Supervisors Wrong on Medical Marijuana

Supervisors Wrong on Medical Marijuana
Posted by CN Staff on December 13, 2005 at 07:29:33 PT
By North County Times Editorial Staff
Source: North County Times
San Diego, CA -- San Diego County supervisors made a bizarre choice last week to waste time and money suing the state to overturn its medical marijuana laws. The decision just doesn't pass the common-sense test.State and county voters nine years ago decided that people suffering from a variety of diseases can obtain legal access to marijuana if a doctor decides the drug can help. Yet the five folks who run county government have refused to implement the law.
In August, a grand jury found the county was flagrantly ignoring a state mandate to create a registry and identification cards for terminally and chronically ill people who use marijuana for relief from pain and other maladies. The worthy idea behind the state law was that victims of disease should not be treated the same as drug dealers. Identification cards would give police a valuable tool to tell the difference.This is a popular, humane law that does no harm to anyone. However, our county supervisors have chosen political posturing over compassion and respect for state law.By a 4-0 vote, Supervisors Bill Horn, Pam Slater-Price, Dianne Jacob and Greg Cox (Ron Roberts was absent) ordered county lawyers to sue the state, asking a court to overturn its medical marijuana laws.To be sure, there is a legal struggle under way. Federal law holds that marijuana is an illegal drug with no medical value. Majorities of California voters and lawmakers decided the opposite. The U.S. Supreme Court will eventually settle the conflict; so far it has leaned toward federal primacy in regulating drugs.So, where is San Diego County's place in this struggle? It's a fair question, but our supervisors have reached the wrong answer.County officials can indeed issue identification cards without violating federal law. That distinction belongs to the individuals who choose to buy or grow their medicine in accordance with state law.In short, this is none of the county's business. Their job is to enact state law and watch from the sidelines. If federal agents want to chase cancer victims, the county is at most a bystander.San Diego County supervisors clearly picked the wrong battle. If they were itching to sue someone, there are major issues galore ---- state-local struggles over transportation funding, health care, water quality and land use, for openers.Of course, such issues won't get a local politician's picture on national television.Note: Our view: Suing state a bizarre decision when major issues abound.Source: North County Times (CA)Published: December 12, 2005 Copyright: 2005 North County Times Contact: editor nctimes.comWebsite: Articles:Marijuana Brought Relief To My Dying Father To Sue To Overturn Medical Marijuana Law To Sue State Over Medical Marijuana Laws
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help

Comment #4 posted by Jim Lunsford on December 13, 2005 at 15:01:06 PT
State Law?
What do the people of the community want though? I believe they want it legal, but think about Denver. Local law is observed over state law (in theory). This case (if it were to represent the views of the county, which I doubt) shouldn't be enforced with a different attitude. What is good for one is good for both. But only if the supervisors represent the true will of the people. Not if it's a sham.That doesn't mean that they shouldn't be exposed to the neighboring counties in which the good and bad could be noted. It should be legal everywhere, but only if the public truly wants it. It is our fault if they don't share our goal. I think the ones that matter do share this goal however. There are too many interests in this world which happen to intersect the path of Cannabis legalization. Even the FDA is having to run scared. Pharmaceutical companies are complaining about the more accurate use of the poison labels the FDA is beginning to use. Vioxx is a very big deal.Religious freedom. The heart of my cause. In the Supreme Court at the moment. Either way the decision goes, Cannabis will be legal afterwards. Or else we will accept no freedoms whatsoever. I wouldn't doubt the CSA could be seen as trumping Religious freedom, but I wouldn't want to be facing the mobs coming out after a decision like that. It would be a revolution.Environment. Oh yeah, big oil has shrank a little in the public eye. And London depot's burning down, burning down, burning down. Global warming. Ocean's rising, fishing industries, over-population, the list goes on and on and on.These truly are the best of the times of my life so far. We are as close as we want to be. I don't believe in scarcity. That foundation of capitalism. We have to have those wants become needs in order for that to work.There is abundance beyond all desire in this world. Beyond that hope. All we have to do is allow ourselves to have it. Trust in our connection with that oneness to deliver what we desire. It is here as soon as we allow ourselves to recognize it. It is here now. Rev Jim LunsfordFirst Cannabist ChurchWorship: Done best by really enjoying this wild and crazy ride of life.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by siege on December 13, 2005 at 11:07:22 PT
Czar office
Drug Czar office has been giving them the high 5 in the last mo. This will go back about 8 to 10 mo. the fed are going to over turn p 215 if they can... and backing them. So follow the money. they could have been pay off. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by kaptinemo on December 13, 2005 at 08:41:04 PT:
More likely, the DEA notified THEM
However, it would be interesting to see the phone logs of those particular 'supervisors' to see what, if any, phone traffic has occured between them and the DEA...and when.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by mayan on December 13, 2005 at 08:14:10 PT
Seeking Work Soon
Bill HornPam Slater-PriceDianne JacobGreg Cox I wonder if these dolts called in the DEA?
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment