Medical Marijuana: "Yes" or "No" on Question 3?

Where do you stand on Question 3 in Massachusetts, which concerns the medical use of marijuana.

In November, Massachusetts voters will decide whether or not to allow the medical use of marijuana in the state.

In Question 3 on the ballot, a "yes" vote would allow medical marijuana and a "no" vote would maintain the state's current laws, which don't allow for the medical use of marijuana.

Battle lines are already being drawn. Those who support the measure include The Committee for Compassionate Medicine and, to a degree, Senate Candidate Elizabeth Warren.

Those opposed to the measure include the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association and the Massachusetts Medical Society.

For an interesting discussion on the matter, listen to WBUR's "Radio Boston," which addressed the issue on Sept. 25.

According to a guide to ballot questions published by the Massachusetts Secretary of State's office, Question 3 would do the following:

  • Eliminate criminal and civil penalties for medical marijuana
  • Require that qualifying patients must have serious debilitating medical conditions, such as AIDS or cancer
  • Allow qualifying patients to possess a 60-day supply of medical marijuana
  • Allow 35 non-profit "marijuana treatment centers" across the state, with at least 1 and up to 5 in each county
  • Allow certain qualifying patients to grow marijuana for medical use
  • Establish penalties for fraudulent use of a medial marijuana, including up to five years in jail

Supporters of Question 3 say it would help ease the suffering of patients with severe medical conditions and that medical marijuana would be tightly restricted by the state.

Opponents point to other states that allow medical marijuana, such as California, and say people abuse the system and use marijuana for non-medical reasons.

About 59 percent of Massachusetts residents supported Question 3 in a recent poll.

Where do you stand? Will you be voting yes or no on Question 3, and why?

