Topic: Feds to shut down medical marijuana dispensaries in California
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg started this discussion 15 years ago #12,711
This will be interesting...
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/10/feds-cracking-down-on-california-medical-marijuana-dispensaries.html
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/10/06/141137946/u-s-tells-californias-pot-shops-to-close-down-or-face-charges
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/10/feds-cracking-down-on-california-medical-marijuana-dispensaries.html
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/10/06/141137946/u-s-tells-californias-pot-shops-to-close-down-or-face-charges
Pot dispensaries have flourished in California, one of 16 states where the use of medical marijuana is legal. But the federal government is now giving some of the state's pot shops 45 days to close down.
The state's four U.S. attorneys gave notice to at least 16 stores that they must close, or face criminal charges and the seizure of their property, according to the Associated Press.
The letters likely stem from a Department of Justice memo sent to U.S. attorneys, instructing them that people "who are in the business of cultivating, selling or distributing marijuana, and those who knowingly facilitate such activities, are in violation of the Controlled Substances Act, regardless of state law."
The state's four U.S. attorneys gave notice to at least 16 stores that they must close, or face criminal charges and the seizure of their property, according to the Associated Press.
The letters likely stem from a Department of Justice memo sent to U.S. attorneys, instructing them that people "who are in the business of cultivating, selling or distributing marijuana, and those who knowingly facilitate such activities, are in violation of the Controlled Substances Act, regardless of state law."
hamfist !!snnYcROO9 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 24 minutes later[^] [v] #228,590
Fuck tha police
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 21 seconds later, 24 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #228,591
Fair enough.
squared colon three !L.....AlN. joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 56 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #228,605
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 hours later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,639
I thought the United States of America was a bunch of different states, each with their own laws, who banded together as a country with a smaller government to act as the mouthpiece of the federation and to make laws on inter-state issues.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,641
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 37 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,642
@previous (F)
I'm mostly ignorant of American history. I thought the civil war was over the legality of slavery.
I'm mostly ignorant of American history. I thought the civil war was over the legality of slavery.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 11 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,643
@228,639 (E)
It's supposed to be like that but federal laws have more power than state laws. This case is just the fucking fun police showing up to halt people from enjoying their lives. So instead of the state making money from weed sales the money will just go to finance the cartels and violence in Mexico.
It's supposed to be like that but federal laws have more power than state laws. This case is just the fucking fun police showing up to halt people from enjoying their lives. So instead of the state making money from weed sales the money will just go to finance the cartels and violence in Mexico.
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,645
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 19 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,646
@228,643 (Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ)
My pen pal is a Mexican cartel member called Rico, who lives in Mexicali.
My pen pal is a Mexican cartel member called Rico, who lives in Mexicali.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,648
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 37 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,649
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,653
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,655
@228,649 (E)
To keep the Union together. The north did not want to recognize the sovereignty of the individual states to break away and form their own nation. Lincoln suspended civil liberties and used the constitution to wipe off his cumbeard so that America could remain united. I'm glad he did because if I was born in the CSA I'd probably have killed myself a long time ago.
To keep the Union together. The north did not want to recognize the sovereignty of the individual states to break away and form their own nation. Lincoln suspended civil liberties and used the constitution to wipe off his cumbeard so that America could remain united. I'm glad he did because if I was born in the CSA I'd probably have killed myself a long time ago.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,658
@228,649 (E)
He's right, the cival war proved states can't secceed and that federal laws trumps state laws. Basically it was a giant bitchslap to put the states in line, slavery was merely one of the catalysts that helped set off the war, but that war was forshadowed for 50 years.
He's right, the cival war proved states can't secceed and that federal laws trumps state laws. Basically it was a giant bitchslap to put the states in line, slavery was merely one of the catalysts that helped set off the war, but that war was forshadowed for 50 years.
[^_^] !yyQ9.ZkX3. joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 18 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,666
Ks !KansasxqvM joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,667
The Feds are also saying medical marijuana users can't own guns. I may not be a lawyer, but this sure seems like some bullshit twist of the law.
http://michiganmessenger.com/53020/atf-memo-says-medical-marijuana-patients-can%E2%80%99t-have-guns
These kinds of things won't stop medical marijuana, the cat is out of the bag. The younger generations are fully aware of the hypocrisy in criminalizing marijuana, yet legalizing alcohol. We really need to get past this issue to progress as a society, people want to use marijuana and its not dangerous to do so, its really just that simple.
http://michiganmessenger.com/53020/atf-memo-says-medical-marijuana-patients-can%E2%80%99t-have-guns
These kinds of things won't stop medical marijuana, the cat is out of the bag. The younger generations are fully aware of the hypocrisy in criminalizing marijuana, yet legalizing alcohol. We really need to get past this issue to progress as a society, people want to use marijuana and its not dangerous to do so, its really just that simple.
