cannabisnews.com: Medical Marijuana Bill Discussed in Legislature Medical Marijuana Bill Discussed in Legislature Posted by FoM on January 27, 2001 at 07:48:11 PT By Joe Kafka, Associated Press Writer Source: Rapid City Journal Use of marijuana for legitimate medical purposes should be allowed as a defense in trials involving marijuana charges, legislators were told Friday.Making it clear he does not favor legalization of marijuana, Rep. Tom Hennies, R-Rapid City, pleaded with fellow members of the House Judiciary Committee to approve HB1120. The bill says people charged with use or possession of marijuana may offer the defense of medical necessity in some instances, which would allow experts to testify that marijuana eases the health problems of the accused."We have a duty to try and find relief for these people," said Hennies, former police chief in Rapid City.Exposure to neurological toxins as an Army nurse in the Gulf War caused her serious nerve damage, said Valerie Miller of Hill City. She told legislators that only marijuana has worked to ease her anxieties, seizures and hallucinations."It has helped me as a medicine," Miller said. "Since I've been using cannabis, the pain has decreased. I know it's illegal."Rep. Duane Sutton, R-Aberdeen, said he met many terminally ill cancer patients last fall when he received radiation therapy after having his cancerous tonsils removed. Prescription drugs are provided before radiation to relieve the nausea, but often little can be done, he said.If marijuana can help people with their nausea in such instances, it should be allowed, said Sutton, who added that he did not use it to relieve his nausea."I'm for any form of relief that we can give these people ... to ease some of their suffering and pain," he said.Testifying against the bill, which was set aside until Wednesday, Assistant Attorney General Charlie McGuigan said allowing a medicinal marijuana defense would lead to more trials. And those trials would be costly because more experts would be called to testify, he said.McGuigan also said the bill is wide open in terms of the amount of marijuana a person could have and still claim it's for medical purposes."There's nothing in here that limits the quantity," he said.Even if such a defense is allowed in state courts and people successfully use it to get acquitted, they still could be prosecuted under federal law because marijuana possession is also a federal crime, McGuigan added.Source: Rapid City Journal (SD)Author: Joe Kafka, Associated Press Writer Published: January 27, 2001Copyright: 2001 Rapid City Journal Address: PO Box 450, Rapid City SD 57709 Fax: (605) 394-8463 Contact: randy.rasmussen rapidcityjournal.com Website: http://www.rapidcityjournal.com Related Articles & Web Site:South Dakota NORMLhttp://www.sodaknorml.org/Lawmaker Wants to Legalize Med. Marijuana Defense http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread8460.shtmlMedical Marijuana Bill Goes Up in Smokehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread8439.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #3 posted by FoM on March 04, 2001 at 12:55:28 PT: Important E-Mail from Bob Newland SD Cannabis Information Bob Newland: newland rapidcity.comA Message from Bob Newland -- President of SoDakNORMLA Founder of So. Dak. Industrial Hemp CouncilA South Dakota contact for the Marijuana Policy ProjectThe above organizations are working together in South Dakota as the South Dakota Cannabis Coalition.We shall certify and circulate petitions to put industrial hemp and medical cannabis issues on the ballot in 2002.Our poll http://www.sodaknorml.org/poll.htm shows that four out of five South Dakotans agree that farmers should be able to grow hemp, and that ill people should be able to use the medicine which works for them without fear of arrest or imprisonment.Once on the ballot, we will win overwhelmingly at the polls in November of 2002.If you are interested in further reading on our plans for these petition drives and our fun fundraisers (this will probably interest you most if you are in South Dakota or live nearby), please go to:http://www.sodaknorml.org/happening2001-2002.htmAlso, you're invited to our immediately-upcoming fundraising gigs. See:http://www.sodaknorml.org/happening2001-2002.htmBest regards,Bob Newland [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by Stripey on January 27, 2001 at 10:38:47 PT Aren't more trials better? Doesn't that mean we're getting closer to the real and whole truth? Isn't that the goal of the justice system, isn't that why we've got rights to trial in the first place? Doesn't it undermine the right to fair trial to say that you're having "too many costly trials"? Isn't justice worth a little more? Isn't truth worth a little more?Oh, that's right. These are anti's. They're not concerned with truth. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Ethan Russo, MD on January 27, 2001 at 08:26:08 PT: Whose Fault is That/ "a medicinal marijuana defense would lead to more trials. And those trials would be costly because more experts would be called to testify, "This is one of the biggest laughers, and poorest excuses I ever remember seeing. Excuse me while I calm myself ---. Bad, unjust laws, conceived through treachery and misrepresentiation without a constitutional basis, lead to trials which lead to expense to the state. Get rid of bad laws, and you will have no trials and no expense. Meanwhile, how does someone possessed of such obvious towering logic and intellect achieve a position of responsibility in this country? [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: