Cannabis Coalition Unifies State In Opposition To House Bills

[Herb Cannabis]

How many others were left off of the signatories? I'd like to see the Lake/Osceola and Osceola County Compassion Clubs names added to the signatories as well. I don't know if we were asked or not, but I just found out about this last evening and we definitely want our names added.

[AKenewell]

We have a great law, but it also should be treated with respect.

 

 

I agree

[GregS]

I sent the following to the Judiciary Committee as my public testimony. It pretty well covers most of my objections. The best route we still have is to obtain enough no votes. If it appears that there is a serious intention to bring them to the floor, then yes, by all means submit your recommended changes to your Representative.

 

In addition to these points the reommended amendment in 4851 to require the courts to allow the defenses in the act to the trier of fact is a headache. The COA has flatly ignored the requirements that possession of a card by a qualified person is enough to stop arrest and prosecution and/or the requirement that the affirmative defense be required to be allowed at an evidentiary hearing before a case goes before a jury or judge, given that the defendants are otherwise compliant. The Prosecuting Attorneys Association stated in their committee hearing testimony that the courts can refuse to abide by legislative action to require that the courts allow the defense before the trier of fact on the basis of separation of powers.That is a defiantly arrogant statement. It has to be expected that judges like O'Connel and idiots like Schitbag will run their absurd agendas and continue to allow prosecutor motions to withhold the evidence. The result is that even if judges allow the defense to the trier of fact it will cost patients and caregivers much more time, money, and aggravation. In short, because the courts have proved that they will simply ignore the written law as is, there is no reason to expect them to treat the revised law any differently.The legislature should be asked what the options are when that would happen, and we should continue to insist that they do what they can to compel or entice the courts somehow to just obey the damm law.

=============================================================================================================================================

 

Re: HB 4834, I find the requirement that two each, two inch photos be printed on registry identification cards extreme. The act already permits a photo to be included. That two photos that are several degrees larger than those found on legally acceptable drivers' licenses and official State of Michigan identification cards be required is silly, and appears at first blush an attempt to render them too large and unwieldy to conveniently carry. By all means, please instruct the licensing agency to include a photo comparable to the one that permits me to drive and cash checks. It is doubtful that this requirement will deter law enforcement from producing fraudulent cards as they, and only they, have been shown to have done. But if the committee insists on spinning its wheels, the provision is not so onerous to require I waste any more time with it. I will, however, point out that the requirement that the photos be six months current on a one (or proposed two) year registry card is a threat. Please, if anything, clarify that the photo be taken within six months of the application submission. Law enforcement and the courts have not demonstrated enough native ability to understand.

 

 

 

 

More disturbing is the unfettered access the legislature would grant to law enforcement in obtaining any individual's registry information with only a person's name and DOB. This is an unlawful intrusion on Fourth and Fifth Amendment Rights. The provision does not even rise to the test of reasonable suspicion, which is the diminished and inferior standard relative to probable cause. Even that requires real and articluable facts, whereas this amendment would require nothing more than finding a birthday wish on facebook. The proposal permits police to fish for information because it does not restrict inquiries only to circumstances involving cannabis. It is entirely unacceptable.

 

 

 

 

Re: HB 4856, I do not object to it, but find it unnecessary. The law already prohibits public use and impaired driving.

 

 

 

 

Re: HB 4853, there are prohibitions and penalties already in the law that have not been shown to be an inadequate deterrent to illicit distribution from qualified to unqualified patients, and additional penalties are unwarranted. If necessary to stroke any member's ego or to feed the prison complex, those are be the only reasons I can imagine to move these changes forward.

 

 

 

 

Re: HB 4851, I find it especially problematic and wish to speak first to the proposed changes regarding the enclosed, locked facility and permissions to enter.

 

 

 

 

Please consider the use of the term “comparable.” I find it inartful in this context and likely to cause confusion. Consider that the courts and police have already failed to understand the most simple tenets of the Act.

