James Backstrom: Law enforcement groups oppose 'medical' mariju...

The organizations that represent Minnesota's law enforcement professionals strongly oppose adoption of a law legalizing marijuana for medical purposes. Full Story
First Prev
of 4
Next Last
Just Wondering

United States

#1 Mar 20, 2009
Just Wondering if it is true that Mr. Backstom supports " legalizing " witness tampering?
All the Facts

Maple Grove, MN

#2 Mar 20, 2009
Who the hell care's what law enforcement thinks about medicinal marijuana?

It's up to lawmakers to pass this law and the police to enforce that result.

<<The bottom line is that marijuana is a dangerous and addictive illegal drug>>

Sure it is and tomatoes are poisionous, the earth is flat, masterbating will cause blindness and eating bull testicles will put hair on your chest!
Bob

Saint Paul, MN

#3 Mar 20, 2009
Scared because legalizing medical marijuana will inevitably result in legalizing marijuana. If it's deemed safe for patients why not everyone else?
joe

Pensacola, FL

#5 Mar 20, 2009
Marijuana will make you eat your parents. It will also make you have sex with Richard Simmons. The law enforcement knows this and is just trying to protect you.
Paul M

Apo, AE

#6 Mar 20, 2009
If we were to do the things that law enforcement wants they would have to repeal the Bill of Rights and set up a Gestapo to spy on all of the citizens and then set up our own concentration camps in Northern Alaska. Don't forget "Arbeit Macht Frei" Sieg Heil to the new Führer Herr James Backstrom.
Andres Lopez

Gainesville, FL

#7 Mar 20, 2009
Same BS, new day...
Dave Houg

Saint Paul, MN

#8 Mar 20, 2009
This is as dumb as self-medicating by getting drunk. A simple back door way to get drugs with no more rational than somebody wants to get high. Yes to the active ingrediant thru the FDC in a safe, consistent, measured dosage. No to letting guys grow / use / (lets be real) and SELL drugs just by claiming pain when the cops show up.
scott brown

Canada, KY

#9 Mar 20, 2009
the underlying reason is JOB SECURITY! Anyone who knows anything about the current hot topic knows that marijauna is NOT addictive. And I repeat: marijauna is not addictive, nor is it in itself and in it's properties addictive. what is dangerous about the substance is the facade of danger created by those who prosper most from marijauna being illegal: the law enforcement community, the courts and their costly substance abuse programs and the prison systems. all of the aformentioned groups are working in collusion to keep their jobs and their right to seize assets and continue to charge the taxpayer and misdemeanor offender outrageous amounts of money for fines and substance abuse programs and forfieture of property and valuable possessions. These same opponents indirectly support the medical and drug manufacturing communitys' efforts to keep the best of holistic and natural medicines from the majority of the public, so they can continue to reap the huge profits derived from the distribution of seeemingly safe and otherwise "legal" drugs.
More time, attention and resources should be directed at fighting real crime, violent crime and moreover, as evidenced in the past couple of years, "white-collar" crimes. which have- in case you haven't noticed - wreaked havoc on the financial stability of our entire country. The desperation is emenating from you people and everyone is beginning to smell it's stench. You are all worried about your jobs and authority and power...and rightly so. It is only a matter of time, only a matter of time...
Ramsey Rules

Minneapolis, MN

#10 Mar 20, 2009
"The bottom line is that marijuana is a dangerous and addictive illegal drug."

PROVE IT BEFORE YOU SPEW LIES!

WHAT A CROCK! Marijuana is NOT addictive! It's been proven that it is NOT addictive! What is DANGEROUS and Addictive is ALCOHOL AND CIGS!

UNREAL!
Tommy

Suffolk, VA

#11 Mar 20, 2009
The bottom line is that Federal and State laws lie about the dangers of pot.

The bottom line is that pot legalization in any form threatens funding that law enforcement wants.

The bottom line is that the FDA is a joke.

The bottom line is that there are other methods of ingesting pot than smoking. And, besides, no one smokes two packs a day of pot.
Milton Friedman

Omaha, NE

#12 Mar 20, 2009
People with severe spinal cord injuries fall under the "severe pain" provisions of medical marijuana laws.
I didn't know having a severed spinal cord wasn't a serious condition.
Thanks "Doctor" Backstrom. How compassionate.

Since: Apr 08

Twin Cities

#13 Mar 20, 2009
While Minnesota's law enforcers have great compassion for persons suffering from cancer, AIDS, MS and other serious diseases, this proposal is not limited to these patients. In fact, one need only look to the experience of other states that have enacted these laws to see that the vast majority of persons accessing "medical" marijuana use it to treat pain (in Oregon, as of Jan. 1 this year, 18,348 of 20,842 users of "medical" marijuana use it for severe pain).

Egads, people use this plant to treat PAIN? How dare they!!! Mr. Backstrom, as a person with advancing MS I have to tell you that you are an indefensible prick for all the energy you put into keeping chronic, incurable, painful diseases from being treated naturally by patients.

Very sincerely,
Zen Birdist

Since: Apr 08

Twin Cities

#14 Mar 20, 2009
Tommy wrote:
The bottom line is that Federal and State laws lie about the dangers of pot.
The bottom line is that pot legalization in any form threatens funding that law enforcement wants.
The bottom line is that the FDA is a joke.
The bottom line is that there are other methods of ingesting pot than smoking. And, besides, no one smokes two packs a day of pot.
Very good points, all. Yes, the FDA is corrupt and it's disgraceful that the care of severely ill patients is in the choking grip of law enforcement. If it can be safely grown in my home or yard and ingested without harm to my neighbors, then law enforcement can kindly kiss my behind while I do what I can to ease my suffering. This makes me a criminal. What does it make law enforcement who opposes it?

Zen
doctors

Louisville, KY

#16 Mar 20, 2009
Why don't law enforcement trust doctors to treat their patients? Backstrom is acting like anyone will be able to use it. That's not the case. A seriously ill patient's doctor will still have to sign off on a recommendation for it, like they do with a prescription.

Backstrom mocks those suffering from severe pain, yet those people are currently able to get Oxycontin, Percocet, Vicodin, and many other narcotics that can actually cause an overdose death. It is impossible to overdose on marijuana -- that fact is not disputed.

If I were a doctor, I'd be pissed at these cops and prosecutors telling me that I'd intentionally endanger my patients. Do Backstrom and the other law enforcement officers really distrust Minnesota's doctors that much?

Yes to doctors and patients making medical treatment decisions based on their individual needs, no to law enforcement making medical decisions for them.
Carry A Nation

Corpus Christi, TX

#17 Mar 20, 2009
I see the light! Based on this article, I agree that we should bring back prohibition on alcohol and begin prohibition on tobacco. I also believe that all pain medicine should be prohibited as well. As for illegal drugs, I believe that we should take a hatchet to all those who consume. I can't see any reason why anyone should use any harmful products.
Tell Your Chilren

Corpus Christi, TX

#18 Mar 20, 2009
Prohibition makes the WRONG people rich. You like what's happening in Mexico? Maintain the prohibition laws. Did prohibition work for alcohol? Is prohibition working for marijuana? California's number one cash crop is marijuana and is worth more than wine and all other fruits and vegetables combined. Are we winning the drug war? It's cost $22.5 TRILLION (fed and states) since Nixon started the war on drugs. Seen any less drugs? Harder to get? Cost more? No. Prohibition is a failure. If people want it, they will get it. Prohibition allows access to drugs for our youth. Drug dealers don't ask for identification or your age only your money. Isn't it time that we quit playing Elliott Ness and Al Capone? Have you seen your 4th amendment rights lately? Does passing a urine purity exam to get a job seem like a reasonable request? If so, North Korea is waiting for you!
Legalize, Regulate, and TAX!!!
Backstrom malpractice

Saint Paul, MN

#19 Mar 20, 2009
"Dr." Backstrom is back from his witness tampering and proceedings before the Lawyer's Professional Responsibility Board to retain his law license to renew his practice of medicine.
If Backstrom were a legitimate lawyer, he would know that Minnesota law prohibits practicing medicine without a license. When he gets done defending himself for tampering with a witness in a murder trial (not even in Dakota County), he can go before the Board of Medical Practice and explain why he's qualified to diagnose and treat terminally ill patients in Minnesota. While he's there, maybe he can get a referral for a good psychiatrist trained to treat narcissim.
Paging Dr Backstrom

Saint Paul, MN

#20 Mar 20, 2009
"Dr" Backstrom is back practicing medicine after taking a break to defend his witness tampering (in a county other than Dakota County) before the Lawyer's Professional Responsibility Board. As a lawyer, Mr. Backstrom should know that Minnsota law prohibits practicing medicine without a license. When and if his law license is reinstated, "Dr." Backstrom should go before the Board of Medical Practice to explain his qualifications to diagnose medical conditions and issue treatment plans. While he's there, maybe he can get a referral to a trained psychiatrist skilled in treating patients suffering with narcissism.
Dr Quack

Saint Paul, MN

#21 Mar 20, 2009
Jim Backstrom has been afraid to appear before the Minnesota Legislature to make these bogus arguments, even though legislative witnesses are not subject to perjury indictments.(Lucky for him!) That hasn't stopped him from making the same lies in the PIONEER PRESS.
Why don't we let physicians and patients make treatment decisions and let Jim Backstrom and his cop friends get back to eating donuts and letting child murderers go free because of incompetent legal work? That's what Jim Backstrom is best at.
Rumblebee

Saint Paul, MN

#22 Mar 20, 2009
Apparently giving morphine and other opiates to treat pain is acceptable, but stay away from the obviously more dangerous and addicting marijuana. Also, thank God Mr. Backstrom is here to make sure terminally ill people are not being exposed to smoking more tar and carcinogens!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Law Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Massena woman who threatened boyfriend with ste... 7 min Massenians r Hicks 13
GOP governors don't see 'Obamacare' going away 9 min Go Blue Forever 102
Dallas begins testing backlog of 4,140 rape kits 43 min Reader 1
A change of culture at Fitchburg Police Dept. -... (Nov '10) 51 min The Insider 270
Stacey Burns murder case "an ongoing investigat... (Apr '10) 1 hr Amazed 333
Boehner Moving Toward Late-July House Vote on O... 1 hr kuda 8
Stamford school administrators seek special pro... 2 hr Mike g Papa 1

Law People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE