digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Deputies Shoot and Kill Pot Farmer During Crop Raid

origin.dailybulletin.com — Members of a drug task force shot and killed one man and launched a manhunt for two others after they discovered an outdoor marijuana farm containing about 3,000 plants.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • NikoKun, on 10/10/2007, -39/+178Another death added to the list of people killed, by this pointless stupid war on Marijuana...
    Innocent or not, shot for aggression or not... All the deaths of people killed, for issues revolving around Marijuana... All of them died pointlessly BECAUSE of the war on drugs... not the drug itself.

    We need to end prohibition, because IT is the problem... It harms and kill more people than Marijuana does, because Marijuana has not killed anyone! It is impossible to die from using Marijuana! It's safer than most over the counter medications out there...
    So why are we killing people, in the name of stopping this drug, which kills no one?

    Ending prohibition, ends all the deaths, all people killed by cops with guns... and all people killed by criminals or gangs in the black market.

    All the problems associated with marijuana, are really the problems with it's prohibition... If we end prohibition, we end those problems and make America a better and more free country!
    • emindaer, on 10/10/2007, -45/+10Drugs are bad, mm-kay.
      • vanbacon, on 10/10/2007, -16/+2***** you If I choose to smoke pot then you can lick a dildo covered in may feces
        • TheGuruStud, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5It's a South Park reference (I assume that's what he's getting at haha). Why are all of you on digg? Dee dee dee
          • itsthebrod, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Now bury me for being an idiot and double-posting...
          • itsthebrod, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Buried for ending that comment with a Mencia reference.
      • Disfnord, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Wow, you are so clever, you can repeat worn-out South Park jokes. Congrats!
      • UnstableMind, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1...except for marajewanna....mmkay. Kids....pass up the marajewanna now...mmmmkay.
    • q1006662, on 10/10/2007, -10/+90Lesson in Illegal Agriculture #1: If you shoot at cops, they WILL shoot back. This has nothing to do with the merits of the current drug laws.
      • petewiz, on 10/10/2007, -13/+9"This has nothing to do with the merits of the current drug laws."
        Actually this has quite a bit to do with the "merits" of the current drug laws. If marijuana were legalized and regulated/taxed, the revenue (billions of dollars) would go to the government rather than shady people like the ones mentioned in the story.
        Instead of wasting billions of taxpayer dollars on the failure that is the War on Drugs, they could be gaining billions of dollars. If it was available in stores, like alcohol or cigarettes, nobody would have any incentive to buy it from some shady criminal.
        For a historical example, just look at alcohol prohibition from the 30's. People wanted alcohol despite the fact that it was illegal. They paid inflated prices for alcohol that they had to buy from some criminal. Mobsters like Al Capone thrived and made a ton of money off of the government's ignorance. After the government ended alcohol prohibition, all of the crime that had previously surrounded alcohol disappeared because legitimate companies could sell a better and cheaper product. If it worked with a drug that is both harder than cannabis and has a higher addiction potential, why wouldn't it work with cannabis?
        I'd love to hear any arguments against legalization and regulation.
        • mortigon, on 10/10/2007, -6/+19Ok... if marijuana were legalized, would that keep this idiot from shooting at cops? What sane person shoots at a cop?
          • capiCrimm, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5not to say it's okay, but the mentality that cops are always good is well -- bad. If the revolutionaries took that perspective there would have been no United States. Sure, pursue diplomatic avenues above anything, but you should never put blind obedience first.
          • garbanzo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7If it were legalized, then there wouldn't be armed men guarding clandestine pot farms. How many moonshine production busts gone bad have you read about in the last few years?
          • Toshibi, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4If marijuana were legal then you wouldn't have laws which can destroy people's lives making you use undue force because you are growing a freaking plant.
        • petewiz, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5No one is defending these idiots. Shooting at cops is retarded.

          Q:Why would a person shoot at a cop over plants?
          A:Because of all the money they make off of marijuana being illegal. These people were trying to protect their profits.
          • mhender, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2You shouldn't have to SHOOT at cops in the first place. Because apparently growing a plant gets you the same punishment as raping a woman or killing a man.
          • mhender, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0--double. Woopsies.
        • Toshibi, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5I would say it isn't about protecting profits and more about the fact that 3000 pot plants is a life ruining drug charge, as in you go to prison for a long time.
        • petewiz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7So their plan to avoid lengthy prison sentences was to murder police officers in front of other police officers? Good plan. These morons were ***** no matter how you look at it.
      • munen123, on 10/10/2007, -11/+5cops are stupid
    • tehpwnrate, on 10/10/2007, -8/+37I agree that it is wrong that marijuana is illegal. However, they shot at and tried to kill the police officers. These are separate crimes.
      • WilliamDavis, on 10/10/2007, -5/+8Seperate crimes, caused by the same asinine policy.
    • TheN0id, on 10/10/2007, -5/+18From the article: "a group of local and federal law enforcement officers - were forced to open fire when one of the men guarding the farm shot at them, San Bernardino County sheriff's officials said." and "One of the people living at the farm climbed up a hill, aimed down at task force members and opened fire." The officers shot and killed the guy because he was an idiot. The article does not say so, but I'll bet the officers where in uniform and identified themselves as officers of the law. This guy wasn't killed because of the war on drugs he was killed because he made a series of pour judgments up to and including involving himself in illegal drug activity.
      • DivisibleByZero, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2just nitpicking, but "up to and including" isn't the phrase you were looking for. The "up to" part implies that illegal drug activity was the most unwise of his decisions. Clearly shooting at the cops was the maximum of his stupidity (that we know about).
    • mortigon, on 10/10/2007, -28/+14Aww, poor drug dealer.

