Wednesday, November 28, 2012

Commissioners get it right and dopers flip out.

So, the county commissioners of Clark, in this case, my brother in law Marc Boldt and Tom Mielke, got it right.... and the dopers lose what's left of their minds.

County moving toward ban on collective marijuana gardens

Commissioners Boldt, Mielke concerned that they violate federal law

Young marijuana plants are shown in Seattle at a medical marijuana growing operation.
Young marijuana plants are shown in Seattle at a medical marijuana growing operation.
Clark County is moving toward a ban on collective medical marijuana gardens.
Commissioners Marc Boldt and Tom Mielke both instructed county staff at a Wednesday morning workshop meeting to begin work on a policy that would prohibit the gardens as an acceptable land use in the county. Commissioner Steve Stuart was absent from the meeting.
The gardens allow medical marijuana growers to establish community gardens where as many as 10 patients can grow up to 45 plants. The state approved the gardens last year, but the county placed a moratorium on them until June 2013 to come up with an implementation plan.
Boldt and Mielke both said they are concerned that allowing the gardens would fly in the face of federal law, which prohibits marijuana use, sale and cultivation. Commissioners also said they would prefer to wait and see how the federal government handles voter-approved Initiative 502, which will allow adults older than 21 to use recreational marijuana.
More:

Here's the problem for the pot heads: the vote accomplished absolutely nothing. It legalized nothing.  The dopers and their comments under this article are completely ignorant of the law and how it works.

We could vote to legalize this crap a DOZEN times, but under our system of law, that it's still illegal federally is the only question... not how badly these morons want to get wasted every day.

Marc and Tom did it right.  And until the fed changes the law... the dopers are just gonna have to get over it... and themselves.

5 comments:

Martin Hash said...

Are you going to get on the losing side of this issue too?

Assisted suicide was against federal law too. The feds took Oregon to the Supreme Court - and lost.

Gay marriage was against federal law. (Defense of Marriage Act)

I'm not going to get into your hypocrisy of States Rights v. Federalism

Just a guy said...

First, with me, it's never been about winning or losing replacing right or wrong.

You cherry pick a few issues while overlooking many others where the states failed (HB 1070 out of Arizona and various state's (Texas, Wisconsin, indiana, for example) voter ID laws come to mind) and apply a far too broad brush.

There was no specific federal prohibition against assisted suicide. Ashcroft was pushing his interpretation of federal law... and that's where he lost.

Had there been such a specific federal prohibition, he would have won. We both know that.

DOMA has been declared unconstitutional (Although I don't believe it to be any more unconstitutional then, say, prohibitions against prostitution or any other regulators of conduct) and my position has always been that UNTIL THE FEDERAL LAW ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE IS CHANGED, THIS INITIATIVE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

DOMA has BEEN "changed," though mostly by the courts.

It's not even close to a "states rights issue." Using your reasoning, slavery should still be legal in the South. That was a state's rights issue as well.

IF the federal law is changed to allow this idiocy that will, in reality, change nothing, then I will have no problem with it... until it starts to cost me personally as a result.

But UNTIL federal law... which actually is on point and DOES supersede this initiative IS changed... then yeah, I DO have a problem with it.

The oath I took was to uphold the Constitution. All of it.

Not just the parts I like.

Until the federal law is changed, we have to live with it. Those behind this initiative knew that going in, and this tail-wagging the dog approach was their best response... "states rights" notwithstanding.

Martin Hash said...

A year from now we'll be having this discussion again, only it will be more doper-leaning. Then 2 years from now, you'll still be harping on it, and I'll be, "like, have a hit off my bong man, and cool out."

Haven said...

That it's still illegal federally was not the only question that mattered in these 175 cases:
http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2012/11/king_county_drops_175_marijuan.html

I know at least Pierce and Kitsap counties followed suit. I-502 made that happen.

Marijuana is, and has been for decades, scheduled federally _above_ such items as Cocaine and Methamphetamine. Such an ominous scheduling means that the federal government deems marijuana to have _no currently accepted medicinal uses_. Yet 18 states have standing and regularly practiced medical marijuana laws dating back to the 1990's. There's you saying federal illegality is the only thing that makes any difference and there's 18 states doing otherwise.

The reality is that while federal illegality is _uncontested_, state law concerning marijuana _does_ matter. If the feds want to spend their resources enforcing marijuana laws no one will stop them. If the feds want to fill up their penitentiaries with marijuana possession convicts they have the right to do so. However, the law doesn't say that states and local jurisdictions have to spend their resources doing the same.

The feds have done their spotty and intermittant enforcement against medical marijuana dispensaries and they've shown they have the power to do so. But where have they ever overturned a state law that allowed them? 18 states, 15 years, the feds haven't yet been able to force states to enforce marijuana laws themselves if they don't want to. The regulation may hit hurdles, but I-502 has definitely accomplished quite a lot already, putting marijuana smokers in jail is not our priority and we're not going to spend our resources to do it.

a ganjist said...

you should try smoking weed, it'd really help you chill out.