CHP Revises Policy on Pot Seizures (Hands off medical marijuana)

LA Times ^ | August 28, 2005

[Wolfie]

CHP Revises Policy on Pot Seizures

Sacramento -- The California Highway Patrol has ordered its officers to stop confiscating medical marijuana during routine traffic stops, a victory for patients hoping to win broader acceptance of the controversial medicine from balky police departments around the state.

Highway Patrol officials sent out a bulletin last week to field commanders spelling out the policy shift, which would allow patients to travel on California's highways with up to 8 ounces of marijuana as long as they have a certified user identification card or documented physician's approval.

Patient advocates say the change will make the state's highways a "safe haven" for those who use marijuana with a physician's permission. They also hope the shift by the CHP sets an example for law enforcement agencies around California.

"This is going to send a very clear message: The constitutionality of patients needs to be protected," said Steph Sherer, executive director of Americans for Safe Access, a marijuana patients group that sued the CHP to force the policy change. "Our hope is this will ripple around the state."

Lt. Joe Whiteford, a CHP spokesman, called the policy shift "a revision" needed in part because of confusion among rank-and-file officers over a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

The high court declared in June that medical marijuana laws in a dozen states, including California, don't protect patients or suppliers from federal prosecution. But the ruling did not sweep away state medical marijuana laws and had no effect on local and state police such as the CHP.

[winston2]

Young people with white lab coats behind the counters. Street prices -- $480/oz."

Time to call that guy with the pager or grow your own - $60. for 10 quality seed - 5 months later - 32 oz. of relief - $1.90 per oz.

Which raises the obvious question - Why does cultivation draw thousands of dollars in fines and jail time?

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[Wolfie]

ping

[Protagoras]

Seems to me that if the state is not going to enforce the drug laws, then they certainly don't need the federal money that goes with it.

Excellent! You are starting to understand. If you don't take stolen money from thugs, you don't have to comply with their conditions. Now if we could just get the usually spineless states to tell the feds to shove the rest of their booty up their booty.

I wonder if the state is going to assist marijuana patients in paying for their "medicine" as they would any other medicine.

What a shame that would be, emulating the beloved welfare state on the local level as well as the federal level.

[Protagoras]

You want to take this one specific incident and generalize it into a whole different topic. Fine. But you can do it without my participation.

ROTFLMAO

That translates into, "Oh my goodness, my imbecilic position has been exposed"!

[Protagoras]

Hmmmm. What did they do to George Wallace when he and his staties stood up for states rights in the schoolhouse door? Why I do believe the President of the United States called out the National Guard and was prepared to do just that.

States are never allowed to assert their powers in violation of individual rights. THAT is what the constitution says. Hence the troops. So your apples to oranges NONcomparison is fallacious.

So, to answer your question, yes. He and the other sworn California state officials should be arrested and tried for sedition, if not treason, for violating their oath of office to honor the U.S. Constitution. In my opinion, of course.

Your opinion is of course noted, and discarded. Any federal offical who exerts power not properly delegated to the federal government by the constitution to them has violated their oath, and should be removed from office. See the tenth amendment for further clarification.

[jmc813]

So, to answer your question, yes. He and the other sworn California state officials should be arrested and tried for sedition, if not treason, for violating their oath of office to honor the U.S. Constitution.

Would you support such charges against President Bush with regards to his signing the Campaign Finance Reform bill?

[TKDietz]

"He [Arnold Schwarzenegger] and the other sworn California state officials should be arrested and tried for sedition, if not treason, for violating their oath of office to honor the U.S. Constitution."

Wouldn't that be something to watch? I agree with you wholeheartedly. Nothing would happen to these guys of course, but it would sure kick the whole debate up a notch. It would be a definite plus for those of us who believe marijuana should be legal.

[freepatriot32]

Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here

[robertpaulsen]

"States are never allowed to assert their powers in violation of individual rights."

Your position is ludicrous -- the states define the rights they will protect and to what extent by their state constitutions.

At least, that's what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they created federalism. And THAT'S what was in the U.S. Constitution.

[robertpaulsen]

"Would you support such charges against President Bush with regards to his signing the Campaign Finance Reform bill?"

No, why would I? There's nothing unconstitutional about CFR, so say the courts.

And rather than wringing our hands about how helpless we are with this liberal court, I suggest we elect those who will rewrite the CFR laws.

[robertpaulsen]

"It would be a definite plus for those of us who believe marijuana should be legal."

I highly doubt it's an issue upon which the Governor and others wish to hang their political careers.

[robertpaulsen]

"Why does cultivation draw thousands of dollars in fines and jail time?"

Because it defines them as a drug dealer/drug trafficker -- someone we don't like.

[TKDietz]

I bet standing up to the federal government on this issue is good for their political careers. If your wish came true and they were arrested for what they are doing, that would probably be good for their careers too. They wouldn't be prosecuted and put in prison over this. Voters wouldn't stand for that, especially considering that most voters in this country support medical marijuana. Any move like that against these people by the feds is just going to propel the issue into the spotlight and make the feds look like bullies who don't care about the democratic process or states rights.


This is a silly thing to argue about though because it isn't going to happen. If Arnold Schwarzenegger is arrested over this by the feds I will eat my hat.

[LibertarianInExile]

"Seems to me that if the state is not going to enforce the drug laws, then they certainly don't need the federal money that goes with it."

Yep, I agree, the DEA should pull out of California and stop spending any more money there.

[panaxanax]

$480/oz?

Wow, looks like pot would have been a better investment opportunity than the stock market, gold and platinum all combined. I remember $10.00 lids. Of course, that was Mexican 'dirt weed' and waaaay back in the late 60's. Also glad I gave it up........30 years ago.

[Wolfie]

What did they do to George Wallace when he and his staties stood up for states rights in the schoolhouse door?

Bit of a difference. The Supreme Court did not strike down California's medical marijuana law. The State law stands. The ruling allows Federal authorities to enforce Federal law. There is no Federal law against a State Governor upholding the laws he is sworn to uphold, namely State laws. Of course, with Republicans in charge, that could change.

[robertpaulsen]

"Yep, I agree, the DEA should pull out of California and stop spending any more money there."

Then you don't agree 'cause that's not what I said.

[robertpaulsen]

"I bet standing up to the federal government on this issue is good for their political careers."

Over the issue of smoking pot? Puh-leeze.

"This is a silly thing to argue about though because it isn't going to happen."

I agree. Sonner or later the federal government will appeal to the USSC to strike down these state medical marijuana laws, using the various scandals as proof that their existence is a joke and a scam.

[TKDietz]

"Over the issue of smoking pot? Puh-leeze."

Is that the issue or is the issue the right of Californians to pass their own internal laws without the federal government butting in? California is a state with around 30,000,000 people and those people have voted to allow medical marijuana. Whether a state leader supports medical marijuana or not is not particularly relevant. The people there have spoken. The question now is do leaders in California stand up for the people in California or do they roll over for the feds? I imagine they would roll over if things got to hot for them, but how much egg will the federal government get on their faces pushing them to that point? It's all good as far as I'm concerned. If the feds want to push the issue, they're just going to crank the debate up several notches, and they're going to piss a lot of people off, which will only be good for those of us who believe in states rights and those of us who in the broader marijuana debate believe marijuana should be legal and regulated like alcohol.

[jmc813]

I agree. Sonner or later the federal government will appeal to the USSC to strike down these state medical marijuana laws, using the various scandals as proof that their existence is a joke and a scam.

Do you think you will be at odds with Justice Thomas in this eventual case?