 

 

 

 

To prohibit individuals who the Act intends its chief beneficiaries from entering those areas where any activity defined, most especially to include cultivation, under medical use is being practiced opens a can of worms. The law is intended, not per the State of Michigan legislature, which have for decades been obstinate in their refusal to accept the wishes of the electorate to establish cannabis as a legitimately accepted medical agent (or for that matter, useful substance that is far less harmful than alcohol or tobacco), but at long last per the constituency at large, to establish a community of patients and caregivers that is restricted within its own as a group, and that has unlimited freedom within, except as required in the enacted initiative, to engage in any and all of the liberal aspects of medical use as defined in the enacted initiative. Perhaps the committee would be so kind to articulate the benefit it sees in prohibiting a patient to see and observe the condition of and the conditions under which a substance they are, by law, permitted to ingest is being cultivated, or in a caregiver to observe the conditions under which sources of cannabis that are to be provided to a sick patient are derived. Even before the legislature could begin to change this, it is apparent that other sections of the law are inconsistent with it. Subsequently the change is illegitimate and should not be passed.

 

 

 

 

To suggest that the term “bona fide” can be in any way changed to mean any more or any less than what its fundamental tenets permit is purely stupid. Translated to “good faith” it cannot be understood in any context that even begins to describe it as a required condition or in any way coerced, especially as codified law. It can rather be understood only in the absolute absence of requirement or coercion, and exceeds anything the law can reasonably aspire to. Used as it is in the Act, it compels us to duty, which serves only our moral awareness. We people can realize and comprehend it, just as we did at the polls, but because the law can only at best pretend to command the concept, it would be necessary to strike the term from the Act and use language that would perhaps better read “best practices” or “coercive requirements,” both which would be accurate and less likely to insult our intelligence. Good faith and coercion are simply inconsistent with each other and cannot be reconciled. But even beyond that, equal protection under the law is ignored in this awkward attempt to define the bona fide doctor/patient relationship. Until and unless we are treated just as any other patient in any other relationship with any other doctor any change is unconstitutional. It further remains that the authority to govern the behavior of its members goes to the medical associations that administer rules and codes of ethics and practice within the medical profession, both as a practical matter and as spelled out in the initiated Act. It is not the legislature's prerogative. The suggested change is unacceptable.

 

 

 

 

So much in these proposed legislative changes and those on the back burner are clear in their intent to diminish, or even destroy, our hard fought and legitimate protections in an affront to the democratic process. Disturbing statements alluding to efforts at clarity display as political pandering to ideological agendas that were unable to prevail during the 2008 election. We hope we can regard you differently, and that you will do what you can to compel the courts and police to follow the law before our rights are forcefully taken from us. It was not the courts, and it was not the police who took the issue to the electorate and obtained its resounding legitimacy. Please vote no on these bills, with the possible exception of a more thoughtfully amended 4856.

Edited April 18, 2012 by GregS

[GregS]

And I am medicated enough to suggest this bunch refers to itself as the 3MillionA, as that is the number of votes in our camp.

[ScottB]

Medical marijuana supporters protest legislation that would change the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act. More than 150 people attended the event at the Capitol on Tuesday...

 

Yes very good job 150 people showed up out of 1000's Now that is saying something.

 

 

http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/04/medical_marijuana_advocates_pr.html

Edited April 18, 2012 by ScottB

[GregS]

This is even more hysterical. Will Meijer have to forfeit the store?

 

http://annarbor.com/news/more-than-70-marijuana-plants-seized-at-nail-salon-inside-meijer-near-ann-arbor/?cmpid=mlive-@aa-river#incart_hbx

[solabeirtan]

This is even more hysterical. Will Meijer have to forfeit the store?

 

http://annarbor.com/...iver#incart_hbx

The Comments posted in your article there are HI-larious. Good looking out G regS !

[+EdwardGlen]

On the Dr - Patient relationship according to ER Doctor who took care of me A relationship was established as soon as we met

 

This came up when my blood test showed I had used cannabis and we started talking

 

His biggest concern is the number of narcotic overdoses they are seeing in the ER

 

Pain pills and heroin are two of most common drug od's

 

He said some patients they see are regular people who got caught up and addicted after suffering a painful injury that required narcotics to control the pain

 

They never knew they had become addicted

 

The most painful deaths he sees are young people some as young as 14

 

Kids start on narcotic pills those get to expensive so either they turn to crime to feed the habit or switch to heroin

 

Four years ago he says a 17 year old high school boy broke his leg playing football simple fracture Doctor prescribed OxyContin the young man was dead in ten months from an OD of heroin

 

He became dependent on the pills but his Dr cut him off so heroin was next best thing he could get

 

Just this week a murder was committed by a kid high on fake pot

 

Our legislature is exerting forces where they're not needed

 

The marijuana sky isn't falling

 

But Michigan along with the rest of the country is losing the war on hard drugs that kill without prejudice

 

We need our elected officials to remove their political party blinders and take a good look around

 

I'll relinquish the soap box

[purklize]

70 mj plants growing on the 2nd floor of a Meijer superstore? What the...?!?!?!? That is the wackiest news story I've ever seen here in Ann Arbor.

 

I am so relieved to see that everyone has set aside their differences and is now standing united to fight this bs. THANK YOU TO ALL RESPONSIBLE!

[Hayduke]

I was told directly today that in light of the letter we delivered to the House on Monday (the group unity letter), there will be no amendments added to any of the bills.

 

This is tantamount to stomping their feet, taking their football, and going home. They play politics and it is just politics, we play politics and we are not negotiating in good faith. how silly is that?

 

So now more cards are being put on the table, and we are beginning to formally ask for commitments to "at least" vote against 4834...

 

I would urge folks to contact their Reps in specific opposition to 4834 and the outrageous access to the registry it gives to any person with arrest powers in Michigan. When you consider 4834 in conjunction with the Koon decision it is entirely bad mojo....

[GregS]

If we weren't getting through, they would not be pissed. That only tells me to ramp up the pressure more persistently. I think it is time to mount an extensive media campaign, most especially in opinion pages and in response to any artice regarding the topic. I had thought to start a new thread for it, but am not finding an option to start one.

[Hayduke]

we are ramped up GregS. Trust me on that one. with the new coalition we have more qualified people roaming the hallways than ever before. I have no crystal ball, but at least we are still making progress....

[GregS]

Man, I know you are stalking these people at the Capitol and love it. I would sell my soul to be there with you. Keep it up. But beyond that I think the community would do well to get real busy with the press.

Edited April 18, 2012 by GregS

[Croppled1]

This is even more hysterical. Will Meijer have to forfeit the store?

 

http://annarbor.com/news/more-than-70-marijuana-plants-seized-at-nail-salon-inside-meijer-near-ann-arbor/?cmpid=mlive-@aa-river#incart_hbx

 

Election year , and this one has the numbers for a medical grow . Could it be legal ? I wonder why or why not ?

 

With the driving ruling I imagine patients will be afraid to lobby in Lansing now . Sad .

Edited April 18, 2012 by Croppled1

[Celliach]

Start writing letters to the editors of your local papers!

[Fat Freddy]

Back on topic, I support hb 4856 no one wants to face the loss of a family member to an intoxicated driver. Need a definition of marijuana intoxication.

Most script drugs say you should not drive for x amount of time. Studies needed to validate time frame.

Hb 4853 The law already addresses these issues aquatically. Oppose

HB 4851:In light of a local ordnance I oppose. Said ordnance seems to point to a single provider in a location that most can not afford. Opposed

HB 4834: Objuction to photo size, and does not state who will supply the photo, where to get such a photo taken.

The dmv has stated that they would be opposed to taking the photos due to budget constraints. Opposed

 

Maybe we should help them out and write our own amendments??? And send them to our legislators ( favorable ) for consideration and possible submission?

Just a wondering mind....

Edited April 18, 2012 by Fat Freddy

[SFC]

Back on topic, I support hb 4856 no one wants to face the loss of a family member to an intoxicated driver. Need a definition of marijuana intoxication.

Most script drugs say you should not drive for x amount of time. Studies needed to validate time frame.

Hb 4853 The law already addresses these issues aquatically. Oppose

HB 4851:In light of a local ordnance I oppose. Said ordnance seems to point to a single provider in a location that most can not afford. Opposed

HB 4834: Objuction to photo size, and does not state who will supply the photo, where to get such a photo taken.

The dmv has stated that they would be opposed to taking the photos due to budget constraints. Opposed

 

Maybe we should help them out and write our own amendments??? And send them to our legislators ( favorable ) for consideration and possible submission?

Just a wondering mind....

Troll Much?

[GregS]

Hey man. The guy laid out his positions. Let him be.

[Croppled1]

Back on topic, I support hb 4856 no one wants to face the loss of a family member to an intoxicated driver. Need a definition of marijuana intoxication.

Most script drugs say you should not drive for x amount of time. Studies needed to validate time frame.

Hb 4853 The law already addresses these issues aquatically. Oppose

HB 4851:In light of a local ordnance I oppose. Said ordnance seems to point to a single provider in a location that most can not afford. Opposed

HB 4834: Objuction to photo size, and does not state who will supply the photo, where to get such a photo taken.

