http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20120621/NEWS02/706219901
Published June 21, 2012 in the Rutland Herald
Springfield ponders ordinance against medical marijuana dispensary
By SUSAN SMALLHEER
Staff Writer
SPRINGFIELD — Springfield Select Board member Michael Knoras wants the town to adopt an ordinance that would ban one of the state’s four new medical marijuana dispensaries from locating in town.
Knoras said Wednesday he is concerned that the medical marijuana dispensary would be a burden on the town and law enforcement.
“There’s no control,” Knoras said, noting he had read through the state’s application process and was unimpressed with the safeguards.
The Legislature has authorized the establishment of four medical marijuana dispensaries throughout the state. All applications for the marijuana dispensaries are due this Friday, June 22.
Knoras said he hadn’t heard of anyone that is interested in establishing a dispensary in Springfield, but at a recent Select Board meeting he urged his fellow board members to be pro-active and prevent a problem before it happens.
According to statistics on the Vermont Crime Information Center, which is handling the medical marijuana dispensary application process, Windham County has the highest number of registered medical users of marijuana with 85, with Chittenden County immediately behind with 84. The next highest is Washington County, and Windsor County has 34 registered users. Rutland County has 27 registered users. Those figures are from March 2012.
In all, there are 411 registered medical marijuana patients, and 68 caregivers.
Town Manager Robert Forguites said Select Board member Stephanie Gibson spoke in favor of medical marijuana, saying that Windsor County had a large number of registered users and that marijuana was often very helpful with people suffering pain from cancer and other diseases.
Gibson couldn’t be reached for comment Wednesday.
Knoras said the town already had a prescription drug problem, and he pointed to robberies at Rite-Aid Pharmacy in town. No one has ever been charged with those robberies.
The veteran Select Board member said he was also concerned that medical marijuana is still illegal on the federal level, and he said he fears if a dispensary located in Springfield it might affect the town’s ability to attract federal funding for law enforcement.
“It’s not a well planned thing. It should be under the Department of Health,” Knoras said.
“My concerns is that we’ve got enough of a problem already,” Knoras said, and he pointed to a recent case of a Chester youth going into a halfway house in Springfield and stealing drugs.
Kristi Morris, chairman of the Select Board, said that Knoras “is flat out against it and wants an ordinance, and Stephanie sees the medicinal need. There are only 34 cases in entire in Windsor County.”
“I’m split, if there’s indeed a need for medical marijuana, I’m not against that. If there’s some evidence out that people get some comfort from that, they are entitled to that,” Morris said.
But Morris said there was a “negative side to it,” and that there wasn’t a lot of state literature about the program.
“The Legislature is still trying to hash it out,” he said.
Morris said he had consulted with Springfield Police Chief Douglas Johnston about the possibility of a dispensary and got an unequivocal answer.
“He’s dead set against it,” Morris said, adding that the police chief cited the contradiction between state and federal law.
“The feds can come in and shut it down,” he said. California, which also has medical marijuana dispensaries, has had a lot of problems with it, he said.
Knoras, too, said he wasn’t opposed to people who are suffering from disease or injury getting some relief from marijuana. But he said he believed the marijuana should be handled like any regulated drug — in a pharmacy.
Finally, someone with the best interests of Springfield at heart. Build a prison and state agencies and they will come and they sure as hell have. We really don't need more problems.
ReplyDeleteThere are enough already.
I disagree with your main point, but agree if you open a medical marijuana dispensary, you will have more people registering to obtain the stuff -- that is why the 34 people argument that is made several times below is completely bogus.
DeleteWhy exactly is it in the best interests of Springfield to ban medical marijuana dispensaries so people dying of cancer or similar issues can't get access to a drug that a majority of Americans now believe should be legal?
ReplyDeleteWhy not have people coming to Springfield to buy their medical marijuana. Maybe they will stop and shop while they are here, maybe satisfy their munchies at a local restuarant. Not sure why we would be opposed to this form of private enterprise. Some reason we have to force people to go to pharmacies like MacGilvary wants?
DeleteNo, no, no, if we let people buy medical marijuana it is going to cut into the profits of the pharmaceutical companies. The purpose of healthcare is to enrich the pharmaceutical companies and health insurance companies. We can't allow this sort of thing, its immoral -- we have to protect the people from themselves regardless of whether the majority of Americans think that marijuana should be legal. Its going to lead to legalization and then who is going to pay for the beds in the prisons -- don't you understand that a huge percentage of the people in prison are there on marijuana offenses, what will happen to the profits of the private prison corporations. We must nip this immoral idea in the bud right now and ban this weed now!
DeleteLet's see.....34 people in the entire Windsor county can legally buy. Sounds like a really big money making opportunity. Are public funds involved again? I think someone here has been smokin' sumptin'.
