cannabisnews.com: Pot Laws Grow More Confusing Pot Laws Grow More Confusing Posted by CN Staff on February 21, 2003 at 07:39:38 PT Editorial Source: Santa Cruz Sentinel It’s time for good public-health policy to dictate this country’s laws pertaining to marijuana. We have long argued that the fight against AIDS has everything to do with public health policy and nothing to do with morality. Perhaps we should take a similar approach with the medical-marijuana situation.Unfortunately, neither side of the medical-marijuana issue is dealing with the future in a practical or effective way. The problem stems from marijuana’s role in the drug culture, and that it’s a recreational drug for many people — and what seems to be medical treatment for some. Most Americans seem to believe that marijuana is basically a danger to the public health, but that it may well be, for some who are sick, marijuana is a great medicine.Unfortunately, our society isn’t doing a great job of figuring out a reasoned approach. Doctors and scientists in particular haven’t been much help in communicating to the rest of us about the benefits of medical marijuana. Is smoking it the only way to achieve the benefit? Are there scientifically sound alternatives?Marijuana has a vocal legion of supporters, many of whom believe the benefits of the drug go further than bringing relief to those with cancer and other serious disease. However, more and more evidence is piling up that marijuana smoking by otherwise healthy people can contribute to further medical problems, both physiological and psychological.Law enforcement is in complete disarray over enforcing drug laws. At least here in Santa Cruz County, local law-enforcement personnel have shown restraint in dealing with medical-marijuana users — and those who distribute the drug.Of course, amid much publicity, federal authorities are cracking down. Federal agents have arrested medical-marijuana distributors and have confiscated the drug.In Oakland, medical-marijuana guru Ed Rosenthal was convicted on federal charges of growing the drug, and defense lawyers were prevented from introducing evidence that he had been doing so to provide pot to medical patients.Now, federal lawmakers are considering legislation that would allow defendants like Rosenthal to be able to introduce evidence showing that state law allows pot growing.The legislation, while understandable, just seems to be laying another layer of confusion onto the argument. We agree that some people seem to need medical marijuana, but the reality is that many others are interested in the recreational aspect of the drug.So we’re caught in a situation where medicine tells us that some people are helped by pot, while others are harmed physically or psychologically by using it.Marijuana is hardly the only drug that is good for some and not for others: a wide variety of prescription drugs are harmful if used outside the bounds of good medicine.It’s time for marijuana to be treated in the same way. Our public health system ought to make information more available to the public, and to our lawmakers, about when and where marijuana should be used.Those who are sick and can be helped by marijuana should have access to it. Those who just want to get high should be limited by laws that already pertain to other prescription-only drugs.The marijuana situation is getting murkier all the time. Those who use the drug to get high seem to want it made available more and more. We’re not convinced that universal access to marijuana is something that’s good for our society.That’s why it’s time for good science and public-health policy to dictate what our marijuana laws should be. Adding confusing legislation onto the pile really won’t solve the problem. Source: Santa Cruz Sentinel (CA)Published: February 21, 2003 Copyright: 2003 Santa Cruz SentinelContact: editorial santa-cruz.comWebsite: http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:Ed Rosenthal's Trial Pictures & Articleshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/trialpics.htmState Pols Push Congress on Medical Pothttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15524.shtmlMeasure Would Add Medical Pot Defense http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15523.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #6 posted by observer on February 21, 2003 at 19:08:11 PT Jail ... Prison? ''That’s why it’s time for good [i.e. good government] science and public-health policy [i.e. government bureaucrats] to dictate what our marijuana laws should be.''Ah, the Statist point of view, nicely obfuscated.Notice how their minds are so wonderfully compartmentalized. No untidy thoughts of jailing people for using a plant, to intrude on a paradise of good government science in service of "public-health policy" to "dictate" to us all. raw, breaking canadian drug news http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/canada [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by billos on February 21, 2003 at 11:20:34 PT: pot / prohibition Who actually says that pot can't be "universally accessed?" I consider myself to be a light to moderate smoker, but pot IS everywhere. I worked at a place once for ten months, out of state, didn't smoke because I was a stranger and didn't know who was or wasn't cool. Didn't know where to get it. A month before I left the job I discovered that most of the people I worked with smoked. It was like a revelation! I even expressed my dismay about not knowing beforehand. It was mutual, and we all partied together the last few weekends I had left to stay. It sometimes amazes me to find out that a certain "so and so" smokes. Anyway, to get to the point, pot is very easy to come by most times. It's also amazing how the Feds can actually believe that prohibition