PDA

View Full Version : Pot Wars or Home Invasion?


LockJaw
10-31-2010, 2:20 PM
A interesting legal story hit the newsline today. In a home invasion of a "Growers" house one invader was shot and killed. I wonder that if the Mendocino DA declares it a good shoot, the Feds will step in and charge for weapons and/or drugs. Prop 19 has prompted the DEA to state they will step in if it passes. This may be a early chance for them to send a message under slightly different curcumstances.
No details have been released concerning whether it was a "medical" grow. However most Growers in that area are wise enough to get a medical card to protect their crop from a local or State raid.
For those that do not know, Mendocino was the most liberal County in amount and ease of Medical grows at one time. The tide has turned how ever with the escalation of outsiders and related grow problems.


http://lakeconews.com/content/view/16692/919/

REGIONAL: Suspect fatally shot during alleged marijuana robbery
Written by Lake County News reports
Sunday, 31 October 2010

LAYTONVILLE, Calif. – An alleged attempted home invasion robbery resulted in the fatal shooting of one of the suspects.
Incident occurred early Saturday morning, according to a report from Capt. Kurt Smallcomb of the Mendocino County Sheriff's Office.
Information developed so far has led investigators to believe the attempted home invasion was related to marijuana activities at the residence, Smallcomb said.
At approximately 7:21 a.m. Saturday Mendocino County Sheriff's communications officers were contacted by Jill Cahill, a resident of Steele Lane in Laytonville, Smallcomb said.
He said Cahill reported that just moments before her telephone call three individuals wearing masks and armed with unknown types of firearms forcibly entered into her residence, where gunfire was exchanged and one of the suspects was shot and believed to be deceased.
Deputies and emergency medical personnel responded to the location where they contacted Cahill and two other individuals who were visiting her. Smallcomb said deputies found one of the masked suspects laying just outside the residence, who was confirmed to be deceased.
Cahill advised that the suspects forcibly entered into her residence and sprayed pepper spray at her and her guests. Smallcomb said Cahill also reported that the suspects further displayed an unknown type firearm and shot at least one round inside the residence which struck one of Jill's visitors in the leg.
Armed with a .357 revolver, Cahill reportedly defended herself and her visitors, and a firefight took place inside the residence. Smallcomb said Cahill fatally shot one of the masked suspects, and the other two suspects fled the residence.
Mendocino County Sheriff's deputies, detectives and an investigator from the Mendocino County District Attorney's Office are continuing to investigate the incident, Smallcomb said.

This is another Laytonville incident that occured Wedsday:

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20101028/ARTICLES/101029472/1308/news?Title=Laytonville-man-shot-in-fight-over-pot&tc=ar

Laytonville man shot in fight over pot

By GLENDA ANDERSON
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT


Published: Thursday, October 28, 2010 at 3:39 p.m.
Last Modified: Thursday, October 28, 2010 at 3:39 p.m.
A 19-year-old Laytonville man was shot in the face Thursday during a dispute over marijuana, law authorities said.

William Graves was airlifted to a hospital outside the county, said Mendocino County Sheriff’s Capt. Kurt Smallcomb.

Graves was shot at least once in the face during a late-morning altercation with a marijuana operation partner, he said.

The suspect’s name has not yet been released. The investigation is continuing, Smallcomb said.

CCWFacts
10-31-2010, 3:26 PM
These stories come up pretty regularly. I can't guess if the feds will press charges or not (weapons, cultivation).

I'll say, first, that I've already voted yes on 19. I think it should be legal, and treated the same way we treat other legal intoxicants, such as alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, pills (prescription and OTC).

But it's not legal. Even if Prop 19 passes, it will remain illegal, and therefore anyone who is involved in it (especially cultivation) is a criminal. Prop 19 will change nothing at the Federal level where cannabis is and will remain a Schedule 1 substance, with felony for cultivation and distribution and possession above certain quantities.

If someone breaks into a pharmacy or liquor store, and the store owner shoots for self-defense, it's a clear situation: a non-criminal defended himself against a criminal.

Unfortunately, today, and for the foreseeable future, pot distributors are not in the same legal situation as pharmacies and liquor stores. Pot distributors are criminal operations. They may be nice people, they may (or may not) have legitimate medical needs, they may be non-violent, but they're still criminals.

This means that the only people who go into it are the kind of people who are not deterred by criminal penalties, and so, even though it should (in my opinion) be legal, the only people involved will be people who think it's ok to live life knowingly committing a serious felony.

Not the kind of people I sympathize with.

paradox
11-01-2010, 10:40 AM
I don't care if you're doing a home invasion to steal pot, cash, jewels, electronics, or the person's freaking chia pet, home invaders should be met with gunfire and dropped on site. I don't even care if the homeowner is the biggest douchbag around and brought bad things upon themselves through excessive bragging about their illicit activities (drugs, moonshine, hookers, modded x-boxes, whatever). If the feds or locals want to prosecute the underlying illicit activities fine, but they should take an self defense charges off the table as a thanks to the homeowner for saving the cost of trial and incarceration of the invaders and as a clear message that hunting season for home invaders is year round.

wash
11-01-2010, 11:03 AM
Who cares?

If prop 19 passes, the motivation to steal marijuana from growers will decrease greatly and drug wars over marijuana will quickly die becaue the value of marijuana will decrease rapidly.

If there is some connection and underlying pot war behind these two incidents or if the first is a completely isolated incident, the solution is the same: decriminalize marijuana.

I'm not a marijuana smoker and don't even drink (possible liver condition).

I'm not saying this because I want to get high, it just makes sense.

Arondos
11-01-2010, 11:13 AM
Had one of these in Modesto about a month ago. Cops were all over our area looking for three guys at about 1am. They invaded a house where someone was growing "legal" pot. They were armed. I know they got two of the three. My wife about had a fit when i realized what was going on and I made sure my .45 was handy.

We are in an apartment and the back side is to a fence and parking lot. Nice and dark. I was not going to take a chance on one of them deciding to come in a back window to escape the police.

