Word from the Obama Admin is coming on mmj

[JJScorpio]

After reading the posts here I have to wonder if pot smoking makes people look at the negative side of things, or if it's just a persons nature. Personally, I see this as a good thing.

Someone made a comment that the raids continued even after Obama asked they stop. I have yet to see a raid that didn't violate some other law....

 

[JefersonAirplan]

Uh, that is a memo "suggesting they stop it". NOT an executive order.

 

[movingtocally]

This is a near replica of the repeal of alcohol prohibition. Look it up! I didn't think Obama had it in him and while I am still skeptical of his adminstration overall, I see this as a huge step forward. Everything else he's done is crap but I'll give props where they are deserved.

The wise grower will look toward expansion and setting the path toward becoming a legal grower. Al Capone was busted for being an illegal alcohol bootlegger (for TAX issues) and that cleared the way for big business to take over the alcohol industry. Cannabis is no different. Those that position themselves to take advantage of their skills (and stay out of jail in the meantime) can profit immensely when the shift takes place. It is starting.

When legalization occurs, your small garden thats been very profitable will become unprofitable. You will need to capture your local market with larger volume, high quality, yet smaller profit margins just like any other business. BUT you will be able to do what you love and still prosper if you can take advantage. The winds of opinion are starting to shift. Take note.

I think that's wayyyy down the road though. Realistically I don't think it will be universally legalized for at least a decade-would you agree with that? And so I'd imagine the price won't drop for some time. I don't see people selling 2500 primo dollar pounds in five years or anything.

 

[SeniorBuzz]

After reading the posts here I have to wonder if pot smoking makes people look at the negative side of things, or if it's just a persons nature. Personally, I see this as a good thing.

Someone made a comment that the raids continued even after Obama asked they stop. I have yet to see a raid that didn't violate some other law....

 

[Rainman]

Incredibly positive and inspiring news!! What a great time.

 

[movingtocally]

well, I'll ask more directly

well, I'll ask more directly

question for you caregivers, etc-how much longer till you guys think you'll start feeling the pinch per pound?

 

[the_man]

I don't see it being legalized on the federal level for a long time if ever

It is going to turn into a prescription drug on the Federal level if anything

as for state legalized it will have to been done by voter ballet which all states do not have

it is going to be a long hard fight in states that don't have voter initiatives

 

[quadracer]

MEMORANDUM FOR SELECTED UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS

FROM: David W. Ogden, Deputy Attorney General

SUBJECT: Investigations and Prosecutions in States Authorizing the Medical Use of Marijuana

This memorandum provides clarification and guidance to federal prosecutors in States that have enacted laws authorizing the medical use of marijuana. These laws vary in their substantive provisions and in the extent of state regulatory oversight, both among the enacting States and among local jurisdictions within those States. Rather than developing different guidelines for every possible variant of state and local law, this memorandum provides uniform guidance to focus federal investigations and prosecutions in these States on core federal enforcement priorities.

The Department of Justice is committed to the enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act in all States. Congress has determined that marijuana is a dangerous drug, and the illegal distribution and sale of marijuana is a serious crime and provides a significant source of revenue to large-scale criminal enterprises, gangs, and cartels. One timely example underscores the importance of our efforts to prosecute significant marijuana traffickers: marijuana distribution in the United States remains the single largest source of revenue for the Mexican cartels.

The Department is also committed to making efficient and rational use of its limited investigative and prosecutorial resources. In general, United States Attorneys are vested with “plenary authority with regard to federal criminal matters” within their districts. USAM 9-2.001. In exercising this authority, United States Attorneys are “invested by statute and delegation from the Attorney General with the broadest discretion in the exercise of such authority.” Id. This authority should, of course, be exercised consistent with Department priorities and guidance.

The prosecution of significant traffickers of illegal drugs, including marijuana, and the disruption of illegal drug manufacturing and trafficking networks continues to be a core priority in the Department’s efforts against narcotics and dangerous drugs, and the Department’s investigative and prosecutorial resources should be directed towards these objectives. As a general matter, pursuit of these priorities should not focus federal resources in your States on individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana. For example, prosecution of individuals with cancer or other serious illnesses who use marijuana as part of a recommended treatment regimen consistent with applicable state law, or those caregivers in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state law who provide such individuals with marijuana, is unlikely to be an efficient use of limited federal resources. On the other hand, prosecution of commercial enterprises that unlawfully market and sell marijuana for profit continues to be an enforcement priority of the Department. To be sure, claims of compliance with state or local law may mask operations inconsistent with the terms, conditions, or purposes of those laws, and federal law enforcement should not be deterred by such assertions when otherwise pursuing the Department’s core enforcement priorities.

Typically, when any of the following characteristics is present, the conduct will not be in clear and unambiguous compliance with applicable state law and may indicate illegal drug trafficking activity of potential federal interest:

*
unlawful possession or unlawful use of firearms;
*
violence;
*
sales to minors;
*
financial and marketing activities inconsistent with the terms, conditions, or purposes of state law, including evidence of money laundering activity and/or financial gains or excessive amounts of cash inconsistent with purported compliance with state or local law;
*
amounts of marijuana inconsistent with purported compliance with state or local law;
*
illegal possession or sale of other controlled substances; or
*
ties to other criminal enterprises.

Of course, no State can authorize violations of federal law, and the list of factors above is not intended to describe exhaustively when a federal prosecution may be warranted. Accordingly, in prosecutions under the Controlled Substances Act, federal prosecutors are not expected to charge, prove, or otherwise establish any state law violations. Indeed, this memorandum does not alter in any way the Department’s authority to enforce federal law, including laws prohibiting the manufacture, production, distribution, possession, or use of marijuana on federal property. This guidance regarding resource allocation does not “legalize” marijuana or provide a legal defense to a violation of federal law, nor is it intended to create any privileges, benefits, or rights, substantive or procedural, enforceable by any individual, party or witness in any administrative, civil, or criminal matter. Nor does clear and unambiguous compliance with state law or the absence of one or all of the above factors create a legal defense to a violation of the Controlled Substances Act. Rather, this memorandum is intended solely as a guide to the exercise of investigative and prosecutorial discretion.

Finally, nothing herein precludes investigation or prosecution where there is a reasonable basis to believe that compliance with state law is being invoked as a pretext for the production or distribution of marijuana for purposes not authorized by state law. Nor does this guidance preclude investigation or prosecution, even when there is clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state law, in particular circumstances where investigation or prosecution otherwise serves important federal interests.

Your offices should continue to review marijuana cases for prosecution on a case-by-case basis, consistent with the guidance on resource allocation and federal priorities set forth herein, the consideration of requests for federal assistance from state and local law enforcement authorities, and the Principles of Federal Prosecution.

cc: All United States Attorneys

Lanny A. Breuer
Assistant Attorney General Criminal Division

B. Todd Jones
United States Attorney
District of Minnesota
Chair, Attorney General’s Advisory Committee

Michele M. Leonhart
Acting Administrator
Drug Enforcement Administration

H. Marshall Jarrett
Director
Executive Office for United States Attorneys

Kevin L. Perkins
Assistant Director
Criminal Investigative Division
Federal Bureau of Investigation

 

[quadracer]

A lot of difference in making an on the record statement, and handing down a new set of specific legal guidelines. The issuance of actual legal guidelines is a follow through of the 'on the record statements'.

Tell that to the people jailed under Obama for non-violent marijuana offenses.

are you drawing this conclusion having read the new list of legal guidelines, of are you drawing these conclusions based on an opinion stated by the author of the news article?

Yes, and from Raich v. Ashcroft, which granted the federal government authority to basically do what they want in terms of enforcing drug laws.

policy changes do not happen over night, and an announcement of an intent to change policy is not a change in policy. The issuance of these legal guidelines is the end result of many hours of debate and discussion about how to best implement the changes they mandated in march, and is the beginning of the Obama administration following through.

Yeah they've been saying it for awhile. Here's what Dale Gieringer has to say:

While it is certainly encouraging that the Obama administration
has committed to writing the AGs declared policy of respecting state
medical marijuana laws, the proof will be in the pudding.
Just a week ago, federal prosecutors in San Diego appeared to
violate the policy by filing charges against a pair of San Diego
dispensary operators, James Dean Stacy of Movement in Action in Vista
and Joesph Nunes of Green Kross. In both cases, DEA agents with
doctor's recommendations made small controlled buys of a few grams of
medical marijuana. Neither case would normally have merited federal
attention, were it not for San Diego's efforts to pursue medical
marijuana providers. Whether their actions were actually illegal
under state law was a matter that should properly have been decided
in state, not federal, court.
Last August, two Lake County defendants, Scott Feil and Tom
Carter, were likewise indicted on federal charges for medical
marijuana offenses in apparent disregard of the AG's earlier
statements.
Note that the new Obama policy has a glaring loophole,
emphasizing that "prosecutors have wide discretion in choosing which
cases to pursue, and ... it is not a good use of federal manpower to
prosecute those who are without a doubt in compliance with state law.
" The salient question is, who decides what is 'without a doubt' in
compliance with state law? As shown by the recent statements of LA's
DA and City Attorney, there exist significant doubts about the
legality of most dispensaries in California.
It remains to be seen how far the administration's new policy
guidelines will go to prevent further abuses, when what is really
needed is fundamental reform of federal laws and regulations.
- D. Gieringer, Cal NORML

Legalization of Marijuana is going to be a PROCESS not an EVENT.

Well this is about medical marijuana and the federal interpretation of voter approved initiatives, not legalizing marijuana. The EVENT was getting Obama into office, to uphold his campaign promises, which hasn't happened yet.

 

[SeniorBuzz]

by far the best opportunity for a CA, non-violent, state prisoner, is the CA budget//prison space problems. 42,000, allegedly non-violent felons are in the process of being released early, without probation.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Tell that to the people jailed under Obama for non-violent marijuana offenses.

Why??
I'm sure that they, more than anyone, know that there is A lot of difference in making an on the record statement, and handing down a new set of specific legal guidelines. The issuance of actual legal guidelines is a follow through of the 'on the record statements'.

