DEA agents raid 3 local medical marijuana dispensaries
Category: Dispensaries | Posted on Thu, January, 12th 2012 by THCFinder
Another sad day for the medical marijuana industry and it's patients who count on medical marijuana to get by day to day with their ailements.
SAN DIEGO (CBS 8) - The DEA has raided three San Diego medical marijuana clinics for violating federal law.
Warrants were served at two collectives on University Avenue, and one on Garnet in Pacific Beach. The federal government informed the three clinics they had 45 days to either shut down or face criminal charges.
Supporters of medical marijuana protested outside the Golden West clinic in North Park as federal agents confiscated marijuana and related equipment.
"It's a total violation of state rights. California legalized medical marijuana. For the federal government to come in like this is a slap in the face to every Californian," protester Alfonso Padilla said.
At least one person was arrested.
Wanna go on a date?
Category: Fun | Posted on Thu, January, 12th 2012 by THCFinder
Court: Marijuana use cause to deny workers compensation
Category: News | Posted on Thu, January, 12th 2012 by THCFinder
LITTLE ROCK — Two workers who tested positive for marijuana after being injured in an explosion when they tried to use a blow torch to open a 55-gallon drum that had contained flammable liquid were rightly denied workers’ compensation, the state Court of Appeals ruled today.
In a split decision, the court affirmed a state Workers’ Compensation Commission ruling against Matthew Edmisten and Greg Prock in a case stemming from a November 2007 accident at Bull Shoals Landing on Bull Shoals Lake in North Arkansas.
Three dissenting judges said there was no evidence that the accident occurred because of marijuana use.
According to the majority opinion, Edmisten held the barrel, which had contained marine oil, while Prock applied an acetylene torch to it in an attempt to cut it open. The resulting explosion caused both men to be engulfed in flames, from which they escaped by jumping into the lake.
At a hearing on their claims, the men testified that they had not used marijuana on the day of the accident, though they had used it in the past. A co-worker testified he had seen the men on the day of the accident and they did not appear to be impaired.
Edmisten and Prock also testified that they had not been warned against using a torch to open barrels. Prock testified that he had used that method previously.
Steve Eastwold, co-owner of Bull Shoals Landing, testified that he had shown Prock how to use a pneumatic air chisel to open barrels. He said he had never seen Prock use an acetylene torch for that purpose and had never approved that method.
An administrative law judge ruled that the injury was the result of an attempt to finish a task quickly, not the result of drug use. The commission overturned that ruling, finding that the men’s testimony was not credible.
The commission also said the testimony of a co-worker that the men did not appear impaired was not persuasive because about 90 minutes transpired between when the co-worker saw the men and the accident, and the men could have smoked marijuana during that time.
In its majority opinion today, the Court of Appeals said the commission weighed the credibility of the witnesses and reached a reasonable conclusion.
“We affirm because the commission’s decision displays a substantial basis for the denial of relief,” Judge Doug Martin wrote in the majority opinion in Prock’s appeal.
Judges David Glover, John Pittman, John Robbins, Waymond Brown and Jospehine Linker Hart joined Martin in voting to uphold the commission. Judges Larry Vaught, Raymond Abramson and Cliff Hoofman voted to overturn the commission.
“The commission had to resort to speculation or conjecture to conclude that the use of marijuana caused the accident because there was no evidence of impairment and no evidence that drug use caused this accident,” Abramson wrote in the minority opinion in Prock’s appeal.
Weed and Cereal - The breakfast of Champions!
Category: Fun | Posted on Wed, January, 11th 2012 by THCFinder
40 gram Joint!
Category: Fun | Posted on Wed, January, 11th 2012 by THCFinder
Vermont dispensaries inch closer to opening
Category: Dispensaries | Posted on Wed, January, 11th 2012 by THCFinder
The Department of Public safety answers questions posed by the legislature about how Vermont can implement medical marijuana dispensaries.
Vermont has more than 400 registered medical marijuana patients. Many are eagerly anticipating the scheduled July opening of dispensaries, but several hurdles must be cleared before that becomes a reality.
A recently released report cleared one such hurdle Tuesday, as Vermont's Department of Public Safety answered three questions posed by the legislature.
The first task for the administrators, determine the actual and projected costs of administering the state's new medical marijuana dispensary law.
"There's no general fund monies that will be used to offset this program, it will all be generated through fees," said Paco Aumand, a division director at the Department of Public Safety.
He says fees that will be imposed on dispensaries and patients are based on the projected cost of the program. The report estimates those costs to be slightly less than $140,000 in fiscal year 2013 - most of which would be paid by the dispensaries.
Question number two asked administrators how dispensaries could deliver marijuana to patients. "We offer no recommendation as to whether it should be done but we've come up with a concept that's been used in Maine," said Aumand.
Currently, the law prohibits marijuana delivery, but if lawmakers change that, Aumand envisions a ticket system for packages. In-transit marijuana would be locked, and marked with the name of the sender, recipient, and its contents.
Aumand said the final question - whether patients who receive marijuana from a dispensary should also be able to grow their own medicine - can't be fully-answered yet. That's banned under the law, but two thirds of respondents to a patient survey say they'd like to see that changed.
"Therefore our preliminary position is that possession limits should really be the guiding principle around whether a person should grow marijuana versus getting it from a dispensary," said Aumand.
The department has requested more time to consider that question. Aumand said they'll likely reinvestigate that matter once dispensaries are in place.
He said he also expects a committee to present new proposed rules for medical marijuana to the legislature in a couple of weeks time.
Aumand said federal raids on dispensaries in other states have not had any real bearing on Vermont's program. The federal prosecutor for Vermont said he hasn't seen the report yet and therefore had no comment.
- 166,182 Views Category: Odd
- 135,077 Views Category: Fun
- 125,011 Views Category: Culture
- 82,898 Views Category: Culture
- 79,677 Views Category: Culture
- 79,468 Views Category: Fun
- 63,893 Views Category: Culture
- 59,614 Views Category: Odd
- 53,785 Views Category: Fun
- 46,839 Views Category: Fun