Jump to content

Dryden Medical Marijuana Dispensary Raided Twice More By Lapeer County Sheriff's

thanks2

Recommended Posts

RevThad Advanced Member

+RevThad

Posted
Posted

Two words, study it -

 

"Qualified immunity"

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_immunity

" Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for the violation of an individual's federal constitutional rights. This grant of immunity is available to state or federal employees performing discretionary functions where their actions, even if later found to be unlawful, did not violate "clearly established law."

 

- as for that comment about arresting car drivers - huh?

 

-DN

In Pearson v. Callahan, 129 S. Ct. 808 (2009), the Supreme Court modified its earlier approach to the order in which the two parts of the qualified immunity test are to be addressed by district courts.

 

Meaning, that the qualified immunity test is not as rigid as it was just over a year ago. There is much more room to get around the qualified immunity, and the SCOTUS in many recent rulings has leaned more towards the side of defendants...

 

Now with all of that being said, at the very minimum there is a violation of the clear language of the state's MMMA, and then we can add on top of those violations the civil rights violations, including but not limited to illegal search and seizure, under color of law violations, and a few others....

 

Whether anything will be done by the Good ole boy network against their own, is a completely different thing.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
peanutbutter Advanced Member

peanutbutter

Posted
Posted

In Pearson v. Callahan, 129 S. Ct. 808 (2009), the Supreme Court modified its earlier approach to the order in which the two parts of the qualified immunity test are to be addressed by district courts.

 

Meaning, that the qualified immunity test is not as rigid as it was just over a year ago. There is much more room to get around the qualified immunity, and the SCOTUS in many recent rulings has leaned more towards the side of defendants...

 

Now with all of that being said, at the very minimum there is a violation of the clear language of the state's MMMA, and then we can add on top of those violations the civil rights violations, including but not limited to illegal search and seizure, under color of law violations, and a few others....

 

Whether anything will be done by the Good ole boy network against their own, is a completely different thing.....

 

You know .. once every two years or so, they have no option but to listen to the civilians.

 

They need our votes.

 

This time, let's give them the chance to show exactly where they stand. With the government or with the citizens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bisharoo Advanced Member

Bisharoo

Posted
Posted

Two words, study it -

 

"Qualified immunity"

 

http://en.wikipedia....lified_immunity

" Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for the violation of an individual's federal constitutional rights. This grant of immunity is available to state or federal employees performing discretionary functions where their actions, even if later found to be unlawful, did not violate "clearly established law."

 

- as for that comment about arresting car drivers - huh?

 

-DN

 

Again proving our point. They write the laws so that we are illegal and they are legal, and this is blatantly unconstitutional. Clearly the intent of the US Constitution is to protect us from all oppression from our own government. This is the entire purpose of the constitution, that we recognize that people own themselves and are not to be ruled over by other human beings without their explicit consent. I do not consent for my state or federal employees to be immune from consequences for their blatant disregard of our individual human rights. They are infringing on the rights of law abiding human beings to live free from oppression and tyranny by exempting themselves from punishment for their actions.

This has to be changed, or our system will stay corrupt...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Digital Nomad Advanced Member

The Digital Nomad

Posted
Posted

Again proving our point. They write the laws so that we are illegal and they are legal, and this is blatantly unconstitutional. Clearly the intent of the US Constitution is to protect us from all oppression from our own government. This is the entire purpose of the constitution, that we recognize that people own themselves and are not to be ruled over by other human beings without their explicit consent. I do not consent for my state or federal employees to be immune from consequences for their blatant disregard of our individual human rights. They are infringing on the rights of law abiding human beings to live free from oppression and tyranny by exempting themselves from punishment for their actions.

This has to be changed, or our system will stay corrupt...

 

Right On man. Until we return our country to the way it was intended to be run, For the People, By the People - we will always be caught in this money cycle of debit, punishment, and infowarfare. The current government seems to be controlled by greed, it is no longer for the people but the almighty dollar.

 

We can be the grass-roots movement to start change, not just in MM, but in how people think about each other and the government.

 

-DN

Link to comment
Share on other sites
peanutbutter Advanced Member

peanutbutter

Posted
Posted

Right On man. Until we return our country to the way it was intended to be run, For the People, By the People - we will always be caught in this money cycle of debit, punishment, and infowarfare. The current government seems to be controlled by greed, it is no longer for the people but the almighty dollar.

 

We can be the grass-roots movement to start change, not just in MM, but in how people think about each other and the government.

 

-DN

 

No dude .. We already have the law in place. The voters have spoken. They, so far, refuse to respect the law of the voters. They refuse to obey.

 

Then what? Pass another law that they thumb their noses at?

 

We MUST get them to obey the voters.

 

I don't want to think about the next step.

 

What isn't understood about this law is that THEY are the ones that are supposed to obey it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...