palmspringsbum
Marc and Jodie Emery attack Dragonfly De La Luz on Facebook
A discussion of California’s marijuana initiative took an all too familiar turn when Marc and Jodie Emery assaulted Dragonfly De La Luz on Facebook this past Saturday.
While shooting the messenger rather than the message is standard operating procedure for the proponents of California’s Proposition 19, this particular exchange marks an all time low.
Except for the time Chris Bennett and David Malmo-Levine screamed from Vancouver, Canada that Scott Imler was a narc while he was going to trial in Los Angeles, California. Bennett and Malmo-Levine are lieutenants of Emery and this occurred during the summer of 2002.
After opening the first medical marijuana dispensary in Los Angeles, The Los Angeles Cannabis Resource Center (LACRC), and after keeping it open for 5 years, Imler was raided in the wake of 911, on 25 Oct 01.
Many people believe these accusations set the movement in Los Angeles and Southern California back ten years. Certainly, it tore the activist community apart. In the name of unity, of course.
Marc Emery set the tone for the current divisive and diversionary jihad with his diatribe on 5 Jun 10 that begins by declaring that everyone opposed to Prop. 19 is either a prohibitionist, a profiteer, a narc, or a jealous has-been.
According to Dragonfly’s comments (copied below) that article was a ‘spin-off’ of an article against Prop. 19 that she wrote and submitted to Cannabis Culture.
The Pot Calls The Kettle Black
The following month, Russ Belville published his “I gots mine” article in the Huffington Post where he states:
Craig and the other dispensary owners who oppose Prop 19 are the ‘I Gots Mine’ element of the anti-legalization campaign. They’ve got the corner on a retail market worth billions, one that is only worth billions if you arrest 850,000 mostly-black-and-brown adults a year for participating in it.
Marc Emery
What Belville seems to have overlooked is that the “I gots mine” crowd are the proponents of Prop. 19.
There’s Marc Emery, who made a good living for many years selling marijuana seeds over the internet at astronomically inflated prices “for the good of the movement”.
There’s Steve DeAngelo, who owns Harborside, the largest dispensary in the state which grossed $26 million last year and is located in Oakland, which is the home of Prop. 19.
There’s Richard Lee, who had $1.4 million cash to give to the signature campaign to get Prop. 19 on the ballot, and who owns Oaksterdam U as well as one of the 4 permitted dispensaries in that city.
There’s Jeff Wilcox, on Prop. 19′s steering committee and owner of warehouses in Oakland with $20 million to spend to turn them into industrial marijuana cultivation operations.
This takes the pot calling the kettle black to a whole new level.
It’s a page right out of Karl Rove’s playbook. And to add insult to injury, it is being done in the name of “unity”. While proclaiming “divided we fall”, they are wantonly dividing the movement.
While marijuana advocates are proclaiming Prop. 19 is not legalization but thinly veiled prohibition, the proponents of the initiative beg the question by accusing anyone opposed to the initiative of being opposed to legalization.
Meanwhile the media toss red-herrings into the debate by framing it as “stoners against legalization” instead of “stoners against Prop. 19″, as was done recently by David Downs in an article titled “Stoners Against Legalization” published by EastBay Express.
Though this article can only be described as a hatchet job on marijuana advocates opposed to Prop. 19, and Dragonfly in particular, it does report that marijuana attorneys Jennifer Soares and Bill Panzer are opposed to the initiative, though it doesn’t tell us much about why. Jennifer Soares represents medical marijuana dispensaries in Southern California. Bill Panzer is a noted marijuana attorney and author of Proposition 215.
As a side note, so far 3 of the authors of Proposition 215 have come out against Proposition 19: Anna Boyce, Bill Panzer, and Dennis Peron. The other authors of The Compassionate Use Act of 1996 were: Dr. Tod Mikuriya, Ph.D. (deceased), Dale Geringer, Valerie Corral of WAMM, and Scott Imler.
The only author of Prop. 215 known to be for Proposition 19 is Dale Geringer, who is Vice-Chair of the NORML Board of Directors and state coordinator of California NORML.
