Potential downside to medical marijuana: criminals who want it.

[Bill Mattocks]

I've read about a couple situations recently involving people who either had or were growing legal medical marijuana and they were attacked and robbed by people who knew they had it. And some medical marijuana dispensaries have been targeted by armed robbers as well.

In this case, the medical marijuana that was present may not have been the motive for the robbery, but it attracted my attention and I realized how many incidents like this I've been reading lately. Just FYI...if I were to use medical marijuana, I don't think I'd tell anyone.

http://www.khsltv.com/content/local...ictims-Fight-Back/Xn5SvhhW_E6PTOOOw8IQ7w.cspx

What started out as a quiet Sunday night at an Oroville home near 10th St. and Nevada St., quickly transpired into something unthinkable to the three residents inside.
Sgt. Jason Hail with the Butte County Sheriff’s Office says, “A male subject and a female accomplice entered the residence, they were armed. They tied them up the occupants.”
One of the victims Clayton declined to speak on camera, but told Action News the details of the home invasion.
He says the lead suspect Dusty Lacey was demanding money, cell phones and the keys to their cars.
While the crime was being committed, the victims decided they weren't going down without a fight.
Hail says, “One of the victims was able to free himself from the duct tape and confronted the male suspect and was able to get the gun.”

 

[Big Don]

The people I see most often advocating for "medical" marijuana usually tend to look like the stereotypical stoner. Would you take this man's advice about medicine, or anything?

Really?

 

[Empty Hands]

The people I see most often advocating for "medical" marijuana usually tend to look like the stereotypical stoner.

Here's a few:

Yep, just a buncha stoners.

 

[Omar B]

This is not an argument against medical marijuana, it's about thieves who knew that something of value was somewhere and they wanted it ... as thieves are wont to do when since they are into the unearned.

The same argument could be made for banks, gas stations, etc.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

This is not an argument against medical marijuana, it's about thieves who knew that something of value was somewhere and they wanted it ... as thieves are wont to do when since they are into the unearned.

The same argument could be made for banks, gas stations, etc.

Yes, this is true - having something of value makes one a target.

However, there is a difference. When homeowners are targeted specifically because they have medical marijuana, that is an added element of risk. You can't argue that a person who is not known to have MM in their house is at equal risk for home invasion as a person who does when the crooks themselves target based on MM possession.

We've had a number of robberies here in Michigan, and MM is just getting underway. In California, it seems to be happening left, right, and center. There was a recent shootout in a legal MM growing area as I recall; hard to say that there would have been a shootout over a crop of soybeans.

Drug addicts are fond of robbing drug dealers - because they have both drugs and cash. But drug dealers know this and are often armed to the teeth because of it. MM-using homeowners have the drugs too, but don't present the same apparent risk. It seems a no-brainer that some some crooks would figure that out and start targeting known MM users.

 

[Omar B]

Yes, but it's still not an argument against MM, it's an argument against theft. I'm sure if those people had diamonds in their house and it was known Catwoman would have shown up too. Theft of MM in one area or another means just that thieves are stealing somethign else of value now. In Jamaica if you have a gun (legally) and it's known criminals will break into your house and try to steal it because guns are hard to come by there. Does that mean guns should be illegal too? No.

Oh, anyone notice how badly written the news story was? Had to read the whole thing twice to get the whole thing. It's as if the writer is a blogger come journalist, it's written in a linear fashion following the sequence of events like he's writing abotu a bad date to his friends. It's really quite simple, in journalism the first 3rd of the article has all the pertinent information to the case and the following two thirds are the sequence of events and the supporting information. We all know from studies people rarely read whole articles, the read the first part or the first half and that's why stories are formatted this way.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Yes, but it's still not an argument against MM, it's an argument against theft. I'm sure if those people had diamonds in their house and it was known Catwoman would have shown up too. Theft of MM in one area or another means just that thieves are stealing somethign else of value now. In Jamaica if you have a gun (legally) and it's known criminals will break into your house and try to steal it because guns are hard to come by there. Does that mean guns should be illegal too? No.

I'm not arguing against MM in this thread. I'm noting that there is a new danger that perhaps some MM users are not aware of. Grandpa decides to give this MM thing a try and tells his family about it, word gets out that he's got a stash of skunk in his medicine cabinet, and the next thing he knows, he's got a rash of morons with masks trying to break and enter at night. That's all. I think you may have misread my intentions, probably my fault.

Oh, anyone notice how badly written the news story was? Had to read the whole thing twice to get the whole thing. It's as if the writer is a blogger come journalist, it's written in a linear fashion following the sequence of events like he's writing abotu a bad date to his friends. It's really quite simple, in journalism the first 3rd of the article has all the pertinent information to the case and the following two thirds are the sequence of events and the supporting information. We all know from studies people rarely read whole articles, the read the first part or the first half and that's why stories are formatted this way.

Maybe the writer was smoking dope. OK, just kidding.

 

[Omar B]

Yes, but that's fear mongering in the article. You can't have MM in your house because you'll get robbed? That's crazy. Criminals will steal anything of value that they can use or trade for something they can use. Using weed as an example to highlight how evil it is is really no argument, one could replace it with diamonds, gold, a new socket set, etc.

Scarcity drives up value.

 

[crushing]

Yes, this is true - having something of value makes one a target.

That's for sure! Makes one wonder why we continue the policies that keep the value of that 'something' very high. Especially when a previous 'noble experiment' failed.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-157es.htmlhttp://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-157es.html

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Yes, but that's fear mongering in the article. You can't have MM in your house because you'll get robbed? That's crazy.

Having MM in your house is no guarantee that you'll get robbed, but it's an enhanced risk that people who have MM in their houses might to be aware of. Would you agree with that?

Criminals will steal anything of value that they can use or trade for something they can use. Using weed as an example to highlight how evil it is is really no argument, one could replace it with diamonds, gold, a new socket set, etc.

I haven't said that weed is evil in this thread, nor did the article author that I noticed. However, I disagree that one could replace it with diamonds, gold, etc. I absolutely agree that if a person is known to have diamonds in their house, they are at increased risk of being victimized. But having MM in their house is even more risky. MM is not only attractive to those who would sell it, but to those who would smoke it.

Scarcity drives up value.

Not sure what that has to do with anything.

I'm not trying to argue the pros or cons of MM use in this thread. I have noticed the recent crimes being reported lately that involve victims who use, raise, or legally sell MM. That seems newsworthy to me, as well as being a cautionary note for those who might be considering MM to use caution, especially about whom they tell about their use.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_16209395?nclick_check=1

In the third armed takeover robbery of a San Jose medical marijuana club this year, two men burst into The Dispensary on Monterey Road just before noon Wednesday, tied up the employees and made off with marijuana and money.

\

Yeah, they could just as well have robbed a jewelry dealer or a liquor store; but they wanted drugs as well as cash, apparently. And I'd be willing to bet that they saw a relatively new type of business, where the risks are not clearly understood yet, as being safer to rob than say a liquor store where most of the owners have a gun under the counter because they're used to being robbed. Besides, you can carry a lot of pot under your arm as you run away; not so much bottles of booze.

http://www.annarbor.com/news/ann-ar...ng-robbery-at-ann-arbor-medical-marijuana-cl/

As three men were robbing a medical marijuana clinic in downtown Ann Arbor, binding the people inside with duct tape, two police officers rushed in and confronted them, Police Chief Barnett Jones said.
The men — two armed with guns — stole cash and marijuana during the Thursday evening robbery and refused to go down without a fight, Jones said.

I'm not saying MM is evil. I'm saying that users, sellers, and growers of MM face an enhanced risk, and yes, that risk is higher than for an owner of a fancy SUV or a diamond ring or what-have-you. The pot itself is an attractant, not just the money one can get for selling it. Not letting people know that they're running a risk by letting people know they have MM seems like not such a good idea to me.

 

[Stac3y]

Maybe someone should compare the enhanced risk of MM to the enhanced risk of having a huge flat screen TV. At least you can't see MM through the curtains.

 

[Omar B]

Having MM in your house is no guarantee that you'll get robbed, but it's an enhanced risk that people who have MM in their houses might to be aware of. Would you agree with that?

I haven't said that weed is evil in this thread, nor did the article author that I noticed. However, I disagree that one could replace it with diamonds, gold, etc. I absolutely agree that if a person is known to have diamonds in their house, they are at increased risk of being victimized. But having MM in their house is even more risky. MM is not only attractive to those who would sell it, but to those who would smoke it.

Not sure what that has to do with anything.

I'm not trying to argue the pros or cons of MM use in this thread. I have noticed the recent crimes being reported lately that involve victims who use, raise, or legally sell MM. That seems newsworthy to me, as well as being a cautionary note for those who might be considering MM to use caution, especially about whom they tell about their use.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_16209395?nclick_check=1

Yeah, they could just as well have robbed a jewelry dealer or a liquor store; but they wanted drugs as well as cash, apparently. And I'd be willing to bet that they saw a relatively new type of business, where the risks are not clearly understood yet, as being safer to rob than say a liquor store where most of the owners have a gun under the counter because they're used to being robbed. Besides, you can carry a lot of pot under your arm as you run away; not so much bottles of booze.

http://www.annarbor.com/news/ann-ar...ng-robbery-at-ann-arbor-medical-marijuana-cl/

I'm not saying MM is evil. I'm saying that users, sellers, and growers of MM face an enhanced risk, and yes, that risk is higher than for an owner of a fancy SUV or a diamond ring or what-have-you. The pot itself is an attractant, not just the money one can get for selling it. Not letting people know that they're running a risk by letting people know they have MM seems like not such a good idea to me.

Sure there's an enhanced risk, just like there's a higher risk when you have anything else of value in your house and let people know.

I was pointing out that a manufactured scarcity makes weed a more valuable commodity and more attractive to thieves. Just like diamond companies on purpose keep it relatively scares compared to what they actually dig out of the ground. If they were to sell all they produced when they produced it the diamond market would crumble, it is it's own micro economy. If/when weed is legal and you can buy a pack at the store (with ID proving you are 21 or older) just like cigarettes then we'll not see these robberies.

You are correct in saying that people rob these dispensaries for the money and the weed. The dispensaries themselves can learn a lot from jewelry stores, liqueur stores, etc in that respect.

 

[Onyx]

That's for sure! Makes one wonder why we continue the policies that keep the value of that 'something' very high. Especially when a previous 'noble experiment' failed.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-157es.html

Would also like to mention that the same policies which keep the value very high keep it untaxed and uncontrolled. Most drug dealers don't care how old their customers are.

http://wn.com/Study_Says_It's_Easier_For_Teens_To_Buy_Marijuana_Than_Beer

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Sure there's an enhanced risk, just like there's a higher risk when you have anything else of value in your house and let people know.

No. MM is not like 'just anything else'. It attracts more and different kinds of criminals. I'm not sure why you choose not to see this.

I was pointing out that a manufactured scarcity makes weed a more valuable commodity and more attractive to thieves. Just like diamond companies on purpose keep it relatively scares compared to what they actually dig out of the ground. If they were to sell all they produced when they produced it the diamond market would crumble, it is it's own micro economy. If/when weed is legal and you can buy a pack at the store (with ID proving you are 21 or older) just like cigarettes then we'll not see these robberies.

Ah, now I see your angle. Well, be that as it may - it's not the case today, is it? I like to deal with what is, and not pie-in-the-sky.

You are correct in saying that people rob these dispensaries for the money and the weed. The dispensaries themselves can learn a lot from jewelry stores, liqueur stores, etc in that respect.

And, I suspect, MM growers and MM users. That being the point of my first post. It's a new and different kind of threat, it's an enhanced threat even compared to having a flat screen TV or a diamond ring that bad guys know about. They face threats not just from the usual criminal element that might target them for what they could hock their property for, but they also face threats from those who habitually otherwise rob drug dealers to get their drugs as well as their money.

You seem rather sensitive to admitting that being a known MM user places a person at enhanced risk. You want to equate it to 'any other kind of risk'. Well, it's not. That's like saying sure, shooting heroin is bad for your health, just like not exercising. No. They're both risks, but they're not the same. I don't think you can yawn and equate them.

Most 'ordinary citizens' who are just now getting interested in the medicinal value of marijuana hardly expect to have their door battered down in the middle of the night by masked men looking for their stash. It's placing Joe Everyman into a niche or fringe society formerly inhabited pretty much exclusively by people who live on the edge and aren't unfamiliar with the idea of desperate men trying to kill them for the drugs they possess.

Taking a blase approach to the risk is foolhardy in the extreme.

Here's what I'm talking about:

http://www.parentdish.com/2010/10/11/pot/

Ever think the day would come when you'd be on the way to Grandma's house with a goodie bag of marijuana?

According to a report in The New York Times, middle-aged adult caregivers are coming to the rescue with cannabis to help ease a variety of ailments for their ailing elderly parents.

Grandma, unlike her middle-aged son who fetches her stash, has probably never scored a baggie in a dangerous neighborhood late at night. She probably has zero exposure to any violent criminal element that formerly dealt pot before the advent of MM. She'd have no more concern for anyone knowing she had MM than she might that someone be aware she takes Geritol. But she'd be exposing herself to some level of risk beyond just owning a flat-screen TV or a diamond ring by letting word get out that she regularly smokes MM and has a stash in her house.

http://www.kcra.com/r/25198552/detail.html

The victim told police he had a medical pot card and was growing marijuana plants in his home.Police said the burglars were after the marijuana.The victim appears to have been justified in firing the shotgun to defend himself, police said.

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/articl...in-pot-robbery-outside-Santa-Rosa-restaurant-

Three men suspected of robbing a couple of their marijuana at gunpoint Friday were caught a short time later in their silver Cadillac with pot in the car, Santa Rosa police said.

#forumnumcom h6 { width: 250px; float: left; margin: 18px 10px 0pt 0pt; padding: 10px 0pt 15px; border-bottom: medium none; border-top: 9px solid rgb(136, 136, 136); }
A handgun believed to have been used in the 1:20 p.m. confrontation outside the Applebee's restaurant on Santa Rosa Avenue was found dropped on the road a short distance from where the car was stopped, police said.
A Lake County couple told police they were robbed in the restaurant parking lot by two men they'd met a few weeks earlier at a Santa Rosa medical marijuana dispensary.

These are people who became victims for the sole reason that they grew or had MM. They didn't have the same risk as anyone off the street, they had an enhanced risk specifically due to their MM involvement.

I am not saying they should not be using, growing, or dispensing MM. If it's legal, it's legal. I am saying that a lot of people just now getting into the world of MM have not had the kind of life that the typical stoner of the last couple decades have had. They're just not prepared for the idea of armed home invasions to get their brownies. They might want to know of the risk and prepare themselves accordingly.

 

[Omar B]

No. MM is not like 'just anything else'. It attracts more and different kinds of criminals. I'm not sure why you choose not to see this.

How does it attract more or different criminals? Do you have statistics proving that theft is higher because of weed being the target? Theft happens, banks get robbed, so do gas stations, clothes stores, even houses. In a new industry popping up they will get robbed because they have not had the years of experience say a bank would have. Also with the manufactured scarcity because of it's prohibition people who have it do get robbed, just like when there was the prohibition of alcohol.

Just like in Jamaica to get a gun you have to first get a license from the police, then your buy it through the police as well as get your ammo through them. They also do the ballistics on the weapon, it's very controlled and only people who can legally get the weapons can have them. So people get robbed and their houses are broken into if criminals even hear that you could possibly have a gun.

Ah, now I see your angle. Well, be that as it may - it's not the case today, is it? I like to deal with what is, and not pie-in-the-sky.

And, I suspect, MM growers and MM users. That being the point of my first post. It's a new and different kind of threat, it's an enhanced threat even compared to having a flat screen TV or a diamond ring that bad guys know about. They face threats not just from the usual criminal element that might target them for what they could hock their property for, but they also face threats from those who habitually otherwise rob drug dealers to get their drugs as well as their money.

You seem rather sensitive to admitting that being a known MM user places a person at enhanced risk. You want to equate it to 'any other kind of risk'. Well, it's not. That's like saying sure, shooting heroin is bad for your health, just like not exercising. No. They're both risks, but they're not the same. I don't think you can yawn and equate them.

I'm not sensative about it, I'm stating what I see. You destroyed your own argument by using that heroin and exercising analogy. You are comparing a prescribed drug to one that is illegal. Never heard of anyone talking about the benefits of heroin.

 

[Nomad]

Actually, I highly doubt that anyone that robs a grow-op or medical marijuana user has a primary goal of getting drugs. Their primary goal is still almost certainly the money they can get from selling (most of) what they steal. I just don't see anyone (even stoners) risking jailtime for an amount that equates to personal use.

That said, yes, it is an additional risk. A friend of mine (honest!) who's a medical marijuana user has the right to grow her own on her property for personal use, and only realized sometime later that you're not supposed to tell all your neighbors and friends that you are growing marijuana... mostly to minimize the possibility of theft.

On the subject of the flat screen TV being easier to see for potential thieves... yes, this is true, but while she was harvesting, the entire house and a significant region outside smelled very very strongly... a good indication for anyone that wasn't in the know what was happening here.

Oh, and just in case anyone thinks she's one of the "got a stubbed toe, get medical marijuana!" types... I'm talking about someone for whom all other legal prescription drugs have failed, and who has been deemed inoperable. The medical marijuana helps keep her pain at bay and lets her sleep at night. Yep, sounds like a stoner who should be locked up to me (at least, by federal definitions)!

 

[Bill Mattocks]

How does it attract more or different criminals?

Criminals targeting MM users, growers, and dispensaries and making off with not just the money, but also the drugs.

