Feds reply to Cali Prop 19

[Tony Aroma]

First of all, this is just what they SAID they're going to do. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for someone in our government to keep their promise.

And suppose they do. This should be good news to all those "no on prop 19" people who are worried about big business taking over. I'd bet that if they do target people to make examples of, that it will be the biggest growers/sellers. If anything, this should make the small-time operations, and medical folks, feel safer.

And whoever said that local LEO should protect CA citizens makes a good point. Aren't CA LEO sworn to uphold CA law? And wouldn't someone coming in with guns, taking or destroying property, be in violation of that law? I'm no lawyer, but I'd think a DEA raid would be armed robbery in the eyes of CA law (if prop 19 passes). Why can't they be arrested? I don't think feds are immune from the laws of the areas in which they operate. At least in theory.

And why not take it a step further? What if the leases on DEA offices in CA were for some unknown reason not renewed? What if DEA agents were hassled by local LEO, like they do now with minorities? You know, stop and frisk them, charge them with minor crimes like jaywalking or littering, let them know they are being watched.

Not that any of this will ever happen. Unless of course the citizens of CA get really pissed at the feds. But they've done nothing so far about federal interference with prop 215. There are just too many people in power in CA who side with the feds when it comes to prohibition.

 

[♥Mo♥]

Sounds like reality is setting in to them, last ditch fearmongering. They can't control what is being grown now. How in the world could they think they can police it when we all want it legal?

 

[Preacher]

I want to see them destroy a clearly marked industrial hemp grow so people will see that and realize they destroyed the crop for no reason other than to be giant dicks.

 

[apanihi]

I want to see them destroy a clearly marked industrial hemp grow so people will see that and realize they destroyed the crop for no reason other than to be giant dicks.

They fear losing their own jobs of chasing down people for no reason. It's self preservation for a really evil reason. A lot of DEA people would be out of jobs if all drugs were legal.

 

[Neo 420]

They do not have the resources, man power or money to do that. Besides the feds never have dealt with small growers. You thin they would start now? Eric is blowing straight smoke.........

 

[prefersativas]

I think this could get very interesting. Very quickly.
It should be fun.

 

[grasspass]

I want to see a Cali vs. Fed fight , this could be very interesting. Hope it passes.

 

[IE2KS_KUSH]

Re: Holder: US will enforce marijuana laws despite how Californians may vote

Re: Holder: US will enforce marijuana laws despite how Californians may vote

Who's surprised really? That's pretty much what they have been doing this whole time. Now they will be able to simply cherry pick who they terrorize and seize assets and cash. DEA agents will multiply like tapeworms and they will probably be operating at maximum capacity and have more potential seizures than they could even dream of handling. Which again isn't much different than now. I feel bad for the future victims that will surely be to come.

 

[zen_trikester]

yeah no shit I knew it was coming and now...I feel way better. Besides, he had to create extra drama by making this announcement right before the election, rather than 6 months ago when everyone forgets.

So...he is basically saying, business as usual for the Feds. No one expected them to say "Have fun Cali, smoke it up" so I figure this response is a little more positive then what most expected. That being an all out legal fight, like Arizona. They still might take it to court...who knows...they might not. It's going to get real interesting.

Ha! Awe fuck it... "Have fun Cali, smoke it up" I want the t-shirt! I think they must have been waiting to decide on which refer madness lie to spew. I like this one... "We can't bust people peddaling real drugs except for when we get lucky busting someone for pot" Nice! I agree this is actually a breath of fresh air. We should see more responces from them in the upcomming weeks. I am really stunned they waited to say anything until after the absentees were sent out, but maybe that makes up such a small portion of the vote. I don't know.

Jed

 

[Greenstar420]

Eric holder is a bitch as usual, suck it eric! Hope you get hit by a bus.

 

[Ben Tokin]

Same old line, different political party. If a person wants to get high, they will. One way or another. Let's face it, many people get high on one substance or another.

The question that intelligent government control freaks should be asking is, "Why do people want to get high?". The answer is obvious. Bored, in pain, psychological issues, habit, peer pressure or just fucking enjoy it. Studies should be performed to find out what the best ways are to deal with these problems. But nnooooooooo, they would rather watch humanity struggle with these issues.

Why don't we allow medical and scientific studies determine the best way to deal with substance abuse. When someone has a problem, you don't make it worse by ignoring the underlying issues and criminalizing everyone. We need to analyze the situation and address these things the right way. Allowing government to treat it's people the way we do today is a crime in itself.

We all know the problems our laws have created. Let's stop the insanity and correct it...right now! Better late than never.