The fact is, many marijuana advocates believe Prop. 19 will set the movement back decades, while making a few people very rich.
Meanwhile, Back At The Ranch
Upon returning from the Know Your Rights Expo in Anaheim, Richard Brumfield posted a link on his Facebook wall to an analysis of Prop. 19 by Attorney Letitia Pepper which concludes that Dragonfly is correct about the impact the initiative could have, and most likely will, on medical marijuana patients and providers.
Between 9:28pm Saturday and 6:12pm Tuesday, the thread logged 156 comments. The majority of them by Mickey Martin, associated editor of West Coast Cannabis; Bruce Cain, of NewAgeCitizen (who received the Bullshitter of The Week award from Mikey Martin); Richard Brumfield, owner of the Facebook wall; and 5 or 6 others. Pretty much everyone that participated made a larger number of comments than either Dragonfly or the Emerys.
The 4th message and first ad hominem attack in the exchange was posted, apparently, by Jodie Joanna Emery using Marc Emery’s Facebook account.
Marc Scott Emery
Saturday at 10:58pmDragonfly is nothing but a prohibition profiteering trimmer with no formal education or training, so she has no proper legal or judicial insight into Proposition 19. She’s just a world-traveling party girl who only got attention for being published in Cannabis Culture for a few pot/drug festival reports, which needed extensive editing, as she’s not a professional journalist, just a blogger who writes about getting high and partying. Why anyone takes her seriously, we can’t comprehend; all she does is trim pot once a year to make big money to travel and get high (she wrote about that in CC), and she needs to protect that prohibition-based income, so has made herself one of the faces of the anti-Prop-19 movement — but she lied about new felonies being created, just like she lies about a lot of things about Prop 19. She’s simply a paranoid prohibition profiteer. That’s what we have to say about the author of that bunk “article”. Marc is appalled by those who have joined the prohibition army alongside cops, the DEA, religious nuts, and the prison industry.
And Richard, you cannot keep telling people that you “were doing business with Marc Emery” because that is simply not true. He liked and approved of your lotion, but did not go into any business contract with you.
While it’s tempting to let that stand on its own, it should be noted that there is nothing “big” about the money one makes as a trimmer. And certainly not when compared to the kind of bucks the Emerys are accustomed to tossing around.
Fifteen comments later, writing as “Dragonflower Lyoness”, Dragonfly responds.
Dragonflower Lyoness
Sunday at 6:35am@ jodie (who comments here using marc emery’s profile):
wow, really, jodie? have you really stooped so low? it saddens me that you have turned the corner from debating political issues to mounting personal attacks on my credibility.
you claim that i have no formal education or training? it is you, jodie emery, who has only a high school education. you never went to university at all. which might be why you would find it wise to accuse me of not having formal education, when in fact i went to university and a prestigious graduate school.
jodie, you have the audacity to say that i am not a professional journalist? not only is my first degree in english–which means writing is my specialty–i have also worked for newspapers and magazines for 11 years, dear–since around the time you started your illustrious high school career. and my professional journalism work has been not only as a writer, but as an editor, as well. in fact, when your husband marc emery saw how horrible your editing skills were when you “edited”/butchered my articles, he gave *me* the final word on my work–something publishers almost never do. you might claim, either out of ignorance or bitterness, that i am not a professional journalist, but your husband marc emery evidently thought i was a better editor than you are.
you “can’t comprehend” why anyone takes me seriously? perhaps your inability to “comprehend” is a result of your high school education. if your comprehension skills are that lacking, why don’t you ask your husband marc emery if he’ll explain to you in words you can understand why he takes me seriously? he took my work so seriously that he financed some of my travels to exotic places so i could produce more of my well-received articles for him to publish in cannabis culture magazine, and urged me to write still more articles about my adventures, even until the night before his unfortunate extradition. your husband marc emery took me so seriously that when i first sent my “why pro-pot activists oppose prop. 19″ article to cannabis culture for publication in may, he took it for his own, twisted it, and co-opted my arguments, re-casting them in *favor* of the initiative, and from this wrote/plagiarized his “why you should vote yes on 19″ blog–in the same style as my article, and even in the same format–an act of intellectual theft which borders on the unethical in the journalism business.
of course, i have no “legal training”–nor do i claim to. i leave the legalese up to the attorneys. oh, and by the way–they overwhelmingly agree with what i’ve written about prop. 19:
http://thehive.modbee.com/node/20404
http://www.rhdefense.com/blog/marijuana-law/blowing-smoke-proposition-19-medical-marijuana/
although it is commendable that you “attended Valleyview Secondary School from grade 8″ all the way “through to grade 11,” i’m afraid a high school education doesn’t make you any more qualified to discuss the merits of prop. 19 than anybody else. i would even surmise that it makes you far less qualified than someone who actually went to graduate school.
i know that in your eyes, i must appear to have a pretty posh life, traveling the world unifying the marijuana movement on a global scale, smoking the best ganja all over the planet, actually getting paid to write about my adventures for pot magazines, and spending summers going to epic festivals and parties up and down the west coast. but that is no reason to try to impugn my credibility.
i don’t mean to put you down, jodie–we have been friends, and just two nights ago i wrote you an email expressing my desire to remain cordial throughout this prop. 19 controversy, even though we have a difference of opinion. so my intention is not to put you down, but i must stand up in my own defense against your libelous attacks. it is quite sad, actually, that you and other prop. 19 supporters can’t come up with any real argument against our “VOTE kNOw ON 19″ points, so you feel that your only option is to attack us personally. when you are open to debating the issues at hand, as opposed to attacking my credibility, stand up and i would be happy to join you.
-
- Emery attacks De La Luz on Facebook – Screenshot 1 of 7
-
- Screenshot 2 of 7 – Emery attacks De La Luz on Facebook 29 Aug 10 6:35am
-
- Screenshot 3 of 7 – Emery attacks De La Luz on Facebook 29 Aug 10 6:35am
-
- Screenshot 3 of 7 – Emery attacks De La Luz on Facebook 29 Aug 10 6:35am
-
- Screenshot 5 of 7 – Emery attacks De La Luz on Facebook 29 Aug 10 5:19pm
-
- Screenshot 6 of 7 – Emery attacks De La Luz on Facebook 29 Aug 10 5:19pm
Move the cursor middle-left until it becomes a double-headed arrow, then click for fullscreen view. Click middle-right to stop and resume slideshow. Press {ESC} to exit fullscreen.
One of Dragonfly’s most prolific detractors is NORML’s National Outreach Coordinator, Russ Belville. He states, in one of his many diatribes against marijuana advocates who oppose Prop. 19, “I am no lawyer… hell, I’m not even a college graduate.”
About an hour after Dragonfly’s response to Emery, Mickey Martin of West Coast Cannabis magazine joins the fray. He begins by addressing her as “dragonflies” and proceeds to ask her where she went to school and what is her real name, and then proclaims that “only cowards hide behind fake names and give spotty details of their history.”
That pretty much blew any discussion of the initiative out of the water.
Sunday at 10:58amDragonfly is a flake, she won’t even say what school she went to or what publications she worked on (she certainly had no references or background when we first took her submissions). I graduated St. Michael’s University School in Victoria,… BC with Honours and was accepted into 3 universities, but chose to work instead, to join Marc’s organization and become active instead of sitting in classrooms for years. Marc is exceedingly proud of my writing and editing abilities, having me edit every CC article — he wouldn’t ever say that bullshit Dragonfly spouted. I’m going to email Marc what she wrote and share his response. He has told me many times recently that he used to think she was attractive but now he finds her repulsive. He also regrets having paid so much to her for travel and live it up, as she’s an exploiter and often failed to get exactly what he assigned (like taking photos of plants but not taking notes of what was what). I even once had to pay $300 of my own money to fix her laptop because she called and beg for more and more money all the time and said she wouldn’t be able to write without her computer. She used Marc for so much money, and he is disgusted by her. Go ahead, Dragon girl, write Marc a letter in prison and ask what he thinks of you and what you’ve said about me.
Sunday at 11:30amI need to add that I was never Dragonfly’s “friend”, as I always found her to be flighty like the other “goddess” chicks who speak in breathy tones and dress like fairies and speak about being sent to earth from other worlds by magical forces for a goddess-given purpose of heavenly love and unity (Marc always rolls his eyes at those people too, because they are not rational or reality-based thinkers). And I’m surprised by Dragonfly’s lack of proper punctuation and capitalization, seeing as she’s apparently such a professional “english” writer. Marc and I often talk about and look forward to the years ahead when, after Proposition 19 passes, all of the prohibition-profiteers are recognized as enemies of progress and liberty.
At this point Richard Brumfield attempts to bring the discussion back to the initiative. Addressing Jodie Emery, he asks her to consider what it will be like if Proposition 19 passes and our worst fears about it are realized. How will she and Marc be remembered? How will he and Dragonfly be remembered? He states that we’re “all playing a part of history here and I think we should be mindful of what we write.”
Sunday at 12:25pmI’m willing to stand up for Prop 19 because I am certain it’s better than prohibition and people going to prison and having countless lives destroyed. I don’t believe any of the paranoid delusions about the Armageddon you opponents/prohibitionists proffer. Only time will tell, and I know I’m on the right side.
Sunday at 5:19pmAs promised, Marc’s response to “Dragonfly”:
First off, not a single writer of any kind, Tommy Chong, Barry Cooper, Peter Gorman , Pete Brady, et al, was spared our editing. All writers were edited. Only Peter Gorman came close to having his work appear as is, but even then, we always maintained the right to edit any writer. Dragonfly never had any articles published as is, nor did we, or would we, ever promise to take an article as is. I did like S******** T*****’s work, this is her real name, I can’t stand to this that someone wants to maintain their credibility without using their real name in a pivotal ballot initiative. If Ms. T***** believes that Proposition 215 makes marijuana legal, then please, use your real name and show that you believe you are legal, otherwise, hiding under a pseudonym is tantamount to admitting that your actions in California ARE illegal, contrary to what you claim. S********, you claim that marijuana is legal under proposition 215, so stop hiding under a pseudonym. Pseudonyms are for people who are acting illegally in the jurisdiction they write from.
Secondly, Jodie Emery is simply the best editor I have ever met, far superior to my editing skills, and without question edited every article in Cannabis Culture after my edits, including Miss T*****’s work. And every article was the better for it. There is no truth to the claim that Miss T*****’s work was ever accepted with the assurance that it wouldn’t be edited. Articles are edited for length (they have to fit), grammar, spelling, and a variety of reasons, though this isn’t necessarily a reflection of any writer’s ability.
I am disgusted with Miss T*****’s defense of the exploiter profiteers who cash in on the sick and dying with $300-$400 an ounce cannabis in what Miss T***** describes as a virtually legal industry under proposition 215. Cannabis prices have not gone down at all for medical users in 14 years, they are still being gouged by black market prices and thousands of producers & dispensary owners live large at their expense. Proposition 19 will drastically lower prices to $12.50 an ounce for their own homegrown to a retail price of $50-$60 an ounce plus tax by November 2011., and this is what opposition to Proposition 19 is entirely and exclusively about, protecting the lucrative income of the existing black market cartels, gangs, police, prison industry and exploiter commercial growers of “compassionate medical pot”. Any other explanations are a scam and smokescreen.
— Marc Emery, August 29, 2010
Sunday at 8:51pm@jeri and michael: thank you for bringing this conversation back on course. jodie and mickey are clearly smoke-screening the issues. our concerns are legitimate and deserve a platform.
@richard: jeri is against prop. 19 because it takes away mmj patients’ rights. she’s saying we need to popularize this point in the media, and not focus on other negative aspects of prop. 19, such as the corporatization of cannabis, since many people don’t have a problem with corporations.
Dragonfly and Emery each made one more comment in the thread. Dragonfly simply said “Keep spreading the word” and posted the address of her blog: votetaxcannabis2010.blogspot.com.
Emery wrote that he pointed out that Dragonfly lied when she said that new felonies were created by Prop. 19 and she hadn’t addressed that. And he went on to say that she was wrong about that, and therefore it is not just possible but likely that she is wrong about other things.
For More Info:
By Dragonfly
For Dragonfly
Against Dragonfly
26 Responses to “Marc and Jodie Emery attack Dragonfly De La Luz on Facebook”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
September 3rd, 2010 at 12:33 am
I have all their attacks compiled into a No on 19! flyer. Especially their attacks on patients. To show how these greedy drug addicts are, sadly, no different than any other when they aren’t under the thumb. Sad to say I helped spread that lie all those years. Now to undo my damage.
September 3rd, 2010 at 1:29 am
shared
September 3rd, 2010 at 7:31 am
The personal attacks are sickening. And the threats even more so. “CHILDISH” would be a better word. He edited, she edited, we edited….. WHO CARES! Are you kidding? And education?…. Some of the dumbest people I’ve met have multiple degrees, and some of the most intelligent have little formal education. This is the age of the internet….. highly advanced education sources and tools are at your fingertips. Intelligence is not measured by a piece of paper, but rather your actions and words. Move on to debating the issues. Eventually you are going to have to agree to disagree. You know… like civil people. What a waste of time attacking somebody on the other side of the fence, when you could be gaining support for your own side from those who are not versed on the topic.
September 3rd, 2010 at 9:29 am
So the Emery’s have gone PeeTree??
September 3rd, 2010 at 10:28 am
Prop 19 has caused more division to our entire culture than anything I can ever remember..even the DEA…makes you wonder, just who is Dicklee?
September 3rd, 2010 at 10:44 am
A few corrections:
You cannot “assault” someone on Facebook. You can “libel” them, you can “defame” them, you can eviscerate their untenable arguments, but you cannot “assault” them.
Massive cut’n'pastes of Facebook back’n'forths is about as interesting and juvenile as junior high school girls gossiping about the new girl. Yawn.
Despite writing it very clearly, you completely miss the point of the “I gots mine” characterization. It’s not “I gots my money”, it’s “I gots my (medical) marijuana” that I am criticizing.
For not once, ever, have you, Dragonfly, Peron, or any other aptly named “Stoner Against Legalization” explained why the 2,700,000 Californians who are healthy enough to get a misdemeanor or felony should vote against no longer being subject to criminal penalty. (Well, to be fair, Dragonfly implies they should just lie to a doctor and get a 215 rec.)
Every argument you people make has to do with Prop 19 taking away your precious rights under Prop 215. As in “I gots my (medical) marijuana and you don’t gets none!” 61,000 Californians faced misdemeanors and 17,000 faced felonies last year alone – Prop 215 didn’t do shit for them.
You’re asking people to vote to continue their own criminalization because you wrong-headedly believe it will somehow criminalize you. Forgive us if we get a little bit angry at fellow pot smokers who vote alongside Steve Cooley, Carmen Trutanich, and Bonnie Dumanis (gosh, if 19 devastates 215 like you claim, wouldn’t these three be FOR it?)
As for the “money men”, sure, Emery has lots of dough from selling seeds at prohibition pricing. How is he any morally different than Lanette Davies selling marijuana and clones at prohibition pricing, and then using that money to campaign to keep me a criminal?
Sure, Richard Lee put $1.4 million into a ballot initiative. You do know it takes money to get initiatives on the ballot, right? (Oh, maybe not, since you keep running back to the Jack Herer Initiative for 1990, 92, 94, 96, 98, 00, 02, 04, 06, 08, 10, and 2012 that has/had NO significant funding and is as dead in the water for 2012 as it is today.) For Lee, this is a complete gamble; it could lose and he’s out $1.4 mil. How much of your business and wealth did you risk on getting a marijuana initiative on the ballot, Craig? How much of the money Peron put into founding the Normandie (a Prop 215 hotel that loses it’s cache if 19 passes) could’ve funded a legalization initiative?
By the way, while Lee may have money in his businesses, he lives a very spartan lifestyle (as did Emery, for that matter), not like some of the “compassionate medical providers” like, say, Luke Scarmazzo.
Sure, DeAngelo and Wilcox stand to make money from legalization of marijuana… that’s the frickin’ point, is that legalization will create new jobs, redirect police resources, and boost the economy. Y’all seem to love dispensaries and growers making money on pot, judging by the “wither the poor trimmers” and “woe to the small growers” ballads I read from Anti-19′ers… you just don’t like it when someone does it better than you.
Well, welcome to Capitalism 101… this is how things work in a legal market. People get up early, commute to a place of business, work hard, price a product/service based on real market demands, pay taxes, follow regulations, make political and business connections, save capital, grow and expand. The days of sleeping til noon, tending a few houseplants, paying no taxes, following no regs, prohibition pricing, and making more from a harvest than a schoolteacher or fireman makes all year are over.
See, I like Lee, DeAngelo, & Wilcox specifically because they proved me wrong. If you care to delve into my writing since 2008 for NORML you’ll find I actually predicted the “I Gots Mine” scenario before it bloomed:
And in other writings, I predicted that medical marijuana would begin to push away legalization as the forces that benefit from the status quo (dispensaries, home growers) would fight to maintain their $300/ounce cash cow. Then these dispensary owners (Lee, DeAngelo) proved me wrong, that there are some who make money off 215 who really do want to fight for legalization for me.
So you go ahead, Craig, Stephanie, Letitia, Dennis, and the other Stoners Against Legalization. Vote with Cooley, Trutanich, and Dumanis. Fight to keep healthy pot smokers living in fear and acing incarceration. If the vote on Prop 19 is whisker-close and ends up losing thanks to your efforts, I will be emailing you each week the list of Californians in jail who wouldn’t have been if 19 had passed. I’m sure you’ll be eager to send them letters explaining why putting them behind bars was the right thing to do.
September 3rd, 2010 at 11:36 am
Radical Russ –
Please see: Prop 19 won’t keep much of anyone out of jail
September 3rd, 2010 at 12:27 pm
I just left a comment on this site–as a founder of the cause I have the RIGHT to tell it like it is!
September 3rd, 2010 at 1:28 pm
It is unfortunate, but not unsuspected that “personal attacks” keep occurring on this issue that touches the emotions of so many. Of course someone who portrays herself as a “professional stoner” should expect to experience attacks on her credibility.
It seems to me DragonFly defended herself just fine, except that her defense demonstrated the same delusional thinking process as her articles when she claimed that Rick Horowitz’s article http://www.rhdefense.com/blog/marijuana-law/blowing-smoke-proposition-19-medical-marijuana/ supported her views. The fact is that there is very little overlap between DragonFly’s articles and Rick’s. Where the articles cover the same subject Rick disagrees with Dragonfly. Here are items that both DragonFly and Howowitz both cover:
Dragonfly’s original article 18 reasons…, now modified to 19 reasons.
