AP Newsbreak: New Medical Marijuana Policy Issued From Obama Administration

trainwreckmolly

trainwreckmolly

Bluelighter
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
4,890
Location
Virginia Beach
AP Newsbreak: New Medical Marijuana Policy Issued
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: October 18, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/10/18/us/politics/AP-US-Medical-Marijuana.html?_r=1

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Obama administration will not seek to arrest medical marijuana users and suppliers as long as they conform to state laws, under new policy guidelines to be sent to federal prosecutors Monday.

Two Justice Department officials described the new policy to The Associated Press, saying prosecutors will be told it is not a good use of their time to arrest people who use or provide medical marijuana in strict compliance with state laws.

The new policy is a significant departure from the Bush administration, which insisted it would continue to enforce federal anti-pot laws regardless of state codes.

Fourteen states allow some use of marijuana for medical purposes: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

California is unique among those for the presence of dispensaries -- businesses that sell marijuana and even advertise their services.

Attorney General Eric Holder said in March that he wanted federal law enforcement officials to pursue those who violate both federal and state law, but it has not been clear how that goal would be put into practice.

A 3-page memo spelling out the policy is expected to be sent Monday to federal prosecutors in the 14 states, and also to top officials at the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration.

The memo, the officials said, emphasizes that prosecutors have wide discretion in choosing which cases to pursue, and says it is not a good use of federal manpower to prosecute those who are without a doubt in compliance with state law.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the legal guidance before it is issued.

At the same time, the officials said, the government will still prosecute those who use medical marijuana as a cover for other illegal activity. The memo particularly warns that some suspects may hide old-fashioned drug dealing or other crimes behind a medical marijuana business.

In particular, the memo urges prosecutors to pursue marijuana cases which involve violence, the illegal use of firearms, selling pot to minors, money laundering or other crimes.

And while the policy memo describes a change in priorities away from prosecuting medical marijuana cases, it does not rule out the possibility that the federal government could still prosecute someone whose activities are allowed under state law.

The memo, officials said, is designed to give a sense of prosecutorial priorities to U.S. Attorneys in the states that allow medical marijuana. It notes that pot sales in the United States are the largest source of money for violent Mexican drug cartels, but adds that federal law enforcement agencies have limited resources.

Medical marijuana advocates have been anxious to see exactly how the administration would implement candidate Barack Obama's repeated promises to change the policy in situations in which state laws allow the use of medical marijuana.

Shortly after Obama took office, DEA agents raided four dispensaries in Los Angeles, prompting confusion about the government's plans.
 
Obama and Soros are not going to allow personal cultivation. They want marijuana regulated and highly taxed starting with medical marijuana. It will still be expensive and there will still be a black market. The article below was written sometime earlier this year. Read it before you get your hopes up about marijuana prohibition ending and being able to grow your own.

--------------------------------------------
How the Marijuana Re-Legalization Movement Has Been Betrayed by Soros, Nadleman (DPA) and Kampia (MPP)
(1) Introduction

This may be the ultimate indictment of the "moneyed" drug reform movement in this country and I urge you to distribute this article as widely as possible.

This is the 8th in a series of essays on the MERP Model for Re-Legalizing Marijuana throughout the planet. In this essay I am exposing the "smoking gun" evidence that will show that the "Marijuana Policy Project" (MPP) is secretively plotting to put an end to the personal cultivation of Marijuana which has been a perennial goal of all Marijuana activists since the mid-1960's. This betrayal, of both Cannabis activists and the MERP Model, requires that MPP is cut off from any further activist funding. You will find links to all past and future essays, concerning "MERP" at the following link:

"MERP" Headquarters
The Marijuana Re-Legalization Policy Project (MRPP)
http://www.newagecitizen.com/MERP.htm

(2) Some Brief Background on the Re-Legalization Movement from the 1960's through 2008

I have now been an expert on drug policy for over 20 years and was initiated into the use of Marijuana, in 1967, at the tender age of 13. That was just 3 years after Bob Dylan introduced the Beatles to Marijuana in 1964.

