no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics

Medical Marijuana in Michigan

April 29th, 2008

Some people want to legalize medical marijuana in Michigan. This is counterproductive, for a number of reasons:

U.S. law classifies marijuana, like heroin and LSD, as a Schedule I controlled substance. That means it has a high potential for abuse and no accepted medical use.

Of course, “accepted medical use” is defined by legislators who are neither doctors or patients in chronic pain, based on bogus medical studies funded by the government, through public universities and probably in cahoots with Big Pharma.

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration regards medical marijuana users, even in states that have approved its use, as lawbreakers. And in 2005 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that state laws approving medical marijuana don’t bring with them immunity from federal prosecution.

Sometimes this sort of legalization ends up in limbo for a while, since the legislators don’t know what constitutes a 60-day supply. Sometims the Feds raid cooperatives inhabited by octogenarian cancer patients. In otherplaces, some patients are finding it difficult to receive life-saving organ transplants because of the belief among some medical professionals, that marijuana use (even in the context of clinical pain relief) is a sign of addictive personality! [ed. update 5/3/08: Some of them die without the transplant.]

But if you really want to get to the point, look no further than Oakland County Sheriff, Mike Bouchard:

It’s not a good idea and most practicing physicians who work in pain management know there are better and more effective medicines to deal with the issue rather than using marijuana.

Like the legislators who craft these laws, Bouchard is neither a physician, nor is he a patient. And even though it might generally be true that there are better medecines, this is not a fact which applies to all individuals in all circumstances at all times. There exist patients for whom marijuana is the best and most effective medecine.

[Bouchard] said he believes the true agenda of those backing the Michigan ballot proposal is to legalize marijuana for everyone.

His true colors are starting to show! Bouchard is not at all interested in the will of the people he’s alleged to protect; he has his head so far up his ass that he clearly wouldn’t know what “the people” really wanted, even if they were to voice their opinions through an unscientific online poll, much less, a November ballot initiative. .

At the time I read the article, a whopping 77% of DetNews poll respondents indicated that “everyone” should have legal access to marijuana. Everyone. If it was “the will of the people” which outlawed marijuana back in the 1930s, then “the will of the people” should be permitted to rescind that law.

‘[T]his a guise to advance the process of legalization,’ [Bouchard said.]

So what if it is!

Hundreds of thousands of people smoke pot every day. Some of them are terminally ill. Others just like to burn one once in a while. If that’s what the people want, why can’t you let them have it? Bouchard is allowing his personal opinions to interfere with his obligation as a public servant and elected official. Ostensibly, he is in office because of the people who voted for him, and we can infer from his statements that he has no interest in the alleged will of the people.

It’s not about what the people want. It’s not about the public welfare. It’s not really about addiction, dependency, or gangs, or any other side-effect of the war on drugs. It’s about power. And Bouchard, like other petty tyrants, doesn’t want to cede an inch.

Anyone who advances the argument that only pain patients should be able to use it legally is effectively saying, “I’m OK with letting the other people decide how I live my life.” There is no special moral status granted to the terminally ill. But if you only support medical use, this is essentially what you’re saying: “As long as you are healthy, other people (through the apparatus of the State) get to decide how you shall live your life.”

And since it is ultimately “other people” who decide whether you’re healthy, there’s not much of a distinction between the two.

Full-blown legalization is what the discussion should be about.

Comments

7 Comments

RSS

no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics