Starting The Legalization Process Here In Michigan. . .. .

[greenbuddha]

So, should this "legal" recreational program dictate THC content just like alcohol content?

 

Well, let's see: 100 proof alcohol means the bottle is 50% alcohol.

 

So, would 50% THC content be alright with you, or would you want more, IF THC limits were even to be a part of a 'recreational use law'?

 

And how about 'Couch Lock' warning labels at those levels? (Don't get excited. Just kidding.)

[bobandtorey]

IMHO! the end of anyone growing their own Cannabis in this State is sure to end soon, it is only my own opinion! the player with the $$ have already put that into play IMHO 

 

But first they need the dispensaries up and running and paying TAXES $$, and again it is only my opinion they will go back to Lansing  and say do you want people to grow right next to your homes and have your kid's small it on there way to School.

 

Sorry IMHO we are 10 years away from legalizing Cannabis and even then no one will be able to grow next to your tomatoes that will never happen IMHO only

[motorcitymeds]

The dispensaries want a system like they have in Washington state.

it is going to happen regardless we can either sit and complain like we always do or shut up and make it happen.

 

MONEY TALKS.  That is all they respect.  PERIOD.

[motorcitymeds]

IMHO! the end of anyone growing their own Cannabis in this State is sure to end soon, it is only my own opinion! the player with the $$ have already put that into play IMHO 

 

But first they need the dispensaries up and running and paying TAXES $$, and again it is only my opinion they will go back to Lansing  and say do you want people to grow right next to your homes and have your kid's small it on there way to School.

 

Sorry IMHO we are 10 years away from legalizing Cannabis and even then no one will be able to grow next to your tomatoes that will never happen IMHO only

legalization will not take 10 yrs here in MI.   People are sick of this madness.  And to answer the question about home grows.  If you cangrow out side or inside legally 6 plants grown properly from a 30 day old healthy clone put into a 15-20 gallon container with a 60 day vegg under a 1k HPS can yield a hlaf pound to pound depending on the skill level.  Do patients really need to have 25 plants..?  I dunno....i think 12 plants is a good number to satisfy all the people that are going to cry about just 6 plants.

 

 

I have my aunt and uncle onthe Gold Coast in cali and they both can have 6 per state law and ev ery year they have pounds in surplus.  So what is the argument about plant count.  12 tree's can supply a patient for a year easily.!!!  Vegg all winter do multiple transplant then pop out doors for a TREE.

 

The same can be done indoors and get the same yields it just requires skills.

[motorcitymeds]

Well, let's see: 100 proof alcohol means the bottle is 50% alcohol.

 

So, would 50% THC content be alright with you, or would you want more, IF THC limits were even to be a part of a 'recreational use law'?

 

And how about 'Couch Lock' warning labels at those levels? (Don't get excited. Just kidding.)

This is part of the reason why cannabis cannot be looked at the same way as alcohol.  The skill of the grower can poush THC levels higher or lower.  Same with the other cannabinoids.

[motorcitymeds]

So, should this "legal" recreational program dictate THC content just like alcohol content?

This is a absurd comparison.  THC level even in laboratory grows will always have slightly different cannbinoid levels.  That is part of the problem.  You cannot ever get it to be exactly the same every time.   you can only cahse your tail like a dog.  You cannot ever achive the exact results.  You can only get really close.  THC in extractions can be measured down and labeled that is a more reasonable task.

[greenbuddha]

This is part of the reason why cannabis cannot be looked at the same way as alcohol.  The skill of the grower can poush THC levels higher or lower.  Same with the other cannabinoids.

 

Was thinking of extractions, etc.

[greenbuddha]

legalization will not take 10 yrs here in MI.   People are sick of this madness.  And to answer the question about home grows.  If you cangrow out side or inside legally 6 plants grown properly from a 30 day old healthy clone put into a 15-20 gallon container with a 60 day vegg under a 1k HPS can yield a hlaf pound to pound depending on the skill level.  Do patients really need to have 25 plants..?  I dunno....i think 12 plants is a good number to satisfy all the people that are going to cry about just 6 plants.

 

 

I have my aunt and uncle onthe Gold Coast in cali and they both can have 6 per state law and ev ery year they have pounds in surplus.  So what is the argument about plant count.  12 tree's can supply a patient for a year easily.!!!  Vegg all winter do multiple transplant then pop out doors for a TREE.

 

The same can be done indoors and get the same yields it just requires skills.

 

Yep. Once a few more states legalize for recreational use, which I'm almost positive will happen within the next few years ( Alaska will do it this fall) you'll see a landslide of states getting into the act.

 

And, I'll say it again, if we wait too long to define a 'recreational law' that can be put on a ballot to be voted into law by the citizens of Michigan, the politicians will do it for us, as they're doing in Oregon right now, and THEY WILL NOT ALLOW 'ANY' HOME GROWS', and the amounts you'll be allowed to have on hand will be minimal, no doubt about it. 

