Goodbye Caregivers?

[trichcycler]

my dumb azz gets gets caught up with these perplexing(to me) excerpts of our law

 

"by either the registered qualifying patient or a person designated through the departmental registration process as the primary caregiver for the registered qualifying patient"

 

and "permit access only by a registered primary caregiver or registered qualifying patient."

 

and this "that restrict access to only the registered qualifying patient or the registered primary caregiver who owns, leases, or rents the property on which the structure is located."

 

as it applies to a husband wife registry.

 

again, I don't allow anyone in, but this comes up all the time, here and elsewhere. "Read the law" is something I say all the time, and I get it, but if that's not convincing people of the legal thing to do, we owe it to them to clarify it, break it down to the end, even if its been done time and time again.....look here, I'm still curious about the subject....no legal issues, growing since the beginning. guess we could cage plants in individual secure cells....almost was done here during construction.. not my idea, but an attorneys joking statement.

[t-pain]

This person OR that person. Simple huh?

 

 

Btw resto, milegalize allows a person to assist with cultivation. No limits there, except the 12 plants.

[Restorium2]

This person OR that person. Simple huh?

 

 

Btw resto, milegalize allows a person to assist with cultivation. No limits there, except the 12 plants.

All new laws must pass through the same law makers that have formed our cannabis law into what they want it to be and how they want it to work. What makes you so confident you will be able to instruct them into giving you what you want this time? The only real answer to that would be you think they can't get a 75% vote to change it. That I would see as a valid argument. Only that. 

[bobandtorey]

they can't get a 75% vote to change it.

 

I agree

[Hempcheff]

for clarity

 

so , question...

 

I am a caregiver for my wife, my registered patient. We only grow 12 plants on her behalf.   Is she allowed in my locked garden while I am present?

 

 

 

 

Unless im mistaken GM, the only person allowed to cross a threshhold into a room with plants is the person whos name is on the card.

 

BTW, 2 people cannot share a space to grow.

[Wild Bill]

I said that you should treat it like it is dangerous (like a python or a disease) as AG Schuette has advised. If you are responsible on the forms then you are the one to keep it in the cage away from everyone else.

 

[t-pain]

All new laws must pass through the same law makers that have formed our cannabis law into what they want it to be and how they want it to work. What makes you so confident you will be able to instruct them into giving you what you want this time? The only real answer to that would be you think they can't get a 75% vote to change it. That I would see as a valid argument. Only that.

basically what you are arguing is against ballot initiatives. there are plenty of states that do not allow for direct democracy like michigan has.

[Highlander]

I could be wrong, but I think you could register a patient and both of you could have legal access, while you were there. They could do the labor and the two of you surely could work something out.  There might be a patient willing to do just that in exchange for a safe place to grow??

 

 

There was a COA decision arising out of a case in Oakland County a few years ago.  The COA provided an opinion that only one person could have access to/care of the plants and that it would be a violation to even have someone else water the plants.

 

I've look-up and provided a lot of input on matters such as this in the past, and I'm kinduv exhausted with it now.  So I'm not going to take the time/effort to find the COA opinion and post it here.  But that's where we are...a COA opinion that only one person can have any involvement with the plants....caregiver OR, not caregiver AND.

[Highlander]

Honestly, I think this concept is a misinterpretation of this decision, People v Bylsma.

 

Thanks for the link.  My concern is as follows:

 

We agree with the Court of Appeals that defendant exercised dominion and control over

all the plants in the warehouse space that he leased, not merely the plants in which he

claimed an ownership interest. Section 4 does not allow the collective action that

defendant has undertaken because only one of two people may possess marijuana plants

pursuant to §§ 4(a) and 4(b): a registered qualifying patient or the primary caregiver with

whom the qualifying patient is connected through the registration process of the

Michigan Department of Community Health (MDCH).

[bobandtorey]

 I think this concept is a misinterpretation of this decision, People v Bylsma.

 

Sorry but by who the posters or the Courts?

[pic book]

Well, maybe there are some patients who legitimately enjoy their relationship with their caregiver and legitimately enjoy that model? Just saying.

I'd think that the usual exception would be the patient who can't or won't or doesn't have time or space or who wants a certain product or wants it custom!!!

i have 2 of my patients (former growers) only due to them being allergic to pollen.  Allergies caused them to become former growers.

Edited July 15, 2015 by pic book

[trichcycler]

allergic to cannabis pollen....say it isn't so.  

 

pretty easy fix really, stop growing  the boys 

[Hempcheff]

It may not nec. be the pollen, my wife would have some pretty severe sinus reactions when i had my closet grow going and no pollen involved there...

[trichcycler]

there are a few strains that get my histamines in a fury too. I don't grow boys either. These few are the same ones that make my lips tingle when I smoke them, sometimes hurt a tooth too, like when a dog lick shocks teeth with a kiss. The same ones will leave small hives on my forearm when fan leaves scrape across, and itch like crazy after trimming.(like trimming evergreen bushes/trees for me)  Figured it to be some terpene or another, but those few are still mainstay here. Funny how we can overlook certain punishments.  Growing cannabis takes so much discipline

[Ghastly83]

⌚

Edited February 4, 2018 by Ghastly83

[blackhorse]

Some caregivers are switching over to the MMFLA program, cost a lot of money though. State set the system up that way.

The husband can always become the caregiver for the wife.

[Restorium2]

If you look at the rules we have now for caregivers, obviously set up to keep a caregiver business model small, and then look to what is needed to qualify for the MMFLA program, it's obvious that the State doesn't want real caregivers in their program. There really is no intersection between the two if you are talking caregivers that were actually just real caregivers.

With a little thought it becomes obvious that the MMFLA was set up to kick real caregivers to the curb. As a lot of us predicted. 

[Easy E]

On 2/4/2018 at 7:58 AM, Restorium2 said:

If you look at the rules we have now for caregivers, obviously set up to keep a caregiver business model small, and then look to what is needed to qualify for the MMFLA program, it's obvious that the State doesn't want real caregivers in their program. There really is no intersection between the two if you are talking caregivers that were actually just real caregivers.

With a little thought it becomes obvious that the MMFLA was set up to kick real caregivers to the curb. As a lot of us predicted. 

Now with the new burden of 6% use tax being placed on patients of caregivers this is becoming more and more obvious.

[Restorium2]

Just now, Easy E said:

Now with the new burden of 6% use tax being placed on patients of caregivers this is becoming more and more obvious.

I believe that there is no use tax placed on patients that solely get their cannabis from their anonymously registered caregiver. It's only if they get their cannabis at a store. Then they become not anonymous anymore and are logged on records of the stores that are subjected to taxes. 

[blackhorse]

Just read a couple days ago about patients who have caregivers will need to pay the tax.

 

[Restorium2]

15 hours ago, blackhorse said:

Just read a couple days ago about patients who have caregivers will need to pay the tax.

 

I read it too. It was fake news. We debunked it here.

[Easy E]

On 2/5/2018 at 8:58 AM, Restorium2 said:

I believe that there is no use tax placed on patients that solely get their cannabis from their anonymously registered caregiver. It's only if they get their cannabis at a store. Then they become not anonymous anymore and are logged on records of the stores that are subjected to taxes. 

I definitely agree.

I just wanted to highlight another backhanded effort against the patient/caregiver model. However, RAB 2018-2 has definitely been debunked here and elsewhere and shown to be invalid.