1967 was also the year that the first major petition, demanding Marijuana Re-Legalization, was placed in the London Times by Paul McCartney. Here is a brief description of the petition from Barry Miles "Beatles Diary:"

The "Pot" Ad
The Times ran a full page advertisement on July 24th, 1967, headed, "The law against marijuana is immoral in principle and unworkable in practice" which was signed by, among other, all four Beatles and Brian Epstein. The petition's arguments included the following: that the smoking of cannabis on private premises should no longer constitute an offence; cannabis should be taken off the dangerous drugs list and controlled, rather than prohibited; possession of cannabis should either be legally permitted or at most be considered a misdemeanor and that all person now imprisoned for possession of cannabis or for allowing cannabis to be smoke on private premises should have their sentences commuted.

It was signed by 65 eminent names including Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of the DNA molecule and a Nobel laureate, novelist Graham Greene, and MPs Brian Walden and Rom Drilberg, as well as future MP Jonathan Aitkin, but the four MBEs caused the most press concern. Questions were asked in the House, and a chain of events set off, which did actually result in the liberalization of the laws against pot in Britain. the advertisement was paid for by the Beatles at Paul McCartney’s instigation.
The Beatles Diary: The Beatles years By Barry Miles

Four years later (1971) another Beatle, John Lennon, came to the assistance of Michigan activist John Sinclair, who had been put in prison for 10 years for getting arrested with a mere 2 Marijuana cigarettes. Recently John Sinclair became the most important luminary to join the roster of activists supporting the MERP Model for Marijuana Re-Legalization. And the list of supporters is growing by the day.

So for nearly 42 years we have now been fighting to end the prohibition of Marijuana throughout this planet. Am I the only one that is angered that we have not yet achieved this goal? Think about it. It only took 13 years to realize that Alcohol Prohibition was a mistake, despite it being a far more dangerous drug than Marijuana. Yet it has now been 71 years, that we have endured Marijuana Prohibition, and despite 52% support nationwide (see Zogby Poll), our representatives continue to ignore us.

Despite numerous feeble attempts it was not until 1996 -- 29 years later -- that the first Medical Marijuana Initiative, Proposition 215, was passed in California. George Soros was a major contributor to Prop 215 but, according to activist Ron Kiczenski, he was not able to have much input into the structure of this initiative which had no limits to the number of plants that a patient could grow. Proposition 215 also held the counties responsible for granting citizens access to "Medical Marijuana."

For the uninitiated here is what you should know about George Soros:

(1) He is the primary funding source for the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) headed by Ethan Nadleman and the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) headed by Rob Kampia.

(2) He has been the primary source of funding for the remaining 12 Medical Marijuana initiatives that have passed through 2008.

(3) He is a ruthless Globalist who supports gun control, open borders and is also a primary funding source to dozens of drug reform organizations throughout the planet.

(4) It is becoming clearer, by the day, that Soros is positioning himself to profit from a highly "taxed and regulated" Marijuana industry that will not destroy the drug cartels or stop the arrest of American Cannabis consumers.

You can learn quite a bit more about George Soros by accessing the references in the 7th part of this series, "How Marijuana Re-Legalization Might Really Save the Planet" Here is the accompanying video:





So it is not a big surprise that Soros funded California Senate Bill 420 (SB 420), after Prop 215 passed. This was Soros's attempt to limit the number of plants that a patient could grow. Fortunately the Californian Appeals Court found SB420 unconstitutional because it did attempt to set limits.

Undeterred Soros became the primary funding source for the remaining 12 Medical Marijuana Initiatives which culminated in the passage of the Michigan Initiative in November 2008. But the clever little Soros made sure that most of the remaining 12 initiatives were restricted to a 12 Plant limit for the Medical Patient or the Caregiver.

This concludes my brief summary of Soros activities through 2008. It should also be clear that Soros has shown absolutely no inclination to support initiatives that allow personal cultivation for healthy Cannabis consumers. In fact Ethan Nadleman would not allow me access to Soros when I attempted to garner more funding for the Michigan Personal Marijuana Initiative (PRA) in July 2001. We had collected over 270,000 signatures and needed additional funding to bring in professional canvassers to get the remaining 180,000 signatures. But Nadleman and Soros "just said no" and the initiative never made the ballot.

(3) How Obama, Soros, Rob Kampia and MPP Intend To Betray the Marijuana Re-Legalization Movement in 2009

In a recent email from MPP they talk about the pending AZ Medical Marijuana Initiative:

“What's unique about the Arizona law is that it would permit qualifying patients or their caregivers to legally purchase marijuana from licensed dispensaries — so they wouldn't need to obtain it from the criminal market”.

Once you understand what Kampia (MPP) is really hiding you will have every right to get pissed off. You see, under this initiative (should it pass), you will NOT be able to cultivate the common 12 Plant maximum unless you live more than 25 miles from a licensed dispensary.

Here is what Rob Kampia and Soros did not want the Cannabis Activist Community to understand:

"Qualifying patients who live more than 25 miles from the nearest dispensary will be allowed to cultivate up to 12 marijuana plants for personal use."
Source: AZ Medical Marijuana Policy Project Files With Secretary Of State's Office by Press Release
http://www.postchronicle.com/news/he...12230833.shtml

In other words, once there are enough dispensaries individual consumers will no longer be able to cultivate their own Marijuana!

So the only thing “unique” about Rob Kampia’s (President of MPP) AZ initiative is that it will basically prohibit personal cultivation as soon as Soros can set up his network of "Medical Marijuana Dispensaries.". On that count alone I urge everyone in AZ to reject this flawed initiative and stop supporting MPP or DPA.

I have not assembled all of the puzzle pieces here but certainly enough to make the case that Soros, Kampia and Nadleman are not honest brokers of the drug policy reform that most Americans would like to see. untaxed, unregulated cultivation by all American Citizens over the age of 18.

It is also becoming clear that the media is slowly attempting to "manufacture consent" for a highly regulated "tax and regulate" model for Marijuana Re-Legalization that will force American Citizens to pay exorbitant prices for Marijuana (e.g., $300 to $500 and ounce) in order to feed the tax coffers of local, state and federal government. Why would we want to allow this when the MERP Model would allow you to grow for free outside or for about $30 and ounce if grown indoors under lamps.

A fellow activist also made the astute observation that Obama is most probably also in on this betrayal. Just consider the following excerpt from a recent Christian Science Monitor article on this subject:

"Several recent polls show stepped-up public support for legalization. This means not only lifting restrictions on use ("decriminalization"), but also on supply – production and sales. The Obama administration, meanwhile, says the US Drug Enforcement Agency will no longer raid dispensaries of medical marijuana – which is illegal under federal law – in states where it is legal."
Legalize marijuana? Not so fast.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20090522/cm_csm/emarijuana

This is how she put it after we discussed the flawed AZ initiative in some detail:

"This is why MPP wants to put the power and control of med pot distribution and sales into dispensaries. and take it out of the hands of the patients. Do the dispensaries now become the care giver/grower as well? How many plants are they allowed to grow? Dispensaries will be popping up like convenience stores if that is the case. I see a whole new set of laws coming under corporate oversight and it's screaming MONSANTO/DUPONT GENETIC PATENT ON SEED AND PLANT DISPENSARY CONTROL. What a set up...Obama said he won't raid "DISPENSARIES" in states where medical marijuana is legal...that is why they are taking the power away from home growers/patients...These dispensaries will fall under federal laws....and more than likely federal control and regulation. Sneaky, sneaky."


This is exactly what I have been warning people about for years regarding the major drug reform groups supported by George Soros. Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) and Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) are two of the greatest beneficiaries of Soros funds. But Soros funds dozens of groups throughout the United States and dozens more outside of the United States .

As an activist in drug reform for over 20 years my goal has always been to change the laws so that ALL American adults, not just the sick, would be able to consume and cultivate their own Marijuana. And under the MERP Model we will be able to do this just like we are currently able to produce our own homemade beer and wine: without any taxation, regulation or government interference. To that end I have come up with the MERP Model and have produced a series of essays and videos to explain how it would be implemented:

MERP Headquarters
The Marijuana Re-Legalization Policy Project (MRPP)
http://www.newagecitizen.com/MERP.htm


It is bad enough that Soros is moving to “cash in” on Medical Marijuana by prohibiting personal cultivation. What is worse is that such initiatives will do nothing to destroy the Drug Cartels, Terrorist Organizations and Gangs that profit from the illicit sale of Marijuana. The only model that would assure this outcome is the MERP Model, because it would essentially take all but the normal profit out of the Marijuana market.

For most goods the “normal profit” is usually about twice the cost of producing the product. So in the case of Marijuana you can grow it for about 20 to 30 dollars per ounce using the latest hydroponic techniques and High Intensity Discharge lamps. So you would expect the “normal profit” to be somewhere between $40 to $60 dollars an ounce. But the MPP Arizona initiative would do nothing to eliminate the “black marketing” of Marijuana where an ounce will still sell from between $300 and $600 an ounce. In such a setting the Medical Dispensaries, Terrorists, Mexican Drug Cartels etc. will continue to thrive at our expense.

