Breaking News From Msp

[welj31]

I hope I am right also Hayduke

 

The privatization for the program was talked about with Rep Cushingberry and the MDCH had 2 informal bids from companies that expressed interest in doing the job. Both came in over the income of the program itself. That is when the meeting went to getting the bids in on the new printers and in a timely manner.

 

Is there a link to read up on CPU?

I have put out feelers to get info on the cpu. I asked for membership prices, how to join, and how many mmembers along with any other info they may have for the public. Waiting to hear back.

[peanutbutter]

The MSP position is to let the judge sort it out. They fear people will be denied the right to become a patient, and still carry their original paperwork, which the MSP cannot confirm without a card number, and it may allow them to avoid arrest when actually the MSP would like to arrest them.

 

By issuing a pin number prior to the issuance of your card, the MSP or local police could find out through LIEN that you are a legit patient who has not yet been issued your card with your permanent number for the year.

 

The reason we have a problem is that the MSP believes it is their right to completely ignore a direct order from the people of this state.

 

That is the result of many years of treating the people as if they were supposed to be controlled, directed and repressed. They don't understand their responsibility in the face of a direct order from the people via election.

 

They just don't understand that they ARE NOT IN CHARGE OF THE PEOPLE.

 

I don't give a bunny sh!t if they feel like obeying or not. That is not their right.

[peanutbutter]

If the MSP doesn't like the marching orders given to them by the voters ..

 

then they should quit their jobs. Just be honest and quit the job ..

[MightyMightyMezz]

If the MSP doesn't like the marching orders given to them by the voters ..

 

then they should quit their jobs. Just be honest and quit the job ..

 

They used to be all like "Hey, I'm just enforcing the law. If you want the law changed then you are free to make that happen. That's what makes this country so great..." Well, we DID change the law, so now what's up!

[peanutbutter]

They used to be all like "Hey, I'm just enforcing the law. If you want the law changed then you are free to make that happen. That's what makes this country so great..." Well, we DID change the law, so now what's up!

 

EXACTLY!

[dlovas]

This is a emil I received today. You too can join this group for information updates.

 

 

 

you received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Michigan Medical Cannabis Updates"

 

 

On May 26, 2010

 

Yesterday CPU principals had a meeting with two Michigan State Police officers from the Legislative Liaison Executive Resource Section. It was a productive meeting.

 

We feel it important that we give some of the most current and very important news of this meeting out to other people in the medical cannabis community.

 

The officers we met with were both attorneys, and were very familiar with the law. They stated very clearly that in the eyes of the Michigan State Police, patient to patient transfers are illegal.

 

Additionally, they advised us that in the eyes of the Michigan State Police, dispensaries are illegal. They advised us that investigations are already under way taking a look at the dispensaries that are already open.

 

They left very little doubt in our minds that they were stating these things in earnest.

 

While this is a conservative view of the law, people should realize the officers were forthcoming with this information. CPU urges patients and caregivers and anyone involved in a dispensary or compassionate care center to be aware of this information and take care to stay within the law.

 

 

 

 

Program Status Update (5/21/2010): Application Forms and Instructions are available for printing from this website.

 

Program Statistics:

 

31,543 original and renewal applications received since April 6, 2009.

16,442 patient registrations issued.

7,141 caregiver registrations issued.

4,415 applications denied -- most due to incomplete application or missing documentation.

Applications are reviewed within 15 days of receipt. Incomplete applications are denied and applicants are then notified of denial by certified and regular mail.

Complete applications, change forms and reapplications for previous denials are then processed in the date order in which they are received. If a denial letter is not received, then the application is deemed valid. The statute currently allows for a copy of the application submitted to serve as a valid registry identification if the card is not issued within 20 days of its submission to the department. At this time, we are unable to issue valid registry identification cards within the statutory time frame with the resources available to us. Currently staff is issuing registry identification cards for valid applications received at the end of January. We continue to review and revise our processing methods in order to more efficiently process and issue the valid registry cards.

The staff is diligently working to process the applications and is having difficulty responding to all the voicemails left on the Medical Marihuana Registry phone line. We appreciate your patience and ask that applicants refrain from calling to inquire about the status of the application unless your application was submitted prior to early January.

*************************

The following information added by John Wells

 

"then the application is deemed valid"

 

Please note the MSP will NOT accept paperwork as valid.

P2P is cleary in the law ..how is this illegal..?

[dlovas]

The reason we have a problem is that the MSP believes it is their right to completely ignore a direct order from the people of this state.

 

That is the result of many years of treating the people as if they were supposed to be controlled, directed and repressed. They don't understand their responsibility in the face of a direct order from the people via election.

 

They just don't understand that they ARE NOT IN CHARGE OF THE PEOPLE.

 

I don't give a bunny sh!t if they feel like obeying or not. That is not their right.

 

Fire Up PB..FIRE UP..! LOL..P2P is in the law....so I Concur I don't give a bunny muffin what the MSP say they obviously cannot read the dang law. Dispensaries...well thats another story...I am sure they are going to deo a sweep fairly soon. Wish nothing bad upon nobody but its just the vagueness of the law that makes dispensaries look so bad. But P2P all day every day of the week twice on sundays,,,,fairly clear in the law if u ask me. However there are those Thuggin Popo's that need some ovr time to keep their dwindling Overtime due to serious police force cut backs to support their families that will surely and in most cases illegally drop everythig they are doing to raid a CG or Patient harming nobody just growing a darn PLANT..!!!!! We got a black man in the "white house" which shows progress but a plant is still illegal...seriously WTF? Is America backwards or what....

[+Dickinson County CC]

When the law says transfer, it really means transfer as to the patient caregiver relationship not the general public or other patients, even though both are allow to possess. There will be liberal and conservative translations of the law, but what matters is court case. So really, even though everyone has a opinion only one of them are right till a judge slaps a verdict ie they aren't legal and with MDCH and MSP talking the same language thats what matters.

All the other chips will fall where they may.

[Guest Wayne]

But your going to need some bodies to test the law with. Gonna suck if the courts can't find language in the law or rules supporting dispensaries or such. Brave volunteers. I wish them nothing but the best as it seems likely we will get many opportunities for answers.

[peanutbutter]

It seems that the MDCH and the MSP have conspired to make every single patient in the system a criminal.

 

So exactly what these two agree to is not anything that I'm impressed with. If they are left up to their own tricks, everyone will become criminals.

 

The worst thing is when there is someone that claims to represent the entire community turns around and agrees with these power hungry bureaucrats.

 

When the law says transfer, it really means transfer as to the patient caregiver relationship not the general public or other patients, even though both are allow to possess. There will be liberal and conservative translations of the law, but what matters is court case. So really, even though everyone has a opinion only one of them are right till a judge slaps a verdict ie they aren't legal and with MDCH and MSP talking the same language thats what matters.

All the other chips will fall where they may.

[peanutbutter]

When the law says transfer, it really means transfer as to the patient caregiver relationship not the general public or other patients, even though both are allow to possess.

 

They say the same thing about "acquire." The claim is that you can only acquire from a caregiver. And then only the caregiver related to that specific patient.

 

What about those patients that have no caregiver? These restrictive folks try to teach that it is against the law for any patient without a caregiver to obtain any medicine at all.

 

We've been over and over this stuff here. Bottom line you are being the mouthpiece for those powers that wish to put every one of us in jail.

[+Dickinson County CC]

Well, that is MY interpretation, and there is one way to prove it.

 

Get two patients to stand in front of a group of officers of the State Police and lets see what happens.

Yes, 3ma has said that 'what happens privately is your own business' and it is still a nice disclaimer.

 

But trying to confuse me with what the CPU is doing, or their message will get you into trouble. I simply am the messenger and like you I have a opinion. Is my opinion right? I don't know but if the MSP and MDCH say they aren't legal, they mean its not legal, either by default or because it isn't defined in the law and we all know that changing the law is pretty much not going to happen.

The Safer Coalition for the Detroit legalization and the city ordinances are good steps to making the judges rule one way or the other but if its not in actual black and white I just don't buy it or the assertions that it is in black and white when clearly the law is speaking about patients and their caregivers, not all caregivers or patients.

I will come down on the conservative side of this law everytime because I have no reason or want to PUSH to find the borders. They are already defined for me. Mostly.

[peanutbutter]

Well, that is MY interpretation, and there is one way to prove it.

 

Get two patients to stand in front of a group of officers of the State Police and lets see what happens.

Yes, 3ma has said that 'what happens privately is your own business' and it is still a nice disclaimer.

 

But trying to confuse me with what the CPU is doing, or their message will get you into trouble. I simply am the messenger and like you I have a opinion. Is my opinion right? I don't know but if the MSP and MDCH say they aren't legal, they mean its not legal, either by default or because it isn't defined in the law and we all know that changing the law is pretty much not going to happen.

The Safer Coalition for the Detroit legalization and the city ordinances are good steps to making the judges rule one way or the other but if its not in actual black and white I just don't buy it or the assertions that it is in black and white when clearly the law is speaking about patients and their caregivers, not all caregivers or patients.