That's why they were jailed, no specific guidelines had yet been issued, or they were not in compliance.

Yes, and from Raich v. Ashcroft, which granted the federal government authority to basically do what they want in terms of enforcing drug laws.

So you are making assumptions based on other policy documents which this one supersedes, and on your understanding of this document. right on. I think you are a bit off base, and absolutely jumping to conclusion.

Yeah they've been saying it for awhile. Here's what Dale Gieringer has to say:

In response to Dale, I say... Dispensaries should obey the laws under which they operate. and... This is still the first step of Obama following through on the statements made in March... lol

Well this is about medical marijuana and the federal interpretation of voter approved initiatives, not legalizing marijuana. The EVENT was getting Obama into office, to uphold his campaign promises, which hasn't happened yet.

Medical Marijuana is a step in the legalization process. In fact, recognizing it as medicine and treating it like a pharmaceutical IS LEGALIZATION. It is legalization with regulation, but it would still make medical use legal. Legalizing the use of marijuana as medicine on a federal level is a PROCESS not an EVENT.

Legalization on the whole will be a process.


Upholding campaign promises is NOT an EVENT, it is a process which IS HAPPENING.

You youngsters are spoiled by microwaves and email... You think everything should be instant... some things progress over time, get used to it... Expecting everything to be hot and ready to eat in 5 minutes is only ever going to disappoint you.

 

[Noobian]

Very good news. This is the next step towards getting the Federal laws changed for good. For all you Obama haters out there this is one thing that you CANNOT deny he's done better than his predecessor. Hate on that

 

[DIGITALHIPPY]

its becoming a messy scene here in cali....
we need some guidance.

 

[Anti]

Seeing negatives is evolutionarily advantageous

Seeing negatives is evolutionarily advantageous

After reading the posts here I have to wonder if pot smoking makes people look at the negative side of things, or if it's just a persons nature.

[rant]It's just animal nature. Preparing for disaster does more to enhance your survivability than hoping for a better tomorrow. Lots of German Jews heard Hitler speaking and hoped for a better tomorrow. Others heard the speech, and prepared for disaster. By and large, one group survived, one did not.

Over millions of generations, those who hope for a better tomorrow are not surviving long to reproduce, or being selected as mates nearly as much. There is hope, however. We can look at ourselves and at things as they are, without flinching, and the very knowledge of self will be its own savior.[/rant]

Good for us! We've made a symbolic gesture! People like symbols. They make them comfortable. If new symbols being introduced calms the herd enough to allow for new legislation, I'm for it.



But I'm still watching.

 

[imnotcrazy]

Do any of you realize the gravity of this statement.... I have a funny feeling come November we may have a few more states goin to MMJ. Several were waiting for this to happen before they went MMJ and had the DEA/Feds running around countering what they did on a state level. Two or three states on the East Coast already have the law drawn up.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

.

[rant]It's just animal nature. Preparing for disaster does more to enhance your survivability than hoping for a better tomorrow. Lots of German Jews heard Hitler speaking and hoped for a better tomorrow. Others heard the speech, and prepared for disaster. By and large, one group survived, one did not.

Over millions of generations, those who hope for a better tomorrow are not surviving long to reproduce, or being selected as mates nearly as much. There is hope, however. We can look at ourselves and at things as they are, without flinching, and the very knowledge of self will be its own savior.[/rant]

Good for us! We've made a symbolic gesture! People like symbols. They make them comfortable. If new symbols being introduced calms the herd enough to allow for new legislation, I'm for it.




But I'm still watching.

Making a better tomorrow does more to increase your survivability than bitching. No one is suggesting at all that recognizing a step in the right direction means lie down and hope for a better tomorrow... lol... any more than bitching and complaining about not enough not fast enough means one is becoming 'prepared for disaster'

Some people are just impatient, some people are just grumpy, some people do not understand... That does not make complainers any more survivable than people who have the clarity of mind and enough of a sense of logic to recognize a step toward justice

Calling a shift in policy which will definitely help some people, a symbolic gesture, does not reduce it to one.

 

[KMK0420]

Unfortunately, it is not LAW. It is a suggestion from the DOJ to the DEA and law enforcement to tell them to focus on illegal growers, not med users.

Again, NOT LAW.

Prob needs bumped to the other forum anyway..

 

[KnowBudz]

It is really a rather lame proclamation. BO's policies-to-date have been a disaster to Federalism, so I have to wonder, "why this?" Proclaiming that the Federal government might back off from something they had no business doing is not a cause for celebration. Taken in the context of the rest of the mess, I wonder about the motivation.

 

[PassionForMaryJ]

Very good news, while it may be a small step to what we all dream/hope for, it is just that, a step.

 

[KnowBudz]

Like so many aspects of the Obama regime, all this is is rhetoric. In an administration that freely tramples upon the Constitution, this small gesture towards Federalism seems out of place. I suspect the net effect of this statement will be of little benefit to anyone. If this is truly of importance to BO & Co., why did it take 10mos to kick out a three-page memo?