Jump to content

Medical Marijuana Distribution System Working Document


Recommended Posts

i had this thought in another thread as well, why cant we establish locations throughout the state, organized and managed by modeling after VFW, Eagles, KofC, etc...

Something like that may come out of the Compassion Club Alliance project I saw mentioned within the past few days... It would of course depend on the CCs and how they wished to organize or model themselves..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 186
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Private or public doesn't matter. How about we let the Michigan farmers have ago at it, they can then sell it to the state run or privte owned dispensaries and all patients can have a place were they feel welcome and comfortable getting thier meds.

 

A patient bound to CG is not good thing for the patient. Think about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Private or public doesn't matter. How about we let the Michigan farmers have ago at it, they can then sell it to the state run or privte owned dispensaries and all patients can have a place were they feel welcome and comfortable getting thier meds.

 

A patient bound to CG is not good thing for the patient. Think about it.

A patient need not be bound to a CG, as they can grow for themselves if they choose. Also, a patient is perfectly able under current law to get their meds from any person or place they choose.

 

I do think that the idea of maybe opening up the growing to Michigan farmers would be something I could get behind in the future, the only draw back I see to those is the amount of seeds that will be in the product... Definitely an interesting concept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the state runs the disp. and they hire people like us to do the day to day stuff, it might be ok depends how they handle it, (worker's rights and all), if they grow it themselves I wouldn't trust it, if they let the people grow it that'd be better. Look how well they're handling the MMMP, I don't trust 'em. They've proven untrustworthy too many times.

 

Sb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Private or public doesn't matter. How about we let the Michigan farmers have ago at it, they can then sell it to the state run or privte owned dispensaries and all patients can have a place were they feel welcome and comfortable getting thier meds.

 

A patient bound to CG is not good thing for the patient. Think about it.

 

im quite sure i dont want some for profit grower producing medicine with who knows what will be used on the plants, next thing ya know, were getting supplied from farms regulated as poorly as the beef, pork and poultry industries are at present. i dont wanna have to return my medicines due to a mass recall, or for any reason for that matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the state runs the disp. and they hire people like us to do the day to day stuff, it might be ok depends how they handle it, (worker's rights and all), if they grow it themselves I wouldn't trust it, if they let the people grow it that'd be better. Look how well they're handling the MMMP, I don't trust 'em. They've proven untrustworthy too many times.

 

Sb

 

Peaceful Warrior

There is an old saying amongst lawyers, if the government scares then you are normal, but if the government intimidates you then you should be a librarian (nothing against librarians).

I agree with your concern with anything State run. The criminal justice (injustice) system in the United States while the best ever invented, is the worst place a person could ever find themselves. Like so many government run companies, the purpose and nature of its function is often lost. Judges today have become collection agencies for the State. How about the driver responsibility fee, a classic situation where the state invented a way to raise revenue, and reopen the concept of debtor prisons. I think some of the mentioned concerns of a state run dispensary/distribution system are real, especially in light of the dire economic situation here in MI. These are just minor examples, the story of our governments failures are a constant reminder every day in our lives. If you listen to the Bouchard comments, and other opponents, after the raids, it would seem he is suggesting this, both for a "public safety" and "revenue generating" reasons. I personally think this would be a disaster, and the idea of the government trying to get involved (actually hands on involvement) in regulating, testing, cultivating or anything to do with how to produce this medicine is a bad idea. I think if a system of any kind is going to be developed, however it may ultimately look, the government cannot and should not be left alone to design it. I believe the design must come from the community, consider the patients needs, and challenges of cultivating, and keep it out of the hands of the government. The exercise going on in one of the other threads is a great idea, and really the only way to really develop a comprehensive model that is reflective of the community, (although a very tough challenge). This would be the only way to ensure that any designs DOES NOT interfere in anyway with the current patient caregiver/cultivator rules,protections in the act.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have to agree with the most recent posts, we want less government involvement in our lives and medicine not more. State run dispensaries would inevitably become a corruption of what they were intended to be. Politicians and bureaucrats would use it as personal slush funds, diverting the funds to anything but the patients well being.

