Bipartisan amendment seeks to halt Obama’s medical marijuana raids

I should say, unenthusiastic enforcement instead of non-enforcement. Kinda like what Bush Jr. did with environmental laws.
Pres Obama could spend the DoJ resources going after Wall Street instead of medical marijuana dispensers, but he has chosen to go after medical marijuana.

A+ brother.

-p

Knowing that the Republicans will go against anything he is in favor of, the amendment will pass. This way, the Republicans will have to defend themselves as being called soft on drugs.

N-O-B-O-D-Y.

Here's Nancy Pelosi's take on it:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/03/pelosi-condemns-obamas-continued-raids-on-marijuana-dispensaries/

Why isn't Holder held accountable?

....he can't handle criticism from the other side. Or maybe he has a buddie in DEA he wants to keep employed. Who knows.

No longer do you have to worry about following the law, you can claim to be an MMJ facility and break every other law in the book, and claim "persecution" if you get busted!

Oh, wait, this law wouldn't do that, so the raids would continue, for the exact same reasons they're going on now.

suddenly close down because it's "too close" to a school?

They followed that law to the letter, did they?

The answer's in your question. They did not follow the law, therefore, they got shut down.

even tho I know that's the "go-to" excuse.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=661949

The rules vary from state to state, but in general:

1. Do not profit.
2. Do not grow in bulk.
3. Only grow for legitimate, registered, patients.
4. Do not open a "dispensary".
5. Follow all tax and zoning laws.

If you follow those 5, you are fine. Mega growers (or even micro growers) who ignore those laws get shut down.

In short, if you have enough profit to run a retail shop, you are probably breaking the law. If you make money from growing, you are breaking the law.

The city council was working on this and trying to negotiate a way to work with the state to make it happen.

That's when the Fed. decided to step in.

However, if you had bothered to read the link provided, you would see that the DEA, the IRS and other agencies have threatened people who are not involved in any illegal activity in various states.

The Federal Govt itself said that no one was exempt from their determination to enforce FEDERAL not state law.

Just because you make a statement - that doesn't make it true.

I did not see any such assertion made.

And FWIW, Oakland cannot legally circumvent county and state law, which forbids industrial grows.

And, yes, lie to the IRS, it doesn't matter what your business is, they will come after you.

The issue is federal vs. state.

This had nothing about lying to the IRS - the IRS was refusing to allow deductions for employees - and then putting businesses into a situation in which they would violate IRS rules.

Landlords are told to whom they may rent, in violation of state regulations. They are threatened with asset forfeiture for renting to a business that is a legal entity in the state in which it is located.

If you want to argue none of this matters because of federal law, knock yourself out.

But the actual issue is federal vs state law.

If your state allows a federally illegal business, federal taxes are a problem if you have employees and make money.

If you are a landlord, the federal government said years ago that it can step in and regulate your "choice" of tenants, and also hold you liable for any federal crimes on your property.

Federal law trumps state laws.

The south lost.

If the south lost, why are marijuana laws applied in such a racist manner?

Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis said that states are the incubators of democracy.

But you're trying to claim that federal govt. is a dictatorship and there is no way for states to try to IMPROVE the laws of the land. To claim this is an issue in any way akin to states rights regarding slavery is ridiculous - following your logic, gays gaining the right to marriage in various states is the equivalent of slavery.

Yeah. That's a really stupid argument on your part.

But, okay. If you want to let this be about the total hypocrisy of the Obama administration regarding medical marijuana, go for it.

He has sided against science and for special interests on this issue. He has been a moral coward. He has kowtowed to money rather than dealt with the reality that the majority of the American population has supported legalization of medical marijuana for more than a decade.

His actions continue to allow law enforcement across this nation to arrest more than three quarters of a million people every year for simple possession of marijuana. It allows them to continue to target minorities in a way that has lasting consequences that some kid in a MacMansion will NEVER face.

If the south lost, why does the federal govt. continue to enforce laws that favor their brand of America?

...That's why it's no longer a crime to be gay in Texas... or anywhere else.

"why are marijuana laws applied in such a racist manner"?

Because all drug laws are inherently racist at a federal level? Oh wait, not true, different groups tend to have different inequal amounts of incarceration for various substances, because different groups have different use patterns. For example, cocaine vs crack, and abused pharmaceutical amphetamines vs. street meth, and the absolutely insane amounts of alcohol jailings and imprisonments.

"there is no way for states to try to IMPROVE the laws of the land"

...like holding literacy tests at the polls?
...like making abortion a crime?
...like making birth control a crime?
...like turning a blind eye to lynchings?
...like keeping schools segregated?
...like letting polluters dump waste?
...like making consensual sex between adults a crime?

