Marijuana supporter Morgan not high on older people Marijuana supporter Morgan not high on older people - Page 7 - Talk of The Villages Florida

Marijuana supporter Morgan not high on older people

Closed Thread
Thread Tools
  #91  
Old 11-07-2014, 11:05 AM
Sandtrap328's Avatar
Sandtrap328 Sandtrap328 is offline
Eternal Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 5,349
Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Default

...and a senior using marijuana to relieve pain of cancer or to deal with the effects of chemotherapy is going to turn into a heroin user and start committing crimes to feed their heroin habit?

This is Medical Marijuana that was on the ballot.

Besides, it is a moot point now. The narrow minded voters of Florida saw to that.

Case closed.
  #92  
Old 11-07-2014, 11:17 AM
OldManTime OldManTime is offline
Veteran member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 676
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Anyone seen the video of Morgan drunk, he is such a sleez bag
  #93  
Old 11-07-2014, 11:22 AM
gerryann's Avatar
gerryann gerryann is offline
Platinum member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,922
Thanks: 0
Thanked 10 Times in 6 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldManTime View Post
Anyone seen the video of Morgan drunk, he is such a sleez bag
No didn't see it.......and , it would certainly add a whole lot of beneficial information to this discussion.........
  #94  
Old 11-07-2014, 11:24 AM
Rags123 Rags123 is offline
Veteran member
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 673
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueash View Post
Thanks for your compliment. I will pause to suggest that these are very different issues. A decision whether to allow the state to regulate the availability of medical marijuana seems like it should be decided on medical evidence. That means both evidence in favor and against. And balance the risk vs benefit. While it is legitimate to ask the "what if" questions they should not dominate the discussion, as they did too often IMO. If there is a product which according to a licensed physician would benefit a patient more than present risk to that patient, and in fact there are hundreds or thousands of similar cases, that would make me question the classification of that product as having no known benefit. Keep in mind we allow medications which have a huge amount of potential for abuse to be prescribed and just do our best to control that abuse. Oxycontin has an enormous abuse potential, but sometimes is the only pain medication that provides some relief to patients with severe pain. Could there be doctors who abuse the right to prescribe and patients who fake symptoms and divert their pills to the street, of course. But we don't make oxycontin a schedule one drug because it is a needed weapon in the battle against pain.

Legalization of recreational marijuana is not one which should be based mostly on the medical considerations. The one medical/psychological concern might be the theory of gateway drug use. IMO this is not settled in the literature but most data suggests pot does not lead to other drugs, it more is a stop over point for people who are going that way anyhow. Example, most people get to having intercourse. But at some point they behaviorally pause at second or third base. Petting didn't gateway going all the way, it was just easier to get there first.

Legalization should be decided on whether the societal costs of criminalization, prosecution, incarceration, creating a high profit drug underground, loss of potential tax revenue, and those kinds of considerations are worth keeping. What is the downside of legalization vs continued criminalization? Reasonable people will see the data differently, and we all come pre-loaded with our cultural constraints. In a few short months we will have 4 states with wide availability of recreational pot. Those who oppose de-criminalization should be prepared to produce real data showing that the consequences they predicted actually happen. That means something more than just a case report here and there of an individual who did poorly. In the absence of adverse outcomes, I would hope that those who oppose decriminalization would reconsider.
First, at the risk of you getting a "big head" , allow me to once again compliment your postings on this issue. I think one of the best things about message boards like this is the ability to debate logically, see new ideas, and prompt investigation. You have done that for me, without the usual quips and one liners that folks normally use and try to disguise that as being knowledgable.

I did some reading based on your post and again will say loud and clear that it is obvious in reading your posts that I am not in the same ballpark as you in knowing the subject, but that is fine. Most of what I will say you can take as a question because I surely am not to pass myself off as any kind of expert on this subject.

I will start at the end. I still have questions and concerns about MEDICAL marijuana. As do the American Medical Association, although they feel strongly that whatever needs to be done to further study should be done ASAP. I also believe that the American Cancer Association are in that camp.

I did find two drugs that supposedly will do what cannabis will do for patients....Marinol and Zofran....both of which I am sure you will find fault with, and that is fine with me.....both have side effects but so does medical marijuana.

