Legalize Michigan

[bobandtorey]

Nov. 1- Vote Green workshop at the Royal Oak Compassion Club meeting.

 

7:00 pm- 104 W 4th St st. 214 Royal Oak, MI 48067

 

Corner of Main and 4th

 

Rick Thompson will be there to discuss the situation with Big Daddy's case in Chesterfield, which was joined, recently, by Bill Schuette.

 

i have been to these meetings and they are good if you want to know more this is a good starting place

[Uncle Bud]

If it is going to be legal, there shold be no weight limit. Is there a limit on how much alcohol you can buy? No. Why? Because it is legal.

[solabeirtan]

Sounds like they are changing the two oz limit. They are also working on the DUI and firearms issues. I will post as soon as I see the updated version.

 

I'm still thinking there may not be enough time or money to pull this off.

The MMMA cost well over one million dollars to get done.

Look at the signature gathering efforts for the recall snider campaign.

You have to have paid canvassers to get the job done. A volunteer effort does not cut it.

 

Which unfortunatley has Failed Miserably. As of Oct 31 they had failed to gather the required number of signatures

 

 

 

[TheBeagle]

12 12 12 plan...lmao 12 oz on hand 12 plants 12 oz in home... Pulll a hermit cain on they donkey

[Sledge]

If it is going to be legal, there shold be no weight limit. Is there a limit on how much alcohol you can buy? No. Why? Because it is legal.

 

Same with ciggs, no limit,no restrictions on smoking 40 a day or more,the more smoked the higher the revenue.

[Ms Chocolate]

I have not read the whole thing, but what I did read had issues.

 

Section 1: Michigan’s Marijuana Legalization Initiative (2011) This already needs to be re-named

 

Section 2:

A #3 64% voter approval, indicating the prevalence and acceptance of marijuana

63% voter approval, indicating the prevalence and acceptance of marijuana as medicine

 

#6 Similar or increased revenue could be expected from the regulation and taxation of all cannabis products. Keep in mind that with legalization there is no registration, thus no 10 million dollars.

7. A lack of specific definitions was outlined in Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. Attorney General Bill Schuette was able to capitalize on this unclear language. Why not work to clear up the language?

 

B #4 By legalizing marijuana, it can be used for scientific, medical industrial and research purposes. Even if the state legalize the plant (which should be allowed under Article 10 of the U.S. Constitution, how will this play with the FDA stand on medical and research use?

 

C #2 This Act would still allow for the regulation of sales to minors to be enforced, unless a minor has parental and doctor approval to consume cannabis for its medicinal purposes. This would be a case of medical use. Minors should not be allowed to make these purchases.

 

Section 3 #1a Under the provision of this proposed Act and under Michigan law, there shall be no criminal ramifications or penalties for people aged 18 or older. If the idea is to make a law similar to that for tobacco and alcohol, why have a lower age of consent?

 

1b Cultivate, on private property by the owner, lawful occupant, or other lawful resident or guest of the private property owner or lawful occupant, cannabis plants for personal consumption only. Why would a guest cultivate on private property? If you are speaking indoors, 5sq is half a bedroom; what is to be done with the other half?

 

1c Possess, on the premises where grown, the living and harvested plants and results of any harvest and processing of plants lawfully cultivated for personal consumption. So if you are in possession of any material that was not produced on the premise, you are in violation.

 

Corrections made to spelling & such

[The Digital Nomad]

all hail ms. chocolate!

 

DN

[hofner67]

That's a draft. There is another draft still formulating. Legalization is good for patients.

[Croppled1]

Some of the BS crowd has discussed taking over production for the State as soon as cannabis is reduced from schedule 1 here as plan B to the nuisance argument now . Remember the 10 distributor concept that came out of Holland ? Can one add language stating cannabis in natural form including all developed strains is to be over the counter or not scheduled and controlled in Michigan per State law . I have much to learn in this area . Yes Ms Chocolate is very sharp I agree DN .

[+420Atheist]

Which unfortunatley has Failed Miserably. As of Oct 31 they had failed to gather the required number of signatures

 

 

 

 

That was clear to me it was never going to happen. The volunteer effort just never happened. A call in my county got about 10 people to show up. That is why I am standing pretty strong that a large dollar amount has to come from somewhere to make legalization happen. You have to have paid and trained canvassers to get it done.

[+420Atheist]

12 12 12 plan...lmao 12 oz on hand 12 plants 12 oz in home... Pulll a hermit cain on they donkey

 

LOL Now I like that one.

[hofner67]

A legalization effort, even failed, will provide cover for the mmma. All of a sudden, these politicians will say there for medical but not legalization for all. It fundamentally changes the political environment. Patients win. Win or loose with a legalization effort.

[Ms Chocolate]

I finally read the rest of the proposal. It is a lot to read and absorb.

 

From the responses, most are comparing the over-all legal use with the present medical use ACT. If legal use was allowed, there would be no need for our Medical ACT. With the Medical Act in play, any legal or decriminalization of use would be at a level less than that for medical. With this in mind, the 2oz per sales noted in Section 3 B 2 makes sense.

