Urban planning community

Poll results: Supreme Court Bans Medical Marijuana - Watcha Think?

Voters
50. You may not vote on this poll
  • Go Supreme Court Go!

    5 10.00%
  • Rise up agianst this judicial tyranny!

    27 54.00%
  • I don't care.

    9 18.00%
  • Dude, I'm like so hungry!

    9 18.00%
+ Reply to thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 39

Thread: Bummer man...Supreme Court harshes medical mary jane buzz of entire nation

  1. #1
    Cyburbian el Guapo's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Samsara
    Posts
    5,075

    Bummer man...Supreme Court harshes medical mary jane buzz of entire nation

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...600666_pf.html

    Quote Originally posted by Wastington Post
    washingtonpost.com
    Court Rules Against Pot for Sick People

    By GINA HOLLAND
    The Associated Press
    Monday, June 6, 2005; 12:12 PM



    WASHINGTON -- Federal authorities may prosecute sick people whose doctors prescribe marijuana to ease pain, the Supreme Court ruled Monday, concluding that state laws don't protect users from a federal ban on the drug.

    The decision is a stinging defeat for marijuana advocates who had successfully pushed 10 states to allow the drug's use to treat various illnesses.

    Justice John Paul Stevens, writing the 6-3 decision, said that Congress could change the law to allow medical use of marijuana.

    The closely watched case was an appeal by the Bush administration in a case involving two seriously ill California women who use marijuana. The court said the prosecution of pot users under the federal Controlled Substances Act was constitutional.

    "I'm going to have to be prepared to be arrested," said Diane Monson, one of the women involved in the case.

    Stevens said the court was not passing judgment on the potential medical benefits of marijuana, and he noted "the troubling facts" in the case. Monson's backyard crop of six marijuana plants was seized by federal agents in 2002, although the California law was on Monson's side.

    In a dissent, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said that states should be allowed to set their own rules....
    Sandra, here's a hemp tote bag from the San Diego Chapter or NORML. Girl, you fight the man!

    What say ye Cyburbians? Is the court correct?

  2. #2
    (for now) Frozen Caveman Planner mendelman's avatar
    Registered
    May 2003
    Location
    Staff meeting
    Posts
    8,704
    why is marijuana illegal for pain treatment, while codeine is not?

    Aren't they both addiction forming substances?

    Wait.....an individual can't grow a bottle of codeine in their backyard......now I understand......
    Last edited by mendelman; 06 Jun 2005 at 2:41 PM.
    I'm sorry. Is my bias showing?

    The ends can justify the means.

  3. #3
    Cyburbian boiker's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2001
    Location
    West Valley, AZ
    Posts
    3,895
    marijuana is defined as a dangerous drug by our society. it's a tough sell to convince anyone otherwise after years of PSAs and drug programs. To make an exception for medical use is going to require overwhelming evidence.

    I know there is a fear of MJ being used as a gateway drug, but that is almost not the case anymore. My small, central illinois county is battling a rapidly growing heroin problem. The problem isn't kids trying MJ and moving on up to harder drugs, the problem is kids are unable to find weed and are starting off on cocaine and herion. My friends in the PD can vouch for this. It's nearly impossible to find weed around here, but I could buy cocaine, crack, meth, or herion at will in the hood.
    Dude, I'm cheesing so hard right now.

  4. #4
    moderator in moderation Suburb Repairman's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2003
    Location
    at the neighboring pub
    Posts
    5,429
    I think they were correct on their interpretation of Federal law vs. State law and how conflicts in the two are appropriately handled.

    However, I will note that the Court in no way agreed that there should be laws banning medical mary jane, which was clearly stated in Stevens's opinion. It's sounds like the judiciary is telling Congress that they need to reevaluate this law based on other facts presented in the case.

    I don't remember O'Conner being a State's rights advocate... she was probably using those grounds to say that the Federal law was inappropriate.

    "Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

    - Herman Göring at the Nuremburg trials (thoughts on democracy)

  5. #5
    Cyburbian biscuit's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Paris of Appalachia
    Posts
    3,902
    As much as I loath to admit it, the Supreme Court called this one the right way. Whether we like it or not, since marijuana is illegal on the Federal level than the regulation and de-criminalization of it is completely out of the states hands. I say legalize it, but when you do make sure it’s Congress that does it because otherwise you still run the threat of going to the pokey.


