It Isn’t the Medical Marijuana, Folks
by jhwygirl
All of these stories were available last night on the front webpage of Montana newspapers across the state…
In Billings, this gem of a guy was allegedly 3 times the legal limit when he nearly hit a police car. He had 5 minors, four under age 9, in the car.
Missoula, not to be outdone, has its own worse cretin – 33-year old Lolo resident Wayne Dale Munnell rolled his vehicle near the Buckhouse bridge on 93 south. He had 3 minors in his car, and a 24 year old who’s arm was nearly severed. Munnell, like the gem above, did not have the passengers in proper restraints or seat belts. His blood alcohol was measured at .149, but not before he snatched the syringe during the blood draw and threatened a state trooper. And a nurse. There’s more violent behavior – go read it.
That guy had a medical marijuana card. And there was “an odor of burnt marijuana on his clothing.”
Just an observation on what I know in life: It’s the drunks that cause the problems. Stoners? Pretty harmless.
Helena, of course, has its own special kind – Adam Wilson threatened to kill two women and a 16-year old, holding them hostage. There was a police chase, yadda yadda yadda. Oh – and a driving under the influence charge.
Frankly, when I think about it…drunks can be a pain in the ass. Mean too.
The Kalispell guy charged with double murder of his ex-girlfriend and her 15-year old daughter? The tragedy began to unfold at the Scoreboard Pub and Casino.
No flash on this story – just your regular ordinary Montanan with a 5th DUI. Nothing to see there, right?
Still more….over in Great Falls, we have a 29-year old male who drove the alleys hitting damaging over 100 garbage cans, along with fences and other myriad personal property.
So before I close this out, I’m heading over to check the Bozeman Chronicle and the Montana Standard…..
….looks like they escaped the banality that is Montana and its alcohol.
Recent Comments
Miles on A New Shelter for Vets or an E… success rate for In… on Thirty years ago ARCO killed A… Warrior for the Lord on The Dark Side of Colorado Linda Kelley-Miller on The Dark Side of Colorado Dan on A New Shelter for Vets or an E… Former Prosecutor Se… on Former Chief Deputy County Att… JediPeaceFrog on Montana AG Tim Fox and US Rep.…
4&20 blackbirds 
December 29, 2010 at 8:58 am
what, xanax, yoga, zeitgeist?
David Brooks at the Aspen Institute: http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2010/07/16/midday2/
and another great Amy: http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/24/dr_gabor_mat_on_the_stress
ixnay the oomday and the oomglay….
December 31, 2010 at 10:41 am
“Just an observation on what I know in life: It’s the drunks that cause the problems. Stoners? Pretty harmless.”
A fundamentally erroneous conclusion based on incomplete data. When authorities test only for alcohol consumption, only alcohol will be detected.
A recent report, released in the last month, indicates that at least 20 percent of all accidents are caused by stoners, i.e., persons on some kind of drug other than alcohol. Most investigators believe future findings will indicate a much higher percentage, once authorities start testing for drugs other than alcohol.
December 31, 2010 at 2:43 pm
Max. Please. Have I ever lied to you? We may disagree on opinion…but to say that’s a “fundamentally erroneous conclusion based on incomplete data” is presumptuous.
Beyond the wisdom I have beyond my years, I have had extensive amount of experience being in environments where people are under the influence of alcohol or marijuana or prescription drugs or any mixture of all of the above….and let’s just be clear that we are talking about medical marijuana here.
And I assure you I was stone-cold sober.
If medical marijuana were truly the societial problem that the over-regulators want to make it, we’d have the cops in an outcry about accidents and alleged drunk driving crimes but ending up with little to charge them with when no signs of alcohol are found to be involved.
Alcohol Tobacco Marijuana Oxycotin Heroin – they’re all drugs, only two of ’em are legal. Decades of having the green stuff instead of the brown stuff illegal have warped minds into thinking that one is bad bad bad while the other one (while still being addictive and therefore changing of brain chemistry) is legal and taxed and regulated.
Then there’s alcohol – which is also addictive and therefore changing of brain chemistry – which is also legal and taxed and regulated.
Good Goddess. Of all the problems we have facing government today…state local and federal..do we really have tospend so much time trying to regulate away something that voters said they wanted; something that could generate some serious tax revenue for the State of Montana; and something that – sooner than later – is going to be legalized nationwide.
Shouldn’t Montana be poised to leap on that agricultural crop?
Not only that, Max – the cost of keeping this stuff illegal is expensive. Is it worth it? Do we expose youth to that and other drugs because we drive it underground?
They prohibited alcohol for a while and eventually realized that no matter what they do they couldn’t stop it…and that prudent regulation was better than pseudo-banning….and cheaper…and that there was tax revenue to be made.
Why not ‘move on’ to other more legit issues and let people do what they’re going to do. It needs some regulation and some parameters. Age limitations.
Can we talk about that? What would make it work for you? Or do you just want to take away what a majority of voters said they wanted?
Surely that can’t be the case. Isn’t your party planning on putting forward a dozen or so referendums to the voters?
December 31, 2010 at 3:23 pm
jh, the hyperbole is no different for mm than it is for cell phone use while driving. “It’s worse than drunk driving” is the mantra from the axe wielding prohibitionists.
But it’s bullpucky. Eighty some people killed by drunk driving in 2009 and fifty some in 2010. No such statistic for cellphones or mm.
And make not mistake, as avid as those on the right are about mm, so is the far left over cellphones.
December 31, 2010 at 3:28 pm
I think you have mistaken me for someone else. I am not concerned with the criminalization or legalization of any drugs and have not participated in that debate to any extent. And, as far as my “party planning on putting forward a dozen or so referendums to the voters,” I have no idea what you are talking about.
I was merely pointing out that government research into fatal traffic accidents indicates that stoners are not “pretty harmless,” as you said. To the contrary, they account for at least 1 in 5 traffic deaths or at least 4000 drivers in 2009. Moreover, the figure is likely higher:
“Researchers said the numbers could be higher because only about 3 in 5 drivers who were killed in car crashes were tested for drugs after the crash and testing varied from state to state. Among all the drivers who were killed in 2009 and later tested by authorities for drugs, about one-third had drugs in their systems.” [The Associated Press, 11/30/2010]
On the larger debate, it costs about $30,000 per year to keep a person in prison in Montana no matter what the reason for the incarceration. That figure does not include other costs to the taxpayer, such as salaries for judges, prosecutors, public defenders, police officers, probation officers, rehabilitation councilors, etc., etc. Therefore, as a taxpayer, I am in favor of the decriminalization of all drug use and possession regardless of the circumstances.
I would prefer to take my chances with the occasional drunk or stoned driver on the highway rather than pay for their incarceration. And I certainly do not want to pay for my own loss of constitutional rights by creating a police state to deal with drinkers and dopers.
December 31, 2010 at 3:50 pm
Or cell phone use, which is becoming a primary law in Montana cities, and another excuse for bored cops to pull you over because they don’t like your looks.
December 31, 2010 at 4:51 pm
“I am in favor of the decriminalization of all drug use and possession regardless of the circumstances.
I would prefer to take my chances with the occasional drunk or stoned driver on the highway rather than pay for their incarceration. And I certainly do not want to pay for my own loss of constitutional rights by creating a police state to deal with drinkers and dopers.”
“Or cell phone use, which is becoming a primary law in Montana cities, and another excuse for bored cops to pull you over because they don’t like your looks.”
now that is the kind of real libertarian right wing talk that could incline a bear to buy you two gentlemen a drink. happy new year to mb and you too goof but hey- stay safe out there.
December 31, 2010 at 5:30 pm
test
December 31, 2010 at 5:31 pm
test 2
December 31, 2010 at 5:32 pm
test 3
December 31, 2010 at 6:03 pm
You’re kinda “testy” today, aintcha?
December 31, 2010 at 6:18 pm
Hehe.
Happy New Year, my friend.
January 3, 2011 at 12:49 am
I think Max has a point, a small one but a significant one nonetheless. Obviously (and it really should be obvious to anyone willing to think about it) the prohibition on marijuana makes little sense. But Max is right – while people don’t tend to cause trouble when they are stoned, they do have a pretty high rate of accidents. This is readily observable from watching someone who is high trying to perform complicated tasks. That’s not to say that marijauna needs to be illegal for that reason, merely a word of wisdom for those who do enjoy getting high – be careful, take into account things like your ability to multi-task and your reaction time before you drive impaired by anything – be it prescription drugs, alcohol, your phone, or just not sleeping enough.
January 8, 2011 at 8:53 pm
great post mate have a great 2011