Is This The End? Caregivers Giving Up Inmass

[Murph]

Calm down people,

 

those who say they are "quitting" or whatever is a foolhardy move at this point in time (5/6/12)- Someone registered means they already have your info. so quitting will not help that fact.

 

Koon, depending on your system could make you DUID from a few hours to a day or so after last use --- then the active THC is metabolized to THC-COOH, which is NOT the same as active THC and is not illegal under Feezel. So, it is not a terrible as people are making it out to be.

 

ALso, hopefully Koons lawyers are hopefully taking the case to the Mich Sup Crt and seeking leave to appeal (it is all they can do) and if so that koon deicison is not "final" until they are turned down by the Sup Crt - which could take months or more -- so really it is time to get busy, redouble our efforts but this time on the Michigan Senate and finally on Snyder - so nothing is over. Keep fighting. Who would quit after round 2 and lay down and say I'm out? Quitters never win and winners never quit.

 

The NORML talk list had Targowski (Targowski and Grow, Attys) come on and make it clear that people should not be worried about metabolites THC-COOH, just the active THC in one's blood --- which does not stay active too long ----

 

Your Certification and Registry Card still have legal protections -- without them it could be a Felony -- so personally it is better to have than not right now. Do not confuse the House Bills and Koon they are two different things and the House Bills are just that -- BILLS -- they are not law. Right now the Law says the Registry is confidential and all the Registry will do if LEO calls with a Card number is confrim, or deny, it is valid. LEO does not legally have access to the riegistry RIGHT NOW (5/6/12). * caveat is noted below which I hope is not true or will be changed....

 

Without Certification and the Registry card removes your legal protections for 12 plants, 2.5 Oz and CG transactions ---whatever the enforcement status in Court right now, the law is in flux and I have got to believe we will get it right so at at this point keep fighting ---(quitting will not change that a person or persons were registered, as they are already are in the registry so if you want to be "removed" I do not think that will happen -- as even not renewing will not eliminate, remove, or delete your information from the registry database (the do not delete information) it will just make it reflect "not valid" and that your no longer have the protections the Registry Card provides -- you and I WERE registered and that will not change no matter what you do (even not renewing) nope they got our information and the game is not over....so It seems foolhardy to make any rash actions. Personally I think many people will sue if the Bills that remove confidentiality become law (I will be the first one suing and I hope I have 131 K people suing with me).

 

House Bills are NOT law. Confidentiality is still in place and law of the Registry access.

 

The House Bills still need to go to the Michigan Senate, be worked or not, then brought for vote, and pass the Senate (who can amend the Bills as well) and get 75% super-majority there --- so it i still a long way to go and We can still work with others to defeat them.

 

 

** the caveat noted --- R. Schiener pointed out on NORML talk list that She and some associates say calling the registry phone number, pressing # 3, and giving someone's name and social sec. and the Registry will confirm if a person is a patient or CG and the CG patients if the latter -- this is a particularly scary thing given, as noted above the registry RIGHT NOW is still confidential. If this is true, I would say that NORML or someone HAS TO SUE the program , as if they do not, someone should as we were promised in law -- confidentiality --

 

To change that AFTER 131 K people signed up is not right, and could violate several Constitutional Protections (Due Process, Equal protection under law as well as a few dozen other issues, so I would anticipate legal challenges if the House Bills do make it to the Governors Desk and are signed into law -- and even then they night not have immediate effect

 

If you (or I) were to get pulled over, remain silent. No one can make you talk or answer questions -- be cool and be nice.

 

Lastly , as the zapatosunidos noted, the Koon decision is about DUID not opening up the registry to LEO (so some people are confusing things together, they are separate issues). Further, it is hopeful that Koon's Attorneys will apply to the Supreme Court (Application for Leave to appeal) and seek its reversal, so it is not over yet but yes, Koon is law right now so I am dealing with it by not driving till morning after any MM.

 

M

[Dr. Bob]

THC in the blood ALWAYS was illegal. Koon didn't really change anything. As for the rest of your post, thought I don't agree with every point, it is well written and considered. I think it is important, as you said, that now is not the time to panick and flee the program. I join you in your call to have everyone just take a deep breath and see where it goes from here.

 

Dr. Bob

[Herb Cannabis]

"should known better than to support limp penis liberals."

 

Stay out of my pants, really GanjaWarrior, what were you thinking?

Edited May 6, 2012 by Herb Cannabis

[Murph]

Bob and Cavet Lector,

 

I want to to address the bottom of this to you both -- I have changed my position on Marinol vs. Natural Marijuana (Plant and it's vegetable matter) that it is not seperately identifiable -- what I do not change is that legally, some defense is better than no defense (as I said all along). Without a defense, you have noting to argue at all -- even a "novel" defense is permitted I would think Cavet Lectior would agree without my citing the court rule. Having said that, I was mistaken, and have changed positions on it, as it would be a hail mary that in all odds would fail.

 

However, I want to add I think it is childish for Mods or Admins or whomever to lock topics --- It does not one person any good to try to quell free speech and people will move elsewhere as this is the net and as we have seen you cannot stop the net (pirate bay is my example) discussions among (most) rational people who are intelligent, and open to new facts, will come to the right conclusions in most situations.

 

I changed my position on Marinol (after researching the issue more in depth) -- Todd McCormick tried the same things in 2005 I think it was, said Marinol AND Cannabis might be in his system and the Gov. could not prove otherwise -- He was on to a good defense, as the Gov. had a hell of a time (in 2005) proving otherwise, but they did in the end. And now it is pretty simple if a properly equipped lab is tasked with determining the same. But in that research, I discovered with the Help of Atty. Targowski's post, and Karen O'Keefe's that ACTIVE THC in Michigan is all that matters - not metabolltes --- and active THC in whole blood is not as long "lived" in the Human blood as it is metabolized rather quickly --- but everyone is different depending on their metabolizing of it, frequency of use, quality and quantity and probably what you had for breakfast, lunch and dinner and a dozen other things -- it seems from THEIR posts on NORML talklist that ACTIVE THC in human whole blood IS metabolized from active THC, to metabolites in a few hours to 24-48 hrs. -- not the weeks or months like most people are now thinking.

 

Metabolites are not illegal - as Feezel is Mich Sup Crt Case law -- so people using are "clean" or legal" to drive much sooner than most are assuming (weeks to a month, month and a half like employment tinkle tests often find people dirty 3-45 days after last use if using Gas Chrom/Mass Spec).

 

So in conclusion I was in error about Marinol and Cannabis not being separately detectable and using both might help in the time being.

 

But Koon is not that terrible causing everyone with a registry card to stop driving for weeks if they stop use of MM -- the case does need to be changed however (and hopefully it will be appealed further to the Mich Sup Crt).

 

M

Edited May 6, 2012 by Murph

[mibrains]

i know this is section 6, and it is administrative rules...however..it is the standard for administering the act, and therefore still has significant merit.

 

6 (g) Possession of, or application for, a registry identification card shall not constitute probable cause or reasonable suspicion, nor shall it be used to support the search of the person or property of the person possessing or applying for the registry identification card, or otherwise subject the person or property of the person to inspection by any local, county or state governmental agency.

 

i now see they have added a butt load of administrative rules...

 

http://www7.dleg.state.mi.us/orr/Files/AdminCode/104_45_AdminCode.pdf

 

Koon opened his mouth.... DO NOT SAY ANYTHING...it will/may/should/might help protect u.... please do not EVER answer the question...when was the last time you medicated? even if you think your safe...

[Murph]

zapatosunidos,

 

 

 

I am stuck wondering why you say (or disagree with) the statement that THC was never "legal"

 

(and perhaps we need to be more precise and say active THC or a THC Metabolite, and what "legal" and "illegal" means exactly).

 

 

 

I would define "legal" as a law I can cite that protects my actions being legal or permitted.

 

"illegal" is the opposite, being something prohibited by law, or conversely, not saying it is protection act --- something not protected by the reference or citation to law is usually illegal (not always as tons of gray areas exist, otherwise we would never need courts)?

