Off Topic Posts

[freemannabis]

You could of fooled me by the way the police are handle some of this. Kicking in doors, smashing lites, steal things and leaving? so Are we living in Nazis -Germany? or America? a think a little of both.There is not a lot of choices for people up here in Central Mich. to find meds ,except disp. and they are way high for disabled people.

 

Couldn't have said that better, myself ...

 

except, maybe, I might have said all across Michigan / America.

 

Thanks!

 

FREE The TREE!

[+420Atheist]

Wow.

 

I work as a consultant/troubleshooter. I often times follow other companies who were unable to solve an issue or did a very poor configuration. I figure the client will be more impressed by me if I take the high ground and not bash the competition. Their work stands on its merits and my work stands on mine.

[Guest Marywanna]

Hope Kid Rock shows up at J.Geils saturday night...................You better be there or be square,Bobby!

[Guest Wayne]

your right Bb just say the word well be there

 

 

HIPPA is not applicable to caregiver's period. Caregivers are not medical entities in accordance with HIPPA. The MMMA was acutely aware of the practices of these wholesale cannabis distributors and gave no warning regarding record keeping of personal medical information. in fact encouraging this risky, unacceptable behavior. This organization has, by not taking a position, encouraged and promoted what happened to these patients. Accessories to patient abuse before the fact. Now your going to get all high and mighty about defending patients from abuse, and make it appear you are defending the practice of dispensaries in the process. The MMMA is becoming the driving force toward repeal of our new found rights.

 

The question now becomes why? Major funding from private entities with financial stake in promoting pushing the limits of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act? Profiteering from compassion? Simply another front of political shills.

[+RevThad]

HIPPA is not applicable to caregiver's period. Caregivers are not medical entities in accordance with HIPPA. The MMMA was acutely aware of the practices of these wholesale cannabis distributors and gave no warning regarding record keeping of personal medical information. in fact encouraging this risky, unacceptable behavior. This organization has, by not taking a position, encouraged and promoted what happened to these patients. Accessories to patient abuse before the fact. Now your going to get all high and mighty about defending patients from abuse, and make it appear you are defending the practice of dispensaries in the process. The MMMA is becoming the driving force toward repeal of our new found rights.

 

The question now becomes why? Major funding from private entities with financial stake in promoting pushing the limits of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act? Profiteering from compassion? Simply another front of political shills.

Why wouldn't HIPPA apply to a caregiver? Wouldn't the leaking of who a caregiver's patient be a violation of HIPPA? If a caregiver was there procuring meds for his patient, shouldn't (wouldn't) they be protected not only from arrest, but also from privacy violations? How about the caregiver that is also a patient? Why wouldn't any of those caregivers be protected under HIPPA?

 

Even if you disagree with the idea or concept of dispensaries, one must agree that the customers of these places deserve all the rights afforded them under the law, as long as they are complying with the law? I think everybody agrees that a patient has the right to get their meds, even if in the worst case it is from the black market. Why should they be subject to harrassment, manhandling, and invasions of their privacy by police for acquiring their meds? I know for a fact that a patient or caregiver has a reasonable expectation of privacy when it comes to their paperwork, especially when being used for verification of medical conditions. How does that fit, with the seizure of patient records in these raids?

 

You talk about warnings, and who is responsible for warning folks about crooked practices by police officers? Should folks be warned to not call 911, because some LEO might not understand the extent of the law, and might handcuff you and breakup your stuff because of the smell of mmj when they get to the door? Why would the folks that visited the Ferndale place have been worried, their town just approved the business a day earlier?

 

I understand your dislike of dispensaries and folks pushing "the limits" of the law. If I understand your position, you believe that pushing these limits will have a backlash on us, and will actually give extra ammo to the prosecutors and legislators when they try to tighten the reigns. Hell, I am not completely convinced that dispensaries are the best thing, for different reasons, but just as valid. My concerns are more that the dispensaries will lead to more and more commercialization of mmj, and will ultimately lead to less quantity, higher pricing, and less folks being able to get their meds. That being said, I can understand the need and place for dispensaries, it gives folks between harvests a place to go that should be safe to get their meds.

 

If we let the smallest infringements of edges of the law, it becomes even easier for the prohibitionists to nibble a bit more and more, until finally there is no law to speak of. If we allow the parts of this law that we don't agree with to be attacked without challenging those attacks, who will stand to defend the parts we do agree with when they are attacked? We need to stand united on all fronts, and at times even push the line outward. Pushing the edges in a rational way, is healthy for the cause and for morale of the community.

 

Just some thoughts...

[Guest Wayne]

Why wouldn't HIPPA apply to a caregiver? Wouldn't the leaking of who a caregiver's patient be a violation of HIPPA? If a caregiver was there procuring meds for his patient, shouldn't (wouldn't) they be protected not only from arrest, but also from privacy violations? How about the caregiver that is also a patient? Why wouldn't any of those caregivers be protected under HIPPA?

 

Even if you disagree with the idea or concept of dispensaries, one must agree that the customers of these places deserve all the rights afforded them under the law, as long as they are complying with the law? I think everybody agrees that a patient has the right to get their meds, even if in the worst case it is from the black market. Why should they be subject to harrassment, manhandling, and invasions of their privacy by police for acquiring their meds? I know for a fact that a patient or caregiver has a reasonable expectation of privacy when it comes to their paperwork, especially when being used for verification of medical conditions. How does that fit, with the seizure of patient records in these raids?

 

You talk about warnings, and who is responsible for warning folks about crooked practices by police officers? Should folks be warned to not call 911, because some LEO might not understand the extent of the law, and might handcuff you and breakup your stuff because of the smell of mmj when they get to the door? Why would the folks that visited the Ferndale place have been worried, their town just approved the business a day earlier?

 

I understand your dislike of dispensaries and folks pushing "the limits" of the law. If I understand your position, you believe that pushing these limits will have a backlash on us, and will actually give extra ammo to the prosecutors and legislators when they try to tighten the reigns. Hell, I am not completely convinced that dispensaries are the best thing, for different reasons, but just as valid. My concerns are more that the dispensaries will lead to more and more commercialization of mmj, and will ultimately lead to less quantity, higher pricing, and less folks being able to get their meds. That being said, I can understand the need and place for dispensaries, it gives folks between harvests a place to go that should be safe to get their meds.

 

If we let the smallest infringements of edges of the law, it becomes even easier for the prohibitionists to nibble a bit more and more, until finally there is no law to speak of. If we allow the parts of this law that we don't agree with to be attacked without challenging those attacks, who will stand to defend the parts we do agree with when they are attacked? We need to stand united on all fronts, and at times even push the line outward. Pushing the edges in a rational way, is healthy for the cause and for morale of the community.

 

Just some thoughts...

 

Rev,

You've put an awful lot of words in my mouth but I'll attempt to clear that up. This site that belongs to the MMMA has provided promotional services, referal services, and direction to those desperately needing meds to seek out these dispensaries. I myself have repeatedly questioned the practice of keeping records by these dispensaries. Thje MMMA as I said before is accutely aware of these practices. It's no differnet than if I solicited copies of patient cards and ID's and succeed in suckering people to provide them. Where in HIPPA regulations am I, wholesale cannabis distributors, or caregiver's required to keep these records at all, much less protect them? LEO has them now. FACT! They didn't get them from MDCH did they? They did not get them from the medical clinics did they? Patients are protected them from disclosure by medical practitioners not wholesale cannabis distributors.

 

 

Where are these MMMA advisory attorney's getting their law degree? From a correspondence school?

 

If I was the opposition I would engage in the very tactics promoted here. Approaching every hostile community with the wildest ideas for wholesale distribution of cannabis, announcing they will distribute free samples at local public events like high school sporting events, arts in the park, etc to anyone asserting the AD verbally, thereby promoting their services. Just shove it up their arses. How disappointed these communities will be when the citizen's cower in fear, aware of the fact they can't stop it by petitioning their neighbors for prohibition and placing it before the voters.

 

If we are beyond the need to maintain the support of the 63% who supported us I apologize and they can go screw themselves from this day forth.

[+RevThad]

Rev,

You've put an awful lot of words in my mouth but I'll attempt to clear that up. This site that belongs to the MMMA has provided promotional services, referal services, and direction to those desperately needing meds to seek out these dispensaries. I myself have repeatedly questioned the practice of keeping records by these dispensaries. Thje MMMA as I said befor is accutely aware of these practices. It's no differnet than if I solicited copies of patient cards and ID's and succeed in suckering people to provide them. Where in HIPPA regulations am I or medical marijuana caregiver's required to keep these records at all, much less protect them? LEO has them now. FACT! They didn't get them from MDCH did they? They did not get them from the medical clinics did they? Patients are protected them from disclosure by medical practitioners not wholesale cannabis distributors.

