Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing most liked content since 01/20/2018 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    The push to legalize marijuana for adult recreational use got a boost Friday when a deadline for opposition groups to challenge petition signatures passed and no one stepped up. Now it will be up to the Secretary of State's election office to review a 500-signature sample of the 362,102 signatures that were turned in by the Committee to Regulate Marijuana like Alcohol in November, to determine whether there are enough valid signatures from registered voters to qualify for the Nov. 6 general election ballot. Once that review is complete, the state Board of Canvassers will rule on whether voters will see marijuana legalization on the ballot. "It’s great news, it shows the opposition must feel that we have a well-worded proposal, but that doesn’t mean we’re taking anything for granted," said Josh Hovey, spokesman for the pro-legalization group. And just because the group may have won this first battle — it must have 252,523 valid petition signatures to get on the ballot — it mean it has won the war. There are still two groups that have formed to formally oppose the ballot proposal: The Committee to Keep Pot out of Neighborhoods and Schools and the Healthy and Productive Michigan Committee. Neither had asked to challenge the petition signatures by Friday's 5 p.m. deadline, however. The first committee is funded by the Michigan Responsibility Council — an organization of businesses that are interested only in medical, not recreational, marijuana. That group is the only contributor so far to the anti-legalization effort with a $5,000 donation, according to campaign finance reports filed with the Secretary of State. "There are a number of options being looked at" for how the opposition campaign will develop, said Chris DeWitt, spokesman for the committee. "There certainly will be opposition of a robust nature." The other group — Healthy and Productive Michigan — is bankrolled so far by the group Smart Approaches to Marijuana, a Virginia-based group opposed to the legalization of marijuana, which has kicked in $150,000 to the campaign. The group, which was founded in 2013 by former U.S. Rep. Patrick Kennedy, D-Rhode Island, and Kevin Sabet, director of the Drug Policy Institute at the University of Florida, has been active in opposing legalization efforts in other states. Scott Greenlee, spokesman for Healthy and Productive Michigan, said his group kept an eye on the petitions as they were being delivered, but figured that the pro-legalization group had gotten enough of a cushion that they would be able to qualify for the ballot.. While millions are expected to be spent on both support and opposition of the proposal if it does make it on the ballot, that level of money hasn't materialized yet. The group pushing the ballot proposal spent most of the $651,736 it had raised so far on paying the National Petition Management team, which collected the signatures for the ballot proposal. And the Committee to Regulate Marijuana like Alcohol is now in debt to the tune of $257,484 owed to consultants, attorneys and fundraisers. "We're focused right now on paying off our campaign debts. But our fundraising continues to go strong. We have a lot of large and small donors across the state and country," Hovey said. "Ideally, we'd like to raise $8 million for the campaign, but we're aiming at between $5 million and $8 million." If it makes the November ballot, the proposal would: Levy a 10% excise tax at the retail level as well as the 6% sales tax. Split the tax revenues with 35% going to K-12 education, 35% to roads, 15% to the communities that allow marijuana businesses in their borders and 15% to counties where marijuana business are located. Allow communities to decide whether they’ll allow marijuana businesses. Restrict possession of marijuana that a person can carry for recreational purposes to 2.5 ounces, but individuals could keep up to 10 ounces in their homes. Follow the same type of licensing model that is being used for medical marijuana, which will provide for five categories of licenses — growers, processors, testers, secure transporters and dispensaries. Voters in eight states have legalized the recreational use of marijuana in recent years, including Colorado, California, Alaska, Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, Oregon, Washington and the District of Columbia. Canada has legalized marijuana for recreational use and that market is expected to start up sometime this summer. And Vermont's Legislature approved legalization last month.. The state of Arizona defeated a marijuana ballot proposal in 2016. The Board of State Canvassers has three ballot proposal petitions to work through and will do them in the order they were received: repealing the prevailing wage, which requires union-scale wages on public construction jobs; marijuana legalization, and shifting the way district lines are drawn for state and federal offices from the political party in power in the state Legislature to an independent commission. The Board has not set a timeline for when it will consider the three petitions. https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2018/02/09/marijuana-legalization-effort-signatures/321236002/
  2. 3 points
    As much as I hate it, I have to disagree with this based on the current state of the law. Assume for the sake of argument that we are discussing the most straightforward arrangement - the husband and wife patient-caregiver arrangement. One spouse's patient card will read "Authorized to Possess Plants: NO" while the other spouse's caregiver card will read "Authorized to Possess Plants: YES." The unfortunate problem becomes, if there is a police interaction while the patient is alone in the caregiver's grow room, is that the patient will have a card that explicitly says "Authorized to Possess Plants: NO" while they are possessing plants. I personally think that situation is to be avoided.
  3. 3 points
    Michigan State law is still set up so that you can become your wife's caregiver. That's probably one of the safest situations for medical marijuana caregiving in Michigan.
  4. 3 points
    4a/b card protects penalty in any manner (penalty for not paying taxes) and then 7e , tax is inconsistent with mmma and thus does not apply.
  5. 3 points
    The way you phrase and frame this scenario, makes it sound like you are an OAKLAND COUNTY police officer or prosecutor looking to mess with patients and caregivers. I've never heard of this happening. There is no known case of this happening in Michigan. This would never happen for this logical reason: Lets say Jimbo posted Bob Dole's card on Jimbo's "mystery garden (MG)". The police find the MG, check the card, see that its valid, and leave it alone. The police also enter it into their database and stakeout the grow until someone shows up. Jimbo shows up and enters the grow. The police roll up and ask Jimbo who he is. Jimbo is Jimbo, not Bob Dole, so the police charge him with being in the wrong grow/possession of more plants than he is allowed. Jimbo goes to jail. Nothing happens to Bob, hopefully, maybe only a visit from the police asking what the connection is. If you think someone stole (copied) and might be using your card, the solution would be to call LARA and explain to them that you need a new caregiver ID number (and a new card). That way your scenario would not work either, as the old caregiver ID number would be invalid. http://michigan.gov/mmp Telephone Number: 517-284-6400Email Address: LARA-BMMR-MMMPINFO@michigan.gov The best advice is to keep your cards secret, only you and your patients (plus any law enforcement that asks for it) should be able to see your card(s). The other advice is to use a P.O. Box for your LARA registered address.This is not a gray area at all, you do not have to use your grow address for your LARA registration. This is done to protect caregivers and patients from a multitude of bad situations, including federal agents with supremacy law wanting a list of people and where their medical grows are.
  6. 2 points
    Lawsuit Could Be The One To Legalize Marijuana Posted by CN Staff on February 15, 2018 at 05:55:27 PT By Mona Zhang, Contributor Source: Forbes Washington, D.C. -- On Wednesday, advocates and professionals in the cannabis industry descended on a federal court in New York to watch Justice Department lawyers try to dismiss a case against Attorney General Jeff Sessions. The suit involves a motley crew of plaintiffs: Alexis Bortell and Jager Cotte, both pediatric medical marijuana patients, Jose Belen, an Army combat veteran who uses cannabis to treat his PTSD, Marvin Washington, a former New York Jet-turned cannabis entrepreneur, and the Cannabis Cultural Association, a non-profit dedicated to ending the war on drugs and promoting people of color in the cannabis industry. Over the years, many have attempted to challenge the federal government’s classification of marijuana as a Schedule I substance. Wednesday’s hearing was both an example of how far the country has come on the issue and how far there still is to go. During the hearing, Judge Alvin Hellerstein considered the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the suit. Assistant U.S. Attorney Samuel Dolinger argued that the case should be dismissed because “courts around the country have considered similar or identical claims and have rejected them.” Dolinger and Hellerstein spent a good deal of time discussing the case of U.S. v. Kiffer, which affirmed the drug’s Schedule I status. “When they talk about Kiffer, a 1973 case… you really don't know the rest of the history,” Michael Hiller, lead counsel for plaintiffs in the case, told reporters after the hearing. He cited numerous developments since 1973, including the government’s Investigational New Drug program, Nixon’s Schafer Commission, the federal government’s very own cannabis patent, and the emergence of state-level marijuana programs. “There is a well-established body of case law that when the facts change, the courts have to change too,” said Hiller. “If you only decided case law based upon what people thought years before, we would never have Brown vs Board of Education… We would never have Windsor. We wouldn't have marriage equality.” Indeed, while other attempts to challenge marijuana’s Schedule I status have failed, the atmosphere in the court reflected the times. Supporters of cannabis reform showed up in droves, quickly filling the court and spilling into an overflow room. They laughed and cheered when the judge grilled Dolinger, who seemingly struggled to answer some of his questions. They scoffed when Dolinger cited Kiffer, suggesting that marijuana’s Schedule I status "was constitutionally rational." But perhaps most indicative of our changing times was that “the judge made absolutely clear that cannabis does not meet one of the three requirements,” for Schedule I status, said Hiller. “As far as I'm aware, very few judges have commented openly on [that].” “Your clients are living proof of the medical applications of marijuana,” Hellerstein told Hiller during the hearing. “I have to take the plausible allegations in your complaint as true. How could anyone say that your clients’ lives have not been saved by marijuana? How can anyone say that your clients’ pain and suffering has not been alleviated by marijuana? You can’t, right?” “I could not agree with you more, your Honor,” responded Hiller. While the judge’s views did reflect the changing times – a majority of Americans now support some sort of cannabis reform – he questioned whether it made sense to challenge the matter in a district court. “There are lots of things district judges have to do,” said Hellerstein. “When agencies are set up to do the very kind of thing that you want me to do, I think the right thing is to defer to the agency.” The lawyers for the plaintiffs recognized this. “We can't carry the day necessarily with a judge that feels constrained by what the law may keep him from doing, which is declaring this unconstitutional,” said co-counsel David Holland. “He knows it is, but he may not be able to do it. We need you all to keep the fight alive.” Still, the pro-cannabis camp was heartened by the judge’s statements. “Our judge gets it,” said Lauren Rudick, counsel for the plaintiffs. “And that was really important today.” For the time being, the judge delayed making a decision on the government’s motion to dismiss the case. “He's going to consider the issues over the next several days or weeks until he comes to a conclusion,” said Hiller. But the plaintiffs came away from the hearing feeling optimistic. “I think the judge made it very clear that he agrees and understands that cannabis is helping Alexis and Jagger and so many other people,” said Jagger’s father Sebastien Cotte. “We're going to keep fighting because we have to make this happen for everybody.... we're in it for the long run.” Dean Bortell, Alexis’ father, agreed. “Kids are growing up seeing this hypocrisy... if we don't get it done. But we're going to get it done.”
  7. 2 points
    True. Although I have to say it makes no sense that a patient be unauthorized to be near a plant that they are authorized to have everything that comes from it. The only legal purpose the plant has is to supply the patient who created the authorization in the first place.
  8. 2 points
    That depends. Are you currently using or abusing a controlled substance? If your answer is "yes" then you cannot purchase a gun. But, then again, that same question would be asked even if you still had a MM license. Just having a MM license isn't necessarily an admission that you use MM. You may have stopped using it. I don't think you HAVE to use MM just because you have a license. If you ever get tested you could claim that some patients were using in your presence and you probably inhaled some secondary smoke. I don't think that the "authorities" check the MM registry for gun license clearances. But hey, if they ever give you any grief about it tell them to PROVE IT YOU IGNORANT, RIDICULOUS, NAZI, COMMUNIST MUTHERPHUCKERS! Make sure you get their reaction on film. This tactic works well for Donald Trump. Should work for you, too?
  9. 2 points
    Michael Komorn has worked tirelessly for his clients at Komorn Law PLLC to return property seized and forfeited to the police. The items and property seized often has absolutely no medical marijuana (or any crime at all) connection whatsoever. Just looking at the list of things seized, none of it makes sense. 4 wheeler? Gas generator? 401k retirement account? Cars purchased 20 years ago and restored. Ladders, children's birthday money taken out of their Hallmark birthday cards. iphones, ipads, computers, cash, gold rings, guns. The police will take anything of value that they can in any medical marijuana case. As an expert in civil asset forfeiture, Michael Komorn and Komorn Law PLLC attorney Jeff Frazier educate other lawyers on the steps and pitfalls of forfeiture cases on ICLE. Michael Komorn and Jeff Frazier discuss with Rachael Sedlacek about the procedural requirements in a civil asset forfeiture case. Criminal defense can often involve recovering property seized by the police. Civil asset forfeiture cases require navigation of unique procedural rules and complex negotiations. LANSING, Mich. (WXYZ) - You have seen the movies. Police seize the stuff of crime bosses to stop a network of criminals, but could it happen to the average person? Could your stuff be seized even if you aren’t charged with a crime? Defense attorneys say it is happening all the time here in Michigan, especially to medical marijuana users.When police seize stuff they believe was bought or is money made from a crime, they start what is called a civil asset forfeiture process. Rep. Lucido says bill would prevent police from seizing innocent people's stuff Kim Russell 11:28 PM, Jan 30, 2018 LANSING, Mich. (WXYZ) - You have seen the movies. Police seize the stuff of crime bosses to stop a network of criminals, but could it happen to the average person? Could your stuff be seized even if you aren’t charged with a crime? Defense attorneys say it is happening all the time here in Michigan, especially to medical marijuana users. When police seize stuff they believe was bought or is money made from a crime, they start what is called a civil asset forfeiture process. “It allows law enforcement and benefits everybody, to remove the profit motive from drug dealing,” said Robert Stevenson, the Executive Director of the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police. Police say they only seize stuff they truly believe is connected to crimes. Often people are never charged with a crime or their belongings are kept after charges are dropped. “I did not get bound over by the judge but they still have my stuff,” said Ginnifer Hency as she testified before state lawmakers in 2015. She said she has multiple sclerosis and is a medical marijuana patient. She said even after a judge cleared her of any crime, the prosecutor fought to keep her valuables. Lawmakers changed the law to raise the burden of proof, but people are still voicing complaints. “I felt robbed, like a highway robbery,” said John Hamann of what happened to him and his dad Ron Hamann. The Hamanns say they believe it is about making money for law enforcement. When medical marijuana became legal, they applied for cards to be caregivers and patients. “I thought everything was legal,” said Ron. “Everything you are supposed to do. I followed all the weights, all the counts and everything like that, but it doesn’t matter. They take everything and say gotcha,” said John. They say almost three years ago police seized all their valuables. They say about two years later, only when they came close to winning their belongings back, were they charged with manufacturing marijuana. To them, it felt like a shakedown. “WCPO’s longstanding office protocol is that any civil forfeiture case and the associated criminal cases are kept separate. In other words WCPO has a fire wall in place..The civil and criminal cases are completely independent from one another,” said Maria Miller of the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office in a statement. The prosecutor’s office says the Hamann's face the charges because it is alleged that they had over 20 pounds of marijuana and 69 marijuana plants. Komorn, their attorney says that doesn’t make sense as a legal allegation. Ron had a patient card and proof he was a caregiver for two patients. He was allowed to possess 36 plants. John had a patient card and was a caregiver for 4 patients. He was allowed to possess 60 plants. As for the weight, Komorn says pictures submitted as evidence show the marijuana weighed was unusable in that it was wet and included stalks thrown in the garbage. Komorn says only usable marijuana is supposed to count in weight limitations. The Hamanns say what was seized has nothing to do with marijuana. They say police seized their 401Ks, which they contributed to through their jobs at a home remodeling company. Police told them they could because the money was from drugs. “I don’t understand it at all. It is on my paystub. It shows where my money comes from. It is all legal,” said John Hamann. “All the money is traceable from his job into his 401k,” said Rep. Peter Lucido (R-36th District). “There is no logic or reason for the police to do what they are doing. But they have the right to do it under state law.” Representative Peter Lucido has introduced House Bill 4158. He says police all too often seize property from the innocent.Taking a look at the numbers. The state’s asset forfeiture report says in 2016 police seized more than 15 million dollars in property. In about ten percent of those cases no one was charged. He wants the law changed, so that police would only be able to keep your stuff if there is a conviction, forcing police to at least charge people in order to keep their belongings. “They have a right to seize it and put it into an evidence locker, but if they don’t charge the person, what did the person do wrong under the law?” asks Lucido. “It does put people in a tough spot. It puts a person in a tough spot if those proceeds are from illegal activity,” said Stevenson. Law enforcement leaders, like Stevenson, say If someone wants to get their stuff back, all they have to do is answer the questions investigators have. It has the potential to be a powerful tool in the fight against crime. “One of the things you have to do in a civil case, which you do not have to do in a criminal case, is you have to answer questions,” said Stevenson. Michael Komorn argues that it hurts justice. He says he takes on clients who can’t afford his services, because their assets are seized. “The idea that the government just takes it, and the idea that by possessing it it becomes theirs, and the burden shifts to the owner of it to prove that the property is not guilty or that they got it legally, goes against the grain of what people expect from our legal system,” said Komorn. John and Ron Hamman says they believe they will be found not guilty - but in the meantime are being punished. Rep. Lucido will have the chance to make his case that this law needs to be changed during a hearing in Lansing on February 6. https://www.wxyz.com/news/rep-lucido-says-bill-would-prevent-police-from-seizing-innocent-peoples-stuff http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/vibrator-taken-during-marijuana-police-raid-says-woman Read more about criminal asset forfeiture and civil asset forfeiture on my blog. http://komornlaw.com/does-freezing-defendants-untainted-assets-violate-right-to-counsel-of-choice/ http://komornlaw.com/how-a-sex-toy-put-spotlight-on-michigan-civil-asset-forfeiture-laws-targeted-for-reform/ http://komornlaw.com/civil-asset-forfeiture-guilty-until-proven-innocent/ http://komornlaw.com/editorial-court-puts-limit-on-police-stealing/ http://komornlaw.com/feds-using-forfeiture-to-their-advantage/ http://komornlaw.com/mich-cops-seized-24m-in-2014-in-drug-cases/ http://komornlaw.com/house-speaker-michigan-must-reform-asset-forfeiture/ http://komornlaw.com/court-pot-as-tip-no-reason-for-police-to-seize-car/ http://komornlaw.com/vibrator-taken-during-marijuana-police-raid-says-woman-fox-2/ http://komornlaw.com/police-ransack-charges-dropped/ http://komornlaw.com/2015-michigan-state-police-asset-forfeiture-report-final/
  10. 2 points
    resto is simplifying the issue too much. its kind of a complicated issue. lets go through it real quick here. You (patient) your husband (caregiver) only one of you is allowed to possess 12 plants. in this case, only one of you would be allowed to be in the grow room. now here is another situation, which may work for you. you (patient, but keeps possession of plants on the LARA form) husband (caregiver, not allowed to possess plants) then only you would be allowed in the grow room. different way to do this you (patient, keep possession of plants) husband (caregiver to you, patient himself, keep possession of plants) now both of you would be able to be in the grow room, since you are both allowed to possess 12 plants. if your husband does not have a qualifying condition than the above situation would of course not work for you and your husband. there is one more situation that might work better for you. you (patient, cant keep plants) husband (caregiver, can keep plants) the husband waters, cultivates, grows the plants. then he cuts the plants down when the plants are ready to harvest. as soon as the plant is no longer living, it is an amount of marihuana. it is no longer a plant if it is not in growth material or living. then you are free to possess it and help trim etc. the reason this is important is there were 3 cases in the court of appeals and supreme court of michigan. people v bob said husband and wife could not grow together, because the total of the 21 plants was more than the 12 plants each could possess. people v bylsma said 3 caregivers could not grow together because the total of the 88 plants was more than the total 72 plants that is a maximum number of plants a caregiver could possess if they had all 5 patients plus themselves. people v mazur said a wife could not help her husband cultivate if she was not a patient. she merely wrote down some numbers on a post-it note that was found on a plant. this case went to the michigan supreme court. where it was found that any device or item used for marijuana cultivation was paraphernalia and thus legal under section 4 of the MMMA. so , its complicated. but in general, if you want to be in the grow room of 12 plants, your card better say "allowed to possess plants" for you to be in there. there maybe another issue that a grow room is only allowed to be either a patient OR a caregiver, but not both. but this issue has not been fully found in the courts yet. in reality, as long as you dont talk to the police without a lawyer at all, dont tell no one about you being in a grow room , and your grow room door automatically closes and locks and only one person has the key (or combination lock) then really you should be fine. otherwise to be 100% safe, wait for plants to be cut and dead. then you can trim and dry away!
  11. 2 points

    Goodbye Caregivers?

    I read it too. It was fake news. We debunked it here.
  12. 2 points
    I just do not want any legal grief. I am dealing with enough with my wife's recent diagnosis of cancer. Her caregiver basically rode on his patients backs until he applied for a commercial liscence. He never even grew her requested strains. So she is fed up and knows what my true intentions are. Her survival not my profit. Sometimes people just make bad choices. Those situations do not show true personality necessarily. But my interpretation of the law is that it's a state by state issue currently. Until federal government decriminalization. I've tried to contact a lawyer with the simple question of interpretation with no response from them yet. I am going to give it a go. She needs a reliable source of unadulterated medicine for the treatment she will be undergoing.
  13. 2 points

    Goodbye Caregivers?

    I believe that there is no use tax placed on patients that solely get their cannabis from their anonymously registered caregiver. It's only if they get their cannabis at a store. Then they become not anonymous anymore and are logged on records of the stores that are subjected to taxes.
  14. 2 points
    On Tuesday, February 6, the House Judiciary Committee will hold a public hearing on HB 4158, a bill that would require a criminal conviction before members of law enforcement could seize, keep and/or liquidate property siezed in connection with an alleged crime. I’ve been in contact with the sponsor of this bill, Rep. Peter Lucido, and he is seeking people who have had their property seized by overzealous members of law enforcement. He would especially like to hear from people who have had assets forfeited and who were never charged with any crime! Rep. Lucido’s bill bans seizures where the victim was never charged with any crime and forces cops and prosecutors to obtain a conviction before they can keep a person’s possessions. If you have been an asset forfeiture victim and you would like to tell our legislators your story, please contact me at bradforrester@minorml.org, or drop a comment below. http://minorml.org/asset-forfeiture-victims-needed-for-house-testimony/
  15. 2 points
    That's why they want to keep cannabis illegal.
  16. 2 points
    The first rule in using cannabis, superior to all others, is that you do not tell anyone anything they don't need to know.
  17. 1 point
    Thank you for continuing the fight for Autistic children who need the benefits of medical marijuana. My son is severely Autistic and has severe self injurious behaviors so severe that they have caused him serious injuries. Self injurious behavior should qualify my son. Drs offer my son anti psychodic medication with serious side effects especiall the long term effects which are potentially life threatening with no real proof that they will reduce self injurious behaviors. Don't stop fighting.
  18. 1 point
  19. 1 point
    Democrats Forming Marijuana Legalization Consensus Posted by CN Staff on February 15, 2018 at 05:45:36 PT By Tom Angell, Contributor Source: Forbes Washington, D.C. -- Support for marijuana legalization is quickly becoming a mainstream consensus position in the Democratic Party. Two of the party's leading potential 2020 presidential candidates joined together this week in support of far-reaching legislation that would end the federal prohibition of cannabis and encourage states to legalize the drug. “Legalizing marijuana isn’t a matter of if, it’s a matter of when," Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) said about the legislation, the Marijuana Justice Act, which he introduced last August. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), who signed onto the bill as a cosponsor on Wednesday and did a Facebook Live chat with Booker about it, called cannabis legalization "a social justice issue and a moral issue that Congress needs to address." The vocal pro-legalization support from the two senators, who are widely considered to be weighing campaigns for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, signals that a shift toward marijuana reform advocacy that has been underway in the party for some time is elevating to a near consensus. And polling shows that Democratic voters are in support of the move. Gallup found last year that 72 percent of Democrats back marijuana legalization, and a Quinnipiac University survey last month showed that 95 percent of the party’s voters support medical cannabis. The latter poll also showed that just 12 percent of Democrats want the federal government to interfere with the implementation state marijuana laws. Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent who caucuses with Democrats, also supports legalization. The senator, who introduced legislation to deschedule marijuana during his nearly successful campaign for the party's 2016 presidential nomination, is reportedly considering another run in 2020. Last week, Sanders's campaign organization launched an online petition calling for an end to marijuana prohibition and the broader "war on drugs." Democrats' march toward legalization seems to have been accelerated by the Trump administration's anti-cannabis moves. While Trump pledged during the campaign that he would respect local marijuana laws if elected, Attorney General Jeff Sessions last month to tore up Obama-era guidance that has generally allowed states to implement their own laws without federal interference. A large number of members of Congress from both parties, but Democrats in particular, immediately criticized the Justice Department reversal. "The Attorney General’s decision to rescind the Cole memo was a very bad one & I oppose it," Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (NY) tweeted. "I believe that the States should continue to be the labs of democracy when it comes to recreational & medical marijuana. Jeff, this is one place where states’ rights works. Let each state decide." House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi also slammed the move, tweeting, "Attorney General Sessions, your unjust war against Americans who legally use #marijuana is shameful & insults the democratic processes that played out in states across the country." But while most Democratic lawmakers tend to vote in support of marijuana proposals in Congress, the party is by no means unanimous on the issue. Longtime Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), for example, is one of Congress's most ardent opponents of marijuana law reform, and has voted against amendments to protect her state's medical cannabis law from Justice Department intervention. She also vigorously campaigned against marijuana reforms at the state level. And some Democrats were upset that congressional leaders chose Rep. Joe Kennedy III (D-MA), who opposes legalization, to deliver the party's response to President Trump's first State of the Union address last month. As a member of Congress, Kennedy has not only opposed his state's move to legalize marijuana, but has voted against amendments to shield state medical marijuana laws from federal interference, allow military veterans to access medical cannabis and protect children who use non-psychoactive cannabidiol extracts to treat severe seizure disorders. Kennedy knows that his views on cannabis are out of step with the party. "I come at it a little bit differently, obviously, than the vast majority of my colleagues,” he said in an interview. “I think the party is clearly moving in that legalization direction. It might already be there." But legalization isn't strictly a Democratic issue. Several Republican lawmakers have taken leadership roles in efforts to end federal cannabis prohibition. Sen. Cory Gardner (R-CO), for example, has gone so far as to actively block Justice Department nominees from being confirmed in protest of Sesssion's move. In a speech this week, Sessions called the dispute "frustrating" and implied that Gardner is prioritizing marijuana over national security. While support for marijuana law reform is growing across party lines -- Gallup's recent poll found for the first time that a bare majority of Republicans now back ending prohibition -- Democratic voters and elected officials are so far more likely to favor legalization. But although the party's platform adopted in 2016 included a plank calling for "a reasoned pathway for future legalization," that year's Democratic presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton, only went as far as voicing vague support for respecting state laws and slightly downgrading cannabis's federal status. And not all rumored 2020 contenders have embraced legalization like Booker, Gillibrand and Sanders have. At least not yet. While another potential 2020 Democratic presidential candidate, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), like Sanders, also recently launched an online petition about marijuana, she hasn't yet added her name onto any bills to change cannabis's status under federal law. Her position does seem to be evolving, though. In 2014, as state attorney general, Harris simply laughed in a reporter's face when asked about her position on legalization. But now she is signing letters calling on the federal government to respect state laws and cosponsoring legislation to allow banks to serve state-legal cannabis businesses. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) -- another potential 2020 contender -- is also cosponsoring the banking bill and has signed onto broader legislation to allow states to implement medical marijuana policies. A lot can happen before the 2020 Democratic National Convention, but it's a safe bet that the party's next presidential nominee will at least have a more far-reaching marijuana reform position than that of their 2016 candidate. Tom Angell publishes Marijuana Moment news and founded the nonprofit Marijuana Majority.
  20. 1 point

    Girl Scout Cookies Forum Cut

    I am growing her for first time now and she is purpling out at day 50 sticky trich covered rock hard buds. She isnt a real heavy yeilder but its def quality over quantity with this strain i will try upload a few pics
  21. 1 point
    Medical marijuana used to treat autism-related disorders PALM BEACH COUNTY, Fla. — Abigail Dar’s son, Yuval, is 24-years-old, and she says he is severely autistic. Mollie Ryckman Barrett’s youngest daughter, Sumer, is 13-years-old and has Asperger Syndrome. This is the story of two moms looking for answers to help their children. "Medication helps, at times. Sumer, who is doing well in seventh grade, takes two of them," Barrett said. “One helps her focus with her brain and one relaxes her brain a little bit.” Always, though, there is the nagging worry. “How safe really is the medication we are giving our children today?” asked Barrett. Dar gave her autistic son higher and higher doses of pharmaceutical prescription medications for years in a bid to control his anxiety and aggressiveness. Dar complained, “They just give medication hoping it will give an answer, which it doesn’t, and I get my kid crazier and crazier.” Amid that frustration, Dar had an alternative within reach. “Israel is much more liberal regarding medical cannabis,” Dar said. Dar spoke from her home outside Tel Aviv, Israel, where she is at the forefront of medical marijuana research. “I gave him (Yuval) his first dose and it was a miracle,” she remembered. The dose she talked about was a strain of medical cannabis she and her son’s psychiatrist settled on after trial and error. Yuval became calmer, less anxious, more attentive. “It’s a game changer,” Abigail said, “it gave us quality of life.” Barrett said she wants the same opportunity for her daughter, but their home in West Palm Beach, Florida is far removed from the access, and attitudes, available in Israel. “We should have a right to decide in our home what is in the best interest of our children, what is the safest alternative option for them,” Barrett said. She said she hopes to someday use cannabis derived oils for Sumer, but her child’s doctor does not agree with the idea. “He just says,” Barrett recalled, “that he doesn’t feel it’s a safe option and she seems OK on her medicine and there really are no side effects.” The American Academy of Pediatrics does not support medical marijuana use for autism-related disorders. One big issue, experts say, is the fact that there are many strains of cannabinoids in marijuana. Dr. Norina Ocampo is a South Florida pediatrician. “The other issue is they think probably all these compounds work synergistically with each other to help, so how do you pick which one will be the right compound,” she said. Dar is working with Israeli doctors, pushing for much more extensive research on that prime question. “Today we have over 300 kids having access to medical cannabis,” she said. https://www.kshb.com/news/health/autism-and-medical-marijuana- Medical marijuana used to treat autism-related disorders Michael Williams 9:56 PM, Feb 5, 2018 2:03 PM, Feb 6, 2018
  22. 1 point

    Caregiver here with opening.

    Midland caregiver and patient here. I am in the Midland area but am willing to discuss any area and I deliver. Honest and reliable here. The meds I supply are the same meds I myself use for a variety of medical issues. Been a caregiver for patients and a contributing, supporting member of this site for many years. Am experienced in many forms of medicating. Have had patients from already experienced medical users to patients who have never used meds before and can help you along your path. Am very personable and easy to get along with making the transition to using a caregiver an easy and drama free experience. I truly believe and know this medicine helps many people with many ailments and if you ended up on this website you have taken a big step in the right direction. There are many good caregivers here. Please do not be afraid to send a private message with any questions you may have. I will do the best I can to help you get transitioned or find a new caregiver. If I myself cannot help you perhaps I can point you in the direction of another caregiver on this site that may be able to help you. Look forward to hearing from you.
  23. 1 point
    Also reap the pollen from your neighbors' hermaphroditic plants. Or the white flies from dirty clones that your neighbor brings in.
  24. 1 point
  25. 1 point

    Goodbye Caregivers?

    Just read a couple days ago about patients who have caregivers will need to pay the tax.
  26. 1 point
    your question sounds like you were convicted of a crime in another state? you can always apply for a caregiver license. LARA then does a background check on you, and then either approves or denies you. if you are bored you can do your own ichat (michigan state only) background check, just to see whats on your record. ichat specifically says they do not do federal records or other state felonies. https://apps.michigan.gov/ichat/home.aspx to answer your other question, if a felony in another state counts as a felony here... no idea. maybe yes maybe no. depends on what kind of other background checks that LARA runs. the quick answer is just apply to be a caregiver and see what they decide. unless you have an active warrant in another state....
  27. 1 point

    Goodbye Caregivers?

    If you look at the rules we have now for caregivers, obviously set up to keep a caregiver business model small, and then look to what is needed to qualify for the MMFLA program, it's obvious that the State doesn't want real caregivers in their program. There really is no intersection between the two if you are talking caregivers that were actually just real caregivers. With a little thought it becomes obvious that the MMFLA was set up to kick real caregivers to the curb. As a lot of us predicted.
  28. 1 point
    Sun grown (with appropriate light deprivation) is almost always preferable to indoor, in my opinion.
  29. 1 point
  30. 1 point
  31. 1 point

