supreme Court ruled that federal authorities could prosecute patients taking medical marijuana in the dozen states that have approved its use. FDA spokesperson Susan Bro said the agency issued its statement in response to inquiries from the public and Congress. "For the FDA, there has not been enough clinical data demonstrating that either the drug is effective or safe in treating chronic, painful conditions," Bro said. Marc White works for a member of Congress who has requested more information from the FDA, Rep. Mark Souder (R-IN). Souder opposes the medical use of marijuana. "We've been asking them to look at the science of whether marijuana is really medicine for about three years, and asking them to weigh-in on it repeatedly," says White. The Institute of Medicine, a division of the National Academy of Sciences, is already on record with its verdict. The IOM report was not exactly what White was looking for. One of the authors of the IOM's 1999 study is John Benson, a professor of medicine at the University of Nebraska. "We thought there was sufficient evidence at that time to justify the statement that it had benefits in patients for pain, for the relief of nausea and vomiting from, for example, chemotherapy for cancer, or AIDS," Benson says. He adds that he's seen nothing since to contradict the panel's 1999 conclusion, though he is disappointed there haven't been more studies since then. The IOM report was carefully worded. It focused on possibilities and noted that benefits had to be weighed against potential harm from inhaled smoke. Opponents of medical marijuana, including Robert DuPont, drug czar in the Nixon and Ford administrations, point to the potential harm and say that without more solid proof of effectiveness, medical marijuana is a bad solution. To Bruce Merkin of the Marijuana Policy Project, a pro-medical marijuana group, the FDA's decision had everything to do with pressure from Capitol Hill. "This is not a scientific statement, this is a political statement. Nakedly, baldly political," he says. Dr. Jerome Kassirer, a former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, says it's motivated by a concern that smoking marijuana might lead to drug addiction. "I think it's ridiculous. The fact is there are circumstances where smoked marijuana may be helpful to patients who are desperately ill," says Kassirer. Whether it was politics or science that pushed the FDA, what happens next is not in the agency's hands, says FDA spokeswoman Susan Bro. "That is the beginning and the end of what the FDA does," Bro said. "The enforcement of a product such as this is done by other agencies, such as the DEA." Meanwhile, Souder will continue to ask the FDA to post more information on harmful effects of marijuana on its Web site. And U.S. Rep Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), who supports the use of medical marijuana, will send a letter to the FDA next week to find out why the agency apparently disregarded the Institute of Medicine study. |
|
|
|
02-12-2008, 06:50 PM
|
#17 |
|
|
[quote=Jasonik;214790]You guys should be using scientific studies and clinical data if you want to have a debate in keeping with the spirit of the thread. I'll start you off.
***** FDA on Medical Marijuana: Science or Politics? quote] Thanks. I think we should do this all the time. 
|
|
|
|
02-13-2008, 10:28 PM
|
#18 |
|
|
Oh please, if you think that "natural" is healthy you are listening to nonsense. I called you out on a ridiculous analogy. First of all, heroin is manufactured with the aid of chemicals. It is NOT a naturally occurring substance. I'm not saying all natural things are good, for God's sake. Nor are all unnatural things bad. HGH (the synthetic kind) has proven much safer than naturally harvested hormone. What does all of this say about medicinal marijuana? NOTHING. Stick to the topic. |
|
|
|
02-13-2008, 10:55 PM
|
#19 |
|
|
You guys should be using scientific studies and clinical data if you want to have a debate in keeping with the spirit of the thread. I'll start you off. |
|
|
|
02-14-2008, 04:30 PM
|
#20 |
|
|
Uh, please sir? Don't start generalizing my comments. I am saying they come from natural roots. I am saying that most of the chemicals that we use have some sort of basis in natural origination. A lot of the poisons, drugs and medicines. I'm not saying all natural things are good, for God's sake. Nor are all unnatural things bad. HGH (the synthetic kind) has proven much safer than naturally harvested hormone. What does all of this say about medicinal marijuana? NOTHING. Stick to the topic. the tangent you are going on has nothing to do with it. I was trying to steer the argument about MJ AWAY from the whole "It's Natural, therefore it is good" BS I keep hearing. I hear that for almost any product. Until people realize that even dirt is "natural" they will keep professing that somehow something is better because it came from it. Medicinal MJ is fine by me and we are wasting $$, federally, pursuing it. It is not a constructive or helpful drug in the sense that it does not inspire people to do much, but it is not as destructive as many of the drugs we have both legal and illegal (alcohol being one of them). Having vending machines is more than a bit silly, but so is the persecution involving getting and using this stuff. And with 12 states saying "OK", how does the Fed have the right to start stomping all over them when it does not effect the country? Separation of MJ from the other hard core drugs may tighten the pipeline because of the removal of so many casual users from the supply chain of illicit. It will no longer be a "gateway" if people stop associating a relatively harmless substance with the big guns. You say MJ is bad and a kid tries it and does not turn into a junkie it is hard to convince them that OTHER drugs that you put in the same category are as bad as you said. Not only that, the dealer would probably know where to get the others. If you go to CVS for MJ, I doubt the cashier or pharmacist will be able to tell you where to get some smack. So back fully to OT, I don't know which is sillier. The vending machines or the legal pursuit of those providing them. Don't we have terrorists to catch or something? 
|
|
|
| Reply to Thread New Thread |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
Linear Mode
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
