Medical marijuana petition drive this weekend to challenge Broomfield's dispensary ban

• The way I see it, either Bloomfield wants dispensaries that are paying taxes and in the limelight, or they opt for lots of residential operations that are out of sight and no taxes for the city/county. It's really that simple. Ban dispensaries and lots of smaller operations will pop up above and beyond those that already exist. Broomfield, you cannot stop people from exercising their constitutional rights!

• yea, im in broom too, and growing. i hope they keep the care centers outta here too. they charge too much for crap. mine is better

• Federal Medical Cannabis Program Check this out http://www.mpp.org/news/press-releases/federal-medical-marijuana-prog.html Maybe we should get this going to accept more patients again...

• im a grower living in Broomfield i hope they do keep the ban cause me and my friends are raking in. vote NO dispensaries or centers.

• Screw um, I've got 100s of plants and I and I not gonna stop! I have the patients and the constitution to back me up! Big harvest coming soon. :-)

• GOD bless the weed!

• Thanks Robert. I appreciate the info.

• Redwolf, please call me. Robert Chase Colorado Coalition for Patients and Caregivers 720-213-6497

• redwolf@colorado.usa.com

• Thanks, Robert. This is much more information than I am getting from my attorney, which is next to nothing. He is not answering my questions in e-mail since he obviously doesn't know the answers. Know where I can find a knowledgeable attorney in Boulder County on the whole MMJ thing? I'm basically being forced to study the laws myself which is difficult for me since I am not an attorney. If I understand you correctly, the way to override state law and keep my constitutional rights as a patient is to be arrested for selling to another patient who I am not a legal caregiver for (violate 1284), then take it up in court? I am hoping for another answer since my wife is home bound with multiple sclerosis and is depending on me 100% as her caregiver. The last time I was arrested, she ended up in the hospital after losing lots of weight due to all the stress and me not being around. That being said, once I am off probation (for growing cannabis without a license - I was convicted of a feloney) in a few months and find someone I can rely on to care for her, I'd have no problem going to jail again to restore my constitutional rights. But, I'd rather find protection so I can continue to give my patients and any other patients the relief they need, not to mention not totally disrupting my wife's life and possibly aggravate her condition, yet again. Life was good before 1284, I'm simply trying to get back there and continue to support us as a cannabis caregiver.

• Confused: In reference to the THC Ministries, CTI did try to work with Roger Christie to help him make the case for the sacramental use of cannabis -- that was entirely sound. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act and ensuing legal precedent clearly mean that the Government has the burden of demonstrating that any interference with religious practice is required to realize the intent of the law which occasions it. The trick is to be recognized as a religion. In US v. Meyers, the Court provides a practical checklist of the characteristics of an established religion. Roger seemed to consider that a license to marry people in Hawaii and the dismissal of a suit without prejudice to be a sufficient basis upon which to spread the faith; we tried to reason with him. It is true that he remains in Federal custody without bond, but not all of the ministers of the faith have been arrested, and Roger has not had his day in court. Whether or not Roger Christie and the THC Minstries are vindicated, we agree with the argument that the sacramental use of cannabis is protected under the First Amendment. CTI and CCPC are committed to using all legal means and all sound arguments to end Prohibition -- religious freedom is but one. Reflect, and you might become less confused.

• Confused & Redwolf: you are correct that this is a constitutional issue. The General Assembly should never have considered putting language pretending to permit localities to ban dispensaries, the Broomfield City Council was wrong to even consider such a ban, and it should be overturned by the courts -- the latter takes money to pay the lawyers who must sue on behalf of the injured parties. If they prevail they should be compensated for their legal costs, but at the moment filing suit costs money. There's also the conundrum of trying to do continue to do business as a deluge of new regulations are drafted and imposed and at the same time challenging the entire legal basis for those regulations in court -- the harsh reality is that dispensary owners and even our lawyers are afraid to piss off Matt Cook. I won't belabor the point, but how absolutely pathetic it is to be hanging on the words of this former DEA narc! What you have missed (and is not perhaps clear) is that the petition, if successful, will be legally binding on the Council -- either they will have to rescind the ban or put it to a vote of the People. We should not have to do this, but the onus falls on the Broomfield City Council and Colorado's political establishment in general for defying the Law. The People may eventually wake up to the fact that their putative representatives not only are stonewalling them about cannabis, they can think of little else and are bringing the bodies on which they serve into general disrepute, wasting public funds by frittering away the resources of government and defying the Constitution of Colorado, incurring legal liabilities for taxpayers as they go.

• I trust that when the Colorado Supreme Court ultimately rules, which it will, that the reach of Amendment 20 is not absolute, then some of the nonsense will stop. Legitimate patients should have the right under A20 to grow their own or to have caregive substantially responsible for their care grow it. A shop on every corner is not what people voted for and the local prohibitions will ultimately be upheld. Instead of griping about all this, why don't those that want to legalize pot take another crack at a statewide vote? I know this is in the works, and when that gets defeated - again - what next?

• A little confusion in this story. This is not a CTI project. This is being spearheaded by Broomfield resident Pamela Gianola. CTI is just trying to help get the word out. Please contact Pamela if you can help. Thanks.

• Sean, why fight bans that are legal by 1284? Why not fight 1284? Or is that what you are doing...one piece at a time? If that's the case, when are you gonna get to the unconstitutional parts of 1284 having to do the primary caregivers? It seems that would be a higher priority since it has a much higher impact on patients...patients who have enjoyed their caregiver for years and now may have to give them up because the caregiver is so afraid of being arrested, that they are giving up their constitutional rights to state law. It seems you are after the money and couldn't care less about the patients. I thought you were better than that.

• Why waste your time? Until 1284 is overthrown as the unconstitutional piece of shit that it is, Broomfield has every right to ban dispensaries. Put the bong down and get a clue. If you really want to make a difference, use that energy to fight 1284. Then, you take the head off the dragon once that is thrown out. Laura, your group is wasting your time. Look what happened to the religious movement. All "ministers" were arrested and most are still in jail. What a wast of time that was. Quit farting around and take on the dragon.

TotalComments: 16