Greg September 26, 2012 at 09:41 PM
Vote YES ON 3 ! Its time we regulate and tax marijuana .. let Massachusetts reap the benefits of this harmless plant !
Tara Saulnier September 26, 2012 at 10:13 PM
tell that to this guy http://personalliberty.com/2012/07/30/man-arrested-for-collecting-rainwater-on-his-property/
Chris O'Hara September 30, 2012 at 06:44 AM
It sounds like you just want to get stoned and not get into trouble for it. Thats what am hoping for in the future
Mike Cann October 01, 2012 at 06:45 AM
Mike Cann October 01, 2012 at 06:45 AM
Joan Hartley October 11, 2012 at 07:07 PM
to get real information go to; www.mavotenoonquestion3.com
Joan Hartley October 11, 2012 at 07:09 PM
Illegally diverted “medical” marijuana is sold to our kids In Denver, of kids in drug rehab, 74% had received illegally diverted marijuana from a medical marijuana cardholder and had reported using diverted marijuana an average of 50 times. Massachusetts has already opened FOUR Rehab High Schools for drug-addicted teens and a fifth will open in Worcester next year. •35 pot retail stores would open the first year with the promise of more in subsequent years •People could carry a 60-day supply — the equivalent of hundreds of joints — around with them at all times •People could grow marijuana in their home •There is no expiration date on a doctor’s marijuana recommendation, and doctors with restrictions on their medical licenses would be able to recommend the drug. The loopholes and opportunities for an exploited, abused system are enormous
Joan Hartley October 11, 2012 at 07:10 PM
Under this ballot question, anyone 21 years or older can sell marijuana as long as they don’t have a felony drug offense conviction. Anyone 21 years or older can grow marijuana, even if they have a felony drug offense conviction.
Joan Hartley October 11, 2012 at 07:12 PM
@ Greg .... You said "Vote YES ON 3 ! Its time we regulate and tax marijuana " There is no way to regualate it correctly. Marijuana has no dosage and no one will ever know how much anyone takes. And the shops will be non profit and the state government will not be able to tax them because they are a non profit org. We as tax payers will be paying for them because DPH does not have extra money to deal with it.
Martha Johnson October 25, 2012 at 04:30 PM
I would ask that people think long and hard about the implications before voting on Question 3. Marijuana is an herb and not a medicine, there are no major medical organizations in the country who support initiatives such as this, and it violates federal law (whice supersedes any state law). The law would allow as many as 5 dispensing centers in each county in the first year alone. In other states locations with these centers have seen an increase in crime and neighborhood blight and there has been an outcry to close them down. The centers are not medical centers which means that there is no regulation as to the content of the marijuana, and it will not be dispensed by medical personnel. Any adult can obtain a DPH license to open one of these centers to grow and dispense marijuana to adults as well as children, for any ailment a physician has deemed might be helped by the use of marijuana, even something as vague as 'pain'. Ask yourself why is it that it is considered allowable for this product to bypass scientific research and development, as well as FDA oversight? For those who feel it just doesn’t matter because pot is harmless, consider this: Marijuana addiction is the #1 reason minors in this country are admitted to substance abuse treatment centers, and is the #2 reason for adults.
Joshua Brightman October 25, 2012 at 05:40 PM
When I was in high school I purchased marijuana with the greatest of ease.... in fact it was the easiest product to purchase.... easier than alcohol.... if kids want to smoke pot.... they are going to find a way and the current system is a perfect example of that.... you just said how bad the problem is and IT IS AS ILLEGAL AS ITS EVER GOING to get..... the only thing the current system accomplishes is taking it out of the hands of the people that need it..... it IS NOT STOPPING KIDS FROM GETTING IT...... if anything the current system makes it easier for kids to get because i've never seen a drug dealer ask for an I.D..... so stop using children for an excuse
Joshua Brightman October 25, 2012 at 05:46 PM
the current system is bad for our kids.... look no one is saying kids won't circumvent the system and find a way, no plan is ever bullet proof..... however, in Colorado and California.... marijuana use amongst teens has not increased and those models are over a decade old..... if kids get pot through a chain of people from medical marijuana that is better to me then where our kids get their pot now which is from criminals.... i'd rather kids not be involved with criminals the have guns, heroine, cocaine, have records for god knows what.... there is no proof in decades of medical marijuana existing that teens are any more susceptible to smoking pot so using this "for the kids" tactic is propaganda
Joshua Brightman October 25, 2012 at 05:53 PM
vote yes on question 3..... my brother Michael Hughes passed away from AIDS.... his life was easier with marijuana, it allowed him to eat more often, have an appetite, keep food down, and relieve pain, marijuana alone got him off 12 prescription pills that were ruining his liver, it made his quality of life better, he had to purchase it illegally off the street and once even ended up in jail for it..... a terminally sick man in jail for getting medicine can you believe that? vote yes so people can get what they believe is the best medicine for them so they can have a comfortable life like my brother but without feeling like a criminal
Matt C October 25, 2012 at 05:55 PM
Why can't people proposing this just get to the point and admit this has very little to do with "medical necessity" and much more to do with getting high. The medical title is a farce.
Martha Johnson October 25, 2012 at 05:57 PM
I think that 'the kids' is just one of the reasons to vote against it. In 2012 alone, 74% of adolescents in substance abuse treatment in the Denver area had used someone else’s medical marijuana half of the time they used. Also in 2012, the Denver Police saw a 69% increase in crime at the dispensaries during the previous 6 months. The Los Angeles city council recently voted unanimously to shut down all of its' dispensaries. There is nothing 'medical' about it, it is totally unregulated as to content and amount. The law states that you can carry a 60-day supply, but nowhere is there a definition of how much that would be. And how about just the idea that you can still be arrested and charged under federal law, for growing or possessing. People need to get their heads out of the clouds and educate themselves. I'll guarantee that all of the proponents are horrified by the idea of smoking cigarettes, yet doctors will tell you that smoking anything is harmful to your health. If this was just needed for medicinal purposes, you can get a marijuana pill from a licensed doctor and pharmacist.
Joshua Brightman October 25, 2012 at 06:01 PM
the marijuana pill does not work my brother tried it.... it never worked, he died a happier person because of marijuana and i will fight for every other person that wants to use it for the same reasons..... you keep using the same statistic about 74% of the kids in Denver.... let me ask you this and becareful because I have statistics to back up my argument..... did the amount of children that used marijuana in Denver go up or down since medical marijuana was implemented?
Joshua Brightman October 25, 2012 at 06:12 PM
http://sensiblecolorado.org/marijuana-use-down-among-teens-in-colorado-since-regulations-took-effect/ this article proves that according to the Federal Government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention teen use for marijuana DECREASED in 2011 and 2 years prior to that since implementing medical marijuana.... the link to the government's research is on this site for 2011 and 2009 .... so Martha Johnson please tell me why you are twisting words to make it look like medical marijuana was a bad thing in Colorado? When I have just produced FACTS that prove medical marijuana in Colorado has decreased teen use, so if you all care about the kids vote yes on 3 or if you want teen use of marijuana to continue to rise do like our friend Martha here and spew propaganda and vote no on 3 and watch the drug problem amongst teens continue to rise
Tara Saulnier October 25, 2012 at 06:17 PM
Seriously, yes some of us fighting this do want that. There is nothing wrong with that! Unless you never use any over the counter drugs or drink, who the f are you to judge that? THAT said, this IS a medical issue. People DO use pot for medical purposes, and only that. It's not my or your place to judge someone's choice between an illegal plant or a highly addictive opiate for pain.
Martha Johnson October 25, 2012 at 06:23 PM
I never said it increased drug use by kids, just that a majority of kids using pot were using someone else's marijuana prescription. I'm sorry that the pill didn't work for your brother, but that's true of most medications. Not everyone reacts the same way to each medication. It does work for many people. Here's just one of the dilemmas....you have someone who is ill with cancer or AIDS, and you give them something to smoke (which by itself is unhealthy), and you have no idea what is in it. Their immune system is already compromised. I wouldn't trust any doctor who would prescribe something that is not regulated. Every teen who uses this or any drug is one too many. Next time you have the chance please visit a support group and speak with the parents who are dealing with a child who is addicted to pot. If you really wanted people in pain to have it you would instead be looking at a way to have it regulated so that you know what is in it, and in what amounts, and you would be fighting for it to be dispensed only in medical settings by medical personnel.
Tara Saulnier October 25, 2012 at 06:24 PM
Speaking of getting their heads out of the clouds and educating themselves... You should research before you talk. The pill doesn't work, it does not have the same effects. Also, everyone possessing and growing KNOWS they can still be persecuted under federal law, that is their choice, and not your business. As for the smoking... google "Vaporizer" then. Also, "the kids" are getting it anyway! teens can usually get pot faster than adults who have been smoking for years. You know what "the kids" have trouble getting? Alcohol, because they need an ID. Which is exactly what they should do with marijuana if they're ACTUALLY worried about the kids. I on the other hand am an adult who would rather risk federal punishment, then continue living day to day as a "criminal" in my state for something that should be my own choice to do in my free time when it effects no one but myself.
Tara Saulnier October 25, 2012 at 06:27 PM
"Marijuana is an herb and not a medicine" lolz...um... penicillin! One could just as easily argue that penicillin is a fungus, not a medicine.
Joshua Brightman October 25, 2012 at 06:28 PM
