Our View: Medical marijuana centers should be banned

Advertisement

Editorial Board, Sept. 25, 2011, to January 2012

  • Scott Stanford, general manager
  • Brent Boyer, editor
  • Tom Ross, reporter

Contact the editorial board at 970-871-4221 or editor@SteamboatToday.com. Would you like to be a member of the board? Fill out a letter of interest now.

— Medical marijuana centers are not necessary to meet the needs of Routt County patients suffering from debilitating medical conditions.

Helping those patients is the extent of what Colorado residents authorized when they voted for Amendment 20 in 2000. They did not vote for — and reasonably could not have anticipated — the development of an industry that stretches the law to justify selling marijuana to recreational users. For that reason, we urge voters to ban medical marijuana centers in the November election. Specifically, voters should vote “yes” on four referendums prohibiting such centers:

■ 1A, which applies to unincorporated Routt County.

■ 2C, which applies to the city of Steamboat Springs.

■ 2E, which applies to the town of Oak Creek.

■ 2A, which applies to the town of Yampa.

Marijuana centers were born out of Amendment 20, the language of which reads: “An Amendment to the Colorado Constitution authorizing the medical use of marijuana for persons suffering from debilitating medical conditions, and, in connection therewith, establishing an affirmative defense to Colorado criminal laws for patients and their primary caregivers relating to the medical use of marijuana.”

The amendment allows registered patients or their designated caregivers to cultivate and possess marijuana in small amounts to meet the patients’ needs. Referendums 1A, 2A, 2C and 2E would not change that — patients who truly need pot still would have access to it. Instead, the referendums would, effective Jan. 1, shut down the five marijuana centers operating in Routt County — three in Steamboat, one in Oak Creek and one in Milner.

Nothing in Amendment 20 provides for medical marijuana centers. Such centers began cropping up along the Front Range in 2008 as some interpreted the caregiver provision of the law to allow commercial operations to grow and sell significant amounts of marijuana on behalf of registered cardholders. In most cases, including in Routt County, the marijuana businesses began operating before municipalities could put rules in place authorizing or regulating them.

The local regulations enacted provide some controls on where such businesses are located and how they operate. Unfortunately, there is little accountability for who has access to medical marijuana and whether those regulations are being followed. We also question the accountability for how much product is produced and distributed and whether that quantity makes sense in relation to medical need. No parallel system of training, licensing and oversight exists to that which regulates the conventional medical world or even the liquor distribution system.

The liquor and pharmaceutical distribution regulations include substantial oversight and penalty structures for distribution or redistribution of product to unqualified individuals. There are only limited such controls in place for medical marijuana.

Consider that the latest census indicates there are 18,995 adults living in Routt County. As of July, 1,179 of them were registered medical marijuana cardholders. It defies all credibility to believe that 6.2 percent of our adult population needs marijuana to ease the symptoms of a debilitating medical condition. Our per capita cardholder rate is twice the state average and among the highest in the state.

We should note that the five marijuana centers in Routt County have provided some benefits to our economy in the form of jobs and sales tax revenues. And while the centers certainly haven’t helped our community’s substance abuse issues, we do not subscribe to the naïve notion that banning them will somehow solve those issues. Pot is here with or without marijuana centers.

Colorado has one of the easiest constitutions to amend. If marijuana advocates want to see marijuana legalized, then bring it before voters. If such an amendment were approved, there might be a role for marijuana centers here and across the state.

But until then, the centers are engaged in a sham that uses the guise of medicine to promote the sale of marijuana for recreational use. The centers are making a mockery of what the voters intended when they approved Amendment 20. Voters should ban them by voting “yes” on Referendums 1A, 2A, 2C and 2E.

Comments

JJ Southard 2 years, 12 months ago

Wow, what a ruduculous article. Engaged in a sham? A "sham" that the Pilot has encouraged and created, while all the while collecting a HUGE amount of advertisement dollars from this industry. What a two-faced newspaper. Did Dr. Victory pay you more than the mmj ADs to write this? What about the mmj patients on your staff?? Is their view too? Sure glad the "Opinion" of The Pilot is continually laughed at in this town and hardly taken seriously.

0

mmjPatient22 2 years, 12 months ago

This "opinion piece," or whatever they want to call it, is complete rubbish. I really have a hard time believing that this trash actually made it to print. Shame on you.

0

Rich Hall 2 years, 12 months ago

Congratulations to the Steamboat Pilot for making their decision based on what is right rather than what is popular with the vocal minority. Everyone I know sees what is going on in this industry, and the fact that no one has made any effort to stop the fraud that is taking place is insane. Go away Mary Jane!

0

insbsdeep 2 years, 12 months ago

It made it to print because it is the editorial board of the paper.

Funny how the paper would not ban the advertising, and keep taking the money, when this is their position.

0

JJ Southard 2 years, 12 months ago

tshirtguy, your neighbors and their marijuana won't go anywhere... Actually vote to ban MMC's and your neighbors will only increases their business. Think about it. The vote does NOT ban marijuana. It bans MMC's, which are the safe regulated way of dispensing our constitutionally protected right to use our meds.

Let's vote to ban the Steamboat Pilot & Today's Editorial Board.

0

mark bond 2 years, 12 months ago

The is a very well written and logical article. The vocal minority will have a very hard time logically arguing against simple facts such as the ridiculous notion that all of a sudden there has been an outbreak of debilitating illnesses requiring 6.2 percent of the population to need marijuana. So they will resort to "indignation" and name calling as a last resort to trying to hold on to their recreational use of an illegal substance.

0

CHAUNCEY COOKE 2 years, 12 months ago

Anyone want to score some pot ? Just go to Howelsen any day after school and buy some edible marijuana from the school kids.

They hang out in the baseball dugouts and leave the wrappers. The kids in this town have no problem getting high. My baseball plyers ( 11 year olds ) are getting a grand education from these kids daily.

Where are the kids getting these edbles and pot ?

0

Brian Kotowski 2 years, 12 months ago

mmjPatient22 & insbsdeep seem not terribly fond of the 1st Amendment. One believes a publicly stated opinion to be "shame[ful]", the other believes that legal businesses should be censored.

0

sturn 2 years, 12 months ago

It's about time this was written. It's what most people are thinking anyway. Taking the advertising money but writting this takes some kahuna's...aloha!

0

Rob Douglas 2 years, 12 months ago

Well stated. Well written. Spot on. I support legalization of marijuana. I hope that happens. But, it is time this MMJ farce ends.

0

hereandthere 2 years, 12 months ago

For an entity that makes a ton of money off the sale of alcohol to pretend that they have any moral authority to take a position on this issue is ludicrus in the extreme. Way to go Brent. Perhaps you did not read your own Police Report column this morning. Why don't you grow some cajones and take a stand against the real drug problem that is devastating our community. Instead you promote restricting the civil liberties of your fellow neighbors to promote your bigotry. Don't like, think that others may want, or have the right to treat their medical condition the way they see fit? 6.2 % of the population don't have the right to medicate their debilitating condition under the care of their doctor? Did you do the same indepth analysis and determine the percentage of people in the area that are using precription narcotics? Of course not, did you. Did you not notice the case of precription fraud published in the Police Record today. And lastly, since this old mmj user needs to get to work to contribute to society in a meaningfu and productive way, could one of you pot haters please, for once, provide some direct evidence of the negative effects that having mmj centers has had on our community?

0

Rich Hall 2 years, 12 months ago

Stop calling this an issue about "debilitating conditions"! You only look stupid when you do that. This issue is about the blatant fraud and disingenuous intentions of an industry that presents itself as a para-medical enterprise but makes its money off high school and college kids who are looking to get a buzz. It is poorly administered and it is thoroughly corrupt in the way it has manifested itself.

0

JJ Southard 2 years, 12 months ago

Hereandthere, great post. It does not take "Kahunas" to print this kind of crap... It takes an extraordinarily unprofessional newspaper that has basically extorted money from businesses, now to only stab them in the backs. Were you people proud of the front page and back page marijuana ADs for the last 2 years?

If the blame were properly placed where it should be, this newspaper is solely to blame for allowing the ridiculous advertising, for printing front page after front page pictures of marijuana plants, even dedicating a week-long series on MMJ.... The Pilot was once refered to as a new virtual "High Times". Now this? I don't know how Scott Stanford and Brent Boyer can walk around this town with their heads up, knowing they are so inconsistent and amazingly unprofessional.

This behavior is disgusting.

0

JJ Southard 2 years, 12 months ago

Hey tshirt, jealous of a lucrative industry like all the other business owners in town? Or just a sospbox you like like everyone else?

0

rhys jones 2 years, 12 months ago

Y'all can flap your gums and pound keys all day long, and the only things that could possibly change are where we have to go to get it, where it came from, and whether the town gets their cut.

0

Brian Kotowski 2 years, 12 months ago

hereandthere:

An impressive array of red herrings. First, patients who want to light up will not see their “the right to treat their medical condition the way they see fit ” infringed. Cardholders will still have easy access to all the weed the law entitles them to. Second, the regulatory mechanisms for booze & conventional meds are rigorous. If you believe they need to become even more so, more power to you. It's not the Pilot's job to prosecute your personal crusades. If you wish a brighter spotlight on those issues, how about a letter to the editor? You might even consider standing behind those convictions with your identity.

I find nothing to argue with in the piece. At the end of the day, it advocates letting the voters decide. While I support the legalization of mj, I'll be voting as the editorial recommends.

JJ Southard:

Why is it unprofessional for a publisher to allow a legal entity to advertise a product contrary to the paper's editorial board? Why do you consider censorship to be a hallmark of journalistic integrity?

0

bhad 2 years, 12 months ago

I guess I'll just have to start my indoor grow if they shutdown. Then I can sell to whoever I want.

0

Zed 2 years, 12 months ago

Glad this "industry" is being called out for what it is - a scam with no accountability. I suspect a lot of people might consider a broad legalization of marijuana, myself included, but the current system allows a few to take advantage of the free for all and get rich quick. Shut em down and let's have a conversation about what full legalization might look like.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 12 months ago

The editorial opinions and practices of this publication surely qualify as a "chronic pain" and are thus worthy of mmj treatment. See your doctor. Or ours. Time for a dose...

0

muck 2 years, 12 months ago

MY View!!!!

This paper has done nothing to support the ABOVE view at all!!! THEY PLASTER FULL PAGE ADS OF ALOA ON THE BACK AN FRONT AND CENTER!!! YOU SURE A HECK AINT AGIANST PROFITS FOR THOSE ADS!!

WHAT A JOKE!!

0

John Fielding 2 years, 12 months ago

. I agree that the Pilot has had a significant role in inflaming this issue. While I support their right to accept advertisements from industries that have negative impacts on the community, they have wide discretion over the content. They knew the Alohas ads and the front page placements would be offensive, (perhaps they decided to deliberately offend to create a backlash?)

I disagree with their decision to accept offensive advertising,and their editorial position. As stated above, banning dispensaries will not solve any drug problems. What it will do is send the traffic back underground, the venue of the murderous cartels. It will continue to enrich those dangerous criminals as they continue to expand their presence in the United States, even in remote resort communities.

They have made a good point about the accountability, that is something the state can deal with easily. But having their activity subject to observation as it is now makes possible to scrutinize the activity, to track those who make large and frequent purchases, and to observe if they have frequent contact with the youth in the community.

I have already called for MMJ to support youth activity that will help provide constructive alternatives. http://www.steamboattoday.com/news/2011/sep/10/dervla-lacy-our-drug-problem/#c100425 I also call for the industry to fund the necessary police activity to discourage the diversion of legal product to kids, just as I do for alcoholic beverages. Arresting a few adults buying beer or pot for teens will go a long way toward discouraging that practice. .

0

kevin fisher 2 years, 12 months ago

Our View: The Steamboat Pilot Is a Sham

Guess their online poll didn't come down how Mr. Stanford had hoped.

How pathetic. This very rag, which has glamorized the medical marijuana industry with its full-color, front-page, propaganda pieces and big-buck gratuitous advertising, now takes this stance. So what, 6.2% of the county population has a card? 10% of the population is on an antidepressant. For the paper to step in and question what a physician has decided is an appropriate course of treatment for a patient is not just shameful, it's dangerous. Maybe Mr. Stanford should be at your doctor's office overseeing your next script.

Then, to take the position that the dispensary model was not envisioned is ludicrous. There is no product legal in this country that cannot be purchased in a retail environment. That is America. We don't say "sure Pepsi is legal, but you or your caregiver must make it yourselves."

Lastly, the ever-perpetuated notion that this industry is not regulated is a BOLDFACE LIE. Hundreds and hundreds of pages of laws and rules guide my businesses operation. Both CIVIL and CRIMINAL penalties loom for the non-compliant. On both Monday and Tuesday of this very week all premises under the RMR umbrella were thoroughly inspected by the Medical Marijuana Enforcement Division. To insinuate that the alcohol industry is more heavily overseen is FARCICAL.

I take very serious umbrage with the editorial board's position on this issue. The credibility of this paper and these men should be called into question when lies, not facts are used to set policy positions. These men hold positions of authority and influence in our community. What does it speak of us that we choose them to represent our voice?

Embarrassing.

0

JJ Southard 2 years, 12 months ago

I don't need to spell out 'why' this is unprofessional, Brian.... It's utterly obvious. Ypu explain to me their motive.

Don't worry, 2012 you will vote on legalization. When legalized for recreational use, I will enjoy smoking it then too. But, until all these opinions based on bigotry are just as I have already stated: Disgusting!

0

Brian Kotowski 2 years, 12 months ago

JJ:

Their motives are twofold: running a profitable business, and abiding by the law. The alternative to what you decry as "unprofessional" is censorship. First Amendment, and all that. Are you honestly suggesting some sort of ideological litmus test for who is and isn't allowed to advertise?

0

rhys jones 2 years, 12 months ago

Ahh, better now. As I was saying... You can't blame the Pilot for sucking up to their perceived silent majority, not knowing that many of our resident ranchers are toking up too, they're not stupid; nor stirring the "pot" yet again, forums suddenly dead with boring news. Old Highwaystar hasn't had much to say lately. how to fix that...

True, mmj is just a step toward full legalization, let's hope. This is a movement no government or army can stop, never could, never will. We're gonna do what we're gonna do, and nobody is going to stop it.

The real question is how the Federal Reserve comes down on the issue (ha, watch me sneak that back in) because they determine all national policy in their boardroom, immune form any oversight or regulation whatsoever. If they see pot as a threat, because the populace might then see through their scam, then they would continue to support illegalization. If, on the other hand, they recognize just what a groundswell this is, and the fact that we're ready to fight right now, right here, to save our country and oust the tyrants, then maybe they will take steps to placate the populace.

That's my take. Don't mess with my lifestyle.

0

kevin fisher 2 years, 12 months ago

LIARS: from the editorial-

"Nothing in Amendment 20 provides for medical marijuana centers. Such centers began cropping up along the Front Range in 2008 as some interpreted the caregiver provision of the law to allow commercial operations to grow and sell significant amounts of marijuana on behalf of registered cardholders. In most cases, including in Routt County, the marijuana businesses began operating before municipalities could put rules in place authorizing or regulating them."

From the Pilot's own piece "Growing Pains" one of the authors of Amendment 20:

"Martin Chilcutt, the creator of Amendment 20, moved to Kalamazoo, Mich., five years ago but returned to Denver in summer 2009 to see how far Colorado’s medical marijuana industry had come.

A former member of the U.S. Navy and a psychologist, Chilcutt said in a telephone interview that he was prompted to become an activist for marijuana legislation after seeing the positive impacts it had on the veterans he counseled. But as a longtime marijuana user, Chilcutt said he already knew marijuana’s medical benefits after using it while battling cancer and to treat post-traumatic stress disorder.

Chilcutt, now 76, said the intention of Amendment 20 was to create a constitutional amendment that, when approved, couldn’t be changed. He said it also was written, with the help of his attorneys, in a way that was flexible enough to allow the medical marijuana industry to evolve into a workable system that would benefit patients.

But Chilcutt said a corner drugstore type of distribution model was part of the evolution he envisioned for Amendment 20. He just didn’t know to what extent.

“I was shocked,” Chilcutt said. “My very first impression was, ‘Great. It’s working. Dispensaries are opening, and there’s a delivery system in process.’ I thought, ‘This is great. It’s wonderful.’”

LIARS

0

JJ Southard 2 years, 12 months ago

Im sure all you Pilot paparazzi fat cats are toasting one this morning, feet up on the desk.......aaaaaah the power of the press.

What a sad industry you have chosen, and you call the MMJ industry a sham.... Laughable.

0

Guinevere 2 years, 12 months ago

For once I agree with the Pilot editorial. What's happening is not at all what we voted for with Amendment 20 and it's a total sham. Ridiculous that 6.2% of adults in Routt have a medical marijuana card. The ads are a big problem too and make the whole town look bad. We have enough drug and alcohol problems in this town without adding phony medical marijuana shops and huge ads in the paper for all our kids and visitors to see. It leaves kids with the impression that it's normal to smoke pot.

0

JJ Southard 2 years, 12 months ago

Just lost me as a customer and I, just last week, signed a contract, regretfully now, for more advertising for my new business.... As a professional, I will uphold the contract. But over my dead body will I pay you another penny.

Any business in the MMJ industry of Routt County should follow suit... Even businesses that support MMJ as a legitimate industry should follow suit.

Pull all ADs from The Pilot and Today. Ban this rag!

0

JJ Southard 2 years, 12 months ago

Guin....you agree with the editorial, but then say the ADs are the big problem. Honey, the both come from the same place. Oxymoron eh?

0

rhys jones 2 years, 12 months ago

JJ -- You are correct, Sir. One of the many reasons I got out of TV news (besides the fact that they cut Valley View that summer) was the general insecurity of the "talent" I usually ended up working with. Every one was a star, aspiring to be Ted Koppel. Decisions about what the populace would see were made in busy newsrooms, usually decided by flames and blood, flashing red lights good too. The reporters and news directors were quite smug in their "agenda-setting" function, deciding what is important for us. Then quite serious telling us about it. There are few things larger than a reporter's ego.

0

1999 2 years, 12 months ago

Guinevere...what percentage of people in routt county do you think use prescription drugs to alleviate their pain?

what percentage of routt county do you thing abuses prescription drugs?

what percentage of people in routt county are on "personality" drugs or "antidepressants"?

0

rhys jones 2 years, 12 months ago

1999 -- Thank you!! You just put another piece in place for me!!

I was down in Phoenix a few years ago, brother-related, doing temp labor around town. And in my travels I noticed a large proportion of that town on legal "feel-good" drugs; a little inquiry would verify, and they got easy to recognize, so la-de-da and happy were they... until they ran out of meds. Then stand back, or better yet, just leave town.

Said brother died of liver cancer about then, prescription-caused, reinforcing any previous doubts I may have had about mankind's chemicals. No la-de-da for me.

So if the Fed and the Pharmacies can get us ALL la-de-da, we'll be so happy!!!

0

1999 2 years, 12 months ago

I'm not sure people relise just how many people are driving around wacked out on drugs that hve been prescribed to them because they feel a bit "down"

I wonder if Brent has ever been to drs office and checked their records to find out who has been prescribed personality drugs. Would he have the kahunas to tell the drs that this practice is a sham? would he have the kahunas to tell the people who get these drugs that they don't need them and their use is a sham? are they all suffering delbilitating depression?

me thinks not!

I think we all know HUNDREDS of people who take personality drugs just to take the edge off of their day.

so recreational use of prescription drugs is okay but not recreational use of pot?

gotcha......

0

rhys jones 2 years, 12 months ago

Along with professional sports and organized religion, feel-good drugs are part of a vast but subtle plot to keep the populace blind to the activities behind the curtain.

0

Scott Stanford 2 years, 12 months ago

All:

The Steamboat Pilot & Today Editorial Board's role is to take a stance on community issues on behalf of the newspaper. This editorial represents the collective opinion of the Editorial Board, whose members are listed at the top of this opinion piece, including community representatives. Certainly we understand, accept and invite differing opinions, both in this forum and in print.

Newspapers maintain a distinct separation between the editorial and advertising departments. Advertising is purchased based upon the audience the newspaper is able to reach. Judging simply from the comments above, the newspaper clearly reaches medical marijuana advocates as well as those who oppose it. Thus, it makes sense that medical marijuana businesses would purchase advertising in the newspaper to reach potential customers. At the same time, it makes sense that medical marijuana centers would refuse to advertise in the newspaper based upon this editorial stance. But if an editorial is to have any integrity, then past or future advertising should have no impact in the formulation of the newspaper's opinion.

Again, differing opinions are encouraged and welcome. We will gladly offer equal space in print and online to opposing views. You can submit a letter to the editor or guest column by emailing editor@SteamboatToday.com or simply filling out the form at the link below:

http://www.steamboattoday.com/submit/letters/

I look forward to your feedback.

Scott Stanford General Manager 970-871-4202 sstanford@SteamboatToday.com

0

1999 2 years, 12 months ago

it's pretty amazing to me that some feel good drugs are perfectly acceptable and other feel good drugs are not.

explain that please.

0

CONative 2 years, 12 months ago

Sure enjoying all the discussion today. Don't need to watch any soaps. I have two comments:

  1. First, can everyone please stop misusing the word "kahuna?" Kahuna is a Hawaiian word, defined as a "Priest, sorcerer, magician, wizard, minister, expert in any profession." I think the word you want is "cojones."

  2. Second, congrats to Ed Board. This was a well-written piece, and you definitely showed some COJONES in taking on this topic.

0

CHAUNCEY COOKE 2 years, 12 months ago

My step father took medical marijuana for cancer ( in North Carolina ). You can get marijuana in any state legally if you have a true need.

The mediacl marijuana centers here are simply a sham. The drugs are getting into the hands of our children at an alarrming rate.

I am gettting tired of seeing kids eating the edible marijuana and smoking pot in places such as Howelsen. This great supply of pot is flowing at an alarming rate to the kids.

The " don't mess with my lifestyle " people don't see this nor care. That is sad.

0

gettinold 2 years, 12 months ago

yvb,

do you really think the cartels read the pilot, and that they dance in the street? or perhaps a little fear mongering is going on here?

thanks Scott for pointing out the diffrence between advertising and an editorial opinion, I would have thought it to be obvious.

It seems this particular debate will be won by whoever shouts the loudest and most often

0

BeCoolHoneyBunny 2 years, 12 months ago

While I do agree that "the centers are engaged in a sham that uses the guise of medicine to promote the sale of marijuana for recreational use", I disagree with the reasons the editorial uses to back up it's stance on closing down the dispensaries.

  1. These businesses are HIGHLY regulated. To say that there is little accountability is ludicrous. The editorial staff is either ignorant or untruthful if they assume this. Maybe not as much as a pharmacy but definitely way more than a liquor store.

  2. As routter stated, "Chilcutt said a corner drugstore type of distribution model was part of the evolution he envisioned for Amendment 20. He just didn’t know to what extent." So this IS really the expected outcome, by both the creators of Amendment 20 and the voters. Just not to recreational users.

  3. That leads me to the most important issue I have with this editorial. Why can't we really see the real issue? It's not the dispensaries that should be targeted by the anti-MMJ crowd, but the doctors who write the recommendations. Would we choose to ban Walgreens and Lyons if we feel there are some recreational users of pills abusing the system? No! We would target the doctors who write the prescriptions. I don't believe anyone is arguing that these MMJ dispensaries are selling to non MMJ card holders.

Has anyone ever presented a valid argument why these places should be banned? I hear a lot of speculation of harm being done, but really can only see the positives of having these businesses.

0

BeCoolHoneyBunny 2 years, 12 months ago

And while I do agree recreational users are abusing the system, "using the guise of medicine" is not only a problem with MMJ. Prescription drugs are steeped in the practice. Commercials on TV are constantly saying to go ask your doctor about their drugs. That's no different than how these MMJ cards are being given out. Anti-anxiety drugs are widely prescribed, for no other "medical" purpose then to make you feel less anxious and depressed. How is that different than MMJ?

Again, why can't we create REAL solutions to REAL problems?

0

freerider 2 years, 12 months ago

Americans have become a nation of pussies and sheep - fear of marijuana is laughable

fear is a real disease of the mind and is the mantra of politicians and clergymen

Time to legalize and stop the cartels - follow the money

REEFER MADNESS !!!

So Scott and Brent what's the pilot's position on legalization ?? it is pretty funny you take the dispensary's money for ads then stab them in the back with this makes the pilot look like two faced politicians blowing smoke ...

0

1999 2 years, 12 months ago

ya know freerider...please refrain from using the P word. it's highly offensive to me.

0

JJ Southard 2 years, 12 months ago

Scott, that is a ridiculous excuse for this article. We are not idiots. This article has HUGE influence and YOU KNOW IT. Using OUR newspaper to spew your agenda is disgusting and when my contract runs up, I will never give you or your rag another penny of mine. You can say whatever you want, the motives of this article are apparent.

Of course you offer space on your pages for differing opinions, you are a newspaper. But, take for example the City of Vail and The Vail Daily. With Eagle and Edwards right down the highways full of dispensaries, they took a stand and said NO ADVERTISING in their paper for medical marijuana. This way, they're stance is clear.

Steamboat Pilot & Today Editorial Board, you have discredited yourselves forever.

0

spidermite 2 years, 12 months ago

freerider, The Pilot didn't stab anyone in the back. They just have a different opinoin . They are allowed to state their opinion. They allow us to give our opinions. Thank you Pilot. I'm for legalization...

0

CHAUNCEY COOKE 2 years, 12 months ago

I think we are all in agreement that the centers are a sham. Persons that have a true need will not be effected if the centers close. Medical marijuana is availble to anyone ( such as my step father with cancer in N.C. )if the centers close. Why keep the centers open ?

Many supporting the centers argue that they should be able to abuse marijuana, just like people who abuse prescription drugs.That is a bad argument to keep the centers open.

I am not seeing pills in the hands of kids. I am seeing a free flow of edibles and pot to kids. There is a huge amount of pot free flowing now via card holders to kids not pills. Check out Howelsen and other areas after school and see which drugs the kids are using.

0

Brian Kotowski 2 years, 12 months ago

Both Tom Ross and Joanne Palmer have contributed Pilot columns delineating their concerns with/fears about guns in America. One wonders if the mj chest-thumpers regard them as having stabbed Gunsmoke Bob in the back, given that he advertises his concealed carry class here about once every quarter.

0

1999 2 years, 12 months ago

CRC...you are all kinds of wrong.

do some research on prescription pill abuse by kids.

http://www.webmd.com/parenting/features/prescription-pills-teens

honestly...do some research. your ignorance about this is alarming.

0

jk 2 years, 12 months ago

Sep, will you please reference these articles?

0

CHAUNCEY COOKE 2 years, 12 months ago

1999 Do you ever tire of using abusive words to try a make a point ? It is easy to do when you hide and remain anonymous.

Be the better person you can be.

0

Brian Kotowski 2 years, 12 months ago

jk - the Palmer piece is pretty recent, within the last 30 days. The Ross column appeared shortly after the Tuscon attack where Representative Giffords was shot.

0

SMRFF 2 years, 12 months ago

It's extremely frustrating that people, even with all of the current research on marijuana and its effects (good and bad), still lump MJ with true hardcore drugs when referencing the drug and alcohol problem that exists. Sorry, but MJ is in no way similar to cocaine, meth, heroin, alcohol, etc.

The side effects of marijuana are relatively harmless, especially when compared to those of alcohol, oxycontin, vicodin, xanax, valium, soma, children's tylenol, aspirin, tussin cough syrup, OTC allergy medication, afrin, and yes, caffeine.

So, to say that these dispensaries are somehow contributing to the drug abuse epidemic in this town is BS.

No one from the anti-dispensary/anti-MMJ side is able to present any solid facts to backup their antiquated arguments on the subject. They base their ignorant opinions on anecdotal evidence or outdated, proven-to-be-false information.

Even in the editorial above, the only hard facts presented are the number of residents in Routt County and the number of said residents with an MMJ card. This proves absolutely nothing. Pilot, who are you to dictate who has a legit need and who does not? Even if 100% of Routt County residents carried a card, you still would not have a valid argument.

As someone else pointed out - yes, there are most definitely people who are abusing the system just like people will abuse any regulated system that is put in place. It is not, however, the dispensaries' duty to decide who is legit and who is not. They are not doctors.

Me thinks some members of this county need to turn their focus to more pressing, non-marijuana related issues which have a very negative impact on this community - alcoholism, prescription pill abuse, the high suicide rate, etc, etc.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 12 months ago

More smoke and mirrors, diversionary tactics, throw 'em a bone, watch 'em squabble, and don't look behind that curtain!!

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 12 months ago

This editorial has bad factual errors. It is outright deceptive to mention MMJ dispensaries and Amendment 20 without mentioning Colorado State law HR 1284 which provides for the registration and regulation of MMJ dispensaries. These are some of the serious factual errors of the editorial:

1) The MMJ dispensaries were not imposed by some outside force, but was the result of considered decision making process by the Colorado State Legislature which has passed an original law allowing MMJ dispensaries and then HR 1284 which significantly updates and specifies MMJ regulations.

2) The US Supreme Court has ruled that personal use, personal growing or caregiving MMJ remains a federal crime. Raich vs Ashcroft To say it would remain a legal option is simply factually wrong.

3) Since personal use, personal growing and caregiving is clearly described in Colorado Constitutional Amendment 20, the legislature cannot violate what is now part of Colorado's Constitution to make those conform to federal law.

4) The US Supreme Court has not ruled on the legality of Colorado's HR 1284 regulating MMJ dispensaries. The law was written after Raich vs Ashcroft and is intended to satisfy the concerns expressed by the US Supreme Court on why personal use still triggered the interstate commerce clause. Specifically, Colorado dispensaries now must track plants from seed to harvest through processing to eventual sale to registered Colorado MMJ patients. Thus, dispensaries now have the records to demonstrate they did not buy or sell MJ across state lines.

5) Banning dispensaries will not alter the number of registered MMJ patients in Routt County. The number of MMJ patients and upon what basis their doctor wrote a MMJ recommendation is a matter between the patient and their doctor. Dispensaries are not allowed to write MMJ recommendations to prospective patients.

6) If kids possess MMJ products then someone has violated state law. If a dispensary sold to kids then that is a very serious violation that could easily be the end of that dispensary. If a MMJ patient allows a nonMMJ patient to use their MMJ then that is grounds for the MMJ patient to have their state license revoked and criminal charges to be filed.

7) The fact that the Colorado Constitution is relatively easy to amendment is irrelevant because Colorado can do very little other than what it has already done to make MMJ legal. To avoid violating violating federal law then Colorado would have to do is regulate the growing, processing and sale to locations within the state and to limit sale to people licensed by the State as Colorado residents. That is exactly what the State Legislature did in HR 1284. Thus, it would the only step not taken that would be acceptable to the authors of this editorial would be to make HR 1284 into a constitutional amendment where it could no longer be modified or correct by our elected state officials. That is a truly bad idea.

0

Kelly Victory 2 years, 12 months ago

I strongly support the views expressed by the Pilot in today's editorial, and respect Brent Boyer, Scott Stanford and the rest of the editorial board for weighing in publically on this topic. I have been a vigilant proponent of banning MMJ dispensaries for the very reasons that have been ennumerated in Boyer's column. This is not an argument, pro or con, on marijuana; a vindication of all that is alcohol; a pardoning of prescription drug abuse; a love of "big pharma"; or any of a thousand other topics the pro-MMJ crowd wants to toss in as a diversion -- It's an arguement that the pot dispensaries have taken advantage of a poorly regulated and administered "medical exception" in order to create a lucrative business, promote their wares, and provide a drug to thousands of people without a legitimate medical need. They are making a mockery of the system in the process, and much of the drug is ending up in the wrong hands. The only ones who will be impacted financially -- one way or the other -- by the outcome of the vote in November, are the dispensaries. Not I, not the Pilot, not Sheriff Wiggins or Police Chief Hays, not Grand Futures, not the school board, not the other out-spoken physicians in town will benefit financially from either outcome. We are all taking a stance because we believe it's best for our community to shut these dispensaries down. So in the words of one of the strong dispensary and marjuana supporters, yes, "Follow the money"...

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 12 months ago

It also a factual error to fail to list the Town of Oak as not being affected financially by this election.

Town of Oak Creek would collect $8,000 in fees into the general fund unless the MMJ businesses are banned. That represents about 3% of the general fund.

Town of Oak Creek electricity enterprise would be so affected by losing major customers that the Town is drawing up two budgets depending upon the election results.

To say Town of Oak Creek would not be financially affected by the election results is yet another factual error of the opponents to MMJ.

0

CHAUNCEY COOKE 2 years, 12 months ago

One negative impact on our community are the radio ads that are aired by our medical marijuana centers.

They feature Cheech and Chong type voices that say " buy medical marijuana, it is not habit forming like oxycontin ".

0

jk 2 years, 12 months ago

Sep. I found both of those articles and talk about comparing apples to oranges, Give me a break! Nice job of trying to stir the pot!!

0

Brian Kotowski 2 years, 12 months ago

All part of the service, jk. Happy to oblige.

Do you count yourself among those who resent the distinction between the paper's editorial & advertising departments? Do you believe an ideological litmus test should be administered to those who wish to advertise in the Steamboat Pilot & Today? Do you propose that only those advertisers who conform to the publisher's editorial board should be allowed to peddle their wares? Are you an advocate of that kind of censorship?

0

Bob Samardzic 2 years, 12 months ago

Oh man, this is great news!! Thanks to the Pilot, me and all my friends from back home can quit our landscaping jobs and start selling weed again! We'll just go down to Denver and pick up garbage bags of that cheap stuff and sell it up here to the stupid locals and tourists, just like the good ol' days. Hey, and while we're at it, we might as well pick up some other... stuff... y'know what I mean...

So, lemme know, people! November 2nd, Suburban Mafia is back in bizniss!

0

jk 2 years, 12 months ago

Sep, all I am saying is pot stirrers like yourself, and the paper, just rub me the wrong way. Now I understand the paper is just trying to get the best bang for their advertisers buck, but why are you spewing your nonsence?

0

Brian Kotowski 2 years, 12 months ago

jk,

If arguing against censorship="pot stirring", guilty as charged. And happily so.

It is instructive, I think, that I have respectfully replied to your queries, and you have ignored all of mine. On the other hand, you've avoided much of the childishness that characterizes too many contributions here, so thanks for that.

0

spidermite 2 years, 11 months ago

Bentneck, Do you really think that if mmj is voted out it will be because of the" Pilot's View"? Do you think " the stupid locals" can't make their own decisions? Your comment has hurt the dispensaries.

0

jk 2 years, 11 months ago

Sep, I will answer your queries.

No No This one seems like a catch22 to me. I feel the paper is being somewhat hypocritical to sell advertising to someone whos business they call a sham. Yet if the idea is to get your add viewed by as many people as possible for the price payed, then you have to say they are doing their job by trying to increase circulation. No

"Both Tom Ross and Joanne Palmer have contributed Pilot columns delineating their concerns with/fears about guns in America. One wonders if the mj chest-thumpers regard them as having stabbed Gunsmoke Bob in the back, given that he advertises his concealed carry class here about once every quarter." This statement however has no relevancy in my opinion, and is simply stirring the pot.

0

bandmama 2 years, 11 months ago

I couldn't help but read the inquiry as to to the munchables those wacky kids seem to be hauling around in such quanities at the Hill, if that person is really interested there is a GREAT recipe book at Off the Beaten Path....Hmmm, another local business that seems to be making money off of MMJ.....Hmmmmm. I agree to give up MMJ if everyone on Prozac, Zoloft, Paxel, Perc's Demeral, ect ect ect agree to give up their medication for their "legit" ailments, DEAL? Dont see that happening. Does anyone else?

0

Brian Kotowski 2 years, 11 months ago

jk -

Regarding your last graph, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Re: your "catch22": At my workplace, we have potlucks from time to time. My white bean chicken chili is famous all the way from my house to across the street. It usually contains a fair amount of bacon. I love bacon. Don't understand those who don't. Nonetheless, as one of my colleagues adheres to his religion's injunction against pork, I accommodate him by substituting a repulsive turkey-bacon facsimile. Despite my LOVE for the real thing. It doesn't make me a hypocrite - in my opinion, anyway.

On the other hand, if it does make me a hypocrite, then a dispensary's decision to advertise in a venue that opposes its existence would make the advertiser a hypocrite, too. Yet only the paper is charged here with hypocrisy. Duplicity, in this case, is a two way street. That only one party is excoriated tells us a great deal about the accusers.

JJ Southard has called for an advertiser boycott of the SP&T. If the dispensaries don't answer the call, one wonders if Mr. Southard will accuse them of hypocrisy. Somehow, I doubt it.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 11 months ago

Sep, First, the circumstances of this situation is unusual because rarely has the Pilot called for banning a product which they carry advertising.

Second, the editorial used words like "mockery" and generally asserted it was an unregulated out of control business.

Thus, the paper's own editorial raises the question whether the paper believes that advertising from MMJ dispensaries is fundamentally based upon lies. And thus, after reading the editorial, it is reasonable to wonder if the paper accepted advertising it now considers to be false and misleading.

0

muck 2 years, 11 months ago

SSP&T- "Consider that the latest census indicates there are 18,995 adults living in Routt County. As of July, 1,179 of them were registered medical marijuana cardholders. It defies all credibility to believe that 6.2 percent of our adult population needs marijuana to ease the symptoms of a debilitating medical condition. Our per capita cardholder rate is twice the state average and among the highest in the state".

So Scott and all those who oppose..... Chew on this a second. If above is correct information. Imagine how many ILLEGAL pot smokers are in and amongst you. If 6% are legal, i bet 40+% smoke and 25% dont smoke but are smarter then you think and dont buy the BS.

0

CHAUNCEY COOKE 2 years, 11 months ago

Many supporting the centers argue that they should be able to abuse marijuana, just like people who abuse prescription drugs.That is a bad argument to keep the centers open.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 11 months ago

And if I was an owner of a dispensary that advertised in the Pilot then I wouldn't expect that the Pilot owed me a favorable editorial, but I'd be extremely upset over this editorial because I'd expect the Pilot owed me a FAIR editorial.

To include outright lies in an editorial is simply wrong.

To mention the Colorado regulatory environment for dispensaries without mentioning HR 1284 is to simply ignore the factual regulatory system.

Many of the comments and concerns expressed in the editorial are explicitly addressed in HR 1284.

This editorial reminds me of something Gilda Radner's Emily Latila character would say on Saturday Night Live only for a news anchor to say Colorado HR 1284 regulates grow operations and dispensaries from seed to sales to licensed customers. And then she says "Oh that's good. Never mind".

0

muck 2 years, 11 months ago

Do you support a ban of all medical marijuana dispensaries and related businesses in the city of Steamboat Springs?

Yes 41% 189 votes No 55% 254 votes I need more information 2% 13 votes 456 total votes

0

Brian Kotowski 2 years, 11 months ago

Scott Wedel:

I regard the “circumstances” you accurately describe as immaterial to the issue of censorship. A vendor wishes to advertise a legal product. The proprietor's ability to do that should (ideally) be unimpeded by a media outlet's opinion of the product.

I did a TDY in Vegas not long ago. I found myself irritated by the herds of rolling billboards encouraging Johns to patronize the hookers (hell, I'm irritated by Ron Popeil). My irritation is irrelevant. The voters in that jurisdiction have decided it's all good in that venue. Until the voters in these environs make an appropriate ruling, whining about hypocrisy is, well... whining.

0

BeCoolHoneyBunny 2 years, 11 months ago

Sep, your argument is weak.

"A vendor wishes to advertise a legal product. The proprietor's ability to do that should (ideally) be unimpeded by a media outlet's opinion of the product."

Really? Television and newspapers OFTEN pull adds that it disagrees with or that they think may hurt profits. It is such a common occurrence that your argument seems absurd.

0

Brian Kotowski 2 years, 11 months ago

BeCoolHoneyBunny:

There's a reason I parenthetically included the qualifier "ideally."

Do you advocate the Pilot imposing editorial censorship of our local dispensaries?

0

BeCoolHoneyBunny 2 years, 11 months ago

In a perfect world is what your saying? Ideally?

I don't know what you mean by editorial censorship. Please explain. An editorial is an opinion piece written by the newspaper, usually the senior editor. How does that relate to the censorship of the MMJ's?

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 11 months ago

"The centers are making a mockery of what the voters intended when they approved Amendment 20."

This is a perfect example of the editorial being extremely unfair and misleading.

We can endlessly debate what the voters intended when they approved Amendment 20. As a voter in that election, I very much expected it to be a step towards legalization. I recall that the opponents at the time pointed out that Amendment 20 had a generous list of allowable medical conditions for which patients could falsely claim to be suffering. It was also claimed by opponents that there was no medical proof that MMJ use had a medical justification for many of the medical conditions. I recall the opponents suggesting that MMJ might make sense for certified glaucoma patients or cancer patients wasting away, but not this. But what happened? Voters approved it so whatever the voters were thinking when they voter for it, it cannot fairly be said the voters had no idea of the claimed faults in Amendment 20. All those claimed faults were known to the voters and yet it was approved by the voters.

Also, Amendment 20 is hardly the last word on Colorado MMJ. The editorial board is apparently unaware the Colorado has a state legislature and governor, both elected by the public, that has passed two significant state laws defining and regulating dispensaries.

The elected state legislature passed the HR 1284, the current law, after much debate and was signed by the governor. And dispensaries are exactly what this bill envisioned. For an editorial to claim the local election would end a "mockery" that is precisely what current Colorado law envisions is a gross deception of the historical record.

0

BeCoolHoneyBunny 2 years, 11 months ago

Are you asking whether or not I advocate the paper's ability to choose not to advertise for the MMJ dispensaries? If so, then yes. While I personally think they should run the ads, I also acknowledge it's their right not to run whatever ads they want. Businesses have no right to advertisement. Just imagine if that was part of the Bill of Rights.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 11 months ago

Sep, The difference with the Pilot and this editorial is that the Pilot is saying MMJ is illegal federally and contrary ("mockery") to state law and is mostly being used by people that should not have access to MMJ.

The editorial suggests that the paper accepted advertising for which the editorial board, which includes the paper's general manager, thinks is an illegal product and the ads were false and misleading.

Thus, it is not merely that the paper accepted advertising for a product which is not supported by the paper's editorial, but that the paper's editorial thoroughly suggests failed to meet their advertising standards.

0

cindy constantine 2 years, 11 months ago

Scott W.,

This was an OPINION piece, not a news article that would require all the "facts" be listed as you stated to provide fair and balanced information. I have never known of an OPINION piece that states all the facts that are available--that would not be relevant necessarily to their OPINION. And I further surmise that the voters are smart and certainly would not base their vote on a Pilot editorial. This piece should have the needed effect of rallying the forces so as not to be complacent with the upcoming vote . . . . .

0

1999 2 years, 11 months ago

HEY CRC,.....those were not abusive words. that was a factual statement.

if you think kids are not doing prescription drugs you are ignorant.

thats the facts jack.

you are ignorant to the REAL situation of prescription drug abuse by kids.

0

Brian Kotowski 2 years, 11 months ago

BeCoolHoneyBunny:

Evidently, you've not been following the discussion. No worries - I often wander late to one of these threads; and am not always completely up to speed with all the issues addressed. But I generally try to educate myself before crossing swords with the other participants.

You ask: “How does that relate to the censorship of the MMJ's?” Because the pro-dispensary crowd is trashing the Pilot for accepting adveritising revenue from an enterprise it opposes, and is urging the Pilot to reject all ads dispensaries might choose to buy, as a demonstration of its editorial integrity. However you slice or spin it, it boils down to censorship - which I regard as objectionable.

And for the record: I categorically oppose dispensaries because they're unnecessary. I know adolescents (we all do) – children - who score weed at will, despite legal prohibition and parental admonishments. Anyone with a government thumbs-up to toke doesn't need a government sanctioned/protected dispensary to medicate.

But until the dispensaries are voted in or out, they purvey a legal product, and their ability to do business (IDEALLY, BeCoolHoneyBunny) should not be infringed.

And let's be honest: the pro-dispensary crowd is only attacking the Pilot's acceptance of dispensary ad $ because it's a convenient tactic. The pro-dispensary crowd wants the dispensaries to thrive; denying them access one of the most prominent advertising venues only spites the face by severing the nose.

0

1999 2 years, 11 months ago

sadly bandmama...people will not give up their "antidepressants" if others give up their antidepressants.

it's perfectly okay to use prescription pills to combat depression but not weed.

it's perfectly okay to use prescription drugs recreationally but not weed.

mmmmmmmmm

0

BeCoolHoneyBunny 2 years, 11 months ago

Really? Just because it's an opinion piece doesn't mean it should be lacking in facts. When you go to another doctor for a "second opinion" I hope he/she is using logic and facts to make their conclusions.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 11 months ago

Cindy, An opinion piece written as the opinion of the editorial staff does typically does present a fair representation of the most relevant facts. An editorial board opinion would typically be expected to pass an independent as presenting credible facts.

I never said anything about an opinion presenting "all facts".

But this editorial reads far less like the well rationed opinion of knowledgeable people, but as either quite ignorant of the actual legal situation or deceptions and lies.

How else can you explain how the editorial complains about a lack of controls when those exact issues are specifically addressed under current law? Ignorance or lies?

0

cindy constantine 2 years, 11 months ago

Scott W.

As the "all-knowing, all-seeing" purveyor of facts on the SPT blogisphere, can you tell me if Colorado HR 1284 addresses where/how the patients obtain the prescriptions and how those are monitored? I am sure we all know patients who have gotten scripts on-line from out-of-state docs who have not physically examined the patient requesting the MMJ script. Perhaps the dispensary owners can answer that question for me.

0

BeCoolHoneyBunny 2 years, 11 months ago

Sep,

Are we just now arguing/debating just for the pure fun of debate? Or are we really thinking about what we are saying?

Media always censors. It has a right to. It owes no one the right to advertise.

It's not just that they oppose MMJ in the editorial, but it's with such vigor. They call it a sham and a mockery. Yet, they are helping promote a business that they are against. Seems like a contradiction to me.

By the way, I think I'm pretty informed, I've read everything on this page. The way you worded your question was confusing. I think censorship when it comes to advertising is common. Would the paper write an editorial about the need to ban liquor stores and then still run CPL's ads. I think not. Or what if I wanted to buy an ad that promotes devil worshiping and orgies, both legal activities. Would you not think the paper has the right to not promote that with its advertisements?

0

cindy constantine 2 years, 11 months ago

It also occurs to me that perhaps someone on the Editorial Board or another flunky at the paper staked out one or more of the dispensaries for a credible period of time and an OPINION was formed based on those actual observations of the comings and goings.

0

BeCoolHoneyBunny 2 years, 11 months ago

Cindy, it's not a "script", it's a recommendation. You have to see a doctor. That doctor then fills out a form in which it basically says that you "could" benefit from the use of MMJ. That's all it is. You send that paperwork to the state, with the state fee of course, and they send you a card/license that is good for one year. Each year you have to go back to a doctor to have them re-recommend that you "could" benefit from the use of MMJ.

0

sledneck 2 years, 11 months ago

The "pile-it" is exactly right here. And that pains me to say but...

Medical MJ is a sham that uses the guise of medicine to circumvent a law against recreational MJ. If people have a problem with that reality (and I sure as hell do) then they should work to change the law and stop trying to use the flimsy excuse of medicine for smokin pot.

I think if the perspective changed the law would follow: "We don't need no stinkin permit".

One of the biggest obstacles here, as I see it, is that sooooooooo many pot smokers are, in other areas of our lives, big fans of big-gubbamint policies. The conflict is actually what's biting them in the ass right now.

As the old saying goes: "free your mind (from gubbamint control) and your ass will follow." The question is: can pot smokers, a group that includes some mighty big fans of uncle scams other policies, wean themselves from gubbamints tits long enough to throw off the particular regulations that bedevil them? I doubt it.

0

BeCoolHoneyBunny 2 years, 11 months ago

What is the editorial's opinion?

That MMJ dispensaries should be banned.

Why?

Because of "the development of an industry that stretches the law to justify selling marijuana to recreational users"

So banning dispensaries will prevent "recreational users" from being sold marijuana? Don't think so.

So basically they are proposing a solution to a problem that does nothing to solve the problem they believe exists. Does anyone else see the pure absurdity of this?

0

cindy constantine 2 years, 11 months ago

BCHB,

What about the patients that get their "recommendation" on-line and no doc sees the patient? How does that work?

0

1999 2 years, 11 months ago

I've never heard of anyone getting a recommendation online.

0

BeCoolHoneyBunny 2 years, 11 months ago

The editorial board is not against marijuana as much as it seems it's against these three businesses. Since the ban would only close these 3 shops but not actually ban the act of obtaining MMJ. Someone else will have to be the seller. And that Sep is why it's a contradiction to be for the demise of a business you are also helping to thrive.

0

heboprotagonist 2 years, 11 months ago

For everyone who says "This isn't what I voted for" there are three of us who say "This is exactly what I voted for".

Sham? Yeah. So?

All politics are a sham, economics is a sham. The fact that Steamboat only has one paper (and I don't think it's even locally owned) is a sham.

Vocal minority? I believe that's the anti-mmj clowns and witch doctors (I can only look at voter statistics and facts), but we'll know for sure in Nov. Calling the pro-mmj crowd the "vocal minority" is a clever attempt at re-branding, but it's far from the objective truth.

As for the retort by Mr. Stanford w/r/t a separation between editorial and advertising standards. Don't let his rhetoric fool you. We were all taught how to spin that type of b.s. in journalism school, but every beat writer knows where his company's bread is buttered- and few dare to cross that line. He can claim objectivity all he wants, but it's clear based on what "letters" they print and the biased reporting that he wouldn't know objectivity if he took a class on it.

You would think that with the onset of the digital age that local papers would be extinct by now. Rocky Mountain News certainly couldn't make it work. How does the "Pile o #$-it" make it? Follow the money. No subscriptions, just ads and private money.

0

BeCoolHoneyBunny 2 years, 11 months ago

I believe you might be able to use Videoconferencing with a doc on a computer. Maybe that's changed.

0

BeCoolHoneyBunny 2 years, 11 months ago

Here are all the rules for MMJ in CO

http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/hs/medicalmarijuana/25%201.5-106.pdf

What I'm wondering is if there is a way around a ban? Could the dispensaries dissolve into smaller care-giver groups? Seems like they couldn't legally sell in town under a ban no matter what they call themselves. I guess the city can ban any legal business if it wants. Kind of like making a county dry for booze. So guessing only option for MMJ card holders is to drive out of the county to buy it, or buy it from illegal dealers. Seems like a good solution to their so called "problem."

0

jk 2 years, 11 months ago

Or they can all grow their own. 1,176 grow houses across the county, ya gotta love it!! How long will the pilot sell advertising to the new "Grow Your Own" shops before they write their next editorial??

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 11 months ago

Prior to HR 1284, it was possible to video conference with a Colorado doctor to get a MMJ recommendation. HR 1284 requires a bona fide relationship between the patient and the doctor. So that requires enough of a visit with the doctor to be comparable to what is needed to write a prescription for drugs from a pharmacy.

And yep, grow your own would become huge because of all the locals know with experience are now available to help MMJ patients. I would also expect it to become common for groups of well off SB residents to rent an inexpensive second home which they primarily use to grow their personal MMJ.

