Marijuana Cuts Lung Cancer Tumor Growth In Half, Study Shows

Science Daily ^ | 4/17/07 | American Association for Cancer Research

[RSmithOpt]

Oregon, Alaska, and Washington. If I remember correctly allows people to grow certain amounts for personal use. It cannot be transported and one’s stash must be keep in a single container.

[Clinging Bitterly]

I guess it’s because all states don’t have to have the same laws. If you like guns (and I do), come to Oregon and keep all you want. Shall issue, few restrictions, no bans, no quotas, no registration. And if you want to grow weed, come to Oregon and get a “medical marijuana” card. Everybody I know who has one got it in bad faith and really uses it for recreational purposes. That’s not to say I think it should remain illegal, because I don’t.

[bvw]

There are very few, if any, acts of a human being that do not in some way infringe on the rights and welfare of others. For example, as the Supreme Court recently dictated, your exhaling pollutes my air. Carbon dioxide is now a declared pollutant.

[RSmithOpt]

From what you informed me of of laws in Oregon, that's one of my many cornerstones for my anti-BS government stance. Certain types of laws should be uniform across the nation as far as legalities. A person in Oregon, misdemeanor at worst for < 1/2 lb. of weed. In Texas, 1/2 lb. weed = 10 years in the slammer.

My question is not that the laws exists like they do and should be obeyed, by why is it according to the Constitution, that states to have certain powers to create the serious discrepancies in such laws? Guns are another.

What's the purpose then of the Supreme Court? Maybe to see that laws are uniform for the most? If it's a state law that gets a person 10 years for 1/2 lb. in Texas, then why is it considered a felony if the federal government hasn't created the law?

I'm confused. That's where my beef is.....states can write federal laws?