Koon Loses At Coa

[Herb Cannabis]

You are talking over 3 years befor the 16 elections so why can't we raise a mil plus? I believe that there are over 140K patients, $100 each. If that doesn't work for you, sue the state for the money they stole from the program and just use that. Sounds good to me!

[purklize]

If asked to do a PBT the Law says you must (or your Lic. is suspended) as We have implied consent -- so say nothing. Do not answer questions.

 

Are you saying you should just stare blankly and not respond to requests for a PBT? Interesting...

[SFC]

Mal may be right. It is nowhere near hopeless yet, Koon will definitely be going to the supreme court. As Caveat pointed out tho, we should not carry much hope there just yet. We are being back-doored by Schuette, of this you can be certain. We can only hope that is hubris has made him start to get a little sloppy....

[purklize]

Protect drivers. Protect workers. Protect Housing.

 

Sad thing is the original initiative does this. The courts have interpreted the life out of it so thoroughly though that it's effectively worthless.

 

Sec. 4. (a) A qualifying patient who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card 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, for the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act

 

This plainly prohibits firing someone for testing hot on a urine screen, or arresting someone for driving with it still in their system.

 

Thanks, CoA.

[+Malamute]

Trust me, we can be WAY more specific.

 

:-)

[GregS]

I understand that the Casaias case is going up the Federal Court heirarchy. In a twisted kinda sense, these two issues are working in tamden.

[CaveatLector]

Sad thing is the original initiative does this. The courts have interpreted the life out of it so thoroughly though that it's effectively worthless.

 

 

 

This plainly prohibits firing someone for testing hot on a urine screen, or arresting someone for driving with it still in their system.

 

Thanks, CoA.

 

Where are you getting this firing prohibition out of that?

[JohnB RPh]

But Feezel still stands, correct? The carboxy-THC metabolite does not constitute impairment?

[CaveatLector]

But Feezel still stands, correct? The carboxy-THC metabolite does not constitute impairment?

Correct.

[Croppled1]

I am still of the belief that juries don’t want to convict when there is no evidence of impairment. you are right but that is going to take a good lawyer and that will cost you lots of money and most people do not have it

 

In one swoop patients cannot organize or travel who are alone and the program as well as many of the benefits to patients who are responsable and fighting to stay active are gone . They just won't let us succeed in helping ourselves and each other . This definitely effects everyone on the program unifying us . Since daily users will registrar often at 100ng plus how do you define impaired ? Most States are saying 5 ng but there is absolutely no proof that means anything .

[purklize]

Since daily users will registrar often at 100ng plus how do you define impaired ? Most States are saying 5 ng but there is absolutely no proof that means anything .

 

This is what bothers me so much about this, there is no science here, just arbitrary posturing by politicians to score cheap political points while throwing people under the bus, probably literally from time to time.

[Reaper]

not legally! there is no doubt in my mind the MSP illegally has the Patient database in use as we speak. JMHO

 

So "legally" they can't run yer plate and then cross it with the registry. Thet would have to come up with another reson to take you in for a blood test. They can't say "your on the registry so your going in for a blood test" right? Can you refuse a blood test by the poice? "If they want to test my bood it will be through a bullet hole!"

[trix]

MODERATOR: Please tell me how to start a new topic, thank you.

 

PM sent

[cristinew]

now more than ever we need help in michigan, this state wants all patients not to drive, its crazy,, no new conditions no cards new bills so police can snoop this is a very Hostile

[Scooter]

Calm down. 83 in a 55. Alcohol. Pipe. Card. He was screwed the minute he saw the cop in the rear.

 

The psychoactive THC ( THC acid, THC-D-9, THC-H-11, etc are fairly fast moving metabolite molecules. CBD, CBN, etc are entirely different molecules and stay in the body for up to months dependent on use, time length thereof, strain, etc. Sadly, they are also the most medicinally beneficial out of everything listed, and most are unidentified. You may be comparing apples to oranges. If they test your blood and THC is present, you are under the influence. But just like alcohol give it time and it will go down. Are they going to be testing for urine content? Getting a warrant for your blood? That would take a lot of time ( read:$$$ ). And effort. If your "high", don't drive. That's your safest bet.

[GregS]

Hey Scooter. I cannot agree that any amount of THC present indicates impairment. I know for a fact that blood concentration of 9mg/dl is to be reasonably expected twelve hours after having last medicated with moderately potent cannabis. At that point there is no impairment. A per se law is not the answer, and the answers can only be found in some kind of objective measure of behavior or visibly distinct physical condition. The matter should not even be considered without facts. This is another example of the COA's intransigence to recognize the law for what it is, and those judges whose agenda lines up with McConnel are outrageously delinquent in their duty.

 

O'Connel must, not only but especially, be targeted hard and heavy for defeat by this community in the upcoming election. His election will be another demonstration of our will to egage the process and win.