      Marijuana is currently classified as an illegal drug, so don't feel sorry for this guy... He was breaking the law.
      • iomegaboy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11Ohhh, bad form. You made a comment that is against Marijuana. Prepare to be dugg down.

        /sarcasm
      • gmprunner, on 10/10/2007, -5/+6Yay for logic.
      • ClaudiuUSA, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Don't feel sorry for Rosa Parks. . . She was breaking the law.
        • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Did you just compare smoking weed to the wholesale dehumanization of an entire race?
          • GeneralFault, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No, I think he just compared one un-just law to another and in the process made evident the fallacy of mortigon's statement..
      • StrangeFamous, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Right... as if legality was all that really matters.

        Alcohol is much, MUCH worse of a drug than Cannabis, yet because it's legal, people sell it on every street corner, in supermarkets, even on HIGHWAYS (I kid you not, New Hampshire has state liquor stores located at Interstate rest areas!).

        Alcohol kills more people in a DAY than pot kills people in a DECADE... And the only reason why alcohol is legal right now is because crotchety old white bastards wanted to get their drink on back in the 30's and were sick of having to buy it illegally, so they reversed prohibition. Unfortunately, pot wasn't widely used back then, so it failed to be picked up as a recreational drug in the same way.

        Cannabis is illegal because of old, outdated ideologies that have been blown way out of proportion over the years, to the point where there are now more lies supporting the federal regulation than truths.

        It's also because of the fact that if the government legalized pot, it would have to legalize hemp... and hemp represents the biggest threat of all to the oil, paper, pharmaceutical and agricultural industries of this country. Corporations won't stand by and see their cash crops being replaced by something as ubiquitous and cheap to grow as hemp.
        • GeneralFault, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"Alcohol kills more people in a DAY than pot kills people in a DECADE."
          Try
          "Alcohol kills more people in a DAY than pot has or ever will kill". since no deaths have ever been directly associated with smoking pot.
    • projectstartrek, on 10/10/2007, -7/+4The first death due to marijuana!
    • Bodhinature, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1I think marijuana should be legalized. That being said, if I were growing illegal pot and I got raided, I would open fire on armed and trains drug officers. That's pretty stupid.
    • bnorman, on 10/10/2007, -12/+6Uh, pretty sure Marijuana can kill you if...Oh, I dunno, you drive and are so high you crash and kill yourself? Or others? So no, it's not impossible.
      • garbanzo, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8So, by that argument, cell phones should be illegal?
        • petewiz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6No. By that argument, cars should be illegal. You can crash your car if your sober too, ya know.
      • capiCrimm, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6actually there's no evidence to that effect, and there is anecdotal evidence to the contrary(that your more alert when your high and driving).

        However to the point that you can die while high on marijuana, yes. I don't think anyone is making the claim that marijuana prevents death and gives you with super powers. If you'd like me to prove the idiocy of your claim, however, let me point out you can go to the super market and buy bleach with no questions asked. You can also own paint thinner, gasoline, gun powder, guns, knives, cars, airplanes, tobacco, flame throwers, grenades, attack animals, and alcohol.
        • Onyxblaze, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1grenades and flamies are a no-no...
        • Onyxblaze, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2grenades and flamies are a no-no...
      • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Driving while under the influence is illegal whether the substance is outlawed or not.
    • Eska, on 10/10/2007, -8/+8Mmmm, i got what you are saying but when you said, "It is impossible to die from using Marijuana!" you lost it for me. It is possible, just not probable. Just like it is possible for someone to die from having their wisdom teeth removed. Saying that its impossible just makes you look like some uneducated hippie.
      On a different but related note, what about smoking and driving? Is the marijuana killing people there, or their driving?
      I agree it should not be illegal, but I don't think people should smoke. I do not see why people want to smoke. I think smokers and drinkers alike are unbelievably dumb. Why do you want to lose your judgment and senses?
      • capiCrimm, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6there is as much scientific evidence that smoking weed and driving impairs your evidence as chewing gum and driving. I can find you anecdotal evidence to the contrary, even. Saying that just makes you look like a fear mongerer who presumes drugs are automatically bad and disabling. But, since weed is sooo evil we're not even allowed to prove or disprove your claim.
        • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I can tell you that I was stoned to the bejeezuz when I ***** up a '76 maverick all the hell. Good enough?
          • GeneralFault, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I can tell you that I was sober as a stone when I ***** up a 66 mustang. And your circumstantial evidence falls apart.... now.
      • Jones82, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7I wouldn't say being high makes you "lose your senses". You don't need to understand why people do it, the point is that people should have the right to if they choose.
        • GeneralFault, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Precisely. I don't get prayer. I don't understand the need to talk to yourself. yet I still believe that you should be allowed to do it.
    • davidemm, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4I don't excuse them for breaking American laws. If you really want to change the law, you can't sit on Digg all day, stop complaining about it and do something about it.

