Federal Zealots Cause Death of Disabled Man

[Classic Iconocl]

The mother of a quadriplegic man who died in 2004 while in the custody of the Washington, D.C., Department of Corrections filed suit this month against jailers and a local hospital for failing to provide adequate medical care, in violation of federal laws -- including the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

27-year-old Jonathan Magbie was paralyzed from the neck down due to a car wreck when he was 4 years old. Magbie died four days into a 10-day sentence for simple possession of a single cannabis cigarette. It was his only criminal offense. Although it was within D.C. Superior Court Judge Judith Retchin's discretion to sentence Magbie to probation only, she imposed a 10-day sentence because she feared he might continue to use marijuana to treat his painful symptoms.

Retchin's 10-day punishment turned into a death sentence for Magbie, who required a motorized chin-operated wheelchair, tracheotomy tube, pulmonary pacemaker, and a ventilator to breathe at night. Additionally, Magbie was at a high risk for contracting pneumonia and had a history of other medical problems with which his jailers would have to contend.

During the four days he was in jail, Magbie's health quickly deteriorated, and he was transferred multiple times between the D.C. Central Detention Facility and the Greater Southeast Community Hospital. He was having a hard time getting oxygen, he contracted pneumonia, and was barely able to eat, according to the lawsuit filed by his mother. Magbie had difficulty speaking above a whisper, and was forced to move his wheelchair around to get the attention of his incarcerators. The movement irritated the guards, who locked him inside an infirmary cell, without access to any kind of intercom or alert button. The guards didn't check on him until the next morning, according to the lawsuit. Magbie's mother, Mary Scott, is seeking over $100 million in damages.

$100 million may sound enormous, but the money won't bring her son back. Compared to being sentenced to drown in their own mucous, the judge, jailers, and hospital are getting off easy.

[sam i am]

Dude. He was on a vent with a trach and was smoking MARIJUANA?! How the hell was he inhaling? His lung capacity must be for shit. He couldn't even get high!!

Anyhow, personal responsibility for one's own actions seems to have taken a back seat yet again to the zealousness of those who would blame the current Admin. for just about everythinbg they possibly can, no matter how far they ahve to stretch it...

[Classic Iconocl]

You're right, Sam. You advocate "personal responsibility", yet you evidently have no problems with using our federal tax dollars to nanny-state (http://www.waronjunk.com) disabled people, thrown them in isolation rooms, and then let them die.

Cannabis is an expectorant, Sam. It causes people to COUGH UP what is in their lungs. That's why he didn't drown on his mucous until government officials forced him to stop using his medicine, and kept him in isolation. That federal judge threw him in jail because she was afraid he might smoke a joint, then allowed him to die.

I spent three years traveling the nation with a man who gets LEGAL marijuana from the U.S. Government, and we wrote a book about it. Medicine. Grown with YOUR tax dollars, Sam. Why not open your mind and learn (http://www.prescriptionpot.com)?

[K-nowledge]

Anyone who would blame the current admin. is an idiot. This is a local D.C. issue. That judge, and the jailers, should go down in a hard way. If that judge had any inkling of sympathy she wouldn't have jailed a person in that condition for a joint. Horrible story.

[Classic Iconocl]

In a sense, the current administration IS to blame for his death.

When Bush was campaigning for president as governor of my home state, he claimed (more than once) that medical marijuana was an issue for STATES to decide. Once he was in office, his administration (John Ashcroft, John Walters, etc.) rolled over patients and caregivers in states that had decriminalized medical marijuana. And it was Daddy Bush who closed the federal marijuana program (http://www.prescriptionpot.com) to all new applicants in 1992.

Under Clinton, on the other hand, when the 9th Circuit ruled that medical cannabis was allowed by states, the Clinton administration let it drop. It was the Bush administration that decided to appeal the case to the Supreme Court. Like Bush and company had nothing better to do than waste our fucking tax dollars to override states and ensure that sick people had no legal access to an herb that was used medically for five-thousand years before Bush ever took power in this nation. Sick judgmental scumbags, killing out of the "Christian" goodness in their hearts.

By the way, while the Jihad was planning to take out New York (summer 2001) the feds had bigger fish to fry, like raiding marijuana clinics that were operating LEGALLY ACCORDING TO STATE LAW. They didn't have their priorities straight. Also, it's kind of hard to plug a levy when you've got your thumb up everybody's asshole to keep them "drug-free".

I'm not a Democrat, for the record. I don't play party politics. I'll call a pig a pig, no matter the party.

[K-nowledge]

We can rant at each other all day about the legalization of marijuana. But the real issue in my mind is abuse of power. I don't know the whole case but if the only charge was a joint, not the cocaine or gun(like he could use a gun anyways) found in the car of wich he was arrested, the penalty should be probation, fines, couseling, whatever. Not 10 days in jail for a man in his condition. Not to mention that when he was put in jail he should have recieved better care.

