Clare Cc 3/23

[GregS]

I understand that. Yet, how can he ever make up for proposing the ending of growing in your own home? No amount of 'good deeds' will make up for doing that to make himself rich, IMO. All the rest of his moves are just table dressing around his major plan for his dispensaries. Bribes, if you will, to get to the grand prize.

 

 Those are some pretty harsh judgements. We agree that he has been instrumental in efforts to trash us. Better to put the anger to work in smart ways.

[SFC]

On a personal level Jamie is a likable guy, but every time we have given him the benefit of doubt he still turns and bites us. How many times should we allow ourselves to be bitten?

[GregS]

I don't think it's fair to even ask a 'position' on dispensaries when you don't specifically show how you get them to be legal.

EVERYONE sees the good a dispensary COULD POSSIBLY do. So everyone is on board with some sort of dispensary. The problem is the sacrifices that might have to be made to get them legal. Just look at the sacrifice of home grows and you know the problem right now.

If there is no position, how do we establish a formal one?

[GregS]

On a personal level Jamie is a likable guy, but every time we have given him the benefit of doubt he still turns and bites us. How many times should we allow ourselves to be bitten?

Shall we formulate a position?

[GregS]

Herding cats is cake compared with this.

[Restorium2]

 Those are some pretty harsh judgements. We agree that he has been instrumental in efforts to trash us. Better to put the anger to work in smart ways.

All published facts, not harsh judgements. The harsh judgements are much worse and don't need to be written here.

[+Annnie]

Im not a dispensary proponent ,, most who know me will tell you that.. I support the MMMAct as written and voted on in 2008..  How can we get the cops to support that as well and the courts.. ??? We need to fight every single court battle we can and educate these patients on their sec 8 protections... We have those protections and I feel often they get belittled here because they are not immunity based.. Well guess what guys when you are going to court (a lot of the time the ppl were fully within their rights and protections of the act) You have already lost your immunity.. there is no recourse besides sec 8.. Do I want to suggest that everyone have a free for all because of section 8.. Heck no.. im just saying at that point .. You have that protection and should be using it..  

[GregS]

Im not a dispensary proponent ,, most who know me will tell you that.. I support the MMMAct as written and voted on in 2008..  How can we get the cops to support that as well and the courts.. ??? We need to fight every single court battle we can and educate these patients on their sec 8 protections... We have those protections and I feel often they get belittled here because they are not immunity based.. Well guess what guys when you are going to court (a lot of the time the ppl were fully within their rights and protections of the act) You have already lost your immunity.. there is no recourse besides sec 8.. Do I want to suggest that everyone have a free for all because of section 8.. Heck no.. im just saying at that point .. You have that protection and should be using it..  

 

I hope and expect we are all in agreement. Please take a little time to calm yourself. What more can we do to help?

Edited March 25, 2013 by GregS

[+Malamute]

There is also Sec. 4 protections in court, unfortunately i guess.(shouldnt be there anyway).

 

And of course you should educate people on Sec. 8.

 

:-)

 

I tell your story Annie(no names used), I tell the story of Bad Axe, King, Redden, etc etc etc and tell them this is what you will go through if you do not follow what i am telling you to remain in Sec 4 protections. :-)

 

Was it worth it?  No need to answer.

 

 I tell people that basicly the sec. 8 defense is getting off on a technicality.  IF,big if, you can prove beyond a doubt or to a reasonable person(doesnt exist in court) that you have satisfied the elements of the sec 8 defense, you will not be convicted; but you are still arrested, lose all your crap, spend thousands on attorneys and go through the insane amounts of stress and life upheavel it causes.

 

 I lay it out as it is and will be for awhile still.

[+Annnie]

Of course you are correct.. It is a huge expense on so many levels.. But if it has to go there which it obviously does, we need to help ppl to use and understand that other part.. IM calm greg..

[+Malamute]

Absolutely Annie.

 

I just overemphasize the want/need to never ever rely on the Sec 8 defense.  It should only be depended on when all else goes bad.

 

:-)

[GregS]

"IM calm greg"

 

And I am glad of that. Thanks.

[+Annnie]

Lol you will definitely realize when I lose my cool.. LOL

[GregS]

To each their own. It's hard for me to understand how anyone could even be deemed a medical cannabis advocate when they propose a law that helps end patient home grows. To each their own.

 

This clearly points up the need to dig hard to prevent or minimize 4271. Dispensary interests have alllll their chicks there.

[Restorium2]

This clearly points up the need to dig hard to prevent or minimize 4271. Dispensary interests have alllll their chicks there.

I think you meant peeps. LOL Good one though.

[GregS]

I think you meant peeps. LOL Good one though.

 

I guess I should have said hopes.

Edited March 25, 2013 by GregS

[ozzrokk]

I do not look at section 8 dismissal as getting off on a technicality. I do not see a technicality being written into the act.

 

If you are unjustly arrested , etc, etc,etc....... Even though you SHOULD have had the protections of 4. Then you also go through the arrest, loose everything, spend thousands yadda yadda yadda.

 

And I know Mal you did not mean it as a literal technicality but merely a comparison, At least I hope not lol....... And I also agree that someone does not want to HAVE to rely on sec. 8 but as Annnie (hi annnie good to see you.) said sometimes that is all people got.

[+Annnie]

when they arrest ya  and you didn't break the law and don't want to take a plea then sec 8.. duh.   Hi Ozz!! HUGGS

[ozzrokk]

Clare County Compassion Club are good people and have the communities best interest in mind.

[+Malamute]

Correct. "Technicality" is not the proper term,... but it helps me to convey what an Affirmative defense is. Such as "Justified" Murder and such.

 

 Here are some legal definitions pertaining to Criminal AD's:

 

Legal Dictionary:  An affirmative defense is also allowed under rules of Criminal Procedure. For example, a defendant accused of assault may claim to have been intoxicated or insane, to have struck out in Self-Defense, or to have had an alibi for the night in question. Any one of these affirmative defenses must be asserted by showing that there are facts in addition to the ones in the indictment or information charging the defendant and that those additional facts are legally sufficient to excuse the defendant.

The rules that govern Pleading in most courts require a defendant to raise all affirmative defenses when first responding to the civil claim or criminal charges against him or her. Failure to do so may preclude assertion of that kind of defense later in the trial.

 

Cornell Law:  A defense in which the defendant introduces evidence, which, if found to be credible, will negate criminal or civil liability, even if it is proven that the defendant committed the alleged acts. Self-defense, entrapment, insanity, and necessity are some examples of affirmative defenses. See, e.g. Beach v. Ocwen Fed. Bank, 523 U.S. 410 (1998).

 

 

 

 So in general, you committed a crime/damage, but there may be an exception to your (criminal/civil) actions.  Technicality isnt the proper term, but it seems people understand it better when terming it that way. :-)  I have had to explain it to people hundreds if not thousands of times and it always seems it clicks in when i break it down(dumb it down) to that. THEN, i can procede and explain it more in depth. :-)

 

I do not look at section 8 dismissal as getting off on a technicality. I do not see a technicality being written into the act.

 

If you are unjustly arrested , etc, etc,etc....... Even though you SHOULD have had the protections of 4. Then you also go through the arrest, loose everything, spend thousands yadda yadda yadda.

 

And I know Mal you did not mean it as a literal technicality but merely a comparison, At least I hope not lol....... And I also agree that someone does not want to HAVE to rely on sec. 8 but as Annnie (hi annnie good to see you.) said sometimes that is all people got.

[+Malamute]

Btw, I had attorneys "dumb it down" for me in 2008/9 so i could properly understand it as well. It isnt meant to be derogatory in the least bit,... its just a way of saying,... there is alot of legal mumbo jumbo involved that parses words to an insane level and it takes a bit to fully understand it. :-)

[GregS]

Clare County Compassion Club are good people and have the communities best interest in mind.

...and I sincerely hope to see them take a seat and work with those of us who agree to keep short sighted avarice and infighting at bay. I will work to see that those who refuse, from any source, are effectively managed, and hope that said management does not mean taking them out with the trash. Sometimes it comes to that.

[GregS]

Asking the state for a law making what you are already doing legal would be pretty dicey. It's like an admission of guilt. I believe the feds are watching, and deciding who to add into the net, as this new law is attempted. A Rico case, that could involve elected officials, wouldn't be out of the question.

4271 is that law Resto. Nothing dicey about it, except to stop it.