I am vehemently opposed to THC being offered in the form of gummies, and for this exact reason. Also, that they're not regulated as to potency and do not come in child-proof containers.
The mother claimed that they were CBD gummies, not THC gummies. They were said to be in a container with a CBD gummies label. Before filing charges, presumably steps were taken to confirm the original contents of the container were (or probably were) CBD gummies, and that the one found in the container did or did not resemble the original contents. I am of the opinion that THC edibles and concentrates should be flat out illegal; Over the decades that I worked as a forensic toxicologist I encountered three [3] clear cases of driving under the influence of THC. Two of those defendants had blood THC levels FAR beyond what can be achieved by smoking anything remotely resembling a marijuana cigarette; I don't know what the blood level in the third case was, but the evidence of intoxication within the meaning of our state vehicle code and of THC concentrate use was absolutely damning. I'd say that more than 99.9% of the cases of alleged THC DUI I have encountered were based on the cops' assumption that any amount of THC use constitutes driving under the influence (which would make it unique among drugs/medicinal substances). THC plus alcohol is another matter--it can be very intoxicating, even at blood levels that are individually not particularly risky. Making a murder case of it sounds like prosecutorial overreach. Reckless child endangerment would probably be more accurate. But sad to say, many prosecutors play upon the prejudices of jurors.
Since the mother and child were visiting in a home not their own, I could easily imagine that as the adults were talking the 4 year old found the gummies. When it got too quiet and they went to check on him, they found him with a half a gummy in hand. The assumption was made that he'd only found that one, and the Poison Control Center seems to not have asked if there could have been more, and to name what symptoms to watch out for just incase. They told the mom he'd be fine. What I wanna know is, who did the container of gummies actually belong to: Mom or the relative they were visiting? If the latter, the mother really isn't at fault.
Ownership is a property right and the Constitution considers property protection a primary governmental objective, However, trade and exchange is another matter. There are no impediments to controlling or prohibiting commerce. That is why the importation of slaves was banned in 1803 and the sale of alcohol or production for trade was, for a time, totally banned. The Constitution promoted trade because taxes on importa and sales were expected to fund governmental activities when currencies were based on stores of gold and, to a lesser extent, silver, When Nixon terminated the connection of the dollar to gold, the result was that gross inflation people are now referencing for comparison. His response was to impose price caps, but that did not work. And then the whole monetary crisis was swamped by Watergate and the oil embargo. I do not think the long range consequences of substituting the value of labor for the value of gold as a basis for the currency has been fully explored. Republicans are still convinced that the greenback has some mythical value. It's sort of like the host in Catholic ritual being considered the body of Christ instead of a flour wafer.
Just seems to me that a church has the right to say weapons are not allowed here. It's not public property. That is, how come the government gets to tell a church what it can and cannot allow inside its walls? How about some separation of church and state?
I'd like to see evidence that religion(s) of the plaintiff "ministers" is/are cool with folks in the congregation packing heat. As for the religion of the affected church approving of it or not, that question should be heard by an ecclesiastical court, not a government court. IMHO
Russia is suffering from the same problems that doomed the Confederacy [Click] An interesting comparison; many of the Confederacy's problems are glossed over in the popular understanding of the Civil War.
ReplyDeleteEarly and dramatic increase in pediatric RSV cases [Click]
ReplyDeleteYeah, it's bad everywhere. The Vermont Medical Center's ER is overwhelmed.
DeleteVT ER overwhelmed
Strange: Landscapers Discover Car Buried in Atherton Backyard [Click] Atherton is a famously wealthy suburb of San Francisco.
ReplyDeleteUpdate--lots of interesting things, although nothing definitive yet.
DeleteI'd want to have the whole darn yard dug up after that!!
DeleteA child in Virginia has died of THC overdose
ReplyDeleteI am vehemently opposed to THC being offered in the form of gummies, and for this exact reason. Also, that they're not regulated as to potency and do not come in child-proof containers.
The mother claimed that they were CBD gummies, not THC gummies. They were said to be in a container with a CBD gummies label. Before filing charges, presumably steps were taken to confirm the original contents of the container were (or probably were) CBD gummies, and that the one found in the container did or did not resemble the original contents. I am of the opinion that THC edibles and concentrates should be flat out illegal; Over the decades that I worked as a forensic toxicologist I encountered three [3] clear cases of driving under the influence of THC. Two of those defendants had blood THC levels FAR beyond what can be achieved by smoking anything remotely resembling a marijuana cigarette; I don't know what the blood level in the third case was, but the evidence of intoxication within the meaning of our state vehicle code and of THC concentrate use was absolutely damning. I'd say that more than 99.9% of the cases of alleged THC DUI I have encountered were based on the cops' assumption that any amount of THC use constitutes driving under the influence (which would make it unique among drugs/medicinal substances). THC plus alcohol is another matter--it can be very intoxicating, even at blood levels that are individually not particularly risky. Making a murder case of it sounds like prosecutorial overreach. Reckless child endangerment would probably be more accurate. But sad to say, many prosecutors play upon the prejudices of jurors.
DeleteRemember all those "crack babies" that were supposed to be ruined for life but were indistinguishable from others not exposed to cocaine in utero?
DeleteSince the mother and child were visiting in a home not their own, I could easily imagine that as the adults were talking the 4 year old found the gummies. When it got too quiet and they went to check on him, they found him with a half a gummy in hand. The assumption was made that he'd only found that one, and the Poison Control Center seems to not have asked if there could have been more, and to name what symptoms to watch out for just incase. They told the mom he'd be fine. What I wanna know is, who did the container of gummies actually belong to: Mom or the relative they were visiting? If the latter, the mother really isn't at fault.
DeleteQuite so. THC gummies might well have been put into a labelled CBD gummies container as a means of concealment.
DeleteThere oughtta be a law...
ReplyDeleteNY judge blocks ban on guns in places of worship
Ownership is a property right and the Constitution considers property protection a primary governmental objective, However, trade and exchange is another matter. There are no impediments to controlling or prohibiting commerce. That is why the importation of slaves was banned in 1803 and the sale of alcohol or production for trade was, for a time, totally banned.
DeleteThe Constitution promoted trade because taxes on importa and sales were expected to fund governmental activities when currencies were based on stores of gold and, to a lesser extent, silver, When Nixon terminated the connection of the dollar to gold, the result was that gross inflation people are now referencing for comparison. His response was to impose price caps, but that did not work. And then the whole monetary crisis was swamped by Watergate and the oil embargo. I do not think the long range consequences of substituting the value of labor for the value of gold as a basis for the currency has been fully explored.
Republicans are still convinced that the greenback has some mythical value. It's sort of like the host in Catholic ritual being considered the body of Christ instead of a flour wafer.
Just seems to me that a church has the right to say weapons are not allowed here. It's not public property. That is, how come the government gets to tell a church what it can and cannot allow inside its walls? How about some separation of church and state?
DeleteI'd like to see evidence that religion(s) of the plaintiff "ministers" is/are cool with folks in the congregation packing heat. As for the religion of the affected church approving of it or not, that question should be heard by an ecclesiastical court, not a government court. IMHO
DeleteAs for Alan's second point, that's basically what the judge said.
DeleteGlad to hear it; thanks, Bill.
DeleteWell said, Alan.
Delete