Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Ah, Sweet Federalism
On Wednesday the Los Angeles City Council put a moratorium on medical marijuana facilities to examine what sort of success they were having. Less than 15 minutes later the FBI raided 10 of those facilities.
City Councilman Dennis Zine said the temporary ban was designed to protect patients' rights while drawing up rules to protect communities where dispensaries are located. He also suggested that the DEA raid on the Hollywood dispensary was intended as a statement.
"I think the DEA is doing it out of spite, which I think is sad," said Zine, who is a reserve LAPD officer.
Several dozen medical marijuana activists attended the council meeting to support the temporary ban. No one spoke against it.
And posts about law enforcement stupidity in Los Angeles are best accompanied by a link to this video.
|7.26.07 @ 9:27AM|#
Sounds like someone really wants to squash the medicinal
marijuana movement.
Good thing there's a United States Attorney in office who's down
with the agenda.
|7.26.07 @ 9:28AM|#
RC,
Are you mad? Why would you wish civil war upon us? It's terrible
when it happens and it can't end well.
The administrations commitment to fucking this country is beyond my
comprehension. They must be insane because they keep doing the same
thing over and over, expecting this time it will work.
What's even more depressing is the notion that they're happy with
the results they're getting and want more of the same.
The second Bush administration is what's going to push this country
into a second Clinton administration.
Never has this country been in greater need of an infusion of
libertarianism.
RON PAUL '08
|7.26.07 @ 9:44AM|#
Warren,
Do you think the consequence would really be civil war? What
sequence of events would lead to that - national guard blocks DEA
agents, DEA agents call the federal military? If a state actually
stood up to this crap, it would create so much bad PR for the
administration and the DEA, they'd be forced to back down.
|7.26.07 @ 9:55AM|#
Guys, we're talking about DEA agents here...
These guys are cowards. Oh, they're brave when they infiltrate drug
gangs and the like, but in the end the institution is completely
cowardly.
During prohibition, these guys went after alcohol production. When
prhibition ended, they were too scared to go out and get real jobs,
so they lobbied for and got Federal laws outlawing marijuana.
When drug gangs started getting sophisticated, they started going
after doctors. Every generation they comission soem study that
demonstrates conclusively that the only people who benefit from
drug prohibition are succesful drug-running gangs and law
enforcement. But because ending the drug war would force them to go
out and chase real criminals who hurt people or even worse go out
and get real jobs, they interfere with local elections, pump out
propaganda, and intimidate those who threaten their welfare
checks.
Every DEA agent is a traitor to the United States. I don't care how
brave they were in 'Nam, how many violent murderers they nab. They
help assist those violent murderers amass their wealth and power.
DEA agents are robbing the american people, betraying the
constitution, making the people less safe, solely for their
personal gain. Bunch of Benedict arnolds, every one of them.
|7.26.07 @ 9:57AM|#
I forgot tofinish my thought...
Because they are cowards, when faced by a hostile armed force,
there is no question in my mind that the DEA would back down.
|7.26.07 @ 9:58AM|#
RC,
Pardon my hyperbole.
If a state actually stood up to this crap, it would create so
much bad PR for the administration and the DEA, they'd be forced to
back down.
I think you're very wrong about this. I think the only possible
result would be the state being forced to back down. The feds are
prepared to ratchet up all the way. If the past four years have
convince you of nothing else, it's that bad publicity only
redoubles the commitment
|7.26.07 @ 10:11AM|#
I guess we just disagree then. The feds have very few options
against a national guard force - who would they call? U.S.
Marshalls? BATF and FBI swat teams? Or would they deploy some of
our thinly stretched military to Humboldt County to show them
what's what?
Wiretapping and torture in foreign lands is, to some, not
particularly evil. Federal agents opening fire on national guard
troops is (I think) universially viewed as evil.
Robert|7.26.07 @ 10:21AM|#
I'm afraid the worst would happen. Neither side would back down, both would be reinforced, and we'd have a bloody war. Very soon everybody would forget why it started.
Episiarch|7.26.07 @ 10:22AM|#
Or would they deploy some of our thinly stretched military
to Humboldt County to show them what's what?
They can't; Posse Comitatus. National Guard wins hands
down over Fed LEAs. The Feds would have to be insane to escalate
it; every state in the union would go apeshit because they would
know it could happen to them too.
|7.26.07 @ 10:23AM|#
I suppose that with the new and improved Military Commissions Act, Bush could declare the state of California to be in a state of emergency to sidestep the posse comitatus business. But overall, I agree with you Episiarch.
|7.26.07 @ 10:31AM|#
As far as Federal vs State showdowns, anyone remember this minor
incident?
The Feds ALWAYS win. Don't kid yourselves.
|7.26.07 @ 10:32AM|#
The next day, Woodrow Mann, the Mayor of Little Rock, asked
President Eisenhower to send federal troops to enforce integration
and protect the nine students.
On September 24, the President ordered a Battle Group of the elite
101st Airborne Division of the United States Army to Little Rock,
and federalized the entire 10,000 member Arkansas National Guard,
taking it out of the hands of Governor Faubus. An ad hoc unit, Task
Force 153rd Infantry, was hastily organized at Camp Robinson from
Guardsmen drawn from units statewide. The bulk of the Arkansas
Guard was quickly discharged from Federalized status, but Task
Force 153rd Infantry remained, taking over the entire operation
when the paratroopers left at Thanksgiving, and remaining on duty
until the end of the school year.
Federalize. It's a magic word.
|7.26.07 @ 10:35AM|#
But would the mayor of LA or some other equivalent California official be willing to play patsy to the feds over medical marijuana? I think Californians see it like segregation but the other way around.
Episiarch|7.26.07 @ 10:38AM|#
federalized the entire 10,000 member Arkansas National
Guard, taking it out of the hands of Governor Faubus
Let Bush try this over an issue like medical MJ as opposed to civil
rights. I'd like to see it. Can you say "impeachment
proceedings"?
|7.26.07 @ 11:04AM|#
Good thing there's a United States Attorney in office who's down with the agenda.
Yeah, because we all know how anti-drug-war Kerry was in his bid
for the presidency.
I mean, he even, like, tried snowboard, dude.
VM|7.26.07 @ 11:10AM|#
Media -
apparently he was better on snow than Sonny Bono was...
(although in his defense, maybe he thought the "I Got You Babe"
duet with the tree actually was Cher after her botox appointment,
but I digress)
|7.26.07 @ 11:12AM|#
If this republic cannot comprehend the difference between
disallowing a human being to have an education because of the
quantum of melanin versus allowing people to humanely try to stop
from dying (or dying in a dignified manner), then this republic is
truly fucked?
The former should be considered an embarrassment to the concept of
a civilization, the latter is the very epitome of civiliazation,
compassion for your fellow human beings. I could see Albert
Schweitzer handing out weed. I could not see him pointing a gun in
someone's face for wanting to reduce thier suffering.
I say bring the confrontation on and lets see what happens.
x,y|7.26.07 @ 11:44AM|#
One of the major reasons states don't fight the feds on these issues is because the states depend on *conditional* federal largesse.
|7.26.07 @ 1:07PM|#
It's always occurred to me that if the federal government can
federalize the national guard, then that pretty much eviscerates
the position of the gun control groups that the national guard is a
state militia.
What do you think would have happened if the federal govt didn't
have the ability to federalize "state" national guard units? Would
they have had the army actually do battle with the state national
guard?
If it truly is a state unit, why does the national guard allow
itself to be federalized?
|7.26.07 @ 1:25PM|#
If it truly is a state unit, why does the national guard
allow itself to be federalized?
The Militia Act of 1903 (aka the Dick Act - really, that's the
name, no foolin').
John Rhoads|7.26.07 @ 1:59PM|#
If the "militia" in the 2nd amendment refers to the national
guard (hint...it doesn't) then congress has the power to call it up
in times of insurrection:
"To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of
the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;"
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlei.html#section8http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlei.html#section8
DEA Agent|7.26.07 @ 2:00PM|#
Tarran,
I vus just following orders!
As a result, on July 1, 1973, the Bureau of Narcotics and
Dangerous Drugs (BNDD) and the Office of Drug Abuse Law Enforcement
(ODALE) merged together to create the DEA.
Scooby|7.26.07 @ 3:17PM|#
tarran,
It might be more productive to offer drug warriors job retraining
and amnesty from prosecution for their crimes against humanity
instead of thinly veiled threats that they'll be first up against
the wall come the revolution.
Not that the scumbags deserve mercy that they deny to the
terminally ill, but it may be the path of least resistance.
|7.26.07 @ 3:31PM|#
"""national guard federalism showdown! I wish so much it would
happen.""""
""""The feds have very few options against a national guard force -
who would they call? U.S. Marshalls? BATF and FBI swat teams? Or
would they deploy some of our thinly stretched military to Humboldt
County to show them what's what?""""
How easy we forget history. The President would just federalize the
National Guard.
http://www.centralhigh57.org
Bee|7.26.07 @ 3:56PM|#
One of the major reasons states don't fight the feds on
these issues is because the states depend on *conditional* federal
largesse.
Well, since California is a net Sugar Daddy, I say F'em. If we
stopped paying Uncle Sam, I guarantee you'd see the Feds
parachuting into Sacramento!
We need a Secession party.
|7.26.07 @ 5:07PM|#
Did someone say secession?
Join the Guns and Dope Party!
You're welcome in Freetopia when we finally win an election.
Equal Rights
for Ostriches!
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245