[hazy]

Seems the pressure by the feds since the memo from the US attorney Dennis Burke who wrote among other things:

"...the CSA may be vigourously enforced against those individuals and entities who operate large marijuana production facilities. Individuals and organizations - including property owners, landlords and financiers- that knowingly facilitate the actions of traffickers also should know that compliance with AMMA will not protect them from criminal prosecution, asset forfeiture and other civil penalties...."

He goes on to say that they will get 'traffickers' when they cross Reservation land, since that's run by the feds. That means lots of highways including stretches on I 10 from Phx to Tucson.

I really don't know if I want to get involved in the MMJ program here at all anymore.


Maricopa County officials urged not to issue permits for medical-marijuana dispensaries

by Michelle Ye Hee Lee - May. 20, 2011 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic


Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery advised the Board of Supervisors this week against issuing permits to medical-marijuana dispensaries on county-controlled lands, fearing a backlash from the federal government.

Although Arizona's medical-marijuana program mostly will be run by the state Health Department in cooperation with cities and towns, Maricopa County officials plan to opt out in reaction to mounting federal pressure on states that have legalized medical pot.

County officials indicated they would heed Montgomery's advice if he drafts a formal legal opinion, which Montgomery said he plans to do in about a week.

Montgomery said he would not prosecute medical-marijuana cases because it is outside his jurisdiction. He said he consulted with the supervisors on the issue in his role as the county's legal adviser.

Last November, voters approved Proposition 203, the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act, which allows qualifying patients with certain debilitating medical conditions to use marijuana. But marijuana is not a federally approved drug.

Arizona is the 15th state to legalize medical pot and to join the ongoing national debate over conflicting state and federal marijuana laws.

Although the U.S. Department of Justice in 2009 released a memo discouraging prosecution of medical-marijuana users, federal pressures continue to mount on states that have legalized medical pot. U.S. Attorney for Arizona Dennis Burke this month warned Arizonans they are still violating federal law by participating in the state's program, and they will not have any immunity from federal prosecution.

"I always hate to go against the will of the voters, but in this case, Dennis' letter is pretty compelling. And if Montgomery issues an opinion that mirrors the federal letter, I think it's something we have to heed," county Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox said.

Montgomery said although the federal government clearly will not prosecute seriously ill patients using pot as medicine, the same legal "safe haven" does not exist for dispensary agents or local government employees who implement the state's law.

"I'm not comforted by a wink and a nod" from the federal government, Montgomery said, explaining why he is advising the county against issuing permits.

Prop. 203 allows qualifying patients to receive up to 2 1/2 ounces of marijuana every two weeks from dispensaries or to cultivate up to 12 marijuana plants if they live 25 miles or farther from a dispensary.

Montgomery has publicly opposed medical marijuana and was one of the most outspoken local officials who joined the anti-Prop. 203 campaign last fall. Montgomery said he still disagrees with the policy of legalizing medical marijuana and is concerned that dispensaries operating in Maricopa County will become "magnets of crime."

It is unclear what implications Burke's letter will have on the state's medical-marijuana program, or how the county's pending decision to prohibit dispensaries on county land would affect patients' access to marijuana in remote areas of the county.

The state Department of Health Services will begin accepting dispensary applications on June 1. There is one dispensary application pending with Maricopa County.

"We're still trying to figure out what the impact of the letter we got from the federal government is going to have. I think all those (federal warning letters to state officials) have put a layer of uncertainty on this program and all the other states' programs," DHS Director Will Humble said.

Prop. 203 allows local jurisdictions to impose "reasonable" zoning restrictions for dispensaries. The majority of cities and towns have come up with a zoning ordinance for medical-marijuana dispensaries, said Ken Strobeck, executive director of the League of Arizona Cities and Towns.

If the county decides not to allow dispensaries on its land, that means cities and towns that encircle county land will have to work around it, Strobeck said.

Chris Jacques, Peoria's interim community-development director, said he would prefer that dispensaries locate within city boundaries rather than in county islands. The city's zoning ordinances have specific distance requirements for dispensaries, and the city would prefer to be able to regulate dispensaries, he said.

"If there was a proposal to have a dispensary in a county island, we would not like that because we've got strict controls over where dispensaries could be located," Jacques said.

The applications for dispensaries in Wickenburg all are within town boundaries and not in the sizable county islands in the area, said Steve Boyle, Wickenburg community-development director. Although Boyle said it is "discouraging" that Wickenburg would approve dispensaries against federal law, he said he does not anticipate the federal government cracking down on town officials for allowing dispensaries.

