News Releases

Tom Davis: Law Enforcement Agencies Wrong About Medical Marijuana

BEAUFORT, S.C. – South Carolina State Senator Tom Davis today released the following statement regarding yesterday’s letter (attached) written by the directors of South Carolina’s four primary law-enforcement agencies to the members of the state’s Medical Marijuana Study Committee, which he co-chairs.  This response to that letter is Sen. Davis’,…

BEAUFORT, S.C. – South Carolina State Senator Tom Davis today released the following statement regarding yesterday’s letter (attached) written by the directors of South Carolina’s four primary law-enforcement agencies to the members of the state’s Medical Marijuana Study Committee, which he co-chairs.  This response to that letter is Sen. Davis’, not the committee’s.

“In my six years as a state senator, I have always supported full funding for law enforcement, which is without question a core and critical function of state government.  And I have great respect for the men and women who put their lives on the line every day to protect us.  That said, however, when law enforcement officials make statements that are in error, which I believe they have in this letter, it is important for me to say so.

“First, the law-enforcement officials write they ‘were encouraged to see the General Assembly pass legislation this year that [they] felt would prepare South Carolina to respond in a positive manner if the federal government were to take action to address marijuana’s status as an illegal substance.’ But that’s not a correct statement of what the General Assembly did.

What the legislature actually did was pass a bill (S. 1035), signed into law by the governor (Act 221), that makes it legal for a person who has a severe form of epilepsy that is not adequately treated by traditional medical therapies, and whose condition has been certified in writing by a licensed physician, to possess and consume an oil derived from cannabis ‘that contains nine-tenths of one percent or less of tetrahydrocannabinol and more than fifteen percent of cannabidiol.’ (Quoting from Section 44-53-110(27)(b)(vi) of the Act.)

“The General Assembly did not, as suggested by the officials in their letter, condition the legality of a person’s possession or consumption of cannabis oil in South Carolina on the federal government taking action to address marijuana’s legal status.  Such possession and consumption of the cannabis oil became legal in South Carolina when Gov. Nikki Haley signed S 1035 into law on June 2, 2014.  There is no ambiguity in this regard; in fact,

‘A physician is not subject to detrimental action, including arrest, prosecution, penalty, denial of a right or privilege, civil penalty, or disciplinary action by a professional licensing board for providing written certification for the medical use of cannabidiol to a patient in accordance with this section.’ (Quoting from Section 44-53-110(27)(d) of the Act.)

“Second, the law-enforcement officials write that “the intent of the [Medical Marijuana Study Committee] has moved away from its statutory purpose.  The last section of S 1035, Act 221 (Section 4(c)) charges the study committee as follows:

‘The study committee shall provide a report with findings and recommendations to the House of Representatives and the Senate by March 15, 2015, at which the study committee shall dissolve. The report must address, at a minimum, methods and procedures for cultivating medical marijuana in the State, the amount of tax to impose on the sale of medical marijuana, the need for an agriculture marketing plan for the sale and use of medical marijuana, and the impact of the sale and use of medical marijuana on public health and wellness.  The report must address, at a minimum, methods and procedures for cultivating medical marijuana in the State, the amount of tax to impose on the sale of medical marijuana, the need for an agriculture marketing plan for the sale and use of medical marijuana, and the impact of the sale and use of medical marijuana on public health and wellness.’

“Over the past three months, the study committee has held four public meetings, one each in Columbia, Charleston, Greenville and Florence.  In each instance public notice of the study-committee meeting was provided and every individual who wanted to speak was heard.  The committee’s charge was very broad – to report on ‘the impact of the sale and use of medical marijuana on public health and wellness’ – and though a few speakers may have made comments regarding (quoting from the law-enforcement officials’ letter) ‘possibly even recreational marijuana use,’ the committee’s focus has always been on the impact of marijuana for medical purposes only.

“In regard to the broader public debate about whether to increase the medical uses of marijuana beyond the scope permitted by Act 1035, I certainly respect and welcome the opinions expressed by the law-enforcement officials in their letter, even though I strongly disagree with them.  But I take issue when they write: ‘We simply believe that federal action is required before any type of marijuana use should become legal in South Carolina.’ The General Assembly, in passing S 1035, and the governor, in signing Act 221 into law, has already determined that, as a matter of state policy, such federal action is not required.”


Related posts

More News

Release: Palmetto Family Applauds Donald Trump’s Court Pick

News Releases

PAC Targeting Graham

News Releases

Lee Bright: Lindsey Graham Has Surrendered To Liberals



jimlewisowb December 5, 2014 at 7:28 pm

Chuck Wright – Federalist Cockroach

Mark Keel – Federalist Cockroach

Mike Oliver – Federalist Cockroach

Dan Reynolds – Federalist Cockroach

ImaDawn Baker December 6, 2014 at 12:40 am

what have you got against cockroaches ?

Youssef Ismail December 5, 2014 at 9:10 pm

Asking a cop about medicine makes as much sense as asking a janitor to explain rocket science. They are not qualified to speak on the issue in any capacity.

Mike at the Beach December 6, 2014 at 11:45 am

That makes perfect sense, but surely you know that the MJ legalization drama isn’t *really* about medicine, right?

Oily Taintz December 6, 2014 at 3:27 pm

It’s about the booze and pill interests not wanting the competition. It’s about people worrying that workers won’t be productive enough. It’s about people believing all the propaganda that has ever been pumped on on the subject. But the fact is, MJ helps a lot of people with a whole range of illnesses.

9" December 6, 2014 at 3:45 pm

That’s not true.There are more effective treatments for any medical condition than marijuana.My sister died from cancer a little over a year ago;an old hippie,she loved getting high on pot,but that’s not what she wanted when she was dying.She wanted morphine,and she got it.

Pat Hines December 6, 2014 at 10:47 pm

You’re not qualified to make such a statement. We don’t make medical policy on anecdotal evidence.

9" December 6, 2014 at 10:54 pm

‘What do we do when we assume?’ For the answer,see,Oscar Wilde

Pat Hines December 7, 2014 at 8:00 am

Your non sequitur fails.

Mike at the Beach December 7, 2014 at 12:43 am

It may; it may not, but that’s still not what drives this debate. Look at the folks flocking to the “medicinal MJ” shops; simply take a look at the folks proselytizing for legalization and the often angry pot zealots who post online (general statement- not tossing you into this camp). I don’t have much of a dog in this fight. One part of me says let the potheads smoke themselves into oblivion. Drunks already cost us a fortune, so what’s a few million more lives ruined? MJ is just about as prohibition-resistant as alcohol, so there’s a sense of inevitability there, it would seem. I also look at it as a competitive edge for my kids entering the workforce… whatever percentage of additional stoners created just bumps my kids that many additional notches above their already solid socioeconomic zip code. Then I start feeling guilty for not caring about all of the additional stoners (or at least their families), so I don’t know. At any rate, I simply get tired of the whole medicinal angle- it’s just part of the overall grand scheme to wrest MJ off of Schedule I, which is fine. Let’s just call it that, though, is my point. The “medicinal” piece is getting about as tired as a politician’s old “it’s for the children” saw.

Pat Hines December 7, 2014 at 8:18 am

Drug abusers, including alcohol abusers, are a more or less fixed subset of the population at large. Legalizing cannabis completely will not create a significantly larger population of abusers.

Users aren’t necessarily abusers, many people drink socially without abusing alcohol at all.

euwe max December 7, 2014 at 9:28 pm

Lighten up – it worked, didn’t it?

Mike at the Beach December 7, 2014 at 9:34 pm

Sorry…I just like honest brokers in public policy debates. Not many of those around, though, on either side of most issues.

euwe max December 7, 2014 at 10:34 pm

Does it matter that tea was discovered by shepherds?

I still remember the article in High Times when they first proposed that medical marijuana would be the path to legalization. It sounded crazy at the time, but it worked.

It’s like tricking someone into giving up cigarettes.

You know best December 7, 2014 at 11:16 pm

Such nobility!

truthmonger December 6, 2014 at 12:49 pm

Why? Because we have an understanding of legal and social issues? Can’t let facts get in the way of gettin’ high???

Is getting drunk any better? December 6, 2014 at 2:33 pm

How different are the social issues surrounding marijuana from that of alcohol?

Pat Hines December 6, 2014 at 10:43 pm

Cops haven’t a clue about the legal and social issues, what they have is a horrendous conflict of interest with this.

Cops voicing an opinion in this is the height of unethical behavior. I’d criminalize that behavior as well.

Really, cops, you’ve gone down the wrong road here.

Mike at the Beach December 7, 2014 at 12:24 am

That position is a little bizarre; a lot bizarre, actually. The professionals tasked with enforcing laws shouldn’t advise policy makers attendant to the substance of those laws? There are entire governmental mechanisms in place to facilitate precisely this type of interface at the federal level (and in most states, SC included). Debate the pot all you like, but don’t get weird on cops’ right to speak to these issues.

Pat Hines December 7, 2014 at 7:59 am

” The professionals tasked with enforcing laws shouldn’t advise policy makers attendant to the substance of those laws?”

That activity must end. It is a grotesque conflict of interest for any cop, sheriff, or prison guard to advocate something be made illegal or continue in an illegal status because they derive benefit from that law. Financial benefit. Further, professionals are enforcing law are not professionals at creating law.

Cops put people in prison, ruin lives, and even kill people because there are laws preventing the growth and use of a plant, for any reason.

Few, if any, cops know about the medical uses of cannabis, and what people use it for privately is none of their business.

Uh huh December 7, 2014 at 8:53 am

That’s the irony of Mike’s statement, it’s self reinforcing.

It’s also very telling; it’s not enough that cops enforce the law, most of them deep down feel like Judge Dredd and therefore feel that not only should be enforcing laws but also determining guilt, innocence & what the laws should be.

Most cops are sociopaths, like Mike.

Mike at the Beach December 7, 2014 at 10:01 am

Folks who casually throw around terms like “sociopath” (especially when they possess no other background on the individual to whom they are referring) show themselves to be uninformed (at best) or moronic (much more likely). It’s not that I am for or against the MJ issue; like Pat Hines you missed the entire point of my comment, and I don’t have time to break it down into little words for you.

Uh huh December 7, 2014 at 10:16 am

“Folks who casually throw around terms like “sociopath” (especially when
they possess no other background on the individual to whom they are

You’re past statements are enough Mike. I’m sorry you dislike the label. I don’t have time to break it down into little words for you.

Uh huh December 7, 2014 at 10:40 am


Mike at the Beach December 7, 2014 at 10:52 am

You obviously don’t get basic English, psychology, or the use of an edit button, so definitely don’t try little words.

Uh huh December 7, 2014 at 11:50 am

Ok sociopath, you got me.

Mike at the Beach December 7, 2014 at 10:05 am

This “grotesque conflict of interest” exists (necessarily) in almost any field, but you obviously don’t want to discuss that point while you’re so passionately fixated on legalizing MJ, which is fine. I’d be willing to bet that if a bunch of sheriffs and chiefs came out publicly for legalization, the tack would change to “these are the professionals…the boots on the ground…we should listen to them.” At any rate, I’ll just remind you that I admitted that I have no dog in the MJ fight and couldn’t care much less on most days about the legalization piece. I just grow weary of the disingenuous nature of the medical MJ debate. It’s all about legalization…period. Let’s just say that.

Dave Chappelle I'm Rick James December 6, 2014 at 1:02 pm

Speaking of janitors and marijuana . . . I couldn’t help myself.

Jeff deutsch December 5, 2014 at 9:16 pm

The need to immediately legalize Marijuana nationally is the most pressing moral issue of our time.
More and more present and former members of law enforcement agree.

Please see

I’m a Scientist. Not a politician, not a Cop.

Like the majority of Americans, I strongly support the immediate, complete legalization of Marijuana.

But as a Scientist with a strong interest in Cancer research, I feel even more strongly about the need for its immediate legalization of it for Medical use, and the need to ensure that no Cancer patient is denied it than I’ve ever felt about any issue, because I’m so impressed with its benefits for Cancer patients.

Dying of Cancer sucks, ask, anyone doing it.

Cancer patients can’t wait.

I urge everyone reading this to PLEASE call and email the Attorney General, the press, Congress and the President today.
Its amazing what a few well written editorials and interviews on news programs can do.