My solution would be to allow the safest substances possible to be legally available. Get rid of tobacco and alcohol, they're KILLERS! Cannabis would be the first thing I would make available to anyone who wants it. Drop all laws against it. Then I would analyze the real issues that people have and address them on an individual basis. If new, safer drugs need to be developed to deal with the problem so be it.

Let's get rid of this fucking Neanderthal mentality and do something intelligent for a change.

 

[Greyskull]

i wonder if they will use this...

i wonder if they will use this...

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/10/15/florida.drug.bust/index.html

Federal agents capped a two-year investigation Friday with dozens of arrests they say have broken open a marijuana smuggling operation that "dominated" the New York market for two decades, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement announced.
Among those arrested were Kareem "Biggs" Burke, a founder of rapper Jay-Z's Roc-A-Fella Records, and High Times magazine ad salesman Matthew "Magazine Guy" Stang, ICE said.
"These criminal organizations have allegedly dominated the illegal marijuana market in New York City for almost 20 years," said Special Agent in Charge James T. Hayes, Jr. "The high profile stature of some of the alleged members of these organizations is especially troubling."
ICE said that the suspected leader of the organization, Manuel Geovanny Rodriguez-Perez, was also arrested. Rodriguez-Perez was heard discussing violent acts on intercepted telephone calls, including a threat to "hunt" a customer who was late paying for marijuana, the agency said.
The operation, dubbed "Operation Green Venom," started in July 2008 and used more than 20 separate wiretaps to infiltrate the crews suspected of running the operation.
The operation also targeted alleged "brokers" who controlled the movement of drugs from Florida to New York and the drivers who transported them.
Arrests were made and search warrants were executed in New York, New Jersey and Florida.
Law enforcement has seized nearly $2 million in proceeds from marijuana sales and more than 225 pounds of the drug since July 2008, ICE said.

is this going to be part of the anti 19 campaign?

 

[Ben Tokin]

That's interesting^^^^

 

[Maria_Vanessa]

yeah no shit I knew it was coming and now...I feel way better. Besides, he had to create extra drama by making this announcement right before the election, rather than 6 months ago when everyone forgets.

So...he is basically saying, business as usual for the Feds. No one expected them to say "Have fun Cali, smoke it up" so I figure this response is a little more positive then what most expected. That being an all out legal fight, like Arizona. They still might take it to court...who knows...they might not. It's going to get real interesting.

*nod* And it should be business as usual for all of the smart growers in California as well. This is the story running out of the NY Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/16/us/16pot.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2&src=mv

October 15, 2010
On Marijuana, Californians May Ignore Leaders’ Views
By ADAM NAGOURNEY

LOS ANGELES — The Department of Justice says it intends to prosecute marijuana laws in California aggressively even if state voters approve an initiative on the Nov. 2 ballot to legalize the drug.

The announcement by Eric H. Holder Jr., the attorney general, was the latest reminder of how much of the establishment has lined up against the popular initiative: dozens of editorial boards, candidates for office, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and other public officials.

Still, despite this opposition — or perhaps, to some extent, because of it — the measure, Proposition 19, appears to have at least a decent chance of winning, so far drawing considerable support in polls from a coalition of Democrats, independents, younger voters and men as Election Day nears. Should that happen, it could cement a cultural shift in California, where medical marijuana has been legal since 1996 and where the drug has been celebrated in popular culture at least since the 1960s.

But it could also plunge the nation’s most populous state into a murky and unsettling conflict with the federal government that opponents of the proposition said should make California voters wary of supporting it.

Washington has generally looked the other way as a growing medical marijuana industry has prospered here and in 14 other states and the District of Columbia, but Mr. Holder’s position — revealed in a letter this week to nine former chiefs of the Drug Enforcement Administration that was made public on Friday — made explicit that legalizing marijuana for recreational use would bring a whole new level of scrutiny from Washington.

Mr. Holder did not fully spell out the reasons for the decision, but he did allude to the reluctance of the federal government to enforce drug laws differently in different states. “If passed, this legislation will greatly complicate federal drug enforcement efforts to the detriment of our citizens,” he wrote.

The Los Angeles County sheriff, Lee Baca, who has been one of the leading opponents of the measure, quickly embraced the Justice Department’s stance. He said that the initiative was unconstitutional and vowed to continue enforcing marijuana laws, no matter what voters do in November.

Supporters of the initiative have portrayed support for it as another example in an anti-incumbent year of voters rejecting authority.

“Bring on the establishment,” said Chris Lehane, a senior consultant to the campaign pushing for passage of the initiative. “This campaign, and the energy driving it, is predicated on the common understanding that the establishment’s prohibition approach has been a complete and utter failure, as proven by the point that today it is easier for a kid to get access to pot than it is to buy a beer or a cigarette.”