      I hate to be the one to say it, but really, you shouldn't believe everything you read. You weren't there, police can lie and fabricate stories. I'm sure this will go to court, follow it from there in hopes of finding the truth.
    • Bologner, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0LEAVE BRITTANY ALONE!
    • martcharb, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0"I think we should legalize marijuana in this country, so potheads have nothing to talk about ever again. You are so annoying... Grow up and do coke like an adult! "
      • StrangeFamous, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Right. Stop doing the relatively harmless drug that makes you sit, laugh and enjoy cartoons more, and instead start doing the highly addictive drug that makes you turn into a narcissistic *****.

        By the way, I'm assuming that the quotations mean you're pointing out how stupid such a statement is, so take my comment as a criticism of that quote, not of you.
        • martcharb, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1Yeah...pretty stupid comment from comedian Daniel Tosh...but he's actually quite funny! You should look him up...
    • dbz253, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1i think they are brave for not adhering to bogus laws.
  • ScornForSega, on 10/10/2007, -5/+70What we need to do is restore state's rights. If the state of California decides that marijuana is legal or decriminalized or whatever, then that should be the end of the discussion for California.
    • satanatnmtedu, on 10/10/2007, -7/+19Then, we have a confederacy. We had this argument once - the federalists won.
      • phenry50BMG, on 10/10/2007, -6/+18We need to have it again.
      • alvinrod, on 10/10/2007, -4/+24Then: Slavery
        Now: Marijuana

        I think that things are just a little bit different this time around.
        • sexybobo, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2The USA was a confederation way before then 1777 -1789 didn't work then didn't work during the revolution wont work now.
      • spyd3rweb, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7states rights doesn't mean a confederacy you idiot. it means the federal government cant legislate with powers that are not constitutionally granted to it.

        AMENDMENT X

        The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
        • GeneralFault, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If I understand it correctly, the feds only have the right to regulate marijuana through the interstate commerce provisions of the constitution. So, why do they have any say in drugs (or anything else for that matter) that are planted, grown, harvested, distributed, and consumed within city limits?
      • gossipninja, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4i agree it should be a state decision, that being said, what about abortion? Many have advocated for that to be a state's right and it has not got a lot of traction. I think if the pot lobby wanted to make head way, they would advocate a non pot issue, not necessarily abortion but something, as a state right and then use that as precedent to help garner marijuana law adoption.
        • Chandon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3> i agree it should be a state decision, that being said, what about abortion?
          If that's what it takes, then so be it. Having varying laws among states so at least some places get it right in many areas is far more important than a woman not having to drive for a couple hours to get an abortion.
        • Pyrogen, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3So, you're trading a woman's right to choose for your right to smoke pot. I'm sure that the women who fought for it will be happy to roll over.
    • skyshock1, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Yes, and when a state like say, South Carolina says they have the right to decriminalize slavery we have a problem. :) Hist 1101.
      • zachblume, on 10/10/2007, -2/+21101?
      • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"...when a state like say, South Carolina says they have the right to decriminalize slavery..."

        Ah, the old Southern bias rears its ugly head again. We'd all have slaves down here if it weren't for those cotton-pickin' yankees, right? Did they teach you about Duncan Kenner in History 1101?
  • satanatnmtedu, on 10/10/2007, -13/+71Shoot an an officer while protecting your drugs; do you honestly expect that the cops won't shoot back? If you do, then you deserve to be shot for your stupidity.
    • Chibigoten, on 10/10/2007, -10/+6The law prohibiting marijuana is immoral. The farmers faced 20+ years in prison and having all of their property siezed for this violation. Did you honestly expect them not to try to fight for their lives?
      • zachblume, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Yes. Regardless of the law, the way to fight it isn't by shooting a innocent police officer. The way to fight is to take it the supreme court and have them declare the law unconstitutional.
        I don't completely believe the legalization of marijuana would be a good thing, maybe you do, maybe they did...but what does trying to kill or harm a officer of the state do? Give majuana a worse name as a drug perpetuated by bad things. Underage use, people trying to kill police officers, etc...
        • SoulRebel23, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5Why are the police innocent? They know full well that their job will involve fighting in the drug war, yet they still choose it. The man who shot at the police officer did so because he knew his life as he knew it was over.
          • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"Why are the police innocent?"
            Because they were being shot at?

            "The man who shot at the police officer did so because he knew his life as he knew it was over."
            Yeah, sorry, I'm all for decriminalization of marijuana, but the guy made the decision to grow pot. He knew the risks involved. If his life as was over as he knew it, it was because of the choices he made prior to the cops arriving.
          • GeneralFault, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1""Why are the police innocent?"
            Because they were being shot at?"
            Does that make the soldier an innocent? Of course not.

            "The man who shot at the police officer did so because he knew his life as he knew it was over."
            Yeah, sorry, I'm all for decriminalization of marijuana, but the guy made the decision to grow pot. He knew the risks involved. If his life as was over as he knew it, it was because of the choices he made prior to the cops arriving."
            Absolutely! There are no innocents in the war on drugs. That is the problem. The war itself (like all wars) removes any innocents from the players involved.


      • wishninja, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1bbbut the police go out of their way to inflict as much pain on people as possible. They use every excuse to kill. They lie under oath to get convictions. They are occupiers, they perpetuate this war on citizens in the cruelest way they can. They are not innocent.
    • spyd3rweb, on 10/10/2007, -6/+8i call it defending yourself and property against an unjust law and a runaway police state government.
    • UnstableMind, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Well, I somewhat disagree. I don't like the situation, but he _WAS_ protecting his property.
  • Andronicus1717, on 10/10/2007, -9/+126How many people will digg this without reading the article and learning the suspect shot first?
    • BillDoE, on 10/10/2007, -7/+26Yeah well, people aren't digging this because somebody got shot. They want make a point about this being an unpopular, no one wins, war against our own citizens. Those plants wouldn't be worth killing over if they weren't going on the black market grown by a criminal outfit.
      • iomegaboy, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1Wow. Nice non sequitur.
      • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"Those plants wouldn't be worth killing over if they weren't going on the black market grown by a criminal outfit."

        They're not worth dying over either. So why put yourself in that situation?
    • Sp0rAdiC, on 10/10/2007, -4/+13There would've been no shots at all if it was legal.
      • iomegaboy, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5There would have been no shots at all if there was no one manufacturing guns. Dumbass.
        • MacEnvy, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4Right. Swords and arrows are better, then?

          Humans will own weapons - always have, always will. No reason to be too picky about which ones, you'll be dead either way.
          • iomegaboy, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2It was a comment about the HOLE in his logic, not about guns dumbass.
      • xike, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3We should legalize other things too so there won't be any confrontations with police.

        Your argument blows.
      • skinrock, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If by "legal", you are referring to the act of shooting at cops, then yes.
      • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1There would've been no shots if the guy hadn't pulled the trigger first. Marijuana laws don't kill people. People kill people.
    • jdaniel284, on 10/10/2007, -8/+25Correction: The cops *claimed* the other guy shot first. There were no other witnesses. Dead men tell no tales.
      • gmprunner, on 10/10/2007, -9/+4Give the criminal the benefit of the doubt? Are you serious?
        • happytron, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Our justice system was built on the premise that the accused are given the benefit of the doubt until proven guilty in a fair trial.
        • DaSuHouSe, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1@happytron It was build on that premise but you'd have to be really gullible to believe that's how the system actually works. Anyone with any experience in the criminal justice system knows the defendant is always presumed guilty. How many people do you think differentiate between arrested and convicted when they read about someone?
      • iomegaboy, on 10/10/2007, -6/+5It's a sad day when cops are assumed to be guilty. Well, there is no evidence that the cops are innocent, guess they're guilty! You try risking your life everyday for $26k a year.
        • kl0ne, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3you must not have known many cops. while it's not accurate to assume that all cops are shifty, power hungry types, it IS accurate to say that 100% of the ones i've known (admittedly, only 6 total) have been shifty, power hungry types with a huge chip on their shoulder. i don't care how much or little they make, that's the career they've chosen. if they chose a job that requires them to risk their lives for "$26k" a year, are you more inclined to think they did it for the money, or to carry a gun around thinking they're 'the man'?

          that being said, i'm all for legalizing grass. at the same time, until it's legalized, if you grow it and/or sell it then you've got to know the potential consequences and at no point is firing the first shot justified.
        • DaSuHouSe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I don't know where you're from iomegaboy but $26k is incredibly low. Try $70k+ if you're willing to work overtime. I read an article a few months back about some cops getting six figures a year.

          http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9402E1DE123DF932A35751C0A961958260
          • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"Try $70k+ if you're willing to work overtime."

            That's all we need, overworked, irritable cops. By the way, the article you reference is in no way indicative of the nation. It references the four top paying cities. Where I'm from --New Orleans -- the starting pay is one $35k. And yes, all the cops I know work have to overtime to support their families. Is it any wonder we don't have enough good cops on the force? You get what you pay for.

            http://secure.cityofno.com/portal.aspx?portal=50&tabid=45
    • munen123, on 10/10/2007, -5/+8i agree with jdaniel284... how do we know the suspect shot first? hes dead the other 2 are missing.. the only thing we have to go on it what the cops said. oh yea the cops are so honest.... yea right! this is the real world.
    • Chibigoten, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5These men faced 20+ years in prison plus having all of their property seized by the feds. Do you think they were unjustified in trying to defend themselves from unjust government intrusion into their lives?
      • brycelb, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1100% unjustified and they got what they deserved. Just because you don't like a law does not give you the right to break it.
        • BlacklabelSAR, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Tell that to Bush.
        • wishninja, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Just because people are breaking the laws doesn't mean the government can act in an unreasonable manner. They were just plants, harmless plants. Facing a twenty to life sentence is not reasonable its cruel and people are starting to fight back.
    • SmokinWeed, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0You wouldn't shoot at the cops raiding your property?
  • MasterThief117, on 10/10/2007, -7/+38"a group of local and federal law enforcement officers - were forced to open fire when one of the men guarding the farm shot at them"
    Just putting that out there.
    • Sp0rAdiC, on 10/10/2007, -12/+10No shots would've been fired if it was legal. Just putting that out there.
      • HUKI365, on 10/10/2007, -4/+12No, I think if a wheat farmer started shooting at cops, they would shoot back.
        • onewingedangel9, on 10/10/2007, -4/+7Show me a story of police seizing a wheat farmers crops.
          • gmprunner, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Who says the police have to be seizing their crops?
          • Sajentine, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2@gmprunner

            Okay, now you're just being retarded. Are you actually able to follow a single train of thought?
        • UnstableMind, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The wheat farmer, if he opened fire, was most likely protecting his property, is that wrong?
      • mortigon, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3poop
    • jdaniel284, on 10/10/2007, -5/+7What if the cops saw the guy had a gun, shot him, and later claimed he shot first? Just putting that out there.
      • gmprunner, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5What if you didn't give the criminal the benefit of the doubt? Just putting that out there. Besides, why would the guy have a gun out and visible if he didn't intend to use it?
        • MacEnvy, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Many people carry guns hoping that the mere sight of it will cause an enemy to flee in a dangerous situation. I imagine a pot farmer would have LOTS of curious people he'd want to be able to scare away from his fields, even if actually using the gun was the last thing he wanted to do. Just putting that out there.
          • MonkeyFarts, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Yeah, because trying to intimidate a police officer by brandishing your weapon is always a brilliant idea.
        • zachblume, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I'm going to guess he probably didn't have a gun license anyway, just putting that out there
    • rrbest, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Hi. Just putting that out there.
  • Darkhowling91, on 10/10/2007, -2/+16Either way if this was regulated through large industries you wouldn't have to worry about this. I don't think Marlboro execs would run around shooting people.

    And yes I read the article, the grower shot first. Which was stupid as hell but think about how much ***** goes on because of the drug war.
    • iomegaboy, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3"Which was stupid as hell but think about how much ***** goes on because of stupid dumbass people."

      Fixed that for you.
    • unearth, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Marlboro? Imagine if legalized weed was distributed by big pharma. The prices would be even higher than they are now.
  • chicoer2001, on 10/10/2007, -5/+28This has nothing to do with pot. If a robber holding up a 7/11 shots at a cop, I bet he'll be shot dead too.
    • zweben, on 10/10/2007, -8/+9It does have to do with pot, because if it were legal there wouldn't be people growing illegal crops getting in firefights with the police over it.

      I'm not saying that's the most convincing of the reasons to legalize it, but if pot were legal there is no question that this situation would not exist.
      • Sp4nk, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4What an ignorant arguement. This situation would not exist had he not grown the pot in the first place.
        • Chandon, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2False. There is sufficient market demand that people *will* grow pot - and with the current policy some of those people will get shot for doing so.
      • iomegaboy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Nor would it happen if guns did not exist.
        • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Try putting that genie back in the bottle.
      • brycelb, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Such flawed logic. You can say that about any crime.
        • Chandon, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3You can. And for every crime we should ask the same question: Does the law itself cause more harm than good by making people into criminals?

          Consider the law that was proposed in New York making the act of selling a violent video game to a minor a felony. Sure, we could argue all day about the harmful effects of violent video games on children - but we know for a *fact* that a law like that will result in a number of well-meaning store clerks receiving felony convictions when they forget to check the ID of some 16 year old with a full beard.
          • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Unless that guy was growing pot prior to its being made illegal in 1930s, the law did not make him a criminal, he did when he chose to grow pot.
    • sponeil, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Sorry zweben, but chicoer is dead on. The men growing it didn't do it because they're peace-loving pot-smoking hippies. They only cared about the money. If pot was legalized, it would become dirt-cheap, and these dumb-asses would be looking for some other way to make some quick money. And the pot definitely wasn't the reason they decided to shoot back at him.

      The guy who got shot was a major dumb-ass for two reasons:
      1) He shot at police officers who didn't seem to know where he was (he could've slipped away instead).
      2) He missed (if he was dumb enough to do #1, he should've at least been smart enough to take good aim before letting them know exactly where he was).
      • Synchro, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2He was also a dumb ass for using a shotgun at less than close in ranges. bring a rifle to a rifle fight.
    • mortigon, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Normal people don't just open fire on cops, this guy had something mentally wrong with him to do something like this... legalizing marijuana would not have saved his life
  • Segment, on 10/10/2007, -15/+8Well I'm all for the freedom of the people. I seriously doubt that the guards shot at the cops. They are just saying that to make it look like they were in the right to shoot them dead.

