Get permission to steal from the public.... Get a job, uniform and a badge from a government law enforcement agency and you are good to go.
Civil forfeiture have increased 4000% in the last 25 years due to law enforcement seizure and forfeiture. The institute of justice found that over 80% of items seize, forfeited and sold was from innocent members of the community never charged with any crimininal acts. The fact is that law enforcement agencies confiscate property from people not committing any crimes, sell these innocent people's personal and business property, then deposit the money generated into their person budgets which should be considered stealing and a conflict of interest because they financially benefit from their unlawful actions against the citizens they are sworn to protect. Arizona law enforcement have become the perfect description of actions described in accordance to Arizona RICO law violations.
However, since they consider marijuana a schedule I Narcodic drug as dangerous as heroine, it would be appropriate the unlawful stealing of an innocent citizen's property under the guise of Civil Forfeiture law is not a violation of "racketeering in organized crime" by law enforcement.... It is just a friendly armed robbery by the public servants paid to protect us from cartels and the mafia from committing such crimes against individual hard working citizens, whom are helpless to protect themselves from this government tyranny.
Mr. "Joe Public" needs to remember that their property has No Rights when defending themselves. The police have no legal expenses when prosecuting property seizure and forfeitures.... While on the other hand, you or your property have the burden of financing a defense to protect its return. Consequently, to pay an attorney in these matters are more expensive than the value of the property stolen by the police, this it it cost prohibited in trying to defend and seek return of your property. How can the public protect themselves from these unlawful and unethical government actions?
The police were under an Order of the Court to return Mr. Johnson's seized property but never did.... Instead they sold it and split the proceeds of the sale of the items and failed to return not one single piece of Mr Johnson's property as per Order of the Court, but rather they deposited the funds equally into each of their budget accounts, Mr. Johnson was never reimbursed nor return any of his property from the police.
So this is a good lesson for future criminals, get a uniform and a badge first, whereby laws don't apply to you when stealing, hurting and robbing the public.
As an editor for our Facebook page, I could not find any records pertaining to Anna Gomez as a member. is a safe place for the community. Mr Johnson would like to know when and for what purpose was this supposed money intended for? How was this investment transferred to MR Johnson and can you produce a receipt? If not this is considered slander and will be dealt with according.
Sincerely 420 club.
I'm not surprised that teen marijuana use in Colorado has stagnated or declined since legalization took place. For many teenagers, doing something that is wholeheartedly approved of by the law and/or your parents can be boring as hell.
I didn't leave out Nixon it is just the most common name the ignorant on this subject use to think they have knowledge and background. Use the Nixon name as a anti prohibition chant that way it will focus, NOT HARDLY !
I can go back to June 1971 Time Magazine did an article on Catalina High School "Most Drug Ridden High School in America". In the article they show the student body in the auditorium Class picture. You look at all, as they were billed at the time, anti social, drug infested, hair farming, tye dyed, mistake for the future.
Reluctant to even mention this is previous posts. Just a look at that I can see who became the who's who of Tucson. I see judges business owners, prominent Atty's, State rep's of all sorts we have all grown in Tucson and Arizona with Marijuana. The biggest fallacy is that it breaks down into political lines which it does not.
AZFMR >>is not gone>> They had a change in management more organizational structure. The grassroots 200+ so far volunteers are being assembled , The grassroots org. that separated from MPP over legal structure and governing policy. They have reorganized either way the outcome of the Nov.
AZFMR is now CRLM
Campaign to Regulate Legalize Marijuana
This was necessary as they are now a licensed PAC with the Sec of ST. This is mostly a group that did a fantastic looking out for the interests of the user and the market collectively. This is your neighbor you family members your community not another harvest.
either way this is the Proposal they will start gather signature in OCT first allowable time. If you care read for yourself see if fits with your values. It has been a long road in sales venicular do you want to take the first pencil from the car dealer?
You left out Nixon. His administration created the "schedule" system, and put marijuana on Schedule 1. When people, including scientists and physicians, objected, he created a blue ribbon panel to study the matter, and then promptly ignored their findings. Marijuana has continued to be on Schedule 1 ever since, for no good reason, other than the fact that Nixon associated its use with "hippies" and "negroes."
Just looking at this carrot/caveat depending on conception of understanding of 6 plants. what does that mean? Is that really definitive?
Anyone who has grown more than 2 harvests inside knows it's a joke the yield is so small per plant it would hardly be a market force. Would hardly be a addicted user supply chain Dispensaries and agents know this too.
Rules to be written will do what several state tried and Maine votes rejected. The Point of sell for clones only certain clone will be sold through to be nego, (tbd) outlets.
When a person obtains a clone from a licensed taxing agent. It will be given a tag good for so long. A person will have to apply for and sign a agreement to forgo all rights property & search rights to allow compliance of the agreement.
Basically a Retired police/compliance officer come to the door and says we are here to look at your grow. Retired police that are still in good standing with the DPS license to be a police officer in the state. They are still police carry weapons and can do all the police functions up to Swat Team's.
It also seems inconceivable 6 plants as a definitive amount. I know several older people in rural that would allow family member to obtain and grow 12 plants on their rural property. Outside the harvest could go on for 2 months or better culling the buds much bigger harvest. Then you have the guy trying to save a buck by buying a tent and some lights. hardly equivalent of each other . A stalk of corn grown in a closet or one grown in the field what's going to yield more? Can you just imagine the cost to police that, it will be added onto the price at point of sale.
Yea the only person that would vote for this abortion of personal righs is he one going to the dispensary getting that oil based suppository and need instruction on the application.
User we have gone done the right thing getting MMJ. Some meeting with a legitimate doctor and to so regularly discussing the use I do. We have a force of 90,000+ we need to be heard not represented by the market forces. In Oct we will be present.
VOTE NO PROP 205 KEEPING PERSONAL RIGHTS
A very good story on several points addiction & societal resulting in positions taken. The position ADRP will still be enforced Montgomery & Polk will be in a position to negotiate each of their counties. This is a no loss to the political contributions aspects to both.
If 205 passes every county attorney will be in a position to negotiate how marijuana will be enforced. What is now bundled together with Marijuana smoke shops, home growing. Just how does Polk lose, Montgomery can now negotiate on every aspect of what happens in the county.
The rules not even written kind of like we have to vote for it to see what comes. Some look at this as an opportunity others as the wolf in the hen house. Given the past history and how marijuana has been prosecuted. The industries that built and used to support and complement the enforcement, prosecution, probation, abuse counseling, incarnation. All of these industries will continue to flourish and feed off of marijuana prohibition. There will be no change just a new component to the feed chain of Marijuana.
The simple target is to limit the criminal and civil penalties to marijuana use. Prop 205 addresses the right to market and support it. With the criminal simple possession prosecution harshest in all 50 states where's the win for the user.
The AZ Marijuana user has complemented the existing industry to obtaining 90,000 plus MMJ licenses. Everyone know's that this is the distribution for the illegal market in AZ today.
It would not be unreasonable to ask this Market forced entity for relief. Relief from the Jack boot on the back of the neck of the consumer. Relief from frivolous prosecution relief of unreasonable search and enforcement. Repealing the criminal code 13-3405.
However repealing 13-3405 felony for simple possession to be negotiated at every turn. The market representatives know this only bolsters their market control and price. As you can see really nothing for the consumer but limited availability and the harshest persecution of you stray. Every user goes under the bus with this.
Arizona needs to decriminalize before it builds a market. Prop 205 does not do any of this and the representatives don't give a damn. This whole concept was drawn with the idea it could sell the concept of conservative voter base Sun city, Green Valley, Snowbird Capital. They missed the target there too the political profiling is not accurate or comprehensive.
All this does is build another new business feeding of the addiction of marijuana. With a new prohibition effort written by the collective rep of counties attorney's. It gives new laws on so many ancillary businesses that the county attorney's never had. New laws that the counties could not get representative in the legislatures to propose. What is bundled here is a pandora's box.
I was in favor of the other initiative which did not make the ballot. I am still not sure if I will vote for this one.
It's fascinating how the fear of "Marihuana" first instilled in the public mind in the 1930's through blatantly deceitful and racist propaganda has endured to this day. The folks at ARDP and their ilk are still drinking that antique, polluted kool-aid. Fortunately, their numbers are rapidly declining along with their delusions of doom.
Vote yes on Prop 205! It's not perfect, but much better than prohibition. Laws in Colorado are evolving to be more reasonable as the benefits of legalization accrue and fears subside. Same will happen here.
The internet was established in 1991.
"The World Wide Web became a global interconnected computer network available to the public on August 6, 1991, according to The Next Web. The first actual instances of connected computers in a network."
"The public history of Gmail dates back to 2004."
Do you want to recheck your dates?
Prop 205 was created and funded by MPP (East Coast lobbyists) bent on decriminalizing marijuana. They say we Arizonans should treat marijuana like alcohol but that's not what Prop 205 does.
The Department of Liquor Licenses and Control administers liquor licenses but Prop 205 sets-up the Department of Marijuana Licensing and Control, a whole new bureaucracy, to administer marijuana licenses. Its worth noting that the Arizona Department of Health Services administers medical marijuana licensing (also thanks to MPP) but that was dismissed because medical professionals discourage marijuana use.
Arizona liquor licensees need to be a US citizen (or legal permanent resident) and a resident of Arizona. Arizona marijuana licensees don’t need to be a US citizen (or legal permanent resident) or a resident of Arizona. In theory, El Chapo could get an Arizona marijuana license.
First, I don’t like outsiders telling us Arizonans what we should and shouldn’t do. Next, I really don’t like outsiders drafting AZ legislation … that’s our Legislature’s job. Finally, and most of all, I think this is BAD LAW and we already have our share.
Too many old grumpy retired people in Arizona who are against pot and they all vote. They would rather have their expensive pharmaceuticals, most of them far more dangerous than marijuana. It doesn't help that the Chamber of Commerce, backed by big Pharma, is going all out to defeat this proposition.
Take a minute let this soak in the proposed DMLC, will be structured like the Dept of Trans, DOT.
Within the DOT you have the DMV division of motor vehicles. The DMV is where your vehicle and drivers licence as well as title are administered.
When applying for and obtaining a driver's license your sign a agreement for the privilege to drive this is not a RIGHT. This will be similar when anyone signs an agreement even for the 6 to 12 plants per household. Will be signing an agreement to have the DMLC to be the presiding court in civil concerns.
This will be an agreement to have your place spot inspected like a car. Only various strains will be allowed. If caught with a strain out of registry not only will you be prosecuted for felony growth/manufacturing possession of a controlled substance to wit Marijuana. Beside the criminal court you will have the administrative court of the DMLC that levies fines like that of DOT/DMV. This is like alcohol except we will be turning it over to a rouge government.
DMLC will be it's own court, police force, interstate trade negotiator, license agency, collection WTF why do we have a government do we need two?
I just don't know how or why some would think we need this to sell marijuana. Don't take this huckster Holyoak's offer controls is prohibition . This charleton thinks hes has the solution to make prohibition it work where it has not ever. Keeps the status quo of high profits ruined lives, few get riches off the back of the ignorant. Mentally challenged medically needy.
This is the travesty a vote yes will bring. This is just a small penance of issues with this disgusting proposal
Dave: So guess you agree with the analogy I take it you agree that some on say Yavapai county can get a felony and several related ancillary related charges for simple possession but in Pima county he walks or a civil fine ? That now each and every county can arbitrarily enact all kinds or retail license reg most dont relate to marijuana tho. Like smoke shops, horticultural supplies. I remember this kind of appeasement for profit and gain. That was called one state slave one state free. So giving some freedom was better than causing problems to making all free.
Sometimes a step in the right direction may not be the exact direction you want but it is better than where we are at...
Carpet Baggers is correct. The political lines have blurred on this issue, at least at the Federal level. The Republican Congress has defunded the DEA on this issue, and in the Congressional Budget Resolution of Dec 2014, told Federal Agencies to leave state legal businesses alone if they were abiding by state law.
politically speaking; Does anyone understand that it is this republican congress that is constantly reining on the Obama justice department and the DEA? for prosecuting states that have medical marijuana.
They have denied monies for investigation to the DEA. This congress has spearheaded just how monies will be used in states with medical marijuana laws passed. The federal court in CA just threw out many cases brought before the court this week. Following the rules of congress the cases were not in conflict with California law.
In this day and age the political paintbrush is running very thin. It is taking way to many coats to cover up the stains and patches. I think we need a good coat of KILZ and perhaps a new color.
It has to happen this way, tax and regulate means tax and regulate....Arizona is not ready for full free like tomato approach, to not support it would be politically naive.
Tucson Weekly |
7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 |
(520) 797-4384 |
Powered by Foundation