Who is for it ? Who is against it?

For it!

I don't care if people like to smoke (or whatever else, long as they aren't mugging me to pay for it), but I've always thought sneaking it in under medical pretense is fairly ridiculous.

I trust my doctor to make more informed decisions regarding my health than I do my congressman.

Voted it in and still for it 100%, anyone who's ever had a loved one go thru cancer and chemo and still wants to stay on the side of marinol is an idiot.

and BTW ******** people who smoke pot are the ones who are least likely to try and mug you. it's the tweakers you gotta watch out for.

I agree with Palimax. If the research demonstrates effectiveness, then it's a viable treatment when prescribed by a physician, no "sneaking" required. It's not much different than using morphine and synthetic opiates (Demeral, Percodan, etc.), and really, most of the people who'd benefit from medical marijuana use are suffering enough as is. This is a decision for the medical establishment, not for congressmen too worried about potential attack ads from future opponents to give a rat's ass about cancer sufferers.

Seems to be a viable relief of pain in some instances but I can just see it now.... I have seen cocaine used medically also (just for anestesia purposes) topically. I'm sure that the beer and medically community would be for it if they thought it wouldn't interfere with their profits.

Marinol (oral mj) is also an appetite stimulate and not just used for nausea.

Speaking as someone that has a family member in a situation where they need it for pain relief, for it. It should be treated like many other controlled substances that doctors can prescribe.

I have to agree with Pali, Ailwon, and Thor. I trust my doctor and until my went through Ovarian Cancer I probably wouldn't have cared one way or another. She smoked it to relief her pain b/c there really was nothing they could do for her. And the thought of a 60yr old smoking dope was odd but it did help her in those last days.

Personally... I don't use the stuff, nor do I condone it. However, if people are going to use it, then do it right. Also, if they want people to cut down on it's use, then make it less appealing.

How?

Legalize it, let tobacco producers commercially manufacture marijuana cigarettes and tax the crap out of it like they do so many other things. This would have obvious caveats, but hey, our guv'ment is plenty able to handle those. Just look at how well they've handled the issue of (insert any socio-economic issue here).


*tosses two coppers into the hat*

Agreed. Legalize it. Tax the shit out of it, if it is not for medical use.

While I never smoked it I tend to think that there is really no need to demonize it.

It is just another chemical which can influence the nervous system, so what?

There are plenty of stuff in legal circulation that can impair judgment or cause addiction. Alcohol to name one.

I completely agree with the use of "Medicinal Marijuana" As other people have stated here, there are times when cancer patients can get little to no relief from anything but medical pot. The good Lord put it on this planet for a reason, I am thinking that the medicinal value is a major part of it.

Now, as far as legalizing it, that will probably never happen in this country. The US Gov't makes plenty of money on pot every year. They don't need to tax it to make money. They just need to keep siezing millions of pounds of it, busting those that are dealing in it and siezing all their assets. There is more income and profit for them this way than there would be in taxes.

There is still no good reason why pot is illegal and alcohol is legal. There are no marijuana related deaths on record to this day. Stoners don't go out and get violent, cause car wrecks or cause much trouble in general. The typical stoner just wants to sit back, laugh alot and eat alot with friends. If anyone has ever been to Amsterdam, they have little to no crime with prostitution and marijuana being legal.

There is still no good reason why pot is illegal and alcohol is legal.

The "good" reason they wont is


The US Gov't makes plenty of money on pot every year. They don't need to tax it to make money. They just need to keep siezing millions of pounds of it, busting those that are dealing in it and siezing all their assets. There is more income and profit for them this way than there would be in taxes.

They make way to much money to legalize it, but back to the question at hand. I would have to agree with Fild, Pali, and Thor leave the decsion up to the doctors.

Now, as far as legalizing it, that will probably never happen in this country. The US Gov't makes plenty of money on pot every year. They don't need to tax it to make money. They just need to keep siezing millions of pounds of it, busting those that are dealing in it and siezing all their assets. There is more income and profit for them this way than there would be in taxes.

But what is that number compared to the amount spent keeping the large amount of drug offenders in jail, fighting the drug war, and running those all ads that insult our intelligence everywhere? (serious question)

I'm totally for legalizing it, there's no health related reason to keep it illegal while tobbaco and alchohol aren't. But I do understand the supreme court's decision, that really was more about federal jurisdiction over states and whatnot.

Another reason why it's difficult to get legalized... it's hard to tax something that can be easily grown at home. The majority would still rather just pay for convenience... but it is still an issue.

Considering there are OTC drugs much more dangerous than marijuana, they might as well legalize it.

Agree with Selwen.

In a perfect world, people would not abuse these substances and there would be no need to regulate them. But they do, so we have to decide as a society what makes sense.