I will come down on the conservative side of this law everytime because I have no reason or want to PUSH to find the borders. They are already defined for me. Mostly.

 

The word "transfer" is in black and white. The word "caregiver" is not within the context of the word "transfer."

 

The people that don't like the law are trying to insert that word "caregiver" into the what is "medical use" section.

 

They work themselves into circles until they convince themselves the word "caregiver" exists in that section.

 

No matter how many times they chase their tails in that circle, the word "caregiver" still will not be in that section.

[Marijuana Ranch]

This is a emil I received today. You too can join this group for information updates.

 

 

 

you received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Michigan Medical Cannabis Updates"

 

 

On May 26, 2010

 

Yesterday CPU principals had a meeting with two Michigan State Police officers from the Legislative Liaison Executive Resource Section. It was a productive meeting.

 

We feel it important that we give some of the most current and very important news of this meeting out to other people in the medical cannabis community.

 

The officers we met with were both attorneys, and were very familiar with the law. They stated very clearly that in the eyes of the Michigan State Police, patient to patient transfers are illegal.

 

Additionally, they advised us that in the eyes of the Michigan State Police, dispensaries are illegal. They advised us that investigations are already under way taking a look at the dispensaries that are already open.

 

They left very little doubt in our minds that they were stating these things in earnest.

 

While this is a conservative view of the law, people should realize the officers were forthcoming with this information. CPU urges patients and caregivers and anyone involved in a dispensary or compassionate care center to be aware of this information and take care to stay within the law.

 

 

 

 

Program Status Update (5/21/2010): Application Forms and Instructions are available for printing from this website.

 

Program Statistics:

 

31,543 original and renewal applications received since April 6, 2009.

16,442 patient registrations issued.

7,141 caregiver registrations issued.

4,415 applications denied -- most due to incomplete application or missing documentation.

Applications are reviewed within 15 days of receipt. Incomplete applications are denied and applicants are then notified of denial by certified and regular mail.

Complete applications, change forms and reapplications for previous denials are then processed in the date order in which they are received. If a denial letter is not received, then the application is deemed valid. The statute currently allows for a copy of the application submitted to serve as a valid registry identification if the card is not issued within 20 days of its submission to the department. At this time, we are unable to issue valid registry identification cards within the statutory time frame with the resources available to us. Currently staff is issuing registry identification cards for valid applications received at the end of January. We continue to review and revise our processing methods in order to more efficiently process and issue the valid registry cards.

The staff is diligently working to process the applications and is having difficulty responding to all the voicemails left on the Medical Marihuana Registry phone line. We appreciate your patience and ask that applicants refrain from calling to inquire about the status of the application unless your application was submitted prior to early January.

*************************

The following information added by John Wells

 

"then the application is deemed valid"

 

Please note the MSP will NOT accept paperwork as valid.

 

Lot's of us received this email from Tim Beck.

Who is CPU is it a 3med, retread?

[Guest hayduke]

we are not related to 3Med at all

[+Dizledot]

Dizz, I hope those folks are making this abundantly clear to Mr. Cox and the MSP

 

If not I will ask the guy's I know to do so....

'

Dizz

[Marijuana Ranch]

we are not related to 3Med at all

 

 

420Peace hayduke,

 

Thanks.

 

Please

Who, What, When, Where, Why CPU.

[Guest hayduke]

private group. nothing more needs to be said. you got me hear today to help give out the same info Tim Beck has put out. Some want the info, others wish to hurl insults about my panties.

 

If you wish more info email me and I will give you a private phone number.

[+Dizledot]

private group. nothing more needs to be said. you got me hear today to help give out the same info Tim Beck has put out. Some want the info, others wish to hurl insults about my panties.

 

If you wish more info email me and I will give you a private phone number.

 

 

 

 

Hey thanks for the info.... "We" can get pretty riled up over this stuff. I'm sure any credible info that is passed along is appreciated ............ we're all sensitive about our rights to use and possess right now

 

Dizz

[welj31]

To all parties posting: Lets keep it civil. No personal attacks. We can talk about this with out attacking. Thanks

[mstone]

Can we please put a Goggle calender on this site that list all meeting and hearings around the state. I would love to show my support but it always seems I find out the night before or day of the event. Giving everyone a little advanced notice would greatly help turn out.

[welj31]

Hello everyone

I am going to try to explain where I stand on all of this.

First I am still with 3MED.

3MED is not part of the CPU.

I am using the 3MA website to try and unite ALL groups in our community.

