War on Drugs

Seen in the Courant:

The legislation would have allowed patients with conditions such as cancer, epilepsy, glaucoma, multiple sclerosis or AIDS to grow up to four marijuana plants in their homes with a doctor’s prescription.

But in a three-page veto message, Rell said her sympathies for those with unmanageable pain did not overcome her concern that citizens still would have to break the law to obtain marijuana or marijuana seeds.

“There are no pharmacies, storefronts or mail order catalogs where patients or caregivers can legally purchase marijuana plants or seeds,” Rell said. “I am troubled by the fact that in essence this bill forces law-abiding citizens to seek out drug dealers to make their marijuana purchases.”

While I’m no expert in the use of marijuana as a means to alleviate pain, I am married to someone with a chronic pain syndrome. We’re fortunate to have health and drug coverage that are generous enough and understanding doctors that make it possible for her to get some relief. However, I also am very well aware that for folks who are not so fortunate, if the sole choices are unbearable pain and acquiring some herb… it’s likely the current state of the law wouldn’t factor into the decision.

Seen in the Courant:

A move to legalize marijuana for people suffering from certain medical problems cleared its first legislative hurdle today, giving hope to those who’ve been pushing for the bill for several years.

The Judiciary Committee voted 31-8 in favor of the legislation.[...]

In the bill, qualifying patients would be limited to growing no more than four marijuana plants, each having a maximum height of four feet. The plants must be grown in a secure, indoor facility.

The debilitating medical conditions covered by the bill include cancer, glaucoma, AIDS, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, damage to the nervous tissue of the spinal cord, epilepsy, cachexia or wasting syndrome.

As someone married to an individual who lives with excruciating, currently incurable pain, it’s nice to see the local legislators abandoning William Randolph Hurst’s biases in attempting to open up treatment options.

Seen on the AP wire:

A California woman whose doctor says marijuana is the only medicine keeping her alive can face federal prosecution on drug charges, a U.S. appeals court ruled Wednesday.

The case was brought by Angel Raich, an Oakland mother of two who suffers from scoliosis, a brain tumor, chronic nausea and other ailments. On her doctor’s advice, she eats or smokes marijuana every couple of hours to ease her pain and bolster a nonexistent appetite as conventional drugs did not work.

The article mentioned that part of her defense had been thrown out by the Supreme Court a couple of years ago, in a ruling that stated that federal drug laws trump state medical marijuana laws. This time, the court case was on whether the imposition of federal law could be blocked on “right to life” grounds.

The decision, according to the story is that the law can be enforced, but she’s still entitled to a “medical necessity defense”.

While I am definitely not pro-pot .in this particular case, count me firmly in the “dude, that ain’t right” camp.

As seen in the New York Times:

Things could change if a measure passed by legislators in Sacramento and now on Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s desk becomes law. [The bill reached Mr. Schwarzenegger last week; he has 30 days to sign or veto it.]

Seven states have passed bills supporting the farming of industrial hemp; their strategy has been to try to get permission from the Drug Enforcement Administration to proceed.

But California is the first state that would directly challenge the federal ban, arguing that it does not need a D.E.A. permit, echoing the state’s longstanding fight with the federal authorities over its legalization of medicinal marijuana. The hemp bill would require farmers who grow it to undergo crop testing to ensure their variety of cannabis is nonhallucinogenic; its authors say it has been carefully worded to avoid conflicting with the federal Controlled Substances Act.

But those efforts have not satisfied federal and state drug enforcement authorities, who argue that fields of industrial hemp would only serve as hiding places for illicit cannabis. The California Narcotic Officers Association opposes the bill, and a spokesman for the Office of National Drug Control Policy in Washington said the measure was unworkable.[...]

“California is a great climate to grow pot in, and no one from law enforcement is going through the fields to do a chemical analysis of different plants,” said Thomas A. Riley, a spokesman for the Office of National Drug Control Policy in Washington.

To some people intimate with the nuances of marijuana, however, the idea of hiding marijuana in a hemp field, where the plants would cross-pollinate, provokes amusement.

“It would be the end of outdoors marijuana,” said Jack Heber, 67, a marijuana historian and author who runs a group called Help End Marijuana Prohibition, or HEMP. “If it gets mixed with that crop, it’s a disaster.”

While I’m not a proponent of legalizing marijuana per se, the amount of energy and tax dollars spent on some paranoid manifestations in the cannabis front of the War on Drugs amazes me sometimes. Even aside from enforcement activities, refusing to explore potential medical and industrial applications of a particular plant seems remarkably short-sighted.

One would think that our bureaucrats and politicians could come up with a more thoughtful response than “just say no” here.

My hat is off to creativity of California state legislators, and to the apparent crossing of the liberal-conservative axis to make it happen.

And, well, I’m sure that DEA agents in the field will find some way of testing whether product in the field contains too much or too little THC.

(Via Daily Kos) The Department of Defense appears to be jumping into blog-land debate

As seen on a mailing list…it’s not actually news, but it is something not commonly known.

From the Providence Journal comes this story:

The balance on their JCPenney Platinum MasterCard had gotten to an unhealthy level. So they sent in a large payment, a check for $6,522.[...]

After sending in the check, they checked online to see if their account had been duly credited. They learned that the check had arrived, but the amount available for credit on their account hadn’t changed.[...]

They were told, as they moved up the managerial ladder at the call center, that the amount they had sent in was much larger than their normal monthly payment. And if the increase hits a certain percentage higher than that normal payment, Homeland Security has to be notified. And the money doesn’t move until the threat alert is lifted.

Yes, boys and girls. If you deviate from your normal patterns in a manner that can be detected via data mining, you attract the attention of Big Brother.

What wonderous times we live in.

As seen in The Sun:

England fans will be allowed to smoke dope before Sunday’s crunch clash with France — to keep them calm.

Cops in Lisbon plan to crack down on drunk supporters while turning a blind eye to those spotted puffing on a spliff. Pot-smoking fans have been assured that they will not be arrested, cautioned — or even have their drugs confiscated….

Dutch police used a similar policy in Euro 2000 and England’s hooligan element were too stoned to fight.

Now, while I think that many of the drug law liberalization advocates are too idealistic/nuts…this is a nice example of tolerating lawbreaking for the sake of the social good. Stoned English fans are less harmful to society than drunk English fans.

Now, that doesn’t tackle the bigger issue of the propensity for English footy fans being generally harmful to society…but small steps still constitute progress.