Do you have statistics proving that theft is higher because of weed being the target? Theft happens, banks get robbed, so do gas stations, clothes stores, even houses. In a new industry popping up they will get robbed because they have not had the years of experience say a bank would have. Also with the manufactured scarcity because of it's prohibition people who have it do get robbed, just like when there was the prohibition of alcohol.

On the one hand, you claim it's not a higher risk, then you admit it is, but put the blame on the fact that it is scarce. You prove my point for me.

Just like in Jamaica to get a gun you have to first get a license from the police, then your buy it through the police as well as get your ammo through them. They also do the ballistics on the weapon, it's very controlled and only people who can legally get the weapons can have them. So people get robbed and their houses are broken into if criminals even hear that you could possibly have a gun.

Bingo. So we agree - people with MM are at a higher risk. I thought you said they were not.

I'm not sensative about it, I'm stating what I see. You destroyed your own argument by using that heroin and exercising analogy. You are comparing a prescribed drug to one that is illegal. Never heard of anyone talking about the benefits of heroin.

You equated the relative risk of owning, raising, or dispensing MM with any other risk, such as owning jewelry or whatever. It's not the same. Comparisons such as yours invite analogies. I made one. I, on the other hand, do not equate MM with heroin, but neither do I place the relative risks of dealing heroin with the relative risks of not exercising. They're just not the same at all.

We both seem to agree that there is a risk in owning, growing, or dispensing MM. I say it is an enhanced risk because the MM is attractive to drug users as well as to those who would otherwise look for property to steal and sell. You say the risk is the same as any attractive valuable thing; but then you say yes, it is actually an enhanced risk, and it's society's fault for creating a market where the price of marijuana is artificially high. You can't have it both ways.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Actually, I highly doubt that anyone that robs a grow-op or medical marijuana user has a primary goal of getting drugs. Their primary goal is still almost certainly the money they can get from selling (most of) what they steal. I just don't see anyone (even stoners) risking jailtime for an amount that equates to personal use.

I posted several links to people being robbed of precisely that - their personal stash. Believe it or don't; it's happening.

That said, yes, it is an additional risk. A friend of mine (honest!) who's a medical marijuana user has the right to grow her own on her property for personal use, and only realized sometime later that you're not supposed to tell all your neighbors and friends that you are growing marijuana... mostly to minimize the possibility of theft.

That would be my point. I understand people who have a grow operation having an enhanced sense of security; but I wonder if Grandma with the gout and a brand-new MM prescription is prepared for having Joe Thugg kick down her door for her brownies? That's what I'm talking about.

On the subject of the flat screen TV being easier to see for potential thieves... yes, this is true, but while she was harvesting, the entire house and a significant region outside smelled very very strongly... a good indication for anyone that wasn't in the know what was happening here.

It's frankly a bit difficult for any neighbor not to know what is growing in the garden next door. I hate my neighbor, and we've got a 12-foot-tall set of pine trees between us, but I can still see his garden and I'm sure he can see mine. That's not an easy secret to keep unless one grows indoors. Of course, if I were a dope smoker looking for an easy score - one that is unlikely to be armed - I might hang around near "Happy Harvesters Hydroponics" (real name) and follow home the first Volvo station wagon I saw with a mom-n-pop average-looking couple I saw.

Oh, and just in case anyone thinks she's one of the "got a stubbed toe, get medical marijuana!" types... I'm talking about someone for whom all other legal prescription drugs have failed, and who has been deemed inoperable. The medical marijuana helps keep her pain at bay and lets her sleep at night. Yep, sounds like a stoner who should be locked up to me (at least, by federal definitions)!

Again, although I have a personal opinion on the use of marijuana, I have also said on more than one occasion that medical marijuana is now the law of the land in many places, and that's that. I would rather see people who are new to this whole medical marijuana thing be safer by warning them of a risk they might not have anticipated so they can take precautions.

 

[Omar B]

You missed the point Bill. I used the gun issue and the prohibition issue to show that anything that people can't get legally they will get illegally. In some cases robbing those who legally came by it, or targeting criminals who have it (like in prohibition). Manufactured scarcity drives up value, but it makes people want to steal it. Diamonds, gold, weed.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

You missed the point Bill. I used the gun issue and the prohibition issue to show that anything that people can't get legally they will get illegally. In some cases robbing those who legally came by it, or targeting criminals who have it (like in prohibition). Manufactured scarcity drives up value, but it makes people want to steal it. Diamonds, gold, weed.

I got the point. We have a different agenda. I was wanting to note that there is a new threat which many new users of MM may have no idea they are exposed to; you want to carp about the effect that manufactured scarcity has on crime rates. I don't disagree with your point - it just wasn't my point.