cannabisnews.com: Endorsement: No on Medical Marijuana Endorsement: No on Medical Marijuana Posted by FoM on October 01, 2000 at 10:46:36 PT Editorial Source: Denver Post Coloradans should vote no on Amendment 20, which would make marijuana available to certain medical patients, including those with AIDS, glaucoma, or those who suffer from chemotherapy's side effects. The ballot measure proposes such a complex approach that even people who think pot has medicinal value should oppose it.Amendment 20 would let patients buy marijuana on the existing illegal market, but make them immune to prosecution. Without a lawful source for the drug, patients would be forced to participate in what would still be a criminal enterprise. In fact, while Amendment 20 touts marijuana's supposed medical benefits, it doesn't seek to make pot a prescription drug. That omission could create a consumer nightmare. With all other prescription medicines, a doctor must write a prescription, which is filled by a licensed pharmacy and doled out in specific, controlled amounts. This system works well even with potent, possibly addictive but very useful medicines such as morphine. And it ensures a high level of quality control.However, Amendment 20 evades the usual consumer-protection channels. Even the need for a formal prescription gets sidestepped. It's thus uncertain just who would or wouldn't have access to medical marijuana, or who would monitor the dose and purity of the drug.Weirdly, the measure simultaneously sets up a new bureaucracy and creates a potential invasion of privacy. Amendment 20 would have state government issue cards to anyone authorized to obtain medical marijuana, with the state health department keeping a registry of such persons. The registry supposedly would be confidential, but nonetheless Amendment 20 authorizes state access to now-private medical records.Many such concerns were known in 1998 when the measure was first proposed, but supporters got trapped in a legal time warp. Former Colorado Secretary of State Vikki Buckley had refused to certify the measure for the ballot, so backers took her to court and won. But the dispute wasn't resolved in time for votes cast that year to count. Yet having won the court case, supporters were obligated to stick to the existing, defective language.The biggest underlying worry about Amendment 20, however, is the lack of credible, objective research into whether marijuana really is a safe, effectual treatment. If future scientific studies prove marijuana does have medical benefits, then the issue of making the drug available under controlled circumstances to certain patients should be re-examined. Send a letter to the editor about this editorial. (Must include name, city and phone number.)This editorial represents the official opinion of The Denver Post as decided by the newspaper's editorial board.The members of the editorial board are Gerald E. Grilly, publisher; Glenn Guzzo, editor; Sue O'Brien, editorial page editor; Bob Ewegen, deputy editorial page editor; Angela Cortez, Al Knight, Penelope Purdy and Billie Stanton, editorial writers; Mike Keefe, cartoonist; and Barbara Ellis and Peggy McKay, news editors. Source: Denver Post (CO)Copyright: 2000 The Denver PostPublished: October 1, 2000Contact: letters denverpost.com Address: 1560 Broadway, Denver, CO 80202Fax: (303) 820.1502Website: http://www.denverpost.com/Forum: http://www.denverpost.com/voice/voice.htmRelated Articles & Web Sites:Coloradans For Medical Rights http://www.medicalmarijuana.com/Drug Policy Forum of Coloradohttp://www.drugsense.org/dpfco/Marijuana Laws an Election Issue in Many W. Stateshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread7195.shtmlColorado To Vote on Marijuana Uses http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread7018.shtmlCannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archives:http://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml END SNIP --> Snipped Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #8 posted by John Markes on October 03, 2000 at 18:52:50 PT Thank Goodness! Thank goodness the FDA hasn't screwed up marijuana like they have most other drugs, most of which kill many people every year. But marijuana doesn't.Tylenol kills over 9,000 every year. Aspirin more than 16,000.But marijuana doesn't kill anyone.All legal drugs together kill over 1,000,000 every year.But marijuana can't be counted there.Seems to me the feds don't know what they are doing... ARDPArk [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by freedom fighter on October 01, 2000 at 15:17:42 PT thanks FoM for the praise. Im hoping they would print it. Just hope that the writing is not too long for them to print it.We will see.. :) [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by FoM on October 01, 2000 at 14:54:29 PT Wow Freedom fighter! All I can say is your letter is excellent and from the heart in my opinion. Thank you for sharing it. I really mean that.Peace, FoM! [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by freedom fighter on October 01, 2000 at 14:40:10 PT Can you give me a critique? Dear EditorThis is in reference to your recent editorial on Amendment 20.First of all, let's us make it clear that when Vikki Buckley passed away, there were