Medical Marijuana Argument

What is it do we know about Marijuana? Let’s start off by mentioning that most of our medications, prescriptions, and drugs come from stuff we grow, environmentally extinct rarities. Example of this is trees, plants, herbal remedies, and recipes. Others are formed from experience throughout our generations; some illegal drugs became legal passed through State. The reasoning is unlimited, for science has its advantages, as well as its ups and downs.

“If the Federal Government cannot tax it, they will illegalize it!”, “If the Federal Government cannot regulate it, then they’ll do everything in their power to make it illegal!” But, let’s look at another point of view shall we, from articles, and abstract debates in Medicine; With the dissatisfaction with an expanding corporate healthcare industry dominated by profit margins has spawned numerous reform ideas. One idea that has gained a foothold is a patients' federal BILL OF RIGHTS. In 1997, President Bill Clinton appointed an Advisory Commission on Consumer Protection and Quality in the Health Care Industry. The commission was directed to propose a "consumer bill of rights." The 34-member commission developed a bill of rights that identified eight key areas: information disclosure, choice of providers and plans, access to emergency service, participation in treatment decisions, respect and nondiscrimination, confidentiality of health information, complaints and appeals, and consumer responsibilities. Would any of this be illegal, or legal? (What about the book by Stephen Rachlin “Litigating a right to treatment: Woe is me”).

The main reason, and I think, and I quote is the only reason why “Our Federal Government just loves to Illegalize substances, acts, find loopholes to keep us blinded in their messed-up system, is because, they CAN NOT control ‘the people’ (Declaration of Independence) it’s unconstitutional to rip ‘the people’ of their rights)).

In short though, we help the Federal Government by this default because ‘we the people’ abuse these rights, set forth an addiction in capturing resources, utilizing them as if it were a matter of life and death. So therefore, this makes it a problem. Most problems become Illegal through Propositions, Legislature, passing a request to pass a new law bill.

Legal Marijuana blends do not work. Nothing will give the same exact high as Marijuana. A lot of people use a thing called "Saliva Divinorum" (Substance supplemental to ‘raw’ Marijuana). It is very powerful and definitely works. Now, just because it’s unknown, does the Federal Government see this as illegal, yes? Same concept, if you mix, it’s illegal. Since, the government does not know about it, they cannot tax it, so the Government cannot tax this, so therefore, it is illegal.

This brings me up to this question. What if Marijuana was too composed into pill form, the government CAN now tax this, since it is being recorded, researched, and controlled as the Health and Safety codes follow these guidelines well? Then, why Marijuana is so bad, compared to our previous cases against Coca-Cola, or Heroine. Oxy-Contin, Oxycodeine, or even medications with codeine (will test positive in drug-tests, because it contains opiates) in general (Look at the ingredients of your prescribed medication from what your doctor authorized, if you ask me “I believe we are all drug-addicts for even taking these”), are all small doses of these drugs to help patients relieve of their pain, suffering, you name it. All LEGAL in the eyes of the government, only because they can TAX it. Because the ill need it, so therefore, they found a loophole that is also in their favor. All illegal drugs made illegal by the Federal Government we so kindly follow. “AWK!” (Belching) All illegal drugs that were illegal made lightly legal, but in small doses, and don’t forget TAX it.

I will tell you why, The Federal Government wants to regulate everything and anything as if they need to take control. It feels like a dictatorship to me, and a select others that have experienced fallacy in serving ‘the people’, our government rule.

It’s illegal to be under the influence of anything in public. Example; if you took too much cough syrup and were under the influence of that, even Novocain, or Viacadin (Numbing substance to relieve pain) right after the Dentist Appointment. YES. You would be arrested, under the influence, in public, or behind the wheel.

Under the influence is a term used to describe a state of intoxication which is criminal during certain activities, such as public intoxication or driving under the influence. Driving under the influence cases, whether referred to as a DUI, DWI, DWAI, OUI, OUIL, or any other acronym, all have certain things in common. (Including CUI, cycling under the influence)

All states have laws against driving intoxicated, which vary by state. Legal intoxication is defined as a certain level of blood alcohol content (BAC), usually measurable at .10 or .08 percent. States that use the lower .08 BAC to define intoxication are eligible for more federal assistance, and therefore, there is a trend toward lowering the BAC limit.

