http://www.rte.ie/news/20...nabis.html

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that people who use cannabis for medical purposes to relieve chronic pain are breaking the law.

The decision, by a six to three majority of the judges, means the federal government can enforce a law that outlaws the cultivation and use of cannabis even where it is legal under state law.

At least nine American states allow the medical use of the drug.

Federal government lawyers argued that it would be difficult to enforce the nation's drug laws if there was an exception for medical cannabis.


We all have our opinions about cannabis and it's usage, but it does have proven medical benefit for certain conditions. The stupidity of this ruling is just mind-boggling, especially when you consider that heroin is regularly prescribed for medical purposes.
One step forward, two steps back.

Is this in the wrong forum? Ah well, I don't care, it will be moved if required.
I just thought you should all know.

Everyone talks about the benefits of usage, but no one ever brings up the BAD effects of inhaling smoke. Which outweighs the other??

jerseykrs said:

Good point - but cannabis doesn't need to be inhaled, it can be eaten.
Even when smoked the negative effect depends on what form your cannabis is - if you're smoking resin with tobacco, then obviously there are harmful effects, if you're smoking weed without tobacco then the harmful effects are debatable - some people insist that cannabis is itself carcinogenic but there is no scientific evidence that I am aware of to back this up.

I would guess that the negative effects of smoking tobacco (in a joint), from a purely medical standpoint, would outweigh the positive effects of the cannabis. Tobacco is proven to be damaging, and cannabis can't counteract the negative effect of tobacco, it's only going to relieve pain.

Having said that, if I was (for instance) suffering from MS, and knew that the only effective pain relief available to me could also potentially have all the negative effects of regular cigarette smoking, I don't think I'd give it a second thought. It'd be cannabis all the way. Extreme pain has a way of making us dismiss possible side effects and negative aspects of possible cures. Anything to take away the pain....

Yeah , American laws (or almost all countries' laws on this matter) are just ;
Prohibiting an innocent drug like cannibis ,
that has proven to relieve pain
while you can legally buy a gun or drink yourself to death

I like
[Edited 6/7/05 8:53am]

AsylumUtopia said:

Eating is fine, but how much of the active substance will actually survive the first pass through your liver and subsequently, what are the effects on the liver? Other than that illegal cannabis is cultivated to have high levels of THC to give people that nice high, but cannabis for medical use is different. It's not THC which relieves pain. So I feel they should allow pharmaceutical companies to grow cannabis for medical use (after proper research of course).

Dewrede said:

I don't think innocent is the right term, but I don't see why it can't be available as a prescription drug. A lot of drugs used daily by people are just as bad or even worse for their health and they actually passed all the tests and such.

We're talking about a regulation of a plant...like chewbacca it don't make sense.

There are many reasons pot is illegal...and if you think that it is because the gov't thinks it's bad for you, you'd be wrong.

One has to wonder why cigarettes are legal, yet pot is not.

superspaceboy said:

because pot makes you think in an alternative way to the way you have been brainwashed. Government dont want people thinking in ways other than the way they dictate.
[Edited 6/7/05 10:19am]

JoeyMFinCoco said:

I smoked medical cannibis once and i surely got very stoned i can say
What gave you the idea that it's not the thc that causes the relieve of pain ?
It definitely is !
[Edited 6/7/05 10:27am]

Electrostar said:

Well I suppose. I was talking more along the lines of the Gov't has almost no way of making money off of it. I mean when Liquor companies are paying tons of money to keep it off the market...it's almost a cash cow keeping it illegal. ANd because it's quite common, you can jail more people for it...keeping your prisons stocked and police busy.

superspaceboy said:

Understood. The US is a free market economy. Therefore why dont they legalise and tax. Even Amsterdam keeps quantity 'limited' in the coffee shops. And you cannot smoke just anywhere. Why hide the pot? I firmly believe my little brother would not have ended up on heroin if he did not have to hide behind close doors to smoke his pot.

jerseykrs said:

If one joint brought on horrible addiction and almost certain death what right does anyone have to tell someone they can't do it? Where does this mind set come from?

noonblueapples said:

I was just posing the question, I don't necessarily agree with what I asked.

noonblueapples said:

Indeed. So. What does the government gain by making rules which set boundaries on our activities. The legal substances eg tobacco are proven to hurt us by scientists. So the government is not interested in the populations health. What is it trying to achieve? Any politicians out there care to enlighten me?

Good points people.

Make it legal I say, just so students wont be banging on why it should be legal. It bores me now

thesexofit said:

Dope bores me now. But it was a stage i think i had to go through.

Electrostar said:

Apparantly the line of thought is that between beer gasoline oxy-contin and viagra we ought to have enough to keep us happy till we wake up and go back to work

noonblueapples said:

This really irritates me.