This was just a simple case of bad guy wants something without having to work for it. I don't care if it is cash, TV, electronics, or something illegal. You want it? Get a job and earn it or risk winding up dead.

nicki
11-01-2010, 11:40 AM
I predict that other than paperwork, nothing will happen to the home defenders.

Mendocino is good for both gun rights and marijuana.

Assuming that these are otherwise clean self defense shootings, no DA in Mendocino county is going to press charges. Truth is many people in Mendocino county are making a living by growing pot and those individuals will be in the jury pool.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the home defenders don't apply for and actually get CCW permits after this is over.

Sure the Feds could get involved, but they won't because it opens up too many cans of worms that they don't want to deal with.

People still have a right to be tried by their peers and the Mendocino residents aren't going to be sympathetic to the Feds.

Yeah they could pull things to San Fran, but that is even a worse choice.

42 percent of San Franciscans voted against prop H, support for medical marijuana is at least 80 percent and support for outright legalization in San Francisco could exceed 65 percent.

I know that some people on this board are upset that the home defender was growing pot. The bottom line for me though is the following.

If we don't support their right to protect themselvees in their homes, how can we argue we have a right to protect ourselves in our homes.

Seems like we are seeing more home defender cases involving marijuana growers.
They may be potheads, but I guess they forgot to drink the "gun ban" KOOL AID.

I just wish someone would ask Obama or Holder point blank their opinion on the actions of the Home Defender.

Nicki

Of course the big question is this, will this story make it into the NRA magazines.

tyrist
11-01-2010, 11:40 AM
Who cares?

If prop 19 passes, the motivation to steal marijuana from growers will decrease greatly and drug wars over marijuana will quickly die becaue the value of marijuana will decrease rapidly.

If there is some connection and underlying pot war behind these two incidents or if the first is a completely isolated incident, the solution is the same: decriminalize marijuana.

I'm not a marijuana smoker and don't even drink (possible liver condition).

I'm not saying this because I want to get high, it just makes sense.

Prop 19 will do nothing to decrease crime. The motivation will still be there because of the large amount of cash the growers have as well as the fact it is still illicit in the rest of the US so the margins for criminal activity is still there.

BusBoy
11-01-2010, 12:16 PM
Prop 19 will do nothing to decrease crime. The motivation will still be there because of the large amount of cash the growers have as well as the fact it is still illicit in the rest of the US so the margins for criminal activity is still there.

and this is different from a 7-eleven or a bank how??

LockJaw
11-01-2010, 12:30 PM
In posting this story I had hoped to have a discussion on possible legal actions by the Feds. I realize that that marijuana growing and use are emotional issues. Historical comparisions can easily be made to the Prohibition of Alcohol. When money and wants intercect there will always be those that cross the legal line in the sand.
I really don't think at this time that the DA of Mendocino will take anything into account other than the invasion. The State will probably defer to the County. The Feds however have already stepped in and challenged the county's last Grow initative that was passed this last year. (See story below) Of all the the Counties in CA none have pushed the envelope in concern to okaying Pot growing than Mendocino. The Politics of Pot dominate their local political races. The candidate's stance on growing and views on peoples legality to use are one of the first personal statements asked for by voters. You have BOS candidates listing their views when they announce to run. There is a close DA race being decided tomorrow as well as a few seats on the BOS.
Here is the link to the raid the Feds made in response to the last County ordinance when first implemented in July. What is not in the article because of the date, is the recently stated intention of the DEA to ignore Prop 19 if it is passed. The question will be if Prop 19 passes, is how hard and with what tools will the Feds hit back with. If the push for marijuana growing charges are not enough to deter will they begin to push for Gun law prosecution as well, and how will that play out?

http://calpotnews.com/pot-pourri/dea-busts-mendocino-medical-marijuana-grower/

The federal Drug Enforcement Administration has flouted Mendocino County’s newly enacted medical marijuana ordinance by raiding the first collective that had applied to the sheriff’s cultivation permit program, the Emerald Triangle News Service reports.

A multi-agency federal task force descended on the property of Joy Greenfield, the first Mendo patient to pay the $1,050 application fee under the ordinance, which allows collectives to grow up to 99 plants provided they comply with certain regulations.

Greenfield had applied in the name of her collective, “Light The Way,” which opened in San Diego earlier this year. Her property had passed a preliminary inspection by the Mendo sheriff’s deputies shortly before the raid, and she had bought the sheriff’s “zip-ties” intended to designate her cannabis plants as legal.

In the days before the raid, Greenfield had seen a helicopter hovering over her property; she inquired with the sheriff, who told her the copter belonged to the DEA and wasn’t under his control.

Santa Rosa Press-Democrat coverage

The agents invaded her property with guns drawn, tore out the collective’s 99 plants and took Greenfield’s computer and cash.
Joy was not at home during the raid, but spoke on the phone to the DEA agent in charge. When she told he she was a legal grower under the sheriff’s program, the agent replied, “I don’t care what the sheriff says.”

When she returned to her house she found it in disarray with soda cans strewn on the floor. “It was just a mess,” she said. “No one should be able to tear your house apart like that.”

Greenfield called the raid a “slap in the face of Mendocino’s government.”

The DEA has been tight-lipped about the raid, but claims it was part of a larger investigation involving other suspects.

“Here Mendo is trying to step out in front by passing this ordinance, and what do the Feds do but raid the first applicant,” said Greenfield’s attorney, Bob Boyd of Ukiah.

“The DEA is stepping all over local authorities trying to tax and regulate,” Boyd said.

Neither Boyd nor other locals believe that the sheriff tipped off the DEA or gave them any information about permit applicants.

Mendocino County Sheriff Tom Allman confirmed Friday that the property owner had the proper paperwork and the marijuana was legal in the eyes of the county.

“This was a federal operation and had nothing to do with local law enforcement,” Allman said. “The federal government made a decision to go ahead and eradicate it.”

Mendocino County Sheriff Tom Allman has been supportive of medical marijuana cultivators who go by the rules.

Sheriff Allman has been highly supportive of efforts to bring local growers into the permit program. Nonetheless, observers fear the raid will have a chilling effect on medical cultivators, possibly causing supply problems for local patients.