"It could happen," he said, "but our attorneys don't see it getting that drastic."

Read more: https://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepu...#ixzz1Mv3FNzYp

One commenter on the story on AZCentraldotcom said, "No dispensaries...no problem, grow your own."

Sounds great, with the "no growing within 25 miles of a dispensary" law. Next story also in the paper today:

Home-grown marijuana challenges Arizona police

by Edythe Jensen - May. 20, 2011 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic


More than 2,300 Arizona residents have state permits to grow marijuana in their homes - for now. That will end in a few months when medical-marijuana dispensaries start opening and household gardeners must pull the plug on their grow lights or face criminal charges if they live within 25 miles of a dispensary.

But it's unclear who will enforce the shutdown, and spokesmen for local law-enforcement agencies say they expect that will be a challenge.

The state Department of Health Services began issuing the growing permits in April. DHS spokesman Laura Oxley said it will notify holders when the permits are no longer valid but will not inspect homes for compliance. That will be up to police if they suspect illegal activity, she said.

Joe Yuhas, spokesman for the Arizona Medical Marijuana Association, said the law was never meant to promote home cultivation. Doing it without a state permit is a criminal offense that carries stiff penalties, including possible fines and incarceration.

"I wouldn't think a person would want to take the risk," he said.

Law-enforcement agencies across the Valley are grappling with how and under what circumstances they will check on suspected illegal-marijuana-growing operations. Most say they have no plans to investigate addresses of expired permits routinely, and there must be a complaint or strong evidence of a crime before they would try to inspect a home. They agree that separating legal from illegal activity under the voter-approved medical-marijuana law will be difficult.

Patients who had a marijuana prescription when the law took effect last month can't buy it from legal vendors yet because the state won't be approving dispensary sites until August. They can, however, apply for home-cultivation cards available to anyone who isn't within 25 miles of a dispensary. Growing must be indoors and is limited to 12 plants.

According to commercial sites that sell lights and other equipment for indoor cultivation, growing setups can cost hundreds to thousands of dollars. Phoenix police spokesman Steve Martos said it is puzzling why anyone would invest time and money in an indoor setup to use it only for a few months or risk criminal charges by continuing the cultivation.

So far, 2,315 Arizona residents have one-year state-issued cards to grow marijuana at home for personal use, although DHS officials say it is unlikely all are doing it.

Spokesmen for several Valley police agencies, including Phoenix, Chandler, Gilbert, Tempe and Scottsdale, said they have no plans to check homes on the DHS permit list routinely where residents may have expired marijuana-growing cards.

"The law prohibits police from using the fact that a person has a medical-marijuana card, by itself, to establish probable cause or reasonable suspicion of a crime," Chandler Detective Frank Mendoza said.

Neighbors who complain about suspected illegal drug activity may call police and spur an investigation. However, DHS information on marijuana-growing cards is not public record, so neighbors have no way of checking whether the house next door once had permission and doesn't any more. Police agencies, on the other hand, have access to the DHS records, including the names and addresses of those authorized to use or grow it and permit expiration dates.

Sgt. Steve Carbajal, Tempe police spokesman, said the department will likely use DHS data as "investigative tools" if there's a complaint or if police suspect illegal activity.

There must be strong evidence that a crime is being committed before police initiate an investigation into reputed illegal marijuana-growing, said Mendoza and Scottsdale police spokesman David Pubins.

Glendale police are discussing the challenges of marijuana enforcement under the new law with their legal department, and "we do not have absolute answers right now," said Sgt. Brent Coombs, a department spokesman.

Martos, the Phoenix spokesman, said home use of medical marijuana brings a myriad of enforcement challenges, including that the mere detection of marijuana odor is no longer a clear-cut indication of criminal activity.

Whatever police agencies say their plans are now could change in coming months as medical marijuana becomes more accessible, DHS spokeswoman Carol Vack said. "How they bust people for marijuana might change. There are a lot of gray areas, a lot of undefined areas in this law," Vack said.

Read more: https://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepu...#ixzz1Mv2lbvZ6

[paladin420]

[b]THEY [b] Still don't like US. No wonder they say I hav trust issues.

[Hydrosun]

16 States + DC = 17 of 51 jurisdiction recognizing cannabis has medical value. The US Federal government is doing more to promote fascism than the Nazi's ever did.

[paladin420]

[quote=Hydrosun;4452985]16 States + DC = 17 of 51 jurisdiction recognizing cannabis has medical value. The US Federal government is doing more to promote fascism than the Nazi's ever did.

[/quote "Trust us it's just a pot leaf tattoo" That way they will kno we are legal don't cha kno....

[hazy]

From the 'homegrown' article above.


Spokesmen for several Valley police agencies, including Phoenix, Chandler, Gilbert, Tempe and Scottsdale, said they have no plans to check homes on the DHS permit list routinely where residents may have expired marijuana-growing cards.

"The law prohibits police from using the fact that a person has a medical-marijuana card, by itself, to establish probable cause or reasonable suspicion of a crime," Chandler Detective Frank Mendoza said.

Neighbors who complain about suspected illegal drug activity may call police and spur an investigation. However, DHS information on marijuana-growing cards is not public record, so neighbors have no way of checking whether the house next door once had permission and doesn't any more. Police agencies, on the other hand, have access to the DHS records, including the names and addresses of those authorized to use or grow it and permit expiration dates.

Sgt. Steve Carbajal, Tempe police spokesman, said the department will likely use DHS data as "investigative tools" if there's a complaint or if police suspect illegal activity.

There must be strong evidence that a crime is being committed before police initiate an investigation into reputed illegal marijuana-growing, said Mendoza and Scottsdale police spokesman David Pubins.

My biggest problem here is that I thought, from my reading of the law, that LEO's only access to the database of AMMA cardholders, was to check a cardholder to see if he/she was legit and hadn't bought more than 2 1/2 oz in the last 14 days, or to see if it was OK for that cardholder to be possessing up to 2 1/2 oz, say in a traffic stop.

This story says that LEO already has access to the whole database to peruse through at their will.

Which means that LEO has and will always have all MMJ users on a list.

[Hydrosun]

All Jews must register and wear the yellow star until their train ride ENDS! Registering with the government is not OPTIONAL, unregistered Jews will be killed on sight.

[Stress_test]

I think that we are all slacking in our own parts of the MMJ issue and encouraging or even simply allowing state lawmakers to pass legislation is a huge mistake and major under sight.

It is imperative that MMJ patients and supporters in every MMJ state begin drafting bills for the people to vote on which negates government legislation of MMJ.

If the "people" pass legislation by majority vote, then the federal Government is hogtied and has a very difficult time opposing the will of the majority. However, as was proven in Montana and Washington states, the federal government will not allow elected lawmakers to approve MMJ in any form without federal interference.

If the feds challenge the vote of the people it would be too obvious to the world that the American Government is overthrowing the Constitution and the will of the people, which would cause a domino effect culminating in mass rebellion of the American citizens.

Simply put: It truly is a case of a "wink and a nod" where the legislation is passed by the people. Nearly every instance of state or local legislation has been met with swift action on the part of the feds.

The American people do not need government regulation of MMJ. In fact, it is imperative at this point that we initiate and pass laws which prohibit government interaction and interference with MMJ laws and regulations.

To that end, we the people must get initiatives on the States Ballots which prohibit dispensaries, cultivation, MMJ use or possession within 500 feet of schools, day-cares, public parks, churches or anyplace where children may frequent. The people need to implement regulations which will limit the number of dispensaries within designated areas in order to ensure public support.

If we, "the people" fail to regulate ourselves we will undoubtedly be forced to succumb to laws, regulations, and legal actions from the government.

Through correspondences with my own state legislature, I am confident that such initiatives would garner the support of elected officials, and along these lines, there is a growing movement in Washington to put such an initiative on the 2011 ballot.

It would create quite a stir at all levels of government if the people pass laws with strict restrictions and regulation of MMJ. It would be very difficult for officials and lawmakers to oppose such self imposed initiatives and restrictions. Saying "NO" to a 500' restriction of MJ would be suicide for any public official and tantamount to saying no restriction is needed at all.

[hazy]

Originally Posted by Stress_test

To that end, we the people must get initiatives on the States Ballots which prohibit dispensaries, cultivation, MMJ use or possession within 500 feet of schools, day-cares, public parks, churches or anyplace where children may frequent. The people need to implement regulations which will limit the number of dispensaries within designated areas in order to ensure public support.

The Arizona Medical Marijuana Act does impose those restrictions and many more. It was like Montezuma trying to appease Cortez with gold and silver gifts. The towns and counties pride themselves on one-upping the last town in passing ever more restrictive zoning laws with 1320 foot distances in many cases. They still act like they have to impose more rules to keep it from becoming like California, whatever the fuck that means, even though this law was already the most restrictive and regulated in the country.

I'm finding it hilarious when a town like Kingman or even Chandler, fights tooth and nail to resist the will of the voters, hoping to ban dispensaries, then they find out about the 25 mile no grow thing and in order to keep the people from growing, suddenly they are trying to rewrite their zoning to allow one.

[Hash Zeppelin]

Originally Posted by Hydrosun

All Jews must register and wear the yellow star until their train ride ENDS! Registering with the government is not OPTIONAL, unregistered Jews will be killed on sight.

The U.S. Government is very close to the Nazi Government at this point. Lets not Forget Hitler was voted in. we are literally just a half step away

the nazi situation in germany
step1.financially devastated country divided and needed a scape goat. Hitler gave them the jews. he officially demonized them and stirred fear amongst the uneducated poultaion.
step2. Then he separated the jews into ghettos. Ones that refused to go were removed forcefully. He made them identify them selves with the gold star they picked up at jewish registration.
Step 3.Next he took away there right to bear arms.
Step 4. he started organized raids with militarized police on jewish homes, and said they were just being moved again when people asked questions.
step. 5he worked them until they had no will power left.
step 6. he loured their tired minds and bodies into the showers that were ovens and gas chambers.

The US Fascist Situation.
step 1. financially devastated country divided and needed a scape goat. Politicians gave it to them. called it drugs, and then added on terrorism and then made them the same thing.
step 2.separates them by labeling communities liberal or conservative. so instead of a physical relocation they could just turn minority neighbor hoods into ghettos by flooding them with drugs and crooked cops.
step 3. demonize drug users, which are actually just over worked stressed out people.
step 4. take away the right to bear arms though drug/ gun laws. take away our right of free speech and or right to a fair trial by removing jury nullification.
step 5. illegal organized raids on homes using militarized police, and say that they are just going to jail. but really they are going to and over crowded rape camp where they can easily die.
step 5.5 almost 6. you can be sentenced to death in a federal court over a serious enough drug crime. Thanks Newt Gingrich you piece of shit.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarce..._United_States
actual numbers According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) 7,225,800 people at yearend 2009 were on probation, in jail or prison, or on parole — about 3.1% of adults in the U.S. resident population.[7][4] 2,292,133 were incarcerated in U.S. prisons and jails at yearend 2009.

American prisons and jails held 2,292,133 inmates at yearend 2009.[1][3] On January 1, 2008 more than 1 in 100 adults in the United States was in prison or jail.[11]

In 2008 approximately one in every 31 adults (7.3 million) in the United States was behind bars, or being monitored (probation and parole). In 2008 the breakdown for adults under correctional control was as follows: one out of 18 men, one in 89 women, one in 11 African-Americans (9.2 percent), one in 27 Latinos (3.7 percent), and one in 45 whites (2.2 percent). Crime rates have declined by about 25 percent from 1988-2008.[12] 70% of prisoners in the United States are non-whites.[13] In recent decades the U.S. has experienced a surge in its prison population, quadrupling since 1980, partially as a result of mandatory sentencing that came about during the "war on drugs." Violent crime and property crime have declined since the early 1990s.[14]

In addition, there were 92,854 held in juvenile facilities as of the 2006 Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP), conducted by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.[8][9]

At yearend 2009 around 1 out of every 135 U.S. residents was incarcerated in prison or jail.[3] The total incarcerated at yearend 2009 was 2,292,133, with 1,319,426 state prisoners, 205,087 federal prisoners, and 767,620 in local jails.[4] As of 2009, the three states with the lowest ratios of imprisoned people per 100,000 population are Maine (150 per 100,000), Minnesota (189 per 100,000), and New Hampshire (206 per 100,000). The three states with the highest ratio are Louisiana (881 per 100,000), Mississippi (702 per 100,000) and Oklahoma (657 per 100,000).[15]

In 2009, 92.9% of prisoners (not jail inmates) were male.[15]

A 2005 report estimated that 27% of federal prison inmates are noncitizens, convicted of crimes while in the country legally or illegally.[16] However, federal prison inmates only account for six percent of the total incarcerated population; noncitizen populations in state and local prisons are more difficult to establish. The World Prison Brief puts the total number of foreign prisoners in all federal, state and local facilities at 5.9%