I find it difficult to support the use of a "drug" that has not gone through the process of being approved by the FDA. As I said, drugs INCLUDING marijuana have side affects.

Actually you probably know this but HEROIN also has a number of beneficial things it can do for us medically. THAT fact shocked me as I read and I sure hope that is not the next drug being pushed on a ballot to approve for use.

I also find it difficult to VOTE on a ballot on a subject like this. I think you said about deciding based on medical science and I have strong doubts as to whether the voters voted on this based on medical science. It has been politicized and if there were to be a movement to find more drugs that can mimic the good things about medical marijuana, I would probably support that. I just hope in my lifetime I am not faced with a ballot that wants to legalize both marijuana and heroin which appears not beyond the reasonable.

Again, I appreciate your instilling in me the need to investigate this further and I will continue to read more as I go.

I doubt if you will ever convince me to support recreational marijuana but you did get me to look further into medical use and for that I am glad.

I will read your response and I am sure that will generate more reading for me but as I said....THAT is one main function of a message board.

Thanks for not quipping and generalizing. I am not, as charged, narrow minded in anyway...those who make that charge are the narrow minded. I am also not unsympathetic as charged also.

Thanks for allowing some conversation and please continue....
  #95  
Old 11-07-2014, 11:27 AM
blueash's Avatar
blueash blueash is offline
Sage
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,392
Thanks: 253
Thanked 3,498 Times in 941 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietman View Post
I still don't understand why it has been proposed as an Amendment to the state constitution instead of a state passed law. Am I missing something? If we amend our constitution it would be extremely difficult to backtrack if it didn't work out as expected. Or is that the end game?
Florida has a GOP legislature and governor and very gerrymandered districts which will certainly maintain GOP legislative control into the foreseeable future. The war on drugs has been conducted by both parties but to a far greater extent the GOP which regularly features accusations of Dems being "soft on crime". As more states have liberalized their marijuana laws the political question became, can it happen in Florida. No way with the present legislature.

To see how well medical marijuana has done in the Florida legislature check 2013 SB 1250 Senate Bill 1250 (2013) - The Florida Senate
which the GOP directed legislature refused to even have a hearing or a vote.

The 2014 minor medical marijuana bill SB 1030 was passed in part to attempt to co-opt the push for Amendment 2. Posters on this forum have said, well we already allow Charlotte's Web so there is no need for Amendment 2. By the way our local Florida State senator, Alan Hays was one of the 16 out of 141 who voted NO on the bill
Senate Bill 1030 (2014) - The Florida Senate

In Florida the prospect of meaningful reform bringing us into conformity with other states is not happening with our legislature. That is why the supporters of MM went directly to the voters. I think it is likely it will come up for a vote again. With a slightly more diverse and younger electorate as you tend to get in Presidential election years, it is more likely to pass.
__________________
Men plug the dikes of their most needed beliefs with whatever mud they can find. - Clifford Geertz
  #96  
Old 11-07-2014, 11:30 AM
Rags123 Rags123 is offline
Veteran member
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 673
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wandatime View Post
Rags123: I can't answer your questions because I don't know the answers. When my sister was ill and smoked pot, it was illegal and medical marijuana was only beginning to peek over the horizon. I certainly did not mean to imply you are unfeeling and unsympathetic -- I was merely trying to show that for some people marijuana works. Again, I don't know why, and I don't know if any other drugs work as well. I know what I've read on this thread, but that doesn't mean it is the truth. Doesn't mean it is not the truth either, just saying I personally have not done the research. If you are really that interested, perhaps you could do some research, add the links, and get back to us. Please don't think I am being a smart aleck by saying that. I just know for me if I am interested in a subject I do my own research.

From what I hear the proposition put forth was not worded very well. I am not a Florida resident yet but if the proposition was worded strongly in favor of medical marijuana in controlled circumstances, I would vote yes.

If it had hints of recreational marijuana I am not sure how I would vote. I do not smoke pot, but there is a great deal of pot being smoked out there (.05% of the population of Florida smoke pot for whatever reason, see link below), and it is unregulated. Perhaps regulating and taxing it would provide the smokers with untampered pot and the state with much needed revenue. I saw a program on CNN regarding the regulation of pot in Colorado, and the whole operation from growth to sales is tightly run. Apparently there are different strains for different needs -- some strains are very helpful for insomnia, some strains are good for depression, and others help with pain.

