An investigator from the district attorney’s office who has been spearheading recent raids on local medical marijuana dispensaries says every pot club in Santa Clara County is operating outside the law.
Dean Ackemann, who has been responsible for obtaining search warrants for the task force that has been conducting armed raids in recent months, said that in his opinion every dispensary in the county should be shut down. “The search warrants and the investigations are not going to stop,” Ackemann vowed.
But he may be wrong.
Ackemann’s new boss, District Attorney Jeff Rosen, seems far less interested in a crackdown.
“I think the voters of California would like people with legitimate medical problems that a doctor thinks can be alleviated with marijuana to have access to marijuana,” Rosen said in an interview Monday evening, hours after being sworn into office.
In the last three months of 2010, four dispensaries were raided by the Santa Clara County Special Enforcement Team (SCCSET), which includes members of the San Jose and Santa Clara police departments as well as the California Highway Patrol and other agencies.
Three of these raids came immediately after San Jose voters overwhelmingly passed Measure U, which would allow the City Council to regulate and tax the San Jose clubs.
In San Jose, there are currently more than 100 medical marijuana dispensaries and delivery services, while there were only a dozen or so as of last March. There has been some speculation that the four clubs singled out were not operating above board, and were profiting from the sale of marijuana, forbidden by 2003’s Senate Bill 420.
Ackemann said that’s not the case. Instead, the investigator said, every medical marijuana dispensary is illegal, regardless of its policies or bookkeeping procedures.
“Unfortunately for them,” Ackemann said of the clubs that were raided, “it was luck of the draw.”
Ackemann said that, in his opinion, California voters’ hearts were in the right place in 1996 when they passed Proposition 215, also known as the Compassionate Use Act. However, he said, the result has been an epidemic of supposedly nonprofit pot clubs and their patrons taking advantage of the system.
“This is my own personal feeling and the feeling of many other law enforcement I’ve talked to,” Ackemann said. “The majority of citizens were deceived in 1996, because they thought they were voting for people who were critically ill or with debilitating diseases, such as cancer and HIV. Well, the one little line that was included in the Compassionate Use Act is where it says ‘and any other condition medical marijuana would relieve the symptoms of.’”
Ackemann says that that has resulted in distribution of medical pot to “teens with [complaints of] stress, anxiety ... ‘I have a bad back; I hurt my knee skateboarding.’”
Rosen, who took over the position formerly held by Dolores Carr on Monday, said he has not yet developed a strategy for dealing with the flourishing medical marijuana dispensaries, but indicated a willingness to come to some kind of compromise.
“I think the challenge that law enforcement faces is how to implement the desires of voters in a way that is consistent with the law that voters passed,” Rosen said.
The new DA then pointed out that he plans to make personnel changes in his department. “Those changes will be made public at the end of this week and starting next week,” he said.
County vs. City
Just days after Measure U passed with 79 percent of voters’ approval, two dispensaries—MediLeaf and San Jose Patients Group—were raided by SCCSET officers brandishing automatic rifles. Following the raids, Councilman Pierluigi Oliverio, the author of Measure U, posed three questions about the manpower and money being appropriated to SCCSET in a memorandum to San Jose’s acting police chief, Christopher Moore. The response left Oliverio with few answers.
Oliverio asked who had given permission for the dispensary raids. He did not receive an adequate response.
Oliverio asked how many police were involved in the raids. The answer was “SCCSET and various law enforcement agencies.” Oliverio asked who is paying for the raids. The answer was that SCCSET is a state-funded task force.
Oliverio says he felt the response was much too vague. He was particularly interested in the federal grant that funded the raids, which seemed to be targeted for methamphetamine abatement.
“I simply wanted to know the purpose of the grant,” Oliverio says, “and what is our role as a police department when a district attorney decides she wants to do a raid. Does that automatically mean we use police officers? Do we use sheriffs?
“And my other question was: What’s the main purpose? If in fact it was for medical cannabis, and the purpose was to close places making a profit, how is it they know that unless they have a financial audit?”
Hector Gonzalez, who is president of Arc Healing Center and has been acting as a liaison between the city of San Jose and the pot club operators, has the same questions.
“I find this very interesting disconnect with what’s been approved at the state level for some time,” Gonzalez says. “It’s now been 15 years since 215 passed. Granted—there haven’t been many dispensaries in Santa Clara County [until now]. But now I find it a bit confusing who they’re targeting.”
Ackemann reiterates that the task force is targeting any and every dispensary in the city and county.
“The law has been explained to them by the [deputy district attorney, Frank Carrubba] that the sale of medical marijuana is illegal,” Ackeman said. “The only person who can be compensated for marijuana is a primary care provider.”
The San Jose City Council decided on Dec. 13 to work with medical marijuana dispensaries and assess a 7 percent tax on the proceeds of all transactions. At that time, the DA’s office appeared to have little intention of scaling back its investigations and raids, leaving many medical marijuana proprietors wondering if extinction was on the horizon.
Even the dispensaries that claim to be going above and beyond established rules and regulations have reason to fear becoming casualties. Dave Chloupek, who runs MedMar Healing Center in San Jose, said his dispensary requires all marijuana vendors to fill out 1099 tax forms, and offers holistic services beyond marijuana to clients. Still, he fears that might not be enough to stay out of the task force’s crosshairs.
“It’s a race between City Council regulating ordinance and [SCCSET] shutting everyone down,” Chloupek said.
“How is it that everyone in the city and the people who elect the city officials have unanimously said, ‘Yes, we agree with this. Let’s tax it and manage it appropriately?’ That just tells me the left hand doesn’t agree with the right hand and the county is not listening to the city.”
Hilarious… just as the SJ City Councilgrubs commence assessing a 7% levy on sales, the County DA comes along and shuts down a few dispensaries, thereby cutting into the newly-found revenue stream. This is what’s known as a first rate MCF.
I run into so many people, both teens and adults, who abuse the law by paying some unethical medical doctor to issue them a medicinal marijuana card, claiming, as Investigator Ackeman says, they have anxiety, stress, or some other obviously false and stupic reason. And most people don’t seem to care, or simply don’t realize the law is flawed in that respect. Wake up!
Kudos to Rosen for getting his priorities right. I’m glad he’s taking the high road, and not acting like a reactionary. The D.A.‘s office needs just this kind of thinking.
RGR
The DA’s job is to enforce the law as it is written. Nothing in the law permits the retail sale of medical marijuana…nothing…end of story. I challenge anyone to prove otherwise.
in 2007 Superior Court Judge Barbara Ruled that
“contrary to the stated policy of the County, the legislature intended collective cultivation of medical marijuana would not require physical participation by all members of the collective, but rather would permit that some patients would be able to contribute financially, while others performed the labor and contributed the skills and ‘know-how.’ “
a ruling btw that still stands despite the appeals.
so i guess the judge sees the law a bit differently than you.
Alright Freddie…dispensaries are not selling medical marijuana; they are donating it. I challenge anyone to prove otherwise. Dispensaries are legal and non profit organizations and are following the law as it is written.
There are at least 5 dope shops within a mile of my house. We are now witnessing the predictable results. Criminal activity such as strong-arm hold-outs, fires at dope houses and shootouts at dope grow houses. My council members sees none of this and spends all of his time defending this disreputable business. He never answers why. If you are reading Pier, please inform us if you have any plans for regulating this “business”. All I have heard so far is tax them, protect them and make sure there are an unlimited number of them.
Am I wrong?
Yes, you are mistaken.
Since Oct 2009 when the Obama administration reversed the Bush policy I have advocated for a limited number, limited places, regulated and taxed. All of these elements were in my original memo and subsequent memos.
Important to note that not only did our mutual Council District 6 vote in favor of Measure U at higher rate than city wide result, District 6 also voted in favor of State Proposition 19 which was legalization of recreational use.
Call me anytime 535.4906
and how many liquor stores, or convenience stores that sell alcoholic beverages?
btw, san jose news coverage doesn’t seem to reflect the situations that you outlined here, could you maybe provide some links to some shootouts and strong arm and fires in your area officer?
There are hundreds of liquor stores and CVS stores near my house. What they are peddling is much worse than marijuana; which is supported by the AMA and the Institute of Medicine. It is more probable for a bank or liquor store to get robbed that a dispensary. You obviously have not done the homework that your council members have. Face it, you are throwing out science for a Reefer Madness mentality.
> There has been some speculation that the four clubs singled out were not operating above board, and were profiting from the sale of marijuana, forbidden by 2003’s Senate Bill 420.
Well, DUH!!!!
Of course they were profiting from the sale of marijuana.
Like we were supposed to think they were selling pot for humanitarian reasons because it has some medicinal value? Only people with lobotomies are capable of believing that.
Ok, everyone, here is another fuddy duddy who has not educated himself regarding the marijuana myths invented by Anslinger and Hearst. You are the dope!
If you wish to be both cynical and honest, many, if not most of the California Non-Profit Corporations serve to enrich individuals working there, providing nice salaries and benefits to the cultural elites running the organization while obeying the law that at least 10% of income goes to the charitable or social purpose of the non-profit. There’s probably more non-profit corporations than for-profit that’s what California has become in the post-industrial era, a social service mecca.
Marijuana is the largest cash crop in California.
The reason we have “medical marijuana” dispensaries is NOT because pot has any significant medicinal value. It’s because lobbyists from Big Marijuana have stuffed gobs of cash into the bodily crevices of any craven politician who would sell his soul and civic conscience for a fist full of dollars.
The ten percent tax on marijuana is a joke! It is cheap permission to engage in a sleazy, slimy, humanly destructive business.
The tax on a working man making an honest living is 30-40%. The tax on cigarettes is effictively 3,000% !!!
Distributing marijuana is STILL drug pushing and STILL illegal.
I say, send in the SWAT teams and put the boot on the neck of the pot pushers.
Raise the price of a medical marijuana dispensary license to ONE MILLION dollars, and raise the tax on the sale of marijuana to 5,000 percent.
The argument that a 10% tax on marijuana helps the public treasury is phony baloney. The public cost of treating pot addicts is far greater. (Yes! Pot IS addictive for many people).
If a “sin tax” of 10% recognizes the social costs of pot, then let’s be honest and realistic about the magnitude of the “sin” that marijuana is and make the tax 5,000%—or more!
pray tell, really, the magnitude of “sin”?
as for your ignorance of the status of cannabis as a medicine, are you, perhaps, unaware that cannabis actually has been used medicinally for thousands of years?
that it has been found by many studies to relieve pain, nausea, and neurological symptoms? perhaps you are unaware of the recent studies that showed that it acted as a protective agent on brain cells subjected to trauma by reducing swelling, or that it also can alleviate some of the effects of alzheimers. and i will bet that you were also ignorant of the fact that it destroys cancer tumors?
too bad, that a basic ignorance of the science of medicine and irrational beliefs of the “harms” of marijuana by fanatical alarmist such as yourself will block the development of a medicine that could cure cancer.
Dear seriously uninformed:
If marijuana is so medicinally wonderful, why doesn’t the Food And Drug Administration (FDA) license it as a “safe and effective”?
The answer is: because there is no competent scientific case to support the claim that it is “safe and effective”.
The FDA was created and chartered to provide science based scrutiny to claims of wonder cures made by all sorts of crackpot snake oil salesmen and fly by night pill peddlers for profit.
Sorry. Urban myths and folklore offered up by drooling, mouthbreathing Dead Heads is NOT a sufficient basis for telling kids that it is OK to buy addictive substances on street corners from stooges of the Mexican drug cartel.
Go to church or something. Get some morality!
No, plain and simple it is igorant people such as yourself. You need God, Jesus came to heal the sick and my friend you are sick, get help!
Morality offends you doesn’t it, Momma.
Here’s a quiz: What do you call a society that doesn’t have any morality?
A. A jungle.
B. A mobocracy.
C. Nihilistic
D. Anarchic
E. Progressive
My last comment was for “Pat Down”
much love to you Dave!
Thank Dave for shedding light on this issues. Keep up the good work we need more fighters like you for the cause
> No, plain and simple it is igorant people such as yourself. You need God, Jesus came to heal the sick and my friend you are sick, get help!
Momma:
You ducked the question. Too tough, eh?
“What do you call a society that doesn’t have any morality?”
Mr. Seriously Uninformed sayeth:
> and, the real reason that it hasn’t been approved by the FDA is political cock blocking by the Federal government. pure and simple.
Oh. So you don’t like FDA regulation of drugs. An anarchist, eh? But I suppose that you DO like receiving your welfare check and your free Obamacare from the gubbermint.
Here’s why the FDA was created:
“Elixir sulfanilamide”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elixir_Sulfanilamide
If you want to buy your pot from creepy slimebags in parking lots and stick it up your nose, be my guest. Just don’t ask for any sympathy or free public healthcare when you learn that your creepy climebag provider cut your pot with horse manure or adulterated it with ethylene glycol.
And also, don’t give any of your disease laden addictive substances to my kids, or to anyone else’s kids.
you want to talk about snake oil salesman and pill peddlers for profits, stooges and the fda? i got one word for you vioxx, well wait, i have a few more… Trasylol, avandia, paxil, colchys Phenylpropanolamine), meridia …
in fact i probably couldn’t even list all the dangerous drugs that the FDA approved because they were told to ignore the dangers by managers caught up in the corruption and politics… and the big money pharma industry.
http://www.consumerjusticegroup.com/drugrecall/fdarecall.html
and, the real reason that it hasn’t been approved by the FDA is political cock blocking by the Federal government. pure and simple. the same federal government that ironically holds a patent on using cannibinoids for anti-inflammitory and other uses.
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6630507.html
as for the scientific evidence it is out there – in fact there is a growing body of evidence that cannabis is actually good for the human body.
here are five, again they are too numerous to list here.
Daniel Carter
Anticancer activity of cannabinoids: http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/cancer/THC_cancer_sep_1975.htm
9-Tetrahydrocannabinol Inhibits Cell Cycle Progression in Human Breast Cancer through Cdc2 Regulation:http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/66/13/6615.abstract
Antitumor Activity of Plant Cannabinoids with Emphasis on the Effect of Cannabidiol on Human Breast Carcinoma: http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/318/3/1375.abstract
Cannabidiol inhibits tumour growth in leukaemia and breast cancer in animal studies: http://www.cannabis-med.org/english/bulletin/ww_en_db_cannabis_artikel.php?id=220#2
Suppression of Nerve Growth Factor Trk Receptors and Prolactin Receptors by Endocannabinoids Leads to Inhibition of Human Breast and Prostate Cancer Cell Proliferation: http://endo.endojournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/141/1/118
The endogenous cannabinoid anandamide inhibits human breast cancer cell proliferation: http://www.pnas.org/content/95/14/8375.abstract
Marijuana Ingredients Slow Invasion by Cervical and Lung Cancer Cells: http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20071226/pot-slows-cancer-in-test-tube
Cannabinoids in intestinal inflammation and cancer: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19442536?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum&ordinalpos=22
the fact is that by continuing to push prohibition YOU are the one catering to the cartels, and forcing sick people who truly benefit from cannabis to buy their meds from on the black market.
not to mention contributing to the other harms of prohibition that are sitting right now in our backyard just waiting to come over the border.
Politics have trumped sciencec. DEA and Republican Congressmen have thrwarted any current scientific evidence. The Institute of Medicine and AMA highly regard marijuana as having health benefits. Scientific evidence also shows that students and drivers have performed the same or better than non-medicated students and drivers. No one has died from marijuana. You are not a scientist. You either have not done any research or you are happy with people popping pills,the FDA approved, that give side effects worse than the initial diagnosis. Get real no one cuts pot you fool! More people are going to rehab for marijuana because they are forced to because some stupid cop doesn’t know how to follow State law. You must learn!
No, morality I’m not offended by, it’s your ignorance Pat Down. Really your not worth my time. I will pray for you but mostly your children, hopefully they will be the generation to break the disfunctions you clearly display. Get help.
> Politics have trumped sciencec.
But you DO believe, don’t you, that “global warming” is really science and not politics, right?
Pat Down sayeth:
> Go to church or something. Get some morality!
Momma sayeth:
> No, morality I’m not offended by, it’s your ignorance Pat Down.
OK. So Momma is not offended by morality, only by being asked to get some morality. I see.
You’re probably also one of those people who likes work: “I can watch other people do it all day.”
Good question Pat Down. I see you are testing my wisdom and attempting to discredit it by having me answer that politics are controlling the world’s view. That’s good. I don’t have the same knowledge of global warming as I do on MMJ. But, I will say that I do believe global warming is happening. I also believe humans are contributing to global warming. Finally, I’m not so sure the human factor is the defining cause of global warming; global warming has occured throught history and it was not caused by humans then.
If you must know, my family was one of the 1st founders of Sicllon Valley…. We are the founders of Quarts International. Pat Down you are the Biggest idiot I know. Get help, you truly are mentally ill.
Pat Down,
Sounds to me your the type to use God for your personal gain…. If you really go to church then you would know this is a plant given from God! Man can make it it came from God, you truly are a foolish person.
Genesis 1:11
Then God said,“Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing PLANTS and TREES on the LAND that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their VARIOUS KINDS.” And it was so.
You should actually read the bible and follow it if you are going to tell others what to do. It’s the teachers of this land that will be judge harshly. I pray you find Jesus and get the help you need. may God have mercy on your soul.
if I was your Momma I teach you a thing or two. And before you judge me, know Danielle means, ” God is my Judge!” Not a foolish person as you.
> If you must know, my family was one of the 1st founders of Sicllon Valley…. We are the founders of Quarts International.
Oh, really!
Where is Sicllon Valley?
Am I supposed to know what Quarts International is?
Didn’t your family have any ambition? You come they didn’t found Gallons International?
> Pat Down you are the Biggest idiot I know. Get help, you truly are mentally ill.
I’ll check myself in immediately. What should I ask the therapist to treat me for?
Seriously? The answer to that is F(as in FAIL) The Church and those pagans like yourself that speak completely out of their ass.
First of all, being a person that uses cannabis for its medicinal value, Im far from a “drooling, mouthbreathing Dead Heads”. To be perfectly honest here, if anyone is that person, it would be you. Do you know how long the AMA has been trying to get cannabis in their labs to test it? Do you know how many times theyve been BLOCKED in doing so?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-5614233-503544.html <—-If you like links.
You want to keep spitting this bs rhetoric thats been spewed for the last 40 years. If you DONT know what youre talking about, you have two choices in this world. Do your research and LEARN, or SHUT THE F&%$ UP YOU MINDLESS DRONE.
nope, i would rather buy my pot from legitimate providers who operate with-in the law than from slimebags in parking lots, thus my support of ending prohibition. i would also rather buy my pot from local growers and stimulate the economy here rather than support the cartels and gangs that control the black market.
not sure what you meant to accomplish by bringing up why the FDA was started. Does it matter why it was formed, if it has become corrupted by corporate interest, rather than doing the job it was created for, to keep the american people safe?
and no, again, i am not an anarchist – just a true american who believes that just because there is a rubber stamp from washington dc on something doesn’t mean blind acceptance. who believes in the constitution and bill of rights. who believes it is within my rights as a citizen to question my government, if not my downright duty, as a tax payer and responsible citizen. who believes in a democratic republic and a federal government with limited powers, rather than a plutocracy that it has become.
and no, i don’t like is the federal government overreaching itself and declaring a ‘war on drugs’- on “moral grounds”
tell me, are lies moral, is bigotry moral? is favoring big pharma over the safety of the american people or a cure for cancer, moral?
i’ll stay away from your kids if you stay away from my children, or run for political office. i do not want them to be confused as to what it really means to be a citizen of this great country, and do not want them to become a victim of a shortsighted zealot who swallows every lie they are told, and tries to impose a morality that they don’t possess themselves upon the rest of the world.
thanks.
*best al pacino voice*
are you talking to me?
Dear Pat Down,
Do some real research on why “Marijuana” is illegal.
1) Start with this letter from the American Medical Association July 10, 1937
Bureau of Legal Medicine and Legislation
Chicago, July 10, 1937
Hon. Pat Harrison
Chairman, Committee on Finance, United States Senate
Washington D.C.
SIR: I have been instructed by the board of trustees of the American Medical Association to protest on behalf of the association against the enactment in it present form of so much of H.R. 6906 as relates to the medicinal use of cannabis and its preparations and derivatives. The act is entitled “An Act to impose an occupational excise tax upon certain dealers in marihuana, to impose a transfer tax upon certain dealings in marihuana, and to safeguard the revenue therefrom by registry and recording.”