Federal law classifies drugs according to schedules - From I to V.

Schedule V being drugs like cough syrup, which they consider to have the lowest or no potential for abuse.

Schedule IV drugs like Ambien (which my doctor would only prescribe to me in low doses, due to the potential risk of addiction) Valium and Xanax are also considered low potential for abuse.

Schedule III drugs... like anabolic steroids, any barbiturate and others are considered to have a moderate potential for abuse.

Schedule II drugs such as cocaine, codeine, methadone, morphine, opium, amphetamines... all classified as having a high risk for abuse but many of these Schedule II drugs are considered legal if used under strict medical supervision.

Then we have schedule I drugs, which Federal law classifies as unsafe to use even under medical supervision and these drugs are LSD, PCP heroin, quaaludes and... marijuana.

What angers me is like many of the Schedule II-V drugs, marijuana has proven medicinal properties. It is natural. I can understand LSD, PCP, heroin and ludes being illegal as there hasn't been any proof of to show they offer medicinal value and much proof to abuse and extremely harmful effects.

And what really angers me is that while I am one that does drink now and again and sometimes more often that I should on a given occasion, but our children are are shown, daily, that alcohol is this wonderful drink that will bring a party to your front door. Every time we watch sports on televsion, they advertise alcohol. On television and in commericals and advertisements the kids learn that there is tons of fun around every corner when buying this beer or that liquor, that there are oodles of women or men wanting to date you or show you a good time if you drink, drink, drink, barbeques are more fun when alcohol is involved, wherever alcohol is you're pretty much assured a "good time".

Then we see commericals, especially late at night, but any time of the day we are told to take any number of pills. Similar to what Noonblueapples stated... don't feel too great or a little shy in public settings, well, take an antidepressant, have a headache, take a pill, feeling under the weather?... take a pill. Kids are seeing commercials for "male enhancement" for fucks sake. So for a minor headache, to more fun in the bed, taking pills are shoved down our throats and then everyone wonders why the nation has such an addiction problem!

Marijuana we know gets you high. We know that. We also know alcohol is addictive. Taking more than three asprin a day can cause serious damage to your stomach and shoving handfulls down your throat will kill you. But, that's okay to take. So, while marijuana gets you high, it also relieves pain and is not addictive!

I think noonblueapples mentioned OxyContin, which is synthetic Marinol, which is highly addictive, but won't look further into a natural weed that has proven medicinal qualities and isn't addictive! Damn, this topic angers me more than anything. I would love to take Congress and shake the hell out of them.

I guess the thing that angers me is that alochol is legal, and a known depressant, yet each second a drunk is either killing someone, killing themselves, fighting/stabing/shooting another drunk in the bar or down the street, some fool getting lit up and raping someone or someone using alcohol as an escape from everyday problems and becoming so depressed while in their stupor and turning to suicide... yet, we advertise alcohol as being such a great thing.

Congress, in my eyes, made a mistake in the 70's when classifying marijuana as a Schedule I drug and I think that over 30 years later perhaps they should take a closer look into this.

So, I'm gonna stop my rant. I could go on for days about this. And, for the record, I haven't smoked pot in years, never was a big pot smoker because I was too relaxed, so my feelings on this are not because I want to go and smoke up a storm.

I just wanted to put in my two cents.

AzureStarr said:

You need to smoke a joint and chill the hell out.

2the9s said:

I know!



(Still want to shake some sense into those people!)

AsylumUtopia said:

Conservatives bring real wreckage to this country.

doctamario said:

Nice peace of writing AzureStarr. In the UK we actually downgraded the classification of pot several years ago. (I think) If your not smoking it around kids and you only have personal quantities then 'you'll be let off with a caution'. However very recently alot of press has hinted that the same government is about to backtrack and reclassify pot in with the big boys. It is a maddening subject. There must be a government report somewhere justifying there action.
[Edited 6/7/05 16:37pm]

Poor Montel.

and you all saw this right


http://www.prince.org/msg/105/148363

Electrostar said:

I wish the US would seriously take a look at it as the UK did (I didn't realize the UK did that... very cool). It just appears that because of Congress ruling in the 70's they're just saying, what's done is done and that's that.

I'm sure there's a government report somewhere, but I'm sure it'll only show attempts to justify their lack of action... lol.

It's really frustrating to have known a couple of people in life, personally, who were given OxyContin and then morphine to kill the pain of disease, and be completely out of it while on the drugs, but yet, smoking a small amount of weed in a bowl, off and on throughout the day, killed the pain as well, but didn't leave them so they weren't barely even alert. One of those people were advised by his doctor to smoke if it helped.

This subject and not allowing assisted suicide to terminally ill patients are two that really get under my skin.


*shrug*

AzureStarr said:

you are so much more attractive when you ramble like this!!!

jerseykrs said: