Diane Norman, owner of the Miramar Collective in Summerland, pleaded to possession of concentrated cannabis and sentenced to three years of felony probation. She was arrested in February 2010 for allegedly operating as an illegal marijuana dealer outside of state provisions. The Miramar Collective was one of several dispensaries raided during a crackdown of area pot clubs.
Probation for Miramar Collective Owner
Thursday, July 19, 2012


Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace




Previous Month



Comments
Thanks for wasting our tax dollars and ruining yet another life. War on Drugs = epic fail
bronc (anonymous profile)
July 19, 2012 at 5:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The DA gets DEA rewards for each case. Forget about all the actual crime on our streets.
I hope all the politicians are paying attention to the increasing negative public reaction to these cases. It's a real vote loser, for starters.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 19, 2012 at 11:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I, for one, am very glad to see the laws of this country being enforced and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If you don't like a law then you get your legislators to change the laws. You don't select which ones you want to enforce and not enforce based on your personal feelings. Enforcement and prosecution is what keeps us from sinking into anarchy.
Carpeterian (anonymous profile)
July 19, 2012 at 5:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Carpeeterian - The people that don't want to see our laws enforced are simply following the lead of the current president! If Obama can do this without any problem why can't anyone else?
whatsinsb (anonymous profile)
July 19, 2012 at 6:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Actually the current President (and he's my President and your's) has continued the failed drug war. So I guess your partisanship isn't gonna take you far in this debate.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 19, 2012 at 6:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yeah, but funny how selective they become when it comes to prosecuting one of their own, ahem, Eric Holder.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
July 19, 2012 at 7:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The people that don't want to see our laws enforced are simply following the lead of the current president! If Obama can do this without any problem why can't anyone else?
whatsinsb (anonymous profile)
July 19, 2012 at 6:26 p.m
Obama (for that matter most of the Senate and House) think that that constitution--the supreme law of the land doesn't apply. (Think: NDAA)
billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 19, 2012 at 7:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
AZ2SB--the Supremes upheld the federal "regulation" of marijuana under the Commerce Clause (part of the Constitution) despite the fact that local and intrastate decriminalization has no apparent impact on interstate business. This is the same Supreme Court that found the Commerce Clause doesn't justify regulation of the medical insurance industry which is absolutely engaged in interstate commerce. So, anyway, as it stands now the law of the land allows Congress to outlaw local legislation dealing with the use of mj.
RHS (anonymous profile)
July 20, 2012 at 10:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
errata--the last comment was addressed to billclausen.
RHS (anonymous profile)
July 20, 2012 at 10:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hey Carpeterian, you are completely wrong in like ten different ways.
First, we ARE following the law, medicinal cannabis is legal according to state law.
If you haven't noticed, our Federal Government was taken over by the military industrial complex and the criminal banking cartels long ago. If you wish to follow laws created by a corporatist authoritarian regime overstepping their legal constitutional authority, that is your decision. I will not be apart of the racket.
Consuming a plant is not immoral, imprisoning somebody for consuming a plant is immoral. You've got it completely backwards. Our freedoms come first, government is supposed to be there to protect those freedoms. One of the ways government protects freedoms is protecting us from violence, theft and fraud. They are not there to tell us how to live our lives or what substances we should ingest. Doing so with the threat of violence is the complete opposite of the intended purpose of why our government was created. If you don't like the reason four why our government was created, then I would really prefer go somewhere else because your philosophy of violence threatens my freedoms.
I guess if it was the law that a certain group of generally peaceful people had to be rounded up and placed into death camps based on their race or religion, you would argue that we should change the law and we should not attempt to save any of these people less changing the law..
Ridiculous logic is ridiculous.
loonpt (anonymous profile)
July 20, 2012 at 10:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What Loonpt said, x3.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 20, 2012 at 2:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
No one should face having their life ruined for using cannabis. Obama admits his early use, and yet he became President. Would that have happened had he been caught? I don't think so.
There's a lot of money to be made in keeping the Drug War going. Mexican cartels, the DEA, for-profit prisons, law enforcement, the alcohol industry, the pharmaceutical industry, etc. all profit if we keep cannabis criminalized. It seems that only voters using referendums can change cannabis regulation (our politicians certainly won't), and then the Feds go and change it back again.
Nitz (anonymous profile)
July 22, 2012 at 11:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)