Both sides: Risks far outweigh benefits from 'medical' marijuana

Post-Bulletin - Rochester

By Dennis Flaherty

This year at the Legislature we're at it again, engaged in what has become the annual debate about "medical" marijuana.

The stage has long been set. On one side you have a group of people wanting to legalize marijuana for medical purposes, and on the other you have every legitimate group in our state representing law enforcement. Very soon our elected representatives will have to choose a side. They will decide on what type of Minnesota they want.

You have a very loosely written piece of legislation that, if passed, would clearly hamper law enforcement's ability to enforce marijuana laws. Laws on both the state and federal level prohibit the possession and sale of marijuana. If legalized for any purpose, it will put us in conflict with the feds.

In addition, it creates penalty provisions for unlawful cultivation, distribution and possession of the drug that are much less severe than existing statutes.

The proposal gives the Commissioner of Health the sole responsibility to regulate this new bureaucracy and excludes the Commissioner of Public Safety with any oversight role. The very agency best suited to help regulate this new industry will be sidelined.

The proposal does not limit the use of marijuana to treating patients confronting a terminal illness, but instead would allow many to access it including for the treatment of pain. Don't believe that it is designed only for those that are in the final stages of their life finding some relief from a "joint." That is not what the bill says.

The facts are that marijuana is a drug that is associated with violent crimes such as robberies and assaults. Many have and will resort to almost anything to get their hands on it. Families and caregivers of the sick could easily become victims of yet another illness called crime.

Legalizing it for medical purposes will create a perception among many, especially our children, that marijuana is a good thing, when we all know that it is not. It is the most widely abused controlled substance in our state.

If as a state we are really serious about trying this, then I can assure you that a better, more carefully written bill could be put together that does a far better job than the one being considered in the Legislature.

Law enforcement and prosecutors have paraded before committees of the Legislature where this proposal was heard, consistently telling our policy makers that the proposal was seriously flawed and how it would have a dramatic affect on drug business in our State.

They pointed out flaw after flaw from a public safety standpoint, the very things they are the experts on. They did not challenge the total lack of medical science to support that marijuana has any medicinal qualities, or that doctors can prescribe many other legal drugs to address the pain people with debilitating diseases normally encounter.

Law enforcement stuck with their script, which as law enforcement professionals was to point out realistically the things that will result if passed.

To counter Minnesota's law enforcement experts, the proponents brought in a former chief of the Seattle police department who in December 2004 wrote an editorial in The Seattle Times wherein he announced that "I favor legalization, and not just of pot but of all drugs, including heroin, cocaine, meth, psychotropics, mushrooms and LSD."

Here he is brought in to St. Paul to testify in support of medical marijuana. I sincerely hope no one was influenced to support this bill based on anything he said. As a people, I don't believe that his direction is the way we want to go in Minnesota. It gives one pause as to why those advocating this selected him to testify as their "law enforcement expert."

At the end of the set, some voted to side with public safety, but more voted to roll the dice and give it a try.

It is difficult for me to predict the outcome of how the Legislature handles this. I can tell you to simply ask any cop you know and the decision is an easy one for them. They would tell you they should vote it down. If they had the chance to be in St. Paul, they would tell the Legislature the very same thing that their colleagues have been saying at each committee.

Don't pass this bill. The risks are too high.

Dennis J. Flaherty is the executive director and chief lobbyist of the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association.