Again, I sure didn't mean to make you feel guilty or like you weren't being heard; I did read your posts and never thought you were old, uncaring, stupid or anything else. I was just putting my two cents into the pot (no pun intended).


Marijuana legalization sweeps the 2014 midterm elections - Vox
Your two cents accepted

I was just a bit annoyed, not at you or others with real stories, but those who must for some reason make these little uninformed quips as if they have the final answer on anything that might come up.

Sometimes, enough of that and I can get a bit defensive. Your story was read, appreciated and contributed to my continually trying to learn more about this.

I am not happy about it being political....but I am only one person. And for recreational use, I cannot see me EVER agreeing with that. Our young people deserve much more from us. They are already being desentized on drug use from this debate
  #97  
Old 11-07-2014, 12:04 PM
rubicon rubicon is offline
Email Reported As Spam
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,694
Thanks: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 13 Posts
Default Rationalize in haste, repent in leisure



I get very concerned when some people attempt to sound so cerebral and rational about this subject as if they were absolutely right and thus have the moral high ground. First, let's set aside that perhaps the medical community will find benefit with cannabis oil extract removing the THC high. Let's also set aside that the medical community learning from the abuse of opoids works with the FDA in strict metering of this extract. Let's assume everyone agrees with this very narrow purpose. If so we can eliminate the medical marijuana canard and call a spade a spade.

The real debate here is about finding a way to get recreational use legalized.
Proponents speak of decriminalizing it and yet like gambling criminals always find a way in the back door because they will not be denied the billions up billions of dollars it will bring. So from that prospective all that was done is that criminals now have a way to continue illegal activities with the blessing of the government. because they will also continue black markets

Proponents are also politicians who salivate over taxes but they will end up paying out more because of the damage legalized marijuana will bring to their state.

Proponents claim that by legalizing it it can be regulated but alcohol and cigarettes are heavily taxed and regulated and politicians keep telling us how much it is costing us in medical care. The young will be able to get marijuana and according to experts it has a 6 point drop in IQ in one study and a 8 point drop in another along with memory loss. Essentially we have enough slackers in our country now without giving them more in which to enjoy their relax style.

You have to be very naive and/or have an incentive to want recreational marijuana enacted....and again it is being slipped in with the canard called medical marijuana.

So intellectualize til the cows come home but dope is called dope for an obvious reason. Rationalize in haste repent in leisure
  #98  
Old 11-07-2014, 01:19 PM
Buffalo Jim Buffalo Jim is offline
Sage
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brownwood
Posts: 3,548
Thanks: 588
Thanked 35 Times in 20 Posts
Default

If you were to Google his name you will find one very interesting history .
  #99  
Old 11-07-2014, 01:26 PM
gerryann's Avatar
gerryann gerryann is offline
Platinum member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,922
Thanks: 0
Thanked 10 Times in 6 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffalo Jim View Post
If you were to Google his name you will find one very interesting history .
who's name?
  #100  
Old 11-07-2014, 01:41 PM
graciegirl's Avatar
graciegirl graciegirl is offline
Sage
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 40,170
Thanks: 5,009
Thanked 5,783 Times in 2,004 Posts
Send a message via AIM to graciegirl
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandtrap328 View Post
...and a senior using marijuana to relieve pain of cancer or to deal with the effects of chemotherapy is going to turn into a heroin user and start committing crimes to feed their heroin habit?

This is Medical Marijuana that was on the ballot.

Besides, it is a moot point now. The narrow minded voters of Florida saw to that.

Case closed.
It was completely another agenda. It had nothing to do with pain relief. It was not going to be controlled by the medical community. It was thinly veiled recreational marijuana. I don't really care what anybody gets high on as long as they don't bother me, kill me or annoy me, but call it what it is.

If any person who wants to smoke pot can get it so easily than it can be obtained for a person suffering just that easily too.

I am skeptical. VERY skeptical.
__________________
It is better to laugh than to cry.
  #101  
Old 11-07-2014, 02:28 PM
justjim justjim is offline
Sage
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Illinois, Tennesee, Florida, Village of Caroline, Sanibel, LaBelle
Posts: 6,136
Thanks: 60
Thanked 1,765 Times in 747 Posts
Default

I suppose that I would move to one of the States that have approved medical marijuana if I had a medical need for the drug. 57-58% approval by a very conservative State is pretty remarkable when you really think about it! In most "elections" it's a landslide.

On the other hand, you are breaking federal law any State you go. We live in a great country.......how be it confusing sometimes.
__________________
Most people are as happy as they make up their mind to be. Abraham Lincoln
  #102  
Old 11-07-2014, 05:21 PM
Buckeyephan Buckeyephan is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 349
Thanks: 0
Thanked 242 Times in 68 Posts
Default

Another interesting fact: Charlie Crist is an attorney for Morgan & Morgan. Although he has never be assigned a case, he was paid nearly $300,000 in 2013. Maybe he hasn't been in court because it took him 3 tries to pass the bar.

Charlie Crist: Touted as attorney for Morgan & Morgan, but hasn
  #103  
Old 11-07-2014, 05:23 PM
manaboutown manaboutown is offline
Sage
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NJ, NM, SC, PA, DC, MD, VA, NY, CA, ID and finally FL.
Posts: 7,872
Thanks: 14,332
Thanked 5,109 Times in 1,955 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandtrap328 View Post
...and a senior using marijuana to relieve pain of cancer or to deal with the effects of chemotherapy is going to turn into a heroin user and start committing crimes to feed their heroin habit?

This is Medical Marijuana that was on the ballot.

Besides, it is a moot point now. The narrow minded voters of Florida saw to that.

Case closed.
Actually, unfortunately, the case is far from closed. Its sponsor has further plans to pursue his dream of getting rich(er) from pot.

It seems to me the intelligent, well informed, concerned voters of Florida saw the proposed law was poorly drafted, with lots of ambiguity and loopholes and would likely be a step toward legalizing recreational cannabis. Just look at who sponsored it! It did not come from a group of oncologists, ophthalmologists or other medical professionals. It came from a profane trial attorney with multiple DUI's.
__________________
"No one is more hated than he who speaks the truth." Plato

“To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.” Thomas Paine
  #104  
Old 11-07-2014, 05:42 PM
Sandtrap328's Avatar
Sandtrap328 Sandtrap328 is offline
Eternal Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 5,349
Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by manaboutown View Post
Actually, unfortunately, the case is far from closed. Its sponsor has further plans to pursue his dream of getting rich(er) from pot.

It seems to me the intelligent, well informed, concerned voters of Florida saw the proposed law was poorly drafted, with lots of ambiguity and loopholes and would likely be a step toward legalizing recreational cannabis. Just look at who sponsored it! It did not come from a group of oncologists, ophthalmologists or other medical professionals. It came from a profane trial attorney with multiple DUI's.
The opposition was from the drug manufacturers and they duped a minority of the voters into voting NO. Remember that 57% voted YES. I imagine that Rick Scott and his cronies in Tallahassee got big political payoffs from these drug manufacturers.
  #105  
Old 11-07-2014, 05:44 PM
Rags123 Rags123 is offline
Veteran member
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 673
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandtrap328 View Post
...and a senior using marijuana to relieve pain of cancer or to deal with the effects of chemotherapy is going to turn into a heroin user and start committing crimes to feed their heroin habit?

This is Medical Marijuana that was on the ballot.

Besides, it is a moot point now. The narrow minded voters of Florida saw to that.

Case closed.
You continually use the term "narrow minded" when referring to everyone in Florida who does not agree with YOU.

I assume you adopted this term from the Growth and Opportunity Project, but am not exactly sure how you apply "narrow minded" to over 3 million fellow citizens who have well founded fears, not only over the theorem presented but even more over the actual language in the ammendments.

I also wonder about those who support the ammendment but offer nothing to support their position except for the calling names of those who voted against it, and attempting to make anyone opposed to changing the state constitution relative to a medical decision, not supported by the AMA, the American Cancer Society or any other mainstream respected medical authority feel guilty.

Do you also support the use of heroin for medical reasons, as it also has value that has been supported in medical circles ?

This may pass eventually, but there are alternatives that those who are not so "narrow minded" according to YOUR use of the term, which supposedly makes them "open minded" refuse to discuss. This is why the motives here are questioned.
Closed Thread


You are viewing a new design of the TOTV site. Click here to revert to the old version.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:34 PM.