 

If we are beyond the need to maintain the support of the 63% who supported us I apologize and they can go screw themselves from this day forth.

 

Where are these MMMA advisory attorney's fetting their law degree? From a correspondence school?

 

If I was the opposition I would engage in the very tactics promoted here. Approaching every hostile community with the wildest ideas for wholesale distribution of cannabis, announcing they will distribute free samples at local public events like high school sporting events, arts in the park, etc to anyone asserting the AD verbally, thereby promoting their services. Just shove it up their arses. How disappointed these communities will be when the citizen's cower in fear, aware of the fact they can't stop it by petitioning their neighbors for prohibition and placing it before the voters.

First, there is nothing wholesale about these dispensaries.

 

If admission into one of these places is the cost of proving you are registered, and the only protection they have is that they were providing to those that are registered, logically they need to keep some sort of records. The only way to verify that the customer is registered is by looking at these documents that reveal information that is protected under HIPPA, which would subject an entity looking at this information to the same expectations a patient would have under HIPPA.

 

Now this is where the nuance comes in, are these establishments assisting in the "medical use" as defined under Michigan law? I would argue that yes they are, and if they wanted to be in the more solid colored portions of the law, the owners and staff could all be registered patients and caregivers.

 

I do even agree with you about how prohibitionists are likely to try and tear down this tower. I think your description of a shock and awe campaign to scare the folks that are on the fence about the law, is probably not far from the truth in the way they will attack in the future.

[Guest Wayne]

You are so off target and refusing to listen carefully. Give me or them your information and you have no recourse if it's stapled on lamp posts all over town, or provided to LEO as it was yesterday. What you going to do sue them for malpractice? Collect from their malpractice insurance company or revenue capital? Doctors, clinics, hospitals and those that provide related services are business entities with substantial capital and insurance coverage required if they violate my rights, so that I may recover for my abuse. If LEO could subpoena or be granted warrant for MDCH or clinic records do you believe for a second they would not?

 

So do I really need five card? Given the MMMA's position I see no need to subject myself to additional government taxes (fees). Anybody with just one card designating them "Caregiver" in compliance with the MMMA can now provide services to anyone, including those with different designated caregivers. I like the idea of that kind of open competition but don't see it in this statute, correct me if I'm wrong.

[Guest Wayne]

In fact the MMMA may be providing the most compelling argument for the legislature to revisit the voter enacted law. Protection of private medical records. Write them and demand that 3/4 of the legislature join in correcting this issue. Wouldn't worry too much about the unfriendly amendment aspect. I'm sure opposition legislatures wouldn't take advantage of such an opportunity, but would merely do the right thing.

[+RevThad]

Wayne,

 

Just 2 points.

 

First. The only argument I can see for the operation of these places, is that they are assisting with the "medical use" of a qualifying patient as defined under law. If this is the case, that they are assisting with a medical condition, or even just billing for the treatments of those medical conditions, they would be subject to HIPPA regulations. If you doubt that dispensaries or caregivers are covered under HIPPA, one only need look at what protections are provided under the act from the HHS website: "The Privacy Rule, a Federal law, gives you rights over your health information and sets rules and limits on who can look at and receive your health information. The Privacy Rule applies to all forms of individuals' protected health information, whether electronic, written, or oral."

 

Second. If transfers between patients and caregivers that aren't registered to each other weren't intended under the law, why include all of the language that is in the bill? For example there would be no need for "(k) Any registered qualifying patient or registered primary caregiver who sells marihuana to someone who is not allowed to use marihuana for medical purposes under this act shall have his or her registry identification card revoked and is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $2,000.00, or both, in addition to any other penalties for the distribution of marihuana." There are already plenty of laws covering the sale of marijuana to folks not covered under the MMMA. Logic would dictate that at the very least sales of marijuana are allowed to folks that are covered under this act. Now following that logic if we look over at the specific languange of Sec. 4 "(e) A registered primary caregiver may receive compensation for costs associated with assisting a registered qualifying patient in the medical use of marihuana." it uses the word "a" in reference to patients, which is a stark difference between the language used earlier in that same section " qualifying patient to whom he or she is connected through the department's registration process". Is this an oversight? Is this just nuance? Or was it intentional? I argue that it was intentional, as it allows for further clauses in the law to be enacted, in other words, without the understanding of subset (e)to mean transfers to any qualifying patient, a visiting qualifying patient would not be able to procure their meds while here in Michigan without violating state law.

