GrowGreenerGuru (Dr B) court update and security talk

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
Schuette...
Schuette didn't sign nor execute this warrant and raid. Do you have any clue what the political affiliation of those responsible are :confused:

How about understanding the problem and it's causation, rather than blindly opposing politicians and their parties. The state AG relies upon the federal AG to keep these lawfare games in business and in turn your local court room and law enforcement agencies to work (abuse) the marketing and clientele (Dr B here). Any questions?

No Holder (D) games, no Schuette (R) games, no local court room/LEO games period. These atrocities (our "justice system") ARE NOT party specific IMHO. Then again Trial Lawyers have a clear and powerful political affiliation :confused:

If Schuette (R) was replaced with a Democrat tomorrow do you honestly think this game changes? What about a Libertarian (R)? Is political ideology your only answer to these lawfare threats we face? What's your opinion of AG Holder (D) :confused:

Try developing a sentence ...
 
Last edited:

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
If schuette were replaced tomorrow I absolutely think things would be different.
Is that your best attempt at developing a sentence/point?



I'm going to write you off as part of the problem, not the solution ...
 
Last edited:

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
Exploitation of ignorance got us into and maintains this mess today. Let's move on ...

To quote the lawyer in AG Eric Holder (3:50): "What's obvious to one is perhaps not obvious to another" ...

 
Last edited:

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
Yes! He has had a raging boner to bust anything marijuana related since he took office.

Have you not noticed?????
How else would he fund the system :confused: Does it matter that he does so maybe as moral opposition (R) based upon his "sky daddy" or playing to that audience (his constituency)? What is Holder & Obama's (D) story here and now in your opinion and understanding?

Regardless, your and my political opinions here are only divisive as they were designed and used against us today. What does politics have to do with the right and wrong of this effective lawfare other than funding and maintaining of the Democratic and Republican political dichotomy that enslaves us here?

This lawfare transcends the simple abuse of criminal law through prohibition schemes we speak of here brother. In particular it is this corruption of "regulatory capture" within our government that we watched destroy our economy in 2007 and it's the reason we will never truly recover. It's how our government sells us progressive tax law and effectively delivers an extremely regressive one. It's how Republicans and Democrats fund their billion dollar campaigns and maintain power. IMHO education is societies only means of survival, as this is the only way equality in a democratic society can be achieved. How to remove the root evil that is successfully being sold to us as a solution :confused:

Regulatory capture is a form of political corruption that occurs when a regulatory agency, created to act in the public interest, instead advances the commercial or special concerns of interest groups that dominate the industry or sector it is charged with regulating. Regulatory capture is a form of government failure; it creates an opening for firms to behave in ways injurious to the public (e.g., producing negative externalities). The agencies are called "captured agencies".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture

Are you beginning to understanding why I chose the term "lawfare"?
 

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
How else would he fund the system :confused: Does it matter that he does so maybe as moral opposition (R) based upon his "sky daddy" or playing to that audience (his constituency)? What is Holder & Obama's (D) story here and now in your opinion and understanding?

Regardless, your and my political opinions here are only divisive as they were designed and used against us today. What does politics have to do with the right and wrong of this effective lawfare other than funding and maintaining of the Democratic and Republican political dichotomy that enslaves us here?

This lawfare transcends the simple abuse of criminal law through prohibition schemes we speak of here brother. In particular it is this corruption of "regulatory capture" within our government that we watched destroy our economy in 2007 and it's the reason we will never truly recover. It's how our government sells us progressive tax law and effectively delivers an extremely regressive one. It's how Republicans and Democrats fund their billion dollar campaigns and maintain power. IMHO education is societies only means of survival, as this is the only way equality in a democratic society can be achieved. How to remove the root evil that is successfully being sold to us as a solution :confused:

Regulatory capture is a form of political corruption that occurs when a regulatory agency, created to act in the public interest, instead advances the commercial or special concerns of interest groups that dominate the industry or sector it is charged with regulating. Regulatory capture is a form of government failure; it creates an opening for firms to behave in ways injurious to the public (e.g., producing negative externalities). The agencies are called "captured agencies".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture

Are you beginning to understanding why I chose the term "lawfare"?

Just so I'm clear, I think a new AG from EITHER party would be an improvement over Schutte. I don't know that his political affiliation has anything to do with his zeal for fucking with marijuana users/growers/sellers ...... but I do know that he is dead set on stamping it out (whatever his motive is).
 

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
Just so I'm clear, I think a new AG from EITHER party would be an improvement over Schutte. I don't know that his political affiliation has anything to do with his zeal for fucking with marijuana users/growers/sellers ...... but I do know that he is dead set on stamping it out (whatever his motive is).
I will reiterate that ONLY marijuana remaining a Schedule I narcotic and the individual actions of the local court and law enforcement ("discretion") matter here. WTF does the state AG's legal opinion or your opinion of him matter here :confused:
 

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
I will reiterate that ONLY marijuana remaining a Schedule I narcotic and the individual actions of the local court and law enforcement ("discretion") matter here. WTF does the state AG's legal opinion or your opinion of him matter here :confused:

What does the AG's legal opinion matter?????

I'd say it matters a great deal to those unfortunate folks who have gone through the meat grinder here and are now sitting in prison due to having a fuck like Schutte as our AG.
 

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
What does the AG's legal opinion matter?????

I'd say it matters a great deal to those unfortunate folks who have gone through the meat grinder here and are now sitting in prison due to having a fuck like Schutte as our AG.
If Dr B were (could afford) to sue civilly for the clear violation of his MMMA Section 4 protections, whom would he sue? What standing would he have to sue Schuette? I suggest you read, consider and answer those pointed question asked here earlier that you have simply chosen to ignore. If not here publically, at least reason them out in your own head please ...

 
Last edited:

buckaroo bonzai

Well-Known Member
What does the AG's legal opinion matter?????

I'd say it matters a great deal to those unfortunate folks who have gone through the meat grinder here and are now sitting in prison due to having a fuck like Schutte as our AG.

Dave Leyton for AG mich !:-P

...and govenor!:grin:
 

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
If Dr B were (could afford) to sue civilly for the clear violation of his MMMA Section 4 protections, whom would he sue? What standing would he have to sue Schuette? I suggest you read, consider and answer those pointed question asked here earlier that you have simply chosen to ignore. If not here publically, at least reason them out in your own head please ...

Who sets the mandates for law enforcement?

Who chooses which cases to prosecute?

Clearly this law has been interpreted with bias by Bill Schutte. He has given directive to law enforcement, and prosecutors to very aggressively go after medical marijuana patients and caregivers. Whether you wish to acknowledge it or not, he has caused a great deal of bullshit for many people because of his views on marijuana.
 

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
Stop being foolish brother. Explain the dozens of dispensaries open in Ann Arbor, Flint, Detroit, etc. from MMMA's start to today. ANSWER: It is the local court and law enforcement's sole "discretion" and legal opinions that matter REGARDLESS of Schuette's or ANY other state AG's legal opinion. On the other hand Eric Holder's (DEA, FBI, ATF) actions in this state over these past years CANNOT be stopped by ANY state law, official or court. Want to talk about that and what he's done here?

For the final time, WTF does ANY state AG's legal opinion or your opinion of Schuette have to due with those facts of the matter or the subject matter I have offered here? I really don't give a fuck if you hate Schuette or me :bigjoint:
 
Last edited:

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
Stop being foolish brother. Explain the dozens of dispensaries open in Ann Arbor, Flint, Detroit, etc. from MMMA's start to today. ANSWER: It is the local court and law enforcement's sole "discretion" and legal opinions that matter REGARDLESS of Schuette's or ANY other state AG's legal opinion. On the other hand Eric Holder's (DEA, FBI, ATF) actions in this state over these past years CANNOT be stopped by ANY state law, official or court. Want to talk about that and what he's done here?

For the final time, WTF does ANY state AG's legal opinion or your opinion of Schuette have to due with those facts of the matter or the subject matter I have offered here? I really don't give a fuck if you hate Schuette or me :bigjoint:

.

If you're saying that the AG's legal opinion doesn't matter, then we'll just have to agree to disagree on that. The legal protections that you keep bringing up are obviously being interpreted by our AG in a completely different manor than you. And guess what ....... your opinion on the matter means absolutely nothing to nobody, while his opinions mean a great deal to a lot of folks.
 

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
.

If you're saying that the AG's legal opinion doesn't matter, then we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.
That's exactly my earlier sentiment before you began making your statements ...

"Exploitation of ignorance got us into and maintains this mess today. Let's move on ...

To quote the lawyer in AG Eric Holder (3:50): "What's obvious to one is perhaps not obvious to another" ...

"

Those are the same expressions many lawyers/politicians deploy when they refuse to answer direct and pointed questions about the facts of the matter. At least you've learned something ...
 
Last edited:
Top