U.S. Attorneys Should Back Off Medical-Cannibis Dispensaries

Jacob Bell

New Member
The federal crackdown on medical-marijuana dispensaries in California is wrong – a wrong policy and a wrong use of federal power to block social change.

President Obama was supposed to be for change. He appointed a drug-policy adviser, Gil Kerlikowske, who announced that the War on Drugs was "over." That was an exaggeration, but for medical marijuana it seemed to be so.

In October 2009, the Justice Department told U.S. attorneys they "should not focus federal resources" on "individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana."

For some unexplained reason, that has changed. Last week the four U.S. attorneys in California sent letters to 16 dispensaries demanding they close within 45 days or face prosecution and confiscation of their property. Hundreds more letters are going out.

In Spokane, U.S. Attorney Michael Ormsby sent such letters months ago, and all dispensaries there have been shut down. Spokane patients are now buying their supplies on the illicit market – at almost double the price.

The U.S. attorney for Western Washington, Jenny Durkan, has not done this here – thank you! – and dispensaries in Seattle remain open with the open support of city government. We hope Durkan relays to her superiors in Washington, D.C., that closing dispensaries, seizing property and imprisoning owners would not be supported by people here.

Our political leaders, particularly our senators, representatives and governor, should push back. They have to tell the Obama people: Don't do this.

Washington was one of the first three states to legalize medical marijuana, along with Oregon and California. All did it by popular vote. Over the past decade and a half, 16 states plus the District of Columbia have made this decision, 10 of them by popular vote. More such votes will be coming in 2012 – in Montana and possibly in Idaho, Ohio and other states.

Change is happening, and from the bottom up. It is good change. It is peaceful. It helps people and it respects their rights.

The Obama administration should let it be.

abb37.jpg


News Hawk- Jacob Ebel 420 MAGAZINE
Source: seattletimes.nwsource.com
Contact: Contact Us
Copyright: The Seattle Times Company
Website: U.S. attorneys should back off medical-marijuana dispensaries
 
It is impossible for the DOJ not to get involved. The spirit of California's 1996 Prop 215 and subsequently Prop 420 was not to enable an industry but was to enable a compassionate vehicle to deliver medical cannabis to sick people.

In California, Props 215/410 have morphed into an industry, part of California's largest(1). I have seen it grow here in California since its beginning in 1996. It's like the wild, wild west. More people than not knew this had to happen

The DOJ is the sheriff that has to deal with the Medical Marijuana business and get it back within the parameters defined by Prop 215/420.

Dispensaries like "Harbor" here in Oakland and San Jose invested millions in modern "Starbuck" like facilities. The DOJ says they owe $2.4 million in back taxes because they say an illegal (2) entity may not take business deductions.

I've heard a small, select group of long established non-profit dispensaries in the Bay Area are being left alone. I'm assuming the DOJ will handle the rest of the state in the same manner. This will allow Prop 215 to get back to its roots.

The Sheriff's in town, guns a blazin!

1) CNBC.com estimates about $40 billion a year.
2) Federal law always trumps State law.


:peace::amen::peace:
 
Back
Top Bottom