It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NEWS: Feds Enforcing Medical Marijuana Law

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 05:01 AM
In California, one of 10 states allowing the medical use of marijuana a round of sweeping arrests went down. This on the heels of a new Supreme Court ruling that Federal drug laws supercede state laws allowing medical use of marijuani. Local law enforcement are cited as saying that this operation is unrelated, but two of the arrests included a Dr. and spouse.
First Assistant U.S. Attorney Lawrence Brown in Sacramento said the Supreme Court ruling "lays to rest any question whether federal authorities have jurisdiction."

California is one of 10 states that allow the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes.

In San Francisco, drug agents conducted searches of three pot clubs and more than 20 homes and businesses Wednesday, capping a more than two-year investigation into an alleged marijuana trafficking ring.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

I think the statement by Lawrence Brown makes it clear what is going on here, despite the denial of others. Quite frankly, though I would never use marijuana myself, I am applauled that my tax dollars in the fight against drugs are being used in a case like this. The fight against drugs has a lot more serious issues than medical use of marijuana. Go fight the fight where it's needed and leave alone the people who are suffering, or aiding those who are.

posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 05:10 AM
Enforcing the medicanal bud laws would mean that they are protecting them, not nulling them. Its more like they are pissing on the state medicanal pot laws, not enforcing them. I'll stop before I get political.

posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 09:06 AM
This just goes back to the beggining of Political Issues. We have now seperated Church and State why not seperate all laws ?

posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 09:08 AM
What ever happen to doctor patient privilege?

I guess it WAS the doctor.

[edit on 23-6-2005 by SpittinCobra]

posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 09:27 AM
No where in the Constitution does it say that the Supreme Court has the final say on matters of all laws. It may be so for Federal Law, but then again "change the law." But consider such masterpieces as the Dred Scott Decision:

"Slavery is founded on the selfishness of man's nature--opposition to it on his love of justice. These principles are in eternal antagonism; and when brought into collision so fiercely as slavery extension brings them, shocks and throes and convulsions must ceaselessly follow." (Abraham Lincoln) [1]

During the 1850's in the United States, Southern support of slavery and Northern opposition to it collided more violently than ever before over the case of Dred Scott, a black slave from Missouri who claimed his freedom on the basis of seven years of residence in a free state and a free territory. When the predominately proslavery Supreme Court of the United States heard Scott's case and declared that not only was he still a slave but that the main law guaranteeing that slavery would not enter the new midwestern territories of the United States was unconstitutional, it sent America into convulsions. The turmoil would end only after a long and bloody civil war in which an important issue was the question of slavery and its extension into America's unorganized territories. The Supreme Court's ruling in Dred Scott v. Sandford helped hasten the arrival of the American Civil War, primarily by further polarizing the already tense relations between Northerners and Southerners.


The humanitarian concerns are nonetheless poignant, when comparing the Dred Scott decision with the hemp decision. One should note Clarence Thomas and his dissent. Today the public is far more dumbed down and asleep, and will tend to be either arrogant defenders of misdeeds here from the government, or cannon fodder taking their chances with some illusion of safety in numbers in an increasingly Orwellian and centralized monstrousity.

In this case the slavish devotion of our government to corporate coal tar pharmaceuticals and artificial rope in the form of Dupont nylon, trumps an otherwise huge and life supportive biomass. Why let the peasants have anything, when you can tax and work them to death even when they think they are on pleasant street? Hello, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and even the Bible Washington used for his inauguration was printed on hemp paper. Our so called leaders are so brain dead but even one of their own fellow but slightly less brain dead Clarence Thomas objects to this! Incredible it is.

[edit on 23-6-2005 by SkipShipman]

posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 09:42 AM
In a capitalist society your body is your own to use as you see fit, as long as there are no direct trespassing of others with it.

These drug laws are based on the notion that the state has a vested interest in your body, ie. partial or complete ownership of it. I think that is called slavery. This was outlawed in the US over a century ago.

The US government is not my parent, your parent or anyone's parent. It should be the servant and tool of the people and not a dictator over them. Frankly my parents were infinitely more sensible and intelligent than the US government.

This government isn't even securing it's own southern border. This is the most fundamental job a nation has, it is what defines where it is and where it is not. It has absolutely no business invading the private use by adults of any non-environmentally hazardous substance they so choose.

These government officials should be put down like the rabid dogs they have become.

posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 09:46 AM
Federal law definitely needs to be changed on this matter.

There are bills before Congress, but they probably don't have enough support at the current time. I think public opinion will really be swayed when the pictures of cancer and AIDS patients getting hauled off to jail start getting coverage.

posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 11:06 PM
Its about time. WHile we could go on about the pro's and cons of cannabis medicine, the simple fact is that most of these operators are using it as an excuse to cultivate. San Fran has what like 40+ registered clubs????? Give me a break. One or two would be more like it and have city controll over them. Face it, had the program been ran in a more legit fashion and not out of controll as it seems the feds may have backed off.

posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 11:16 PM
They wouldnt have to run it like that if the gvmt would allow such growing for medic use.

I have a strong no drug policy, but in regard to it actually being proven that people who have glock coma(sp?) can see a bit better, or someone with cancer can feel a tad better, or someone with aids that can eat, I am all for it...