Or maybe it is banned in SB and Routt County except Oak Creek and Yampa so then suddenly two economically depressed towns find themselves as boom towns suddenly with dislocated MMJ businesses looking for more commercial space than exist in both towns.

0

Gern123 2 years, 11 months ago

I have to give the editorial board credit. They summarized this issue very succinctly. It comes down to 2 key points: 1) the medical necessity of pot dispensaries is a charade, and 2) this is a dishonest attempt to legalize marijuana and allow some people to make a lot of money by promoting to all segments of our community what is simply a recreational drug. This is a direct health threat to our community.

The alcohol comparison is very non-congruent. Alcohol is not marketed as a medicine. There are no medical alcohol dispensaries. Lets have an honest social debate about it. Even my friends who support legalizing pot call the dispensaries a joke. Either acknowledge that marijuana is a recreational drug issue or keep supporting medical marijuana dispenaries and stop the false comparison.

MMJ advocates sensationally claim that all of our town docs are just giving out narcotics with reckless abandon. Creating a new bad guy to divert attention is an old trick. Ironically, the very pot doc that has been brought up here to make money for themself and the dispensaries gives out the strongest narcotics without hardly even seeing the people and provides no ongoing care. The pot doc writes a recommendation for marijuana, then gives many of the people a prescription for Oxycontin!

The main crafter of A20 stated his intent was to create dispensaries and promote the general legalization of marijuana. Yet that is not what Amendment 20 talks about. So Amendment 20 was a charade for something else? So much dishonesty.

The pro dispensary crowd frequently resorts to personal attacks and outright threats. The TV video of the city council meetings this spring played like a circus of bullies shouting out ban proponents and trying to intimidate them. Dispensary advocates have made threats of 200 grow operations in town, unregulated grow warehouses, lawsuits, more crime, and even threats to the personal safety of ban proponents. I think our voters are smarter than to succumb to threats. They will see the reality of the dispensary mess we have now, and the harm it is causing to our community now, and will ban the pot dispensaries. From 2000 until 2008, the medical marijuana issue lay relatively dormant while at the same time a number of MMJ users exercised their constitutional right. Only since the advent of the pot dispensaries did we get this explosion of abuse and misuse.

The Kelly Victorys, health professionals, educators, business leaders, parents and others who have commented publicly against the dispensaries have no direct financial interest in this issue (loony pharmaceutical and medicine organization conspiracy theories aside). Dispensaries would not be here if it was not about the money. Dispensary owners see a way to make big bucks. The rest of you want to legalize your recreational use of marijuana. Fine. Do both in an honest way. This is not it.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 11 months ago

Gern123, If the paper had printed your comment as their editorial then I would have few problems with it. I may disagree with your opinion, but it is not that bad factually.

Alcohol very much has a history of medicinal use. From Ohio State on the history of Prohibition.

http://prohibition.osu.edu/content/medicinal_alcohol.cfm

And note that during Prohibition that it was legal for a doctor to write a prescription for alcohol. The history of Walgreen's includes how they used the sales of medicinal alcohol during Prohibition to become a nationwide chain.

I do not see MMJ being advertised as good for you medicine that everyone should take. I see MMJ as being advertised as available for those that want it. I honestly hope that there is no one so naive and so stupid to believe because MMJ includes the word "medical" that it is thus good and the person should try to get a mmj prescription.

Personally, I see MMJ as a required sham that creates a structure in which patients are registered and dispensaries can only sell to those that are registered. Since the doctor prescription and pharmacy filling the prescription is a well understood business then it is easy for the State of Colorado to adopt that structure to regulate MJ.

I note that the Colorado Medical Society is not upset at the role they are being asked to play in writing MMJ recommendations. They do not claim that writing mmj recommendations is ruining the medical profession. They are willing to allow doctors to suggest homeopath and other nonconventional remedies. Doctors draw the line when a bad doctor causes real harm to a patient and the evidence of MJ causing harm is weak.

As for the explosion in 2008 of MMJ patients, does anyone believe this reflected an explosion in people using MJ? I think it is clear there now a reason for current mj users to seek a mmj recommendation to be able to get mmj legally and so the change is existing mj users getting recommendations.

If the criticism is that MJ users should not go to a doctor to get a MMJ recommendation, but instead the laws should be changed so that an adult can go to a civil servant to become a registered MJ user then it makes no sense to ban dispensaries. That change to remove the aspect that can be viewed as a medical sham would not affect the operations of dispensaries in any way. It makes no sense to complain that the doctor and mmj recommendation process is a sham by then banning dispensaries.

0

kathy foos 2 years, 11 months ago

Out of 18,995 adults in the county,1,179 seems like a small number of card holders and completely within the real numbers of disabled and sick people using the drug legally at this point in history.They pay the license fees, follow the laws as they are,and then are accused of not really needing the mj and being lawless.My point is that I dont see that this amount oif patients is all that high to remark about.

0

Guinevere 2 years, 11 months ago

Gern123 - Very nice summary of the key points. I agree that the bully tactics of some of the pro-dispensary crowd are going to backfire.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 11 months ago

Don't tell me it's not beneficial. In addition to the many medical advantages mmj offers over man's poor alternatives -- which are a side benefit, to me -- I use mmj to assist in the creative process of whipping electrons into submission. Some of the most innovative solutions to unique programming challenges I ever faced were concocted with the assistance of, if not made possible by, our friend the kind bud. That trend continues today, as my regular trips into cyberspace result in code my construction boys can use.

My second point is to express my extreme disappointment in the Pilot editorial staff for publishing this tripe, gonzo journalism at its finest. Not only are they biting the hand that feeds them, as well as snubbing them in the face, they are arguably alienating at least half the community, pending the results at the polls; a significant portion anyway. All to get a little circulation, more pageviews for their sponsors -- how much are the popup ads? Do you get paid per click? -- and get all the stalwarts like you and me squabbling again, looking at their ads -- how can you help it -- while ignoring our real life, assuming we have one.

Go Pilot. I'll check ya later.

0

OnTheBusGus 2 years, 11 months ago

Perhaps the medicinal mushroom will soon be available for alterations in personality characteristics.

"Many individuals who took a single dose of psilocybin -- the active ingredient in what the drug culture calls "magic mushrooms" -- showed alterations in personality characteristics, largely for the better, that persisted for more than a year, a prospective scientific study showed."

http://www.medpagetoday.com/Psychiatry/GeneralPsychiatry/28788?utm_content=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DailyHeadlines&utm_source=WC&eun=g43935d0r&userid=43935&email=heatheravs%40hotmail.com

0

kathy foos 2 years, 11 months ago

Beyond the issue of mj patients,is that of the newspaper placing pot plants on the cover page so long unnecessarily.Everytime a child hit on it they were to see it.You could have placed a more neutral picture of something more appropriate?Everyone has made mistakes in this new industry ,but the laws of Colorado regulate it?Or does the federal gov have priority/One commissioner stated that the laws conflict,well which one as Routt County residents do you expect people to follow?Its a bit confusing,can a commissioner say let federal law rule and disgard state law? One more point that is always so annoying with the pilot is why the our view at all.Thats five people?Are you sure in the deepest parts of your hearts that everyone agrees with everything said in the view?Or a sort of view of some people on somethings for a paycheck?When we comment we must be called personally and no one is supposed to comment in our names.Some are unnamed and some have been forced to say the name from being banned(like me)and other brave brave souls do it on thier own accord(real leaders if you ask me)At any cost you pay the price by speaking up with your name(I personally wish everyone was unnamed as if makes the point better .Apariently you agree as you are the "Our View Gang".Yet this is the only paper in the world that I have registered to comment and had to have a human being call me and say hello.(Hi Brent!)With the encouragement offered by the Pilot to use your name commenting ,this is so suprising.Anyway,there are a few us us who think you are weird.Im used to editorials with a name and I just dont care what yall think.Its like if I called up John Fielding,Scott Wedel,Freerider ,Bandmama to get together and asked to get together to put out some ideas.What for?Besides causing world war three ,you wouldnt get anyone real opinion.Just some food for Our View thought.

0

steamboatsconscience 2 years, 11 months ago

hey Guinny What I call bully tactics is basically 3 people getting city council to put this on the ballot without requiring them to go out and get the signatures everyone else has to do to get a measure on the ballot. Lets see if that backfires on y'all....

0

Scott Stanford 2 years, 11 months ago

All:

Tshirtguy is the pseudonym for an individual who posts on our online comment board. Tshirtguy is not the owner of Crown Prints, an employe of Crown Prints or affiliated in any way with Crown Prints.

Sincerely, Scott Stanford General Manager, Steamboat Today 970-871-4202 ssatnford@SteamboatToday.com

0

exduffer 2 years, 11 months ago

A thought- If as has been stated so many of my fellow Routt Countians are MJ users, and if it is so easy to get a MMJ license, then why are there not many more MMJ license holders in the county? If I still used MJ (19 years dry) I would get a license right away, you know the sustainability thing, locally grown, no transport costs or drug cartels to worry about. Just a thought.

0

muck 2 years, 11 months ago

Ban the 5 Despensaries and you will create 1700 people selling MMJ in the shadows in Routt County to EVERYONE!

0

rhys jones 2 years, 11 months ago

I sort of miss my Mexican -- decent product, at a third the price or less, AFTER transportation. Ban the dispensaries, please, I want my Sinaloan again!!

0

sashas 2 years, 11 months ago

You and the Governmental agencies can keep suppressing valid cancer cures (there are others), but one of these days, someone might bear arms on you. I am so sick of all these people dying when they could get alternative treatment, but our Gov. won't allow it or share it, of course. Below are some cancer cures not allowed in the USA. Don't you think anyone should be allowed to try to cure themself in the way of his or her choice? Here's a little file I have put together. It's brief and just states tidbits, but you can look further and see the CRIMINALITY going on with our Government! Here are some cures, but of course you marijuana opposers won't believe any of the others either. . . .because the Government is good. Yah right. Keep taking your chemotherapy, vaccines, pharmaceuticals, fluoride, GMOs, aspartame, high fructose corn syrup, and all the other packaged foods, etc. and stay as stupid as you are. Give me a break. I just don't get any of you. There comes a point when thoughts of this sort are nothing but brainless.

0

sashas 2 years, 11 months ago

Cancer Cures

  1. Renee Caisse. (rene-caisse.net) Used herbs called essiac to cure cancer. Died in 1978.

  2. Harry Hoxsey, N.D. Created a salve, which seems to be used more for skin cancer/Opened a clinic in Mexico after being chased out of the USA by the government. Wrote a book called When Healing Becomes a Crime.

