medical marijuana

Just when you think you can put the "left wingers" into one category
and the "right wingers" in another, along comes an issue that scatters
the categories. Supreme Court justice Scalia, one of the "right wingers"
enthusiastically asserted that dope is evil, but get this from Clarence
Thomas, usually considered Scalias closest ally.

Quote:

---

"Respondents Diane Monson and Angel Raich use marijuana that has never been bought or sold, that has never crossed state lines, and that has had no demonstrable effect on the national market for marijuana," Justice Thomas wrote. "If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything -- and the federal government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers."

---

http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/...2936-7709r.htm

BTW, the "left wingers" were also divided on this issue. In fact, I believe that
marijuana is the one thing that defies a right or left classification. That and maybe
motorcycles. LOL
:cool:

Hmm, pot is evil? That's funny, God made it. And in the Bible it says that the Lord gives us all seed bearing plants for consumption. This is one of many problems with retard republicans and dumb ass democrats, they don't know **** but they think they do and everyone suffers from it. I brought this topic up the other day about those two woman who are pretty much being told to bad.

Can't please everyone. I think their biggest fear is, if you legalize it, where does it stop? Next theres going to be a cocaine lobbiest wanting it made legal, and heroine. Well you let weed be legal so we want this legal too. Stirs up a big pot.

None the less how happy would you be if they made it legal with say a restriction saying you had to be 21 or older to smoke it?

Personally, I don't do any drugs of any kind...you pretty much have to hold me down just to take an asprin...I don't drink either...having said that...

I am a proponet of legalizing all drugs...and having them sold through prescription...at slightly above cost...

this would kill the drug trade because the drug trade is motivated by money not drugs...take away the profit you kill the trade...

make drugs accessible...you don't have as many people breaking into your house to steal your tv so they can buy drugs...

make them accessible only by prescription...you can assess the problem and have an accurate list of users and what they are taking...

it makes sense to me to legalize it this way and ' then ' deal with it.

Eg ;)

No drugs were illegal in the USA until about 1900. It used to be the
general theory that the gov't had to have a compelling
reason in order to make something illegal, otherwise it was assumed
to be the people's right to decide for themselves.

Since when did we submit to the belief that we only have the rights
that they decide to give to us? Legalizing drugs would only restore
the constitutional balance that once existed when this was a great
and free nation.

Besides, the states would still have the power to ban it, so the non-smokers
could go to their states (I wonder which), and the smokers could have theirs.
Local option, just the same with alcohol or gambling.
:cool:

Hi rcgreen,

As I said...we should legalize all drugs but in a controlled way...through prescription...because drugs are not the only issue here...if it was, that would be different...but...

there is the various criminal aspects of it as well that needs to be addressed...if ' everyone ' who did drugs and sold drugs only affected themselves...fine...

but that's not the reality.

The same can be said for alcohol...I've got no problem with someone who wants to go out and get wasted...but...the moment it interferes with my family or my freedom...that's where I draw the line.

Eg ;)

Eg,

Unfortunatly what you said is a little short sighted. If you make it legal and available through prescription, this doesn't eliminate trafficing. The people that don't want to be traced, or can't get a prescription will still feed this. The profit will still be there for the sellers. The only thing you have done is taken the power away from the police to counteract it. Some kid who bought it from a dealer on the corner and is smoking it would be just as legit as someone who has a prescription. An office can't make an assumption about how he obtained it.

I'm not an advocate for not legalizing it, I can just see both sides. The gov't seems to have to protect citizens from themselves. If it was legal you'd end up having people coming to work high. I guess in this case its not even protecting people from themselves but from the problems that the abuse of others could create.

Hi zENGER,

I don't think I'm being short-sighted at all...I grew up with drugs...lots of drugs...it was the sixties...half my friends were dealing...and I've yet to meet a person who does drugs who, given the choice, wouldn't take a legal route where they can get their drugs for ' free ' or next to nothing...than buy them illegally for ten times the cost.

Eg ;)

As for work...if you go to work drunk ( legal ) do they let you keep your job? Legalizing it would not allow you to go to work stoned. ;)

I'm not saying that what I said would fix the problem...just that it would get a handle on it.

Greeings all,

Well here is one subject that is of great concern to me because it concerns me and my family..That being said,in short my wife has a terminal illness called SLE(Systemic Lupus Erythamatosis,also known as Lupus or sometimes called “the wolf illness”)There is no cure for it at this stage of the game and can only be suppressed with day to day medication such as ibuprofen,cortisone,and metotrexate which makes her feel like sh*t, and costs a fortune..

My question is this??In South Africa the drug called”dagga”can be used as a form of pain treatment , which can make her life and my family,s a hell of a lot easier..It is not legalized yet but if it can be be!!, and prescription controlled I am all for it.
I do agree it can be misused as well but I think government can put measures in place to deal with that appropriately..I also think there is a wide range of other illnesses that can benefit from this.

Cheers
vanman

Whos on my Home Grown bandwagon? Gore, most people who are extremely biased against drug use have seen it's destructive properties first hand. Nothing wrong with that and existing law enforcement people are doing what they are paid to do. Uphold the law, so we change it. Legalize drug use for adults, close the Mexican border, solve Iraq, Invest in alternative engergy, exlplore space. Thats my ideal presidente... oh and reform Social Secuity. Why are dems so against reforming a dying program BTW?

//EDIT when I say legalize drugs I am refering to homegrown drugs in the home. If you can't grow it, go to someone who can. People growing pot in a closet should not be going to jail, this is an issue out of control. The hardened criminals can still be put behind bars when they commit violent crimes, but the dude eating a twinkie watching scooby doo with a couple of counts of possession will go to the same jail.

Hi RoadClosed,

I'm sure you've heard of the pot debate and de-criminalization in Canada...to run your own pot house you'll need a licence...like any business licence. ;)

Eg :D

OH...and I agree, pot smokers eating a twinkie should not say hi to bubba...in fact, as I've said before, prison should be ' restricted ' only for violent crimes.
And legalizing drugs through prescription would effectively solve the problem of users going to jail for smokin' at home at their leisure.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by RoadClosed
Whos on my Home Grown bandwagon? Gore, most people who are extremely biased against drug use have seen it's destructive properties first hand. Nothing wrong with that and existing law enforcement people are doing what they are paid to do. Uphold the law, so we change it. Legalize drug use for adults, close the Mexican border, solve Iraq, Invest in alternative engergy, exlplore space. Thats my ideal presidente... oh and reform Social Secuity. Why are dems so against reforming a dying program BTW?

//EDIT when I say legalize drugs I am refering to homegrown drugs in the home. If you can't grow it, go to someone who can. People growing pot in a closet should not be going to jail, this is an issue out of control. The hardened criminals can still be put behind bars when they commit violent crimes, but the dude eating a twinkie watching scooby doo with a couple of counts of possession will go to the same jail.

---

I've been around drugs and I was raised.... A sheep thinking they were bad. I looked up things on my own. And I have in fact been around people who drugs took over them. So I don't have that biased. Drugs are only destructive because they are hard to get pure, and.... You know what the biggest problem with addiction is? Running out. That's it. other than that addiction teaches you to be a good person.

You learn how it feels to REALLY want something and get it. I don't steal from stores, I don't need things I can't afford so much, I have what I really want. And drug addicts wouldn't steal if they were legal, wouldn't need to, because you wouldn't get fired for doing it.

And of course, you could afford it.

I don't think weed or Opium need scripts though, put them in bars or something. In other countries they have this, you go there relax with friends and smoke.

As for legalizing Cocain.... Go ahead, hell it was legal and used in many man surgerys. That's what it was made for.

Go get Scarface, the 1931 edition. Watch how prhibition ruined, ended and stopped many lives. Then look me in the eyes and tell me it's wrong to legalize. All those people could be alive today if it hadn't been for a moronic idea such as prohibition, it should be against the contitution, which is written on hemp.

