Medical Marajuana
Posted by indawindigoes (+5) 11 years ago
On an almost entirely party-line vote with Republicans in favor, the Montana House voted again on Saturday to repeal the state's medical marijuana law, passed by voters in 2004, after a House panel supposedly looked at the repeal measure's fiscal impacts.

Sounds like the right wing wants to make sure no more people in Montana become enlightened enough to vote them out. :mad
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
Dan, your crappy spelling is giving you away.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bill Freese (+473) 11 years ago
He misspelled .
Top
supporter
Posted by Kelly (+2734) 11 years ago
Top
Posted by DStone (+146) 11 years ago
The problem is the lawmakers repealing something voters agreed to... although they may not have voted for the thing its become they DID vote for medical marijuana.
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
I didn't agree to legitimize a bunch of lazy dope dealers, that's my biggest issue with it. I don't want to live in a state where you can be a petty criminal one day and the next you're a "caregiver." Let the dealers take it back to the underground and start treating the medical patients like medical patients. Card or no card has never stopped anyone, but this whole license to be a lazy a-hole needs to stop.
Top
founder
supporter
Posted by Amorette Allison (+11898) 11 years ago
The MMJ issue has been abused by stoners, that is for certain, but the Lege is avoiding dealing with it, just the way they are avoiding dealing with any real issues. Can MMJ be regulated in such a way that actual patients get help and stoners and dealers get zip? Yes. Will the Lege do such a thing? Not likely.

They don't think the will of the people is of any importance. After all, they are in that fancy building at Helena and therefore know better than than the people who elected them.
Top
Posted by ziegulpu (+32) 11 years ago
Let me guess you're a Republican. Narrow minded, ignorant. One whom you can throw facts and figures all day at and he'll still "H'rumph, not in MY town" you in favor of conservative ignorance. Your small rant reeks of bigotry similar, but not nearly equal to, past racism in the South. "Let's keep it the way it is, segregation ya know, cause all dem blackies just steal and rape our white women. H'rumph, not in my town!" Um, yeah, but No.

Do some research and stop relying on old, crusty, misinformation that was probably pounded in your head long ago
Pot head = Bad Um, yeah but No.
Ohhh, watch out for those boogeymen!


Z
Top
supporter
Posted by Bill Freese (+473) 11 years ago
And Hitler. Don't forget Hitler.
Top
founder
supporter
Posted by Amorette Allison (+11898) 11 years ago
Me? A Republican? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
Top
Posted by ziegulpu (+32) 11 years ago
Sorry, I'm new to this blogosphere. My posting was to Buck, your post got in there first.
My apologies for the insinuation.
Z

[This message has been edited by ziegulpu (3/8/2011)]
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
No dumbass, I'm not. I promise I smoke your body weight in pot every year and I'm pretty f*cking tired of the losers I buy my dope from thinking they are anything other than the lazy assholes they truly are. I support legalization across the spectrum, because LAZY DOPE DEALERS will be out of business and LEGITIMATE business with BUSINESS LICENSES will take their place. Now go tell yourself that your a medical professional who knows jack sh*t about jack sh*t. In the mean time, the working professionals who indulge in marijuana will continue to suffer at the hand of LAZY DOPE DEALERS/PETTY CRIMINALS who turned this thing into such a sh*tshow.

P.S. You're a f*cking dumbass.

[This message has been edited by Buck Showalter (3/8/2011)]
Top
Posted by ziegulpu (+32) 11 years ago
Me? A Dumb ass? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

No, Bucky. I think not.

You took me by surprise by saying you too smoke pot, but your rant reeked of the same stupid ignorance of the repeal Repubs.

Just guessing, you don't have a license do you? Jealous? ball less?

I took the steps to stop going to see a-hole loser dealers. Now I can chose from 12 different kinds of bud in a safe environment, and at a 1/4 cost of the crap the "loser" dealer sold.

I can see your frustration.

(Hey, we're agreeing! Street drug dealers are generally loser a-holes)

Lets send the many, 28, 739 and counting, card holders back to the crack houses!

P.S. No. YOU'RE a dumb ass. Nrrr

By the way, if you smoked my weight in pot a year that would be approximately 261 grams a day.

Not likely, but thanks for playing,

Z

[This message has been edited by ziegulpu (3/8/2011)]
Top
supporter
Posted by Wendy Wilson (+6170) 11 years ago
Ooooh! Fight! Fight!
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
28,739 and it just takes 5 or 6,000 twenty year olds with debilitating back pain to screw it up for everyone. If anyone can read your last message and recognize how valuable it must be for pain sufferers to know they can get 12 different strains of weed, I'd love to hear it. I'm sure you'll fill is on in on the ways indica is better than sativa for this or that, but you're totally full of your own sh*t. It's sad that some guy who served his country 40 years ago and came back all screwy is going to lose the medicine that helps because you found a doctor that will diagnose you with anything for $125.

[This message has been edited by Buck Showalter (3/8/2011)]
Top
supporter
Posted by JCF (+399) 11 years ago
Give it to him Buck!
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4457) 11 years ago
I can't wait until these guys can Lawyer up. I'm sure the courts will have a great time sorting these guys out from the few legit ones.

Repeal is the only answer.
Top
Posted by ziegulpu (+32) 11 years ago
Wouldn't repeal take it away from the vet, or such, that truly needs it. Why is repeal the only answer?

Z
Top
founder
supporter
Posted by Tom Masa (+2107) 11 years ago
As I said in another post:
I don't understand why they don't just legalize marijauna and then everyone would be happy. It could be taxed so the state/cities would be happy and all the dudes would be happy and high.
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17661) 11 years ago
Tom Masa is absolutely correct.

Rick, as usual, is completely wrong.

Those of you who are new to this forum, should know that Rick is one of the last bastion's of your grandfather's Republican party, who has coddled up to their new Tea Party base to win votes.

That said, who does Rick and the old GOP speak for anymore?

The answer, of course, is:

"Same as it ever was. Same as it ever was."

"Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss."

Yep, the rich who cynically manipulate the Tea Party (R-Montana) on puppet strings getting them to shout birther epithets, soveriegnty diatribes, and murky consititutionalist hogwash.

There is one flaw in their current argument. If they were true conservatives, they shoulg argue to place an excise/sales/whatever tax on MJ sales, and demand that that amount received in revenue would then be used in decreasing property taxes.

That is what the old guard Republican/conservatives would have done. Today's Republicans like you-know-who could never buy into that.
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4457) 11 years ago
Gunnar, it's almost like you forgot that there were plenty of Republicans around back in 2004 saying "This is just a Trojan Horse for the Rolling Stoned"

And now, here we are.

Not all of us are of the belief that writing nice things on paper makes nice things happen in the real world.

As for 'fixing' medical marijuana, I've yet to hear any of the main problems with the possibility even addressed.

First off, I keep hearing talk of setting up some sort of 'reputable' supply chain for Medical Marijuana, but nobody questions... is that really possible while we're still talking about a felony under federal law?

I sure as heck don't see many legit pharmacists willing to risk their careers on a federal pinky-swear of MJ non-prosecution. The same can be said of anyone with the resources to build a clinical-grade supply chain.

So as long as the issue of federal law goes unaddressed, the 'industry' is going to continue looking pretty much like it does in this thread

And like I said before, I can appreciate an anti-prohibition argument as much as the next guy. But that's kind of a Pandora's box. There are plenty of things I can grow in my back yard or basement that are illegal. Where does it end?

[This message has been edited by Rick Kuchynka (3/8/2011)]
Top
Posted by Joe Smity (+108) 11 years ago
"First off, I keep hearing talk of setting up some sort of 'reputable' supply chain for Medical Marijuana, but nobody questions... is that really possible while we're still talking about a felony under federal law?"

So which law are you willing to break, Federal or State? Are you taking a Federalist stand or are you a States' Rights advocate?
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
Rick is whatever suits his argument, of course. zieg - yep, need to repeal. I remember being about 5 years old and learning one bad apple spoils the bunch. It's time to give the folks who screwed it up for the veteran a little bit of a refresher. And technically, I'm with Tom on this. Turns out I'd like to see a billion dollar corporation profit from this before I'd like to see my friends earn a penny. Also, please be aware of my general disgust with the disingenuous concern about veterans and voter intentions.

[This message has been edited by Buck Showalter (3/9/2011)]
Top
supporter
Posted by Stone (+1590) 11 years ago
I got the answer Ricko.
Legalize all drugs and quit letting politicians spend billions of dollars on drug wars to prop up their campaigns and quit letting gang members get rich. This is so simple; if we just looked historically at anything we would find the answer. Prohibition did not work and drug czars and wars are not working.