“This raid is clear evidence that the DEA is out of control,” said California NORML director Dale Gieringer. “A change in federal law is long overdue.”

“In the meantime, the DEA needs a new director who will enforce Attorney General Holder’s pledge not to interfere in state medical marijuana laws,” Gierigner said.

The DEA is currently directed by Michele Leonhart, a Bush Administration holdover who has presided over numerous medical marijuana raids, and has obstructed research efforts to develop marijuana for medicine.

President Obama has renominated Leonhart to head the agency — a move strongly opposed by drug reformers, who are calling on the administration to honor its pledge of change.

negolien
11-01-2010, 12:39 PM
Just one of the crimes involving so called legal drugs.....wait till this lame pandering to young kids thing passes then well see even more morons.

LockJaw
11-01-2010, 1:04 PM
I predict that other than paperwork, nothing will happen to the home defenders.

Mendocino is good for both gun rights and marijuana.

Assuming that these are otherwise clean self defense shootings, no DA in Mendocino county is going to press charges. Truth is many people in Mendocino county are making a living by growing pot and those individuals will be in the jury pool.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the home defenders don't apply for and actually get CCW permits after this is over.

Sure the Feds could get involved, but they won't because it opens up too many cans of worms that they don't want to deal with.

People still have a right to be tried by their peers and the Mendocino residents aren't going to be sympathetic to the Feds.

Yeah they could pull things to San Fran, but that is even a worse choice.

42 percent of San Franciscans voted against prop H, support for medical marijuana is at least 80 percent and support for outright legalization in San Francisco could exceed 65 percent.

"Edited for brievity" LJ

Nicki

Of course the big question is this, will this story make it into the NRA magazines.


If you recall the Feds went after Eddy Lepp for a Medical CO-OP Grow raid. The took the trial to Fed Court in San Francisco and won.

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2009/may/22/medical_marijuana_eddy_lepp_sent
Medical Marijuana: Eddy Lepp Sentenced to 10 Years in Federal Prison
Post to:TwitterFacebookDiggStumbleUponRedditby Phillip Smith, May 22, 2009, 12:00am, (Issue #586)

Posted in: Federal Courts, Medical Marijuana, News Brief
California medical marijuana grower, spiritualist, and activist Eddy Lepp was sentenced Monday to a mandatory minimum 10-year prison sentence on federal marijuana cultivation charges in a case where he grew more than 20,000 pot plants in plain view of a state highway in Northern California's Lake County. US District Court Judge Marilyn Patel also sentenced him to five years probation. He must report to federal authorities by July 6.
Eddy Lepp (courtesy cannabisculture.com)Lepp contended that the plants were a medical marijuana grow for members of the Multi Denominational Ministry of Cannabis and Rastafari and legal under California law. But during his trial, he was not allowed to introduce medical marijuana or religious defenses. He was found guilty of conspiracy to possess marijuana with the intent to distribute more than 1,000 pot plants and of cultivating more than 1,000 plants, which carries a maximum life sentence.
According to California NORML (CANORML) and the Santa Rosa Press-Democrat, there were gasps and sobs from Lepp supporters in the courtroom as Patel passed sentence. The sentence was "extreme," Patel conceded, but said her hands were tied by federal law.
In a nod toward the current turmoil over the status of federal prosecutions of medical marijuana providers, Judge Patel said Lepp could apply for a rehearing if the laws changed. Lepp and his attorneys plan to appeal the verdict and the sentence.
Lepp attorney Michael Hall told Patel the sentence was "incredible." "Incredible is what the law requires," Patel responded, adding that legalizing marijuana appeared to be Lepp's driving passion. "Maybe you want to be a martyr for the cause," she said.
Sentencing Lepp, a 56-year-old veteran in ill health, to prison is a travesty and a waste, said supporters. "This case sadly illustrates the senselessness of federal marijuana laws," said CANORML's Dale Geiringer. "The last thing this country needs is more medical marijuana prisoners. Hopefully, we can change the law and get Eddy out of jail before he completes his sentence."
"Locking up Eddy Lepp serves no purpose and is a huge waste of life and scarce prison space," said Aaron Smith, California policy director of the Marijuana Policy Project. "The community would be a lot better served if we taxed and regulated California's $14 billion marijuana industry rather than continuing to incarcerate nonviolent people like Eddy, who are clearly of no danger to society."

hvengel
11-01-2010, 1:18 PM
This type of thing has been going on forever. I remember an incident about 30 years ago in Contra Costa county where 3 armed individuals tried to rob a pot farm. When they entered the property they claimed to be police and fired shots to take control. A major problem for them was that they were complete morons and one of their shots hit one of their own in the head. He died at the scene.

In that case the only people charged were the farmers for cultivation. I suspect that now days the invaders would be charged.

Crom
11-01-2010, 1:20 PM
All violent home invaders should be met swiftly with a 12 gauge and dropped immediately.

383green
11-01-2010, 1:21 PM
I don't understand why anybody is surprised by DEA raids and federal prosecutions like this. Many of the quotes in the above articles show a profound ignorance. Pot is still illegal under federal law. Prop 215 didn't change that. Prop 19 won't change that if it passes. A Presidential request that .gov should look the other way doesn't change that, it's not binding upon federal law enforcement agencies, and even if any of those agencies choose to follow it, they could change their mind at any instant. I plan to vote in favor of Prop 19 tomorrow on libertarian grounds, but I do so with the understanding that pot will remain illegal (and pot + guns more so) until and unless federal law is changed.

nicki
11-01-2010, 1:37 PM
Eddy Lepp was not allowed to bring up at trial that he was growing medical marijuana.

Now I know that from a legal standpoint since the Feds don't recognize med marijuana, that defense was suppressed and kept from the Jury.

I bet if he was allowed to present that to the jury, it would have been at least a hung jury.

When a person is on trial for anything, IMHO a defendant should have a right to say whatever in their defense.

Perhaps we should follow this case and see if Obama does anything. Eddy Lepp could open the eyes of many that when it comes to their rights, Obama is a frienemy.

I still don't believe the Feds will get involved only because the last thing the feds want to do is risk uniting gun rights and pot rights supporters.

Nicki

wash
11-01-2010, 1:47 PM
Prop 19 will do nothing to decrease crime. The motivation will still be there because of the large amount of cash the growers have as well as the fact it is still illicit in the rest of the US so the margins for criminal activity is still there.
Once it's legal, why would people have lots of cash around?

CCWFacts
11-01-2010, 1:49 PM
I don't understand why anybody is surprised by DEA raids and federal prosecutions like this. Many of the quotes in the above articles show a profound ignorance. Pot is still illegal under federal law. Prop 215 didn't change that. Prop 19 won't change that if it passes. A Presidential request that .gov should look the other way doesn't change that, it's not binding upon federal law enforcement agencies, and even if any of those agencies choose to follow it, they could change their mind at any instant. I plan to vote in favor of Prop 19 tomorrow on libertarian grounds, but I do so with the understanding that pot will remain illegal (and pot + guns more so) until and unless federal law is changed.

Exactly. Pot is still illegal, and will remain illegal if Prop 19 passes. Just because something doesn't violate a state law doesn't mean it's legal.

To make an analogy, AFAIK there is no state-level law against copyright violation. I can set up a DVD duplicator and make a thousand copies of Avatar and sell them, and I've violated no California law. That doesn't mean that what I'm doing is legal!!! It's still Federal-level illegal and criminal. Likewise, I can go to Vermont, and start manufacturing machine guns (M16s for example). I can manufacture them and sell them all day long and I'm not violating any Vermont law. But that doesn't mean that the BATF is ok with it! I'll still go to Federal prison if I do that!

BigDogatPlay
11-01-2010, 2:08 PM
Who cares?

If prop 19 passes, the motivation to steal marijuana from growers will decrease greatly and drug wars over marijuana will quickly die becaue the value of marijuana will decrease rapidly.

While on face a valid theory, in fact I am afraid it will not work out that way.

This will be particularly true when the state, in it's ever burgeoning need for dollars launches a licensing and taxation scheme for all that ganga. Use cigarettes as an example, with the widespread avoidance of taxes in many states and the long standing interests of organized crime in tax free smokes, and the opposite of your theory becomes emminently clear.

Add to it that marijuana will continue to remain illegal to some degree or another over much of the nation. The moderate to larger grows are still going to be targeted and will have to be guarded by men with guns.... as they often are now.

If there is some connection and underlying pot war behind these two incidents or if the first is a completely isolated incident, the solution is the same: decriminalize marijuana.

These incidents are not isolated. They are happening with increasing frequency across Sonoma, Napa, Lake, Mendocino and Humboldt counties. They are becoming common place enough that they aren't getting that much splash in the media. Most of the home invasions of the dozen or so I am aware of in the past year in my own county have been of "medicinal" grows... that which is already legal. The number of hunters who are encountering illicit grows is a very large problem and is keeping a lot of hunters away from excellent hunting grounds.


Unless or until you get the entire nation, if not the world to de-criminalize, and are successful at keeping the government out of it (laughable on face) from a taxation perspective, limited de-criminalization isn't going to reall y change much, IMO.

21SF
11-01-2010, 3:20 PM
Pot should be legal plain and simple.

Alcohol has and will continue to destroy more families and lives than ANY other drug.(dont get mad its ok)

The feds just cant tax it, thats all.

It doesnt kill nearly as many brain cells as alcohol.

Its less addictive than coffee, i can go a morning without a joint, NOT without my coffee!!!!

the list goes on, honestly its un injustice.

QQQ
11-01-2010, 3:25 PM
I voted for Prop 19.

Do I think it will pass? Hell no.

Old people would rather everyone else pay for their legal drugs and keep everything else illegal. And old people, unlike young people, generally vote.

Regarding the original post, I will be surprised if this person is convicted for the shooting. Clearly, his life was in danger. What was he supposed to do in that situation? California has no duty to flee.

383green
11-01-2010, 3:30 PM
Its less addictive than coffee, i can go a morning without a joint, NOT without my coffee!!!!

I've managed to go almost 42 years so far without a joint, but I need to make myself a warm-up latte at home to wake up enough to go to Starbucks!

wash
11-01-2010, 3:47 PM
While on face a valid theory, in fact I am afraid it will not work out that way.

This will be particularly true when the state, in it's ever burgeoning need for dollars launches a licensing and taxation scheme for all that ganga. Use cigarettes as an example, with the widespread avoidance of taxes in many states and the long standing interests of organized crime in tax free smokes, and the opposite of your theory becomes emminently clear.

Add to it that marijuana will continue to remain illegal to some degree or another over much of the nation. The moderate to larger grows are still going to be targeted and will have to be guarded by men with guns.... as they often are now.



These incidents are not isolated. They are happening with increasing frequency across Sonoma, Napa, Lake, Mendocino and Humboldt counties. They are becoming common place enough that they aren't getting that much splash in the media. Most of the home invasions of the dozen or so I am aware of in the past year in my own county have been of "medicinal" grows... that which is already legal. The number of hunters who are encountering illicit grows is a very large problem and is keeping a lot of hunters away from excellent hunting grounds.


Unless or until you get the entire nation, if not the world to de-criminalize, and are successful at keeping the government out of it (laughable on face) from a taxation perspective, limited de-criminalization isn't going to reall y change much, IMO.
I must have missed all of those home invasion robberies over cigarettes.

As for all drug related crimes being connected, that's just silly.

Face it, no one will do home invasion robberies over 25 ft^2 of marijuana plants once marijuana is ~legal and cheap.

No one will get shot in the face over 25 ft^2 of marijuana plants either.

I don't believe that the federal government will come in to California to enforce drug laws against smokers and small time growers. They've said they will but I think that's just to save face over the failed drug war and try to salveage votes in more concervative states.

It's not a good idea to smoke weed or have anything to do with it if you are interested in retaining your second amendment rights (until it's federally legal).

On the other hand, legalizing it in California is the right move.

N6ATF
11-01-2010, 3:59 PM
I must have missed all of those home invasion robberies over cigarettes.

Watch those crime video shows. Cigs and booze, prime targets in convenience store robberies and shoplifts, I would venture to say even more than cash because they're not in a locked drawer or safe. Criminals will go where they know the good stuff is. Which is why Prop 215 dispensaries are pretty good targets.

383green
11-01-2010, 4:01 PM
Face it, no one will do home invasion robberies over 25 ft^2 of marijuana plants once marijuana is ~legal and cheap.


I would agree if legalization was happening all over the country, since a commodity's price can be driven way down when its brought out into the light from what was formerly a black market. What would the street value of that 25 ft^2 of plants be in the other 49 states, though? Would it be high enough to create an incentive for people to steal it here in CA for resale in the other states?

(I'm honestly asking; I don't know what the street value of a given unit of pot is, nor do I know how much pot a 25 ft^2 crop would yield).


It's not a good idea to smoke weed or have anything to do with it if you are interested in retaining your second amendment rights (until it's federally legal).

On the other hand, legalizing it in California is the right move.

Agreed on both counts. Legalization in CA would be a first step, not an end goal. I'm also hoping that prop 19 passes in order to trigger another state vs. fed situation, much like the hullabaloo we're already starting to see over firearms. The commerce clause has been terribly abused, and I hope that we'll see it pushed back quite a bit in the coming years.

MasterYong
11-01-2010, 4:15 PM
So is the OP saying that he thinks people that break the law have no right to self defense?

If you're growing pot and you become the victim of a home invasion you should just surrender?

Wow. Just. Wow.

wash
11-01-2010, 4:17 PM
When marijuana is legalized in CA, there will be plenty of people buying marijuana in Ca and then transporting it to places where it is not legal.

That should drive down prices across the country because the difficult and time consuming part is cultivating and drying marijuana. If that can be done without fear of prosecution, the price will be much lower and hopefully that savings would be passed along.

If the federal government was smart they would stop trying to enforce that particular crime which would take a lot of profit away from the Mexican drug cartels.

The big reason why home invasions won't happen is that real grow houses have lots more than 25 ft^2 of plants. They are already breaking the law, it pays to go big. If the price per ounce goes down and people don't risk growing more than 25 ft^2 to comply with the law, the total value is going to be perhaps a few thousand dollars, not hundreds of thousands. Crooks could make more money stealing LCD TVs...

Once the incentive goes away, crooks will look for something more valuable to steal.

383green
11-01-2010, 4:17 PM
So is the OP saying that he thinks people that break the law have no right to self defense?

I didn't get that impression. It seemed to me that he's just commenting that the feds may not recognize their right to self defense.

383green
11-01-2010, 4:25 PM
When marijuana is legalized in CA, there will be plenty of people buying marijuana in Ca and then transporting it to places where it is not legal.

That should drive down prices across the country because the difficult and time consuming part is cultivating and drying marijuana. If that can be done without fear of prosecution, the price will be much lower and hopefully that savings would be passed along.

Ah, that make sense. I think we may see more states creating their own "agricultural checkpoints" a their borders then, though. That could still be a net benefit for California; even though lots of people would still get locked up for smuggling pot, they'd be locked up in other states, paid for by other people's excessive taxes.


If the federal government was smart they would stop trying to enforce that particular crime which would take a lot of profit away from the Mexican drug cartels.

The fed government would be able to rake in lots of revenue if they allowed+taxed pot, yet they'd also give up a portion of the power, influence and fear-mongering opportunities that they enjoy from the failed war on drugs. That is, unless they figure that they could allow+tax pot and continue their anti-boogie-man campaign at its current size due to all of the other illicit recreational drugs that would remain black-market commodities.

bigstick61
11-01-2010, 4:47 PM
I think those who think Prop 19 will acually have a major impact on the current state of things are deluding themselves, just like the people who think pot and hemp are miracle plants that do all manner of wondrous things, or the people who think marijuana causes no impairment.

That said, I do support legalization and I certainly do not think anyone should be prosecuted for defending themselves, to include gun possession charges, from those trying to steal an illicit substance they have or where the illicit substance is a coincidence. What I question is the specifics of Prop. 19 itself (which is why I'm still on the fence).

My understanding is that Prop. 19 makes regulation of legal marijuana in this state piecemeal. Who really wants a patchwork of laws like that? Just look at the impact on gun ownership of such practices in states like Illinois. My understanding is also that this is a constitutional amendment. As such, would the legislature be able to fix this issue, or would it take yet another constitutional amendment (which may or may not pass) to fix it?

timdps
11-01-2010, 6:51 PM
I still don't believe the Feds will get involved only because the last thing the feds want to do is risk uniting gun rights and pot rights supporters.

Nicki

LOL! I love reading Nikki's posts. Definitely call me a Nikki fan!

Tim

tyrist
11-01-2010, 7:17 PM
Once it's legal, why would people have lots of cash around?

First it will not be legal. Second those locations will not be using debit/credit cards because the credit/debit card companies will be involved in criminal activity. Third it will still be completely illegal in numerous other states and therefor still give criminals a huge profit margin.

I don't care whether anyone votes one way or the other but do not go into the booth thinking prop 19 will have any positive effect on crime.

LockJaw
11-01-2010, 8:12 PM
First it will not be legal. Second those locations will not be using debit/credit cards because the credit/debit card companies will be involved in criminal activity. Third it will still be completely illegal in numerous other states and therefor still give criminals a huge profit margin.

I don't care whether anyone votes one way or the other but do not go into the booth thinking prop 19 will have any positive effect on crime.

You are wrong about Credit Cards. Medical Marijuana Dispenseries do take Credit Cards. I was curious and asked someone that is a patient. Maybe not every card company will but if there is money to be made many will. Probably not too hard to put something into the fine print that saves them from any problems.

LockJaw
11-01-2010, 8:56 PM
I voted for Prop 19.

Do I think it will pass? Hell no.

Old people would rather everyone else pay for their legal drugs and keep everything else illegal. And old people, unlike young people, generally vote.

Regarding the original post, I will be surprised if this person is convicted for the shooting. Clearly, his life was in danger. What was he supposed to do in that situation? California has no duty to flee.

Lets do some math, 18 years old hippie in 1965, add 45 years and you have a 63 year old Senior Who prefers a toke to a shot and a beer.
Add in that many true Medical MJ patients are in this age range. Once they figure out that reefer madness was a hoax it's hard to change their minds. They vote but not always like you would expect a Grandparent to vote.

It refreshing to see so many people with a libertarian leanings on this site. I do see that we also have alot of people that will put obeyence to law above their beliefs. It is the safest play of course. I however believe those that will push their beliefs with action do deserve our respect as long as they are doing no harm to their neighbor. Very few laws or beliefs are changed by simple conversation. If that was true CA gun laws would be more like Arizona or Texas.
With due respect to Nicki, I don't believe the Feds will let prop 19 go unanswered. There is too much to lose on their end. Money and Power are not items that are let go of without a fight.

CCWFacts
11-01-2010, 9:05 PM
First it will not be legal. Second those locations will not be using debit/credit cards because the credit/debit card companies will be involved in criminal activity. Third it will still be completely illegal in numerous other states and therefor still give criminals a huge profit margin.

You are wrong about Credit Cards. Medical Marijuana Dispenseries do take Credit Cards. I was curious and asked someone that is a patient. Maybe not every card company will but if there is money to be made many will. Probably not too hard to put something into the fine print that saves them from any problems.

If these dispensaries are taking CCs, I bet what they have done is set up their CC accounts with false information, like claiming to be an "herbal supplement store" or something like that. I bet they would have their merchant accounts shut off if the CC companies found out. ALL CC merchant account contracts say that the merchant agrees not to sell illegal items through the merchant account, and if they do it's grounds for immediate termination, and my impression of CC processors is they would do it immediately.

On the money question: Any of these medical marijuana businesses open themselves, and a lot of other people, up to various financial crimes prosecutions. Taking money from selling pot and converting it into some other form is money laundry. That is true even if Prop 19 passes. That is true regardless of amount.

Going even further, if a government entity (state gov't, county or city) taxes any of these businesses, that gov't entity itself could be pursued as being part of a criminal enterprise, including for money laundry. The Federal gov't could come after them civilly, and seize assets, or could even come after them criminally, as individuals. And coming after them criminally, as individuals, would be a double-whamy, because their state-level immunity doesn't count in Federal court.

If I were a state / county / city tax collector or official, I personally would not want to be involved in any kind of cannabis tax, whether or not Prop 19 passes. There is no question that the Feds could prosecute people in that position. The only question is, do they want to slap California into its place, or will they let it slide and risk having the whole War on Drugs start to unravel?

And yes, the WoD could start to unravel. Right now, the WoD relies heavily on cooperation from our international partners in Colombia, Mexico, Afghanistan, Burma and such places. All of those places have bowed to US pressure (foreign aid, military force) and agreed to go along with US-style pot laws. How can the US seriously impose its will on Mexico and Colombian legislatures if it can't impose its will on California?

tyrist
11-01-2010, 9:08 PM
You are wrong about Credit Cards. Medical Marijuana Dispenseries do take Credit Cards. I was curious and asked someone that is a patient. Maybe not every card company will but if there is money to be made many will. Probably not too hard to put something into the fine print that saves them from any problems.

Then the dispensary has lied to the company.

HUTCH 7.62
11-01-2010, 9:11 PM
These stories are common in the emerald triangle. Druggies will kill their own to get a fix, or a chance to make a little money.

Ksmash01
11-01-2010, 9:34 PM
All I know is this:

The gun owners that don't see the prohibition of ________ to be a threat to their gun rights must be turning a blind shoulder to the facts.


Likewise, the people that think that Prop 19 will have anything to do with how the feds go after people in CA are also turning a blind shoulder to the facts.

The fact is this.................................dude, I wanna cheeseburger :D.

NightOwl
11-01-2010, 11:19 PM
Prop 19 passing will result in a court case, with CA defending it against the Fed. An injuction will prevent it from taking effect until the case is decided. The case will take a while, couple of years or more I'd guess, and go all the way to SCOTUS. When it makes it to SCOTUS, the justices will get a chance to overturn Wickard V. Filburn if they so desire. Overturning Wickard V. Filburn would significantly impact the use of the Commerce Clause by Congress to pass legislation (which, incidentally, I would love to see this overturned).

The downside is that SCOTUS, with the exception of Clarence Thomas, is almost...afraid to overturn major decisions, even if they were horrible or decided wrongly.

Anyhow, there will be no immediate effect to this state if Prop 19 passes, other than some headlines in the news.

Carnivore
11-01-2010, 11:59 PM
AMAZING!!! I can't believe people really think that passing prop 19 will do anything to stop drug crime. Alaska is still having issues and it has been legal on a state lever for years. It is the same exact belief that the gun grabbers have that if you make guns illegal then no one will use them in a crime. Not one ounce of proof to back up any of the FOD but who needs proof anyway. Hay let's all just take our front doors off then that way there is no more breaking and entering too. Amazing.

kabley
11-02-2010, 12:08 AM
A interesting legal story hit the newsline today. In a home invasion of a "Growers" house one invader was shot and killed. I wonder that if the Mendocino DA...

I had to pause there...

Man... do we really expect anything less of Mendocino?

NightOwl
11-02-2010, 2:10 AM
AMAZING!!! I can't believe people really think that passing prop 19 will do anything to stop drug crime. Alaska is still having issues and it has been legal on a state lever for years. It is the same exact belief that the gun grabbers have that if you make guns illegal then no one will use them in a crime. Not one ounce of proof to back up any of the FOD but who needs proof anyway. Hay let's all just take our front doors off then that way there is no more breaking and entering too. Amazing.

1. California has been ordered by a judge to reduce its prison population by 40,000 (27%) by August, 2011. Incidentally, less people in prison saves money.
2. If marijuana is not illegal, there won't be additional people in prison for it, or getting sentences extended by possession/cultivation/etc. See point 1.
3. LEO not being tied up dealing with marijuana will leave them available to deal with more serious crimes.

Just out of curiosity, if someone wants to use marijuana, and they're not forcing you to, why would you be against that? How much proof do you need that, if something isn't illegal, people won't be arrested for it, thus less laws being broken? Seems pretty straightforward. Also, your logic is a bit twisted on the comparison to gun arguments. If you make guns legal, then crime will decrease because people won't be going to jail for having guns = If you make marijuana legal, then crime will decrease because people won't be going to jail for having it, not the way you put it.

Also worth noting, people die because of the drug cartels. If marijuana is legal, this will cut a pretty good sized chunk out of their profit margins, as it would be able to be grown/sold through legitimate business enterprises and in private gardens.

Furthermore, and perhaps most importantly, look up Wickard v. Filburn, the controlling case law for Congress to have the authority via the Commerce Clause to regulate something that isn't involved in interstate commerce (also the groundwork for the 1934 NFA). If pot being legalized by states leads to a SCOTUS challange of that, it could potentially be beneficial to our gun rights and our country as a whole.

Want to see the NFA get overturned/thrown out? Vote yes on prop 19. It's no guarantee, but every avenue of attack on that court case is a good thing. The more people interested in seeing it get thrown out, the better the odds of it happening, and the easier good plaintiffs could be found to press the lawsuit.

tyrist
11-02-2010, 8:41 AM
1. California has been ordered by a judge to reduce its prison population by 40,000 (27%) by August, 2011. Incidentally, less people in prison saves money.
2. If marijuana is not illegal, there won't be additional people in prison for it, or getting sentences extended by possession/cultivation/etc. See point 1.
3. LEO not being tied up dealing with marijuana will leave them available to deal with more serious crimes.

Just out of curiosity, if someone wants to use marijuana, and they're not forcing you to, why would you be against that? How much proof do you need that, if something isn't illegal, people won't be arrested for it, thus less laws being broken? Seems pretty straightforward. Also, your logic is a bit twisted on the comparison to gun arguments. If you make guns legal, then crime will decrease because people won't be going to jail for having guns = If you make marijuana legal, then crime will decrease because people won't be going to jail for having it, not the way you put it.

Also worth noting, people die because of the drug cartels. If marijuana is legal, this will cut a pretty good sized chunk out of their profit margins, as it would be able to be grown/sold through legitimate business enterprises and in private gardens.

Furthermore, and perhaps most importantly, look up Wickard v. Filburn, the controlling case law for Congress to have the authority via the Commerce Clause to regulate something that isn't involved in interstate commerce (also the groundwork for the 1934 NFA). If pot being legalized by states leads to a SCOTUS challange of that, it could potentially be beneficial to our gun rights and our country as a whole.

Want to see the NFA get overturned/thrown out? Vote yes on prop 19. It's no guarantee, but every avenue of attack on that court case is a good thing. The more people interested in seeing it get thrown out, the better the odds of it happening, and the easier good plaintiffs could be found to press the lawsuit.

If marijuana is legal and the profit margins went away then the criminals would enter another enterprise and still be in custody. The idea there will be any reduction in the prison population is laughable.

It takes 5-10 minutes to cite somebody for marijuana possession so the idea any time will be saved is ridiculous.

As I have said before do not vote yes because you think this will somehow reduce crime or fix the state budget. If you feel somebody should be permitted to use marijuana for recreation then vote yes.

wash
11-02-2010, 9:32 AM
There are plenty of criminals that only sell pot to support their own habit.

If marijuana decreases in price, those "criminals" will no longer be comitting any crime and will never go to prison.

Mexican drug cartels will look for other ways to make money, mostly other drugs probably.

The good news is that if marijuana is easily obtainable, there will be less demand for other drugs. Most people will decide not to become a criminal to try cocaine or heroine or whatever. I think things like extacy and meth will be the only real bad drug problems that remain after that.

There will be an increase in tourism. There will be a decrease in spending because marijuana users and growers will not be arrested or prosecuted. There will be an increase in tax revenue because a lot of marijuana growers and dealers will pay the tax. This can't hurt the state budget.

nicki
11-02-2010, 10:14 AM
The big issue regarding marijuana for me is industrial hemp.

The Dupont Corp and the Hearst Corp conspired together not so much to ban pot, but to ban Hemp because taking hemp out of the market so that they could make huge profits from snythetic oil based products.

Left to compete in the free market, Hemp could easily become a annual 200 to 500 billion dollar annual cash crop and that is not including the pot.

Ethanol and biodiesel produced from Hemp would help us break our national addiction to OPEC oil.

When you start tallying up all the damage to our country from the War on Drugs, the destruction to many familes, the expansion of police powers on all levels of government, you have a war that is costing our economy at least 1 trillion dollars per year.

If we had that money going to other things, like business loans/grants to budding entrepeneuers and inventors, we would grow our way out of our depression.

Nicki

Lostsheep
11-02-2010, 12:49 PM
Why do people assume that because someone smokes pot that they must be a violent criminal who will do anything to "get high or make a buck"?

I could have sworn that the stereotype was that they were hippies or slackers; one is a pacifist and the other is too lazy to do anything. WTF?

383green
11-02-2010, 12:53 PM
What? Wasn't Reefer Madness a documentary? :p

hkdad
11-02-2010, 1:08 PM
Why do people assume that because someone smokes pot that they must be a violent criminal who will do anything to "get high or make a buck"?

I could have sworn that the stereotype was that they were hippies or slackers; one is a pacifist and the other is too lazy to do anything. WTF?

exactly... i don't see the difference in smoking pot or drinking alcohol. therefore it should be legal...

HUTCH 7.62
11-02-2010, 6:55 PM
AMAZING!!! I can't believe people really think that passing prop 19 will do anything to stop drug crime. Alaska is still having issues and it has been legal on a state lever for years. It is the same exact belief that the gun grabbers have that if you make guns illegal then no one will use them in a crime. Not one ounce of proof to back up any of the FOD but who needs proof anyway. Hay let's all just take our front doors off then that way there is no more breaking and entering too. Amazing.