For the SxE drug haters:

**** off and watch Cheech and Chong you uptight bastards.


"Legalize drug use for adults, close the Mexican border, solve Iraq, Invest in alternative engergy, exlplore space. Thats my ideal presidente... oh and reform Social Secuity.

Agreed for the first one, **** the border, **** Iraq, not sure about that alternative one, and there is more known about the moon than Earth so just explore the water.

The issue goes way beyond drugs. It's about politics, the definition
of the terms "liberal" and "conservative", and the meaning of the
US constitution.

Quote:

---

The chief author of our Constitution, James Madison, had little patience for those who accused him and his allies of trying to create a large, intrusive federal government.
In 1788, he noted pointedly the "powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined ." Those of the states, by contrast, "are numerous and indefinite." Last week, addressing the same question, the Supreme Court said, "James who?"

---

http://washingtontimes.com/commentar...2051-4116r.htm

I was struck by the fact that some people are so irrationally and emotionally anti-dope
that they will set aside their usual legal philosophy to come up with a twisted decision
like this one.

Where's Owsley when you really need him?
:cool:

how would the prescription sale of marijuana differ from the persvription sale of any other drug. some people sell the drugs they've obtained legally. some just give them away to friends and family that need them.

marijuana is not addictive, most people polled have said it should be de-criminalized and at least five states have made marijuna for medical use legal.

the decisions of these states have been overridden by the supreme court. the will of the people is not even considered. in my opinion the real question is do the courts have too much power?

we spend far too much money stopping (and punnishing) people from doing something they want to do.

The will of the people? Damn you're idealistic.

Quote:

---

the decisions of these states have been overridden by the supreme court. the will of the people is not even considered. in my opinion the real question is do the courts have too much power?

---

This is nothing new. I mean... that right there is the issue that started the civil war, once the civil war was lost, so was any hope of true state based government. We're all just federal puppets now.

rc, the issue does go beyond drugs. It's both a social and political problem. That's why I support limited release on controls AT A STATE'S discression. And employers who still wish to impose controls on their workers are free to do so. Schools and colleges who wish to impose controls are also free to do so and the legal age will be the right of suffrage, what ever that is in each state. If you don't like it move or get another job. Just like alcohol and other controlled substances.

The court decision is based on existing laws at a federal level. Change in those laws will take time and only through direct communication to congress and guess what, we need the Christians on board to enact any real change.

Hey folks, this is a bit of a weird one for me?...............We (The British) are looking at cannabis as a pharmacalogical substance..............sure we will need to identify the active ingredients, and make some little white pills, but let's start the research?

Back before WWI you could go into a pharmacist and buy cannabis.............you could also buy a pint of laudanum to wash it down with (that's tincture of opium :cool: )

I am pretty sure there is good stuff here............shall we just find out what and isolate it? that might just improve a few people's quality of life?

:)

No no, it's Opium and wine, ;) It's funny, back in the day before 1906 you could walk around smoking Opium, there was damn near NO crime rate, no gangs, no people being shot down in the street, then boom drug laws everywhere and gangs ruling the country with guns.

Anyone from the DEA reading this? You realise your job is to make life hell for people?

Hah, are you trying to say that almost all violence stems from laws banning drugs?

ALL DRUG RELATED violence is in fact from them being banned. How many time has someone robbed someone for money to buy a drug that's dirt cheap to make? How many times have gangs murdered people for territory? How many people "Promote terrorism" by buying drugs?

Legalize them, tax them, problem solved.

Gore, old chap.................

I am arguing that we are denying possible relief?.................we NEED the research?..............why was it treated as a pharmaceutical in the past?

:)

It's all about control of the population................The only reason the Uk invoked, limited, opening hours in pubs, was to stop workers, in munitions factories, being incapable or under parr (in their work). Since the end of the war there has been no nead for the back against the wall attidude, that was neaded at the time.

