Comments on: Why I am for medical marijuana but against Amendment 2, Orlando Lawyer John Morgan’s deceptive campaign to legalize pot smoking across Florida

By: peter zemelka

peter zemelka — Mon, 03 Nov 2014 11:05:55 +0000

Decriminalize marijuana to better understand it– and Florida needs to lead the way!
It happened before when alcohol consumption was legalized by Congress in December 1933, and the 18th amendment to the U.S. Constitution that banned the manufacture, sale and transportation of alcohol beverage was repealed.
A major shift in U.S. public opinion came during the Great Depression when opponents to Prohibition argued that: Prohibition deprived people of jobs and governments of revenue. Following repeal, liquor control became a state function. And, the effects of alcohol consumption on the common good could now be openly monitored. After the potency of an alcoholic drink was determined, laws to protect people followed, like: No underage drinking allowed! Driving and drinking prohibited!—just to name a few!
Currently, the federal prohibitions on marijuana has helped to discourage marijuana research in the U.S. Retired Professor Raphael Mechoulam, Hebrew University Medical Campus, Jerusalem, in an article that appeared on September 13, 2013, in NO CAMELS, complained that the National Institutes of Health once was rejecting requests to grant awards on marijuana research on the grounds that, “marijuana is not an American problem.”
Hence, much knowledge about the medicinal benefits of marijuana is being treated like other medicinal usage of herbs—the medicinal research has originated outside the U.S because the U.S. Medical establishment only recognizes Pharmaceuticals.
James A. Duke, PhD., in his 1997 classic, The Green Pharmacy, wrote: “The reason herbs are not more popular in the U.S. is that drug companies can’t patent them, by pulling medicinally active molecules out of herbs and then tinkering with them, until they are chemically unique. The companies can then patent their new molecules, and give them a brand name to sell back to us for a profit.”
In Europe, for example, it is not unusual for a physician to recommend herbs to alleviate aches and pains.
Dr. Duke concluded, “There is a need for more research that tests herbs against pharmaceutical drugs. Until that happens, we simply won’t know which is better. That leads me to the rather shocking conclusion that Americans are not necessarily getting the best medicine.”
It is not surprising, then, that the medical establishment (in Brevard County, the Brevard County Medical Society) was moot in their endorsement on Amendment-2 and the potential legitimacy of marijuana—after all, marijuana is just another herb.
That’s too bad!

By: Ray Napper

Ray Napper — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 01:20:12 +0000

I have heard every argument you all put out and sorry but none of it including that it’s written badly is false and misleading. First off the rules have NOT been established and won’t be unless it passes. No drug dealers are going to be caregivers because of current laws of abuse and most family members who will be the caregivers they are talking about aren’t drug sellers. You tell the people that there are pharm-drugs to handle all the problems. I have tried many and I mean more than I can count. They haven’t worked yet and I don’t think you should be allowed to lied about a health issues. I KNOW for a fact that it works. Now why do you want to take my life?

By: Nikki Velazquez

Nikki Velazquez — Wed, 29 Oct 2014 02:22:55 +0000

I took the liberty of reading the article and responding to each point: 1) no responsible doctor is going to prescribe it to a child without parental consent. You can’t even see most doctors without parental consent nowadays if you’re under 18. 2) Dispensaries will be regulated by cities like anything else. And if they’re really concerned about this, I hope they go after all the smut shops that openly advertise to the point that I have to distract my kids by pointing out something on the other side of the road so they won’t see them when we drive by. 3) Why would you need a background check to administer medication? Not seeing why that matters; it should be up to the patient who administers it to them. No medical training is needed; it’s a plant… smoke it or put it in food. 4) It’s up to a doctor to decide if it’s appropriate to prescribe. Let’s let doctors do their jobs. And it’s not oxycodone, so that comparison is not valid. 5) Such marketing, which I’m guessing is rare, is indeed in poor taste, but not enough reason to deny something to people who medically need it. Just like alcohol that is packaged in a fun way, you keep it away from kids or CPS will come knocking. 6) Marijuana isn’t potent/dangerous enough to cause real harm, so not a concern of mine. 7) Politics- nothing new there. Morgan also have a stake in it because he’s a cokehead and is hoping cocaine legalization will be next. Either way, I don’t care what this lawyer’s motive is. It’s still a worthy cause. 8) Lawyers profiting from stuff… nothing new there. That’s where we get the term ‘ambulance chasers.’ It’s capitalism, and our country supports that. 9) Not really an argument against it, just the author stating an opinion about some polls he’s seen. 10) So, when the media or politicians say something he agrees with, they’re reputable people with no ulterior motives. Would he have the same opinion of them if they were for the amendment?

By: Randy Cheatham

Randy Cheatham — Tue, 28 Oct 2014 10:33:20 +0000

Only a dr can recommend it to a child and I think they deserve safe treatment just like adults. Dont no why you republicans are so hard on the children.

By: Ken

Ken — Tue, 28 Oct 2014 03:35:14 +0000

back in 1968, Joey, a recovering heroin addict, spoke to our youth group. He said that marijuana was the drug that he first used , A few months later Joey relapsed back into heroin use. Some young people then were saying,”It’s natural!” They were believing that it was not addicting. Research showed then that it WAS psychologicallyaddicting. Research now shows that it causes brain damage.
This bill will effectively legalize unlimited marijuana use in Florida.
Teens that have never used it, would now use it.
Baking it into cookies, ect. would make it appealing to children. Unlimited access to our children and teens with no legal way to stop them, would make the pot providers rich. It would also make Charlie Crist, Mr, Morgan, and Jimmie Buffett richer. It would make more of our children and grandchildren addicts,

By: Manny H

Manny H — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 22:42:16 +0000

The purpose of this message is to clear the misinformation contained in this post.
I want to break this down into a few parts as it relates to medical marijuana (MMJ), the proposed amendment, and marijuana use in general.
All, please watch two movies before you vote (both independently funded at international film festival)!
The union: the business behind getting high
http://youtu.be/jT-UIe7l3-Q
And, The culture high
http://youtu.be/P2IL7sgaTBY

On the links arguments against the proposed amendment:
1. The amendment will allow minors to smoke pot w/o parental knowledge or consent. It seems the concern is there is no age restrictions for who can obtain MMJ.
Let us begin with, the current state of marijuana use amongst minors.
As it stands, minors using marijuana is already going on behind their parents back.
And to clarify the law, under the amendment, no one can obtain MMJ w/o the recommendation from a Doctor.
This little topic could split into “it’s none of your business what a doctor prescribes” to their patient.
I would also like to add that since the laws passed in Colorado, MMJ use amongst minors is in decline.
When MMJ is legal, it is regulated, like alcohol, and thus harder to obtain for minors (or people w/o proper documentation).
When MMJ is legal and kids see old, sick, people going into the stores, the whole glamour goes away.
http://sensiblecolorado.org/marijuana-use-down-among-teens-in-colorado-since-regulations-took-effect/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/07/marijuana-usage-down-in-t_n_1865095.html
No dispensary is going to risk its business by selling to undocumented/minors.
If they do, shut-em down, like regulated alcohol stores.
The beauty with MMJ being legal, is that the business is transparent and people can vote on how its regulated.

2. There are no restrictions on where in your neighborhood dispensaries can operate…across from schools…
I would like to see the source of how that conclusion was made?
It should also be known that counties/cities have the authority to vote dispensaries out of their county/city. Still I want to reiterate, the beauty with MMJ being legal, is that the business is transparent and people can vote on how it is regulated.
http://www.wptv.com/news/region-s-palm-beach-county/boynton-beach/boynton-beach-agrees-on-temporary-ban-for-medical-marijuana-businesses

3. Caregivers are drug dealing criminals with no medical training.
If someone is arrested for selling marijuana to elderly (with medical conditions), were they really a criminal to begin with?
With legal MMJ, people who need substance abuse help will receive it, not to be locked away.
We can save so much by not incarcerating people for possessing a plant or selling a plant to help someone with a medical condition.
On the basis of medical training…how can someone have former medical training on a substance which was consider schedule 1 and no place offers MMJ training (no medical benefit)…. sounds like a great job venture to get trained MMJ professionals.

