Emerald Cross Robbery

September 21, 2007 1:58 PM

Steal legal marijuana. . . . and they WILL call the police. Emerald Cross of Seattle: Arresting the pain . . . not the patients.
posted by augustweed (32 comments total)

Emerald Cross Director Sue Watson says she is very suspicious of this crime, because, only patients and volunteers know where the leafy meds are kept. "The thing is, it had to be someone that knew, to know to drop down into this space here," said Watson.

Brilliant observation, there.
posted by fandango_matt at 2:04 PM on September 21, 2007

It's not technically legal.
posted by delmoi at 2:15 PM on September 21, 2007

Eponysterical.
posted by tristeza at 2:16 PM on September 21, 2007

Mowie Wowie!!
posted by TechnoLustLuddite at 2:24 PM on September 21, 2007 [1 favorite]

The federal government's behavior regarding medical marijuana really calls into question their legitimac-

"The suspect is an Asian man about 5 feet 4 inches tall with a thin build. He was wearing jeans and a G unit t-shirt. "

Fitty would be so proud.


Anyway, yeah. Career bureaucrats telling DOCTORS what they can and can't prescribe?

This shit gets me worked up. It's the worst of big government: "Well we have this whole drug war thing going on, we can't stop it now just because the states used democracy and science to settle the matter."

The drug war is a welfare system for police and other assorted bureaucrats.
posted by mullingitover at 2:28 PM on September 21, 2007 [10 favorites]

It's not technically legal.

Illegal under Federal Law.
posted by C17H19NO3 at 2:28 PM on September 21, 2007

Fuck the federal law.
posted by chlorus at 2:32 PM on September 21, 2007 [4 favorites]

b>chlorus writes "Fuck the federal law."

Exactly. Federal law is so wrong in this case that it's your civic duty to break it, and break it good.
posted by mullingitover at 2:36 PM on September 21, 2007 [3 favorites]

Good attitude, MullingItOver. You'll go far with that.

This retort is laced with sarcasm, just in case you can't tell over them there Internets. Before long, I'm sure federal law will find that illegal too. At which point I may join you with the civic duty crapola but not before.
posted by ZachsMind at 2:39 PM on September 21, 2007

Illegal under Federal Law.

Nahh, we issued a citizen's signing statement.
posted by stet at 2:43 PM on September 21, 2007 [9 favorites]

ZachsMind: laced you say? Can you get me some of that shit?
posted by chlorus at 2:44 PM on September 21, 2007

This retort is laced with sarcasm

You call horse tranquilizers 'scarcasm' too? Awesome.

*tokes up a fatty retort*
posted by quin at 2:49 PM on September 21, 2007 [4 favorites]

The drug war is a welfare system for police and other assorted bureaucrats.posted by mullingitover

Ah, so true. Please include the GIANT prison system.
posted by snsranch at 2:52 PM on September 21, 2007 [2 favorites]

ZachsMind writes "This retort is laced with sarcasm, just in case you can't tell over them there Internets. Before long, I'm sure federal law will find that illegal too."

So you're ok with the feds interfering with the judgement of medical professionals, but they'd better keep their hands off your empty gestures?
posted by mullingitover at 2:54 PM on September 21, 2007

Fuck the federal law.

Just as a heads up, that kind of attitude has gotten us South Carolinians in trouble before.
posted by ND¢ at 2:55 PM on September 21, 2007 [6 favorites]

Illegal under Federal Law

This argument is of doobie-ous merit.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 2:55 PM on September 21, 2007 [3 favorites]

The drug war is a welfare system for police and other assorted bureaucrats.posted by mullingitover

Yep.
posted by Mr_Zero at 3:04 PM on September 21, 2007

The drug war is a welfare system for police and other assorted bureaucrats. posted by mullingitover


I am glad to see their are some like minded people here.
posted by Brandon1600 at 3:17 PM on September 21, 2007

What a surprise that there's good reason to believe that the perpetrator was a patient. Of all the seedy no-good anarchist druggie slackers I've been unable to avoid meeting here in Oregon, it's just amazing how many of them mysteriously developed chronic pain symptoms after medical marijuana became available. I'm sure there are some people who honestly can benefit from the stuff, just as I'm sure that some of the people waving "disabled vet god bless" signs on the street are actually spending the money on feeding their children instead of buying crack and booze before going back to their homes. I'm not convinced that they're in the majority.
posted by darksasami at 3:50 PM on September 21, 2007

darksasami, sadly enough, I think I agree with you. On the rare occasion that I pick up one of our local rags, there are these HUGE ads for "Legal Marijuana".

On the other hand, it's funny that the term "nanny state" has been floating around a lot lately but I haven't seen it used in the "drug war" context. But of course, I guess, the U.S. is the mother of all nanny states.
posted by snsranch at 4:03 PM on September 21, 2007

darksasami writes "it's just amazing how many of them mysteriously developed chronic pain symptoms after medical marijuana became available."