  3. Greg Caton. Followed in Hoxsey’s footsteps. Makes a salve called Cansema. Kidnapped by the FDA in 2009, served 2 years in prison, was in Parade magazine’s World’s Most Wanted along with Osama Bin Laden. http://www.naturalnews.com/033573_FDA_abduction.html

  4. Dr. Max Gerson. Specialized in the diet treating and curing first tuberculosis and then cancer.

  5. Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski. Mainly cured brain and spinal tumors. Great movie called Burzynski the Movie: Cancer is Serious Business: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsbNJMufVLA Thomas Navarro - child example

  6. Cancer Breakthrough: Scientists Discover Harmless Bacteria in Soil Kills Cancer Tumors. http://naturalnews.com/033505_soil_bacteria_cancer_tumors.html

  7. Rick Simpson. Uses marijuana to create an oil to treat many different types of cancer. Watch the movie Run from the Cure: The Rick Simpson Story - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0psJhQ...

0

sashas 2 years, 11 months ago

We need to legalize first!

And people keep worrying about the kids getting weed much easier due to the clinics. As a kid, with no clinics, I could get my hands on cannabis a heck of a lot easier than alcohol.

We need to go to the very beginning, Harry Anslinger times, and why cannabis became prohibited. If the beginning can be proven corrupt, it should be overthrown and none of this should even be discussed.

0

CHAUNCEY COOKE 2 years, 11 months ago

Great post Sashas about cancer cures including marijuana. Great info.

Persons that have a true need will not be effected if the centers close. Medical marijuana is availble to anyone ( such as my step father with cancer in N.C. ) if there are no centers. I also have another relative with Wilsons disease who gets medical marijuana where centers do not exist.

Closing the marijuana centers will not effect persons with a medical need.

0

sashas 2 years, 11 months ago

CRC, I had no idea people could legally get marijuana in illegal states if they pushed the issue. My Dad has had glaucoma for the last 13 years, and he is in Wisconsin. I'll have to research regarding how he go about this so he can utilize the cannabis to reduce inflammation. I even wonder about cannabis oil being placed on the eyeball, like skin cancer. The eyedrops he uses are filled with so much crap that his eyes burn extremely bad when he uses them, and the drops are used a couple times daily. It's like someone taking a cow brand to the eyball, he says.

0

CHAUNCEY COOKE 2 years, 11 months ago

My cousin has been had the horrible Wilsons disease for years. He has a medical marijuana permit via his doctor. I think the pot is government grown.

My step father has now passed away from cancer. Both lived where there were no medical marijuana centers. I have a friend who knows someone with glaucoma who has a permit and gets pot as well.

If you are sick and have a true need, marijuana is availble if the centers close.

0

surf4life 2 years, 11 months ago

Howdy, I'm a resident of Routt County and I support the use of medical marijuana to treat patients with a valid medical issue. A few years back when Steamboat allowed the first dispensary to open I was kind of optimistic. It seemed to me that one dispensary might be ok. It was just one business, kind of a test run for this sort of thing. From my perspective all was well for a while, but somehow one business grew to 5 now I think with more and more people wanting to get “into it”. Kind of the marijuana version of the gold rush or the wine country in California. The kicker for me was when we began to see aggressive full page ads in the pilot, radio spots complete with impersonations of some of our favorite stoners. What happened? I was a supporter until I felt it was out of control. You guys lost my trust and I don’t see any turning back now. I’m now convinced that the dispensary model does not work here, not in Routt County. Too much of a good thing seems to have backfired in this case. I’ve followed the news and read the facts on both sides and it’s been very interesting. I actually can’t believe I live in a town that has been a part of this process. So now after watching, reading and listening for years I still support medical marijuana as a treatment, but I for one believe we need to shut down the dispensaries in Routt County as soon as legally possible. It’s clear to me that in order for medical marijuana to be distributed to its intended recipients it should only be dispensed by a licensed pharmacy/licensed pharmacist. I wish the dispensary owners well, but we managed here just fine before you came and I’m sure well be just fine without you if the voters so choose in November.

0

kathy foos 2 years, 11 months ago

I just hope that this election settles things for patients.It seems that people will never stop harrassing the patients(like its open hunting season).Patients are complying with the Colorado laws ,the dispensaries are part of that law,you can vote them out of the community,but you cannot vote out the patients rights at this point..What of the ones that absolutly cannot grow?Do they have a place in Denver that they will have to travel to buy it?Dont just say that they can grow it themselves because that is not true., not everyone can do that even if they have a place.Its like a predjudice that is sanctioned by the newspaper against the people that are a minority, that are following the laws the best they can.The ones that went overboard are the newspaper and radio station by accepting blindly advertising that was bad practice..Just because some are young you automaticly think no one young has pain or any legitamite need for it.This is like a prejudice against a minority that are legal citizens and this will have to stop sometime or its going to be out of control.This a democracy and no matter who you are,if you are bullies against a legal law and legal people living the lives they are entitled to within the law,you are wrong.This election needs to stop it.After the election what next for the harrassment?It has to stop sometime,you are setting examples to kids to do things the wrong way in a democracy.

0

surf4life 2 years, 11 months ago

hi yampavalleyboy, nope I'm not connected to the pharmaceutical business in any shape or form. Is there anything else in my post that needs clarification amigo? Those of us that want the dispensaries to go are not your enemy. We all live here and want what's best for our community. Don't blame me, blame the poor decisions made by the dispensary operators in this county.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 11 months ago

I just hope the forces rise when the time comes, and respond at the polls better than the straw poll of the Plot. Tip, friends: When you make sure your registration is up-to-date, you can also request a mail-in ballot, so you can vote at your leisure. Looks like we've got to beat the rednecks again; they just won't go away.

And Kathy -- I guess this is a "republic," as opposed to a "democracy," the subtle difference being that in the latter the people rule, whereas in the former, their elected representatives do the dirty work. Political scientists will correct me I'm sure, but I think that is the essence of the difference. You don't vote for President; you vote for an elector, whom you hope votes for the same guy (or, um -- gal) -- they will the first round, until their obligation is complete, then they're for sale. We introduce the possibility of graft at several levels, with our system, and nothing was simplified with the near-simultaneous creation of the IRS and Federal Reserve in 1913.

Bottom line is, this is a "republic" in appearance only, as it is indeed the special interests, big business, the "military-industrial complex" (Eisenhower's phrase) and other unseen or unnamed powers which determine policy, ANYBODY BUT US. We see that on an ongoing basis, as our government's ears remain deaf to our pleas. The hand in their pocket tells them what to do.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 11 months ago

Yeah, Kevin Fisher should never have written, directed and produced any of those pothead movies such as the Harold and Kumar series. Right, since if we get rid of local dispensaries then we will never have to hear of marijuana again. It is not as current teenagers would have ever heard of Cheech and Chong if it wasn't for the local dispensaries.

There have probably been lots of teenagers with no desire to try illicit substances, but then they see some ads in the newspaper and think to themselves "I need a beer" or "I need a joint". And so eliminating local dispensaries will eliminate teenage alcohol and drug abuse.

Right, and the dispensaries are obviously part of the problem because they've never been accused of selling directly to minors unlike many of the local liquor stores.

And people in nice neighborhoods would much rather have a gang take over a neighborhood house that have a dispensary owner move in.

Yeah, that's the sort of thinking that is going to help our community.

0

steamboatsconscience 2 years, 11 months ago

hey surf mind telling us what the poor decisions made by the dispensary operators are? the only one I can think of is believing City Council saying they could open their businesses legally.

0

mtroach 2 years, 11 months ago

Interesting tirade against Lisa Watts was posted over on the Summit2012 goals story. I flashed back to it and it was gone. Anyone else see that?

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 11 months ago

I saw that tirade. I would not call it interesting.

What should matter are the ideas, not the person making the argument. Should the TEA Party be dismissed because some idiot racists in the crowd with signs?

What should matter is that those supporting the mmj bans seem suggest that Routt County has too many mmj patients and thus the county shouldn't have any dispensaries.

What should matter is that those supporting the mmj ban say that mmj dispensaries are unregulated and are ignorant that Colorado is the only state which regulates growing from seed through processing to sales. Local dispensaries can not only claim to not buy or sell MJ on the black market, they can prove it.

What should matter is that alcohol is a far more harmful drug and is less regulated (anyone with an id can buy it while MMJ requires a Colorado MMJ patient license).

What should matter is that those supporting the ban are so upset at doctors which cannot be working for dispensaries writing mmj recommendations while literally thousands die from over prescribed narcotics.

What should matter is those supporting the ban claim that Amendment 20 did not foresee dispensaries while ignoring that Colorado State Government explicitly recognizes dispensaries in a series of laws passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor.

What should matter is that the reasons to ban local mmj businesses have a complete lack of commonsense or knowledge.

0

chickadee 2 years, 11 months ago

I am not afraid to double post. Why has not the banking issue been addressed by either "side" of the dispensary "debate"?

Please refer to this Denver Post story:

http://www.denverpost.com/news/marijuana/ci_19016660

Does this banking issue impact the stand of any voter on the dispensary issue? Are the voters considering this information?

If commercial banks will not accept deposits or hold accounts for pot shops and credit card processors are shutting off dispensary accounts, will it necessarily follow that the dispensary business with at least for the near term be an all cash business? How does that impact community safety? How might that result in an increase in white collar crime?

From the Denver Post:

"On Friday, the last bank in Colorado to openly work with the medical-marijuana industry — Colorado Springs State Bank — officially closed down the accounts of dispensaries and others in the state's legal marijuana business over concerns about working with companies that are, by definition, breaking federal law. Robert Frichtel, an industry consultant who runs the Medical Marijuana Business Exchange, estimated the number of accounts the bank held to be around 300"

Read more: Last bank shuts doors on Colorado pot dispensaries - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/news/marijuana/ci_19016660#ixzz1ZfQtGCzt Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse

0

chickadee 2 years, 11 months ago

Should CPS intervene to remove children from the homes of parents who are chronically impaired by MMJ?

Neither CPS nor the Courts care whether the intoxicant of choice of a parent is legal or illegal. If you are impaired, you cannot be a safe supervisor of a child. Not your child. Not anyone else's child.

Does the presence of dispensaries put more children at risk of inadequate supervision because MMJ is so readily available?

According to Rhys and others, the answer might be no. Rhys would say that those who use will get MJ somewhere....anywhere. So maybe the presence of the dispensary just makes it easier for people to request that CPS investigate parents who are known to be regular users?

