cannabisnews.com: S.F. Pot Club Defies Feds with Freebies





S.F. Pot Club Defies Feds with Freebies
Posted by CN Staff on January 12, 2006 at 07:40:37 PT
By Josh Richman, Staff Writer
Source: Oakland Tribune
San Francisco, CA -- In a show of defiance against federal drug authorities, operators of a recently raided medical marijuana collective doled out marijuana and cannabis-laced sweets at midday Wednesday outside City Hall. Steve and Cathy Smith stood beneath a pair of white tarps pitched in City Center Plaza as dozens of patients lined up to receive the small, red paper bags filled with cannabis products. Only 20 patients of the Smiths' HopeNet collective had preregistered, and only they received the bags.
Earlier, local officials and state lawmakers' aides gathered inside City Hall to voice outrage over the Drug Enforcement Administration's Dec. 20 raid of the Smiths' San Francisco home, the nearby HopeNet club and a Sonoma County site. Federal agents seized almost 340 marijuana plants, various cannabis products and about $50,000 cash that day, but no charges have been filed against the Smiths or anyone else connected to HopeNet. San Francisco supervisors Chris Daly and Ross Mirkarimi praised the Smiths for working with the city to create a safe, well-regulated cannabis collective aiding hundreds of patients, including many who are indigent. An aide said Mayor Gavin Newsom is disappointed the federal government continues to intrude on local and state regulation of medical marijuana. Anna Damiani, an aide to Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, read a statement from the lawmaker in which he decried the DEA's "zeal to harass patients and providers" as being "abusive and unconscionable" as well as a waste of resources that would be better deployed against real public-safety threats. Similar statements from state Sen. Carole Migden, D-San Francisco, and San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris also were read aloud. Steph Sherer, executive director of Oakland-based Americans for Safe Access, said DEA officials  after June's U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding the federal marijuana ban  had claimed the agency would not make a priority of targeting patients. "We're here to let America know they're lying," she said, announcing a postcard-petition drive urging U.S. Attorney Kevin Ryan not to file charges against the Smiths. The Smiths thanked local officials and the community for what they described as an outpouring of support since the federal raid. Cathy Smith said other Bay Area providers have helped replenish some of HopeNet's cannabis supply. "Basically, we're going to have to start all over again," she said. "They're going to have to put us behind bars to make us stop." Bruce Mirken, communications director for the Washington, D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project, said federal raids like that of HopeNet should be seen as "the behavior of a caged, cornered animal lashing out because it knows it's on the losing end of history." He cited polls showing strong public support for medical use of marijuana, and he said federal refusal to reclassify the drug has no basis in science or common sense. "The debate is over," he said. "It's not a question of if, it's a question of when." Rhode Island last week became the 11th state to legalize medical marijuana and the first state to enact such a law since June's Supreme Court ruling. Note: Operators of raided collective, officials criticize DEA's zeal to harass patients.Source: Oakland Tribune (CA)Author: Josh Richman, Staff WriterPublished: January 12, 2006Copyright: 2006 MediaNews Group, Inc. Contact: triblet angnewspapers.com Website: http://www.oaklandtribune.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:Marijuana Policy Projecthttp://www.mpp.org/Americans For Safe Accesshttp://www.safeaccessnow.org/In The Dark - San Francisco Bay Guardianhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21415.shtmlDEA Returns and Raids SF Marijuana Clubhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21398.shtmlMedical Marijuana Provider Raided http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21397.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #34 posted by global_warming on January 12, 2006 at 17:47:57 PT
so, here 'we are
at the foot of that cross.i hold close my soul,stand as close to that Light I Love,for every question,Belongs to the Bosom of God,Like sunshine and rainOn those hot summer days,The dew, affirms,In this universe,'we have a seat at the table of white linen,May we break bread,May 'we raise our hand,Thanking the stars,The Eternal Night,Glistens and SingsThe Night, watches, over all,The Night, child of God,Bows to the Eternal Light.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #33 posted by whig on January 12, 2006 at 17:24:29 PT
We have a law
He transgressed the law of the high priests, for he gave the sacrament to the people, which had been deprived them. Cannabis was then, and remains, the eucharist, by which we may each in our turn be anointed and become one in Christ.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #32 posted by museman on January 12, 2006 at 17:13:30 PT:
Fear Of God
Has it's roots in absence;Absence of Love 
which engenders all the negative attributes 
of human spirit, and becomes hatred and spite
in an effort to fill the vacuum.Absence of correct guidance
which leads eager innocent zeal 
into paths of destruction, 
and manifests as a multitude of blind guides
crying "It is here!" and "It is there!"Absence of correct knowledge (and information)
which allows ignorance to wear the mantle of wisdom,
and the intellect to despair of knowing the truth.Absence of Faith
which provides the anti-foundation of religion,
(which means "to constrain or hold back")
and all manner of evils perpetrated in the name of God.Absence of belief
which becomes the death of the child within,
and a stumbling block for all those that would believe.Fear is a product of being in this place, not an attribute or 'requirement' of a loving God.