I could accept pot by prescription. Contrary to what others have posted, people *have* gotten into nasty accidents while high on pot (it does impair your reactions while driving) so I tend to think it should be covered in similar fashion as alcohol abuse. I see no redeeming qualities for tobacco whatsoever, so I would ban that if I could. As far as booze goes, it's the worst killer of all but is so culturally ingrained that it would be unrealistic to ban and in light usage may also have minor health benefits.

Long story short, medicinal pot is OK with doctor's supervision. Recreational use should be discouraged through education and regulation (much like tobacco), but not necessarily outlawed completely. It's dysfunctional to have a legal system where killers spend less time behind bars than a kid caught with a half-kilo of marijuana.

I see no redeeming qualities for tobacco whatsoever, so I would ban that if I could.I see no redeeming value in lots of things. Lets ban them too.

I mean, sure, smoking is for absolute retards, but pretty soon we'll be drinking tap water and plain tofu.

I'm kinda biased, as my father has developed emphysema and his sister (my aunt) died last year from lung cancer. Both from smoking.

The crackdown (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/23/national/23marijuana.html) begins:
Arrests Follow Searches in Medical Marijuana Raids

By DEAN E. MURPHY (http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=bylL&v1=DEAN%20E.%20MURPHY&fdq=19960101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=DEAN%20E.%20MURPHY&inline=nyt-per)
Published: June 23, 2005
SAN FRANCISCO, June 22 - Federal agents executed search warrants at three medical marijuana dispensaries on Wednesday as part of a broad investigation into marijuana trafficking in San Francisco, setting off fears among medical marijuana advocates that a federal crackdown on the drug's use by sick people was beginning.

About 20 residences, businesses and growing sites were also searched, leading to multiple arrests, a law enforcement official said. Agents outside a club in the Ingleside neighborhood spent much of the afternoon dragging scores of leafy marijuana plants into an alley and stuffing them into plastic bags.

"The investigation led the authorities to these sites," the law enforcement official said. "It involves large-scale marijuana trafficking and includes other illicit drugs and money laundering."

In a separate investigation, a federal grand jury in Sacramento indicted a doctor and her husband on charges of distributing marijuana at the doctor's office in Cool, a small town in El Dorado County.

The doctor, Marion P. Fry, and her husband, Dale C. Schafer, were arrested at their home in nearby Greenwood and pleaded not guilty in federal court in Sacramento to charges of distributing and manufacturing at least 100 marijuana plants. The authorities said in a court document that Dr. Fry wrote a recommendation for medical marijuana to an undercover agent from the Drug Enforcement Administration even though there was a "lack of a medical record," and that her husband provided the agent with marijuana.

The raids and arrests were the first large-scale actions against marijuana clubs and providers since the Supreme Court upheld federal authority over marijuana on June 6, even in states like California, where its use for medicinal purposes has been legal since 1996. The raids involved agents from federal agencies including the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Internal Revenue Service and the Secret Service.

"We will not turn a blind eye to serious and flagrant disregard of federal law," Gordon Taylor, an assistant special agent in charge of Drug Enforcement Administration office in Sacramento, said in a statement. "There may be those who think we can disregard the court and Congress. D.E.A. will not be among them."

The raids angered and alarmed advocates of medical marijuana, some of whom stood on the sidewalk outside the clubs in San Francisco as federal agents worked inside.

"This is an affront to patients and should not be happening," Kris Hermes, legal director of Americans for Safe Access, a marijuana advocacy group, said outside a storefront club that nearby residents said was used to grow marijuana not distribute it.

Mr. Hermes said he could not say if the raids were a result of the Supreme Court ruling, but called it "unacceptable" that federal agents were accompanied by the San Francisco police because the city several years ago declared itself "a safe haven" for medical marijuana users.

Several blocks away, agents seized computer records, medical files and marijuana plants at the Herbal Relief Center on Ocean Avenue. A security gate across the entrance had been pulled open, and a lock lay cut open on the sidewalk.

"They came here before we even opened," said Van Nguyen, 27, who said the dispensary had been in operation about five years and had the records of several thousand patients.

A spokesman for the San Francisco Police Department, Sgt. Neville Gittens, said in a statement that its officers "did not take part in any investigation of these clubs or take any enforcement action against these clubs."

Even before the Supreme Court ruling, many cities, including San Francisco, had begun to crack down on the clubs, which have proliferated in recent years and generally operate without regulation.

Though the authorities would not say how the three clubs raided in San Francisco were tied to the accusations of drug trafficking, the police in San Francisco have complained that some of the 40 or so clubs in the city are little more than fronts for drug dealers.

Ross Mirkarimi, a San Francisco County supervisor who favors the use of marijuana for medical purposes but wants the city to regulate the clubs strictly, said the raids reinforced the need for oversight.

"We do not want bad apples to ruin something that Californians and San Franciscans overwhelmingly voted for and support," Mr. Mirkarimi said.

Peter Ragone, a spokesman for Mayor Gavin Newsom, said the federal investigation reinforced the importance of "trying to protect the legitimate uses of medicinal marijuana in the state."