Deleted posts -- Unambiguous Compliance Rules

[Dr. Bob]

No rational person would fail to understand the policy.

Edited June 21, 2012 by Dr. Bob

[restlesslegs]

There is no sane reason we would want to post ambiguously compliant material on this site. Why can't some understand that the policy is there to protect members and the organization from law enforcement scrutiny?

 

If somebody really, really thinks it is a good idea, let's have the argument out here in the open. I am game.

Zap I think somethings are discussions and just that, and that is a good thing, then all the ins and outs can be discussed. Some folks have questions about certain things and need to know the answers but it gets nipped in the bud at times as being unambiguous. It might even be the word?

 

I wanted to add that if someone does want to give away something like this can't a member be PM'd like those that look for patients or caregivers?

Edited June 21, 2012 by restlesslegs

[smokepole001]

I think this fits in with the p2p transfers? Why is a Farmersmarket allowed in Lansing then??

[Dilligaf]

Unprovoked attacks, you mean like suggesting a member is psychotic or drunk when they post because you don't agree with them?

 

Dr. Bob

 

If you want to bring up what was said in PMs I'm more than willing to post them. I was asking about unprovoked attacks by mods/admins If you bothered reading.

[smokepole001]

Dr Bob, we are not school children, we don't need to be scolded all the time, so give it a break, its getting old, you ragging on people.

[restlesslegs]

OK got ya but is there a way to do that or is really off limits? Not selling them on the forum but like in this case? Not sure how you would do it. *shrug*''

 

Better add when I say really off limits as in no choice not how some might interpret that.

Edited June 21, 2012 by restlesslegs

[restlesslegs]

People break laws all the time, on purpose and inadvertently. Driving too fast, drinking too young, smoking in bathrooms, etc. There is nothing the MMMA can do about it, nor anything we would want to do about it. The thing they don't generally do is go to an public internet forum and post about it.

LOL ya no doubt!

[Michael Komorn]

"Hasnt P2P without renumeration been tried and now allowed?" (spelled remuneration)

 

 

 

 

 

Great question Medcnman, and what a great opportunity to make this point.

 

 

 

“Hasnt P2P without renumeration been tried and now allowed”

 

What for the love of golf is that statement supposed to mean. If we could codify in exactness what it is that we are trying to prevent it is this “Hasnt P2P without renumeration been tried and now allowed” Hasn’t it been tried? Meaning there was a trial ? And a verdict by a jury? Is that the question? Or is this a statement that someone new to the medical cannabis community reading that post should rely upon when making critical decision on what behavior they choose to engage in.

 

If it was tried, and there was a verdict, that is great news and supports my argument that juries will return not guilty verdicts in these cases.  But that is not precedent and thus would have absolutely no legal value at all anywhere. Maybe the prosecutor in that jurisdiction would think differently before charging someone in the future knowing juries are returning not guilty verdicts, but in NO WAY SHAPE or FORM, does a verdict in a criminal case rendered by a jury act as a precedent.

 

 

 

So what could you be talking about then, that should be relied upon as far as how to behave and limit risk of arrest and prosecution. Maybe it is the footnote 16 and 17 of the McQueen decision, that says the three other transfers recognized ( by the coa at this time) (1. p to p w/o $/ 2. any reg cg to any reg pat with compensation for cost  3. the registered cg to their registered patient (1 of 5) with compensation for cost) are not before the Court and thus we are not deciding upon them at this time. If this is from where this statement is being drawn, if so they cannot be reconciled. If I am incorrect when unraveling that statement, please let me know and direct me to the authority by which you rely when you say: "Hasnt P2P without renumeration been tried and now allowed?"

 

Or said another way please direct me to the exact language in the Court ruling that you speak of that has precedent in other cases that specifically protects patient to patient transfers without the exchange of money, against arrest,  prosecution or any penalty.

 

 

 

Medcman do we really want people to make judgments and decisions without a full understanding of the law. How can we say we are protecting patients with that loosely worded and inaccurate statement?  I believe that these transfers are legal, but this is irrelevant unless the police who are questioning the behavior also believe it, which most do not, see MI State Police (wrongly interpreting the McQueen decision). (http://www.michigan....89_362839_7.pdf  )

 

 

 

Let’s be safe with our words or at least not be misleading.

