Will NJ Medical Pot Law Go Up in Smoke?
function share_this(num) {
 tit=encodeURIComponent('Will NJ Medical Pot Law Go Up in Smoke?');
 site = new Array(5);
 return false;

Will NJ Medical Pot Law Go Up in Smoke?
Posted by CN Staff on January 17, 2011 at 05:22:10 PT
By Bob Jordan, Statehouse Bureau
Source: Daily Record
Trenton -- The terminally ill's lack of access to medical marijuana is one of the worries of a state senator who is trying to force Gov. Chris Christie's administration to change proposed regulations of the drug.Sen. Nicholas Scutari, D-Middlesex, said the Republican governor's proposed rules have several flaws, including barring dispensaries from making home deliveries, even for terminally ill patients -- those defined in the regulations as having less than 12 months to live.
"Terminally ill patients are penalized,'' Scutari said.Also, the levels of the drugs active ingredient are capped "arbitrarily'' and a rule requiring doctors who register with the program to complete training in addiction medicine is "unnecessary,'' Scutari said.Scutari has scheduled a hearing Thursday with the Democrat-controlled Senate health committee that could lead to a rewrite of Christie’s rules.Hanging in the balance is the delivery of medical marijuana to those who suffer from chronic or terminal illnesses, which the law, signed in January, is supposed to provide.Some key Democrats said they fear the rewrite process could significantly delay the launch of the program, which would deny people who could use medical marijuana much-needed relief.Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, D-Mercer, says Christie has already made adequate changes, with the governor upping the number of facilities to grow and distribute the marijuana to six, as the law calls for. The changes would make it easier for patients to get access to doctor-prescribed medical marijuana. Snipped   Complete Article: Daily Record, The (Parsippany, NJ)Author: Bob Jordan, Statehouse BureauPublished: January 17, 2011Copyright: 2011 The Daily RecordContact:  letters dailyrecord.comWebsite: http://www.dailyrecord.comCannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archives 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help 

Comment #7 posted by Sinsemilla Jones on January 17, 2011 at 19:56:33 PT
Later in the morning was CNBC's Marijuana USA
A much better hour with Trish Reagan updating the popular Marijuana Inc, if I'm not mistaken.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #6 posted by Sinsemilla Jones on January 17, 2011 at 19:52:43 PT
Drugged wasn't quite as bad as Reefer Madness
It seemed to contain as little information as an hour could possibly hold, leaving many loose ends that could easily have been followed up on.But at least they didn't have the young men walking in the woods get lost and starve to death.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #5 posted by FoM on January 17, 2011 at 17:14:54 PT
I think we all have gotten good at spotting propaganda. I get this uptight feeling and turn the channel. I only remember the intelligent parts of the History of Marijuana because there was a good deal of common sense in that documentary.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by Universer on January 17, 2011 at 16:51:39 PT
FoM -- Agree
"History of Marijuana" was good. Straightforward, closed, historical, rounded. There are probably some criticisms I'm deciding not to remember, as in comparison with the unmitigated garbage that National Geographic -- say it ain't so, NatGeo! -- spewed out recently.Want to learn others' considered opinions on "Drugged." Maybe looking through weed-colored glasses, I'm being overly harsh.Maybe.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by Universer on January 17, 2011 at 16:45:02 PT
O, & BTW...
Pursuant to the piece under which I'm commenting:...I move that we ban all headline writers from using "up in smoke" ever, ever again. It's hackneyed, trite, antiquated, old, tired, uninspired, poor and pathetic.And in the case of this piece, doesn't even make sense.Here, Content Editors of the World with More Deadlines Than Time:Instead of "up in smoke" to denote something going or gone, try"burn(s) out""flame(s) out""stoned to death" -- you propagandists'll like that one
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by FoM on January 17, 2011 at 16:43:04 PT
It sounds terrible. We missed it and I'm glad we did. I like the one on the History of Marijuana. That one was interesting.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by Universer on January 17, 2011 at 16:32:38 PT
Apologies for posting out of turn, but I'm bursting about a repugnant regrettable refutable pile of TV trash disseminated by National Geographic recently, called "Drugged: High On Marijuana." Might as well have spelled it with an h.Surely many here have seen it. Perhaps there's another thread about it I've missed.Substanceless rant as superficial review:Poorly and hyperbolically written, lightly researched, status quo biased, only pretty good for some pretty pictures of really pretty plants. Cannabis (especially via smoking, which is of course the most unhealthy aspect) may, as you say, "Drugged," increase risk for heart attack, especially in people prone to heart attacks. Duh. So can eating a cheeseburger. And no, cannabis is not an "herbal terrorist," neurologically or otherwise. That inappropriate phrase, which somehow was produced despite doubtless countless edits (benefit of doubt being generously given), is a weakly attempted failure at clever writing which callously preys upon the striking, motivating fear that terrorism incites in an unwitting public, disjointedly scripted inside a purportedly educational program on a purportedly educational network. And we could go on. There have been many more fact-based shows produced on cannabis, and there will be many still. This is not among them.
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment