Interesting
NORML says sheriff is violating Oregon’s medical marijuana law and HIPAA’s privacy confidentiality regs.
14 Responses to “Interesting”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
April 2nd, 2010 at 9:28 am
NORML, ignoring federal law for decades.
Wishful thinking=the intellectual foundation of Libertarianism
April 2nd, 2010 at 9:32 am
I would like to see the sheriff prosecuted (or at least removed from office), but, you know ….. Only Ones.
And Shootin’ Buddy, we get it that you don’t like Libertarians. But can you honestly say that every federal law is absolutely just?
Yeah, didn’t think so.
April 2nd, 2010 at 9:55 am
“And Shootin’ Buddy, we get it that you don’t like Libertarians. But can you honestly say that every federal law is absolutely just?”
Of course not, but purposely ignoring federal law is akin to a little kid sticking his fingers in his ears and repeating over and over “I can’t hear you” but enough about Libertarians.
The Wookies could say “here is why this federal law is moronic and should be abolished” or “here is why a narrow reading of the Commerce Clause is just” instead they come in guns blazing wanting people prosecuted for obeying the law and not committing misprison of a felony.
April 2nd, 2010 at 11:34 am
so the cop broke the law, NORML points it out and says that the people who broke the law should be prosecuted, and you are saying “Stop ignoring the law, NORML!” Sounds like your argument is on sound logical grounds to me!
April 2nd, 2010 at 12:14 pm
The Sheriff DID NOT break the law. He obeyed federal law which trumps state law.
April 2nd, 2010 at 12:21 pm
And HIPPA doesn’t apply to Sheriffs.
April 2nd, 2010 at 12:33 pm
After re-reading the intial report, I would say that if he failed the state backround check, which I would presume since the sheriff dealt with it and not the fbi, then the sheriff did break the oregon law.
April 2nd, 2010 at 4:28 pm
Shootin’: Ignoring Federal law gets you arrested.
Getting arrested is necessary (as the first step) for civil disobedience.
Civil disobedience is a great way to get laws abolished.
Get arrested, go to trial, either get let off (precedent!) or go to jail, where you can be pointed to as an example of the injustice of the law.
It works very well if most people agree with you that the law is unjust (as they probably would in this case)… but it takes time and commitment that most NORML people aren’t going to accept.
(And, yeah, wanting the Sheriff arrested? Not really effective.)
April 2nd, 2010 at 4:41 pm
civil disobedience against such people is useless. too many federal laws which will never get repealed, plus prohibition which has NEVER worked.
sounds like a job for ultraviolence!
April 2nd, 2010 at 6:03 pm
Since we’re back on the medical marijuana – in terms of discussion, I mean – here’s another issue to consider: Say Mr. Freddy Freakowtski has a prescription for the medical maryhoochie. Mr. Freakowtski is also an armed citizen. Local miscreant Harold Hedd embarks upon a plan to enter the Freakowtski home intending to do him harm, and to take the drugs. Freakowtski has had several bongloads for the evening per his prescription and has settled in with some Pink Floyd when Hedd enters the home with a handgun and tells Freakowtski to “give me the drugs before I kill you.” Freakowtski pulls out his stash box and instead of the weed, pulled out his .357 and ventilates Hedd, who expires.
The jurisdiction has a law stating that shootin’ and smokin’ = negligent use of a firearm. Should Freakowtski be prosecuted? How to address this issue on a policy/legislative level, fellow readers?
April 2nd, 2010 at 7:30 pm
RML,
I would venture that in said jurisdiction, Mr Freakowtski should be treated as would any other citizen taking any other prescribed medication.
Substitute mepergan or phenergan for marijuana and you should have your answer. However, I have no way of knowing how far ahead the legislature thought about what they were doing.
But I digress – Mr Freakowtski is the victim of a crime and deserves to be able to defend himself, no matter in what condition he’s in.
April 3rd, 2010 at 7:59 am
When SCOTUS asked Gura what should be protected under the 14th amendment’s privleges and immunities clause, patient records and lawyer-client confidentiality would have been good answers.
April 3rd, 2010 at 9:27 am
HIPPA is a federal law, not a state law. Also it applies to anyone who comes into to contact with covered information as part of their regular duties. It would apply to law enforcement who came into contact with prescription records.
April 3rd, 2010 at 10:59 am
“Shootin’: Ignoring Federal law gets you arrested.
Getting arrested is necessary (as the first step) for civil disobedience.
Civil disobedience is a great way to get laws abolished.”
I know we all have our little L. Neil Smith Libertarian God Out of Machine Fantasies, but being it does not sound like this Sheriff is up for being a martyr.
This Sheriff is obeying the the law as ganja boy is a prohibited person and he is reporting such to the feds to avoid misprison of a felony.
The Sheriff is not bound by HIPPA or Libertarian Fantasy; the Sheriff is bound to obey federal law which he is doing.
Now, as Marijuana become relegalized (.gov cannot stop it in SoCal and will not be able to stop it in California) there will come a time when the federal prohibited person statute must be amended. However, right now, the Sheriff is obeying the law and is in the right.