 

We have probably hi-jacked this thread farther than it need be, I would be glad to continue this topic in a thread of its own? Or is it fine here?

[Guest Wayne]

Never mind Rev these patients can just sue the pants off of them then and recover everything they have lost including their privacy. Someone will let us know when this happens I'm certain. Must be talking in the millions here.

[DetroitGreen]

Suing someone, let alone an entire county government, is not just a switch that one can flipped. It takes a ton of money, a ton of resources and a ton of time. The county will push back and push back until all of these individual's resources have been depleted. I would be ecstatic...yet very surprised if any patients get any money, let alone a million $.

[Guest Wayne]

Sept 8 11:00am Oakland County Courthouse. Bring your signs and all the people you can gather. There will be no more persecution of patients. No one under any circumstances has the right to put their hands on a patient. We demand the immediate return of all patient protected records. We demand an apology from Sheriff Barney from Oakland County for practicing medicine without a license. We demand he cease and desist in his harassment of medical marijuana patients and caregivers. Immediate response and capitulation will stop the demonstration. Nothing more, Nothing less.

I demand the MMMA org and it's repeal efforts cease immediately. There I fell better now and feel certain I will prevail. Hehehehe! I sound just as childish don't I?

[+RevThad]

Never mind Rev these patients can just sue the pants off of them then and recover everything they have lost including their privacy. Someone will let us know when this happens I'm certain. Must be talking in the millions here.

Thanks for the conversation on the issue, I for one have enjoyed it. I am not sure that there are millions in it for any patient, for the lawyers I have no doubt. Somebody once said that the reason laws are written the way they are, is to insure that lawyers have job security...

 

I know your heart is in the right place, as we have discussed in the past. I would prefer not giving the enemy any ammuntion either, but the only way to be absolutely sure that never occurs is to not carry any ourselves... I don't like the thought of being unarmed.

[Guest Wayne]

Thanks for the conversation on the issue, I for one have enjoyed it. I am not sure that there are millions in it for any patient, for the lawyers I have no doubt. Somebody once said that the reason laws are written the way they are, is to insure that lawyers have job security...

 

I know your heart is in the right place, as we have discussed in the past. I would prefer not giving the enemy any ammuntion either, but the only way to be absolutely sure that never occurs is to not carry any ourselves... I don't like the thought of being unarmed.

I don't like the idea of loading the oppositions guns! But hey somebody in this community has to do it. We have the BULLET PROOF law to protect us, never, ever to be taken away by anyone under any circumstances. So send 'em all the bullets you want. They can only shoot sio many patients at a time, worthy sacrifice in our book.

[Guest Wayne]

lease make sure you read section 3 of the AD carefully!

(3) The patient and the patient's primary caregiver, if any, were engaged in the acquisition, possession, cultivation, manufacture, use, delivery, transfer, or transportation of marihuana or paraphernalia relating to the use of marihuana to treat or alleviate the patient's serious or debilitating medical condition or symptoms of the patient's serious or debilitating medical condition.

This applies to wholesale cannabis distribution how? Are you telling me registered patients acquired meds at these facilities only from their primary caregiver?

 

I'll say it again "caregiver's" are not subject to HIPPA. LEO must be total idiots if they didn't take a warrant to MDCH and clinics.

[peanutbutter]

You are so off target and refusing to listen carefully. Give me or them your information and you have no recourse if it's stapled on lamp posts all over town, or provided to LEO as it was yesterday. What you going to do sue them for malpractice? Collect from their malpractice insurance company or revenue capital? Doctors, clinics, hospitals and those that provide related services are business entities with substantial capital and insurance coverage required if they violate my rights, so that I may recover for my abuse. If LEO could subpoena or be granted warrant for MDCH or clinic records do you believe for a second they would not?

 

So do I really need five card? Given the MMMA's position I see no need to subject myself to additional government taxes (fees). Anybody with just one card designating them "Caregiver" in compliance with the MMMA can now provide services to anyone, including those with different designated caregivers. I like the idea of that kind of open competition but don't see it in this statute, correct me if I'm wrong.

