Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
beourbud

Http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/topic/26145-State-Should-Set-Up-Dispensary-System/

Recommended Posts

I'd like to preface this with I support the caregiver system, I support home grows, and I will continue to fight for both.

 

That being said, I, along with every single parent of a pediatric patient in Michigan that I have ever spoken to, want dispensaries to be available. Unless we plan on growing cannabis ourselves, the caregiver system does not work for us. Good dispensaries offer safe, reliable, and consistent access to medicine, and would be a protected alternative to us having to grow the medicine ourselves.

 

Outside of politically, I do not see a reason both cannot exist.

http://www.house.mi.gov/MHRPublic/PlayVideoArchive.html?video=JUDI-050715.mp4

Almost every patient testifying about oils/edibles didn't get the help they needed from dispensaries, and obtain their cannabis/edibles/oils from caregivers, or make it themselves.  They also talked about having the cannabis tested before their medicine was extracted.  So it seems if you go the extra mile help is available.

Edited by slipstar059

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to preface this with I support the caregiver system, I support home grows, and I will continue to fight for both.

 

That being said, I, along with every single parent of a pediatric patient in Michigan that I have ever spoken to, want dispensaries to be available. Unless we plan on growing cannabis ourselves, the caregiver system does not work for us. Good dispensaries offer safe, reliable, and consistent access to medicine, and would be a protected alternative to us having to grow the medicine ourselves.

 

Outside of politically, I do not see a reason both cannot exist.

.

Edited by suneday11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh the irony: Everyone BUT dispensaries (and their minions) wants to co exist. 

 

Never forget the words of the bought and paid for dispensary representative in our Michigan legislature, "A vote for dispensaries is a vote against home grows". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please clarify how you will, under the protection of section 4, transfer medicine to my child.

I have been wondering about this. I have the same problem with my elderly father. I can't grow but my Father needs my help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Outside of politically, I do not see a reason both cannot exist.

 

The original intent of the law as written, as I understood it at the time, was to allow those with medical issues to grow their own or have someone grow it for them if they were unable to do so.

 

There is no good reason why dispensaries are not legal other than that's the way the proposal was worded. The assumption was that they would be legal but we all know about the dangers of assuming.

 

As it is now those who have a financial stake in the dispensary racket have taken the stance that home grows are dangerous and a menace to society. They have taken this stance not because it is true but because they need a reason to make themselves legal and do away with any possible competition.

 

The State agrees because if everyone grew their own then the State would get no tax money from them. That's what it's all about.

 

Is there some reason you are unable to grow it yourself or have it grown for you? Or do you use dispensaries primarily for convenience?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to understand the numbers. One-hundred plus dispensaries? Common in Detroit? Hard to grasp considering the situation on the ground here Ban Herban, Cash and Bury'en Counties.

 

Then the talk of the Byzantine political maneuvering behind it all.

 

So many questions. Why are some jurisdictions allowing them and others not?

 

Why are dispensaries against home grows, anyway? Who is supplying them? Commercial grows? Imported?

 

For convenience sake, 120 day, 2.5 ounce plant. Times three. Eight ounces per plant per year. One-hundred ounces for twelve.

 

Michigan consumes 16,000,000 oz/yr. Roughly equivalent to full output from one-hundred and eight thousand cardholders? Not likely but a significant percentage of the total market transactions all the same.

 

At $500/per retail it is an eight billion dollar market.

 

All my dispensary estimates are pure guesses 100 moving 10 is 365,000. 200 moving 50 for a year is 3.85 million.

 

Four-hundred thousand at five-hundred is two-hundred million. Times ten for the high estimate.

 

Given the comparisons is there any wonder the dispensaries attack home grows? Other than their own suppliers?

 

And meanwhile, the police chiefs, prosecutors, and elected Republican zealots are defending their own eight billion dollar-a-year Arrest-and-Punishment Indusrty business. Is it me, or are Activist elected judges are the worst? Why is it judges, choirs, and Muslims wear robes, anyway.

 

What we have here really isn't bad, is it? Compared to what it was? Those are questions worth pondering out back. My condolences to all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

people were smoking pot long before the 2008 law. why would you say patients and caregivers are the ones supplying all mj to michigan?

 

thats just a weird thing to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The original intent of the law as written, as I understood it at the time, was to allow those with medical issues to grow their own or have someone grow it for them if they were unable to do so.

 

There is no good reason why dispensaries are not legal other than that's the way the proposal was worded. The assumption was that they would be legal but we all know about the dangers of assuming.

 

As it is now those who have a financial stake in the dispensary racket have taken the stance that home grows are dangerous and a menace to society. They have taken this stance not because it is true but because they need a reason to make themselves legal and do away with any possible competition.

 

The State agrees because if everyone grew their own then the State would get no tax money from them. That's what it's all about.

 

Is there some reason you are unable to grow it yourself or have it grown for you? Or do you use dispensaries primarily for convenience?

I always chuckle inside when the argument of 'we the people' comes up... The leg and cops and courts subverting the original intent of the original mmj law & all. (b o b... U do it quite a bit, in particular.)

 

But u seem right on to me.

 

The original intent of all the mmj laws were to take the very first steps towards a legitimized, regulated, and taxed enterprise system. The original authors of varying mmj bills, that is. They stem from ca originally, and the eye was always to somehow, someway, over time, to open up the existing homegrown black market trade into the open... And that it would involve steps, done in portions, as a pragmatic consideration towards overcoming public and political inhibitions. Start with 'medical', as it is the most palatable argument to the general public, and then work into the language some wiggle room to further allow and expand sales.

 

((Unforeseen was the altering of the language by the rules committee where they hit the biggest nail on the head... Restricting the cg ability to assist 'a patient' to only the five they r officially registered to. That was the key language that would have allowed for the wiggle of dispensaries and eventually a taxed system. They plugged the key loophole here, which was always possible but it really doesnt matter much towards the master plan, as the next stage was always understood))

 

The current round of efforts, such as milegalize, is stage 3 (by my count). First being the language of medical. Second being the wiggle and expansion of sales within that language, along w hoefully beneficial trial cases and administrative interpretations along the way. Third being an introduction of licensed growing and sales, most preferably w the concessions of high entrance barriers and limited licensing to not only stave off the objections of the l&o crowd, but to also limit competition against those that started off and were the orginal backers of the legitimization of legal weed. If need be, stage 4 could be broken out to be continued further reatrictions to the production and distribution along with an eye on stage 5 being intertstate commerce.

 

Of course other views come up during the process, as more and more people participate and become invested... And that leads to compromise and subtle deviations, but the end goal is/was the same since the inception. And the original authors of the law, and the original intent, has always been the eventual legalization of a commercial market. And we have varying opinions and competition as to how that market will take shape, and who will take ownership and eventually win out.

 

Anyway, long way of saying the dispensary 'types' r the orginal fathers of the beloved mmj law, and the people simply voted in their language that would eventually lead to a market system, or even better yet, a limited competion model where they r the main players on a national level. We the people have very little to do w it other than changing opinions in general, and that the original medical language sounded better over what existed in the world. And now they may get a chance to vote those changing values again, but it will be the language written on the pragmatic considerations of the original intent of the original players... A regulated, commercially grown and dispensary distributed system. They seem to have to compromise a bit to include the many cg's that currently exist, but in their ideal world, the cg's would go away... Far far away from the legal market.

 

Dont get me wrong... Of all the mmj laws proffered around the states, mi still has the best, most inclusive, most potential for an open model of entrance and competition, with locally owned and operated mom & pop style businesses participating. It can be an inclusive system that limits size and ownership interests, protecting the local people, their money and their communities. We coupd keep the money flowing within and throughout the local communities, allowing a greater number of people to participate and benefit. That would be wonderful, and is still possible here in mi, unlike many of the other mmj states.

