Medical Marijuana
In his last story for the paper, my colleague Lex Alexander takes a look at the medical marijuana debate. From the story:
In November, Michigan became the 13th state to legalize marijuana for medical purposes.That popular-vote referendum was just the most recent decision in a long-running debate: whether it should be legal for people to use, grow and sell marijuana for medicinal purposes.
On one side: sick, suffering patients, many of whom are dying. For at least some of them, cannabis eases symptoms of illness or side effects of treatment.
On the other: a federal government that believes marijuana's benefits are too few and its side effects too risky for the drug to be legalized, even to the highly restricted level of cocaine.
[snip]
State Rep. Earl Jones, D-Guilford, introduced a bill in the 2008 legislative session to create a study commission to look at legalizing marijuana for medical purposes in North Carolina. Jones plans to reintroduce his bill this year ."I think the legislature will do the right thing once they see it will benefit the public and they have been educated," Jones said.
But the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration remains adamantly opposed to legalizing cannabis even for medical purposes. It continues to prosecute under federal law in some other states for growing and distributing the plants.
Click here to read the whole thing.
I talked to Jones back when he first introduced the bill in 2008. Here's a video of that conversation:
Comments (3)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Care to give odds?
J
PS I've gotten interested in America's Holy War on Drugs after reading Dr. Art Benavie's new book. It should be required reading for any public official in any jurisdiction anywhere.
I hope someone at your paper will get in touch with Benavie to hear about his important book.
Posted on January 19, 2009 9:43 PM
My guess is that this will go nowhere. It's the type of issue that puts members on the record in an uncomfortable way for re-election purposes. (Campaign ads aren't famous for context, and you can very well imagine an opponent running one that says "Sen. X voted to legalize pot in your community..." no mention of the "medical" aspect.
That, and it's the type of things that would take up time and generate controversy, something that the leadership in both chambers have shown a propensity for avoiding.
It might get included in a study bill, but I think that'd be as far as it gets.
But, I could be wrong. Maybe the budget is cruddy enough this year that they'll go looking for a distraction.
Thanks for the book recommendation. Will look for it when I'm at the library.
Posted on January 20, 2009 8:21 AM
test
Posted on January 21, 2009 10:33 AM