Legislative Alert: HB5389: Renamed: CT Democrats pro-marijuana crusade
 |
| Governor Dan Malloy and his protege - "Puff" The Magic Dragon |
"Stoned and being a fan of John Denver is no way to go through life, son."
And no offense to the many Ron Paul Libertarians who stop by to visit this blog, now and then. I know you folks have a lot of passion, and are well-meaning, and you harbor extreme hatred for the Federal Reserve, but many of you are a little nutty when it comes to defining Liberty as the right to smoke a bowl where-ever, and whenever you please. Some of you have gone so far as to express the view that "smoking pot is good for you." Sorry, not for me. And not for our children. And let's face it, you'd have to be pretty baked to sell your crazy theories about a secret government 911 conspiracy, or to adhere to the idea that the lunatics within al-Qaeda are just a bunch of misunderstood folks who mean us no real harm (you guys have more in common with Obama than you do with the GOP). Love, Dope, Peace!
The pro-marijuana/drug users are back in full force with a new Bill in hand (as amended), and once again with Governor Malloy in their pocket:
(please click the link above for the draft version)
This version is an extension of the original but with many additional components. Basically, you find a pro-marijuana doctor (Sect. 1, Sub 8) who can diagnosis you with an debilitating medical condition (as loosely defined under Sect. 1 Sub. 10), who then takes his nifty pad, and writes you a certified note (Sect. 1, Sub. 12) that you're marijuana-fit, and you're good to go! It's also nice to see the medical lobby is well represented in this bill by it's army of attorneys - HB5389 carefully outlines all the protections afforded to Doctors and "caregivers"; making then free from prosecution (and accountability) for anything their patients do, or they may have done to promote marijuana use, and or the results of that act as long as they've covered their rears with the right checklist (Sect. 5 and Section 6):
"(Sect 5): A qualifying patient or a primary caregiver may assert the palliative use of marijuana as an affirmative defense to any prosecution involving marijuana, or paraphernalia relating to marijuana, under chapter 420b of the general statutes or any other provision of the general statutes, provided such qualifying patient or such primary caregiver has strictly complied with the requirements of sections 1 to 15, inclusive, of this act."
and...
(Sect. 6): . (NEW) (Effective October 1, 2012) "A physician shall not be subject to arrest or prosecution, penalized in any manner, including, but not limited to, being subject to any civil penalty, or denied any right or privilege, including, but not limited to, being subject to any disciplinary action by the Connecticut Medical Examining Board or other professional licensing board, for providing a written certification for the palliative use of marijuana..."
This bill is one that even Michael Jackson's Doctor would approve. If only Conrad Murray had Jackson under his care in Connecticut, right?; he'd probably be onto his 30th cadaver by now, and able to afford to live large on an big estate next to Tom Foley in Old Greenwich.
I was happy to read to read that there are a few positives in the bill, including some restrictions outlined in Sect. 2, Sub (a)2, its nice to know that potheads won't be permitted to smoke their way onto a transit bus, or ... god forbid, a school bus. Boy, these legislators think of everything, don't they? I'm beginning to feel safer already.
This bill is just another move in the direction to legalize all kinds of drugs, and activities (or at least decriminalize them). Democrats are carefully inching step-by-step toward a world where drugs of all kinds are perfectly acceptable so long as they are administered by the State; nothing is beyond reproach if the State can simply get its cut of the action.
The victims of these bills are the generations of children who will grow up watching their parents smoking their brains away, and worse - they themselves becoming addicted to even more deadly alternatives which will put their lives in peril. Democrats don't want to talk about the tie-in that drugs - even marijuana - has to serious crimes like larceny and even murder. Democrats will tell you that no-one dies over dime bag of weed, yet it seems that we read week after week about drug-related gang shootings across the Country.
Making access to drugs easier is not the brightest move by our Government. And making those who should be accountable for perscribing them, like doctors, less accountable makes even less sense. It makes the job of the policeman, drug councilor, addiction staff member, and even the teacher that much harder. When hearings are held on March 7, the fact that the drug enthusiasts will drag out cancer victims and use the testimony of AIDS victims to use as props to advance their agenda is both unfortunate and disgraceful - because it masks the real intentions of pro-marijuana advocates, and disgards the real consequences for the rest of society.
 |
| Buzz off, Copper! I've got a certification from Dr. Roraback! |
I AM
THE KING
This original blog entry can be found at http://www.thekingsview.blogspot.com
Disclaimer: This entry and others will be modified/updated at a future date. All entries are for the sole purpose of entertainment.
2 comments:
Mr. King,
I agree, government making recreational drugs more available and easily accessible is a very bad thing. That is exactly what the drug war does. Heroin was bad enough for you in 1920. The government making it 600 times cheaper by having a drug war and creating a black market (and creating the organized crime element by proxy) is absolutely terrible.
Even if you forget Iran Contra, laundered money funding organized crime and everything else, the result is clear. The result is also the opposite of what the drug war was supposed to do. And none of these people are screaming from the roof tops that government dramatically cut profits through decriminalization. We should have already known better when the bootleggers of the 30's found and in fact lobbied government for a better one to have by the 40's.
The people on drugs are winning that war, which should be cause to reevaluate... only 40 some odd years later. Then again, in the government's favor, there are a lot more people on drugs every year to fight them no matter what they seem to do. But I suppose it goes to the same point.
Whether whatever is or is not illegal otherwise does not change the fact that it should be criminal to operate heavy machinery. It also be illegal to rob a liquor store. It should be illegal to cause violence, beat people randomly and burn down buildings. So is using all the chemicals in the manner you would to make crystal meth - and the profits are also "explosive" for that reason. The point is that all those things you might do based on the fact you did drugs are already illegal. Not only is it duplicative; it's made far more certain that you will go to jail longer for drugs than violent or property crime. That's why justice for the Petit family took so long. That's the system we created where the drug war is a priority over murder trials and investigations.
And the really unfortunate part is how we allegedly do this for the kids. Sometimes they raid the wrong house, and kids are home, and they just happen to be caught in the direct line of a big misunderstanding.
Overall, drugs are a good way to ruin your life. It's generally a stupid idea whether it's illegal or not. But we should never use that as an excuse to go out and ruin lives for people.
And no, Ron Paul supporters do not say "go do drugs" when they put forth a much better approach. They've just paid attention to what works and doesn't work.
You want to call me "a washed out, angry 60's nutcase" because I like being able to walk without being so zonked on the legal opiates that are my alternative?
Post a Comment