What Are Your Thoughts?

[Ms Chocolate]

Based on what I’ will present, what are your thoughts?

 

Section 3(d) tells us that "Marihuana" means that term as defined in section 7106 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.7106 (3) states that “Marihuana” means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L., growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant or its seeds or resin.

 

It does not include the mature stalks of the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of the plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the mature stalks, EXCEPT the resin extracted therefrom, fiber, oil or cake, or the sterilized seed of the plant which is incapable of germination.

 

This legislation says that what it is not considering as marijuana are the mature marijuana stalks, the fiber produced from those stalks, and any other type of preparation one might create from those mature stalks. Also not considered is the oil made from marijuana seeds, as well as smashed seeds patties.

 

The remaining parts of the plant, including the resin extracted, are considered as marijuana.

Under the Section 3 (j) tells us that "Usable marihuana" means the dried leaves and flowers of the marihuana plant, and any mixture or preparation thereof, but does not include the seeds, stalks, and roots of the plant.

 

I’m reading this to mean that the MMMA does not allow patient coverage for “the resin extracted”, because it is not included in the definition of "Usable marihuana".

[OG Fire Beaster]

Based on what I’ will present, what are your thoughts?

 

Section 3(d) tells us that "Marihuana" means that term as defined in section 7106 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.7106 (3) states that “Marihuana” means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L., growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant or its seeds or resin.

 

It does not include the mature stalks of the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of the plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the mature stalks, EXCEPT the resin extracted therefrom, fiber, oil or cake, or the sterilized seed of the plant which is incapable of germination.

 

This legislation says that what it is not considering as marijuana are the mature marijuana stalks, the fiber produced from those stalks, and any other type of preparation one might create from those mature stalks. Also not considered is the oil made from marijuana seeds, as well as smashed seeds patties.

 

The remaining parts of the plant, including the resin extracted, are considered as marijuana.

Under the Section 3 (j) tells us that "Usable marihuana" means the dried leaves and flowers of the marihuana plant, and any mixture or preparation thereof, but does not include the seeds, stalks, and roots of the plant.

 

I’m reading this to mean that the MMMA does not allow patient coverage for “the resin extracted”, because it is not included in the definition of "Usable marihuana".

 

I would consider resin a preparation thereof. Don't extract resin from the seeds stalks and roots of the plant if your worried.

[Highlander]

I agree. Resin is a preparation of mj.

[cristinew]

mixture or preparation thereof,

 

​must be usable also

[maxmax]

Well am sure we will be hearing about this kind of thing soon from the courts

They will clean the Law up

So we will all know how to bake up a pan of Browne without being arrested

 

Maybe

 

[Ms Chocolate]

Hash is extracted resin, is it not?

[mibrains]

Hash is extracted resin, is it not?

 

i would say it is.. by the most absolute of definitions.. and almost inarguable...

[mibrains]

that is in my approach also included under the definition of "any preparation thereof"

 

i mean..

 

where did the hash come from?

 

from the dried leaves and flowers.

 

it was prepared using ice to extract it.

it was prepared using butane

it was prepared using dry ice

it was prepared using naptha

ect...

[Ms Chocolate]

If resin is as stated, “preparation thereof”; lawmakers need to drop the dispensary idea and work on the idea of preparations. If hash is used in food products, then there should be labeling that read (so many) grams of hash per ounce of end product.

 

If instead of hash, you might have oil or butter that contained heat or cold processed plant material. This oil or butter is then used for foods or topical applications. A like label should be required.

 

This would be in addition to what is required under the Cottage Foods Act. Not only does this inform the patient what they are getting, it shows LEO the amount of marihuana that is being held.

 

Of course this means that it would have to be written that the total product would not count a person’s weight, just the marihuana contained within.

 

I think it is more important that lawmakers define the product before creating a store to sale the product.

[OG Fire Beaster]

I'm not sure that this is a top priority for anyone else right now.

[GregS]

A tbsp or two of close trim in a pot of chili works grreat!

 

No problem here.

[mibrains]

If resin is as stated, “preparation thereof”; lawmakers need to drop the dispensary idea and work on the idea of preparations. If hash is used in food products, then there should be labeling that read (so many) grams of hash per ounce of end product.

 

If instead of hash, you might have oil or butter that contained heat or cold processed plant material. This oil or butter is then used for foods or topical applications. A like label should be required.

 

This would be in addition to what is required under the Cottage Foods Act. Not only does this inform the patient what they are getting, it shows LEO the amount of marihuana that is being held.

 

Of course this means that it would have to be written that the total product would not count a person’s weight, just the marihuana contained within.

 

I think it is more important that lawmakers define the product before creating a store to sale the product.

 

i agree.

 

and i could offer that my input here is exploratory in nature... not trying to dictate.. or impose my way of thinking on anyone...

 

it is a HUGE concern for people who want to attain their cannabis in orally suitable forms.

 

medibles and weight are a definite issue when it comes to section 4 protections.

 

it is not so simple. it has many layers and is one of the only times i would ever tell a person to rely on section 8 defense...because really you have no other choice.

 

i agree... ms chocolate.. it is worthy of exploring and an issue that deserves good answers.

 

folks tend to downplay the significance of medibles.. but the issue is real, tangible and a daily threat to many patients. i hear more and more from people who only want to eat their cannabis and have absolutely no desire to smoke or even vaporize their medicine.

[Ms Chocolate]

This is an issue I brought up to Reps. Horn and Cavanagh

[Hayduke]

a year ago, a session ago... Ms C you know the drill.... we are on to the next session, the next real world. You are the best in asking the most direct questions......lol... look forward to seeing you on Saturday!

 

we should talk then...

[GregS]

This is an issue I brought up to Reps. Horn and Cavanagh

 

And please note that they did not respond, but wrote extensive legislation that entirely ignores that. What was their response to you?

 

These are not our friends.

[Ms Chocolate]

And please note that they did not respond, but wrote extensive legislation that entirely ignores that. What was their response to you?

 

These are not our friends.

The law was written for smokers, not for non-smoking medical users. Cavanagh did not seem concern. He wanted to discuss enclosures. Rep Horn, on the other hand, seems to understand my point. He even said that a gram of marihuana mixed with 5 ounces of lotion should not be counted as 5 ounces of marihuana.

Hayduke – if the body is willing, I will see you this weekend.

[mibrains]

i would like to take a moment to ask a question ms c.

 

it might derail your thread a bit.

 

but i came to your posted definition of cannabis because it was the most recent place i have seen it

 

something has eaten away at me since i started exploring cannabis.. and discovery channel has a new show last night on called "weed country" i watched the first part of 6 and dvr'd the second.

as i am watching it this morning they hit on and nailed a point i had been thinking about for a long while.

 

Section 3(d) tells us that "Marihuana" means that term as defined in section 7106 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.7106 (3) states that “Marihuana” means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L., growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant or its seeds or resin.

 

what if your growing an indica?

 

they wrote these laws a very long time ago...

 

we know a lot more now about genealogy..

 

this question has been in the back of mibrains for a few years and they hit on it on the show so i thought i would ask while the show is paused... and see if anyone else noticed it.. and if it has any presentation of relevance.

[Northern Lab]

i would like to take a moment to ask a question ms c.

 

it might derail your thread a bit.

 

but i came to your posted definition of cannabis because it was the most recent place i have seen it

 

something has eaten away at me since i started exploring cannabis.. and discovery channel has a new show last night on called "weed country" i watched the first part of 6 and dvr'd the second.

as i am watching it this morning they hit on and nailed a point i had been thinking about for a long while.

 

Section 3(d) tells us that "Marihuana" means that term as defined in section 7106 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.7106 (3) states that “Marihuana” means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L., growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant or its seeds or resin.

 

what if your growing an indica?

 

they wrote these laws a very long time ago...

 

we know a lot more now about genealogy..

 

this question has been in the back of mibrains for a few years and they hit on it on the show so i thought i would ask while the show is paused... and see if anyone else noticed it.. and if it has any presentation of relevance.

 

I watch that last night. Very interesting point, but I doubt it will hold up in court.

 

I wonder if anyone has ever tried that argument in court.

[mibrains]

well... if it was never corrected then it should probably hold up...

 

i am anxious to see if he tries to use it to defend himself.

 

maybe a long shot... maybe not so much.

 

it is their rules we play by

 

and the meaning of words holds ultimate value in court.

[Ms Chocolate]

i would like to take a moment to ask a question ms c.

Section 3(d) tells us that "Marihuana" means that term as defined in section 7106 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.7106 (3) states that “Marihuana” means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L., growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant or its seeds or resin.

what if your growing an indica?

This is a question I'd asked a judge friend of mine, a few years back. Cannabis come as sative L, indica L, and one other (i'll look this up later). The only form ever listed in any law is the sative L. Should a person get arrested and wanted to fight the form, that person would first have to have the material tested, then fight to get the test results entered, plus present a lot of other things. But it might be worth a try, I think it has, once. I'd tossed, loaned a lot of research; so I can't give details. Granted, you know lawmakers will just broaden the law.

Edited March 1, 2013 by Ms Chocolate

[OG Fire Beaster]

This is a question I'd asked a judge friend of mine, a few years back. Cannabis come as sative L, indica L, and one other (i'll look this up later). The only form ever listed in any law is the sative L. Should a person get arrested and wanted to fight the form, that person would first have to have the material tested, then fight to get the test results entered, plus present a lot of other things. But it might be worth a try, I think it has, once. I'd tossed, loaned a lot of research; so I can't give details. Granted, you know lawmakers will just broaden the law.

 

Sativa

Indica

Rudelaris(autos low THC)

Chinensis

I think there is another one from south east Asia that is distinct as well.( might be gigantis or something like that)

 

EDIT: I'm pretty sure a SOLID legal case could be made but I think it would absolutely fail. They would probably even tell you you're right and say too bad anyway.

Edited March 1, 2013 by OG Fire Beaster

[Dlo]

I thought in the Jeorge Cervantes, grow bible, he talked about sativa, indica, afghanica. Its the only place i seen it, and i cant find my book. Maybe someone with the book can help.

[OG Fire Beaster]

Afghanica is what you would consider a land race Indica. I think more of a indica sub group, but you could probably say the Chinesis and other(gigantica) are sativa sub groups land race species as well. They are all officially separate species of the same genus.

 

EDIT: It seems the law doesn't specify the family just the species, I wouldn't want to be the person to find out.

Edited March 1, 2013 by OG Fire Beaster

[Ms Chocolate]

http://plants.usda.g...le?symbol=CASAI

http://plants.usda.gov/java/nameSearch

http://usdasearch.us...9&commit=Search

 

Seems that I found something on the USDA site in the past. Whatever it was, it's not there now - or is as a sub-group to sativa L

Edited March 1, 2013 by Ms Chocolate

[GregS]

This is a question I'd asked a judge friend of mine, a few years back. Cannabis come as sative L, indica L, and one other (i'll look this up later). The only form ever listed in any law is the sative L. Should a person get arrested and wanted to fight the form, that person would first have to have the material tested, then fight to get the test results entered, plus present a lot of other things. But it might be worth a try, I think it has, once. I'd tossed, loaned a lot of research; so I can't give details. Granted, you know lawmakers will just broaden the law.

 

Indicas, if not included in the MMMA protections, would likely be subject to drug laws, and an effort to approach it from this perspective mightcause a lot of grief . Some things are better left alone.