 

In the beginning there was a term that was used to suggest the behavior  for the medical cannabis community it was called a “Culture of Security”.  This is what we need to be doing, creating a culture of security for this community. Thanks for all the hard work you do for the community. </p></p>

[Croppled1]

Under Michigans current laws outside the MMMP a transfer with compensation is a 4 year felony and or up to a $20,000 fine and without compensation a misdomeaner up to 1 yr and or $1000 fine . This does not include forfeiture that can also happen and the societal employment penalties that are also truely horrendous . Nothing I would want to see a friend go through . I know many have heard of activists risking arrest at civil rights protests but almost always well thought out for civil infractions or low misdomeanors not felony or high misdomeanors . All of us do need to discuss to educate each other where and how positive change can occur when we see unjust policy in the MMMP law . That shouldn't upset anyone and we can do it without actively supporting behaviors not fully tested or supported by the courts be engaged in by ourselves or others . I think thats fine with polite reminders .

 

As far as giving out bad information per these boards there should and is a disclaimer not to accept them as legal advice . I would think the place to put actual complaince rules in practice is in reference materials not endless forum responses a suffering , chronic or terminal patient could be on the other end of . Hope to catch the show if able tonight .

Edited June 21, 2012 by Croppled1

[AKenewell]

Under Michigans current laws outside the MMMP a transfer with compensation is a 4 year felony and or up to a $20,000 fine and without compensation a misdomeaner up to 1 yr and or $1000 fine . This does not include forfeiture that can also happen and the societal employment penalties that are also truely horrendous . Nothing I would want to see a friend go through . I know many have heard of activists risking arrest at civil rights protests but almost always well thought out for civil infractions or low misdomeanors not felony or high misdomeanors . All of us do need to discuss to educate each other where and how positive change can occur when we see unjust policy in the MMMP law . That shouldn't upset anyone and we can do it without actively supporting behaviors not fully tested or supported by the courts be engaged in by ourselves or others . I think thats fine with polite reminders .

 

As far as giving out bad information per these boards there should and is a disclaimer not to accept them as legal advice . I would think the place to put actual complaince rules in practice is in reference materials not endless forum responses a suffering , chronic or terminal patient could be on the other end of .

 

I agree with you croppled!

[peanutbutter]

Until just a few weeks ago, there was NOTHING at all settled within the law.

 

So for the last, more than, three years we have existed without a set in stone law.

 

So I guess nearly every conversation that took place here should be deleted.

[Dr. Bob]

 

 

"Hasnt P2P without renumeration been tried and now allowed?" (spelled remuneration)

 

 

 

 

 

Great question Medcnman, and what a great opportunity to make this point.

 

 

 

“Hasnt P2P without renumeration been tried and now allowed”

 

What for the love of golf is that statement supposed to mean. If we could codify in exactness what it is that we are trying to prevent it is this “Hasnt P2P without renumeration been tried and now allowed” Hasn’t it been tried? Meaning there was a trial ? And a verdict by a jury? Is that the question? Or is this a statement that someone new to the medical cannabis community reading that post should rely upon when making critical decision on what behavior they choose to engage in.

 

If it was tried, and there was a verdict, that is great news and supports my argument that juries will return not guilty verdicts in these cases. But that is not precedent and thus would have absolutely no legal value at all anywhere. Maybe the prosecutor in that jurisdiction would think differently before charging someone in the future knowing juries are returning not guilty verdicts, but in NO WAY SHAPE or FORM, does a verdict in a criminal case rendered by a jury act as a precedent.

 

 

 

So what could you be talking about then, that should be relied upon as far as how to behave and limit risk of arrest and prosecution. Maybe it is the footnote 16 and 17 of the McQueen decision, that says the three other transfers recognized ( by the coa at this time) (1. p to p w/o $/ 2. any reg cg to any reg pat with compensation for cost 3. the registered cg to their registered patient (1 of 5) with compensation for cost) are not before the Court and thus we are not deciding upon them at this time. If this is from where this statement is being drawn, if so they cannot be reconciled. If I am incorrect when unraveling that statement, please let me know and direct me to the authority by which you rely when you say: "Hasnt P2P without renumeration been tried and now allowed?"

 

Or said another way please direct me to the exact language in the Court ruling that you speak of that has precedent in other cases that specifically protects patient to patient transfers without the exchange of money, against arrest, prosecution or any penalty.