 

So we are back to looking at either individuals networked through some sort of organization(s), Compassion Clubs, Co-ops, and possibly Dispensaries as all being legal and viable means of making sure no patient in our state goes without medications.

 

I list Dispensaries as a possibility not because I don't think they are allowed under the law, just that I am not sure that they would be afforded the full protections of Section 4, and that again would depend on how they are structured.

 

I am asking for any of the lawyer types out there to please chime in on their opinions of the application of Section 7 (e). I am curious if my layman's understanding of the simple language is accurate. That no other acts or portions of acts that are contrary to the medical use of marijuana can be applied to anything that is covered under the MMMAct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have to agree with the most recent posts, we want less government involvement in our lives and medicine not more. State run dispensaries would inevitably become a corruption of what they were intended to be. Politicians and bureaucrats would use it as personal slush funds, diverting the funds to anything but the patients well being.

 

 

i have to agree with you there rev

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michigan Medical Marihuana Act Cheat Sheet

 

Section 4 states:

* A registered patient and/or caregiver are NOT subject to arrest or prosecution as long as:

(1) They possess a registry identification card; AND

(2) is in possession of an amount of marihuana that does not exceed the amount allowed under this act.

 

* 12 plants per patient are allowed to be cultivated, either by the patients or their designated caregivers.

 

* All other people are protected from arrest and prosecution solely for being in the presence or vicinity of the medical use

of marihuana, or for assisting a registered qualifying patient with using or administering marihuana.

 

* A registered caregiver can receive compensation for the costs of assisting a registered patient with the medical use

of marijuana. That compensation SHALL NOT constitute the sale of controlled substances.

 

* There shall be a presumption that a qualifying patient or primary caregiver is engaged in the medical use of marihuana

in accordance with this act, as long as bullet one is met.

 

* Any marihuana, marihuana paraphernalia, or licit property that is possessed, owned, or used in connection with the medical use

of marihuana, as allowed under this act, or acts incidental to such use, shall not be seized or forfeited.

 

 

 

Important Definitions:

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.

 

Registry identification card - If the department fails to issue a valid registry identification card in response to a valid application or renewal submitted pursuant to this act within 20 days of its submission, the registry identification card shall be deemed granted, and a copy of the registry identification application or renewal shall be deemed a valid registry identification card.

 

 

Other protections of the law provided via Section 8:

* Anybody not protected by Section 4 for various reasons can assert the medical purpose for using marihuana as a defense to any

prosecution involving marihuana, and the charges shall be dismissed following an evidentiary hearing where the person shows:

(1) A physician has stated that the patient is likely to receive therapeutic or palliative benefit from the medical use of

marihuana; AND

(2) The patient and the patient's primary caregiver, if any, were in possession of a quantity of marihuana that was not

more than was reasonably necessary to ensure the uninterrupted availability of marihuana for the purpose of treating

or alleviating the patient's; AND

(3) The patient and the patient's primary caregiver, if any, were engaged in the medical use (as defined above).

 

Just a quick primer to have easy access to what the law provides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael K thanks for replying to my post. To you and everyone, I say, I think I know exactly what would happen if the state ran the dispensaries- they'd give it to some big agribusiness firm, and our meds would become impure. Then big pharma would come in. This is what they're trying to do with other natural substances, I read an article last night about it being almost a done deal in the EU. These are the oils, herbs, and supplements which have been provided by people who are considered to be practicing "alternative medicine." Greedy big pharma and agribiz wanna make it illegal for anyone else to make and sell them. For decades there's been a war on natural care. Big pharma hates the competition, and so does agribusiness. I've seen where this is going even before reading that article last night. It's us against them, because they have banded together as them against us. They have too much power. That's the main problem, and the more they get, the less we have.

 

A friend told me he thought state run dispensaries would put an end to the raids. Perhaps that's true, but I still don't trust the state. (Sorry, state, but track records speak for themselves). I think CA law has provisions for dispensaries, but they don't have a cg system. Find a good, working model of a dispensary and adapt it, amend it our law, if that's what we need.

 

It seems whatever we do we face a struggle. I really like the Cg system, and the CC's. When I started learning about the law, I saw nothing of dispensaries. I thought the Cg system was very well thought out and a good, workable solution. I didn't think there'd prob'ly be more pt's than cg's, though I thought there'd be enough who grew for themselves also, but someone should've figured there'd be many more patients with no one to asisst them. Perhaps it wasn't as well thought out as I had believed at first. How the compassion club model came about, I don't know, but I truly believe they can help handle the overflow in pt's, as well as any overages growers have. IF a pt can only acquire from their own cg, it'd mean any visitors would be out of luck, or a pt who ran out, or a grower who's crop failed or hasn't been harvested yet. If any registered patient can acquire from any registered caregiver, a visiting pt would have a way to get meds if needed, and any crop failure, etc., wouldn't be a total disaster to other pt's. If only the cg can have access to that pt's meds, there can be no system where meds for any unconnected pt's can be stored and distributed. This is how I see it. The main problem here seems to be there's more pt's than cg's, and the restrictions on how many pt's a cg can have needs to be changed.

 

I don't know much but I've been here long enough to have an idea what's happening and possible solutions. Reading many messages from those who know more has helped me reach my conclusions, added to that some personal insight and ideas.

 

Sb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Marywanna

Govt has shown over and over throughout history that they are inept at running anything except into the ground. I want legalization,but the price we pay will be literally in taxes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why would the government need to dispense my meds....I dont get any of my other meds through the state....I go to CVS....

 

plus the governemnt would make more if they just collected taxes (property use tax, business tax, sales tax, this+that tax, assessors fees, etc....)...they just sit back and collect and not have to worry about doing anything....creates jobs too...the greedy get priced out, the value ceiling and quality disbursement..... start to show i see no downside...until CVS gets into the growing and selling business..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Public agencies of all types are (by virtue of some legal doctrine Karen O'Keefe explained to me 2 weeks ago, as I related a similar question - why cant a city be a dispensary - to her) impermissible because the state would be directly participating in a federally-prohibited function. There is a legal term for this, which I cannot remember. This fact permeates the nature of the Act, and results in what many lesser-informed judges do not yet understand: The Act is as rigorous as it can be, with the possible exception of the visiting patient piece. These people instead attack the Act as 'poorly written law'. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

That said, we are on our own to devise an alternative to the dispensary model. Frankly, I would not be here today if I hadn't (I think) figured its necessary core elements last December. I'll save the details for the 2nd, but there is plenty of reason to believe that this model works, as it appears to already be affirmatively authorized by statute. I have never believed that CA-style dispensaries are authorized under the Act. So stay tuned, I think we are good to go with a program that will only mildly upset everyone, er... be widely seen as satisfactory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has been a great analysis but is the hyperbole really necessary? Rarely are absolutes accurate. Government can do nothing right just is not true and an off topic political statement.

 

There was a time after prohibition when alcohol was only distributed by the state liquor commission. They still determine what can be sold in Michigan and add a tax to it. I have never heard anyone complain about that model before.

 

I would prefer private run dispensaries because the competition will decrease prices and improve quality. The point worth considering is if having government run dispensaries is preferable to no dispensaries. I don't mean this as a false dichotomy because I recognize the other options but government run may be the only option that can get approval.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

State run dispensaries sound great to me. I see no reason a patient should be bound to some greedy CG for meds. I'm pro dispensary private or goverment run.

 

eww i just had to swallow my own vomit.... state run disp will mean we pay even more for even less quality and once the sate shows they can do a horrible job at it we will lose our right to do it ourselves. ever seen the few countries where the state supplies the meds.... the patients all get it from the black market.... we dont need the state getting their grubby mits on our meds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds to me that anyone, who is assisting a patient, is protected by the law. That's just a straight up English reading of the law. No gray areas needed. Thanks,Bb

Joe, note that the wording of that clause is assisting a registered patient. Also, that there is no clause to cover how much an other person (non patient or non-caregvier) can possess, and therefore might open them up to the legal system if not in the vicinity of patients or caregivers...

 

Any distribution "center" be it Compassion Club or Dispensary will have to keep that in mind as they structure their internal model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a model proposed by some law firm quoted in our local paper here in Lapeer County, will try to find it again. It was just short of given the "green light" by Byron Konschuh, the County PA. Basically it proposed a bar code tracking system to track (and possibly tax?) the product. There is a conformational client not named in the article who hired the private firm to approach the PA with the intent of agreeing on a working model.