first of all they don't have to smoke it they can eat it.... in brownies and many other different baked items....... have you ever seen pot shops.... funny thing is there are labels on every jar of every strand and it tells you exaclty how potent it is down to the .1 percentile.... and if you want it regulated as you say then you should be completely against our current system because as it stands right now it is completely unregulated, by puting it in a store and carding every person that walks in is step one to getting it regulated..... as far as the kids' i just squashed this..... IT HAS BEEN PROVEN IN AREAS WHERE MEDICAL MARIJUANA EXISTS TEEN USE DECREASES.... so why do you teirelessly keep going back to the same argument?
Tara Saulnier October 25, 2012 at 06:48 PM
Alcohol, gambling, sex, drama, attention, coffee, food, Video games, smart phones, tanning, cosmetic surgery, funerals, Books, adrenaline.... all legal things that a person could develop an addiction to. Addiction is bad. I get it, but just because someone is addicted to something, does not make it right to restrict that from EVERYONE else. You can't even use a situation like your NA meeting one above because anyone who has BEEN to a recovery meeting knows all the different situations that lead to addiction/recovery (and the shaming/blaming/enabler/victim/other roles in that addiction and or recovery that parents play) and the main point of the meetings is, if someone wants to indulge in their addiction... they will, one way or another. You are powerless to stop them. More importantly, laws/regulations/legalities are powerless to stop them. Everyone will be faced with some form or addiction in their life... it's called a test of will. Keeping pot illegal will fix nothing!
Joe Johnson October 25, 2012 at 06:50 PM
Mr Brightman, I don't think you're listening because you are so set on your own agenda. This question would not regulate it. The shops can label their items any which they choose. There is no regulation or oversight as to content. I don't understand promoting something like this for someone who's immune system has been shot to hell by chemo or AIDS. Also, the societal costs for addiction are enormous. I agree that if you really wanted patients in need to receive this, you would be fighting for it to be done the right way. Having a MA prescription in your hand will not prevent you from being arrested by federal authorities. To me, that's reason enough to be against it.
Joe Johnson October 25, 2012 at 07:07 PM
Tara you are absolutely right, which is why the vagueness of this question troubles me. It can be dispensed to children as well as to adults. What happens when a child goes to school stoned and the parents say 'it's okay we have a prescription.'? How will that be handled, especially since the statute would be meaningless since it is superceded by federal law?
Joshua Brightman October 25, 2012 at 07:12 PM
Mr. Johnson if shops were to "label it any which way they chose" they wouldn't be doing a very good job, word by consumer would spread, they would lose customers, would lose money, and would have to close down due to their competition doing a much better job, and they would lose their entire investment of well over 400-500,000 dollars, capitalism would correct that problem for us, if a market started selling grapefruit as apples do you think that would be a successful market?.... you are splitting hairs talking about regulating something that does less harm then Advil..... so let's not pass this law for what reason Mr Johnson.... tell me, so your not going to pass this law because someone might put the wrong label on something that would not have any implications to begin with.... tell me do you know what the implications would be if strands of marijuana were'nt labeled properly and someone purchased sour diesel instead of OG Kush? Or Purple Haze instead of Commercial? I know what the implications would be but please....tell me, you seem to be presenting a side of an argument here and I believe everyone gets their say, what implications occur if "things are mislabeled"?
Tara Saulnier October 26, 2012 at 03:26 AM
Joe: You get kicked out of school for having giving your midol to a friend nowadays...obviously the schools would handle it as they see fit. If a kid absolutely needs it, there's always homeschooling. Either way, I still don't see a problem with it. The kid is its parent's responsibility... and if said kid has the parent's permission, well that makes it no longer your business doesn't it.
Louis Sibley February 25, 2013 at 07:32 PM
Ok. If its really medical All insurance company's would cover it. And thay don't And. The. FDA is. Telling everyone you get cancer and die. But. 1 joint equils to 10 cigarettes
Tara Saulnier February 25, 2013 at 07:57 PM
Louis, I keep getting your comments e-mail to me then you delete them before I can reply. First off, please forget everything you think you know about marijuana (you know, those lies they told you in DARE to make you not do it. They are all LIES.) Second, please go read any of the thousands of real scientific studies on the subject. Third, insurance companies do not get to decide what they feel is medical or not and they don't cover it because it is still federally outlawed. This does nothing to prove whether or not marijuana has a medical benefit. Fourth regarding the FDA: here read this http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/21/health/21marijuana.html?_r=0. Fifth, the '1 joint=10 cigs' thing, that was one of those DARE lies. Educate yourself before you speak. You'll save yourself some embarrassment. Also, periods only end sentences not divide words.
Chris O'Hara February 26, 2013 at 02:04 PM
@ louis sibley go a little over board with the periods but hey to each is own The US government seems to think its medical US government patent 6630507 is the us patent on medical cannabis


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something