[racer5.0stang]

I agree with punishing the person for breaking the law, but he should have been taken to some type of medical facility not a jail.

[Classic Iconocl]

I love it when self-described "conservatives" argue for "personal responsibility" while trying to force their personal choices on their fellow citizens, making ALL of us responsible for the choices of others.

If an alcoholic suffers a hangover, that's personal responsibility. Forcing everybody in the nation to pay to put the alcoholic in jail for engaging in unhealthy behavior is NOT personal responsibility. It's the nanny-state at its worst.

[K-nowledge]

I love it when people like to blame thier problems on the government and not take responsiblity for thier own actions.

It's not my fault officer that I was drunk, crossed lanes and plowed into a another car. It's the governments fault for setting those rediculous standards. :rolleyes:

[Bob]

I love it when people like to blame thier problems on the government and not take responsiblity for thier own actions.

It's not my fault officer that I was drunk, crossed lanes and plowed into a another car. It's the governments fault for setting those rediculous standards. :rolleyes:

yeah it's totally that guy's fault that he got put in jail, locked up in a room and ignored by the guards so that he died. if he didn't want that to happen, he shouldn't have had that joint. what did he expect, honestly?

[Classic Iconocl]

So you would just outlaw alcohol and bring us back to the days of bootleggers, rather than focus on the action that causes the endangerment of citizens, drinking and driving?

I'm not talking about reckless endangerment. I'm talking about personal choice to possess and use a substance.

Focus on the action that violates the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of others.

Junk food is unhealthy. It's not against the law. (http://www.waronjunk.com) If I smack you with a Snickers bar, however, I should go to jail for assault. But I shouldn't be incarcerated for possessing and eating a Snickers bar. That's my personal choice. The government has no business criminalizing personal, consensual decisions that do not violate public safety.

Duh.

[K-nowledge]

^Bob. If you would actually read the earlier posts, I am not blaming the guy with the joint.

[racer5.0stang]

Junk food is unhealthy. It's not against the law. If I smack you with a Snickers bar, however, I should go to jail for assault. But I shouldn't be incarcerated for possessing and eating a Snickers bar.

That Snickers bar doesn't impair your judgement when consumed.

[Classic Iconocl]

Then you don't know the new science behind food. Empirical and clinical studies have shown that chocolate causes the brain to produce opiate-like substances. Refined sugar depletes the body of vital minerals necessary to optimal functioning (judgment included).

Example: What if a study showed that going to a charismatic church caused people to have increased levels of excitatory endo-stimulants, such as adrenaline? Would you outlaw speaking in tongues, or would you focus on the reckless endangerment, speaking in tongues while driving?

[K-nowledge]

^Get real, dude.

[Classic Iconocl]

You get real, dude. Don't believe that ecstatic religious experiences alter brain chemistry? I'll place $100 bet right now that they do. Don't believe that junk food is mind-altering? I can point you to hundreds of studies indicating otherwise.

Do you have a junk food addiction (http://www.waronjunk.com)? It's not a crime to admit it. There is treatment available. You aren't a bad person, just sick. :>)

Personally, I think the most dangerous addicts are the power junkies who defecate on the Constitution and cover their shit with the flag.

"You got anything on you I need to know about, son? Knives? Guns? Bombs? Corn chips?" - Sgt. Belcher

[K-nowledge]

Keep spinning it, man. You're a crack-up.

[Ace42X]

Your a crack-up.

Read that again, and tell me what is wrong with that sentence.

[K-nowledge]

Read the whole thread. Started off talking about the wrongful death of a handicapped person in wich I agree with. Then on to personal responsibilities wich have nothing to do with getting high off snickers and religion. If it's fucking illegal and you do it, take fucking responsibility for it.

[Ace42X]

Is that an "I don't know what was wrong with that sentence" ?

[K-nowledge]

I don't disagree with that particular sentance. Food and religious dissorders is not the topic of discussion. It's a spin and I'm calling him out on it.

[Ace42X]

So, despite me pointing out those three words (crack-up is a compound, that is what the hyphen does, so only one word) - you still don't know why "your" was the wrong word? And, despite this, you feel confidant in criticising other posters here?

[K-nowledge]

Oops, sorry for the misuse of grammar Mr. Ace42.
Correction made.

I hold out my hand and wait to get slapped across the knuckles with a ruler.

[King PSYZ]

When entering a battle of the wits, be well armed.

[Ace42X]

Correction made.


Good good. Now if you want to escape a reprimand, can you tell me precisely what the differences signify?

[Funkaloyd]

^Get real, dude.Keep spinning it, man.
Great rebuttals.

[Classic Iconocl]

K-nowledge...

All I can say is that I've been cracking people up all my life, including myself. Maybe that's why people like you call me a crack-up.

I wasn't trying to be rude with my rebuttal. But I'll share a story that may make my anger more understandable...

My grandfather died of lung and brain cancer six months ago. He was a World War II veteran, and lifelong fire captain with the city of Fort Worth. He was a law and order man. He wasn’t the type of guy who would turn his own kids into the police when they started smoking cannabis in the 60s, but he never used it himself, because it was illegal.

My grandfather decided not to fight the cancer with chemotherapy, and our family respected his wishes and tried to support him through the process of dying. During his final week on earth, he was unable to eat, and was racked with nausea, vomiting, cramping, and diarrhea. He was also in pain, and under the heavily sedating and addictive narcotic influence of morphine. Whenever he was not knocked out from the physician-prescribed opiates, he was on the toilet, dealing with his symptoms.

Finally, with the blessing of the hospice worker and the assistance of the family who loved him, my grandfather tried something he had never tried before – cannabis. The herb allowed him to eat his final meal, and it allowed him to take less morphine for a while. This meant he was able to spend valuable quality time with his loved ones during the last hours of his life. It was a gift to us all.

There is absolutely no reason why the law should have treated my grandfather as a criminal in his last hours of life. It enrages me to think that if the Bush’s (so much for compassionate conservatism) and Clinton’s had their way, my grandfather would have spent his last moments wasting in a jail cell, separated from his family and his medicine, scared and in pain, while our tax dollars were wasted to torment a man who was a good citizen, a patriot who cared deeply about his community.

It makes me feel like walking up to the White House and screaming…

YOU SWORE TO DEFEND THE CONSITUTION. YOU CLAIM TO SPEAK FOR GOD, WITH AUTHORITY GIVEN BY GOD. HOW DARE YOU DEFILE WHAT IS BEAUTIFUL AND NOBLE? HOW DARE YOU LIE TO THE PEOPLE YOU REPRESENT, IN ORDER TO LUBRICATE YOUR CORPORATE LOBBYISTS WITH TONS OF CASH? HOW DARE YOU TRAMPLE ON FUNDAMENTAL LIBERTIES THAT WERE NOT GRANTED BY YOU, BUT BY THE ONE YOU CLAIM TO SERVE! GET YOUR HANDS OFF THE BODIES OF MY FELLOW CITIZENS AND ME, YOU TWISTED CONTROL FREAKS!

To the “conservative” poster who quotes the Bible in his signature and advocates arresting sick and dying people for using cannabis therapeutically… I hope have mercy for your fellow human beings, and do not place the letter of the law above the spirit of the law. Otherwise, you are a hypocrite, separated from the source of light and life within you.

[K-nowledge]

C.I.
Bless your grandfather.
I never said anything about not legalizing marijuana. For the record, I think it should be legalized so that anybody that needs, or wants it, can get it without having some authority figure punishing us for it. It fucking grows in the ground naturally. Even tobacco/alcohol needs to be processed, go figure. Back to the topic of the thread starter. Getting 10 days in jail for a joint is absurd and the end result for that man is an injustice. Then we started in on personal responsibilities. I am a firm believer in being responsible for you own actions. If something is illegal wether someone thinks it should or should not be, that person needs to be accountable for thier actions if they get caught. If you don't think it should be illegal, don't point fingers, fight for your cause.

[racer5.0stang]

Then you don't know the new science behind food. Empirical and clinical studies have shown that chocolate causes the brain to produce opiate-like substances. Refined sugar depletes the body of vital minerals necessary to optimal functioning (judgment included).

Isn't it amazing how we justify the things that we want to do.

So what it YOUR reason for wanting to smoke marijuana?

Maybe you are clinically ill and suffer imense pain on a daily basis and need something other than prescribed drugs or maybe you just want to get high with your friends. In either case in this point in time it is illegal and if you punish one, you must punish all. Even you should be able to see the logic in that.

To the “conservative” poster who quotes the Bible in his signature and advocates arresting sick and dying people for using cannabis therapeutically… I hope have mercy for your fellow human beings, and do not place the letter of the law above the spirit of the law. Otherwise, you are a hypocrite, separated from the source of light and life within you.

If something is illegal wether someone thinks it should or should not be, that person needs to be accountable for thier actions if they get caught.

^^ My point in my original post.

[Ace42X]

Isn't it amazing how we justify the things that we want to do.

Like you misinterpreting the Bible arbitrarily to suit your rather twisted and ignorant ideologies?

[racer5.0stang]

Like you misinterpreting the Bible arbitrarily to suit your rather twisted and ignorant ideologies?

Much like your ability to point your finger at everyone except yourself.

[Ace42X]

Much like your ability to point your finger at everyone except yourself.

See, if that had come from someone who wasn't a moronic cretin like yourself, it might've had some weight behind it. Hell, I'd even over-look the fact that your phrasing was totally incompetent, and as such the retort made no contextual sense whatsoever.

I could point my finger at myself and accuse myself of being as phenomenally ignorant as you, but I'd be wrong. Because, quite frankly you're stupid, VERY stupid.

I know you can't see it. And I know in your cute little heart of hearts you feel that there has to be something more to your pointless beliefs than the personal preference of an imbercile (you) - but there isn't.

So why not just accept that nothing you say will ever have any intrinsic worth, and that you would be better off cutting out your tongue, cutting off your own fingers, and never embarrassing humanity with your utterings again, hmm?

[racer5.0stang]

Man, how I've missed these little chats. Haven't you?

I could point my finger at myself and accuse myself of being as phenomenally ignorant as you, but I'd be wrong. Because, quite frankly you're stupid, VERY stupid.

That is funny coming from the one who believes that monkeys do not have an opposable thumb.

Maybe you should reevaluate who is stupid here.

[Ace42X]

That is funny coming from the one who believes that monkeys do not have an opposable thumb.

Maybe you should reevaluate who is stupid here.

Considering it was YOU that said monkeys do not have opposable thumbs, and considering that it was YOU who I have been mocking with that retort constantly, and considering that you can't even remember this, I think that is all the re-evaulation that is necessary. Fucking inbred retard. Go ask Jesus to forgive you for being so congenitally dull.

http://www.beastieboys.com/bbs/showpost.php?p=586318&postcount=13

Right there is where you said it, moron. And despite me reminding you again and again and again, you STILL get it back to front you deluded retard. I even had to post LINKS TO WEBSITES SHOWING OPPOSABLE THUMBS before you believed me. And you STILL are convinced you knew better...

No wonder you are so stupid when every time your igorance is exposed you just rewrite history so it never happened.

[racer5.0stang]

Considering it was YOU that said monkeys do not have opposable thumbs, and considering that it was YOU who I have been mocking with that retort constantly, and considering that you can't even remember this, I think that is all the re-evaulation that is necessary. Fucking inbred retard. Go ask Jesus to forgive you for being so congenitally dull.


Your post just further proves my point.

http://www.beastieboys.com/bbs/showpost.php?p=586318&postcount=13

Read the last sentence in that post.

BTW, what happened to ASSMAN?

[Ace42X]

Your post just further proves my point.
Read the last sentence in that post.

Hah, you fucking pea-brained moronic son of a bitch. Read it again.

"Sarcastic about the comparison of a human with a monkey"

If you remember (and I do not know if you do, because you are one stupid fuckhead) - you were being sarcastic when you were saying "humans are monkeys" not about the opposable thumb comment.

If you WERE being sarcastic about the opposable thumb comment, then that also means you think humans and monkeys have the same intelligence. In your case, clearly that is not so far-fetched.

I mean what the fuck are you on? Are you seriously trying to tell me that in the middle of a post about why you don't believe in evolution, you randomly decided to say monkeys don't have opposable thumbs? Right at the start of a list of differences between monkeys and humans that you thought discredited the straw-man argument that humans evolved from monkeys? What, you didn't believe your own argument enough, so you threw in some bullshit just as a joke?

And that every time you tried to wriggle out of it and gave a DIFFERENT bullshit excuse, you were just "playing around" ? And that despite me saying clearly and repeatedly for nearly a year that your belief that monkeys do not have opposable thumbs is wrong, you STILL took that to mean that I believe monkeys don't, hence prompting your fucked up post?

Can't you even smell your own bullshit? Well of course you don't, otherwise you'd not be so backwards or mistaken in your belief structure.

BTW, what happened to ASSMAN?

He probably got fed up with how worthless you are and decided to go and do something that doesn't equate to watching a chimp fling his own feces (you try to argue).

Really, you're a prime dickweed.

[racer5.0stang]

I'm am glad that we are still good friends.

Thanks Ace!! (y)

[Ace42X]

I'm am glad that we are still good friends.

Thanks Ace!! (y)

Either shut up, or at least *try* to engage your brain before just blurting out whatever random shit fills your pointless existence, and we'll get along fine.

I favour the "shut up" option though. The fact that you can't remember your own goddamn posts over the course of nearly a whole year speaks volumes about your limitations. Perhaps you should try to overcome your problems *elsewhere* ? Rather than subjecting us to your worthless and ignorant opining.

[racer5.0stang]

The fact that you can't remember your own posts over the course of nearly a whole year speaks volumes about your limitations.

Who said that I couldn't remember the post. It was a cloudy day late that November....

I'll be glad when you acquire a sense of humor and learn to take a joke.

Really King Ace, get off your high horse.

[sam i am]

You're right, Sam. You advocate "personal responsibility", yet you evidently have no problems with using our federal tax dollars to nanny-state (http://www.waronjunk.com) disabled people, thrown them in isolation rooms, and then let them die.

Did I ever say I had no problems with using our federal tax dollars? No. OK. Don't put words on my mouth.

Cannabis is an expectorant, Sam. It causes people to COUGH UP what is in their lungs. That's why he didn't drown on his mucous until government officials forced him to stop using his medicine, and kept him in isolation. That federal judge threw him in jail because she was afraid he might smoke a joint, then allowed him to die.

Sure. Cannabis is an expectorant. With a tracheotomy and being on a vent, my original question stands : HOW was he inhaling? Answer that, then we'll talk. Further, your indictment of a federal judge that "she was afraid he might smoke a joint..." is completely pointless and not backed by the facts. Nowhere in the article is that point made nor is is it apropos to your position in the first place.

I spent three years traveling the nation with a man who gets LEGAL marijuana from the U.S. Government, and we wrote a book about it. Medicine. Grown with YOUR tax dollars, Sam. Why not open your mind and learn (http://www.prescriptionpot.com)?

Boo-ya for you. So, you are an expert, then? "traveling the nation with a man who gets LEGAL marijuana from the U.S. Government, and we wrote a book about it," qualifies you as an expert on all the ins and outs of the efficacy of marijuana? I'm sure you have no prejudicies or inherent subjectivity when addressing this subject, thus allowing your on-high diatribe to be completely correct and without any basis for analysis?

Please.

[EN[i]GMA]

Isn't it amazing how we justify the things that we want to do.

What's that supposed to mean?

You wouldn't do something if you couldn't somehow justify it.

For example, I cannot logically justify getting up our of my chair and jumping through the glass window behind me, hence, I don't do it.

I can logically justify typing this sentance, so I do it.

What a meaningless statement.


So what it YOUR reason for wanting to smoke marijuana?

Me? It sounds fun.


Maybe you are clinically ill and suffer imense pain on a daily basis and need something other than prescribed drugs or maybe you just want to get high with your friends. In either case in this point in time it is illegal and if you punish one, you must punish all. Even you should be able to see the logic in that.

"It's illegal to stab someone, right!? So what if you need surgery! You can't tell someone to stab you, cut you open and fix your ailment! Stabbing is illegal in this country, even if it's for surgery! Can't you see the logic behind that!? If you punish the person who kills 3 people with a knife, you have to also punish the surgeon who cuts the ailing person with a knife. It's only fair!".

Only that's a bad anology, because 'stabbing' CAN hurt someone other than the stabber, but inhaling marajuana can't hurt anyone else, in and of itself.

[sam i am]

GMA']but inhaling marajuana can't hurt anyone else, in and of itself.

Second hand smoke? Carcinogens? Inhaling something other than air (oxygen/nitrogen) "can't hurt anyone else?"

OK.

[EN[i]GMA]

Second hand smoke? Carcinogens? Inhaling something other than air (oxygen/nitrogen) "can't hurt anyone else?"

OK.

Use a bong or a hookah or ventilator or other device.

Oh waaaaaaaait! Those (Safe) things are illegal!

[Ace42X]

Really King Ace, get off your high horse.

You need someone to tell you what to do, because you are too stupid to be in charge of something as dangerous as an opinion. When you are less ignorant, then I'll feel comfortable turning things over to people like you.

[sam i am]

You need someone to tell you what to do, because you are too stupid to be in charge of something as dangerous as an opinion. When you are less ignorant, then I'll feel comfortable turning things over to people like you.

Ace, do you get along with ANYONE or are you content to sit in your imaginary ivory tower and throw "us peasants" the crumbs of your all-encompassing wisdom?

[sam i am]

GMA']Use a bong or a hookah or ventilator or other device.

Oh waaaaaaaait! Those (Safe) things are illegal!

I was talking about the exhale, man.

[EN[i]GMA]

I was talking about the exhale, man.

What about it?

Anyone not breathing 6 inches from your nose isn't effected.

It's not as if THC would all of a sudden saturate our atmosphere.

[sam i am]

GMA']What about it?

Anyone not breathing 6 inches from your nose isn't effected.

It's not as if THC would all of a sudden saturate our atmosphere.

Ok. Then you are not against secondhand cigarette smoke then, as well?

[Funkaloyd]

He's a libertarian. Why ask?

[YoungRemy]

so was he smoking medical marijuana or not? you never made that clear in your first post, Iconocl....

are we simply assuming his dope was prescribed? how was he arrested? in his home? in a public place?

do you have a link?

[Ace42X]

GMA']What about it?
Anyone not breathing 6 inches from your nose isn't effected.
.


Barbeques release infinitely vaster numbers of carginogens that cigarrettes, but I don't see anyone moving to ban those in public places.

[EN[i]GMA]

Ok. Then you are not against secondhand cigarette smoke then, as well?

You don't understand.

Bongs and ventilators don't release the harmful carcinagins and toxins that smoke does.

The exhaled pot smoke would not be nearly as bad as exhaled cigarrete smoke.

And no, I'm not 'against' secondhand smoke on private property in the legal sense, but I am 'against' it on the health sense.

[EN[i]GMA]

Barbeques release infinitely vaster numbers of carginogens that cigarrettes, but I don't see anyone moving to ban those in public places.

Quite true.

It's an absolute joke to compare cigarrette smoke to car exhaust, factory emissions or waste produced due to power consumption, but how many people drive for less than necessary reasons, purchase products that pollute or leave their electricity on when its not necessary.

'Smokers' just prove an easily and politically vulnerable group.

Certainly any form of smoke being released into the air has adverse effects, but it needs to be put into perspective.

And all this is moot as bongs/ventilators don't produce the same harmful effects as smoking joints.

[Classic Iconocl]

Sure. Cannabis is an expectorant. With a tracheotomy and being on a vent, my original question stands : HOW was he inhaling? Answer that, then we'll talk. Further, your indictment of a federal judge that "she was afraid he might smoke a joint..." is completely pointless and not backed by the facts. Nowhere in the article is that point made nor is is it apropos to your position in the first place.

He only required assisted breathing at night. And yes, the judge TOLD him the reason she was incarcerating him was because he was likely to use marijuana again.

Boo-ya for you. So, you are an expert, then? "traveling the nation with a man who gets LEGAL marijuana from the U.S. Government, and we wrote a book about it," qualifies you as an expert on all the ins and outs of the efficacy of marijuana? I'm sure you have no prejudicies or inherent subjectivity when addressing this subject, thus allowing your on-high diatribe to be completely correct and without any basis for analysis?

Please.

I never called myself an expert, and I personally dislike the term. However, I do have credentials. I have offered friend of the court briefs in medical marijuana cases, and I've served as faculty for university-sponsored conferences on the issue, alongside doctors and researchers from six nations. My articles on health and disability have been read by tens of millions internationally. Additionally, I am the youngest user of therapeutic cannabis on record in the United States, having first used cannabis when I was two years old.

And 34 years later, I can still debate the existential circumlocution of iconoclastic antidisestablishmentarianism with the best of them (yes, I'm being a smart-ass). I'm no "expert", but I am humble enough to learn.

[Classic Iconocl]

Isn't it amazing how we justify the things that we want to do.

So what it YOUR reason for wanting to smoke marijuana?

Maybe you are clinically ill and suffer imense pain on a daily basis and need something other than prescribed drugs or maybe you just want to get high with your friends. In either case in this point in time it is illegal and if you punish one, you must punish all. Even you should be able to see the logic in that.

Did I say that I wanted to smoke marijuana?

Punish one, punish all. I understand the concept of equal justice, but equality of punishment does not imply justice when the law itself is unjust. You speak as if you would have no problem crucifying Christ, stoning Mary Magdelene, etc. After all, they were lawbreakers. Surely you can acknowledge that tyranny and despotism often cover themselves with the cloak of law.

[Classic Iconocl]

Additionally, Racer...

You said "punish one, punish all"...

But where is the equal justice behind the federal government cultivating and distributing medical marijuana to certain patients, then throwing other patients into an isolation cell to drown in their own mucous?

[Ace42X]

CI, there is no point in arguing with Racerstang, the guy's a dumbass. He can't even remember *his* arguments from a few months ago, let alone anything you'll say, no matter how reasoned or self-evident your arguments are.

Yes it is noble to correct him, but it is also a thankless task.

[racer5.0stang]

What's that supposed to mean?

You wouldn't do something if you couldn't somehow justify it.

For example, I cannot logically justify getting up our of my chair and jumping through the glass window behind me, hence, I don't do it.

I can logically justify typing this sentance, so I do it.

What a meaningless statement.

It means that the things that we know are wrong (whether immoral or illegal) we can always find an EXCUSE to do them.

"It's illegal to stab someone, right!? So what if you need surgery! You can't tell someone to stab you, cut you open and fix your ailment! Stabbing is illegal in this country, even if it's for surgery! Can't you see the logic behind that!? If you punish the person who kills 3 people with a knife, you have to also punish the surgeon who cuts the ailing person with a knife. It's only fair!".

It is the intent that determines the legality.

You need someone to tell you what to do, because you are too stupid to be in charge of something as dangerous as an opinion. When you are less ignorant, then I'll feel comfortable turning things over to people like you.

You feel that you must attempt to down play others to feel better about yourself.

That is really pathetic.

It's an absolute joke to compare cigarrette smoke to car exhaust, factory emissions or waste produced due to power consumption, but how many people drive for less than necessary reasons, purchase products that pollute or leave their electricity on when its not necessary.

'Smokers' just prove an easily and politically vulnerable group.

Certainly any form of smoke being released into the air has adverse effects, but it needs to be put into perspective.

Unfortunatly, most people do not usually sit in an enclosed room while the automobile or grill is in operation.

But where is the equal justice behind the federal government cultivating and distributing medical marijuana to certain patients, then throwing other patients into an isolation cell to drown in their own mucous?

So did this guy have a legal prescription for marijuana?

