MEDICAL MARIJUANA LAW PUTS NEEDS OF PEOPLE FIRST

In regard to the article "Saginaw officials, businessmen are divided
over medical pot," City Attorney Fancher parrots the same canned
narrative we've regularly seen reported in the media: the new medical
marijuana law is sloppily written.

Fancher, like many others, isn't inclined to elaborate on the
particulars of this sloppiness because it's a fallacy.

This law was designed to put the needs of the individual first and
foremost, and that's exactly what it does. Beyond that, anything is
certainly subject to fine tuning insofar as what the public will
accept, but is not due to any fault in the law.

The foundation has been laid, and so long as the interests of patients
aren't compromised, building on that foundation is not only
reasonable, but customary.

Saginaw, like every other city in Michigan, has received most talking
points from the Michigan Municipal League and other sources with a
stated opposition to this law.

If you look closely, the source for the lion's share of objections
will quickly be revealed as people with a current or former connection
to law enforcement or other positions within the legal hierarchy. It's
understandable that those with the biggest stake in maintaining the
status quo would also be the most opposed to change.

Consequently, we've been systematically conditioned to the ideal that,
with marijuana enforcement representing a disproportionate share of
the greater host of supposed crises, if provided enough resources,
they can protect us from ourselves, protect public interests and
protect the children. The problem for them is that the curtain is
finally being raised to expose this charade for what it is.

With the medical marijuana law, the people have re-asserted their
authority over the government, and as we all know, government doesn't
appreciate that sort of thing. As a libertarian, this is cause
celebre, and I hope to see more of it.

David Light, Saginaw Township