The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

Legalize It! Options
risadr
Posted: Monday, December 7, 2009 8:34:17 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/16/2009
Posts: 1,155
Neurons: 3,545
Location: PA, United States
To try and kind of get the discussion going again...

NORML - Active State Medical Marijuana Programs

According to this site, there are currently fourteen states with active medical marijuana programs.

Of the fourteen, eleven require patients to obtain an "identification card" and two (NM and WA) require a prescription from a licensed physician, in addition to posing limits on possession.

In MD, the "legalization" is really more "affirmative defense" legislation. From the website linked above: "This law requires the court to consider a defendant's use of medical marijuana to be a mitigating factor in marijuana-related state prosecution. If the patient, post-arrest, successfully makes the case at trial that his or her use of marijuana is one of medical necessity, then the maximum penalty allowed by law would be a $100 fine."

So, what does everyone think about this?

It's like a book elegantly bound, but in a language that you can't read just yet. "I Will Possess Your Heart," Death Cab for Cutie
Raparee
Posted: Wednesday, December 9, 2009 8:58:54 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 1,231
Neurons: 18,102
risadr wrote:
To try and kind of get the discussion going again...

Of the fourteen, eleven require patients to obtain an "identification card" and two (NM and WA) require a prescription from a licensed physician, in addition to posing limits on possession.

In MD, the "legalization" is really more "affirmative defense" legislation. From the website linked above: "This law requires the court to consider a defendant's use of medical marijuana to be a mitigating factor in marijuana-related state prosecution. If the patient, post-arrest, successfully makes the case at trial that his or her use of marijuana is one of medical necessity, then the maximum penalty allowed by law would be a $100 fine."

So, what does everyone think about this?

I like the idea of the ID card, Rx, and limits.

I dislike the MD way of doing things. Be PROactive. The way they're doing it is like going around your butt to reach your elbow and it's a total waste of money. Now, were they to have the ID card, Rx, and limits, THEN allow the option in court, that would be fine. But that really only works if the person is arrested for other reasons and then found to have marijuana on them, not if they're being arrested for marijuana alone. Either make it legal or illegal. The grey area there is going to cause a lot of headaches for people, law enforcement, and the courts.

...

I'm not sure I made sense there. Need more coffee.


A closed mind is like a closed book - nothing can be gained if either remains closed.
Epiphileon
Posted: Wednesday, December 9, 2009 2:27:28 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/22/2009
Posts: 3,973
Neurons: 62,617
I think that legislating drug use period, is not the business of government. I realize that, unfortunately many societies have become used to having an external authority legislate their morality for them but, it neither makes it right, nor healthy. This is of course an extreme view that I do not expect to be able to argue successfully for.
When it comes to marijuana though I see no legitimate argument for continuing to make possession or use, a criminal offense. Legalizing it and taxing it would go a long way to solving, at least many states, budgets. There are many reasons this hasn't happened yet, but you can bet some very large dollars that part of it is the lobbying power of the, for profit, prison private contractors that are quickly taking over the prison, and jail systems in many of the states in this country.


Question authority. How do you know, that you know, what you know?
angelster
Posted: Thursday, December 10, 2009 10:14:47 AM

Rank: Newbie

Joined: 12/10/2009
Posts: 1
Neurons: 3
Location: Kansas City
I don't see any reason why marijuana need to be legalize...if this happen there would be a possibility that it will be use in a wrong way...they will just abuse using it..
Raparee
Posted: Friday, December 11, 2009 4:02:33 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 1,231
Neurons: 18,102
angelster wrote:
I don't see any reason why marijuana need to be legalize...if this happen there would be a possibility that it will be use in a wrong way...they will just abuse using it..

I don't feel this would happen, at least not for very long. Often, the lure of doing something illegal is what makes or breaks something. Once you legalize it, the joy of doing something rebellious and sneaky dies out. I don't think legalizing it will change how people use or abuse, really. If you're going to abuse something, you're going to abuse it whether it's legal or not. Legalizing it simply makes it taxable, useable, and obtainable for those who could truly benefit from it (cancer patients, etc) without threat of legal prosecution (and frees up drastically overburdened LEO resources in the process).

