Police Search Stage IV Cancer Patient's Hospital Room for Marijuana

[jamil]

Let's consider some facts.

1. Context: A ballot measure had just passed last November to legalize medical-use Marijuana.
2. A hospital security guard asked the patient to search his belongings because he thought he smelled marijuana coming from the room. The man refused so the security officer called the cops.
3. The man told the cops he had taken some THC pills in the parking lot earlier. The cops told him they would search for marijuana, and if they found some, they'd give him a citation, but would not arrest him. They did not find marijuana.

The cops were called in by hospital security. They kinda have to respond. I think they searched because there is likely an ordinance against smoking in a hospital room. A citation would be the proper action if found. But they said they didn't find any, and they obviously didn't care to pursue the THC pills. The article doesn't explain why the hospital security officer thought he smelled marijuana.

This sounds like much ado about nothing. No one needs any law books thrown at them. Cops don't need hanged for massive rights violations. The security officer may need to take a Midol.

Carry on...


But people are using marijuana to ease their cancer symptoms. Next thing you know they'll be shooting horse!


No. NO! Cops are harassing cancer victims just trying to relieve their symptoms! That's an abuse of power!



BTW, I've read that the substance similar to THC in hemp shows similar benefits but without producing a high. Obviously, in terms of treatments, that's not going to go over as well.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

But there are crimes that are worse than other crimes and all but the most wealthy of us have to prioritize what we do with our resources. And then take into account that their resources come from us they really need to prioritize what they're gonna spend their money going after

Calls for service are given a priority even before being dispatched. If there was a more serious crime at the same time that required the officer's attention, the officer would have been dispatched to that instead. If a serious crime came out while he was on his way to deal with that one, he would be diverted. Policing is like an ER, it's not first come/first served.

 

[BugI02]

Let's consider some facts.

1. Context: A ballot measure had just passed last November to legalize medical-use Marijuana.
2. A hospital security guard asked the patient to search his belongings because he thought he smelled marijuana coming from the room. The man refused so the security officer called the cops.
3. The man told the cops he had taken some THC pills in the parking lot earlier. The cops told him they would search for marijuana, and if they found some, they'd give him a citation, but would not arrest him. They did not find marijuana.

The cops were called in by hospital security. They kinda have to respond. I think they searched because there is likely an ordinance against smoking in a hospital room. A citation would be the proper action if found. But they said they didn't find any, and they obviously didn't care to pursue the THC pills. The article doesn't explain why the hospital security officer thought he smelled marijuana.

This sounds like much ado about nothing. No one needs any law books thrown at them. Cops don't need hanged for massive rights violations. The security officer may need to take a Midol.

Carry on...


But people are using marijuana to ease their cancer symptoms. Next thing you know they'll be shooting horse!


No. NO! Cops are harassing cancer victims just trying to relieve their symptoms! That's an abuse of power!



BTW, I've read that the substance similar to THC in hemp shows similar benefits but without producing a high. Obviously, in terms of treatments, that's not going to go over as well.

Esp. not among the libertarian rank and file

 

[fullmetaljesus]

I see we jumped very quickly to Godwin's law.
With cases like this shouldn't we at least take a quick stop by Lovejoys law first?

 

[BugI02]

I don't know, but I'll bet I could derive an equation to predict how much time will elapse between any discussion about liberty and when it devolves into a legalization screed. I doubt very much I would need a calendar

 

[BugI02]

It shouldn't be eponymous - that would only encourage me. Perhaps Chong's Law?

 

[fullmetaljesus]

I don't know, but I'll bet I could derive an equation to predict how much time will elapse between any discussion about liberty and when it devolves into a legalization screed. I doubt very much I would need a calendar

Do we know if there is any Canon information as to if klatu's home planet legalized weed? Wwgd(what would Gort do?)

 

[BugI02]

Do we know if there is any Canon information as to if klatu's home planet legalized weed? Wwgd(what would Gort do?)