(4) Summary

By looking retrospectively at the the activities of Soros it is clear that he is against any form of personal cultivation and more than likely expects to profit handsomely from a highly "taxed and regulated" system of drug reform. It is also clear that Obama and the Corporate Media are also on board to manufacture consent for such a stupid and short sighted model.

But from the Hippies of the 60's, to the Activists of the New Millennium, we have always wanted full rights to cultivate Mother Nature's plant without the encumbrances of taxes, regulations or other excuses for the government to invade our homes and properties. As far as I'm concerned Soros, Kampia and Nadleman can go "nadle" one another. We have uncovered their deception and we will no longer support their flawed plans to control both us and our plant.

I think it is time we stop supporting these Soros-supported organizations and unite to achieve the only solution that will destroy the Cartels and serve the common good: the MERP Model. It already enjoys the support of thousands of activists including some of the most important luminaries of the movement: John Sinclair, Ron Kiczenski and Bruce W. Cain (Editor of New Age Citizen).
http://www.newagecitizen.com/MERP/Re...NowObama08.htm
 
Pot advocates: Looser guidelines leave questions
Oct 20, 12:52 AM (ET)
By MARCUS WOHLSEN and LISA LEFF
Associated Press
MyWay

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - A new Obama administration policy loosening guidelines on federal prosecution of medical marijuana on Monday signaled to users that they had less to fear from federal agents but still left their suppliers to contend with a tangled mesh of state laws and regulations.

The Justice Department told federal prosecutors that targeting people who use or provide medical marijuana in strict compliance with state laws was not a good use of their time.

Marijuana advocates and patients called the memo an encouraging step forward from the strict anti-pot policies of the Bush administration. But many worried that the web of laws in the 14 states that allow medical marijuana use could still leave medical marijuana providers vulnerable to prosecution.

"Now we've got to figure out what these words actually mean," said Wayne Justmann, a longtime pro-pot activist in San Francisco who campaigned for the 1996 ballot measure that made California the first state to legalize medical marijuana.

The state stands out for the inconsistent enforcement of medical marijuana laws. There are as many as 800 storefront pot shops in Los Angeles just as some dispensary owners are starting decades-long sentences in federal prison. Some cities are trying to clamp down on medical marijuana, while others offer permits and collect taxes on dispensaries just like any other small business.

The confusion makes some medical marijuana backers skeptical that anyone can feel secure they are clearly in compliance with state law and safe from federal prosecution.

"There's just too much disagreement about what the law is," said Dale Gieringer, director of the California chapter of The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. "The legality of almost anything is in doubt in California when it comes to dispensaries."

On Monday, for example, a state judge temporarily barred Los Angeles from enforcing a ban on medical marijuana clinics, ruling that the City Council failed to follow state law.

California also stands alone for the widespread presence of storefront dispensaries, but places to legally obtain pot are starting to sprout in other states. Colorado also has dispensaries, and Rhode Island and New Mexico are in the process of licensing providers.

Marijuana is effective in treating chronic pain and nausea, among other ailments, advocates say. In the past, federal agents have focused on busting dispensaries they said were using medical marijuana as a front for traditional drug-dealing and earning millions in the process. The Justice Department's latest memo suggests that approach will continue.

"We will not tolerate drug traffickers who hide behind claims of compliance with state law to mask activities that are clearly illegal," Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement.

The Justice Department memo emphasizes that prosecutors have wide discretion in choosing which cases to pursue. In particular, the memo urges prosecutors to pursue marijuana cases which involve violence, the illegal use of firearms, selling pot to minors, money laundering or involvement in other crimes.

The states that allow some use of marijuana for medical purposes are Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington, by the government's count.

But who exactly determines what compliance at the state level means is still a contentious question. California, for example, does not have an agency similar to its department of Alcoholic Beverage Control that focuses on marijuana. As a result, it has been up to the courts, city governments and local law enforcement to determine who is following the state law and who is not.

On Oct. 9, attorneys for the city of Fresno, Calif., obtained a restraining order to force the closure of nine pot clubs for violating zoning laws that require them to comply with both state and federal laws, an essentially impossible requirement since the U.S. government classifies pot as an illegal narcotic.

