SalemNews.com, Salem, MA

Opinion

Discussion

The Salem News has a real-name policy for commenting. Users may sign in using the Facebook Connect tool above the comments field. Once your first comment is posted by a moderator, all future comments will post automatically. If you prefer not to use Facebook, send an e-mail with your comments user name (which must be the same as your real name), city or town, street address and daytime phone number to comments@salemnews.com. A staff member will contact you directly to confirm your identity. It may take a day or two before you can post comments. Only your user name will be public. All users are required to follow our rules for commenting, which can be found here.

comments powered by Disqus
October 16, 2012

Letter: Will vote no on medicinal marijuana

The Salem News

To the editor:

I understand why individuals suffering with cancer, HIV or chronic pain may want access to the active ingredients in marijuana.

And yet, I am voting noon Ballot Question 3.

Here is why:

The infrastructure proposed in Question 3 is flawed. If it is enacted:

Marijuana could be grown at home, and an undefined “60-day supply” could be carried.

Thirty-five dispensaries could open in the first year with no clear limit on future growth. (Vermont currently has only two locked facilities and Maine only eight.)

There is no system for tracking production or distribution. Individuals with a state card could obtain multiple doses from multiple dispensaries or growers.

There is no expiration date on a “medical recommendation.” Physicians would not have the normal prescription renewal process to monitor the patients’ status and potential drug interactions. The Massachusetts Medical Society opposes the legalization of medical marijuana.

The cost for public health oversight and law enforcement at the state and local levels has not been determined.

Ballot Question 3 is a “wolf in sheep’s clothing”lacking implementation safeguards, and full of loopholes.

Instead of a ballot question, Massachusetts’ approach to medical marijuana is more appropriately addressed through the legislative process. This would allow safeguards to be ironed out and unintended outcomes to be more fully considered.

I will support future medical marijuana legislation that ensures systematic accountability and maximizes safety in the production and distribution of the drug.

Until then, I will vote no on Question 3.

Stephanie Meegan

Boxford

Text Only | Photo Reprints
Opinion

AP Video
Raw: Widespread Destruction in Moore, Okla. Raw: Massive Funnel Clouds in Oklahoma Raw: Japan's WWII Atrocities Under Fire in Seoul Voters Could Elect LA's First Female Mayor Raw: Rescuers Pull Tornado Survivors to Safety Oklahoma Gov: 'Hearts Are Broken' After Tornado Raw: Walking in a Flattened Okla. Neighborhood Raw: Rescue Workers Search Oklahoma School Raw: Witness Describes Scene After Okla. Tornado Raw: Aftermath of Massive Tornado in Oklahoma Raw: House Burns After Massive Oklahoma Tornado Raw: Tornado on the Ground in Oklahoma Split-second Choice Ended With NY Student Dead White House Backs 'Shield Law' for Media Wave of Attacks Kills Scores in Iraq Pug Life on Display at Wisconsin Festival Company Promises to Make All Snail Mail Digital Analyst: Tumblr Fills Void in Yahoo's Offerings
Comments Tracker
Roll Call
Helium debate
Helium