evidence that she withheld the numbers needed to get on the ballot. Secondly, this ballot will send a clear message to the Federal Government that it is time to stop putting sick, dying people who prefer to use cannabis in prisons. We had this cannabis laws for 100 years and it never did worked. Just how many more studies do the editors need before we can get your endorsement on this issue? Humans have used this so-called substance for 10 thousand years. Eat ten raw potatoes and you will die, but eat,drink,consume,smoke the entire cannabis plant will not kill you, you will just sleep to see another day with no hangovers. You have stated that the cannabis business is a criminal enterprise. Thank you for pointing this out. Yes, the Law made it criminal enterprise just like in old days of moonshiners where we had those murderous gangsters fighting for the market. But that does not give us the reason why not to vote NO on amendment 20. In fact, the State of Colorado should get busy finding a site to start growing the herb. The State of Colorado also have to protect these people who really needs them. Thanks for calling me a criminal. Yes, I am a deaf cannabis dealer who have some friends who got diseases such as Aids, MS, bad backs, incurable headaches,...etc, coming to me asking where they may get the herb. Give me one good reason why I should not help them? My friend with this Aids said to me once that he have to smoke to live. It really hit me that no matter if the Law says, there will always be people who want to use cannabis. Just how many more sick, dying people are we willing to kill, imprison them in the name of drug war? Do the editors know who Peter McWillams? He died in his own vomit because government told him he could not smoke cannabis.Your image of criminality of this business is kinda warped. I am a 40 year old deaf man who built 300 houses in Colorado and I use herb daily. I do not carry axes with me. I have no intention of forcing anyone to use cannabis. Your image of this god-given herb needs more research before you write this kind of editorial. I am not a drug kingpin who sells on the street. Just a hard working deaf man who smoked herb for 27 years. In fact, your article provoke me to go out and vote this Amendment 20, YES! And I am going to vote third party. This will be my first vote. Amendment 20 is about freedom of interference from Federal Government. For the last 40 years, the laws and regulations have increased. I am just sure that none of the editors actually know just how many laws we presently have. We need to tell the Federal Government it is time to leave the sick dying people alone. Please do not print my name because of this problem. I do help my sick friends and have seen how much their lives have improve. It is possible that I can go to prison for this reason and of course, I do not wish for this to happen. I as a deaf writer just hope the editors will change their viewpoint on this issue. Thank you. [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by observer on October 01, 2000 at 14:12:31 PT Ooopsie! Did the dear editorial board there just happen to forget to mention jail? Again? My, my, it is peculiar, sometimes, how prohibitionists accidently forget to mention that jailing people, in this case, sick and dying people, is what they are advocating.Why is it, do you suppose, that prohibitionists often to forget to mention that the patients are facing jail for having the unmitigated audacity to simply use a plant to relieve their suffering? That might make the prohibitionists' arguments less appealing? [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by FoM on October 01, 2000 at 12:55:42 PT: Me Again! Hi Sledhead & Occassional Smoker!It sure is interesting watching the election getting close and all the different opinions. Sledhead! I want to say I have a great deal of respect for your ability as a NewsHawk! You do a wonderful job!Peace, FoM! [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by Sledhead on October 01, 2000 at 12:35:11 PT The Rest Of The Story - LTE To the editor:With the elections of Peru's President Alberto Fujimori andYugoslavia's President Slobodan Milosevic in question and as electionprocesses, around the world, continue to be a topic of discussion,your editorial, "Medical Marijuana: No" (Oct 1), ignores the mostimportant and obvious point concerning medical marijuana in Colorado.Did Vikki Buckley, Colorado's former Secretary of State, intentionallywithhold petitions to affect the outcome of, what was to be, a fairand honest election?Since this very question has garnered national attention and theDenver Post continues to ignore the possibility and probability thatBuckley did illegally influence democracy, your credibility is inquestion and your influence on local opinions will continue to bepractically nil.By the way, did the editorial staff collect their payment from theONDCP's media campaign for printing that piece of rubbish? [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Occassional Pot User on October 01, 2000 at 12:06:19 PT Some good points,.. interesting He does have some good points. But I think the mmj initiatives are a step in the right direction so we should vote yes. [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: