NEW HAMPSHIRE 2013 - HB 573 - MEDICAL CANNABIS ACT - WHEN GOVENORS RUIN A GOOD THING AND CAUSE HARM TO SOCIETY

Updated May 26, 2013, 10:15 AM

HB 573 in New Hampshire would legalize the use of cannabis for medicinal use.

The New Hampshire House (which represents the people of NH) has, for the past four years, proposed a bill to legalize medicinal cannabis 3 out of the 4 years with an overwhelming majority of votes.

Under our former governor, John Lynch, this was an impossible act to pass through the Senate, let alone through the governor, as John Lynch felt that cannabis, aka marijuana, was nothing other than a dangerous, addictive drug, in much the same way as does the federal government which lists it as a Schedule One drug (narcotic) with zero medicinal value and an extremely high propensity for addiction.

To John Lynch, life in the "Live Free or Die" state meant life living in a family oriented amusement park with nothing that realistically related to the realities of the human condition. The fact that life involves people of all ages with different life situations and conditions meant nothing to him. He looked upon adults as children, life in NH as a child's amusement park and there were no adults present, just the state to mandate laws oriented towards children, with the insight being, adults other than government were not present. The day he left was the day I let out a huge sigh of relief. and voted for Maggie Hassan.

I voted for our new governor Maggie Hassan as I believed she was more open-minded, better educated and had the will of the people of New Hampshire in mind, and that she did not think of adults in our state simply as children. It appears, much as I wish it were not true, that I was deceived and sorely wrong.

The good news is that the NH Senate approved HB 573. The bad news is that it was severly gutted before passage - much of the slashing due to governor Maggie Hassan.

Normally i would post a link to the actual bill, but under the circumstances I am convinced the Senate bill as it has been rewritten is hardly suitable for consideration.  It's like telling a kid you can eat popcorn, but without the corn.

Passage of HB 573 would legalize use of cannabis for those with medical need - and establish state run facilities to grow the cannabis for distribution. This could take 2 - 5 years.

In the meantime, although passage of the bill would legalize medical cannabis, the bill was stripped of protections for those who qualify as per legal exclusion until such time as the facilities are in operation. What this means is if one qualified legally, possession or use of cannabis until such time as the facilities are operational would mean the user is a criminal and subject to prosecution under current state laws prohibiting cannabis use.

Second: NH is a state without much in the way of public transportation. We are a commuter state. Stripped from the bill is the authority of those with a medical need to grow their own. The governor felt it would be a burden to law enforcement should the grow your own option be included, as law enforcement would be forced to make determinations of legality should they find someone growing cannabis.  Since most such encounters involve law enforcement drawing their weapons under the assumption that cannabis users are equivalent to terrorists, murderers and rapists, it was felt that the grow your own option was too much for law enforcement to adapt to.

Third: Written permission needed to be required for a patient using medical cannabis - meaning that cannabis use is so dangerous per se, that a patient would need to provide land-lord or property owner permission of such use before the patient could be approved. Essentially, this equates to if you're gay, you can be gay if your land-lord or property owner approves.

Fourth: PTSD is not a valid condition for use of cannabis. You will want to read the following article first, but suffice to say that cannabis is very effective in treating symptoms of PTSD, for which alternative pharmaceuticals are extremely strong and potentially very addictive. Stripping the bill of the treatment for PTSD is like saying you can simply drink yourself to death or subject yourself to extremely powerful pharmaceuticals instead. CANNABIS AND PTSD

And finally... oddly enough the senate bill is written to require patients to sit in the pharmacy, sorry, cannabis facility, to use the medicine rather than provide for legal use at home.Yes, you heard me correctly. Under Gov. Hassan's guidance she felt it was irresponsible to allow patients the right to use cannabis at home. Even with written permission of the landlord or home-owner. No other medicine requires a patient to use it while at the pharmacy, but Gov. Hassan felt cannabis is the exception. Well, maybe not the only exception as those addicted to heroin often must inject methadone at the methadone clinic.

However, seriously, does she actually believe that cannabis is equivalent to heroin addiction? Where cannabis is medicine for many people, methadone is prescribed exclusively for heroin addiction and withdrawal. There is absolutely no comparison, yet that is how Governor Hassan views a prescription for cannabis. Under her mindset, we should require alcoholics to drink booze at the liquor store.

You can read about the SENATE BILL HERE.

All told, considering the empathy and understanding in all the other New England states, the current NH bill to legalize cannabis for medical use is a farce. I wish really I didn't have to say that, but it's the truth. The Live Free or Die state is encouraging death. And a torturous one at that.

Of course, should one wish to consider the position of the NH Medical Society, which suggests they've advocated for the betterment of medicine since 1791, one would be aghast at the possibility that a natural plant like cannabis be legalized for medicinal use given all they claim are dangerous about it, and how modern pharmaceuticals are far better for use by humans, drugs such as marinol, and other synthetics. I hate to suggest they are playing god, but they are, as natural plants, although subject to pollutants introduced by us humans render much of what we eat today dangerous, nonetheless, I'd suggest, if there is a natural alternative to pharmaceutics, that is far better than a pill. Still, to provide for open, honest discussion about the subject, refer to this document, submitted by the NH Medical Society, as to why a pill is better than the plant God provided us.

For myself, yet another misplaced vote for an elected official who simply just doesn't have what it takes to see reality, NH Medical Society aside as I believe they are wrong, and centuries of safe use of cannabis by humans is my proof. That official and the NH Society are welcome to comment on my blog to put forth their point of view and rebuttals. I doubt they will, but surprise me.Fact is, the natural plant provides a balanced God provided therapy that no pill can equally provide. Consider coffee as a basic example... it provides caffeine, which is available in pill form. But who the hell would give up their coffee for a pill???

Live Free if you can, but sadly, most of us must die first... and love NH, if you can believe in a lie, which I do not.

Stop The Hurt!

BOBKAT'S LAIR STATISTICS - WHO COULD GUESS??? 25,000+ VIEWS!!!

Before I embark on my next series of posts I thought I would share some statistics with you. I know some of you out there love statistics!

I have been blogging since around 2009... and to be honest I never thought I'd be a blogger. Sure, 15 years ago when the internet was still relatively young I had my own website, which I put a lot of work into... I lost it all when I changed ISP providers a few years after that and then lost it all when a hard-drive crashed and burned.

In my list of Favorite Bloggers is a fellow blogger called SlamDunks. He's been on a "Vacation Hiatus" now for several months but had an extremely interesting blog that at one time I was a guest writer for him. It's a long story, but suffice to say that is when I got interested in blogging - in setting up my own blog.

I don't know that it would be accurate to say I expected to become an overnight success, or if I even expected to become the go-to guy for extraordinary and intriguing stories... I guess, yeah, I secretly dreamed of such a thing, but realistically I also realized the WWW is a very BIG place.

Well, I've been at it now for around four years and if comments and followers to my blog are any indication, I'm a dismal failure. I have 9 followers and maybe 20 - 30 comments over that time. Quite disappointing, I might say, but years ago I wrote a post about "Why Blog?" and noted that the reason's to blog included more than how many followers one had, or how often people posted comments. It was a goal... something personal... something I did to communicate with the world.

I publish the following so that for those who wonder why I do it, what have I achieved, and why would I encourage anyone else to start a blog of their own, given the work involved and the rewards can see that although my topics may be considered fringe elementals, like cannabis reform and legalization, personal rights and freedom, stopping the hurt and the infringement of government on Constitutional Rights that if you judge a book simply by it's cover - the number of followers and comments you may be sorely deceived.

Thank-you to all who have paid a visit to my blog... I hope I have provided enlightenment, or at least encouraged you to ask questions.

The past 7 days plus my today, yesterday, last month and lifetime views (click image for a large size view):

My Most Popular Posts:

CAPTIVE CLEVELAND WOMEN RESCUED RAISES CONCERNS ABOUT MISSING PERSONS - ARE WE DOING ENOUGH?

Few persons by now have not heard the shocking news about the escape and rescue of three women held hostage for a decade  in a house in Cleveland Ohio. [Photo Source: NY Daily News]

Amanda Berry (16), Georgina DeJesus (14) and Michelle Knight (21)

There was one abductor who allegedly kidnapped and enslaved the women between 2002 and 2004. He allegedly kept them in chains, bound them in duct tape, tortured and starved them, used them for sex, and fathered a child with one of them and, I say allegedly, which is an understatement, but until proven guilty in a court of law I must add that disclaimer. He also allegedly impregnated one of them multiple times, the older of the three women, subjecting her to extraordinary torture and abuse to induce abortions after causing her to be pregnant.

I'm not here to retell their story... you can peruse the following links among many for that:

NY Daily News

CNN

CafeMOM

All three were abducted from the same street in Cleveland between 2002 and 2004. All three were reported to the police as missing persons. Due to extenuating circumstances Michelle Knight was dropped from any missing person's investigation about two years after her disappearance. Only her immediate family continued to try to find her. The other two victims, Amanda Berry and Georgina DeJesus were still (allegedly) being "actively" pursued by law enforcement.  However almost ten years had passed since they were reported missing.