 

 

 

I would add or agree that regular folk making legal calls on what "they think" a law or sentence in a law means is foolhardy-- as they have to be right in their interpretation of the law (which takes some training most do not have). The Law is fraught with exceptions, exclusions and twists and turns -- in legal parlance, it takes knowing what Statutory Interpretation (or application) is, ---and in all actuality the law is what a court rules it is -- and you and I can agree all day long what the law means (as I have seen between a few people on these boards), but that does not make me or You "right" as it is the Courts have that province or right (in our society) to determine what the law "is" and you and I do not -- in other words the Court's Opinion is what matters more than yours or mine on a matter of law (sure we can go to court and argue something, but they, and all appellate courts above them must agree, as appellate courts can, and often do, rule the trial court was wrong).

[+Malamute]

know this is section 6, and it is administrative rules...however..it is the standard for administering the act, and therefore still has significant merit.

 

6 (g) Possession of, or application for, a registry identification card shall not constitute probable cause or reasonable suspicion, nor shall it be used to support the search of the person or property of the person possessing or applying for the registry identification card, or otherwise subject the person or property of the person to inspection by any local, county or state governmental agency.

 

i now see they have added a butt load of administrative rules...

 

http://www7.dleg.sta...5_AdminCode.pdf

 

 

 

 

No new rules.

 

Same ones from 2009 from what i see.

 

Also, without the "UNity letter", we would not have saved Sec.6(g).

Edited May 6, 2012 by Malamute

[mibrains]

No new rules.

 

Same ones from 2009 from what i see.

 

Also, without the "UNity letter", we would not have saved Sec.6(g).

 

yessir..

 

your correct after i re-read it it is the revised list from 09...

 

i stand(sit) corrected...new old rules

[Dr. Bob]

I do not agree with this, not even now.

 

You want to show something that says you can drive with a schedule 1 narcotic in your system? The MSC ruled the carboxy was not a schedule 1. THC is schedule 1.

 

It was always illegal to drive while impaired, and the motor vehicle code said it was illegal to drive with Thc or something to that effect. There never was a legal limit of Thc in Michigan, so I really don't understand what you are referring to when you say you don't agree with the statement that it was never legal to drive with thc in your system.

 

This isn't a battle I want to fight, just wanted some clarification of your reasoning.

 

Dr. Bob

[Dr. Bob]

The problem is, Zap, is that you want to do something that isn't in the law. There is no low, medium, or high level or minimal level of impairment in Michigan for THC. If there was, you would have an argument. There isn't, so it is zero. You have it and violate the vehicle code, or you don't and don't violate the vehicle code.

 

As for internal possession, you can have all you want. As long as you aren't driving. I can legally drink alcohol. I can drink it til I pass out sitting in front of the tv at home. But I can't drive with anything over a particular level in my blood. o.o8 I believe for alcohol, o.oo for THC.

 

My recommendation is not to want to do something and then try and figure out how to justify it (the internal possession argument), I would look at what they said and act accordingly. I think the court ruled specifically on the 'internal possession' issue stating that the MMMA does not give you a get out of jail free card while someone illegally using the same amount and driving would go to jail.

 

Drink some rubbing alcohol and I'll pump your stomach and start you on an 'ethanol' IV (yes that is the treatment). But just because you are on an alcohol drip for medical reasons, you can't in turn go out and drive.

 

Dr. Bob

[Cannalytics]

The problem is, Zap, is that you want to do something that isn't in the law. There is no low, medium, or high level or minimal level of impairment in Michigan for THC. If there was, you would have an argument. There isn't, so it is zero. You have it and violate the vehicle code, or you don't and don't violate the vehicle code.

 

As for internal possession, you can have all you want. As long as you aren't driving. I can legally drink alcohol. I can drink it til I pass out sitting in front of the tv at home. But I can't drive with anything over a particular level in my blood. o.o8 I believe for alcohol, o.oo for THC.