    Quote Originally posted by mendelman
    Wait.....an individual can't grow a bottle of codeine in their backyard, though......now I understand......
    Our boys back at the lab are working on that one.

  6. #6
    Cyburbian Michele Zone's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    7,061
    Basically: what biscuit said.

  7. #7
    Corn Burning Fool giff57's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 1998
    Location
    On the Mother River
    Posts
    4,595
    Watch Giff tear into this like EG to a gun discussion.

    One of my friends is one of the eight federally legal smokers. There are many different diseases and symptoms that are helped by Mary Jane. Sometimes there are other drugs that are helpfull and sometimes there are not. The side effects of the other drugs if there are any are much worse that with MJ because marajuana is a natural substance. My friend was in a wheel chair before he got his prescription and was supposed to be dead in five years. Now 10 years later he rides a bicycle and gets around fine. This isn't just a bunch of stoners looking for a high. There are highly respected medical professionals that also feel that this has value as a drug. These folks were forced into growing there own because the feds cut off the prescription program after a very short time. This wouldn't even be an issue if they could get the drug by prescription. The US government grows some wicked weed for the folks that do have legal scripts. This is a drug that has proven benefit for many people and the drug war is keeping it away from folks who need it. You can get prescriptions for many stronger and more damaging drugs but not weed..... why?
    “As soon as public service ceases to be the chief business of the citizens, and they would rather serve with their money than with their persons, the State is not far from its fall”
    Jean-Jacques Rousseau

  8. #8
    Cyburbian Michele Zone's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    7,061
    I have to agree with giff: my genetic disorder has significant impact on my digestive tract and taking oral drugs when my stomach bothers me can be real torment. I have never been on IV drugs for my condition, in part because I was determined to stay out of the hospital before I had a diagnosis when I considered the doctors to be a serious threat to my life (with their opinions that I was some psycho with an overactive imagination), but IV treatments are common for the disorder I am diagnosed with and I did own a nebulizer for a while and used to use a homemade saline-and-xylitol solution to treat my lungs (when I was much sicker and trying to get off all the drugs I was on). Additionally, both of my parents and my sister have all been treated for cancer -- my dad for colon cancer.

    There are times when oral meds are very hard to take for someone experiencing nausea, etc. There are plenty of inhaled drugs -- albuterol, for example -- and it just seems ridiculous to me that cultural prejudice about this plant should interfere with effective medical treatment. There are lots of drugs that have a history of addictive abuse -- like morphine -- that are controlled substances and they just take extra precautions in how they give them out. My husband has been on a pain killer (or cough medicine?) that was a "controlled substance" when he had bronchitis years ago in Kansas. They took more measures than just a prescription to ensure he couldn't readily become addicted and just get different doctors to write him prescriptions or something. But they were able to prescribe it -- it wasn't forbidden from their repertoire of treatment options just because it is known to be highly addictive.

    PS -- Because of my lung problems, I can't imagine I would want to use medical marijuana (that would be like smoking to help with emphesema or something ), so let's not make the mistake of thinking I am advocating for MY "right to get high".

  9. #9
    Cyburbian el Guapo's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Samsara
    Posts
    5,075
    Quote Originally posted by giff57
    Watch Giff tear into this like EG to a gun discussion.

    One of my friends is one of the eight federally legal smokers..... You can get prescriptions for many stronger and more damaging drugs but not weed..... why?
    Dittos Giff.

  10. #10
    Cyburbian hilldweller's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Land of Confusion
    Posts
    3,757
    Quote Originally posted by giff57
    You can get prescriptions for many stronger and more damaging drugs but not weed..... why?
    rant on/ Because American pharmaceutical companies don't make weed. And if they did they would charge Americans twice as much for it than they charge other countries. And the FDA would prohibit the importation of weed from other countries because they say it wouldn't be safe, but really its because the FDA is the bitch of the big drug companies and could care less about whether Americans get ripped off or not /rant off/

  11. #11
    Cyburbian ijustkrushalot's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Champaign, Illinois
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally posted by boiker
    My small, central illinois county is battling a rapidly growing heroin problem.
    Which county is that? I am from near Bloomington

    The biggest problem around here is Meth... meth can be made with all-local ingrediants (especially with anhydrous amonia in great supply from farmers)

    The problem isn't kids trying MJ and moving on up to harder drugs, the problem is kids are unable to find weed and are starting off on cocaine and herion.
    Thats kind of a lame excuse...

    There are bigger issues at play with kids looking to take drugs and do hard stuff instead of pot...

    JUST STICK TO BOOZE!!!

    Wait.....an individual can't grow a bottle of codeine in their backyard......now I understand......
    Letting people grow MJ in their backyard is like letting people who need to take codeine or morphine grow opium poppy's... (i know, opium is a heck of a lot more dangerous, but still..)

    Marijuana is a plant that has many chemicals in it... codeine is a drug derived from a plant or chemical process

    There has to be a way to create useful drugs out of pot than just letting people light up all the time (and as for Michele Zone... inhalers)

    But then again... the drugs will probably cost hundreds of dollars a year for a perscription...

  12. #12
    Cyburbian MD Planner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2002
    Location
    On the corner of Walk and Don't Walk
    Posts
    580
    This is just a question because I really don't know. Can you take medical marijuana by any way other than by inhaling it? I could swear I remember reading something a few years ago about marijuana and soy milk.
    He's a planner, he's a dreamer, he's a sordid little schemer,
    Seems to think that money grows on trees . . .

  13. #13
    (for now) Frozen Caveman Planner mendelman's avatar
    Registered
    May 2003
    Location
    Staff meeting
    Posts
    8,704
    Quote Originally posted by ijustkrushalot
    Marijuana is a plant that has many chemicals in it... codeine is a drug derived from a plant or chemical process...But then again... the drugs will probably cost hundreds of dollars a year for a perscription...
    I know how either are derived...I was just subltely trying to point to the presumption that marijuana is illegal because the big drug companies would rather the perosn use their products, costing hundreds of dollars (as mentioned already), but not be able to access the relief by growing something for virtually free.
    I'm sorry. Is my bias showing?

    The ends can justify the means.

  14. #14
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Santiago, Chile
    Posts
    4,767
    Wow... there go your freedoms man.... While I may or may not like to smoke it.. who the heck am I to impose my feelings about said drug on others, that specially in the case of therapeutical use... they haven't got much to lose, at least when they're terminal... So sure, smoking marijuana will give you lung cancer and all, but for a patient that's dying of anything else and is in pain... it doesn't matter, since there's not a chance s/he'll get cancer for that....

    If you want to use drugs... it's up to you, and not the state to decide. Now if you commit a crime while on drugs (DUI and DWI included), may you rot in jail.

  15. #15
    Member Wulf9's avatar
    Registered
    May 2003
    Location
    Near the Geysers
    Posts
    922
    The question should not be whether Federal law trumps State law. It should be whether this is an issue where the Feds have the right to legislate under the powers assigned to the U.S. government vs State's rights.

    IMO, this is a state issue.

  16. #16

    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Solano County, California
    Posts
    6,468
    Quote Originally posted by SkeLeton
    Wow... there go your freedoms man.... While I may or may not like to smoke it.. who the heck am I to impose my feelings about said drug on others, that specially in the case of therapeutical use... they haven't got much to lose, at least when they're terminal... So sure, smoking marijuana will give you lung cancer and all, but for a patient that's dying of anything else and is in pain... it doesn't matter, since there's not a chance s/he'll get cancer for that....

    If you want to use drugs... it's up to you, and not the state to decide. Now if you commit a crime while on drugs (DUI and DWI included), may you rot in jail.

    EXACTLY. I don't even care if the people ARE stoners who just want to get high.

    (Note, as an asthmatic with too many other addictions, I don't indulge. As a taxpayer, however, I resent the creation of an entire industry devoted to stomping out the DEMON WEED WHICH INFESTS OUR COUNTRY BECAUSE OF THE BROWN PEOPLE, DON'T YOU KNOW

  17. #17
    Cyburbian Big Red's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    out standing in my field
    Posts
    114
    http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y21...ngboy-O_e0.gif

    America's drug war marches on, impervious to efficacy, justice, or absurdity.
    The drug war has wrought the zero tolerance mindset, asset forfeiture laws, mandatory minimum sentences, and countless exceptions to criminal defense and civil liberties protections. Some sociologists blame it for much of the plight of America's inner cities. Others point out that it has corrupted law enforcement, just as alcohol prohibition did in the 1920s.