Not to mention, since the growing of any hemp is currently illegal, legalizing it would open a new avenue of quite literal cash crops to farmers who would have an extremely low-cost crop with extremely flexible and wide-ranging purposes (food, medicine, textiles, etc).


A closed mind is like a closed book - nothing can be gained if either remains closed.
stephalexis09
Posted: Saturday, December 12, 2009 7:45:36 PM

Rank: Newbie

Joined: 12/12/2009
Posts: 1
Neurons: 3
Location: United States
Actually I also feel the same way with angelster, maybe there's a good reason why some really wants to legalize it,..but the thought of to misuse of this opportunity is really possible...
sandraleesmith46
Posted: Saturday, December 12, 2009 9:09:58 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 11/20/2009
Posts: 696
Neurons: 2,132
Location: Arizona's high deserts
Okay, I'm sorry but I have to come down like a wet blanket here. Marijuana intoxication {it's a mild hallucinogenic} has caused fatalities on the highways. I've been called to the scenes thereof. For the carcinogens, one average roach is the equivalent of a PACK of regular, king-size cigarettes, which I learned separately in nursing school, and in the military. The most obvious effect of regular use is the total apathy about everything in life.
I agree alcohol is more immediately visible as a threat. So is nicotine, and in fact it does cost this nation more than all the others put together, including the alcohol. First, we subsidize the farmers growing it, then we pay for the health costs caring for the users thereof. How does that justify adding more to the already bad mix?? Granted, prohibition and the war on drugs haven't worked. How does that justify NOT stopping the destruction??
Where the war on drugs went wrong, in my opinion, is that it attacked the wrong end of the problem. Yes, curb the in-flow as much as possible, but far better to focus on the roots of WHY people feel the compulsive NEED to alter their moods somehow in the first place, and that covers alcohol and nicotine as well! Not much over a century ago, the sale and use of opiates was quite legal in this nation. It was because of the destructive effects on human lives that it was made a restricted, prescription-only drug class. Doctors treating the addicted victims lobbied for that. Whether that was "right" or "wrong" I can's say. The initial intent was to help; to prevent more from falling prey to that and destroying their lives and hurting those around them. I have trouble seeing that as a "bad" thing. That criminals moved in and have made a fortune manufacturing and/or importing and selling drugs illegally is unqualified evil from every point of view.
At this point, I honestly don't know what the answer is, but legalization of marijuana just doesn't look like it either. My sister, also a nurse, was telling me about her last visit to San Francisco, since the opening of the marijuana shops and pharmacies there. She said the whole character of the city has changed. We'd both been there during the height of the "hippie years" and it was a lovely, vibrant city. What she described to me sounded more like the Bowery in NYC, where all the winos were panhandling and passed out in the streets when I was a little girl, only the whole city seemed to be that way, that she saw. Do you really think that's the answer this nation needs?? I sure don't! But I personally think ALL mood-altering substances need to be better controlled and monitored. I'd even include SAMe and DLPA, if they showed the destructive effects the rest do. I enjoy a drink on occasion too, but I can live quite nicely without. And I'm one of those "rabid" reformed ex-smokers, admittedly. I have also been, in the past, addicted to prescribed pharmaceutical narcotics, which I got myself off, because I didn't want to spend the rest of my life addicted. I didn't like it! I found other ways to deal with the pain that prompted the prescriptions, which I think are healthier and better in general. I don't know; maybe I'm some weird exception to the addictive personality...I generally don't fit into the medical books anyway... but I don't think I have exceptionally strong will-power. I just know I've seen both sides of the fences here, and I don't think having people "blotto" on anything is a good thing for a society, especially not in large numbers!
Okay, I'll get off my soap box again, and try to behave properly...

fair winds and following seas
risadr
Posted: Sunday, December 13, 2009 6:27:00 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/16/2009
Posts: 1,155
Neurons: 3,545
Location: PA, United States
Thank you for your point of view sandralee, but I still can't see why it shouldn't be legalized, based on those points alone. In fact, through your discussion of the need for greater regulation, you have only further driven home the point that it should be legalized. If it's not, how can regulation occur?

It's like a book elegantly bound, but in a language that you can't read just yet. "I Will Possess Your Heart," Death Cab for Cutie
Raparee
Posted: Monday, December 14, 2009 9:26:02 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 1,231
Neurons: 18,102
risadr wrote:
Thank you for your point of view sandralee, but I still can't see why it shouldn't be legalized, based on those points alone. In fact, through your discussion of the need for greater regulation, you have only further driven home the point that it should be legalized. If it's not, how can regulation occur?

You've got a great point there, Risa. If it's to be regulated to that degree, it HAS to be legalized and under government supervision.

I wonder if we could get stats from countries who have legalized it?


A closed mind is like a closed book - nothing can be gained if either remains closed.
risadr
Posted: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 9:29:36 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/16/2009
Posts: 1,155
Neurons: 3,545
Location: PA, United States
I think that it would definitely be interesting to see what kinds of trends those countries have seen, both in terms of use, growth, and distribution. I'd also be interested in knowing how the taxes collected from legalization would be allocated.

It's like a book elegantly bound, but in a language that you can't read just yet. "I Will Possess Your Heart," Death Cab for Cutie
moorwood
Posted: Friday, December 18, 2009 1:27:27 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 12/4/2009
Posts: 138
Neurons: 465
Location: Australia
As with all moral issues, assuming you are a consequentialist (and I realise a lot of members probably aren't), you would want to try to work out whether legalising it would produce a good or bad outcome in the country in question (and I suppose the world) in the long run. So you would list the pros and cons. On the pros side you would probably put the economic benefits such as more employment and increased tax revenue and things like freeing up law enforcement, courts and gaols. On the cons side you would put the probability of increased use with all the social problems that that would cause.
And then you would give up!
Personally I tend to favour legalisation but that is of no importance or value whatsoever to anyone. Bit like saying I favour abortion or like oysters: it is just telling you something about me and nothing at all about abortion, oysters or, in this case, marijuana.
risadr
Posted: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 9:14:14 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/16/2009
Posts: 1,155
Neurons: 3,545
Location: PA, United States
Excellent point, moorwood. Discussing the possible benefits of (and one's opinions about) legalization is a bit pointless, as none of us are in a place to do anything about it. However, it's always nice to see how many like minds there are in a community such as this one.

And on the point of abortion: don't get me started.

It's like a book elegantly bound, but in a language that you can't read just yet. "I Will Possess Your Heart," Death Cab for Cutie
saranghe09
Posted: Tuesday, December 29, 2009 6:21:38 AM

Rank: Newbie

Joined: 12/29/2009
Posts: 1
Neurons: 3
Location: United States
Actually, I am not aware what will be the benefit we could get upon legalizing the use of marijuana though if it will help us in any cases then I don't see anything wrong with it, but if it will just start a controversy rather not...
risadr
Posted: Sunday, January 3, 2010 1:28:52 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/16/2009
Posts: 1,155
Neurons: 3,545
Location: PA, United States
There's going to be controversy surrounding the possible subject of the decriminalization (which I think is more important than outright legalization) of marijuana, because there will always be people who stand against it for "moral reasons." To that effect, I feel like I need to make the point that there's nothing necessarily immoral about using pot. At least I can't see anything immoral about it, and I consider myself to have high moral and ethical standards.

It's like a book elegantly bound, but in a language that you can't read just yet. "I Will Possess Your Heart," Death Cab for Cutie
nooblet
Posted: Thursday, January 7, 2010 4:38:31 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/15/2009
Posts: 1,570
Neurons: 4,778
Location: United States
I knew a bunch of people that smoked marijuana in middle school and high school. They ran the gamut of personality types, and some of them went on to far more dangerous drugs and got into a life of crime. The majority of the people that I know who use(d) marijuana are simply great people who don't really do anything else that puts them on the wrong side of the law. For the people who ended up falling into a life of crime, I'm fairly certain that regardless of their drug use (or at least marijuana, which they quickly strayed away from), they would have followed a similar path simply due to the environments they grew up in. Several of them had been my friends and had already had records of getting into fights, theft, and other misbehaviors BEFORE they started doing drugs. The fact that they escalated in drugs may have a correlation with the increase in the crime they were committing, however I am under the belief that they were constantly looking to push themselves further along the edge just to get a thrill, so I think both the increase in crime and use of progressively more dangerous drugs simply reflect a personality trait and if you removed drugs, they may have even escalated in other crimes faster for the lack of other things to do with their time.