This.

Smokeybehr
11-02-2010, 7:28 PM
Prop19 is going to turn into a Tenth Amendment issue, because there's nothing in the Constitution that allows the FedGov to regulate MJ. If you look at the discussions back in the '30s about banning MJ, there were plenty of discussions about everything but the Tenth.

Also, remember that during WWII, the prohibition on growing hemp was lifted, and farmers were actually encouraged to grow it buy the Feds. There's a film in the archives called "Hemp for Victory" put out by the War Department and the Department of Agriculture.

NightOwl
11-02-2010, 7:35 PM
Prop19 is going to turn into a Tenth Amendment issue, because there's nothing in the Constitution that allows the FedGov to regulate MJ. If you look at the discussions back in the '30s about banning MJ, there were plenty of discussions about everything but the Tenth.

Also, remember that during WWII, the prohibition on growing hemp was lifted, and farmers were actually encouraged to grow it buy the Feds. There's a film in the archives called "Hemp for Victory" put out by the War Department and the Department of Agriculture.

Wickard v. Filburn. SCOTUS case from 1942. Have a wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn Until that gets overturned, we're stuck with an overpowered fed and absurd laws. If it does get overturned, a whole lot of laws will be up for challange.

Smokeybehr
11-02-2010, 7:49 PM
Wickard v. Filburn. SCOTUS case from 1942. Have a wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn Until that gets overturned, we're stuck with an overpowered fed and absurd laws. If it does get overturned, a whole lot of laws will be up for challange.

I know all about it. A swipe was taken at it with overturning GFSZ I, but GFSZ II went right ahead and kept going, ignoring the fact that too much was read into the Commerce Clause by a liberal court.

a1c
11-02-2010, 8:00 PM
The Feds generally don't give a crap about those cases except when hundreds of plants are involved, in which case it's usually an illegal grow, even by California standards.

A few years ago, in the next county over (Lake), some guys invaded a house to steal from a pot grower. They brutalized his son (who sustained brain damage) and when they left, the owner shot dead two of them. The leader of the group was arrested and charged with the murder of his accomplices (a unique and little used statute in California law allows it). The Lake DA lost on that charge. (Look up Hughes Renato online to see details about this case.)

However, no charges were ever filled against the home owner. And the Feds didn't charge him either. (He got arrested much later in an unrelated murder case.)

As it's been said before, there are cases like this on a regular basis in the area. If the homeowner is defending himself in a self-defense situation, he won't be charged. I know of several similar cases, either involving drugs, or not involving any.

We had last year in our county the first federal case involving marijuana since Obama had taken office, but it was a guy growing thousands of plants illegally. He was trafficking and got caught. The DEA only cares about cartel grows and pot clubs or individuals trafficking at a large scale or making an illegal profit (the IRS sometimes gets involved or even leads such cases).

chaseface
11-02-2010, 11:46 PM
Face it, no one will do home invasion robberies over 25 ft^2 of marijuana plants once marijuana is ~legal and cheap.

No one will get shot in the face over 25 ft^2 of marijuana plants either

Wash I've gotta respectfully disagree with you on this one. Btw I hope you don't mind the partial quote. If marijuana was legalized nationwide I'm sure that there would be a huge drop in price of pot but IMO only one state will not change the laws of supply and demand. Nationwide there is a demand for pot so high that I personally don't believe California will be able to fill that need. There will be a huge market in coming from all over to buy it legally and illegally transport it back to where they are from. Why take the trouble to grow something illegal in your own state for 4 months when you can buy it legally and then just figure out how to get it home. So I don't think that the price would change that much.

But... lets say that the price of pot dropped by 50% from an average of $20 per gram to $10. Well with a good green thumb some people can grow ten pounds in a 25 square foot area. At about 4,500 a pound they would have $45,000 dollars worth of pot at harvest time. Even if the price dropped by 75% it would still be $22,500 worth of pot... dropped by 90% = $4,500... you see my point. Of course that is not wholesale price. People will still get robbed, people get robbed over walking down the street with a $100 chain on. BTW they can make that much per crop, 3-4 times a year if indoor.

Just my opinion, looks like we wont get to find out this time around anyway.

Chase

Carnivore
11-03-2010, 1:35 AM
Just out of curiosity, if someone wants to use marijuana, and they're not forcing you to, why would you be against that? How much proof do you need that, if something isn't illegal, people won't be arrested for it, thus less laws being broken? Seems pretty straightforward. Also, your logic is a bit twisted on the comparison to gun arguments. If you make guns legal, then crime will decrease because people won't be going to jail for having guns = If you make marijuana legal, then crime will decrease because people won't be going to jail for having it, not the way you put it.

Missed what I was saying all together. Not talking about the possession of it still sending people away but the people trying to get around the tax, PPT from friends etc. Not everyone has the room/time/ability to grow it themselves. Yes they can buy it legaly from a dispencery but they can now and still "friends" help out each other today.

The gun analogy was right on, grabbers believe that taking guns away (no proof of this) will stop crime. Just like people that think making pot legal will keep people from committing crimes to afford, buy, grow their own etc. Again no proof that it will stop other related crimes that drugs bring with them besides just the possession of them alone. You don't have to see it if you want but it will happen.

Lastly I couldn't care less if you are doing it at your house. None of my business as long as I don't have to smell it. There just is no need to add yet another drug (alcohol being first) into society. We are having enough problems with alcohol to add another reason for people to be idiots in public.



Also worth noting, people die because of the drug cartels. If marijuana is legal, this will cut a pretty good sized chunk out of their profit margins, as it would be able to be grown/sold through legitimate business enterprises and in private gardens.


Now that you have pointed out the obvious you unfortunately have missed the obvious problem with this. They need to make up for the loss in revenue which means they will need to build up their OTHER drugs. This will put more drugs on the street that are harder then Pot. Same thing happened in the early 90s when crack hit the street. Much easier to make and better profit margin.

All academic anyway it failed to pass. We can have this discussion in 2012 when they will most assuredly will try once again to make it some what legal.