Colorado Lawmakers Ask DEA to Stop the Raids
Tue, Mar 09, 2010 6:18 pm
After public outrage forced Colorado lawmakers to postpone a vote on a bill that aimed to regulate medical marijuana dispensaries, a group of legislators have responded by asking the Feds to back off.
In a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, a bipartisan group of two state senators and two representatives called for an end to medical marijuana raids by the DEA.
The DEA is already responsible for three Colorado raids this year alone – two of which focused on laboratories that conducted tests to determine the potency of medical marijuana.
According to the letter, which was also sent to President Obama, “These raids discourage dispensary operators, caregivers, growers and patients from providing testimony or recommendations to state lawmakers, hampering our ability to develop a workable and realistic regulatory arrangement for medial marijuana.”
More @ thedenverdailynews.com & nytimes.com













» add a comment
swany
Apr 5 2010, 9:10 pm
Ignorance is Bliss-Never Free
Mar 19 2010, 6:10 pm
Ironic
Mar 18 2010, 10:10 pm
Idiots
Mar 16 2010, 8:10 pm
WEEDGOD
Mar 16 2010, 1:04 am
THE MIGHTY WEEDGOD HAS SPOKEN!
gstlab3
Mar 12 2010, 8:55 pm
DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCEY AND ITS AUTHORITY OVER YOU IS A SURE SIGN OF YOUR FREEDOMS BEING TAKEN FROM YOU BY FORCE AND BY FEAR ALONE!!!!!
THIS IS TERRORISM BY THUG POLICE TACTICS APPROVED BY YOUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.,
THINK ABOUT THE FACTS., YOU VOTED FOR CHANGE AND THESE THUGS FROM WASHINGTON D.C.TOTALLY IGNOR YOU AND YOUR WHOLE STATE.
TOO BAD I GUESE FOR YOU GUYS WHO FALL AND WORSHIP AT THE ALTER OF GOVERNMENT APROVAL.
GO FILL OUT SOME MORE FORMS,PAY YOUR FEES AND TAXES AND GET BACK TO ME ON THIS HOPE AND CHANGE.
GROW YOUR OWN, FREE YOUR MIND, FREE THE PLANET!!!!!!!
puffin
Mar 11 2010, 7:25 pm
King
Mar 11 2010, 3:50 pm
JAX
Mar 11 2010, 3:47 pm
john
Mar 11 2010, 11:40 am
Crazy Dave from RIsland
Mar 11 2010, 11:12 am
Common sense
Mar 11 2010, 9:00 am
their bosses memo. Furthermore, I would rather see my tax dollars going
toward things that benefit society as a whole. Instead of these guys rushing in
and arresting the sick. Why not offer to take them to their next doctor appointment?
If the DEA or any other law enforcement agency is looking for ways to improve
and protect society, I would suggest they use their increasingly scarce funds wisely.
Finding a loophole in the law and using that as a means of continued harrasment
of the sick isn't a good use of the publics money. Can someone from law enforcement
please tell us how busting the doors of a lab down is a good use of public money?
I understand that law enforcement has a job to do, but the job doesn't have to include
making the lives of the sick any harder then they already are.
anonymous
Mar 11 2010, 7:14 am
they don't work and you do NOT get your money back. You do not even get a return phone call or email.
anonymous
Mar 10 2010, 10:01 pm
FTD
Mar 10 2010, 7:09 pm
Knoxville Journal, pA1 and A6
August 7-13, 1997
SHERIFF BOOTS FEDS FROM HIS COUNTY
by Phil Hamby
Sheriff Dave Mattis of Big Horn County, Wyoming, said this week that as a result of Case #96-CV099-J, U.S. District Court, District of Wyoming, he now has a written policy that forbids federal officials from entering his county and exercising authority over county residents unless he is notified first of their intentions.
After explaining their mission, Mattis said he grants them permission to proceed if he is convinced they are operating within the legal parameters and authority limitations set forth in the U.S. Constitution.
The sheriff grants permission on a case-by-case basis only. When asked what, if any, repercussions he had gotten from the Feds, he quickly and confidently replied, "None whatsoever." He explained by saying, "They know they do not have jurisdiction in my county unless I grant it to them."
Mattis clarified his position by saying the federal court had ruled then state of Wyoming is a sovereign state and the state constitution plainly states that a county sheriff is the top law enforcement official in the county.
Additionally, Sheriff Mattis contends that the U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, clearly defines the geographic territories where the federal government has jurisdiction. Amendment X, he said, states that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Therefore, Mattis thoroughly believes the Feds have very limited powers in any state unless the local high-sheriff allows them to exercise power beyond that which the Constitution provides.
"Put another way," Mattis said, "if the sheriff doesn't want the Feds in his county, he has the constitutional power and right to keep them out or ask them to leave."
Accompanied with other legal interpretations Mattis stands on the definition of the world "sovereign," which is defined by Webster's as "paramount, supreme. Having supreme rank or power. Independent: a sovereign State."
Mattis said he grew weary of the Feds coming into his county and running rough-shod over county residents: i.e., illegally searching, seizing property, confiscating bank accounts, restricting the free use of private lands and other abuses, without a valid warrant and without first following due process of law as guaranteed by the Constitution to every citizen.
As long as Mattis remains sheriff he says he will continue to see to it that the citizens of his county get their day in court.
Mattis went on to say that, to his knowledge, even the IRS has not attempted to seize any citizen's real property, bank account or any other private-owned possessions since he ran the Feds out of his county.
Sheriff Mattis emphasized that he is not a radical man. He said he is only dedicated to protecting the constitutional rights of the citizens of his county.
He added that ordinary citizens are not the only ones bound by and expected to obey laws. Elected officials and government employees at all levels of government are also bound by and should be expected to obey certain laws.
As long as Sheriff Mattis is the high-sheriff of Big Horn County, he seems determined to make sure private citizens and government officials alike act within the law and their designated powers.
Sheriff Mattis came across as a soft-spoken, polite man whose only interest is protecting the citizens he was elected to serve. That being the case, he might be the sheriff for as long as he wants to be.
Sheriff Mattis is hopeful that other sheriffs will assume the same stance.
c. 1997 The Knoxville Journal
anti gang
Mar 10 2010, 10:51 am
Crazy Dave from Rhode Island
Mar 10 2010, 10:19 am
anonymous
Mar 10 2010, 6:51 am
The Bud Review
Mar 10 2010, 6:19 am
Make it legal
Mar 9 2010, 8:42 pm
legalize
Mar 9 2010, 8:38 pm
http://www.change.org/ideas?order=popular
King
Mar 9 2010, 7:21 pm
» add a comment