    _ \ | / _
    • johnn11238, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Yeah, man. All cops are liars, man. I seriously doubt that a professional criminal facing 25 YEARS TO LIFE IN ***** SAN QUENTIN for cultivation of pot would actually shoot at a police officer. That shotgun they found him with with his fingerprints all over it was an obvious plant. I'm all for freedom of the people, too, man...
    • jdaniel284, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Amen.
    • munen123, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2what are u tryin to say john11238, you know the cops? you have never heard of a cop killing someone then covering it up? I think every other cop movie is about something like this. grow up!
      • djAnakin, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3That's why it's called "fiction".

        Once again.. stop smoking pot.... and grow up. No one likes stoners.
        • happytron, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1No one likes authoritarians either.
  • Hoov, on 10/10/2007, -5/+15When you create sensationalist news stories it does not help our cause.

    That said, the guy who fired at a cop is an idiot.
  • Mohdoo, on 10/10/2007, -7/+9Arrrg! Every time I hear about this kinda thing, I wish they could have just given me like 40 ounces the day before the raid. That is so much just down the drain.
    • iomegaboy, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3The oxygen you breath is a waste.
    • daz80, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0just try to be in the vicinity when they burn it all....
  • gernblansted, on 10/10/2007, -5/+19Whew... We're all safe now...
  • HelpIamSober, on 10/10/2007, -11/+6This just gives me one more reason to vote for Ron Paul. he is the only candidate tat will abolish this ignorant drug war.

    And for the record; THIS IS NOT SPAM!!!!!
    • renegadeafk, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Yes it is. WTF digg
    • renegadeafk, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Yes it is.
    • iomegaboy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1When you say it's not. It is.
    • brycelb, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Like you really needed one more reason. Once you found out he agreed with the troofers you were on board. BTW this is defiantly spam.
  • 2XVISION, on 10/10/2007, -9/+3Yeah! Get those god ***** hippy bastards. He was too stoned to even kill a couple of pigs. *****. They ain't getting their air ***** into my lungs. Why they gotta be so ig'nint? Everyone who hits the bong should be gassed to death!
    • petewiz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0"Why they gotta be so ig'nint?"
      I was just about to ask you the same thing. By the way, could you clarify your use of the words "god *****" and "air *****"? Just because the voices in your head understand your crazy made-up language doesn't mean the rest of us do.

      "Everyone who hits the bong should be gassed to death!"
      That'll teach 'em.

      Did you know you share your stance with political geniuses (like Newt Gingrich)? Lucky bastard!

      I guess I'll just have to be content with agreeing with Milton Friedman...and all of those other Nobel Prize winners and economists from across the country. http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/endorsers.html
  • 0xbaadf00d, on 10/10/2007, -5/+9Well he shouldn't have shot at the cops... But still. How many of you here are like me? I smoked my body weight + 100 worth of pot in college and I am now a contributing member of society. If I had gotten caught I could be sitting in prison right now leeching off of society.
    • iomegaboy, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1You enjoying your job at Taco Bell?
  • joshuagor44, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2Nice
  • FRANKeB, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7What the ***** is wrong with your country? Get caught with a grow-op here in Canada and you get a few months in a minimum security prison. *****, if you get caught with up to an ounce (un-parted) and you get a ticket for 70 dollars. I live an hour and a half from Buffalo and four hours from Detroit yet it seems like it's worlds apart when comparing our nations.
    • munen123, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3yea this country has gone to the morons! I grew up here and its been getting worse and worse.... I really used to think this was an ok place to live/be from now days Im not too sure. theres nothing left of the america they talk about in the stories. the only thing we have left are commericals for crap we dont need and power hungry assholes tryin to tell everyone how to think and act.....
    • Synchro, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2You might get a harsher sentence down here, but in the USA if you shoot a gun at the cops, expect to get popped regardless of what you were doing previously.
  • Sp4nk, on 10/10/2007, -6/+5It's funny how you morons bitch and complain about how the media spins this and lies about that when you nimrods do the same ***** posting this garbage on Digg.
  • Xuvious, on 10/10/2007, -6/+6I wonder if an autopsy would show bullet holes in his back.....just saying....
  • bsonline, on 10/10/2007, -4/+16Everyone is speculating, with a lot of different opinions flying around. Le me ask you this:
    What if, instead of guns, everyone had used bongs? The grower smoked at the cops, and then they returned smoke? I've seen a lot of disputes settled this way.
    • ingxia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Seriously, that would have settled it...no doubt. You just need an amplifier for announcing the notorious bubbling bong smoke and of course followed by a healthy cough
      • bsonline, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No amplifier needed with smoke signals.
  • personfromhell, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4i say we just all take to the streets and light up
    i mean they can't arrest all of us
  • metric7, on 10/10/2007, -4/+7Isn't it just silly, how can you outlaw a plant?
    • 2XVISION, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Not as silly as it is that they haven't outlawed your mum yet. Damn.
    • unearth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Just for the sake of argument I was trying to think of a plant that could be harmful to society, and I can't. I got nothin. Reply if you can think of one!
      • elscorcho717, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Coca
        • smileyouredead, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Coca in it's natural state is nothing more than a mild stimulative
    • petewiz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0If you wanna ban a plant, ban poison ivy. Seriously, ***** that *****.
  • Sogui, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2I dunno how I feel about the "If Marijuana was legal he wouldn't have been shot" argument.

