Jump to content

Our New Civil Rights: You Can't Take Our Stuff


peanutbutter
 Share

Recommended Posts

Once in a great while, a law gets passed that limits the powers of the government.

 

Our MMA law is one of those kind of laws. Instead of being a tool to arrest people with, this law has a target of the government.

 

In a recent ruling, a Michigan court of appeals ruled the protections given in the MMA are rights.

 

That elevates the need of the system to pay attention to the direct order of the voters of Michigan. We are talking about civil rights violations. It’s time to shake the “gray” out of your head. You have had nearly two years to come to understand the direct orders of the voters of Michigan.

 

Attention government officials This law is for YOU to obey.

 

This law, the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, has direct orders within it. These are civil rights that were granted to us by the voters of Michigan. You are the ones that have legal boundaries that can’t be crossed.

 

This is one source of “gray areas” that government officials claim to see. They simply can’t understand that they are no longer allowed to do the things that are being done. They don’t understand that the voters set limits on them.

 

Orders are given to police in this law. Orders are given to judges. Orders are given to every sub-branch of bureaucratic government. A new crime was defined that only an employee of any level of state or local government can commit. And that crime carries a six month jail term.

 

Only a government official can commit this crime. Police officers are supposed to go to jail, when they do this. I doubt that even one single police department has warned their officers that they could go to jail for this crime.

 

These direct orders, from the voters of Michigan, are civil rights.

 

These orders from the voters, these civil rights, include our expectation that these officials obey their duty to perform.

 

One of the most basic of these orders is to the judges in our courts: “the case shall be dismissed.”

This can not be directed to anyone but the judge. The defendant can not dismiss their own case. It doesn’t read “may be dismissed.” It is in terms of a absolute command. SHALL be dismissed.

 

It is a civil right to expect you to obey this direct command from the voters. Judges have this duty to perform placed on them directly by the voters. There is no option for them.

 

And this duty to perform was placed on them in every case “involving marihuana.” Every one! No exceptions! By order of the voters!

 

It’s easy to see how resistance to this idea about citizens ordering judges could generate a “gray area.” It’s much simpler to fail to understand the order. An order about civil rights.

 

There are areas that are direct orders to police. Remember, these are civil rights. Your duty to perform. A duty placed upon you by the people of Michigan.

 

To start with, you can’t take our pot.

 

It’s legal, deal with it.

 

Here’s a quote of the section of law I’m talking about:

 

Section 4 (h) Any marihuana, marihuana paraphernalia, or licit property that is possessed, owned, or used in connection with the medical use of marihuana, as allowed under this act, or acts incidental to such use, shall not be seized or forfeited.

 

You see, not only is the marijuana itself protected from you, so is everything around the marijuana.

 

These things are not to be seized. You can’t just take them anymore. Whatever allowed police officers to reach out and take things before 12/4/2008 no longer applies. It is a civil right granted to us by the voters to expect you to obey this order.

 

You can’t take it anymore. Deal with it.

 

Not only is this an order to police, it is also an order to the courts of Michigan. The police officer can not take it and no judge is allowed to keep it. By order of the People of Michigan. The duty of every police officer and judge in Michigan is to obey. There is no legal option.

 

Police are rarely exposed to new civil rights. When these kind of events take place, it is typical to expect resistance. Think of the late 50’s and early 60’s. It took a very long time to get our legal systems to comply with direct orders.

 

These are simple things, within the MMA, to understand. These order are not “gray” at all.

 

You can’t take or keep our stuff and the case must be dismissed. See!! Very simple.

New civil rights. Very simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once in a great while, a law gets passed that limits the powers of the government.

 

Our MMA law is one of those kind of laws. Instead of being a tool to arrest people with, this law has a target of the government.

 

In a recent ruling, a Michigan court of appeals ruled the protections given in the MMA are rights.

 

That elevates the need of the system to pay attention to the direct order of the voters of Michigan. We are talking about civil rights violations. It’s time to shake the “gray” out of your head. You have had nearly two years to come to understand the direct orders of the voters of Michigan.

 

Attention government officials This law is for YOU to obey.

 

This law, the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, has direct orders within it. These are civil rights that were granted to us by the voters of Michigan. You are the ones that have legal boundaries that can’t be crossed.

 

This is one source of “gray areas” that government officials claim to see. They simply can’t understand that they are no longer allowed to do the things that are being done. They don’t understand that the voters set limits on them.