 

I just woke up!!

 

You have opened my eyes. Thank you.

 

So lets see .. the MMMA is an evil group.

 

Thank you so much for pointing that out to me.

[peanutbutter]

In fact the MMMA may be providing the most compelling argument for the legislature to revisit the voter enacted law. Protection of private medical records. Write them and demand that 3/4 of the legislature join in correcting this issue. Wouldn't worry too much about the unfriendly amendment aspect. I'm sure opposition legislatures wouldn't take advantage of such an opportunity, but would merely do the right thing.

 

WOW!! the MMMA is a danger to patients.

 

Thanks for the education!

[Guest Wayne]

Misguided by self interest. Evil? Never used the word. Gotta go pass out cannabis samples at the local high school football game later to promote the new dispensary coming to town. Anybody qualifying under the AD must state so before receiving their free sample. Due to fears of out of control crowds I cannot post the location at this time. Keep ya posted on all the positive PR I get. Gonna WOW 'em!

[the green leaf farmacy]

Misguided by self interest. Evil? Never used the word. Gotta go pass out cannabis samples at the local high school football game later to promote the new dispensary coming to town. Anybody qualifying under the AD must state so before receiving their free sample. Due to fears of out of control crowds I cannot post the location at this time. Keep ya posted on all the positive PR I get. Gonna WOW 'em!

more bable do you have a point where is this going

[Guest Wayne]

So does the MMMA endorse patients on this site to continue supporting remaining dispensarie/coops with the assurance that all records will remain confidential and protected in accordance with HIPPA? Seems important?

[+RevThad]

This applies to wholesale cannabis distribution how? Are you telling me registered patients acquired meds at these facilities only from their primary caregiver?

 

I'll say it again "caregiver's" are not subject to HIPPA. LEO must be total idiots if they didn't take a warrant to MDCH and clinics.

Even a warrant or subpeona would require notification of the patients that such information was being sought by LEO, and these patients would be allowed an appeal of such siezure, or at the very least a limit on what "identifiable" information was being siezed. Even a sitting judge has to abide by those rules. Whether or not these businesses are covered entities, will no doubt be decided in the courts. Looking at current precedent and laws around the country it looks as if they will fall under such guidelines. Yay, more money for the lawyers.

 

Please for simplicity sake, show me where the law states that a qualifying patient can only get their meds from their registered primary caregiver. Oh, and how does that apply to patients who don't have a primary caregiver, and visiting qualifying patients?

 

If we assume your reading of the law is correct, doesn't it (the law) setup a few inconsistancies and perhaps even contradictions? For example the visiting qualifying patient portion of the law, would preclude any visiting patient from acquiring meds while they were here visiting. As they would not have a registered (with MDCH) primary caregiver to "purchase" from. When looking at the 2 possible readings of the law, one must accept the one that is most reasonable. I argue that the law allows for a visiting patient to acquire their meds while here visiting, as it is still against most laws to travel across state lines with marijuana.

 

I will wait for your rebuttal.

[the green leaf farmacy]

How this turned into the price thread I don't know. It is certainly off topic, but 1 more comment in this vein then I'll leave it alone. What level of compensation IS acceptable for a caregiver to receive? Below cost, cost, cost plus a safety margin? Cost plus living expenses? Is making $5 off an ounce of medicine immoral/unethical? How about $10? $50? $100? What is the price point that signals you have no compassion? Is it a gradiated scale so I could be 50% compassionate and 50% business? 60%/40%? Who gets to make this determination? You? What qualifies you to judge others?

 

Like I said, if you provide the same level of services at a lower price, than more power to you! I wish you the best and you should have no problem attracting patients. But to come here and say that after a certain price point people no longer deserve our support is just wrong.

nice i could not agree more

[the green leaf farmacy]

Hiding it from them makes it more interesting to them? Uhhh...if you were keeping it from them and they never saw it how could it interest them? I would argue that not hiding it from them would spark there interest..What is that Mommy/Daddy? And if asked, are they at an age where you would be able to sit down and really explain things,if not wouldn't that be just a bit much for a child to understand?

you are right people want what they can not have kids are no different i could not agree more

[elklake]

I sure would like to know how your producing for $50.00 a z?