With that said, I'm mostly apathetic about what others do. I'm largely of the opinion that if you're not negatively affecting others, why should anyone care what you do? I also agree that legalization would help cut down on one of the largest crime syndicates and would redirect a lot of the US's money in ways that would HELP us. First, money is no longer leaving the country since it is grown stateside and the taxed portion of it goes to the government to help fund all sorts of programs, not to mention this may just help stimulate the economy. Second, government funding can be redirected to more important projects, which will further help the nation (however I still think that the war on harder drugs should continue, since those are the real problem). Finally, the people who use marijuana will (probably) no longer have to worry about fines or incarceration.

However, I do believe that etiquette should be observed for smoking anything. My family, for example, has a long history of bronchitis, pnuemonia, and other lung-related illnesses, and we are particularly sensitive to the inhalation of smoke (and have gotten rather bad cases of pnuemonia and lung infections from being around inconsiderate smokers). As long as people are conscientious about it, I have no problem.
NinjaMonkee
Posted: Thursday, January 7, 2010 7:01:37 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/17/2009
Posts: 281
Neurons: 768
Location: CA. USA
Nooblet, im sure here in california, where smoking cigs is restricted to certain designated areas, smoking MJ will have the same type of restrictions. Maybe even more because of the fact that one wiff is enough to get someone high.

My beef strong.
nooblet
Posted: Thursday, January 7, 2010 7:15:01 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/15/2009
Posts: 1,570
Neurons: 4,778
Location: United States
Yeah, I'm grateful of the restricted areas for smoking, as I also live in California. However, when I lived in San Diego, there were a whole lot of people that did not follow those restrictions, typically in spite of them.
NinjaMonkee
Posted: Friday, January 8, 2010 4:27:26 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/17/2009
Posts: 281
Neurons: 768
Location: CA. USA
yeah i see that a lot too

My beef strong.
risadr
Posted: Saturday, January 9, 2010 8:39:10 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/16/2009
Posts: 1,155
Neurons: 3,545
Location: PA, United States
A little food for thought:

Two news items brought to my attention by the NORML Women's Alliance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3ODIhXC0IY

and

http://www.momlogic.com/2009/06/marijuana_mamas.php

Discuss.

It's like a book elegantly bound, but in a language that you can't read just yet. "I Will Possess Your Heart," Death Cab for Cutie
.wichitarick
Posted: Sunday, January 10, 2010 10:08:32 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/29/2009
Posts: 221
Neurons: 752
Hi not High

I will try a little.Think I usually stay out any discussion in these areas because of my background in it and can only say my thoughts from the experiences I see in my own life.
Wait a generation for the last of the good ol,boys to die off and it WILL get approved.
Attach the right tax incentive to this and it WILL get approved.
I will say and answer my question.
To think that the GOVERNMENT can approve and REGULATE anything like this is LUDICROUS !
That is what the prohibitionists were SCREAMING during the 1930,s
It took the government a while but take a look at alcohol and it,s regulation at least when it comes to paying the taxes on it. Has anybody here been involved in this ? from owning a liquor store or distribution center even moving beer in and out of a bar ?
It is fairly easy to track about every drop of booze in this country.
A lot harder with weed but give it awhile and a lot of tax money and it will get fixed .You will just be jailed for failure to pay taxes instead. (a little behind on my part because I am not that up to date on what is happening "on the street " in California)
Weed IS a gateway drugd'oh! But so is 3.2 Beer.
The first two beers I chugged opened Pandora's box of abuse that should have led to my death and even with years of non use still haunts me. My brother and sister were there but addictions have never ruled their lives.
But was it the weed we snuck from my brothers stash or the beers we stole from the neighbors garage that led to our addiction,s ?
There are so many titles and figures for these "types" of people lost in those DSM manuals you WILL go CRAZY trying to figure it out.
The legalization ,regulation of weed can never work with the state border wars most of us live in currently.
A person in this state (Kansas) received 24 months hard time for a few crumbs of weed but I can get a prescription for weed in California and even grow a few plants with out a huge fear of getting "hard" time.
From my minds eye and street level position on the totem pole a few of the questions I would love to have answered at lunch in Washington D.C. or Virginia tomorrow is .
Why are the regulations of weed getting looser in some states
mandatory hard time in others.
But very recently the open airing of liquor advertisement on family television channels with very glamorous ads that have left some young viewers to think this drink was a health food drink.
I have no answers for the legalization questions but I do understand as long as weed is linked with more hard core physically addictive drugs there will be strong resistance from politicians against it.
and is why I coined the phrase."Crack gave hippies a bad name"R.C.










