Nevada, SB 262- 3 Steps Backwards If Passed

[resinryder]

Say they pass this bill. They bust the grow houses here and now that leaves the sucking sound of thousands of smokers in the state who will find their smokey treats where they can. The cartels come in to fill the vacuum leo has created for them now that it's wide open for new business. Now you'll have killings, kidnappings, etc, over territory to provide the bunk brick weed to the customer base. It's bad enough in Southern Nevada(Las Vegas has been blessed with the most dangerous city title) now as it is. Do we really want to make it worse?? I swear the leo's just don't get it.

 

[marx2k]

I swear the leo's just don't get it.

They get it. It's exactly how they want it.

 

[JackTheGrower]

They get it. It's exactly how they want it.

I have to agree. It's the system that works for both sides best.

Those that profit from the industry of Marijuana ( suppliers ) and those who profit from the Industry of Marijuana ( Law enforcement ):

It's the small independent grower or consumer that ultimately provides the profits for both sides.

Ain't it so..


( Humor ) Jack will now move on beating his drum of truth Thanks..

Jack

 

[resinryder]

Bit of good news regarding SB 262 here in Nevada-

We just got word from Assemblyman xxxxxxxx in Carson City that SB 262,
a truly awful bill which we have been fighting all year long was
defeated in the Judiciary Committee today. I want to thank all of you
who have taken the time to write or call our legislators. In spite of
fierce lobbying from the sponsor and proponents of this bill, our
collective voice made a difference, and has saved some our fellow
citizens from the draconian penalties this law would have demanded.


This bill is dead and LVMPD lost a big one!!!! A push is now on to amend the MMJ bill in NV for the better. More when I find out how that goes.

 

[Maj.PotHead]

hell yea take that david rodgers and LVMPD

 

[♥Mo♥]

Great to hear. I may end up back there soon.

 

[h^2 O]

so david rodgers had the sentencing setup as if jessica was found guilty of DUI. matter of fact she was found not guilty of driven under the influance but was still sentanced as if she was found guilty of DUI. she was sentanced to 48 yrs in prison she was 19 when she went in them kids had

holy SHIT man!!! 48 years!!!!!!!!!!????????? Is that like without parole? She HAS to do 48 years? If I had to do 48 years I'd just grab a pen and stab as many people in the throat as I could before they shot me.

 

[WoW maannnn]

but i CAN drink myself into alcohol poisoning then gamble away my kids inheritance and wind down my evening with a whore whom will help me give my wife aids

put nevada on the FU list...

 

[WoW maannnn]

Fuck icmag.

huh?

 

[Maj.PotHead]

but i CAN drink myself into alcohol poisoning then gamble away my kids inheritance and wind down my evening with a whore whom will help me give my wife aids

put nevada on the FU list...

put nevada on the FU list

then again i'm sure ya can accomplish all the above statements in your own state of residience.

 

[Vegan]

Bit of good news regarding SB 262 here in Nevada-

We just got word from Assemblyman xxxxxxxx in Carson City that SB 262,
a truly awful bill which we have been fighting all year long was
defeated in the Judiciary Committee today. I want to thank all of you
who have taken the time to write or call our legislators. In spite of
fierce lobbying from the sponsor and proponents of this bill, our
collective voice made a difference, and has saved some our fellow
citizens from the draconian penalties this law would have demanded.


This bill is dead and LVMPD lost a big one!!!! A push is now on to amend the MMJ bill in NV for the better. More when I find out how that goes.

Hey resinryder
if you can....... keep the updates on this thread

subscribed......

really need to update the plant thing...
3flowering and 4 in veg sucks balls.....
im pretty much having to get stuck paying for fem seeds

Vegan

 

[resinryder]

Vegan-Here are the proposed changes/amendments to the Nevada MMJ law. I'll add to the thread as info comes in. BTW, there is a provision in the NV MMJ law that gives the patient an affirmative defense to have more plants than allowed in the law as long as your doctor agrees you need more plants to treat your specific condition. Right off hand I think it's section 310. Affirmative Defenses

Here are the items to be amended


Amendment #1

The following text shall be added to NRS 453A.200:

NRS 453A.200.5 A registry identification card or its equivalent
issued by another state government to permit the medical use of
marijuana by a qualifying patient or to permit a person to assist with
a qualifying patient's medical use of marijuana has the same force and
effect as a registry identification card issued by the department.

The following text shall be added to NRS 453A.250:

NRS 453A.250.4 A patient in the program may act as a designated
primary caregiver for other patients in the program.

NRS 453.210.5 shall be amended to delete article (e):

(e) The Department determines that the applicant, or his designated
primary caregiver, if applicable, has been convicted of knowingly or
intentionally selling a controlled substance;

NRS 453.300.1 shall be amended to delete article (f):

300.1(f) - Delivering marijuana for consideration to any person,
regardless of whether the recipient lawfully holds a registry
identification card issued by the Department or its designee pursuant
to NRS 453A.220 or 453A.250.

********************

Explanation of Proposed Amendment #1 to A.B. 538

The State of Nevada Medical Marijuana Program was legislated
following the approval of Question 9 on the 2000 ballot by 65% of
Nevada voters. The changes to statute in this amendment are meant to
address constitutional deficiencies and provide minor adjustments for
better administration of the program for both patients and the state.
The changes all address operational violations of the equal protection
clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Subsection 5 of section 200 requires reciprocity for patients who are
valid medical cannabis patients in other jurisdictions when they
travel to Nevada. This proposed amendment text is taken directly from
the Montana Medical Marijuana Act [Sec. 50-46-201(8), MCA]. Tourism is
a vital component of the Nevada economy. Yet there are numerous
instances each year of visitors being forced through the Nevada
criminal justice system for possession of medical cannabis despite
being lawful participants in their own state medical cannabis
programs.

Subsection 4 of section 250 enables licensed patients to be
designated as caregivers for other patients in the program.

Subsection 5(e) of section 210 will be deleted. The current statutory
implementation of subsection 5(e) causes a bottleneck at the Division
of Criminal Records, and increases operational costs to the state and
expense to the patients by requiring that every applicant undergo a
fingerprint background check. This change will allow the state to
comply with the 30-day turnaround for applications as required by
subsection 8 of section 210.

Subsection 1(f) of section 300 will be deleted. 300.1(f) violates the
equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S.
Constitution. Nowhere else in either state or federal law is it
mandated that someone desiring to provide a service or product must do
so free of charge, unable to recoup basic expenses of time and/or
labor.

Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States
Constitution (the Equal Protection Clause), provides that "no state
shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws". By mandating no “consideration” in
453A.300.1(f) the state is, by its action, denying lawful state
medical cannabis patients the same right to obtain medicine, as any
other citizen may. This state action turns these people, whose most
effective treatment option is cannabis into a ‘suspect class’ as
defined by Justice Harlan Stone (US v Carolene Products), and
infringes upon their fundamental right to treat their illness.
Although some might argue citing the Thirteenth Amendment that no one
is forcing them to take part in this program, for many patients, such
as those suffering from neuropathic pain, cannabis is simply the best
treatment option and cannot be denied under our right to life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Furthermore, the text of Question 9, passed in 2000 clearly states:
“The proposed amendment . . . would authorize appropriate methods of
supply to authorized patients.” The use of the word supply in the
initiative directly indicates that the people’s intent was to
provide patients with a source of medicine rather than force them to
produce their own. Wrongly, the Legislature denied the legal
implementation of the initiative by specifically prohibiting medical
cannabis to be commercially available as is every other medicine.

 

[Maj.PotHead]

right on brotha thx for the update hey i'll give ya a call tomarrow

 

[resinryder]

Found it.
NRS453A.310-Affirmitive Defense



2) Possesses, delivers or produces marijuana only in the amount described in paragraph (b) of subsection 3 of NRS 453A.200 or in excess of that amount if the person proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the greater amount is medically necessary as determined by the assisted person’s attending physician to mitigate the symptoms or effects of the assisted person’s chronic or debilitating medical condition.

Basically, all you need is a confidential waiver type document from your doctor stating why you need more plants(providing number of plants) such as using butter instead of smoked marijuana or whatever he/she and you determine the number of plants are for. On the same document they will also need to state how much dried weight you will need over the 1 ounce state limit. This is very important for an affirmative defense should leo ever come check your garden. This document does not need to be sent into the state program. It is between you and your doctor, but should be kept in or near your garden to show officers at the time of being checked. Your doctor MUST also be willing to go to court on your behalf to verify the overage they signed off on. If leo does come to check, they may still take your plants and dried weight because they are over the "legal limits", however, with your doctors statement and verbal verification, it should be more than enough to keep you on the program and out of legal trouble. When the program was crafted, the need for more plants and dried flowers than the "legal limits" for patients with more needs was anticipated and therefore the affirmative defense clauses were added to provide an additional layer of protection.
Unfortuntantly, most leo in the state doen't even know what the legal limits are!!!