 

This Proposal addresses commercial sales, but I see no provision for the home-grower. There should be something that allows for 1-3 plants and 2oz of dried, smokeable material for the home-grower’s personal use.

 

This Proposal does not address home use at all. Why would I (or any one here) welcome commercial sales and smoking rooms, but not home use?

 

I like 5(B) 2!

 

In Section 6 © it is stated that "marijuana" and "cannabis" and “marihuana” are interchangeable terms. It is followed with “that mean all parts of the plant”… “edible products containing same”… “or preparation of the plant, or resin”. Which would mean my 2oz brownie is my total allotment. Not Good!

 

Section 7 won’t fly. There always has to be a way out.

[Restorium2]

A legalization effort, even failed, will provide cover for the mmma. All of a sudden, these politicians will say there for medical but not legalization for all. It fundamentally changes the political environment. Patients win. Win or loose with a legalization effort.

It didn't help medical in California. Legalization failed and medical kept down the same path it was on like nothing happened. They are two separate issues, two separate paths. Medical is not a back door to legalization until a lot more states have medical. You will see legalization out west first before it comes here, just like with everything else.

[hofner67]

Uh no, politicians proposed and passed decriminalizatio while legalization effort was going on at least partially as a reaction. Decrim is improvement for all including patients. And while the politicians debated Decrim, they weren't amending the medical marijuana act.

 

If you don't think legalization would help patients, I prefer to not speak of it.

It didn't help medical in California. Legalization failed and medical kept down the same path it was on like nothing happened. They are two separate issues, two separate paths. Medical is not a back door to legalization until a lot more states have medical. You will see legalization out west first before it comes here, just like with everything else.

[Restorium2]

Uh no, politicians proposed and passed decriminalizatio while legalization effort was going on at least partially as a reaction. Decrim is improvement for all including patients. And while the politicians debated Decrim, they weren't amending the medical marijuana act.

 

If you don't think legalization would help patients, I prefer to not speak of it.

Not that I don't think it would help patients if it passed. It's sure not going to help patients by using them to get it passed. Do you see the distinction? The issues are separate, medical and recreational. Our opposition would like to lump them together, that alone should convince you to avoid it. Letting our oppositon put them side by side is not a good thing and we need to fight that by showing how separate the issues are. Both important, but different issues, that are both stronger separate.

[hofner67]

Not that I don't think it would help patients if it passed. It's sure not going to help patients by using them to get it passed. Do you see the distinction? The issues are separate, medical and recreational. Our opposition would like to lump them together, that alone should convince you to avoid it. Letting our oppositon put them side by side is not a good thing and we need to fight that by showing how separate the issues are. Both important, but different issues, that are both stronger separate.

were only stronger and safer with legalization triangulating the government. Without it, its just the medical law attracting the governments attention. We are stronger with an active legalization effort, even if the medical community says they don't support it. And we probably(maybe), as an organization, should stay away from it.

[Restorium2]

were only stronger and safer with legalization triangulating the government. Without it, its just the medical law attracting the governments attention. We are stronger with an active legalization effort, even if the medical community says they don't support it. And we probably, as an organization, should stay away from it.

Yes. We knew this back before the Act was passed. MPP made us all shut up about legalization while we were working on getting the Act passed. It's nothing new. This is just a reminder for those who weren't there then or just forgot about the stategy that worked. If you read our first rules for the MMMA you can see the footprint. It's more important to get more states medically legal than to go for legalization now. Once we have over half of the states med legal then that might tip the scales. In the mean time, medical will force a schedule change that will help legalization.

[hofner67]

Yes. We knew this back before the Act was passed. MPP made us all shut up about legalization while we were working on getting the Act passed. It's nothing new. This is just a reminder for those who weren't there then or just forgot about the stategy that worked. If you read our first rules for the MMMA you can see the footprint. It's more important to get more states medically legal than to go for legalization now. Once we have over half of the states med legal then that might tip the scales. In the mean time, medical will force a schedule change that will help legalization.

That's your opinion and I didn't start this thread.

[+420Atheist]

Yes while trying to pass medical, full legalization was a distraction that the opposition would use against us. But times are different now. The MMMA is constitutional law. A majority of people support full legalization today. Now what is good for legalization is good for medical and what is good for medical is good for legalization.

 

Wouldn't it be nice to have full legalization a law and take all the transfer BS off the table? All transfers legal of 2 oz or less. No more f'in p2p, c2p, c2c, p2c, or unregistered BS to worry about.

 

The only issue would be the feds and if you know your history at all you would know that New York legalized alcohol during prohibition before the feds did. It made it so the feds had to spend resources trying to enforce the law for the whole state. They did not have the resources to do that and it essentially made alcohol legal in NY. This action was one of the big reasons prohibition got repealed. The feds knew other states would follow and make it impossible to enforce.