New Michigan Based Mmj Documentary- Blazed And Confused By Jen Whalen

[Rick Thompson]

Well Northern all I can say is the law is the law. Unless it changes to allow the things you want it is not perfect but it is a world better than what we used to have. Many CG's are not making a whole lot of extractions because they are more concerned with staying compliant. It takes a lot of bud to make oil. Make no mistake tho, we can and do make extractions and medibles, difference is we do it with soem degree of legality for our patients that are registered to us. Unlike dispensaries.

 

I personally think it would be a huge mistake for us to support ANY commercial interests.

Uh, you do realize that Northern Lights is a commercial interest... so is Komorn Law, a commercial interest that makes money from patients and caregivers... are you really so interested in bashing things that you would make such a broad, sweeping statement?

[Rick Thompson]

Yes, the cost will be passed on down the line to the consumer ultimately. But, how is that any different with the dispensary?

 

Now Caveat states that caregivers have the same profit incentive and business model as dispensaries. Costs- either labor, overhead, medicine, testing- are passed on to the consumer. The difference between a single man distribution center (caregiver) and a multi-man distribution center (dispensary) is become less and less frightening. An evolution of thought is taking place here.

[Rick Thompson]

Spintastic, Rick!

 

You are quite welcome.

[Northern Lab]

Yes, the cost will be passed on down the line to the consumer ultimately. But, how is that any different with the dispensary? Do I hear $20/gram?

 

In your framework a dispensary is only as good as the cgs who supply it. You said yourself that a dispensary can only exist within the 5:1 pt:cg model. So, how about rather than a dispensary bill, maybe a farmers' market bill? Then pts have direct contact with the supplier. Then they know who to come back to if they like the quality.

 

I suppose the only reason why that could not work for those pro-disp. people is the fact that the profit margins suffer ay?

 

I really like the farmer's market model. I wish there were more in our area.

 

I agree that many have dollar signs in their eyes when they open a dispensary and the prices reflect that. There was a dispensary here locally that operated how I think CA did before the McQueen decision. They allowed farmers to set the prices on their counter and charged the farmer 20% consignment fee for sitting there all day and selling their meds for them. Basically an all day, every day farmer's market that didn't require the farmer to sit at a table all day. This model caused small price wars between farmers, which benefited patients immensely. The owners made a modest living while having the best prices and some of the best meds in the area.

 

Sadly, they were the only dispensary in our area to permanently close after last fall. I hear so many CGs say they wish they would open back up, but I don't blame them for not wanting to take the risk anymore.

[Rick Thompson]

Also, if it is not obvious, dispensaries do exist now under no regulation whatsoever (i.e. do it however they want), and they are not magically solving the remaining issues in implementation.

Very true. No single solution exists to the problems faced by patients today. I will say, and I hope that this sentiment is echoed by those I have poked at here today, no one on this listing actually wants to harm patients. SFC and Zap and Hayduke and Jamie and I all want the same thing- patients to have access to quality medication in a way that is comfortable and safe and protected- we just disagree on how to bring that about.

 

I believe the caregiver system and the dispensary system work together to offer options to patients. SFC wants to limit choices to eliminate the dispensary portion of the equation. One philosophy embraces choices, one eliminates choices. In America, we are predicated on a free market economy that offers us 20 different types of aspirin, 15 different fast-food restaurants and oodles of places to buy clothing, groceries, alcohol.

 

Choice, or no choice. I choose CHOICE. I bet most of the rest of us would agree that is best, too.

[CaveatLector]

Now Caveat states that caregivers have the same profit incentive and business model as dispensaries. Costs- either labor, overhead, medicine, testing- are passed on to the consumer. The difference between a single man distribution center (caregiver) and a multi-man distribution center (dispensary) is become less and less frightening. An evolution of thought is taking place here.