 

Orders are given to police in this law. Orders are given to judges. Orders are given to every sub-branch of bureaucratic government. A new crime was defined that only an employee of any level of state or local government can commit. And that crime carries a six month jail term.

 

Only a government official can commit this crime. Police officers are supposed to go to jail, when they do this. I doubt that even one single police department has warned their officers that they could go to jail for this crime.

 

These direct orders, from the voters of Michigan, are civil rights.

 

These orders from the voters, these civil rights, include our expectation that these officials obey their duty to perform.

 

One of the most basic of these orders is to the judges in our courts: “the case shall be dismissed.”

This can not be directed to anyone but the judge. The defendant can not dismiss their own case. It doesn’t read “may be dismissed.” It is in terms of a absolute command. SHALL be dismissed.

 

It is a civil right to expect you to obey this direct command from the voters. Judges have this duty to perform placed on them directly by the voters. There is no option for them.

 

And this duty to perform was placed on them in every case “involving marihuana.” Every one! No exceptions! By order of the voters!

 

It’s easy to see how resistance to this idea about citizens ordering judges could generate a “gray area.” It’s much simpler to fail to understand the order. An order about civil rights.

 

There are areas that are direct orders to police. Remember, these are civil rights. Your duty to perform. A duty placed upon you by the people of Michigan.

 

To start with, you can’t take our pot.

 

It’s legal, deal with it.

 

Here’s a quote of the section of law I’m talking about:

 

Section 4 (h) Any marihuana, marihuana paraphernalia, or licit property that is possessed, owned, or used in connection with the medical use of marihuana, as allowed under this act, or acts incidental to such use, shall not be seized or forfeited.

 

You see, not only is the marijuana itself protected from you, so is everything around the marijuana.

 

These things are not to be seized. You can’t just take them anymore. Whatever allowed police officers to reach out and take things before 12/4/2008 no longer applies. It is a civil right granted to us by the voters to expect you to obey this order.

 

You can’t take it anymore. Deal with it.

 

Not only is this an order to police, it is also an order to the courts of Michigan. The police officer can not take it and no judge is allowed to keep it. By order of the People of Michigan. The duty of every police officer and judge in Michigan is to obey. There is no legal option.

 

Police are rarely exposed to new civil rights. When these kind of events take place, it is typical to expect resistance. Think of the late 50’s and early 60’s. It took a very long time to get our legal systems to comply with direct orders.

 

These are simple things, within the MMA, to understand. These order are not “gray” at all.

 

You can’t take or keep our stuff and the case must be dismissed. See!! Very simple.

New civil rights. Very simple.

 

Shall be dismissed

case must be dismissed.

 

you are so right PB and now Leo will have to give it back it is only going to make it worst for them when we WIN are case against them come join us Sept:13 at 10am for another Protest the bus weill be their for us all to come

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PB....I hear you my friend! How do we grt the ACLU to investigate the communities that have adopted the federal law and are using that to come after us?

 

Dizz

 

I'm thinking the Michigan Civil Rights commission.

 

These are violations of Michigan civil rights.

 

And someone please arrest that sheriff for mishandling confidential patient information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lawsuits are the only way to stop these tyranny gentlemen.In my case the lead investigator,Bad Axe Police Chief,Mike Anderson has stepped down.FEDERAL LAWSUIT AGAINST ARE CIVIL RIGHTS.My wife died because of the raid,she was so stressed out.I have the time and money to fight on.It has been nearly 1 year since the raid.Still no charges and no return of property and medicine..I will not rest until justice is done.Leo killed my wife,with there tyranny tactics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lawsuits are the only way to stop these tyranny gentlemen.In my case the lead investigator,Bad Axe Police Chief,Mike Anderson has stepped down.FEDERAL LAWSUIT AGAINST ARE CIVIL RIGHTS.My wife died because of the raid,she was so stressed out.I have the time and money to fight on.It has been nearly 1 year since the raid.Still no charges and no return of property and medicine..I will not rest until justice is done.Leo killed my wife,with there tyranny tactics.

Sorry to hear about your loss, this is the second one i have herd of, SEEMS like this would wake people up..wish you all the best .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those "people" are NOT gentlemen! Jeff, so sorry about your wife.

PB, GREAT POST as usual! That should be printed and given to all those a-holes who disobey our law, AND given to anyone in law enforcement, as well as judges, AG's, etc., to put them on notice.

Sb

what about making copies and start mailing them out to all..a thought..dont see where that would be against the rulles,return address, power of the people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm thinking the Michigan Civil Rights commission.

 

These are violations of Michigan civil rights.

 

And someone please arrest that sheriff for mishandling confidential patient information.

 

Has anyone tried this route? It does not stop you from suing later.

MDCR

Phone: (313) 456-3700

Fax: (313) 456-3701

WATS: (800) 482-3604

TTY: (877) 878-8464

Email: MDCRServiceCenter@michigan.gov

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm thinking the Michigan Civil Rights commission.

 

These are violations of Michigan civil rights.

 

And someone please arrest that sheriff for mishandling confidential patient information.

I have hand written letters to sen.Levin and US AG Holder explaining as best I could the rights that are being violated by the police and courts in Michigan. A letter writing campaign is one tool we can use to help get this matter resolved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

I was glad to see this brought back to attention before May 25th . Shouldn't these protections also apply to allow defendants to introduce their qualified patients and use medicinal cannabis as a defense in any case they feel it necessary in our State and local Courts . Even when one is in violation you would think it would be important to implement fair sentences . We can read in the act this is legal per State Constitutional Law and the Supreme Court has stated the Federal Supremacy Clause has limited scope vs State Rights . Hopefully soon either Truth in Trials will be passed at the Federal Level or the Supreme Court will right its error and allow for medicinal use to be brought up at the Federal level . It is absolutely wrong the concept is withheld for those involved in activities legal within their States like here in many Michigan courtrooms just as it is both wrong and illegal to not be able to introduce qualified patient status or a affirmative defense as supported by our Constitutional State Amendment . I would think all Citizens would be upset that this is occurring, question why , and want the practice stopped . Patients are being injured because of a minority of people with power in Government are choosing to make barriers and prevent the evolution of safe access workable policy that is clearly understood in each County . There is so much money in the old status quo precluding any initiative for workable progress .

Edited by Croppled1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was glad to see this brought back to attention before May 25th . Shouldn't these protections also apply to allow defendants to introduce their qualified patients and use medicinal cannabis as a defense in any case they feel it necessary in our State and local Courts . Even when one is in violation you would think it would be important to implement fair sentences . We can read in the act this is legal per State Constitutional Law and the Supreme Court has stated the Federal Supremacy Clause has limited scope vs State Rights . Hopefully soon either Truth in Trials will be passed at the Federal Level or the Supreme Court will right its error and allow for medicinal use to be brought up at the Federal level . It is absolutely wrong the concept is withheld for those involved in activities legal within their States like here in many Michigan courtrooms just as it is both wrong and illegal to not be able to introduce qualified patient status or a affirmative defense as supported by our Constitutional State Amendment . I would think all Citizens would be upset that this is occurring, question why , and want the practice stopped . Patients are being injured because of a minority of people with power in Government are choosing to make barriers and prevent the evolution of safe access workable policy that is clearly understood in each County . There is so much money in the old status quo precluding any initiative for workable progress .

 

 

 

Open them gates to progress, let the truth be told, across the land, let the anger simmer down with acceptance for all.

 

 

And then all shall be equal.

 

 

Gotta love it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been lying low for several months, waiting for some legal issues to clear before posting about a complaint that has been filed with the United States Department of Justice, stemming from a traffic stop and subsequent arrest, where the officers involved ignored the civil rights guaranteed under the Americans With Disabilities Act. With those issues behind me, I think it is time to let the community know about it, because most, if not all of us, are disabled and are included as a class of "qualified individuals with disabilities," a key term within the ADA, and this can be a substantial level of protection from police misconduct toward us. This thread speaks to some of these same issues, and I hope this will help resolve some concerns.

 

There was cannabis involved, and the possession and use charges were eventually dropped. The officers confiscated it, along with some paraphernalia, but returned it all within a few days. They were visibly agitated and angry that I was unable to comply to all of their demands to submit as promptly as they wanted because of my mobility issues, and were violent to the point that I was further injured, as has been subsequently medically documented.

 

During arrest and subsequent custody, the officers were told that there are certain disabilities that required accommodation. I am reluctant to disclose any further details here because the matter is being investigated. It can be said, however, that they were out of line on all counts.