[bobandtorey]

legalization will not take 10 yrs here in MI.   People are sick of this madness.  And to answer the question about home grows.  If you cangrow out side or inside legally 6 plants grown properly from a 30 day old healthy clone put into a 15-20 gallon container with a 60 day vegg under a 1k HPS can yield a hlaf pound to pound depending on the skill level.  Do patients really need to have 25 plants..?  I dunno....i think 12 plants is a good number to satisfy all the people that are going to cry about just 6 plants.

 

 

I have my aunt and uncle onthe Gold Coast in cali and they both can have 6 per state law and ev ery year they have pounds in surplus.  So what is the argument about plant count.  12 tree's can supply a patient for a year easily.!!!  Vegg all winter do multiple transplant then pop out doors for a TREE.

 

The same can be done indoors and get the same yields it just requires skills.

read the poll here

http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/topic/44357-advertisement-poll-nearly-half-of-likely-michigan-voters-favor-legalizing-taxing-pot/

[greenbuddha]

If seven plants is a felony, marijuana is not legal.

 

 

The feds have said (DOJ) that as long as people are following STATE law along with what the feds say about keeping cannabis out of the hands of minors, etc., they will not get involved.

 

How much of that we can trust, time will tell.  But Washington State and Colorado are going ahead with their 'legalization' program.

 

If Michigan state law said 7 plants, 10 plants, whatever the number might be, is 'legal for recreational' possession,  then supposedly the feds would stay out of it.

 

So it's up to us, the voters in Michigan, to define what will be acceptable in terms of plant count.

 

You like the number 7, put it out there.

 

But with this yelling about not limiting the number of plants and the places they can be grown under a possible 'recreational law', I wonder why so many people accepted the low number of 12 plants per patient that the 'medical marijuana law' set up?

 

Shouldn't everyone have been screaming for a larger plant count, and the right to grow them next to their tomatoes?

 

Suddenly everyone wants unlimited grows in their backyards when it comes to a 'recreational use law'?

[greenbuddha]

If seven plants is a felony, marijuana is not legal.

 

Need changes in FEDERAL law????

[t-pain]

The feds have said

 

the feds have always lied.

the feds will continue to lie, to the president, to the congress and to the people.

[greenbuddha]

the feds have always lied.

the feds will continue to lie, to the president, to the congress and to the people.

 

Time will tell, won't it?

 

It's just like people on the site were saying not long ago that Washington State and Colorado wouldn't vote in their recreational use laws, but they did, didn't they.

 

And they're going ahead with putting them into place.

 

And if the feds are lying about not interfering, they're going to have one hell of a job putting a stop to them, because the state enforcement agencies aren't going to be giving them any help to do it.

 

And we can all go back to sleep and let Lansing dictate to us what our 'recreational use legalization' will look like and go on whining about it, or we can do something about it.

[motorcitymeds]

Time will tell, won't it?

 

It's just like people on the site were saying not long ago that Washington State and Colorado wouldn't vote in their recreational use laws, but they did, didn't they.

 

And they're going ahead with putting them into place.

 

And if the feds are lying about not interfering, they're going to have one hell of a job putting a stop to them, because the state enforcement agencies aren't going to be giving them any help to do it.

 

And we can all go back to sleep and let Lansing dictate to us what our 'recreational use legalization' will look like and go on whining about it, or we can do something about it.

Exactly we need to organize ge money into the right hands and get laws passed that favor us all.

 

The time for complaining and moaning about this and  that is over. 

 

 

TIME FOR ACTION.  Anybody going to start up a KickStarter fund site..?

[bobandtorey]

Need changes in FEDERAL law????

Sorry IMHO only me

 but if we want that we will have to wait 20 years 10 years sounds better

[bobandtorey]

Time will tell, won't it?

 

It's just like people on the site were saying not long ago that Washington State and Colorado wouldn't vote in their recreational use laws, but they did, didn't they.

 

And they're going ahead with putting them into place.

 

And if the feds are lying about not interfering, they're going to have one hell of a job putting a stop to them, because the state enforcement agencies aren't going to be giving them any help to do it.

 

And we can all go back to sleep and let Lansing dictate to us what our 'recreational use legalization' will look like and go on whining about it, or we can do something about it.

 

 

So are you saying to give up on the Law we have/had ? sorry i am just asking

Edited September 15, 2013 by mibrains

[greenbuddha]

 

Time will tell, won't it?  IMHO again i am sorry but time has already told this story to many times

 

It's just like people on the site were saying not long ago that Washington State and Colorado wouldn't vote in their recreational use laws, but they did, didn't they. Is this the State that had medical back in 1900? 

 

And they're going ahead with putting them into place.

 

And if the feds are lying about not interfering, they're going to have one hell of a job putting a stop to them, because the state enforcement agencies aren't going to be giving them any help to do it.

 

And we can all go back to sleep and let Lansing dictate to us what our 'recreational use legalization' will look like and go on whining about it, or we can do something about it.

So are you saying to give up on the Law we have/had ? sorry i am just asking

 

 

We'll see!

[greenleaf]

I wouldn't mind doing it, but it sounds suspiciously like work.

[Celliach]

I wouldn't mind doing it, but it sounds suspiciously like work.

 

...and there is the crux of the problem for all activists.

[Wild Bill]

It is not about the number, it is about what is beyond the number. If there is a number, when that number is exceeded, bad things happen. The idea that making a new law with another, smaller number, will make everything better for everyone, well, I am just not buying it. Not at all.

 

If people can be arrested for going beyond the number, then a lot of other bad things will not stop. Things such as housing and employment issues, CPS issues, etc. will not go away as long as there are numeric limits.

 

We've seen how our existing law has been tortured and twisted at the hands of our legal system. Does anyone think that the drug warriors will go away when a recreational law is passed?

 

They're not going to say, "Okay then, I guess I'll just find myself an honest job."

 

They're going to find "gray areas" so they can "save the children".

 

Any restrictions at all will be an opening for them to harass and plunder just like nothing changed.

[Celliach]

We've seen how our existing law has been tortured and twisted at the hands of our legal system. Does anyone think that the drug warriors will go away when a recreational law is passed?

 

They're not going to say, "Okay then, I guess I'll just find myself an honest job."

 

They're going to find "gray areas" so they can "save the children".

 

Any restrictions at all will be an opening for them to harass and plunder just like nothing changed.

 

probably very prescient.  There were a small group of us that said the same when the MMMA was passed.  We were a small voice in the wilderness.  People eventually started to listen.  Most of the people that got involved in the beginning really didn't understand exactly how the law enforcement and legal systems work, and thought they were fully protected and had free rein to do whatever they wanted to with MMJ.  Unfortunately, that isn't true as we now know.  

 

Hopefully, now that we have a better idea of what will come, we can handle the initial legal onslaughts from the other side in a better manner, and before they severely effect us. 

[greenbuddha]

probably very prescient.  There were a small group of us that said the same when the MMMA was passed.  We were a small voice in the wilderness.  People eventually started to listen.  Most of the people that got involved in the beginning really didn't understand exactly how the law enforcement and legal systems work, and thought they were fully protected and had free rein to do whatever they wanted to with MMJ.  Unfortunately, that isn't true as we now know.  

 

Hopefully, now that we have a better idea of what will come, we can handle the initial legal onslaughts from the other side in a better manner, and before they severely effect us. 

 

 

quote: Hopefully, now that we have a better idea of what will come, we can handle the initial legal onslaughts from the other side in a better manner, and before they severely effect us. 

 

Very well put.

 

The only other option is ' to do nothing at all' and wait until  the pols in Lansing see the tax money that eventually can be made from 'recreational' use of cannabis and they then write up legislation that leaves OUR wishes out of the new laws.

[greenbuddha]

It is not about the number, it is about what is beyond the number. If there is a number, when that number is exceeded, bad things happen. The idea that making a new law with another, smaller number, will make everything better for everyone, well, I am just not buying it. Not at all.

 

If people can be arrested for going beyond the number, then a lot of other bad things will not stop. Things such as housing and employment issues, CPS issues, etc. will not go away as long as there are numeric limits.

 

 

So the only option is to wait until Lansing sees the money to made in taxes from 'recreational legalization' and let THEM define the law where THEY set the possession and plant limits themselves just because we are afraid to look at 'limitations'?

 

I'm going to do all I can to see to it that we consider our options to give ourselves the best chance we can to define 'recreational use' laws... you may trust the boys and girls in Lansing... I don't!

 

And am I getting it right, that you don't think 'recreational use' laws are headed our way?  Because all the indications are that recreational use IS headed, not only to Michigan, but to a lot of other states as well.

 

But I'm all for keeping the Medical Marijuana Laws just as they are.

 

And to keep people from being thrown in jail for using herb / cannabis  / marijuana for NON-MEDICAL purposes is a 'darn' good reason to consider a 'recreational use' law.

[Celliach]

quote: Hopefully, now that we have a better idea of what will come, we can handle the initial legal onslaughts from the other side in a better manner, and before they severely effect us. 

 

Very well put.

 

The only other option is ' to do nothing at all' and wait until  the pols in Lansing see the tax money that eventually can be made from 'recreational' use of cannabis and they then write up legislation that leaves OUR wishes out of the new laws.

There's no money to be made if we are all growing it in our gardens.

[pergamum362]

Oh there still money in it if its legalised, lots more money..whole lots more money. You think everyone who smokes is going to grow it. F u c k no, most wld rather go to the store and buy it. Some disp rake in 4-5 figures in a day, think about a store carrying it where EVERYONE can go into and buy. Gotta get ahead of the competition and prepare for these transitions.