Barney Bishop: Amendment 2: Caregivers are the new Pot Wizards

Amendment 2, the deceptive effort to essentially legalize marijuana, is supposedly self-regulating by the creation of so-called “caregivers.”

The amendment’s authors invented this idea that caregivers, a/k/a Sugar Daddies or more appropriately Pot Wizards, can provide medical dope to other individuals.

Interestingly, the authors didn’t define this Pot Wizard other than to say that they must be at least be 21 years old. They also require that the Pot Wizards can’t provide their weed to more than five other people.

To compound the vagueness, the authors claim that the Florida Legislature will provide the necessary constraints on the Pot Wizards. But what these very smart lawyers fail to divulge is that they will sue the Legislature or anyone that tries to restrict the Pot Wizards’ powers. Mark my words.

And in all likelihood the amendment’s authors will win because the courts will be forced to interpret this new “right” in the most expansive way since it would be ensconced in our state Constitution.

For example, the Pot Wizard can be an ex-felon, a drug addict, a former mental health patient, a parent with a history of spousal or child abuse, a former DUI arrestee, a convicted embezzler, etc. You get the idea.

The Legislature will have a very difficult time restricting the Pot Wizards.

But the real kicker is the concept that Pot Wizards will self-regulate themselves to only five “patients.” Exactly how will this ridiculous threshold be enforced?

Are we now going to have Pot Finks who will turn in Pot Wizards for supplying their dope to six, 10 or even 20 potheads?

What’s to keep one of the five original recipients from giving it to someone else? How will we ever know how much dope anyone ever really receives in the first place?

How can amendment proponents guarantee that children who don’t have seizures won’t get the new, powerful, high-THC pot? Right, they can’t guarantee it. Which means that nefarious Pot Wizards will use dope to curry all kinds of sick and perverted favors.

Is that what Floridians really want?

Now, proponents will say that Pot Wizards giving dope to non-sick children will only be the exception. It’s only a worse-case scenario.

Therein lies the problem. Non-sick children will be able to access dope – and certainly without, or even worse – with their parent’s knowledge.

Isn’t that most parents’ worst nightmare? Unfortunately we all know, and we read in the newspaper every day, about adults who do illegal, sick and immoral acts with children.

Dope, which for many people lowers one’s inhibition, is going to become a serious problem.

Oh sure, the proponents will say that this hasn’t happened in other states; however, that ignores the fact that Florida’s proposed amendment has already been identified as the most lenient in the country.

Immoral adults already use alcohol and other drugs to lower children’s inhibitions, so why wouldn’t they turn to dope as well?

Florida taxpayers already spend over a billion dollars annually to help children and adults fight their addictions to cigarettes, alcohol and drugs. Now we’re going to make dope even more accessible to anyone who has the money to get a Pot Doc’s “recommendation” for Med Pot, or a willing Pot Wizard?

If you believe that farce, then indeed you’re on better drugs than I.

I’ll admit that many people who are not really sick can handle Med Pot without serious and dangerous consequences.

But many will not be able to handle it and we already know this intuitively because much of the budgets of the Department of Children & Family, Corrections and Juvenile Justice is spent trying to help individuals who have an addictive personality.

Our state’s expenditures on drug addiction are only going to skyrocket with easier access to “Med” Pot.

This is what makes this amendment so insidious. The amendment’s proponents want the rest of us to believe that to get Med Pot to the truly sick, we must make it available to anyone for any reason.

Based on human nature, common sense and past experience, “this dog won’t hunt.” It’s not a rational or logical conclusion.

Vote no on 2!

Barney Bishop III is the president and CEO of Barney Bishop Consulting, LLC. Barney can be reached at [email protected]. Column courtesy of Context Florida.