Making the Case for Medical Marijuana

[Conan71]

I remember people buying at the standard price of the time at $20 an ounce.  Sometimes they would get it for $15....

I can see today's market would keep me off pot forever, even if legal.  Unless I grow my own...

Geez dude, how old are you or was that total ditch weed?  I figured that was the price back when Jesus and his band of merry men were tromping around together.

[dbacksfan 2.0]

Geez dude, how old are you or was that total ditch weed?  I figured that was the price back when Jesus and his band of merry men were tromping around together.

Waaaaayyyy back when, around the time Peter Frampton played at the Tulsa Speedway, and Gary Temple when not working for TPD worked for Tulsa Security Patrol at Nathan Hale as the resource officer rent a cop, and my source lived in Lortondale, a lid (ounce) was $10.00 for average stuff, and $20.00 for the "knock your socks off" stuff.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Geez dude, how old are you or was that total ditch weed?  I figured that was the price back when Jesus and his band of merry men were tromping around together.

Mid to late 60's or so.

As the saying goes, "Good sh$t, Maynard..."

Won't say where the best stuff came from but it was a special room in a basement in downtown Tulsa with EXTREME security armed protection everywhere...

[patric]

Oklahoma leadership

That, or an almost contemptuous lack of sensitivity:

"While Tulsa's west side is known for narcotics, Durant said the checkpoint could have been placed anywhere in Tulsa"

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/crimewatch/west-tulsa-to-be-site-of-dui-checkpoint-during-multi/article_4ae85647-bd5c-50a7-82ff-186331f18848.html
They got around to their legal obligation of announcing the roadblock location after the fact.  People often wonder why the courts require police to specify the exact location...

It may seem counterintuitive for police to be so specific in advance about their intent to set up a checkpoint. After all, anyone who would be planning to go out drinking on the night in question would, it would seem, be able to thwart the social and safety-related usefulness of the checkpoint simply by avoiding the exact location where the police indicated that it would be. But there are many people of precisely the type that police are interested in taking off the roads who either do not pay attention to advance warnings of checkpoints, or disregard them. http://www.oklahoma-criminal-defense-lawyer.com/oklahoma-dui-checkpoints-in-actual-practic

[TeeDub]

I think it was public before it actually happened...   Not long before, but before none-the-less.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/crimewatch/west-tulsa-to-be-site-of-dui-checkpoint-during-multi/article_4ae85647-bd5c-50a7-82ff-186331f18848.html

[patric]

I think it was public before it actually happened...   Not long before, but before none-the-less.

If we are talking minutes it still borders on contempt and puts every checkpoint citation in jeopardy.  One good lawyer...

Meanwhile, good news:
http://kfor.com/2018/04/23/gov-fallin-signs-industrial-hemp-measure-into-law/

[patric]

Alcohol is legal, but pretty much everyone knows you are not allowed to be drunk (or drink) at work.
Nevertheless, there are employers this stupid:


State Chamber says medical marijuana state question would restrict employers' rights

"Although we recognize the medicinal qualities and potential for economic growth in our state, Oklahoma's employers shouldn't be required to change their policies regarding drug testing and employee retention based on a sloppily drafted State Question."
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/government/state-chamber-says-medical-marijuana-state-question-would-restrict-employers/article_c4f1a9d3-3f75-5dbb-8118-f044fa99b79a.html

[Conan71]

Alcohol is legal, but pretty much everyone knows you are not allowed to be drunk (or drink) at work.
Nevertheless, there are employers this stupid:


State Chamber says medical marijuana state question would restrict employers' rights

"Although we recognize the medicinal qualities and potential for economic growth in our state, Oklahoma's employers shouldn't be required to change their policies regarding drug testing and employee retention based on a sloppily drafted State Question."
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/government/state-chamber-says-medical-marijuana-state-question-would-restrict-employers/article_c4f1a9d3-3f75-5dbb-8118-f044fa99b79a.html

I was told last night by someone who is pretty heavily involved in politics in New Mexico that there's an undercurrent of movement in some counties and communities across the state to decriminalize all drugs.  The logic is that the state and communities are pissing away millions (or billions) in taxpayer funds on incarcerations and putting people into debtor's prisons who can never pay off their legal bills and fines which adds further to the issues which likely feed their addictions.  He feels stepped up treatment options need to be a part of such an initiative.  He did mention that it was basically to quit penalizing users, but dealers could still be arrested as the decriminalization would be based on quantity, i.e. less than 1 oz of weed or less than a gram of meth.