Cannabis and its preparations and derivatives are covered in the bill by the term “marihuana” as that term is defined in section 1, paragraph (b). There is no evidence, however, that the medicinal use of these drugs has caused or is causing cannabis addiction. As remedial agents, they are used to an inconsiderable extent, and the obvious purpose and effect of this bill is to impose so many restrictions on their use as to prevent such use altogether. Since the medicinal use of cannabis has not caused and is not causing addiction, the prevention of the use of the drug for medicinal purposes can accomplish no good end whatsoever. How far it may serve to deprive the public of the benefits of a drug that on further research may prove to be of substantial value, it is impossible to foresee.
The American Medical Association has no objection to any reasonable regulation of the medicinal use of cannabis and its preparations and derivatives. It does pretest, however, against being called upon to pay a special tax, to use special order forms in order to procure the drug, to keep special records concerning its professional use and to make special returns to the Treasury Department officials, as a condition precedent to the use of cannabis in the practice of medicine. in the several States, all separate and apart from the taxes, order forms, records, and reports required under the Harrison Narcotics Act with reference to opium and coca leaves and their preparations and derivatives.
If the medicinal use of cannabis calls for Federal legal regulation further than the legal regulation that now exists, the drug can without difficulty be covered under the provisions of the Harrison Narcotics Act by a suitable amendment. By such a procedure the professional use of cannabis may readily be controlled as effectively as are the professional uses of opium and coca leaves, with less interference with professional practice and less cost and labor on the part of the Treasury Department.
It has been suggested that the inclusion of cannabis into the Harrison Narcotics Act would jeopardize the constitutionality of that act, but that suggestion has been supported by no specific statements of its legal basis or citations of legal authorities.
Wm. C. Woodward,
Legislative Counsel
Whereupon at 11:37 AM Monday, July 12, 1937, the subcommittee adjourned.
2) So where did the term “Marijuana” come from?
“Marijuana” is a Mexican slang term used in the 1930s by American newspaper magnate & wood pulp stakeholder, Randolph Hearst, as part of a scheme to end the use of fiber from the cannabis/hemp plant. Hearst had the help of DuPont Chemical’s banker, head of the US Treasury, Andrew Mellon. Mellon had close family ties with Harry Anslinger (The 1st Drug Czar) who had married Mellon’s niece. Anslinger needed an opponent to fight in his war, cannabis users made easy targets. In the 30′s, hemp was poised to be a “billion dollar crop”, with Anslinger’s new job, it was easy for Anslinger, Hearst and Mellon to destroy the cannabis/hemp industry, Nylon & Wood Pulp’s main rival. In addition to the valuable fiber content, resins from hemp could have compromised several of DuPont’s petrochemical based patents. Utilizing racism & propaganda, Hearst & Anslinger protected Mellon & DuPont’s interests, spreading fear and lies around the use of marijuana by “Negroes, Mexicans & Entertainers!” through Hearst’s newspaper network.
3) And how did Cannabis become a Schedule I?
(a drug with no medical purposes)
When the Controlled Substances Act in 1970 was passed, Congress created a presidential commission to review the research and recommend how to handle marijuana. President Nixon loaded this commission with “drug warriors”. The National Commission on Marihuana & Drug Abuse (aka:the Shafer Commission) launched 50 research projects, polled the public & members of the criminal justice community, & took thousands of pages of testimony. Their work is still the most comprehensive review of marijuana ever conducted by the federal government.
After reviewing all the evidence, these “drug warriors” came back talking about legalization. When Nixon heard such talk, he denounced the Commission before it issued its report. Nixon saw marijuana as part of the culture war that was destroying the United States & claimed that Communists were using it as a weapon. Without the support of Nixon, the Commission was ignored & Marijuana was made a Schedule I, a drug with no medical purposes.
Beyond that who are you to judge someone to be “healthy”? I personally use cannabis for several conditions including stress. I find it a great alterative to Celexa, Zoloft, Prozac, Effexor, Paxil, Elavil, Luvox, Minipress, Selfemra, or Vanatrip, all of which have many more side effects then cannabis.
Please open your mind, and seek the real truth.
Best Regards,
Dave Hodges
Founder
SJCBC LLC (the 1st San Jose Cannabis Buyers Collective)
no change yet.
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2011/01/04/1430968/arrested-marijuana-distribution.html
A state agency with a fed grant? Oh my.
Can medicinal marijuana cards be issued to anyone under 21 years old ?
If so, why since alcohol is prohibited ?
Does issuing a card to under 21 mean you notify parents or just encourage casual drug use since they are few if any controls on doctors issuing cards ?
If law allows medicinal marijuana card for under 21 then they should not have driver license since there is a high probability they will drive impaired
> Can medicinal marijuana cards be issued to anyone under 21 years old ?
Hold on!
Under Obamacare “children” up to age 26 are covered under parents’ health insurance.
We need to protect the children!
No medicinal marijuana cards for children under 27!
Nope, 18 with a parent’s approval. To Marijuana Doper Questions: under valid scientific investigation, young and older drivers performed the same if not better, than non medicated drivers. DMV tried to cancel driver’s licenses because drivers showed they were MMJ patients, but they lost to ASA- who showed this was unconstitutional.
> under valid scientific investigation,
In this country, the FDA is in charge of the science of drug policy.
If the FDA isn’t reviewing and approving the “valid scientific investigation” you are referring to, it isn’t valid.
Let me know who is doing this “scientific invistigation” without FDA permission and I’ll report them and have them busted.
Marijuana dispensaries?
Where are the secondhand smoke Nazis in all this?
What about secondhand smoke in unincorporated areas?
Ken Yeager – call your office. Stat!
This whole “medicinal” marijuana business has me scratching my head. How is it that with a health care system that we’ve been told fails even working Americans, every dull-witted, unemployed burnout in California has still managed to get in to see a doctor to get a weed card? In a system that is allegedly so broken—if we believe the news stories, that it turns away even the desperately ill, how is it there’s a doctor for even the healthiest looking stoner?
Here’s the situation in a nutshell: The legislature, the body charged with changing the laws that need changing, has done nothing to resolve the marijuana quagmire; supposedly freedom-loving dope growers fought legalization to protect their profits; doctors, perhaps as an expression of their political sympathies, prescribe marijuana to anyone who asks; voters, given ample opportunity to legalize marijuana, didn’t; and dope smokers, showing no concern that their fraudulent behavior might jeopardize the availability of the wonder weed to the truly ill, have made a mockery out of the letter and spirit of the medicinal marijuana law.
Oops, I left out law enforcement’s role. Let’s see, what is it? Oh, yeah, to enforce—not interpret or ignore, the laws on the books.
And at who has Councilman Oliverio aimed his wrath? That’s right, law enforcement, the only participant in the ongoing drama that seems to take its obligations seriously. What a heavy-hitter we have here, sending tough questions to an acting police chief who is one of several candidates for the job. I guess the councilman wasn’t impressed that it wasn’t SJPD that organized the raids, or that his authority is limited to this municipality. What a jerk. Reading between the lines it’s obvious that PO is entertaining ideas about restricting the use of SJPD assets in future raids, not at all concerned with the dangers—real and political, involved in disrupting the cooperative relationships between agencies.
If the councilman doesn’t like how the DA interprets the law he should establish his legal credentials for challenging it and take it up with the DA. If he doesn’t like the way the state or county enforces the law he should argue his case with them. But to engage in this cheap bit of grandstanding at the expense of a guy who is little more than a job applicant, one without any real authority in the matter, is despicable and, based on the track record Mr. Oliverio’s assembling, quite predictable.
Your premise that medical marijuana is part of our health system is faulty and is simply a lie. Medical marijuana is not part of our health system and people who can’t afford our overpriced health insurance must look for alternative ways to alleviate pain. Medical marijuana is the alternative, not the establishment.
And what do you define as “truly ill”? When a “kid” injures himself on a skateboard, shouldn’t that person use something safer than OTC meds like Advil to alleviate pain?
MM,
Were you just lousy in school or should we attribute your cluelessness to the medication you’ve been inhaling? My post was not premised on the relationship between medical marijuana and the health system, it was instead a satirical observation based on the contradiction between health care access when depicted by those in favor of Obama-care versus that experienced by those seeking to obtain a medical marijuana card.
But speaking of faulty, as in logic, how can the medical marijuana program be the antithesis of the medical establishment if participants must first obtain authorization from a medical doctor who is a member of the establishment? How many hits on the pipe does it take to get you to that comforting delusion?
As for what I define as truly ill, get this: it doesn’t matter! State law defines the qualifying conditions, and does so in a way that leaves a respectable doctor the wiggle room he needs to best treat his patient, but also, unfortunately, leaves plenty of room for irresponsible quacks willing to medicate anyone eager to buffer themselves from reality.
I find this story and many of the comments following it to be very disturbing. There is a sad level of ignorance and fear around this issue, especially for a smart progressive community like San Jose.
First, H&S Code 11362.775 grants patients and caregivers immunity from charges of sales and distribution when they associate to cultivate. The Attorney General has told patients that these associations need to be nonprofit collectives or cooperatives that pay sales tax, get business licenses, and restrict purchases to members only.
Ackemann and the DA’s office are ignoring these directives from the Attorney General and making up the law as they see fit because they do not like the fact that so many people benefit from the medical use of cannabis.
Yes there are 18 year olds who suffer from stress, insomnia, and anxiety. These are major issues affecting many Americans across the country. What would opponents prefer? That these 18 years take prescription medicines instead of cannabis? The fact is cannabis is far safer than most prescription medicines prescribed for these types of symptoms. That is why a licensed, educated, physician recommended cannabis to these young people. Because they know it is the better option.
Although there is no age requirement to receive a medical marijuana recommendation many of the collectives and cooperatives voluntarily limit members to 18 years and older.
Yes, there are doctors who abuse the system and I am the first person to say the medical board should investigate and if necessary discipline any doctor not following the proper procedures. Unfortunately the medical board is too busy investigating more serious claims of prescription fraud because they too know that cannabis is far less dangerous than the many other drugs doctors prescribe on a daily basis.
Yes, there have been some incidents of crime related to the collectives and cooperatives. Unfortunately this is due to the failure of the city to regulate and control them. Criminals take advantage of the fact that collective and cooperative operators do not have support of the police. They see an easy target and take advantage of the lack of protection.
Cities that have strict rules and controls on collectives report no connection to an increase in crime. These cities include Oakland, Denver, and San Francisco.
By their nature medical cannabis collectives reduce crime because they take consumers out of the black market. They put drug dealers out of business and reduce the amount of money going to illegal drug gangs. It is not illegal to buy marijuana and patients may legally purchase from the black market. Many choose not to do so because they would prefer safe and legal access to quality medicine that does not give profits to criminals.
That is why we fight for safe access in San Jose and the rest of the South Bay.
Lauren Vazquez
Director Silicon Valley Chapter
Americans for Safe Access
Is this a good time to suggest lowering the drinking age to 18 again? If 18 is old enough to vote, go to war, consume medical marijuana, why not booze too?
Isn’t that 21 age thing just a vestige or puritanical christian values and a hold-over from prohibition era values of “people are too dumb to be trusted.”
If pot is okay, why not booze too?
Booze is far more dangerous. Several people have died once a boozer gets behind a wheel.
Thanks BS Monitor for, again, being the voice of reason. I’ve been doing this job for over a decade now and encountered dozens of people who have used marijuana under the ‘protection’ afforded by possession of a ‘cannabis card’. Of those dozens, only two have stood out as legitimate users – a young man with a variant of Crohn’s disease. Having known a couple of people who suffered from that (arguably) horrible and painful illness, my heart went out to him for his extraordinary suffering. The other was an HIV patient. And, as for the rest…I can’t think of a single other person who possessed the card and used marijuana for the treatment of what most people would consider to be a genuinely debilitating (or terminal) illness. The other reasons for prescribing marijuana have ranged from ‘uncontrolled stress’ to ADHD, to anxiety. And, without exception, every single one of the other users of ‘medicinal’ marijuana was the stereotypical stoner/slacker/layabout who lived off of SSI or disability insurance (or his/her/but-mostly-his parents), sat around eating snack foods and who played video games (usually on a fairly high-end flat panel TV) while taking periodic bong hits.
Now, I would like to see how a cannabis apologist rationalized this gross abuse of the law and, for those concerned citizens, I recommend this: approach an officer and ask him about his experiences. You might be surprised at what you learn.
Lastly, examine these websites for some information that cannabis apologists perhaps don’t want you to know
http://www.studentdrugtesting.org/student_statistics1.htm
and
http://www.goetgheluck.com/PDF/drug_brain.pdf
For those who are uninformed, such as OfficerD, who has more knowledge in political science than he does in science, clarify your understanding of marijuana here: http://www.changetheclimate.org/facts/#4
Thank you OfficerD for being the voice of bad information.
OfficerD,
> “I’ve been doing this job for over a decade now.”
So continuing to spread the propaganda you have been taught over the past 10 years is the “right” thing to do? Or is it that spreading BS protects the job you’ve had for over a decade now?
> reasons for prescribing marijuana have ranged from ‘uncontrolled stress’ to ADHD, to anxiety. And, without exception, every single one of the other users of ‘medicinal’ marijuana was the stereotypical stoner/slacker/layabout who lived off of SSI or disability insurance (or his/her/but-mostly-his parents), sat around eating snack foods and who played video games (usually on a fairly high-end flat panel TV) while taking periodic bong hits.
How dare you stereotype people who use cannabis, “stoners”, as “slacker/layabout who lived off of SSI or disability insurance (or his/her/but-mostly-his parents)”. If that were the case, why does San Jose have over 100 cannabis clubs? Are you saying lazy people start businesses?? or that everyone who uses cannabis to function normally in society are really people who just “layabout and live off of SSI/DI/their parents”??? You might as well be saying the only people who use marijuana are “Negroes, Mexicans & Entertainers!”
The references you use are outdated. This one: http://www.goetgheluck.com/PDF/drug_brain.pdf is the funniest of all. In fact when you look at the information provided (fuzzy 1’inch pictures of cat scans of the brain) marijuana appears to have the least effect.. and no where does it indicate this is harming the brain.
The StudentDrugTesting.org link: http://www.studentdrugtesting.org/student_statistics1.htm proves the case that something needs to change. The current policy’s on Marijuana and Drugs in general, are not working. Continuing the same policies and propaganda will not fix the problems they have created.
“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” -Albert Einstein
I am not suggesting the US do the same as Portugal, but look what they did. Drugs in Portugal are still illegal. But what Portugal did: It changed the law so that users are sent to counseling and sometimes treatment instead of criminal courts and prison. The switch from drugs as a criminal issue to a public health one was aimed at preventing users from going underground.
Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Socrates, one of the chief architects of the new drug strategy, says he was inspired partly by his own experience of helping his brother beat an addiction. “It was a very hard change to make at the time because the drug issue involves lots of prejudices,” he said. “You just need to rid yourselves of prejudice and take an intelligent approach.”
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/12/26/portugals-drug-policy-pays-eyes-lessons/
I suspect, until a new presidential commission to review the research and recommend how to handle marijuana is done, like the “National Commission on Marihuana & Drug Abuse” (aka:the Shafer Commission), I doubt people like you will ever stop spreading prejudgments and lies. Hopefully this time when they come talking about legalization, we wont have a president denouncing and disregarding the scientific facts and conclusions of the commission.
“It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.”
-Thomas Jefferson
“Truth is by nature self-evident. As soon as you remove the cobwebs of ignorance that surround it, it shines clear.”
-Mohandas Gandhi
Best Regards,
Dave Hodges
Founder
SJCBC LLC
http://sjcbc.org
Mr. Hodges, in your indignation at my post, and describe what I said as ‘stereotype’, you missed one crucial point. That I was describing personal experience and information I had gleaned in conversation with the people whom I had contacted in the course and scope of my duties. When I walk in to a house as the result of a call for service and have a conversation with a person and that person states to me, “I got my cannabis card for ADHD”, and then, when I ask him how he supports himself, and he tells me, “SSI”, my incination is to take what he said at face value. Then, When I look around at his residence and see the debris of various snack foods, a top-of-the-line flat panel TV, video game system, and a dizzying array of games, common sense would lead a person to draw various sensible conclusions. This has nothing to do peddling stereotypes, and everything to do with simple observation, interviews, and dissemination the resulting information gained thereby. However, I find it ironic that you tacitly acknowledge how consistent these observations are with the stereotypes of marijuana users. As for the terms I used to describe these persons, the value of the term slacker may be in dispute, but ‘layabout’ seems self-evident. If a person does little or no work, is not gainfully employed, supports himself/herself on SSI, and, can’t even be bothered to place the snack food debris into a trash can, then the term ‘layabout’ seems appropriate.
On another note, you’ve completely missed that I acknowledge that there are certainly illnesses for which the prescription of marijuana may be appropriate. However, I think it is both fair and appropriate to question how broadly the medicinal marijuana law has been interpreted and the uses to which marijuana has been put. More people than just me question the use of marijuana as something approaching a panacea.
Lastly, I am sickened by the insinuation that my disinclination to agree with you is tantamount to ignorance and prejudice and that the only intelligent response is to agree with you – an insinuation to which you apparently subscribe given your quotation of P.M. Socrates. That this sort of approach seems to be the fallback position of you, and, by extent, your organization speaks volumes about your sense of self-importance and the disdain which you apparently hold for those who disagree with you. Sadly, this is the sort of approach which is going to gain you few converts from the ‘other side of the aisle’.
adhd sufferers are seldom organized enough to be good housekeepers. not just because they are layabouts, it is a part of the disease. and i know quite a few young men, and a few older ones as well, employed, unemp, adhd,marijuana users or not, and otherwise who fail to either make good choices in their snackfoods and the debri seldom makes it from the couch to the trashcan until the issue is forced. god love ‘em it is just part of being a teenager, and sometimes a guy.
as for the other… it is your job as an officer to note things and investigate, i understand. and i accept that diversion of medical marijuana to the black market is without doubt, against the law.
but it is not your job to determine what diseases it relieves, it is your job to determine if he holds a valid recommendation by a licensed physician, if it is a matter of possession or growing it. and if it is the other then you need to establish the facts before you go judging it.
you are of course entitled to your opinions, but it seems to me that in the course of your duties that establishing the facts of the matter should be above that.
ideally, that is.
Marijuana is for more than just Crohns disease and AIDs. If someone is on disability, as you show in your own example, it proves that it’s legitimate as that person was injured and is recovering from an injury. You are in no position to judge whether anyone is “legit” or not.
Again, I was not profering an exhaustive list of conditions for which the prescription of marijuana might be appropriate. I as documenting direct personal experience, as I made explicit in my initial post.
As for your assertion that the mere fact of a person being on disability establishes that the prescription and use of marijuana by that person is legitimate is plainly preposterous and exactly the sort of circular reasoning that seems to be consistent with the marijuana apologists on this thread. News flash: insurance and disablity fraud does exist. California has an entire branch of law enforcement (insurance investigators) which spends substantial amounts of time investigating fraud. Are you really so willing to just give a free pass to all marijuana users that you are unable to even entertain the notion that, among those who use marijuana as a prescribed medicine, no fraud exists? This seems like an interesting bit of prejudice on your part.
Marijuana was made illegal and continues to be illegal by politicians for benefit and profit of lobbyists, wood pulp, pharmaceutical, police / prison industries while many of advocates for legalization also want increased profits
Nixon’s 1970 drug law was a means spirited strike back against hippies who opposed Trick Dick’s Vietnam war
War on Drugs has been like many USA wars a financial, political and moral disaster driven by lies, desire for increased profits and many falsehoods – Time to legalize, tax and regulate marijuana
Let’s clear the air – Ask every politician for or against marijuana:
1) Do you use or have used marijuana
2) Have you accepted campaign contributions from opponents or advocates for marijuana use
Well, I’ve been . . . like, you know . . . doing pot for thirty years . . . like, you know . . . and it hasn’t . . . uh . . . hasn’t . . . hasn’t . . . hasn’t affected me at all. I find that it . . . uh . . . it . . . helps me to . . . umm . . . relax, yeah that’s it . . . relax. And . . . that dude that said it was addictive . . . he’s seriously wrong, man . . . there’s nothing addictive . . . about pot . . . man. . . I can quit anytime . . . .
Nothings sadder than an old guy trying to impersonate a “stoner”. Well, here’s how you come off: you potheads are destroying our community…I’m going to complain to the DEA and send you off to prison…never mind everyone around me is hooked on alcohol and pills…hey DEA waste your time on these potheads instead of concentrating on hard drugs….I see what happens to potheads, they start thinking and realize how oppressive I am.
