cannabisnews.com: Compassion & Common Sense!





Compassion & Common Sense!
Posted by FoM on July 23, 1999 at 21:57:06 PT
BY Gerald F. Uelmen
Source: San Jose Mercury
Proposition 215, the initiative that permits the medical use of marijuana, is entitled ``The Compassionate Use Act of 1996.''
Indeed, no political issue in America today defines the need for compassionate politicians better than medical marijuana. Yet this is an issue on which the voters are ahead of the politicians.The overwhelming majorities that approved initiative measures to permit medical use of marijuana in California, Arizona, Alaska, Washington, Oregon and Nevada reflect deep compassion for those who suffer from debilitating diseases like AIDS and cancer, and the side effects of their treatment. Much of that compassion is based on firsthand experience, not medical studies. Those at the bedside of dying relatives struggling with wretching nausea, who see them gain relief from marijuana, have no difficulty distinguishing ``medical'' from ``recreational'' use, and are ready to accept such legal distinctions. But in an era of sound-bite politics, it's hard to convince many politicians that the public is sophisticated enough to accept compassion for the sick and dying as an exception to a strong anti-drug stance. They react with the timeless folly of leaders who lose touch with their followers, by stopping their ears. Even in the face of mounting scientific evidence confirming that marijuana has legitimate medical benefits, our federal drug czar views the medical marijuana movement as an insidious threat. In California, displaying political courage, Attorney General Bill Lockyer convened representatives of law enforcement, the medical profession, and patients groups to serve on a task force to implement Prop 215.Sen. John Vasconcellos and Santa Clara County District Attorney George Kennedy co-chaired the effort. I was privileged to serve on the task force, and observed first-hand a convergence of compassion and common sense. A carefully fashioned proposal to establish a state-wide registry for medical marijuana users emerged, modeled on the registries established in the Washington and Oregon initiatives. It would provide police a rapid and convenient way to confirm whether a claim that marijuana is possessed for medical use is legitimate, by issuing identification cards to patients who have their physician's approval.Does this effort ``flout'' federal authority? Hardly. The federal government itself set up a program to make marijuana available to medical patients 20 years ago, after a District of Columbia jury acquitted a glaucoma patient who claimed ``medical necessity.'' When the program was overwhelmed with applicants, new enrollments were cut off 10 years ago. The federal government has never prosecuted a cancer or AIDS patient for simple possession of marijuana for personal use. Nor will it, because government officials realize no jury would ever convict in such a case. While federal authorities have sought a civil injunction against large-scale Cannabis Clubs, small cooperatives that serve the needs of local patient groups are operating openly in California. .Earlier this month, after the Assembly Health Committee approved the task force's proposal by a vote of 9-3, Gov. Gray Davis's press secretary dumped cold water on the effort. He announced the governor will probably veto the measure because it is ``clearly in conflict with federal law.''The conflict with federal law is far from clear. California police are not charged with enforcing federal law. State law now declares that patients afflicted with debilitating diseases have a ``right'' to possess and use medical marijuana with the recommendation or approval of their physicians. Thousands of them will do so, regardless of federal law, and federal authorities are not foolish or reckless enough to seek their prosecution in federal court. That leaves local law enforcement officials with an enormous headache. They don't want to take medicine away from sick people, but have no way to verify a claim of legitimate medical use. Patients who are willing to accept the rather minimal risk of federal intervention should not be deprived of their rights under state law.A California governor can't hide behind the federal drug czar. He took an oath to uphold California laws. Ignoring the clear mandate of the people in Proposition 215 would demonstrate not only a lack of compassion, but a streak of cowardice.In one important respect, California law and federal law are identical. They both require the support of the people for their enforcement. A California governor ignores at his peril the demand of the people for compassion in the enforcement of our law.Gerald F. Uelmen is a professor of law at Santa Clara University School of Law, and a Scholar of the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University.Pubdate: July 23, 1999©1999 Mercury Center. 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #4 posted by FoM on July 24, 1999 at 11:44:07 PT:
The Will Of The People!
Hi Dr. Ganj!How can they keep this up? The news is being sent and posted all over the Internet. I hope it sinks in!Peace, FoM!PS: The link didn't work but thanks for the thought!
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by Dr. Ganj on July 24, 1999 at 09:11:32 PT
Great work FoM!!
FoM...So true! What about the prison guard union, peace officers, and the other narco groups that infuse dirty money into the gov's office. That's a lotta corrupting force, and all medical marijuana patients want is just to have their law, and wishes respected. Is that too much to ask? Sure seems so. How sad. I wish God would intervene, but it doesn't work that way. Looks like we have go and earn it.Cheers,Dr. G. :-)
http://www.fineworkFoM!.com
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by FoM on July 24, 1999 at 05:32:17 PT:
The will of the people
Hello Dr. Ganj,The issue of medical marijuana and prop 215 being in the news so much really shows how our government is only run by who owes who what favor. I don't know if there ever was or could be a person that really does care about the peoples rights in politics.Good to see you.Peace, FoM!
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by Dr. Ganj on July 23, 1999 at 23:12:33 PT
The will of the people, vs. the will of Gray Davis
Mr. Uelmen said it perfectly. Let's see if our new governorwill have the courage to stand up for the peoples' will, or fail a real test of character. Any bets?Dr. Ganj
http://www.ahemp.org
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment


Name: Optional Password: 
E-Mail: 
Subject: 
Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]
Link URL: 
Link Title: