SUPREME COURT RULING: You can arrest those using marijuana for medical purposes

[eleni121]

You and the people you cite need to get real. And one more thing: legalizers need to grow up and stop using the marijuana podium as a way to push their Libertarian agendas. I unlike you refuse to personalize this issue suffice it to say I have seen the many many cases of addiction to marijuana I have personally witnessed over the years both here and abroad. It's horrifying and depressing. Marijuana promoters need to cease using this issue to deceive many young people out there who feel as if they can smoke it without paying the consequences. And if you are so obsessed with it - start winning some elections...last time I checked the libertarians got what? .02% of the votes?
http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/ongoing/marijuana.html

[Quinotto]

I, personally, take Zanaflex (Tizanidine)...it works for me. I, also, know there are MJ derivatives.

Zanaflex is not a cannabiniod, it's a a2-adrenergic agonist. Did non-interferon therapy ever worked for you (eg: Copaxone)?

[derheimwill]

currently insufficient data...

...because the feds won't let them do research.

[eleni121]

Homeopathy = quackery

[TeleStraightShooter]

And the blueprint being...
...get congress to pass a law classifying marijuana as a Schedule I?

[derheimwill]

This is new, welcome! You will find a great multitude of opinions here...

[TeleStraightShooter]

ROTFLOL!

[missyme]

What is a matter with you Marijuana is not an addictive drug for Cryin out loud!
Here are addictive drugs.
1. Alcohol
2. Nicotine
3. Benzodiapezines
4 Opiates

You don't know anything about drugs NADA..You have fallen for some sterotype melodrama regarding Pot....

Tell me one incident of a Marijuana Overdose?
Tell me one violent crime comissioned after a person smoking Pot
Tell me one person you know that has used Pot and became
depressed...

[Quinotto]

And the blueprint being... ...get congress to pass a law classifying marijuana as a Schedule I?

By legal definition marijuana is classified under Schedule I.

[TeleStraightShooter]

...get congress to pass a law classifying declassifying marijuana as a Schedule I?

[TeleStraightShooter]

...get congress to pass a law classifying declassifying marijuana as a Schedule I?

[The KG9 Kid]

This ruling from the highest court is the death of the 9th Circuit Court's ruling in US vs. Stewart, as I see it, based upon precisely the same arguments about the jurisdiction of the US Commerce Clause. Even the Wickard vs. Filburn ruling from 1942 is mentioned in both cases.

Justice Thomas, dissenting in today's medical marijuana ruling: "[The defendants] use marijuana that has never been bought or sold, that has never crossed state lines, and has no demonstrable effect on the national market for marijuana. If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually everything --- and the Federal government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers."

US vs. Stewart 02-10318 (2003): "... The district court ruled against Stewart’s Commerce Clause argument, reasoning that “the parts, at least, moved in inter-state commerce.” Indeed, some of the machinegun parts did move in interstate commerce. At some level, of course, everything we own is composed of something that once traveled in commerce. This cannot mean that everything is subject to federal regulation under the Commerce Clause, else that constitutional limitation would be entirely meaning-less. As Lopez reminds us, Congress’s power has limits, and we must be mindful of those limits so as not to “ ‘obliterate the distinction between what is national and what is local and create a completely centralized government.’..."

The defendants in the medical marijuana ruling had an even better case than Stewart did: Their marijuana required no construction materials whatsoever.

I think some posters on FR are of the mindset "Embrace Statism and help screw over the hippies!" -- just another addition to the teetering pile of examples on how FreeRepublic has changed radically over the years from it's original intent.

We can't hate the Libertarians this much as to act so stupidly, can we?

[dawn53]

I know Zanaflex is not a cannabinoid, but the poster I was replying to said that MSers should take Zanaflex or Baclofen for spasticity instead of MJ.

My comment was Zanaflex works for me, but I know people that it hasn't helped. Same with Baclofen and they swear that MJ works for them...I believe them.

By the time I was diagnosed I was pretty close to being SPMS. Only CRAB (copaxone, rebif, avonex, betaseron) that has shown some success in trials of SPMS is beta, so that's what neuro put me on.

I am pleased with my Beta therapy and my MS is very stable.

[firebrand]

legalizers need to grow up and stop using the marijuana podium as a way to push their Libertarian agendas.

It's the other way around. Drug use is the driving force behind Libertarianism. Not to say every Libertarian is a drug user, but it's the driving force, exactly the way the desire not to get blown to pieces in Vietnam was the driving force behind the "peace" movement.

[missyme]

Are you a Doctor? nurse? Are you in the Medical Field...
Hmmm.
At 45 I take no medications for any ailment I never get a cold have not been sick with flu in 15 years, I use homepathic herbs and foods to maintain good health and I smoke Pot when I have insomnia Oh well guess I am a full on druggie....

If homeopathic medicine is quackery I will choose to Quack Quack into my 90's!

[Quinotto]

I wish you good luck and HEALTH, the interferons are some mean meds(I am referring to the side effects, of course). And as far as the MS patients who benefit from MJ I say to them more power to you.

[Lurker 50001]

Laugh it up all you want. The argument they are using for this applies... Show that it does not. There's no limit to the feds involvement in you life, based on this ruling.


Lurker

[Lurker 50001]

Should read "your" life

sorry.

[excludethis]

Why the liberal judges voted down law is the Wickard case.

Wickard was from the 1930's. The previous 150 years of court precedent was that the Federal Government could not regulate commerce unless it crossed state lines. The Wickard case turned the prior 150 years of precedent on its head. The Wickard court said the Federal Government could now regulate solely in state commerce if it in total had a substantial effect on interstate commerce. The court gave the ruling after FDR threatened to pack the Supreme Court if he did not get his way to regulate wages, working conditions and everything else under the sun. This was the courts cave in to FDR. TOTAL BS OPIONION

This case is the FDR and demcrocrats number case of a lifetime. It is the authority the liberals use for 90% of every law they pass. Without the case, we would have the federal government of our founding fathers.

No wonder the supposed personal rights liberals ruled against the states.

It would almost seem that Bush administration brought the appeal in hopes the Wickard case would go down with liberal judges help.

At least three republican judges got it right - Down with Wickard votes by Rehnquist,Thomas and O'Connor. WHERE WAS SCALIA?

[hoosierham]

The main issue was decided in 1865 when the dictatorial A. Lincoln Army finally crushed the rebellious States who foolishly believed in the Constitution of these United States;and tried to leave it when their States' rights were denied.

The Civil War was the time of transition from a Republic to a Democracy. And in a Democracy ultimately everything including your life is subject to the whim of the majority of the mob,or the whims of those who control the mobs. The centralization of power is almost unstoppable,since those who have power can use(misuse) it to get ever more power. And the argument was made in the beginning to crown Washington king, then the Articles of Confederation weren't strong enough so the new Constitution ,and reluctantly, the Bill of Rights came into being.

It is always easier to bludgeon people into line with gov't power than convince them through reasoned argument. Why without the power of the Federal Gov't the people might not have sent 55000 to die in a jungle for nothing. (I believe you should fight to win or not fight). And G.W. Bush is not about limiting gov't power;I think the AWB non-renewal was just a bone tossed to distract the gun-owning conservatives.

Getting ready to change my label to "Classical liberal",not to be confused with today's Liberals.