Medical Marijuana Consultations

National authorities have been continuing their activities on shutting down medical marijuana clinics and dispensaries t hroughout California in spite existing state law.The Compassionate Use Act of 1996 or the Proposition 215 permits  patients having recommendations from licensed physicians or marijuana doctors to grow and acquire marijuana only  or medical purposes. However, federal law claims it is illegal to acquire, distribute, or cultivate any kind of marijuana  or whatever use it may serve.For instance, a previous Morro Bay owner of a medical cannabis dispensary, Charles  lynch, will be sentenced in the Los Angeles Federal Court House on March 23 for violating federal drug laws.

n August 5, 2008, Lynch was found guilty on five federal counts. His charges include criminal conspiracy and  ossession with intent to distribute. Lynch said that his case has destroyed his life after being seen for one week on the  ront page of the DEA Web site. Lynch was a former medical marijuana patient who opened Central Coast  ompassionate Caregivers to patients and other users (caregivers, providers, marijuana doctors) having a licensed  hysician’s or marijuana doctor’s recommendations. Lynch may face a minimum of 5 years in federal prison.Morro Bay  ayor, Janice Peters and City Attorney Rob Shultz testified at the trial. Peters claimed that medical marijuana  linics and dispensaries in their area are worthwhile as many patients and marijuana doctors use and recommend edical marijuana for glaucoma and even cancer symptoms. On the other hand, Schultz claimed that the council had  et  ll city requirements although the federal law said marijuana is still a controlled substance, which prompts them to  rrest anybody with the said substance.

On the other hand, the controversial case of Lynch brought to light to varying federal and state laws in terms of using  nd selling marijuana. Under California law, growing and distributing marijuana is legal in some cases.  In line with this,   california becomes one of 13 states, which allow legal medical marijuana practices. In accordance to the Attorney    eral’s 2008 guidelines on using medical marijuana, the law does not recognize medical marijuana clinics   dispensaries; however, these medical marijuana clinics and dispensaries have been operating for years in California.    y collectives and cooperatives are being recognized as group entities allowed for cultivation and  distribution.

Based on the guidelines, medical marijuana clinics and dispensaries that do not comply with the guidelines are    bably   erating beyond the protections of the Medical Marijuana Program and Proposition 215. Thus, the individuals patronizing such medical marijuana clinics and dispensaries including patients, caregivers, and   marijuana doctors (who recommend the drug) may be subject to criminal prosecution under the law of California. Charles Lynch wrote to the senators, representatives, and the governor after being disappointed with the lack of support from the state. However, the responses given to him indicated that his case was a federal matter and nothing can be done to support  im. Moreover, Schultz claimed that Lynch called the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) officials who apparently told  im that legal enforcement for medical marijuana clinics and dispensaries was under the discretion of the county and city. Consequently, Lynch was able to get the city’s permission prior to  opening his dispensary. In this light, Lynch believed that he was not violating any laws. Despite this, DEA officials and   country sheriff claimed that Lynch was a drug trafficker, selling marijuana to teenagers who carried backpacks full of hash.

According to Dr. Jean Talleyrand, Medi-Cann founder, “Overwhelmingly, they’re seeking relief from pain; pain for  any  different reasons; people who’ve had multiple fractures; people with arthritis.” He stated that his purpose  on      icing medicine in more holistic ways has inspired him to establish Medi-Cann. Medi-Cann is a statewide network of nine medical clinics offering evaluations for individuals in order to obtain a licensed physician’s or marijuana doctor’s  referral for marijuana.Medi-Cann has been seeing more than 500 patients a week. Talleyrand has completed his training in San Francisco and said that, “I kind of have a little bit more progressive, alternative look at health. As I developed  what I wanted to do, a lot of it was alternative healing; acupuncture, botanical medicine. Marijuana is botanical medicine and when you start thinking of it that way, you redefine what it’s good for. A lot of plants and herbs are good for a lot of different things.And because they tend to be more benign than pharmaceuticals, they tend to have lesser side effects too.”

Wayne Justmann, member of a San Francisco cannabis cooperative, Church Street Compassion Center said that the critics against San Francisco cannabis have been reproving the users and advocates (caregivers, providers, marijuana doctors) of the drug of exploiting the expansive language of Proposition 215 as they seek out marijuana for frivolous purposes. Justmann had argued that Proposition 215 has been clear on the fact that San Francisco cannabis users should secure permits and a licensed physician’s or marijuana doctor’s recommendation prior to possessing and cultivating the drug.

Justmann has been positive for HIV for 18 years. He has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder and was the first person to secure a medical marijuana ID card in San Francisco with a recommendation from a licensed physician/marijuana doctor. He said that in his case, San Francisco cannabis or any medical marijuana coming from other areas has been established to be more effective than any prescribed drug or pills. Justmann said that he does not have faith in the behavior of other people inhibiting access to marijuana.He said that, “People will abuse any type of system; it’s human nature. Do we close down the Internet because some people abuse  it?” Equally, founder of Americans for Safe Access, Sherer, had admitted that she take Oakland cannabis for her chronic pain owed to a neck injury. Sherer has been an
activist and organizer on campaigns that involved social justice, globalization, and various progressive causes. She had worked with patients and advocates (caregivers, providers, marijuana doctors) of medical marijuana. As she suffered a neck injury, she was left with severe chronic pain and shifter her career path. Shere had shared that, “About
a year and a half into my injury, my kidneys started failing because of side effects from my pain medications and  ibuprofen.

It’s not an uncommon thing — about 1 in 200 people’s kidneys shut down when they have to take 3200 milligrams of  ibuprofen a day. I was not a marijuana user — I thought that medical marijuana was for people who were dying.
Luckily I lived in California and had a marijuana doctor who said that maybe I should try it.”

Majority of patients, caregivers,and advocates including marijuana doctors found the new scheme of San Francisco authorities as a systematic way of implanting the law as well as the needs of the people. The authorities had launched a new scheme associated with protecting medical marijuana users from local prosecution. Terence Hallinan, District

Attorney had announced the provision of giving medical marijuana cards  to medical marijuana patients and  caregivers. Medical marijuana patients and caregivers could obtain official medical marijuana cards by securing a recommendation from a doctor and $25.  According to Hallinan, “This represents another stone in the foundation we’re building to make people recognize that medical marijuana is a legitimate medicinal agent.” The legalization of marijuana for medical use had been approved in 1996 by voters of California although prohibitions on the drug have been questioned and disputed legally since then. Take for instance, the Office of National Drug Control Policy had opposed to the medical marijuana card program claiming that it just leads the way to full legalization of marijuana. While federal government continues to oppose the use of marijuana for medical purposes, signs as to the government’s arguments against allowing marijuana for medicinal use have been evidently weakening.
In fact, several states have also implemented their own medical marijuana card programs.

On the other hand, even if the medical marijuana card program will protect medical marijuana patients,

caregivers, and marijuana doctors, who recommend the drug to patients, from local prosecution, the federal law maintains that marijuana is illegal regardless of whatever purpose it serves. On the other hand, despite federal government’s intervention on marijuana-related concerns, Hallinan is still positive about the success of the medical marijuana card program. He said, “I’m not really worried we won’t be able to work things out with the federal government.” Many advocates (patients, caregivers, marijuana doctors) of medical marijuana have expressed their delight over the implementation of the medical marijuana card program in San Francisco. Jane Weirick, a marijuana user for decreasing her back pain said that the medical marijuana cards would provide them with legitimacy.

Weirick said that medical marijuana had helped her in many ways and that a scheme such as the medical marijuana card program will make it easier for her to obtain the drug. San Francisco residents can obtain their medical marijuana cards by securing a licensed or marijuana doctor’s recommendation. In addition, their licensed or marijuana doctors should sign a form that prompts them to monitor the medical condition of their patients using medical marijuana. On the other hand, patients who are minors and want to obtain medical marijuana cards would have to get the approval of their parents in addition to the doctor’s recommendation. The medical marijuana cards expire in two years, making no mention as to how patients will obtain the drug. However, police enforcement had  expressed their support for the program, saying that the medical marijuana card system would make it easier for them to distinguish medical marijuana users and marijuana doctors from those using and recommending the drug for recreation.Hallinan, on the other hand,  had refused to implement the United States government’s “War on Drugs.” He referred to himself as “America’s most progressive district attorney” and favors lenient sentences for minor offenses related to drugs.

In a significant victory for marijuana doctors and seriously ill patients relying on marijuana to cure or relieve their  suffering, the U.S. Supreme Court had decided  not to review a lower court’s decision that upheld a medical marijuana doctor’s right to recommend the drug to patients. Presidents Clinton and George W. Bush have both tried to stop  medical marijuana in states, which have upheld it through a threat of removing the license of any doctor (marijuana doctor) who even mentions or recommends medical marijuana to a patient. Thus, the decision by the Supreme Court was in response to a request by the Solicitor General to review a unanimous decision by the Federal Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in which marijuana doctors have the right to recommend or prescribe marijuana to their seriously ill patients for treatment.
In the case Conant vs. Walters, it upheld an injunction by the lower court to prohibit the Federal Government
from threatening physicians and marijuana doctors to revoke their licenses should the doctor recommend, or

even discuss, medical marijuana use with their patients. The patients involved in the Conant case have been suffering from cancer, AIDS and other serious illnesses, and rely on their physician’s uncensored medical judgment to treat their illnesses and life-threatening conditions.According to Daniel Abrahamson, Director of Legal Affairs at the Drug
Policy Alliance, ““Patients’ rights and the will of state voters have both been vindicated today.” Abrahamson further stated that, ““The State of California has developed a well-structured and thorough process through which it ensures  he proper implementation of Prop 215….It has always been, and should continue to be, the state’s role to police the medical profession while balancing the First Amendment rights of doctors and patients.

Under today’s decision, the federal government’s intrusion into this system should come to an end.” Consequently, the  drug Policy Alliance is the leading organization in United States that extends efforts in ending the war on drugs as  well as in helping initiate the class action lawsuit on behalf of physicians, marijuana doctors and patients. The Alliance  had led legal efforts to challenge the federal government that threatened the revocation of the licenses of physicians and marijuana doctors.Californians had passed Proposition 215, also known as the Compassionate Use Act, in 1996,  which declares that laws against marijuana possession and cultivation “shall not apply to a patient, or to a patient’s primary caregiver, who possesses or cultivates marijuana … upon the written or oral recommendation or for approval of a physician.”

On the other hand, the Federal Government had continued to threaten physicians and marijuana doctors, who recommend medical marijuana under state law.Currently ten states (Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii,
Maine, Maryland, Nevada, Oregon and Washington) have legalized some form of medical marijuana.

In April 2001, a patient who admitted that he possessed medical marijuana after being stopped by park rangers, howed a letter from a marijuana doctor, Dr. David Bearman, attesting to his legitimate right to use the drug under Proposition 215. As recalled, Proposition 215 protects seriously and terminally ill patients from criminal  prosecutions for medical marijuana use.On the other hand, an appeals court had ruled that the privacy of the patient and the  marijuana doctor is indeed protected under the medical marijuana law of California.

According to Judy Appel, acting director of legal affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA), “The California Medical board’s aggressive activities to sanction doctors may well chill their feeling free to recommend medical marijuana to their patients, a right directly protected by the ruling in Conant vs. Walters. The Medical Board of California

had attempted to access the records of the patient; however, the patient and the marijuana doctor both refused to provide the medical records, citing doctor-patient confidentiality. The subpoena had alleged Dr. Bearman of  ecommending medical marijuana use to the patient “indiscriminately.” In his comments to advocates and supporters,  he marijuana doctor said, “This is a wonderful victory which sustains the sanctity of the doctor patient relationship, privacy of patient records and provides the court’s common sense affirmation that a letter of approval is no more an invitation to go fishing in a patient’s records than is showing a law enforcement person your
prescription.”

In another case from California courts, a Nevada County judge had recently dismissed charges against five defendants  ho were arrested for maintaining a collective garden for 22 medical marijuana patients. The judge had ruled the  actions of Ron Wilson and his four co-defendants to be legal under SB 420. SB 420 is a state medical marijuana law that went into effect in 2003. This law states a voluntary, confidential medical marijuana patient registry in the state, along with a set of possession guidelines and procedures for legal use of medical marijuana. This law is to protect patients and advocates including caregivers and marijuana doctors through a medical marijuana identification card program.

Another relate case on the Senate Bill 420, a San Bernardino judge had dismissed all charges against medical  marijuana patient Craig Canada. Judge Bert Swift had ruled that San Bernardino County failed to meet the burden of proof that Canada had possessed more medical marijuana plants than permitted under the law.

Another victory was on the hand of medical marijuana patients and marijuana doctors as the California Supreme Court  declined the review an appellate decision impeding the California Medical Board from going through the  records of Dr. David Bearman, a marijuana doctor. The decision has protected marijuana doctors and patients in possession of medical marijuana from violation of their rights by the California Medical Board and law enforcement. In a commentary, Dr. Bearman  stated that, “This is a wonderful victory which sustains the sanctity of the doctor- patient relationship, privacy of patient records and provides the court common sense affirmation that a letter of approval is no more an invitation to go fishing in a patient’s records than is showing a law enforcement person your prescription.”

