processing = making extracts = felony in CA and fed, right?
i think it was in 2008, not last year.
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=124485
what are you talking about? gov't makes laws all the time, thats what they are there for.
-
As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.
Werc Shop Busted
- Thread starter Chimera
- Start date
processing = making extracts = felony in CA and fed, right?
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=124485
@ schrews, I'm probably mixing something up. Thanks man.
I understand that but they dont have unlimited jurisdictional authority... they are granted authority to regulate commerce via the state constitution and that is the jurisdiction in which their legislations are enforcable...
the problem is most people live their entire lives through commercial entities and don't even know it, therefor making themselves subject to commercial regulations...
as an example, if you work under and put all your property into your SSn entity then when you pass and your things are allocated to your family members the IRS takes a 30% inheritance tax... (my friend had to sell his dads house to afford the taxes on the house, boat and truck)
VS.
someone who establishes an irrevocable living trust and puts all their assest into that entity... that individual can operate the trust as trustee and have full control over the assets and when they pass the property held by the trust is allocated to the beneficiaries with out going through probate or being taxed by the IRS. (my great grandfather had a $2 mil estate... which my extended family inherited 100% tax free and the IRS never bothered anyone as it is 100% lawful)
the trust as a non commercial entity isnt subject to the same jurisdiction and therefor not a subject to the same rule as a commercial entity.
the money was besides the point... only necessary as a comparitive example. EDIT: I didn't see a dime btw 
the solution is to learn how to live and do business outside of commerce, and the supreme court will uphold the rights of the people under the constitution...
the supreme court cannot undermine this...
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SECTION 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have
inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and
liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing
and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy
but one must take it that far if there is no supreme court precedence on the issue at hand (as may be the case with MMJ collective production of oils)
... but that's all I'm going to say on the subject, I'm not a lawyer and I dont give out legal advice... this is just stuff I have learned and witnessed.
the solution is to learn how to live and do business outside of commerce, and the supreme court will uphold the rights of the people under the constitution...
the supreme court cannot undermine this...
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SECTION 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have
inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and
liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing
and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy
but one must take it that far if there is no supreme court precedence on the issue at hand (as may be the case with MMJ collective production of oils)
... but that's all I'm going to say on the subject, I'm not a lawyer and I dont give out legal advice... this is just stuff I have learned and witnessed.
S
sourpuss
Guess u dont blow smoke in the cops face continues to apply... control your odours...
oneofus
Member
@ Shcrews - iirc, the legislature is not allowed to make laws that change or affect constitutional amendments such as 215. sb420 was struck down by the cali supreme court in Jan. 2010 in People v. Kelly. idk how that angle will affect this case, but at least it's an angle...
http://www.commondreams.org/newswir...urt-strikes-limits-medical-marijuana-patients
Thursday, January 21, 2010 - 2:02pm
California Supreme Court Strikes Limits for Medical Marijuana Patients. Exemption From Arrest and Prosecution Upheld for State-Issued ID Cardholders.
SAN FRANCISCO - The California Supreme Court issued a
unanimous published decision today in People v. Kelly, striking
down what it considered unconstitutional legislative limits on how much medical marijuana patients can possess and cultivate.
Today's decision also affirms protection from arrest and prosecution for patients who both possess a state-issued identification card and comply with state or local personal use guidelines.
"The California Supreme Court did the right thing by abolishing limits on medical marijuana possession and cultivation," said Joe Elford, Chief Counsel with Americans for Safe Access, the country's largest medical marijuana advocacy group. "At the same time, the Court may have left too much discretion to law enforcement in deciding what are reasonable amounts of medicine for patients to possess and cultivate."
Although the court affirmed that qualified patients and their primary caregivers retain "all the rights afforded by the CUA [Compassionate Use Act of 1996]," law enforcement can still arrest and prosecute if probable cause exists. In keeping with the CUA, qualified patients and their primary caregivers will still have an affirmative defense in court. Advocates remain concerned that without guidance on personal use amounts, police may abuse their discretion to arrest patients who are in compliance with the law.
The defendant, Patrick Kelly, is a qualified medical marijuana patient treating a number of conditions, including hepatitis C, chronic back pain, and cirrhosis. Kelly was arrested in October of 2005 for possessing 12 ounces and cultivating 7 plants at his home in Lakewood, California. Kelly was convicted a year later by a jury, which concluded that he had exceeded the state-imposed "limits" of 8 ounces of dried medical marijuana and six mature plants.
California's Second Appellate District Court overturned Kelly's conviction on the grounds that legislatively-imposed limits on possession and cultivation of medical marijuana are an unconstitutional restriction to a voter approved initiative (Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act of 1996).
Both parties in the case, Kelly and the State Attorney General, agreed that medical marijuana limits should be abolished as unconstitutional.
Both parties also opposed the appellate court's invalidation of the
entire statute, Health & Safety Code Section 11362.77, which
protects ID cardholders from arrest and prosecution if they are in
compliance with local or state guidelines.