An evolution of YOUR thought maybe. Not mine. I am not against free enterprise. I am not against profit. You are clouding the issues with profit. See my comments regarding profit in response to you up above somewhere. Profit is not the reason why anyone is against the dispensary interest. Neither is the existence of dispensaries themselves. No one here, that I have seen, has railed against dispensaries for those reasons. It is the tactics, the strategies, employed by some of the pro-disp. types that are unsettling. Stop confusing the issues. People keep saying they aren't against profit, et al, and you keep harping that they are.

[Rick Thompson]

That's why we have a free market. So you can move to another CG if they are giving you better service.

 

Uh, according to the 1 caregiver-5 patients statement, you are not allowed to try out another caregiver to see if they are "giving you better service" until AFTER you officially switch caregivers with LARA.

 

Under the dispensary model you are free to shop around. The freedom you describe, Celliach, does not exist in a fixed 1:5 system. Switching caregivers is possible but only at a cost ($10 change form) and with risk (you can't give them a trial growing period).

[Rick Thompson]

An evolution of YOUR thought maybe. Not mine. I am not against free enterprise. I am not against profit. You are clouding the issues with profit. See my comments regarding profit in response to you up above somewhere. Profit is not the reason why anyone is against the dispensary interest. Neither is the existence of dispensaries themselves. No one here, that I have seen, has railed against dispensaries for those reasons. It is the tactics, the strategies, employed by some of the pro-disp. types that are unsettling. Stop confusing the issues. People keep saying they aren't against profit, et al, and you keep harping that they are.

 

Actually you are quite wrong. We have read that all dispensaries have no compassion. It was even written with a "Period." at the end of the sentence. No wiggle room, no some-of-them-are-ok. "Period." You are now saying "employed by some of the". This is in conflict with the whole "Period." thing. At least be consistent with your messaging.

 

Profit was mentioned by you and others- if profit incentive is not a bad thing, why do you and your brothers keep using that word as a sword? If profit is not an issue you should never have mentioned it. Your quote is a reasonable approach to the issue but it IS NOT consistent with what has been written on pages 2, 3, 4, and 5 of this thread.

[Rick Thompson]

Ryan, we have all stated repeatedly that we have no problem with dispensaries as long as it doesn't infringe on our rights as caregivers and patients to grow, yet every time we turn around we have dispensary owner/proponents throwing us under the bus to further their own cause. Unnecessarily! So you all have made the enemies where there wasn't one. Preemptively we will be making it clear that our law is great as it stands and there is no safety issue with the current caregiver patient standard in our law. Dispensaries are not about compassion, they are about profits. Period.

 

That is also why you guys want our grow rights. The most obvious profit in all of this is on the growing end. By having to buy from caregivers it eats up half of your potential profit. We get it.

 

Here is the first mention of PROFITS in this thread. Not made by a dispensary proponent but by a detractor like yourself. YOU brought profits into the conversation, not I. He even said the word THREE TIMES and we are still to believe that everyone is okay with profits? Not a believeable statement.

Edited January 16, 2013 by Rick Thompson

[CaveatLector]

Actually you are quite wrong. We have read that all dispensaries have no compassion. It was even written with a "Period." at the end of the sentence. No wiggle room, no some-of-them-are-ok. "Period." You are now saying "employed by some of the". This is in conflict with the whole "Period." thing. At least be consistent with your messaging.

 

Profit was mentioned by you and others- if profit incentive is not a bad thing, why do you and your brothers keep using that word as a sword? If profit is not an issue you should never have mentioned it. Your quote is a reasonable approach to the issue but it IS NOT consistent with what has been written on pages 2, 3, 4, and 5 of this thread.

Read. Read again. Then REread. I have not used profit as a sword and, in fact, have told you to take it out of the equation several times in this thread. Got it yet? Profit may be an issue for SOME but it is not for ME. Shall I multi-quote my posts so as to coalesce my arguments into a more manageable 5th grade level or can you stop confusing issues? You are addressing a NON issue in an effort to avoid the REAL issues brought out in the video in question. The REAL issue is the argument put forth that cgs are somehow less capable than a dispensary.