> Nothings sadder than an old guy trying to impersonate a “stoner”.
Sorry, FishWrapper!
I’ve been a naughty intellectual.
I’ll work on my “stoner” impersonations and on being younger.
How about this:
“I was grooving on some Acapulco Gold . . . you know . . . watching Hannah Montana on my iPhone . . . you know . . . feeling really mellow . . . you know . . . . there’s nothing addictive . . . about pot . . . man. . . I can quit anytime . . . .”
Pretty rad, huh!
while some people might say that pot is addicting, there is conflicting data and interpretations. not until recently did the notion of “psychological dependence” even exist.
but the argument here of addiction is moot really if the efficacy and safety of cannabis is compared to the “legal” drugs and recreational substances, for which cannabis can and has replaced for many, alcohol, tobacco, and drugs like morphine, tranquilizers, phenobarbitol, ADD/ADHD and narcotic anti emetic drugs. all of which are highly physically AND psychologically addictive and highly toxic to the human body, per the ppm and come with well proven detrimental side effects on organs like kidneys, livers, gastro-intestinal and stupor, unlike cannabis which does not.
but thanks for playing.
> but the argument here of addiction is moot really if the efficacy and safety of cannabis is compared to the “legal” drugs and recreational substances, for which cannabis can and has replaced for many, alcohol, tobacco, and drugs like morphine, tranquilizers, phenobarbitol, ADD/ADHD and narcotic anti emetic drugs. all of which are highly physically AND psychologically addictive and highly toxic to the human body, per the ppm and come with well proven detrimental side effects on organs like kidneys, livers, gastro-intestinal and stupor, unlike cannabis which does not.
Boy! Are you ever smart! This is an astonishing recitation of genuine DATA. Irrelevant data, but nonetheless data.
None of this has anything to do with the FACT that the FDA is in charge of drug science in this country, and no one—not even Big Marijuana—can sell a drug in this country until the FDA is convinced that it is SAFE and EFFECTIVE and licenses it for sale.
It’s amusing that left-wing moonbats are obsessed with “Big Oil” and their “giant profits” and want the government to put its boot on the neck of Exxon and BP. But when confronted with the monopoly power and obscene profits of a criminatl network selling addictive substances to children, the moonies just shrug and so “Oh, well, it has medicinal benifits”.
It’s time to put the boot on the neck of Big Marijuana and the violent drug cartels.
why are facts on safety and efficacy or comparison to regulated drugs vs cannabis irrelevant in a discussion about medical cannabis? seems to me that it would be exactly what should be discussed.
and blaming anything but prohibition for the drug cartels and unregulated markets is just silly.
personally i think its time to put the boot on the neck of BIG GOVERNMENT.
Marijuana has been illegal in California for almost a century, a felony here BEFORE Nixon took office; in 1972 (when Nixon was president) 66% of California voters said NO to legalizing marijuana.
You can’t make Nixon your demon for what happened during his term without demonizing Obama for what hasn’t happened during his. He had both houses, he was the Change god, but nothing changed. I agree that there are many villains behind the scenes of this story, but they’re villains from both parties.
By the way, Nixon inherited the Vietnam war… I’m quite sure you wouldn’t ever call Iraq Obama’s war.
Good choice in examples fella. The Watergate god.
My comment was in response to a posting citing Nixon as the boogeyman, so “choice” played no part in my reply, just as facts played no part in yours.
You’re starting to make me nauseous, Fishel, how much weed do I have to smoke to make you tolerable?
BS Monitor or “BS” as I’ll be calling you,
1) Who’s making a “Mockery out of the letter and spirit of the medicinal marijuana law”?
The people really making a mockery out of the medicinal marijuana laws are the California Narcotic Officers’ Association (CNOA), the California Police Chiefs Association (CPCA) and their allies in the Medical Marijuana Dispensary Task-force, who continue to spread the propaganda you believe in.
2) Councilman Oliverio was responding as any good public minded politician should, ask questions of what’s going on in his town. The problem is the people who should know what’s going on didn’t seem to. This is not a problem with the acting chief, but a problem with how SCCSET represents themselves. The fact is they are using city and county resources in their misinterpretation of the law. This unfortunate situation was directly caused by SCCSET’s improper training by the CNOA, combined with a lack of transparency within SCCSET and the agency’s they use.
3) “If the councilman doesn’t like how the DA interprets the law he should establish his legal credentials for challenging it and take it up with the DA. If he doesn’t like the way the state or county enforces the law he should argue his case with them.”
So every council members should be a lawyer? That would be an interesting world. I prefer mine to ask questions of their community, other public officials, people who specialize in the subject, and as many legal professionals as they can when dealing with a situation like this.
3) “For the record, there is nothing irrational about someone not wanting a pot club (or liquor store) near one’s home, nothing sinister in someone doubting the medicinal value of marijuana (or statins), nothing wrong with someone questioning the legitimate need of a medical marijuana patient (or welfare recipient), and everything wrong with negatively labeling someone who does any of these things.”
For the record, there is problems with believing and spreading propaganda. There is no difference between the the Marijuana propaganda you, SCCSET, CNOA and CPCA spread today and the propaganda used in the 1940’s against Japanese American to create internment camps, or in Nazi Germany against the Jews.
4) “Medicinal value does not equal absolute right.”
Execpt in California with the passage of 215 the provides them that right.
5) Where, I ask, is the justification in this section for treating the hypothetical teenage stoner?
Right here: “(B) If not alleviated, may cause serious harm to the patient’s safety or physical or mental health.”
“BS”, in your eyes a parent’s only choice to treat a teen with severe social anxiety issues has to be either Celexa, Zoloft, Prozac, Effexor, Paxil, Elavil, Luvox, Minipress, Selfemra, or Vanatrip… Even if that parent tries all of the prescription drugs with their teen, and none work as well as cannabis, prop 215 does not protect their right to get this medication??? Because YOU do not consider “anxiety” to be valid? If a parent came into my shop with a 12 year old, and told me this was the only thing that worked for them, I would be obligated to provide them this medication.
6) “BS”, “You can’t make Nixon your demon for what happened during his term”???
How about for these quotes:
* Jews and marijuana: “I see another thing in the news summary this morning about it. That’s a funny thing, every one of the bastards that are out for legalizing marijuana is Jewish. What the Christ is the matter with the Jews, Bob, what is the matter with them? I suppose it’s because most of them are psychiatrists . . .”
* Marijuana and the culture wars: “You see, homosexuality, dope, immorality in general. These are the enemies of strong societies. That’s why the Communists and the left-wingers are pushing the stuff, they’re trying to destroy us.”
* Marijuana compared to alcohol: marijuana consumers smoke “to get high” while “a person drinks to have fun.” Nixon also saw marijuana leading to loss of motivation and discipline but claimed: “At least with liquor I don’t lose motivation.”
* Marijuana and political dissent: “. . . radical demonstrators that were here . . . two weeks ago . . . They’re all on drugs, virtually all.”
* Drug education: “Enforce the law, you’ve got to scare them.”
More from the Nixon Tapes: http://www.annieappleseedproject.org/nixtapshowwh.html
Best Regards,
Dave Hodges
Founder
SJCBC LLC
http://sjcbc.org
Dear Mr. Hodges,
With all due respect, as someone of Jewish origin who had relatives die in the Holocaust, it is absoulutely disgraceful you state: “For the record, there is problems with believing and spreading propaganda. There is no difference between the the Marijuana propaganda you, SCCSET, CNOA and CPCA spread today and the propaganda used in the 1940’s against Japanese American to create internment camps, or in Nazi Germany against the Jews.”
Whether or not which side of the marijuana debate one is on, to create some comparison between this and 6 million Jews dying at Hitler’s hand, is absolutely vulgar.
I must have missed the ignorance and fear that saddened Ms. Vazquez. What I see in the comments here is a difference of opinion, a venting of complaint, a voicing of concern… in other words, citizens being citizens in the public square of SJI. But of course, Ms. Vazquez, being a representative of a “progressive” organization, espouses the tired party line, that being to equate all opposing views with ignorance and paint those holding them as phobics.
For the record, there is nothing irrational about someone not wanting a pot club (or liquor store) near one’s home, nothing sinister in someone doubting the medicinal value of marijuana (or statins), nothing wrong with someone questioning the legitimate need of a medical marijuana patient (or welfare recipient), and everything wrong with negatively labeling someone who does any of these things.
Medicinal value does not equal absolute right, so let’s stop pretending there’s a moral high ground in this debate. Were it a right then no legislative body in the nation could outlaw marijuana’s use, but it not a right and that’s why it remains illegal despite the claims of its medicinal value. That California has provided a legal mechanism for those who desire to use it medicinally doesn’t make those users experts in the law, medicine, substance abuse, or crime prevention, thus being the “director” of collective of stoners has about as much cachet being Debra Figone’s beautician.
Director Vazquez may believe that an 18 year old suffering from stress, insomnia, or anxiety is a patient deserving of a medicinal bong hit, but I certainly don’t see the authority for that in the law. In Health and Safety Code section 11362.7 (g), eleven specific “serious” medical conditions are described (no mention of stress, insomnia, or anxiety), but it is in the two-part description found in the twelfth condition—the catchall clause, that most accurately reveals the legislative intent:
(12) Any other chronic or persistent medical symptom that either:
(A) Substantially limits the ability of the person to conduct one
or more major life activities as defined in the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-336).
(B) If not alleviated, may cause serious harm to the patient’s
safety or physical or mental health.
Where, I ask, is the justification in this section for treating Ms. Vazquez’s hypothetical teenage stoner? Does she, as a director, have the right to amend the law however she sees fit? Since every teenager I’ve ever known has experienced stress and anxiety, judging by her interpretation of the law, every kid past puberty should be entitled to purchase medicinal marijuana—that is, unless the pothead running the collective decides otherwise.
Self-appointed dope gods making medical decisions and writing the law on the fly—now that’s something worth fearing.
let me get this right, you do not believe that we have the right or have any power to pursue or choose the best medical treatment for us? that we must accept alternatives that come with potentially deadly side effects over medicine that has literally not ever killed anyone?
that the state or any governmental agency would have powers over that seems very un-American to me. Are you a communist perchance?
Sooooo,
You think you’re arguing against my opinion but you’re not. The practice of medicine is strictly regulated in this country, which is why every year thousands of desperate Americans travel to foreign lands because their idea of “the best medical treatment” for them is prohibited here. Sooooo, it blatantly clear that the legislature and the courts, perhaps taking note of what is and is not in the Bill of Rights, have established that the right that you wish to claim does not exist.
That said, there is nothing prohibiting you from working within the system to make your preferred medicine available… does that sound soooo un-American?
you are terribly misguided individual if you believe that government trumps individual rights in the constitution and the bill of rights. or that the courts have the power to grant rights to the government that do not exist in the constitution.
in your defense, i can see how it would seem that way, but just because they have established it by de facto, doesn’t make it constitutional – or right.
and maybe you haven’t noticed, we have worked within the system to make our preferred medicine available, but the system is rigged, corrupt, a regular propaganda machine, and we have been blocked on the federal level, by other interests who profit from and use “the drug wars” to build political careers on and control the minorities and “underclasses”.
What I stated, in response to the absurd notion that we are free to pursue whatever treatment we desire, was that it is an indisputable fact that the government controls the practice of medicine in this country. That said, if you think that control is unconstitutional, feel free to take it up with the court system.
As for those factions of the system that remain in the way of your agenda, there is persuasive evidence to suspect corruption in some, but that does not mean that everyone who gets in your way is corrupt. There have been a number of people commenting here with genuine and justifiable concerns about pot clubs in their city, only to be insulted and have their motives attacked by a bunch of deranged zealots from the medical marijuana industry. Nothing mellow about you folks, is there.
genuwine,
If all you’ve seen in the responses directed at commenters here is “facts and knowledge” I suggest you back off from your medicine. The pro-marijuana folks posting here can’t even see the legitimacy in a local resident’s concern for his own neighborhood.
As for my allegedly ignoring 35 years of anything, I don’t know where you get that. Frankly, marijuana has never been of particular interest to me, and neither have marijuana smokers—most of whom I consider to be dull. My comments here are inspired by what I see as a disrespect for the letter and intent of the law, something that, insofar as the letter of the law, seems to be shared by law enforcement, and as to the intent of the law, is apparently shared by many in the public made skeptical by what they’ve seen on the street.
if you call people responding to you with facts and knowlege during a discussion on the internet being attacked, can’t imagine how you must feel in real life when people try to explain things to you that you don’t like.
did it not occur to you that perhaps there are also people on the other side who have justifiable concerns about an issue that is very important to them either? i am not a member of the “medical marijuana industry” – but i am very concerned over the legality and its status as an accepted medicine for all that it can do, just as it was before it was taken out of the pharmacopia over the objection of the AMA. But i am also concerned with people such as yourself who ignore the fact that something is truly wrong with this situation when there has been proof for 35 years that cannabis destroys brain tumors and our government not only knew about it, but they destroyed the evidence?
you say, remedy this through the law, and believe me many are trying, and one day this foolish and expensive war on marijuana, will hopefully be over. but of course we have opposition from the misguided, and those who profit from the drug war, and monopolies on textiles, oil, recreational intoxicants, and dangerous pharmaceuticals.
sorry bs, but i did not say you were ignoring anything for 35 years, i said that you ignore the fact that the government has known for 35 years that it shrank cancer tumors, and destroyed the evidence.
are you not interested in cancer cures or governmental coverups? you know if you don’t pay attention to your government is doing, accept on blind faith without questions or examination, “they” tend do things like start wars for profit and fun.
“being the “director” of collective of stoners has about as much cachet being Debra Figone’s beautician.”
Now that’s just plain mean, not to mention astoundingly ignorant. Are you aware that the city manager, who you insult, also largely supports your position on medical marijuana?
It’s odd that you begin your post by protesting other people’s pejoratives, then resort to pejoratives to make your ill-informed point. Hmm…
Jack Herrer,
Plain mean? Absolutely. Ignorant? Hardly. I despise Debra Figone for what she’s DONE as city manager and care not a whit about what she THINKS or OPINES about marijuana. As for her feelings, truth be told, what I’d love to see is her feelings hurt by having her ass tossed out on the street just as she’s done to a good number of city employees. Her reckless, arrogant actions are putting real lives at stake—cops, firefighters, and innocent citizens, and she’s doing it as part of a cheap, political power play, one designed to elevate her status—and that of the despicable, lying mayor under whom she serves, as union killers.
This city has had cops killed because of understaffing, and when it happened twenty years ago—when two cops died on the street where city hall now sits, then mayor Tom McEnery acknowledged the problem and vowed to address it. Today, when the staffing level is lower than it was back in 1989, it is Ms. Figone’s intention to reduce the department by 200 sworn. Won’t that be a feather in her hat!… a hat that maybe she’ll wear to the funeral next time a cop dies—because help got there late, or a firefighter perishes—from trying to do too much with too little, or a woman dies—because the police department couldn’t get there to save her from her rampaging husband.
Ah, changing the subject are we?
I also happen to think Figone is a terrible city manager, but that’s not what was under discussion.
While we may agree that SJ has a bad city manager, childish comments about someones personal appearance are clearly out of bounds and reflect poorly on the person making the comment. The ignorance referred to is in the basic concepts of civilized discussion.
That said, I’m sorry to read that you are so obviously stressed out about so many issues. Fortunately, there are legal businesses in San Jose that can help you with this problem, and many other medical issues, if as adult citizen of California you choose that treatment option. You will also be pleased to know that they will soon pay a special 7% tax to help pay for the city services you are so worried about, and business is booming!
Of course you, Figone, and a handful of rouge cops seem to think they can ignore the will of SJ voters who in November’s landslide vote welcomed legal, tax-paying dispensaries to our community. That’s one reason I think Figone should be fired. She and a few of her staff tried to recommend that the voters simply be ignored because, like you, THEY just don’t like California law. It’s also why I was glad to see Chief Lodge out in Santa Clara, since he was one of the instigators of these illegal raids. (Note: This is the same Chief Lodge whose cops supply confidential information to the Hells Angels, while protecting the us good people of Silicon Valley from the evils of voter-approved medical marijuana.) Good riddance to bad law enforcement!
If, as the above article suggests, the new DA will bring some common sense to this controversy, then I’m all for it. Although I believe adult use of marijuana should be legalized with similar restrictions to alcohol, having nearly 100 dispensaries open in SJ, most in the past year, suggests a need for reasonable regulation and zoning requirements. I’d say the same thing if 100 hair nail salons opened in the same year.
Despite concerns about some specifics in the current SJ ordinance under discussion, the overall concept is good and I commend Councilman Oliverio and the council majority for their leadership on the issue, and for tacitly reminding the city manager who she works for.
Have a good weekend. And remember to do (and say) undo others…
BS Monotor,
You stated,” because help got there late, or firefighter perishes- from trying to do too much or too litte, or a woman dies- because the police department couldn’t get there to save her from a rampaging husband.”
This already happens in San Jose and I am a survivor of this but there was no help from our justice system for me or my 3 girls. We still have to fight to live freely from my Ex where there is NO JUSTICE in San Jose with out Proper Laws in place every day!!!!! Cut backs or not it is up to, WE THE PEOPLE, to make a difference in this world even if our leaders don’t see it. When the people once again regain their confidence in the benefits of liberty- and demand it from their elected leaders- Congress will act appropriately.
It is the sick and dying that have nothing to loose but life, so they will fight to live, why deny the people that in San Jose. It is your personal fears that stop you and people for great changes in this world. Creat laws that help create ballance in this great City we live in, San Jose. It is the doctors to question, not the clubs that act as ” middle men” for Safe access from what is in the black market.
Jack Herrer,
Your desire to patronize notwithstanding, I didn’t change the subject, as I was responding to your post criticizing me for making a comment about the city manager—one that could only be deemed insulting by the reader’s interpretation of it, and it was on the topic of the city manager I stayed.
That said, my goodness you think highly of yourself. Diagnosing and prescribing a medication based on the contents of a blog! Tell me Dispenser Jack, how much weed will I need to smoke to make sense out of the ramblings of all the pot heads posting here? How much to convince me that stoners are more adept at understanding the law than lawyers? And finally, is there enough marijuana in all of San Jose to make me hot for Debra Figone?
Oops, there I go again, being uncivilized. I’ll try to be better; try to be more like you, and only to say truly insulting things about a police chief like Steve Lodge, whose entire 30 year career you’ve seen fit to disparage based on nothing more than his interpretation of marijuana laws and the actions of ONE rogue cop on a force of 147 men and women.
BS, you really picked a bad weekend to defend your personal attacks on public officials.
Jack Herrer
Even before the smoke had a chance to clear in Tucson the scumbags from the Southern Poverty Law Center were busy flooding the media with their patented guilt by rumored association tactics, linking an obviously deranged young man with white supremacists and anti-Zionist factions. This is the way these bastards make their millions, seeding the clouds of fear and hatred by exploiting the misery and tragedy of others.
Not to be outdone, the political enemies of Sarah Palin, the haters of the Tea Party, and others with agendas have rushed into the carnage hoping to pick from the bones of the dead whatever political capital can be salvaged. Scumbags all, including those anti-marijuana activists so obviously thrilled to hear the murderous Loughner, a young man far too insane to have an ascribable inspiration, described by acquaintances as a “pot-smoking loner.”
Nice company you’re keeping.
Are you the real Jack Herrer sir? Just wondering, I find it fascinating that you would be participating in the discussion if you were.
Well put BS! Amen!!
Its a cultural war. Dispensary owners are not “self-appointed dope gods”. They are a new league of entrepreneurs with confidence and intelligence. Doing the financials, helping patients, providing jobs, getting high quality medication at a competitive donation,marketing and design skills, circumventing archaic concepts, ordinances, city councils, and the DEA are reasons why dispensary owners should be given kudos. Dispensary owners are in fact an intelligent and creative breed that are worthy of praise. They are fighting the fight and winning. The dispensary owner is nothing like the “street pot dealer” stigma. He is at the forefront of modern economics.
He may dispute my referring to dispensary owners as gods, but it sure sounds like Mr. Fishel worships them. Praise the Great Dispenser and pass the marijuana!