ReplyDeleteNo the public funds are being used to support groups that lobby against making marijuana legal. Prohibition didn't work with booze and it is clearly not working with the softer drug marijuana. Its time to quit this nonsense and legalize marijuana.
DeleteIf it does happen.....could we please bundle marijuanna dispensaries with fireworks vendors? Win/win.
ReplyDeleteI can see it all now....flocks of dopers coming to town...unfortunately only 34 can make a "legal" buy.......then they all go toke up in front of the Gear Shaper and have their picture taken in front of that magnificent structure.... I am sure the founders of Springfield would be proud.
ReplyDeleteSeems to me we have a lot of people making money off campaigning against marijuana when the majority of Americans want it legalized.
DeleteSorry Jacky but marijuana isn't legal and a medical MJ dispensary will not change that. Nice try though....You need to go argue that before the Federal people and not here in Springfield.
DeleteI am actually a little lukewarm on medical marijuana because I favor straight out legalization. Am aware that its possession is still a Federal crime -- one that should be repealed.
DeleteAs a certified/licensed marijuanna dispenser, I can't for the life of me understand what all the controversy is all about. There are people in need! How difficult is that to understand?
ReplyDeleteListen, listen, there are people in need....
What was that?
OK,
Get back to ya......Simpsons coming on.
Not sure I understand the controversy other than we have a lot of people making money off keeping people from using marijuana which is a softer drug than the alcohol which they seem to be okay with.
DeleteOnce again you are trying to misdirect the citizens of Springfield. This is not about legalizing pot for everyone as hard as you try to make it. It is about supplying legal medical MJ to about 34 people in the county and the state will lose millions in the end in trying to regulate that. I can see that makes perfect sense to you as the schools fail while a prison, rehabbing toxic waste sites, convincing everyone they need a polluting BioMess plant, restoring a dinosaur school etc appear to be appropriate in your own small mind. Your list of spending other peoples money is endless and I suspect you and your sidekick if there really is another are in on the gravy train of fleecing the citizens of Springfield and destroying their environment.
DeleteMy preference is to legalize it. Where is this 34 people figure coming from anyway.
DeleteJack your preference is to legalize MJ. That has nothing to do with locating a dispensary here. If you wish to promote legalization you need to do it elsewhere other then on a dispensary discussion. Make yourself a sandwich board and patrol the streets. Take it to the people. Picket the police station.
DeleteThe 34 people comes from the state's figures that only 34 people living in Windsor County have a legal "prescription" to legally use marijuana. There are about 500 in the entire state. Obviously Springfield is not a thriving population center of "legal" users. It may be for the "illegal" users. The state law caps the total users at 1000 in the entire state. Not much of a growth industry. Also if a "legal" user starts buying from a legal dispensary they give up their right to grow their own. What a difficult choice....grow your own or drive 50 miles and pay a huge price for your dose? Hmmmmm let me think.....that is really a tuff one.....
While you ponder the above, ponder this too....Patients, growers and clinics in some of the 14 states that allow medical marijuana are falling victim to robberies, home invasions, shootings and even murders at the hands of pot thieves.
Yes, well there has been a rash of robberies of Churches in Windsor County. Are we going to use that as a reason to ban Churches? The same also could be said of liquor stores. But I agree that the better approach would be to legalize marijuana so that we could end the criminal behavior -- pot smokers tend not to be violent, the violence to the extent it exists is more attributable to the current legal status of marijuana. I would note that whenever I enter Rite Aid there always seems to be signs up offering rewards for the person or persons who keep robbing the place, should we ban stores that dispense all drugs?
DeleteJust because Springfield got a few more votes to be the home of the Simpsons doesn't mean we have to take on the roles of its cartoon characters. Ponder this, when Aethelred takes a "dump" is Alpin there to wipe? Have we not inflicted enough pain on ourselves in this town that we need to add "legal" illegal drug dealing.
ReplyDeleteI suggest you do what I did and look at www.procon.org there are several good arguements on both sides on the site. Sorry Aethelred / Alpin only reading no photo's or free samples.
Why do some of our town leaders keep grasping for straws at the towns expense? Are we going to build our downtown with a medical marijuana business? I'm sure the police chief can confirm the availability downtown already exist. Why would that dealer want to add overhead to his business? Except for the dope trying to burn his families house down I would think he already has more than 34 customers.
On the otherhand think of the possibilities. A store that sells bongs and clips, stock stlyes and custom made. Another store that sells the cool t-shirts that must be worn by all "heads". A Birkenstock outlet would have to open. Then of course a Burger King, Wendys and most importantly a White Castle will be built. You know what, I already see this as a win win for Springfield.