A world renowned psychic had told the parents of Amanda Berry - on national television, that she felt Amanda was dead.

Georgina DeJesus had been best friends with the abductor's daughter, which the abductor allegedly used that relationship to trick Georgina into his car and captivity.

Another man, Fernando Colon, who formed a relationship with the abductor's ex-wife was accused and convicted of inappropriate relations with one of the abductors daughters, and allegedly told FBI investigators they should be focusing on the abductor, not himself. Apparently the FBI didn't take his concerns seriously, nor the testimony provided in court during his conviction. Colon suspected he was being setup... and we now know for good reason as to take attention off from the abductor himself.

NBC NEWS has the story: "The Cleveland (abductor) made accusations against Colon, 39, in July 2004, shortly after 14-year-old Georgina “Gina” DeJesus vanished on her way home from the west Cleveland middle school she attended."

Had (assuming Colon told the FBI what he says he did) Colon been listened to, might not the decade long abductions been brought to a close sooner? It's quite possible I believe. I also believe it's a wake-up call for law-enforcement and their methods that highlights a propensity toward tunnel-vision and priorities.

I'm reminded about two other missing person's cases that I blogged about previously.

Brianna Maitland and Maura Murray. Both women are still missing. Neither has been found. Both it has been speculated were abducted and there is no proof either is deceased. In the former case it is well documented law-enforcement was distracted by Brianna's use of drugs, especially marijuana, and possibly cocaine. What derailed the initial investigation into her disappearance was a firm belief that she had run away, that Brianna was of "questionable character" and that she had owed drug dealers money. Law enforncement speculated she had run away to avoid her debts.

The facts about her case, in my opinion, strongly suggest a possibility she could have been abducted and sold into white slavery. One person who was never officially made a suspect had connections to gangs in NYC. Another unofficial suspect had the money and connections to kidnap her and sell her off in Columbia. Yet another discovery was the alleged activity of a branch of the Chinese Mafia operating in the area at the time, according to my sources. Were any of these possibilities ever truly investigated? I rather doubt it.

In the case of Maura Murray, Attorney general Kelly Ayotte and NH law-enforcement  were more interested in the theory of her disappearance being related to alcohol found in her car and irrational behavior and unusual web-searches she conducted before she disappeared. The family of Maura Murray seriously considered a slave-type abduction, but to my knowledge law-enforcement has never seriously considered the possibility. Efforts by Maura's father to communicate with then Attorney general of NH, Kelly Ayotte went nowhere. Kelly Ayotte is now a NH Senator and recently admitted her close ties with law enforcement were the feathers in her cap when making political decisions for the citizens of NH.

I was told by Brianna Maitland's father that one of the (to remain unnamed) suspects in Brianna's disappearance had threatened three of her girlfriends after the fact that if they said anything he "would make them disappear like he had Brianna".

So the question is, just how do you make someone disappear? Until the story of the three kidnap victims in Cleveland made the headlines one would think murder. But what if...

???

What if the alleged abductor was suspected of selling drugs? Well, now you've got a whole other story. Think about it. Marijuana being the most popular drug they'd be going through his trash, monitoring his electric use, watching his spending behavior, GPSing his activities, and documenting who he associated with.

The focus of law-enforcement is obviously zeroed in on the War on Drugs...  narcs in schools, drug testing and the assumption that marijuana users are more dangerous to society than the alleged kidnapper of the women in Cleveland. Water seeks the path of less resistance and so does law-enforcement.

The fact is there was reason to put a little time into focusing on the alleged abductor of the women in Cleveland. He was seen with a the daughter of one of the missing women in a park in Cleveland - did anyone wonder who was she? Did anyone question it? Neighbors, whether they actually did call police, claim they tried several times to report suspicious activity at the house. Were the calls ignored? Drop a dime, turn in a drug dealer, suggests that Americans are taken more seriously if reporting drug violations, not the sober activities of a kidnapper/rapist.

Compared to those suspected of drug violations where the following questions are asked by law enforcement; what was his electric bill considering he was a supposed single guy? What was in his trash? What was his water bill? What groceries did he purchase? All of those things are questioned by law enforcement for those suspected of possessing, dealing, growing illegal drugs; however, in the case of a butterfly collector, where perhaps by current numbers, thousands of persons are being held as captive in some nut-case's home, what is law-enforcement doing?

I'd say, not much.

I'm not saying finding and busting a meth-lab isn't important. I'm not saying drug use can't be dangerous and cause for concern. What I am saying is that the War on Drugs and especially law enforcement's targeted pursuit of casual cannabis use is a bright red herring, itself a major threat to public safety and a significant diversion from what's necessary to truly protecting the American people.

Do you think what happened in Cleveland was an isolated event? It isn't. Human trafficking is perhaps more common than crack-houses and drug use. It's time we got our priorities in order. It's time we focus on the real dangers in society, not the scapegoats.

It's TIME to Stop the Hurt and find those who are missing without making it necessary for them to find us.

IN SUPPORT OF KELLY AYOTTE ON GUN VIOLENCE VOTE - ALBEIT NORMALLY I'M NOT, WITH ONE CAVEAT!

I regularly get e-mails from NH Senator Kelly Ayotte,

which unlike many politicians who don't bother, I understand that's a good thing; not that I voted for her.

The latest e-mail I received presents her case with regards to her recent NO vote over extended gun control and background checks. Apparently anti-gun groups are hitting her back hard, with smear campaigns and television ads.

Where I often disagree with her, I stand with her on this issue as she correctly emphasizes the laws are already in place, need to be enforced and we definitely don't need new one's. Just like what happened after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, the recent events at Sandy Hook CT, Aurora CO. has had a frantic level of media frenzy and public reaction that asks for a "knee-jerk" reaction for laws that will forever ban such violence.

The result and consequences of Sept. 11, 2001 was the Patriot Act that gave the terrorists a victory in my opinion, eroding the 1st and 4th Amendments of the Constitution significantly. Again, the laws were already in place for such a violent act and what the Patriot Act did was pour salt in the wounds of Americans. We the People didn't deserve to be punished as a result of fanatics by increased government surveillance,;draconian TSA agents and long lines at the airports that single out obviously harmless people and installation of pornographic body scanners. We didn't need to open our own Russian style gulag at Guantanamo Bay Cuba to house terrorists, though where to put them does remain a concern, but I think we had alternatives and I know torture was never a part of our American culture until then.

What Senator Kelly Ayotte has done is to stand up and act in a reasonable and responsible manner to yet more attempts to infringe upon our freedoms and Constitutional rights. To me this is a good thing and for once she has my support.

Having said that her e-mail does point out some weaknesses/perspectives that I find troubling and perplexing about her, which highlights why I didn't vote for her.

Senator Ayotte said in the e-mail: "From my experience working with police chiefs, detectives and prosecutors, I know how important it is to have laws that work - and I know how important it is to enforce the laws we have on the books."

She goes on to say, and I mostly agree: "There are no easy answers. Even if the proposed expansion of background checks had been in place, it wouldn't have prevented the Sandy Hook tragedy - where the perpetrator obtained the firearms he used by killing his own mother, who owned them lawfully."

On the latter... The perpetrator of the Sandy Hook murders was not ruled mentally ill, nor was it illegal for him to own guns. In other violent events this may not be as true, but in Sandy Hook it was. There was little it appears that could have been done, legally or otherwise to prevent that tragedy. New laws, those including the ones you voted against, essentially intend to disarm Americans, in essence, anyone making less than $200,000 a year. It's the Marihuana Tax Act rekindled, as the Personal Protection/2ND Amendment Tax Act of 2013.

My how history seems to repeat itself!

On the former, I'd say to Senator Ayotte, it's all fine and good that you have such a good rapport with law enforcement, and an appreciation for how laws work, but do you really believe that any and every law passed is forever true and enforceable? Shall we go back to arresting people who spit in the street as disgusting as it is? Should we arrest people for fornication and adultery? Should we arrest women who wear bikini's or expose their belly buttons or too much leg?

And naturally, where I'm going with this is, are laws prohibiting cannabis use by adults really protecting the public when the majority of violent crimes are committed by non-cannabis users and straight up straight people who don't even use drugs, except for maybe alcohol - the latter being more a contributing factor in many domestic violence crimes?

Don't you think it's time you develop a good rapport with the PEOPLE too?

When prior to your election a Viet Nam Vet spoke with you and asked you how you felt about medical cannabis you acted like he was from Mars. You behave as if cannabis prohibition solves all the country's problems and makes us safe - it doesn't.

Any law in this country except those of a capital nature need constant evaluation. Things change, people change, times change. What was wrong 75 years ago, or 35 years ago may not be a bad thing today.

The US Constitution grants Americans Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Granted, that includes the 2ND Amendment. But it also challenges you to appreciate that in 75 years no one has been harmed by cannabis except where the laws on the books and those shoved down our throats by a President Nixon has caused enormous harm to society.

I would ask you to respect the Constitution but I would also ask you to think outside the box. I would ask you to think back to the question that Viet Nam Vet asked you. Laws are not made in B&W!