I don’t know a lot about CPU. I believe they are a private group with paid membership.

I don’t know a lot about Mary L. . I have only met her two times. At our last meeting she said I would be helping with the meetings with MSP. I did not hear back about these meetings till after they happened. That’s most likely my fault for making some people mad. I did “hear” she worked with the Native Americans in MI.

I am unaware of any connection between CPU and 3MA.

CPU has shared some information with us (ie:me) about meeting they have went to.

I have contacted MSP asking to be a part of these meetings without reply.

I have made the statement that I don’t feel anyone should have to pay to have their voice heard. However CPU is a private thing so I cant tell them they MUST include us in their actions.

I have been stating that we all need to unite. This is part of the reason why. We all need to be on the same page. And I believe before we go forward with meetings we need to know what the people want.

I would be more than happy to go to the CPU meetings. But I was not invited and I wont pay to be invited.

As for Julie I have never met her, but she does seem to keep us all up to date on meetings and goings on in Lansing.

Greg Starks …Yes I have talked with him several time and yes he is a very capable person.

Neither of these two have received a penny as far as I know to help keep us informed.

I work for the people and only the people. I work to unite and put to rest problems such as this one.

I see us being able to use the 3MA website as a tool to collect the votes of the people and see what they want with out charging them.

If you have questions ask. I will answer IF I can.

[jamieuke]

They say the same thing about "acquire." The claim is that you can only acquire from a caregiver. And then only the caregiver related to that specific patient.

 

What about those patients that have no caregiver? These restrictive folks try to teach that it is against the law for any patient without a caregiver to obtain any medicine at all.

 

We've been over and over this stuff here. Bottom line you are being the mouthpiece for those powers that wish to put every one of us in jail.

 

The narrow interpretation of the State Police attorney, could leave patients without a viable, safe means to access medicine. In my opinion, any policy or interpretation, or municipal ordinance etc., that contributes to making it harder or impossible for the medical marihuana patient to be able to get a necessary supply when needed,within reason, is contrary to the spirit and the intent of the MMMA. No matter how the scenario may arrive, and the possible situations are endless, there are times when a legal patient will be in need of medicine, and their own garden or primary caregiver's garden is not able to produce, at the moment, what is reasonably needed for treatment. To have a private club where those members with more than what they immediately need, can bring it in and get it down to those who need it, seems to make a lot of sense as a means to carry out the purpose of the law and to keep a patient from having to do without medication, than simply telling the patient that he or she has to suffer or use other chemicals that are not preferred. Particularly, if the patient has been able to replace or significantly cut down on pharmaceuticals that may be toxic and/or addictive.I do not believe that the voters ever envisioned scenarios where patients would be legally allowed to suffer over not being able to acquire medicine outside of the specific primary caregiver/patient relationship. Other aspects of the law would be in conflict of such a strict ,narrow interpretation, the MSP is adopting, as well. It would be exceptionally cooler if education, logic, realization, acceptance, understanding and compassion could take the place of tax payer funded resources to enforce a dangerous legal opinion, that is seemingly in direct conflict with what the voters overwhelmingly stated was to be protected by law.

[peanutbutter]

^^^ what he said! ^^^

 

The voters intended patients to be able to use cannabis.

[peanutbutter]

Patients are still protected under the law to obtain medicine anywhere. It's the person selling it to them that will not be protected. It is legal for a patient to go to a local park and buy cannabis from Jay and Silent Bob if they want. Jay and Bob can get into trouble though, but that's a given considering they are in the park selling cannabis to anyone.

 

Well .. I hope you are someone that can make a difference.

 

For the umpteenth time ..

 

section 3 e

(e) "Medical use" means the acquisition, possession, cultivation, manufacture, use, internal possession, delivery, transfer, or transportation of marihuana or paraphernalia relating to the administration of marihuana to treat or alleviate a registered qualifying patient's debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the debilitating medical condition.

 

Each of those actions listed in this section are defined, right there, as medical use.

 

So then "delivery" is medical use. Who is "delivery?" Wrong question. "Delivery" is not a person. It is an action.

The action is legal. This section does not say that the patient is legal when they do such a thing.

 

It's not the person, it is the action that is legal.

 

So then .. who can the patient deliver to? I know that it is tempting to say something like "a patient may accept delivery." But that section of law says nothing like that at all.

 

The "delivery" is lawful action if if if -> "relating to the administration of marihuana to treat or alleviate a registered qualifying patient's debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the debilitating medical condition."

 

If it benefits a patient, then all of these named actions are legal. If the action is legal, then no crime has been committed.