Bigfork Eagle Editorial

Pot predicament

On the front page of last week's newspaper, we reported that three men were arrested for growing marijuana in a Bigfork residence. The trio had 39 pot plants and a room devoted to growing the illegal substance. It was quite the operation. It was also pretty obvious that the men were not growing it for medical reasons.

Interestingly enough, last month the voters of Montana voted to approve the use of medical marijuana in this state.

I-148 passed by a large margin and made Montana the 10th state to allow for such use of the drug. The initiative creates a registry system for patients suffering from specified diseases. With a doctor's prescription, patients can apply with the Montana Department of Heath and Human Services for ID cards specifying their need of the drug. And it is a need. Individuals with terminal disease suffering chronic pain need relief. The majority of voters in Montana recognized that need.

Now the United States Supreme Court is considering trumping state law and ruling that federal law can be used to prosecute medical marijuana users. Justices worry that "Everybody will say 'Mine is medical.'" There is talk that the medical marijuana statute will complicate and degrade the war on drugs in this country. Well, it is a war that the government has been losing for a long time now. Allowing individuals with legitimate degenerative medical conditions to smoke a joint to ease their pain will not do much to contribute to the battle wounds the government has been incurring over the decades.

It should be obvious to law officials who is growing and using the drug for medicinal purposes. The three gentlemen mentioned at the beginning of this article were probably not growing marijuana with medical purpose in mind.

If carefully implemented, the states that have approved medical marijuana should have little problem deciphering who is a legitimate, doctor-endorsed cannabis user.

The conservative voters of Montana passed the medical marijuana initiative. It seems like common sense that if properly used, pot can enable patients a more normal life. With drugs like OxyContin on the market, it seems obvious that prescription pain relievers can be dangerous if abused. OxyContin is being used illegitimately for a cheap, easily obtainable high on the streets. And yet the Supreme Court is not examining the legitimacy of that drug. How can the high court tell people who suffer with terminal cancer, degenerative bone or muscle disease, or debilitating chronic pain that they are criminals if they consume a drug that aids in their daily survival? Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist is currently undergoing treatment for thyroid cancer. If his pain becomes insurmountable, could his colleagues truly deny him a way to ease his suffering? Doubtful, truly doubtful.