    If Marijuana were legal it wouldn't be so lucrative to grow it. People like the guys at this farm are always delving into risky business with wide profits, if it marijuana wasn't so lucrative they'd be off trying to smuggle something else across the border.
    • onewingedangel9, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3show some statistics showing the legalization of a substance leading to increase in the consumption of other illegal drugs.
      • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Has nothing to do with the consumption of other illegal drugs. It has to do with people willing to break the law for the potential of high profits. It's a mindset -- like kids who would rather sell crack than work at McDonald's.
  • exomni, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Headline and description neglect to mention that the pot-farmers opened fire at the deputies.

    That being said: this is another pointless death in what has become one of the most outrageous evils waged by a government on its citizens.
  • DeepSkyDiver, on 10/10/2007, -7/+4Buried - stop pushing the hooch and anything associated with it.
  • slipkn0tz23, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4These article titles piss me off. Anyone who didn't read the article automatically assumes that a cop shot the man for no reason. The guy pulled a gun and shot at the cops first. They're TRAINED to shoot back if they're shot at first.
    • Chibigoten, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1They were defending themselves from a man who was defending himself. You need to realize that they faced 20+ years in prison and having all of their property siezed by the feds. Would you not fight for your life with that much on the line?
      • slipkn0tz23, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I, personally, would not try to take innocent lives to protect my freedom. I would go to jail for 20 years, if the only other option was to kill innocent people who are doing their jobs.

        Now, same question to you. Would you kill a cop to get away from going to jail for a crime you did?
        • numb401, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1If the crime was only an artificial crime based on propaganda and lies and my life/freedom was on the line, I'd shoot (or run if I had the chance to get away).
      • unearth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3At that point, it isn't fighting for your life. Trying to "save your life" in a respectable way is to run and get the ***** out of there. If you want to do it the dumbass way that will never work, I guess shooting at cops is a good idea. Plus, you get a free body bag. Seriously... Don't pull this utilitarian ***** that somehow he's saving his own life by killing a group of armed cops because he broke the law. Any sane person recognizes that it doesn't add up. This man DESERVED to be shot by the police. He didn't deserve to die, but he deserved to be shot at, which in some cases is enough.
      • actorboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"They were defending themselves from a man who was defending himself. You need to realize that they faced 20+ years in prison and having all of their property siezed by the feds."

        An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. The best way he could have defended himself against 20 years in prison and property seizure would have been to not grow pot. When that plan failed, the best way to defend himself against death-by-cop would have been to not shoot at any.
    • jaymzdean, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0You are assuming the cops are telling the truth. Fat chance, Chelio.
  • aknappjr, on 10/10/2007, -5/+7Yet another reason Ron Paul should be president! End the unconstitutional federal war on drugs and return power back to the states and individuals!
  • personfromhell, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2I say we all just take to the streets and light up.
    I meant they can't arrest all of us.
    • personfromhell, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0oops double post plz bury
    • amoirae, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I think you underestimate them.
    • unearth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You're right. They'll arrest half of us, and barrage the other half with rubber bullets and tear gas.
    • petewiz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Here's an idea:
      Write to your state representatives. If you want to change things, you need to start there.
      Also, vote whenever possible on issues that pertain to decriminalization or medical marijuana. They're not quite legalization but still steps in the right direction regarding drug policy. We need our voices to be heard so that we can end this costly, ineffective prohibition and begin a new era where we look at FACTS rather than UNPROVEN PROPAGANDA.
  • facelessname, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2This war was started by elitists. It doesn't behoove them to legalize it because the cigarette companies would be at odds with other companies intending to distribute the marijuana once it DOES become legal. They wouldn't have control over it save for the taxation and that would be it. Those that support the war on drugs apparently haven't seen this war up close. Marijuana is a good sedative and an appetite stimulant for cancer and AIDS patients and is clinically proven!!! It has no side effects like other pain-killers do and is 100% effective and besides psychosis for those WHO ABUSE THE DRUG 300% OF THE TIME has shown no adverse reactions for anyone yet. It's A F***IN PLANT!!! The government isn't interested in the good of the people. It's interested in the money prospects to be had from controlling the industry of distribution. We can have some pigs waste our tax dollars on this ridiculous war to pay for DEA agents salaries and the weapons and equipment and fancy-shmancy Drug War vehicles and have more people die and go to jail needlessly because that's what we're expected to do as the common folk. Me? I'm supporting legalization for those who need it and those who don't abuse it. If you do abuse it you need to get a damn life. I use it infrequently and haven't gotten addicted to it yet. I can live without it, but I need to unwind once in a while....
  • jdaniel284, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Police, Judge, Jury, Executioner, and Reporter - all in one.
    • FIREMILLEN, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Its called efficiency.In china they get arrested before they get in front of the firing squad. USA 1 CHINA 0
    • jaymzdean, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0Exactly. Cops are liars. They're like little Mini Me's of GW running around squashing Liberty and telling lies. Lies. Lot's of lies told by cops.
  • hagbard72, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Need a real war to bring this phony war to an end. The war was start in this country (Canada) when the Americans come for Marc Emery.
  • lebaige, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Ya, it's totally a stretch to think some guy who was farming pot to fund whatever illegal distribution ring he was involved in would shoot at cops approaching his land.
    • bdlang, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It's not "his land", it's uninhabited, stated owned wilderness area.
  • munen123, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1heheheh good one bsonline!
  • djAnakin, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5Law being upheld: Not News.