The doctor further stated that, “It is another building block in the legal wall of support for Proposition 215.” In could be recalled that a patient who admitted to possessing medical marijuana after being stopped by law enforcement officers at Lake Piru Recreation Area, showed them a recommendation letter from Dr. David Bearman attesting to his legal right to possess the drug under Proposition 215.  It should be emphasized that the proposition protects seriously and terminally ill patients from criminal sanctions for using medical marijuana. According the subpoena, Dr. Bearman had “indiscriminately” recommended the use of medical marijuana to the patient. Both the patient and marijuana
doctor refused to turn over the records in an attempt of the Medical Board of California to access them. The patient and the marijuana doctor cited the doctor-patient confidentiality.

Thus, the court ruled that the medical board “failed to demonstrate sufficient facts to support a finding of good cause to invade the patient’s right of privacy” and dismissed the case. Judy Appel, Acting Director of Legal Affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance said that, “The California Supreme Court refused to sabotage the principle of client patient confidentiality.” Seymour Weisberg, Alison Adams of the Chase Law Group, and Joe Allen of Ambrecht and Associates represented Dr. Bearman during his trial. The California Medical Association also displayed their support for the  marijuana doctor through filing an amicus brief in the case. There have been a number of legal victories in both the state and federal courts for medical marijuana patients in California. For instance, a federal appeals court had ordered
the release of Bryan James Eppis. Eppis is the first medical marijuana patient, who had been convicted in federal court after the passage of California’s Proposition 215.

In the People vs. Spark, a conservative California appellate court had attested that Compassionate Use Act of  California does not require a patient to be terminally or seriously ill in order to use medical marijuana. An appellate panel had then reversed the conviction of Noel Spark, who was sentenced to probation as well as 6 months in the county jail for cultivating three marijuana plants.

Various strategies have been employed by the federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) on busting landlords of  San Francisco cannabis clinics and dispensaries.The Senate Joint Resolution 20 was filed by State Senator Carole Migden.This resolution urges the federal government to reconsider and respect state laws, allowing taxation and law-abiding San Francisco cannabis clinics and dispensaries to operate.

The Proposition 215 passed by California voters in 1996 excludes patients and advocates (caregivers and marijuana doctors) from criminal prosecutions upon acquiring and growing marijuana for medical purposes as prescribed by their doctors.In this light, the Legislature approved a regulatory structure permitting local governments to work with San Francisco cannabis clinics and dispensaries to offer medical marijuana to patients, who are seriously ill.California’s Proposition 215 was followed by 12 other states that intend to protect the rights of patients, providers and advocates (caregivers and marijuana doctors) of medical marijuana.

On the other hand, the DEA strongly believed that the San Francisco cannabis clinics along with other dispensaries are pretences of illegal drug dealers, which carry out recreational use of marijuana. Conversely, most operators of medical marijuana clinics and dispensaries, who have called the attention of the State Board of Equalization for details  on how to acquire permits for sellers for collection and remittance of sales taxes, are responsible people abiding the laws in order to pursue their businesses. That is, these people are not considered as fugitives and that their intention
is to help numerous patients relieve or cure their illnesses as well as work with other medical marijuana advocates  (caregivers and marijuana doctors), who also have the same intention.

For instance, the Compassion Center for Alameda County had paid $3 million in sales taxes after being issued a license by the county and prior to its closure by the DEA at the end of October 2007. The said San Francisco cannabis clinic
had 50 workers earning a living wage and offered unemployment insurance and workers’ compensation coverage as well as health benefits.

Another medical marijana clinic or dispensary, the Nature’s Medicinal in Bakersfield was issued a license by the Kern County. The medical marijuana dispensary had paid almost $1 million prior to its closure in 2007. It employed 25 workers, 8 of whom were filed with charges while the rest were left unemployed after the DEA’s raid. These raids have called the attention of medical marijuana patients and advocates (caregivers and marijuana doctors) and prompted  hem to carry out rallies in support of the dispensaries.

A large number of San Francisco cannabis clinics and dispensaries were raided by the DEA and at least 28 other medical marijuana clinics and dispensaries were also raided in June 2007 in California. Four raids in a single day were recorded in 2007 in Los Angeles County alone. State medical marijuana laws remained undefiled despite the upholding of the U.S. Supreme Court that the DEA’s authority, conduct such raids in Gonzales versus Raich.

Angel Raich of Oakland had filed a suit against the federal government to keep it from obstructing her right to use  edical marijuana for her illness including life-threatening wasting syndrome, severe chronic pain, brain tumor, and seizures. Many patients and advocates (caregivers and marijuana doctors) have been deprived of their rights to use a drug that serves them well in their medical conditions.Advocates (caregivers and marijuana doctors) and patients of  the medical marijuana dispensaries said the raids conducted and the sending of letters by the DEA to over 300  medical marijuana clinics and dispensaries, and millions of dollars on tax revenue for municipalities and states are being lost.

It has been safe and easy to obtain medical marijuana from San Francisco cannabis clubs as long as one has a recommendation from a licensed physician or marijuana doctor, a state ID card issued by the local health department and $400 to purchase the drug. This has been possible through the passing of the Proposition 215. Although local  overnment law does not require the ID cards, the state issues them under voluntary basis through health  departments.

Such system helps San Francisco cannabis clubs and other dispensaries in California to register marijuana patients and other advocates (caregivers  and marijuana doctors). Currently, 21 out of the 58 counties of California have been issued with ID cards. However, the DEA agents in San Diego had staged a raid of 13 medical marijuana dispensaries, which  caused asset seizures, closures, and 15 arrests. The patients and advocates (caregivers and marijuana doctors) were spared  during the raids. In San Francisco, traders and residents in the neighborhood of Fisherman’s Wharf have honed the arguments they would  utilize to make sure that the dispensaries would not open in their neighborhood. Consequently, a San Francisco  cannabis club, Church Street Compassion Center is one of the outletsin the city, which addresses the needs of medical marijuana patients and works with other advocates (caregivers and marijuana doctors). It is located at the corner of a busy street of Castro District, which has been considered a sanctuary to San Francisco cannabis dispensaries.

In 1993, Dennis Peron, a certified pot activist, has initiated the establishment of San Francisco cannabis clubs.

The air inside the Church Street Compassion Center has been thick with the smell of sweet medicine. It appears to be a place as similar as a neighborhood recreational center. A customer would enter the San Francisco cannabis club and proceed to a glass display case where wares are kept. Half-dozen apothecary jars filled with marijuana, and ganja-fortified products were inside the case. Customers who purchase their goods from the San Francisco cannabis club usually have small talks with the volunteer cashier. This cannabis club was included in the dispensaries that the DEA raided.

In the 2005 ruling of the Supreme Court on the case Gonzales vs. Raich, it has indicated that the rights of the state cause no obstacle to the power of the federal government in prosecuting anyone who grows, dispenses, or obtains marijuana, whether for medicinal or recreational use. Advocates (caregivers, providers, marijuana doctors) and patients of marijuana have feared that the easy access to the drugs was about to end as the Drug Enforcement  administration intensified their actions against San Francisco cannabis clubs and other dispensaries across the state.

Then again, the raids conducted by the DEA have not slowed the growth of dispensaries in California specifically San Francisco cannabis clubs located in the Bay Area. On the other hand, according
to public opinion surveys, the public has strong support for the legalization
of marijuana both in California and the entire nation.

It could be recalled that California was the first to have its own medical marijuana initiative program, which protects the rights of patients and advocates (caregivers, providers, marijuana doctors) and has been followed by ten other states. However, in 2006, as South Dakota established its own initiative to legalize marijuana, it was rejected by a 52 to 48 margin.

As a whole, the inhabitants of California seem to be in favor of an approach that associated medical marijuana to  Communism with imminent death. Most individuals (caregivers, providers, marijuana doctors) who support medical marijuana claim that as long as seriously ill patients are in need of the drug especially those with cancer and other fatal illnesses, medical marijuana is and should be acceptable.It should be recalled that in light of protecting the rights of patients and advocates (caregivers and medical marijuana doctors) the Proposition 215 and SB 420 were amended.
California voters passed both of these laws; however, they do not indicate provisions on dispensaries. Proposition 215
has allowed licensed physicians and marijuana doctors to recommend marijuana to their patients. It has also  provided patients and caregivers the right to grow and possess the drug.