[higginsmike]

leave it to politicians and lawyers to confuse a very straight forward logical law! "Under the influence" is as straight forward as you can get, are you slurring your words? not able to stand straight ? or can you answer simple questions? essentially a roadside sobriety test!!!!

what every one, including the court of appeals, is missing, that to not have THC in your system you have to wait about 3-4 days after smoking one joint, to drive again legally, so essentially, now no-one can drive with a mmma card!

 

This is what politicians and attorneys do so well, take a simple straight forward term like "under the influence" and spin it into a idealogical and agenda filled stump standing confusing non-definitive definition, to fit their own agenda and to lend some sense of legitimacy to their profession, the more is see of the justice system the more i loose my faith in them, seemingly they have become a self promoting, revenue starved organazation they have seemingly become more political than functional!!!

 

Maybe we should all be government dependent? they supply food, transportation, housing, healthcare, and that way we can all be under their control, which seems more and more to be their M.O.

[GregS]

Focusing on O'Connell might work, and will certainly teach us valuable lessons about that layer of elections. We have already started to organize for the effort on this page: http://www.facebook....349476768407515

 

Also, we got a slate of Democrats for the upcoming Supreme Court races two weeks ago on Planet Green Trees with Representative Ellen Cogen Lipton. We should focus on that as well since at least a few of our cases should make it there during the coming term, and also they will be charged with making decisions about COA justice selection procedure that is biting us at that level, bringing O'Connell and other extremists into too many cases.

 

Thanks. I have been spending some time on PGT, catching up with past radio shows and checking out the wealth of good information there.

 

It is assured that Schithead is working his alliances with the COA judges he sat with. It is assured that Snyder is laffing it up with them and has instructed LARA that they are expected to make things unduly hard for us. And it is assured that we will take our newfound cooperation and kick their azzes. What remains is to establish how we are going to raise funds for the election. I am aware of a PAC in Ann Arbor or Lansing that is working with candidates who support us.

[+Malamute]

Yea it is ridiculous.

 

But in the future, we know to use the word impairment instead of under the influence.

[purklize]

And then, when we get protective laws that use the word "impairment" instead of just "under the influence," they will charge you with being "stoned." Then, it will be "high," then "lit," then "baked..."

 

[legacy]

I seem to remember reading a thread here a month or two ago about the MMMA forming a PAC. Would it be possible for them to lobby for an allowable THC concentration for patients to drive with? The article below quotes a toxicologist with the MSP saying that 2ng/mL is "pretty small". I wonder what concentration would be "average" or just "small". Maybe he has statistics showing a relationship between concentration and driving performance. Maybe that route would get us to a 15ng/mL ceiling instead of zero tolerance. Sure, a performance-based test would be most ideal, but the state seems to prefer black and white tests. I expect to get flamed for suggesting a ceiling, but given the COA ruling and the state of the state, I think it is the only realistic option for regaining protections that the COA pimped us out of.

 

http://www.mlive.com...how_michig.html

[legacy]

I think a better solution would be for section 7 to read "impaired by" rather than "under the influence of." The same standard used for prescription drugs.

 

Good call. The "impaired by" approach sounds way better. I guess the ceiling approach would be like a compromise where no one wins. As it stands today, I'd gladly take the first available.

 

Maybe it's because I'm not at all familiar with the drunk driving terminology, but one good thing i see about the ceiling approach is that if a driver is under the limit, I assume he would be free to go, and would have a record of his innocence. In the article in my last post, the cop said Nix failed the field sobriety test but his THC was at 2ng/mL. If Michigan used a ceiling approach (of 5 or 8ng/mL), would that mean he was impaired, but not under the influence?

[+washtenaut]

What is the blood concentration for vicodin? There isn't one because it is not an issue unless the patient is impaired. The max thc levels should be different for patients than for recreational users, if thc levels must be used.

 

If the blood is from a non-patient, the 5ng level may be OK. There should be testing of folks that have used but don't use daily. Then test them and see how they do at various levels.

 

For patients, there should be a different standard and it should certainly be a good bit higher as these are presumed to be folks in need of keeping a therapeutic dose in their system versus recreational users. Again, it would be a good idea to test several hundred heavy daily users for THC levels, then dose them higher and test performance. Gather some actual data...what a concept!

 

Maybe we should all do what William Breathes did. He is the medical cannabis patient in Colorado that didn't medicate and went to the doctor one day. He visited with the doctor for a time and had the doctor certify that he was in no way impaired. He then had blood drawn and his thc level was something like 13-14 ng/ml. Maybe we should all get our own baseline scores so if we ever get arrested and ever get to a jury trial, we might be able to introduce this 'base level'. It could impact a jurist. It would impact my thinking, especially if I thought the prosecutor was picking on the patient.