Yes, how dare they exploit a loophole like that! Exploiting loopholes is only for wealthy individuals and corporations. It's not for gaining access to safe and popular recreational drugs which will be used under medical supervision. The nerve of those hippies!
posted by mullingitover at 4:19 PM on September 21, 2007 [3 favorites]

Really and truly though, the medical marijuana loophole is ideal. Even the staunchest republicans have to admit it:

1. It guarantees that use of marijuana will be under medical supervision. Marijuana is safer than aspirin (and aspirin kills more 'mericans than terr each year, look it up) but it's not for everyone. Some people who are mentally ill can go batshit insane on the reefer. I have witnessed this when my roommate smoked three or four grams a day and started to think he was Jesus. How many people talk to a doctor about their drinking habits? For that matter, why don't we require a prescription to purchase alcohol?

2. Since it's by doctor's orders only, it ensures that the the poor (republicans: this usually means MINORITIES! woohoo! You can still imprison the brown people, we know how much you love to do that) won't be able to afford it because they don't have insurance.

3. It guarantees easy work for Doctors (republicans: Doctors are rich, and we all know you love to take care of those rich people) and low risk of malpractice since (the DEA hates to admit this) marijuana is completely safe. More people die from being kicked by donkeys than from marijuana use each year.

4. It allows religious people to get stoned (and we know you guys want to toke it up, and bonus: the bible doesn't forbid it either) because hey, it's doctors orders. So it's for your health.
posted by mullingitover at 4:34 PM on September 21, 2007 [3 favorites]

mullingitover: Dude. You're out there, man. In the ether.


Also, completely correct. Cheers.
posted by lazaruslong at 5:12 PM on September 21, 2007

Back on topic, I actually worry about the medical marijuana movement, and what effects it could have on health care overall.

I'd really, really like to see the end of privatized health care and the incredible bullshit that is health insurance, replaced with a national health care service for all.

Since this negates number 2 and 3 of your list, I could easily see how the conservative propaganda machine could spin an argument against an NHS using pot as a wedge issue.

Obviously, there are other arguments they could also use that might go further, but the prospect of anyone able to fake a chronic pain condition having access to free (or incredibly inexpesnive) marijuana seems like something the Repubs would harp on for at least a few cycles.

I guess what I'm saying is that before the Federal law changes we need a few massive changes to the infrastructure that supplies the medicine. Or something.
posted by lazaruslong at 5:18 PM on September 21, 2007 [2 favorites]

2. Since it's by doctor's orders only, it ensures that the the poor (republicans: this usually means MINORITIES! woohoo! You can still imprison the brown people, we know how much you love to do that) won't be able to afford it because they don't have insurance.

Illegal Marijuana ain't cheap, and somehow I doubt the docs who prescribe medical marijuana are super-sticklers about fees and having proper insurance, etc. I'm pretty sure that medical marijuana "prescriptions" don't go through the DEA prescription tracking system. They're more like "doctors notes"

Obviously I'm opposed to this federal law. But the DEA does do raids on medical marijuana operations.
posted by delmoi at 5:45 PM on September 21, 2007

I guess what I'm saying is that before the Federal law changes we need a few massive changes to the infrastructure that supplies the medicine.

Or just install smaller cooking vents.
posted by hal9k at 5:48 PM on September 21, 2007

darksasami: "Of all the seedy no-good anarchist druggie slackers I've been unable to avoid meeting here in Oregon, it's just amazing how many of them mysteriously developed chronic pain symptoms after medical marijuana became available. I'm sure there are some people who honestly can benefit from the stuff, just as I'm sure that some of the people waving "disabled vet god bless" signs on the street are actually spending the money on feeding their children instead of buying crack and booze before going back to their homes. I'm not convinced that they're in the majority."

It's still medicine. A doctor has prescribed it in all cases. Who the hell are you to get into the doctor/patient relationship? And if it really is just to get high, who cares? They're not hurting anyone but themselves. This is just pot, you know. And, fer chrissake, it's under medical supervision, even.

Crack, meth, PCP... those are dangerous drugs. But pot? Potheads giggle.
posted by Malor at 5:59 PM on September 21, 2007

Pot is fantastic.
posted by Henry C. Mabuse at 6:06 PM on September 21, 2007 [1 favorite]

lazaruslong, from what I've seen, the "medical marijuana" thing exists outside of mainstream health care. Even with pot-pills, the big pharma companies can't compete with home/locally grown. So it's a no-win for an industry that relies on the pharma industry. (Micheal Moore will assure you that they have a dubious relationship.)

I guess the bottom line with that is the fact that people can grow their own pot. Ergo, mainstream health care pros will never get on board with it. And so the "movement" will remain at a standstill.
posted by snsranch at 6:08 PM on September 21, 2007

Exactly. Federal law is so wrong in this case that it's your civic duty to break it, and break it good.

just did
posted by quarter waters and a bag of chips at 9:01 PM on September 21, 2007 [3 favorites]

just did
posted by quarter waters and a bag of chips

Eponysterical.
posted by TheOnlyCoolTim at 9:16 PM on September 21, 2007 [1 favorite]

so did they dial 911 or 420?
posted by pyramid termite at 9:55 PM on September 21, 2007