Massachusetts ballot questions: Question 3: Medical Marijuana

[xiphias]

Now, on the surface, legalizing medical marijuana would seem like a no-brainer to me. And it mostly is. Because, well, I see absolutely no reason marijuana should be illegal in the first place. But there are still issues to talk about.

My feeling is that medical marijuana laws are, for the most part, "camel's nose in the tent" laws to attempt to, in the long run, get marijuana decriminalized, and eventually, legalized. And that's not actually a bad thing, really.

I have a few Facebook and LJ friends who have medical marijuana cards in states that issue such things, and most of 'em don't have the sorts of diseases that you associate with medical marijuana. In some of those cases, it would be fair to say that they've got the cards primarily in order to use the marijuana recreationally.

I don't have a problem with that. I think society doesn't benefit from PREVENTING the recreational use of marijuana, so, if people are skating through the medical marijuana laws in order to use it recreationally, who cares?

And, yeah, ADDITIONALLY, marijuana has real benefits for some forms of pain. Besides knowing people who are using medical marijuana recreationally, I ALSO know people who are straight-up-illegally growing marijuana for their own use in chronic pain management of exactly the sort that people use in pro-medical-marijuana arguments. And I'd much, much rather that those friends could just go and buy their pot rather than going through the hassle and risk of growing it themselves. If someone's got a chronic painful disease, or has had a lifetime of the kind of work that is LITERALLY back-breaking, and therefore has worn out all their joints and their spine, or has an injury that never quite healed properly, why SHOULDN'T they be allowed whatever pain relief actually works for them?

This, again, hearkens back to the observation that our society seems to think that "sucking it up and suffering in silence" is a noble characteristic that should be encouraged. And, well, maybe the ABILITY to suck it up and do what has to be done regardless of your personal pain is a virtue, but actually being forced to EXERCISE that virtue when there's no real necessity for it? Not so much. Pain sucks. It's sometimes inevitable, and we have to deal with that fact. But if it's avoidable? Avoid it!

So, yeah. I'm in favor of medical marijuana. But it's not a completely cost-less decision, because of how it's implemented in most states.

In practical terms, medical marijuana dispensaries are primarily used by recreational users. Which means that neighborhoods with dispensaries attract potheads. Which is annoying, but not crippling. ("We've got another infestation of hipsters and/or hippies." "Crap. I'll go get the RAID.") But they also can attract ACTUAL drug users. Someone on my friends list has a series of sad-but-funny stories about this phenomenon in his own neighborhood.

But my mother had another interesting point. She is a liberal, an ex-hippie, a chronic pain sufferer, and a hospice worker, and is ALSO a law-abiding citizen who doesn't break laws no matter how stupid they are unless there's a compelling moral reason to do so. So you can imagine how she feels about marijuana legalization. If pot was legal, she might use it. (Although, given all her food allergies, maybe not so much, actually. That's the primary reason I don't smoke pot: I tried it twice and got a histamine reaction both times, and if I'm allergic to something, odds are Mom is, too. . . ) But still. No reason for it to be illegal, and laws that exist for no reason just plain shouldn't exist.

So, yeah. She's in favor of legalizing marijuana. And she pointed out that this in itself may be a reason to vote AGAINST medical marijuana. Her argument is that, once the medical establishment gets ahold of a thing, it'll never let it go. She wants marijuana legalized just because it shouldn't be illegal in the first place. Does medicalizing it help that process or not?

Even so, me, I'm in favor of the proposed law, simply BECAUSE of the nose-in-the-tent effect of it. I DO believe that marijuana decriminalization, and the legalization of medical marijuana ARE steps on the slippery slope to marijuana legalization. But I WANT society to go down that waterslide, so I'm in favor of it.

Comments

[alandd.livejournal.com]

I would caveat it that - cynical as I am - some of the opposition to medical marijuana laws comes from drug companies, who make money off of pain pills & won't make money from a 'natural' solution...

Follow the money...

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

More of it comes from law enforcement, and especially from the for-profit prison industry, who make a lot MORE money off of this stuff.

Since Massachusetts doesn't have for-profit prisons, we aren't as bad off as a lot of places.

[houseboatonstyx.livejournal.com]

I know a disabled veteran who gets his medical care from the VA. VA doctors had prescribed him pain pills which added up to 70 pills per day. He got a m.m. license and was able to drop ALL 70 pills.

Follow the money.

[chanaleh.livejournal.com]

I don't know from pain management, but I understood that another principal medical use of marijuana was to treat cachexia, which is among the most debilitating sequelae of cancer (in particular), and for which there are currently NO FDA-APPROVED DRUGS, except for pot, which just happens to, y'know, fucking work.

[awfief.livejournal.com]

FWIW - Marijuana, for personal use, has been decriminalized in MA for a few years - it's a civil offense with a fine like $100 or something, if you have 1 oz or less on your person.

