State Should Set Up Dispensary System...

[Clear and Unambiguous]

Nothing wrong? I get ya. So you like it that Arizona's state regulated dispensary system makes it so patients can't grow if they live within 25 miles of one.

WTF is that ps all about dude? LOL Same people wrote Arizona's law as ours and it screws the heck out of patients. Watch out for trends. Times are a changing and not for the better with MPP, wording and state regulated dispensary systems.

 

A couple points here for clarification, not in argument.

 

I believe in Arizona that the wording of the law regarding dispensaries in proximity to caregivers was in the original initiative. This would mean the state did not set that up, but rather the group that set forth the initiative did. Perhaps it helped them gain backing for the project from one group by putting it in, but I don’t think that came from the MPP.

 

The current MPP model is drafted to work for legislation, not voter backed initiatives. Not every state allows constitutional amendments to be put forth by the people, so a model that preemptively answers legislature’s concerns is needed for those cases.

 

In states where you can have a voter initiative to amend the constitution, the wording of the initiative must not represent more than one constitutional amendment, or else it would be turned down by the SOS. So, you have to keep it short and sweet, or you signatures will be invalid. Michigan’s was pretty darn short for this reason, as well as not to give opponents ammunition.

 

Also, state regulated does not mean state run. Regulation is a great way of signaling to the law enforcement at all levels that a facility is compliant with state laws. If we can achieve that without touching the current law, it is a very a good idea.

[mizerman]

A couple points here for clarification, not in argument.

 

I believe in Arizona that the wording of the law regarding dispensaries in proximity to caregivers was in the original initiative. This would mean the state did not set that up, but rather the group that set forth the initiative did. Perhaps it helped them gain backing for the project from one group by putting it in, but I don’t think that came from the MPP.

 

The current MPP model is drafted to work for legislation, not voter backed initiatives. Not every state allows constitutional amendments to be put forth by the people, so a model that preemptively answers legislature’s concerns is needed for those cases.

 

In states where you can have a voter initiative to amend the constitution, the wording of the initiative must not represent more than one constitutional amendment, or else it would be turned down by the SOS. So, you have to keep it short and sweet, or you signatures will be invalid. Michigan’s was pretty darn short for this reason, as well as not to give opponents ammunition.

 

Also, state regulated does not mean state run. Regulation is a great way of signaling to the law enforcement at all levels that a facility is compliant with state laws. If we can achieve that without touching the current law, it is a very a good idea.

Amen!

 

 

A voice of reason.

 

 

Watching a show last night, it sure looked like the regulations imposed on the dispensaries in Colorado were working beautifully!

 

They were growing what they sold.

 

I'm all for keeping the current patient/caregiver arrangement.

 

Bottom line there needs to be far more concern about what is best for the PATIENT!

 

Just my opinion...and, it ain't changing.

 

 

Mizerman

[roadworkahead]

Amen!

 

 

A voice of reason.

 

 

Watching a show last night, it sure looked like the regulations imposed on the dispensaries in Colorado were working beautifully!

 

They were growing what they sold.

 

I'm all for keeping the current patient/caregiver arrangement.

 

Bottom line there needs to be far more concern about what is best for the PATIENT!

 

Just my opinion...and, it ain't changing.

 

 

Mizerman

I agree that there needs to be far more concern about what is best for the PATIENT too! However, I am not so much concerned how "medicine" is distributed, but much more concerned with the medicine itself.

 

 

 

If dispensaries are concerned about patients more than caregivers (as you willingly admit), are the dispensaries willing to have all medicine they distribute, tested?

Here's a link to a testing lab in COLORADO! http://fullspectrumlabs.com/learn/ they even have a "SCARY PAGE"! If dispensaries are trying to monopolize as some have mentioned here

by advocating against the patient/caregiver arrangement, leaving patients not to be able to grow their own, then be prepared to advocate for the testing of ALL MEDICINE by these establishments.

 

Perhaps finding a caregiver that has spent the $$ on testing you would feel a bit more at ease that there are caregivers (so very many) that actually have concern for their patients.

