Pacridge
DP Veteran
If they allow medical marijuana use against the federal government, I can see a whole new can of worms opening.At issue is whether federal drug agents have the authority to prosecute individuals who are abiding by their state's medical marijuana law.
vauge said:I was refering that if the states laws overwiegh the federal laws, we are in for some very trying times in the future.
Extream example:
Say a state does not accept the definition of "free speech". austa lah bye bye first amendment.
Federal laws could become irrelivant - creating havoc and eventually a revolution.
argexpat said:If I were to be a single issue voter, this would be my issue. That we criminalize marijuana, even for medical purposes, while promoting alcohol and tobacco use is itself a crime. The FDA regularly approves drugs that later turn out to be harmful, but let an emaciated chemotherapy patient dying from cancer smoke a joint? No no no!
argexpat said:Ultimately this is a states' rights issue. Yet, conservatives, the traditional proponents of states' rights, are suddenly AWOL on this. (They were for states' rights when it protected segregation, but not when it protects gays and sick people.) For an excellent primer see here: http://slate.msn.com/id/2104207/
CSA_TX said:I see no problem with the reefer. However I find it quite amusing the federal government amended the constitiution to stop booze and then amended the constitution to repeal prohibition. However they have never amended the constitution to fight the war on drugs. Whats up with that.
I agree.Ender said:The states were originally to govern themselves as I understand it. But the Fed wants the power and has evolved into a stronger body as the years passed.
There are studies that show it heals glaucoma? That's pretty amazing, someone should tell the medical marijuana people about this study. Since even they're not claiming it cures anything. The only claim they're making is that it alleviates the symptoms of some ailments, usually pain.IronTongue said:I'm going to dissect my opinion into two parts:
Medical marijuana: as far as we know, there are some effects, but there hasn't been enough study to prove WHAT those effects are. Studies say it affects your long-term memory, others say it heals glaucoma. No one really knows how it interacts with drugs like claratin or prozac, or other prescription drugs; on the other hand, no one has EVER died as a result of smoking. In my opinion, we shouldn't label marijuana medical until we KNOW that it's safe and heals people.
.
Pacridge said:And no one has ever died from smoking? Someone needs to get that info out to the Tabacco Companies and quick.QUOTE]
I meant smoking marijuana, not cigarettes
IronTongue said:The stuff in the papers here in Oregon during the last election (we were voting on a MJ Medical meassure) said that marijuana contained more tar and cancer causing agents then tabacco.Pacridge said:And no one has ever died from smoking? Someone needs to get that info out to the Tabacco Companies and quick.QUOTE]
I meant smoking marijuana, not cigarettes
Then you and I agree.IronTongue said:My point is this: how many people have died from alcohol, be it poisoning, DWI, or whatever. There will always be those who are not smart enough to control themselves; that doesn't mean we have to make laws around them.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?