GOP Leaders Press Ehrlich To Veto Medical Marijuana

Baltimore Sun ^ | April 4, 2003 | Tim Craig

[jmc813]

I didn't mean that. I've just always wanted to say it to you.

[Dane]

Using someone as a human shield puts them at risk; how do pro-pot legalizers put medical patients at risk?

I answered it.

That is a clear lie

Uh no it is not. The premise of a human shield is too use an innocent person to further your political goals.

Call me a liar all you want, I really don't care if you want to revel in your disingenuousness, but it has been pointed out that pro-pot groups use the misery of innocent humans to shield themselves from criticism of furthering their ultimate political goals.

[eno_]

IIRC his FR name is something like FF587.

A truly amazing piece of work.

[Roscoe]

no federal prohibition existed until 1914

99%+ of marijuana possession arrests are made under state laws, and the use of marijuana "as an intoxicant was rare until the beginning of the twentieth century."

[eno_]

The question was how this puts any patient at risk. Plainly it does not.

[jmc813]

Why is it so bad to support both medical and recreational pot? Liberals use the same type of arguments as you when they claim that "conservatives only want a partial-birth abortion ban in order to set the way for banning all abortions". Think about it.

[jmc813]

FF578 to be precise. He also thinks all libertarians cheat on their wives, and none of them believe in God. My favorite though is his position that all homosexuals be executed. If you ever feel like having some fun, bring up Mary Cheney to him.

[Roscoe]

DARE propaganda packets are barely seperable from the knucle-dragging racist

For example?

[eno_]

Yet another Drug War lie.

I guess all those Latvian folk songs about "kanepite mazsaulite" ("small sun-like hemp flower"), and how it makes you feel better, that date to the 11th century must be pothead propaganda.

The Drug War is a discredited pack of lies. Has been since Anslinnger's day, and it continues in what is now a proven ineffective - even counterproductive - and corrupt DARE program.

[Dane]

Why is it so bad to support both medical and recreational pot? Liberals use the same type of arguments as you when they claim that "conservatives only want a partial-birth abortion ban in order to set the way for banning all abortions". Think about it.

Uh there is big difference between saving an innocent human life in the womb and equating that with promoting the abuse and death of the drug culture.

Why do you feel the need to bastardize the pro-abortion argument?

[Dane]

The question was how this puts any patient at risk. Plainly it does not.

And the premise of the question is wrong. It has been pointned out that pot and drug culture legalizers use innocent human beings to shield themselves from criticism in their quest of their ultimate political goal.

[Roscoe]

Yet another Drug War lie.

You guessed wrong again. The quote is from a pro-legalization article.

"Though cannabis was widely cultivated in America for three hundred years, both as a fiber resource and for its medicinal properties, its use as an intoxicant was rare until the beginning of the twentieth century."

[eno_]

The Drug War has had a really bad effect on pain management. If you want to loosen restrictions on prescription narcotic pain meds, abuse may rise. Perhaps it is inevitable that abuse does rise.

It is part of Drug War hypocrisy that such drugs as Ativan are handed out like candy to any housewife with a twitch, while patients in dire need are kept at the edge of unbearable pain by Drug War regulations.

My view is simple: The direct and indirect costs of the Drug War vastly outweigh the mostly promised-but-not-delivered benefits.

[jmc813]

I'm not comparing the two issues, Roscoe. I'm comparing the arguing styles used by liberals and drug warriors.

[Cultural Jihad]

Such a dissembling issue among self-avowed libertarian ideologues. They care about sick people getting cannabis about as much as they care about anyone else overdosing on legalized heroin, which is to say, not at all.

[bassmaner]

99%+ of marijuana possession arrests are made under state laws

If there was no federal prohibition laws, you can be sure that more and more states would legalize, for recreational as well as medical purposes. They'd get on the bandwagon to reap a new source of revenue that's currently denied to them. And you can't deny the feds' outrageous violations of states' rights in their raiding of the CA medipot clinics.

the use of marijuana "as an intoxicant was rare until the beginning of the twentieth century."

Irrelevant. Cannibis was a generally accepted part of the physician's pharmacopia until the Anslinger-inspired MTA passed in 1937.

[Dane]

I'm not comparing the two issues, Roscoe. I'm comparing the arguing styles used by liberals and drug warriors.

Uh yes you were generically equating them. But what the hey actually looking at the the issues takes work.

BTW, I am not roscoe.

[Cultural Jihad]

Exactly. The fine for simple marijuana possession or use in California is a third of what it is for driving alone in the diamond lane during commute hours.

[jmc813]

I thought you supported medical MJ.

[Roscoe]

And if the criminal acts of Rosenthal, Kubby, and Peron discredit the initiative and make it more difficult for the needs of any legitimate patients to be served, they really don't care.