SHERIFF PROTECTS MEDICAL POT USERS

Local law enforcement officials don't think Monday's Supreme Court ruling
against medical marijuana use will affect county residents.

But Sheriff Tony Craver isn't taking any chances.

He's already taken measures to protect medical marijuana card holders.

The data base of patients, Craver said, has been removed from the agency's
computers.

He and District Attorney Norm Vroman devised the cards shortly after
California voters approved medical marijuana use. The cards are intended to
prevent sick people from having their doctor-prescribed marijuana
confiscated or them being hauled off to jail.

At last count, there were nearly 500 card holders, around 100 of whom are
categorized as care givers - people who grow marijuana for others.

Craver said he didn't want to chance the identification system being used
against patients or caregivers.

"I haven't said I won't give it to 'em (federal agents). We'll have to wait
and see if they ask for it. Then I'll tell them I won't give it to 'em," he
said.

Craver said he's not worried about repercussions of the purge.

"What can they do to me?" he said.

Craver said he could get arrested, but he'd be viewed by the public more
like Joan of Arc than a criminal.

He said he doesn't really think he'll be called upon to make any
sacrifices, however.

"I don't see there will be any effect (of the court ruling) locally,"
Craver said.

He said he doesn't think federal agents will bother with small-time growers
and even cannabis clubs that keep low profiles shouldn't have a problem.

"It's difficult to get the feds to do anything unless it's a huge
spectacular case. They seem to be driven by the media," he said.

Vroman agreed there's unlikely to be local repercussions from the court ruling.

It changes nothing, he said, noting federal law already said marijuana use
is illegal and there are no valid medical reasons to use it.

The Monday Supreme Court ruling basically upheld Congress' ability to make
that determination.

And it's determination supersedes California's law to the contrary.

What happens next depends on the U.S. Attorney's Office, and it's not
saying. Numerous calls made to its Washington D.C. press office went
unanswered.

But the court case stems from the office's efforts to shut down California
cannabis clubs.

It's possible it will revive those efforts, said Dave Nelson, who
represented the Ukiah Cannabis Club during the initial shutdown effort in 1998.

He said the injunction issued against the club at that time will go back
into effect when the Supreme Court decision is finalized.

If it is caught distributing marijuana, it will be in violation of that
injunction, Nelson said.

If a judge agrees the injunction was violated, the club managers can be
fined or put in jail, Nelson said.

While elected state judges would be unlikely to prosecute, federal judges
are a different matter because they're not beholden to California citizens,
he said.

"They are a law unto themselves," Nelson said of federal judges, who are
appointed for life.

State, as well as local officials decried the Monday ruling, even though
it's status quo.

"The responsibility for determining what is necessary to provide for public
health and safety has traditionally been left to the states. It is
unfortunate that the court was unable to respect California's historic role
as a laboratory for good public policy and a leader in the effort to help
sick and dying residents who have no hope for relief other than through
medical marijuana," California Attorney General Bill Lockyer said Monday.

Vroman said the federal law prohibiting marijuana for any use is just plain
dumb.

"We have a society that's got far more pressing problems than a person
who's sick using medical marijuana," he said. "We've got people killing
each other in the streets, people starving to death. I just don't
understand it."