Assistant City Attorney Doug Sloan said the Justice memo would not inhibit Fresno's ongoing effort to keep out medical marijuana dispensaries.

"The memo expressly says this doesn't legalize marijuana," Sloan said. "Until federal law changes, and right now marijuana is a Class 1 controlled substance, it will still be prohibited."

In Colorado, where voters allowed the use of small amounts of marijuana for medical reasons, there are no statewide rules regulating the increasing numbers of dispensaries and cities have taken to regulating them on their own. For the new federal policy to have any effect, lawmakers need to create the regulations, Colorado Attorney General John Suthers said.

Patrons at a dispensary in San Francisco said they hoped the new policy would lift the stigma surrounding pot.

But they refused to give their names, saying they would not trust the federal government until marijuana was made completely legal.
---
Associated Press writers Greg Risling in Los Angeles, Tim Korte in Albuquerque and Devlin Barrett in Washington contributed to this report.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091020/D9BEK4780.html
 
Today Attorney General Eric Holder announced formal guidelines for federal prosecutors in states that have enacted laws authorizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes. Those guidelines are contained in a memo from Deputy Attorney General David W. Ogden which was sent to United States Attorneys this morning.

October 19,2009

MEMORANDUM FOR SELECTED UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS

FROM: David W. Ogden, Deputy Attorney General

SUBJECT: Investigations and Prosecutions in States Authorizing the Medical Use of Marijuana

This memorandum provides clarification and guidance to federal prosecutors in States that have enacted laws authorizing the medical use of marijuana. These laws vary in their substantive provisions and in the extent of state regulatory oversight, both among the enacting States and among local jurisdictions within those States. Rather than developing different guidelines for every possible variant of state and local law, this memorandum provides uniform guidance to focus federal investigations and prosecutions in these States on core federal enforcement priorities.

The Department of Justice is committed to the enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act in all States. Congress has determined that marijuana is a dangerous drug, and the illegal distribution and sale of marijuana is a serious crime and provides a significant source of revenue to large-scale criminal enterprises, gangs, and cartels. One timely example underscores the importance of our efforts to prosecute significant marijuana traffickers: marijuana distribution in the United States remains the single largest source of revenue for the Mexican cartels.

The Department is also committed to making efficient and rational use of its limited investigative and prosecutorial resources. In general, United States Attorneys are vested with “plenary authority with regard to federal criminal matters” within their districts. USAM 9-2.001. In exercising this authority, United States Attorneys are “invested by statute and delegation from the Attorney General with the broadest discretion in the exercise of such authority.” Id. This authority should, of course, be exercised consistent with Department priorities and guidance.

The prosecution of significant traffickers of illegal drugs, including marijuana, and the disruption of illegal drug manufacturing and trafficking networks continues to be a core priority in the Department’s efforts against narcotics and dangerous drugs, and the Department’s investigative and prosecutorial resources should be directed towards these objectives. As a general matter, pursuit of these priorities should not focus federal resources in your States on individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana. For example, prosecution of individuals with cancer or other serious illnesses who use marijuana as part of a recommended treatment regimen consistent with applicable state law, or those caregivers in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state law who provide such individuals with marijuana, is unlikely to be an efficient use of limited federal resources. On the other hand, prosecution of commercial enterprises that unlawfully market and sell marijuana for profit continues to be an enforcement priority of the Department. To be sure, claims of compliance with state or local law may mask operations inconsistent with the terms, conditions, or purposes of those laws, and federal law enforcement should not be deterred by such assertions when otherwise pursuing the Department’s core enforcement priorities.

Typically, when any of the following characteristics is present, the conduct will not be in clear and unambiguous compliance with applicable state law and may indicate illegal drug trafficking activity of potential federal interest:

•unlawful possession or unlawful use of firearms;
•violence;
•sales to minors;
•financial and marketing activities inconsistent with the terms, conditions, or purposes of state law, including evidence of money laundering activity and/or financial gains or excessive amounts of cash inconsistent with purported compliance with state or local law;
•amounts of marijuana inconsistent with purported compliance with state or local law;
•illegal possession or sale of other controlled substances; or
•ties to other criminal enterprises.
Of course, no State can authorize violations of federal law, and the list of factors above is not intended to describe exhaustively when a federal prosecution may be warranted. Accordingly, in prosecutions under the Controlled Substances Act, federal prosecutors are not expected to charge, prove, or otherwise establish any state law violations. Indeed, this memorandum does not alter in any way the Department’s authority to enforce federal law, including laws prohibiting the manufacture, production, distribution, possession, or use of marijuana on federal property. This guidance regarding resource allocation does not “legalize” marijuana or provide a legal defense to a violation of federal law, nor is it intended to create any privileges, benefits, or rights, substantive or procedural, enforceable by any individual, party or witness in any administrative, civil, or criminal matter. Nor does clear and unambiguous compliance with state law or the absence of one or all of the above factors create a legal defense to a violation of the Controlled Substances Act. Rather, this memorandum is intended solely as a guide to the exercise of investigative and prosecutorial discretion.