Read to your kid they will read with you,re neighbors kid
It is not the crazy people you worry about ....It is the one,s that don,t know it!
Epiphileon
Posted: Monday, January 11, 2010 5:46:11 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/22/2009
Posts: 3,973
Neurons: 62,617
risadr wrote:
A little food for thought:
http://www.momlogic.com/2009/06/marijuana_mamas.php
Discuss.


Far, far better than the martini mama of the 50's. But that is not really the point, and isn't a valid comparison anyway. I read the article above, and found nothing at all to take issue with in the womens' stories. I particularly liked this sentence, "Marijuana is the magic in my life that helps me unwind, stay sane, and have more energy,"
In my opinion, actually far more than opinion but a strong assertion is that responsible marijuana use, is not just merely acceptable but, extremely healthy. "Responsible use" is a necessary condition of this assertion.
The cornerstone of this argument is that altered states of consciousness, are necessary, in order to be fully aware of consciousness. Consciousness, as a product of the nervous system would seem to be subject to some of the same characteristics displayed by the rest of the nervous system. One of these characteristics I refer to as the steady state ignorance syndrome, (well at least I just did, I forget if there is actually a formal phrase for it) it involves acclimatization, and every one is familiar with it. Do you feel your watchband? Your rings? Do you notice anything in your perceptual realm that becomes a completely unchanging stimulus? No, you don't(vision doesn't count as built in eye shaking assures this never naturally happens*.)
THC is a mild hallucinogenic, it's primary area of effect is in cortical areas, where it alters the operation of area's where consciousness resides, it is a drug and functions as a drug would. Alcohol on the other hand, that is erroneously referred to as a drug, is actually a poison. Mildly altering consciousness, whether one is aware that is what one is doing or not, is, in proper environments, going to be beneficial to mentality, providing a broader perspective on the whole experience of being thing. Broader perspectives are generally better for relaxation, and a more reasoned response to reality.


*one can experience this phenomenon with vision by taking a blank ping-pong ball, cutting it in half, securing each half over an eye with an adhesive, having a red light on, and allowing no shadow to encroach on the field of vision. In a relatively short time you will know neurological blindness when the visual system shuts down. The least bit of shadow, anywhere in the field of vision and vision will be instantaneously restored.



Question authority. How do you know, that you know, what you know?
Tovarish
Posted: Monday, January 11, 2010 6:37:39 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/2/2009
Posts: 11,109
Neurons: 39,933
Location: Booligal, New South Wales, Australia
There has been a huge campaign down here from the anti-smoking lobby and Government, with some success.Some members of the community are so anti-tobacco smoke in public places you would think it was serin gas.The lobby groups are now focused on alcohol marketing & sponsorship.I find it astounding that there are lobby groups FOR marijuana & not necessarily for medical use (which is not legal here). Why would anyone want another addictive substance on the market? Give me two fingers or maybe three, of Scotch any day. Who needs another vice anyway?
risadr
Posted: Monday, January 11, 2010 10:02:48 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/16/2009
Posts: 1,155
Neurons: 3,545
Location: PA, United States
Tovarish: I am NOT a drinker. I will, very rarely, have a beer or two, or sometimes a mixed drink, but that's it. And when I say very rarely, I mean VERY RARELY. I may have a drink twice a year, if that. However, if it were legal, I would probably use marijuana. As the mothers in the article stated, used responsibly and in moderation (once a day, maybe twice on weekends), I think that it could have a tremendous effect on reducing my stress and anxiety levels (I have a diagnosed panic disorder), reducing my discomfort from medical problems (I suffer from PMDD and a digestive condition), and generally raise my awareness and level of consciousness. I would never smoke inside or around my child, but I would never hide the fact that I smoked from her, either.