Amazing what can get done behind closed doors. Who knows, maybe the State's already begun to grow our meds :sick:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look state dispeansaries, private dispensaries, whatever the main point is patients having a place to buy meds safley and not be tired bound or enslaved to any CG, the CG system is set up for faliure and not patient orientated.

 

Any patient with a VALID card should be able to walk into a private dispensary and obtain meds, this is just common sense.

 

I also want to say that it seems that those that are having trouble with the law are maybe those who are pushing the limits of it and probably knew what the outcome would be. Those in trouble must have done something to provoke a raid or bust. I do not see patients coming out in droves saying they were busted for having their MM while having their card, also thier are many dispensaries around and most of them seem to be doing just fine. Just my observation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look state dispeansaries, private dispensaries, whatever the main point is patients having a place to buy meds safley and not be tired bound or enslaved to any CG, the CG system is set up for faliure and not patient orientated.

 

Any patient with a VALID card should be able to walk into a private dispensary and obtain meds, this is just common sense.

 

I also want to say that it seems that those that are having trouble with the law are maybe those who are pushing the limits of it and probably knew what the outcome would be. Those in trouble must have done something to provoke a raid or bust. I do not see patients coming out in droves saying they were busted for having their MM while having their card, also thier are many dispensaries around and most of them seem to be doing just fine. Just my observation.

 

I so hope you just said all of that in jest? You cant truely fear the pt being "enslaved" if youd suggest state or private dispensaries would be a solution. To date the most expensive oz i have given to any of my patients was 180 dollars. Last night i went with a patient to a disp and purchased some pretty nice meds.... for 20-25 a gram. You can find fault with the cg system no doubt, you can find fault with any system. I can see where disp and or legal clubs are needed. But doing away with cg is not the shot in the arm this movement needs. One of the biggest things i loved about this law was the ability to help people, and help myself. I dont want to stand in line for pills at wally world and id rather grow my own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right which is the real reason CGs don't like the idea of dispensaries, they the CGs want the control, the funds, and evryones grow rights, its crazy and gives way to much power to the CGs who always seem to forget those 12 plants thier growing for thier patient arent theirs they belong to the patient, this is where the CGs go wrong. They seem to forget they are not a CG unless a patient makes them one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look state dispeansaries, private dispensaries, whatever the main point is patients having a place to buy meds safley and not be tired bound or enslaved to any CG, the CG system is set up for faliure and not patient orientated.

 

 

There are a lot of good caregivers out there that give patients a oz a moth for free. Some charge a small fee. I like the caregiver system and am glad the law allows for me to grow myself and not be forced to buy at high prices. It is funny to me that legalization for medical use has actually lowered the amount on the street and raised the price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey if patients still want their CGs or want to grow themselves then so be it thats up to them. I'm not against CGs but I don't think a patient should have no other choice such as pick some unknown CG they find online or grow themselves. Most patients don't grow themselves, don't want or need the hassle, have the time, know how, or place to grow.

 

Being able to go to a dispensary keeps things above board and makes sense for patients, the community, and the law.

 

As far as the street goes, I'm sure alot of those CGs out there used to be the same guys out there doing it illegal and now have gotten a CG card and think their a legal drug dealer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

u sound like a victim? Victims don't always make rational choices. Sometimes they stereotype and generalize. I crave no such imagined power. I have only a desire to make people smile, and to prove this plant isn't the devil. I have my own card, I have my own plants. I dont need to grow for someone else. Shouldn't i be able to make the choice if i want to risk being scammed by a person or the state? I know its a crazy world we live in , there's a lot of bad people out there, but believe me they work for the state too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Marywanna

Where does that guy I saw on TV get that big can of joints? Does the cannabis get grown by legal growers for the Govt only? I am for Dispensaries as long as they are part of the private sector. No Govt run crap. I can just see it,you go in,take a number,and when you finally get up there,to greet you is a surly state worker that could give a flying rat butt about what they sell you. It would cost more,because they are Union workers. Rather go for the capitalistic approach. You have a great product line,good service,thats the way to get customers. You could run specials every week. Just my two cents. MW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...