1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.
  1. chillinwill
    Los Angeles city officials were preparing this to start mailing notices to medical marijuana dispensaries warning that they have until June 7 to shut down under the city's new pot shop law, according to the City Attorney's office.

    The letters will start going out Tuesday to more than 400 marijuana retailers in the city that are alleged to be in violation of the law, which prohibits the outlets from being within 1,000 feet of schools, churches, parks and other "sensitive use" sites. The ordinance, signed Friday by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, would put all but 137 pot shops out of business.

    If the shops don't comply, "we could pursue crim or civil charges," City Attorney's spokesman Frank Meteljian told the Weekly.

    "The letters inform the owners and operators the ordinance has been signed and it goes into effect next month," he said, "and that it's our understanding you're not complying and have to shut down."

    A group of 21 shops have filed suit in an attempt to block the law from going into effect.

    By Dennis Romero
    May 3, 2010
    LA Weekly


  1. Kiddycrack
    "which prohibits the outlets from being within 1,000 feet of schools, churches, parks and other "sensitive use" sites." Now this doesn't make sense to SWIM.. SWIM guarantees that there are more shops closer to these areas that sell cigarettes but they wont allow the use of marijuana wtf?
  2. divinemomentsoftruth

    SWIM can definitely see the point in not having these shops around schools, however it's not like these (presumably) legitimate medicinal shops are selling to children on their way home from school (swim would hope) But parks? Churches? Sensitive fucking use sites? With terms like "sensitive use" sites thrown in there they could in theory argue that every dispensary be closed down. How draconian.

    "Excuse me, this shop cannot be with in 1000 feet of anything".
  3. Terrapinzflyer
    the turtles aardvark is somewhat familiar with the siting of these facilities in CA. The main issue is not the marijuana but the crime that comes along with many of these sites. Armed robbery of dispensaries seems almost a fact of life in many locations. And while many dispensaries operate within the spirit if not the letter of the law, many more are merely fronts for distribution. (there was one raided north of where the turtle lives a few months back- rural area with a very small population, 1.2million in cash and enough marijuana to supply their client base for several decades were seized).

    Realistically- these dispensaries in violation should never have been permitted in the first place in their location, but it is unclear whether the fault lies with the city/county, or if they were set up under false pretenses to begin with.
  4. Paradox
    This does seem a bit like an ex-post facto law to me. Generally when they pass a law, things that become illegal to buy/own/do are only illegal if you started them after the law was passed. IE: 1986 GCA banned the manufacture of automatic firearms for civilian use, but any automatics made pre-1986 are still fully legal and can be bought and sold. It's a fundamental part of the constitution (not that the government cares about the constitution, mind you) but instead of forcing established businesses to shut down under a law that is clearly just trying to hassle a sector of the community. That said, the Aardvark has an excellent point about higher crime going along with dispensaries, and the few bad apples that ruin the lot. That seems much more like an argument for legalization than anything else though...if it were legal, patients could get as much as they need/want, for cheaper, stores wouldn't be robbed any more often than liquor stores in bad areas, ect.

    They can constitutionally stop new stores from being opened in that area, but not shut down the ones that already exist. Not like that matters to them, though.
  5. grass
    So lets get this straight.
    They're just takin all the good buds out of the controlled safe areas and forcing people to possibly endanger themselves and get involved in the criminal underworld? To buy their buds from drug dealers and gangster bastards? Sounds like quite the unintelligent decision. But, what else should we expect from our government.

    On the plus side, I guess everyone who doesn't buy from clubs will be able to get the better herbs out on the street now.
  6. Apradavra4
    I am friends with a dispensary owner, and he along with several other shops are filing some sort of lawsuit against the city. There has been rumors going around month after month that the shops who were not part of the initial memorandum, were all going to recieve their closure notice, and it now has happened.

    If they close this many shops, its going to go back to the underground. No way around it.
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!