I posted these links to get the discussion going again... I want to see what people think!

It's like a book elegantly bound, but in a language that you can't read just yet. "I Will Possess Your Heart," Death Cab for Cutie
Tovarish
Posted: Monday, January 11, 2010 10:05:49 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/2/2009
Posts: 11,109
Neurons: 39,933
Location: Booligal, New South Wales, Australia
I cant say marijuana wouldn't be very effective for medical conditions, as I have never tried it. But I was offered it (under the lap) when I had a spinal cord injury, to deaden pain. I refused, not because of high moral values,just that I didn't need something else, to like too much to give up.
I remember the 70s when Valium was a fashionable drug, or Bex or Vincents Powders, and the list goes on.
risadr
Posted: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 9:30:24 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/16/2009
Posts: 1,155
Neurons: 3,545
Location: PA, United States
The vote on Medical Cannabis in New Jersey was yesterday, and Gov. Corzine passed the bill, making the state the 14th with a legal program (Maryland's program, in my estimation, isn't proactive enough and needs to be reevaluated). http://www.cmmnj.org/

For those of us who live in the Mid-Atlantic and Northeastern US, this makes 6 states (District of Columbia, Maryland, Maine, Rhode Island, Vermont, and now, New Jersey) with legal programs. Add to that the fact that pot has been legalized in Ontario, Canada (can you say "Hello, vacation in Toronto"? lol), and there seems to be a pretty strong push in the right (yes, I said right...as in correct) direction for legalization in this corner of the country. Hopefully, the remaining states in New England and the Mid-Atlantic region won't be too far behind in starting their own programs for legalization, and we can start to see some real headway being made on a national scale.

For those who are curious, this is a map and Wiki article showing what countries in the world have taken what steps toward legalization or decriminalization. And this is a state-by-state status map of the US.

Enjoy! And congrats, NJ, on winning a battle! Maybe PA isn't too far behind???

It's like a book elegantly bound, but in a language that you can't read just yet. "I Will Possess Your Heart," Death Cab for Cutie
MiTziGo
Posted: Wednesday, March 17, 2010 3:21:23 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/16/2009
Posts: 1,393
Neurons: 6,142
This story makes me so sad for this man and illustrates exactly what is wrong with the way we treat marijuana use in this country. Either it is legal or it is illegal to use. Once we say it is legal, how can we punish someone for using it in that capacity? He was 2008 employee of the year, he claims to have never been under its influence while at work, and he used it to control the pain of his disease. He was responsible with its use. Even Walmart doesn't challenge that. Guaranteed that if he had been on oxycontin or vicodin and had a prescription for those--in my opinion far worse--drugs, his job would have remained secure. I say his rights have been violated.

FOXNews.com
Wal-Mart 'Sympathetic' to Man Fired for Using Medical Pot, but Won't Rehire Him By Joshua Rhett Miller

A Walmart employee with sinus cancer and an inoperable brain tumor who was fired for using medical marijuana will not be rehired, even though the company says it is "sympathetic" to his condition.

Joseph Casias, 29, was fired in November from a Walmart store in Battle Creek, Mich., after marijuana was detected in a routine drug screening that he underwent after he sprained his knee at work.

Casias, who was the store's 2008 associate of the year, said he legally used marijuana to reduce pain associated with his disease and was never under the influence while at work.

"I gave them everything," Casias told Wzzm13.com. "110 percent every day. Anything they asked me to do, I did. More than they asked me to do. Twelve to 14 hours a day."

Casias, who has been collecting unemployment since his termination, reportedly received a notification this week that Wal-Mart was challenging his eligibility for benefits. But Wal-Mart officials will no longer object to Casias receiving those benefits, company spokesman Greg Rossiter told FoxNews.com.

"This is just an unfortunate situation all around," Rossiter said. "We're sympathetic to Mr. Casias' condition, but like other companies, we have to consider the overall safety of our customers and associates, including Mr. Casias, when making a difficult decision like this."