With narcotics, I believe the same is true. There is already a wealth of data to suggest that the likes of blow, have real medical benifits. The only reason I can see for the research that is being carried out at the moment, is the fear of the Government, of what is already a popular drug being espoused as benifitial. Which would mean the pro drug lobby has more of a case for general legalization.

I believe, that it is widely acknowledged that free thinking is only acceptabe within pre defined terms. Thinking beyond those terms leads to a danger to society. As drug taking is the passtime of free thinkers, it must be a danger to society.

One of the difficulties in getting laws passed or revoked in any democracy is that it generally isn't the people who truly have a say, it is a small hardcore group who weild the power. In capatalist society, this generally means whoever has lots of money. Thus a minority group with minority views ends up being a virtual majority.

ac

Quote:

---

One of the difficulties in getting laws passed or revoked in any democracy is that it generally isn't the people who truly have a say

---

That may be partly true, especially where business and money is concerned, but with
drugs, I'd bet it's the majority that's anti-dope, where many gov't officials may hold
surprisingly permissive views, but are afraid to go against the superstitions of the
voters.
:cool:

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by zENGER
Can't please everyone. I think their biggest fear is, if you legalize it, where does it stop? Next theres going to be a cocaine lobbiest wanting it made legal, and heroine. Well you let weed be legal so we want this legal too. Stirs up a big pot.

---

Interesting question...

Cocaine is legal in the US for perscription already.
Heroin is legal for addicts and perscriptions in Switzerland and the UK respectively. (Though morphine is legal in the US.)

cheers,

catch

Hi zENGER,

Where does it stop?

There are thousands of prescription drugs that have, for years, been un-available any other way...legalizing them as prescription drugs does not open the door for over-the-counter availability...

Eg ;)

Catch is not quite correct there:

Heroin and Cocaine are class "A" drugs in the UK. That means they are banned to all intents and purposes (unless you are a laboratory rat :D )

Like the USA, we use Morphine rather than Heroin, for medical purposes. For the treatment of heroin addicts we use methadone.

We also have a number of "derivative" products that contain drugs such as opium, coedine and also cocaine (you get that at the dentist :eek: )

Cannabis was downgraded to a class "C" drug, and is currently being researched for its medicinal properties.

Apart from the three major illegal drugs (Ecstasy, Heroin & Cocaine) the others are prescription only, and do not seem to be much of an issue over here.

:)

Heroin isn't a Class A though, for people who are in enough pain that Morphine isn't strong enough they ger Heroin, which is Morphine purified.

Ahhhhhhhhhhh!

Over here they just get a higher dose of morphine ;) "heroin" is an abuse drug (political correctness?) as is cocaine. Our Dunlop Committee (Like your FDA) just give them different names.

I guess they base that on the active ingredients?

:)

Quote:

---

Well here is one subject that is of great concern to me because it concerns me and my family..That being said,in short my wife has a terminal illness called SLE(Systemic Lupus Erythamatosis,also known as Lupus or sometimes called “the wolf illness”)There is no cure for it at this stage of the game

---

My heart goes out to you Vanman, Lupus took my little sister only a few months ago...and we all wished that cures were published and that better pain medication was available to relieve their suffering.

[rant]You can say I'm off my nut but...I personally do not trust the drug companies or the researchers that profess to be attempting to find cures for our ailments. After all these years and billions of dollars spent, with all the absolutely brilliant minds we have on this earth, you can never convince me that we do not have CURES! The bottom line is that there is absolutely no money, jobs, or votes in cures! Additionally, anybody been in the hospital lately. How much did that single Acetaminophen tablet cost you? $6 - $8 USD! [/rant]

More on topic: It's use, import, and export can't be controlled anyway. So legalization may not be such a bad option. However do you want the existing drug companies and researchers dictating the price?

cheers

Hi Relyt,

Quote:

---

However do you want the existing drug companies and researchers dictating the price?