    *cough* *cough*

    Moderator note:
    No animated images. See FAQ. Image replace with link.
    Last edited by NHPlanner; 06 Jun 2005 at 5:52 PM.
    Maybe the most any of us can expect of ourselves isn't perfection but progress.

  18. #18
    Cyburbian Emeritus Bear Up North's avatar
    Registered
    May 2003
    Location
    Northwestern Ohio
    Posts
    9,327
    What a drag .

    I don't smoke dope. Never have. Never will. But, this is a non-issue, IMHO. If somebody wants to do a doobie to feel better, ain't no skin off my back. No different than drinking a six to stop the back pain or a margo to calm the nerves.

    Ain't no buddies bizness but my own.

    Bear
    Occupy Cyburbia!

  19. #19

    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Solano County, California
    Posts
    6,468
    Sadly enough, the ramping up of the War on Drugs appears to be increasing. See my earlier post on that horrific "Inform on your family or go to prison" Act spsonored by Wisoconsin's Representative Senseless.

    A good desription:

    Under HR 1528, if you witness or even hear about someone under the age of 21 (or someone with children under the age of 18) using drugs, you are obligated to report it to the authorities within 24 hours – or face anywhere from 2 to 10 years in prison! And if you refuse to assist the police in the apprehension and/or prosecution of that person, you also go to jail! And no exceptions are made if the person in question is a family member. Don’t want to snitch on your brother or your kids when you catch them toking up? You are officially part of the problem. Enjoy the hoosegow!
    Please, please write your Congresscritter.

  20. #20
    Member
    Registered
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    230
    I always thought this medical marijuana thing was a scam for potheads to get this stuff under the excuse that its "medicinal"...yeah, right....

    I was one of those who vote "Go Supreme Court Go".

  21. #21
    Cyburbian ijustkrushalot's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Champaign, Illinois
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally posted by Trinity Moses
    I always thought this medical marijuana thing was a scam for potheads to get this stuff under the excuse that its "medicinal"...yeah, right....

    I was one of those who vote "Go Supreme Court Go".
    Ok... so its you, me... and one other person... i wonder who that is...

    I agree, doctors don't go tell someone with pain to go eat opium poppy's. Wwhy should people smoke pot to help with symptoms?

    There is no way that the only way marijuana can be helpful is if you get stoned... and the fact the government refused to allow people to research it is absurd... but i too have a feeling that part of this entire debate is a group of people wanting another way to get stupid on a saturday night.

  22. #22
    Cyburbian abrowne's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    1,584
    I am VERY against the government legislating what sorts of things we can do, in terms of our bodies and self determination. I'm very willing to concede that they have a right to legislate WHEN we can do it (drinking and driving comes to mind), but thats a reasonable caveat.

  23. #23
    Cyburbian dobopoq's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Southern Antarctica
    Posts
    1,003
    Quote Originally posted by abrowne
    I am VERY against the government legislating what sorts of things we can do, in terms of our bodies and self determination. I'm very willing to concede that they have a right to legislate WHEN we can do it (drinking and driving comes to mind), but thats a reasonable caveat.
    Excellent distinction, abrowne. It's like war vs. murder. If you kill somebody in a pre-meditated way out of personal motivation, it is murder. If you kill someone as a soldier in the field of combat under proper rules of engagement, you're just doing your job. Where the line tends to get a little hazy is when a police officer kills an unarmed civilian in a case of excessive use of force; Or when soldiers start to just outright massacre people such as in a firing squad or in the fire bombing f Dresden, Tokyo, and the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. [Not to in any way validate war. It's just that under one circumstance we celebrate a person who has killed many other people as a hero, but in another circumstance, a person who has killed another is justly condemned as a murderer.]

