Jump to content

Statement From Cpu

Restorium2

Recommended Posts

Hayduke Advanced Member

Hayduke

Posted
Posted

so, if i dont drive myself, i cant move clones from one place to another..... what if im blind? what if i dont have a dl or a caregiver? how am i supposed to transport my live marihuana plants if noone else is allowed in the vehicle with them? And how am i supposed to make my medicine not accessable from my mini van or my suv? or my motorcycle or bicycle for that matter? oh well, keep saying these are good for us, eventually we will believe it.

 

yes it is my understanding that you are correct in you criticism. They really want to crack down on transportation issues in general. i am sorry that is the case. It does not jive with CPU values.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 381
  • Created
  • Last Reply
purklize Advanced Member

purklize

Posted
Posted

Well I get the sense you guys aren't telling people this stuff is acceptable and I am relieved by that. What scares me the most is a compromise being made, one that takes away rights, and the CPU saying we're happy with it, simply because it's not as bad as it could be. I don't want anyone saying they're happy with anything unless we're moving forward. :thumbsu:

 

I'm still nervous that the compromises that have been made could backfire... I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Really nerve wracking...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SFC Advanced Member

SFC

Posted
Posted

One other little accusation that has been thrown around a lot that I would like to dispel and really I apologize for even bringing it up. CPU did not offer to trade anything for more patients or plant count. Ever! At a meeting last summer with Rep Horn (keep in mind this was very early after the bills were introduced) we had a long, long conversation. We bounced around every problem we could think of. Of course dispensaries, farm markets, Taxes, transfers, etc, etc, everything we all have talked about since 2009.

 

One idea that was talked about was having the ability for patients to designate a secondary caregiver, that way it would have legalized transfers between non-connected PT and CG's at its best and at its worst still allow a PT a second choice and a CG access to several more patients. Never was there any suggestion that that would give a CG more plants or clones. NOTHING came of the discussion. The only other time clones were mentioned is when we were advancing the idea that clones should not be counted against your plant count. (we all know the reasons why)

 

So in essence the conversation was just a very engaging discussion about a plethora of issues effecting all of us. It went on for more than three hours as I remember. But again, obviously none of that stuff made it to the finish line.

 

I take that back one thing definitely came out of that very discussion. Two year cards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hayduke Advanced Member

Hayduke

Posted
Posted

Well I get the sense you guys aren't telling people this stuff is acceptable and I am relieved by that. What scares me the most is a compromise being made, one that takes away rights, and the CPU saying we're happy with it, simply because it's not as bad as it could be. I don't want anyone saying they're happy with anything unless we're moving forward. :thumbsu:

 

I'm still nervous that the compromises that have been made could backfire... I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Really nerve wracking...

 

I get your concern, but it is unfounded. We do not have the power to compromise. This is not a situation where we are in control of the agenda. I wish we were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timmahh Advanced Member

Timmahh

Posted
Posted

well I can't force you to read the words in front of you. Sorry, I tried. I can say after ten months of working on this, I am positive as to the meaning. It seems like your take is a bit rigid. In any case it is what it is, and having worked directly on the language I would suspect my handle on the words may have a bit of weight...

 

 

I would only add to that, in 08, as voters, I am sure Many of us were very aware of what the ballot said. but thanks to BS and the CoA, that is not how they see it.

why Should we not expect this clear wording to remain clear once its the law?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hayduke Advanced Member

Hayduke

Posted
Posted

I would only add to that, in 08, as voters, I am sure Many of us were very aware of what the ballot said. but thanks to BS and the CoA, that is not how they see it.

why Should we not expect this clear wording to remain clear once its the law?

 

well you shouldn't at least theoretically. But it is the venue we have to debate the topic. everyones vote matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hayduke Advanced Member

Hayduke

Posted
Posted

been seeing them as users come back and pop up. clearing as found. lmao

thats you Mal? yes?

 

Good to see you again.

 

no I am not Mal... known as just me over at MCP.

 

originally signed on as Hayduke in June of 2009.

 

what a long strange trip it's been

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SFC Advanced Member

SFC

Posted
Posted

Well one thing for certain Tim we realize that every word counts when it comes to COA. I think after the BS decisions that O'Connell and crew have handed down we are wise to read everything frontwards and backwards.

 

I guess if you wanted to call us elitist you could, but it is not true. There are some fairly well off CPU members and there are some fairly poor CPU members. But one thing we all share is a belief in MMJ and a want to protect it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bobandtorey Advanced Member

bobandtorey

Posted
Posted

so, if i dont drive myself, i cant move clones from one place to another..... what if im blind? what if i dont have a dl or a caregiver? how am i supposed to transport my live marihuana plants if noone else is allowed in the vehicle with them? And how am i supposed to make my medicine not accessable from my mini van or my suv? or my motorcycle or bicycle for that matter? oh well, keep saying these are good for us, eventually we will believe it.

 

what if im blind? lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timmahh Advanced Member

Timmahh

Posted
Posted

I say the bills had a good chance of passing either way. I am wondering could you point out to us exactly what part of each bill is bad? I obviously disagree with the FEDs having access to the registry via lean and in my opinion thats the worst one. But just wondering what the other real bad parts are? I do know they added protections for growing outside, made it so we only need to register every two years, are forcing LARA to hold qulifying condition hearings and took the card proccess away from LARA all of which I think are positives. Not saying I want them to pass just wanting specifics on the other parts that are "bad".

