Medicinal Marijuana Raids in Montana (Billings: purchase, live, price)

[ElkHunter]

Originally Posted by Reziac

So enforce the DUI laws for pot same as for booze. The technology now exists to identify blood-intoxication levels due to various street drugs, same as for alcohol. Why should there be a difference? As it stands, people at least understand "don't drink and drive" but they don't think about "don't toke and drive". Let's lay off the double standard. Intoxicated is intoxicated, whether it's from booze or fumes.

If they can now measure it, then it should be legalized and regulated the exact same way alcohol is. Not just medical, but legalize it for everybody.

[ElkHunter]

Originally Posted by strudel42

Don't you mean to say, WE need to change the law?

I don't think any human being with a brain really cares if anyone else is smoking, has smoked, or will smoke marijuana. If you haven't done it yourself (and you probably have), you know people who have, or do, or will, etc.

Alcohol consumption is legal. If the only argument against legalizing weed is, "Stoned people will drive," then by the same argument alcohol should be illegal. Oh yeah, we tried that once.

I'm really not sure any big-time criminal enterprises, aka "DRUG CARTELS" (let's pull out some threatening imagery to scare people) have set up in MT because of the medical marijuana laws. I do know that a surefire way to eliminate "criminal" enterprises would be if said enterprise were made to no longer be "criminal." Anyway, call me when you see zoot suits and tommy guns in the streets of Glendive.

There is no good reason not to legalize weed...

No, I mean THEY. We are discussing MM raids in the state of Montana. This is not a national discussion on Marijauna laws. If that's what it's turning into, then I'll close it. This is a STATE forum.

I don't live in Montana and I don't think you do either. So it's THEY that have to change the law, WE have nothing to do with it.

You are making some nasty accusations when you say that I PROBABLY have smoked dope. You are dead wrong.

As to driving. If Montana, has a method of testing people that are high on marijuana, with accuracy, then it should be done. Right now, there IS a method of testing for alcohol in the system. I was not aware of any accurate testing method, other then a blood test or urine test, for marijuana.

[Timberwolf232]

Originally Posted by strudel42

I'm really not sure any big-time criminal enterprises, aka "DRUG CARTELS" (let's pull out some threatening imagery to scare people) have set up in MT because of the medical marijuana laws. I do know that a surefire way to eliminate "criminal" enterprises would be if said enterprise were made to no longer be "criminal." Anyway, call me when you see zoot suits and tommy guns in the streets of Glendive.

There is no good reason not to legalize weed...

Actually you would be surprised to see who has taken up residence in MT after MM was approved by voters. We actually have an MS-13 presence in Columbus of all places. The Ecuadorians try to pass themselves off as Native Americans.. There is a huge hub here (not just for pot) due to our shared border with Canada.

Since MM was approved, there has also been an increase in American gang activity and movement throughout the state..

The word cartel isn't used as a scare tactic.. but pot advocates seem the think that it's all about hippies sitting around in drum circles or some kids getting the munchies.. THAT is the lie.

I do agree that it's time to legalize weed, instead of all this middle ground and non specific laws. If it was legal and regulated, we would see less gang presence and even some revenue.. But that's just my opinion.

[strudel42]

Originally Posted by ElkHunter

No, I mean THEY. We are discussing MM raids in the state of Montana. This is not a national discussion on Marijauna laws. If that's what it's turning into, then I'll close it. This is a STATE forum.

I don't live in Montana and I don't think you do either. So it's THEY that have to change the law, WE have nothing to do with it.

You are making some nasty accusations when you say that I PROBABLY have smoked dope. You are dead wrong.

As to driving. If Montana, has a method of testing people that are high on marijuana, with accuracy, then it should be done. Right now, there IS a method of testing for alcohol in the system. I was not aware of any accurate testing method, other then a blood test or urine test, for marijuana.

Elk, I was not directing my comments toward you after my first sentence... I should have made that clear; but I have no idea how it could be construed as "nasty" to assume that most people have tried marijuana.

I also have no idea why you assume I don't live in Montana. I've been around these forums for a while now. I have resided in Montana for several years. It is true that I am now temporarily out of the state for educational purposes but I consider Montana my home, intend to return there, and as such am following Montana issues with great interest. I have worked in health care in MT and believe strongly in the medical applications of mj; but even aside from that, I simply don't care who is using it (or for what reason) and see no reason why I or anyone else ought to.

Abuse of prescription (i.e., legal and drug-company-approved) medication is rampant in MT. If we're talking about imbibing various substances and driving, I submit that I'd rather share the road with someone who's had a toke than with someone who's loaded on hydrocodone, but whatever... And as someone pointed out earlier drunk driving is a known danger on MT roads, so why shouldn't local and state law enforcement be allowed more resources to enforce DUIs, instead of focusing energy on those who use pot recreationally?

The responsibility for making or altering the law does not, as implied, lie only with MM backers and providers but with everyone. As the raids in Montana were conducted by the federal government, this issue is obviously linked to national drug policy. While we are discussing the issue as pertains to MT, we can not exactly pretend that MT is isolated from the rest of the nation.

[ElkHunter]

strudel42,

What I was talking about is the discussion is about Montana. Yes, by discussing what happened, the Feds must come into the conversation as well as the laws. But if the discussion moves away from Montana and becomes nothing but the repeal of Federal laws and a federal discussion, then it'll be moved or closed.

I think that Montana law enforcement really lost it on this one. They should ahve stepped up to the plate and should have been running the show to begin with. If they were to get with the program and find these faults in the system first, maybe the feds would say, "Montana Law Enforcement has it under control" and possibly leave Montana alone, or at least leave it up to local Law. Instead, local Law Envorcement doesn't appear to be involved with anything that happened.

Of course, I don't know for sure, Montana Law might have been who called in the Feds. It's hard telling.

Several years ago, when Montana passed the law, I made a statement that Montana was not ready, nor equipted to handle legalizing MM. They had nothing in place, no standards, no research, no plan of action. Pass the law and let's see what happens. I said then that if they had laws in place, standardization of testing, a method of taxing, laws to cover impaired driving, then I had no heartburn of legalization. But instead, they threw the law together and figured they'd correct it as it goes. That doesn't work. They should have known that by watching Congress do the same thing to the nation.

It should have been set up like the liquer industry and distributed the same way.

Montana needs to fix Montana's problems and show the feds they are capable of taking care of business without intervention.

[Threerun]

Montana would have been ill-equipped to handle matters that crossed interstate boundaries. That's why the feds took it, and then they handle the whole shooting match..

And I DO Agree that I would rather share the road with someone having a munch attack than someone zoinked on Oxycontin, booze and Lord knows what else. Plus I don't think most 'stoners' are going to rob a pharmacy or liquor store, or c-store to satisfy their needs. Jeez you can grow and roll enough of your own on a back porch to keep you toasted for half a year

[strudel42]

Yeah, I think it's true that Montana dropped the ball... MT could and should have been a model to show the rest of the world that legalization of mj, esp. for limited purposes, is nothing to fear. Unfortunately people -- both pro and anti-mm -- freaked out and now here we are. The mm providers should have recognized that the legal future of mj in Montana is on the line here and thus behaved with a bit more discretion.

I also think there has been an overreaction on the part of the anti-mm side (people smoke mj -- so what? The sky's not falling here). After all, I can say I have a headache and go to the doctor and get Oxy. In practical terms, I don't see how that's any different than saying I have a headache and getting a mj card.

And Threerun is oh-so-correct. If you can grow a happy lil' plant in your backyard, you don't need to rob, rape, and pillage to acquire it. Nor would you want to.

[Klapton]

Originally Posted by strudel42

Yeah, I think it's true that Montana dropped the ball... MT could and should have been a model to show the rest of the world that legalization of mj, esp. for limited purposes, is nothing to fear. Unfortunately people -- both pro and anti-mm -- freaked out and now here we are. The mm providers should have recognized that the legal future of mj in Montana is on the line here and thus behaved with a bit more discretion.

I also think there has been an overreaction on the part of the anti-mm side (people smoke mj -- so what? The sky's not falling here). After all, I can say I have a headache and go to the doctor and get Oxy. In practical terms, I don't see how that's any different than saying I have a headache and getting a mj card.

And Threerun is oh-so-correct. If you can grow a happy lil' plant in your backyard, you don't need to rob, rape, and pillage to acquire it. Nor would you want to.

It is nothing to fear. Except for the fear of thugs with body armor, assault weapons, and flash-bang grenades bashing in your door at O-dark-thirty.

Oh wait... those people are "protecting" us...

[Threerun]

So they should conduct a raid with daisy's and hot cocoa?

You know- law enforcement really have NO idea what a situation will become, regardless of how 'harmless' an operation you may think it is.

1. Owner carries a gun- check
2. Business suspected to operate illegally- check

Unfortunately they wear body armor because they tend to get shot at, by increasingly more sophisticated weapons. We don't live in Mayberry RFD any more.

Drunk, drugged, violence-prone suspects most likely to be shot by police

The study concludes that drunk and drugged folks are more prone to ratcheting UP a situation that causes police to resort to use of force. If I was a law enforcement officer, I damn sure would want to be as protected as possible.

[Klapton]

Originally Posted by Threerun

So they should conduct a raid with daisy's and hot cocoa?

You know- law enforcement really have NO idea what a situation will become, regardless of how 'harmless' an operation you may think it is.

1. Owner carries a gun- check
2. Business suspected to operate illegally- check

Unfortunately they wear body armor because they tend to get shot at, by increasingly more sophisticated weapons. We don't live in Mayberry RFD any more.

Drunk, drugged, violence-prone suspects most likely to be shot by police

The study concludes that drunk and drugged folks are more prone to ratcheting UP a situation that causes police to resort to use of force. If I was a law enforcement officer, I damn sure would want to be as protected as possible.

Of course they want to be as protected as possible - even if that means killing us mundanes to make sure.

Botched Paramilitary Police Raids

Or how bout this one where the shot a dog - that was IN A CAGE...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbwSwvUaRqc

All this for a plant that has NEVER resulted in an overdose death in several MILLENIA of use. There is NO QUESTION that the most "dangerous" thing about marajuana is that THESE goons might show up at your house.

If you'd like to hijack this thread and turn it into examples of JBT raids killing innocent people, I can go all day long. The "War on Drugs" is FAR more dangerous than the drugs themselves. And pot??? It's simply NOT dangerous AT ALL, making this kind of thuggery simply INSANE. Why on earth a Free People should have to endure such crap is beyond me.