All of these were "states" trying to "improve" things, all were reined in by the federal government. I could probably provide thousands more, if it'll help drive the point home... most of the above were more or less famous cases.

"gays gaining the right to marriage in various states is the equivalent of slavery."

It is, only from the other side.... *refusing* that right is akin to miscegenation laws that came from slavery. If states won't recognize marriages legal in other states, there's a strong 14th amendment case. Are you familiar with Loving? Now, if there was a *federal* law prohibiting same-sex marriage, that would be different, but there isn't one, so the states can still regulate that.

"total hypocrisy of the Obama administration regarding medical marijuana"... total red herring.

Thousands of safe, legal, law abiding, growers and patients have no problems growing and using their medicine, because they're abiding by the laws. ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_cannabis_in_the_United_States#California
"Across California there are an estimated 2,100 dispensaries, co-operatives, wellness clinics, and taxi delivery services in the sector known as “cannabusiness”. That is more than all the Starbucks, McDonald’s, and 7-Eleven outlets in the state put together."

Up here in Oregon, they're less plentiful, maybe about as many as Starbucks locations. There is no wide-spread crackdown on mmj, it much more like the crackdowns on "pain clinics" that are more or less sham fronts for industrial operations than individual persecution of all registered users and growers. Obey local and (most) federal laws, and there's no problem.

"If the south lost, why does the federal govt. continue to enforce laws that favor their brand of America? "

Because the south lost. Federal law trumps any "states rights" to declare that their law is more controlling than federal laws.

in regard to state law as ways to create change - when the Federal govt is stuck in Reagan mode, states can make changes for the better and hope to bring the Federal govt along... which is what has happened. but nevermind.

there's something to be said for not arguing with a brick wall.

cite please.

Here's the law re: 1000 feet:

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/21usc/860.htm

http://www.ednewscolorado.org/2012/01/13/31121-feds-warn-medical-marijuana-facilities-near-schools covers the federal laws, CO state laws, the intersection between the two, and the complexities of distances, and whether 1000 feet *compounds* offenses, or is considered an offense.

Here is a dispensary that is three blocks away from a nearby school.

It's more than 1000 feet by my calculations. It is .18 miles to get that 1000 feet.

I reset my odometer, and drive from the front part of the school, and then stop at the dispensary. Mileage is 0.2

It has passed the 1k feet by about 200 feet.

It's shut down because of that stupid school.

I think removal of school zones that we don't pay taxes on (such as private school) would make it possible for these dispensaries to return, legally. That school I mentioned is a private far-right religious school.

I refuse to recognize private school areas as school zones. Public school zones is what I respect.

Unless the private school starts paying out of their pocket, a reasonable fee to maintain it, otherwise, the concept of the school zone is removed.

The law does not specify distance by driving.

It also does not specify "to the front part of the school".

It also does not allow you to choose what is, and isn't, called a school.

So, get out a map, draw a series of circles circle from the *outermost* edges of each premise, and you will likely see where the law is possibly being violated.

Period.

They are denying the two key importance in this business:

Health care, and jobs.

Maybe possible tax revenue.

What more does the federal government want to deny us?

Thanks for the thread, kpete.

Last I heard, they wanted anyone who ever took even one hit of pot to spend the rest of their lives in maximum security prison.

then how about using the same votes to repeal the laws?

He's used reverse psychology to manipulate the "opposition" and he's now laughing up his sleeve.

Two democrats, two republicans. The Republicans are all in California so they are speaking out on this because they don't want to lose an election by siding with the prohibitionists.

It's about state-level politics.

Roll call vote to come, I hope.

Wow, though: The federal crackdown on medical marijuana is an issue on the House floor.

and you can bet that's why they brought this up.

they read the polls - they can see which way the wind is blowing. too bad they don't do something more substantial - as I mentioned below.

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/lamar-smith-out-of-touch-on-marijuana-legalization

HR 2306 is sitting in Smith's office and he has promised to never let it out of his committee.

The House of Representatives ought to deal with its own house - maybe they should have people testify about the health benefits of marijuana - and tell about the people the govt has killed b/c of this law - and let the public record exist that refutes Leonhart, Smith and the rest of the reactionaries in D.C.

Apple avoided 3 billion in taxes but the dispensary a block away is going to kill the american dream.

Time for a toke!

-p

Assuming of course that they use the DOJ to initiate a similar crackdown on state legal dispensaries.

Sure, then we can call them that.

One of the best.