Myth 10 – Medical marijuana patients would be exempt from the initiative. (Cultivation, Medicating at home when minors are present, only apply to cities)
DragonFly’s 8 Issues…
Issue 2 – Smoking Cannabis in Public (Patients)
Issue 3 – Smoking Cannabis with Children in the home (Patients)
These subjects all deal with section 11300 of which Rick says “…Proposition 19?s proposed section 11300 addition does not trump the medical marijuana laws because while 11300 basically says “regardless of what any other law says, these things are legal,” it does not say, “only these things are legal.” In other words, 11300 provides a list of some things that are legal, regardless of whether some other law says they are not. But it’s not necessarily the only way that things can be legal. Lots of other things, including things allowed by the medical marijuana laws, can be legal, too.” Kirk Tousaw comes to the same conclusion in his analysis at http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/node/24641
The other Attorney’s opinion she reference appeared first on her own site although current references now point to a version published on “the hive” of the Moedesto Bee. Following her lead, the following article on Cannabis Warrior deals with that lawyer’s opinion. http://cannabiswarrior.com/2010/08/30/carl-t-raff-breaks-down-myths-put-forth-by-attorney-letitia-peppers/
September 3rd, 2010 at 1:49 pm
Raff – “The fact is that there is very little overlap between DragonFly’s articles and Rick’s. Where the articles cover the same subject Rick disagrees with Dragonfly. Here are items that both DragonFly and Howowitz both cover”
I suggest you read Horowitz’s next article after “Blowing Smoke”
Toke It Easy Man: More on Proposition 19 – Probable Cause | 14 Aug 10
http://www.rhdefense.com/blog/marijuana-law/toke-it-easy-man-more-on-proposition-19/
September 3rd, 2010 at 4:28 pm
I am quite familiar with all of Rick Howowitz’s articles on Prop 19 including his latest http://www.rhdefense.com/blog/marijuana-law/what-could-go-wrong-still-more-on-proposition-19/ where he talks about on the anti-proposition-19 folks finding validation in his posts. He says “I’m worried that perhaps my comments about potential weaknesses in Proposition 19 are being “over-interpreted.””
The only overlap between his comments and DragonFly’s that I can find are those I’ve identified – where they disagree. If you see others please identify them for me.
September 3rd, 2010 at 5:27 pm
“Perhaps, as some are saying, Proposition 19 could be passed and the problems could be fixed later. There’s certainly an argument for this, especially since the primary danger looks to be for medical marijuana cooperatives, collectives and dispensaries.”
I think there’s something truly sleazy and obscene about an initiative that opens the door for making medical patients sacrificial lambs.
September 3rd, 2010 at 6:28 pm
I think this pretty much sums it up:
(comment by Tramp Finesse at 1 in the morning of 12 Aug 10
September 3rd, 2010 at 7:28 pm
BTW, thanks for drawing my attention to “What Could Go Wrong?” I didn’t know Horowitz had written another article.
The fact is I was beginning to think about an article describing California after 19 passed. Quite frankly, that is about as appealing to me as contemplating circumcision…
September 3rd, 2010 at 8:28 pm
I wish I’d read this before I wrote the article about Dragonfly. The Examiner.com debacle.
They canned me for complaining about the site being down over the weekend during their Friday 13th “upgrade”.
And so I spent … jezus!, several weeks out of commission because of examiner.com. First there was the week I lost hoping they’d get their act together. Then there was loading all my articles into my blog so I would be getting the view, not them, when I referenced them. Then there was the time getting my blog in shape….
…but I digress.
Anyway, I wish I’d read this before I wrote the article about Dragonfly.
Rick Horowitz, Attorney – “I’m beginning to think it’s a deliberate misunderstanding, perhaps spurred by a greater concern for their own ability to grow, possess and use pot than any concern they might possibly have for medical marijuana users. Initially, I avoided saying anything like that, but from the deliberate refusal to read and respond to what I’ve said, I can only assume they wish to deliberately keep anyone from thinking about it. ”
http://www.rhdefense.com/blog/marijuana-law/blowing-smoke-proposition-19-medical-marijuana/#comment-3619
September 3rd, 2010 at 9:28 pm
Is Tramp’s comment supposed to be an area where Rick’s comments overlap DragonFly’s? Rick didn’t respond to that comment, and I don’t recall her talking about local governments passing ordinances to restrict patient rights.
Rick also says there is “an argument against what I just said. One could argue that 11301 says “control, license, regulate, permit or otherwise authorize, with conditions,” and that it does not say, “forbid, prohibit, or prevent.” One can also argue that allowing local governments to place restrictions on medical marijuana would violate the intent of the laws, because “clearly” Proposition 19 is intended to loosen up, or liberate, marijuana from the strictures of State prohibitions. “Clearly,” with this as the intent, it would not make sense to read Proposition 19 as allowing local governments to “control” or “regulate” or place unreasonable “conditions” on medical marijuana patients, or their caregivers.
