It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: HanzHenry
a reply to: Xcathdra
why should someone have to BUY something from a For Profit company at a premium when they can grow it ORGANICALLY on their own for FREE?
plus smoking it provides instant relief AND the cannabis tar has benefits including being beneficial to the lungs.
originally posted by: Xcathdra
As for those who posted with detailed information - Thank you.
I don't smoke so was curious as to the difference between marijuana and pill form. I guess the other "counter point" would be self medication not always being the best idea.
I tend to view a large chunk of the argument in favor of, no offense to anyone, as nothing more than an excuse to smoke it. I am sure its not the case however based on my experience (law enforcement / medical profession) I have seen more cases of a contrived medical condition in order to justify use.
Hence the reason I asked about the difference between the pharmaceutical position verse the Kottonmouth Kings position.
originally posted by: Xcathdra
originally posted by: HanzHenry
a reply to: Xcathdra
why should someone have to BUY something from a For Profit company at a premium when they can grow it ORGANICALLY on their own for FREE?
plus smoking it provides instant relief AND the cannabis tar has benefits including being beneficial to the lungs.
I was under the impression the medical marijuana laws regulate who can grow and amounts they can grow. Unless that has changed the original questions stands.
Source: Court says feds can police pot collectives (Jan 2014)
SAN DIEGO — An appeals court on Wednesday upheld the federal government’s right to crackdown on California medical marijuana dispensaries complying with state law.
The unpublished ruling by a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals addresses a lawsuit from four San Diego dispensaries and a patient, as well as separate but similar suits in Sacramento and the Bay Area.
originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: HanzHenry
State laws vary on who can grow.
As for your comment above about pills. The fact they are prescribed allows better tracking of crime statistics. Either way it all falls under the CSA.
by the way not arguing.. just debating.
Pharmacies, like Walgreens, has the links in place to catch the same person trying to fill similar prescriptions.
originally posted by: Quauhtli
Corporations will start looking at MJ only for the opportunity it has to offer in monetary gain. If you ever thought of it as a controlled substance before it surely will become one now.
I can see the process happening. They will never just erase the criminal charges. But instead little by little they will trickle it down for public use, only under their strict management. It is not beneficial for them to have anyone growing the stuff for their own personal use. They are getting the process down right now, and you can bet after it is all figured out they will have complete control of your backyard garden as well.
For your own safety and well being though.