But Roger Salazar, a political consultant who has been directing the effort to defeat the proposal, said that Mr. Holder’s statement should reinforce deep concerns about the initiative, including the way it was drafted and what he called inflated claims by its backers of what legalization might do.

“This is sort of a shot across the bow from the federal government: They’re saying that, ‘If this thing moves the way we think it is, we’re going to come after you guys,’ ” he said. “That gives California voters one more reason to take a deep breath.”

California’s becoming the first state to legalize marijuana for recreational use would provide a real-life test of theories that proponents of legalization have long pressed: That it would provide a new stream of revenues for government, cut down on drug-related violence and end a modern-day prohibition that effectively turns many citizens into lawbreakers.

As it is, no matter what voters or Mr. Holder do, marijuana use in California these days appears, for all practical purposes, all but legal.

Mr. Schwarzenegger signed legislation last month that made possession of an ounce of marijuana an infraction — it had previously been a misdemeanor — punishable by a $100 fine. Medical marijuana dispensaries are common in many parts of the state, and getting a prescription is hardly challenging. Baby boomers who had not smoked marijuana since college now speak openly at dinner parties of their “medical” experimentation with the drug. The smell of marijuana is hardly unusual at outdoor concerts at places like the Hollywood Bowl.

A Field Poll last month found that 50 percent of respondents said that marijuana should be legalized; that is up from 13 percent when the organization first asked the question in 1969. And 47 percent said they had smoked marijuana at least once, compared with 28 percent when the question was asked in 1975.

“This is the first generation of high school students where a majority of their parents have smoked marijuana,” said Ethan Nadelmann, the executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, which has been pushing for passage of the initiative.

The presence of the initiative on the ballot has encouraged Democrats, who argue it will lead to increased turnout among younger voters.

Notably, none of the major statewide candidates have endorsed the measure. But perhaps just as notably, none have made the proposition a campaign issue.

The state Republican Party has officially come out against Proposition 13 and plans to urge people to vote no, said Ron Nehring, the party chairman. He called repeal a “big mistake” and mocked the notion that placing the proposition on the ballot would help Democrats.

“We call that their Hail Mary Jane strategy,” he said.

John Burton, the chairman of the California Democratic Party, said his party had decided to stay neutral on this issue. Asked if he supported it, Mr. Burton responded: “I already voted for it. Why not? Brings some money into the state. Helps the deficit. Better than selling off state buildings to some developer.”

Mark Baldassare, president of the Public Policy Institute of California, noted that polls showed the measure breaking 50 percent, but said that given the history of initiatives in the state, that meant its passage was far from assured.

Opposition has come from a number of fronts, ranging from Mr. Baca and other law enforcement officials to the Chamber of Commerce, which has warned that it would create workplace health issues.

Still, the breadth of supporters of the proposition — including law enforcement officials and major unions, like the Service Employees International Union — signal how mainstream this movement is becoming.

“I think we consume far more dangerous drugs that are legal: cigarette smoking, nicotine and alcohol,” said Joycelyn Elders, the former surgeon general and a supporter of the measure. “I feel they cause much more devastating effects physically. We need to lift the prohibition on marijuana.”

Ian Lovett contributed reporting.

 

[Preacher]

They fear losing their own jobs of chasing down people for no reason. It's self preservation for a really evil reason. A lot of DEA people would be out of jobs if all drugs were legal.

No doubt. And the more obvious their wickedness is, the sooner we can end them.

 

[DankSide]

This is the same fed and DEA that swore they would never allow the medical movement to flourish

There might be a new president, otherwise most of these operators have not changed too vastly. A glorious mess of incompetence leading right into capitol hill will guarantee no crushing blows are administered.

Too late now, manpower would be so spread out, high DEA concentration in California, allowing other states to get larger, growing unchecked. Aside from developing an airborne cannabis killing pollen, they have tried it all - and it has not worked.

Like a ball constantly gaining weight and speed as it rolls, this juggernaut of a movement is present and growing in all 50 states. Genetics continue to be shared despite their legal ambiguity. Federal law can be on the tipping point but we'd need at least 30 legal states. Very possible.

 

[SpasticGramps]

Fuck Holder and fuck the Feds. Let's get this revolution started!

 

[trichrider]

seen but not heard, I keep getting this feeling...deja vu.

 

[BagseedSamurai]

States have rights. It says so in the motherfucking constitution.

If the federal government doesn't respect the individual state, then what good are they?

 

[Cruzin]

Good use your resources for those legal folks and leave us patients alone! They will be too busy. Yes on 19!