420 protests and the medical marijuana override

[dalebert]

Some [patients] want to come down and get in your faces, and some probably will if you don't stop.  Interesting choice of enemies, isn't it?

It is. It's very twisted that they would choose us as their enemies, people taking personal risk to change the culture of fear surrounding a rather harmless drug, rather than self-centered politicians who would punish sick people over the actions of some strangers. Irregardless, I'll forgive them and continue to fight for them in the manner I believe most effective.

[dalebert]

It's an awful lot to give up over a very vague hope for this one meager bill. It could fail even if all of this momentum is discarded and I think it would be a substantial price to pay even if it passes. It's being presented like this is the only way to save desperately ill people but there are alternatives. Sick people can smoke illegally and take a small calculated risk. Most probably already are. With discretion, it's unlikely they'll be caught. Meanwhile, you could arrange to get in touch with those elderly patients who haven't currently got access to MJ and help them get access.

[KBCraig]

"Dammit, Rosa, git yo black ass back here and sit down! You're gonna ruin it for the rest of us!"

Matt, perhaps the timing is unfortunate for your agenda, but I'm pretty sure none of the 420 activists know anything about political sensibilities. Nor should they have to.

Face it: if any politician turns against your bill because of 420 in the park(s), they were looking for a reason to bolt.

[Mellamo]

It's an awful lot to give up over a very vague hope for this one meager bill. It could fail even if all of this momentum is discarded and I think it would be a substantial price to pay even if it passes. It's being presented like this is the only way to save desperately ill people but there are alternatives. Sick people can smoke illegally and take a small calculated risk. Most probably already are. With discretion, it's unlikely they'll be caught. Meanwhile, you could arrange to get in touch with those elderly patients who haven't currently got access to MJ and help them get access.

Wouldn't it be better if these patients didn't have to take any risk at all? If they could treat their illnesses without fearing government retribution?

Where's the "substantial price" in that?

[Pat McCotter]

http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=8939.msg156425#msg156425

[Puke]

Consider me an asshole as well. I'm not really interested in dealing with anyone who spends his time harassing folks for going about their business as well as coddling other folks who refuse to go about their business unless it has been written on paper by old people.

QFT

[dalebert]

Wouldn't it be better if these patients didn't have to take any risk at all? If they could treat their illnesses without fearing government retribution?

Of course it would. And maybe they'll actually get that someday in part because of this extremely powerful activism. This bill ain't much and it's very possible it won't pass irregardless of the other activism.

Look, I realize that you and Matt don't see this as powerful activism. You realize that I don't see this bill as powerful activism. In my opinion it's a huge sacrifice for a small thing and you guys see it as a small sacrifice for a huge thing. Rather than arguing back and forth about that with no clear end in sight after a couple of years, or issuing ultimatums, why aren't we each doing our own thing in a live and let live manner unless and until we do see eye to eye?

Is that so complicated for anyone who claims to call themselves a LIBERTARIAN?

[Free libertarian]

Wouldn't it be better if these patients didn't have to take any risk at all? If they could treat their illnesses without fearing government retribution?

Of course it would. And maybe they'll actually get that someday in part because of this extremely powerful activism. This bill ain't much and it's very possible it won't pass irregardless of the other activism.

Look, I realize that you and Matt don't see this as powerful activism. You realize that I don't see this bill as powerful activism. In my opinion it's a huge sacrifice for a small thing and you guys see it as a small sacrifice for a huge thing. Rather than arguing back and forth about that with no clear end in sight after a couple of years, or issuing ultimatums, why aren't we each doing our own thing in a live and let live manner unless and until we do see eye to eye?

Is that so complicated for anyone who claims to call themselves a LIBERTARIAN?

Hey stop making sense!

[Moebius Tripp]

Rocketman, I really don't see why you would go out of your way to alienate those who would otherwise applaud your efforts.  Seems a waste of time.  It also seems egotistical to threaten retraction of friendship if we all don't tow your line.  I've met that kind of thinking before.  Maybe the reason you see asshole everywhere is because of the disposition of your head?

[William Lee]

When Mike Fisher buffed your nails for a dollar, Kat, I totally supported him in that.  There was an actual strategy involved, not a bunch of goofballs running amok.

[William Lee]

I think everyone should be able to grow their own medication without the government's permission.

So do I.  Easy question.  But people call me every week, people who are desperately ill, and they are not willing to risk arrest.  Some suffer rather than break the law, and others have no idea where to get marijuana, or if it would be likely to help.  Some of the patients already have good connections, and I'm very very glad they do, but others don't.

Sounds like either a business opportunity or an opportunity to be charitable.  You could provide the service of delivery high-grade cannabis to patients who need the stuff or we could have a "poundraiser'.  I'm sure the civil disobedients would be happy to contribute to the cause of getting sick people their medicine.

[Mellamo]

Wouldn't it be better if these patients didn't have to take any risk at all? If they could treat their illnesses without fearing government retribution?

Of course it would. And maybe they'll actually get that someday in part because of this extremely powerful activism. This bill ain't much and it's very possible it won't pass irregardless of the other activism.

This bill is the chance to get that on October 28, rather than "maybe someday". If I were a cancer patient, I'd want the protection sooner than later.

Look, I realize that you and Matt don't see this as powerful activism. You realize that I don't see this bill as powerful activism. In my opinion it's a huge sacrifice for a small thing and you guys see it as a small sacrifice for a huge thing.

Don't be so hasty to tell me what I think, now. (Speaking for myself here, the only thing I can do.) I actually think it's pretty cool that the 420 protests are gaining local support and media attention, and it's very encouraging to see people openly smoking a joint with police driving past them without a care. When done right, these protests can send a strong message of "look, we're not hurting anyone" to prohibitionists in this state, and could aid a change in local marijuana policy in the future. The timing is what puzzles me.

But enough about me. You just called a bill that will enable seriously ill cancer patients legal access to marijuana to treat their deadly illnesses "a huge sacrifice for a small thing" and remarked earlier that it would be a "substantial price to pay" if it passes. Please, elaborate on that.

[lildog]

Folks, aren't we all fighting for the same cause?  I don't see the need to attack each other here.

Matt had a very simple request and I don't think it was truly unreasonable.  He and others feel that the 420 protests are causing more harm then good to the chance of the medical bill to pass.  Now I agree with others here that is a politician is going to use that as reason to screw over the sick then clearly they were simply looking for justification anyway they could get it.  But that said, is it really too much to ask to just hold off the protests for a short period of time until the medical bill is dealt with one way or the other?

Clearly Matt has started with a confrontational approach here but he is clearly passionate about this cause and has invested a lot of time and effort into fighting for it.  Even if you disagree with his approach just remember he wants the same goal as you, more freedom.  Keep that in mind even if you disagree with one another on the method of achieving that goal.

[Sovereign Curtis]

Lil Dog, there is no way to stop the 420 protest in Keene. It is completely organic, and will die when its time comes, but no one can shoot it dead. Any effort to kill it, will only make it stronger.

[K. Darien Freeheart]

Folks, aren't we all fighting for the same cause?

Yes and no. We'll all say we're fighting for "more liberty" but as is clear here, people have specific strategic steps towards that. Rocketdog seems to be the most concerned with "more liberty for others, now". It's a good goal, yet I think his MEANS (focusing on the system as a way to increase overall liberty) is harmful to my goal of "more liberty for everyone, ultimately".

This issue, because it's so close to those super-absurd lifeboat scenarios we've all been charged with batting down, has really shaken my perspective on using the system as a vehicle to achieve my long-term goals. I used to be there, but I am feeling now as if it's a trap.