I have nothing against the entrepreneurial spirit, but when the “archaic concepts” being circumvented are the laws on the books, then the entrepreneurs—even the most creative and intelligent of them, need to be reined in. Lawlessness, even when packed in a harmless appearing joint rolled with cannabis and hyperbole, still constitutes a danger to a society ruled by laws. The compassionate inch given, in the form of the law authorizing the use of medicinal marijuana, has been turned into a mile of abuse by a self-important collection of immature misfits who’ve anointed themselves the final word on every aspect of the issue. For evidence of this we need look no further than up the page of this post, where Ms. Vazquez provides us smoke-free mortals expert analysis on both the laws on the books and the medicinal needs of stressed-out teenagers.
I realize that you folks are just trying to educate us clueless citizens, but honestly, people, I think there’s something clouding your thinking.
It’s funny. When the subject of pot comes up, suddenly there are always lots of posts from individuals who never post on any other topic. It’s almost as if, for the people who are interested in pot, pot’s the ONLY thing they’re interested in.
Is there any significance to this observation or am I reading too much into it?
Same thing happens with other discussions, such as talking about the Airport and suddenly you’ll get a bunch of posts from 1 or 2 people who want to close or move it.
As far as civic engagement in general, I suspect pot advocates are not the most engaged in civic issues. To be honest, 95% of the population is probably completely disengaged from public policy issues outside of election time, which allows vocal and self-interested actors to move issues while everyone else is looking elsewhere.
John,
That might be true for me… but I think what you are seeing is two things. One, anytime something looks bad to the people pushing today’s marijuana propaganda, they start posting comments to try to turn things back in the direction they want. Two, people (even non-cannabis smokers) are sick of the propaganda that organizations like the California Narcotic Officers’ Association (CNOA), the California Police Chiefs Association (CPCA) and their allies in the Medical Marijuana Dispensary Task-force continue to push, and feel they can’t stand by and watch.
“Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.” -Buddha
In 2006, the CPCA formed a Medical Marijuana Dispensary (“MMD”) Task Force, which is comprised of representatives from CPCA, the California State Sheriffs’ Association, the California Peace Officers’ Association, the California Narcotics’ Officers Association, the California District Attorneys Association, the California Highway Patrol, and the California Department of Justice. The Task Force was formed to address state versus federal enforcement issues, related to MMDs, as well as the crime and quality of life issues.
You can find the propaganda they push to our public officials right here: http://www.californiapolicechiefs.org/nav_files/medical_marijuana.html
“We got to compete with China, and if everybody’s stoned, how the hell are we going to make it?”
—Jerry Brown
After watching the recent parade of brain-trauma-impersonators (aka cannabis advocates) go before the city council – you’d have to agree w Jerry.
Mr. Hodges,
By the numbers…
1) A simple comparison of what the law says with what Ms. Vazquez, director of the local chapter of Americans for Safe Access, said about providing marijuana to 18 year olds suffering from “stress, anxiety, and insomnia”—three conditions not included in the law, constitutes what I consider a mockery of the letter and spirit of the law. Her interpretation of what the law allows, delusional though it may be, is consistent with what many in the public and most in law enforcement have come to see as the facts on the ground—that anyone with an agreeable doctor can take advantage of a law intended to help the truly ill.
2) Councilman Oliverio is a clown whose respect for the letter of law begins with his political self-interest and ends with the election signs of the opposition. Municipal police departments regularly respond to provide security for outside agencies without anyone other than those in the field knowing about it. The agency leading those raids was no secret, and that agency was exactly where Mr. Oliverio should have taken his tough guy act.
3) Every council member has access to a lawyer—the city attorney. If Mr. Oliverio had desired the advise of an expert it was a phone call away, just as it was the day he got caught stealing election signs. That said, if he believes himself qualified to engage in a legal argument with the DA, he can have at it. But for him to take his jackass argument to the police chief, who is neither a member of the bar nor in the chain of command directing the raid in question, is nothing more than a publicity stunt (notably shared with the press) and a waste of time.
3) continued: To compare a regular Joe concerned about a neighborhood pot club, or someone with a common sense question about how the shiftless loser on the corner became a needy “patient” overnight, with what happened to Japanese-Americans in the war is the mark of either a poor education or a mental condition. It wasn’t people talking in the public square that uprooted Japanese-Americans from their homes, it was FDR—the liberal’s hero, who saw Japanese-Americans as a powerless minority suitable for exploiting, and internment as just one more tool to create the “them and us” divide he needed to fully mobilize the nation—most of whom had never even seen a person of Japanese descent.
4) My definition of an absolute right is one guaranteed in the US Constitution, and since the fate of California’s pot clubs seems to be subject to the discretion of the executive branch in Washington, DC, I’m not much impressed with your right.
5) You’re nuts if you think the intent of the law was to make marijuana available to anxious teenagers. The language just isn’t there. As for the pharmaceuticals on your list, the appropriateness of prescribing them is the business of medical professionals, and not you, me, nor the state legislature.
But I do appreciate your candor, as it gives the public a chance to see what happens when a self-righteous zealot gets a sliver of authority. You obviously equate the parent of a 12 year old coming to you with an anxious child with a parent bringing his child to the doctor, the only problem being YOU’RE NOT A DOCTOR! Your arrogance is frightening.
6) My god, you want to play doctor yet you’ve got the reading comprehension skills of a janitor. The point I made was that while some might find it politically satisfying to pretend that marijuana’s illegal status is due strictly to what big bad Nixon did forty years ago, that illegal status has not changed during the administration of Barack Obama, the hero of Nixon haters everywhere.
By the way, no where in any post have I suggested that I support laws criminalizing marijuana use of any kind. I don’t. But I also don’t support taking a law sold to the public as one thing and then bending and twisting it so that it winds up that same public’s ass. This is exactly what was done by the homosexual community with domestic partnerships, working the system to get it and then using it as a sledge hammer to attack traditional marriage in court. I guess that’s just the way progressives wage politics—by way of deception.
1) “BS”, As you pointed out yourself, “stress, anxiety, and insomnia” are covered right here: “(B) If not alleviated, may cause serious harm to the patient’s safety or physical or mental health.”
a) Stress Kills:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/30/health/main561093.shtml
b) Anxiety is a crippling “mental health” issue:
http://www.socialanxietydisorder.net/coping/life-with-social-anxiety.html
c) Insomnia can kill and is also a crippling “mental health” issue:
http://www.newsweek.com/2009/08/23/the-waking-dead.html
The intent or “spirit” of the law, was to make it so sick California’s had access to this medication. I’m not sure how you see it otherwise. Your concept of this only helping the “truly ill” is funny. So I take it YOU are a doctor, and capable of saying Michael Jackson’s condition did not qualify as “truly ill”… or that someone who cant leave their house because of crippling fear is not “truly ill”. “BS” pull your head out of your ass.
2) With the way you talk, you can only be one type of person: A narcotics officer who doesn’t want to loose his job.. and really didn’t like the pension reform, headed by Oliverio that SJ just passed. Honestly I don’t like it either. It’s another example of bad legal advice from our worthless SJ city Attorney. Funny how you bitch about the advice given to the city manager & council from the city Attorney, but at the same time, you expect a council member to only talk to this Attorney?
3) You are not a regular Joe, you are a Narcotics Officer… and yes propaganda is propaganda even against the “Negroes, Mexicans & Entertainers!”. Manipulating the public with bad information is wrong, whoever it’s targeted against. The fear of “protecting” your neighborhood is unjustified. The dangers in your neighborhood are cause by the failed drug policy, knowen as the “War on drugs”, along with the bad legal advice provided to the city by the city attorney. In fact if Richard Doyal had not said “We don’t need a moratorium” back in November of 09, we may have only had 10-15 cannabis collectives in San Jose
5) You’re nuts if you think, I think, I am a DR. In the scenario I described, I could only provide the medication to the 12 year old if a DR recommended it for the child.
Read this:
Many people taking powerful psychiatric medications that increase their risk of weight gain and diabetes are prescribed those drugs when there’s little evidence that they will get any benefit from them, a new study shows.
What’s more, experts say that even when these drugs, which are known as atypical anti psychotics, are prescribed as recommended, they may not be safer or more effective than the less expensive, older medications that they’ve apparently replaced.
Link: http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20110107/study-newer-antipsychotic-drugs-are-overused
An investigation of the Texas foster care system found that 7000 foster children were taking prescribed anti-psychotic drugs; and that the State had also received money from the companies who benefit from sales of those drugs.
Link: http://www.examiner.com/foster-families-in-oklahoma-city/anti-psychotic-medications-overused-on-children-foster-care
6) “BS”, I know your hero is Nixon. Hell he was the only one who could keep the damm homo’s and commies at bay! LOL! My point is you’re ignoring the facts of how we got here and trying to point the finger else where.
Sadly until a new presidential commission to review the research and recommend how to handle marijuana is done, like the “National Commission on Marihuana & Drug Abuse” (aka:the Shafer Commission), I doubt people like you will ever stop spreading prejudgments and lies. Hopefully this time when they come talking about legalization, we wont have a president denouncing and disregarding the scientific facts and conclusions of the commission.
By the way, if you “don’t support taking a law sold to the public as one thing and then bending and twisting it”, why are you supporting the agenda that only Narcotics Officers know what “truly ill” is, and who is “truly ill”… I (and the CA medical board) say a Doctor is the only person who can decide who is “truly ill”, and what “truly ill” is.
Before the 1930’s (for thousands of years) cannabis was used to treat just about everything, and “There is no evidence, however, that the medicinal use of these drugs has caused or is causing cannabis addiction. As remedial agents, they are used to an inconsiderable extent. Since the medicinal use of cannabis has not caused and is not causing addiction, the prevention of the use of the drug for medicinal purposes can accomplish no good end whatsoever. How far it may serve to deprive the public of the benefits of a drug that on further research may prove to be of substantial value, it is impossible to foresee.” – Wm. C. Woodward, Legislative Counsel for the American Medical Association, 7/10/37
“BS”, Right back at you:
“YOU’RE NOT A DOCTOR! Your arrogance is frightening.” -An ignorant Narcotics Officer, spewing propaganda, known as “BS”
Best Regards,
Dave Hodges
Founder
SJCBC LLC
http://www.sjcbc.org
Dave Hodges
again, by the numbers.
1) You “can’t see” why I believe the law was intended to restrict access to marijuana despite the fact that the law is built around a list of serious conditions. If the intent was that everyone suffering something more serious than dandruff should have access to marijuana, then why include a list of “serious” conditions?
