I saw an interesting entry at Slashdot today:
https://politics.slashdot.org/story/...ical-marijuana
In states where medical marijuana is available there are fewer prescriptions for medications for pain and other common disorders. This of course cuts into profits for those producing those medications. This has a side effect of lowering rates of prescription drug abuses and overdoses. This would seem to be a good thing for public health even if it is bad for the profits of large drug companies.
If this medical marijuana has shown to be effective, and reduces deaths from overdoses then why does the federal government still consider marijuana a drug with no known medical use? This is in obvious contradiction to its current schedule one status under the Controlled Substances Act.
Perhaps marijuana remains scheduled as it is because we've seen an increase in crime rates from its consumption? If so then where is the evidence? It seems the crime comes from possession, which sounds like a circular reasoning. We keep marijuana possession illegal because we find so many people breaking the law by possessing marijuana?
What does this mean for gun control? If states can openly violate federal law on marijuana trade and possession then what does that mean for "assault weapons"? If a state can violate federal law and show positive results on public health, safety, and crime then what does that mean for any federal law?
Should federal law remain supreme if enforcing those laws makes the lives of citizens more deadly, less free, and inhibits the pursuit of happiness?
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by phamvan