Further Information:
California Supreme Court decision:
http://AmericansForSafeAccess.<wbr>org/downloads/Kelly_Ruling.pdf
http://www.commondreams.org/newswir...urt-strikes-limits-medical-marijuana-patients
Thursday, January 21, 2010 - 2:02pm
California Supreme Court Strikes Limits for Medical Marijuana Patients. Exemption From Arrest and Prosecution Upheld for State-Issued ID Cardholders.
SAN FRANCISCO - The California Supreme Court issued a
unanimous published decision today in People v. Kelly, striking
down what it considered unconstitutional legislative limits on how much medical marijuana patients can possess and cultivate.
Today's decision also affirms protection from arrest and prosecution for patients who both possess a state-issued identification card and comply with state or local personal use guidelines.
"The California Supreme Court did the right thing by abolishing limits on medical marijuana possession and cultivation," said Joe Elford, Chief Counsel with Americans for Safe Access, the country's largest medical marijuana advocacy group. "At the same time, the Court may have left too much discretion to law enforcement in deciding what are reasonable amounts of medicine for patients to possess and cultivate."
Although the court affirmed that qualified patients and their primary caregivers retain "all the rights afforded by the CUA [Compassionate Use Act of 1996]," law enforcement can still arrest and prosecute if probable cause exists. In keeping with the CUA, qualified patients and their primary caregivers will still have an affirmative defense in court. Advocates remain concerned that without guidance on personal use amounts, police may abuse their discretion to arrest patients who are in compliance with the law.
The defendant, Patrick Kelly, is a qualified medical marijuana patient treating a number of conditions, including hepatitis C, chronic back pain, and cirrhosis. Kelly was arrested in October of 2005 for possessing 12 ounces and cultivating 7 plants at his home in Lakewood, California. Kelly was convicted a year later by a jury, which concluded that he had exceeded the state-imposed "limits" of 8 ounces of dried medical marijuana and six mature plants.
California's Second Appellate District Court overturned Kelly's conviction on the grounds that legislatively-imposed limits on possession and cultivation of medical marijuana are an unconstitutional restriction to a voter approved initiative (Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act of 1996).
Both parties in the case, Kelly and the State Attorney General, agreed that medical marijuana limits should be abolished as unconstitutional.
Both parties also opposed the appellate court's invalidation of the
entire statute, Health & Safety Code Section 11362.77, which
protects ID cardholders from arrest and prosecution if they are in
compliance with local or state guidelines.
Further Information:
California Supreme Court decision:
http://AmericansForSafeAccess.<wbr>org/downloads/Kelly_Ruling.pdf
And its shit like this that will eventually fuck everything up for everyone who knows maybe once new president gets in office he will shut it all down
so every time more n more of this happens or innocent people getting blown up from home oil pot heads ,,
they will see its just not about meds its about GREED and Money and how it can be grown legally yet sold under ground with out paying tax
cause really that is really what its all about being able to grow weed for your self and profits
so every time more n more of this happens or innocent people getting blown up from home oil pot heads ,,
they will see its just not about meds its about GREED and Money and how it can be grown legally yet sold under ground with out paying tax
cause really that is really what its all about being able to grow weed for your self and profits
I dont like getting into political discourse on here, so this will for sure be last post about it
and again, I am not a lawyer and I do not give legal advice
@MJPassion...
true but luckily the status quo isn't the only option.
you have the choice to either exercise your rights and maintain your freedoms or choose convenience, accept the status quo and rely on permissions, benefit and privileges given to you by the gov' instead of being free and independant as nature indended (And we find these truths, to be SELF-evident)
---------------------------------------------------------
@Shcrews,
here is another example, on the seperation of private (common law) vs. commercial jurisdictions more pertinent to medicnical cannabis in california...
If one wants to open a bar, and serve alcohol to the public they have to follow certain rules like limiting the amount they can serve to individuals, they cannot serve alcohol after 2am and one would have to pay a bunch of money for a liquor license (which equates to a permission slip) which all of these rules are passed under the juridiction of commercial regulation...
VS.
a private members only club, my uncle went to check out a local biker club to decide if he wanted to join... they have a private members only clubhouse, that sales drinks as late as they want, they get as drunk as they want (cus each memeber is individaully responsible for their actions) and they have no need for a liquor license...
the police nor sheriff mess with them either because there is well established case law recongnizing our rights to privacy and if they tried to mess with them it would get thrown out of the lower courts and the LEO's would be vunerable to civil suit
the same reason why, that when properly organized, most dispensary owners and staff never see federal charges even when they are busted well over manditory minimums... its not because the DOJ is being nice to them but that they lack the juridiction to charge them with violating commercial acts, statutes and codes. ie 1970 controlled substance act passed under the constitutional congressional authority over regulating INTERSTATE COMMERCE.
Peace,
-Infinitesimal
and again, I am not a lawyer and I do not give legal advice
@MJPassion...
true but luckily the status quo isn't the only option.
you have the choice to either exercise your rights and maintain your freedoms or choose convenience, accept the status quo and rely on permissions, benefit and privileges given to you by the gov' instead of being free and independant as nature indended (And we find these truths, to be SELF-evident)
---------------------------------------------------------
@Shcrews,
here is another example, on the seperation of private (common law) vs. commercial jurisdictions more pertinent to medicnical cannabis in california...
