Thankfully, in Saginaw Michigan, post this embarrassing incident with Mr. Boyke, police seem to now ‘get it’.

Only patients and advocacy groups (like the nearly 30 NORML chapters in Michigan and other pro-reform organizations in the state, such as Americans for Safe Access) are working to keep law enforcement honest and respectful of the needs of medical cannabis patients.

Question: Is the Saginaw County Sheriff’s Department and DEA going to compensate Mr. Boyke to the tune of $7,000 after they illegally destroyed his private property?

Medical marijuana grower releases photos of basement after police visit; Saginaw County sheriff’s officials say destruction policy will change

By Gus Burns
The Saginaw News

May 20, 2010

Photo taken by Edwyn W. Boyke Jr., 64, of Saginaw Township, after police raided his home and destroyed his grow setup.

—–

SAGINAW — In response to the new medical marijuana laws, Saginaw County sheriff’s deputies will discontinue their policy of destroying grow equipment when they serve search warrants at the homes of medical marijuana patients or caretakers, Saginaw County Sheriff’s Detective Randy P. Pfau said.

“Instead of destroying property, we’ll take everything in a forfeiture and let a judge make a decision on whether they’re allowed to have that property back or not,” Pfau said.

The second look at the policy is a response by the department to the public concern regarding action taken by deputies and federal Drug Enforcement Agency agents in the basement of the home owned by Edwyn W. Boyke Jr., 64, of Saginaw Township, Pfau said.

Police raided Boyke’s home on April 15, because they say he violated drug laws, and destroyed his grow operations, which Boyke said cost him $7,000.

“It’s so new to us, this new law, so we’re acting on protocol that’s been in place… forever with manufacture of marijuana,” Pfau said.

Pfau said the old norm was to take a portion of the grow equipment to present as evidence and document with rest with photographs and inventory sheets, so they didn’t need to confiscate sometimes large setups.

Because the possession and farming of marijuana is no longer inherently illegal, due to the new state medicinal laws, Pfau said deputies will adjust their procedures.

In the short run, NORML favors the elimination of all criminal and/or civil penalties prohibiting the possession of cannabis for personal use, regardless of whether one is using it for medical purposes or for personal pleasure. Further, NORML opposes sanctions that presently prohibit the not-for-profit transfer of small amounts of cannabis between adults. This policy, called “decriminalization”, was the recommendation of the National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse in their groundbreaking 1972 report, Marijuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding. Versions of cannabis decriminalization have now been adopted in 13 states.

Cannabis consumers are ordinary Americans who work hard, raise families, pay taxes and contribute in a positive way to their communities. We are not criminals. Just as millions of Americans enjoy a beer or a glass of wine at the end of the day, we enjoy sharing a joint (or, for that matter, a vapor bag) when we relax in the evening. Of the nearly 900,000 marijuana arrests in America each year, about 90% are for possession of small amounts for personal use. Continuing with this Draconian policy makes no sense. That is why three out of four Americans now support decriminalizing the personal possession and use of cannabis.

NORML’s ultimate political goal is the establishment of a legally regulated market where consumers can obtain their cannabis in a safe and secure environment. This policy is generally called “legalization”. As our country discovered when we experimented with alcohol prohibition, it is only by providing a legally regulated market that we can significantly reduce the crime, corruption and violence associated with a criminal black market.

NORML supports the imposition of state and/or federal age and quality controls governing the commercial production, sale, and use of cannabis to assure public safety and to advise the consumer of the strength of the variety of cannabis being purchased.

And, importantly, we support the imposition of a reasonable tax on commercial cannabis sales that could raise substantial revenue for the various states, to be used for drug education and other programs to encourage responsible use and to discourage abuse. But as we work toward these goals, it is crucial that we underscore the importance of permitting consumers the option to grow their own cannabis.