 

My recommendation is not to want to do something and then try and figure out how to justify it (the internal possession argument), I would look at what they said and act accordingly. I think the court ruled specifically on the 'internal possession' issue stating that the MMMA does not give you a get out of jail free card while someone illegally using the same amount and driving would go to jail.

 

Drink some rubbing alcohol and I'll pump your stomach and start you on an 'ethanol' IV (yes that is the treatment). But just because you are on an alcohol drip for medical reasons, you can't in turn go out and drive.

 

Dr. Bob

 

FYI, per the latest protocols from the Michigan State Police, the limit of detection (LOD) for THC is 0.5ng/mL and the limit of quantification (LOQ) is 2ng/mL. Anything below the LOQ will not be reported as positive.

[restlesslegs]

FYI, per the latest protocols from the Michigan State Police, the limit of detection (LOD) for THC is 0.5ng/mL and the limit of quantification (LOQ) is 2ng/mL. Anything below the LOQ will not be reported as positive.

That is good info to know. Where did you find this at Cannalytics?

[Cannalytics]

That is good info to know. Where did you find this at Cannalytics?

 

www.duimaze.com/files/MSP_Quantitative_Analysis_Marijuana.pdf

 

There's several different versions of the protocol that don't seem to be arranged chronologically, however the most recent version lists a 2ng/mL cutoff value. Someone would have to file a FOIA to see if there is a more recent version.

Edited May 7, 2012 by Cannalytics

[restlesslegs]

Thank you, really glad you explained it first, lol.

[Dr. Bob]

I would assume there to be limits of detection, but the underlying problem is that unlike alcohol there is not a cut off level for impairment. So if they can detect it, you are impaired and that seems to be the line the courts are taking. Good post Zach

 

Dr. Bob

[Restorium2]

Yet some police do the field impairment test first. Practice your field test skills and you may have a chance to avoid the blood test.

[maxmax]

Yet some police do the field impairment test first. Practice your field test skills and you may have a chance to avoid the blood test.

maybe

[Restorium2]

Right. Everyone who could possibly be charged will cross that bridge. Be prepared. Be polite and do the test to the best of your ability. It's your first chance at helping yourself out of the situation.

[Dr. Bob]

I might add a little advance prep would help too.

 

Make sure your lights work and your car is in good repair. Don't troll for cops.

Don't drive while impaired, and if you are a lousy drive, have a better one drive for you if there is any question you MIGHT have ANY Thc in you. Don't troll for cops.

Don't smell like marijuana, use medibles if they work for you or follow the advice on 'de-smelling' yourself and your vehicle.

Don't keep your card near your license, hide it in your wallet.

Follow the traffic rules, don't run yellow lights, don't speed.

Did I mention don't troll for cops?

 

Dr. Bob

[mudshow]

I see BB left fear and paranoia running wild. The sky is not falling, it just has been very grey and cloudy lately.

[fishgetter1]

There are several good points in the conversation,However we all new there would be legislation to come,Now is not the time to pack it in and leave,Now is the time to get more involved in the language of the bills that will be produced,And there will be more regulation. The people that stand to gain the most should step up and ' DO " the most. Throw money at the lobbyists that will help,Get involved in the constuction of these house bills...

[zachw]

[snip]

Don't keep your card near your license, hide it in your wallet.

[snip]

Dr. Bob

 

Unless I am travelling with meds - which always go in the trunk - I no longer carry my card with me.

 

z

[Frank R]

Unless I am travelling with meds - which always go in the trunk - I no longer carry my card with me.

 

z

 

Words to live by:

 

[SFC]

Super wise words Zach! We DO have safety in numbers. I would still encourage people to register, but then still treat it as we always did before the law. If you are transporting meds drive carefully. If you are not transporting, the car is clean and you do find yourself in a traffic stop use your head. Do not offer up any more info than your license and registration. If the officer comes back to the car and asks about MMJ he has already broken the law. If you have a pen and paper handy start writing down details.

[purklize]

Medcnman - why Florida? Their laws on mj are much harsher than our own. Why not the West Coast?