4. Pot will be dispensed for any condition.
It is nobody’s business why/what a doctor prescribes to you.
Clearly MMJ does have medical benefit; therefore it should not be schedule one.
Rick Scott, being from the pharmaceutical industry, can appreciate the doctor patient confidentiality.

5. Edible MMJ is targeted to kids.
Edible MMJ is targeted to MMJ patients. The dispensaries are just issuing MMJ in a form which their patients find appealing, an alternative to harsh smoking.
Again, with regulated MMJ in Colorado, countless debates and legislation are going around to up packaging requirements and deter kids.
The fact that we can actually regulate and control packaging is a plus over the current state; quality control.

6. Caregivers have no accountability.
As a regulated substance, we the people can vote on how to make said individuals accountable.

7,8,9,10 can be summed up by….US (Republicans) vs. them (democrats)…ahh now we finally get to the real point behind the post. BTW john morgan is acting to rally people, it is an act. I find it sad that the public cannot read the comments on that video.
This amendment cannot be about us vs. them. It is about compassion for your fellow man. To allow individuals and their doctors decide what they should be prescribed to help them cope with an illness.
Steve, I persuade you to vote yes on 2.

Some other points I would like to bring up on the topic:
People loose respect and trust for law enforcement when a good part of their budget comes from seizures of these MMJ criminals…not to mention all the disturbing videos of SWAT teams shooting family pets (in the owners face) over a pipe and gram of weed.

CCA is a corections corporation making money off keeping people incarcerated.

Rick Scott had a business interest to keep MMJ illegal because of his pharmaceutical ties, his drug testing ties….

By: Victoria Crowe

Victoria Crowe — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 03:14:52 +0000

You should be ashamed of yourself for the lies in this article. Utterly disgraceful.

By: Bob Gegerson

Bob Gegerson — Thu, 23 Oct 2014 22:32:51 +0000

Is John Morgan buying farmland in central Florida ? Could be planning to grow pot and using his political commercials to enhance his bank account.

By: Christopher Sankey

Christopher Sankey — Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:54:58 +0000

Unfortunately, this opinion piece is wrong and is filled with fear-mongering propaganda which I will address below point by point. I am only refuting your first 6 points Mr. Stemberger because your final four are mere conjecture.

1. The Amendment will allow minors to smoke pot without parental knowledge or consent. There are no restrictions on Amendment 2 for age, and those street corner dispensers will be able to give pot to minors without their parent’s consent or even notice. As a father of four children under the age of 13, this alone, frankly enrages me as a parent.

WRONG – If you read the full text of the amendment, you will clearly see, that this law would not have any effect on current federal or state laws already on the books. One of which, is a law prohibiting minors from possession of marijuana. This amendment STRICTLY deals with medical marijuana and not recreational use. The age restrictions you are referring to and are using to try and scare people that we are creating a law that says anyone of any age can just roam the streets smoking pot are ACTUALLY intended for doctors; doctors who wouldn’t be limited by an age on who they can prescribe medical marijuana to. So, if a 4 year old girl is having multiple seizures a day, this doctor wouldn’t be bound by the law into not being able to prescribe it for her.

2. There are no restrictions on where in your neighborhood these “pot shops” can be placed. Based on where they have set up pot shops like “pill-mills” in California and Colorado, and based on the language of this Amendment, you can expect “dispensaries” to pop up across the street from junior high schools, near churches, restaurants and other small businesses.

PARTIALLY WRONG – Again, if you read the amendment, the proposed law actually calls on the Florida Department of Health to regulate and monitor this entire process. Likening a medical-marijuana dispensary to a “pill-mill” is similar to saying a CVS is just like a liquor store. Pill-mills operate in violation of federal and state laws, again this amendment makes no changes to current laws on the books.

3. The only requirement for a so-called “caregiver” marijuana dispenser is that he or she be 21 years old. Also “caregivers” are not required to have background checks, they could be convicted felons, and have no requirements for medical training. We used to call these people drug dealers and put them in jail. The opponents of Amendment 2 are appropriately calling it the “Drug Dealer Protection Act.”

WRONG – Read the amendment people, it clearly says, a caregiver must be issued an ID card by the FL Dept of Health. Do we think a drug dealer is going to walk into a state institution with cameras, records, and law enforcement and apply for a card? Easy way to catch “drug dealers” if you ask me. On second thought, this would actually help eliminate a lot of the drug trafficking that currently goes on, because people who need it would now have a legal way of accessing it, thus cutting some of the dealers.

4. Pot will be “dispensed” for any “other conditions” under Amendment 2. While the ballot summary (the only part you will see when you vote) says that the drug is supposed to be given for “debilitating medical conditions,” the full text of what becomes law in the Florida Constitution (which you will not see on the ballot) says marijuana can be sold for any “other conditions.” So fatigue, insomnia, nausea or back aches will qualify you to smoke dope. This is the functional equivalent of legalizing pot for recreational use.

WRONG AGAIN – None of those conditions you mentioned will automatically qualify you to smoke “dope”. What you are failing and conveniently forgetting to mention is, anyone who gets medical marijuana has to have been prescribed from a licensed, practicing doctor!

5. Amendment 2 expressly allows for “medibles” which are marijuana-laced candies, cookies, baked goods, soda pop and other foods attractive to children. To really appreciate how bad this Amendment would be, look no further than to the states where this dangerous game has played out in California and Colorado. Just Google search images of the word “medibles” and you will find the hundreds of candies, cookies and baked goods laced with marijuana. And who did you think these “edible treats” will be marketed to? You guessed it–our children and grandchildren.

PATHETICALLY WRONG – While medical marijuana is available in multiple forms, it is for the convenience of patients, preventing them from having to light up a joint in order to receive the medical benefits. Again, it MUST be prescribed by a doctor. Nobody is going to be marketing pot cupcakes to your children, unless the FL Dept of Health says so! (This isn’t Amsterdam people, calm down)

6. Amendment 2 gives complete civil and criminal immunity to all caregivers, growers, distributors and doctors selling pot. Under the Amendment’s language, everyone in the process of growing, handling and distributing pot would be given complete civil and criminal legal immunity and allowed to operate free of liability. So if a caregiver hurts someone, there are no lawsuits or arrests that will come from the harm. It almost seems unbelievable but it’s true. How would you, as a small business owner, like to have complete immunity from law suits? But we are going to give unbridled constitutional immunity to everyone involved with dispensing pot?

WRONG – As stated above, this amendment does not effect laws on the books, meaning anyone who does violate those would not have any immunity. For example…
-The amendment does not “affect laws relating to non-medical use, possession, production or sale of marijuana.”
-The amendment does not authorize “the use of medical marijuana by anyone other than a qualifying patient.”
-The amendment does not allow for the “operation of a motor vehicle, boat, or aircraft while under the influence of marijuana.”
-The amendment does not require accommodations for medical marijuana use “in any place of education or employment, or of smoking medical marijuana in any public place.”
-The amendment does not require “any health insurance provider or any government agency or authority to reimburse any person for expenses related to the medical use of marijuana.”
-The amendment does not require “the violation of federal law or purports to give immunity under federal law.”

Ladies and gentlemen, this is a fear campaign. While Mr. Stemberger cites John Morgan and Charlie Crist as having ulterior motives for this bill, which may be true, he also fails to mention the ulterior motives of the opposite parties involved. The billions of dollars the state earns off of tens of thousands of meaningless marijuana charges every year, the attorney fees for fighting these cases, the revenue generated by law enforcement, etc.

For the record, I am not voting for Charlie Crist or Rick Scott nor do I or have I ever smoked marijuana.