Glenn wrote on Jan 10, 2006 5:22 AM:The county should be suing the Federal Government for scheduling Marijuanna as a class 1 controlled substance. It's the best medicine for many, and it's 100% safe and non toxic. NO one has ever died from an overdose, EVER!

burt wrote on Jan 10, 2006 5:27 AM:I think the supervisors are wasting my tax money. The medical users aren't going to stop using because of a law suit, they'll just have to start using the sources that they previously used, supporting a black market, diverting other expensive law enforcement from useful endeavors like neighborhood gang issues, and creating a financial stream for possibly very negative purposes. Let the Fed sue California if its so important; meanwhile California elected officals should support the laws already passed by voters.

Margie wrote on Jan 10, 2006 6:47 AM:I have a son who has suffered through ADHD since childhood, we have gone the way of many doctors ie: MD,s, psychiatrist,psycho therapy and all of the "prescribed" medications, now that he is an adult and has started to use marijuanna he has a control of his mood swings and is a plesent person to be around again. So I'm all for keeping med.marijuanna use, I just wish that they would do more studys on the medical benifets it has to offer.

Rikter wrote on Jan 10, 2006 7:07 AM:The people have spoken thru our democratic system of voting. Isn't this what democracy is all about? I agree with Burt, let the Fed's sue the state. Basically, the supervisors are saying screw all the sick people who can benefit from a non toxic natural drug that God put on this earth. REPLACE ALL THE SUPERVISORS!

Me wrote on Jan 10, 2006 8:09 AM:No one asked me my opinion. I am a church-going, born again Christian and I am for the decriminalization of marijuana use period, medical or otherwise. It is time for government to stop telling adults what they can and cannot use in or on their bodies. Drug trafficking is a different issue, but marijuana? Give me a break. By the way, I don't even smoke the stuff. Give the voters what they voted for...if not, expect not to get reelected. Slater-Price should understand that. What is truly behind this issue is political grandstanding. I, for one, am quite sick of it.

Andy wrote on Jan 10, 2006 9:50 AM:How much money will they spend on this law suit and what a waste. Why don't they take the money and open homeless shelters or a drug rehab program. If they really cared about the people then they would do what the people voted for. All they care about is having a anti drug stance on their record so they can promote their careers. I hope it backfires and the voters remember when it's time for reelection.

John wrote on Jan 10, 2006 11:20 AM:What's wrong with this picture... It is LEGAL to grow opium poppies as long as you don't use them for medication. You can buy the seeds at the grocery store in the spice section. I've seen them growing at Quail Botanical Gardens in Encinitas - but you can't grow marijuana because someone might abuse it. The supervisors are abusing their powers. Slater-Price... said they could not in good conscience support Prop. 215 because federal drug enforcement agents could still arrest and prosecute California residents regardless of the state's law. Well Pam, can you in good conscience condone the arrest of those who seek to use medical marijuana? That is what you are saying - that you support federal laws which would incarcerate sick people who smoke pot reccommended by their doctor. Compassionate consevatives sure don't have much compassion. Aren't conservatives supposed to be for smaller, less intrusive government?

I wrote on Jan 10, 2006 11:20 AM:I cant believe people are trying to out-law something that people benifit from. What about alcohol? What about Cigerettes? People die from things like that EVERYDAY, and they are trying to take something away that is one of the only natural medicines we have these days. I think if they are worried about drug trafficking, and the effects it will have on people and society. Maybe they should be looking at some of the REAL problems.

5th District Voter! wrote on Jan 10, 2006 12:08 PM:I wonder what other state laws the SD supervisors plan on breaking? When you took your positions, you all stated under oath to follow the constitution of the state of California and the will of the people. Obviously the SD supes think they are above the people and the law. Stop wasting my tax dollars on your personal agendas you hypocrites!

Patricia wrote on Jan 10, 2006 12:16 PM:I don't suffer from an illness or use marijuana period, but the thought of these officials trying to deny people who do use it to make their life more enjoyable is motivating me to be sure I never ever miss a county election, I will be sure to vote the supervisors out that obviously don't care about the well being of San Diego County residents.

We wrote on Jan 10, 2006 3:49 PM:Wow... the overwhelming %100 percent responses of San Diego citizens (see below) in favor of protecting this law should tell you how ridiculous this debate is. Medical marijuana should not be such the taboo that it is. I do not hear about people getting into cars and killing people, or stabbing others in bar fights (http://nctimes.com/articles/2006/01/09/news/sandiego/1806194558.txt) when stoned. Try to spend time and money dealing with what are really causing the problems in our city.

xerostomia wrote on Jan 10, 2006 4:03 PM:I find it outrageous that the US government and local officials cling to their out dated arguments. The Canadian Board of Health has approved the drug Sativex for trial testing in that country. The Food and Drug Administration also has plans to test this drug in the coming months here in the US. Sativex is a whole plant extract made from the Cannabis plant. If this plant has no medicinal value then why are millions of dollars being spent by GW Pharmaceuticals bringing this product to market?

Joe wrote on Jan 10, 2006 4:38 PM: Sure any durg will have it's abusers just look at tobacco and alcohol yet, not one person has died from marijuana. What is needed is research in how to cultivate the positive properties of Marijuana. Not all marijuana is the same. Some strains of marijuana aid in helping people deal with pain. Some with neurological problems Some strains are good for sleep issues. What is needed, in my opinion, is research and development. To find strains of marijuana that are standardly effective with a high level of quality. Street drugs are just not the answer for the medical community. I agree that marijuana isn't for everyone but leave peaceful people be please. It's a Natural Plant people safer than asprin!

John wrote on Jan 10, 2006 5:10 PM:Should pot just be legal? Should cocaine? Should heroin, pcp, meth, and all the other mind-altering chemicals? Many, many, many people are just not responsible. Look how many are destroying their (and their families) lives, and the stuff is illegal. If it was legal, sanctioned by the government, it would be that much easier to get. I think it would be a horrible thing. That is why there are some in government that want to fight the day that marijuana becomes legal. When that threshold is breached, it probably means the other more dangerous drugs are not far behind. In a sense I wouldn't mind seeing marijuana have a similar legal status as alcohol. However, I see why some in government would not like to see it happen. Just creating all the legal parameters would be a colossal headache. Alcohol is a dangerous drug. It causes many deaths, health problems, and can make people violent in some cases. Marijuana probably doesn't make people violent like alcohol can, but it has its own problems. Smoke in the lungs can't be good. Memory/brain damage? Impaired driving skills? Smoking in public - what if the people nearby don't care to inhale an intoxicant? Do we as a country really need another legal drug? New laws would have to be drafted, and enforced. It would be expensive. I know this is about medical use, but I see where this is a battle to stop the eventual general legalization of first marijuana, then other drugs. The image of dodging hypodermic needles in the park, ala Amsterdam, is not good.

Rhiannon wrote on Jan 10, 2006 7:06 PM:Marijuana has a 10,000 year history as a food, fibre and medicine. It is one of the oldest and safest substances known to humanity. No one has ever died from Cannabis. The overdose limit is "15 pounds in 15 minutes" meaning one would have to smoke 15 pounds of it in a 15 minute period in order to overdose. I'm glad to see that 95% of the reader responses here were honest and fact based. I'm not sure how much longer Americans (and the rest of the world) are going to accept the bull that the US government is spouting. America was founded by a revolution of the people and if the lies and oppression continue it's going to end that way too.

Rhiannon wrote on Jan 10, 2006 7:10 PM:Marijuana has a 10,000 year history as a food, fibre and medicine. It is one of the oldest and safest substances known to humanity. No one has ever died from Cannabis. The overdose limit is "15 pounds in 15 minutes" meaning one would have to smoke 15 pounds of it in a 15 minute period in order to overdose. I'm glad to see that 95% of the reader responses here were honest and fact based. I'm not sure how much longer Americans (and the rest of the world) are going to accept the hipocrasy that the US government is spouting.(The US is the world's #1 importer of illegal "drugs") America was founded by a revolution of the people and if the lies and oppression continue it will end that way too.

Jon wrote on Jan 10, 2006 7:16 PM:It's politics pure and simple. Neither the Democrats or the Republicans will ever legalize marijuana for any purpose. If they did their opponent would slaughter them during election time. We have heard all the arguments from "gateway drug" to "Reefer Madness". The arguments are all absurd. It's a plant folks! When I was a teen in the 1970's I thought by the time I was an adult and my peers became mainstream voters that marijuana would be decriminalized. I'm ashamed to say that my age group continues to carry the misguided torch and that this benign plant that brings peace and eurphoia to so many is still illegal to possess Vote Libertarian

Lori wrote on Jan 10, 2006 9:25 PM:This is a wake up call. I now want to know who my county supervisors are, and what they are up to. I pay taxes, and vote, and I am truly concerned for San Diego citizens. I am fortunate that I do not need to use marijuana, however, I certainly would not deny its medical benefits to those in need. May the voices of Glenn, Burt, Margie, Ricter, Andy, John, Patricia, Joe and the others be heard, and prevent the heart breaking stories that would occur if the state of California were to be sued for this law.

james wrote on Jan 11, 2006 5:12 AM:don't smoke it, don't use it, but i would never support criminalizing it!

Trina wrote on Jan 11, 2006 10:04 AM:My 23 year old son has struggled with marijuana use throughout his adolescence. He flunked out of high school, was estranged from the family, was unable to hold a job, and was unsuccessful at treatment. So that he can continue his use of marijuana, he has now managed to get a doctor's "prescription" of which he is very proud. With this in mind, I support the Board of Supervisors decision.

Dawna wrote on Jan 11, 2006 10:22 AM:I am behind the Board of Supervisors in their decision to sue the state. No where in either Prop 215 or SB420 are there clear parimenters for the use of marijuana as medicine. The lack of interpretation in either encourages illegal use.

Patrick wrote on Jan 11, 2006 3:20 PM:Trina, you obviously have other issues with your son, how easy to blame everything on drugs. A doctor gave him a prescription for a real reason, maybe he is suffering from something you are not aware of? It will state on his consent form what condition marijuana has been prescribed for, take a look and let us know. I am sure you would be much happier in knowing that if the supervisors get their way your son will be on the streets trying to find his medication. Sounds like you are truly a concerned mother! As for Dawna, what planet are you on? Prop 215 clearly states: (A) To ensure that seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes where that medical use is deemed appropriate and has been recommended by a physician who has determined that the person's health would benefit from the use of marijuana in the treatment of cancer, anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity, glaucoma, arthritis, migraine, or any other illness for which marijuana provides relief. If you need more information on medical marijuana, consult your doctor, not the SD supervisors!

Sanity wrote on Jan 11, 2006 5:48 PM:As Glen wrote, "No one has ever died..." How certain are you that no one has died from Pot? How many tragedies have been caused because people are impared? How many traffic accidents show that the driver was using pot? We don't track this information so your statement isn't valid. The drug laws aren't just to protect the user, but to protect society from the drug abuser. Sanctioning and decriminalizing may make a drug addict's life easier, but what does it do to our communities and the safety of those on the road?

Hmmm... wrote on Jan 11, 2006 5:53 PM:A survey of 500 speaks for all of San Diego? I doubt it -- ask the right questions! Asking, "Should people with cancer be allowed to seek relief with medical marijuana?" is a very different question than "Should people be allowed to self-medicate on a drug?" We keep forgetting that the original law was dripping with emotion about people suffering -- the reality is that most of the people suffering can and do get relief from conventional medicine. A doctor who prescribes a "medicine" without a clue as to it's dosage is simply pandering to an addict. Hmm, maybe we should all be allowed to grow our own poppies and make our own morphine -- wouldn't that be fun? Pot heads should stop trying to hide behind sick people who may or may not be helped by pot.

What? wrote on Jan 11, 2006 5:56 PM:$15,000 from a non-profit organization? Hmm, I wonder where that money came from? It's ridiculous to think that 500 people being called on the telephone would have the information necessary to give an informed response -- these people should get a clue, it's illegal by federal law -- federal law trumps State law -- otherwise we'd still have slavery!

Patrick wrote on Jan 12, 2006 9:37 AM:500 people in a survey is far better than 5 supervisors deciding to waste state tax payer money on a frivolous lawsuit for a voter approved bill. How nice of the spervisors to impose their will on the people of the state. What better wake up with the "federal law trumps state law bit".. glad you think the federal govenment knows what's best for Californians! Think again about fed vs. state in these cases: California's Clean Air Act -Congress has passed legislation -preempting the right of states to pass credit accuracy and privacy laws that are stronger than federal law. What??? -January 2004, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued a sweeping rule that would prevent most state consumer protection laws from applying to nationally chartered banks. What??? I want the federal govenment to rule my life because I don't know any better as a consumer and tax payer. Right what???

senseful wrote on Jan 13, 2006 10:05 AM:Any adult should be able to make their own decision regardimg the use of Marijuana. If alcohol is legal then Marijuana should be legal. Simple as that. Marijuana is less harmful than alcohol.

jon wrote on Jan 16, 2006 8:51 AM:dont somke or use ,work wont allow it,Crimilize it,thats stupid..Ever tried to have a conversation with someone stoned on pot?like talking to a moron..

jc wrote on Jan 16, 2006 6:41 PM:Senseful wrote "marijuana is less harmful than alcohol...". Do you seriously think that? Did you know that when you smoke marijuana you get 15 times the number of carcinogens and tar in your lungs than you do from a regular filtered cigarette? Did you know that there are 4 FDA approved forms of prescription THC (the active ingredient in marijuana) for medical conditions? No, I didn't think you did. Maybe you should lay off the dope and get some more facts.

Patrick wrote on Jan 18, 2006 10:25 AM:jc, put down that crack pipe if you think cannabis is more harmful than alcohol. Smoked marijuana contains about the same amount of carcinogens as does an equivalent amount of tobacco. It should be remembered, however, that a heavy tobacco smoker consumes much more tobacco than a heavy marijuana smoker consumes marijuana. This is because smoked tobacco, with a 90% addiction rate, is the most addictive of all drugs while marijuana is less addictive than caffeine. So where is your proof jc? The 31 August 1990 issue of the magazine Science notes that of the over 800 volatile chemicals present in roasted COFFEE, only 21 have actually been tested on animals and 16 of these cause cancer in rodents. Yet, coffee remains legal and is generally considered fairly safe. Granted, smoking any plant material is not healthy for you, but when you are so sick and nauseated and losing too much weight, you can't swallow a pill, smoking cannabis keeps you from vomiting. What kind of christian like behaviour is it to deny sick and dying people a plant that god put on this earth?