The dmv has stated that they would be opposed to taking the photos due to budget constraints. Opposed

 

Maybe we should help them out and write our own amendments??? And send them to our legislators ( favorable ) for consideration and possible submission?

Just a wondering mind....

 

Freddy , this is medical use as with any medical use many patients will need to keep a therapuetic dose active in their system at all times . When you keep a constant dose you adjust to any side effects . The problem is more of how they are forcing people to dose which is a problem with all medications . I owned my own business and was injured by another driver while stopped at a red light and two half sized vertabrae and a broken collar bone among other issues . I also suffer from some other spinal abnromalities from the non at fault accidents I was in . . Normal treatment for my injuries includes drugs for muscle spasm , like vailum pain duragesic patches with a breakthrough medicine oxycontin and then bowel preps , anti anxiety meds ect . I passed every DOT drug tests for 6 years until it just became impossible to work . I tried hard to stay working people will never understand as I paid to keep that business open because I jknew nothing could be better to try . Eventually I could go no more and filed for disabillity after being hit several more times while working and after years passing a Federal Court awarded disabillity not a process or outcome anyone desires .

 

I drove about 60,000 miles a year like that in City traffic with passengers causing myself so much pain I would not sleep for days at a time often 4- 5 . This is and was State workmans comp policy . Why should cannabis be treated any different then morphine , sleeping pills , barbutiates and the other drugs they had me on at one time ? Several of the drugs have been taken off the market for death and my body is diminished and permently damaged with little support from the system . It is legal to drive on marinol now and that is only the halucigenic part of the cannabinoid chain in marihuana and a synthetic version that has done the only killing associated with the plant and wrongly so .

 

. We really do all have allot of scars from this concept of a drug war and zero tolerance that effects our thinking . People using medications responsabley that improve preformance are not punished we do that because it is in everyones best interest . We are patients with severe dehabillitating conditions like in my case much of my hormonal production has also been destroyed from the c spine injury and years of pain zapping all production to cope with permenent injury causing severe screaming suicidel pain . I lost my thyroid gland funciton as a result of my spinal fusion at c 5/6 which is known to effect it . Taking hormones is nothing like normal production . We all have issues but we need to be as functional as possible for as long as possible . Just because we use cannabis we shouldn't have basic privilages taken away and in every other State this is not occuring unless they pass the 5 ng limit which again is zero tolerance because anyone truly using this with a constant therapuetic dose will have a tripple digit level in their blood . I don't know about you but if this didn't work I wouldn't touch it with all the problems but it does help one find comfort which also improves function and safer driving in mature adults who exercise caution .

 

If we start to invoke strict arbitrary restrictions on medications a huge majority of patients will no longer be able to function in society costing billions in waste to the economy . I read somewhere half of individuals over 55 take three or more medications a day . Many are dependent where if you miss doses you can have severe issues like blood pressure meds or insulin . Why should cannabis be treated different ?

 

Why should one not be able to drive to Church , a local store , a government meeting down the road ? As long as they feel able and do so safely on medication like in California or Oregon . Even Minnisota known for conservatist veiws on substance abuse did not include cannabis in their zero tolerance law and they don't have medical,cannabis . This is going to force allot of patients out of their homes and or into the courts and jails .

Edited April 19, 2012 by Croppled1

[Croppled1]

Hey man. The guy laid out his positions. Let him be.

 

He started another topic asking for a definition of impaird by cannabis of which there is no standard and what is applied elsewhere would not allow for medical use by most patients requirements it is important to discuss and understand that as well as the damage which being stranded in isolation is doing to patients already during these first 4 years of the program who try to comply with unreasonable standards . These things need to be discussed especially when people who can choose how they participate are going out speaking for those who cannot . Some poeple require therapuetic dosing either for chronic pain or cancer treatment as two examples . They also cannot ride in public transportation even if it is available due to various constraints it requires but they can drive short distances just fine . We have not had any issues that I know of during these first 4 years if people don't mix alchohal,are mature and act responsabley . Otherwise other laws cover their poor actions and anyone can have a accident . Yes nobody wants to loose anyone to a impaired driver I agree .