Alcohol consumers possess the legal right to create their own home brew, free from government interference. Although the vast majority of alcohol drinkers never utilizes this freedom, and prefers the convenience of purchasing alcohol at a retail outlet, that option remains available to those who wish to use it. We believe that similar regulations should govern the non-retail production of cannabis.

The cultivation of cannabis for personal use is the single most important element of the NORML legalization proposal. Allowing for the legal, personal cultivation of cannabis provides consumers with the option to grow their own product should commercially available sources offer cannabis that fails to meet the consumers’ needs because it is excessively expensive, too heavily taxed, or of inferior quality. The mere threat of consumers exercising this option should be sufficient to assure that the legal market for cannabis will be responsive to the needs of consumers, and will not be exploitive.

So when any organization or any state or federal legislator proposes legalizing cannabis, either for medical use or for personal pleasure, but forbids the consumer from growing their own cannabis, those of us who lobby on this issue must insist on amendments to permit personal cultivation.

Otherwise we, cannabis law reformers, trade away our only leverage to keep the big corporations and the government honest and responsive to cannabis consumers.

# # #

April 7, 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt fulfilled a campaign promise to hasten an end to alcohol Prohibition when he signed a modification to the Volstead Act, allowing the sale of 3.2 percent beer in advance of the formal end to the 21st Amendment being ratified.

His reward? The first case of beer delivered directly to the White House.

Today, many in the media including National Public Radio and Bonneville radio stations, such as the top-rated WTOP in Washington, DC, are highlighting, even touting, both the joy and commonsense wisdom found in allowing beer to be consumed, albeit under some regulations and controls.

I enjoy responsibly drinking a well-made craft beer. The act is hardly a criminal one, as such, alcohol Prohibition proved an abject failure as a public policy and the ‘great’ social experiment lasted hardly more than a decade. However, amazingly, and at terrific costs to the federal and state taxpayers, cannabis prohibition in America has frustratingly lasted over 70 years.

Tonight, if I were to enjoy some cannabis responsibly in the privacy of my home, I can be arrested, prosecuted and incarcerated (along with other harsh civil penalties), joining 830,000 other like-minded citizens arrested annually in the US. Since 1965, nearly 20 million Americans have been arrested on cannabis charges (90% for possession-only), costing hundreds of billions of tax dollars, and yet cannabis is more popular than ever before as a cash crop, consumer commodity and therapeutic.

The Irony, and Comradery, Should Be Clear Here–Cannabis Consumers and Beer Drinkers Are Much More Alike Than Different
I’ll raise a glass tonight of a fine American crafted brew, Moylan’s Kilt Lifter, brewed in Novato, CA. Yum!! However, ideally, beer drinkers, crafters, major brewers, retailers and wholesalers should embrace and rally around cannabis consumers—not continue to vilify cannabis consumers and producers as the major brewers (and some wholesalers) do, such as Anheuser-Busch and others.

Beer by the numbers in the US:

-Beer is a $190 billion a year industry

-Beer accounts for 1.7 million jobs

-Over 13,000 labels of beer marketed by over 1,400 brewers

-2,750 independent beer distributors

Today’s modern beer industry claims that the current state-based regulatory system works just fine and is the near-perfect answer to the concerns in the 1930s about how to best and most safely produce, market and retail a potentially dangerous consumer product.

The beer industry (and alcohol industry on the whole) highly stresses the need for STATE, not federal control. The beer industry lauds its three levels of control and taxation:

-Responsible Brewing
-Responsible Regional Distribution
-Responsible Retail

I say right on beer industry! I also agree with the sly metaphor of the brother-publishing duo of Jason and Todd Alstrom at Beer Advocate: Respect Beer.

In this same vein, the beer industry and its consumers should respect, and not oppose the tens of millions of responsible cannabis consumers who seek the lawful use of cannabis, just like the tens of millions of beer drinkers who today celebrate 75 years of a pragmatic and tolerant end to beer Prohibition.

I’ll drink to that!