Re:Where Pot Entrepreneurs Go When the Banks Say No
by apple_touchbar on Thursday January 04, 2018 @09:14PM
(#16075940)
If the state laws were written explicitly referencing 'OTC medical use', I would agree.
However, the state laws of Oregon, for instance, specifically use the "recreational" terminology. It is not an invention of the media.
https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors475B.htm...
Re:Where Pot Entrepreneurs Go When the Banks Say No
by dragonwriter on Thursday January 04, 2018 @11:46PM
(#16076627)
> If the state laws were written explicitly referencing 'OTC medical use', I would agree.
There would make it a much easier argument, sure.
> However, the state laws of Oregon, for instance, specifically use the "recreational" terminology.
Other states, like California, with general legalization do not.
> It is not an invention of the media.
The use of it for all legalization regimes that aren't predicated on a physicians recommendation is, though.
OTOH, if the DoJ decides to push the limits of its authority, that's an argument that will potentially have to be made after they’ve seized your assets and charged you everyone in your business—and potentially outside business partners who knew what your business is—with major felonies some of which have 20-year mandatory sentences, and maybe offered you a chance to plea down to a few years. So, even pushing the argument will be a big risk.