 

 

 

Medcman do we really want people to make judgments and decisions without a full understanding of the law. How can we say we are protecting patients with that loosely worded and inaccurate statement? I believe that these transfers are legal, but this is irrelevant unless the police who are questioning the behavior also believe it, which most do not, see MI State Police (wrongly interpreting the McQueen decision). (http://www.michigan....89_362839_7.pdf )

 

 

 

Let’s be safe with our words or at least not be misleading.

 

In the beginning there was a term that was used to suggest the behavior for the medical cannabis community it was called a “Culture of Security”. This is what we need to be doing, creating a culture of security for this community. Thanks for all the hard work you do for the community.

 

Well said Michael. Thanks for clearing up the issue.

 

Dr. Bob

[Dr. Bob]

Under Michigans current laws outside the MMMP a transfer with compensation is a 4 year felony and or up to a $20,000 fine and without compensation a misdomeaner up to 1 yr and or $1000 fine . This does not include forfeiture that can also happen and the societal employment penalties that are also truely horrendous . Nothing I would want to see a friend go through . I know many have heard of activists risking arrest at civil rights protests but almost always well thought out for civil infractions or low misdomeanors not felony or high misdomeanors . All of us do need to discuss to educate each other where and how positive change can occur when we see unjust policy in the MMMP law . That shouldn't upset anyone and we can do it without actively supporting behaviors not fully tested or supported by the courts be engaged in by ourselves or others . I think thats fine with polite reminders .

 

As far as giving out bad information per these boards there should and is a disclaimer not to accept them as legal advice . I would think the place to put actual complaince rules in practice is in reference materials not endless forum responses a suffering , chronic or terminal patient could be on the other end of . Hope to catch the show if able tonight .

 

Excellent post Cropped

[GanjaWarrior]

just insane to shut down a thread offering free med clones.... almost as insane as the way dr (?) babs keeps injecting his op like he knows, or even should be involved...get a freaking card ill teach you how to grow...until then free med cuttings is great idea.

[cristinew]

what if a cop gets that free clone ? is that a great idea?

[cristinew]

what if the cops gets the clone just for the purpose of arrest?

[cristinew]

should we help patients go to jail? have you done time in a Michigan prison?

[Dr. Bob]

Well, since I don't have a card, guess I'll bow out to the OVERWHELMING argument that I have nothing of value to say. Zap is doing just fine, so are the others with common sense on this PUBLIC FORUM.

 

Go ahead, give a cop a free clone and take yourself out of the communty for awhile. We'll get along just fine and maybe even learn from the lesson.

 

Dr. Babs.

[+Malamute]

Michigan Free Seeds and Clones

[knucklehead bob]

knucklehead bob, on 21 June 2012 - 12:25 PM, said:

 

You are here to obey and maintain a strict and unambiguous compliance policy . Resistance is futile ... you will be deleted .

The rules are posted for everyone to read. If you can't follow the posted rules of the site, then yes, your post will be deleted.

Sir , "The rules are posted for everyone to read." ........................... I am aware of and fully understand the rules of this site .

What I DON"T understand , is the accusatory tone(If you can't follow the posted rules of the site) in your mockery of my post . I don't understand the reason that you felt it necessary to re-word my post as if it were your own . Except for being worded differently , both of these posts say essentially the same thing .

As I am nowhere in the vicinity of even coming close to trespassing on your precious rules , kindly do not mock me further . It is uncalled for nor deserved .

 

 

 

Some one said it was going to be "Business as usual" , when the new staff settled in . That much seems certain .

[Celliach]

You can always give away and get free clones and seeds in other locations.  It just takes half a brain, and is best kept in private not an open forum.  If you want to use an internet forum, nobody is stopping you.  You just can't use this one.  Here's one that appears to have been set-up by someone just for the purpose of spreading genetics around: Michigan Free Seeds and Clones </p>

[knucklehead bob]

Your post does seem to imply that the unambiguous compliance policy is imposing on you or limiting you in some way. In addition, as a member who was not only banned, but deleted by the previous administration, your statement, "Some one said it was going to be "Business as usual" , when the new staff settled in . That much seems certain" is nonsensical.

You obviously do not remember Jimi84JustBlazeOneandBeLegalTheBeagleVapor .

[knucklehead bob]

Where do you see I am blaming you for anything ???????????????????????

[Petyr]

Wow MM, what a new and exciting question that you don't already know the answer to!

[MightyMightyMezz]

I thought patients have broad protections in obtaining medical marijuana. The only potential risk I can see is to PB himself and if he wants to take his chances with his own freedom that should be fine.