bob harris
Well-Known Member
The problem isn't with the protections. It's with the implementation of the act.
Good News.. I swear!!
- Thread starter tomcatjones
- Start date
ozzrokk
Well-Known Member
You see bobby boy when you write that you tell ths snotty snidness to it in great anticipation of something bad happening.... Relishing.....
I am not the only one that sees it bob.
bob harris
Well-Known Member
Oh, I am positive that there will be rulings that make you scream...I don't relish them coming..but I know they will. I might not like them either.
You brought up the SC doing the right thing..they did. This time.
bob harris
Well-Known Member
Ozz..when you write it sounds angry and belligerent..a lot like the guy in your icon looks as he may speak. But I don't base anything on how what you write sounds......I go by what they say.
Oh...never mind...it's useless with you...so trapped in your own mind.
bob harris
Well-Known Member
The pot! Now that's fuckin funny...the POT..lol get it..bah ha...thanks Timmahh..good one
FatMarty
Well-Known Member
The Act lays out the path to implementation through the RULES crafted by the MDCH.
We don't need laws for clarification - we need dialog and a seat at the table in an open forum at the DEPT.
The Legislature can require a Finding of Fact on whatever they want to know about the law from the AG.
He has to respond to them, and once he does, his ruling is used as a basis of fact until or unless the Court overrules his interpretation of Law.
The activists have been terrified of confronting the State in this manner because it would screw up their other agendas.
I hit Greg and Co. with this in '09.
I hit CPU with it. They all understood how to actually get some relief and chose not to go down that path.
At that time AG Cox was the guy to rule, and he has since shown he would ruled correctly for the people.
So they were terrified of the wrong guy. Too bad they didn't use tact to talk to the guy instead of what they did do...
It matters not now - except that he would be the best legal advice one could get about implementing this Act fairly.
And he is now in private practice in Livonia area from what I've read in the paper.
If any of you fuckers who purport to care about this Act and it's Intent want to force Full Implementation:
then you must have the balls to face the current AG down in Court.
It will dry up the bullshit cases 'pot' lawyers like to make a living and websites off of.
It will spell out in no uncertain terms that Dispensaries are not covered!
See - that's WHY the law has not been fully implemented - no one really cares about the truth of it that is 'representing' the interests of the Law.
[video=youtube;ZqmC1T9rukk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ZqmC1T9rukk[/video]
tomcatjones
Active Member
Marty that's not true.
we're out there and then the True intent DOES matter
-gonna have to start writing briefs soon. could use all the help from bright minds we can get to formulate the arguments
tomcatjones
Active Member
- Really no plan written into the law.
well bob that is ALSO wrong... UGH.
the first few sections clearly state the intent of the law was to establish and expand upon the program. any hinderence on it goes against the intent,
like removing glaucoma for instance.
easily shot down on this premise... they can't take a way.. only research and add.
bob harris
Well-Known Member
Exactly..we have to write HB"s to clarify..and work within the system...not just scream "it can't be touched" like Timmah does.
Debate and compromise...pretty simple time proven method for success.
bob harris
Well-Known Member
well bob that is ALSO wrong... UGH.
I called bullshit on removing glaucoma the second it came up. But Implementation is simply not spelled out in the law.
Implementation involves the direction of how many dispensaries (or none), what they should operate like, where can they be located, ...who can transfer to who...and so much more..
None of it is clarified in the law.
Timmahh
Well-Known Member
the 08 MMM Act says nothing of dispensaries, or their type business models to be protected from prosecution. This isnt disputable.
Thus the need for a SEPARATE Dispensary Bill, IF the state WANTS a dispensary bill, which as we know, is already in the works in the form of HB 5681 i believe it is. The 08 Act is to Protect Patients and Caregivers from Prosecution for the Medical use of Cannabis as outlined.
so there is no grey area, if dispensaries are to be a viable, allowed Mi Business Model for the additional distribution via these model types, then separate legislation or a separate peoples initiative would need to be passed.
now ask yourself. why would those that WANT a dispensary law on the books be working so hard to amend the 08 act (last 2 yrs of meetings with legislation by mutiple out of state dispensary entitities, as bob is too confused to understand) when they can easily and with greater speed, just put together another Peoples Initiative and put it on the ballot?
Could it be because those parties are well aware, Mi didnt want dispensaries on every corner< thus they knew a petition and initiative on a dispensary would almost certainly fail?
The Act does NOTHING for dispensaries because the People of Michigan didnt want a big pot leaf brick and morter store on every corner, and neither Do I.
however, as i have noted, I have seen the benefit these business can offer, but Like most, I dont really care to see big ole pot leafs on signage everywhere, just like im not fond of seeing huge advertisments for alcohol, or every product under the sun.... But while I have changed my ideals that the Patients can get alot of good from a WELL RUN facility, it does not change my stance that if dispensaries are to be authorized in the State, then they need to be done so by their OWN Legislation. Not on the back, or at the detriment or sacrifice of the 08 MMM Act.
Thus the need for a SEPARATE Dispensary Bill, IF the state WANTS a dispensary bill, which as we know, is already in the works in the form of HB 5681 i believe it is. The 08 Act is to Protect Patients and Caregivers from Prosecution for the Medical use of Cannabis as outlined.
so there is no grey area, if dispensaries are to be a viable, allowed Mi Business Model for the additional distribution via these model types, then separate legislation or a separate peoples initiative would need to be passed.
now ask yourself. why would those that WANT a dispensary law on the books be working so hard to amend the 08 act (last 2 yrs of meetings with legislation by mutiple out of state dispensary entitities, as bob is too confused to understand) when they can easily and with greater speed, just put together another Peoples Initiative and put it on the ballot?
Could it be because those parties are well aware, Mi didnt want dispensaries on every corner< thus they knew a petition and initiative on a dispensary would almost certainly fail?
The Act does NOTHING for dispensaries because the People of Michigan didnt want a big pot leaf brick and morter store on every corner, and neither Do I.
however, as i have noted, I have seen the benefit these business can offer, but Like most, I dont really care to see big ole pot leafs on signage everywhere, just like im not fond of seeing huge advertisments for alcohol, or every product under the sun.... But while I have changed my ideals that the Patients can get alot of good from a WELL RUN facility, it does not change my stance that if dispensaries are to be authorized in the State, then they need to be done so by their OWN Legislation. Not on the back, or at the detriment or sacrifice of the 08 MMM Act.
bob harris
Well-Known Member
The reason that a new "voter initiative" wont be on the ballot soon, is that the voters will not sign the petitions. they signed once for medical cannabis, and have seen how poorly those who benifited from the law have acted.
As for implementing the law...you finally said it! New house bills need to be passed...and the act amended.
Thanks for coming around....now all you have to do is actually get involve in the wording and implementation of the HB"s, and you'll actually be doing something.
Timmahh
Well-Known Member
I never said I was helpful in any amendments to the 08 MMM Act to allow for dispensary wording. I am FULLY Opposed to ANY Changes to the 08 MMM Act, remember Mitt, err bob?
I stated I simply see the need for dispensaries, NOT that the 08 Act needs amendment. Separate issues, Separate legislation is required.
Nice try but still a FAIL on your part. You think you would get tired of being proven wrong over and over.
bob harris
Well-Known Member
But it is NOT a separate issue. medical cannabis will remain ONE law..all clarifications, additions, subtractions, will be amended into that one law.
That's what you don't get...It HAS to be amended. It's how laws work.
So..you think a new law should be voted in for every aspect of clarifying the act? Good luck with that one. And voter initiatives 'easier and faster'...wow, that's just ignorant. A voter initiate has to get a ton of signatures simply to get on a ballot...nothing easy or fast about it...can't even believe you said that.
The law will be clarified and expanded through house Bills and amendments...it's just how the system works. If your hoping that the system changes how it works to suit you...
Good luck to you Timmahh...I hope you can learn to work within society some day..if not, you'll have an angry, lonely life...
And thank you for putting your opinion in stone for me.
WRONG. No Changes, Not a Comma, Not a Period.
It proves you no nothing of how things work in the real world.
FatMarty
Well-Known Member
Well I sure hope that's true - that's why I write these thoughts out - really it's not for me - I never get away from me.
But just to clarify - I don;t remember what MI calls a Finding of Fact - but I did read the pertinent law on it back in '09: it's in there.
I have never met former AG Cox or anyone associated with him - but if you guys got some coin and organization you need to talk to him.
Being a former AG he knows the code for dealing with the Office.
He also is in print in Detroit newspapers saying he would have fairly implemented the law and that he felt Dispensaries are needed as well.
It's a no-brainer. If I had the coin I would go talk to him myself and report back.
Another thought about Cox: he wants back into the political arena: he could use our support for that next Statewide run...
FatMarty
Well-Known Member
I didn't say any of that except to use the system to beat itself with.
There is no need to touch one comma Bob.
The Act allows the Dept. to craft rules and it directs them to do so.
It is not a one shot deal. We can rewrite the rules to clarify everything.
The rules can and should evolve as the program needs.
bob harris
Well-Known Member
That's correct..use the system. Not block the system. Amend the law to define...Timmahh says we cant' do that
Amendments WILL be added..they in fact do "change" the law..at least they add definition.
But, alas, timmahh, Ozz, Corey....all really simply want to be anti government...no interest in working within the system.
ozzrokk
Well-Known Member
Wrong the dispensary bill would not and should not be any part of the 08 act. That is a seperate issue and should be treated as such.
The act as written does not require any changes it only needs to be honored and respected by the system.
Ohh and did I forget to mention fully implemented. How can anyone say this or that needs to be fixed or clarified when it has not even been implemented?
The act has many protections and the system and some nutjobs cant stand that. But this is what the people of Michigan wanted so we voted on it and supposedly won.
Some of you want us to beg the government to allow us to have what we already have. That was settled in 08
The act as written does not require any changes it only needs to be honored and respected by the system.
Ohh and did I forget to mention fully implemented. How can anyone say this or that needs to be fixed or clarified when it has not even been implemented?
The act has many protections and the system and some nutjobs cant stand that. But this is what the people of Michigan wanted so we voted on it and supposedly won.
Some of you want us to beg the government to allow us to have what we already have. That was settled in 08
st0wandgrow
Well-Known Member
How can you NOT be anti-government? These crooked fucks have given me nothing but corruption and shady back room dealings to consider over the past 30 years! Show me an honest politician that works on behalf of the people, and I'll show you a pig that can fly!