Medical Marijuana

Judge Shuts Down L.A. Medical Marijuana Farmers Market

|

I noted this morning that the city of Los Angeles was trying to shut down a farmers market that allowed medical marijuana users to go directly from suppliers and bypass dispensaries entirely. It looks like they've temporarily succeeded. The Los Angeles Times reports:

The judge's ruling Tuesday grants a temporary restraining order filed by Los Angeles City Atty. Mike Feuer, who sought to stop the California Heritage Market operations because he said it didn't comply with the city's law for marijuana dispensaries.

Voters passed Proposition D last year, which established legal parameters where marijuana dispensaries could do business.

The ruling, Feuer said, supports the "spirit and the letter of Proposition D."

"The bottom line is that we argued successfully that this so-called farmers market was an attempt to make an end-run around the will of the people when they voted to put Proposition D in place," Feuer said. "The court saw through this subterfuge."

Guess the will of the people who wanted to voluntarily do business (enough to make a line around the block) with the market doesn't apply. Ah … democracy.

Advertisement

NEXT: Immigration Activist Released by Border Patrol

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Well, we can’t just have markets where who knows who is selling whatever they want to, to whoever wants to buy it. That’s madness! Madness and anarchy! Is that how you people really want to live!? Government is there to protect you, from you!

    1. Exactly! Think of all those oppressed people who can’t pimp children! All they’re doing is filling a demand which doesn’t hurt anyone. Making money is the only true human virtue and these evil democruds just ruin it for everyone!

        1. You read it. You’re right. There is no morality but the market.

          1. Markets have no morality aside from that of their individual participants. While they can be turned to moral or immoral ends by those participating in them, markets themselves have no more or less morality than a hammer or tour bus.

          2. At first, I thought it was sarcasm. But it didn’t make any sense, so I asked you ‘what?’. You know, that was a cue for you to explain yourself. But I see you didn’t get it.

            So, let me lead here.

            So, you are saying that the government should be in the business of shutting down a farmers market selling cannabis? If so, please explain why you think that.

            Also, seems you are saying that selling cannabis is equal to selling children and that Democrats are some sort of heroes for stopping people from selling said cannabis. I give the GOP equal credit for doing so. Again, try to make some sense of your statement, just for us simple folk here.

            1. i am taking your statement to its logical conclusion. You said that any market transaction is moral by default. notice that absolute lack of any qualifiers in your statement. If someone wants to sell and someone wants to buy, by your logic now, then it is inherently moral and to interfere is wrong.

              1. Yeah Hyperion, come on. You made an obviously sarcastic comment and didn’t explicitly list all the things that should be outlawed or at the very least judged as immoral. So obviously you think selling children is A-OK. Unassailable. Fucking. Logic.

              2. You are inferring something that I didn’t intend. And also, you are refusing to answer my questions.

                Answer the questions, or I presume you are incapable of doing so.

      1. You go, kill that strawman!!! DIE, STRAWMAN, DIE!!!

        Looks like someone forgot to take their meds.

        1. What strawman trickster god? Hyperion made it painfully clear – if there’s demand to be filled then it’s evil to interfere with it’s fullfillment. Theres demand for chinese child sex slaves (quite possible even a few long lines) so it’s evil to prevent hardworking entrepreneurs from satisfying that. It’s a volunary commercial transaction and even Judge Jesus says slaves are property like any other so whats the problem? Or are you cozying up to the cosmo cocktail partiers now?

          1. Child sex slavery is not consensual.

          2. Involuntary servitude (slavery) is, like, by definition, not voluntary.

          3. Hyperion made it painfully clear – if there’s demand to be filled then it’s evil to interfere with it’s fullfillment.

            Sure, you could take what I said and turn it in to that, if you have some sort of grudge to grind on against humanity itself.

            It seem obvious that you are against free markets and profits, and that you believe government initiated violence is the solution to all of your issues. I am sad for you if you unable to think outside of that stale old box.

            1. Yes. If I’m not all one i’m all the other. i think it’s sad that you can’t get out of the box that blinds you to the fact that simplitstic bromides arent up to the task of dealing with reality

              1. Careful, Hyperion. He’s trying to lead up to the idea that all of libertarianism is a simplistic bromide, that can’t match the multilayered complex way of dealing with reality that is progressivism

              2. Yeah Hyperion. If you want to deal with reality, you need to assume facts not in evidence in order to make laughably absurd and unfounded claims, like, selling weed == pimping child sex slaves. Get with the the program.

              3. Answer the question.

                Why should Democrats shut down farmers markets selling cannabis?

                Answer, or I win, homer.

                1. Seems pretty obvious

                  Proposition D, Feuer said, does not allow multiple, independent vendors to sell on one site.

                  “That’s essentially what this business model was,” Feuer said.

                  Look if you dont like a law you have three options a: change it legislatively b: fight it in the courts or the preferred libertarian option c: fantasize a world where it doesn’t exist and pretend the fantasy world applies to this one.

                  1. Ok, you’ve proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that you are completely incapable of answering even a simple question or engaging in any sort of meaningful debate. Nite, retard.

                    1. How does that not nswer you’re question? its simple. the market in question was not operating under the parameters required by law. I’m very sorry that california did not ask for your personal input and approval but that;s the breaks kiddo.

                      now ill leave you all to discuss how obama is really an illuminati lizard man 😀

                    2. Even if what you are saying is 100% accurate, Hyperion never claimed that the markets were strictly legal. He was criticizing the law and its justification through the use of sarcasm. Which is a perfectly legitimate use of internet message boards.

                    3. I think you have Reason confused with InfoWars.

                    4. And as I recall, the Bushes are the lizardmen — Obama is just an atheist-Muslim-gay-socialist-Kenyan… or something.

                  2. I smell a law student who was directed by a professor to fuck with libertarians.

                    1. I smell a law student who was directed by a professor to fuck with libertarians.

                      That usually turns out badly for the student. I see tonight is not an exception.

                  3. Nope. You forgot option d: disobey the law.

                    1. Nope. You forgot option d: disobey the law.

                      Law and legislation are not synonyms. Thus disobeying legislation is not necessarily disobeying the law. Law is pretty much agreed upon by society. Like rape, murder, theft, etc. Legislation on the other hand is how government codifies law. When legislation must be imposed upon society, it’s not government codifying law, it’s government imposing on society.

                      When you’ve got time, check this out. Yeah, it’s a lecture by a college professor. But it’s good. Damn good.

                    2. Nope. You forgot option d: disobey the law.

                      “If they wouldn’t make so many stupid laws then I wouldn’t have to break so many stupid laws.”

                      — WBM

                      … Hobbit

                  4. Does proposition D explicitly forbid “multiple, independent vendors to sell on one site”, or does it simply not expressly allow it? That’s an important distinction

                    There are also other options. For example, you can break the law. That comes with risks, obviously, but it certainly is an option.

                    1. You should know that which is not expressly permitted is forbidden because commerce clause. That got settled in Wickard.

      2. Yeah, the situation you outlined features a victim, whereas the only victims in the farmer’s market case are those now going without their doctor prescribed medication, courtesy of Los Angeles. But I’ll hand it to you, you’ve mastered the art of the false analogy.

        1. What if it’s the pimps own kids? As we say in libertopia, you can do what you want with your own kids.

          1. No, that isn’t the case. Parents are guardians of their children, not owners. Children ultimately own themselves.

            1. So i can marry my 10 year old daugher off to a 70 year old man because jesus or deny her lifesaving meds (again because jesus) but i can’t have her turning tricks at a truckstop? What kind of proggie horseshit is that Jose? I but you spend most of your time worshipping obama rather than fighting for liberty?

              1. You don’t make any sense at all, and I think you are completely incapable of carrying on a coherent conversation.

              2. Not according to libertarian philosophy, no. You do not have the right to marry your daughter off at any age. There is still the issue of consent and the idea of legal competence. Children are generally considered not to be competent to make certain decisions on their own, which is why they have guardians, typically parents.

                The medication issue gets into the weeds a bit because the child might also have a personal religious conviction against blood transfusions or chemotherapy or whatever else. If the “child” is in reality a 14 or 15 year old, who is to say that they do not understand the potential consequences of their actions? Personally, I think this might be an area where the state should have some influence, but it needs to be done on a case by case basis, looking at all the circumstances in an impartial and, most importantly, non-political manner. Let me add that this is one of the many gray areas where libertarians differ. The more nuanced the situation, the trickier the ethics will be.

                What we don’t need is the political theater (especially at the federal level) we saw during the Terri Schiavo ordeal.

                1. Dude, I think you are arguing with a drunken retard. He’s probably passed out on his mommies basement floor by now.

                  I’ve asked him several simple questions, and he can’t respond to even one of them in even the most rudimentary way.

                  1. I just don’t want someone else who might have a functioning brain cell to see one of his arguments (if you can call them that) go unanswered. Plus I was hoping he’d keep talking until sunrise so I could see him turn to stone. /nerdderp

                2. And those mormons in texas you all ran aground defending?

                  1. And those mormons in texas you all ran aground defending?

                    Fuck! He’s got us! The Texas Mormons! I forgot all about them, even though there are thousands of stories here on H&R defending them! And we all commented millions of times!

                    It’s almost like the time that we were defending selling children at the flea market!

                    Oh wait, that’s all in the feverishly demented mind of retard troll. Ner mind.

          2. Wow, Flaming Ballsack, did you hear about the evil libertarians on Slate or Salon, and came over here to show us how stupid, immoral and greedy we all are? Please, have at it, you are doing a terrific job so far. I know I’m shaking in my boots.

            1. Well, you do have to admit that he is showing us how totally STUPID that he IS. You have to give him that.

            2. ha ha. just killing some time. I especially love to hear how libertarians beleive theyre some sort of consequential philosophy. you’re not. Anyone who takes five seconds to think of he logical consequenses of social darwinism and anarchy (minarchy my ass) can see how foolish it is.

              But of all the internet youre the easiest and most fun to troll. Overinflated self-importance and a heavy victim mentality insure that 😉

              1. Why should Democrats shut down farmers markets selling cannabis? Last chance.

                Also, where are the emails?

                1. Also, you sound scared shitless of something. Maybe it’s libertarians?

              2. You write like a guy I used to know at Computer Reseller News — it isn’t you MK, is it?

                1. This tard reminds me of a guy that used to post at Politico, who used the posting name ‘Invictus’. Total fucking retarded loser.

              3. Who said anything about “social Darwinism”? You do realize that libertarians aren’t against charity, benevolence, kindness, compassion, and love of your fellow man, right? We just don’t see a one-size-fits-all, damn the unintended consequences, corrupt state as the best means of providing those things. That way lies rent seeking,regulatory capture, and professional classes of victims.

                1. Somebody who can’t conceive of cooperation without coercion is lecturing us about foolishness. Hilarious.

                2. what i see is a bunc of people who don’t give a shit what happens to anyone else as long as they have theirs. someo f you openly say so. ever wonder why no one gives a shit about your philosophy after you say “other peope dying in mass shootings is a price im willing to pay for my freedoms”?

                  1. what i see is a bunc of people who don’t give a shit what happens to anyone else as long as they have theirs.

                    Confirmation bias or dishonesty. Or both.

                  2. what i see is a bunc of people who don’t give a shit what happens to anyone else as long as they have theirs. someo f you openly say so.

                    Your grammar and spelling is impressive. Now you’re going to tell us about your doctorates from Yale and JHU, right?

                  3. other peope dying in mass shootings is a price im willing to pay for my freedoms

                    Now that is actually something worth responding to. There are a few points to make:

                    1) Do you think it is morally acceptable to punish an innocent person for the crime of another? I would say no, but the logic behind your statement implies that it is at least preferably in a utilitarian sense.

                    2) You can’t completely eliminate risk. Let me apply your logic to other areas: “Other people die in driving accidents. The solution is to further impose on safe drivers.” “Other people are emotionally traumatized by hate speech. The solution is to restrict all speech.” “Other people can be denied justice because we have a presumption of innocence. The solution is to presume guilt.” Are you willing to accept any of those?

                    3) Most of the “solutions” to gun violence would do little if anything to reduce gun violence.

                    4) I actually am willing to sacrifice my own life for my freedoms. It’s not liking I’m actively pushing other people into harms way just to get mine.

              4. Do you honestly view what you are doing as effective trolling?

                1. Proggie who is suddenly scared shitless of scary libertarians. It’s fairly entertaining, but I’m getting bored of it quickly. Even Tony is a better troll. That’s pretty sad, really.

                  1. I keep hoping that a progressive will show up on these boards to make an honest argument against libertarianism as it actually exists, not as it is conceived of in their own heads, using logic that is at least internally consistent and fact driven. It would be a useful exercises. They must be out there somewhere, right? But instead we get Tony, PB, and random people like Ballsack that think they are being clever. It’s a sad place, this internet.

                    1. keep hoping that a progressive will show up on these boards to make an honest argument against libertarianism as it actually exists, not as it is conceived of in their own heads, using logic that is at least internally consistent and fact driven.

                      LynchPin, seroiusly man, do you think if they were capable of doing that, that they would be proggies?

                    2. To get serious for a moment, yes. I don’t think libertarians are the only ones capably of logical thinking. There have to be progressives out there that really carefully consider their philosophy, but that start from different assumptions than libertarians. I’d love to get into the meat of those assumptions.

                    3. “I keep hoping that a progressive will show up on these boards to make an honest argument against libertarianism as it actually exists,”

                      Lynch, in all seriousness the reason that’s not going to happen is that libertarianism is not based on logic or fact. It’s a five year-old whining about having to go to Grandma’s elevated to a political philosophy. Not a whole helluva lot of difference from conservatives or progressives, really.

                      But libertarians are especially fun to troll because you really believe that everyone’s out to get you. You really do believe that you’re marginalized not because you adhere to a crackpot philosophy based on whims with some barely understood pre-industrial thinking to give you a patina of credibility but that you’re renegade free-thinkers persecuted by an intellectual elite and their brainwashed masses.