Medical Marijuana not only helps with Cancer therapy, seizures, PTSD and chronic pain, but has helped countless Americans, including countless veterans stop using Alcohol, and hard drugs, both legal and illegal ones.

Every minute an American dies of Cancer.
Every 19 minutes an American dies of a prescription drug overdose.
Many vets become addicted to prescription opiates and die from them.

NOBODY has ever died from smoking too much pot.
Lots of people’s stage 4 Cancer has been cured by high dose Medical Marijuana oil, and every Cancer patient that uses Marijuana to ease their suffering benefits greatly from doing so.

It is immoral to leave Marijuana illegal, for anyone, for even a second longer.
But for Cancer patients, its a matter of life and death.
Cancer patients can’t wait

Medical Marijuana has an unmatched safety profile, and for people who suffer from so many diseases of so many kinds its a medical miracle, and the scientific evidence behind it is rock solid.

For example, Medical Marijuana encourages apoptosis and autophagy of Cancer cells, while leaving normal cells untouched, is anti-angigogenic, anti-proliferative, and is anti-angiogenic.

Its also synergistic with chemotherapy and radiation therapy, making both more effective.

For many Cancer patients its meant the difference between life and death.

For everyone else, its a far safe alternative to Alcohol, and infinitely safer than Cigarettes.

Either take them off the market too, or legalize Marijuana right now.

2016 is too far away, Its too long to wait. Every year we lose more Americans to Cancer than died in WWII.

Between now and the 2016 elections, roughly 1 MILLION Americans will die of Cancer.

And Its a horrible way to die.

9" December 6, 2014 at 12:14 am

I’m all for legalization,but Medical Marijuana is an oxymoron.Infinitely safer than cigarettes? That’s absolute bullshit.

Duncan20903 December 6, 2014 at 2:13 am

You really don’t know what your talking about. Perhaps if you would take your hands down from in front of your eyes and lose the earplugs you just might get a grip on the reality that cannabis has significant medicinal utility. You can’t insist it away. Why don’t you call the Israeli Ministry of Health and ask them why Israel is the only country where the government treats cannabis like the medicine which it is.

9" December 6, 2014 at 3:49 pm

And where did you get you degree in medicine?

John Mcdaniel December 6, 2014 at 8:01 pm

Do you know about LD-50 determinations or therapeutic aspect ratios? No? Cannabis has never killed a person and raw potatoes are significantly more toxic then cannabis. Lets make a bet 9″. I will smoke and eat as much cannabis as you want me to, and in return I just want you to eat 12 raw potatoes. I will survive, you will not. If I win you must resign from whatever gov. tit currently provides your pay. DEAL?

Plump & juicy December 6, 2014 at 8:08 pm

He’s a teacher…it’s a prodigious tit. You won’t even be able to pry him off for the contest.

Smirks December 6, 2014 at 9:23 am

Infinitely safer than cigarettes? That’s absolute bullshit.

Smoking it is very damaging, that’s for sure. Inhaling smoke of any kind isn’t a great idea if you want to live a long time.

Then again, you can do more than just smoke it, same with tobacco really, but in that regards tobacco is definitely worse. (Chewing tobacco for instance can really fuck up your mouth.)

9" December 6, 2014 at 7:29 pm

That’s true,but to repeat,there are far better methods to treat any medical condition than marijuana,and I realize the opinions on this subject are taken directly from bad TV documentaries.
I’ve probably smoked more pot than anyone on this blog.It’s impossible to smoke pot daily,and not develop bronchitis or worse.BUT,it isn’t needed in ANY form,medicinally.If you want to get high,there’s nothing wrong with that.

Pat Hines December 6, 2014 at 10:55 pm

Again, as an RN I must call you out on your lack of medical knowledge or expertise.

You are little more than an alchemist with regard to this subject. That is to say, you’re a know-nothing.

9" December 6, 2014 at 11:12 pm

How do you pass the drug screens?

Pat Hines December 7, 2014 at 8:01 am

Ah, the old implication that because I advocate for a policy, that must mean that I’m a cannabis user.

Such ad hominems are beyond silly, they can be criminal.

Argument by fallacy December 7, 2014 at 8:57 am

Since he’s resorted to ad hominems, you can retort by calling him a “cocksucker” but the difference is if you do so he can’t sue you for libel.