 

right now this is especially upsetting to me because I spent all my discreationairy money for the next year to try to rehabillitate myself by getting out more which requires driving within a 5 mile radius of my home and am very perplexed on what to do . It has been 4 years I didn't expect this though I had been told it was possible no other States do it to their patients . They have tried but been overturned legitimate patients shouldnt' have to worry about arrest for using their medicinal substances or be denied the abillity function as normal as possible in their communities as long as they act polite and responsable . Sorry about the spelling I cant find the spell checker or the start a new thread button .We can't let these issues divide us and we should try to stand up for positions that retain rights for patients inline with what exists for all others . That will keep us unified as well as staying active often leads to less use over time for some lucky individuals who can and do improve . .

Edited April 19, 2012 by Croppled1

[purklize]

Back on topic, I support hb 4856 no one wants to face the loss of a family member to an intoxicated driver. Need a definition of marijuana intoxication.

Most script drugs say you should not drive for x amount of time. Studies needed to validate time frame.

 

We need laws that judge you for performance and nothing else. There's very few fatalities related to mj, but huge numbers related to texting at the wheel, or fatigue (this one is worse than driving drunk, proven by studies). Double digit percentages of drivers are severely underslept and are again more dangerous than a pis s wasted drunk. Just a few weeks ago some mother of four here near my house was killed, she was texting and swerved off the road into a telephone pole. These are the big issues. The only way to answer all these problems in a fair and reasonable way is to measure performance, so if you're driving very badly, no matter what the reason (hot coffee in lap, or whatever), you lose your license.

 

Also, you have to consider tolerance. With alcohol, some people are off the road with one drink, while others can tip back 10 and still drive better than most sober people. The same applies to prescription medications and mj.

 

One thing that has to be considered: there are a lot of medications that are intoxicating - opiates for pain, anticonvulsants for nerve pain and epilepsy. In both cases people on them have to take them around the clock for them to work - meaning, they will never be sober. Are they supposed to never drive again? How could they live if they couldn't?

Edited April 19, 2012 by purklize

[wringly]

Never claimed to represent "you" Wringly. Mal covered much better than I did in my haste. But honestly if you cannot just at least attempt to put it away while your driving I am not shedding many tears for you. We have a great law, but it also should be treated with respect. Why would you even want it out where LEO could either see it or smell it? Are you dying to show your card to the police, I know I am not.

 

Jamie I see your point on 4834 but chances are if they have a warrant there is already a full blown investigation in progress and they are just sealing the deal. Now if just running a card number then yes I do agree there needs to be some checks and balances in place.

Your shooting your mouth off about all the great work you did that,fortunatly is going down the drain,to help leo prosecute patients.I'm a patient!

[mizerman]

What is it that makes you say that? I just don't understand your reasoning.

Looks to me like "wringly" said that because someone on here jumped all over his backside simply because he stated his opinion earlier in the discussion. Sounds all too familiar to me.

[Fat Freddy]

We need laws that judge you for performance and nothing else. There's very few fatalities related to mj, but huge numbers related to texting at the wheel, or fatigue (this one is worse than driving drunk, proven by studies). Double digit percentages of drivers are severely underslept and are again more dangerous than a pis s wasted drunk. Just a few weeks ago some mother of four here near my house was killed, she was texting and swerved off the road into a telephone pole. These are the big issues. The only way to answer all these problems in a fair and reasonable way is to measure performance, so if you're driving very badly, no matter what the reason (hot coffee in lap, or whatever), you lose your license.

 

Also, you have to consider tolerance. With alcohol, some people are off the road with one drink, while others can tip back 10 and still drive better than most sober people. The same applies to prescription medications and mj.

 

One thing that has to be considered: there are a lot of medications that are intoxicating - opiates for pain, anticonvulsants for nerve pain and epilepsy. In both cases people on them have to take them around the clock for them to work - meaning, they will never be sober. Are they supposed to never drive again? How could they live if they couldn't?

 

The 1st part of your statement is what I am aiming at, Sorry to play the devils advocate. But sometimes it is needed to find points to attack unreasonable approaches by leo.

All to often I read postings regarding someone not using good common sense. Example: Driving to Ann Arbor to pick up a friend from work I counted 3 cops off to the side of the road. What were they looking for? Probable cause! ( cruse control is a wonderful medication for my case of lead foot. )

I hope I have stimulated some thought on the matter and I thank everyone for their contributions.

[GregS]

There is a lot to be found here regarding intoxication:

 

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/medical/ch5.htm