This was said in the presence of a local LEO I have high respect for.  I asked his thoughts, he said in his 17 years of being a state patrolman and working in smaller communities that alcohol is by far a bigger problem and he sees the revolving door of locking up the same addicts for three or for days and slapping fines on them as a waste of public resources.  I was rather surprised at his response but I've heard other current and former state patrol types say they are far less concerned with dope smokers as they generally run 5-10 MPH less than everyone else and are semi-paranoid so they drive straight as an arrow.  That may be an over-simplification from a few of the ones I know and they may be the only ones in the entire country who believe this.

I think you have to consider though that "drug safe" zones could lead to chronic abusers relocating basically to escape persecution of their habits.  There's some good merit to this but any unintended consequences need to be fleshed out.  The LEO mentioned what a homeless sh!thole Pueblo is becoming (maybe it's cheaper to be homeless in Pueblo than it is in Denver or Colo. Springs?) since weed was legalized.  I honestly never notice homeless camps when we go through Pueblo or stop there for something but perhaps we aren't looking in the right places.

This still doesn't really address the legal over-prescribing of opioids.  One can only hope that as more states relax their views on weed that people who suffer from pain issues or who simply have an emotional dependence on pain meds might be more apt to use pot instead of pill-seeking.  Odd that most states still ban a substance which is now proven can be grown and taxed and is virtually impossible to OD on (at least die from an overdose, I'm not talking about people who smoke until they have a crazy schizoid reaction they eventually come down from) while they continue to sanction the legal prescription of drugs and legal sale of alcohol which can and do kill people every day.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I was told last night by someone who is pretty heavily involved in politics in New Mexico that there's an undercurrent of movement in some counties and communities across the state to decriminalize all drugs.  The logic is that the state and communities are pissing away millions (or billions) in taxpayer funds on incarcerations and putting people into debtor's prisons who can never pay off their legal bills and fines which adds further to the issues which likely feed their addictions.  He feels stepped up treatment options need to be a part of such an initiative.  He did mention that it was basically to quit penalizing users, but dealers could still be arrested as the decriminalization would be based on quantity, i.e. less than 1 oz of weed or less than a gram of meth.

At least tens of billions, and I suspect if all the costs were added up - something carefully avoided now by the powers that be who benefit from our incarceration culture - it would be hundreds of billions!  Treatment and other assistance programs would be much cheaper.



Here are some thoughts - there are others, but the ones that say incarceration is better are always wrong lying!

https://www.blvdcenters.org/blog/understanding-treatment-vs-incarceration-debate

https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/principles-drug-abuse-treatment-criminal-justice-populations/providing-drug-abuse-treatment-to-offenders-worth-f

http://www.bhsbaltimore.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Incarceration-vs-Drug-Treatment-Costs.pdf

[patric]

Most of the demand for CBD is from consumers or patients who suffer from anxiety, insomnia or sleep problems, joint pain and inflammation and depression, according to a study conducted by Brightfield Group and HelloMD. In their survey, they learned that only 2% of the respondents cited epilepsy as the medical condition they were seeking to relieve:


Source: Brightfield Group and HelloMD


With only a small amount of the overall CBD business likely tied to the treatment of epilepsy, Epidiolex doesn't appear to offer a threat to current CBD providers, except perhaps in that narrow category. Epidiolex, if approved, will be indicated only for patients suffering from LGS or Dravet syndrome, though doctors would be able to prescribe it for additional indications. Most analysts expect that there could be significant off-label activity, as doctors treat patients who suffer from other forms of epilepsy or possibly other indications. GW Pharma is studying Epidiolex to treat tuberous sclerosis complex and infantile spasms.

One of the big advantages of Epidiolex is that it will likely be covered by insurance companies, a distinct advantage over traditional medical cannabis that will likely overcome any sort of cost advantage that dispensary or mail-order CBD might offer. Epidiolex is expected to have an annual cost of $30K or more.  Additionally, quality control is likely to push potential patients to adopt FDA-approved Epidiolex over other sources of CBD.
https://www.newcannabisventures.com/how-fda-approved-cannabis-products-could-affect-cbd-distribution-channels/

FDA taking the lead should mean it will be a lot harder for some vape shop to mix together essential oils and label it CBD.

[RecycleMichael]

I met this guy at the radio station and interviewed his company. They have a brick and mortar store at 68th and Memorial and a website.

This cream is FDA legal and sells for high dollars. I don't know if it works, but he gave me a tub of the Level 5 stuff that sells for $90. I am almost afraid to open it.

https://www.mycbdsolution.com/

[patric]

I was told last night by someone who is pretty heavily involved in politics in New Mexico that there's an undercurrent of movement in some counties and communities across the state to decriminalize all drugs.  The logic is that the state and communities are pissing away millions (or billions) in taxpayer funds on incarcerations and putting people into debtor's prisons who can never pay off their legal bills and fines which adds further to the issues which likely feed their addictions.  He feels stepped up treatment options need to be a part of such an initiative.  He did mention that it was basically to quit penalizing users, but dealers could still be arrested as the decriminalization would be based on quantity, i.e. less than 1 oz of weed or less than a gram of meth.

This was said in the presence of a local LEO I have high respect for.  I asked his thoughts, he said in his 17 years of being a state patrolman and working in smaller communities that alcohol is by far a bigger problem and he sees the revolving door of locking up the same addicts for three or for days and slapping fines on them as a waste of public resources.  I was rather surprised at his response but I've heard other current and former state patrol types say they are far less concerned with dope smokers as they generally run 5-10 MPH less than everyone else and are semi-paranoid so they drive straight as an arrow.  That may be an over-simplification from a few of the ones I know and they may be the only ones in the entire country who believe this.

I think you have to consider though that "drug safe" zones could lead to chronic abusers relocating basically to escape persecution of their habits.  There's some good merit to this but any unintended consequences need to be fleshed out.  The LEO mentioned what a homeless sh!thole Pueblo is becoming (maybe it's cheaper to be homeless in Pueblo than it is in Denver or Colo. Springs?) since weed was legalized.  I honestly never notice homeless camps when we go through Pueblo or stop there for something but perhaps we aren't looking in the right places.

This still doesn't really address the legal over-prescribing of opioids.  One can only hope that as more states relax their views on weed that people who suffer from pain issues or who simply have an emotional dependence on pain meds might be more apt to use pot instead of pill-seeking.  Odd that most states still ban a substance which is now proven can be grown and taxed and is virtually impossible to OD on (at least die from an overdose, I'm not talking about people who smoke until they have a crazy schizoid reaction they eventually come down from) while they continue to sanction the legal prescription of drugs and legal sale of alcohol which can and do kill people every day.

Special interests draft legislation that lackey legislators cant wait to put their name on so they can look "tough on crime," like the 2013 wave of per se zero-tolerance metabolite laws (that courts in other states have already struck down)
https://www.oklahomalegalgroup.com/oklahoma-criminal-defense/arizona-rules-zero-tolerance-drug-dui-law-unconstitutional-could-oklahoma-follow

Everyone has metabolites (endorphins, for example) so no one could pass Oklahoma's DUI law as written,
http://blog.norml.org/2013/06/11/oklahoma-becomes-third-state-this-year-to-approve-unscientific-per-se-limits-for-cannabis/

but the unions that wrote those laws arent about to give up "valuable law enforcement tools" just because they might not be based on medical science.

[patric]

Current law says non-intoxicating CBD oil can have up to .03 ppm THC to be considered legal in Oklahoma, but...

Oklahoma has a zero-tolerance law saying that any positive test for THC, the psychoactive component in marijuana, or its metabolites is considered driving under the influence. The language of SQ788 fails to exempt licensed patients from that law, nor does it provide a legal limit for THC in the blood while operating a vehicle.  (the Oklahoma Association of Chiefs of Police) said that could force officers to make enforcement decisions on a day-to-day basis, which could lead to confusion and criticism.

Part of the problem with marijuana-intoxication tests is that THC and its metabolites can remain in a person's system for days or weeks after just one use. So saliva tests, and even blood tests performed within two hours of a person's arrest on suspicion of DUI, would fail to indicate how recently the person consumed marijuana.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/state/medical-marijuana-vote-spurs-concerns-about-impaired-driving-issue-not/article_06d9ed0a-20a0-5218-81d3-9ad7b1e8131b.html

Hmmm, tough one.  We know the zero-tolerance law is overly-broad and based on a poor understanding of science but it gives us broad discretion to lock up sober people as much as intoxicated ones, so do we enforce it?

...or do we wait for the legislature to catch up?

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/health/oklahoma-house-to-study-how-to-implement-medical-marijuana-if/article_da210198-4e88-50b6-a675-54baba13ba84.html

[patric]

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/elections/we-ask-the-governor-candidates-what-are-your-views-on/article_ec4af3fa-ff06-50ad-947c-8302120f2ddd.html

[Hoss]

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/elections/we-ask-the-governor-candidates-what-are-your-views-on/article_ec4af3fa-ff06-50ad-947c-8302120f2ddd.html

Pretty much party-line nonsense.

As long as Republicans (and some Dems/Inds) back for-profit prisons, they'll never change on this.