If you recall, Gort was the all powerful cop standing behind their utopian civilization (talking the original, here - not the PC remake)

WWGD indeed, because Gort did pretty much whatever he decided was necessary to keep the peace!

We never seem to address why legalized weed, for so many, is the highest possible expression of the ideals - the be all, end all as it were - of individual liberty

 

[MarkC]

They dont have to do something they know is wrong. "I was just following orders" is what got millions of Jews and others killed.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

I see we jumped very quickly to Godwin's law.

With cases like this shouldn't we at least take a quick stop by Lovejoys law first?

Someone beat me to it. Wikipedia: Godwin's Law

 

[HoughMade]

So this is what Time magazine is into now. Reporting on viral videos so people can become all the more entrenched in whatever view they already have.

Useful.

 

[Robert Richardson]

Well, I guess we missed the body cavity search.

 

[fullmetaljesus]

If you recall, Gort was the all powerful cop standing behind their utopian civilization (talking the original, here - not the PC remake)

WWGD indeed, because Gort did pretty much whatever he decided was necessary to keep the peace!

We never seem to address why legalized weed, for so many, is the highest possible expression of the ideals - the be all, end all as it were - of individual liberty

The original is the only one worth mentioning.

But maybe if weed were legal we wouldn't waste so much time with nukes thus preventing klaatu and gorts visit.

 

[Dead Duck]

Think what you want fool. Blindly following orders is a slippery slope.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

There are thousands of years of "I was just following orders" rhetoric that was used to justify everything from stealing peoples property to committing atrocities. If you to much of fool follow the dots then dont know what to tell you not will I try to tell anyone that dense the dangers of it

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[TangoFoxtrot]

The original is the only one worth mentioning.

But maybe if weed were legal we wouldn't waste so much time with nukes thus preventing klaatu and gorts visit.

I dont smoke the crap but really have no issue with people that do or the prospect of it being legal

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[actaeon277]

I see we jumped very quickly to Godwin's law.
With cases like this shouldn't we at least take a quick stop by Lovejoys law first?

 

[jamil]

We never seem to address why legalized weed, for so many, is the highest possible expression of the ideals - the be all, end all as it were - of individual liberty

Maybe INGO never addresses that particular why because no one really thinks of it as such. It’s that when the subject touches weed, the people who think it should be legal, say so. Why is it that that pro-lifers think overturning R v W is the end all be all of morality? Well they don’t. But they talk about it when it’s the topic.

 

[BugI02]

My experience with this is different, perhaps more tangential. In every thread I've ever read into about libertarian ideas and ideals, legalization comes up very quickly and it becomes evident that at least a vocal plurality of participants arguably are all about the weed

It literally feels like some eerie corollary of Godwin's is at work, and it overshadows more consequential ideas. It seems to be first, or certainly top three, on just about everybody's list of freedoms they desire. YMMV

 

[fullmetaljesus]

Do we need to coin
"Cheech's law"
In any report about weed, the conversation will turn to a debate of legality.

 

[Birds Away]

Video: Police Search Cancer Patient's Room for Marijuana | Time

Glad these officers were able to rescue this guy from the scourge of pain and nausea relief.
Hopefully he will see the light and get on prescription opioids, like a good law-abiding citizen, for whatever time he has left.

[video=youtube;UuCuHSUCPvg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuCuHSUCPvg[/video]

The classic part is when the Officer says "if you've got nothing to hide..."

 

[jamil]

Do we need to coin
"Cheech's law"
In any report about weed, the conversation will turn to a debate of legality.

Well, that was my point. I suppose it may be that there are two kinds of libertarians WRT weed. Those who see it truly as a matter of the libertarian non-aggression principle, and those who like the libertarian position on marijuana, not because they’re ideologically libertarian but because they like to smoke weed. I think it’s fair to say there are at least a few of the latter because I’ve encountered a few myself. But I can’t recall a single INGO member who was like that.