Stephen Baldwin vs. Montel Williams on Marijuana
UPDATE: I found a copy of the full-length interview, better quality, etc. The Baldwin vs. Williams segment starts at 7:45. I will keep the lower-quality segments posted in case this gets taken down:
Double Edit: I just realized that this video only gives the first half of the Stephen Baldwin vs. Montel Williams debate. For the second half, scroll down below and watch the lower-quality part 2. Really sorry I didn’t catch this.
—————————————————————————————–
The videos, due to copyright law, are pretty low quality. If anyone can suggest a better copy, please let me know.
This post is not so much in need of a response, rather, just take the time to listen to a man in pain who wants to live a better life.
The program Montel is referring to does indeed exist. The most outspoken of these patients, still alive, is a man by the name of Irv Rosenfeld. Here is his story:
Another video on Irv Rosenfeld:
And finally, a video with Montel and Irv:
Want to share this link on your site/blog? Copy and paste this code:
March 29th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
[...] your interests were piqued from the last post about Montel Williams and Irv Rosenfeld, then you may enjoy this [...]
May 14th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
[...] any position of authority after his failed attempts at logic while debating Ron Paul back in March, being embarassed on Larry King Live, or even attempting to convince Montel Williams that marijuana s…. Sadly, my hopeful assumptions were made in vain as this was indeed a new peek inside the twisted, [...]
August 30th, 2009 at 2:15 am
Montel’s errors:
1. The first Bush administration was 20 years ago, not 30.
2. Dispensaries have been robbed. I even know of a case where marijuana vending machine was stolen.
3. All medical marijuana states are in violation of the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. All it would take is one Supreme Court case to shut them all down.
4. Many of these “despencaries” are unlicensed and illegally servicing non-patients. There is also a great deal of fraud on the part of medical practitioners prescribing marijuana when there are more-effective, alternative treatments available. Look at how many people are hooked on prescription drugs. Can we really trust a loose dispensary system?
If we’re going to do this, the rule of law must be respected. Currently, it is not. All of these medicines, need to go through the same FDA protocols as every other medication. They do it with opiates; so they can do it with marijuana. Of course, this would require the drug to truly be a better alternative to what is already available and it would have to be controlled by the existing pharmacy system rather than some random street pharmacist opening a dispensary. Beyond that, and medical professional will tell you that there is a need to control and monitor the dosage of any drug given to any patient. Marijuana, as it is currently dispensed, is extremely difficult for doctors to prescribe in this manner. This is why they take your money and give you a card to go to the dispensary and buy whatever you want. It’s a scam. So sad that 13 states have already fallen for it.
August 30th, 2009 at 3:12 am
Thanks for the reply, Andrew! Just want to reply to some of your points.
1. Indeed the bush administration was 20 years ago… but this is hardly worth pointing out. The fact that you pointed this out makes me believe you’re attempting to be a bit over-critical.
2. Dispensaries have indeed been robbed… but what is your point? Robberies are not very common in comparison to how many clubs there are. I keep tabs on robberies and I can only think of 3 this year. How many liquor stores were robbed this year? Further, until prohibition is repealed, robberies are something one must expect from time to time.
3. Using the “Supremacy Clause” is, in my opinion, a bit of a desperate ploy on your part. While the Supremacy Clause does indeed stipulate that federal law is the “supreme law of the land”, you are cherry picking and inappropriately applying it to this situation. Not even the federal government will risk using it; rather they go with the claim that they are “regulating interstate commerce”, and under that justification have some sort of ability to control such things. You also seem to forget that there are larger chunks of the same constitution which specifically limit the powers of the federal government to interfere with states’ laws. As for this being “shut down” by a supreme court case, it already won. Certain counties in Southern California were resistant (and still are) to obeying the state law regarding medical marijuana and they attempted to bring it to the Supreme Court to get some backing. The supreme court rejected the appeals and thus upheld California’s medical marijuana laws. Article: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/19/nation/na-court-marijuana19
4. I have met a few dozen dispensary owners, and none of them operated illegally. Some of them found “grey areas” such as not registering with their city, which currently is not illegal but may be challenged. As for servicing non-patients, can you provide any documentation or reputable statistics to back up this claim? Absolutely no dispensary I have ever heard of has allowed persons without documentation to sign up. It is a huge, stupid liability for any place to take on when there are so many valid patients to service. As for your accusations of fraud, patients use medical marijuana because they feel it works… unless you are attempting to claim that people enjoy wasting their money? As for “more-effective, alternative treatments”, I’m fairly sure any reasonable person who is aware of a more valid treatment has either tried to obtain such a treatment, is having such a treatment, or possibly can’t afford it. And for those that are not aware, it is hardly the fault of the dispensary. Marijuana is safe and many find it effective. It’s safer than alcohol and has never killed a person, unlike its pharmaceutical counterparts; in short, if you are going to assert some sort of danger associated with the providing of marijuana (even abusively), you must first substantiate your claims of danger. In other words, if you are going to use the rhetoric, plan to back it up and show me what possible dangers might come out of “loose dispensary systems”, then prove to me that the majority of our dispensaries fall under your definition of “loose dispensary system”.
5. For your claims that marijuana needs to go through the FDA, why? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against it to satisfy the various red tape… but realistically it is a natural, herbal remedy that just works very well. Perhaps verbiage needs to be reworked, but it is not impossible for natural substances to avoid the FDA. Let’s also remember that the FDA is no gurantee of safety. Prescription drugs kill thousands upon thousands.
6. Opiates are hardly similar to Cannabis. If you are going to use that comparison, it is just as logical to claim that “They do it with opiates, so they can do it with coffee.”
7. Why would the drug need to be “better”? Why can’t we just give the option of a safer substance and let people decide if it works for them or not? No where in the pharmacuetical industry is there a rule that says only the “better drugs” can exist; and keep in mind, in my personal opinion marijuana *is* the better choice, though I wouldn’t expect the other options to be taken off the market.
8. Why should a pharmacy be able to control a plant? Pharmacies exist to reduce the dangers of drug-related deaths. Why is this needed for marijuana?
9. Medical professionals will tell you that there is a need to control and monitor the dosage, but that is only when the drug has an inherent danger of harm if improperly used. Show me this risk of harm from marijuana. Why do you believe the government has the right to restrict a person from choosing to use a safe substance?
10. Marijuana is not prescribed and is indeed without its “proper dosage” already figured out, but, again, why does it matter when there is no harm in someone finding the dosage that works for them? Should the government also restrict the amount of coffee a person is allowed to drink?
11. The reason they give you a card and you have to use a dispensary is because that is how the law is written. It’s not a “scam”, its just the middle-ground that was figured out to allow doctors to help their patients without directly risking their professions by violating federal law. A doctor “recommends” marijuana, and the state respects that recommendation.
Again, thanks for the comment. It’s obvious that you dislike medical marijuana, though it would be better if you had a valid reason to dislike it rather than the various fallacies you have presented.