If you could make a list of what it is exactly you want from a caregiver vs/ a dispensary we could better understand. I struggle with ALL that work "just outside the parameters" of the program, as IMHO dispensaries are doing just that. I am hoping they are not out to destroy the patient/caregiver relationship as it is working and continues to work great for most.

 

Testing will be the next step in getting rid of the stuff people are calling quality, "top tier", "gold," platinum" silver tier medicine, when in fact it is not. the quality has yet to be determined on what's out there now without testing. GOOD JOB COLORADO FULL SPECTRUM LABS!

 

Also: on a lighter note: Please don't ask me to advocate dispensaries raffling ounces. no offense to the dispensary that recently advertised their raffle on this site.

 

Thanks for this informative discussion...

[mizerman]

I watched the show last night about the testing that goes on in Colorado and I think it's fantastic!

 

I would simply like to have a constant and steady supply so I could ditch ALL the pills.

 

I truly look at this as a medicine - (because it is) - and I foolishly put my trust in some folks in the past as I looked at our relationship from a patient dealing with a pharmacy. Found out they couldn't be trusted.

 

The dispenary that was so kind to my wife and I is no longer in business as they were one of the places raided by the Oakland County Nazi/Gestapo Task Force.

 

It's pretty hard for me to let my guard down and ever trust someone I don't know.

 

I guess it's time to go to a Compassion Club near me next week if I'm feeling better.

 

 

Mizerman

[Guest Happy Guy]

The best way to know what's in there is to grow it yourself or be very close to the person who grows it. The closer the better. Dispensaries make cannabis anonymous and that's not good for credibility and accountability. There is a recording of a dispensary owner saying they would have to use chemical smelling weed they were buying in medibles to hide the odor. Could you trust a dispensary owner that would do that to even test properly or be on the level about a test? This was the dispensary raided in Oakland County.

[Wayne'sWorld]

Testing sounds like a most excellent idea for driving the bottom line. The more overhead, the lower the cost of services. Is somebody gonna start chemically analysing all the produce I blindly buy from the grocery store too? In search of the perfect winter tomato! I want the licensing for cannabis testing labs in Michigan, and testing must be mandatory! Nothing like another private/government database to maintain anonymity.

[peanutbutter]

If it were just a choice issue then there would be no issue. Some would have you believe it's just a simple choice issue. Don't be confused by them. The two issues are tied; Dispensaries and A Patient's Right to Grow.

There is proof that some dispensary advocates have worked to end the patient's right to grow as they position themselves for a monopoly in that area.

There is proof that state regulated dispensaries are doing the same thing. We don't want to end up like Arizona with their state set up dispensary system where patients can't grow for themselves.

 

The two issues are tied??????

 

In your mind, perhaps.

 

Exactly which proposed legislation ties this together?

 

There was the Kuipers thing .. that one, yes. It seems to be dead.

 

You assume that every idea about protecting dispensaries automatically kills caregivers. I understand now why you go off on dispensaries.

 

Your fear is noted. You have one single example of such an attempt in Michigan.

 

It seems you believe that any law about dispensaries MUST outlaw caregivers. There is nothing that forces both things to exist within the same proposed law.

[peanutbutter]

Testing sounds like a most excellent idea for driving the bottom line. The more overhead, the lower the cost of services. Is somebody gonna start chemically analysing all the produce I blindly buy from the grocery store too? In search of the perfect winter tomato! I want the licensing for cannabis testing labs in Michigan, and testing must be mandatory! Nothing like another private/government database to maintain anonymity.

 

Currently we can't get testing IF WE WANT TO!

 

I can have a medicine, but I can't have it tested to see if pesticides have been used on it.

 

I am not allowed to have a sample tested to determine if this strain has any significant amount of CBD or CBN.

 

All of which means nothing to someone just wanting to get high.

All of which is very important to a medical consumer.

[Guest Happy Guy]

The two issues are tied??????

 

In your mind, perhaps.

 

Exactly which proposed legislation ties this together?

 

There was the Kuipers thing .. that one, yes. It seems to be dead.