    PGT #377 - When You Gonna Wake Up

    PGT #377 - When You Gonna Wake Up View the full article
  32. 1 point
    UGH. When I see the acronym CRMLA it reminds me of NAMBLA.
  33. 1 point
    The State of Michigan Treasury department just issued a tax advisory statement indicating that the Patients of Caregivers should pay a 6% "use" tax on the product they get from their caregiver. Seems totally wacky since their is no legal way for Treasury to identify who is a patient. That said I wonder how twisted this could become given an overage prosecution. Imagine a scenario where a caregiver tries a section 8 defense and claims they had more than 2.5z since their patient needed more. Prosecutor then asks patient to produce records on how much tax they paid.
  34. 1 point
    House Bill Seeks To End War On Marijuana Posted by CN Staff on January 19, 2018 at 05:29:56 PT By Janet Burns Source: Forbes Washington, D.C. -- Yesterday, Representatives Barbara Lee and Ro Khanna introduced a house bill aimed to reform federal cannabis laws and foster healing in communities that prohibition has hurt most. Introduced in the Senate last August by New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, the 'Marijuana Justice Act of 2017' seeks to remove cannabis from the U.S.' illegal and restricted drug 'schedule,' and to address the destructive impacts that cannabis prohibition continues to have on both individuals and their government. During a Facebook Live event, Reps. Lee and Khanna joined Sen. Booker and members of the nonprofit Drug Policy Alliance to announce the introduction of a companion bill to Booker's S. 1689, which has a dozen House cosponsors so far. They also discussed the need for meaningful cannabis reform--and voters' demand for it--in the wake of our mass incarceration crisis, which has primarily impacted communities of color around the country. According to the lawmakers, recovery from our generations-long war on cannabis must include a range of efforts at the federal level, from adjusting the role and responsibility of law enforcement to reinvesting in communities we have left, so to speak, on the battlefield. Among other things, the bill would provide funding for key services and community development in the country's hardest-hit areas, including job training and education. It would also automatically expunge marijuana possession from individuals' records across the country, allow those serving time for marijuana crimes to seek resentencing, and establish rules limiting certain federal funds for cannabis-prohibiting states whose arrest rates show economic or racial bias. Rep. Lee commented that the bill offers a roadmap to ending the war on drugs and mass incarceration for communities of color, but also "an essential step" in correcting the injustices that prohibition has wrought. "People understand that marijuana criminalization has failed, and we’re committed to the goal [of ending prohibition], but we also need to get it right. The victims of this policy need to be at the forefront of this effort," Lee said. "Not only are we fighting back, but we’re moving forward." In light of the current Department of Justice's stance on the matter, she noted, the time to start mapping the road ahead is now. "This issue has never been more critical than it is today," Lee said. "We know who is most likely to suffer from a revival of the war on drugs, and that is marginalized communities of color." Sen. Booker commented that while cannabis has attracted mainstream approval and investment in the past few years, authorities and industry leaders have yet to acknowledge the plant's social history in most cases. "All this rushed enthusiasm going on for marijuana legalization, from California to New Jersey, strikes me as hypocrisy if you're not trying to [mitigate] and help repair the effects of the war on drugs," Booker said. He pointed out that millions of Americans have been imprisoned (or remain there) and have had their children, social services, and work opportunities are taken away "for doing something three of the past four presidents have admitted publicly to doing." "We now have a devastating reality in America, where communities of privilege plonk their marijuana use in the open, and talk about it without fear of consequences, whereas in places like where I live [in Newark], people are still suffering daily." Rep. Khanna said that the $500 million proposed by the bill for reinvestment in communities most impacted by marijuana prohibition would be more than covered by the nearly $7 billion in tax revenue the legal cannabis industry is poised to create. In turn, that investment could help members of those communities--many of whom have spent decades building the cannabis field we know today, and suffered incarceration for it--to have a real share in the growing industry, according to Khanna. "It's estimated that legal cannabis in the U.S. would create $40 billion in revenue and nearly a million jobs," he said. "But it's about more than that $40 billion--it's about equality, and getting rid of the legal past that is stifling individuals' opportunity and their future." Cannabis reform activists and experts have broadly praised the bill, with several calling it the most comprehensive legislative attempt to end and recover from cannabis prohibition to date. Kassandra Frederique, New York State Director for the Drug Policy Alliance, which helped draft the original bill, commented in a statement, “In New York, where law enforcement has arrested more than 800,000 people in the last twenty years alone for low-level marijuana possession, the introduction and passage of this legislation will have a significant impact.” “Across the country, marijuana enforcement has been devastating to communities of color, primarily because of racially-biased policing and the numerous collateral consequences that result from a marijuana arrest or conviction," Frederique said. "This bill makes clear to state and local elected officials that they cannot move forward beyond prohibition without taking a serious look at the historical and ongoing impacts of drug war policies.” Erik Altieri, Executive Director of the National Organization to Reform Marijuana Laws (NORML), commented in a statement, "The Marijuana Justice Act is by far the most comprehensive piece of legislation ever introduced federally when it comes to ending our failed policy of prohibition and addressing the egregious harms that policy has wrought on already marginalized communities.” He continued, “The ongoing enforcement of cannabis prohibition financially burdens taxpayers, encroaches upon civil liberties, engenders disrespect for the law, impedes legitimate scientific research into the plant's medicinal properties, and disproportionately impacts communities of color. It is time for federal lawmakers to acknowledge this reality." So far, eight states have legalized marijuana for adult use, while 29 states have approved it for medical use. According to the most recent Gallup poll, 64% of Americans support legalizing the drug, including majority shares of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. Roseanne Scotti, New Jersey State Director of the Drug Policy Alliance, also commented in a statement that federal leadership in this area will be crucial to helping states create fair and equitable rules--but that, if need be, states are prepared to do without it. “Marijuana laws in New Jersey have disproportionately harmed communities of color, [and] African Americans are three times more likely to be arrested for marijuana than whites even though both use marijuana at similar rates," Scotti said. "Legislation to legalize marijuana in our state must include policies to right these wrongs," she continued. "We welcome this new federal legislation, but with or without federal action, New Jersey will move forward with marijuana legalization rooted in racial and social justice.” In a press call, Drug Policy Alliance national policy associate Queen Adesuyi also noted that cannabis' "unprecedented" benefits to public health have garnered wide public attention, with nearly two-thirds of Americans supporting its outright legalization, 91% supporting medical use, and a full 70% opposed to federal interference thereof. Adesuyi added, "It's time to discuss not if we should end marijuana prohibition, but how we should end prohibition." Janet Burns covers tech, culture, and other fun stuff from Brooklyn, NY. She also hosts the cannabis news podcast The Toke.
  35. 1 point
  36. 1 point

    THC/CBD Shots

    I have seen those pills, and also those that are having so much trouble they can only take liquids. And those that really struggle but still take them as prescribed. That is why I suggested what I did. I am just saying a lozenge might be easier for some patients for various reasons.
  37. 1 point

    THC/CBD Shots

    I always thought lozenges were a great delivery mechanism (both sublingual and ingestion), I wonder why they are not more popular than infused foods and beverages? I would think they would be more popular than capsules, even.
  38. 1 point
    opted-in / opted out map of communities in the MMFLA http://michigan-marijuana-lawyer.com/municipalities/
  39. 1 point
    A lot of township are requiring the grow to be in a pole barn or a green house with carbon filters and scrubbers. Go to LARA and read up on the rules for each of the grows. The township must opt in before you can apply for a license. Also each municipality has different rules and lot size requirements. A good source of info for opt in municipalities is Cannabis Legal Group as they have a map that shows opt in and opt out municipalities. The license will be under the MMFLA.
  40. 1 point
  41. 1 point
    I've had several Kush strains. One of my favorites was a Master Kush my CG supplied me with a few years ago. I saw it at a dispensary and their strain, while inexpensive, gave me a headache. Very unusual. I usually never get headaches from using MMJ.
  42. 1 point
  43. 1 point
  44. 1 point
  45. 1 point
  46. 1 point
  47. 1 point
    This from the person who has the following in their sig. eat crow My bump, and interest in this topic has nothing to do with skunk x haze.
  48. 1 point
    seems to me that most strains we are growing now are about the same what happened to the good stuff, we have been bastardized
  49. 1 point
    BUMP for the uninformed.
  50. 1 point
    darn man, have we all been bamboozled ? i grew some 'gold' seeds outside in '73 that to this day connot be duplicated, it seems most strains now have bastardized