Finally, nothing herein precludes investigation or prosecution where there is a reasonable basis to believe that compliance with state law is being invoked as a pretext for the production or distribution of marijuana for purposes not authorized by state law. Nor does this guidance preclude investigation or prosecution, even when there is clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state law, in particular circumstances where investigation or prosecution otherwise serves important federal interests.

Your offices should continue to review marijuana cases for prosecution on a case-by-case basis, consistent with the guidance on resource allocation and federal priorities set forth herein, the consideration of requests for federal assistance from state and local law enforcement authorities, and the Principles of Federal Prosecution.

cc: All United States Attorneys

Lanny A. Breuer
Assistant Attorney General Criminal Division

B. Todd Jones
United States Attorney
District of Minnesota
Chair, Attorney General’s Advisory Committee

Michele M. Leonhart
Acting Administrator
Drug Enforcement Administration

H. Marshall Jarrett
Director
Executive Office for United States Attorneys

Kevin L. Perkins
Assistant Director
Criminal Investigative Division
Federal Bureau of Investigation

http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/192
Click to expand...
 
Good News for Medical Marijuana, for Now
Posted by Anthony Gregory on 10/19/09
Campaign for Liberty

It is indeed a very positive step that Obama has taken in ordering a halt to federal medical marijuana crackdowns where state law is not being violated. As Glenn Greenwald notes, it is a victory for humane treatment of patients, individual liberty and states rights. But there are limits to this improvement. For one, the determination of what constitutes a violation of state law is still under the discretion of the federal government. This is not the proper role of Washington DC. In March, the federal government raided a San Francsico clinic under the pretense of enforcing state sales tax law. But how can the feds know when the state law has been violated, and why should it be up to the feds to prosecute people, presumably under federal authority, because they happened to allegedly violate state law? Will the state law violations be adjudicated properly? Will it have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that state law was violated before federal prosecution or conviction commences? We shall see just how fundamental a shift in policy this is.

Furthermore, this is the kind of executive policy that could easily be overturned. The Supreme Court's disastrous ruling in 2005 that the feds can override state medical marijuana policy still controls, it would seem. And moreover, the humanitarian, free-market, libertarian and states-rights reasons for Washington to lay off on medical marijuana applies just as well to recreational marijuana, as well as regulation and prohibition of all medicinal and recreational substances. Indeed, this applies not just to the area of drugs, but to the whole range of unconstitutional federal imposition upon state sovereignty -- most criminal justice questions, most economic regulation, health care issues, energy and so much more. For now, this is a victory for liberty for which Obama deserves credit, but it is an incomplete victory. If indeed the president believes the war on drugs is a failure, as he has indicated many times, he should go further in denationalizing, demilitarizing and desocializing American drug policy.
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/#26625
 
Seriously, how you can bitch about perceived capitalist bullshit about MJ legalization is beyond me. It beats the shit out of the current situation, and it is inconceivable that anyone would be prosecuted for growing plants when the product is legal.

Grow the fuck up, and get on board the legalization train. I don't care if GWB is driving, I would follow that shit.
 
you taxed my liquor, taxed my gas, even taxed my poor dead ass. so go fuck yourselves, i'll grow it for free, because i'm never letting ANYONE tax MY WEED!
 
The DEA probably raid those places to get extra cash. They cant spend tax money for their own personal use, but they can with undeclared drug money (I know weed is taxed, but they definently have a way of pinching cash from innocent hardworking people. Honestly if they changed forfeiture laws so that its hard for cops to steal shit, there would be a hell of a lot less drugs busts. Think about all that drug money not being circulated into something like education or social services, instead its being circulated in law enforcement with the excuse that Tony Montana's smoking jacket can be used to fund more raids. And we all wonder where all this countries money went.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top