[ShiningSkull]

Well, we've lost the LATimes, but I'm not surprised.



Editorial

Putting a lid on pot sales in L.A.
Weeding out illegitimate medical marijuana dispensaries
is a job for the cops, not the City Council.

October 29, 2009 | 1:02 p.m.

For-profit medical marijuana dispensers beware: The city of Los Angeles is focusing its finest legal and political minds on putting you out of business. And if you want to see what happens when you run afoul of this crack team of nuisance abaters, just look at the fate of those trying to put up illegal billboards all over town.

Oops, bad example. L.A. has been trying for years to limit billboards, only to violate its own ordinance by carving out exceptions and see its ban overturned in court. That doesn't mean city officials couldn't do a better job with marijuana, but their record doesn't inspire confidence.

The City Council has been trying unsuccessfully for two years to stop the spread of dispensaries, issuing a moratorium in 2007 but then failing to enforce it and allowing anyone who claimed "hardship" status to open a new storefront. That moratorium was voided last week in court, prompting the council to push forward plans for a vote on a new city ordinance placing heavy restrictions on where and how marijuana clinics can operate. But the ordinance, now in its fourth draft, was too tough for some members, so it's headed back for a fifth draft.

Here's a thought for the council: The next time a marijuana ordinance appears, just say no. The city doesn't need one.

Medical marijuana has become a serious nuisance in L.A. Hundreds of stores have cropped up in recent years, many concentrated in downtrodden neighborhoods and bringing a criminal element with them. There are legitimate marijuana cooperatives serving genuinely ill patients, yet there are also storefronts pushing pot to recreational users and raking in illicit profits while getting their supply from criminal cartels in Mexico and Northern California. The city doesn't need a new ordinance to get rid of the latter. It could just start enforcing state law.

In August 2008, Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown released a set of guidelines on possession, cultivation and use of medical marijuana. To operate legally, distributors must be nonprofit cooperatives or collectives. The former are democratically controlled operations in which profits are shared by their members, who are also their patrons. The latter facilitate transactions between members who are legally entitled to grow their own marijuana. A later ruling by the California Supreme Court decreed that medical marijuana distributors must be their clients' "primary caregivers," meaning someone who has consistently assumed responsibility for their housing, health or safety. That rules out a dispensary owner selling trippy buds behind a counter.

A problem caused by a failure to enforce the law won't be solved by passing a new law. It's time to call in the cops, not the council members.

********************

WTF with the "trippy buds" comment and obnoxious tone of this editorial? Also, that "storefronts (are) pushing pot to recreational users and raking in illicit profits while getting their supply from criminal cartels in Mexico" has never been proven in this paper or anywhere else.

How can they editorialize these lies?

[MCMUFFIN08]

I shall write my own editorial for the L.A Times and let the battle of writers on this topic begin. For those who don't like medical marijuana can move to any other of the 49 states they have to choose from. California needs to revolutionize the prohibition of the best plant in the world.

[BrattonBasher]

People should be aware the L.A. Times has historicly leaned Republican. Obama was the first Democrat they endorsed in decades. The editorial is quite flawed because obviously the AG's guidelines did not cover all the zoning and local issues. The city council does need to be involved. I bet when the council reads this they will be pissed at the Times. But activists and patients do need to come to grips with the fact that we have some unsavory folks in our ranks.

[ShiningSkull]

Originally Posted by BrattonBasher

But activists and patients do need to come to grips with the fact that we have some unsavory folks in our ranks.

Good post, BB, but about this last sentence: I wish everyone from the Times to this forum would provide some evidence about the unsavory goings-on in our collectives, before condemning them without facts.

[BrattonBasher]

Originally Posted by ShiningSkull

Good post, BB, but about this last sentence: I wish everyone from the Times to this forum would provide some evidence about the unsavory goings-on in our collectives, before condemning them without facts.

All you have to do SS is grab a copy of JEMM Magazine and look at the ads. Alot of the new places and a portion of the older ones are in this to make big money. Of course there are exceptions. But IMHO the mill doctors are way worse than rogue operators. If we get rid of the recreational users only the good places will stay IMHO. I don't agree with the editorial at all, but I refuse to pull the wool over my eyes and pretend it's peaches and cream.

[BrattonBasher]

And how come the editor does not mention Trutanich as the freaking reason for the multiple drafts???

