It may be helpful to read this short op-ed piece by Washington Post opinion writer Charles Lane before reading on. Or not. Whatever. -KV
When Charles Lane decided to write a short column on how the majority of medical marijuana recipients are not people with chronic pain or illness, but just ordinary folks who want to smoke weed, he should have stuck to the facts.
Because he's right - people ARE taking advantage of the system. And yes, we should have an open debate on legalizing marijuana instead of the strange "sorta-legal" system we have today in states like California.
Instead, Lane just did what one might do in an opinion piece - he gave his opinion. But because it was in the Washington Post (online), you'd have expected him to do a little research. I mean, at least a LITTLE.
Lane admits he's "unsure" about marijuana legalization, musing how it's likely a "gateway drug." Gateway drug? I haven't heard that argument since my days in DARE (and since I realized that by definition, alcohol and tobacco lead the charge). The author also refers to marijuana sold in dispensaries as "snake oil" since it is not regulated by the FDA. Chinese and Eastern medicine advocates everywhere blinked.
How did readers react to such declarations? Were they 50/50, for and against the piece? Let's just say, "no." No they were not.
Also, Lane probably did not know that the web and the bong go hand in hand. Posted on Tuesday, Lane's piece has more comments than anything he's written this year. The ratio? Out of the first twenty (did you think I was going to go through all the comments?) 1 supported his argument, 1 was neutral, and 18 were against. Ardently against.
That's what you get when you take a shot in the dark, and in the dark is giant monster that doesn't like to be shot.*
Some choice comments:
"When alcohol and tobacco have legal status, the stench of hypocrisy that emanates from the likes of you complaining about "Medical Marijuana" being an insult is unbearable."
-HumanSimpleton
"Every time I read ignorant crap like this posting, it makes my blood boil. This filth has no place in a paper as famous as the Post for its journalistic integrity."
-cv_collins
"Your self righteous, ignorant musings are causing me direct harm by denying me legal access to a harmless herb."
-gbeckmann9
"Are you a journalist or newspaper jockey? Ironically, it was Hearst's yellow journalism that got us in this mess in the first place, but I am sure an irony is lost on you."
-snowbank
"How are alcohol and tobacco not schedule I drugs when they are highly addictive and have absolutely no medical value?"
-wildmonkey12
"Thanks to the Washington Post, reading has become an insult to my intelligence."
-moharr
There are so many great responses as well as humorous cheap shots, it's hard to know where to end the piece.
I'll just say this: I agree with wildmonkey12.
Don't we always?
Seriously.
-CL
---
* In this case the "monster" is online marijuana advocates.
No comments:
Post a Comment