Believe me-I know, people immediately think that you are a stoner when you say "legalize drugs". It is a tough stance to take in a town full of Bible Thumper's. But it still makes more sense than spending billions of dollars fighting drug wars that nobody really wants to win.
Top
supporter
Posted by Denise Selk (+1664) 11 years ago
I don't think you are a stoner Stone.
Top
founder
supporter
Posted by Amorette Allison (+11898) 11 years ago
The "War on Drugs" has been lost for decades. We should have legalized marijuana and controlled and taxed it just like alcohol and tobacco for the last fifty years. After all, it is a safer substance than either alcohol or tobacco and would cost society much less.
Top
supporter
Posted by Jeff Denton (+757) 11 years ago
I too would like to see alcohol and marijuana treated more equally as vices that need control somehow. Add gambling as another.

But first I'd rather address the need for people to get a handle on their honesty and responsibilities.

Too late! Of utmost importance is our right to be worthless freeloaders. If you wanna be a junkie, who am I to want to stop you? What government has the right to take away that choice?

I wonder, What is YOUR reputation worth? When's the last time you thought real hard about that, and asked a young person to?

My job is to teach kids how to be better people than what my parents encouraged me to be. That's all I exist for any more.

We start by learning to set goals, and practicing it, and learning to set reasonable goals by reaching them, learning not to set ridiculous ones by failing some. I didn't know that when I was a kid. If my parents did, they were too busy to share that.

Okay, back to the actual topic, exactly why do you need alcohol and pot, how much do you need, how can you justify the expense, what would happen if you couldn't get it, why do you want your kids to have it? Be honest, please.
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
We need alcohol and pot for recreation. Let's be honest.

How much? Enough.

Justify the expense? I work hard for my money, how I spend it is my business.

What would happen if I couldn't get it? Misery loves company, right? Shared misery.

Want my kids to have it? No, but 15 years ago it may have been helpful to hear the truth from an adult rather than, "Drugs are bad." I wonder if "Drugs are bad," isn't almost encouragement to try them? I think there is probably more value in something like, "Well son, I've tried them all and if I could go back and do it all over I wouldn't have even puffed a cigarette butt in my friend's garage in 6th grade because that act itself changed my life in ways I regret. Also, you were an unplanned pregnancy."


Mom and Dad, this isn't a reflection of your parenting.

[This message has been edited by Buck Showalter (3/9/2011)]
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4457) 11 years ago
I got the answer Ricko.
Legalize all drugs and quit letting politicians spend billions of dollars on drug wars to prop up their campaigns and quit letting gang members get rich. This is so simple; if we just looked historically at anything we would find the answer. Prohibition did not work and drug czars and wars are not working.


Now we're getting somewhere, Stone. I can appreciate your perspective... if it's followed to its rational conclusion. Full narcotic legalization, for example, would eventually have to mean disbanding the FDA as we know it. You on board for that?
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4457) 11 years ago
So which law are you willing to break, Federal or State? Are you taking a Federalist stand or are you a States' Rights advocate?


That's kind of a false choice. There's no law saying you HAVE to administer marijuana to anyone. State law says you CAN. Federal law says you CAN'T.

Even assuming they believed in the cause, mainstream Doctors and Pharmacists would still shy away from that controversy, erring on the side of caution.
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
Rick = Roger Clemens
Top
Posted by Joe Smity (+108) 11 years ago
"State law says you CAN. Federal law says you CAN'T."

It isn't a false choice when you deny people one by exercising the other. Again I ask which one are you willing to break?

Answer this question, don't couple it to a different even if related issue.

[This message has been edited by Joe Smity (3/10/2011)]
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17661) 11 years ago
Full narcotic legalization, for example, would eventually have to mean disbanding the FDA as we know it.


Now that is a pretty procreateing stupid statement.
Top
supporter
Posted by Jeff Denton (+757) 11 years ago
It just so happens, there's a great article in the online Daily Interlake newspaper today about a fellow named John Underwood, director of the American Athletic Institute. He gave a talk here about how he'd rather we encourage our youth to lean more toward sports than alcohol and drugs. He's got some interesting points. Rather relevant to this discussion now that we're being honest with each other. It isn't about medical marijuana, but about making pot acceptable as the basis of everyday life, as we do with alcohol.

[This message has been edited by Jeff Denton (3/10/2011)]
Top
Posted by Tony Ackerman (+183) 11 years ago
"...we're being honest with each other. It isn't about medical marijuana, but about making pot acceptable as the basis of everyday life, as we do with alcohol."

@Jeff, that is your opinion. The issue being debated in the legislature is to allow (or not) the medical use of marijuana in the State of Montana.

That is the fact at hand. Plain and simple.
Top
supporter
Posted by Jeff Denton (+757) 11 years ago
No, Tony, not quite that simple. The issue is incredibly confused. What the medical marijuana business has become is NOT what the people voted for. It has been proven that lots of people who voted for it weren't thinking it through any better than the lawmakers!
The legislature is talking about repealing what the people voted for but realising that isn't perfectly proper they are also considering AMENDING the law into something acceptable and realistic.
As for my opinion, well again, I'm not for making pot as illegal as it used to be, just wish there was some control over who ends up ruining their lives with it. Like I wish we would do with alcohol and gambling.
I try to base my opinion on experience, what I see, what I read. Another newspaper article was very helpful in understanding the FACTS of what is being discussed in the state legislature on the matter, some of which I just shared with you. I totally appreciate anyone else's opinion, which might be convincing enough to affect mine. It should sound forthright and intelligent, though.

[This message has been edited by Jeff Denton (3/10/2011)]
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
Marijuana is not quite the life ruiner you make it out to be. And Dr. Underwood should tell us something we don't know. There is no one, NO ONE, encouraging kids to get hooked on drugs.

[This message has been edited by Buck Showalter (3/10/2011)]
Top
supporter
Posted by Jeff Denton (+757) 11 years ago
I'm just not so sure about that, Buck. But I do appreciate your opinion and humor. The advice of such revered,talented sports professionals is highly regarded by myself also, keep up the good work!
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
I'm sure you're not so sure, but you probably lack experience, sorta like when I tell a woman what to do with her uterus. Marijuana might be present in the lives of people who lead crappy existences (that's also a matter of perspective), but your seeing a coincidence, not a cause. We also need to keep in mind that how we view a person is rarely how they see themselves. Healthy and athletic, while healthy, is not everyone's ideal. I know some fat cigarette smokers who are living their ideal of the American dream.
Top
supporter
Posted by Jeff Denton (+757) 11 years ago
Excellent points, thanks for your help in understanding this. My experience is just enough to wonder how any of us survived the seventies... long story. Hilarious sometimes, too, as some of you may recall! Horribly tragic too, as some peoples' absence here proves.
I am absolutely certain that marijuana affects different people in different ways. Who they are (and how they got here) is a big factor, surely.
Tell me Buck, have you ever wondered how your career might have been even more spectacular if you had 100% of your brain cells up and running? How many World Series would you have been in?
I'll write down your comment about healthy lifestyles for further use when we get on the topic of health care reform. The perfect system would require some personal responsibility there too, wouldn't it?
Thanks again. I gotta go to work now. Later.
Top
founder
supporter
Posted by Amorette Allison (+11898) 11 years ago
I hate to mention this but I know people who have enjoyed the occasional recreational puff for years, just the way I enjoy a glass of wine now and then, and they are fine, upright responsible, tax-paying citizens. Drugs of any kind aren't the cause of addiction and other social problems. They are the way some people express their hopelessness about existing problems.
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
Jeff, as you've illustrated, you don't understand marijuana. Marijuana does not kill brain cells. Period.
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17661) 11 years ago
If Paul McCartney hadn't smoked weed for the past 50 years, I'm sure he would have written some great pop songs instead of the marijuana-addled nonsense he came out with instead.
Top
supporter
Posted by Jeff Denton (+757) 11 years ago
Yes, Amorette, I think we all know responsible citizens who like to mellow now and then. Why shouldn't they be able to do that legally? Why do they have to pretend to have unmanageable pain in order to buy pot? Just because they fly a medical emergency helicopter for a living is no reason to deny them a good buzz on weekends. Some might be horrified at that comment but I could tell you a story... not here though.
My gawd, Buck. All the studies indicating marijuana use permanently reduces a child's brain development and capacity are erroneous? Probably Republican-backed propaganda.
This is fun, I'm learning a lot today. Thanks!
Gunnar, I'm sure that artistic genius is altered for the better or worse by drugs. Again, it affects different people different ways. Charlie Manson thought he had it. As far as I know, only Neil Young sort of agreed with him. I loved Jay Leno's secret camera skit showing what Ozzie is like when nobody's looking.... There's a great skit on You Tube making fun of Bob Dylan's play on words. I don't think any drug could make me like the Beatles any less or Dead Kennedys any more.

[This message has been edited by Jeff Denton (3/10/2011)]
Top
admin
moderator
founder
Posted by MilesCity.com Webmaster (+10013) 11 years ago
Gunnar, you are funny ...

Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
Jeff Denton wrote:
My gawd, Buck. All the studies indicating marijuana use permanently reduces a child's brain development and capacity are erroneous? Probably Republican-backed propaganda.

Marijuana is stored in the brain's fat cells. It interferes with the chemical interaction between neurons, sometimes resulting in great poop like Band on the Run. No brain cell death. Period. Can you give even a single example of some of your propaganda? I'll debunk it with actual evidence, I promise.

PS - Didn't even have to see the title of the video to know it was Band on the Run.

[This message has been edited by Buck Showalter (3/10/2011)]
Top
admin
moderator
founder
Posted by MilesCity.com Webmaster (+10013) 11 years ago
Bucky, bucky, bucky ... I still hate you for 1995, but THC is nothing compared to what C2H5OH accomplishes.

In regards to "Sir", IMO, John was #1, Paul #2, then you got the guy who is still pissed off in England, plus George and Ringo. Obviously, the group is dimishing however.

If I have to explain a 45 or a 78 again, and how each side became #1 -- I may have to blow my brain out. I don't have a shotgun shell though.
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
I bet you mean you hate me for 1996. I hate me for 1996, too.

I figured C2H5OH was going to result in The Doors, but that's a whole different compound.

[This message has been edited by Buck Showalter (3/10/2011)]
Top
admin
moderator
founder
Posted by MilesCity.com Webmaster (+10013) 11 years ago
Yeah, you're right ... 1996 sucked. Mary Jane doesn't kill you as fast as booze though.
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
I'm getting the impression you want something quick and painless. Hopefully your day improves.
Top
admin
moderator
founder
Posted by MilesCity.com Webmaster (+10013) 11 years ago
I've done about everything ... from morphine, to oxycodone, to coke, to pot, to all flavors of booze, to speed/etc/meth, some other pretty good opiates, plus the whole codeine pain killer thing, valium, cigarettes ... and I'm not sure what I'm leaving out.

I will tell you one thing though, aside from meth, booze will kill you most quickly. Absolutely, 100%. The liver kind of has a say and problem with it.
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
Agreed.
Top
founder
supporter
Posted by Amorette Allison (+11898) 11 years ago
I want you to consider my liver. I've been overfeeding myself.
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
Mmmm, foie gras.
Top
founder
supporter
Posted by Tom Masa (+2107) 11 years ago
Roll me another one ... just like the other one. mmmmmm.............
Top
Posted by Heather Q. (+438) 11 years ago
I feel that as long as you are using it for a good cause then it isn't bad. Why take pain pill after pain pill, and kill you insides, when you can take a hit of a herb that isn't going to kill you, and have all the same feeling as you would with the pills. I know how it feels to have to take all kinds of meds. but the sad part is, one hit off a pipe would take away 5 different meds that i have to take. so ask yourself do you take pills that are all kinds of god only knows. and are going to harm you more in the long run, or take a hit off a pipe filled with a all natural herb. that will take care of your pain, and not rot you out?
Top
Posted by Heather Q. (+438) 11 years ago
I agree. what is so bad about mj? they only have one record of someone dieing from mj, but yet thousands die from alcohol, and smoking every year. so why don't they make it that you can't drink or smoke to? keep the good, get rid of the bad.
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4457) 11 years ago
Gunnar Emilsson wrote:
Full narcotic legalization, for example, would eventually have to mean disbanding the FDA as we know it.

Now that is a pretty procreateing stupid statement.


Come on, now Gunnar, use your imagination... a scene at your local doctor's office.

[i]I'm Sorry Joe. You've got 6-9 months left. Tops.

Alright Doc, enough with the bad news, what are my options?

Well, I really wish we could try this new experimental drug undergoing FDA testing. But it hasn't been approved for widespread use... for some reason 5-10% of people have unexplained side-effects... heart palpitations, rocketing blood pressure, anxiety, restlessness. They're not sure where it's coming from. Anyway, I wish I could prescribe it, but it's just not ready yet.

then thinks for a minute and says...

But if it's any consolation, I could set you up with a couple lines of Blow in the Men's Room. Take the edge off the bad news at least.
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4457) 11 years ago
Heather Q. wrote:
they only have one record of someone dieing from mj, but yet thousands die from alcohol, and smoking every year.

I love that kind of statement.

And 90% of traffic accidents are caused by sober drivers. They should pass a law that you need at least two drinks to get behind the wheel.
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4454) 11 years ago
Ladies and gentleman, Mr. Roger Clemens!
Top