If one wants to open a bar, and serve alcohol to the public they have to follow certain rules like limiting the amount they can serve to individuals, they cannot serve alcohol after 2am and one would have to pay a bunch of money for a liquor license (which equates to a permission slip) which all of these rules are passed under the juridiction of commercial regulation...
VS.
a private members only club, my uncle went to check out a local biker club to decide if he wanted to join... they have a private members only clubhouse, that sales drinks as late as they want, they get as drunk as they want (cus each memeber is individaully responsible for their actions) and they have no need for a liquor license...
the police nor sheriff mess with them either because there is well established case law recongnizing our rights to privacy and if they tried to mess with them it would get thrown out of the lower courts and the LEO's would be vunerable to civil suit
the same reason why, that when properly organized, most dispensary owners and staff never see federal charges even when they are busted well over manditory minimums... its not because the DOJ is being nice to them but that they lack the juridiction to charge them with violating commercial acts, statutes and codes. ie 1970 controlled substance act passed under the constitutional congressional authority over regulating INTERSTATE COMMERCE.
Peace,
-Infinitesimal
No offense but you don't sound very informed about testing at all, have you had meds tested before?
Where I'm from to do a test they take the entire batch which is usually 1#, only one gram is actually tested but they take the entire batch and seal it with a serial number to authenticate it's validity. That way some one doesn't take one nice gram that's clean get the passing test result and then drop a unit of dirty "medicine" at the dispo...which would be easy to do ootherwise. I have had 1# of extract all sealed up by labs and I have had up to 3# taken by an analytical lab to be tested at once. And these guys easily have 100# at there labs at once sometimes it takes over a week for a test to come back. 500# can easily be testing if you are familiar with the process. They might have had a waiting list considering they are one of the bigger labs in ca..
I know its me, but I always have a problem when someone with that level of education and intelligence makes decisions like this.
I think it is a fair bet they were co-mingling businesses, one legal and one illegal.
If your legal business model is sound why the fuck would you ever jeopardize it by performing illegal activities within it?
Minimally you should be investing the profits in such a way you insulate it and its assets from your own identity and that of your illegal activities. Further more those same profits should be used to insulate oneself from ones illegal activities.
People with less qualifications in darker games run tighter ships , shame to see people get picked off when it seems avoidable.
I think it is a fair bet they were co-mingling businesses, one legal and one illegal.
If your legal business model is sound why the fuck would you ever jeopardize it by performing illegal activities within it?
Minimally you should be investing the profits in such a way you insulate it and its assets from your own identity and that of your illegal activities. Further more those same profits should be used to insulate oneself from ones illegal activities.
People with less qualifications in darker games run tighter ships , shame to see people get picked off when it seems avoidable.
Not sure were you are but all the testing companies in my area require 1/2 gram of flower for testing. I have never heard of sending the whole batch in. That does sound very professional sealing the whole batch. What state are you in?
Anonymous call about a smell? More to it.
CA is cracking down hardcore on suspected BHO labs, its the one thing that still sticks and the county can prosecute more easily. There has recently been online postings about BHO production becoming legal now, but i havent found anything solid that backs that up. Our local county DA just re-iterated that today in the news when he said that all BHO labs will be charged with felony manufacturing of a controlled substance with penalties the same as meth production.
also i dont think it was 500Lbs of processed oil, but 500lbs of starting material which they were processing into oil. Or it could have been 500lbs of crude hash like food grade bubble or low grade BHO that was being refined into the clear.
one reason i dont have anything to do with any kind of BHO related manufacturing. just too hot the handle right now until the laws change and you can do it legally like in CO.
also i dont think it was 500Lbs of processed oil, but 500lbs of starting material which they were processing into oil. Or it could have been 500lbs of crude hash like food grade bubble or low grade BHO that was being refined into the clear.
one reason i dont have anything to do with any kind of BHO related manufacturing. just too hot the handle right now until the laws change and you can do it legally like in CO.
Maybe they should just make Rosin? That and dry sift and water hash are permitted in Calif. You can get very high yields of Rosin from good dry sift or water hash I have seen over 75% and it is legal as far as I know as no solvents are used.
I will wait until the dust clears before jumping to conclusions if they were just testing or a commercial production facility, but either way they do not deserve jail or the shit they are in. I have seen very large co2 and BHO production facilities in Calif, huge... No way they are legal like in Colorado, in fact several were moving to Colorado when I visited.
-SamS
I will wait until the dust clears before jumping to conclusions if they were just testing or a commercial production facility, but either way they do not deserve jail or the shit they are in. I have seen very large co2 and BHO production facilities in Calif, huge... No way they are legal like in Colorado, in fact several were moving to Colorado when I visited.
-SamS
mingmen
Member
you ship entire pounds for a testing facility to hold on to? I'm calling BS on this.
Did you look at the pics? Pretty sure I saw CO2 extraction gear...Again risk vs reward.
If you want to extract on mass for example, be prepared for the legal ramifications if the cops come rolling in.
I am not saying them getting busted is right, just that you can't operate and just "HOPE" nothing will happen....
No different than any other biz....