Asked if Wal-Mart officials were considered offering Casias his job back, Rossiter replied: "No, we're not."

The Marijuana Policy Project, a Washington-based marijuana advocacy organization, has called for a nationwide boycott of all Walmart stores to protest Casias' termination.

"MPP is asking shoppers to demand that Wal-Mart abandon its discriminatory policy of firing employees who are legal medical marijuana patients under state law," an MPP blog posting read. "We need to send a strong message to Wal-Mart and other businesses in medical marijuana states that it is not acceptable to fire sick people for trying to get better by following their doctor’s recommendation and obeying state law. Marijuana is a legitimate medicine, supported by science and protected by law in 14 states, including Michigan."

Dan Korobkin, a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union's Michigan branch, said Wal-Mart's action against Casias is unlawful and "shameful."

"It's illegal to fire somebody for being a medical marijuana patient, and it's also shameful to punish somebody for treating their medical condition in a legal way," Korobkin told FoxNews.com. "As far as I know, Wal-Mart itself sells a lot of over-the-counter drugs and prescription medications."

Korobkin said federal authorities have announced they will not enforce federal marijuana laws in states that have legalized its usage for medicinal purposes, including Michigan, and he's "cautiously optimistic" that Wal-Mart officials will reconsider Casias' termination.

"Wal-Mart is a large corporation, but they don't supersede state laws," he said. "When the voters of the state vote to make the use of medical marijuana legal and protected, that is a law that binds even Wal-Mart."
Vickster
Posted: Thursday, March 18, 2010 12:20:39 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 2/19/2010
Posts: 2,405
Neurons: 7,211
Location: Massachusetts, United States
I just read this and all I can say is....OMG!!!

Being a cop... I'd rather deal with someone whose been smoking some weed than a drunk!! two totally different personalities!!

He who sings scares away his woes. ~Cervantes
Raparee
Posted: Thursday, March 18, 2010 12:33:32 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 1,231
Neurons: 18,102
Vickster wrote:
I just read this and all I can say is....OMG!!!

Being a cop... I'd rather deal with someone whose been smoking some weed than a drunk!! two totally different personalities!!

Vickster, I'd love to hear your take on how legalizing marijuana would affect the LEOs. :)

And I find the Wal-Mart issue APPALLING and I hope the guy takes them to the cleaners. He's done nothing wrong and everything right. Not to mention, the test only measures marijuana "left-overs" and could have been from a month back - it in no way suggests he has ever been under the influence on the job.


A closed mind is like a closed book - nothing can be gained if either remains closed.
kylie_brooks
Posted: Thursday, March 18, 2010 4:47:20 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/1/2010
Posts: 59
Neurons: 189
Location: United States
Ok first off,
I think whoever made drugs is the stupidest person who ever lived,
But thats just me because even though i didnt smoke weed,
My life is messed up because of it,
You never get your time back that you spent smoking weed,
So just give up weed and move on,
Be with the ones you love,
Not some blunt that will bring you closer to death,and not the people you love.
But thats just me.

What do we have but love?
NinjaMonkee
Posted: Monday, March 22, 2010 6:12:49 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/17/2009
Posts: 281
Neurons: 768
Location: CA. USA
I dont know the laws in MI, but here in CA the medical marijuana license is not a free pass. You may posses and use it but your job is not protected. If you pop positive on the test they can fire you.

My beef strong.
Raparee
Posted: Friday, March 26, 2010 11:21:53 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 1,231
Neurons: 18,102
California is stepping it up, people!

California November Vote on Marijuana Legalization

And they're not just talking medical! They're talking FULL ON recreational legalization with all the taxes and regulations and a full source of money for their terribly overburdened budget.

I'm not only impressed with the story, but some of the comments on my local site. My favorite story quotes:

Quote:
"We spend so much time, our police do, chasing around these nonviolent drug offenders, we don't have time anymore to protect our people from murders and child molesters," said Jack Cole, president of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, a group that plans to champion the California proposal between now and the election.

...

