Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Infant Removed From Home Due To Possibility Of Future Armed Robbery At The Home

page: 1
31

log in

join
+7 more 
posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 08:16 AM
link   
This story involves medical marijuana, so I hope it doesn’t get removed.

This sets a very scary precedent, that really could affect anyone.

This couple had their infant daughter removed by CPS. Their reasoning? Do to them being licensed care givers, and growing marijuana, their home “may” become targets for armed robbers, putting the infant at risk.

So, due to the fact that they may be robbed at some point, their home is unsafe for the infant.

Does that not mean that anyone could have their child removed for this reason?

When I heard about this story, it just floored me. CPS could find absolutely nothing else wrong with the home or the family.
The Mom's version here: Mom
News Article: News

This truly is madness. And just makes me very angry.

If this is allowed to stay, please let's just discuss the actually reason, the possible break in, and what that could mean for any family in the future.




posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by chiefsmom
 


just someone with authority pushing their personal moral ideals. Sickening..


What about rich people? so they aren't targets? jewelry, etc..

should someone rob those CPS agents houses, repeatedly?. kidding. IRONIC.. and Karmic
edit on 19-9-2013 by HanzHenry because: add words



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 08:43 AM
link   
I don't see how they cover their very obvious issue bias if they aren't also doing this for, say, Jewelry store owners who may have millions in stones or other things in a home Safe or people with an extensive and high value gun collection? There is one in Oklahoma that is advertised on billboards down the interstate for a firearms collection/display and knowing that state for rural areas? As likely as not, some sort of home/business combination on it. (I think I recall hearing it was, too). So, gee... better yank any kids he has. Imagine that target value for a robber.

How about shopkeepers who happen to have a small pharmacy and live above their store? Uh Oh... No kids for them either. Robbery magnet right there. Goodness!



Or...they could just admit, there is one ISSUE involved here they have the problem with and not the concept of valuables in the home as a whole or part of a business.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Hello everyone
Im from Grand Rapids, MI, and personally i believe that the state has a hard on for screwing over people who have medical marijuana cards and care giver cards. Although, in the city i live weed is decriminalized. During the decimalizing process the state attorney tried his best to get it repealed.

West Michigan = Dutch Mafia vs the people.





~Frexmil2
edit on 19-9-2013 by Frexmil2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 08:49 AM
link   
CPS and the judge both broke Michigan state law and should be punished accordingly. This is happening a lot here in Michigan and has happened to people I know. If the state finds out you are a medical patient and you have small children you should be very worried. What many do not realize is how much it benefits the state funding when a child is taken from their homes and put into foster care. I believe that most of these cases are only happening so that the state can bring more income to the family courts and to their own pockets. It is completely idiotic to say that Medical patients are more at risk for robberies and such. If that was the case they would need to remove children from homes with nice cars and big TV's and many more things. And this right here is how they are getting away with it.

www.mlive.com...


Green claims that her daughter was removed from the home due to safety concerns. The fear was that because the family had marijuana in the house that it would make them a target for crime.

"I was told that in a case in 2010, a guy broke into a house and a little girl was killed," she said. "Because there are marijuana plants in the house, they said that it would put a caregiver's house under greater risk of being robbed at gun point. That was the eminent danger that [CPS] saw in coming to remove my baby."


Here is the actual law that was broken by the state CPS and the judge who ok'd the whole thing. No matter what we do the government seems to find a way to control us with everything. It is pathetic what the State of Michigan and CPS is doing.


www.legislature.mi.gov...(S(oi13so55scpsvkein51c0nv5))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-333-26424

A person shall not be denied custody or visitation of a minor for acting in accordance with this act, unless the person's behavior is such that it creates an unreasonable danger to the minor that can be clearly articulated and substantiated.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Yes, the issue's you both present are what concerns me, besides the obvious bias.
What about driving the most car jacked vehicle with a child in it?
Having your 80" television in front of the window for all to see?