Referenced from one article was a case with, Allison Margolin, a Harvard law School graduate, daughter of Bruce Margolin, the criminal defense lawyer who also literally wrote the book on marijuana law (The Margolin Guide) argued passionately on behalf of Seamus Ethridge, who stood accused of breaking the state’s drug laws. Michael Estrin (a freelance writer living in Los Angeles), quotes, “Allison is pretty well known among [pro-marijuana] activists, “ Ethridge tell him, “she’s great because she doesn’t take any shit; she fights hard and believes in this.” As she felt discomfort, she quotes, “I don’t know where the DA gets off bringing this fucking case,” she adds “The law is on our side!” The Arrest-first mentality infuriates Margolin, making the case to drop charges against Ethridge, did not deny that he was a full-time marijuana cultivator. Margolin simply argued that everything Ethridge did was perfectly legal. (The state legislature passed the Medical Marijuana Program Act to clarify how patients can cultivate and distribute medical marijuana (Cal. Health & Safety Code §§ 11362.711362.9)). Ethridge remembers and explained “I showed them my patient ID,” that he had grown marijuana for various collectives that he belonged to. Referenced: “The cops didn’t know much about medical marijuana laws, so they arrested me,” he says. (City of Corona, and later the City of Claremont, in landmark cases affirming cities’ ability to regulate or restrict marijuana dispensaries and collectives: City of Claremont v. Kruse (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 1153 and City of Corona v Naulls (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 418. He has successfully represented governmental entities, businesses in numerous other court and jury trials, and appellate matters).

My wife Jessica Lynn Vitug, had a friend who was dying of aids (Anti-Immune Deficiency Syndrome), he will not eat. He had an eating disorder that will not allow him to eat; his body will not want to eat. He then, was prescribed Medical Marijuana small doses every night, and whenever he needed to eat. The Marijuana would force his body to be hungry after 20 minutes of intake. State will approve of this because of its ‘peoples’ demand for treatment, but the Federal Government will not, stating “it is still illegal”, and continue to illegalize it. They might as well say “We the government will continue to illegalize it, until we can get in on it, to profit!” “Cha-Ch’ing, money register!” (Patient’s rights: The law presumes that an adult is competent, but competency may be an issue in numerous instances. Competence is typically only challenged when a patient disagrees with a doctor's recommended treatment or refuses treatment altogether. If an individual understands the information presented regarding treatment, she or he is competent to consent to or refuse treatment).

The interpreted California’s fuzzy medical marijuana statues-starting with Proposition 215, also known as the Compassionate Use Act (The California Compassionate Use Act, CA HSC §11362.5), which voters approved in November 5, 1996. Was effective November 6, 1996.
(Cal. Health & Safety Code §§ 11362.711362.9). Was deciding heavily on the judge’s call. Once patients have been charged, it is up to the courts to pass judgment on their medical claim.

This makes you think of the monetary value of our society. If the government had to barter with anything, but money, the endless supply of what we have is what we can ONLY offer, what then? “Illegalized drugs now, offered as bartering tool for other resources”, then what, “Hear ye, Here ye, all residence must grow their own resources”. Always a price for something, when it should never be about Monetary Value.

If you ask the question, “CAN I STILL BE ARRESTED OR RAIDED?”
YES, unfortunately. There is nothing in Prop. 215 to compel police to accept a patient as being valid. Many legal patients have been raided or arrested for having dubious recommendations, for growing amounts that cops deem excessive, on account of neighbors’ complaints, etc. A major purpose of the state ID card system is to avoid undue arrests.

In 2005, two years after the Legislature passed the Medical Marijuana Program Act, only four dispensaries operated openly in Los Angeles. A year later there were 98, according to a report by the LAPD's then-Chief William Bratton. He warned that without an updated zoning ordinance in place, criminal elements would exploit the vagueness of the law and set up shop near schools and residential areas. The city council responded in 2007 by passing a moratorium on new pot shops. But that measure did little to check the rapid spread of outlets, since it contained a loophole allowing dispensaries to apply for a hardship exception. Then, shortly after the council got around to closing that loophole, a judge declared the entire moratorium unconstitutional (Los Angeles Collective Assoc. v. City of Los Angeles, No. BC422215 (Los Angeles Super. Ct. Preliminary injunction issued Oct. 19, 2009)).

Los Angeles defense lawyer Michael Chernis advises doctors and a dozen collectives on how to operate within the state's medical marijuana laws. "The city council gets credit for not trying to ban dispensaries in the entirety or bowing to pressure from the DA and city attorney to ban sales," he says. "However, this [new ordinance] reflects a compromise position on many issues, the net result of which will likely be more litigation and patients getting hurt."