 

You assume that every idea about protecting dispensaries automatically kills caregivers. I understand now why you go off on dispensaries.

 

Your fear is noted. You have one single example of such an attempt in Michigan.

 

It seems you believe that any law about dispensaries MUST outlaw caregivers. There is nothing that forces both things to exist within the same proposed law.

Right, Kuiper was one.

You didn't see the language about two growers being considered a dispensary? You must have been asleep through that one.

I haven't seen an idea(wording) proposed to the legislature that protected patient's rights as it props up dispensaries. Have you? All I see are patient rights grabs.

 

It seems you believe that any law about dispensaries MUST outlaw caregivers. There is nothing that forces both things to exist within the same proposed law.

 

Stick the 'it seems' crap. Not cute. I just haven't seen any friendly language yet. With the current people in control I just can't imagine a positive result at changing the law at this time.

I think we should watch closely and see if patient to patient transfer become solidly legal. The court case with the cops with cards should do it. Then we don't need to mess around at all with our law. Transfer away all day.

[Guest Happy Guy]

Currently we can't get testing IF WE WANT TO!

 

I can have a medicine, but I can't have it tested to see if pesticides have been used on it.

 

I am not allowed to have a sample tested to determine if this strain has any significant amount of CBD or CBN.

 

All of which means nothing to someone just wanting to get high.

All of which is very important to a medical consumer.

Which law says you can't test it? Which law says you can't take an amount less than 2.5 and put it in a machine that tests it?

[peanutbutter]

Which law says you can't test it? Which law says you can't take an amount less than 2.5 and put it in a machine that tests it?

 

If I have a quarter million dollar machine, then I could test my herb .. And it could be argued that it wasn't for my medical use. That testing would not relieve my symptoms therefore is not "medical use."

 

Now think about the people that work in a place where such testing would take place. This assumes that I don't have an extra quarter million dollars for equipment.

 

Someone drops off a sample to be tested. Everyone within the building is at risk of arrest.

[Guest Happy Guy]

First you say 'You're not allowed'. Then you say, 'You can't afford it'.

You were right the second time. You just can't afford the machine. It's not a legal matter. If I had a machine you could come over and use it. You could form a line of patients to use it. It's not illegal, you just can't afford the machine.

[peanutbutter]

First you say 'You're not allowed'. Then you say, 'You can't afford it'.

You were right the second time. You just can't afford the machine. It's not a legal matter. If I had a machine you could come over and use it. You could form a line of patients to use it. It's not illegal, you just can't afford the machine.

 

Is this some sort of game for you?

 

The MS and cancer patients need a solid confirmed source of CBD in Michigan.

 

The very lives of people in this state depend on it.

[Guest Happy Guy]

We are all unique and a better test would be with the individual, not a machine. You are playing games, not I. Money making games.

[peanutbutter]

We are all unique and a better test would be with the individual, not a machine. You are playing games, not I. Money making games.

 

When you are talking about a cancer patient, the clock is ticking.

 

You have to get it right the first time. There will be no second chance.

 

It seems that the only thing you are considering is getting high. You are advocating for the continued suppression of the cure for cancer. That suppression causes people to die.

[mizerman]

Is this some sort of game for you?

 

The MS and cancer patients need a solid confirmed source of CBD in Michigan.

 

The very lives of people in this state depend on it.

Oh yes, Happy Guy is most definitely a game player.

 

This site would be so much better if there was a feature allowing us to type in someone's name and have their posts blocked from even seeing them.

 

Obviously he/she had a huge axe to grind with the people running Everybody's Cafe and Herbal Remedies. I'll defend them and EVERYTHING they were doing until my death!

 

 

 

Mizerman

[mizerman]

Is this some sort of game for you?

 

The MS and cancer patients need a solid confirmed source of CBD in Michigan.

 

The very lives of people in this state depend on it.

And those of us who are in such chronic pain that our pain management doctors would prescribe morphine patches and morphine lollipops to.

 

 

Mizerman

[Guest Happy Guy]

 

 

It seems that the only thing you are considering is getting high.

You will have to take that up with my doctor. He says I use it for medicine. You sound like a prosecutor now.

[Guest Happy Guy]

Oh yes, Happy Guy is most definitely a game player.

 

This site would be so much better if there was a feature allowing us to type in someone's name and have their posts blocked from even seeing them.

 

Obviously he/she had a huge axe to grind with the people running Everybody's Cafe and Herbal Remedies. I'll defend them and EVERYTHING they were doing until my death!

 

 

 

Mizerman

Just the facts. I only told the facts that I can back up. The facts are in the public domain and anyone could have said what I did. Defend away but use the facts just like I did.

[DenturesLost]

If I have a quarter million dollar machine, then I could test my herb .. And it could be argued that it wasn't for my medical use. That testing would not relieve my symptoms therefore is not "medical use."

 

Now think about the people that work in a place where such testing would take place. This assumes that I don't have an extra quarter million dollars for equipment.

 

Someone drops off a sample to be tested. Everyone within the building is at risk of arrest.

Give me a break. How could it be argued that it isn't for your med use? Would you argue that looking at the trichomes under a magnifier isn't for med use either? Seriously, if you don't want testing then just say it but stop coming up with ridiculous reasons why you cannot test. Making sure you aren't ingesting bug killer is directly related to med use. Who, with a straight face, could argue that it isn't?

 

As far as "can't" test it--there is a difference between can't and incapable.

 

For people who TRULY care about others why is it seen as a bad thing to test mj? Everyone knows that there are unscrupulous people everywhere. What is to stop those people from using Raid or something really toxic on flowering plants to get rid of pests? Nothing. Nothing at all. I would point out that YOU peanutbutter have had a signature at the bottom of your forum posts referencing liver problems in regard to narcotic v. mj use. What better way to kill one's liver than hit it with a barrage of raid and other synthetic bug killers. How can you possibly argue against ensuring the integrity of meds?

[peanutbutter]

Give me a break. How could it be argued that it isn't for your med use? Would you argue that looking at the trichomes under a magnifier isn't for med use either? Seriously, if you don't want testing then just say it but stop coming up with ridiculous reasons why you cannot test. Making sure you aren't ingesting bug killer is directly related to med use. Who, with a straight face, could argue that it isn't?

 

As far as "can't" test it--there is a difference between can't and incapable.

 

For people who TRULY care about others why is it seen as a bad thing to test mj? Everyone knows that there are unscrupulous people everywhere. What is to stop those people from using Raid or something really toxic on flowering plants to get rid of pests? Nothing. Nothing at all. I would point out that YOU peanutbutter have had a signature at the bottom of your forum posts referencing liver problems in regard to narcotic v. mj use. What better way to kill one's liver than hit it with a barrage of raid and other synthetic bug killers. How can you possibly argue against ensuring the integrity of meds?

 

I don't understand. I want clear protections for testing facilities.

 

I fully believe that such testing would be protected under our law. But it's like the AD section of law. It would have to be proven in a court of law.

 

Places that could offer such services for our community need to be clearly and completely protected.

[mizerman]

Just the facts. I only told the facts that I can back up. The facts are in the public domain and anyone could have said what I did. Defend away but use the facts just like I did.

Could you please share with me your "facts".

 

I don't even know what you are talking about. I'm not trying to be a smartazz - simply want to learn and know more.

 

Thanks,

 

 

Mizerman

[David1946]

Yes we cannabis!!!

 

In fighting will get us no where Stomping and screaming and pulling out your hair We'll agree to disagree and then let it be The wolfs at the door and we need to be WE!!

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wX72p1gcEVM

[peanutbutter]

Pb, I agree that any scientific facility should be protected. That includes both research and production. There just shouldn't be a requirement to use it.

 

100% agree! No required testing.

 

It just needs to be safely available.

[DenturesLost]

100% agree! No required testing.

 

It just needs to be safely available.

Dispensaries that buy from anyone that walks in SHOULD be required to test for contaminants. Unless, of course, you think it's a good thing for people, who are already sick, to be ingesting god knows what and destroying their livers. Is that a good thing?