Marijuana.com

Buzzby

Denying Relief Is Moral?
Greg Scharf | The Californian | 03/17/2006

A while ago, I had the misfortune to hear the shrill chest thumping of San Diego County Supervisor Bill Horn as he was announcing the county would sue to overturn the state's Compassionate Use Act allowing the medical use of marijuana.

His rantings reminded me of those heartless bastards who gave kids prison sentences in the '60s for small amounts of weed.

Our own county Supervisor Jeff Stone has talked about doing the same thing. Although Stone said he wanted clarification about how to deal with the conflicts between federal and state law, first and foremost, Stone is a pharmacist.

I spoke to him about it, and my impression is that he's simply against the use of marijuana for any purpose. He stated that the stuff out today has some 40 times the tetrahydrocannabinol (active ingredient commonly known as THC) as what was smoked in the '60s, and while it may not be as dangerous as meth or heroin, it's certainly not harmless.

Stone doesn't like amateurs dispensing drugs. He does not lack compassion; his pharmacy specializes in pain-killing "cocktails," which I would assume are morphine-based ---- much stronger than marijuana. But then again, his drugs are precisely measured and administered, there's no variation between doses.

He brought up Marinol, the THC-derived drug that is used to allay nausea involved in chemotherapy. He admitted that it is expensive ---- $38 a pill taken twice a day ---- so if someone doesn't have insurance, they're out of luck. I also mentioned that a friend told me that the drug just keeps the vomiting in check, it doesn't stop the nausea.

He mentioned the risk of people getting marijuana fraudulently, but then again, there are a lot of folks who obtain prescription drugs the same way. Stone admitted in terms of chronic pain, or particularly end of life, that marijuana's side effects or health threats are obviously no longer relevant ---- he simply believes that there are better approaches to pain and suffering than marijuana.

Temecula has followed his lead and placed a moratorium on dispensaries, but then again, after all, this is Pleasantville.

While Lake Elsinore has permitted marijuana co-ops, Police Chief Louis Fetherolf wants no dispensaries in town. He spoke of a "bevy of public safety issues," which sounded much like the issues surrounding beer sales at a convenience store ---- people buying it illegally, people using on premises and theft. Surely the Lake Elsinore PD is up to the task?

The cooperatives sound good but don't serve people who are too ill to grow it or who don't know where to meet other users or find seeds.

He doesn't want to enforce a state law and ignore a federal law. I'm sure that's confusing, but I wonder ---- illegal immigration is a violation of federal law; when Lake Elsinore police pull over illegal aliens do they apprehend them and turn them over to the Border Patrol?

The ordinance proposed by Fetherolf included the language to "promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the residents and businesses of the city."

How moral is it to deny relief to those suffering from multiple sclerosis, nausea and pain related to terminal or chronic illness?
--
Greg Scharf of Temecula is a regular columnist for The Californian. E-mail: Gscharf7@aol.com

__________________

 

Plainsman1963

Now that is a good point.

Mr. Erik

It's sad but America hates every aspect of Cannabis... To bad they can't realize what it can do for some people. The war on drugs is making me madder and madder.

faulninja

Quote:
"He doesn't want to enforce a state law and ignore a federal law. I'm sure that's confusing, but I wonder ---- illegal immigration is a violation of federal law; when Lake Elsinore police pull over illegal aliens do they apprehend them and turn them over to the Border Patrol?"



not such a good point, this is a fallacy that was badly used. immigration and narcotics are completly different issues with different laws concerning extridation and the government allowing states to come up with their own solutions as they pertain to the situation at hand. now dont get me wrong i am all for medical/recreational marijuana, its just that this was a bad arguement that weakened the entire article.

Buzzby

I disagree. The analogy is apt. In both cases it's a question of local law enforcement taking upon itself the duty to enforce laws of a wider jurisdiction when such enforcement is optional.

The state of California's attorney general has ordered the California Highway Patrol to not enforce federal marijuana laws against anyone with legitimate sanctions under California law to use and possess the drug.

 

alexnalaska

Moral=Religion+he has stock in Merck?=pot bad=Him donkeys rear end=USA=DEA=Diplomatic evasive action=full prisons and full bank accounts 4 the Cronieism crew and not diddle sqaut for me and you...............Oh, except a 6 x 9 in the state pen as soon as we get caught w/a seed and a stem. Then we can make shoes and soap, so they'll get richer as we lose hope? .........

If it would have been an old west tale. Mr man sounds like he would have been dodgeing bullets while talking to buzzby.....lol...

alexnalaska

oh, and i have worked w/illgal mexicans in NC, GA, FLA, Alaska,Ca,....ect, so it does pretain to the whole country. how many 9/11 bombers came from mexico or even crossed the mexican boarder? None.....now the canadian boarder is a totally different story. I want to say like 6-7 of the hijackers, but im not sure, came across the canadian boarder, and we know it.

sorry just the facts. I have always wondered why illegal aliens are sent home and we are sent to prison? Yet as an ex-con I can not go anywhere outside the usa but mexico......funny aye? If we kicked the illgal aliens out of the country it would stop. We are a country of buyers not producers.

faulninja

[quote=Buzzby]I disagree. The analogy is apt. In both cases it's a question of local law enforcement taking upon itself the duty to enforce laws of a wider jurisdiction [u]when such enforcement is optional.

The US federal govt has not given the states the leway to make the enforcement of drug laws optional like those of immigration laws. the frderal govt has a much more lax attitude towards immigration, and supreme court rulings have stated that federal law is supreme in dealing with drugs.

Buzzby

I'm sorry, but you're totally misinformed on this subject. State and local law enforcement is under no obligation to enforce federal laws. If it were, the Gonzales v. Raich decision would have declared California's medical marijuana laws unconstitutional. It did not. The decision merely stated that it was within the powers of federal law enforcement to enforce federal laws when they contradict state laws.

As I said, the CA Attorney General, the top law enforcement person in the state, has ordered the CHP not to enforce federal marijuana laws against anyone with valid CA credentials to use and possess the drug.

faulninja

I would like to thank you for setting the truth straight Buzzby, i had fallen victim to the product of misinforation/propaganda.