War on drugs hits new low

The federal war on medi-pot patients hit a new low last month when Royal Canadian Mounted Police nabbed 38-year-old Steven W. Tuck from his Vancouver, B.C., hospital bed, whisked him to the border, and relinquished him to the custody of U.S. officials, who wanted him on charges related to a 2001 marijuana bust in California. Tuck, an Army vet, uses marijuana to help treat chronic pain associated with injuries he received in a parachuting accident back in the 1980s (reportedly his parachute failed to open during a jump). In 2001, after his marijuana-growing operation in California was busted, Tuck fled to Canada in an effort to avoid prosecution, reports The Washington Post. For four years, he had been navigating the Canadian system, seeking asylum, but was abruptly, and surprisingly, denied that safe harbor last month, says Allen St. Pierre, executive director of NORML.

Police arrested Tuck on Oct. 7 after he checked himself into a Vancouver hospital seeking treatment for prostate problems. According to friend Richard Cowan, Tuck was on a gurney, fitted with a catheter, when RCMP nabbed him, cuffed him, and put him in an SUV bound for the border. "I would not believe it unless I had seen it," Cowan told the Post.

Tuck was turned over to authorities and thrown in jail, where he remained for five days with the catheter in place and with only ibuprofen for his pain – pain for which he'd been prescribed morphine and Oxycontin, among other narcotic drugs, says St. Pierre. He was finally taken to court on Oct. 12. "This is totally inhumane," Tuck's lawyer Douglas Hiatt told the Post. "He's been tortured for days for no reason." U.S. Magistrate James P. Donohue re-leased Tuck, at least temporarily, so that he could be taken to a hospital. Tuck's trip to the hospital was waylaid, however, by law enforcement officials who immediately picked him up on a detainer issued by Humboldt Co., Calif., officials in connection with state drug charges related to his growing medi-pot for him-self and others. (Although Tuck is a California state-registered medi-pot patient – meaning he's authorized under state law to possess and grow marijuana for medical purposes – he was also growing for others. At the time, California law enforcers were working under a patchwork of local regulations that defined who could grow for dispensary purposes and exactly how much each person could grow. Tuck had been busted in two different California jurisdictions for growing more than the local law allowed.)

After a flurry of phone calls, Tuck was taken to the hospital, and since then his attorneys have negotiated his release from jail – with the promise that he'll make his various California state court appearances. Sources tell "Weed Watch" that given Tuck's medical condition and the current state of California's medi-pot laws, his supporters are cautiously optimistic that the state charges against him will be dropped. If that happens, whether Tuck will face any prosecution will be left solely up to the feds, who want him on one count of unlawful flight to Canada to avoid the California charges. Whether the federal narcos will exercise their right to bully the sick remains to be seen.

I wondered about that myself. Most of what I've seen here are emotionally based arguments that often degenerate into an ad hominem attack.

I'm sorry that anyone is ever killed by an impaired driver. We have laws against that. But in this case it could just have easily been a drunk driver, someone on an over the counter cold med, someone with a sleeping disorder...the list of things that impair drivers who then have an accident is long. There was a story here this weekend about a kid text messaging who hit and killed a guy on a bicycle.

From the research I've done, it's far more benign than drinking in every way. Anecdotally, I've known several regular users, but unless they told you, you'd never know. It was for them what having a cold beer or two after work was for another. There are better, more productive ways to relax, but let people decide that one for themselves.

I have know many people who lost their lives due to drinking, either theirs or someone else's. I've seen more than a few alcohol fueled fights and craziness. Pot doesn't seem to make people as aggressive nor as stupid as alcohol. But I'm not for making it illegal again. We tried that and it doesn't work. Doesn't seem to be working with marijuana either.

There are hundreds of thousands of people every year that cause fatal accidents that haven't been taking anything. I would be interested to see what percentage out of all automobile fatalities are found to be impaired by any drug.

A person who has cannabis in his blood could have taken it a month ago and none since, so the test proves nothing.

A person cannabis-positive after an accident in no way proves the accident was a result of cannabis, even if he had taken it just prior. That is an assumption, not born out according to studies by the US Transportation depart, by the way.

Actually, the slight paranoia induced by delta9 tetrahydrocanabinol has been found to make a driver tend to be more careful and aware, and the chemical does not depress the CNS like alcohol, but rather, being a stimulant, enhances it.

A drunk person is aware of his debility but can do nothing physical about it; a high person is aware of his debility but can do something physical about it.

I've always wondered how that interstate commerce thing works. Sure, congress has the right to regulate it, but what does that mean and how can the government regulate a form of commerce that officially can not exist because they banned it? Penumbras and eminations of law?
The Commerce Clause was designed to prevent states from taxing each other to death with protectionist tariffs and import/export quotas. In effect turning the entirety of the nation into one giant free trade zone. It was not designed as a backdoor for Congress to regulate anything that has a dollar value, for which they have used it.
The government's job is not to save me from myself but from my neighbors foreign and domestic.
You keep saying that alcohol is acceptable because it's been used by man for thousands of years. Marijuana is not acceptable for the same reasons. Sure, 'Western' people knew nothing of this plant's euphoric properties because of their climate. Cannabis will grow anywhere except in the most northern latitudes and is found naturally in Europe and North America. The big difference is that when it's grown in warmer temperatures it produces much more cannabinoids than in the cold. Grown nearer the equator and it'll get you high. Grown in the British Isles it'll make a nice fiber for paper or clothing, but won't do much for your party.

Thee: I've always wondered how that interstate commerce thing works. Sure, congress has the right to regulate it, but what does that mean and how can the government regulate a form of commerce that officially can not exist because they banned it? Penumbras and eminations of law? >>

Me: Regulation ultimately involves making something available, or less available, based on circumstances as set by the Government. Banning is a form of regulation, which is obvious on its face.

However, Marijuana, being a natural plant and not a chemical requiring manufacturing facilities, is regulated like this: 1) You grow it by farming. 2) Federal law says you cannot farm it or possess it without a license. 3) The federal government never (well, hardly ever) issues a license to grow and possess the stuff. Voila! It's banned. All legal, all constitutional, end of story.

Thee: The Commerce Clause was designed to prevent states from taxing each other to death with protectionist tariffs and import/export quotas. In effect turning the entirety of the nation into one giant free trade zone. It was not designed as a backdoor for Congress to regulate anything that has a dollar value, for which they have used it.
The government's job is not to save me from myself but from my neighbors foreign and domestic.>>>

Me: Au contraire, it was SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED to allow Congress to establish itself as the preeminent regulator of interstate trade. That's been settled since the days of the old Interstate Commerce Commission in the 1880s. As for your opinion about government's job is "not to save me from myself", again, you show your ignorance. Of course that is precisely the Government's job, otherwise you could get crack at the local pharmacy. And besides, selling drugs of any sort, pot included, includes externalities--dangers and negative side effects involving innocent people completely uninvolved in the transaction. Like, oh, say, my three friends killed in various accidents. Or the three year old girl killed by a stray bullet from a drug deal gone wrong.

Thee: You keep saying that alcohol is acceptable because it's been used by man for thousands of years. Marijuana is not acceptable for the same reasons. Sure, 'Western' people knew nothing of this plant's euphoric properties because of their climate. Cannabis will grow anywhere except in the most northern latitudes and is found naturally in Europe and North America. The big difference is that when it's grown in warmer temperatures it produces much more cannabinoids than in the cold. Grown nearer the equator and it'll get you high. Grown in the British Isles it'll make a nice fiber for paper or clothing, but won't do much for your party.>>

Me: Bingo. If this were China you might have an argument. It ain't, so deal with it.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.