Proponents of the measure say legalizing marijuana could save the state $200 million a year by reducing public safety costs. At the same time, it could generate tax revenue for local governments.

A-FRIGGEN-MEN. I've said it before, I'll say it again - quit wasting time and taxpayer money going after nonviolent potties and go after the damned violent crime offenders!

I just hope those in the campaign to back this have some ideas on how best to regulate, test, and enforce, particularly if they don't approve of driving under the influence. You can test for remnants, but those last for a month in the body. Admittedly, you can normally tell when someone is doped, but I'm sure they will want a legal test for the police. Besides, if they can do a current level of intoxication from marijuana, it could put to rest the problems with legal marijuana and on-the-job/workplace usage. Right now, it's unfair and completely inaccurate as far as testing for that. In effect, this will make marijuana on par with alcohol.


A closed mind is like a closed book - nothing can be gained if either remains closed.
SunDevil
Posted: Friday, March 26, 2010 11:45:57 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/13/2010
Posts: 90
Neurons: 262
Location: United States
Legalize it and watch the tax money come in.
risadr
Posted: Sunday, March 28, 2010 3:44:04 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/16/2009
Posts: 1,155
Neurons: 3,545
Location: PA, United States
@Raparee - When I heard about the legalization bill in CA, I was ECSTATIC!!

I agree that the business with that man in MI is ridiculous. He's in the right, and he should take Wal-Mart for everything they're worth.

@kylie brooks - Why are you so against legalization? Surely you must have a reason that you can share, because it seems that you have only made general statements about how "bad" it is. You may not choose to use it, personally, but why should those people who do choose to use it be forbidden from doing so? Legal doesn't mean mandtory -- if it was legalized, no one would force you to start smoking.

It's like a book elegantly bound, but in a language that you can't read just yet. "I Will Possess Your Heart," Death Cab for Cutie
Raparee
Posted: Tuesday, April 6, 2010 8:21:32 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 1,231
Neurons: 18,102
Risa, I'm curious what you think of this. NinjaMonkee posted in a cancer thread (medicine section) on this and it had me curious about how this could/would be incorporated into legal marijuana laws. I've just copied it purely.

Quote:
NinjaMonkee wrote:
An independent study showed that taking a third of a gram of THC oil extract everyday for 90 days was actually curing cancer. I will have to find the study tonight and post it for everyone tomorrow.

That is very intriguing. Did a quickie google on THC oil cause I went, wait a sec!

Per Wiki:

Quote:
The effects of extracted resin are comparable to smoking the same plant from which it was extracted, but often intensified due to its much higher potency. In the case of honey oil, several small drops can produce effects comparable to a much greater amount of plant material. This can sometimes cause overwhelming effects if the extract's high concentration of cannabinoids is not taken into account.

It should be noted, of course, that inhaling vaporized cannabis oil is not the same as smoking cannabis in that it does not carry most of the well known health risks associated with smoking. The smoke from cannabis plant matter contains many of the same consituents of tobacco smoke, including bronchial irritants, mutagens, tumour promotors, and carcinogens. Thus, cannabis oil could be seen as a far safer option than smoking cannabis in terms of the health risks of chronic use.

So essentially the benefits and high of marijuana sans the particulate inhalation. I'd very much like to see that report if you can find the link. I'd have to do a lot more research on medical uses for cancer before believing that one.



A closed mind is like a closed book - nothing can be gained if either remains closed.
NinjaMonkee
Posted: Wednesday, April 7, 2010 7:12:04 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/17/2009
Posts: 281
Neurons: 768
Location: CA. USA
risadr wrote:
@Raparee - When I heard about the legalization bill in CA, I was ECSTATIC!!

I agree that the business with that man in MI is ridiculous. He's in the right, and he should take Wal-Mart for everything they're worth.

@kylie brooks - Why are you so against legalization? Surely you must have a reason that you can share, because it seems that you have only made general statements about how "bad" it is. You may not choose to use it, personally, but why should those people who do choose to use it be forbidden from doing so? Legal doesn't mean mandtory -- if it was legalized, no one would force you to start smoking.


Some people just have a fear of it. They hear drug and think it will be the downfall of society.

My beef strong.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines. Copyright © 2008-2018 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.