DEA Raids Culver City Dispensary - Unclear Legal Boundaries

[OAQfirst]

As an example:

DEA agents raid Culver City medical marijuana dispensary

The action comes on the same day an appellate court in San Diego rules that federal law does not preempt California's medical pot law.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-marijuana1-2008aug01,0,7334306.story

So I'm just wondering, if it can take legal authorities, law experts years to figure out what's legal and what's not, how can the common citizen be expected to know if they're breaking the law? Here we have people following Federal law, and apparently that was wrong, so now they go to jail. Something's not right here.

 

[Crosson]

Something's not right here.

The law is not a perfect system, but lawyers will tell you that we put up with it because it is the best we have. I would rather do away with the whole thing!

 

[OAQfirst]

I'm becoming quite cynical about law. Just why do we have laws, anyway? Every time I read about gun control, it looks like allowing people to have their guns creates a balance with those who shouldn't have them but do anyway. It looks like the system is merely an inconvenience for do gooders.

 

[Crosson]

I'm becoming quite cynical about law. Just why do we have laws, anyway?

The answer is so that people in positions of power can maintain their position. For example, it has been estimated that illegal corporate tax violations cost the US $100B+ per year, and yet street thieves are the ones who fill our prisons. If the justice system is that unfair, then it is an utter failure that should be dismantled.

I would rather protect myself from the occasional madman then live in fear of an incompetent government that has been given so much excessive power. The only way the government maintains the asinine legal system is by scaring typical citizens into fearing the alternatives.

 

[Howers]

I'm becoming quite cynical about law. Just why do we have laws, anyway? Every time I read about gun control, it looks like allowing people to have their guns creates a balance with those who shouldn't have them but do anyway. It looks like the system is merely an inconvenience for do gooders.

If we don't have things in print everything becomes subjective. Does that give you a glimpse of anarchy?

 

[Skateman]

If we don't have things in print everything becomes subjective. Does that give you a glimpse of anarchy?

:shy: That makes me laugh to tears, there was a guy on the web saying that he ran his business without tax code.

 

[OAQfirst]

If we don't have things in print everything becomes subjective. Does that give you a glimpse of anarchy?

I was thinking that anarchy already exists, subjectively. Looking at the laws president G.W. broke at the costs of thousands of soldiers, for example. It's entirely up to a judge/jury how much time a convict stays in jail, so that's also subjective. And I've seen some awful judgments and findings. Then there's the whim of jurors... Looking around at folks, I'm very uncomfortable with jury pickings.

 

[WarPhalange]

The answer is so that people in positions of power can maintain their position. For example, it has been estimated that illegal corporate tax violations cost the US $100B+ per year, and yet street thieves are the ones who fill our prisons. If the justice system is that unfair, then it is an utter failure that should be dismantled.

I would rather protect myself from the occasional madman then live in fear of an incompetent government that has been given so much excessive power. The only way the government maintains the asinine legal system is by scaring typical citizens into fearing the alternatives.

I think you'd like this thread:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=247997

 

[Evo]

Sorry, this thread is ridiculous.