Caregiver closes doors amid federal pressure

[meow mix]

40 more jobs gone in a little town of 8k, and not enough mcdonalds to make it up. ease up on the tyranny a little plz


As a state judge mulls a law that would shut down Montana's medical marijuana industry, one area caregiver said he is closing his business and laying off 40 employees for fear of federal prosecution.

"I'm buckling to federal pressure," said Rob Dobrowski, owner of Area 420, which operated four storefronts in Montana. "I'm scared, and I'm going to stop because the (Drug Enforcement Administration) are acting like a bunch of thugs and destroying people's livelihoods and putting people in prison for creating something that is good, something that helps the economy, helps patients."

Dobrowski made the decision to close his store Sunday after employees at his Jackrabbit Lane storefront reported seeing people in unmarked, black vehicles pull up to the business. They believe the drivers were federal agents.

Scrawled across one warehouse was, "Empty. You win. The only ones happy are you."

http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/news/article_007c374e-a116-11e0-9ad5-001cc4c03286.html

[Dennis Donovan]

1. End Marijuana Prohibition Now!

:grr:

[Tuesday Afternoon]

2. what happens when 2% are happy and 98% are not?

:shrug:

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. Recomend you read into medical marihuana

and why it is the standard of care these days for cancer treatment and pain, even if not official.

Better question would be... why is the pharma industry pressuring NOT to get this out there?

Oh and prohibition ain't working

[Tuesday Afternoon]

5. hmmm , , ,you misunderstand my comment ... I think.

I misspoke. mea culpa. I am pro legalization.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. My apologies for the misunderstanding

[Newest Reality]

4. Where are the good guys?

I have a speculation to offer, since it came-up in response to the OP. There are several, very critical issues today that might relate.

We know that about four-hundred people have a very large share of OUR wealth, (and, of course, the influence and power that go with it) now. There are over 300-million people in this country. So, let's say that there are several hundred or thousands who have more money than they would ever need or could even spend.

I am traveling on a tank of assumptions, but bear with me. Of those wealthy people who are not even in the top-percentile, we could consider that many made it there by adopting certain conventions for acquiring and retaining wealth. Let's say that those conventions may not include a progressive agenda or the concern for the common man and major societal injustices that need rectification.

We know that some of the obscenely wealthy do become philanthropists. However, from what I can see, that activity is largely about their own, personal agendas and legacy in mixed degrees. I haven't seen that philanthropy work to counteract the deep, structural problems in the way the system functions and the glaring, social injustices that ensue. We could attribute that to those who have gamed the system respecting it or even supporting and reinforcing it, as well as a means to preserve its means and methods.

Now, what I am wondering is, (and perhaps someone could site a reference here) is why there are no obvious good guys who, after having played the game and made their fortune, would put their money and skills to work to strike back at the Empire. Rather than just relying on the ACLU and other organizations, wouldn't it be great to have, at least a few, who get in there and go to bat for others by providing money as leverage for the little guys on the front-lines, etc? You know, contact Mr. Dobrowski in the OP and ask him if he would continue to do what he does if the best lawyers and defense where offered for him to fight out any legal battle? That's just an example, but it illustrates the idea of empowering people to push back at the machine.

Or, is that dangerous to do? If some very rich person decided to pick causes and empower others, do they already realize that it is not just their money, but other aspects of their own lives that they would be putting at stake? If so, couldn't they perform this kind of service clandestinely?

So, despite all the potential contingencies that might prevent such behavior on the part of the empowered, is this happening at all? If it is, are we just not aware of a form of truly altruistic philanthropy that aims at fighting back and empowering others in ways that can effectively challenge the system-at-large?

Maybe altruism is dead, or considered old-fashioned and impractical? Personally, the situation I speculated about would be something I would consider if I had huge amounts of wealth right now and had retained my own views on the gross inequity and imbalance of justice on so many fronts.