Need Help Immediately

[Restorium2]

I have been on this site since oct of 09,,,,I have never had this kinda thing happen to me, meaning a 3 way conversation, I most def will use it when the time is right and all party's agree, I dont and realy cant tell any one about you or resto as far as how you both are in real life, I do know any one I have met in person from here was way worth the drive and I have met nothing but good people,

 

Im sure you both fit into that category, I know people are afraid of letting people know who they are online, I wont do credit card purchases to often.   I still write checks to pay my bills and send them via snail mail, I dont pay for anything with my bank card linked to my banck acct!

 

To the op I am very sorry for highjacking your thread, and I would have no prob with admins taking this silly stuff off of this persons thread, we all know what happened, as far as what we wrote our selve and the reply's we got untill the last one,

 

Im not perfect and I could have made some kinda mistake in the pm, but I doubt it, like I said It has never happened to me before, and I dont accuse either of the other 2 in the conversation, I do know that lately a few times i have not been able to get on the site, for what ever reasons, maintenance or internet problems, plus we did have a few idiots come here and try and spam every one, and do a few stupid threads never to be seen again!

 

Happy New Years!

 

Peace

Jim

You would have met me in person if you would have went to my CC meetings back in the beginning. You snooze you lose. You had a few months and two counties. Where were you? My attorney has advised me I can't be on camera. If I told you why I would have to make it so you couldn't repeat it. lol

[phaquetoo]

You would have met me in person if you would have went to my CC meetings back in the beginning. You snooze you lose. You had a few months and two counties. Where were you? My attorney has advised me I can't be on camera. If I told you why I would have to make it so you couldn't repeat it. lol

lol I use to be paranoid about the c.c's and being followed home by leo lol!  one of my paranoia's, I dont think that way now, and wish I had a place close to go and contrubute and learn, im never gonna be to old to learn something, I beleive I learn something every day!

 

Happy New Years!

 

I would love to get together some time just to shake hands and meet, talk about some of the common things we have already or anything, I beleive we could be good friends and not expect nothing from each other, other than respect, and I do respect you!

 

Peace my friend

 

Jim

[Restorium2]

lol I use to be paranoid about the c.c's and being followed home by leo lol!  one of my paranoia's, I dont think that way now, and wish I had a place close to go and contrubute and learn, im never gonna be to old to learn something, I beleive I learn something every day!

 

Happy New Years!

 

I would love to get together some time just to shake hands and meet, talk about some of the common things we have already or anything, I beleive we could be good friends and not expect nothing from each other, other than respect, and I do respect you!

 

Peace my friend

 

Jim

You were paranoid? I was running a CC and growing with a doctor rec since the governor signed the Act in 08. Those were some arse puckering times with mlive and their camera trying to take vids. Mucho respecto amigo. Happy New Year!

[Mikeandamy]

http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/datafiles/2010s/op10340.htm

http://www.law.msu.edu/clinics/rhc/Med_Marijuana_FAQ.pdf

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/Publications/tenantlandlord.pdf

[t-pain]

i ran out of time to put this in the correct thread, but its landlord related so here goes.

 

heres a lease agreement from a company in kzoo, that specifically writes in a prohibition on mmmp.

http://cbeech.com/kalamazoo/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2014/11/Kalamazoo-Lease-2015-16-FINAL.pdf

 

 

 

TENANT agrees to not smoke or use marihuana and further agrees to not grow marihuana plants anywhere on the premises. This includes the use or growing of marihuana by qualifying patients and registered primary caregivers under the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act, MCL 333.26421 et seq.

 

since you are agreeing to this lease, its not a violation of the MMMA. its YOUR choice to sign the agreement and YOUR choice to abide by it. so you cannot be penalized for your use of marijuana, but you can be penalized for breaking a lease agreement...

[GrowGoddess]

I did not read all of the comments, just read the original post.

 

Wow! What horrible luck, to top it off, losing your job! Hopefully he did not get into trouble with LEO.

 

If I am not mistaken, it probably is a scam. If he did not sign a lease agreement, I believe they could throw him out right then and there, on the spot. If he did not sign a lease, how could he have renter's rights? If they agreed on nothing, I don't think he would have renter's rights.

 

Sounds like they got a scam going to me. Probably boarder line legal too.

 

The did have a verbal agreement. He would have to prove that agreement to have any rights.

