# GREAT News for Medical Marijuana Laws!!!



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

State Medical Cannabis Laws are Final!
Return of Legal Cannabis Not Pre-empted by Federal Law 
Dear ASA Supporter,

The U.S. Supreme Court refused to review a landmark decision yesterday in which California state courts found that its medical cannabis law is not preempted by federal law. The Supreme Court's decision in Garden Grove v. Superior Court means that federal law does not prevent state and local governments from implementing medical cannabis laws adopted by voters or state legislatures. In short: federal law does not override state law on medical cannabis!

Yesterday's decision follows three years of strategic legal work by Americans for Safe Access (ASA) in a California case involving the return of wrongfully confiscated medicine. ASA needs your help to keep doing important work like this. Please take a moment to make a special contribution to ASA today.

The Court's decision has broad implications for medical cannabis patients in the 13 states where medical cannabis is legal, and signals a sea change in the impasse between state and federal laws. Better adherence to state medical cannabis laws by local police will result in fewer needless arrests and other problems for patients, allowing for better implementation of medical cannabis laws in all states that have adopted them.

Medical cannabis advocates should be encouraged by opportunities for change in federal policy with a new Presidential Administration and shift in Congress. But until now, federal pre-emption has haunted patients whose state laws allow for medical cannabis use. This decision further clears the way for state implementation and adds new urgency to ASA's work in the nation's capitol, where we have been working full-time to change federal policy since 2006.

ASA is working in the courts and in the halls of Congress to protect and expand patients' rights - and we are making a difference. We have won important victories in court, made significant inroads in Congress, and helped reframe the national debate about medical cannabis. But we need your help to carry on. Please make a contribution to support ASA today.

Thank you,

Steph Sherer 
Executive Director 
Americans for Safe Access 
P.S. Read more about the Supreme Court decision at www.AmericansForSafeAccess.org/USSCKha.

Now THIS is good news!!!!!
Del


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

Another feel good story by the liberal pot heads that are running our country. If there was any hard science behind the efficacy of Medical THC there wouldn't be an issue. Look at the Opiates they have the science behind there usage and they are used widely in medicine. Then there is the science that says certain opiates on the market (namely Demerol) are not effective in pain control and have life threatening metabolites but we can't pull it from the shelves due to patient outrage. And by the way they are the most abused class of medications out there. I think if the feel good folks get their way the opiates will loose that standing. There is not one study that proves THC is effective for pain management. And THC is the most studied drug out there.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> There is not one study that proves THC is effective for pain management.


You know, I think you said that before and I had forgotten it. That would be my reason for making THC legal. I think people in pain from terminal cancer should be given absolutely anything that will help. It's the only humane thing to do.  However, if it doesn't help?????

Still, I would be for growing hemp that contains no THC if it is a viable crop, and especially if it would not require federal subsidies.


----------



## dosch (May 20, 2003)

> And by the way they are the most abused class of medications out there.


Exactly. Lots of pain pill junkies out there but it doesn't get the press like the rest of the drugs.


----------



## nodakoutdoors.com (Feb 27, 2002)

And I still think alcohol causes more problems in this country than any drug.


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

Plainsman the arguement for THC in cancer patients started out as a drug to help nausea associated with Chemotherapy. There are many other drugs available that don't have the euphoric side effects that are as, or more effective than THC. The lay public exrapolated out the "THC for cancer patients" battle cry to include pain relief. The advocates for legalized THC have done nothing to dispell this myth because, as in your case, they gained support much more quickly with the pain relief myth than the anti nausea fact. There is a synthetic THC that is available for use but it does not have the euphoric side effect either. This medicine has been deemed useless by the proponents of medicinal THC but it has the same chemical properties working on the same Chemoreceptors as street corner THC.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

swift said:


> Another feel good story by the liberal pot heads that are running our country. If there was any hard science behind the efficacy of Medical THC there wouldn't be an issue. Look at the Opiates they have the science behind there usage and they are used widely in medicine. Then there is the science that says certain opiates on the market (namely Demerol) are not effective in pain control and have life threatening metabolites but we can't pull it from the shelves due to patient outrage. And by the way they are the most abused class of medications out there. I think if the feel good folks get their way the opiates will loose that standing. There is not one study that proves THC is effective for pain management. And THC is the most studied drug out there.


Well here we go again, someone else who isn't educated on the subject spouting an opinion that is unfounded. There have been numerous studies showing the efficacy of medical cannabis. There are 13 states now that have enacted medical marijuana laws. There is an issue because "when" medical marijuana becomes legal federally, big drug companies will loose billions. They spend millions of dollars each year to lobby congress not to pass this law. Do some research before you spout rhetoric. Below is a letter from a former Sergeon General that should explain it to you. I hope this will help educate you and those who think like you.

Oh, and name calling is a jouvinile way to try to make a point.

Del
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Former Surgeon General: "Mainstream Medicine Has Endorsed Medical Marijuana!"
By Dr.
Jocelyn Elders, AlterNet
Posted on March 26, 2008, Printed on March 27, 2008
http://www.alternet.org/story/80582/
One of America's largest and most important groups of physicians has moved to cut through the clutter of political controversies over medical use of marijuana. Lawmakers and the public alike would do well to pay attention.
The American College of Physicians is the largest medical specialty organization and the second largest physician group in the United States. Its 124,000 members are doctors specializing in internal medicine and related subspecialties, including cardiology, neurology, pulmonary disease, oncology and infectious diseases. The College publishes Annals of Internal Medicine, the most widely cited medical specialty journal in the world.
In a landmark position paper released in February, these distinguished physicians are saying what many of us have been arguing for years: Most of our laws have gotten it wrong when it comes to medical marijuana, and it's time for public policy to get in step with science.
Right now, the laws of 38 states and the federal government bar use of marijuana as a medicine. Federal law classifies marijuana as a Schedule I drug, defined as having no accepted medical use and being unsafe for use even under medical supervision.
ACP's position paper urges "reclassification into a more appropriate schedule, given the scientific evidence regarding marijuana's safety and efficacy in some clinical conditions." The document goes on to call for protection of physicians' right to "prescribe or dispense medical marijuana in accordance with state law" and "strongly urges protection from civil or criminal penalties for patients who use medical marijuana as permitted under state laws."
ACP supports its position with 10 pages of scientific documentation and references. They cite data showing relief of the nausea, vomiting and wasting that can worsen the misery of cancer, AIDS and other diseases; of the pain and tremors associated with multiple sclerosis; and for relief of pain caused by a variety of other conditions. They note that marijuana in combination with some pharmaceuticals may produce more benefit than either drug alone.
ACP calls for more research, but then adds a critical point: In some areas, the efficacy of medical marijuana has already been established, and it's time for studies designed to determine the best dose and route of delivery.
The ACP position paper demolishes several myths, starting with the notion still proclaimed by some politicians that marijuana is unsafe for medical use. The College notes that the most serious objection to medical marijuana -- potential harm to the lungs from smoking -- has largely been solved by a technology called vaporization, already proven in scientific studies.
The ACP position paper also explains that there is no reason to believe that protecting medical marijuana patients leads to increased drug abuse. "Marijuana has not been proven to be the cause or even the most significant predictor of serious drug abuse," the doctors write. "Opiates are highly addictive, yet medically effective ... There is no evidence to suggest that medical use of opiates has increased perception that their illicit use is safe or acceptable."
This is an historic document&183; Large medical associations are by their nature slow, cautious creatures that move only when the evidence is overwhelming. The evidence is indeed overwhelming that, as ACP put it, there is "a clear discord" between what research tells us and what our laws say about medical marijuana.
It appears that voters and lawmakers in a number of states will consider medical marijuana proposals this year, and Congress will again be asked to stop federal attempts to interfere with the 12 state medical marijuana laws already in place. It's time to end that "clear discord" and put science ahead of politics.
Dr. Joycelyn Elders served as U.S. Surgeon General from 1993 to 1994, and is currently distinguished professor of pediatrics and public health at the University of Arkansas School of Medicine in Little Rock.

© 2008 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.

View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/80582/


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

Chris is right, alcohol causes many more problems in our society than any of the illegal drugs.

I personally know several people who use medicinal marijuana to combat the pain associated with auto-immune problems. No, they don't live in ND, they live in a state where it's legal. I also know several others who would benefit from it's use.

I've studied the research and there are reasons and benefits to the use of medical marijuana.

I think medical marijuana should be legal.

And I am not only a cop, but also a right wing conservative, imagine that.

huntin1


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Well, I truly do have a neutral opinion on this, so if anyone can convince me you will perhaps convince others. I look forward to reading more about this, and it is educational for me. Thanks all.