keeps pot out of the "childrens" hands. Hell, I've had more pot offered to me by 18 yo's than 50. I remember a summer family re-union 6 years ago. My sister blasted me because she saw her 18 y.o. son smoking some of a joint while mingling with the crowd. Would you believe I couldn't convince her that the kid supplied the joint?? There's way more to prohibition than meets the eye. I'm convinced that should tomorrow come, and by some weird miracle there was no one left on Earth under the age of 21 y.o. , Walters would still not budge from his stance on Cannabis. - After all, for the "sake of the children" is a big defense for Walters and his cronies - If the trial of "Ed" happened over illegal booze back in the 20's, would society have been so damn blind not to see that the Feds railroaded the poor guy? And if they did see it, what would have been the response? [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by Sam Adams on February 21, 2003 at 10:02:33 PT annoying article What are they trying to say here? Look at this part:"Unfortunately, our society isn?t doing a great job of figuring out a reasoned approach. Doctors and scientists in particular haven?t been much help in communicating to the rest of us about the benefits of medical marijuana. Is smoking it the only way to achieve the benefit? Are there scientifically sound alternatives?"What? Any doctor will tell you that vaporizing or eating is better than smoking. You can find this information all over the internet in minutes. What do these guys want, an official delegation from the AMA to present a gold-plated binder with a complete report on medical cannabis use to the Santa Cruz Sentinel?How about getting off their butts to do some investigative journalism? How about forming an opinion? Are today's newspaper editors still capable of these things? They are in Canada and Europe.... [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by Dumbstruck on February 21, 2003 at 10:02:27 PT: Sources "More and more evidence is piling up that marijuana smoking by otherwise healthy people can contribute to further medical problems, both physiological and psychological."It seems that the norm with talking about cannabis is that you don't need to concern yourself with accuracy or facts, almost as if anything goes. While it may not be as ridiculous as some drug warrior propaganda, these random statements about cannabis need to be challenged. When an individual or organization claims there's "evidence piling up," I'd really like to know where it's piling up at. They need to start telling people who their sources are, where they read something or who their quoting.And right on queue, The History Channel plays one of them Nick & Norm--or whoever they are--commercials while I'm typing this.Enlightened One: (slightly sarcastic)"So what your saying is it's OK to support terrorism...a little."Unenlightened One: (slightly sarcastic)"Did I say that?"Me: (slightly sarcastic)"Brilliant." Pot Laws Grow More Confusing [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by Virgil on February 21, 2003 at 08:08:32 PT The real harm is caused by cannabis prohibition Marijuana is hardly the only drug that is good for some and not for others: a wide variety of prescription drugs are harmful if used outside the bounds of good medicine.Many medicines are dangerous even when used properly. They can be brought to market with research done by the industry that would profit from their sales. Many are abused because they are addictive and are sold by employees on the factory floor as a common practice. It would be a wise policy not to take a prescription before it is on the market for 5 years.We’re not convinced that universal access to marijuana is something that’s good for our society.Well, the Canadian Senate Report says that cannabis laws should not be about controlling the public and be governed by the principle of freedom. This guy writes an opinion and like all articles by the fascist media cannot address the real harm caused to society by cannabis prohibition. Cannabis prohibition is 100 times worse to society than cannabis would ever be.Actually I think regulated cannabis would greatly benefit society. Just the impact it would have on the problems caused by alcohol would be plenty of reason enough to want legalized cannabis.Then there is the issue of freedom as if pragmatism should not have already been considered. There is nothing about cannabis that outweighs the problems of corruption of government that is continued because of cannabis prohibition. Look at the harm done by erecting a stonewall that has blocked out research that has postponed the silver bullet medicines for head trauma and the pill that people will soon dominate the market for headache over-the counter-medicines like aspirin and Advil/Tylonel-type medicines.Others besides the Canadian Senate Special Committee called for legalization. But this dumbass that writes like his opinion is worth a dam and like society has a right to impose it on a so-called free people.He is right about the new bill introduced even though it will never get out of committee anyway. If it were not a meaningless effort it would be completely stupid. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by TecHnoCult on February 21, 2003 at 07:50:39 PT Is Prohibition good for society? We’re not convinced that universal access to marijuana is something that’s good for our society.You don't have to be convinced it's good for society. The real question is: "Should people be jailed for simply making a decision potentailly hazardous to their health?" All the other points we bring up are important, but this is by far the most important. This is the question we need to ask every prohibitionist, and everyone who is on the fence.THC [ Post Comment ] Post Comment