Pat Hines December 7, 2014 at 4:53 pm

Actually, in my case, that would be libelous as well, but these days being a Sodomite isn’t considered a rationale for dismissal from one’s employment, while use of illegal drugs is such a rationale.

Jack B Nimble December 6, 2014 at 10:37 am

You apparently know nothing about marijuana. Thousands of years of use have proven that it IS far safer than tobacco or alcohol. And no harm to lungs or respiratory system:

Ricky December 6, 2014 at 11:11 am

No, you’re just a moron.

truthmonger December 6, 2014 at 12:52 pm

Marinol? Heard of it? Legal version available since the 60’s. Not what you want because dosage can be controlled to alleviate side effects (like getting high). Ah, why confuse the issue with fact….

9" December 6, 2014 at 2:34 pm

Great point,and most people don’t realize that.There are much more effective treatments for any medical condition than marijuana.I think all drugs should be legal,but these people arguing about ‘medicinal purposes’ sound like,Granny Clampett on The Beverly Hillbillies.If you want to get stoned,that’s fine,but don’t bullshit me like you’re on some noble mission.

And,Jeff says-‘Marijuana nationally is the most pressing moral issue of our time.’ That’s the dumbest statement I’ve read on this blog..

John Mcdaniel December 6, 2014 at 8:04 pm

Post under your real name, troll

Pat Hines December 6, 2014 at 10:57 pm

It’s okay, John, this person has illustrated, abundantly too, that he’s completely ignorant with regard to this subject. If someone is paying him to be here, they need to get their money returned, this guy is silly.

John Mcdaniel December 6, 2014 at 8:03 pm

Marinol has significant adverse effects when compared to Cannabis. But if you are going to talk about fact, dont let the actual efficacy to sway your opinion….

Pat Hines December 6, 2014 at 10:56 pm

Marinol is both ineffective and dangerous. Obviously you have no knowledge here.

Pat Hines December 6, 2014 at 10:49 pm

As an RN, I agree with you completely Mr. Deutsch.

9" December 6, 2014 at 11:31 pm

Seeing as you said this,’it’s clear that blacks simply can’t thrive in North America, it’s time for them to relocate to Africa.All of them.’

Does,RN stand for redneck?

Pat Hines December 7, 2014 at 8:02 am

Another non sequitur, plus it’s an ad hominem too. You’ve passed from mere silliness, to the petulant 14 year old syndrome.

CasaCabrones December 7, 2014 at 8:38 pm

Right on. Cannabis should never have been scheduled under Sch. 1 status. The government believes in the power of the plant going as far as patenting it’s medical qualities. A living lie is continuing to prohibit this substance to citizens.

anon. December 5, 2014 at 10:48 pm

After reading Law Enforcement’s letter, their biggest problem with the legalization of Marijuana is that it will somehow make their job harder without federal legalization. To that, I say SO WHAT! It is stupid to assert that there is significant property crimes, people are loseing their jobs and people somehow are ruinning their lives by using Marijuana. There have been zero deaths associated with consuming Marijuana, Alcohol, a legal substance, has killed millions over history and ruined countless lives. Lives are ruined when people go through the legal system because of absurd, ineffective marijuana laws. It’s time we legalize it and tax it!

Uh huh December 5, 2014 at 11:21 pm

“And I have great respect for the men and women who put their lives on the line every day to protect us.”

The police have no duty to protect anyone:

Maybe if you boot lick enough Davis you’ll get cops to change their mind on marijuana…lol

9" December 6, 2014 at 12:28 am

Tobacco vs. Marijuana

Like tobacco smoke, marijuana smoke contains cancer-causing chemicals. There are
33 cancer-causing chemicals contained in marijuana. Marijuana smoke also deposits tar
into the lungs. In fact, when equal amounts of marijuana and tobacco are smoked,
marijuana deposits four times as much tar into the lungs. This is because marijuana
joints are un-filtered and often more deeply inhaled than cigarettes.

Marijuana and the Lungs

Marijuana smoke is also an irritant to the lungs, and frequent marijuana smokers can
have many of the same respiratory problems experienced by people who smoke
tobacco. These include coughing and phlegm production on most days, wheezing,
bronchitis, and greater risk of lung infection, although most of these may go away
after stopping smoking marijuana. Frequent marijuana smokers also have more
healthcare visits both overall and for respiratory conditions compared to nonsmokers.
While research has not shown a clear increase in risk for lung cancer among marijuana
smokers, results have been mixed for heavy, long term use.

Smoking marijuana may be associated with the formation of large air sacs in the lung,
called bullae, which can lead to shortness of breath and, if they rupture, death. Similarly,
there are reports of sudden lung collapse or air pockets forming between the lungs
among marijuana smokers.

American Lung Association

Duncan20903 December 6, 2014 at 2:16 am

Smoking simply is not required in order to gain the benefits of cannabis, whether for medicinal need or just plain enjoyment. Any potential health hazards due to smoking are not the hazards of cannabis, but of smoking. I always recommend that people seriously consider not smoking it. I quit in 2006 and have never looked back. There are just too many other delivery methods which don’t require the person enjoying cannabis or utilizing it for medicinal need to inhale carbon monoxide.

The vaporizer is proven safe, less expensive, and preferred by the study’s subjects by a margin of 7:1 in peer reviewed research published in 2007. No carbon monoxide or other nasty byproducts of smoking are produced when the vaporizer is set at the optimal temperature.

In addition to the vaporizer there is oromucosal delivery via tincture, gel strip, infused edibles/liquids, topical salves/transdermal patches, eye drops or suppositories.


Bud Green December 6, 2014 at 5:16 am

1) Federal researchers implanted several types of cancer, including leukemia and lung cancers, in mice, then treated
them with cannabinoids (unique, active components found in marijuana). THC and other cannabinoids shrank tumors and increased the mice’s lifespans. Munson, AE et al. Antineoplastic Activity of Cannabinoids. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Sept. 1975. p. 597-602.
2) In a 1994 study the government tried to suppress, federal researchers gave mice and rats massive doses of THC,
looking for cancers or other signs of toxicity. The rodents given THC lived longer and had fewer cancers, “in a dose-dependent manner” (i.e. the more THC they got, the fewer tumors). NTP Technical Report On The Toxicology And
Carcinogenesis Studies Of 1-Trans- Delta-9 Tetrahydrocannabinol, CAS No.1972-08-3, In F344/N Rats And B6C3F Mice, Gavage Studies. See also, “Medical
Marijuana: Unpublished Federal Study Found THC-Treated Rats Lived Longer, Had Less Cancer,” AIDS Treatment News no. 263, Jan. 17, 1997.
3) Researchers at the Kaiser-Permanente HMO, funded by NIDA, followed 65,000 patients for nearly a decade, comparing cancer rates among non-smokers, tobacco smokers, and marijuana smokers. Tobacco smokers had massively higher rates of lung cancer and other cancers. Marijuana smokers who didn’t also use tobacco had no increase in risk of tobacco-related cancers or of cancer risk overall. In fact their rates of lung and most other cancers
were slightly lower than non-smokers, though the difference did not reach statistical significance. Sidney, S. et al. Marijuana Use and Cancer Incidence (California, United States). Cancer Causes and Control. Vol. 8. Sept. 1997, p.
4) Donald Tashkin, a UCLA researcher whose work is funded by NIDA, did a case-control study comparing 1,200 patients with lung, head and neck cancers to a matched group with no cancer. Even the heaviest marijuana smokers had no increased risk of cancer, and had somewhat lower cancer risk than non-smokers (tobacco smokers had a 20-fold increased lung cancer risk). Tashkin D. Marijuana Use and Lung Cancer: Results of a Case-Control Study. American Thoracic Society International Conference. May 23, 2006.

nitrat December 6, 2014 at 9:26 am

Smoking marijuana is NOT the same as ingesting marijuana oils.

9" December 6, 2014 at 7:37 pm

But marijuana oils are no substitute for more effective treatment.Buy a fucking vowel! Maybe you can get a JAMA subscription for xmas..

Pat Hines December 7, 2014 at 8:03 am

Why don’t you use your real name, boy?

euwe max December 7, 2014 at 9:25 pm

That *is* his real name!

Ricky December 6, 2014 at 11:13 am

Read the Tashkin study.

10" December 6, 2014 at 11:28 am

OK, so why shouldn’t cannabis be re-legalized?

ImaDawn Baker December 6, 2014 at 12:38 am

Who in hell asked these inbred Barney Fifes for their biased,worthless yet predictable opinion in the first place. Just another prime example of why more & more Americans have less & less respect for the law & the bastards who enforce it every day. Marijuana will be legalized shortly & these smug & condescending cretins are becoming increasingly angered & desperate enough to tell bold-faced lies in hopes of impeding the inevitable. If it’s an adversarial relationship that they covet I’m sure that the tens of millions of Americans who have enjoyed it’s myriad benefits would be happy to accommodate them – any time & any where !!!

9" December 6, 2014 at 10:48 pm


Duncan20903 December 6, 2014 at 1:56 am

My wife woke up ill this morning. At first I was suspicious that she was just malingering, but during her interrogation she convinced me that she’s really very ill by exhibiting actual symptoms of being ill. I said that I was really worried, and asked her if she wanted me to call a politician in for a medical consultation. But she’s still not sold on the assertion that politicians are better qualified to practice medicine and insisted on seeing an M.D. Women!

Now I’m going to have to lobby her to at least get a second opinion from a politician. Even if they can’t cure her, they can at least pass a law which would do so. I may have to put my foot down and insist. After all, it’s for her own good.

But seriously, what about the children? What kind of message does it send the children if she lallygags and acts like a layabout all day without consulting a politician? Doesn’t anyone care about the children?

Bud Green December 6, 2014 at 5:20 am

MDMA and psilocybin are in Schedule 1 and research is moving forward such that there is more psychedelic research taking place now than at any time since the 1960s. The real problem obstructing medical marijuana research is the NIDA monopoly on the supply of marijuana legal for use in FDA-regulated research and the Public Health Service protocol review process that is required for privately-funded medical marijuana studies but not for any other Schedule 1 drug. DEA is protecting the NIDA monopoly despite a February 2007 DEA Administrative Law Judge ruling stating that it would be in the public interest for the NIDA monopoly to end.
Furthermore, marijuana does not cause lung cancer or COPD so it’s scientifically inaccurate to compare the risks of smoking tobacco v. the risks of smoking marijuana. Just look at the papers by Dr. Donald Tashkin, ULCA, a NIDA-funded researcher who devoted his career to understanding the risks of smoking marijuana.

Karl December 6, 2014 at 3:23 pm

I’m a supporter of marijuana legalization, but while marijuana itself does not cause cancer, smoking anything creates a chemical change that creates cancer causing carcinogens. One of them being the irritant gas nitrogen oxide that can scar the lungs. Particulate matter, carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, sulfur dioxide as well. Smoking anything is not inherently healthy for you. While some argue vapor is a safe way to go, which without proper research I don’t think anyone can definitively say whether or not it is either. Specifically when we don’t know that THC or CBD are the only things being vaporized. THC vaporizes at approx. 185C, while other compounds within marijuana could very well vaporize at lower temperatures. Just because combustion doesn’t take place doesn’t mean there isn’t a chemical change as well. I believe the best method is orally or cold water extracts. I think that is honestly the only way you can truthfully say it does more good than harm.

Sumpter December 6, 2014 at 5:21 am

Keep up the good work, Tom. This is a great cause which will benefit countless South Carolinians who afflicted with painful medical conditions.

nitrat December 6, 2014 at 9:23 am

The motivation of law enforcement re: drug laws has to do with the amazing amounts of money they make for themselves, their counties and states thanks to the interdiction laws.

These laws have perverted the idea of community law enforcement and leave towns and counties unprotected while deputies prowl the interstates looking for prey, usually from out of state.

I am generally anti-Libertarian (after years of observing the execrable Mark Sanford and his toady Tom Davis and reading the pontificating and regurgitating of Libertarian dogma by FITSNEWS), but have come across Radley Balko’s blog “The Watch” at the Washington Post. It is THE place to go to learn what is going on with LEO across the country.

Below is a link (you may have to cut and paste in your browser) to a 6 part Washington Post story that makes clear what law enforcement is interested in, why, the training business racket that has sprung up around the interdiction laws and the violation of your rights as you drive across the country:

Smirks December 6, 2014 at 9:32 am

Police offices need to be funded in a way that doesn’t promote bullshit. Give them adequate and stable funding without incentivizing behavior where they just go out and fuck with people over minor things. Simple possession, speeding tickets for going just a tad over the limit, asset forfeiture, etc.

CasaCabrones December 7, 2014 at 8:39 pm

Absolutely. Civic forfeiture is regimented crime. Criminals aren’t always behind bars and wearing orange. Many many live among us.

Gimme ur shit December 7, 2014 at 10:52 pm

“asset forfeiture”

The #1 reason police love drug laws currently.

HD December 6, 2014 at 9:55 am Reply
Jack B Nimble December 6, 2014 at 10:39 am Reply
HD December 6, 2014 at 11:02 am

Different issue.

Buz Martin December 6, 2014 at 11:11 am

Reading through these comments. Good Lord! Health hazzards that may or may not be associated with smoking weed have NO bearing on this. Total red herring. Nobody is trying to make it legal for little sick kids to burn blunts. How dense ARE some of y’all, anyway?

Oily Taintz December 6, 2014 at 3:30 pm

Not so dense. They have an agenda. It is not the same as yours.

9" December 6, 2014 at 8:56 pm

When you’re talking,’Medical Marijuana’,it’s relevant to bring up the hypocrisy behind that non reasoning ‘thinking’.Just don’t bullshit that it’s good for you,and is a Utopian panacea.Legalize it.

9" December 6, 2014 at 10:01 pm

Here’s an interview excerpt from my late partner’s ex father in law(still friends),Dr Herbert Kleber,who along with Mark Gold,literally wrote the book on drug addiction(textbook).

Bill White: Your recent publications on the use of marijuana in medicine would be one such example?

Dr. Herb Kleber: Yes, I was recently asked to write a commentary for the American Journal of Psychiatry on this subject. It was entitled, “Physicians and Medical Marijuana,” and it argued that physicians have no business being involved in this arena at all. We cannot as physicians prescribe something where the dose, the frequency, the duration, potency, and the purity are unknown. When I prescribe Prozac, I know exactly what I’m prescribing. You know, 20 milligrams once a day, and it’s FDA-approved and we assume that it’s pure; it’s not contaminated and that if I say twenty milligrams, that’s what you get. With medical marijuana,you have no notion of what the person is going to get. I believe there are important constituents
in the marijuana plant that could eventually become FDA approved agents. But “Medical Marijuana” programs are not the way to go.My favorite article on medical marijuana was an interview by a New York Times reporter of a physician in Colorado. The reporter was allowed to sit in on an interview with a patient requesting medical marijuana. The whole thing took less than five minutes, and there were
basically two questions and no hands-on physical. “Do you have any conditions for which marijuana might be helpful” and the person answered, “Yes, my back is killing me.” And, “Do you have any condition for which marijuana might be harmful?” “Of course not.” “Go out and see my assistant. Pay her $150, and she’ll give you the medical marijuana card.” And after the individual left, the doctor turned to the reporter and said, “I made a million dollars last year working only three days a week and the wonderful thing about this law is you need a new card

Pat Hines December 6, 2014 at 10:41 pm

It should be illegal for law enforcement to engage in open conflict of interest activities like this. Anyone says this garbage in an official capacity should be dismissed with prejudice before the sun sets.

I’m sick of law enforcement engaging in this disgusting and unethical action.

Understandable December 7, 2014 at 8:59 am

“I’m sick of law enforcement engaging in this disgusting and unethical action.”

It’s the nature of the beast. Lord Acton and all that. Limited government is a unicorn.

James Fleming Jr December 7, 2014 at 4:05 pm

The answer to this problem along with alcohol is to make it legal but illegal to drive with any amount in you!

Uh huh December 8, 2014 at 8:28 pm

legalizing freedom is unpopular

CasaCabrones December 7, 2014 at 8:36 pm

Tom Davis and other senators Mrs Horne and Mr. Todd Rutherford are leading the progressive charge for the South and Southeast.

lise December 8, 2014 at 3:51 pm

grow ops up and running???, whats toms, todds & horns interest, eh; Casa?


Leave a Comment