Also if you will re-read my earlier post I stated that this particular person (due to his physical situation) should be taken to a medical facility, not a jail.

CI, there is no point in arguing with Racerstang, the guy's a dumbass. He can't even remember *his* arguments from a few months ago, let alone anything you'll say, no matter how reasoned or self-evident your arguments are.

I'm just glad we have King Ace who is kind enough to take time out of his busy schedule to chat with us peasants.

May we always retain his wisdom.

[Ace42X]

You feel that you must attempt to down play others to feel better about yourself.

That is really pathetic.

Wow, psycho-analysis from Racerstang, the guy that can't even remember what he said less than a year ago, EVEN WHEN IT IS QUOTED DIRECTLY FOR HIM. What other insightful gems have you got to share? Going to tell us that fish don't have fins?

May we always retain his wisdom.

If you could, then maybe you wouldn't be such worthless pitiful scum. Of course, you have already demonstrated that you can't retain any wisdom, as you can't even remember your own goddamn posts.

[Classic Iconocl]

Second hand smoke? Carcinogens? Inhaling something other than air (oxygen/nitrogen) "can't hurt anyone else?"

OK.

Stop driving! You're messing with my oxygen!!!

[EN[i]GMA]

It is the intent that determines the legality.

Just like with the people who are INTENDING to smoke cannibis for strictly medicinal purposes? Dumbass. Try to stay non-contradictory for at least a page.

And if I 'intend' to give you a heart transplant by throwing a steak knife at you from 20 feet away, does that mean that if I hit you with the knife and injure you, I'm absolved?

[EN[i]GMA]

Unfortunatly, most people do not usually sit in an enclosed room while the automobile or grill is in operation.

Why are you sitting in that enclosed room? Are you forced to?

[Ace42X]

GMA']Why are you sitting in that enclosed room? Are you forced to?

I suppose chaining reluctant customers down in your smoke-filled restaurant is one way of keeping your non-smoking customers...

[Ali]

Dude. He was on a vent with a trach and was smoking MARIJUANA?! How the hell was he inhaling? His lung capacity must be for shit. He couldn't even get high!!Never let complete ignorance of the facts prevent you from making a comment, dude.

[racer5.0stang]

GMA']Why are you sitting in that enclosed room? Are you forced to?

I assume that you are refering to the smoker?

And if I 'intend' to give you a heart transplant by throwing a steak knife at you from 20 feet away, does that mean that if I hit you with the knife and injure you, I'm absolved?

Are you aware of how much that doesn't make sense?

Going to tell us that fish don't have fins?

I guess you are going to tell us that you are in a wheel chair. Oh thats right, already been done.

[Ace42X]

I guess you are going to tell us that you are in a wheel chair. Oh thats right, already been done.

Urm, how does your inability to understand irony reflect badly on *me*?

I think you need to work on your come-backs. Generally when you are formulating a come-back it is considered a bad move to bring up your own stupidity.

[racer5.0stang]

Urm, how does your inability to understand irony reflect badly on *me*?

I think you need to work on your come-backs. Generally when you are formulating a come-back it is considered a bad move to bring up your own stupidity.

Do you have a problem with your eyes crossing as you look narrowly down your nose?

[Ace42X]

Do you have a problem with your eyes crossing as you look narrowly down your nose?

I have a problem with your stupidity. Does that count?

[sam i am]

Never let complete ignorance of the facts prevent you from making a comment, dude.


I've just had a lot of patients on vents and trachs in my professional career and their oxygen saturations were for shit. They could barely talk, let alone inhale and hold marijuana smoke. So....my question still stands.....HOW?

Sorry to burst your bubble on my supposed "ignorance," dude.

[sam i am]

I have a problem with your stupidity. Does that count?

And we have a problem with your infatuation with the mirage-like aspect of your supposed intellect, oh King Ace (I like that title for you, BTW - rather pithy and so intrinsically apropos in its latent sarcasm).

[EN[i]GMA]

I assume that you are refering to the smoker?

You assumed wrong.

I was reffering to the non-smokers.

50/50 chance I guess...


Are you aware of how much that doesn't make sense?

No, because it makes perfect sense.

If all that matters is intent, AS YOU BLITHELY STATED, than the statement is perfectly logical.

It's only absurd because it's coming from an absurd premise; yours.

[Ali]

I've just had a lot of patients on vents and trachs in my professional career and their oxygen saturations were for shit. They could barely talk, let alone inhale and hold marijuana smoke. So....my question still stands.....HOW?

Sorry to burst your bubble on my supposed "ignorance," dude.Oh, so you gave them marijuana? Why did you do that?

And if you didn't, then how do you know that they couldn't and why are others being prescribed it?

[sam i am]

Oh, so you gave them marijuana? Why did you do that?

And if you didn't, then how do you know that they couldn't and why are others being prescribed it?