On the other hand, SB 420, which was a follow-up bill on Prop 215, had acknowledged that patients, caregivers, and medical marijuana doctors can cultivate and recommend cannabis for medicinal purposes as long as they do it collectively. Los Angeles and San Francisco cannabis dispensaries offer easy access for patients needing medical marijuana; however, most of these dispensaries are for-profit businesses that generate substantial revenues. In line with the raids being conducted by the federal Drug Enforcement, dispensaries that appear to be most suspicious are those that adopt the sales strategy of Pfizer or Wal-Mart including the expansion of product ranges, acceptance of credit card for payments, posting ads in newspapers, and aiming to please customers. Some San Francisco cannabis dispensaries and others across the state have required clients (patients, caregivers, marijuana doctors) to pay annual membership fees in order to maintain their status as cooperatives or collectives.

In addition, other dispensaries of Los Angeles and San Francisco cannabis have set themselves as non-profit entities; however, those that offer retail sales to their members are not endowed with any protected under the primary caregiver provision. These dispensaries operate under the mercies of local and state law enforcement agencies.

Since some private San Francisco cannabis dispensaries make a lot of money, which in turn raises suspicions, they offer federal Drug Enforcement Agency attractive targets for raids. A manager of a California-wide chain of ispensaries had said that his weekly operations in the San Francisco cannabis dispensary were $170,000, with 5% to 15% after tax profit margins.Consequently, the DEA has investigated that the chain made 60 cash deposits amounting to $2.3

million in total to a single bank on an 8-month period. The debate over the proper scope of medical marijuana has ameliorated the suspicions in the dispensaries’ retail nature. In fact, even officials from both local and federal
agencies claim that the laws on medical marijuana, such as the Proposition 215 are too broad and expansive.
In the Prop 215, it states that medical cannabis is appropriate to patients with migraine, glaucoma,
cancer, AIDS, and other illnesses in which the drug brings relief.

It also protects the rights of other advocates including caregivers and marijuana doctors.)However, since most county health departments do not keep records of patients’ reason for marijuana use, the DEA has the right to sanction accordingly.

California Attorney General Dan Lungren led the raid by the Drug Enforcement Agency of the San Francisco Cannabis Buyers’ Club on August 4. The club has been supplying marijuana to hundreds and hundreds of people with cancer, AIDS, glaucoma, and other critical conditions needing cannabis for medical treatment.

The DEA had also seized thousands of medical records of the patients that come to the club for their marijuana needs as well as lists of medical marijuana doctors who recommend the drug. Furthermore, the San Francisco office of Californians for Compassionate Use was raided along with the homes of 5 persons associated with the organizations.

The Californians for Compassionate Use had supported the Proposition 215, which legalizes the use of medical marijuana in California in support to patients and advocates including caregivers and marijuana doctors who recommend the drug. The Proposition 215 had received more
than 700,000 signatures of voters. A few hours after the raid has been carried out, 200 protesters including advocates (caregivers, providers, marijuana doctors) and patients of medical marijuana marched to the San Francisco Cannabis Buyers’ Club office. Dennis Peron, founder of the San Francisco Cannabis Buyers’ Club had joined the protesters through a phone-patch as during that time, he was in Canada. As the rally was about to end, the protesters had decided to stage 3 more rallies in support of the San Francisco Cannabis Buyers’ Club.

Jeff Sheehy, president of the Harvey Milk Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual Democratic Club had stated in front of the protesters at the San Francisco Cannabis Buyers’ Club that, “The most alarming thing about what happened today is that thousands of names of people with HIV have been confiscated by the State government, in violation of law that requires that those names be kept confidential. Our next fight is to get our names back. Those people are at risk, they’re sick, and they need their medicine. We cannot let the State hold them hostage. We must demand our names back.”

According to members of the San Francisco Cannabis Buyers’ Club, the officers were armed with machine guns and wore body armor while not informing the San Francisco police and the district attorney. On the other hand, the DEA agents had argued that they had a search warrant so they can gather evidences with regard to sales of marijuana apart from being a medical treatment.The San Francisco Cannabis Buyers’ Club had stated that they have strict rules in letting patients inside the club. According to members of the San Francisco Cannabis Buyers’ Club, an individual who enters the club should present their membership card and photo ID and original letter from a licensed physician or medical marijuana doctor indicating diagnosis of serious illnesses.

More so, if the San Francisco Cannabis Buyers’ Club is in doubt of the letter, a licensed physician or a medical marijuana doctor is called upon to diagnose the patient. The San Francisco Cannabis Buyers’ Club had asked for the support of people on the passing of
Proposition 215. It had staged a strategy that involved registering new voters, educating the incarceration of sick and dying individuals, raising money to spend, and signing up physicians, marijuana doctors, caregivers, patients, nurses, clergy, public figures, and other endorsers.