Just asinine, and I really hope the family wins their case and decides to sue the state. They really deserve it in this case.
edit on 19-9-2013 by chiefsmom because: wording



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 08:57 AM
link   
The problem is the judge...he's effeminent....here in Texas we would assign extra vigil for the household....thus deterring the threat of a future robbery. Family first, you idiot magistrate....get some he-man about yourself.
There's a thousand ways to help the future security of the home these days with tech.....I'm ashamed of that justice of the peace weeny.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by chiefsmom
 


I hope they win it as well. I am composing a letter to all the lawmakers in Michigan and the attorney general in regards to this matter. I am a disabled vet and I am forced to live in pain and misery because I am too afraid of losing my rights as a father. What they are doing is wrong and they should be held criminally responsible for their actions. All of those poor children being pulled out of good homes over what 'could' happen and not for any legitimate reasons.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by chiefsmom
 


I think we’re witnessing the future of Law Enforcement…..pre-emptive enforcement. In another recent thread there is a judge trying to give a guy more time in jail for crimes he has yet to commit.

Prior to all of this, look how our government in US began targeting ‘potential’ domestic terrorists! Potential terrorist??


During the past several years, I have witnessed a dramatic shift in the focus of law enforcement training. Law enforcement courses have moved away from a local community focus to a federally dominated model of complete social control. Most training I have attended over the past two years have been sponsored by Department of Homeland Security (DHS), namely the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

No matter what topic the training session concerns, every DHS sponsored course I have attended over the past few years never fails to branch off into warnings about potential domestic terrorists in the community. While this may sound like a valid officer and community safety issue, you may be disturbed to learn how our Federal government describes a typical domestic terrorist.

These federal trainers describe the dangers of extremists and militia groups roaming the community and hiding in plain sight, ready to attack. Officers are instructed how to recognize these domestic terrorists by their behavior, views and common characteristics. State data bases are kept to track suspected domestic terrorists and officers are instructed on reporting procedures to state and federal agencies.
continued

We all risk being targeted for things LE believes we MIGHT do.

Keep an eye on this issue. I think we'll see more.

edit on 19-9-2013 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by chiefsmom
 


Doesn't this sound like minority report? Go after someone BEFORE a crime is committed?This is crazy.Under this thinking you really could lock up, confiscate and or charge anyone at all with a crime that never happened just because it COULD happen.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


I'm really afraid that you are right.
I have been posting this story everywhere I can think of, just to try to get people to wake up. This is a very scary direction the government is heading, and we need to do whatever we can, to try to stop them.
I'm also going to do what US above your post is doing.
Sending letters demanding to know why this is ok. Why are they not doing something.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Compared to other drugs marijuana is not worth very much. Nor does it precipitate the "do anything to get it" addiction of other drugs.

If there is any real concern to this claim then shouldnt they be removing children from homes that have much more valuable and very addictive drugs in them like prescribed Oxycontin for instance? Homes are broken into everyday for oxy and oxy like drugs. People are killed everyday for oxy and oxy like drugs. They are both very valuable and extremely addictive.

There is no reason whatsoever for anyone to break into a home to steal personal use amounts of marijuana.

I hate it when the people in positions of power so obviously have no clue about that which they portend to lord over. No different than letting a six year old head the CDC.
edit on 19-9-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 09:50 AM
link   
When they start coming for your kids, they better come WELL- armed with LOTS of back-up.
If you don't wanna meet the mama bear you don't f**** with the cubs!



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 10:11 AM
link   

whitewave
When they start coming for your kids, they better come WELL- armed with LOTS of back-up.
If you don't wanna meet the mama bear you don't f**** with the cubs!


Nailed it.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by chiefsmom
 


Since they were growing their medicinal product within the house, probably not to many people knew of it. Now that the story has been published because of this, many now know. CPS just made this family a target.

I would be moving elsewhere if I were them.



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 07:52 PM
link   

TDawgRex
reply to post by chiefsmom
 


Since they were growing their medicinal product within the house, probably not to many people knew of it. Now that the story has been published because of this, many now know. CPS just made this family a target.

I would be moving elsewhere if I were them.


and sending the moving costs to the state via my lawyer
this is ridiculous.



posted on Sep, 23 2013 @ 07:22 AM
link   
Well, the couple had an emergency hearing Friday. They were denied custody again, but received unlimited visitation rights. What a crock!!!!

They are going back to court on the 7th of October, and plan to take this to trial.

Update



posted on Oct, 29 2013 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Well, it is complete BS what the couple had to agree to, but at least Baby Brie is finally home!!!!
Back Home






top topics



 
31

log in

join