SDBWM On Medical Marijuana
Bob Newland responded to the item regarding Tim Johnson's letter to Eddie by asking Todd Epp to answer questions about medical marijuana. Since I posted the item -- and because I've thought about this issue quite a bit since Bob rode his bike across the state this summer -- I decided that I would take the time to answer.
First, I want to point out that the reason the item was posted is because Johnson took a position on Medical Marijuana. John Thune has also answered Eddie's question; he said he was opposed to legalizing it. The item is news -- big news -- and deserves more coverage.
I would sign the petition, but only because I believe that it deserves a place on the ballot. I am in favor of letting the public vote on a variety of initiatives. That doesn't mean I favor it. That said, I am firmly in the undecided column. Hopefully, my answers will give you a better understanding why.
(I will also say that I am not a pot smoker. And I am of the school that believes it is not a harmless drug. But so is aspirin when abused.)
Bob's questions are in bold.
1. Do you think that the people who use marijuana medically are lying about their assertions that it works for them, and that many have tried prescriptive medicines and found that they don't work, or that they have serious adverse side-effects?
No. In fact, I believe that many of them have found comfort in using marijuana for medical purposes.
2. What, exactly, is the danger to society in adult (or juvenile, with parental involvement) use of marijuana under the guidance of a doctor?
I worry about legalizing access to marijuana and the possible problems it might cause. I wonder how we would go about acquiring a drug that is illegal to produce. Who would produce and market marijuana? Would it be distributed at the drug store like Vioxx? (bad example).
3. Can you present even one benefit from marijuana prohibition?
There a plenty of studies that question the health effects of marijuana. Alcohol prohibition probably was beneficial, since it is a substance that is easily abused. The question itself gives me pause, since it suggests that you see the Medical Marijuana initiative as a step toward the wholesale legalization of the drug. And that's my biggest problem with it is that, while I don't doubt the sincerity of many of the people who use it, I do question the sincerity of the people pushing for legalization of marijuana for medical use.
Now, if you would say, "can you present even one benefit from the prohibition of marijuana for medical purposes," I have a tougher time answering the question. Probably not. Because of the popularity of marijuana, I expect that access to it by recreational users would increase. That's not the point of your campaign, at least in the way that it 's being presented to the public.
Assure me that you are advocating for patients and not for pot and I will be firmly in your corner. Right now, you haven't been able to do this.
SDBWM
SDBWM
3 Comments
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (3)
I’ll state my opinions on cannabis as plainly as I can, so my sincerity should not be at issue.
First, it is counterproductive and stupid to deny American farmers a shot at the international market in industrial hemp. Hemp is the most versatile crop on earth, in every respect. It grows everywhere, with less fertilizer and water than any commodity crop of which I am aware. It provides great promise in A) alleviating our dependence on foreign fuel sources, B) alleviating food shortages, and C) revitalizing family farms. (Regardless of what opponents say, it is quite easy to distinguish hemp from marijuana.)
Second, marijuana prohibition doesn’t work. It’s expensive and harmful. Anyone who wants weed can get it. Add to that the fact that there is no societal rationale for putting people in jail for using marijuana. Add to that the fact that the ONLY success in marijuana prohibition has been to enrich people who are willing to take the risks of production and distribution. Anyone who wants weed can still get it, at prices lower than 20 years ago.
Third, I assure you that my purpose in advocating that sick, disabled and dying people have safe legal access to therapeutic marijuana is to help provide a way for sick, disabled and dying people to have safe legal access to therapeutic marijuana. I do so because I have personally witnessed the palliative power of cannabis and I believe it is cruel beyond characterization to deny medicine that works to people who need it.
Those who look at these arguments and still say that we are piggybacking on sick people to get weed legalized are, in a word, despicable. Their prized prohibition policy is a failure and creates huge damage. They are obviously not lying on a bed writhing in agony from a migraine attack that could be alleviated by marijuana (for some sufferers).
Incidentally, alcohol prohibition doubled alcohol consumption in the US in 10 years. It also succeeded in making some very vicious people very rich. So, it those senses it was a success, yes. Much like the War on (some) Drugs.
The 1948 LaGuardia Commission, the 1972 Schafer Commission (a Nixon-appointed group) and the 1997 Institutes of Medicine Commission (a Barry McCaffrey group) were all gummint-funded. All three commissions recommended decriminalization of marijuana, because they could discern no threat to social order from the herb. All were ignored and derided by their appointers. Another three or four dozen smaller studies from all over the world have arrived at the same conclusions, including universal acknowledgment of cannabis’ medical indication.
No credible study has found a single serious threat posed by even long-term heavy use of marijuana. On the other hand, hundreds of unarmed people have been killed by cops attempting to enforce marijuana prohibition. In addition, people have served about 20 million years in prison in the US since 1937 on marijuana prohibition charges.
It appears that the prison-industrial complex is piggybacking on sick people to maintain its reign of terror. Once we take the very weakest and neediest folks out of this equation by giving them safe legal access to the medicine that works for them, we can get on with a more sensible argument over a controlled, regulated, taxed and socially acceptable cannabis policy in general.
This much is obviously true. Keeping things the way they are assures an uncontrolled and ready market for marijuana among people of all ages, along with obscene profits for those who deal in the black market for it.
http://www.sodaksafeaccess.org/
Now you are advocating for legalizing marijuana as a sort of farm program? I think this is part of the problem with the MM campaign, too many fronts.
I appreciate the information, and your passion.
Thanx for the nice comments. One thing though, can you tell me to what post you were responding? I don't find anything in it that relates to what I said above.
Bob