What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

FEDS JUST BUSTED ANOTHER CALIFORNIA DISPENSARY!

Status
Not open for further replies.

TanzanianMagic

Well-known member
Veteran
Another message: The United States is not a dictatorship, no matter how much Bush and his gang tried to make it one.

There are the two houses of Congress, the State governments, local governments, etc.

So get busy and stop whining about 'Obama'.

The elections are over. We won. Get over yourself.
 

zolar

Member
the charles lynch case may break the issue out if it goes to the supreme court not being allowed free speech in telling the jury that he was in compliance with state law that effectively
voids fed law because med MJ is an approved medication by the state sop to states rights in controlled substances law saw refs to it on one of the boards....

but really a precident overturning a conviction could settle
it out
 

FreedomFGHTR

Active member
Veteran
the charles lynch case may break the issue out if it goes to the supreme court not being allowed free speech in telling the jury that he was in compliance with state law that effectively
voids fed law because med MJ is an approved medication by the state sop to states rights in controlled substances law saw refs to it on one of the boards....

but really a precident overturning a conviction could settle
it out

Unfortunately that won't be the case. The supreme court ruled in 2001 in the OCBC case that "There is no medical necessity exception to the Controlled Substances Act's prohibitions on manufacturing and distributing marijuana." http://www.chrisconrad.com/expert.witness/ocbc.htm
 

treedup

Member
I wish I could understand what it is people are saying Obama lied about. The only real concrete thing I've heard him say was he doesn't believe the legalization of marijuana would benefit our economy. Of course I don't agree with him but then again as an avid supporter of his, I always knew he and I were never going to see eye to eye on this.
 

FRIENDinDEED

A FRIEND WITH WEED IS A . . .
Veteran
:2cents:

:2cents:

well as glad as i am to see a black man in office (and yes he is black, remember a child takes his/her fathers name, not his mothers; twist it how you want, it has bearing and is true) it is true that there will be no president that is gonna do anything real about this whole MMJ thing in any way shape or form. the fact that there is a rogue/covert op style enforcement agency is the very problem in and of itself, how is it that these states were created in the first place and then there is an existing agency that has the power to say "uh uh, we dont like that, its bad cause WE say so, so you have to stop although your helping every and anyone we dont care, do as i say"

the fact that some people are actually willing to step out of the "truman show-esque" type of politics surrounding MMJ is astounding to me personally. MMJ is a small trifle to most politicians and due to time honored and consistent ignorance of wide spread propaganda by teh very same DEA and politicians, the higher ups are cool with the current level of suppression of MMJ as a valid topic of concern much less discussion.

as far as him OBAMA being all this type of liar and blah blah blah is pure bullshit. like someones else posted, what can ANYONE EXPECT OF ANYTHING IN A PERSONS FIRST!!! FUCKING FIRST COUPLE OF DAYS IN OFFICE?!??! and you know what? i dont even care that hes black , im just glad the man is putting more money into my pocket so i can take care of what i need to take care of right now, and hes been THE ONLY PRESIDENT ive seen actually give a shit that i, the common man, even exists!! you republicans sure are some little sniveling bitches when you dont get your way, aintchya? now that the pacifier has been taken out of your mouths you wanna moan and wine?! fuck ya'll, its time for the moral man to live a little.

no one ever comes into office and makes any MMJ promises of any kind, so dont look at OBAMA and act "brand new" just because "obama said. . ." and he may have said this, that and the third, but for right now, let that man do what he needs to to, and thats get things back together with this economy. its not BARACKS fault that THIS COUTNRY felt that the DEA and other agencies of the like were necessary. YOU AND YOUR ANCESTORS CREATED THIS crap and now you wanna blame everyone else for it. . . im tellin you people . . .you all really REALLY need to get that agency disbanned or eradicated or some shit otherwise the next thing they're gonna start sniffing around adn lord knows what they'll wanna fuck up next. . . THEY HAVE TOO MUCH POWER!!!! plain and simple

everyones gettin on and on about what he aint doin, but no one has made mention that he had nothing to do with fucking anything up BUT he still took risks (cause i put money that some sick bastard was gonna shoot him dead and i had lost money on that bet too) and stepped up to the plate and made his case as to why/how it can be fixed, so hush and let the man fix it. if people could have given BUSH a chance. . . .TWICE!!!!, you can DEFINITELY give obama a chance. its shitty to say but its true: there are bigger issues on the table that WE ALL FACE AS COUNTRY, if thats even how people see things anymore.

and you people are not children, you know damned well your not going to agree with everything he says! politics has always, ALWAYS been about choosing the lesser of two evils and you ALL know this

dont get me wrong MMJ needs to be fought for, that right needs to be fought for,hands down, but its fucked up that no ones even giving shit time!!! so to me its even ridiculous to discuss anything along the lines of raids and all that.

in a nut shell:
1. barack just friggin started this thing, its not that people see him as god but more so people who dont like him are expecting him to be a god.

2. you MOFO's better wise up and start dealin" with that federal goverment/ DEA agency first!! there are the ones that are str8 out wildin out, and not being rambunctious but literally wilding the fuck out!!!

3. there is way WAY too much greed in this cannabis thing man!!! if you've got a small grow and you know someone that needs a couple grams or even an ounce or two for medicinal reasons then hand him/her a couple!! if you grow you know damned well it aint gonna kill you to spare it, ESPECIALLY to someone who is in literal need

thats the one thing that OBAMA has said that i totally agree with, we all are gonna have to pull together and rely on each other, so arent we as growers the "beacons of humanity"? so i question, how is it then pound upon pound is being grown, peoples pockets are getting fatter and there are still people suffering? dont look to government people!! always look to yourselves and each other ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING WHAT WE DO as growers!!!

its true that there are people waking up, but they dont know that they are still dreaming. . .
 
T

TroubleGuy

So I'm tired of reading pages of arguments/conspiracy theories.

Can anyone say, and show sources for, what this place did that got them raided?
 
I

IE2KS_KUSH

I wish I could understand what it is people are saying Obama lied about. The only real concrete thing I've heard him say was he doesn't believe the legalization of marijuana would benefit our economy. Of course I don't agree with him but then again as an avid supporter of his, I always knew he and I were never going to see eye to eye on this.

He said that he would no longer allow federal money to be spent prosecuting people in MMJ states. Federal dollars are still being spent on both, raids and prosecutions.
I am assuming you just want to know what he lied about w/ regard to the topic of this thread. If you would like, we could start a whole new thread about how he lied about lobbyist in his administration, about how the public would be able to read all bills prior to him signing them, NOT raising taxes on any person making less than 250K, etc..etc...
Maybe it would be easier to see if you opened your eyes.

im just glad the man is putting more money into my pocket so i can take care of what i need to take care of right now,

Wow, cool man, care to elaborate on that? How exactly has he put more money in your pocket. Do you work at AIG LOL?
Because if you smoke cigs, you recieved a new tax, last I checked, a couple of folks making less than 250K do smoke cigs. IF you use electricity, then guess what, 2010 your utility company will be paying some brand new fancy taxes to help save the earth, guess what, they ain't paying it, YOU ARE. They will probably start raising rates now planning ahead for the future, most businesses do that kind of thing. So again, I am thinking, some people that use electricity, gas, etc.. may be under the 250K limit. But tell me I am wrong. LMFAO.

you republicans sure are some little sniveling bitches when you dont get your way, aintchya? now that the pacifier has been taken out of your mouths you wanna moan and wine?! fuck ya'll, its time for the moral man to live a little.

Actually, what we have here is a PRIME example yet again, of someone that is incapable of debating intelligently and has to resort to "discredit the messenger" as opposed to put up a relevant intelligent reply. WHich you can't, your position is in-defensable. Hence the very predictable reply you have posted here. THanks for providing the real time example!:laughing:

no one ever comes into office and makes any MMJ promises of any kind,

One of them did. Maybe you missed it, or if you deny it, then you can say to yourself the Obama is righteous and moral, and doesn't lie. ROFLMAO


so dont look at OBAMA and act "brand new" just because "obama said. . ." and he may have said this, that and the third,

So he did make that promise? You realize that in the statement immedeatily before this, you said the exact opposite. I am beginning to see that it is highly unlikely you will be able to muster any sort of reply other than a flamming burning drooling rant. Please though, see if you can post any sort of reply to my posted points. Are you related to AMstel Lightweight? LOL

hush and let the man fix it. if people could have given BUSH a chance. . . .TWICE!!!!, you can DEFINITELY give obama a chance. its shitty to say but its true: there are bigger issues on the table that WE ALL FACE AS COUNTRY, if thats even how people see things anymore.

Uh, I think he's done enough already lol! :mad:


dont get me wrong MMJ needs to be fought for, that right needs to be fought for,hands down, but its fucked up that no ones even giving shit time!!! so to me its even ridiculous to discuss anything along the lines of raids and all that.

So how much time does he need to fulfill the promise that he's made to allow any bill he signs to be read by the public first? How much time does he need to not raise taxes on anyone making under 250K as he promised? Can you tell me when it's ok to hold the man accountable for anything he's said. Hell, how much money has he printed up and spent in just 60 days? It's scary to think how much more he will spend in another 60, but really, when is it ok? How much time? 180 days, 250? 365? 780? How long? Never? :dueling:


in a nut shell:
1. barack just friggin started this thing, its not that people see him as god but more so people who dont like him are expecting him to be a god.

Holding the man accountable for what he says, is hardly expecting him to be god. Just expecting him to do what he says period. Not too hard is it? How is that expecting him to be God?


2. you MOFO's better wise up and start dealin" with that federal goverment/ DEA agency first!! there are the ones that are str8 out wildin out, and not being rambunctious but literally wilding the fuck out!!!

Wise up eh? Ok oh wise sage, HOW exaclty would the American people do that? Care to elaborate, probably not I am betting lol. Do you realize that Obama is the PRESIDENT, and that he has a hand in this "federal gov" thing. And that he has actually made statements to that effect, and is now apparently just forgetting what he said? Someone here certainly needs to wise up that's for sure.:nanana:


3. there is way WAY too much greed in this cannabis thing man!!! if you've got a small grow and you know someone that needs a couple grams or even an ounce or two for medicinal reasons then hand him/her a couple!! if you grow you know damned well it aint gonna kill you to spare it, ESPECIALLY to someone who is in literal need

thats the one thing that OBAMA has said that i totally agree with, we all are gonna have to pull together and rely on each other, so arent we as growers the "beacons of humanity"? so i question, how is it then pound upon pound is being grown, peoples pockets are getting fatter and there are still people suffering? dont look to government people!! always look to yourselves and each other ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING WHAT WE DO as growers!!!

Boy, I haven't had any cannabis for quite some time, but I certainly do not expect anyone to just give me some for free. It's my choice, and when my harvest comes in, I'll be damned if some pinko bed wetter is gonna tell me that now that I have risked my life, liberty, and freedom, to do what I do, I need to hand out my hard earned flowers for free like they are candy, because we need to implement some sort of cannabis socialism. GTF Outta here w/ that shit.:2cents:
 
I

IE2KS_KUSH

So I'm tired of reading pages of arguments/conspiracy theories.

Can anyone say, and show sources for, what this place did that got them raided?


NO, no one can. THe only facts are, the federal gov. has again, just as they continue to use federal money for prosecutions, spent federal money raiding another clinic in a state w/ MMJ laws. Which is directly contradictory to what Obama has stated, and so far as I can tell, he's not too upset about it. In fact the next day, he had a golden oppurtunity to segway into a comment about it, but instead he just laughed about cannabis being legalized at the federal level. Here is your lord and saviour folks! :laughing:
 
I

IE2KS_KUSH

I got it!

I got it!

So I'm tired of reading pages of arguments/conspiracy theories.

Can anyone say, and show sources for, what this place did that got them raided?

They were raided, because, wait for it....
they cultivated, and sold cannabis. It's against federal law. That's enough, it's all the DEA needs to raid anyone. Just wait, there will be more to come, I am betting around the beginning of July some time, if not sooner.
THe only reason they need is that someone is violating federal law. THat's enough.
 

OldTroll

Member
There are few things more entertaining than a stoner who fancies himself to be the second coming of Rush Limbaugh.
 
S

Sir_Nugget

didnt it have to do with the club evading taxes? so it fell under dea, just as if it were dealing with violence or any other crime related to the ilegal sale of medical mj
 
I

IE2KS_KUSH

didnt it have to do with the club evading taxes? so it fell under dea, just as if it were dealing with violence or any other crime related to the ilegal sale of medical mj

That's a rumor, but I believe it was related to state taxes. Fact is no one knows, everything is under seal at the moment.
The bigger issue is really that the DEA will continue Business as Usual despite what many followers believe. They don't need any other reason aside from the fact that federal law is being violated period, w/ regard to cultivation, manufacture, and distribution of cannabis. No one is losing their job over enforcing existing laws. It's their job!:2cents:
 
I

IE2KS_KUSH

Since you can't come up w/ anything remotely intelligent to respond with....

Since you can't come up w/ anything remotely intelligent to respond with....

LOL, so I am guessing you are not capable of providing any sort of counter argument to what I have stated here, hence the oh so enlightening and intelligent response you made below. LMAO
Your name is appropriate for you, keep hitting my expectations for you LOL!
Almost half your post here are referencing Rush Limbaugh for some reason, I think someone is secretly in love LOL!:2cents:

There are few things more entertaining than a stoner who fancies himself to be the second coming of Rush Limbaugh.
 
A

Amstel Light

give it up fella's Kush is way to good!!! He know's all things!!

We should have known, a bald man wearing a snuggy, smiling intelligently while reading an important document...Plus he was obviously smart enough to purchase the Franlin mint's special edition "wizard of oz" collectible plate before it skyrocketed in value....

Let's get behind him,with our support maybe he will lead us to an impeachment of this evil lier OBAMA!!! By golly i bet Sarah Pallin would still be up for the job!!!!
 

OldTroll

Member
LOL, so I am guessing you are not capable of providing any sort of counter argument to what I have stated here, hence the oh so enlightening and intelligent response you made below. LMAO
Your name is appropriate for you, keep hitting my expectations for you LOL!
Almost half your post here are referencing Rush Limbaugh for some reason, I think someone is secretly in love LOL!:2cents:
1. I was not trollng. I do find people like you to be very entertaining.

2. I was not trolling. If I had wanted to enter into an arguement with you, I most certainly would have doine so.

3. If you truly think that I was trolling, then why did you take the troll bait and respond? The second rule of the internet is, "Do Not Feed the Trolls."

4. I have voted Republican in most presidential elections since voting for Gen. Eisenhower in 1956. Notable exceptions have been Kennedy (because he was a Catholic) and Obama (because he is black).

5. IMO people like you and Limbaugh damage both the Republican party and the United States with your ranting. At least Limbaugh, although childish wih his his namecalling, doesn't have a potty mouth.

Respond if you so desire, but be assured that I will be quite satisfied allowing you to have the final word in our dialog.
 

FreedomFGHTR

Active member
Veteran
I really think the key with the DEA is this

-CITE-

21 USC Sec. 822 01/22/02

-EXPCITE-

TITLE 21 - FOOD AND DRUGS
CHAPTER 13 - DRUG ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONTROL
SUBCHAPTER I - CONTROL AND ENFORCEMENT
Part C - Registration of Manufacturers, Distributors, and Dispensers of Controlled Substances

-HEAD-

Sec. 822. Persons required to register

-STATUTE-

(a) Period of registration

(1) Every person who manufactures or distributes any controlled substance or list I chemical, or who proposes to engage in the manufacture or distribution of any controlled substance or list I chemical, shall obtain annually a registration issued by the Attorney General in accordance with the rules and regulations promulgated by him.

(2) Every person who dispenses, or who proposes to dispense, any controlled substance, shall obtain from the Attorney General a registration issued in accordance with the rules and regulations promulgated by him. The Attorney General shall, by regulation, determine the period of such registrations. In no event, however, shall such registrations be issued for less than one year nor for more than three years.

(b) Authorized activities Persons registered by the Attorney General under this subchapter to manufacture, distribute, or dispense controlled substances or list I chemicals are authorized to possess, manufacture, distribute, or dispense such substances or chemicals (including any such activity in the conduct of research) to the extent authorized by their registration and in conformity with the other provisions of this subchapter.

(c) Exceptions

The following persons shall not be required to register and may lawfully possess any controlled substance or list I chemical under this subchapter:

(1) An agent or employee of any registered manufacturer, distributor, or dispenser of any controlled substance or list I chemical if such agent or employee is acting in the usual course of his business or employment.

(2) A common or contract carrier or warehouseman, or an employee thereof, whose possession of the controlled substance or list I chemical is in the usual course of his business or employment.

(3) An ultimate user who possesses such substance for a purpose specified in section 802(25) (FOOTNOTE 1) of this title.

