Marijuana hearing may result in changes to state laws

Marijuana hearing may result in changes to state laws.

The benefits of a part-time legislature are quickly being seen as a detriment to NV especially one that has existed on the forefront of legalization since its inception. Can you tell me another state that has legalized prostitution, gambling and open container laws?

Since 2001 NV has been among the states that allows for the use and possession of marijuana for medical purposes. Yes, the state has its proponents for full legalization as well as the prohibitionist class that believe the draconian ways of the Rockefeller Drug Laws (yes a reference to the way NY has handled such items for many years) is the way to go. In either case, both parties are on the fringes. Most people between the ages of 40 and 70 simply don’t care, or at the very least are the persons responsible for the hippie culture that led to the draconian laws that are being overturned and dismantled in numerous states. 16 States and the DC allow for the medical use of MMJ, with many more openly discussing its legalization.

Here in NV there are many people, patients that use alternative medicines to deal with pain and other debilitating ailments, without having to be under the thumb of Great Pharma; have you ever listened to the list of side effects that drugs could have when they are advertised on TV?

NV has over the past few years a large growth of both legal and illegal sources of Marijuana.
The illegal should be seen without hesitation as problematic, we’ve heard of the massive grows found in local neighborhoods and in the valleys near Mt. Charleston.

But the illegal sources are no place for people who would be considered for compassionate use under FDA guidelines let alone people suffering from AIDS, Glaucoma, extreme pain and the like as identified under NRS 453a (the NV Medical Marijuana Statutes). It is our responsibility to provide a source for those that we allow to use MMJ, not doing it implies that the legislature refused to execute the orders and desires of the people after the referendum approved Marijuana’s use for medical purposes.

We, those that uphold the law and those that wish to abide by it must be provided the necessary guidance so that we may work together to protect ourselves and those around us. Basic criminal law principles require that the average person must be able to determine if what they are doing is wrong or not. In short, it must tell us what we can’t do, not what we can do.
This forces us to ask the question; if the learned Honorable Judge has a problem determining if the behavior of a defendant is illegal under the law, then how are we to figure it out?

I believe that one of the basic issues that we face is that NRS 453a, has conflicting and confusing statements with the NV Controlled Substance section NRS 453. If both are read in order, that is the one that comes latest controls, then I can see how the Judge is asking the AG to step up, NRS 453a leaves open for interpretation many issues.

I applaud Judge Mosley’s demands. The AG should clearly articulate the position of the State as is her job. So if she does her job, I predict that the charges against these people would be dismissed. In my opinion, the Law won’t be struck down. But the issues relating to the distribution, sale or exchange will remain open until the next legislative session.

In the end it is likely that the community will determine where and how MMJ will be made available for patients, not a distant, part-time, ineffective legislature.