    My further thoughts on the topic are that in the Netherlands - Amsterdam in particular, where there is tolerance for marijuana use, Dutch society actually has lower drug use rates than many of their European neighbors. Above all, drug use should be treated as a health issue, not a criminal issue. We don't put people in jail because they aquired HIV through a careless attitude toward unsafe sex. People are encouraged to play safe and get tested regularly so that when and if they should become HIV+, they can get the necessary treatment as soon as possible. Like sex, drugs in moderation, in the proper context (time and place) can be enjoyed with little or no harm to anyone save the individual, but only if we promote an attitude of tolerance, openness and acceptance that encourages people to seek help if they have a problem, rather than fear being found out.

    I'm not going to waste my time worrying about all the legalese and this state's rights vs. federalism thing. What happens if you're an athiest, gun-toting, pro-choice, anti-birth control, anti-prostitution, pro-polygamist, pro-drug legalization, anti-gambling, gay marriage proponent? There's never going to be any one state that would have all the views that you want to have be legal and illegal. Over time, I think our society is gradually becoming more tolerant. We used to hang people, put debtors in prison, defend the property of slaveowners and keep women from voting or showing any leg. Now, the only skin the censors get to be uptight about is the areolas and pubes. Mari Jane should be decriminalized, plain and simple, but I don't care how we get there. I just think it should be the law of the land. So if I had to choose, I guess I'd take the federalist perspective. I'm not gonna up and move every time some such far flung state happens to legalize or illegalize a behavior I care about. And if IMO, too many of the laws suck, I guess I'll just have to fly the coop.

    Quote:
    "WASHINGTON -- Federal authorities may prosecute sick people whose doctors prescribe marijuana to ease pain, the Supreme Court ruled Monday, concluding that state laws don't protect users from a federal ban on the drug."

    eG: The above statement from your thread post article is a ridiculous contradiction. It is M.C. Escher in words. Such is the absurdity of the legal profession. Therefore, I can't agree with any of the four vote options.
    Last edited by NHPlanner; 07 Jun 2005 at 10:28 AM.
    "The current American way of life is founded not just on motor transportation but on the religion of the motorcar, and the sacrifices that people are prepared to make for this religion stand outside the realm of rational criticism." -Lewis Mumford

  24. #24
    Cyburbian el Guapo's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Samsara
    Posts
    5,075
    Quote Originally posted by dobopoq
    eG: The above statement from your thread post article is a ridiculous contradiction. It is M.C. Escher in words. Such is the absurdity of the legal profession. Therefore, I can't agree with any of the four vote options.
    Well then my friend please suggets another choice, remembering I didn't write the article. I just posted the links and a snippet. I always try to offer users the entire variety of choices in a poll that I can think of. I do not always know the entire universe of possible responses. Just as Dan cannot envision anyone believing a political bias exists in the news coverage of PBS and NPR, I may not always perceive alternative view points that should be included in our polls. Cyburbians should always feel free to suggest alternative poll responses, even once they are up.
    Last edited by el Guapo; 07 Jun 2005 at 10:19 AM.

  25. #25

    Registered
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Blue County in a Red State
    Posts
    117
    Anybody want a brownie?

    Seriously, I am most annoyed with how our government pushes everything on the states, until it doesn't fit with something it wants. I know the Supreme Court is doing its job, but the Feds behind the case are what really piss me off. If they hadn't pushed this, we'd not be having a conversation about it.

    And don't give me the arguement about "growing opium poppies in my backyard". There are far more dangerous plants I can grow legally in my front yard that no one seems to give a rat's ass about. Salvia, for one, is a big hallucinogenic. How about mushrooms for a wild ride? Periwinkle, morning glory, angel's trumpet? All legal. No one will care if I plant them in full view of my busy street. Angels trumpet can kill you easily, but the Feds don't care. Why do we draw the line on cannibis?

    This is nothing more than our standard government full of Puritanical Hypocrites who will rail against drug use, then go off to the bar to get drunk. It reeks.
    Last edited by Pride of Place; 07 Jun 2005 at 10:45 AM.

+ Reply to thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 0
    Last post: 08 Jul 2013, 12:55 PM
  2. Replies: 16
    Last post: 07 Sep 2006, 2:49 PM
  3. Supreme Court Openings
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 19
    Last post: 05 Jul 2005, 9:12 PM
  4. Replies: 24
    Last post: 20 May 2002, 8:04 PM
  5. Supreme Court ruling
    Land Use and Zoning
    Replies: 1
    Last post: 07 Apr 2000, 8:27 PM