 

We the people can vote on such an ideal, i suppose... It would be counter to the models being offered up however, and deviate from the master plan, so...??? Milegalize is still the better option of the groups openly competing imo, but any plan offered up today will be vulnerable in the future, so again...??? If we go by history, smart bet is what is best 'for the people' will lose out to the economic interests of those w iniative and ability, so...???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always chuckle inside when the argument of 'we the people' comes up... The leg and cops and courts subverting the original intent of the original mmj law & all. (b o b... U do it quite a bit, in particular.)

But u seem right on to me.

The original intent of all the mmj laws were to take the very first steps towards a legitimized, regulated, and taxed enterprise system. The original authors of varying mmj bills, that is. They stem from ca originally, and the eye was always to somehow, someway, over time, to open up the existing homegrown black market trade into the open... And that it would involve steps, done in portions, as a pragmatic consideration towards overcoming public and political inhibitions. Start with 'medical', as it is the most palatable argument to the general public, and then work into the language some wiggle room to further allow and expand sales.

((Unforeseen was the altering of the language by the rules committee where they hit the biggest nail on the head... Restricting the cg ability to assist 'a patient' to only the five they r officially registered to. That was the key language that would have allowed for the wiggle of dispensaries and eventually a taxed system. They plugged the key loophole here, which was always possible but it really doesnt matter much towards the master plan, as the next stage was always understood))

The current round of efforts, such as milegalize, is stage 3 (by my count). First being the language of medical. Second being the wiggle and expansion of sales within that language, along w hoefully beneficial trial cases and administrative interpretations along the way. Third being an introduction of licensed growing and sales, most preferably w the concessions of high entrance barriers and limited licensing to not only stave off the objections of the l&o crowd, but to also limit competition against those that started off and were the orginal backers of the legitimization of legal weed. If need be, stage 4 could be broken out to be continued further reatrictions to the production and distribution along with an eye on stage 5 being intertstate commerce.

Of course other views come up during the process, as more and more people participate and become invested... And that leads to compromise and subtle deviations, but the end goal is/was the same since the inception. And the original authors of the law, and the original intent, has always been the eventual legalization of a commercial market. And we have varying opinions and competition as to how that market will take shape, and who will take ownership and eventually win out.

Anyway, long way of saying the dispensary 'types' r the orginal fathers of the beloved mmj law, and the people simply voted in their language that would eventually lead to a market system, or even better yet, a limited competion model where they r the main players on a national level. We the people have very little to do w it other than changing opinions in general, and that the original medical language sounded better over what existed in the world. And now they may get a chance to vote those changing values again, but it will be the language written on the pragmatic considerations of the original intent of the original players... A regulated, commercially grown and dispensary distributed system. They seem to have to compromise a bit to include the many cg's that currently exist, but in their ideal world, the cg's would go away... Far far away from the legal market.

Dont get me wrong... Of all the mmj laws proffered around the states, mi still has the best, most inclusive, most potential for an open model of entrance and competition, with locally owned and operated mom & pop style businesses participating. It can be an inclusive system that limits size and ownership interests, protecting the local people, their money and their communities. We coupd keep the money flowing within and throughout the local communities, allowing a greater number of people to participate and benefit. That would be wonderful, and is still possible here in mi, unlike many of the other mmj states.

We the people can vote on such an ideal, i suppose... It would be counter to the models being offered up however, and deviate from the master plan, so...??? Milegalize is still the better option of the groups openly competing imo, but any plan offered up today will be vulnerable in the future, so again...??? If we go by history, smart bet is what is best 'for the people' will lose out to the economic interests of those w iniative and ability, so...???

Instead of looking back at the 70 years of prohibition history, let's look at George Washington and England. Taxation without representation, unwarranted searches and seizures, ...Same sheet as today.

We the People have had enough of this corrupt republican legislature.

I do not claim to lead We the People, but I can read We the People.

We are supported by folk just like you who have endured the tyranny of the police and courts of the WOD for decades.

We fought tirelessly for the right to grow are own or have someone help us with that.

We are not in it for the money and are opposed to the greedy who would throw us under the bus for a dollar at the first opportunity.

We the People thru education , compassion and generosity will prevail.

Join us. Let's Make History.....Abrogate

 

 

,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again,

 

Kinda weird post, admittedly. What I was trying to do was examine why conflict exists between disps and CGs. From the admittedly broad guesstimates however, it is apparent the CG mmj providers market share is multiples larger that the disps, and CGs are lower costs.

 

Little surprise then disps are as threatened by CGs as the LEOs.

 

The range in these estimates is large. One-hundred dips retailing ten zips versus two-hundred selling fifty is a very broad range.

 

Also skewed are the prices as the CGs I am acquainted with are $100-200/zip and dispensary prices are estimated at $500 retail.

 

But the fact remains, CGs and homegrows have two powerful forces to contend with, one from each side of the spectrum.

Edited by outsideinthecold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to preface this with I support the caregiver system, I support home grows, and I will continue to fight for both.

 

That being said, I, along with every single parent of a pediatric patient in Michigan that I have ever spoken to, want dispensaries to be available. Unless we plan on growing cannabis ourselves, the caregiver system does not work for us. Good dispensaries offer safe, reliable, and consistent access to medicine, and would be a protected alternative to us having to grow the medicine ourselves.

 

Outside of politically, I do not see a reason both cannot exist.

 

We want a protected way to get our kid's medications, I am not speaking in reference to what exists presently. Both are obviously operating with the same amount of protections in place today.

 

Before McQueen, there was more medicine donated for kids then I knew what to do with.

 

McQueen changed things drastically for us.

 

Restorium, I think it may be more appropriate for me to say that the Michigan caregiver system does not work for us, as opposed to the caregiver system. The restrictions they have placed on us in the law makes it unworkable.

 

 

Hi mp4c,

 

 I just wanted to say these are all legitimate points. 

 

 The way they setup parents and children in the program is difficult. I know they did it that way to put heavy barriers to children using cannabis. But,... it does force the parent to grow for their child by using up the Cg slot. That was a mistake. Of course the parent is medically responsible for the minors health and medical issues and a Cg designation doesn't particularly alter that in any way thus it is unneeded. They probably should have put some simple guidelines and rights in their for parents to give them "cg rights" without using up the Cg slot. This way a parent could get a Cg for their child and be a cg.

 

But, wouldn't just allowing everyone to have 2 Cg's solve the problem just as much as allowing dispensaries?  And honestly even moreso, because the vast vast majority of parents cannot afford to buy oil at a dispensary? I mean, it would be nice for backup plans, but the parents I talk to say they need exact strains and specific dosages and they cannot afford dispensaries at all and that they would still continue to grow for themselves or have Cg friends assist them. 

 

 I find the child argument a bit of a red herring when it comes to commercialization for those reasons and more.  170, 000 patients and up until like 2 years ago, 8 children under the age of 12 in the program.  That number has risen recently but I believe it is still well under 50 children under the age of 12.  And most of those parents state they wont even use a dispensary anyway because of financial reasons.

 

I think the better route to go is to allow 2 cgs, the parent being one, and creating a statewide non profit for parents dealing with cannabis as medicine for their children. In current reality you would only need 5 super awesome Cg's to handle the entire needs of children under 12 in the state.  It is a much smaller problem than it is portrayed  IMO, and commercialization actually isn't the answer due to cost.

 

But, I wholeheartedly understand the issue and sympathize completely and of course a parent is going to do wtvr it takes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why is there a limit on the number of patients a caregiver can help , at all? mal?

 

was it to limit caregivers from becoming dispensaries?

Look at the number of plants maximum allowed, 72, and compare that to what we have learned was below a threshold on the federal level, 100.

 

It was just a 'foot in the door'. A starter law. A law to test the limits but not go too far. I believe it was a perfect law for that time in our history here and across the nation. MMP nailed it. If we had decent politicians here it would have been amended perfectly to be exactly what most all patients wanted and needed. Instead, our spiteful (ex sheriff run), government took it as their new personal drug war. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why is there a limit on the number of patients a caregiver can help , at all? mal?

 

was it to limit caregivers from becoming dispensaries?