It's just common sense, as far as I can see. HOW do they inhale and hold smoke? If their capillary intake is severly impaired, HOW can they process THC in addition to the regular oxygen they can barely bring into their alveoli?

I'd really like a real explanation - I'm not playing a game here. It just seems nearly impossible to envision HOW they are actually contriving to make it happen in their conditions....

[Ali]

It's just common sense, as far as I can see. HOW do they inhale and hold smoke? If their capillary intake is severly impaired, HOW can they process THC in addition to the regular oxygen they can barely bring into their alveoli?

I'd really like a real explanation - I'm not playing a game here. It just seems nearly impossible to envision HOW they are actually contriving to make it happen in their conditions....And the next question is: WHY did that judge sentence this guy, when he's so obviously impaired.

What difference would it make to anyone if he smoked a joint or not?

Except to him :mad:

The drug laws in the US are ridiculous! So much time, money and effort wasted on small time users and dealers, leaving no resources for tracking down and prosecuting REAL criminals (http://accounting.smartpros.com/x49825.xml).

[Sand Razor]

It's just common sense, as far as I can see. HOW do they inhale and hold smoke? If their capillary intake is severly impaired, HOW can they process THC in addition to the regular oxygen they can barely bring into their alveoli?

I'd really like a real explanation - I'm not playing a game here. It just seems nearly impossible to envision HOW they are actually contriving to make it happen in their conditions....

One can use a vaporizer or eat cannabis that is cooked into food...

http://www.maps.org/mmj/vaporizer.html

[Classic Iconocl]

If you live in Canada, you can use Sativex, a natural cannabis sublingual spray, produced by Bayer, the same aspirin company that pays Partnership for a Drug-Free America to lie to U.S. citizens about marijuana being a harmful, addictive drug with no medical value. Bayer can't get a U.S. patent for Sativex, because it's not synthetic. So Bayer profits from Americans thinking marijuana has no medical value (so the dumb masses keep buying Bayer's synthetics rather than growing their own medicine). Aspirin kills thousands of Americans annually. Cannabis kills a grand total of ZERO.

The drug warriors are so right, they can't see they're wrong.

[sam i am]

One can use a vaporizer or eat cannabis that is cooked into food...

http://www.maps.org/mmj/vaporizer.html


Ok. But that's NOT what he was doing, from what I gathered. He was smoking it....

So, the question remains : HOW, physically, did he accomplish it? Unless.....




NO......




It couldn't be that he really wasn't that bad off. Could it? :eek:

[sam i am]

If you live in Canada, you can use Sativex, a natural cannabis sublingual spray, produced by Bayer, the same aspirin company that pays Partnership for a Drug-Free America to lie to U.S. citizens about marijuana being a harmful, addictive drug with no medical value. Bayer can't get a U.S. patent for Sativex, because it's not synthetic. So Bayer profits from Americans thinking marijuana has no medical value (so the dumb masses keep buying Bayer's synthetics rather than growing their own medicine). Aspirin kills thousands of Americans annually. Cannabis kills a grand total of ZERO.

The drug warriors are so right, they can't see they're wrong.

Ok. Sativex. http://www.drugdevelopment-technology.com/projects/sativex/. http://www.gwpharm.com/ (Just a few links with more info for those who are interested).

My question still remains : WHY and HOW did he smoke it? WHY is it so important to have it in smokable form when it can be sprayed via the method described above?

One wonders WHY it's so important to have the pot in a smokable form......

WHO profits?

[Sand Razor]

Ok. But that's NOT what he was doing, from what I gathered. He was smoking it....

So, the question remains : HOW, physically, did he accomplish it?

Well, you're right in that the article says (I didn't catch this the first time I read it):

Magbie died four days into a 10-day sentence for simple possession of a single cannabis cigarette.

Maybe he had just enough for a single joint and not an actual rolled joint and the author of the article didn't phrase it right? I have no idea...

Regardless, to me this tragedy is just a natural consequence of what happens when people try to legislate "morality".

[Medellia]

It couldn't be that he really wasn't that bad off. Could it? :eek:
If he wasn't that bad off then how come he died?

[Classic Iconocl]

You can find a picture of a young Jonathan Magbie, in his wheelchair, meeting President Reagan, at http://www.waronjunk.blogspot.com (about halfway down the page). He was definitely disabled and dependent upon care.

[sam i am]

Well, you're right in that the article says (I didn't catch this the first time I read it):



Maybe he had just enough for a single joint and not an actual rolled joint and the author of the article didn't phrase it right? I have no idea...

Regardless, to me this tragedy is just a natural consequence of what happens when people try to legislate "morality".

Well, no one was able to answer my question about HOW he was smoking pot, so I guess it's another EXAMPLE of the efficacies of pot smoking? How come things like Sativex aren't more popularized? Could it be that the medicinal value of smokable pot is greater than something like vaporized pot?

One wonders WHY it's being pushed so hard, except maybe to make a point that shouldn't have been made in the first place....