And Rhys, you seem like a nice guy, so I have to say: WHY the heck are you admitting here to past illegal activity and intent to commit future illegal activity (reference to your Mexican). I ask because I care. It appears that your judgment is IMPAIRED.

You are putting yourself in a position to experience negative consequences (legal) for the sake of championing your cause and your lifestyle. These are hallmark symptoms of substance abuse and dependency. But you know that, right? Because MMJ makes you smart and able to think about Euclidian Vectors and what not. I ask this because I worry about you and hope that you are OK.

PLEASE post lots of responses and feel free to make fun of me and call me a nay-sayer. I am interested in hearing from "both sides of the debate".

The more posts the better. I look forward to sitting down with a diet coke and some chips later this evening in front of the computer and would like to have some more entertainment. Right Here!

0

chickadee 2 years, 11 months ago

While I making requests for entertainment, will those of you on "either side of the debate" continue to post more opinions based on some anecdote where n= 1?, that is, there is no control group.

example: "mj applied topically "cured" my skin cancer! I know this because of my personal experience, that is a real scientific study with a control group of one person !";

or better yet, tell me you learned something third hand from an uncle with irritable bowel syndrome and pink eye as to the efficacy of MMJ according to personal anecdote where n= 1 (mmj cures both, aight?)

It is always interesting to hear these stories, but I feel sorry for the poor folks whose medical privacy rights are being violated for the sake of anecdotes in support of a "lifestyle". Really—do you think that anyone’s elderly uncle wants the SB P and T readers to know about his glaucoma or diarrhea?

That being said...believe it or not...I am neutral on the dispensary issue and I support legal mj. But I will not support anyone who drives or tries to parent while under the influence and I continue to refuse to hire people who are suffering from substance abuse or dependency. card or no card. Not even to mow my lawn or walk my dogs. If you show up to mow my yard, paint my house, diagnose my network, install my home theater, babysit my grandchildren etc. and you even look high...no dice. I will not do bidness w/cha.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 11 months ago

Does the presence of dispensaries put more children at risk of inadequate supervision because MMJ is so readily available?

Do dispensaries really make it more likely that parents will have MJ in the house? I know of no studies on the issue, but the answer is not obvious because ease of supply reduces the need for storage. Dispensaries make it easier for people to get what they plan to use that night while having to go to less convenient drug dealers encourages buying enough for several days.

I know it has been shown for grocery shopping that nearby access to a grocery store tends to cause people to shop more for a day or two while those live further tend to buy more to last longer. And for food, it affects their shopping habits with frequent shoppers buying fresher ingredients and bulk shoppers tend to buy more frozen food.

As for n=1 examples not proving anything, valid point. If mj contained a clear straightforward drug like penicillin then it would have been found and isolated by now. But studies have also shown that the placebo effect is stronger where there is more advertising for drugs and thus a greater expectations that drugs will fix health issues. Remarkably enough, the placebo effect has been shown to still be effective even when telling the patients they are receiving placebos. Incredibly enough, people with irritable bowel syndrome taking a sugar pill a few times a day not only reported feeling better, more of them felt better than taking the latest prescription drug for IBS.

Seems to me that you get into these complex systematic conditions such as IBS then patient's attitude is very important and so patients that believe MMJ is helping them are probably correct.

Far more important than the medical efficacy of MMJ is that MMJ provides an easy legal framework for regulating MJ from production to selling. So dispensaries are far less about being medically proven remedies (that health insurance would cover?), but about creating a legal means of distributing MJ to adults with a state license.

If the situation was compared to banning Genetically Modified foods where it is so complex that banning would eliminate it then it would make more sense to place a higher emphasis on the question of medical efficacy. But it is far more comparable to alcohol Prohibition of the 20s with the law being so commonly violated that it did not stop people from drinking. If we ban dispensaries then we do not remove marijuana from the community, but probably transfer it to the illegal market which includes gangs.

Dispensaries at least sell only to licensed adults unlike drug dealers. I think we should really be asking ourselves if we'd rather have dispensaries or drug dealers selling marijuana in this county? Seems obvious to me that dispensaries are a better way of distributing mj than drug dealers because dispensaries are far easier to monitor and regulate as well as being far more helpful to the local economy.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 11 months ago

BTW, over prescription of narcotics is the big issue facing the medical profession, not mmj recomendations

Bad doctor story http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-drug-dealing-doctor-20111005,0,5840883,full.story

The charges come amid a prescription drug epidemic that recently pushed drugs ahead of traffic accidents as a cause of death nationwide.

lots of deaths story http://www.latimes.com/health/la-me-drugs-epidemic-20110918,0,4000089,full.story

One relative newcomer to the scene is Fentanyl, a painkiller that comes in the form of patches and lollipops and is 100 times more powerful than morphine.


You have got to be kidding! Where is the outrage over the narcotic lollipops? But the local anti-mmj crew get upset over mmj lollipops? The hypocrisy of Dr Victory and her ilk of making mmj the local issue while being silent as narcotics are also put in lollipops and are killing people is grotesque. If they really cared about people then she would have used her knowledge to craft local regulations on local prescription narcotic use and left mmj alone.

0

Brian Kotowski 2 years, 11 months ago

Feds order pot shops to close within 45 days

SAN FRANCISCO -- Federal officials are warning California medical marijuana dispensaries they must shut down within 45 days or face criminal prosecution and having their property confiscated.

The state's four U.S. attorneys sent letters Wednesday and Thursday notifying at least 16 pot shops or their landlords that they are violating federal drug laws, even though medical marijuana is legal in California. The attorneys are to announce their coordinated crackdown at a Friday news conference.

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/state&id=8381783

0

rhys jones 2 years, 11 months ago

Chickadee -- I think we are nearing the problem. Why are you so concerned about what I do? Have you met me? Do I threaten you? Why is it that you are so concerned that I toe the mark you set? What business of yours could it possibly be how I spend my time?

I am honest in these forums to a fault, obviously. I will live with the consequences, and some appreciate my candor. If all were so revealing, maybe we'd have fewer problems. I will not apologize for being who I am. At least you know who it is.

0

mavis 2 years, 11 months ago

Honestly-- I don't have the time to read all of these blogs.... which brings me to my question... how many of you WORK full time???? Unemployment pays way too good aparently...... If you need your pot to keep you going and alive for true medical needs fine.. .It doesn't need to be like a brownie, muffin or whatever. The last time I had antibiotics I had to choke every time I took one and couldn't even come close to doing it for two days let alone the 10 prescried days.
Bottom line if you are sick... take what makes you better. are most of americans OUT OF CONTROL?? yes. Do you ALL need pot in the shape of a dessert NOPE. We don't want our children thinking drugs are candy.. why do you have your "medicine" in the form of a dessert??

0

muck 2 years, 11 months ago

WHAT ABOUT THE KIDS? Try parenting! Its this old thing that our grandfolks did! It is difficult for some.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 11 months ago

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/10/16/sunday/main20121033.shtml (CBS News)

According to the Centers for Disease Control, one American dies of a drug overdose every 14 minutes ... with a rapidly increasing share of those deaths caused by prescription drugs. It's the sort of statistic law enforcement officials in one Florida county know about all too well. Our Sunday Morning Cover Story is reported now by Tracy Smith:

Another day, another pill patrol for Pinellas County, Fla. Sheriff's deputies.

Instead of chasing drugs from abroad, police say their biggest problem now comes from a doctor's office.

0

canyonwind 2 years, 11 months ago

The Federal Government is by far the Biggest Drug Dealer in the 60's they flew in C130's and B-52 packed with Herroin to help pay for that unjust war. In the 80's the CIA sold crack cocaine to the Black neighborhoods starting in Oakland and then everywhere else. The 90's brought Meth to Middle America state like Colorado were flodded with the stuff and in Hawaii they made it smokable and called it ICE where it is still Hawaii's biggest drug problem. Today it's ARM CANDY from Afganastan a $500 Billion Business that funds BLACK OPPS. And you thought we were there to get those Terrorist. Oh Please grow up. People are worried about the MMJ they think the FEDS don't like drugs when the truth is all Papa FED cares about is a kickback As long as the Cartels in Mexico pay Papa FED they will get to sell their drugs here and we even give them guns to kill their rivals that are not paying their dues. So grow up the Government don't give a rats @$$ what you do just shut up and pay up thats what its all about

0

rhys jones 2 years, 11 months ago

I just wish I was one of the jarheads on night patrol guarding the poppy crop from the nasty Al-Queda.

0

canyonwind 2 years, 11 months ago

What ever happened to those two ladies that had it out for Fisher??? One was from Ohio and a Doctor the other North Routt County and a phoney Tea party person. Not that they are missed. ANYWAY DON"T FORGET TO VOTE TO KEEP THE POT SHOPS OPEN AND WHILE YOU ARE AT IT VOTE THAT PROP 103 DOWN. THIS STATE WON'T NEED TO RAISE TAXES IF WE SAY YES TO THE POT SHOPS. AND ALSO AMERICA IS BROKEN AS WELL WE HAVE HAD ALMOST 12 YEARS OF NONSENSE IN THE WHITE HOUSE AND WE CAN'T TAKE 4 MORE YEARS OF OBAMA. WE GOT TO GET RON PAUL IN THERE OR WE ARE SCREWED. PERRY, PALIN, ROMNEY BACHMAN ARE NO DIFFERENT THAN OBAMA. REGARDLESS OF WHAT EVER STUPID PARTY YOU BELONG TO. JUST GO REGISTER AS A REPUBLICAN SO YOU CAN VOTE OR CACCAUS FOR RON PAUL HE IS OUR ONLY HOPE. THE NEO CONS ARE JUST AS BAD AS THE OBAMA ZOMMBIES AND PAUL IS FOR LEGALIZATION

0

lenny gawlinski 2 years, 11 months ago

Why do some people want this ban . The majority voted its use. I SAY LETS BAN ALCOHOL people who want it can go to other places to get there "recreational drunk "and get in there cars - cause accidents , and violence , and domestic problems in our society . ALCOHOL is the big problem in the world and its legal. MMJ helps people and is not the cause of violent crimes . Alcohol is the bad drug so I say ban alcohol now for the good of all and legalize MMJ and watch as the people this world join in peace in - in 2012 vote for the legalization of this wonderful , helpful , calming , product that was put here by GOD for our use .Peace be wit you. God be with you . Please vote NO on the ban . Thank you AMEN

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.