 

I am so sick of stories like this where people are victimized and others get away with it. Happens all the time with LEO. How can you prove your side of the story? I am not going to be a victim. Anything important or even any time I drive a vehicle, I will always have the option to record audio and video. Many ways to do it without being invasive. Recording stuff and that is perfectly legal as long as it is not being used for illegal purposes. You can get a spy pen with audio and 1080 HD recording at the push of a button and nobody would even know it. Protect yourself, don't be a victim.

 

Too bad things have to be that way, but that is the way it is.

[imiubu]

http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/datafiles/2010s/op10340.htm

 

http://www.law.msu.edu/clinics/rhc/Med_Marijuana_FAQ.pdf

 

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/Publications/tenantlandlord.pdf

 

Very nice!

Great 1st post too... Welcome!

[GregS]

Sure. Your landlord is discriminating against you on the basis of your disability and legal treatment thereof and is required to accommodate you under disability law. Read the following carefully. Freedom from discrimination in housing is a civil right, and you might find an activist attorney who finds enough constitutional reasons to take it.

 

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%28kwbwns45q0gbkv45j3cazr55%29%29/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-Act-220-of-1976

Edited January 1, 2015 by GregS

[GregS]

i ran out of time to put this in the correct thread, but its landlord related so here goes.

 

heres a lease agreement from a company in kzoo, that specifically writes in a prohibition on mmmp.

http://cbeech.com/kalamazoo/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2014/11/Kalamazoo-Lease-2015-16-FINAL.pdf

 

 

 

 

since you are agreeing to this lease, its not a violation of the MMMA. its YOUR choice to sign the agreement and YOUR choice to abide by it. so you cannot be penalized for your use of marijuana, but you can be penalized for breaking a lease agreement...

This can be challenged under disability law. How do you imagine that would go? How much damage can a couple of house plants do?

Edited January 1, 2015 by GregS

[t-pain]

if you can show me in the MMMA where it says you cannot discriminate against an mmma patient in hiring or housing, then i'll believe you greg.

 

otherwise, much like in the walmart case, fed law trumps and fed law says its schedule 1 not medicine, which means the disability law does not come into play. 

 

i like your argument greg, but if i were a betting man i'd bet no help from disability law. and no help from 'denied any right or privledge'.

 

but, if you were kicked out because of growing plants, i think you would have a case under the MMMA.

 

i think theres a subtle difference between being denied a right and voluntarily giving up your right.

 

now if you were to ask me if that clause in the contract was legal or unconstitional, then that would be a better question. because the courts have said you cannot sign away your rights in a contract. if you did, the contract is null. so i dont know if the mmma right would make that contract null and void.

[GregS]

if you can show me in the MMMA where it says you cannot discriminate against an mmma patient in hiring or housing, then i'll believe you greg.

 

otherwise, much like in the walmart case, fed law trumps and fed law says its schedule 1 not medicine, which means the disability law does not come into play. 

 

i like your argument greg, but if i were a betting man i'd bet no help from disability law. and no help from 'denied any right or privledge'.

 

but, if you were kicked out because of growing plants, i think you would have a case under the MMMA.

 

i think theres a subtle difference between being denied a right and voluntarily giving up your right.

 

now if you were to ask me if that clause in the contract was legal or unconstitional, then that would be a better question. because the courts have said you cannot sign away your rights in a contract. if you did, the contract is null. so i dont know if the mmma right would make that contract null and void.

The MMMA is not required to specifically state our protections under disability law. How would protection under state disability law be prohibited by cannabis law? The feds are through enforcing interdiction where state authorized people are concerned. It is a State of Michigan prerogative to enforce its own laws. I think this issue can and should be challenged.

 

PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES CIVIL RIGHTS ACT

Act 220 of 1976

AN ACT to define the civil rights of persons with disabilities; to prohibit discriminatory practices, policies,

and customs in the exercise of those rights; to prescribe penalties and to provide remedies; and to provide for

the promulgation of rules.

History:

1976, Act 220, Eff. Mar. 31, 1977

;



Am. 1980, Act 478, Imd. Eff. Jan. 20, 1981

;



Am. 1992, Act 123, Imd. Eff. June 29,

1992

;



Am. 1998, Act 20, Imd. Eff. Mar. 12, 1998

.

The People of the State of Michigan enact:

ARTICLE

1

37.1101

Short title.