Anonymous H replied with this 15 years ago, 12 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,673
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,674
@228,667 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
> We really need to get past this issue to progress as a society
Your sense of priorities sure are strange.
> We really need to get past this issue to progress as a society
Your sense of priorities sure are strange.
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 35 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,688
@228,667 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
> block stoners from buying guns
> allow for alcoholics to freely buy arms
I AM GETTING FUCKING SICK AND TIRED OF IDIOTIC PIECES OF SHIT RUINING MY NATION - MYHOMELAND FOR THE SAKE OF FULFILLING THE WISHES OF THE CARTELS AND CORRUPT "TOO BIG TO FAIL" CORPORATIONS.
> block stoners from buying guns
> allow for alcoholics to freely buy arms
I AM GETTING FUCKING SICK AND TIRED OF IDIOTIC PIECES OF SHIT RUINING MY NATION - MYHOMELAND FOR THE SAKE OF FULFILLING THE WISHES OF THE CARTELS AND CORRUPT "TOO BIG TO FAIL" CORPORATIONS.
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,691
@228,674 (F)
I didn't say it was more or less important than other issues, priority wasn't even implied...
I didn't say it was more or less important than other issues, priority wasn't even implied...
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 55 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,692
@previous (Ks !KansasxqvM)
Quiet you, you're impeding his ability to use arguments consisting of mockery instead of substance.
Quiet you, you're impeding his ability to use arguments consisting of mockery instead of substance.
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,693
@228,639 (E)
Yeah, federal laws win. I can see this becoming an appeals issue and I'm sure the marijuana advocacy groups would be happy for that to happen.
Interesting is Obama's role in this.
Yeah, federal laws win. I can see this becoming an appeals issue and I'm sure the marijuana advocacy groups would be happy for that to happen.
Interesting is Obama's role in this.
As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama said the federal government should not raid medical marijuana users and caregivers. Three months after Obama was inaugurated, his attorney general announced that it would be the administration's official policy. [...]
Recently, the administration and some of its federal prosecutors have drawn strict limits on what they would tolerate. When Oakland and Berkeley began to make plans to allow industrial-scale cultivation, the U.S. attorney for the Bay Area made it that clear she would not allow it, leading those cities to shelve ambitious plans motivated by the desire for tighter regulatory control and increased tax revenues.
The latest letters have baffled the state’s medical marijuana activists, who believe the president has broken his word. “Obama says, ‘Yes.’ The conservatives say, ‘No.’ So they get together and huddle and they settle on no,†said William G. Panzer, an Oakland lawyer who helped draft the state’s medical marijuana initiative. “The Obama administration has been incredibly disappointing on this issue.â€
Recently, the administration and some of its federal prosecutors have drawn strict limits on what they would tolerate. When Oakland and Berkeley began to make plans to allow industrial-scale cultivation, the U.S. attorney for the Bay Area made it that clear she would not allow it, leading those cities to shelve ambitious plans motivated by the desire for tighter regulatory control and increased tax revenues.
The latest letters have baffled the state’s medical marijuana activists, who believe the president has broken his word. “Obama says, ‘Yes.’ The conservatives say, ‘No.’ So they get together and huddle and they settle on no,†said William G. Panzer, an Oakland lawyer who helped draft the state’s medical marijuana initiative. “The Obama administration has been incredibly disappointing on this issue.â€
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,694
@previous (marvin !H0G.H/BnJg)
Obama has broken many promises made on lesser issues. You would have been a fool to think that he would have not broken this one.
Obama has broken many promises made on lesser issues. You would have been a fool to think that he would have not broken this one.
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 19 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,724
@228,691 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
You are implying we cannot progress as a society without getting past this issue.
You are implying we cannot progress as a society without getting past this issue.
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 23 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,755
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 14 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,762
@previous (E)
But society can and has been progressing without doing so. The priorities and sense of importance are way off.
But society can and has been progressing without doing so. The priorities and sense of importance are way off.
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,766
@previous (F)
> But society can and has been progressing without doing so.
Citation needed. But as you can see from this topic, drug restrictions have been slowly weakening.
> But society can and has been progressing without doing so.
Citation needed. But as you can see from this topic, drug restrictions have been slowly weakening.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,770
@228,762 (F)
> But society can and has been progressing without doing so. The priorities and sense of importance are way off.
Look around bud, you call all of this progress?
> But society can and has been progressing without doing so. The priorities and sense of importance are way off.
Look around bud, you call all of this progress?
Anonymous F replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,772
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,776
@previous (F)
Like the car? Electricity? Those are new. You're posting in a thread about the government telling grown people what to do with their bodies and you mention progress? Linger longer
Like the car? Electricity? Those are new. You're posting in a thread about the government telling grown people what to do with their bodies and you mention progress? Linger longer
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,779
@228,766 (E)
> But as you can see from this topic, drug restrictions have been slowly weakening.