Listen to Chief Johnston on this one please! This is his buiness and my guess Police Chiefs around the County report on this and what comes with it. Think about this, why would the police be against this if it would help take drugs off the street? I doubt it has anything to do with job sercurity.
Here's a thought. If this medical wonder is so important then let the local police departments be the dispensers. Whoa, we won't want that now would we. If you need to use an illegal drug than maybe Big Brother should be the one handling it. You get what you need and the town can have some comfort that its not getting into the wrong hands. Plus the town gets the added income, now that is a win win.
That won't happen of course because the libs will argue that's not freedom to do as I please with my body. Of course they will continue to pick up their government assistance check while whining about how they need more. I digress.
I'm calling Simon Pearce today to see if do any custom bongs! Hey man, its the future of Springfield, cool!
This isn't really a development issue, although I don't see it as harming development. It is an economic issue, however, because we truly are wasting tax dollars with the campaign against marijuana. Both in distracting police chasing marijuana users when they could be concentrating on the thefts occurring in the community, prosecution resources which would be better used on bringing non-consensual crimes to justice, incarceration costs, and the ruination of lives due not to drug use but the existence of criminal records. I agree that medical marijuana dispensaries are not the real solution, the real solution is legalization -- but if this will help move us towards legalization, then I am all for it.
DeleteNo, no, we need to keep marijuana possession and use illegal at all levels. The war on drugs has been a tremendous success just look at the number of criminals we no have incarcerated, we are leading the world. What we should be doing is criminalizing the use and possession of tobacco -- just look at the huge increase in tobacco use that has occurred because we have simply taxed and regulated it. Why during WWII you hardly ever saw anybody smoking tobacco, now its ubiquitous invading our schools and communities. If we would just make it illegal, its use would drop off just like the use of illegal drugs has dropped off. Besides legalization would drop the street value of marijuana and could adversely affect our balance of trade with Mexico, we manufacture and supply guns to sell to their marijuana growers down there.
ReplyDeleteMittens, I enjoy you attempt at sarcasm but ture sarcasm is an art. You my friend are not an artist. Not saying you shouldn't keep working on it because I see some hope in your writing. Pointer, just because you are falling on the floor laughing doesn't mean the readers are. You do get credit in my book for at least coming up with pseudonym.
DeleteAs an example I'm not sure if Alpin is using sarcasm when he says "This isn't really a development issue, although I don't see it as harming development." That is good stuff and thought out. It makes one go, um. Sarcasm remarks should also make some feel offended but not be sure they were just offended.
Now with all that said I think we should expand on this issue. If we're going to have "pot stores" then we should have places for this the waiting criminals that Anonymous 11:44 AM refers to hangout. I'm thinking a strip (sorry Gentlemans) club would be a good idea. Problem is you need at least two clubs. One for the normal guys that spend money and the other for the low-lifers with the crackhead dancers. Which club you gain entry to of course is left in the hands of the bouncers, it's the only fair way to do it.
Then of course we will need some prostitutes to walk Clinton Street after the clubs close. Police will have to be careful thought because we will want no confusion with the current folks walking on that street. I don't understand why prostitution is illegal, don't they know there would be less if it was legal. Damn laws that are made thinking they are protecting us are only taking away my fun.
Get the point?
Mittens, we know the person you are mocking has his head stuck in the 1950's but you are probably overdoing it. As to Harry, I think you have the stereotypic behavior of beer drinkers confused with the behavior of marijuana users. I don't believe the perferred venue of such is strip joints, however, you might see an increased demand for large music festivals. Plus the need for bouncers is probably greatly reduced when dealing with marijuana users as compared to beer drinkers. As to the legalization of prostitution, it doesn't seem to have caused that much social disruption in Nevada, so as long as the prostitutes are regularly checked for VD, not sure exactly why it is illegal. I find it interesting how conservatives clamor for decreased government regulation of business, but then turn around and demand increased regulation of adults who do not conform to their behavior standards. To me it is a great irony -- they demand government intrusion into the private lives of individuals and at the same time say the problem is government is too heavily funded and too big.
DeleteMittens, see what I mean. How long did it take me to drag Alpin out of the "fog" of his room? Do you think the guys stealing the pot are using it? Yeah, right. Besides why would those good pot heads you write of here steal from each other, I mean everything is cool between us, right? Thus the thiefs are beer drinkers and while they may attend the large upcoming music festivals they will leave with more money than the beer vendors.
DeleteShould we check for only VD or all possible SID's? Nevada would be a better reference for how they feel about legal prostitution. I notice it is not legal in Las Vegas, that you know is "Sin City".
Not sure if I would rather be able to buy a large Coke in NYC or get a prostitute, I guess I'll have to check the local laws first. Law and regulations come from both sides of the aisle, some dumb some needed. To me laws should be sound and have reason, sometimes those reasons need to be morally based. Often these things you think should be legal do more harm to a community than good. The goal is to have an upstanding community providing good jobs, great schools and solid families. Isn't the libs the ones claiming that it takes a village to raise a child? If so let's not provide them with a village of idiots.