His first comment comes from the statutory language, not intent or purposes. Ultimately he’s saying we will be to the courts to resolve the issues. Which is the same situation we have now.
It should be noted that Rick’s comment about local governments interpreting P19 to restrict the rights of cannabis patients refers to the Commercial section and the rights impacted are those provided by SB 420 which allow for collective cultivation. This is the right that we are interpreting to allow dispensaries to sell cannabis to their members, but many local governments interpret those rights differently maintaining that all sales are illegal. This issue has not been addressed by the appellate courts, but the lower courts have tended to side with local governments on this issue.
Since SB420 was enacted by the legislature rather than by initiative, the legislature may decide to alter or eliminate the right to cultivate collectively resulting in the elimination of dispensaries as we know them. The failure of SJR 14 to pass in the assembly shows that the legislature is concerned about the current situation.
We’ll have a new Attorney General next year. If Cooley is elected there will be no more dispensaries. If Harris, who wants more regulation, is elected she may issue new guidelines that restrict the way collectives operate. I’m not entirely comfortable with either possibility unless P19 passes.
September 3rd, 2010 at 10:27 pm
i don’t believe in personal attacks, but i do believe in questioning the sources and the facts – and it seems to be an emotional issue that is drawing the attention of a lot of out of state um, interests? that seem to feel that if we pass 19, it will somehow hurt them in their state. i say that those people should maybe concentrate on getting support in their own state for the way they want things to be done or drumming up support for the federal bills languishing in congress to allow medical states to have medical marijuana, and leave californian’s to discuss and decide the fate of prop 19 – which even if it passes will be certain to be immediately challenged by the federal government and remain in courts for how long? all the way to the top… certainly longer than the two years it will take to come up with this wonderful, perfect bill that the no-on-prop-19er’s seem to want in ’12.
oh and while we are all concentrating on prop 19 steven cooley is gonna sneak into the AG’s office if we aren’t careful and eliminate medical marijuana as california knows it today… prop 19 got nothing on that… silly stoners… the wolf is at the door and we are too busy eating the red herrings to even put an effort up to stop him from getting in.
September 3rd, 2010 at 11:28 pm
Wildweed, ssshhhhh on Cooley. I was planning to drop that like a bombshell into this whole debate…but not for a few days. I haven’t even begun that article yet.
September 4th, 2010 at 12:28 am
Didn’t I just bring up Cooley? Yea I hear he is in the lead.
September 4th, 2010 at 4:25 am
[...] from the the Stoners Against Legalization Article of the Day – Tossed SALAD, as I call it: (Palm Springs Bum) A discussion of California’s marijuana initiative took an all too familiar turn when Marc and [...]
September 13th, 2010 at 5:46 pm
[...] Soares Related Articles 02 Sep 10 – Marc and Jodie Emery attack Dragonfly De La Luz on Facebook 3 Aug 10 – A look at Oakland’s marijuana price, tax, sales, and production 27 Jul 10 [...]
October 18th, 2010 at 11:23 am
[...] not her. Jodie Emery of Cannabis Culture, which had employed “Dragonfly de la Luz”, posted her true identity as Stephanie Taylor, which had been picked up in the blogosphere. Chris Conrad of West Coast [...]
October 18th, 2010 at 11:36 am
“had been employed”??? What happened?
November 4th, 2010 at 2:39 pm
I will not attack the person but I will do this. Anybody,I repeat ANYBODY, that prints anything written by her I will no longer suscribe to nor buy their publication. She is a complete traitor to the cause.
November 5th, 2010 at 2:39 pm
[...] Prop 19″ — traitors to the movement such as Dennis Peron, Dragonfly De La Luz and J. Craig Canada — whether through stunning ignorance or outright malice, spread disinformation about exactly [...]
March 4th, 2011 at 10:26 pm
[...] and marijuana activists who oppose Prop. 19 of being the “I gots mine” crowd, when it’s really the proponents of Prop. 19 that were the “I gots mine” crowd. And the patients, most of whom [...]