A federal prosecutor in Grand Rapids doesn’t think state medical cannabis laws should be used as a defense in federal cases and has filed a motion to keep defense attorneys from saying marijuana has medicinal value or alluding to state medical marijuana laws.

The feds also want to avoid “jury nullification,” in which jurors who disagree with the law might acquit the defendants. The possibility of this goes up if jurors are allowed to see the accused in a compassionate light.

But this is exactly why “jury nullification” needs known far and wide. The federal prosecutors want to stack the deck against defendants, saying they only go after big operators and leave medical marijuana patients alone. That’s not really true, but even if it was, how many medical marijuana patients depend on dispensaries and collectives for their medication? If all the pharmacies in a city or town were shut down, many sick people would have to go without their medication, and that wouldn’t be allowed to stand.

It cannot be denied that federal law prohibits the growing and selling of marijuana (although the federal government grows marijuana at the University of Mississippi, you’re not allowed). So while it’s true that Michigan’s law has no effect on that, it is the duty of everyone to not enforce a law which they feel is unjust.

In the end, all we have to defend ourselves from tyranny is our conscience. Just because the federal government says things need to be a certain way doesn’t mean we must obey. If enough people take action against an unjust law, they can bring it down.

States have rights too, that is why they exist. If they couldn’t write their own laws based on the will of their citizens, why are there 50 states in the first place?

Source: http://www.mlive.com