Absolutely, we need an upstanding community and I am your candidate. We need to make sure that the community is not tainted with non-upstanding people, meaning people who do not conform and anything which does not conform with my world view is immoral and therefore not upstanding. I don't think upstanding people smoke and therefore we should outlaw smoking and the possession of tobacco like I said. While we are at it, we should outlaw those bug-eyed people as well, and for heaven sakes require them to cover up those bellies that they proudly display. Its immoral. The gay people gotta go to they should all be shipped down to Bellows Falls we don't want any shops in the storefront in downtown Springfield. We need to keep our eye on the ball and make sure everyone conforms to our standards, otherwise the community is going to go to that H word profane people use. We really should consider banning all those restaurants and other dives that sell alcohol in Springfield it sets a bad example for our precious children.
DeleteMittens your sarcasm is lost on these folks, the inconsistency of opposing government intervention on a public level to help revive the town and the demand for government intervention to limit choices at the individual level is beyond their grasp.
DeleteCan someone please tell me where the number of people that can legally buy MJ came from? If it truly IS 34, then it would be pointless to open a store to service just those 34. It would be like opening a store in Florida that only sells snow shoes.
ReplyDeleteVermont has 411 patients and 68 caregivers on its medical marijuana registry; patients are allowed to grow for their own use. The dispensaries are intended to give safe, legal access to patients who can't grow their own cannabis.
DeleteIf you read the article that started this discussion at the top of this page you will find: "There are only 34 cases in entire in Windsor County"
The number is basically meaningless because people who don't want to or have the means to grow the stuff themselves would be stupid to register before a stable number of dispensaries exist. I mean why gratuitously throw up a red flag for Eric Holder to watch if you can't really do anything about it. Also, the issue isn't whether the business would be pointless, we have a lot of pointless businesses in this community and country, but that isn't a reason to ban them.
Delete479 "potential clients" is a VERY small number to open a business with.
ReplyDeleteI can't imagine making the trek to Springfield from the Burlington area to buy cannabis. If I truly needed it (which I don't) I wouldn't think about driving 2-3 to buy it. I would just grow it.
Bad move to think about opening this kind of store in Springfield.
I don't believe the question is whether such a business would be successful, I believe the question is whether the Town should ban someone from trying to open a business. If we were to ban all businesses which are not likely to succeed in Springfield, it seems like we would have a lot of banned businesses. So the whole question as to whether the business would be successful is really not an issue.
DeleteYea Jack...Springfield needs more unsuccessful businesses? Those dispensaries have to pony up $30,000 a year to be licensed. It looks like with guys like you and the boondoggles that you promote that sanity will never return to Springfield. Don't forget all of the crime these dispensaries will attract too. A lot of nonsense and risk to provide a service for about 30 people who it appears will be paying a massive price for their weed to offset those huge costs. I think the police department might have to hire another officer with a new car just to monitor the place....
DeleteYes, we need to ban all potentially unsuccessful businesses. While I was at Bain Capital I made sure that we shut those businesses down after we sucked out all their capital. Its time for the Town to step in and make sure that all potentially unsuccessful businesses are banned immediately.
DeleteI could not read the article from the Rutland Herald website. I dont think the town should BAN any kind of business. Although, just looking from the outside in, I think it would be a huge mistake to open with so few potential clients. Like I said before, snow shoe store in Florida.
DeleteMittens, I really hope you are just trying to be sarcastic.
What ever happened to the halfway house? Will the dispensary be located close-by? I am thinking maybe some type of peep show should be next. Nothing too exotic maybe just your standard 25 cent variety. Maybe a tat parlor could work with them applying tattoos while you watch. Thinking longer term I see the need for a naked bungee jumping enterprise off the Comtu Falls bridge and a exotic and endangered wildlife dining experience. After all if the desire is to turn Springfield into Sodom and Gomorrah there is still a lot work to be done here.
ReplyDeleteYou really expect a medicinal marijuana dispensary to turn Springfield into Sodom and Gomorrah? Not sure what a dispensary has to do with either a "peep show", naked bungee jumping, or endangered wildlife dining experience. Am thinking you are thinking of a different group of drug users, like say alcohol or other hard drugs. We already have those, but fail to see the connections you are drawing to allowing people with cancer and other painful diseases at least the possibility of access to a natural relief.
DeleteEverything you promote for Springfield is either reliant on public funding or is an expense or liability to the tax payers and in this case can endanger them. Try doing something useful with your life....it's not too late. I hear they are hiring clowns Bozo.