 

 

 

Besides expanding protections from police,.. I would say the four things I wish I could change the most about our law is:

 

1) Usable marijuana limit - Any grower can testify to how moronic 2.5oz is.

 

2) Allow patients to have 2 Cg's - creates stability and competition.

 

3) Allow Cgs to service 10 patients without increasing plant numbers- CG's don't need more plants, we need more patients It also resolve overage issues, etc.

 

4) Allow pt/pt transfers and Cg to any patients transfers for no compensation.

 

 

Now, of course we want full freedom, but those 4 things would absolutely resolve almost all problems; disregarding the need for expanded police, employment and housing protections of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was all part of it.

 

:-)

 

Thank Hayduke for that one. Right place, right time, right thing said. One little smidgeon number change from 1 to 2.

 

:-)

 

Would rather have gotten the 2 Cgs though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO  Their, MDCH/LARA incompetence getting our cards out in a timely manor, combined with our incessant badgering over it, got us the two year cards.

 

 

And it also got people arrested

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was all part of it.

 

:-)

 

Thank Hayduke for that one. Right place, right time, right thing said. One little smidgeon number change from 1 to 2.

 

:-)

 

Would rather have gotten the 2 Cgs though.

 

 

Thanks for all your help 

 

i would of rather gotten Autism  added but none of this matters if Leo and the Courts won't give people a fair trail 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PTSD. A LOT of people suffer from PTSD. That's why they canned it ..

 

To me, the PTSD petition, and how it was handled by our government, shows that we were just going through the motions of protecting ourselves from our government without a single stitch of fairness from them. 

 

Michigan gets F grade in 2015 State Integrity Investigation
An honor system with no honor
By Chad Selweskiauthor-byline-rss.png     12:01 am, November 9, 2015  Updated:  11:55 am, November 12, 2015
 
 
 
The State Integrity Investigation is a comprehensive assessment of state government accountability and transparency done in partnership with Global Integrity.

In November 2013, Michigan lawmakers revealed the lengths to which they’d go to maintain the state’s secret system of funding election campaign activities.

A Senate committee was meeting in the Capitol to discuss and approve a bill that would double the maximum amount that individuals could contribute to legislative, executive and judicial candidates. The senators were told that the higher limits were unnecessary because 99 percent of Michiganians never give the maximum amount.

Then something puzzling happened. In a rare move, the legislators called a recess midway through the session. A lobbyist in the audience who was friendly with the committee chairman, it was later learned, received an urgent phone call warning that Secretary of State Ruth Johnson had just announced new administrative rules requiring the disclosure of campaign donors in all circumstances.

When the committee reconvened, an amendment was hastily attached to the legislation, which would override Johnson’s decision and preserve Michigan’s “dark money” campaign practices. House and Senate approval of the bill soon followed, as did Gov. Rick Snyder’s signature.

“We don’t have full public disclosure and it’s not because good people failed to do the right thing, it’s because those gentlemen did the wrong thing. It was a hostile action,” said Rich Robinson, the state’s top campaign watchdog at the nonpartisan Michigan Campaign Finance Network. “And the fruits of those actions were tens of millions of dollars of undisclosed campaign cash.”  

The shadowy aspects of Michigan’s money-driven politics serve as a key reason why the state ranks last among the 50 states with a grade of F and a numerical score of 51 out of 100 from the State Integrity Investigation, a data-driven assessment of state government transparency and accountability by the Center for Public Integrity and Global Integrity. Michigan received an F in 10 of the 13 categories of government operations that were examined.

The first State Integrity report, released in 2012, gave Michigan a similar score – 58, an F, though the state ranked 44th that time. The two scores are not directly comparable, however, due to changes made to improve and update the project and its methodology.

Edited by Restorium2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PTSD. A LOT of people suffer from PTSD. That's why they canned it ..

 

To me, the PTSD petition, and how it was handled by our government, shows that we were just going through the motions of protecting ourselves from our government without a single stitch of fairness from them.

you know ptsd passed and is now a qualifying condition right?

 

maybe i am misreading your words...

 

LARA directors are jerks though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...