----------



## Leo Porcello (Jul 10, 2003)

Chris Hustad said:


> And I still think alcohol causes more problems in this country than any drug.


I agree. I say ban booze and bring back ephedra!


----------



## dblkluk (Oct 3, 2002)

Chris Hustad said:


> And I still think alcohol causes more problems in this country than any drug.


Of course it does. It is the most readily available one.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

Personally, I am against ALL "man-made chemical drugs" that are not used to explicitly "save lives" or "maintain quality of life". I believe (and history shows) that "man" didn't have a problem with "any" plant until we "thought" we could make it "better". Like we know better than our creator.

There are many reasons to legalize medical marijuana, and only ONE not to...MONEY!

I must say, I am very happy to hear that there is a police officer who agrees with MMJ. It's nice to know someone in law inforcement here in ND is on our side! You could help if you choose to... 

PS...I too am a RW Conservative, I'm a Ron Paul Republican. How much more conservative can you get?...lol

Can we keep this as a factual and sensable conversation? Ephedra...seriously... uke:

Del


----------



## 6162rk (Dec 5, 2004)

do you really think that alcohol causes more problems? i guess i look at the violent crimes in our country and tend to think they are more drug related. examples being gang activities, prostitution, assults. i would agree that alcohol causes more driving problems and is part of the homeless problems, spousal abuse, etc. but drugs are also a part of this.


----------



## Leo Porcello (Jul 10, 2003)

DelSnavely said:


> Can we keep this as a factual and sensable conversation? Ephedra...seriously... uke:
> 
> Del


I was kind of making a joke as to the fact so much crap happens from alcohol related incidents and it is still here and promoted. One base ball player drops dead because he takes too much ephedra and they make it illegal.

And yes bring back the all natural ephedra. Its weight loss abilities are unmatched!


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

6162rk said:


> do you really think that alcohol causes more problems? i guess i look at the violent crimes in our country and tend to think they are more drug related. examples being gang activities, prostitution, assults. i would agree that alcohol causes more driving problems and is part of the homeless problems, spousal abuse, etc. but drugs are also a part of this.


Most assaults are due to alcohol. Most property crime is due to the "prohibition" of drugs and prostitution is due to lack of money and education. I don't even consider prostitution to be a crime.

Selling is legal. F&$%ing is legal. Why isn't selling F&^@ing legal. Why is it illegal to sell something that it's perfectly legal to give away?...George Carlin...lol

We have been so brainwashed in this country that we have completely forgotten alcohol prohibition. These things are "vices" and people will ALWAYS have vices.

In 1914 when the Harrison Act was first imposed to control drugs like heroin, because there were so many addicts from the Civil War, the Spanish/American war and the war of 1912, 1.3% of the population was addicted to drugs. In 1972 when Nixon created the DEA and put all drugs into a scheduling program 1.3% of the population was addicted to drugs, and in 2007 after spending almost a trillion dollars, having gone through 7 presidents over 35 years, 1.3% of the population is addicted to drugs.

These are facts. Show me where we went wrong.

Del


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

Well I just HAVE to say this...

"It is "Impossible" to regulate "Anything" that is not legal!

Del


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

dblkluk said:


> Chris Hustad said:
> 
> 
> > And I still think alcohol causes more problems in this country than any drug.
> ...


Fact...85% of teens say it is easier to get marijuana than alcohol.

Those who sell alcohol have something to loose, their license and business.

Drug dealers don't care how old your kids are and will sell to anyone with money.

We could also reduce "gang" crime if we "legalized and regulated" all drugs through hospitals and clinics, free of charge with registration and took the "money" away from the gangs. But, then that's a completely different subject all together.

Del


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

Leo Porcello said:


> DelSnavely said:
> 
> 
> > Can we keep this as a factual and sensable conversation? Ephedra...seriously... uke:
> ...


The problem with that is that a 10 year old kid with a C average can "make his own" meth. using Ephedra. I say legalize it and make it a prescription only the needy can get. Then you can go after the Dr. for prescribing it wrongly. Also let's make the pharmasists, doctors and clinics who have drugs use "vaults" for their drugs like a bank.

Del


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

swift said:


> Plainsman the arguement for THC in cancer patients started out as a drug to help nausea associated with Chemotherapy. There are many other drugs available that don't have the euphoric side effects that are as, or more effective than THC. The lay public exrapolated out the "THC for cancer patients" battle cry to include pain relief. The advocates for legalized THC have done nothing to dispell this myth because, as in your case, they gained support much more quickly with the pain relief myth than the anti nausea fact. There is a synthetic THC that is available for use but it does not have the euphoric side effect either. This medicine has been deemed useless by the proponents of medicinal THC but it has the same chemical properties working on the same Chemoreceptors as street corner THC.


These receptors are called CBD (cannabidiol), CBN (cannabineurol) and CBG (cannabigiol) receptors. Marinol (the drug you reffer to) is 100% pure "Delta 9 Tetrahydrocannabinol) THC for short.

Many of the studies you don't believe exist are studies of CBD and CBN compounds. These compounds are shown to be useful for many problems. No one knows exactly how "all" of these compounds "work together" but you can only get them all from the plant itself.

The problem is that the pharmaceutical companies can't "pattent" a plant. They don't want you to have the plant because they can't make the money. There is one drug that has become legal in most other civilized countries called Sativex. It is an extract of the properties of the entire plant, but it's not legal here in the US.

Del


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

> We could also reduce "gang" crime if we "legalized and regulated" all drugs through hospitals and clinics, free of charge with registration and took the "money" away from the gangs. But, then that's a completely different subject all together.


I just hate when people use the argument, we cannot enforce it so lets make it legal and regulate it! Maybe we should allow everyone in this country to kill one person because we cannot stop murder, then if you go over your limit you would be in big trouble!!! :eyeroll:


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

djleye said:


> > We could also reduce "gang" crime if we "legalized and regulated" all drugs through hospitals and clinics, free of charge with registration and took the "money" away from the gangs. But, then that's a completely different subject all together.
> 
> 
> I just hate when people use the argument, we cannot enforce it so lets make it legal and regulate it! Maybe we should allow everyone in this country to kill one person because we cannot stop murder, then if you go over your limit you would be in big trouble!!! :eyeroll:


This is a typical responce. You know very well that most murders are caught. Do you take everything to the extreem, or is it just this subject?

If we use your logic, nothing would be legal. You can kill yourself falling off a horse. Should we make horses illegal? You can kill yourself falling off a cliff. Should we shut down all the National Parks that have cliffs?

Over 500 people per year die from aspirin. Should we outlaw aspirin?

Since 1976 the Netherlands have deregulated all drugs. They have less addicts of all drugs than the US per-capita. Their High School population has only 22% that have tried marijuana and the US number is 65%. You can't even find "crack" because no one wants it. They call "anyone" who abuses "anything" a junkie. If you drink to much, or even EAT to much, you're a "junkie"...

This is all about "harm reduction". We cause more harm from the war on drugs than we prevent. That's the bottom line.

Del


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

I really didn't want to let this thread get off topic, but it seems that we can't talk about medical marijuana without the other "dangerous drugs" getting brought into it. That is the problem with those who don't want it legal. They HAVE to lump marijuana in with the other drugs or their arguement would completely fall apart.

Is so unfortunate that so many should have to suffer for the fears of the few.

Del


----------



## USAlx50 (Nov 30, 2004)

DelSnavely said:


> Can we keep this as a factual and sensable conversation? Ephedra...seriously... uke:
> 
> Del


Actually Ephedra has been legalized again and can be purchased online. I agree with Leo, safe and effective, but it can be abused like many other legal substances.


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

> If we use your logic, nothing would be legal.


Quite the contrary......If we use your logic, everything would be LEGAL, but there would be regulations for how much we can do it, only one hooker a month, only one murder per lifetime, one wildlife violation per season, I could go on and on!!!!


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

djleye said:


> > If we use your logic, nothing would be legal.
> 
> 
> Quite the contrary......If we use your logic, everything would be LEGAL, but there would be regulations for how much we can do it, only one hooker a month, only one murder per lifetime, one wildlife violation per season, I could go on and on!!!!


Fortunately, my phillosophy has already been put into practice and been shown to be the "safer" and more logical.

With the phillosophy you advocate, we continue to spend billions of dollars, ruin families and only support the "Prison Industrial Complex". It's gotten us no where for the past 35 years, and never will.