DeleteInteresting how you like to promote small government and lower taxes by opposing any expenditure of monies to restore and refurbish buildings so they can be put to good use or sold, but then want the government to intervene to limit individual freedom of choice and stop the establishment of businesses.
DeleteAethelred, Alpin and Mittens. My guess is when each look into a mirror the same person appears, anyone agree? Writing style is the same, post tend to be in the same time period, points are mostly the same and the attack style is cohesive. If that is what it takes to make your own point (getting yourself to support it) then we're all wasting our time posting here. Anonymous or not.
ReplyDeleteNobody is saying to deny cancer or others suffer from illness treatment or relief. We're saying we see a problem with the model that wants to begin. New Hampshire just rejected a bill for medical marijuana, based on concerns of the police departments.
Alcohol, prescription drugs, tabacco and such are legal. While they too can be used illegally that a brought legally. Laws are pieces of paper with writing on them, people decide if they will follow them or not. If you choose not, then you may be choosing your own future. If you legalize a drug, how and where would you sell it? What age group would be allowed to buy it legally? You say the government would benifet from added taxes. What would keep folks from then growing their own and supplying their friends with the "home brew"?
We grow as a community because of our laws and morals. When ideas for a law pop up that are ridiculous than we rise and question it. That leads to debate, which leads to what hopefully will be the right decision. Last check we still live in a republic based on majority rule. Propose it, debate it, vote on it. That's how we got the prison you love so much, and why we don't have new bleachers at Riverside. And now we are looking to a bio-mass project that has done nothing to prove its worth. If we have so much water to spare now rather than bring in an questionable industry to sell it to why now offer it to other towns or find buyers, is that possible? I don't know. Let's be creative and protect our own at the same time.
As for Aet-pin-ten get a job. I suggest it's not one as a writer for Nation Lampoon or The Onion.
Absolutely, right on Harry Byrd. Time to stop this nonsense from multiple personalities. The idea of legalizing something that so many use illegally is a terrible idea. Next thing they will be proposing a nursing college or something in Springfield. We need to keep these peasants in line as we might run out of cashiers at the grocery store or people to empty the bed pans at the nursing homes. We need more upstanding people in this town who stand four square for life, liberty (as we view it) and the pursuit of Chinese tradegoods! Anyway marijuana is already Vermont's most profitable cash crop, do you want to destroy that market? Mittens is right though we need to make alcohol and tobacco illegal as well as upstanding people shouldn't be possessing or using them and it is complicated to determine what age people should have them or who should make them.
ReplyDeleteThanks Mittens err Boss Hogg.
DeleteWhy are we reading all of these immoral postings. You should be ashamed of yourselves. Here we have a good decent man like Knoras who has done so much to improve Springfield over the years and you people are questioning his thinking. Shame on you, didn't your mothers teach you better?
DeleteWould you like to list exactly what Knoras has done to improve Springfield over the years? I am curious.
DeleteHarry Byrd~~
ReplyDeleteFirst, thanks for using a name. "Anonymous" is the refuge of the rich and powerful.
Second, marijuana, heroin and cocaine all got their bad reputations at the same time alcohol did, and all four of them were banned. While the first three were not widely used, the fourth one was. Can you tell us what the effects were of Prohibition?
Chuck, ironically I can. A few years back I was taking some job related classes for Human Recourses. One of the topics was addiction and how it effects production. We each had to pick an addiction and provide argument on how it not only effects a person but how it may have possibly effected America.
DeleteFirst off a person can be addicted to anything. Addicted is a rush for the brain, as an example for a gambler it's not winning or losing that is the rus, it's placing the bet.
The biggest debate among those in the class was the debate you are trying to drag me into so you can make your point, this my friend will not happen. As you well know every effect of Prohibitions Laws can be applied to argue legalizing drugs. Other than NASCAR prohibition really didn’t provide much good. Prohibition was a cause for increased crime, immorality grew and prevented treatment for many with a drinking problem. And the biggest thing I think you are going for would be the increase in family violence. (Drug users tend to be mellow you know.) Violence like when the old man comes home drunk and beats the kid and wife silly, that is something I know more about than one may think. There are others but I'm sure you can provide those in your counter argument.
Now I will give you an opening to attack. Those decisions were made in a different time and society. Religion was important to people as was public image. Twenty-four hour news cycles didn’t exist, politics were not fulltime work and most had a much simpler vision for this country. And as you say yourself those three other vices were not even on the map. (If they were would they have been made legal?) I believe that all changed with WWII. Now here is your big opening, with time the flaws were seen, as were the cost of those flaws. So by legalizing alcohol they felt the criminal activity would stop. Go for it.
If you look back in my posting you will see I ask in my 9:20 AM yesterday "If you legalize a drug, how and where would you sell it? What age group would be allowed to buy it legally? You say the government would benefit from added taxes. What would keep folks from then growing their own and supplying their friends with the "home brew"?" If you would answer those questions you may start my thinking to be different. More than likely that would include more questions from me.
Do you agree with this, our county is loaded with problems and has burden itself with trying to protect and maintain its people with way too many taxes and much foolish spending. And to be honest the supposed “War on Drugs” is one.
I look forward to your response. For me I'm done working for today so the computer is going off and will go relax by my pool with a nice cold one!
Oh, guess my history class got it wrong. Somebody said that we got heroin as a cure for a pain-killer addiction after the Civil War, and that Prohibition got passed mainly as an anti-German measure around WWI, and the reason that marijuana is illegal was that it was primarily an African-American addiction. Are you saying that they passed Prohibition for religious reasons and that is why we should keep marijuana illegal?
DeleteNo Holland Smith, I don't think your history class got it very wrong. Heroin indeed was developed as a cure for morphine addiction after the Civil War. The Civil War veterans became addicted to morphine because of the gruesome wounds they received in that cataclysm and in the search for a cure someone got the bright idea to invent a more refined version, hence heroin. Various Temperance groups had campaigned for Prohibition with a religious side to it, there was some anti-Catholicism involved there -- but for the most part they were truly interested in reforming humankind's morals to fit what they felt upstanding people should behave like. They were, with a few exceptions, basically unsuccessful -- then came the Kaiser to the rescue and Americans looked around and realized that the brewers and distillers were -- you guessed it German. So wallah we have Prohibition which outlawed a vice that was deeply engrained in the culture and of course people kept on drinking and the Canadians made a handsome profit as did the Kennedys who permanently anchored cruise ships just outside the national boundaries so people could come imbibe. They even continued to drink in the White House, and of course organized crime thought it was the best thing since sliced bread. Chicago basically succumbed completely to the gangs. So eventually people woke up and said enough of this and repealed Prohibition. Marijuana wasn't really on the scene except amongst some African American communities, but then along came that wonderful war to make the world safe for capitalism known as Viet Nam -- and of course the Vets got introduced to marijuana and the hippies and counterculture picked up on the new vice. But marijuana though a softer less dangerous drug than alcohol or tobacco was not part of Western European White Culture...so it got dubbed a dangerous drug. The same reformists that want everyone to live in conformity with their lifestyle choice are alive and well. But my guess is that in the long run Americans tend to require a certain level of consistency in their laws, and legalization of marijuana now is supported by a majority of Americans. So eventually, I expect that it will be legalized. The arguments in favor of legalization greatly outweigh those opposed to it and will eventually prevail. As a prelude to that, the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries makes sense because it will establish a regulated means of dispensing marijuana, just as we have liquor stores today.
DeleteAlthough we are supposed to be the same person, I don't think I totally agree with you on this Aethelred. I don't see the need to have the government regulate marijuana anymore than it regulates any other farm crop. The only justification for regulating it would be to prevent people from adulterating it which is a problem now while it is illegal, but that is because it is illegal. I don't see why it couldn't be handled the same as adulterated food. And if somebody wants to give their friends a free high, well so what. Am a little ambivalent on the age thing as well, many countries don't bother with an age limit on alcohol.
DeleteIs there some reason that Norton Symantec is attempting to block this webpage as a "fraudulent website"?
ReplyDeleteYour antivirus sucks??
DeleteHarry Byrd, thank you for your comments about the effects of abuse of alcohol and other drugs, plus a bit about why Prohibition was put into place. What were the civic effects of Prohibition, and what role did they play in its repeal?
ReplyDeleteI'll be happy to address your questions about the marketing of substances anon.
Chuck, not sure where you are going with this but I have changed my opinion of your veiws. Meaning I'm not sure you are for legalization and have found a friend in me to help make your points (of course we haven't seen one yet). I could be wrong but have a hunch.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading, then digesting Holland and Aethelred I'm not sure myself what Prohibition was all about. I thought I would based my writing on fact, didn't realize theory and folklore would have been a better path. Not sure where you want to go with the civic question and I'm not ready nor have the time to write an American History term paper. So I will give two very simple answers, you will fill in the rest.
First one is a statement of fact. Prohibition took a legal tax paying business (brewing) and put it out of business. Thus an legal business that had developed a demand was driven underground, creating even more demand for the illegal product. And as with most things illegal other elements followed, needless to say nothing that was meant to be accomplished with Prohibition Laws.
Second, this is a combination of my opinion and some truth. People learned that one cannot force morals or lifestyle upon others. Fact is Prohibition change America for the worst not better. It created division among people, hurt business and took a toll on families. The morals were lost in the illegal "gin joints".