    Buried.
  • TomK88, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5Thank god. Another dangerous farmer is off the streets!

    /sarcasm.
    • irvman21, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Thank god. A man who attempted to kill an officer, who was doing his job, is off the streets!
      /not sarcasm.
      • TomK88, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1That obviously would not be necessary if marijuana was legal. How many corn farmers do you know that need to guard their crop with firearms? Take the power away from the gangs. Marijuana users/cultivators are not the problem, it is the association with gangs. Narcotics account for almost 100% of gang revenue. Cut that source off, and gangs will all but disappear. Instead, the USA spends billions a year trying to tell people what they can or cannot put into their own body (doing nobody else harm).
  • kije, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4Does it bother anybody else that the armed people growing marijuana, are doing this on public lands?
  • RebornInFlames, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2What a moron, he opened fire at long range with a shotgun? If you are going to shoot at trained law enforcement professionals, at the very least you should use a scoped semi-automatic rifle. Otherwise they will, you know, kill you.
    • TomK88, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Thanks for the tip on killing police officers.
    • unearth, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Well TomK88, I was going to say the same thing, but when you think about it, it's just common sense.
  • Snarq, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2Another murder committed by pigs enforcing a useless law. Hope they rot in Hell.
    • FireForEffect47, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4You're a ***** moron. If some guy starts shooting at you, what the ***** would you do? I hope you ***** rot in hell, you imbecile.
  • macdup, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1I dug it because I live really close to this and now prices are going to go up :-(
  • iamdegenatron, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4I shot the sheriff, but I didnt shoot no deputy, oh no! oh! I shot the sheriff, but I didnt shoot no deputy, ooh, ooh, oo-ooh
  • SuckMyDigg, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Growing plants in the ground? That's a shootin'.
    • unearth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Shootin' at police officers? You better believe that's a shootin'.
  • atomicartist, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Sad story, if the man shot and killed had the law in his sight, why fire on them. Your busted and no way out.
    Change your bloody countries laws on this matter and move on.
  • aelias, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1If someone really opened up on the cops, I'm surprised any of them lived. This story is textbook cop stuff. I was hoping they were at least unarmed so I could hate a little bit.
  • Dunphalunphy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1The campaign against marijuana production. Wow. That sounds futile
  • ZenFountain, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2"One of the people living at the farm climbed up a hill, aimed down at task force members and opened fire. Officers returned fire, striking the man."

    I support decriminalization and eventual legalized of weed. However, you're not going to get away with shooting at police officers reguardless of what crime is being committed.
  • LizardonaStick, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5They were armed and they attempted to KILL police officers. For that I have no sympathy. As far as I am concerned if you kill or attempt to kill an officer you should get the death penalty. Just because they were flouting a stupid law does not give them the right to kill. Most pro-marijuana people I know are less than violent and would be upset of someone shot their dog. How in the world would it be right to shoot at the police?

    The marijuana prohibition was ill-conceived and has never worked. That is obvious.

    Digging this story does not mean that you approve of the content of the article or the synopsis given by the submitter. It just means that the topic is important enough for people to take a look. Digg it so other people can read and decide for themselves.
    • happytron, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Everyone has limits on the extent to which they will tolerate an affront to their liberty before deciding to opt out of the state and deny the legitimacy of police officers. At that point the cops are just a band of armed thugs who intend to lock you up in a box. What would you expect to happen?
  • izzie2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2They shot Oldman?
    Bastards!
  • linuxhansl, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Why is it that these days whenever I read a story like this my first reaction is: "Did the cops fabricate the story? Did they plant the shotgun?"
    It is this reaction of mine that I find scary. Maybe we have just more exposure to these types of events, or these stories are over hyped and we just never read about cops doing good work, or are we really sliding into a society that is controlled by a mob wearing uniforms?
  • justiceforsome, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Sorry, this is not logical. A pot grower doesn't just shoot it out if he see's cops coming. It's just unlikely.
    What's more likely is that the cops shot first, the pot grower didn't shoot back and the cops planted the shotgun. Why?, because it happens ALL the time. You all know it's true, sad , but true.
  • VaporBro, on 10/26/2007, -0/+2Leeeeeeeeegalize it
  • DivisibleByZero, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"There was a shotgun found by the suspect"

    They really should have phrased that better. Does that mean the suspect found a shotgun, or they found a shotgun beside him?

    (Obviously they meant the second, but it made me do a double take)
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 74 of 74 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.