 

The DOJ complaint was filed timely and is taking its time going through process. Not having heard back from them yet, they have been provided with reams of documentation that spells out the necessary facts. In speaking with the Michigan Department of Civil Rights, I was told that it is best to have only one government agency perform an investigation at a time, because there are serious complications that can arise with more than one agency getting involved. Legal counsel has advised that it is correct. The MDCR does enforce the laws of the state against state agencies. They tell me, however, that they are not authorized to involve themselves with local departments or agencies. They can, so they say, investigate the Michigan State Police, but not local municipal departments. Justice, on the other hand, is responsible to enforce the provisions of the ADA where any entity, i.e., federal, state, local, or private are concerned. There is no requirement that any other administrative remedies be sought and exhausted before bringing a federal complaint. The State does have that requirement, which would require that I confront any and all local entities and take them to a resolution, whatever that may be, before they can become actively involved. Essentially, that is an out for them to game us, because it is a long, drawn out process and the deck is stacked against us and in their favor. Subsequently it is not just unnecessary, but important, in this instance, that Justice perform the investigation rather than the State. Immunity provisions are especially problematic, but are more readily dismissed under federal law, those being the ADA, Section 504 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and 42 USC, Section 1983. There are other laws that speak to immunity and to necessary and required accommodation for disabled indviduals, but those loom largest in the scheme of things. Some of you may recall that I posted regarding this a short while ago referring to: http://www.nlg-npap....rringtonADA.pdf

 

Pending the outcome of the government investigation, there will be charges brought. A civil action is a clear option. Treble damages are permitted under the ADA. With any luck, some of the people involved will lose their jobs. Most importantly, it could lead to Justice compelling the local departments to adequately train their personnel in the proper handling of disabled people, helping to put a stop to the violence they take obvious pleasure in.

 

It will take time to go through the moves. Inasmuch as it has been a few months since the complaint was filed, a response should be coming shortly.

 

 

 

.

Edited by GregS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

VERY NICE, Greg! :goodjob:

 

I have been lying low for several months, waiting for some legal issues to clear before posting about a complaint that has been filed with the United States Department of Justice, stemming from a traffic stop and subsequent arrest, where the officers involved ignored the civil rights guaranteed under the Americans With Disabilities Act. With those issues behind me, I think it is time to let the community know about it, because most, if not all of us, are disabled and are included as a class of "qualified individuals with disabilities," a key term within the ADA, and this can be a substantial level of protection from police misconduct toward us. This thread speaks to some of these same issues, and I hope this will help resolve some concerns.

 

There was cannabis involved, and the possession and use charges were eventually dropped. The officers confiscated it, along with some paraphernalia, but returned it all within a few days. They were visibly agitated and angry that I was unable to comply to all of their demands to submit as promptly as they wanted because of my mobility issues, and were violent to the point that I was further injured, as has been subsequently medically documented.

 

During arrest and subsequent custody, the officers were told that there are certain disabilities that required accommodation. I am reluctant to disclose any further details here because the matter is being investigated. It can be said, however, that they were out of line on all counts.

 

The DOJ complaint was filed timely and is taking its time going through process. Not having heard back from them yet, they have been provided with reams of documentation that spells out the necessary facts. In speaking with the Michigan Department of Civil Rights, I was told that it is best to have only one government agency perform an investigation at a time, because there are serious complications that can arise with more than one agency getting involved. Legal counsel has advised that it is correct. The MDCR does enforce the laws of the state against state agencies. They tell me, however, that they are not authorized to involve themselves with local departments or agencies. They can, so they say, investigate the Michigan State Police, but not local municipal departments. Justice, on the other hand, is responsible to enforce the provisions of the ADA where any entity, i.e., federal, state, local, or private are concerned. There is no requirement that any other administrative remedies be sought and exhausted before bringing a federal complaint. The State does have that requirement, which would require that I confront any and all local entities and take them to a resolution, whatever that may be, before they can become actively involved. Essentially, that is an out for them to game us, because it is a long, drawn out process and the deck is stacked against us and in their favor. Subsequently it is not just unnecessary, but important, in this instance, that Justice perform the investigation rather than the State. Immunity provisions are especially problematic, but are more readily dismissed under federal law, those being the ADA, Section 504 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and 42 USC, Section 1983. There are other laws that speak to immunity and to necessary and required accommodation for disabled indviduals, but those loom largest in the scheme of things. Some of you may recall that I posted regarding this a short while ago referring to: http://www.nlg-npap....rringtonADA.pdf

 

Pending the outcome of the government investigation, there will be charges brought. A civil action is a clear option. Treble damages are permitted under the ADA. With any luck, some of the people involved will lose their jobs. Most importantly, it could lead to Justice compelling the local departments to adequately train their personnel in the proper handling of disabled people, helping to put a stop to the violence they take obvious pleasure in.

 

It will take time to go through the moves. Inasmuch as it has been a few months since the complaint was filed, a response should be coming shortly.

 

 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...