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

Sure. But "decriminalization" is not "legalization", and PROVIDING the marijuana is still a criminal offense.

[awfief.livejournal.com]

*nod* agreed.

[ellettra.livejournal.com]

One of the problems we're running into here in Oregon is that while MM is legal here, it's not legal under federal laws. That makes it end up being a sticky, tricky dance between state autonomy and federal regs. As usual, patients get the shaft.

Another problem we're running into here is that MM dispensaries are about as far from your average Rite Aid pharmacy as you can get. One dispensary was called "Rumpspankers" for pete's sake. My point is that there is still a huge leap to be made in public relations terms. If MM dispensaries and growers want to be taken seriously.... wellll... then they ought to act more life pharmacists and less like Rastafarians.

[dianavilliers.livejournal.com]

Even without the medical use of marijuana, I can't find any reasonable justification for keeping it illegal for recreational use while alcohol is still legal. They both seem to have about the same level of social harm, and, arguably social good and they're about equally difficult to produce for the (in some cases very) average person, which has implications for enforcement/taxation. So, both or neither, and your country has experience with the results of the criminalisation of alcohol...

[felis-sidus.livejournal.com]

I see rebmommy's point, but for me the benefits of having marijuana legally available now outweigh the possible delay in outright legalization. Although, there may be less risk of the medical establishment keeping hold of marijuana than one might think. Pharmaceutical companies can't patent marijuana because it's a natural substance. They'd have to "tweak" it in some way, or develop an artificial version, then patent that. So there's no motivation for the pharmaceutical companies to try to control it. And insurance companies are only too happy to have medications available "over the counter" because that means they don't have to pay for them. So there doesn't seem to be much economic benefit for the medical establishment to hold onto.

Then, too, I have a selfish personal concern regarding complete legalization of marijuana. I'm allergic to the smoke, just as I'm allergic to tobacco smoke. Sure, we could pass "no smoking tobacco OR marijuana in public" laws, but my experience as a T rider leads me to believe that such laws are not likely to be enforced other than in places such as restaurants, where the owners could face penalties for not enforcing them. I realize that it's NOT all about me, but there probably are plenty of other folks who have the same concerns as I. Anyone have a handy solution?

[jhitchin.livejournal.com]

In Washington, we have Initiative 502 this year which would legalize cannabis to an extent. You would be able to purchase it from state authorized sources and the tax revenue would go to support health care and substance abuse protections. The pro 502 commercials are all featuring law enforcement saying that they're for it.

[cos]

In general states that have legalized medical marijuana hadn't already decriminalized simple possession beforehand. We have, which I think will make medical marijuana play out much less dramatically here. People will need to go through the medical marijuana system to *sell* without high risk to themselves, but people who merely want to use or share have much less incentive. Not much risk to being caught with a bit of pot in your possession translates into not that much incentive to cheat the medical marijuana system so that you have something to protect you if you get caught.

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

My guess would be that any of the parts of the "pot economy" which involve money would include going through the medical marijuana system, but people who are just mooching off their friends wouldn't have to.

I honestly don't know what percentage of pot smokers only mooch of their friends without ever buying it themselves. Since I don't smoke, I'm not part of those interactions.

[cos]

I disagree. Even if someone buys, the main motivation to cheat to get a medical certificate is fear of getting caught with possession, not getting caught for the act of buying.

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

But don't you need a medical certificate in order to buy from a dispensary? I'd have thought that the existence of dispensaries would have pushed out other dealers. I mean, wouldn't someone who bought from a dispensary in order to resell have to mark up the product, making the dispensary cheaper? Or does the entire existing supply chain simply continue to exist unchanged?

[cos]

If you're currently selling, even if just informally or to a few people you know, why would you stop? You'd stop if people stop buying from you. But why would they stop?

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

Like I said, I'm not entirely clear on how the economy works, since it seems like a small-scale black market economy would be an informal economy, which would take on blended characteristics of both market AND gift economies.

In a pure market economy, you'd either expect that the dispensaries can provide the product cheaper, because they are doing it more openly and don't have to spend resources on keeping it quiet, or that they would be providing it more expensively, because of the costs of regulation.

If the costs of regulation were high enough to raise the prices, then, from a market point of view, one would expect that the existing black market supply chain would continue to exist, in competition with the dispensaries, and that you'd end up with two markets -- the legal market and the black market. Although, because of the Federal/State weirdness with dispensaries, you'd actually be dealing with a grey market-vs-black market situation, which is really interesting -- I don't know of other cases like that.

But the point is that, if it is a market economy, people would be going for the best price, balanced by their tolerance for risk.

However, if the marijuana market has more of the characteristics of a gift economy, then people might NOT be selling primarily for profit, but also with a community/relationship-strengthening motive. Which would mean that people would be willing to pay a higher price, both in money AND risk, in order to maintain their social bonds.