We have to think about pros and cons of this, maybe we should take other drugs off the market as well since they are being misused.. Such as vicadins, and perks, and so on..

People are selling those the same as drugdealers sell weed.. show me a diffrence..

And as for this post about the police going after people who arent actually a treat to society.. Maybe they should put as much time into other crimes like people getting killed and such, instead of chasing a few aids victims and old people.

[edit on 6/23/2005 by ThichHeaded]

[edit on 6/23/2005 by ThichHeaded]

posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 11:36 PM
I guess we need to put an end to the sale and use of ALL painkillers since many of them get used illegally. The US government is absolutely clueless and useless at best. Medical marijuana is no different than any other medicine that requires a script. Ignorance runs in abundance in Washington.

posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 12:29 AM
Your government is run by and for corporations.
Medical Marijuana is a HUGE threat to the pharmaceutical industry, who's ONLY interest is making MONEY, not healing sick people.

We are supposed to live in a democracy...

Proposition 215 (HS 11362.5) was passed in 1996 by a 56% majority of California voters in November 1996. That is more California votes than Presidents Clinton, Bush or most other elected official have received.

If that law was put to the ballot now I would bet my life that it would pass with more than 56%...

This is not just a POT issue, it is our federal fascist government siding with a corporation over the choice of the people.
It just proves that democracy and the vote are worthless and the feds will just ignore the peoples wishes as and when they see fit.
They control your life in more ways than you realise. The freedom you have is just on loan, when they want it back they'll take it with interest.

But of course the gov makes sure the majority of people remain ignorant on the use and effects of Marijuana. So the only people paying any attention are those that it effects. So again another raping of our freedom and personal choice goes by without anybody realising the big picture.

You might not agree with smoking pot, but I do hope you support the democratic process (as crappy as it is) and when the majority vote YES, shouldn't it be so?

How dare these government/corpoate idiots tell us what to do with our bodies!


posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 12:46 AM
Right now I'd like to see a ballot initative to remove the Supreme Court. They have pretty much become a useless lot.

posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 12:49 AM

Right now I'd like to see a ballot initative to remove the Supreme Court. They have pretty much become a useless lot.

Now there is a DAMN good idea there..

Now all we goto do is.... Nevermind I might get thrown in jail or worse.

posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 04:56 AM

Originally posted by Indy
Right now I'd like to see a ballot initative to remove the Supreme Court. They have pretty much become a useless lot.

I'll third that! Especially after the other story about them ruling that local government can eminent domain your property for private development. These people have a wild imagination in interpreting our laws at this point, focusing on one point in the Constitution and twisiting it to violate the rest of our rights. This is not the first time the protections given by our forefathers have been twisted by the Supreme Court and I'm sure it won't be the last.

As for the use of medical marijuana when States have voted it as the will of the people to allow, this is an outrage. I would never use it myself, but I am finding more and more people who suffer serious chronic pain that Drs. refuse to alleviate with prescription drugs as it is. In the case of medical use of marijuana, from my understanding the people who benefit from it are unable to find relief through any other available medication.

Ultimately though my largest gripe is the fact that they are even making an issue and example of this when there are so many more serious drug crimes and other crimes that are not being addressed adequately.

posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 05:37 AM
This mainly has to do with the fact the marijauna is scheduled as a class 1 drug (having no medicinal or theraputic use, and a high potential for abuse). This puts it above HEROIN, COCAIN, morphine, barbituates, codeine, ephedra, blah, blah, blah.
Everyone keeps thinking that common sense will come in to effect sooner or later, it just seems to be later and later. No medicinal use... seriously. LOL. Then why are so many people complaining. Hundreds of/and thousands of people can't take prescription drugs because of side effects; like blindness, allegeric reactions, naseau, DEATH.
For more info, google NORML for support and ONDCP for propoganda. ONDCP is federal funded and supported while NORML is grass roots and constantly harassed. Wha Happen?

Who does it hurt, and who ever died from it.

posted on Jun, 26 2005 @ 08:11 AM
So the Feds are busting these doctors and clubs for what - possession with intent to ease pain and suffering? It is patently ridiculous, and another example of how big oil and big pharmaceutical companies are using their lackeys, Bush, Gonzales, and the USSC, to control crucial decisions regarding our health, comfort, and welfare. This is not government by the people for the people, it is government by big business for big business. Oil and Opiates are their principle products, and we are being forced to consume them by the very people who control their manufacture, and reap the profits from their sale!

posted on Jun, 26 2005 @ 08:28 AM
I wish they'd just make Canibus legal like Cigarettes.

posted on Jun, 26 2005 @ 08:44 PM
Since the feds have no jurisdiction in a state matter wouldn't that mean that anyone detained in such a case would be the same as kidnapping? And the feds certainly don't have a right to enter the properties of these people so trespassing applies as well. Since this is out of their jurisdiction any federal agent that acts on this is powerless and a criminal. So I would assume people would have a right to use force to defend themselves from a potential kidnapper. The feds have no more jurisdiction than if a state trooper went to Washington to arrest a senator. He'd be treated as a criminal as well. Feds should be looked at in the very same light.

new topics

top topics


log in