Florida Right to Medical Marijuana Initiative, Amendment 2 (2014)

[+paradox]

Florida Right to Medical Marijuana Initiative, Amendment 2 (2014)

The Florida Right to Medical Marijuana Initiative, Amendment 2 is on the November 4, 2014 ballot in the state of Florida as an initiated constitutional amendment. The measure, upon voter approval, would legalize medical marijuana. Specifically, the measure would guarantee the following:

• That medical use of marijuana by a qualifying patient or personal caregiver is not subject to criminal or civil liability or sanctions under state law.
• That a licensed physician is not subject to criminal or civil liability or sanctions for issuing medical marijuana to a person diagnosed with a "debilitating medical condition" under state law.
• That registered medical marijuana treatment centers are not subject to criminal or civil liability or sanctions under state law.

The measure defines a "debilitating medical condition" as cancer, multiple sclerosis, glaucoma, hepatitis C, HIV, AIDS, ALS, Crohn's disease, Parkinson's disease "or other conditions for which a physician believes that the medical use of marijuana would likely outweigh the potential health risks for a patient."

The Florida Department of Health would be responsible for regulating medical marijuana. The department would issue and regulate patient identification cards and personal caregiver identification cards, develop procedures related to medical marijuana treatment centers and institute regulations defining reasonable amounts of marijuana for medical use. The department would be required to protect the confidentiality of all patients.

The constitutional amendment contains six limitations on how the amendment's language can be construed:

• The amendment does not “affect laws relating to non-medical use, possession, production or sale of marijuana.”
• The amendment does not authorize “the use of medical marijuana by anyone other than a qualifying patient.”
• The amendment does not allow for the “operation of a motor vehicle, boat, or aircraft while under the influence of marijuana.”
• The amendment does not require accommodations for medical marijuana use “in any place of education or employment, or of smoking medical marijuana in any public place.”
• The amendment does not require “any health insurance provider or any government agency or authority to reimburse any person for expenses related to the medical use of marijuana.”
• The amendment does not require “the violation of federal law or purports to give immunity under federal law.”

Supporters of Amendment 2 say the measure will help people with debilitating medical conditions. Opponents, on the other hand, argue the amendment is “de facto legalization" of marijuana.

For a referred amendment to win in Florida, it must win a supermajority vote of 60 percent of those voting on the question, according to Section 5 of Article XI. This change was made via Amendment 3 in 2006.

source: http://ballotpedia.org/Florida_Right_to_Medical_Marijuana_Initiative,_Amendment_2_(2014)


your thoughts?

why not just decriminalize it already?

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

It does not look like they have the 60% to pass it.

When we actually get tough on drunk drivers for there actions then I can support people wanting to be druggies.

When they show a set of new tough laws and standards on how being under the influence of smoking pot while driving is going to take your license away forever I will support people who want to smoke pot.

When I see a law saying if you have medical conditions because of smoking pot you need insurance or no hospital will treat you using money by the tax payers.

Until then no way am I supporting to decriminalize pot.

 

[+paradox]

It does not look like they have the 60% to pass it.

lets wait and see what happens... (;

When we actually get tough on drunk drivers for there actions then I can support people wanting to be druggies.

i thought florida does have tough laws against the mixture of driving or operating machinery and alcohol?

what were you referring to and what kind of laws do you want against it?

calling cannabis users as "druggies" is a bit harsh don't you think?

When they show a set of new tough laws and standards on how being under the influence of smoking pot while driving is going to take your license away forever I will support people who want to smoke pot.

there's already laws and punishments regarding cannabis and the mixture of cannabis and driving or operating machinery, i thought... as well as a system about your license...

When I see a law saying if you have medical conditions because of smoking pot you need insurance or no hospital will treat you using money by the tax payers.

that same thing could be said about any other unhealthy thing out there...

just replace "because of smoking pot" with anything else like because of smoking cigarettes, because of drinking alcohol, because of eating too much junk food, etc...

Until then no way am I supporting to decriminalize pot.

:S

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

What I am saying is we to many times do not enforce laws on people who drive drunk and hurt others. And these people get there driver's license back also. On my mothers side there should be people who should never drive again but yet the courts just keep giving back drivers licenses to drunks. I want to see our current problems solved before adding a new one to people who do not take such freedom's of responsibilty seriously.

And with your question I mean lets say someone is as high as a kite and falls down a stairs and breaks bones. Drives their car into a telephone pole and needs months of care. Catches there house on fire and gets third degree burns. The smoking of pot creates some kind of medical issue in the body. So if these people are not insured should we or the hospital be forced to pay for those medical costs when they made a free choice to smoke pot instead of using money for say health insurance they don't have?

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

It does not look like they have the 60% to pass it.

lets wait and see what happens... (;

When we actually get tough on drunk drivers for there actions then I can support people wanting to be druggies.

i thought florida does have tough laws against the mixture of driving or operating machinery and alcohol?

what were you referring to and what kind of laws do you want against it?

calling cannabis users as "druggies" is a bit harsh don't you think?

When they show a set of new tough laws and standards on how being under the influence of smoking pot while driving is going to take your license away forever I will support people who want to smoke pot.

there's already laws and punishments regarding cannabis and the mixture of cannabis and driving or operating machinery, i thought... as well as a system about your license...

When I see a law saying if you have medical conditions because of smoking pot you need insurance or no hospital will treat you using money by the tax payers.

that same thing could be said about any other unhealthy thing out there...

just replace "because of smoking pot" with anything else like because of smoking cigarettes, because of drinking alcohol, because of eating too much junk food, etc...

Until then no way am I supporting to decriminalize pot.

:S

Seen so many lived destroyed from pot and drinking so I am bit harsh with my thinking on drug users.

And with smoking or candy eaters your judgement and reflects are not effected so it is not the same thing.

 

[+paradox]

there are punishments in place for that TL, just do some research for them...

the more harmful/dangerous the crime(s) while under the influence driving a vehicle or operating machinery the higher the punishment... same goes with the license... it all depends on what the person did and what crimes the person committed... some people get their license suspended and others lose it altogether in some situations...

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/dui-or-dwi-punishments-penalties-30321.html

 

[+paradox]

i also don't come across many cases that a driver caused harm to others while driving under the influence of cannabis but many with alcohol and real drugs/dope such as prescription pills, cough syrup and human created hard street drugs...

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

there are punishments in place for that TL, just do some research for them...

the more harmful/dangerous the crime(s) while under the influence driving a vehicle or operating machinery the higher the punishment... same goes with the license... it all depends on what the person did and what crimes the person committed... some people get their license suspended and others lose it altogether in some situations...

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/dui-or-dwi-punishments-penalties-30321.html

I don't need to research, I already have done so thank you very much. The laws are weak in place right now and are lacking. The laws in place are often not enforced and repeat offenders keep getting there licenses back over and over again.

Law enforcement or should I say our courts do not do there jobs so in no way should we put more lives at risk with weak enforcement we currently have.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

i also don't come across many cases that a driver caused harm to others while driving under the influence of cannabis but many with alcohol and real drugs/dope such as prescription pills, cough syrup and human created hard street drugs...

So because you yourself do not across "MANY" cases and do not see it as a "REAL" drug lets do it and Risk lives while the courts do not enforce laws while more more people die because of it.

 

[+paradox]

who dies from cannabis and where are these cases you speak of?

 

[+paradox]

there are punishments in place for that TL, just do some research for them...

the more harmful/dangerous the crime(s) while under the influence driving a vehicle or operating machinery the higher the punishment... same goes with the license... it all depends on what the person did and what crimes the person committed... some people get their license suspended and others lose it altogether in some situations...

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/dui-or-dwi-punishments-penalties-30321.html

I don't need to research, I already have done so thank you very much. The laws are weak in place right now and are lacking. The laws in place are often not enforced and repeat offenders keep getting there licenses back over and over again.

Law enforcement or should I say our courts do not do there jobs so in no way should we put more lives at risk with weak enforcement we currently have.

weak laws, punishments and enforcement?

why do you say this? and how do you want the punishment of it?

i'm pretty sure the police in florida enforce dui/dwi and rarely give people breaks...

and have you seen the people out there endangering/killing others by just being sober?

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

there are punishments in place for that TL, just do some research for them...

the more harmful/dangerous the crime(s) while under the influence driving a vehicle or operating machinery the higher the punishment... same goes with the license... it all depends on what the person did and what crimes the person committed... some people get their license suspended and others lose it altogether in some situations...

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/dui-or-dwi-punishments-penalties-30321.html

I don't need to research, I already have done so thank you very much. The laws are weak in place right now and are lacking. The laws in place are often not enforced and repeat offenders keep getting there licenses back over and over again.

Law enforcement or should I say our courts do not do there jobs so in no way should we put more lives at risk with weak enforcement we currently have.

weak laws, punishments and enforcement?

why do you say this? and how do you want the punishment of it?

i'm pretty sure the police in florida enforce dui/dwi and rarely give people breaks...

and have you seen the people out there endangering/killing others by just being sober?

What do you mean why do I say this? There is decades of evidence on courts giving back a license to DUI drivers. And then to many have gone back on the road to hurt and kill others. People who drink and drive should never drive again.


I didn't say police I said our courts and judges who give lenient sentences or can't give harsher ones because of the laws.

No you are just being silly making weak excuses to justify another danger on our roads where the victims do not see the punishments that should be imposed.

 

[Jazzy]

who dies from cannabis and where are these cases you speak of?

Fatal Car Crashes Involving Pot Use Have Tripled in U.S., Study Finds

Fatal crashes involving marijuana use tripled during the previous decade, fueling some of the overall increase in drugged-driving traffic deaths, researchers from Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health report.

"Currently, one of nine drivers involved in fatal crashes would test positive for marijuana," said co-author Dr. Guohua Li, director of the Center for Injury Epidemiology and Prevention at Columbia. "If this trend continues, in five or six years non-alcohol drugs will overtake alcohol to become the most common substance involved in deaths related to impaired driving."

The research team drew its conclusions from crash statistics from six states that routinely perform toxicology tests on drivers involved in fatal car wrecks -- California, Hawaii, Illinois, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and West Virginia. The statistics included more than 23,500 drivers who died within one hour of a crash between 1999 and 2010.

Alcohol contributed to about the same percentage of traffic fatalities throughout the decade, about 40 percent, Li said.

But drugs played an increasingly prevalent role in fatal crashes, the researchers found. Drugged driving accounted for more than 28 percent of traffic deaths in 2010, up from more than 16 percent in 1999.

Marijuana proved to be the main drug involved in the increase, contributing to 12 percent of 2010 crashes compared with 4 percent in 1999.

 

[+paradox]

who dies from cannabis and where are these cases you speak of?

Fatal Car Crashes Involving Pot Use Have Tripled in U.S., Study Finds

Fatal crashes involving marijuana use tripled during the previous decade, fueling some of the overall increase in drugged-driving traffic deaths, researchers from Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health report.

"Currently, one of nine drivers involved in fatal crashes would test positive for marijuana," said co-author Dr. Guohua Li, director of the Center for Injury Epidemiology and Prevention at Columbia. "If this trend continues, in five or six years non-alcohol drugs will overtake alcohol to become the most common substance involved in deaths related to impaired driving."

The research team drew its conclusions from crash statistics from six states that routinely perform toxicology tests on drivers involved in fatal car wrecks -- California, Hawaii, Illinois, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and West Virginia. The statistics included more than 23,500 drivers who died within one hour of a crash between 1999 and 2010.

Alcohol contributed to about the same percentage of traffic fatalities throughout the decade, about 40 percent, Li said.

But drugs played an increasingly prevalent role in fatal crashes, the researchers found. Drugged driving accounted for more than 28 percent of traffic deaths in 2010, up from more than 16 percent in 1999.

Marijuana proved to be the main drug involved in the increase, contributing to 12 percent of 2010 crashes compared with 4 percent in 1999.

sorry, but that's not answering my question...

and you expect me to believe this study? on what?

 

[+paradox]

there are punishments in place for that TL, just do some research for them...

the more harmful/dangerous the crime(s) while under the influence driving a vehicle or operating machinery the higher the punishment... same goes with the license... it all depends on what the person did and what crimes the person committed... some people get their license suspended and others lose it altogether in some situations...

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/dui-or-dwi-punishments-penalties-30321.html

I don't need to research, I already have done so thank you very much. The laws are weak in place right now and are lacking. The laws in place are often not enforced and repeat offenders keep getting there licenses back over and over again.

Law enforcement or should I say our courts do not do there jobs so in no way should we put more lives at risk with weak enforcement we currently have.

weak laws, punishments and enforcement?

why do you say this? and how do you want the punishment of it?

i'm pretty sure the police in florida enforce dui/dwi and rarely give people breaks...

and have you seen the people out there endangering/killing others by just being sober?

What do you mean why do I say this? There is decades of evidence on courts giving back a license to DUI drivers. And then to many have gone back on the road to hurt and kill others. People who drink and drive should never drive again.

punishments and reinstatement of driver's privileges are not up to the judges and courts, they only follow what the laws are, and the system of punishments set but law... so blaming judges and courts of weak punishments is incorrect as the judges have set standards/systems of each punishment for each crime... i understand that impaired drivers do cause harm and death, but at the same time way more harm and death is caused by sober drivers... there's different types of dui/dwi, depending on the situation... if someone got caught driving while drunk and didn't cause any harm then why would you want that person to not have the chance to get their license back? driving is a major tool for americans these days and people rely on self transportation and even to work...


I didn't say police I said our courts and judges who give lenient sentences or can't give harsher ones because of the laws.
so, you're basically blaming the courts and the judges and then at the same time not blaming them because they have to follow the laws and the punishment system? :S


No you are just being silly making weak excuses to justify another danger on our roads where the victims do not see the punishments that should be imposed.
what excuses? and if the crime fits the punishment then that's that... the person do their time and if the person as an option of being able to get their license back, then why not? why not a second chance?

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

there are punishments in place for that TL, just do some research for them...

the more harmful/dangerous the crime(s) while under the influence driving a vehicle or operating machinery the higher the punishment... same goes with the license... it all depends on what the person did and what crimes the person committed... some people get their license suspended and others lose it altogether in some situations...

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/dui-or-dwi-punishments-penalties-30321.html

I don't need to research, I already have done so thank you very much. The laws are weak in place right now and are lacking. The laws in place are often not enforced and repeat offenders keep getting there licenses back over and over again.

Law enforcement or should I say our courts do not do there jobs so in no way should we put more lives at risk with weak enforcement we currently have.

weak laws, punishments and enforcement?

why do you say this? and how do you want the punishment of it?

i'm pretty sure the police in florida enforce dui/dwi and rarely give people breaks...

and have you seen the people out there endangering/killing others by just being sober?

What do you mean why do I say this? There is decades of evidence on courts giving back a license to DUI drivers. And then to many have gone back on the road to hurt and kill others. People who drink and drive should never drive again.

punishments and reinstatement of driver's privileges are not up to the judges and courts, they only follow what the laws are, and the system of punishments set but law... so blaming judges and courts of weak punishments is incorrect as the judges have set standards/systems of each punishment for each crime... i understand that impaired drivers do cause harm and death, but at the same time way more harm and death is caused by sober drivers... there's different types of dui/dwi, depending on the situation... if someone got caught driving while drunk and didn't cause any harm then why would you want that person to not have the chance to get their license back? driving is a major tool for americans these days and people rely on self transportation and even to work...




I didn't say police I said our courts and judges who give lenient sentences or can't give harsher ones because of the laws.
so, you're basically blaming the courts and the judges and then at the same time not blaming them because they have to follow the laws and the punishment system? :S


No you are just being silly making weak excuses to justify another danger on our roads where the victims do not see the punishments that should be imposed.
what excuses? and if the crime fits the punishment then that's that... the person do their time and if the person as an option of being able to get their license back, then why not? why not a second chance?

Judges can give softer punishments and minimum sentences because of special "circumstances". I have witnessed it in courts over and over again. Anyways regardless of what judges can do or can't do the laws are soft and people time after time are hurting people and not paying the price for their crimes.


No I am blaming soft judges and soft laws.


The excuse you just wrote.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

who dies from cannabis and where are these cases you speak of?

Fatal Car Crashes Involving Pot Use Have Tripled in U.S., Study Finds

Fatal crashes involving marijuana use tripled during the previous decade, fueling some of the overall increase in drugged-driving traffic deaths, researchers from Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health report.

"Currently, one of nine drivers involved in fatal crashes would test positive for marijuana," said co-author Dr. Guohua Li, director of the Center for Injury Epidemiology and Prevention at Columbia. "If this trend continues, in five or six years non-alcohol drugs will overtake alcohol to become the most common substance involved in deaths related to impaired driving."

The research team drew its conclusions from crash statistics from six states that routinely perform toxicology tests on drivers involved in fatal car wrecks -- California, Hawaii, Illinois, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and West Virginia. The statistics included more than 23,500 drivers who died within one hour of a crash between 1999 and 2010.

Alcohol contributed to about the same percentage of traffic fatalities throughout the decade, about 40 percent, Li said.

But drugs played an increasingly prevalent role in fatal crashes, the researchers found. Drugged driving accounted for more than 28 percent of traffic deaths in 2010, up from more than 16 percent in 1999.

Marijuana proved to be the main drug involved in the increase, contributing to 12 percent of 2010 crashes compared with 4 percent in 1999.

Thank you!

And how much you want to bet most of these people will do few years in jail. And how much you want to bet most will get licenses again and be back on the road.

 

[+paradox]

what about the people that cause harm and/or death not being under the influence?

you don't care if they get their license back?

seems like you're only targeting drivers that have caused harm while under the influence of cannabis which is not that much compared to everything else simply because you don't agree on the legalization/decriminalization...

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

what about the people that cause harm and/or death not being under the influence?

you don't care if they get their license back?

seems like you're only targeting drivers that have caused harm while under the influence of cannabis which is not that much compared to everything else simply because you don't agree on the legalization/decriminalization...

Getting a little desperate on making points. We are talking about pot. Now if you want to start a topic on that I would be more then happy to share my views.

 

[+paradox]

i think you're so against cannabis that you'll make up anything to try to justify not legalizing/decriminalizing the stuff... you're trying to make little points here and there in support to keep pot illegal with irrational and unreasonable arguments...