Based on what I just said one would think the way to stop it would be what? That's right make it legal again. Problem is every other vice that came with the illegal activity was still roaring and growing. Althrough I think I read once where acohol use did drop off over the following years. (Must be when everyone went to Viet Nam).
Did you know that at one time Coke had cocaine in the mix and Bayer Asprin heroin, which was used for the common cold cure? Both could be brought over-the-counter at the local drug store, even by children. What seems like 100 years ago to me my first year of college I had visions of being a history teacher.
"Fat, dumb and stupid is no way to go through life son." -A big pat on the back for the first person to tell us the person saying never truer words of advice.
Oh man I got to get an editor. The line is
ReplyDelete"Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life son."
Harry Byrd~~
ReplyDeleteThanks for continuing this conversation on prohibition. You have your facts right-- Cocaine et al. were considered harmless novelties, as were the tobacco Sir Walter Raleigh brought back from the New World and the wine that got Noah soused after the Flood.
So harmless, in fact, that Sherlock Holme's preferred stimulant was cocaine-- a habit accepted by the entire British reading public without a qualm.
It wasn't until they got lumped in with alcohol during the Women's Christian Temperance Union's heyday that the public was told to fear "reefer madness." My point here is that prohibitions on tobacco and alcohol don't work because they are culturally accepted. We are both quite aware of the corruption Prohibition introduced into all levels of American life. Under Warren Harding, Prohibition resulted in the storage in the cellars of Congress the very alcohol that was illegal to be consumed; I have a feeling Coolidge allowed the practice to continue.
Al Capone would not have been sent to prison had the Feds not provided the judge at his trial documentation that the jury had been bought; the judge immediately exchanged the jury for another one drawn for a different trial and then proceeded with the case. And as you point out, the criminal organizations that formed as a result of Prohibition continue to this day, having spread out into other rackets to maintain their existence.
So, the crux of the marijuana situation is, just how culturally embedded has its use become? If it were limited to a few Uigur immigrants, proscribing it would be no problem at all, but if 40% of the population are either using it or tolerating its use, then we are faced with another Prohibition problem, one which Mexico is already suffering.
Marijuana can and does cause problems, just in different ways than alcohol does. But we deal with the problems of alcohol differently-- we tax it and we limit the sale of hard liquor to state-operated liquor stores. This does three things.
First, because the trade is open and is regulated, there is very little incentive for criminal activity above the level of theft or bootlegging. Second,the state-operated liquor stores are not motivated to increase sales of hard liquor, therefore they do not try to entice the young to become consumers, like other stores would. Third, the tax revenues produced are largely used to provide A) preventive education for the young and for members of the public affected by a person's alcoholism and B) treatment programs for alcoholics and relatives of alcoholics.
The result is that when it comes to dealing with the bad effects of alcohol consumption, our justice system is largely free of corruption, our neighborhoods free of crime associated with the immense profits to be made from dealing in illegal alcohol sales, our roads largely free of the effects of drunk driving (although improvement is needed, clearly), and family members are free from the slavery required by the alcoholic.
Marijuana, as I said, presents different ill effects than alcohol, but if a cultural tipping point has been reached, then in order to minimize its harm, we have to treat it the way alcohol is treated-- an open, regulated trade which prevents its commercialization (especially toward the young) and steers the profits into prevention and education programs.
I don't think it is a harmless drug by any means, but we do need to keep out in front of a trend (if there is one) or risk having it decriminalized and then marketed by a for-profit industry. If we find ourselves fighting against it the way we fought against alcohol in Prohibition, we will face even worse problems than today's.
Does this rambling rant have anything to do with a medical marijuana dispensary in Springfield? No? I thought so....
DeleteThere are additional issues. Because marijuana is illegal it is more susceptible to being adulterated with other drugs which are more harmful in order to be sold as supposedly more potent marijuana. Because marijuana is illegal the persons who market the drug are likely to also be marketing harder more dangerous drugs. Because marijuana is a softer drug than alcohol and possibly tobacco, the young see an inconsistency in our laws and it lowers their respect for law in general. How this discussion relates to medical marijuana dispensaries is in my mind connected to whether you view this as a way of setting up a regulated system for dispensing the drug once it becomes fully legal. It is similar to what was done in some states with respect to hard liquor, namely in some states the sale of hard liquor was limited to pharmacies -- under the fiction that it was medicinal in nature.
DeleteAnd by the way, Aethelred was correct in what he said. Prohibition would never have been passed nationally except for the anti-German vote. If you study the history of the temperance movements that becomes very clear.
Blah,blah blah. This not about legalizing marijuana at all. You keep clogging this blog with your personal agenda that has nothing to do with what is happening. Does this rambling rant have anything to do with a medical marijuana dispensary in Springfield? No? I thought so....once again.
DeleteAnonymous, the issue of medical marijuana is just a small part of a much bigger picture involving cultural mores, the effect of the messages of an environment persuading others to make bad choices (all ads say, "I'm beautiful. You're ugly. Buy this."), and the effects they have on your life and your family.
DeleteIf medical marijuana is permitted, there will be seismic changes in public attitudes towards marijuana use. How do you want those changes to play out? If medical marijuana is not permitted, the underlying problems will continue. How do you want to deal with those? I'm sorry you considered it a "rambling rant."
great, now we are going to have face eating zombies in Springfield.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cnn.com/2012/06/27/us/florida-cannibal-attack/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
You already have zombies running the town and the school system...
DeleteI really agree with the point that you have shared in this article. A interesting and useful article always makes me benefit and get a lot thinking.Bookmark it and recommend to my friends. scottsdale medical marijuana
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 11:21, before you blah, blah me let me say I am against a dispensary in Sringfield even if it were legal! With that being said history plays an important role in making decisions as such. As an example, if you were to cheat on your wife (or boyfriend) and she (he) cracked you in the head with a frying pan you would know that if you cheated again brain damage could be in your future. History taught you this.
ReplyDeleteFor those wanting to convince us this is a good idea Prohibiton provides them (in their eyes) with a fair agrument. Very similar points in many ways. But those points leave out many things, nor apply to our current society.
Another example, if I sit at a bar drinking water and the person next to me is drinking beer when that person falls off the stool and cracks their head open it really has no effect on me. I can still walk, drive and most likely have to use the restroom before I leave. If that same person was sitting next to me smoking a joint there would be effect as I would be inhaling the excess smoke. Thus getting "high" myself. This can happen anywhere. Since we are a "me" society now does this not infringe on my personal space. This is one reason why I say if it is legal how do you regulate it?
Second, don't we have enough headaches in Springfield already? There is not one bit of proof this is a good idea, nor any history of what comes with a dispensary. Why can't our Selectboard explain in more detail why they are for or against anything. Just saying it would be a good or bad idea is not thinking it through, you can go to Shaws and get that opinion just speaking to people.
Quickly one last point. Alpin the anti-German thing had some play in the law. More so was the concern of stockpiling grains at a time of War. Since the Germans made most of the beer it was a natural connection.
I know, I know, blah, blah, blah.
Harry Byrd, how much of a problem is abuse of alcohol in America?
ReplyDeleteChuck, don't know. My point was about the difference and affect of the two. What I do know is both are costing me via my tax dollars for abuse centers, low-income medical care and I'm sure a fair share of food stamps that get traded for cash so they can buy both alcohol and marijuana.
DeleteOur government says alcohol is legal so it is regulated, taxed and somewhat controlled by the States. I say somewhat because I've been to States such as New Mexico where I can buy hard liquor at a 7-11. So to rehash over and over, at least to me is kicking a dead horse.
Marijuana is the hot topic and our government says it's a drug. If you don't want it to be a drug that is illegal then get to work on changing the laws. If you don't want it legal then get to work fighting those that do. Otherwise you are not staying ahead of anything. When the government says its legal, they will also tell you how it will be regulated, how much tax will be collected for the abuse centers and who can sell it. And then nobody will be able to keep it out of any community.
For me the game is over, I refuse to compare a legal beverage to an illegal substance. No need to over think it.
Thanks for the conversation, Harry Byrd! I appreciate your attention to the topic. As I wrap up my end here, I'll leave you with some statistics about the effects of alcohol. In your further roaming through life, you might dig up some comparable ones about the effects of other substances, like tobacco, marijuana, cocaine, crystal meth, and consider what they all have in common and what we have to do to deal with them:
ReplyDeleteDeaths:
from liver disease:15,183
other alcohol-related deaths, excluding accidents and homicides: 24,518
From alcohol-related accidents, 59,000:
falls, 41%
drownings, 30%
boating deaths, 25%
fire fatalities, 45-55%
Crimes:
7,700 to 10,500 homicides
40% of rape offenders (but no numbers)
50% of those who commit sex abuse crimes (no numbers)
Suicides:
28,800 of all adolescent suicides are from families with an alcoholic parent
Family Violence:
572,000 to 660,000 domestic violence cases
26.8 million children live with an alcoholic parent and are twice as likely to develop their own alcohol problems
Pharmaceuticals kill the equivalent of a Boeing 747 filled with people every week, and we're still worried about what pot is doing to people? Anything can be a gateway drug, if it's not pot it will be something else, so I don't want to hear that argument again.
ReplyDeleteIs everyone still too dumb to realise that who controls the drug flow are also the same people who sell us their expensive prescription drugs? God forbid we get back to a more natural less expensive way of living, these greedy Rx companies won't be able to rob us of billions of dollars. Boo-Fricken-Hoo.