Warning. Law Changes Will Take Place Instantly.

[peanutbutter]

Thanks for catching me .. Hate that backtracking stuff.

 

Transporting bill effective in April. HB 4856

[peanutbutter]

that being said

 

we all know how LEO acts...and how the world works.....

 

best to start following this new law right away..

 

before it goes into effect

 

EXACTLY

 

Watch your butt!!!

[mibrains]

gersh.. u have a link to the full copy of this bill as passed? i can't seem to find the full text version...also is this the only one that passed that doesn't have to go back to the house for re-vote? did all the others have amendments? i missed that information..

[free country 420]

so what if your car doesent have a trunk?

[mibrains]

LOL 4856 is the trunk bill not 4853... my apologies...

 

H02609'11 (H-3) TLG

HB-4856, As Passed House, May 3, 2012

SUBSTITUTE FOR

HOUSE BILL NO. 4856

A bill to amend 1931 PA 328, entitled

"The Michigan penal code,"

(MCL 750.1 to 750.568) by adding section 474.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:

SEC. 474. (1) A PERSON SHALL 1 NOT TRANSPORT OR POSSESS USABLE

2 MARIHUANA AS DEFINED IN SECTION 26423 OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH CODE,

3 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.26423, IN OR UPON A MOTOR VEHICLE OR ANY SELF4

PROPELLED VEHICLE DESIGNED FOR LAND TRAVEL UNLESS THE USABLE

5 MARIHUANA IS 1 OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:

6 (A) ENCLOSED IN A CASE THAT IS CARRIED IN THE TRUNK OF THE

7 VEHICLE.

8 (B) ENCLOSED IN A CASE THAT IS NOT READILY ACCESSIBLE FROM THE

9 INTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE, IF THE VEHICLE IN WHICH THE PERSON IS

2

H02609'11 (H-3) Final Page TLG

1 TRAVELING DOES NOT HAVE A TRUNK.

2 (2) A PERSON WHO VIOLATES THIS SECTION IS GUILTY OF A

3 MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY IMPRISONMENT FOR NOT MORE THAN 93 DAYS OR

4 A FINE OF NOT MORE THAN $500.00, OR BOTH.

[mibrains]

House Bill 4856 (Substitute H-3 as reported by the Committee of the Whole)

Sponsor: Representative Ben Glardon

House Committee: Judiciary

Senate Committee: Judiciary

CONTENT

The bill would amend the Michigan Penal Code to restrict the transportation or possession of medical marihuana in or upon a vehicle designed for land travel.

Specifically, the bill would prohibit a person from transporting or possessing "usable marihuana", as defined in the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA), in or upon a motor vehicle or any self-propelled vehicle designed for land travel unless the usable marihuana was enclosed in a case carried in the trunk of the vehicle. If the vehicle did not have a trunk, the marihuana would have to be enclosed in a case that was not readily accessible from the interior of the vehicle.

A violation of the bill would be a misdemeanor punishable by up to 93 days' imprisonment and/or a maximum fine of $500.

(The MMMA defines "usable marihuana" as the dried leaves and flowers of the marihuana plant, and any mixture or preparation of the dried leaves and flowers. The term does not include the seeds, stalks, or roots of the plant.)

The bill would take effect on April 1, 2013.

[Highlander]

LOL 4856 is the trunk bill not 4853... my apologies...

 

H02609'11 (H-3) TLG

HB-4856, As Passed House, May 3, 2012

SUBSTITUTE FOR

HOUSE BILL NO. 4856

A bill to amend 1931 PA 328, entitled

"The Michigan penal code,"

(MCL 750.1 to 750.568) by adding section 474.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:

SEC. 474. (1) A PERSON SHALL 1 NOT TRANSPORT OR POSSESS USABLE

2 MARIHUANA AS DEFINED IN SECTION 26423 OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH CODE,

3 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.26423, IN OR UPON A MOTOR VEHICLE OR ANY SELF4

PROPELLED VEHICLE DESIGNED FOR LAND TRAVEL UNLESS THE USABLE

5 MARIHUANA IS 1 OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:

6 (A) ENCLOSED IN A CASE THAT IS CARRIED IN THE TRUNK OF THE

7 VEHICLE.

8 (B) ENCLOSED IN A CASE THAT IS NOT READILY ACCESSIBLE FROM THE

9 INTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE, IF THE VEHICLE IN WHICH THE PERSON IS

2

H02609'11 (H-3) Final Page TLG

1 TRAVELING DOES NOT HAVE A TRUNK.

2 (2) A PERSON WHO VIOLATES THIS SECTION IS GUILTY OF A

3 MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY IMPRISONMENT FOR NOT MORE THAN 93 DAYS OR

4 A FINE OF NOT MORE THAN $500.00, OR BOTH.

 

This is pretty easy to comply with even if you don't have a trunk. Lock the meds in a case. Keep the key at the place of origin of the meds. Make sure the patient at the other end of the deal also has a key. LEO could then tear your Yugo without a trunk completely apart and they wouldn't find a way to open the lock. Problem solved. This is one of those bills that lets the anti-MMJ peeps feel like they accomplished something but there is a super-easy steer-around.

Edited December 13, 2012 by Highlander

[shishka]

I'm curious if just being "seal-a-mealed" would be enough? Kinda along the same thought as a seal on a liquor bottle?

[mibrains]

This is pretty easy to comply with even if you don't have a trunk. Lock the meds in a case. Keep the key at the place of origin of the meds. Make sure the patient at the other end of the deal also has a key. LEO could then tear your Yugo without a trunk completely apart and they wouldn't find a way to open the lock. Problem solved. This is one of those bills that lets the anti-MMJ peeps feel like they accomplished something but there is a super-easy steer-around.

 

the only problem with that is when your transporting your own personal cannabis.

 

downside is.. you can't carry it in your pocket anymore..

so if your used to carrying it on your person... that habit will need to change.

 

to include medibles.. vaporables.. any "usable marihuana" i would assume..

 

i started carrying it in my pickup in a locked tool box. i figured they would pass this one... so i started preparing early.. all and all not such a horrible thing...

[mibrains]

I'm curious if just being "seal-a-mealed" would be enough? Kinda along the same thought as a seal on a liquor bottle?

 

enclosed in a case that was not readily accessible from the interior of the vehicle.

 

possibly not..

possible maybe tho...

i think a hard case (like a tool box or something solid) with a padlock would be best to avoid any interpretation issues...

[shishka]

enclosed in a case that was not readily accessible from the interior of the vehicle.

 

possibly not..

possible maybe tho...

i think a hard case (like a tool box or something solid) with a padlock would be best to avoid any interpretation issues...

 

I agree with the inaccessible part but I think "case" can be interpreted many ways. I think seal a meal in a trunk would be ideal.

[+washtenaut]

can you open a seal-a-meal from the interior of your vehicle ..ie. while driving ? most jurists would say, yes, one could open a seal a meal package from the interior of the vehicle.

[mibrains]

agreed...

 

i actually think anything in the "trunk" would be fine.. even a mason jar... i get caught up because i have a pickup truck without a lockable trunk..

so my thought process stems from that perspective...

i think the enclosed in a case standard is only in the scenarios where a lockable trunk is not available such as a pickup or an suv.

[shishka]

can you open a seal-a-meal from the interior of your vehicle ..ie. while driving ? most jurists would say, yes, one could open a seal a meal package from the interior of the vehicle.

 

As opposed to a locked box which could not be opened while driving? Not sure I follow you here.

[mibrains]

can you open a seal-a-meal from the interior of your vehicle ..ie. while driving ? most jurists would say, yes, one could open a seal a meal package from the interior of the vehicle.

 

i have to think that so long as the seal is intact it might be sufficient. as is the same for any other transportable product like alcohol.

shows it has not been used...

however i personally will not be testing this theory..

i will use a hard case and shrink sealant to be double safe

[bobandtorey]

Under the bill, selling marihuana in violation of registry identification card restrictions

And to me this part is were it gets bad for people selling meds Imo

[shishka]

i have to think that so long as the seal is intact it might be sufficient. as is the same for any other transportable product like alcohol.

shows it has not been used...

however i personally will not be testing this theory..

i will use a hard case and shrink sealant to be double safe

 

That was my thought. If you open it then you no longer have it enclosed in a case. As long as it's sealed,I have not accessed it.

[mibrains]

As opposed to a locked box which could not be opened while driving? Not sure I follow you here.

 

thank you. agreed

i have never understood their logic with this legislation.

 

it cannot make sense.

 

i follow it and practice a "best compliance approach" because i was told this legislation has teeth and is probably going to pass... (it did)

and so i lock it.. its on the floor on the passenger side... but it is silly to think it is not accessible.

so what do we do with it?

in a suv it can be in the back out of reach.

in my pickup if its in the back..it's outside.

and that's no good.

and it won't fit behind the seat... (however i may need to obtain a different case and find a way to shove it behind there...)

what about split seats though..

or trucks with an extended cab... it's within reach and unlockable from anywhere....

 

i think it will boil down to intent.... i try to lock it up because LEO want's to see it that way... i am not sure i have ever agreed... but i still have been doing it for several weeks if not months to try to figure out how to stay safe...

it's a conundrum to be sure... so i try very hard to show the key is on the trucks key ring, and i will have to shut it off or unwind it...

[t-pain]

is there anyone planning to challenge the lock box law?

seems like its a discrimination against the handicapped.

 

what might work is one of those money bags with the locks.

like banks or gas stations use to transport money.

its soft and slim so it can fit behind/under a seat.

[ozzrokk]

Has this actually passed or is it sent back to the House? On the senate site seems to look like it has been sent back to the house with ammendments. Does anyone have a confirmation on this and if it is immediate affect does that translate ot April 1st? By everyones post I assume it does go into affect 4/1/13. I was under the understanding immediate meant immediate. But I am still confused on whether this was the same wording as the house and is just simply passed or if it was ammended and sent back to the house.

[mibrains]

the locked box one passed without amendments from the house so its a done deal...

i think

 

now it goes to the Governor for signature.

[mibrains]

http://planetgreentrees.ning.com/opensocial/ningapps/show?appUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blogtalkradio.com%2Fning%2FBTRNingProd.xml%3Fning-app-status%3Dnetwork&owner=0hsbaw2apwocg

 

they are going to discuss the ramifications here tonight...

[mibrains]

the locked box one passed without amendments from the house so its a done deal...

i think

 

now it goes to the Governor for signature.

 

actually as i am reading the .gov site.. they both say they have amendments...

ughhh

it's no wonder our country is so confused...

 

i watched it live and i still don't really know what happened... unreal..

 

can we all at once say

"red tape"

[ozzrokk]

Exactly It is so hard to tell what the hell they are doing. When I read the law it appears that it does not have changes but whe the flower knows.

[bobandtorey]

I think its more then red tape but nothing any one can do about it with the way the Leo's have been they just cant trusted