 

If you want to continue to look like a clown then keep harping on the non-issues. If you want to get down to brass tacks then address the real issue. What message are people sending to the legislature when they insist that cgs cannot provide adequately for pts? Answer that please. Are they sending a message that the law needs further fixing? That dispensaries should have grow warehouses? That cgs should be cut out? Answer a freaking question and drop the duck, weave, bob, evade crap that you have pulled through this entire thread.

Edited January 16, 2013 by CaveatLector

[SFC]

Profit is not in our law Rick. Period. Repeat if you need to.

 

Jamie, I see you looking in. A question. Do you think Rick is helping or hurting your cause?

Edited January 16, 2013 by SFC

[jamieuke]

Just to chime in and to , hopefully, clarify. I do not, in or out of the documentary say anything negative about the caregiver system.

 

I do not and will not condone compromising the caregiver system. I will not support legislation that seeks to compromise the caregiver system.

 

I, nor any other person, dispensary owner, or other, had any influence on the documentary at all. I was simply interviewed when requested.

 

Jen Whalen will be on Planet Green Trees next week- Jan 24. Anyone with concerns or questions about the making of the documentary can directly ask her about it.

 

 

[purple pimpernel]

nice to see all the folks here with their pitchforks and rakes......

 

I actually liked the video! very well done......

 

definately an infomercial of 'why' we need dispensaries tho-- and the justification lies in the comments of the shortcomings of CGs and the need for patient access ....

 

so we go from CG based law right to commercial?

 

 

the problem I have seen from the minute I jumped into the arena is/was the fact of no 'patient' groups.....CC yes

patient real time working groups....?.....no- and I don't believe dispensaries are that...uh-uh no-

 

to call dispensaries patient groups because they just provide an extra option for patients is not how I interpret a patient support group

 

dispensaries from what I've seen here are just a place to buy weed....as much as they try and look otherwise in their presentation of themselves--

 

the service that dispensaries provide is just a storefront enterprise.....

 

if all the dispensaries operated under a system where they provided medicine to indigent and terminal folks I would donate MORE$ this year for their cause.....as it stands I see them as for profit enterprise and that is scary!

 

because anytime you create an enterprise that is for profit without including the state you are setting it up to be something the authorities are going to step in and mandate a response....

 

that is what is going to happen soon

 

 

I have a problem with lawyers being the driving force behind all the nuances in the law...

 

as I stated back in the thread...

 

--.in California the patients had the driving force behind the law.....clubs came into being as a result of that

 

--in Colorado the for profit tax and regulate folks were the driving force behind their format.....

 

--in Michigan it is up in the air as to where the real compelling nature of our law lies.....

 

and from what I have seen by keeping my fingers closely on the pulse of things the battle is in front of us....

 

 

dispensaries will come online....it's inevitable and necessary

 

how they do that remains to be seen

 

if they cannot work together with the majority of patient advocates they are going to have a splintered reaction to their efforts and will force the issue to the top thereby dictating the next move of the legs....

 

knowing the politicos will jump in bed with whoever pays the most like prostitutes is what is very disconcerting to me as the dispensary proponents could very well buy themselves a law-- at the rest of the patients expense

 

 

I have been to both Rick and Jamie's clubs and many of their friends--

I have also been in others that I would never return--

 

if there can be some sort of amicable compromise to allow for support for dispensaries that would be what is best for everyone IMO

 

dispensaries using inexperienced CG as the basis of their argument is weak IMO

 

when they show support of 2-300 folks/patients/caregivers to bolster their argument that is when I will choose which ones I will align with

 

as I see the big picture now dispensaries are just slinging weed...trying to justify that with the argument of patient access is BS

 

the biggest thing I see at dispensaries I go into right now is how pissed off they get if you don't spend $$.......

 

 

the approach here in Michigan is backassward to me.....if there were such pressing need for clubs and dispensaries I would think we would see the support by virtue of numbers ....I.e...people/patients screaming for these

 

I don't see it except in flint at gc3 and the jack town FM.......other than that I just don't see the high volume of patients supporting these individual clubs dispensaries and what I do see is their indignant argument for their existence...

 

I do believe lawyers are leading the folks around in circles here with mich law--

 

I do believe dispensaries need to come online for everyone benefit--

 

I believe that anyone involved with vending machine type distribution is only trying to create a niche market of profiteering for themselves and anyone else that supports those---and I would call t the first step into the corporate commercialization of our beloved plant...

 

I sure hope you folks can come to consensus on things.....for the good of all--

 

till then I have my pitchfork by the door along with a few rakes for friends if things get tough--

 

nice to see all the civil discourse here ......bravo

[Hayduke]

Is there any place on this forum for people who think that not every caregiver is equally skilled at all aspects of medical cannabis? Are there people here who won't see that notion as a shot against ALL caregivers?

 

Is there a place for people who would like to see dispensaries thrive and compliment a very robust caregiver and patient based system?

 

I agree with you Northern Lights I would like to see both thrive, but to put on blinders and not see the constant criticism of the patient/caregiver going on is not too objective on your part, I would suggest. And I would cordially ask you if each testing facility is equal, or are some more competent and ethical than others? Can a large grow become fouled by bugs, mold, etal? Do large grows not use pesticides and petroleum based products to ensure a timely harvest and not lose their profit model? Would you agree there are good and bad dispensaries and distribution models? Do you think it prudent to see the Ann Arbor Guild's attorneys in their Amicus, or the lady councilwoman from Ann Arbor in the film, make comments that are rude and demeaning? How many insults should our current system have to absorb before it is acknowledged that these are cheap shots? And then how long before the dispensary proponents who deliver these insults are made to stop being such jerks?

 

To suggest that it is only home based patients and caregivers who are unpure in their cultivation skills and processing skills, is in and of itself a lie.

 

We all understand that the film was skewed towards a point of view. That is acceptable. It is also acceptable to critique the film without getting personal and insulting.

 

For the record: I did not disagree with Neil Rockind at all. I thought he was eloquent. Now the manner of which his footage was edited, could, be criticized. But for me it was not bad. And I met Jen and she seemed a very very nice person. My criticism was the story was not as balanced as it could have been.

[jamieuke]

Profit is not in our law Rick. Period. Repeat if you need to.

 

Jamie, I see you looking in. A question. Do you think Rick is helping or hurting your cause?

 

I just see Rick offering what he thinks. Most involved with this discussion could stand to do a better job of separating opinion and supposition from fact.

 

I like the fact that Rick tried to offer a perspective that was not based on "us v them" which is the false premise that many continue to begin this kind of discussion with.

 

We all want the same thing. All methods of distribution are as good as the practices applied. The more options, utilizing good practices, the better.

[SFC]

Then you guys need to reign in those among you that are hell bent on jacking up our grow rights. We are not going to sit on our hands while it happens.

[purple pimpernel]

putting Steve deangelo in the opening of the film and then as the last word speaks volumes to the intent of the filmmaker ...

..mayb unintentional?? doubtful-

 

like my friend said....what does the largest dispensary owner 'defendant ' from California have to do with mich ??

 

also the proponents of the tax and regulate system failed in Cali and then took it successfully into Colorado and now they are here IMO

[Wild Bill]

It seems to me that dispensaries of some sort are inevitable. The tax money was supposedly the factor that tipped the scales in the states that legalized. When cannabis is legalized it will most likely be taxed and regulated along the lines of the alcohol model. The only way to do that effectively is to have point of sale taxation.

 

The best we can hope for is to compare home grows with beer making as a hobby. You can get away with beer and wine but try to set up a still and the ATF is at your door.

 

If the government receives enough revenue from commercial sales then small home grows shouldn't be worth their while. But if they think you are costing them money then rest assured they'll be down your throat in a heartbeat.

 

I personally have only been in one dispensary and was not at all impressed. The product was of mediocre to poor quality and cost $50 to $60 per 1/8 oz. It was nothing at all like the set ups you see in other states. Just a storefront with a glass display case with four or five varieties and a couple of pipes.

 

I hadn't actually paid for cannabis for close to 30 years so I can't speak on the price but I could probably get better quality at the local bus stop.

[Celliach]

It seems to me that dispensaries of some sort are inevitable. The tax money was supposedly the factor that tipped the scales in the states that legalized. When cannabis is legalized it will most likely be taxed and regulated along the lines of the alcohol model. The only way to do that effectively is to have point of sale taxation.

.

 

Why? What's wrong with a model where we can grow MJ right next to our tomato plants in the backyard?

[TheHarvester]

I don't know why, but it's hard to find examples of any discussions, materials, or videos about Dispensaries that don't also involve subtle to out right attacks on care givers. From accusations of shoddy product to being characterized as creepy interlopers, it's consistently present in any material I have seen where Dispensaries are shown in a favorable light. Maybe the narrative of the work demands a contrast and thus the relationship. That being said caregivers don't lend themselves to the characterizations typically presented. I refrain from judging intent, but when these negative themes are presented repeatedly it becomes hard to ignore.

[purple pimpernel]

 

 

Why? What's wrong with a model where we can grow MJ right next to our tomato plants in the backyard?

 

 

 

there's alot of places in most cities where people can't grow tomatoes.....or anything else outside-

 

clubs are for cities---they dictate that

 

cities are consumer areas for the most part....supply/demand it's a mandate for clubs---it's needed like a 7eleven

 

but just like 7eleven only the stores that have the most customers will survive

 

I just have a problem with a lot of them seeing us pts as customers instead of pts-

 

there's an inference in there towards us as patients......

if the clubs had huge numbers of pts with high profile visibility well it would be obvious which ones had the most support...and it is for the most part....

gonna be a couple big ones in each area

 

this is the part where they start to try and expand their patient base and support...

let's see how nice they 'reach' out to more pts...

 

it's hard to tell some of the newer ones....just being for profit and such

but I definately see some of the larger more highly visible ones that have a clear amount of patient support and need in their communities and are not going away and I support a couple of them ....

 

I just don't see the patient numbers supporting most of them.....

 

our rights are just starting to 'flower'....it's going to be interesting how we gro as a community

Edited January 17, 2013 by purple pimpernel

[mibrains]

lost me..

and all rational focus for any argument

 

when i saw..

 

"Newman"

 

the specialist at 22:45

 

we all pretty much work for him...

 

 

life is short... "stay Happy"

[Wild Bill]

Why? What's wrong with a model where we can grow MJ right next to our tomato plants in the backyard?

 

Same reason you can't cook your own moonshine.

 

Because it is too difficult for them to tax everyone's plants. Remember the government is only in it for the money.

 

They don't care about your health, happiness or even whether you live or die but they do care about their revenue streams.

 

It would be great if they let us continue to grow. They could always sell permits or licenses to grow.

 

They'll go with whatever plan nets them the biggest profits.

[Celliach]

Same reason you can't cook your own moonshine.

 

Because it is too difficult for them to tax everyone's plants. Remember the government is only in it for the money.

 

They don't care about your health, happiness or even whether you live or die but they do care about their revenue streams.

 

It would be great if they let us continue to grow. They could always sell permits or licenses to grow.

 

They'll go with whatever plan nets them the biggest profits.

 

YOUare the government. You only have to get up and start making the changes. The problem is getting people off their couches and caring.

[Wild Bill]

YOUare the government. You only have to get up and start making the changes. The problem is getting people off their couches and caring.

 

In theory. Personally I haven't seen much response from government to the will of the people unless things get so bad they have to worry about civil unrest.