                      And it’s this sense of phony victimhood (which you would scorn in others) that makes you perfect targets.

                    4. I’ll agree with you on this much: dogmatic libertarianism and anarchism is premised on an unrealistic (and maybe impossible) approach to the real world. But I see so many attacks on libertarianism that start and end with the assumption that dogma is all there is, and it gets really boring. Reason is full of fact based, logical, and pragmatic responses to a range of social and governmental problems, and Reason is far from the only example of such libertarian thinking. That you seem ignorant of that indicates that you are either woefully uninformed about that which you claim to be against, or that you are just intellectually dishonest, or both.

                      Furthermore, the dogmatic approach has value. It provides an ideal to strive for, and a moral and philosophical anchor when navigating the sloppiness of the real world.

                      And for the record, I don’t personally think anyone is out to get me. I do think a lot of innocent people get swept up in misguided efforts to catch “the bad guys”, who may not actually be all that bad. I think an overblown fear of the bad guys leads a lot of people to accept it as necessary collateral damage. And I can certainly see myself making life choices that would get me labeled as one of the bad guys. I don’t, because it’s not worth the risk, but the fact that I even have to make that calculus upsets me.

                2. Anyone who takes five seconds to think of he logical consequenses of social darwinism and anarchy (minarchy my ass) can see how foolish it is.

                  You’re right, of course. Because if someone only takes only five seconds to think about those things, they will react instead of respond. And the emotional appeal of limited government and personal responsibility can be kind of yucky. I mean, it doesn’t let you use government force to make other people to pay your bills, or use government force to put your competition out of business. It sucks.

                  If you actually think about it, as opposed to emoting, it does make some damn good sense.

                  But thinking is hard. Emoting is easy.

                  1. “But thinking is hard. Emoting is easy.”

                    is that why you’re a libertarian?

                    1. is that why you’re a libertarian?

                      Yeah. I’ve never been one to take the easy way.

                3. Well, youre all responding arent you?

                  1. Well, youre all responding arent you?

                    Apostrophes with contractions, they’re free!

                    Go to bed kid, you’re in way over your head, before you embarrass yourself further.

                    1. Hyperion, you just spent an hour arguing with a lunatic. Who should be embarrassed?

                    2. Hyperion, you just spent an hour arguing with a lunatic. Who should be embarrassed?

                      It’s what I do. It is you who should be embarrassed for being a dumb shit. Now go to bed and shut up, retard.

                    3. That’s it, Hype, treat me rough – I’ve been a bad boy 😛

                    4. Now go to bed and shut up, retard.

                      Sometimes it is good to take your own advice. You are rolling around in the mud with a pig, and the pig is enjoying it.

                    5. Well, sarc, if you read the entire thread, you would see that I was busy rubbing pigs face in the mud, and that I was getting even more enjoyment from it.

                      But I’m not going to start a fight with my own, so I’m going on over the the other thread, while Fuming BallLicker passes out.

  2. Freedom means asking permission and obeying orders.

  3. Look, we had to have our law enforcement agenda for the week. Click it or Ticket week was over. We were down to bust up pot farmer market or smash up some more kid’s lemonade stand. We couldn’t find any lemonade stands, so what were we to do, nothing? Well, we care for the children, mister anarchy!

    1. You didn’t explicitly state that the lemonade was free of poison, so you must obviously think it is OK for kids* to sell Drano marketed as lemonade. I mean, buyer beware, amirite?

      *On the side, of course, when they aren’t being pimped.

      1. Dude, I’m REALLY NOT in favor of kids being pimped out okay? I mean, I’m for them having to polish monocles in my sweat shops 20 hours a day, but come on now, what sort of monster do you think I am?

        1. You let your monocle polishers take a 4 hour break? Every day? They really only need to eat one meal, and that can be done in 15 minutes. You, sir, are depriving the world of many monocles. You are obviously a bigger monster than even I envisioned.

          1. Man… I mean, I removed all the fans and bricked up the windows… but I didn’t have the energy to watch the little fuckers in the 4 hours a day that I reserved for my harem of sex slaves…

            1. Ah, why didn’t you say so. Orgy marathons always take precedent over profit margins in my book.

              1. +1 High Fives

  4. Guess the will of the people who wanted to voluntarily do business (enough to make a line around the block) with the market doesn’t apply. Ah ? democracy.

    Those people were expressing their will through volunarily participating in an EVUL commercial transaction as opposed to voting. Remember, voting = “will of the people,” free markets = “EVUL PROFITZ.”

  5. Looks like Flaming Balllicker couldn’t stay up with the grown ups. I can see him now, passed out in his bunk bed in mommies basement, peeing on his plastic sheets.

    You see, Flaming Balllicker, if you want to challenge libertarians, then get used to waking up on plastic in a pool of piss.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.