The USA holds only 5% of the World's population, yet we hold 25% of the Worlds prisoners. We could send every drug addict to rehab 8 times for what it costs us to keep them in prison for a year. Good idea... :eyeroll:

Del


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

> With the phillosophy you advocate


Now you are a mind reader??? Where and when did I tell you my philosophy? Must be all that ganja you are advocating sneaking up on you Dell. All I said was that because you cannot seem to stem the tide you want it legalized. To me that is a bad reason to do something. There has to be better reasons to want something legalized than because you cannot control it!! I was pointing out the illogical nature of the statement that you made. Sorry, but you have no idea what my philosophy is. :roll:


----------



## USAlx50 (Nov 30, 2004)

So we're supposed to just send crackhead criminals to rehab a bunch of times on taxpayer coin :lol:


----------



## cgreeny (Apr 21, 2004)

I think I heard over in Switzerland they legalized the use of heroin as long as its administered by a hospital or clinic.... SO whats next......


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

USAlx50 said:


> So we're supposed to just send crackhead criminals to rehab a bunch of times on taxpayer coin :lol:


I never said anything about "criminals"... Violent criminals and property criminals are a different story. Let's make a distinction between crime with a "victim" and those without. Drug addiction "in and of itself" is a victimless crime as is "prostitution". Alcoholism is a "disease" drug addiction will get you "prison". They are one and the same in my opinion. They ALL deserve treatment!

Sending "addicts" to in-patient rehab makes more sence than turning the US into the World's biggest prison, and will cost the "taxpayer" much less.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

cgreeny said:


> I think I heard over in Switzerland they legalized the use of heroin as long as its administered by a hospital or clinic.... SO whats next......


That is true. Within the first 5 years of doing this they had a 22% drop in heroin use, an 80% drop in HIV and an immediate drop of more than 60% in property crime....You just made my point, thanks!

Del


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

Any crime has a victim. People that break drug laws are making us all the victim by using our tax dollars to put hem in prison or even if we decide that they need a hug and some rehab!!


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

djleye said:


> > With the phillosophy you advocate
> 
> 
> Now you are a mind reader??? Where and when did I tell you my philosophy? Must be all that ganja you are advocating sneaking up on you Dell. All I said was that because you cannot seem to stem the tide you want it legalized. To me that is a bad reason to do something. There has to be better reasons to want something legalized than because you cannot control it!! I was pointing out the illogical nature of the statement that you made. Sorry, but you have no idea what my philosophy is. :roll:


Ok, so if you're not advocating a prison planet, what IS your philosophy? You did notice I haven't made derogitory remarks about what"s "sneaking up" on your mind.....


----------



## USAlx50 (Nov 30, 2004)

DelSnavely said:


> cgreeny said:
> 
> 
> > I think I heard over in Switzerland they legalized the use of heroin as long as its administered by a hospital or clinic.... SO whats next......
> ...


What percentage of people in england are addicts? What percentage of people in Africa have aids? Will smoking dope help them?


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

djleye said:


> Any crime has a victim. People that break drug laws are making us all the victim by using our tax dollars to put hem in prison or even if we decide that they need a hug and some rehab!!


That's absolutely incorrect. What you do "to" or "with" your own body is "your" business, as long as you don't infringe on the rights of others. Someone elses "emotional" state is their own problem, it does not make them a "victim". Also, your tax dollars are being spent regardless of what any of us think. I would rather mine be spent on "helping" people and not supporting them in prison. That will save some for other things as well.

Del


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

USAlx50 said:


> DelSnavely said:
> 
> 
> > cgreeny said:
> ...


You have obviously decided to turn this into a bashfest so I'm out of this forum. You got your wish...again I'm sure...How many have you run off by calling names and making illogical arguements? Rhetorical question.....


----------



## MSG Rude (Oct 6, 2003)

WOW!


----------



## HUNTNFISHND (Mar 16, 2004)

djleye said:


> Any crime has a victim.


Prostitution? If she's willing to sell and he's willing to buy, who is the victim?


----------



## Chaws (Oct 12, 2007)

Driving under the influence of alcohol tends to create victims and can be immediately identified if that person driving is in deed under the influence. Unfortunately the same type of affect is caused by cannabis, we can not identify immediately if that person driving is under the influence.

One very small case against keeping it illegal.


----------



## DodgeLynn (Aug 28, 2008)

HUNTNFISHND said:


> djleye said:
> 
> 
> > Any crime has a victim.
> ...


How about those affected by the spread of virus and disease???


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y (Sep 23, 2004)

MSG Rude said:


> WOW!


Ditto!


----------



## huntingdude16 (Jul 17, 2007)

> Fact...85% of teens say it is easier to get marijuana than alcohol.


I'm not sure if it would be easier, but I can tell you it wouldnt be that hard if I wanted to.


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

Because people didn't agree with you we are bashing and running you off............I guess I disagree with you again Del. Sorry. Not everyone will agree with everyone else. :eyeroll:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

DelSnavely the resistance your getting is nothing compared to the hot topics or political form. The argumentative tone doesn't mean these guys don't respect you. Don't let it bother you. Both sides have made good points, and I find it confusing because I am agreeing with many that are contradictory. I'll need to work a little harder to sort these things out in my mind.


----------



## 6162rk (Dec 5, 2004)

i am not against medical marijuana but if you think most girls are not sold into prostitution because the pimps get them hooked on illegal drugs then i don't know what to think. hell look at the amount of runaway juvies that end up as hookers. promise them the world, give them illegal drugs so they feel good or forget what they are doing and make them a sex slave until they pay you back. talk about oweing your body and soul to the devil.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

Plainsman said:


> DelSnavely the resistance your getting is nothing compared to the hot topics or political form. The argumentative tone doesn't mean these guys don't respect you. Don't let it bother you. Both sides have made good points, and I find it confusing because I am agreeing with many that are contradictory. I'll need to work a little harder to sort these things out in my mind.


I'm sorry man, I just get a lot of the kind of talk that I've heard here. Names like dope, pothead, druggie and others do nothing but make me mad. If we can't make logical arguements without that, I would rather not talk. I know most of ND are alcoholic drunks and make these statements out of ignorance, but that doesn't change the way it makes people feel.

Most have never seen a friend with a good job and family, be torn from them to go to prison because of personal use of a plant that had no negative effect on their lives before that. Most have no idea what it's like to know people who deliberately do something to go to jail for six months, so they won't freeze and go hungry over the Winter. I can bet that none on here have ever seen a man with MS who can't even talk because of muscle spasms, calm down enough after smoking a joint to hold a ledgable conversation or feed himself, but they would deny that man the only "HERB" that can do that for him.

These are the people who make me mad, because since they are not directly effected by the ailments that medical marijuana can help, they don't care and all they want to do is help fill our prisons. When was the last time you checked your spam folder? I bet almost half are to become some kind of "officer" so you can help create the New Prison USA.

I to be honest, think that everyone who "drinks" alcohol belongs in jail, if that's the way we're going to have it. Let's not wait till they KILL someone in a car crash. Let's put them in jail NOW since those crashes they will cause are NOT accidents, it's just a matter of time. They ALL drive drunk in ND!

That's what name calling and illogical arguments are. I can't stand people who make NO sence, so they need to resort to overblown and unfounded ideas to lay on those who are making sence and trying to make a difference for the better. That's the kind of thing that kept alcohol illegal for 13 years and created the drug war mentality. Better yet, let's put all the drug users in jail and let all the child molesters and killers go. That would really do the job.

If it weren't for the drug users, prisons wouldn't have anyone to do the work they get paid .25 cents an hour for, to make the "privately owned" prisons millions of dollars like they have been doing for years. The prison state is here. As long as the drug war can keep drug users, or "slaves" in prison to make them money, they can continue to build more prisons. Over 800,000 people were sent to prison LAST YEAR ALONE on marijuana charges and 90% of those were for "SIMPLE POSESSION ALONE". Why don't they ever catch the guys WITH THE MONEY? I've known a LOT of people all my life who did drugs of some kind and NONE of them have the kind of money to do the IMPORTING! WHERE ARE THESE GUYS AND WHY DON'T THEY GO TO JAIL? Because they are the guys building the prisons, that's why!!!

Or, how about helping "addicts" and spending some time to catch REAL criminals that hurt people, steal and do crimes that have a VICTIM!

GOD, that might make too much sence. We can't do that, we might "help" someone.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

6162rk said:


> i am not against medical marijuana but if you think most girls are not sold into prostitution because the pimps get them hooked on illegal drugs then i don't know what to think. hell look at the amount of runaway juvies that end up as hookers. promise them the world, give them illegal drugs so they feel good or forget what they are doing and make them a sex slave until they pay you back. talk about oweing your body and soul to the devil.


Ask a girl in Vegas, who pays taxes, has a checkup each week and makes $5,000 a night who's keeping her down by feeding her drugs.

Prohibition of any kind "in and of itself" "CREATES" crime!


----------



## huntingdude16 (Jul 17, 2007)

> I know most of ND are alcoholic drunks and make these statements out of ignorance, but that doesn't change the way it makes people feel.


Edited by me, MSG Rude. Ease off on this stuff gents.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Just throwin it out there, there is no victimless crime. And it is easier to get weed then beer, even in high school.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

huntingdude16 said:


> > I know most of ND are alcoholic drunks and make these statements out of ignorance, but that doesn't change the way it makes people feel.


***Edited by MSG Rude***

What, can't take it?....ROFLMAO!!!!!


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

blhunter3 said:


> Just throwin it out there, there is no victimless crime. And it is easier to get weed then beer, even in high schoo.


Ok, a man in a medical marijuana state grows his own, none ever leaves his house and he is a "criminal" in the eyes of the Federal Government....Who's the victim?


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

huntingdude16 said:


> > I know most of ND are alcoholic drunks and make these statements out of ignorance, but that doesn't change the way it makes people feel.


***Edited by MSG Rude***

Ok, I appolojize for making this statement. I was using it to get the exact reaction you gave me. These kinds of names and derogitory remarks are the same ones I hate when people call others dopers, druggies and much worse. They serve no purpose but to make people mad and do no good to any conversation.

Again, I'm sorry, but you did help make my point...


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I'm a little late this morning to edit for content, but keep it cool guys. Thanks.

DelSnavely, things are still a little fuzzy for me, but there is one thing I clearly disagree with. The prisons are not making money, they cost the taxpayer. I think the only jail that comes close is run by that Sheriff in Arizona (I don't remember his name).

I often wonder about the claim that marijuana is a gateway drug. Most hard drug users begin with marijuana, but are they on hard drugs because of marijuana, or are they on hard drugs simply because they had the propensity for it and marijuana was just a step on the way. Without it perhaps most would have just skipped that step and moved along anyway. Perhaps, perhaps not, perhaps both.

Still I look at a 40 year old adult in pain and would say a doctor should be able to prescribe anything required. There may be synthetic drugs that do the same things I don't know. If I look at a man or woman 80 years old I'm not going to worry about lung cancer or some other side affect. Chances are something else will get them first. Cancer isn't something you get overnight or in a year or two. Older people especially should have anything they need to control pain. We would do it four our dogs, but not our parents?????

I guess I get that attitude after listening to a doctor tell me he took my mother off a drug because it was habit forming. She was 90. He didn't like my response. I asked him if he thought she might open a window, sneak out of the nursing home, and mug a teen.


----------



## bjertness07 (Jan 4, 2005)

I just find it very interesting that people can no longer smoke cigarettes in restaurants, their place of work, and even bars (here in Fargo); and you're advocating for the legalization of cannabis. Medicinal marijuana may be worth it...I'm still neutral on that subject...


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

Dell, you just make it too easy to pick your arguments apart. The difference is that MJ is ILLEGAL!!!!! Until you get alcohol outlawed, that is the difference. Very cut and dried.


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

Del, You said yourself in the beginning lets stick to the facts. Well your entire post is from your heart not based on fact. It is easy to see you feel very passionate about this. BUT it is easy to see you are for total legalization of marijauna and are using the medical arguement as a stepping stone. 
Also, I find it hard to believe your statistical facts on Switzerland and have not been able to reproduce those findings in print.

Also you stated, 
"I really didn't want to let this thread get off topic, but it seems that we can't talk about medical marijuana without the other "dangerous drugs" getting brought into it. That is the problem with those who don't want it legal. They HAVE to lump marijuana in with the other drugs or their arguement would completely fall apart."

The reason THC is lumped in with other dangerous drugs is because it is an illegal dangerous drug. And the people that use it are engaging in a criminal activity.

Now to the ACP's stance on Medical THC. The ACP has not signed off as you have eluded to. From their website...
'Additional research is needed to further clarify the therapeutic value of cannabinoids and determine optimal routes of administration. Unfortunately, research expansion has been hindered by a complicated federal approval process, limited availability of research-grade marijuana, and the debate over legalization. ACP believes the science on medical marijuana should not be obscured or hindered by the debate surrounding the legalization of marijuana for general use. In this paper the College lays out a series of positions on research into, and the use of, marijuana as medicine.'

Thus far the research does not show increased efficacy over the other drugs available on the market.

I will apologize for the childish name calling I did in my first post. It was not necessary and did not help to make my point.


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

American Academy of Family Physicians position statement on Marijauna reads "The American Academy of Family Physicians opposes the use of marijuana except under medical supervision and control for specific medical indications. (1989) (2007).

The American Academy of Pediatrics opposes the legalization of marijuana. 
The American Academy of Pediatrics supports rigorous scientific research regarding the use of cannabinoids for the relief of symptoms not currently ameliorated by existing legal drug formulations. \

And from the AMA...
"The AMA calls for further adequate and well-controlled studies of marijuana and related cannabinoids in patients who have serious conditions for which preclinical, anecdotal, or controlled evidence suggests possible efficacy and the application of such results to the understanding and treatment of disease; (2) The AMA recommends that marijuana be retained in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act pending the outcome of such studies. (3) The AMA urges the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to implement administrative procedures to facilitate grant applications and the conduct of well-designed clinical research into the medical utility of marijuana. This effort should include: a) disseminating specific information for researchers on the development of safeguards for marijuana clinical research protocols and the development of a model informed consent on marijuana for institutional review board evaluation; b) sufficient funding to support such clinical research and access for qualified investigators to adequate supplies of marijuana for clinical research purposes; c) confirming that marijuana of various and consistent strengths and/or placebo will be supplied by the National Institute on Drug Abuse to investigators registered with the Drug Enforcement Agency who are conducting bona fide clinical research studies that receive Food and Drug Administration approval, regardless of whether or not the NIH is the primary source of grant support. (4) The AMA believes that the NIH should use its resources and influence to support the development of a smoke-free inhaled delivery system for marijuana or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) to reduce the health hazards associated with the combustion and inhalation of marijuana. (5) The AMA believes that effective patient care requires the free and unfettered exchange of information on treatment alternatives and that discussion of these alternatives between physicians and patients should not subject either party to criminal sanctions."

As I stated above when legitimate studies are done and show efficacy greater to medicines already available I will support medicinal THC supplied by prescription. Until then I oppose.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

swift said:


> Del, You said yourself in the beginning lets stick to the facts. Well your entire post is from your heart not based on fact. It is easy to see you feel very passionate about this. BUT it is easy to see you are for total legalization of marijauna and are using the medical arguement as a stepping stone.
> 
> I do feel very passionate about this, since I know some of these patients in WA and am a Legal Patient from that state myself for nerve damage to my back. I do also believe personally that MJ should be legal and regulated to help keep it out of the hands of children. This is a tough subject because it's hard to talk about one side without bringing up the other parts, but that doesn't meen that it is a "stepping stone" for total legalization. My only real goal here is to get it to patients who need it legally.
> 
> ...


Thanks.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

djleye said:


> Dell, you just make it too easy to pick your arguments apart. The difference is that MJ is ILLEGAL!!!!! Until you get alcohol outlawed, that is the difference. Very cut and dried.


Come on man, that's a cop-out and you should know it. If it weren't for people like me in the 1930's we would still be drinking alcohol from a jug ILLEGALLY.


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y (Sep 23, 2004)

DelSnavely said:


> djleye said:
> 
> 
> > Dell, you just make it too easy to pick your arguments apart. The difference is that MJ is ILLEGAL!!!!! Until you get alcohol outlawed, that is the difference. Very cut and dried.
> ...


 :drunk:


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

swift said:


> American Academy of Family Physicians position statement on Marijauna reads "The American Academy of Family Physicians opposes the use of marijuana except under medical supervision and control for specific medical indications. (1989) (2007).
> 
> The American Academy of Pediatrics opposes the legalization of marijuana.
> The American Academy of Pediatrics supports rigorous scientific research regarding the use of cannabinoids for the relief of symptoms not currently ameliorated by existing legal drug formulations. \
> ...


You must mean that when the studies are done IN THE USA. Most of the recent studies have come from Spain, Italy, Germany and Isreal. The D9 THC molicule was discovered in Isreal in 1964. That scientist has been working with cannabis every since. Here are some of those studies.
http://www.safeaccessnow.org/section.php?id=265
http://www.mpp.org/assets/pdfs/download ... tudies.pdf
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/lib ... tudies.htm

The last is a list of studies since 1894 to date. Some are not yet available, due to slowness getting them from the government through the Freedom of Information Act.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

hunt4P&Y said:


> DelSnavely said:
> 
> 
> > djleye said:
> ...


LOL...