Did you even read the topic? This isn't true at all.
> But as you can see from this topic, drug restrictions have been slowly weakening.
Did you even read the topic? This isn't true at all.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,785
@228,776 (Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ)
I'm on the fence about drugs. On the one hand if you legalised them you'd basically have the government selling slow-acting poison and more people would be willing to try it, but on the other, look at cigarettes. If you made those illegal then you'd have the same situation, crime organisations making money off of them and addicts living in fear. Legalising them would solve both of these. It's not an easy problem,
I'm on the fence about drugs. On the one hand if you legalised them you'd basically have the government selling slow-acting poison and more people would be willing to try it, but on the other, look at cigarettes. If you made those illegal then you'd have the same situation, crime organisations making money off of them and addicts living in fear. Legalising them would solve both of these. It's not an easy problem,
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,786
@228,779 (marvin !H0G.H/BnJg)
We're at the stage where cities have been planning industrial cultivation of cannabis and the federal government have had to intervene and say "NO YOU GUYS CANNABIS IS NOT ALLOWED NOW STOP IT"
Could you picture this occuring ten years ago?
We're at the stage where cities have been planning industrial cultivation of cannabis and the federal government have had to intervene and say "NO YOU GUYS CANNABIS IS NOT ALLOWED NOW STOP IT"
Could you picture this occuring ten years ago?
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,787
@228,785 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Cigarettes are the cause of several deaths as is drinking/drunk driving. The majority of drug related deaths are because of the criminals who deal them. Fuck people are getting beheaded in Mexico because of drugs. Also I just think people should be allowed to live line they want without a being told what they do, to a degree of course.
Cigarettes are the cause of several deaths as is drinking/drunk driving. The majority of drug related deaths are because of the criminals who deal them. Fuck people are getting beheaded in Mexico because of drugs. Also I just think people should be allowed to live line they want without a being told what they do, to a degree of course.
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,789
@228,786 (E)
The various pockets where medical marijuana is quasi-legal are pretty meaningless, actually, compared to trends in prosecution and sentencing of drug offenses, which have been going an entirely different way.
The various pockets where medical marijuana is quasi-legal are pretty meaningless, actually, compared to trends in prosecution and sentencing of drug offenses, which have been going an entirely different way.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,790
@228,787 (Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ)
But drugs themselves are bad for people, physically and mentally (usually just in excess, but they're addictive they'll keep doing them). Heroin addicts certainly aren't the healthiest bunch.
But drugs themselves are bad for people, physically and mentally (usually just in excess, but they're addictive they'll keep doing them). Heroin addicts certainly aren't the healthiest bunch.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,791
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I agree with some of that. I think we differ in that I wouldn't mind heroin addicts killing themselves off in large numbers. I'd even pay more in taxes so they could shoot up for free as long as they agree to not seek medical care from the government.
I agree with some of that. I think we differ in that I wouldn't mind heroin addicts killing themselves off in large numbers. I'd even pay more in taxes so they could shoot up for free as long as they agree to not seek medical care from the government.
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 54 seconds later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,792
@228,789 (marvin !H0G.H/BnJg)
It's always darkest before the dawn. They're getting hardcore about crackdowns because they've noticed that people are drifting towards legalization.
By 2030, I predict cannabis will be fully legal.
It's always darkest before the dawn. They're getting hardcore about crackdowns because they've noticed that people are drifting towards legalization.
By 2030, I predict cannabis will be fully legal.
Nexus !jNexusRe/. joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 35 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,814
@previous (E)
> By 2030, I predict cannabis will be fully legal.
It will never be legal at the federal level, Pharmaceutics companies and private hospitals can not make a profit off of something you can grow in your backyard. If their lobbyists get the slightest hint that cannabis could be even decriminalized, they will throw millions to politicians to halt any legislation. Politics are not about what is right and what is wrong, its about how much money can be made and how to be re-elected.
> By 2030, I predict cannabis will be fully legal.
It will never be legal at the federal level, Pharmaceutics companies and private hospitals can not make a profit off of something you can grow in your backyard. If their lobbyists get the slightest hint that cannabis could be even decriminalized, they will throw millions to politicians to halt any legislation. Politics are not about what is right and what is wrong, its about how much money can be made and how to be re-elected.
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #228,816
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 15 hours later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #229,185
@228,639 (E)
> I thought the United States of America was a bunch of different states, each with their own laws, who banded together as a country with a smaller government to act as the mouthpiece of the federation and to make laws on inter-state issues.
lol it is meant to be...
anon e i read this whole thread and i love you
> I thought the United States of America was a bunch of different states, each with their own laws, who banded together as a country with a smaller government to act as the mouthpiece of the federation and to make laws on inter-state issues.
lol it is meant to be...
anon e i read this whole thread and i love you
(Edited 3 minutes later.)