Impact on Public Safety

  • Prop 203 either is poorly drafted or craftily drafted so as to be intentionally misleading.  Either way, the voting public has a right to know about the inevitable, unadvertised consequences if the law passes.
  • Cardholders are allowed to purchase as much as 2.5 ounces of marijuana every 14 days, which is enough to produce as many as 200 marijuana joints.
  • Marijuana is a Schedule I controlled substance and is illegal under federal law. There is nothing in Prop 203 that changes federal law, leaving thousands of Arizona citizens vulnerable to prosecution under federal statutes.  Even if “patients,” “caregivers,” and “dispensary” operators act in accordance with Prop 203, they can be arrested and prosecuted by federal agents in accordance with the Controlled Substance Act.
  • “Medical” marijuana is already available.  Marinol, a synthetic form of THC, is FDA approved and available at any pharmacy with a doctor’s prescription. It is not smoked and is given under direction of a physician attending directly to the patient’s need.
  • Prop 203 allows for any “medical” marijuana cardholder who is not within 25 miles of a dispensary to grow as many as 12 marijuana plants in their home.  A “medical” marijuana caregiver (because he or she is allowed to have as many as five “patients”) would be allowed to grow as many as 60 marijuana plants!  What if  two “caregivers” are married or cohabiting?  What if “caregivers” create cooperatives (as they do in other states)?  These “grow houses” become blights in our neighborhoods, bringing down our already crippled property values, and dramatically increasing criminal activity.
  • Remember the tobacco and asbestos litigation?  Prop 203 does not require warning labels with respect to the marijuana dispensed, despite overwhelming evidence of the harm that can be caused by marijuana use.  Who will be responsible for damages when a “patient” suffers consequences from smoking marijuana?  ADHS, as well as other state agencies, very well could be battling lawsuits on this front in the future.  Without FDA involvement, who is responsible for warning the public of the potential hazards of smoking marijuana?
  • Law enforcement personnel are overwhelmingly against “medical” marijuana laws as being contrary to public safety.
  • Many cities in “medical” marijuana states, frustrated with the increased crime and administrative problems caused by dispensaries, have passed local ordinances banning “medical” marijuana dispensaries within city limits.  Cities banning dispensaries are being challenged in the courts by marijuana advocates with deep pockets to force compliance with state marijuana laws.  Understanding the potential for cities and towns to “opt out” of the marijuana business, Prop 203 requires local authorities to be “reasonable” in zoning ordinances concerning dispensaries, making legal challenges inevitable.  At what economic cost to our cities and towns will Prop 203 be passed? It is not a proper use of taxpayers’ money to have cities, counties and state governmental agencies dealing with this issue.
  • We all should take note of the “warning” from Alameda city officials, who imposed a temporary ban on dispensaries, concluding that the “potential impact of such facilities poses a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and welfare” due to “reported increases in illegal drug activity, illegal drug sales, robbery of persons at or leaving dispensaries, loitering around dispensaries, falsely obtaining identification cards to qualify for medical marijuana and other increases in criminal activities . . . .”