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y (Sep 23, 2004)

Hit the quote button on the top of someones post. That will quote it without the broken post.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

hunt4P&Y said:


> Hit the quote button on the top of someones post. That will quote it without the broken post.


There was a lot to quote and I had to respond to each part one at a time. I did quote the whole thing, but had to disect it...lol


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

Del very few antiemetics for chemo are given via the oral route. Zofran, Anzemet, Kytril are all given Intravenous so the idea that inhaled drug is more efficacious is wrong. I am not opposed to the use of THC in the medical setting when the research shows it is a safe, cost effective, drug that has a risk to benefit ratio that supports it's use. You continue to bring up "nobody has ever died from cannabis" I wish you would amend that to nobody has ever died from a cannabis overdose. Because the sequale that follows smoking alone has led to the deaths of people. Cannabis has been shown to be resposible for motor vehicle crashes, child neglect, as well as many other societal ills. Marijuana elicits a feeling of apathy which in turn can lead to and has led to regretful outcomes.



> What you do "to" or "with" your own body is "your" business, as long as you don't infringe on the rights of others.


It was this statement that made me think you have the agenda of legalizing all marijauna.

Your "federal government this and that" theory is invalid as well. The government is taking heat for the huge costs that tobacco and alcohol have put on the healthcare system. Why would they want another known problematic vice that would compound the problems of the other legal drugs?

Del, I am going to ask you to tell me why I should prescribe THC to patients instead of well studied FDA approved drugs that are available. I'm not calling you out for an arguement just would like to know where your coming from. BUT don't give me the tired response of "natural" because that is not a viable answer.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

It's really hard to be the only one here trying to answer ALL of the concerns of everyone, but I'm doing my best. Some of the information that I have committed to memory are a little hard to find now, since I've been reading this stuff from numerous places and for a number of years. I hope you will grant me some leway.


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

No problem Del. I am impressed with your knowledge on the subject. It's always fun to debate with someone that knows there stuff.


----------



## Daren99 (Jul 6, 2006)

DelSnavely said:


> Most have never seen a friend with a good job and family, be torn from them to go to prison because of personal use of a plant that had no negative effect on their lives before that.


I've never seen that but, If they know it's illegal and they know they're going to go to jail and leave their in a major bind, lose their job, then why do it?
I would feel sorry for the family but not for the person going to jail for commiting a crime. Do you feel sorry for the murderer or rapist or whatever that makes the same choice to break the law. What's more important to them family, freedom, or drugs? I can't imagine there are no legal drugs to have the same affect as medical marajuana. Am I wrong?


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

Del where are you from in WA? I graduated from HS in Tacoma at Lakes HS in ... lets say along time ago, back when the Huskies where still good.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

swift said:


> Del very few antiemetics for chemo are given via the oral route. Zofran, Anzemet, Kytril are all given Intravenous so the idea that inhaled drug is more efficacious is wrong. I am not opposed to the use of THC in the medical setting when the research shows it is a safe, cost effective, drug that has a risk to benefit ratio that supports it's use. You continue to bring up "nobody has ever died from cannabis" I wish you would amend that to nobody has ever died from a cannabis overdose. Because the sequale that follows smoking alone has led to the deaths of people. Cannabis has been shown to be resposible for motor vehicle crashes, child neglect, as well as many other societal ills. Marijuana elicits a feeling of apathy which in turn can lead to and has led to regretful outcomes.
> 
> *Again, no drug works for everyone. Also, you can't give yourself those drugs at home when you're sick. They must be administered by a medical professional.
> 
> ...


*Because it is shown safer than most drugs on the market...Here are your health reports.
http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=3471 *

Whew....


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

Daren99 said:


> DelSnavely said:
> 
> 
> > Most have never seen a friend with a good job and family, be torn from them to go to prison because of personal use of a plant that had no negative effect on their lives before that.
> ...


No I don't feel sorry for murderers in any way. Their families, yes. These people have taken a life. That's MUCH different than smoking a joint and going to sleep, only to wake and find a gun in your face with a cop standing behind it.

Many of you sound like you believe EVERY LAW EVER ENACTED is a GOOD law.... That's what I don't understand. You can't compare someone using cannabis with murder. It just doesn't fit the same criteria.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

swift said:


> Del where are you from in WA? I graduated from HS in Tacoma at Lakes HS in ... lets say along time ago, back when the Huskies where still good.


I was born in Watford City, ND and "shanghied" by my parents to Tacoma when I was 10. I graduated from MT. Tahoma in '78. It took me 27 years to get back home...


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

DelSnavely said:


> hunt4P&Y said:
> 
> 
> > Hit the quote button on the top of someones post. That will quote it without the broken post.
> ...


Hi Del

The issue you are having is likely because you have "disabled all BBCode option" checked for all of your posts. I've gone in and edited your last 12 posts, and all of them have the checkbox "checked" to disable BBCode.

I'd venture to guess this means you have that setting "checked" in your profile. Please go to your profile and switch the "Allow BBCode" option to yes, and this will take care of this issue.

It is indeed hard to keep up on who is saying what in this thread.

Thanks

Ryan


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

R y a n said:


> DelSnavely said:
> 
> 
> > hunt4P&Y said:
> ...


I have it reset now. Hope it helps.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

Can I embed videos in this forum? I sure hope so...

Guess not...lol

Here's a great video....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oPaSnjH ... r_embedded


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

Here is another one. They call this man a criminal. This is a 7 part video. Each part is about 10 minutes long.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

How about this one by Dr. Rober Melamede?


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

Hear is one for the rest that has nothing to do with Medical Cannabis. This is a video by L.E.A.P. (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition)


----------



## Lvn2Hnt (Feb 22, 2005)

Hey!! I got a video too!






Just call me a hijacker


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

Lvn2Hnt said:


> Hey!! I got a video too!
> 
> Just call me a hijacker


Ok, I like the song and have the VHS tape, but what is the point in this forum? :-? Maybe we should outlaw banjo playing? Maybe it could lead to homosexual rape or something?....lol


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

Del, All of your reasons are based on biased media reports, norml.org is not exactly an unbiased group about this. It's like asking MoveOn.org what they think about smart bombs in Iraq. Your analogy to food addiction is laughable. Apathy is not an effect of food BUT it IS the DESIRED affect of marijuana.

Also how can you say that cannabis is the safest drug for all ailments when you say yourself the only studies done on cannabis were on the detriments of it?

There are NO over the counter mood altering drugs on the market other than alcohol. So how do you have these terribly ill patients run a grow your own operation And have it done under prescriptive privlege? I don't prescribe any medicine now that I don't know what the dose of medication the patient is getting. Having people grow their own and smoke it is not an option. Have you found any studies of drug to drug interactions? Most cancer patients are on Opiates as well, how do these work with increased sedation? Do they inhibit the T-cell modulators? We don't know. There are many more answers that need to be found before we just start selling grow lights. We cant even use the old propellents in inhalers due to CFC and you want us to allow open flame burning of medicine? The questions are much broader than simply letting someone grow and use MJ. Once these questions are answered maybe it will show a need for MJ usage but until then it should not be allowed based on feel good stories.


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

Here's a lot of medicine.

28 pounds of marijuana seized, Bemidji woman arrested
Bethany Wesley, Bemidji Pioneer
Published Thursday, December 04, 2008

BEMIDJI

A 50-year-old Bemidji woman has been arrested following an investigation by the Paul Bunyan Drug Task Force and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service.

The woman was arrested and 28 pounds of marijuana was seized, according to a press release from the Beltrami County Sheriff's Office.

A package was delivered on Nov. 26 via U.S. mail to a Bemidji business while task force agents watched the store and subsequently arrested the Bemidji woman who picked up the package, the press release said.

The package was found to contain 28 pounds of suspected marijuana.

The task force continues to investigate and the case will be referred to the Beltrami County Attorney's Office.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

swift said:


> Del, All of your reasons are based on biased media reports, norml.org is not exactly an unbiased group about this. It's like asking MoveOn.org what they think about smart bombs in Iraq. Your analogy to food addiction is laughable. Apathy is not an effect of food BUT it IS the DESIRED affect of marijuana.


These groups are virtually the only ones that will show you the studies done. There are no "Main Stream Media" that will show this information due to corruption. Show me something from the other side that didn't come from the government.



> Also how can you say that cannabis is the safest drug for all ailments when you say yourself the only studies done on cannabis were on the detriments of it?


You didn't read it correctly. I said "the only studies allowed BY THE USA since 1972 have been to find the dangers. None could find any, including the Schafer Report. If I said anything else, I was wrong.



> There are NO over the counter mood altering drugs on the market other than alcohol.


Try drinking a bottle on Niquil or taking more than the recommended dosage of any weight loss drug.



> So how do you have these terribly ill patients run a grow your own operation And have it done under prescriptive privlege? I don't prescribe any medicine now that I don't know what the dose of medication the patient is getting.


The fact that cannabis "itself" has never killed anyone is proof enough of it's safety. People have been using it for thousands of years without an overdose that can kill. As far as growing their own, if they are physically unable in MMJ states, they can assign a "care giver" to do it for them. These care givers are registered as well as the patients themselves. In the Netherlands, patients buy cannabis at the pharmacy and those who provide it to the pharmacy are regulated as well as to make sure of it's potency.



> Having people grow their own and smoke it is not an option. Have you found any studies of drug to drug interactions?


I don't understand why it's not an option. It has worked since 1996 in CA and 1998 in WA and OR as well as many others. I have a video from the Cannabis Theropeutics Conference that will show how it interacts with other drugs. I'll post it as soon as I find it. BTW,,,The Cannabis Theropeutics Conference is held each year. The AMA gives class credits for those who attend. If that's not support, I don't know what is.



> Most cancer patients are on Opiates as well, how do these work with increased sedation? Do they inhibit the T-cell modulators? We don't know.









> There are many more answers that need to be found before we just start selling grow lights. We cant even use the old propellents in inhalers due to CFC and you want us to allow open flame burning of medicine?.


There are many ways that are safer than burning the plant.








> The questions are much broader than simply letting someone grow and use MJ. Once these questions are answered maybe it will show a need for MJ usage but until then it should not be allowed based on feel good stories.


If you would be so kind, please search youtube for "Cannabis Therapeutics Conference". There are many, many videos of these scientists who will answer all of your questions. I'm hurting a lot right now from all the work I've done on here today answering all the concerns, and I can't have the medicine that helps me here in ND. I need to lay down for a while. In case it matters, I refuse to take "man-made" drugs, so I don't get much relief.

Del


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y (Sep 23, 2004)

Except weed!


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

hunt4P&Y said:


> Except weed!


So you found me on Facebook. Do I know you or is this just some kind of harassment? I haven't used Facebook in a while and I wouldn't use cocaine if you gave me a billion dollars.


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y (Sep 23, 2004)

NO No no harrasment, I was just reading a pile of your articles and in the search that was on the very top. I found the video very funny, thats all.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

hunt4P&Y said:


> NO No no harrasment, I was just reading a pile of your articles and in the search that was on the very top. I found the video very funny, thats all.


Yeah, especially since he played a coca dealing nut in Cheech & Chong's Nice Dreams.

But how did it come up when you searched for me? I search my name on google and yahoo every week and never seen it.

I don't like being associated with any kind of chemicals for any reason. I'm completely against them. I won't even take Tylenol.


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y (Sep 23, 2004)

While I was watching one of the 50 videos linked on here I looked up DON'T DO DRUGS and it popped up.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

So,,,,just to find out,,,,did I change anyone's minds yet on here? I sure hope so.

This should give me time to rest now and just read...lol


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

You have convinced me there is more need for research. But I do find it ironic that you will only subscribe to illegal drugs for therapy instead of the researched and studied legal drugs available.


> I don't like being associated with any kind of chemicals for any reason. I'm completely against them. I won't even take Tylenol





> Try drinking a bottle on Niquil or taking more than the recommended dosage of any weight loss drug.


Nyquils active ingredient is alcohol. Wheat loss meds don't cause mood alteration.



> I refuse to take "man-made" drugs, so I don't get much relief.


This sounds funny to me. your neuropathy must not be to the extent of some of my patients that would stick a gun in there mouth without the man made medicines to keep their lives liveable.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

swift said:


> You have convinced me there is more need for research. But I do find it ironic that you will only subscribe to illegal drugs for therapy instead of the researched and studied legal drugs available.
> 
> 
> > I don't like being associated with any kind of chemicals for any reason. I'm completely against them. I won't even take Tylenol
> ...


I have been on , Darvon, Demerol, Percs., Oxycontin and Vics. All of which either knocked me out, made me sick or addicted enough know I needed to get rid of them. When I became a medical marijuana patient in WA, I found the only thing I could live with. I moved back to ND because I love this state and it's my birth home. I live in pain on a constant basis, and yes, I cry a lot and use heat and cold packs as much as I can. Don't think that putting a gun in my mouth hasn't crossed my mind at times. I have family that cares for me when it really gets bad. I don't trust any agency that will advocate a medicine let alone MANY that have the sole purpose of getting your dick hard and can and HAS killed people. That's NOT what I call the Bennefits OUTWEIGHING the risk. I have a LONG list of FDA approved drugs that have been taken off the market ONLY because ENOUGH people died from them. I don't trust any of them. I KNOW that cannabis works for me enough to let me live normally, WITHOUT the CHANCE of it killing me, making me stupid or getting addicted. Nothing else can make that claim. And NO ONE has the right to determine my pain except ME! If I have to, I can go to MT and my medical MJ permit is good there. It's written into their laws.

As far as mood alteration, you must mean making me "happy" to be able to do ANYTHING.

If you are a doctor, I can't believe you would deny something like this to patients considering you MUST know the truth about the FDA and their practices.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

Drug Companies and how they work with the FDA.

http://video.google.com/googleplayer.sw ... 2400&hl=en


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

I just don't subscribe to the conspiracy theories out there.

Neuropathic pain is not very receptive to opiates you are correct but drugs like neurontin and lyrica can do quite a bit for that type of pain.

Don't think that I am rating your pain, I'm not but in my experience if pain is bad enough anything will be attempted to aliviate it. Which would exclude dispelling most modern day medicines.

It bothers me when "advocates" talk about the left coast as all knowing. The three left coast states are three of the biggest drug abuse problem states in the country. And my opinion is the advocates in those states have sold a bill of goods based on emotion not fact.

When I started in medicine 24 years ago I was working on an ambulance along the I-5 corridor. We routinely picked up heroin overdoses. Since being in the Dakotas the last 20 years I have not seen one heroin OD. BUT I do see people that are above average in education, routinely lead the nation in the lowest crime rates, and, even with little industry in the states, have the lowest unemployment rates. I believe this is a result of good clean living and a lack of a real drug base. I am not niave enough to think there is no drug use in the Dakotas but when I see violent crime reports they are related to #1 Drugs #2 Domestic violence.

You have still failed to convince me that unknown doses of a drug that has a more euphoric response than pain relief response is better than the legitimate well studied medicines out there.

To dispute your FDA in bed with drug companies theory All of the meds you said you did try for pain Demerol, morphine, vicodin, oxycontin,percodan and oxycontin are all generic so they are very cheap and the drug companies don't benefit from them being prescribed.

Darvon and Demerol have also been showed to be poor pain managers and work similar to MJ. They cause euphoria that doesn't block the pain for the patient but makes them apathetic to it. I'd like to see those two removed from current use.


> If you are a doctor, I can't believe you would deny something like this to patients considering you MUST know the truth about the FDA and their practices.


I follow the current practice standards which does not include medical marijuana. Thats why I can deny it. I have prescribed Marinol a few times and found it to be ineffective and expensive. Pt's didn't want it because it didn't work as well as the other meds given.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

swift said:


> I just don't subscribe to the conspiracy theories out there.
> 
> Neuropathic pain is not very receptive to opiates you are correct but drugs like neurontin and lyrica can do quite a bit for that type of pain.
> 
> ...


I guess there is nothing I can say to you then. You're a doctor and if you watched the last video I posted and still don't believe in what was said, then "in my opinion" you're in their pocket as well. Sorry, that's the only alternative I have to believe. These are PROMINANT scientists and doctors in this video. I have to believe them first. I will NEVER trust the FDA or anyone who praises them.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I hope I'm not getting myself in trouble I took Naproxen for eight years, have taken Celebrex for seven years, Lyrica for three years and was taking 12 Ibuprofen a day for five or six years before I started the Naproxen. I suppose my liver and kidneys are taking a beating.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

Plainsman said:


> Well, I take Celebrex and Lyrica so I hope my liver and kidneys hold out.


I wish you the best of luck and health.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

RIGHT WHILE I WAS WATCHING THE LAST VIDEO (for the third time),,,IT DISAPPEARED!!! Now it says it's no longer available!!!

I wonder who might have seen it and why it was taken away. Typical of the truth. Once someone "inside" knows it's there, it disappears so no one else can see it.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

swift said:


> Neuropathic pain is not very receptive to opiates you are correct but drugs like neurontin and lyrica can do quite a bit for that type of pain.


Sometimes.

I have been taking neurontin for restless leg syndrome for almost 10 years. It worked ok in the beginning, not great but ok, now, not so much. Have not taken lyrica, so can't say anything, good, or bad about it.

Not all drugs work the way they are supposed to.

huntin1


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

huntin1 said:


> swift said:
> 
> 
> > Neuropathic pain is not very receptive to opiates you are correct but drugs like neurontin and lyrica can do quite a bit for that type of pain.
> ...


I also "had" RLS. To the best of my knowledge it is mostly caused by sugars settling in the legs. I stopped eating anything with sugar after about 3:00 pm and do exercises flexing my lower legs for about 5 minutes before bed. It went away completely with no drugs at all.

Hope it works for you if you try it.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

Del,

Never heard of that. All the dang Dr's I've seen over the years and none of them came up with that. I'll give it a try.

huntin1


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

huntin1 said:


> Del,
> 
> Never heard of that. All the dang Dr's I've seen over the years and none of them came up with that. I'll give it a try.
> 
> huntin1


See, the internet is good for something...lol

Good luck, it worked for me. Let us know how it goes. It worked for me the first time I did it.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Prescription drugs issued by my doctors have kept me functioning for the last three. I had horrible migraines, a mouse walking on carpet would sound like a sonic bomb, and light would intense my pain.

I don't know where I stand on people smoking MJ for medical use.

I watched my old best friend and hunting partner waste away from MJ. He started out once a month and 2 years later he now smokes MJ, like they are cigs.

My stepbrother, was a great athlete. He had pro baseball teams looking at him, but is told the judge when he got caught with MJ, he was high 24/7 at school, during games, at church, everywhere. He now bounces from job to job still smoking weed and doing other drugs, all because as he has stated I tried weed.

How ever I have a relative who has cancer and arthirtise and very bad glaucoma and has quit all drugs given to her by the doctors and qui cancer treatment and she smokes MJ. She said its the only thing to really work.

So I toss and turn when this subject comes up.


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

DelSnavely said:


> Daren99 said:
> 
> 
> > DelSnavely said:
> ...


The point being Dell, the person knew what they were doing was illegal and they still took the risk. The drug was more important to them than their family and freedom. If that doesn't pain a poor picture of MJ, then what does??? :eyeroll: 
And no, I don't believe that every law ever enacted is a good one, but until they are changed by the courts or lawmakers, they are still laws. We cannot randomly decide which laws we will follow. We have to abide by them all or suffer the consequences. I do not pretend to be a perfect law abding citizen, but I do not take illegal drugs. I have too much respect for my body and my family to do so.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

Ok, with all the info I have posted here, I have done no good it seems. I will not continue to post in this topic. This thread has run it's course. Either you believe that patients deserve to have this medicine as a choice or you don't. I used to believe that ND people were compassionate. Now I know that's not the case. In fact, since over 80% of the American public believe that patients deserve this choice, I don't need to work so hard at convincing people. It will happen eventually anyway. Your kids are going to use drugs no matter what you think, and there is nothing you can do about it. I only try to show a better way. If I need my medicine, I can go to MT for the day, where they are compassionate people and have enacted this law. I can have someone drive me and do just fine. I was fighting not only for me but EVERYONE who may need it. I worked at this so hard yesterday that I got no sleep last night from the pain. I won't do it again. If what I posted here all day yesterday didn't change your mind, then let's keep putting dissabled people in prison. I'm sure in your view, they deserve it.

May you never NEED this medicine and I hope the FDA and Big Pharma takes good care of you all, but statistics show different.


----------



## huntingdude16 (Jul 17, 2007)

I think we would all appreciate it if you stopped posting all-together. Like you said you were going to.


----------



## DelSnavely (Oct 17, 2007)

huntingdude16 said:


> I think we would all appreciate it if you stopped posting all-together. Like you said you were going to.


That's fine too.

Webmaster please remove my profile from your site.


----------



## MSG Rude (Oct 6, 2003)

DelSnavely wrote: 


> I used to believe that ND people were compassionate. Now I know that's not the case.


Del, I don't know you but you know that this idiotic statement you make here is just plain wrong. I have never seen compassion this strong any where I have traveled in this world. Just because everyone disagrees with you here doesn't mean that they are not compassionate.



> Your kids are going to use drugs no matter what you think, and there is nothing you can do about it.


Both of these statements are just plain not true and with the thinking you have (or not thinking at all) we should just give it to the kids because they are going to get it anyways? That is just plain ridiculous...as is your logic.



> I only try to show a better way. If I need my medicine, I can go to MT for the day, where they are compassionate people and have enacted this law. I can have someone drive me and do just fine. I was fighting not only for me but EVERYONE who may need it.


Have you ever heard of 'special interest groups'? Those are folks that kind of fight or support something because they have a particular interest in it...same as you. You have used dope for so long for a multiple of reasons, stated by you, that you are pushing it anyway you can. Medicinal purposes was a fight of yours and now you say that my kids are going to do it anyways so just give in and let them have it. Ludacris...and I am not talking about rap either.



> I worked at this so hard yesterday that I got no sleep last night from the pain. I won't do it again. If what I posted here all day yesterday didn't change your mind, then let's keep putting dissabled people in prison. I'm sure in your view, they deserve it.


"Putting disabled people in prison"? How about putting criminals in prison? They broke the law...let that resonate through the fog man and let it sink in. These are not just 'disabled people'! Heck, I am 90% disabled rated by the VA system and I don't smoke dope and I never have in my life. I have constant pain every day and it is getting worse but I am not addicted to prescription meds of illegal substances.



> May you never NEED this medicine and I hope the FDA and Big Pharma takes good care of you all, but statistics show different.


If I had to wager a guess, I would bet you were using this loonnngggg before you "needed it" for medicinal purposes.

There, now I have said my peace.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

When I was a kid I never did drugs and neither has many of my friends. Beer yes but other then that, nope.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

Drugs are drugs whether legal or not. Many people try to elevate themselves because the drugs they are addicted to come from a drug store.

I have seen the results of marijuana for several terminal cancer people I have known, the relief it gave them was very visible even when they were not awake. You could see the pain furrows in their foreheads even when not awake but after they smoked weed the pain furrows went away for a couple hours. So if anyone would deny a dieing person the right to self medicate those people are about as compassionate as a dog.


----------



## MSG Rude (Oct 6, 2003)

buckseye said:


> So if anyone would deny a dieing person the right to self medicate those people are about as compassionate as a dog.


I know some very compassionate dogs. I have two of them.


----------



## HUNTNFISHND (Mar 16, 2004)

I say legalize it and tax the heck out of it. It has worked to curb cigarette smoking. More tax revenue, less money wasted on criminalizing some of the pot heads. People are going to abuse something wether it is legal or not. Why not punish the people that abuse something rather then everyone. It's like saying we should ban alcohol because somebody drives drunk. We tried that with prohibition, all it does is make for more criminals!

:2cents:


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

> I know some very compassionate dogs. I have two of them.


Dogs are not known to have the human emotion of sympathy, unless it is for themsleves. Kind of describes some people too.


----------



## Leo Porcello (Jul 10, 2003)

snapping turtles are better example! (just trying to help)


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

> snapping turtles are better example! (just trying to help)


 :rollin:

Yeah about as compassionate as a snapping turtle :lol:


----------



## Daren99 (Jul 6, 2006)

buckseye said:


> > I know some very compassionate dogs. I have two of them.
> 
> 
> Dogs are not known to have the human emotion of sympathy, unless it is for themsleves. Kind of describes some people too.


I'd have to disagree with you there. If my kids are sick in bed my dog will lay on the floor by their side untill they are better, he never lays in their rooms unless they are sick. Dogs are better people than people.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

> I'd have to disagree with you there. If my kids are sick in bed my dog will lay on the floor by their side untill they are better, he never lays in their rooms unless they are sick. Dogs are better people than people.


I agree with part of this, but tend to realize all animals live for the moment. I'm sure they sense your mood being down but are probably just waiting for the ball to get rolling again.

How about when dogs try to screw their own mother is that better?


----------



## Doogie (Feb 23, 2007)

Montanas population centers are full of liberal dopers from California thats why its legal here.


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

"I quit" is an answer alot of activists give. Unless it's followed by "doing drugs" then they can stand fast for their cause.


----------



## KRAKMT (Oct 24, 2005)

Doogie said:


> Montanas population centers are full of liberal dopers from California thats why its legal here.


If you look at the voter graphics on the passage of the inititive in MT, it was not just "liberal dopers"

That said the national initive was and is crap. Frankly, either legalize it or ban it but stop ***** footing around- every hammertoe aching thirty year pot head now just goes to the pothead network doctor to learn the buzz words needed to get the prescription.

If it comes to North Dakota fight it!! If you want to pass your own that is tailored for ND then do it but the national inititive is a mess.

I guess I don't have a problem with the use for chemo patients to stop the nausia. 
But for pain, it is questionable and if you have ever previously been convicted of unlawful MJ possession prior to your debilitating hammer toe then BS. 
I knew an old cowboy that was dying of cancer and on enough morphine to put down a horse. Maybe.

I know a 30 year cronic daily marijuana user (now with is MJ card) that can load a semi full of wood and then is all pained out but just needs a few tokes to melloooo out the pain. He has a history of illegal drugs and felony convictions. Thats CRAP!

K


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Ohh the hypocrisy ....

Last Thursday, a team of narcotics officers in Texas raided a house they suspected of containing a pot-growing operation. But when they walked in they found-not pot-*but two Christmas trees growing under grow lamps. *:lol:

A note on the wall said the cops were the ones under investigation, and every room in the house had cameras rolling. Hah!

You see...Under the leadership of former police officer Barry Cooper, a new reality show called _KopBusters_ had orchestrated the county's *first-ever reverse-sting on a drug raid:*





> KopBusters rented a house in Odessa, Texas and began growing two small Christmas trees under a grow light similar to those used for growing marijuana.
> 
> You see..When faced with a suspected marijuana grow, the police usually use illegal FLIR cameras *and/or lie* on the search warrant affidavit claiming they have probable cause to raid the house. Instead of conducting a proper investigation which usually leads to no probable cause, *the Cops lie on the affidavit* claiming a confidential informant saw the plants and/or the police could smell marijuana coming from the suspected house.
> 
> The trap was set and less than 24 hours later, the Odessa narcotics unit raided the house *only to find a KopBuster's attorney waiting under a system of complex gadgetry and spy cameras* that streamed online to the KopBuster's secret mobile office nearby.


You can watch the cops searching the house, guns drawn and ready to shoot-ostensibly at docile pot growers-in this video below.






And here's the report on the local news (it's kinda loud, so you may want to turn down the volume):






via *Reason*

The irony is dripping...

Note that KopBusters vows to take their campaign across the country. Stay tuned for more and more of this "War on Drugs" that is being fought on behalf of the poor citizens of this country.

I realize this isn't perfectly on topic. But it does show how over zealous idealogues are perpetuating a culture of over reacting with MJ and MJ law enforcement. Given the dwindling number of law enforcement resources we have, you would think that departments would direct their staff to focus on issues of violence and serious crime, rather than sensationalistic news stories done to curry favor with the citizenry in the appearance of being "tough on drugs".

Ryan


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Infrared to look for grow rooms is not illegal. That was one mistake in that article. The other thing is police perhaps go to only 1/10 of the houses that people report. They have to be careful it isn't someone just trying to cause trouble. The police perhaps went to this house because the guys wanting to catch the police reported it themselves. Highly likely because police have enough real work without making up crap. I think there is a high probability that is exactly what was going on in this case.

Dope heads just have a high imagination and think the cops are always after them. It's sad that adults who want pot blame police. I think kopbusters are just overgrown children. Actually they better be very careful. If they get caught calling in a suspect house and then jump out with their cameras they just committed a felony by lying to law enforcement.

I think it's articles like this that make most people dig in their heels and resist any changes to our drug laws. In other words these children are counter productive. Someone might actually need a cop while they are tied up playing games with idiots.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

R y a n said:


> Ohh the hypocrisy ....
> 
> Last Thursday, a team of narcotics officers in Texas raided a house they suspected of containing a pot-growing operation. But when they walked in they found-not pot-*but two Christmas trees growing under grow lamps. *:lol:
> 
> ...


I've been trying to figure out a way to respond to this post. I think I'll let Mark Twain do it for me.

"It is better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than to open it and remove all doubt." - Mark Twain

Good advise, that some would do well to heed.

huntin1


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

DelSnavely, I was learning from both you and Swift. I am concerned about people going through the pain of cancer treatment and the like, but I don't want to be associated with the hippy type police bashing I witnessed in the 1960's. I thought everyone grew up and the nation was beyond that mentality. Maybe we can seriously discuss this another time, but I'm done for now.


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

My God Ryan.........Are you for real?? How in the hell anyone can endorse lying to police in order to get them to bust a house just to get some camera time is unbelievable!!! They have a ton of growing up to do!!! :eyeroll:


----------



## headshot (Oct 26, 2006)

I am glad I live in a country that doesn't persucute people for self medicating. IMO whatever consenting adults do on their own time is their own business but this "reverse sting" crap seems to be an utter waste of valuable police time and money.


----------



## greenwinger_13 (Oct 6, 2005)

Chris Hustad said:


> And I still think alcohol causes more problems in this country than any drug.


Amen, didnt read any further than the first page and dont need to... All this talk about pot this and pot's so bad that.. Take this how you want to, I have "experimented" in college and am not araid to say it.. The last 2 years I hold a 3.6 cum. gpa.. I have tons of friends who drink, smoke pot, or both... and out of every bit of violence... any driving incidents... etc Alcohol has been the benefactor.. say what you want but there is no way around it. Obviously everyone grows up, but you will nevers see me being a hypocrit talking down, ever..


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

Hey Greenwing, Maybe if you spent more time studying than "experimenting" you would know that alcohol is not the "benefactor" of anything.



> Chris Hustad wrote:
> And I still think alcohol causes more problems in this country than any drug.


Maybe because it is legal more people take part in it. I'm all for prohibition to be reinstated.

The difference to me is this. If your 21 years old or older and drink responsibly so be it.

If you smoke Marijuana you are by default a criminal. Experimenting or not.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

swift said:


> Maybe because it is legal more people take part in it. I'm all for prohibition to be reinstated.


You do realize how corrupt porhibition was? It will never happen again.


----------



## greenwinger_13 (Oct 6, 2005)

You must have missed that part where I have a 3.6 gpa over the last 2 years, and welp... I am a criminal, call the police and tell them I smoked marijuana!!! (there are plenty of people on here that have)!!! There are thousands of people downloading movies and music right now... illegally.. you can get a 1,500$ fine for downloading one song, 500 for each copyright, so take a look at (for instance) your 18 yr old sons laptop, and do the math, that would be into the hundreds of thousands for trying to listen to music... yet getting caught smoking a joint is small fine.. In ND specifically, a 10,000 fine constitutes having over 100lbs of marijuana, thats 7 songs worth.. Then ask me why i feel so freely about a plant.. of course there is prison time and i am not a drug dealer but it's just something that way too much money is being spent on... incarceration costs money for the tax payers.. I could go on and on, you could go on and on... I am entitled to my opinion


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

Greenwinger I caught the part about the 3.6 GPA. I have come to the conclusion based on your inarticulate writing and your incomprehensible thought processes that you are a liberal arts major. It's typical that a 20 year old college sophomore would justify his illegal actions with the arguement that everyone is doing it. You have admitted to illegal drug use and illegal alcohol consumption so far, and eluded to illegally downloading music. Two illegal acts you proudly display on a public message board. How in Gods name can you believe this gives you any credibility?

A little advice from an old man to you, Don't ever write something down you don't want your future employer to read.

Greenwinger you have a long life ahead of you. You will someday have to decide what is best for you. A couple hours of feeling good after smoking a joint can keep you from that one job you always wanted. That lifestyle you spent 5 years in college and $40,000 in educational costs to obtain. Ask yourself next time you want get high or drive drunk if its worth risking everything you ever worked for.

In my profession you cannot work without a state license. If you google the ND state board of medical examiners you can view all the MD's and PA's that have lost their licenses to practice and why they lost them. The number one reason is drug related, Number 2 is sex related. Both are just lack of good judgement by the accused.

And finally you may be right that smoking pot is not that bad in and amongst itself. But, it is illegal and knowingly displaying an attitude of Rules be damned I'll do what I want, shows lack of sound judgement. That is what employers are looking at.


----------



## greenwinger_13 (Oct 6, 2005)

I like your response, however "smoking pot" was used in past tense in my response.. Communications major.. And I am a senior not sophmore... so you are fairly close. And as far as credibility, I don't have MD or Pa or any of that and never will. A comm degree is an easy degree, but I also dont feel like I need to have PHD or whatever to have credibility. I also have agreed to never work for an employer that is going to be sniffing around on blogs and forums trying to get dirt on me. Why would I want to work for someone who would refuse to hire me because I was drunk in a facebook picture? Thats just me, and I am smart enough and have the personality to get a job in plenty of areas..


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

There's no doubt Greenwinger that you are smart. Good luck in the future. Communications is not an "easy" major nor do I think liberal arts is easy. Just a different mindset and values set than the science side. I'm sure you will be an asset to any company that picks you up.


----------