Restricting the application of a medicine to certain medical conditions is the norm, except in those cases where a medicine has been designated for over the counter sales. Clearly, that is not the case with marijuana, which requires a prescription (of sorts). Once again we run into the same phenomenon, that being a complete disconnect between the law on the books and its interpretation by those who lobbied for its passage.
I guess that’s what to be expected when the Jeff Spicoli’s of the world toke up and open up that first law book.
2) It’s my understanding that they’re doing remarkable things these days with cannabis cultivation, but I’m quite sure they’ve yet to produce a variety that supplies the user with psychic powers. Guess again. No way would I ever have anything to do, in any capacity, with narcotics, primarily because doing so requires one to deal with drug users, the most single-minded bores this side of a golden retriever with a ball in his mouth. All they talk about, think about, and live for, is their drug of choice. Their obsession is so deep-seated that it even shows up on an MRI.
3) Back off the pipe a bit, David, you’re accusing me of things I’ve never claimed and got me ducking quotes I didn’t utter. I will admit that I don’t want a pot club anywhere near my home, but that’s not because of any prejudice against cannabis sativa, it’s my mistrust and disgust with a good percentage of the people who use it regularly.
5) I never thought you were a doctor, I just happened to catch you talking as if you were one. Check your own post: you said nothing in your little story about the 12 year old having a doctor’s referral, but even had you included that, the idea that anyone might ever think it right to treat a 12 year old with marijuana is appalling. Had that little vignette been included in the campaign to legalize medical marijuana we wouldn’t today be having this exchange.
6) I won’t waste any more time on your psychic visions or weird, homoerotic sexual fantasies about Tricky Dick, but I will address your basing your predictions on how marijuana will affect people today with a researcher’s opinion from eighty or more years ago. The drug is not the same today, hell, it doesn’t even resemble what it was just thirty years ago. Your cherry picked facts do nothing to change the fact that had the law been intended to make marijuana available to everyone, had that been its legislative intent, it would be right there in black and white in the Health and Safety code. But it ain’t, and there’s no amount of research you can cut and paste from Google that will change that.
Is there some reason that if marijuana has a legitimate medical purpose and needs a doctor’s prescription, its proper place to be dispensed would be from a pharmacy? Also, if it is a legitimate drug which is legal to help those with life altering illnesses, isn’t it rather inhumane for Pierluigi to be punishing these extremely ill individuals with a huge tax, a tax that is levied on no other legitimate drug? By having stand alone stores for marijuana and taxing it, I think it gives the public the impression that these are more akin to liquor stores than legitimate medical facilities. Why is it necessary to create another level of government to police these medical marijuana stores? If marijuana is legitimate and legal, put it in a pharmacy with every other prescribed drug. Quit taxing those that are desperately ill.
It’s all a bunch of crap, drug are drugs no matter if you put a mainstream reason or label on things.
My Doctors won’t give me an Rx for this drug and I have true need for pain deferment(3 Blown Discs. I can’t get the Steroids that are only obtained legally with an Rx because I want to get buffed up.
Do I really need these drugs? No, but if I whine enough maybe the Feds will allow me to use these controlled substances without regulation.
There are ways of getting things done in this world without shoving it down someone throat who has an opposing opinion.
I would say take a good look at why someone would need drugs in the first place unless they are very very ill.
But not just because they have an imagined pain or symptom from something that will get them the dope they crave.
People will say and do anything to obtain legal or illegal drugs this includes lying about or having fictional issues regarding pain management to gain access to somewhat seemingly harmless recreational drugs.
Unfortunately most of the folks that I see on the TV news being interviewed are “very young”. They appear to be wanna be versions of “Dead Heads” from the 60’s and 70’s.
If the movement is serious please think about having mainstream individuals state how and why they feel about this issue, it may be better accepted by all.
It seems more “real” groundwork needs to be done to facilitate a better communication and direction for this Medical Marijuana dilemma.
Good Luck
how much more mainstream than 77% approval do you think it gets?
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1548/broad-public-support-for-legalizing-medical-marijuana
and even 44% seems rather mainstream:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/123728/U.S.-Support-Legalizing-Marijuana-Reaches-New-High.aspx
some “mainstream” (that could not even to be confused with dead heads), supporters of legalizing marijuana and medical marijuana:
Joycelyn Elders
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/10/18/former.surgeon.general.marijuana/index.html
Hugh Downs
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/downs2.htm
montel williams
Gary Johnson, former gov of new mexico
judge jim gray, and all the members of leap –
milton friedman
ron paul
jimmy carter
organizations:
the cato institute
the AMA
the American Nursing association
are just a few…
Polls only reflect a very minuscule portion, less than 0.01% representing very small groups of individuals with specific knowledge of this topic.
These “mainstream folks” are part of focus groups specifically designed to be one sided and are given just a smidgen of info that (may be correct or not?) to make an important decision.
Just don’t believe everything you read in political rags.
Please check in with your therapist soon….
yes, please lets disregard the facts, studies, statistics and realities of the situation and go on lies, alarmist misguided notions and distortions instead
i mean who cares what 77% of the public believes anyway??
“BS”,
1) So now you claim Dr’s are giving medical cannabis recommendation for bad dandruff? Find me a Dr. that will write a medical cannabis recommendation for dandruff, and I’ll admit you’re right, “it’s all bs”. In the law itself it spells out what a serious condition is “(B) If not alleviated, may cause serious harm to the patient’s safety or physical or mental health.”. Based on that dandruff does not count, but “stress, anxiety, and insomnia” DO!
“BS”> “Once again we run into the same phenomenon, that being a complete disconnect between the law on the books and its interpretation by those who lobbied for its passage.”
2) Who are you? Are you a doctor? Are you a lawyer? Are you a medical cannabis Lobbyist? or are you one of our Public Servants? Again you ignore the fact YOU are the one with the complete disconnect of the law. You went from claiming “stress, anxiety, and insomnia” are BS, to claiming people can get it for a bad case of dandruff?? The fact is the law was designed to give DR’s the right to decide who medical cannabis is appropriate for, not you, not the narcs, not the lawyers who support the narcs, but medical professionals who have their doctorate in medicine.
“BS”> “not because of any prejudice”…
“BS”> “it’s my mistrust and disgust with a good percentage of the people who use it regularly.”…
3) So “I’m not prejudging anything, but everyone who smokes pot is bad”?? Wow, ok, you’re right. All stoners rob banks, kill people and rape babies… I forgot… must have been all the weed I smoke. Reefer madness! Hell we need to jail all those weed smoking “Negroes, Mexicans & Entertainers!” ASAP!! They’re going to destroy our society!!!
5) I made a bad assumption you understood how medical cannabis collectives work. So let me explain this one for you. In order to purchase cannabis in California you need a recommendation for medical cannabis written by a doctor. I’m sorry I didn’t spell that out for you. Here is how it would have looked if I had not assumed you knew that part.
“If a parent came into my shop with a 12 year old(and a medical cannabis recommendation for that 12 year old), and told me this was the only thing that worked for them, I would be obligated to provide them medical cannabis”
“BS”, I officially apologize for assuming you knew anything about this subject.
“BS”> “The drug is not the same today, hell, it doesn’t even resemble what it was just thirty years ago.”
6) What are you basing this on? Are you aware of all the manufacturing processes of the medications used before the 1930’s? Where are your facts that prove what you claim? Please provide us “Your cherry picked facts”. The facts I have provided are only the tip of the iceberg that proves people like you wrong.
The fact is medical marijuana was legalized in California for anyone who has a condition that “(B) If not alleviated, may cause serious harm to the patient’s safety or physical or mental health.”. Show me court rulings that prove otherwise, and again I’ll admit you are right.
It’s unfortunate you hide behind your omnipotent post name “BS Monitor “. I’d love to have this talk in person, and introduce you to some real people who use this medication.
Best Regards,
Dave Hodges
Founder
SJCBC LLC
http://sjcbc.org
Dave Hodges,
1) Again, your poor reading comprehension is the problem here, as what I implied, sarcastically, was that anyone with a problem more serious than dandruff could qualify for a medical marijuana card. The operative phrase being “more serious than,” meaning that dandruff would not qualify. If you doubt the misunderstanding here is yours, I prescribe an appointment at a remedial reading dispensary; there’ll be nothing to inhale and it might help you in your reading of the law.
As to the law itself, subsection “B” of item 12, the language upon which your delusions hang, refers to “physical or mental impairments” described in the Americans with Disabilities Act, where you will find them defined as:
any physiological disorder or condition, cosmetic disfigurement, or anatomical loss affecting one or more of the following body systems: neurological; musculoskeletal; special sense organs (which would include speech organs that are not respiratory such as vocal cords, soft palate, tongue, etc.); respiratory, including speech organs; cardiovascular; reproductive; digestive; genitourinary; hemic and lymphatic; skin; and endocrine. It also means any mental or psychological disorder, such as mental retardation, organic brain syndrome, emotional or mental illness, and specific learning disabilities.
The “substantial limitations of a major life activity” referred to are defined as:
caring for one’s self, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, and working.
These are the conditions and limitations which, “If not alleviated, may cause serious harm to the patient’s safety or physical or mental health.” One would have to be hallucinating to see the intent here to treat the stress, anxiety, or insomnia of 18 year-olds with marijuana.
2) The law gave doctors the right to prescribe marijuana as they deem appropriate within the confines of the law. Your misunderstanding is typical of the “give them an inch and they’ll take a mile” crowd. The conditions defined in the medical marijuana law are no different than are the element that describe robbery. Just as cops don’t get to define what is and what isn’t a robbery, doctors do not get to override the medical marijuana law.
3) Here’s some advice: allow your eyes the week or two it will take to get them un-dilated, then get them checked. My comment referred to my not caring for a “good percentage” of marijuana smokers. But my goodness, where did the “Negroes, Mexicans, and entertainers” comment come from? Having flashbacks, are we?
4) Apparently up in smoke.
5) I responded to what you wrote, but if you’d like me to apologize to you for comprehending what you wrote, then I apologize.
6) If you want to deny that the plant has, in the hands of skilled and highly-motivated cultivators, evolved significantly since the 1930s there is no sense in arguing it with you (I would suggest you consult an old stoner but the odds are you couldn’t find one who could remember).
Mr Hodges,
Are you for or against medicinal marijuana being distributed at a pharmacy with all other prescribed medicines?