 

 

I have a problem with any Enforcement Agency having unadulterated open access, Federal or State, to the registry with out Solid Probable Cause. Pulling someone over for a burnt out license plate light is not it. I do not believe the majority of MMMP Registrants are foolish enough to think, If they are transferring meds, and get pulled over for that burnt out light lets say, and the Officer smells the meds and says you have marihuana in the car?, one would be hard pressed in my opinion to believe a Registrant who is legally compliant would have any problem providing their Card/paperwork to said Officer to Authenticate with the State.

 

But the bigger question becomes. You do get pulled over, you are compliant in all aspect of the stop. Does that then mean, they may pull a warrent, to come check your grow for compliance as well? and if it does, are YOU ok with that? I can not say that is a warm fuzzy for me, or many others I would suspect.

 

It would be different if the citizens could be assured a fair portion of our Law Enforcement Agencies held to the "Protect and Serve" moto that was the founding principle of organized law enforcement in our country. When some look around, they dont have that same warm fuzzy feeling of their public servants.

 

With the fall Opine of Mr Schuette, can you say you blame them for felling as many of us do on that point.

 

God it is good to see open discussions again. Many of us have been wanting to have this back for some time now

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hempcheff Advanced Member

Hempcheff

Posted
Posted

thanks bob, It is a serious concern,

 

as is the case with a close friend of mine. his wife has ms and is a patient, they use a van for transportation as she is wheelchair bound and can no longer drive. She grows her own, but has a caregiver as a back up. Her caregiver is not her husband, but another patient/caregiver that grows her own. How is she supposed to be able to acquire and transport clones/plants if this passes? Her husband isnt going to be allowed in the van, and as stated before, she cannot drive?

 

I take it this is going to nullify

(i) A person shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, solely for being in the presence or vicinity of the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act, or for assisting a registered qualifying patient with using or administering marihuana.

does this make it a crime to use the public transportation system (busses, people mover) or taxi service?

what if im blind? lol

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
purklize Advanced Member

purklize

Posted
Posted

Here's an old post of mine that didn't seem to generate any interest... perhaps you CPU folks would be interested in this. It's an alternative to having a centralized database for the cops to access of cardholders.

 

An easy and more effective alternative to the bill that requires a police database, which allows police to instantly verify that someone is a valid patient, from anywhere, anytime, without a database::

 

This is so easy it's ridiculous... I can't figure out why this hasn't been done in the first place.

 

They could take the initials and the birthdate of the patient, and the expiration date of the card... say BRF_01-20-1982_04-01-2012 and encrypt it with a key that only cops and government officials have access to. This would mean there would be a unique number on each card that could not be altered, and would be easily and instantly verifiable anywhere without a central database. Easy as pie. Please ask if you have any questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hayduke Advanced Member

Hayduke

Posted
Posted

Could you describe your activities at the capitol? I have been under the impression for some time "compromising" described it well... if not please do set the record straight.

 

 

compromise is not involved.

 

We tell what we don't like. We submit alternative language. They determine what they will do.

 

Purklize, the reality is you do this very very quietly. The only language that gets through the filter is presented as the Reps point of view. If anyone thought a mmj group was submitting language it would be rejected out of hand....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
purklize Advanced Member

purklize

Posted
Posted

Well that's very different from what I have been given the impression was happening... which was more like a group of guys with pot leaf shirts sitting down with some stiff guys in suits in a closed door meeting and compromising on language...

 

So you're like ninja staffers then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SFC Advanced Member

SFC

Posted
Posted

The more you can let the reps take credit for fixing a problem the better. Of course it don't always work and often they will not go 100% anyway. And you want to talk about frustrating, say you have a productive meeting with a rep or two and everyone leaves in agreement, you write up some fixes to problems, everyone is happy and then a few days later they meet with either their caucus or another stakeholder on the other side (PAAM, MSP, The Black Hand) and baam! Your right back where you started. We have often said this is a roller coaster ride that stopped being fun 6 months ago.

 

Then couple that with another cannabis leader completely slandering you.. Frustrating...yea that about covers it..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
c2288420 Advanced Member

c2288420

Posted
Posted

Someone please explain if we couldn't protect our rights under the law as it is written , how in the H**L should someone expect protection under these so call"improvements"? The state received over 10.5 million in 2011 from their citizens in an attempt to comply with a law that was passed by the voters. Now a select few legislators and judges say screw the people and the law. Hey CPU can I get a refund and my name removed from the list? If you are negotiating lets try and get that on a bill!! My card expired 12/1/11, mailed my renewal in 10/03/11, check cashed 10/06/11, as of 04/5/12 still no card. This is all a crock. The state spent 800k for a new printer and if anyone renews after this fiasco they deserve to be locked up. Trust me, history dictates anytime the government maintains a list of names there is never a good outcome(remember the Japenese internment camps, notice how quick the Patriot Act materialized after 911). We already know its about the seizure of assets because they don't need to charge you to seize your assets. BTW two of the largest recipients of election dollars were Attorney General Bill Schuette and Chief Justice Robert P Young of the Michigan Supreme Court after Governor Snyder.You do the math.The conservatives got the best money could buy and dam the people or the law. Is this considered electronic terrorism?

 

Regards and peace,

C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...