Police State Example Served Up Locally

This is an update to the following post: Is The U.S. Really A Police State?

Since the 9/11/2001 incident after George W. Bush took control of the United States government this country has sunk deeper into a lawless state of anarchy. The Ruling Elite, a small group of wealthy individuals and corporations encompassing all relevant political parties, has literally trashed the U.S. Constitution. That universal Law is only as good as the people make it. Unfortunately, they've decided the Rule of Man is more to their liking and subsequently have co-opted, corrupted and perverted the Law and the Courts with their arrogant, self-serving lawlessness. Glenn Greewald has a timely article today: Guantanamo death highlights U.S. detention policy - You may think that what happens to a few "rag-head" Arabs that supposedly hate our guts has nothing to do with you or your family and the long-held belief that our home is our castle and we are always safe there, you may want to re-think your beliefs.

Thursday's February 3, 2011, Times-Standard has an extremely revealing expose by Jeffrey Schwartz in the My Word: Up in arms: Search warrant folly. You may think the we are people with certain, guaranteed rights with honorable, decent and just men stationed in high offices to protect those rights. Armed to the teeth, masked gunmen can't just cave your door in sometime in the early morning, shouting police, drag you and your family out of bed, providing you didn't do something stupid, like trying to defend yourself and your family in your own home, on your own property, and get shot dead, or can they. Mr. Schwartz says they not only can, but do on a regular basis right here in Humboldt County.

Today we see people living in the more brutal, domineering totalitarian police states beginning to stand up for their personal and collective rights as equal human beings - both men and women. What's becoming more and more widespread in this country has been going on in these other countries for decades. All with American blessings. Considering the fact that Mr. Schwartz had the courage to write that article, making us all aware of what's going on in our names, tells me we won't wait decades to put a stop to this lawless corruption.

What puts everyone's life, liberty and citizenship in jeopardy is who Mr. Schwartz says is responsible for this, what I consider criminal conduct and perversion of the law, the gutless and sycophantic District Attorney and Superior Court Judges. They legitimize this outlandish police action, what amounts to a pure, raw act of terrorism, without any apparent substantive evidence of probable cause other than someone's unproven accusation. This situation puts everyone under the gun and at risk.

What is to stop anyone, an irate neighbor, a family member or anyone else from calling the police and telling them some wild, unsubstantiated lie about you? Mr. Schwartz says:

But if you own a handgun or rifle, just imagine this: A judge issued a warrant to search your house because someone you know saw you with it and they don't know whether or not you have a license to own it.

Sadly, Jeffrey Schwartz doesn't offer much hope for all of the common, law-abiding people that live in this county, other than to say:

"It remains to be seen if it is OK with the higher courts and juries in civil rights actions against law enforcement officers." [Emphasis added]

 "Higher courts." Our history tells us where that goes. Courts (Judges) protect themselves in these kinds of situation involving police power. And "juries in civil rights actions against law enforcement officer"? The problem is NOT with the "law enforcement officers." It is with the District Attorney and the Superior Court Judges.
For the complete article: Up in arms: Search warrant folly click the link or continue reading.

Boohoo!

[UPDATE Below]

This is what greeted me this morning: Legalize-marijuana measure loses in California

Supporters of Proposition 19 are out in force trying to explain why the measure FAILED.

Here's an excerpt from the AP report:

“Prop 19 supporters blamed the outcome on the older, more conservative leanings of voters who participate in midterm elections and pledged to try again in two years.” [Emphasis added]

There may be some truth to that analysis, but I think, when you consider the worry everyone feared, as projected in this article posted on MSNBC: Reefer sadness for pot farmers – there's an even more pragmatic reason.

Here's a list of some of the local blog articles and follow-up comments:

1. Here's what Eric Kirk and some of his followers say here: Why did legal pot lose last night?
2. Kym Kemp: The Emerald Triangle’s Response To Prop. 19–Flowers Among The Weed?
3. NC Journal: Conservative Sweep?
4. A fair sampling of local comments at Humboldt Herald.

There's probably a more on this subject, but I got tired looking. This article poped up on Twitter thanks to NCJ's Ryan Burns: Minds Don't Change That Much, But Voters Do -  A good article about why people vote the way they do. In the end, really just an exercise in futility.

So, why did California voters shoot down Prop. 19 when all the polls showed it would pass? Money. It's as simple as that. When you can NET $150,000 to $200,000 plus a year AFTER you pay for all the hard lifting, there is a vested interest in all businesses that profit off this large amount of tax-free money coming into these communities. Even the small 10 to 15 plants a year anyone can grow nets a tidy sum. Regulating and taxing these growers would expose their lucrative operations. No one really wanted see that happen either.

Apparently with all the local buzz on the possible adverse benefits of legal pot growing some people are put out at the Humboldt Grower's prices. Here's what Kym Kemp thinks the growers need to do: Attitudes Towards Humboldt Growers - Join forces as one big corporation, then lobby and advertise.

My idea use some of all that tax-free money to buy representatives that will serve your interests first. The way the laws are today, no one would know where the money originated. That way everyone associated with this criminal so-called industry could be legitimate mainstream crooks and become active members of the ruling elite.

[UPDATE :: Friday, November 5, 2010]
Kym Kemp's latest take pot matters consequences as she sees them: Smokers Calling For A Boycott Of Emerald Triangle Growers? Problem is, she lives in a fantasy world. Think she'd get a clue if she understood why voters across the U.S. voted in a majority of conservative, Tea Party Republican types? Think she'd admit this was part of the backlash I talked about?

--Joe

Lost Logger Redux

One of Joe Blow's afterlives was a logger. In the mid-seventies he became aware of an ever-growing adversarial change in attitudes and in the law regarding the logging and timber industry. Most of this negative impact was believed to be caused by the ever-expanding population growth, including retired people and environmentalist-motivated, pot growing, so-called “back_to_the_land” transplanted Southern California Hippies. It was the Redwood National Park sale that really impacted his business and got his attention. The environmental movement, widespread propaganda against old growth timber harvesting, political glad-handing, new restrictive laws and new invasive agencies, he soon learned, were far more destructive and threatening than a few “pot farmers” trying to enforce a new way of life.

Joe fought the good fight, but in the end lost the battle and went the way most old loggers go. In Joe's case, in an effort to retain some dignity, he took his businesses out of state. Since “home is where the heart is,” throughout those years away Joe remained aware of how the timber industry and his remaining friends were managing. One of his concerns was how the directly affected communities were dealing with, what he considered a hostile takeover by the environmentalists and big timber companies. Where was the anger and the backlash? It seemed like the rough and tough timber man and woman just rolled over like a cowed dog. They took their generational losses as if it was ordained by God. Most local business people's attitude was, “Oh well, what can we do?” But, somethings apparently changed in thirty years. All that anger didn't just go the way of "old loggers." Thirty to forty years of constant battles and the struggle to stay alive and to defend and protect your family from repressive attitudes, laws and the narrow-minded, thin-skinned, changes people.

It seems turnabout is fair play. At least that is what's being reported by Heidi Walters for the NC Journal: Unhappy Camp - Reliving the bad old ’80s way up in there the hills – An excellent article on some of the “local” signs of the times.

Why it took 30 years for short-sighted business people to stop voting their pocket books must have something to do with the fact their Ronald Reagan experiment in capitalist domination didn't work for the small business person and land owner like they believed it would.

Frankly, this is a lesson all the pot growers, a.k.a. “pot farmers” should take to heart. Some people have long memories and deeply buried resentments. Lets not forget all the people that exploited all that easy money, either. Since they are the ones that ran interference for the growers and made the whole process possible. Now, according to the news in today's Monday, October 18, 2010, Times-Standard paper, 'A neighborhood problem': Eureka neighbors take to courts to fight grow house -- and win, you can run a commercial, in-house grow operation with 79 or more plants right in the middle of a Eureka residential neighborhood and the police won't bother you even when everyone complains. Why did it take 14 “plaintiffs,” people in the neighborhood, filing suit in court to get the operation stopped even when the Judge said:

“The evidence supports a conclusion that the nuisance conducted on the premises interfered with plaintiffs' use and enjoyment of their property,” Reinholtsen wrote in the ruling. “The plaintiffs suffered substantial actual damages, and the use of the premises by defendant and his tenants was unreasonable.”

EPD Detective Neil Hubbard concluded by saying:

With the seemingly ever-increasing gray area of the state's marijuana law, Hubbard said frustrated neighbors may be wise to follow the Hillsdale Street neighborhood's lead. He said this is increasingly a problem that falls outside of police hands, noting that the tenants at Ebenstein's house were not arrested nor charged for the grow operation.

Hubbard said he's never heard of a small claims case like the one brought forward by the Hillsdale neighbors, but would like to see more of them. [Emphasis added]

“The grow houses are really not so much of a police problem anymore,” Hubbard said. “It's a neighborhood problem. I'm glad to see (the Hillsdale neighbors) stepped to the plate and took this on. ... It's going to take that kind of thing to improve these properties. I'd like to see more of it.”

When Judge Reinholtsen concludes “that the nuisance conducted on the premises interfered with plaintiffs' use and enjoyment of their property,” and “suffered substantial actual damages” and the use of that property was “ unreasonable,” I'd like to know what is police business these days?

What does it mean when the local police start telling citizens, that when they've got a problem that threatens their health, children, life, and property that it's time for them to start taking matters into their own hands? Maybe our city fathers know something we don't and when it comes to cutting back on so-called “public safety” their only doing what's obvious and necessary. If so, we live in a rather convoluted mess, that's for sure.

If that's the case, then maybe it's time to take another look at California gun laws and concealed carry permit issues. If we can't count on the police, then the only ones left are “us.” Old loggers know what that means.
[Source]

--Joe

The Elephant in the Room - Legal POT

[UPDATE Below :: August 2, 2010]
[UPDATE Below :: August 4, 2010]


So what's a "no-brainer"?

Jane Hamsher posted on FireDogLake (FDL) Friday July 23, 2010 this:
Want to Defuse the Mexican Border Problem? Legalize Marijuana

The Report has made some observations on some of the negative, un-talked about consequences of the so-called "Industry." Eric Kirk's SoHum Parlance II recently posted a real eye-opener, if you have the stomach to look through it, The literal side of the drug war. And another posting: Another marijuana bust gun death.

When money trumps lives it's time to devalue the issue.

---

There are two more pertinent articles just posted on FDL:

1. Call Your Member of Congress and Ask Where They Stand on Ending Marijuana Prohibition
2. Senate Votes to Double Fines, Jail Time for Pot Brownies  [Source]

---

[UPDATE :: MONDAY, AUGUST 2, 2010]

FIREDOGLAKE is making their move: Announcing Our Marijuana Legalization Campaign: Just Say Now

They've opened up a new "Just Say Now website" - They want to know what you think and offer other stuff.

---

[UPDATE :: MONDAY, AUGUST 4, 2010]

Mexico wants to talk to the U.S. -- "Former Police Chief Urges President Obama to Join Mexican President Calderon in Debate on Legalizing Marijuana" -- This is the latest proposal, where Mexico joins Columbia and Brazil encouraging Latin American countries to legalize marijuana to deny the cartels their major source of revenue. Offering to "debate" seems rather insulting and a waste of time. Getting Barack Obama to personally recognize the President of Mexico, Felipe Calderon as an equal and actually work to establish that reality for the future benefit of both countries would be well worth doing. The Drug War solution has so far in the last four years produced 28,000 dead.

I guess the "elephant in the room" question is, who profits from illegal marijuana, "The Industry," in California?
A more pertinent question is, who profits from the illegal so-called pot industry in Humboldt County?

--Joe