---

Actually, over here, it is the Government that dictates the price, and the profits you are allowed to make (even though they tax them as well)

One of the advantages of a taxpayer financed health system?

Some people may find my stance rather strange?..............well I worked in ethical pharmaceuticals for a few years. What gets to me is the disorganisation and waste............sure we could do better, one hell of a lot better in my opinion, we just seem to lack co-ordination?

:(

Hey Nihil

Quote:

---

Actually, over here, it is the Government that dictates the price,

---

Don't know whether to congratulate you or share my condolences:D Both obviously have their benefits and disadvantages.

"disorganisation and waste" lites me (and hopefully others) up to the rabied state! It's our money they are using.

cheers

Pharmaceutical drugs can easily be regulated...in Canada we pay sometimes less than half of what the typical American pays for the same product...which is why our drugs are in such high demand with Americans...

Why do Americans pay so much for their drugs? Because the drug companies know you will pay...they say they have to charge a mark-up ' beyond normal profit ' because they have to fund more research...so...above normal profit there is an additional mark-up for research...this way they can fund their research ( along with government and private funding ) without losing ( read: using ) profits...

that makes them somewhat unique in the world of business...in that they do not have to re-invest out of profits like virtually every other business who wants their business to grow...essentially you get charged a research penalty that other Nations do not have to pay.

Essentially...it's like if GM, over and above their normal profit mark-up, were allowed to charge an additional 70-120 % for research into alternative fuel vehicles.

The words...getting shafted...come to mind!

We've recently passed some legislation which lets companies use other copyrighted drugs in research without licensing fees. It's like drug open source. That could drive down research cost.

The UK does use Heroin in a clinical sense but not everywhere. They call it diamorphine. In my local 'big' hospital it's used regularly for epidurals for childbirth.

I can't ever see weed being legalised. They're about to ban tobacco smoking in public places here so I doubt they'd allow general use of dope. Forgetting it gets you monged dope is far more carcinogenic than tabacco. Not a prob if you're terminally ill or suffering another condition where the relife from dope would out weigh anything else.

When I was studying they used to have fridges filled with pharmaceutical grade drugs like aphetamine, cocaine, lsd, diamorphine, diazapam, triazapam and a load of others. The fridges were never locked and there was no security on the doors. I've no idea why nothing was ever stolen. We had scales go missing probably taken by dealers who had no idea that there was 100k in drugs just round the corner. I don't think Gore would have lasted long on that course, but he'd have enjoyed his time.

Thank you Aspman

Quote:

---

The UK does use Heroin in a clinical sense but not everywhere. They call it diamorphine

---

"Diamorphine".............couldn't remember what it was called, but we still call it morphine..........just like "novocaine" is the cocaine you get at the dentists?...............makes your nose go numb as well :D

I have made the point of "political correctness"? in the way we describe our pharmaceuticals?

:D

I can imagine the screams in the labour ward if the expectant mother was told she was about to be injected with heroin :D

Quote:

---

They call it diamorphine. In my local 'big' hospital it's used regularly for epidurals for childbirth.

---

Its also used to put the elderly (in care homes/nursing homes) to sleep, permently. When they become to troublesome. Aparently.

Quote:

---

Its also used to put the elderly (in care homes/nursing homes) to sleep, permently. When they become to troublesome. Aparently.

---

Nah mate!......total urban myth.......we use 9mm Parabellum (4Z?).............it is way cheaper :D

What does happen in cancer wards is that the patient does eventually succumb to an opiate overdose. Most people in care nursing are not on that medication................and if you read back what you just posted you would realise that there would not be anyone in those establishments licenced to hold and administer opiates...........?

:)

Nihil,
I lived in a care home for a number of years, both my ex wife and mother worked there. I remember my mother balling out a Doctor, who was none to happy to have been called out at late o'clock. I do not say it is wide spread, but it is not an urban myth.

As for the administering, that was always done by the patiants Doctor.