(FOOTNOTE 1) See References in Text note below.

(d) Waiver

The Attorney General may, by regulation, waive the requirement for registration of certain manufacturers, distributors, or dispensers if he finds it consistent with the public health and safety.

(e) Separate registration

A separate registration shall be required at each principal place of business or professional practice where the applicant manufactures, distributes, or dispenses controlled substances or list I chemicals.

(f) Inspection

The Attorney General is authorized to inspect the establishment of a registrant or applicant for registration in accordance with the rules and regulations promulgated by him.

-SOURCE-

(Pub. L. 91-513, title II, Sec. 302, Oct. 27, 1970, 84 Stat. 1253; Pub. L. 98-473, title II, Sec. 510, Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 2072; Pub. L. 103-200, Sec. 3(b), Dec. 17, 1993, 107 Stat. 2336.)

-REFTEXT-

REFERENCES IN TEXT

This subchapter, referred to in subsecs. (b) and (c), was in the original ''this title'', meaning title II of Pub. L. 91-513, Oct. 27, 1970, 84 Stat. 1242, as amended, and is popularly known as the ''Controlled Substances Act''. For complete classification of title II to the Code, see second paragraph of Short Title note set out under section 801 of this title and Tables.

Section 802(25) of this title, referred to in subsec. (c)(3), was redesignated section 802(26) of this title by Pub. L. 98-473, title II, Sec. 507(a), Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 2071, and was further redesignated section 802(27) of this title by Pub. L. 99-570, title I, Sec. 1003(b)(2), Oct. 27, 1986, 100 Stat. 3207-6.

-MISC2-

AMENDMENTS

1993 - Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 103-200, Sec. 3(b)(1), inserted ''or list I chemical'' after ''controlled substance'' in two places.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 103-200, Sec. 3(b)(2), inserted ''or list I chemicals'' after ''controlled substances'' and ''or chemicals'' after ''such substances''.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 103-200, Sec. 3(b)(3), inserted ''or list I chemical'' after ''controlled substance'' wherever appearing.

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 103-200, Sec. 3(b)(4), inserted ''or list I chemicals'' after ''controlled substances''.

1984 - Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 98-473 designated existing provisions as par. (1), struck out provisions relating to dispensing controlled substances, and added par. (2).

EFFECTIVE DATE OF 1993 AMENDMENT

Amendment by Pub. L. 103-200 effective on date that is 120 days after Dec. 17, 1993, see section 11 of Pub. L. 103-200, set out as a note under section 802 of this title.

PROVISIONAL REGISTRATION

Section 703 of Pub. L. 91-513, as amended by Pub. L. 99-514, Sec. 2, Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2095, provided that:

''(a)(1) Any person who -

''(A) is engaged in manufacturing, distributing, or dispensing any controlled substance on the day before the effective date of section 302 (this section), and ''(B) is registered on such day under section 510 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (section 360 of this title) or under section 4722 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (formerly I.R.C. 1954, section 4722 of Title 26), shall, with respect to each establishment for which such registration is in effect under any such section, be deemed to have a provisional registration under section 303 (section 823 of this title) for the manufacture, distribution, or dispensing (as the case may be) of controlled substances.

''(2) During the period his provisional registration is in effect under this section, the registration number assigned such person under such section 510 (section 360 of this title) or under such section 4722 (section 4722 of Title 26) (as the case may be) shall be his registration number for purposes of section 303 of this title (section 823 of this title).

''(b) The provisions of section 304 (section 824 of this title), relating to suspension and revocation of registration, shall apply to a provisional registration under this section.

''(c) Unless sooner suspended or revoked under subsection (b), a provisional registration of a person under subsection (a)(1) of this section shall be in effect until -

''(1) the date on which such person has registered with the Attorney General under section 303 (section 823 of this title) or has had his registration denied under such section, or ''(2) such date as may be prescribed by the Attorney General for registration of manufacturers, distributors, or dispensers, as the case may be, whichever occurs first.''

-SECREF-

SECTION REFERRED TO IN OTHER SECTIONS

This section is referred to in sections 827, 828, 880, 958, 965 of this title; title 18 section 2118.

Get approved by the attorney general as stated in the law.
 

FreedomFGHTR

Active member
Veteran
damn forgot not edit button...

I wonder who is going to have the balls to attempt to register first?

Very high Reward/Risk ratio.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top