Meeting In Lansing 7 16 13

[+Malamute]

 dont say you took the high road.

 

 

[SFC]

 

Just trying to stay informed not easy on this site.  

 

 

And it gets worse every day.  The people that actually have knowledge for the most part have given up on sharing it.  Greg, please, stay at RIU, your posts are almost insane.  I cannot believe I just wasted ten minutes reading them....

[Natesilver]

I, for one, value Greg's posts.

[GregS]

 

im not a fan of either Dr bob or you Greg but dont say you took the high road.

For you, anything.

And it gets worse every day.  The people that actually have knowledge for the most part have given up on sharing it.  Greg, please, stay at RIU, your posts are almost insane.  I cannot believe I just wasted ten minutes reading them....

More useless rhetoric.

Edited July 23, 2013 by GregS

[Dr. Bob]

Just trying to stay informed not easy on this site.  

 

 

And it gets worse every day.  The people that actually have knowledge for the most part have given up on sharing it.  Greg, please, stay at RIU, your posts are almost insane.  I cannot believe I just wasted ten minutes reading them....

The problem you run in to on this and other sites is that folks who actually know what they are talking about are constantly dog piled by some idiot with an ax to grind, or a 'certification center' that got shut down as a result of the law changes, or just some one with a pet theory that can make them some geld.  Most of the more knowledgeable folks get tired of the 'produce your CV' and 'show me a copy of where I said....' to even bother sharing information.  

 

I've put up my information, it is there and accurate for those that want information about the section 8 defense and other aspects of the act that I deal with on a daily basis.  My interest is and has always been to keep patients safe and informed with accurate information.  I don't have outside interests, like farmers markets, or self serving financial schemes.  Every day less and less of my practice relies on certifications and I am still the largest clinic in N. Michigan.  So really, why should I bother other than to protect patients from the latest skirt around the Act?

 

Dr. Bob

[Dr. Bob]

I, for one, value Greg's posts.

I like my posts too, why wouldn't it surprise me you like Greg's....lol

[TheHarvester]

Greg,

What do you think people are misunderstanding most about the ideas you are proposing?

I'm not sure I entirely understand them, but I would offer some concerns.

 

What I believe is being talked about in this instance, and forgive me as I don't have all the info, seems to be about section 8 and it's relationship to transactions at FMs. Do you think it makes sense to broaden the scope of all the possibilities of consequences beyond just the defense ability of the transactions themselves? 

 

I like discussing ideas and talking steering with your Greg. I think where we differ tends to be the scope of the environment the ideas would exist in and perhaps the other avenues accessible by LEOs to achieve their goals if your ideas are in fact solid.

 

Your thoughts?

[Natesilver]

I like my posts too, why wouldn't it surprise me you like Greg's....lol

 

Are you accusing me of being Greg?

[Dr. Bob]

If the shoe fits......

 

Dr. Bob

[GregS]

Greg,

What do you think people are misunderstanding most about the ideas you are proposing?

I'm not sure I entirely understand them, but I would offer some concerns.

 

What I believe is being talked about in this instance, and forgive me as I don't have all the info, seems to be about section 8 and it's relationship to transactions at FMs. Do you think it makes sense to broaden the scope of all the possibilities of consequences beyond just the defense ability of the transactions themselves? 

 

I like discussing ideas and talking steering with your Greg. I think where we differ tends to be the scope of the environment the ideas would exist in and perhaps the other avenues accessible by LEOs to achieve their goals if your ideas are in fact solid.

 

Your thoughts?

The premise was floated so that it could be vetted. I do not think so many people do not understand, especially if they have been following the legal facts in my comments. Regarding the proposal itself, I have been prohibited from remarking about it here. I am frustrated with that, and would welcome a productive and intelligent dialogue with anyone who cares to do the same.

Edited July 23, 2013 by GregS

[Natesilver]

If the shoe fits......

 

Dr. Bob

 

Here I am, sitting at my computer eating skittles and drinking iced tea, and I have to fend off your absurd accusations. I assure you I am not Greg

[Hayduke]

It was never floated in a way anyone could understand Greg.  Sorry bout that.  Previously at MCP you pushed patient to patient as a guaranteed lock even after the McQueen CoA decision, and seemingly it made me begin to not take you seriously.  This time I thought if you were trying to set up a CC in Lansing, that was a very good thing.  Suddenly the real deal seemed to revolve around Farmers Markets and Section 8 theories of defense you have adopted as righteous.  

 

Now I have no idea if you wish to make money off all this.  I will not address that point, or the whole Farmers Market issue, because they are 100% illegal at this time.

 

But I specifically recall at MCP when you came up with the Greg Schmid run on sentence about patient to patient and we warned you that following that path would likely result in your arrest, you told me you did not intend to be the test case. Now I ask you on the section 8 stuff and the unregistered caregiver stuff, are you planning on being the test defendant?  Or are you just offering to try and raise funds for the poor soul who is arrested after following your advise?

 

Perhaps you need to spell this out more clearly.

 

And if you can't respond here, why not just drop the subject?  You have some insight Greg, but you do not seem to grasp limits too well.  You blither at Dr Bob, and he isn't even your doctor.  How weird is that.  Since you are neither lawyer, doctor, judge, legislator, or lobbyist.... just what are your qualifications to give advise on these topics?

 

You have people here interested in your views, I get that, but you do not qualify your pet theories with the honest caveat's they deserve.  Like: "until there is a test case, I cannot be sure that following my approach will not get the participants arrested."

 

Personally you have lost credibility with me because I cannot tell what he heck you are talking about in the big picture arena.  And truthfully I don't have time to be spoonfed small doses.  Circular comments, paranoid responses to any criticism, and just a general wild shot gun approach is all I see.  You asked me to come to your meeting, a three hour round trip drive on a Tuesday night (and I work days) on the basis of you calling the meeting.  But I was never given any info as to topics.  Then after the meeting you would not confirm how many attendee's, what was discussed, or if you were able to get financial commitments in order to fund your projects.

 

Can you see why someone like me is a bit put off by this?

 

I read your proposed contract at Roll it Up and consider it virtually an illegal pyramid scheme of sorts.  I do not think it viable or legal.  

 

So Greg, no offense but ya'll need to be the one showing both humility and logic here, as you are the party trying to win hearts and minds.  You need to quit the attacks on Dr. Bob, and the catty comments for all others.  Sack up, man up, whatever you wish to call it... but recognize by being nasty when people question you, you merely reduce you own credibility.  Try and see that those of us who have invested thousands of hours in all of this and make absolutely no money or pay on medical marijuana, do it because we care for patients and think cannabis can help them, and we are just not going to follow your pied piper lead, just because you are energized, you have to do better than that.  Some of us think what you propose could be illegal and get people arrested.  Until you get past the schemes that you dream up being the "best method" to proceed, it will be hard to convince people like me you are for real.  Perhaps you need to float them by others, and maybe even learn to accept their advise and criticism without going off like a whirlling dervish.  Perhaps people would be more respectful if you did not try and convince us that you understand the MMMA better than the CoA judges and the Supreme Court Justices.

Edited July 23, 2013 by Hayduke

[ozzrokk]

Hayduke..... I wouldnt really say the COA has or wants to really have any knowledge or understanding of the MMMA

[Dr. Bob]

Zap, the thread is great if we are discussing strategies for potential section 8 defenses of patients.  For example how to properly document your certification and the need for follow up, or strategies for dealing with oils and butter as in many cases those may need a section 8 defense.  I also just got a federal prescription for cannabis that indicates that the federally approved dosage of smoked cannabis is 1 ounce per 3 days.  These are things that may help patients successfully defend deviations from section 4.  

 

What is not needed is further discussions of schemes to bypass the registry or find loopholes to justify illegal activity like farmers markets.

 

This matter could easily be resolved by Greg here and now.  I will gather 10 grandmas with documented glaucoma and get them certification documents that will overcome any challenge to the bona fide dr/pt relationship.  2.5 ounces is a reasonable amount of marijuana and clearly within the limits of the law for them to possess.  We will have them all sign Greg's contract agreeing to name him as their caregiver and get them notarized.  Greg can come with 25 ounces as their 'unregistered caregiver' and transfer for compensation 2.5 ounces to each of them at a safe location, like the Clare Co. Sheriff's Department.  That should settle the issue right then and there.

 

Dr. Bob

Edited July 23, 2013 by Dr. Bob

[bobandtorey]

Our judge said anyone can understand the Law in one of her opines  she did use a Bigger word in saying it

[Natesilver]

Greg can come with 25 ounces as their 'unregistered caregiver' and transfer for compensation 2.5 ounces to each of them at a safe location, like the Clare Co. Sheriff's Department.  That should settle the issue right then and there.

 

Dr. Bob

 

I don't think that location would be a good idea for a registered caregiver and 1 registered patient connected through the registry.

[bobandtorey]

Hayduke..... I wouldnt really say the COA has or wants to really have any knowledge or understanding of the MMMA

i will agree to that

[Dr. Bob]

I don't think that location would be a good idea for a registered caregiver and 1 registered patient connected through the registry.

Actually, if you are fully within the law ie registered patient and THEIR one and only registered caregiver there are no laws being broken and the main concern would be robbery.  If Greg is confident, let him come forward.  I'll get the patients.  

 

But thanks for answering for him again.  Funny you qualified it all of the sudden to mention registry connection, I thought you maintained that isn't needed.

 

Dr. Bob

Edited July 23, 2013 by Dr. Bob

[Natesilver]

Actually, if you are fully within the law ie registered patient and THEIR one and only registered caregiver there are no laws being broken and the main concern would be robbery.  If Greg is confident, let him come forward.  I'll get the patients.  

 

But thanks for answering for him again.  Funny you qualified it all of the sudden to mention registry connection, I thought you maintained that isn't needed.

 

Dr. Bob

 

I don't think advising people to make transfers at a sheriff's department is particularly wise.

[Dr. Bob]

Clare has a reputation as being a friendly county, it has the 3rd highest per capita rate of card holders, and they have no problem with legal transfers between patients and their caregivers.

 

But it is clear the confidence isn't there when it is your skin on the line.  I can provide 2 solid prongs of the section 8, all you have to do is stand behind your plan and provide the 3rd, personally. 

 

Come on, you say the attorneys are behind you and you are recommending it to others.  Why don't you lead the way?  Back up your talk with action or let's just get on to real section 8 discussions designed to protect patients and keep them safe.

 

Dr. Bob

[Natesilver]

Clare has a reputation as being a friendly county, it has the 3rd highest per capita rate of card holders, and they have no problem with legal transfers between patients and their caregivers.

 

But it is clear the confidence isn't there when it is your skin on the line.  I can provide 2 solid prongs of the section 8, all you have to do is stand behind your plan and provide the 3rd, personally. 

 

Come on, you say the attorneys are behind you and you are recommending it to others.  Why don't you lead the way?  Back up your talk with action or let's just get on to real section 8 discussions designed to protect patients and keep them safe.

 

Dr. Bob

 

It would be a good test case. If you can guarantee the first two prongs, it's an interesting suggestion

[Natesilver]

Clare has a reputation as being a friendly county, it has the 3rd highest per capita rate of card holders, and they have no problem with legal transfers between patients and their caregivers.

 

But it is clear the confidence isn't there when it is your skin on the line.  I can provide 2 solid prongs of the section 8, all you have to do is stand behind your plan and provide the 3rd, personally. 

 

Come on, you say the attorneys are behind you and you are recommending it to others.  Why don't you lead the way?  Back up your talk with action or let's just get on to real section 8 discussions designed to protect patients and keep them safe.

 

Dr. Bob

 

It's a good idea. Maybe use a change form and caregiver attestation filled out and signed by all parties and notarized rather than the ad hoc contract. And definitely with a patient that already has a card rather than just a cert. And definitely just one patient, rather than 10.

[GregS]

It was never floated in a way anyone could understand Greg.  Sorry bout that.  Previously at MCP you pushed patient to patient as a guaranteed lock even after the McQueen CoA decision, and seemingly it made me begin to not take you seriously.  This time I thought if you were trying to set up a CC in Lansing, that was a very good thing.  Suddenly the real deal seemed to revolve around Farmers Markets and Section 8 theories of defense you have adopted as righteous.  

 

Now I have no idea if you wish to make money off all this.  I will not address that point, or the whole Farmers Market issue, because they are 100% illegal at this time.

 

But I specifically recall at MCP when you came up with the Greg Schmid run on sentence about patient to patient and we warned you that following that path would likely result in your arrest, you told me you did not intend to be the test case. Now I ask you on the section 8 stuff and the unregistered caregiver stuff, are you planning on being the test defendant?  Or are you just offering to try and raise funds for the poor soul who is arrested after following your advise?

 

Perhaps you need to spell this out more clearly.

 

And if you can't respond here, why not just drop the subject?  You have some insight Greg, but you do not seem to grasp limits too well.  You blither at Dr Bob, and he isn't even your doctor.  How weird is that.  Since you are neither lawyer, doctor, judge, legislator, or lobbyist.... just what are your qualifications to give advise on these topics?

 

You have people here interested in your views, I get that, but you do not qualify your pet theories with the honest caveat's they deserve.  Like: "until there is a test case, I cannot be sure that following my approach will not get the participants arrested."

 

Personally you have lost credibility with me because I cannot tell what he heck you are talking about in the big picture arena.  And truthfully I don't have time to be spoonfed small doses.  Circular comments, paranoid responses to any criticism, and just a general wild shot gun approach is all I see.  You asked me to come to your meeting, a three hour round trip drive on a Tuesday night (and I work days) on the basis of you calling the meeting.  But I was never given any info as to topics.  Then after the meeting you would not confirm how many attendee's, what was discussed, or if you were able to get financial commitments in order to fund your projects.

 

Can you see why someone like me is a bit put off by this?

 

I read your proposed contract at Roll it Up and consider it virtually an illegal pyramid scheme of sorts.  I do not think it viable or legal.  

 

So Greg, no offense but ya'll need to be the one showing both humility and logic here, as you are the party trying to win hearts and minds.  You need to quit the attacks on Dr. Bob, and the catty comments for all others.  Sack up, man up, whatever you wish to call it... but recognize by being nasty when people question you, you merely reduce you own credibility.  Try and see that those of us who have invested thousands of hours in all of this and make absolutely no money or pay on medical marijuana, do it because we care for patients and think cannabis can help them, and we are just not going to follow your pied piper lead, just because you are energized, you have to do better than that.  Some of us think what you propose could be illegal and get people arrested.  Until you get past the schemes that you dream up being the "best method" to proceed, it will be hard to convince people like me you are for real.  Perhaps you need to float them by others, and maybe even learn to accept their advise and criticism without going off like a whirlling dervish.  Perhaps people would be more respectful if you did not try and convince us that you understand the MMMA better than the CoA judges and the Supreme Court Justices.

It is not difficult to accept advice and criticism as long as they are couched in reasonable terms, much like your comments here. I admittedly get caught up in the nastiness. That I regret, and have agreed to keep without insults and with facts. That Townsend gets a pass is obviously a political consideration. Attitudes that the AD not be so much as mentioned here, and which had prevailed here for a long time, and a certain reluctance because of that, plays into an absence of detail. I think the details at rollitup, while not by any means conclusive, are actually quite clear.

 

In initial discussion and for a long time afterward I made it clear that there is substantial risk involved, and repeatedly. Others chimed in regarding the same ad nauseam. That fact was not in any way diminished or marginalized. It still comes up in the conversation when appropriate. What has happened of late, that being primarily with Carruthers, brought members to consider the AD more closely, as was apparent in their posts. In the events of the last several months, to include LARA rule changes, the theft of our 3.5 million dollars by the police, talk in Lansing regarding 4271, and other assorted and important matters, it became apparent that we have been standing by idly watching these things happen. My thoughts turned to a means to put money behind our efforts because that is an odds on way to make things work. The former management under Fransisco was constantly underfunded and disappeared. Cain did nothing to raise funds to support the community and my take is that we are now living in the flotsam and jetsam left behind him and are drifting aimlessly. Money is, after all, the mother's milk of politics, and we need to be politically engaged.

 

Regarding the likelihood of my being involved as a test case, if I am found not to be in compliance with the law it is pretty much assured. I do not advocate that people be stupid about their choices, but wish to inform them fully regarding them. The AD has been given such short shrift here that it is clearly a misunderstood topic. The constant ankle biting that I've experienced distracts from productive discussion, and it should stop. For what it's worth, I am closely involved with a defense that intends to take down the illegal transport law, and it will require a sec. 8 motion to dismiss. While I am not the defendant, I am waay on board with seeing it through.

 

Regarding my own participation in a market or much of anything that requires any physical effort, my condition limits that and makes it questionable that I will be able to engage personally. I have been unable to walk since Saturday. While I am in treatment getting steroid injections as fast as they can give them to me, I am facing life in a wheelchair if something doesn't change pretty fast. And dammit, I am not happy with these infringements on the community, and by extension, to me.

 

I am not a credentialed professional, and have been called a man of the world, with keen interest in many things. Those things I have taken up throughout my life have been approached with energy and gusto and dedication and sometimes even discipline. Yes. Limits are especially tough for me. That is not uncommon in patients with bipolar disorders. Likewise the depression is horrific and debilitating. My treatment works pretty well, and keeps me mostly between the floor and the ceiling. The law fascinates me with its methods, power, its dedicated and intelligent adherents, and its place in history and in current events. It is among the most advanced methods of seeking truth I have seen, despite its human failings. College coursework was interrupted by serious family medical issues, to include my own. So maybe I am a wannabe counselor. I read opinions for fun and entertainment. Things that are very immersive also appeal to me and is a characteristic of bipolar behavior. I am immensely dedicated to it. I don't think anybody will deny me that. What I am that qualifies me to participate in these discussions is a patient and caregiver. In my considered opinion, no one has a larger stake, and thus we are not to be denied.

 

My long view includes a number of things. Perhaps chief among them at this point is taking the fight to the government. Jamming the courts with cases it has little to no chance of winning appeals to me, both in the sense that it will come to be seen as a fruitless endeavor on the part of law enforcement and the courts, and with luck they will come to see that there is an immense waste of time and resources involved in trying to run us through the grinder, and that workable precedent is a likely outcome. For that reason yes, I would like to see a method to raise money to take cases to fruition. In the end, it is a method intended to benefit us.

Edited July 24, 2013 by GregS

[Natesilver]

It's a good idea. Maybe use a change form and caregiver attestation filled out and signed by all parties and notarized rather than the ad hoc contract. And definitely with a patient that already has a card rather than just a cert. And definitely just one patient, rather than 10.

 

It's pretty clear this would be covered under sec 8

[Dr. Bob]

It's a good idea. Maybe use a change form and caregiver attestation filled out and signed by all parties and notarized rather than the ad hoc contract. And definitely with a patient that already has a card rather than just a cert. And definitely just one patient, rather than 10.

No the point was to use the contract and exceed the limits of a registered caregiver.  I can most definitely provide 2 prongs, the patients are protected as they can obtain meds from ANY source and I put myself at personal risk to stand behind my certifications every day.  Will anyone stand behind Greg and do this themselves?

 

Dr. Bob 

Edited July 23, 2013 by Dr. Bob