Tiger spotted in the Rockies!
- Thread starter NiteTiger
- Start date
Frankie Pebbles
Member
/
congrats night tiger you have had my wish come true for you... However my wish came true for me too cause my state passed its own med laws... woohoo...
hope all your hopes and dreams come true...
hope all your hopes and dreams come true...
HossCartwright
Member
Growers license? Food/hash license? WTF? Warren Edson: You and your band of dispensaries, senators and lobbyists have put the real growers and patients of this state in a very compromised position. Basically, our hands are tied and we're bent over the table waiting to see if Rob Corry comes down the stairs with a Katana to save our asses from Zed. In this Analogy Zed is the big business way of thinking that is being led by you, Romer, Massey and Matt Brown on behalf of the greediest dispensaries in the state. So, are you a wolf in sheep's clothing as I suspect, or are my suspicions of you and your work incorrect?
warrenedson
Member
Sorry Sunday and my good notes are at the office. Want to say 12-43.3-301?
Again, these are new defenses that apply to those who have applied and received permission from the state. You are not a caregiver, you are one of these new things.
They are going to regulate this thing, we are talking about manufacture and distribution of a schedule 1 drug here. Even under the current draft this would be much more open than any other state currently or as proposed. Look at Michigan, NJ, Rhode Island, Montana, New Mexico, lots more regulation.
Again, these are new defenses that apply to those who have applied and received permission from the state. You are not a caregiver, you are one of these new things.
They are going to regulate this thing, we are talking about manufacture and distribution of a schedule 1 drug here. Even under the current draft this would be much more open than any other state currently or as proposed. Look at Michigan, NJ, Rhode Island, Montana, New Mexico, lots more regulation.
Frankie Pebbles
Member
/
HossCartwright
Member
Frankie, I shouldn't be forced underground b/c I can't financially afford to comply with the laws that are setup to assure dispensary/government success at the expense of smaller caregivers. No disrespect but I'm sick of hearing from all the illegal guys telling me to relax while my rights get taken away by senators, lobbyists and lawyers.
warrenedson
Member
Try getting a license to manufacture a schedule II or III controlled substance. This is illegal, it is not lettuce.
ndnguy
Active member
Things must have changed bigtime in Aurora since I been there, was there staying and working in Last Chance on a plant. There was a killing right in front of hotel first night I was there and two more after so 3 gang killings in less than a month,glad to hear it is a much better place now...ndn
HossCartwright
Member
Nope, it's much more beneficial to the planet than lettuce. It's medicine that has been growing naturally all over the world forever.
HossCartwright
Member
I think the first part of his post is the most important to pay attention to. "I've never been there." When you get on craigslist rentals and see how far your dollar goes I can see how it might be a tempting place to live. But the housing is affordable there for a reason.
Greenmopho
Member
There are warehouses zoned as "Multi-Purpose", which can legally be used for residential, commercial, manufacturing, or light industrial. This zoning exists in most states.
Greenmopho
Member
I've hiked red rocks a couple of times. I always burn one when I go up there (or on any hike for that matter). Isn't that the point of hiking, getting high with nature!
Ah, didn't know I was talking to a CO MMJ celeb
Awesome, 'cause I got some questions! Maybe you can clear this up for me.------begin text wall-------
My first issue with this bill as written, as I've said a couple of times, is that the bill never defines it's target. How can a law not state what it applies to? Nowhere in there does it define a "Medical Marijuana Center".
How in the hell can they introduce a bill regulating Medical Marijuana Centers, and not even tell you what qualifies as a Medical Marijuana Center? How has this not been laughed out of the GA? A freaking second grader could catch this glaring omission.
Second issue is that it limits patients access to quality and effective medicine through it's limits on patient numbers. Even though the revised bill states the State "may" issue a waiver on patient numbers at the request of a patient, that simple little word makes such a difference. It should be the State "shall" issue a waiver at the request of a patient. The State should not have arbitrary and unconditional control over a patient's access to available medicine.
If this passes, the State gets to arbitrarily decide who a patient can and cannot see to obtain the proper medication for their condition.
For example - My long term goal would be to set up a caregiver practice with my wife. In my plan, I would be meeting with patients individually in their homes, and actually forming a proper care plan.
Crucial to that is finding the strain that best treats their condition. Medical Marijuana is not created equal, but that is what this bill assumes. I certainly wouldn't choose an early sativa to treat an anxiety patient, nor would I recommend a late indica for a Chronic Fatigue Syndrome sufferer.
Personally, my condition comes from nerve damage in my back sustained when a concrete ceiling collapsed on me. The most effective treatment I've found actually involves a three phase approach. A mid to late Sativa during the day leaves me relatively pain free, yet alert and energized to function now that I am pain free.
In the evening, when the activity of the day has raised my pain level, and I've completed my days activities, I settle into the couch with a nice early indica. This gives me a much heavier body stone, relieving the pain and relaxes me, which is important to reduce tension and inflammation the muscles in my back produce after a day's activity.
As I begin preparing for bed, I reach for a late indica. This is the 'sleepy weed', relieving my pain so that I can fall asleep, as well as making me drowsy and causing a deep relaxation that makes it easy to fall asleep. On a more subjective note, it also puts me in a 'happy place' as I start to dream, so I haven't had a single disturbing dream interrupting my sleep when using a late indica
Using the different strains, phenos, and ripeness allows me to constantly keep the pain under control without building a tolerance. The different cannabinoid profile also means you get full effect every time, instead of diminishing returns.
Now, to achieve this for a patient will require a commitment on my part to truly be a caregiver, and not just a pot dealer. This bill attempts to do that, but again, it fails because of its vagueness.
So, back to my practice. My patients are receiving the most effective meds possible, through home and office visits, in a relationship that any patient of any kind of practice would envy.
However, I won't be open to the public. I will not be maintaining a store front presence. I will not be selling meds directly to the general patient population. I do intend to provide any excess medicines to dispensaries so that they have a wide range of options for their patients. This allows me to help provide not only for my patients, but to patients at large.
Yes, I do intend to generate income from those dispensary sales. This will allow me to provide discounted medicines to my patients in need, and generate an income commensurate with the level of care and dedication I'm providing to my patients.
In other words, I'm planning on being the caregiver that my patients deserve, and serving them to the absolute best of my ability.
But I can't do that if this law passes as written. You've got a bill written by people who don't understand Medical Marijuana and its uses that attempts to dictate the terms of both the variety and the administration.
Do there need to be some basic regulations on dispensaries? Sure. Like I said, the reasonable parts of the bill I considered common sense. Reasonable security precautions like requiring restricted access areas, clearly identifiable employees, video and alarm systems should be common sense. Of course, we all know that common sense isn't really that common, so it has to be spelled out. I'm fine with that.
Building inspections, and LEO inspections? Well, DUH! Of course you need to be able to certify the safety of your building to insure the safety of your patients and employees. LEO inspections are debatable as to necessity, but, to be honest, I was planning on inviting local LEO to my establishment anyway. I WANT LEO to know that I'm playing by the rules, and feel comfortable with my operation. I also want them to know where I am, so that in case of an emergency, they know what's up. I don't want them to be distracted by my grow op when I've got intruders in my building.
Staying away from schools and daycare? It never even occurred to me for it to be any other way. Maybe it's my years of underground growing showing, but I avoid schools, churches, and playgrounds like the plague when siting a grow. Who the hell wants to make a bad situation worse if the shit hits the fan?
Hell, even in a med state, fed law can bite your ass, and they'll tack on some extra years for proximity to a school.
So yeah, I'm a big supporter of that one. Again, common sense is not necessarily common
Requiring a relationship beyond a retail counter? That makes sense to me too. Again, nothing I wasn't planning on doing anyway.
But limiting my patients? Get the fuck outta here. I'll help as many people as I possibly can, and when I can't handle anymore, I'll hire someone and train them. But how many patients could I reasonably service in a day and maintain that level of relationship?
Well, let's say I'm lazy, and only want to work consults 5 hours a day. Guess what, there's my 5 patients. So, given that, I could potentially accommodate a personal care relationship with 150 patients a month.
But no, 145 of those folks may have to accept lesser quality and service for no logical reason, except the State taking a page out of my wife's playbook and saying 'Because I said so'.
And why can't I help more patients? What other caregivers are limited in the number of patients they can assist? How many patients is a Pharmacist limited to? How does it help the patients to prevent them from getting the best care they can?
"Oh, yeah, Nite runs a hell of a service, his patients get quality meds at an affordable price specific to their condition, and a true relationship. But, you can't go to him because he already helps 5 people. You have to go to this guy down the street that's only running two strains of shit quality and doesn't give a fuck about whether it's the best strain for you."
Yeah, great help to the patients
Could I have more patients? Maybe. Who knows? Nothing in the law requires the waiver to be issued, nor does it set forth any guidelines on the issue. It's completely arbitrary.
How does this bill help patients maintain access to safe, quality, effective medication again?
To come full circle, do I qualify as a "Medical Marijuana Center"? How do I know? Closest thing you get to an answer is that only a MMC can 'sell' MMJ. Well, I'm not selling MMJ. I'm providing care to a patient authorized to use the specific medicine I focus on. I don't intend to open my doors to the public. That is not the type of relationship I want.
Too bad only 5 people can benefit from the relationship I described.
If I wanted to get real cutesy with it, I'm providing the MMJ for free, but I'm charging for the personal care services
After all, the bill does say I can charge for caregiver services.In all, this bill flies in the face of providing reasonable access to knowledgeable care and safe, quality product.
In fact, it literally harms patients.
You want regulation and limits? Fine, as long as they are reasonable.
Patient limits- Unreasonable, unless that shall be changed by request of the patient. Not "may" be changed, but "shall" be changed. To do otherwise prevents patients from choosing the care relationship that suits them best.
Fire, Codes, LEO, Licensing Agency inspections - very reasonable, and logical.
No schools, playgrounds, or churches within 1000 feet - reasonable.
Limiting the trade of product between licensed persons, or those mysterious 'Centers' - unreasonable. What is the limit how many pills a pharmaceutical manufacturer can deliver to licensed pharmacies again? Yeah, we've got excess medicine, too bad we can't help you provide for your patients if the need arises. They'll just have to suffer.
Restricting signage? Eh... I won't say it is reasonable, but I could live with it. Won't effect me anyhow
Restricting informational and product displays? WTF, that's just absurd. Don't provide the patient with too much information, they might actually make an informed decision! Oh no!
Oh, and if you're looking at imposing all these licensing requirements and regulations on 'Storefront' providers, then why are they held to the same limits as a non-licensed patient?
If they meet all these requirements to provide MMJ to the public, shouldn't that person be entrusted to cultivate more plants per patient, to ensure variety and availability? Sure would suck to have one of these Mysterious Medical Centers get a rush and run out of product, and not be able to replace it. They can't buy any at that point, because then 100% of their inventory was purchased, and that's a no-no. So there pretty little license does them, and the patients that depend on them, absolutely no good.
In fact, that license is PREVENTING them from helping patients.
Whew, I'm gonna cut off the wall of text now, though I could keep going.
----------end text wall---------------
TL;DR -
Bill doesn't even know who or what it applies to.
Bill's few bright spots are buried under the incredible amount of heavy handed bullshit that serves no legitimate purpose.
Bill harms patients, and goes against the whole idea of providing reasonable, safe, and legal access to medicinal cannabis.
Bill as it stands is extremely vulnerable to a constitutionality challenge.
How can a law not even define its target? How can anyone actually look at this with a straight face and call it reasonable?
Help me understand this, you're obviously active in the scene, perhaps you can help broaden my perspectives? What am I missing here?
Oh, and by the way, I still couldn't find anything in the bill allowing Mystery Centers to have more patients than any other primary caregiver. Mystery Center can be a primary caregiver. Primary Caregiver = 5 patients. If a=b, and b=c, then a=c, no? Mystery Centers are supposed to provide for the patient population at large with just 15 flowering plants? Where in the bill is the provision for more plants per patient, or more patients for Mystery Centers?
If it is the purpose of the licensing to permit a Mystery Center to grow as much as they want, why isn't it stated in the bill?
And what is the reasoning behind preventing caregivers from helping as many people as they can just because they don't want to open a storefront?
How can anyone that supports this bill as written consider themselves advocates for patients?
Help clear this up for me, I want to make sure I'm prepared.
Sorry for the text wall, just wanted to address my concerns and maybe, just maybe, rant a little
Frankie Pebbles
Member
/
HossCartwright
Member
No I didn't just jump on the band wagon. My first license# was under 5000 if that gives you any indication. One would have to be a real pessimist to expect these kinds of regulation changes 2-3 years ago. The momentum was in our favor and anytime they fucked with us Rob Corry came to our rescue. Things didn't start to unravel until Senator Chris Romer came along and decided MMJ was going to be his claim to fame. Be weary trusting the advice of all those who have aligned themselves with the name Romer. They don't have the best interest of CO MMJ patients in mind, and only see dollar signs.
Heard this morning that the new re-write of the bill will "allow caregivers to serve up to 16 patients in localities which decide to ban dispensaries". So does that mean that in Denver caregivers would not be allowed to operate?
Also I am confused as to why caregivers are getting written out of the law, since the actual language of the constitution only references caregivers. I know that money talks, and I am not against dispensaries, but seriously? Seems like if legislation passes restricting caregivers it would be deemed unconstitutional.
Yo Tiger sorry for the hijack, and welcome to Co, you chose a great time of year to come on out
Also I am confused as to why caregivers are getting written out of the law, since the actual language of the constitution only references caregivers. I know that money talks, and I am not against dispensaries, but seriously? Seems like if legislation passes restricting caregivers it would be deemed unconstitutional.
Yo Tiger sorry for the hijack, and welcome to Co, you chose a great time of year to come on out