[ShiningSkull]

Originally Posted by BrattonBasher

All you have to do SS is grab a copy of JEMM Magazine and look at the ads. Alot of the new places and a portion of the older ones are in this to make big money. Of course there are exceptions. But IMHO the mill doctors are way worse than rogue operators. If we get rid of the recreational users only the good places will stay IMHO. I don't agree with the editorial at all, but I refuse to pull the wool over my eyes and pretend it's peaches and cream.

How did you know I was pretending it was peaches and cream? Mmmm... my favorite!

I don't know, BB, I guess I take a more liberal view than you do. I don't think that ads are necessarily unsavory. Besides, how much money is big money? Is it enough to cover your expenses to reopen after a smash and grab operation by the cops? Does it cover attorneys' fees to fight the case, if there is one? I hope NNCC made enough money to cover these things.

How do you know that these ad placing joints are getting their weed from cartels? That's one thing that's always alleged. No one ever proves it.

[j_kushman]

I just cancelled my subscription to the L.A. Times and when they asked why I said " because I don't agree with your negative stance on mmj" It felt great!! Hit rm where it hurts.

[Pico+Barrington Collective]

WOW!!!! and yeah its not a surprise...

[silvercloud]

Prolly reporter Lopez doesn't expect to get too much of a warm welcome at this point at the co-op level ~ it is fortunate for us b/c the Times is waay down on circulation ,paper thin ,lol ~ that is all

[Eden Therapy]

I love these fictional accusations, but I'd like to go on record saying that we have never got our meds from any cartels and if anything all our home grown meds are putting the cartels out of business!! So to the idiot who wrote this for LA Times...

Originally Posted by ShiningSkull

Well, we've lost the LATimes, but I'm not surprised.



Editorial

Putting a lid on pot sales in L.A.
Weeding out illegitimate medical marijuana dispensaries
is a job for the cops, not the City Council.

October 29, 2009 | 1:02 p.m.

For-profit medical marijuana dispensers beware: The city of Los Angeles is focusing its finest legal and political minds on putting you out of business. And if you want to see what happens when you run afoul of this crack team of nuisance abaters, just look at the fate of those trying to put up illegal billboards all over town.

Oops, bad example. L.A. has been trying for years to limit billboards, only to violate its own ordinance by carving out exceptions and see its ban overturned in court. That doesn't mean city officials couldn't do a better job with marijuana, but their record doesn't inspire confidence.

The City Council has been trying unsuccessfully for two years to stop the spread of dispensaries, issuing a moratorium in 2007 but then failing to enforce it and allowing anyone who claimed "hardship" status to open a new storefront. That moratorium was voided last week in court, prompting the council to push forward plans for a vote on a new city ordinance placing heavy restrictions on where and how marijuana clinics can operate. But the ordinance, now in its fourth draft, was too tough for some members, so it's headed back for a fifth draft.

Here's a thought for the council: The next time a marijuana ordinance appears, just say no. The city doesn't need one.

Medical marijuana has become a serious nuisance in L.A. Hundreds of stores have cropped up in recent years, many concentrated in downtrodden neighborhoods and bringing a criminal element with them. There are legitimate marijuana cooperatives serving genuinely ill patients, yet there are also storefronts pushing pot to recreational users and raking in illicit profits while getting their supply from criminal cartels in Mexico and Northern California. The city doesn't need a new ordinance to get rid of the latter. It could just start enforcing state law.

In August 2008, Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown released a set of guidelines on possession, cultivation and use of medical marijuana. To operate legally, distributors must be nonprofit cooperatives or collectives. The former are democratically controlled operations in which profits are shared by their members, who are also their patrons. The latter facilitate transactions between members who are legally entitled to grow their own marijuana. A later ruling by the California Supreme Court decreed that medical marijuana distributors must be their clients' "primary caregivers," meaning someone who has consistently assumed responsibility for their housing, health or safety. That rules out a dispensary owner selling trippy buds behind a counter.

A problem caused by a failure to enforce the law won't be solved by passing a new law. It's time to call in the cops, not the council members.

********************

WTF with the "trippy buds" comment and obnoxious tone of this editorial? Also, that "storefronts (are) pushing pot to recreational users and raking in illicit profits while getting their supply from criminal cartels in Mexico" has never been proven in this paper or anywhere else.