http://wholeearthfamily.org
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #31 posted by global_warming on January 12, 2006 at 17:00:49 PT
"We have a law,"  "Here is the man.29
Joh 19:1 Then Pilate took Jesus and had Him flogged. Joh 19:2 The soldiers also twisted together a crown of thorns, put it on His head, and threw a purple robe around Him. Joh 19:3 And they repeatedly came up to Him and said, "Hail, King of the Jews!" and were slapping His face. Joh 19:4 Pilate went outside again and said to them, "Look, I'm bringing Him outside to you to let you know I find no grounds for charging Him." Joh 19:5 Then Jesus came out wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. Pilate said to them, "Here is the man!" Joh 19:6 When the chief priests and the temple police saw Him, they shouted, "Crucify! Crucify!" Pilate responded, "Take Him and crucify Him yourselves, for I find no grounds for charging Him." Joh 19:7 "We have a law," the Jews replied to him, "and according to that law He must die, because He made Himself the Son of God." 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #30 posted by global_warming on January 12, 2006 at 16:30:53 PT
Fear Of God
Has no place at the table of God,Where fresh linen marks the places at our table.This is our supper, may 'we raise our hand,With Grace and Wisdom,in supplication,For our bounty, is but a blink,In Gods universe,In the blink of an eye,That Light can find your darkest soul,Stand up! before that Light,Proclaim your inheritance.You are "NOT" a slave,There is "NO" human being that can 'ever OWN 'you.The ownership of this worldIs 'more than a 'title,More than some steel prison bars,Consider your 'life,Your thoughts and judgments,'We and our revelations,Also 'witness ,take our testaments Towards our 'gravesWhat i have seen in this 'our worldIs to 'me a nightmareA 'spiritual insanityCannabis plant, cannot, forever forgiveThe 'Grave, shall be witnessed,Our first breathMarked our contractWith God, children in this universe,'We can take this worldTurn it into a garden,Filled with every green leaf,Food and Medicine,This is our gardenThis is our seatAt the table with clean linenStand Up before the Light
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #29 posted by museman on January 12, 2006 at 16:15:42 PT:
re:comment 27
ThanksIt's nice to find a forum that takes the truth seriously. And thanks for the welcome guys.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #28 posted by global_warming on January 12, 2006 at 15:18:24 PT
re:comment 12
I really appreciate your insights and wisdom, thanks for being there and with us.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #27 posted by global_warming on January 12, 2006 at 15:14:11 PT
re:comment 19
Thanks.Ultimatum, that is a wonderful writing.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #26 posted by FoM on January 12, 2006 at 15:01:22 PT
Toker00 
You're welcome. I've always assumed the same thing.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #25 posted by Toker00 on January 12, 2006 at 14:56:43 PT
Thanks FoM
It doesn't post my e-mail. I really don't care, because if the government wants into my computer, all they have to do is pull a Bush, and probably have. I'm sure we are ALL registered in some FBI/DEA/CIA/NSA data base somewhere, anyway. Proud ranks! Wage peace on war. END CANNABIS PROHIBITION NOW!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #24 posted by FoM on January 12, 2006 at 14:30:26 PT
Toker00
 I use IE and only my name auto completes. Not my password or e-mail.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #23 posted by Toker00 on January 12, 2006 at 14:26:48 PT
Welcome, museman
runruff is a family member here, and I see you're gonna fit in just fine. Most of us see the big picture, but always appreciate new posters with a fresh point of view. We never stop talking, never stop thinking, never stop fighting. Welcome. FoM, are our name and password auto filled now? Or is that something Firefox does? Wage peace on war. END CANNABIS PROHIBITION N0W! 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #22 posted by FoM on January 12, 2006 at 13:19:36 PT
dongenero
What principles? I just don't notice any except looking down on us and that is a bad principle. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by FoM on January 12, 2006 at 13:14:23 PT
museman 
Welcome to CNews. We love runruff here. I wanted to say to you that I really like your web site. I think similarly.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #20 posted by dongenero on January 12, 2006 at 13:07:40 PT
federalism
Isn't it interesting how the Republicans were all behind state's rights until they wrenched control of the federal government?Now they seem to be all for centralized control of everything from Washington.Principles? What principles? We don't need no stinking principles! Principles all depend on the weather of the day.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by museman on January 12, 2006 at 13:05:44 PT:
Money money money
The DEA represents the interests of the Power Elite, the top 3 percent of the wealthy class. It should be obvious by now that money, and the power it renders, is the prime reason and motivation for all usurpations of liberty. The Drug War (until Iraq depleted the coffers) was a lucrative source of revenue for the Law Enforcement agencies around the country. Why should they press charges? They got the 50 grand, any court time would only deplete the stash.***************Hello, let me introduce myself; I was pointed your direction by a mutual friend of ours who goes by the handle "runruff." 
I have been a user and promoter of the wondrous uses and values of cannabis, and hemp for more than 30 years...watched the whole drama unfold as it were. I have seen the inside several times (if you know what I mean) since being one of the first persons to recieve the 'marijuanna ticket' in 1976 in So. Ca. to 'manufacture and possession' (2 times in 2 states). 
Somehow, by the power fo faith I am still here, still free, and still smokin'.I have a lot to say, but certainly not all at once.Peace is cheaper than war.
http://wholeearthfamily.org
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by FoM on January 12, 2006 at 12:48:29 PT
More Pictures from Giveway and Protest
http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/news_in_brief/med_mj_060112.shtml
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by FoM on January 12, 2006 at 12:35:37 PT
MSNBC Question of the Day
Should Supreme Court Nominee Samuel Alito be confirmed?  * 139502 responses  
 Current Results: Yes -- 45%  No -- 55% http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080261/
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by FoM on January 12, 2006 at 11:15:13 PT
Two Related Pictures from Giveway and Protest
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060111/480/fx10401112324http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060111/480/fx10501112330
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by FoM on January 12, 2006 at 10:39:18 PT
Whig
I knew that Raich was a long shot but it would have been great if it happened but it didn't happen. Lawyers are needed. Without lawyers in my life I wouldn't be where I am today for many different reasons from simple fence disputes with a farm that has land attached to our property line to Wills and other things in between those extremes. Maybe the next case will bring us closer to change. We take two steps forward then one step back and so the cycle goes but at least we gain one step forward each time I think.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by whig on January 12, 2006 at 10:23:20 PT
FoM
It's probably worth remembering that O'Connor wrote the primary dissent on Raich, so her replacement with Alito is a step backwards. On the other hand, I really believe that the issue wasn't put properly before the court in that case, they tried to carve out a narrow exception that was hard to apply in a general context rather than taking on the CSA facially.As I understand the current frame of the ongoing Raich case (it is still in the lower courts) they are now arguing on straight medical necessity grounds. I think that's going to be another tough row to hoe, because they'd have to challenge the jurisdiction of the FDA and to prevail. Timid attorneys unwilling to make the bold case make it more likely that we continue to lose on that front.The foundational argument should be (and needs to be if the lawyers want to even have a chance in court) that the commerce power of regulation does not incorporate the power of complete prohibition, and if it did then it would have been unnecessary ever to amend the constitution to ban alcohol.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by FoM on January 12, 2006 at 10:08:38 PT
Whig 
Thanks. I don't think by any means Democrats are angels. A politician is a politican. The only thing is they have stood for medical marijuana issues more then Republicans. I do understand numbers.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by whig on January 12, 2006 at 09:59:44 PT
Btw
This is what Schumer thinks too. Schumer is a democratic party drug warrior.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by whig on January 12, 2006 at 09:58:38 PT
FoM
Yes, he would have ruled against Raich too. In answer to his discussion with Schumer, he made it clear that he was more aligned with the concurring opinion of Scalia than the dissent of Thomas.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by FoM on January 12, 2006 at 09:54:45 PT
Had Enough 
I am listening to it but I don't understand any of it. Whig so are you saying he would have ruled against Raich too? The double talking at the hearings doesn't register with me. I am a very simple thinking person. I think in yes and no.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by Had Enough on January 12, 2006 at 09:46:46 PT
Boob Tube
I missed it. I saw your post and turned on the tube, but it was over by then.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by Had Enough on January 12, 2006 at 09:44:47 PT
More Law Talk
It takes 30 minutes for some of these people to ask a simple question. I think some like the cameras.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by whig on January 12, 2006 at 09:43:57 PT
FoM
What they are discussing is whether Alito agrees with the holding in Raich. He does.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by Had Enough on January 12, 2006 at 09:40:53 PT
Law Talk
The way these guy's talk you need a law dictonary on your desk.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by FoM on January 12, 2006 at 09:29:13 PT
They Are Talking About Raich at The Hearings
I don't understand what they are saying though.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by Dr Ganj on January 12, 2006 at 09:16:37 PT
Fighting Oppression
What other "crime" can you think of, where people get awards, accolades, and commendations for their efforts?
What other "crime" can you think of where sick people end up feeling better, pain is assuaged, and nausea is relieved?
What other "crime" can you think of where homes are raided, people are hand-cuffed, property is confiscated, money is taken, plants are killed, and no charges are filed? Now, what country do you think this could happen in? What year? Yes, it's true. It's all happening in this country, in this year, right now.
The only way to stop such blatant abuse of power is through civil disobedience, just like what happened yesterday outside City Hall in San Francisco. More free marijuana needs to be given away, more sick people assisted in plain view for the world to see. Just as the lone man stood in front of a tank in Tienamen Square, a single person in San Francisco giving out free marijuana is just as powerful. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by FoM on January 12, 2006 at 08:49:45 PT
Related Article from the San Francisco Chronicle
Civic Center Rally Features Politicians, Joints, Pot Candy***Rachel Gordon, Chronicle Staff WriterThursday, January 12, 2006 
 With at least tacit support from several local elected officials, operators of a San Francisco medical cannabis dispensary raided by U.S. drug agents last month thumbed their nose at federal authorities and handed out bags of pot-laced confections and marijuana cigarettes in Civic Center Plaza outside City Hall on Wednesday. During the well-publicized demonstration, the smell of pot wafted through the air, and Rosalyne Montgomery, who says she uses marijuana to treat degenerative joint disease and depression, was given a week's supply. "This has really helped me deal with my pain,'' said Montgomery, who, like the other recipients of Wednesday's giveaway, has a doctor's recommendation for medical marijuana. Law enforcement authorities made no attempt to stop the distribution to 20 people, which was carried out by Cathy and Steve Smith. They run HopeNet, the South of Market medical marijuana club that was raided Dec. 20 by the federal Drug Enforcement Administration. The Smiths were joined on the plaza by Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, co-author of recently adopted local legislation regulating medical marijuana dispensaries in the city. At a press conference beforehand inside City Hall that was coordinated with the marijuana handout, Supervisor Chris Daly spoke in support of the Smiths and railed against federal opposition to medical marijuana. Mayor Gavin Newsom, Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, state Sen. Carole Migden, D-San Francisco, and District Attorney Kamala Harris sent representatives to read statements that reaffirmed their endorsement of medical marijuana. "Our position remains consistent. We will not prosecute people who use or provide marijuana solely for medicinal purposes,'' said the prepared statement by Harris. "As a community, we do not want to jeopardize the safety of sick people by forcing them to get medicine they need through dangerous means. Caretakers and providers who abide by the law deserve no less protection.'' The law referred to is California Proposition 215, a measure backed by state voters in 1996 that legalized the growing and use of cannabis for medical purposes. Such activities, however, remain illegal under federal law. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last summer that the federal government does not have to recognize state or local marijuana laws. In response to Wednesday's demonstration and pot giveaway, Javier F. Pena, the special agent in charge for the Drug Enforcement Administration's regional office in San Francisco, said participants were subject to federal prosecution. Snipped:Complete Article: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/01/12/BAGIOGLTR21.DTL
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by potpal on January 12, 2006 at 08:28:37 PT
Only difference...
Between this treatment and that of say a banana republic dictator is that the latter more often makes the person disappear along with their possessions. Each uses methods to intimidate and destroy.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by dongenero on January 12, 2006 at 08:13:43 PT
armed robbery
How is it that the DEA can raid a business or home, abscond with more than $50,000 and then not press charges?At this point how does it differ from armed robbery?
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment