Exactly who has "stakes" in any proposed mmj bills up for vote?

it's foolish-

monsantos and pm have already won.

joe d bag gets on rollitup and learns some shit. gets good at growing but doesn't mature mentally. gets his own genetics going, learns basic botany, etc.

monsantos offers joe d bag from flint 52,ooo for his notes and genetics, and employs him for 28 k a year.

joe d bag takes the deal. the man owns joe's ass.

Does anyone think there's a real chance that patients won't be able to grow their own at some point?

Anything is possible my friend

I'll always grow my own.. Did before it was legal, will after.

Rrog said:

Does anyone think there's a real chance that patients won't be able to grow their own at some point?

Click to expand...

New Jersey 100% happened. Greatest concentration of big pharma co's in our country. NJ claims they are a medical mj state. I don't want to believe that MI would allow such.

abe supercro said:

New Jersey 100% happened. Greatest concentration of big pharma co's in our country. NJ claims they are a medical mj state. I don't want to believe that MI would allow such.

Click to expand...

NJ has the greatest concentration of Big Pharma as DE has the greatest concentration of Banks. Both true, yet not really. I believe it's just a lawyer "address" trick gaming national corporate law.

i just want to grow and smoke my meds .dirty fucking bastards just need to let us alone

I'd like to understand who owns the handful of state sanctioned provision-centers in NJ. And how much in annual fees it takes to renew that gig. Believe the same thing is happening in Massachusetts. patients required to only obtain state affiliate-grown medicine.
talk about tricked out shit.

Well, we voted to grow our own, not buy from some state liquor store. I am not comfortable with the verbiage in this legislation as it pertains to this commercial dispensary, as it seems like a quick move to say that we're out as caregivers, even for ourselves.

The other thing, with all our names in at least one database, what's to say this isn't hacked or simply copied? Would the names and addresses of a bunch of growers not be worth money to a small enterprising criminal organization?

expanded access to database for various jurisdictions, campus security even, cld be part of ammeded mmj act, if certain forces had their way, mostly leo. on the note re semi-organized crime, yes of course patients wld be vulnerable w compromised database. Po box on card is better than home addy, but far from flawless.

note: ppl cld also easily be followed from grow shops by rippers. shh.. don give em any ideas,

so who is pushing these bills ?who are the local profiteers .we need to bring these people to the light..whos really behind these bills

I am particularly concerned about campus access, as these organizations are clearly under federal threat to deny MMMP rights and do so ruthlessly. That is exactly why there is no HighTimes Cannabis Cup in Ann Arbor, as UofM owns all facilities large enough to host it yet they refuse to do so because of this federal threat.

I thought this thread was going to be to review and discuss the bills. Does HB 5580 say anything about ending patient or caregiver grows? Or the database?

What part of the bill is objectionable and how would we change it? If we want to take them apart, lets do one at a time if possible, keep the focus so to say.

Dr. Bob

bloodytrichomes said:

so who is pushing these bills ?who are the local profiteers .we need to bring these people to the light..whos really behind these bills

Click to expand...

So let's answer Bloody's question. The common feeling is that someone- me, cpu, bill schuette, or whoever, has 'something to gain' I'd like to hear what the theories are and why folks think this individual or that or this group or that somehow stands to gain by something in these bills.

Dr. Bob

the thread is marinading,
focus can be nice. 

ok, so let's take 5580 and see what the bad provisions are and what local profiteers are behind them....

Dr. Bob

guess everything's kosher,
just ask Colorado.

commercial grows aren't v far behind provision centers.
but we ready knew that. or did we?

abe supercro said:

guess everything's kosher,
just ask Colorado.

commercial grows aren't v far behind provision centers.
but we ready knew that. or did we?

Click to expand...

this is exactly the problem. a colorado style implementation that would RESTRICT access by adding burden of registration fees or inability to compete with those who have ...legislated and legally protected UNEQUAL rights...

it'd be like allowing a a white man to have let's say... 2/5 more the right to vote than someone else??

Looks like there leaving a lot of what if's to the "Municipalities" regarding Provisioning centers. Again kinda of wide open as to what they can do, or am I wrong?

CashCrops said:

Looks like there leaving a lot of what if's to the "Municipalities" regarding Provisioning centers. Again kinda of wide open as to what they can do, or am I wrong?

Click to expand...

not at all. they can say yes and no again. moratoriums and that whole thing alllll over again. but with added protections from some and none for others.

...thought we voted for statewide equal implementation?