How can they editorialize these lies?

[Justonevoice]

Originally Posted by ShiningSkull

How did you know I was pretending it was peaches and cream? Mmmm... my favorite!

I don't know, BB, I guess I take a more liberal view than you do. I don't think that ads are necessarily unsavory. Besides, how much money is big money? Is it enough to cover your expenses to reopen after a smash and grab operation by the cops? Does it cover attorneys' fees to fight the case, if there is one? I hope NNCC made enough money to cover these things.

How do you know that these ad placing joints are getting their weed from cartels? That's one thing that's always alleged. No one ever proves it.

SS surely you can not believe that every co-operator is a shinning example of a good citizen now do ya. I operated clubs in LA for 5 years and met with many different operators and let me tell ya they are not all the same and some I prefer not to even be in the same room with. Does that make me a snob? I do not believe so, Ijust have different standards and morals (notice I said different). The truth is that we do need a cleansing of sorts but not like they say in this article or the way our DA and CA see it either. Do not be nieve about the fact that there are some that can spoil the whole thing. If you have seen some of the stuff I have I am sure that you would feel the same.

[lwien]

When one goes into a dispensary, it can be pretty obvious, at least to me, if they are primarily targeting the recreational user or the medical user.

For those of you that readily see these differences, I'm curious. Out of all the dispensaries that are currently operating on SoCal, what percentage of those do you think are targeting their operations towards the recreational user?

[cephas]

Originally Posted by Justonevoice

SS surely you can not believe that every co-operator is a shinning example of a good citizen now do ya. I operated clubs in LA for 5 years and met with many different operators and let me tell ya they are not all the same and some I prefer not to even be in the same room with. Does that make me a snob? I do not believe so, I just have different standards and morals (notice I said different). The truth is that we do need a cleansing of sorts but not like they say in this article or the way our DA and CA see it either. Do not beat about the fact that there are some that can spoil the whole thing. If you have seen some of the stuff I have I am sure that you would feel the same.

Yeah, the better I get to know some of the owners.....the more I cannot wait for the eventual cleansing.

Unfortunately the politicians, judges, and police are too institutionalized into believing "No good can come from MJ." That they are unwilling to truly legalize us and as such throw us into these people's arms...

All we need are background checks into Co-Op/dispensary owners criminal records. Any drug charges, tax evasion, emebzelment, etc.... no business license issued. Problem solved for the most part. I know that would also exclude many truly kind individuals from owning Co-Ops (activist's with records for possession, or trumped up "intent to sell" charges), but is needed regardless to keep the unsavory people out of our midst (as much as possible, loopholes exist, and opportunists are everywhere).

The other part of the issue, is right now we need to look outward; To attain legalization, more than, or as much as, we need to look inward...truly makes it a difficult problem.

Regardless, this editorial upsets me, and I also am writing a letter to the Times editorial staff.

[Eden Therapy]

Originally Posted by cephas

Yeah, the better I get to know some of the owners.....the more I cannot wait for the eventual cleansing.

Unfortunately the politicians, judges, and police are too institutionalized into believing "No good can come from MJ." That they are unwilling to truly legalize us and as such throw us into these people's arms...

All we need are background checks into Co-Op/dispensary owners criminal records. Any drug charges, tax evasion, emebzelment, etc.... no business license issued. Problem solved for the most part. I know that would also exclude many truly kind individuals from owning Co-Ops (activist's with records for possession, or trumped up "intent to sell" charges), but is needed regardless to keep the unsavory people out of our midst (as much as possible, loopholes exist, and opportunists are everywhere).

The other part of the issue, is right now we need to look outward; To attain legalization, more than, or as much as, we need to look inward...truly makes it a difficult problem.

Regardless, this editorial upsets me, and I also am writing a letter to the Times editorial staff.

We pay our taxes and no one here has a criminal record, but i know some awesome individuals that wouldn't qualify......unfortunately, it's all the shady co-op owners that i know that have zero criminal history and zero interest in the movement.....they are just business

[healersonthird]

We heard this and wonder if it is true??? Please Post if true..let us know so we can rally some support....

[ShiningSkull]

Well, what shadiness have you all seen then?
Anything concrete?

