While we wait... Ogden memo, musings about the legal process

[ftwendy]

I have heard so little in the days since AG Eric Holder's 12/8 testimony regarding the '09 ogden memo, and the fed's intention to hold off on chasing sick people and their caregivers in med states. Why? I thought the entire conversation was in our favor, and represents a rallying point of sorts... But I've heard nothing about it since then. Seems like a wasted opportunity, yes?

In another state's forum I was commenting about attorneys becoming the de facto nucleus of the medical movement, and how I think this is a mistake. Here are my thoughts:

The weakest link in every med state's chain is the attorneys: it is on their advice that most dispensaries close, shrinking the crowd, spreading fear, which focuses leo and perpetuates the boogeyman mentality. The simple fact is that most attorneys lack the courage to focus the law to reflect the voters intentions; in fact, from an attorneys point of view, it is counterproductive to behave like an activist for any reason other than building client lists and retainer accounts. It is in the lawyers best interest to see the pendulum swing back and forth while the AG resists the spirit of our law...

They talk like activists when they're at the podium, but the advice they provide in private feeds the system. Where is our referendum to define the terms of caregiver to patient transfers, and caregiver to caregiver? Nowhere that I've seen. Everything I see in print, or hear through the grapevine is just cows mooing about decisions made by a few old men in suits. We need to speak up and explain to the old men that they will lose their jobs if they continue to cater to the minority opinion that cannabis should remain a black market commodity. After all, a patient's medicine needs to be available for it to have any benefit. Right?

What are the pro's thoughts?? I'm lost here... How does one start the process of defining the law better to protect patients and caregivers? Is this a referendum? High school civics class is a foggy memory now - somebody please help me. Cheers, Ftw:sun

 

[ftwendy]

edit: the fed's STATED intention....

 

[ftwendy]

Now there's the Cole memo, dated 7/2011: this is why every dispensary shit themselves.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/01/medical-marijuana-memo-doj_n_888995.html

Here's another excellent article:


How does Holder's testimony on the 8th of this month change things since the Cole memo? I will ask an attorney if I can. Anybody else have thoughts on how this is being received by dispensaries?? Why are they still closing their doors?

To quote: "Although certainly a controversial subject and one on which reasonable people may and do disagree, there is no disputing the fact that in this as in so many other cases, the federal government is disregarding the sovereignty of states and seeking to impose its will on Americans in open and hostile defiance of constitutional principles."

Well stated. Makes me want to do something about this...

 

[sky high]

I see where the Fed is coming down on the dispensaries, but I've yet to see where the Fed is "chasing sick people and their caregivers" in med states.

From my reading/understanding, all of these "memos" have seperated out those who SELL weed in a retail scenario and those who are truly sick/personal users/growers.

I personally think such a message is huge and that many folks are missing the fact that >never< before has the fed given ANY nod of acceptance to those who use/grow marijuana in ANY scenario/situation.

To me...the saying "give em an inch and they will take a mile" sums it up completely.

IMO, it isn't the FED that should be running rampant over these dispensary folks, it should be the >patients< cleaning their own house of those who THREATEN their very existence via the operation of entities that are obviously THE sore spot in all of this with the Fed.

be safe, all

s h

 

[ftwendy]

The fed sending intimidating letters to dispensaries is a threat to the patients and caregivers because it represents another speed bump on the road to safe access. These laws are in place to define terms of protection. They are a shield... and the leo? Also a shield. Unfortunately, the cops are behaving like raiding parties against patients instead of like security to protect them. Patients, caregivers, hydro store owners....almost everyone I've talked to about this matter has first or second -hand stories of some form of harassment and intimidation.

The US govt has overstepped its bounds -pissing all over the 10th amendment- when it begins to make policy decisions that attempt to supersede local federal regulations. While I agree with Sky about people needing to police their own concerns, the point needs to be made that a cardholding citizen still has SO many legal worries after outing himself to the government and attempting to do things above the table, that these laws seem flimsy, and unlikely to provide the protections that the majority of people believe are important to making the laws USEFUL.

Dispensaries are getting the stink eye because they have found ways to behave just like the fortune 500's: they pay minimal taxes by justifying massive deductions and exemptions. The IRS, DOJ etc, complain that accepting tax revenue from a taxpayer who is following state laws somehow violates fed law by validating illegal activity is pure hogwash. The guys in washington are pissed b/c they aren't getting their's through in taxes, lobbying, or campaign contributions. This is a money thing... and bad decisions are being made out of confusion, spite and jealousy.

The 10th amendment to the US constitution is very clear in it's language that the states are to regulate themselves on matters beyond the scope of the constitution: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

The mere existence of a US federal agency that is designed to police matters already addressed by a state law is a waste of time and money, and it is illegal under our constitution. Pure and simple: the constitution has nothing to say about the production or consumption of ANY substance, when each state took initiative and defined mmj laws they were taking care of that responsibility.

 

[sky high]

Dispensaries here in CO have caused NOTHING BUT additional regulation for patients since they came on the scene. This regulation that HAS TAKEN AWAY MY RIGHTS as a patient so that someone else (who prolly isn't a patient at all) can open a dispensary and play drug dealer...

fuck that! I hope they shut em all down and return this program to the patients as it was originally intended to be before the dispensaries were granted their monopoly to operate and patient rights were taken away so a few could benefit/profit. (including the greedy fucks @ the State)

Blows me away that folks are protesting the 1% and then support such corporate entities (all dispensaries are more than likely LLC's)

This should ALL be under the table, IMO (as it always has been). Buying/playing into this retail sales/Gov't controlllled dispensary model is bad for all patients!

be safe, be well

s h

 

[ftwendy]

And what are the 'unconnected' to do? Suffer till they meet the super hookup? Just doesn't seem to satisfy the spirit of the law, IMO.

I agree that the scene in CO is a mess. How can we prevent it from happening elsewhere, and at the same time promote access? I'm at a loss here, but there seems to be some middle ground between the two poles of walmart weed and alley grass. Well, I fucking hope there is. :)

 

[sky high]

If they are smart enough to find a doc they can find a hook. Fuck..everyone and his brother now has a garden.

As far as CO...it's the dispensaries that go against our original amendment and the will of the voters. There was NO dispensary provision in our law...it was something born out of Cali's law and folks are just greedy/want it all...so it took off like a rocket here even though there was no rules/regs or laws that addressed it.

HB1284 (dispensary regulation) was an afterthought/reaction to the push of greed...not a furthering of "access. How the fuck could it be when they TOOK AWAY THE RIGHTS of ALL PATIENTS to hook with other patients and gave a monopoly on sales to the dispensaries???

It wasn't/isn't about "access". Money and tax collection are the game, not a concern over "access".

The movement here was intended to allow people to grow and help others grow, not as a mechanism for the STATE to profit via the removal of rights from the patient-base.

Dunno what other states are doing...but if they follow this model the patients are in danger of loosing their personal rights as we have here.