Sec. 101.

This act shall be known and may be cited as the “persons with disabilities civil rights act”.

History:

1976, Act 220, Eff. Mar. 31, 1977

;



Am. 1998, Act 20, Imd. Eff. Mar. 12, 1998

.

37.1102

Opportunity guaranteed; civil right; accommodation of person with disability; undue

hardship.

Sec. 102.

(1)

The opportunity to obtain employment, housing, and other real estate and full and equal

utilization of public accommodations, public services, and educational facilities without discrimination

because of a disability is guaranteed by this act and is a civil right.

(2)

Except as otherwise provided in article 2, a person shall accommodate a person with a disability for

purposes of employment, public accommodation, public service, education, or housing unless the person

demonstrates that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship.

History:

1976, Act 220, Eff. Mar. 31, 1977

;



Am. 1980, Act 478, Imd. Eff. Jan. 20, 1981

;



Am. 1990, Act 121, Imd. Eff. June 25,

1990

;



Am. 1998, Act 20, Imd. Eff. Mar. 12, 1998

Edited January 1, 2015 by GregS

[t-pain]

its ripe for a challenge, greg.

 

btw did you see this case?

https://ajjcs.net/main/fair-housing/medical-marijuana-reasonable-accommodation

[GregS]

its ripe for a challenge, greg.

 

btw did you see this case?

https://ajjcs.net/main/fair-housing/medical-marijuana-reasonable-accommodation

No I had not. Thank you so much.

[GregS]

The Supreme Court ruled in TerBeek that federal law does not trump state law as long as the federal government is permitted to enforce its own laws too. The point that the feds refused to fund enforcement in the last budget against we who are qualified cannot be overstated.

[slipstar059]

I'm pretty sure the OP took off.

[GregS]

I'm pretty sure the OP took off.

Hope not.

[trichcycler]

 

 

as long as mj is scheduled by the feds as is currently, anyone know what could prevent a landlord from asking a tenant to agree not to break any federal laws while in the lease?

[trichcycler]

for the first time ever I see the emoticons have come alive. what gives?

Edited January 2, 2015 by grassmatch

[Restorium2]

as long as mj is scheduled by the feds as is currently, anyone know what could prevent a landlord from asking a tenant to agree not to break any federal laws while in the lease?

Nothing is stopping a landlord from writing that in a lease. It would be a sneaky way to say you can't have marijuana on the property. But why be sneaky at all if you are a landlord? Makes no sense. 

[Restorium2]

for the first time ever I see the emoticons have come alive. what gives?

Fixed your browser?

[trichcycler]

I didn't make any changes, maybe an update or something?

 

I'm guessing kicking a renter out for using/growing involves more rights violations possibly than including the clause in the lease is all(with eviction), as a protection for a landlord who is not supportive of ill renters.  I understand landlord concerns as well as renter concerns. With so many unresolved renting issues in play already without even considering an indoor marijuana garden, I suspect a fair universal policy is some time away. Squatters and slumlords, stolen copper pipes, dead fish, and removed doors, the scene sounds complicated as is.

Edited January 2, 2015 by grassmatch

[pic book]

as a renter who went to court over being evicted for growing, and now still living there at times; and now owning a house where i grow; and also having  a house where i squat, with the city not aware they are my landlord for growing, i find the squat easily the best of any of the arrangements. 

[Restorium2]

as a renter who went to court over being evicted for growing, and now still living there at times; and now owning a house where i grow; and also having  a house where i squat, with the city not aware they are my landlord for growing, i find the squat easily the best of any of the arrangements. 

How do you comply with 'secure enclosed' while you are squatting? In my opinion, where I live, squatting isn't something good at all. I really hope you are not pretending to be a 'medical squat'. Your whole scenario makes me a little queazy because it's so greazy and sleazy.

[trichcycler]

as a renter who went to court over being evicted for growing, and now still living there at times; and now owning a house where i grow; and also having  a house where i squat, with the city not aware they are my landlord for growing, i find the squat easily the best of any of the arrangements.

you own a home where you grow,

you occasionally live at your past "evicted from" rented space,

and you "squat" in a vacant house in which you also grow? wowzer man that stress would debilitate me

 

are you concerned with posting your home address on this forum ?

[t-pain]

living in detroit is always an odd situation, i wouldnt judge pic book (or anyone who lives in the d) too quickly.