[cephas]

Originally Posted by Eden Therapy

We pay our taxes and no one here has a criminal record, but i know some awesome individuals that wouldn't qualify......unfortunately, it's all the shady co-op owners that i know that have zero criminal history and zero interest in the movement.....they are just business

There-in lays the problem.

What to do, would be an interview before a patient peer group where things could be explained and a decision could be made, based upon the individual's circumstances, character, and motivations regardless of criminal history or not.

In other words if the peer group thinks you would be good, you're in. If not, you're not. ....of course even that system is ripe for corruption and problems...but would probably be better than anything else. The problem is getting the politicians to see the benefit...

[cephas]

Originally Posted by ShiningSkull

Well, what shadiness have you all seen then?
Anything concrete?

I know from multiple sources, including the owner himself, of one store that sells pounds out of the backdoor to non-patients.....

Will not name, names, doesn't matter anyway anymore......they have been closed down....but regardless it happened..I think that particular person was in the MMJ for the right reasons, but had expensive tastes....

[Pitjustice]

Originally Posted by MCMUFFIN08

I shall write my own editorial for the L.A Times and let the battle of writers on this topic begin. For those who don't like medical marijuana can move to any other of the 49 states they have to choose from. California needs to revolutionize the prohibition of the best plant in the world.

Fight (as in self-defense) or flight (as in close and run away) time.

[Eden Therapy]

Originally Posted by ShiningSkull

Well, what shadiness have you all seen then?
Anything concrete?

i'd love to start making lists of the spots and i'd have back up from other collectives and patients, but WT doesn't allow that....I've asked and posted threads of this nature if you check my posts...especially, i wanted to warn vendors where they might get robbed...


i'll give you examples of what THEY (SHADY ONES) do:

-leave flyers on cars next to middle schools
-back door sales (to non-patients and over legal amounts)
-putting out moldy meds (anything that will sell)
-adding weight to herb with fruit peels (not healthy; not cool)
-making unsanitary edibles at home (fell on the floor;oh well)
-not paying vendors, after they leave meds on consignment ($15,000; not for you)
-not verifying patients at all (some don't even attempt)
-not paying taxes
-selling OTHER things besides MMJ
-lying about caps (we cap at 40; you come in and there's 10 strains for 60)
-pre-packaging with lots of skimping

...and so much more...these places wouldn't know what ASA stands for!

Unfortunately, as ASA tought me, we cannot bad-mouth ANY collectives cause the media will take quotes out of context, generalize and blame the whole movement

[Pitjustice]

The Market for cannibis is handling these problems and weedtracker plays a vital role in this, if a consumer of cannibis in a private contract exchange is not satified with price, quality etc. he/she will tell others and no longer continue to voluntarily exchange with the other party.

An adult consumer of the medicinal herb know as cannibis freely medicates by choice, he/she does not need anothers permission to consume or exchange this herb.

No one else opinion on this matters, and definatly no one has the right to threaten and attivate force, theft and fraud.

[Pitjustice]

If there are other actual crimes taking place then that has nothing to do with mmj/cannibis shops. And there are plenty of legitiment laws to address those.

[ShiningSkull]

Originally Posted by ShiningSkull

Well, what shadiness have you all seen then?
Anything concrete?

Much thanks to those who answered.

[bushka]

Originally Posted by eden therapy

i'd love to start making lists of the spots and i'd have back up from other collectives and patients, but wt doesn't allow that....i've asked and posted threads of this nature if you check my posts...especially, i wanted to warn vendors where they might get robbed...


I'll give you examples of what they (shady ones) do:

-leave flyers on cars next to middle schools
-back door sales (to non-patients and over legal amounts)
-putting out moldy meds (anything that will sell)
-adding weight to herb with fruit peels (not healthy; not cool)
-making unsanitary edibles at home (fell on the floor;oh well)
-not paying vendors, after they leave meds on consignment ($15,000; not for you)
-not verifying patients at all (some don't even attempt)
-not paying taxes
-selling other things besides mmj
-lying about caps (we cap at 40; you come in and there's 10 strains for 60)
-pre-packaging with lots of skimping

...and so much more...these places wouldn't know what asa stands for!

Unfortunately, as asa tought me, we cannot bad-mouth any collectives cause the media will take quotes out of context, generalize and blame the whole movement

yup ...