Haha, good one, H Android.
Let us put this argument to rest once and for all, it seems the bashers love to revisit from time to time the faulty assumption that RFMK is breaking federal law by selling the CannaCig.
21 USC 863 : definitions can be found here
http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/21usc/863.htm
Under exemptions, we find the following letter of the law :
(f) Exemptions
This section shall not apply to--
(1) any person authorized by local, State, or Federal law to manufacture, possess, or distribute such items; or
(2) any item that, in the normal lawful course of business, is imported, exported, transported, or sold through the mail or by any other means, and traditionally intended for use with tobacco products, including any pipe, paper, or accessory
The key is that the dispensaries and shops actually selling the CannaCig are licensed and protected under state law to be allowed to operate under such exceptions. RFMK a Nevada business is not actually selling them at these stores, the dispensary stores are selling the product direct to the consumer. And those dispensaries are protected under local and state law in order to operate as an exception to this overriding federal mandate, which is already hotly contested around the country and could have a high likelyhood over getting overturned late this year.
As for the details of state law? Well, you can examine the details of say Californias MMJ laws here
http://www.shouselaw.com/medical-marijuana-dispensary.html
There is also a decent article about the matter here
http://www.nocuffs.com/drug_cases/mar_Marijua...rnalia.php
An excerpt from that article states,
"It should also be noted that an individual who owns, operates or maintains a business where drug paraphernalia is kept, displayed, sold, furnished, transferred or given away (for legal substances) must keep it in a separate room, inaccessible to minors who are unaccompanied by their parents. Violating this law will not invite criminal penalties but may provide grounds for the revocation of one’s license. "
This suggests that even if businesses are lazy and do not follow the letter of the law to the "T", then they still are not going to suffer criminal penalties, instead they will just have to possibly go through a paper work hassle. It goes on to suggest that even if charged with possession of drug paraphernalia it is at maximum merely a $1,000 fine and up to six months in jail, however I interpret the code here to mean for individuals possessing the devices, not the businesses selling them.
It is clear that even the federal law-makers and agents working to try to use the generic federal mandates to close down MMJ dispensaries and shops are having difficulty and that is because the local and state laws protect these businesses and RFMK operates via supply contract with these businesses which are protected as an exception to these laws.
It is rather amusing how the basher arguments always attempt to use some kind of probablistic argument to make their point of view more credible, when really any use of chance or probability in such legal discussions mean absolutely nothing and is just mere distraction from the crux of the matter. There are no odds which we can place on a particular law presiding or a likelyhood of a particular law being used to bring litigation to such businesses or not. Either the law is clear and these businesses are operating against the law and will be shut down OR the law is unclear and the businesses will continue to operate because of the loopholes and exceptions used specifically because of the lack of clarity in the federal mandates. It seems apparent that up to now, the federal law has lost ground because it is generic and the chances are that it will be tossed out by a populus vote sooner or later. Perhaps as early as November!!!
