Supremes Reverse Coa On King & Kolonek

[Dr. Bob]

Semantics is everything!

 

I think it was pretty clear, but glad to clarify it further.

[+mayorherb]

Nice ramble. Thanks for the input and have a nice day Mayor.

 

Dr. Bob

That is just one example of a grandma being arrested..There are many more..

[+mayorherb]

That is just one example of a grandma being arrested..There are many more..

People saying that EVERYONE ARRESTED was at fault or breaking the laws..is so wrong..For anyone to say..Not everyone arrested broke the law..You of anyone should know this bob..

[+mayorherb]

Nice ramble. Thanks for the input and have a nice day Mayor.

 

Dr. Bob

Bob why do you insist on being rude? I was just trying to point out the fact, THAT not everyone arrested are breaking the law..

[Dr. Bob]

Mayor, first of all, this has been discussed and if you go back and check up you will see what the conversation was about and what was covered. You are welcome to discuss it with the administrators if you feel I was impolite when you chose to post on my postings. Have a nice day mayor.

 

Dr. Bob

[+mayorherb]

That is just one example of a grandma being arrested..There are many more..

Hell i am not going any wheres..Been here since the doors opened..

[+mayorherb]

Mayor, first of all, this has been discussed and if you go back and check up you will see what the conversation was about and what was covered. You are welcome to discuss it with the administrators if you feel I was impolite when you chose to post on my postings. Have a nice day mayor.

 

Dr. Bob

Actualy i was talking to ( purklize ) ..Not you.. this is a forum for all to use..

[+mayorherb]

hERE IS A GRANDMA/mOTHER/SISTER WHO WAS DOING nothing wrong>> http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/page/news.html/_/legal/sal-agro-medical-marijuana-patient-raided-dies-r20

[+mayorherb]

http://theoaklandpress.com/articles/2012/02/27/news/local_news/doc4f4bf0356ecd5800238599.txt

[Dr. Bob]

Yes mayor, I am aware of the folks that were involved in a dispensary raid. Note the term 'dispensary'. Also, under the new SC ruling, Barb might have been able to use the MMJ defense, whereas she was not at the time of the raid. Again, note the difference between running a dispensary and unambiguous compliance. Just because YOU feel someone isn't doing anything outside the act is not the same as unambiguous compliance.

 

Do not engage me mayor, I will not respond further to you. I am not repeating the full discussion, go back and read it.

 

Dr. Bob

[+mayorherb]

When ever a law is put in place by the Voters..And there is a question rather they are following the law/rules..They are to lean on the side of patients..NOT the OLD law..Or what ever else they choose to ad..This was just the way it is..Why the law dogs do not get this..Is beyond me..

[Dr. Bob]

I guess they don't get it because they have the training and experience to understand the law, but lack your grasp of the issue. Perhaps that is why the professionals or 'law dogs' as you call them don't see it your way.

 

Dr. Bob

Edited June 12, 2012 by Dr. Bob

[Dr. Bob]

What about the Argo,s? they was BOTH arrested..Mr. Argo died of a heart attack..His wife is on probation..Just one EXAMPLE of Grandma,s/Grandpa,s being arrested..Or ANN and RODNEY who was following the law..They was all following the law..all was arrested and all but one so far has been charged..Only cause the judge wouldnt accept her guilty plea..People are getting arrested everyday ..Which are following the law.So as i see it..We seen 10 people plea guilty to Possesion..9 all was patients with a small amount..The Prosecutor/there attornies told them they had NO choice but to plea..OR they would be doing alot of time behind bars.....Which one day for a sick person is one day to many..one of the people who plead guilty..is allowed to use cannabis on PROBATION>>Cause he is a marijuana patient..He He can continue to use cannabis ,can even continue to grow..All while on probation..I get tired of people saying..You was arrested cause you broke the law..SO NOT TRUE>>all the people i have met and or known , who was arrested..WAS following the law... All of them was rail roaded in to a plea..Once they have a bunch of PLEA bargains of our younger PATIENTS>>They use this info agasint us...How? heres How..once they have so many patients plea to Possesion charge..THEY then say LOOK AT all the people using cannabis with out a card( so not true..Most have had a card)This is causeing issuses..Since it has been a law..They are forcing all to plea..and using info against our cause..As i see it..Plea NOT GUILTY>>let a jury decide.. Any Marijuana case..Screw them..We tried..

 

For example, you would never see a 'law dog' express a grasp of the entire issue with this kind of clarity and insight. Not to mention spelling and grammar. I am now convinced.

 

Have a nice day Mayor.

[+mayorherb]

The Head detective in Anns case for instance..Told the judge he didnt know nor did he need to know the law of 08..Then he had told the judge it had changed..This detective is the head of" :STING" He addmited to the courts he didnt know the law..But yet he is head of "sting" He is suppose to be a expert witness, but didnt even know the law..I do believe the JUDGE is even learning the law himself in this case..As i see it..it is pretty black and white..And everything we have said in the begining.And all along .The Supreme court just prove it ..Ann and Rodney did NOTHING wrong..They was following the law..they had to have(According to head detective) front door unlocked, basement door unlocked, 2 other doors unlocked and then 2 more doors unlocked..they had all there cards/papers needed..Which the Judge made the (head dectective) tell the truth..He told the head detective more then once that he HAD to tell the truth..He admited they was all locked up..he admited they had all the cards/papers to have the plants they have..he even told they was UNDER count they could have....All and all..Ann and rod are just a small part of people being arrested who are following the law..When a law is voted n by the people..and theres question if they are following the rules..They are to lean on the side of THEY are following the law..REGARDSLESS>I have a great relationship with our county police force..we are started going to neighborhood watch programs..We even have the Sheriff coming to one of our compassion meetings..As we see it , the cops need to be educated just as some of us do..We have officers sending people to our compassion meetings so they can get educated n the law/rules..With this being said..I am sure i understand both sides of this..I have talked to our sheriff a few times on these issues.I think hes ready to learn as well..I again bob..Do not and am not arguing with you..I am just like you..Voiveing my Opion..Rather you agree or not..We are all in this together..Rememebr ..I waved the white flag months ago on CCCC with you and i..As i see you are a dr. do dr. things..i as a patient/cccc operator..i will do things as a patient and a cccc organizer..Thanks the mayor..

[Shredder]

There was a 60 something year old grandmother arrested in Oscoda for two 8 inch plants. Her neighbor turned her in, because of a grudge. She ended up taking a 7411. This could have ended much better under today's interpretation of our law.

 

In Tawas a guy in a wheelchair was arrested twice for having tiny plants in the open, both cases his druggy son turned him in after dad refused to share his medicine. Twice the police and courts sided with the son. This probably would be different today as well.

 

These grandparents were not criminals then or now. They may have been guilty of not reading every part of the law or relying on here say for legal info, but they were no criminals. And it goes without saying just how inept our local lawyers are. But saying or insinuating they were just asking to be prosecuted or that they deserved everything they got is ridiculous.

 

There was a reason for section 8. I think it may be written in to protect us from rabid police and out of control prosecutors......shredder

[Dr. Bob]

Since people seem to forget the entire topic of the post or my position....

 

My point was to stack the deck in your favor with strict compliance. No guarentee of safety by doing that, but pushing the limits of the law, talking about or showing off your grow, doing things that are controversial in their legality, all work toward making you UNSAFE. Perhaps a better way to phrase it might be to say the deck is somewhat stacked against us to start, so we have to be more careful with what we do and say to keep well within the limits of the law if we expect to have any margin of safety at all.

 

Dr. Bob

Hope that gets things back on topic.

[knucklehead bob]

Since people seem to forget the entire topic of the post or my position....

 

My point was to stack the deck in your favor with strict compliance. No guarentee of safety by doing that, but pushing the limits of the law, talking about or showing off your grow, doing things that are controversial in their legality, all work toward making you UNSAFE. Perhaps a better way to phrase it might be to say the deck is somewhat stacked against us to start, so we have to be more careful with what we do and say to keep well within the limits of the law if we expect to have any margin of safety at all.

 

Dr. Bob

Hope that gets things back on topic.

I certainly hope so .

[GregS]

The condescension and rudeness got bad enough a while back bob. We all know and understand your point. What remains is your continued shrill argument that there is nothing to argue about and that your arguments are the only ones that have merit. That could not be further from the truth.

 

The choice lies somewhere between full body armor and going commando. That we know. You cannot make our arguments go away to only leave room for yours. We have heard it ad nauseam. Many of us sorely wish you would keep to medicine.Your legal acumen is something short of stellar.

[Dr. Bob]

And this is back on topic somehow? Sorry I have you blocked but just had to peek. Go do what you want and I'll compare LSAT scores any day my friend... But I think the best resolution is that the real lawyers tend to echo the same points I make, and oppose yours. So again, let's stay on point or move on. The point was, unambiguous compliance and keep things quiet and private are the best receipe to stay out of trouble. That is not controversial nor is it really questionable advice. So why keep indicating it is somehow a problem?

 

Dr. Bob

[purklize]

Bob, the reason we're getting confused is because you keep saying two somewhat contradictory things:

 

1) It is best to encourage patients to take the least ambiguous road to avoid prosecution (we all agree on this)

2) No patient who followed the least ambiguous road has been prosecuted (simply not true, and creates a false sense of safety in some while discrediting the misfortunes of others)

[Kingpinn]

Yo BOB the Goodie Two Shoe Look Dont look well with you. Not everyone is as pure as the driven snow like you BOB.

 

Have Nice Day Goodie Two Shoes

Now maybe back to topic

Edited June 12, 2012 by Kingpinn

[GregS]

I give up bob. Why? And what with the condecension and rudeness?

Edited June 12, 2012 by GregS

[Kingpinn]

See if we had 200,000 Dr Bob Clones we,d never have a problem. Kinda stuck on your self arent you BOB ??

Edited June 12, 2012 by Kingpinn

[Dr. Bob]

Yo BOB the Goodie Two Shoe Look Dont look well with you. Not everyone is as pure as the driven snow like you BOB.

 

Have Nice Day Goodie Two Shoes

Now maybe back to topic

 

Well thank you and well done with your case. Looking forward to seeing it dismissed.

Edited June 12, 2012 by Dr. Bob

[Dr. Bob]

Bob, the reason we're getting confused is because you keep saying two somewhat contradictory things:

 

1) It is best to encourage patients to take the least ambiguous road to avoid prosecution (we all agree on this)

2) No patient who followed the least ambiguous road has been prosecuted (simply not true, and creates a false sense of safety in some while discrediting the misfortunes of others)

 

My understanding is that was clarified earlier. Not NO patient EVER, but LEAST chance of having a problem.