ICMAG Administration endorses The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010

[rives]

you have to remember to these people

legal cultivation, legal possession, legal use, legal giving, and a path to legal selling=not legalized

Thanks, that does clear it up!

 

[Smoke Buddy]

This is about the stupidest thing that you have written, and that is saying a lot. How on earth do you prevent addiction by signing an agreement? If you take opiates for more than a very short time, you will become physically dependent on them. In my view physical dependence=addiction.

Hahahahaha - You are not paying attention:
What Is a Pain Treatment Agreement?

As pain medication addiction is possible, doctors sometimes require that patients sign a pain treatment agreement as a condition of their receiving therapy for chronic pain. Such agreements are most commonly used when narcotic pain relievers are prescribed. Narcotics can sometimes become addictive if not taken as prescribed by a doctor.

http://www.webmd.com/pain-management/guide/pain-management-pain-treatment-agreement

You want so desperately to make points against me that you post bullshit and then claim your expertise.

 

[CrazyCooter]

Good argument. If your against tax, let people continue to be incarcerated.

Tell me if your anti tax, why do you support that fascist 215 system? You realize mmj is taxed, right? So how is 215 good if it is taxed and 19 is bad because it is taxed.

Just because your using big words and forming complete sentances for a change, does not mean that your argument is valid or correct...

Nobody is being incarcerated in California for less than an ounce. Prop 19 doesn't improve this.

The 215 system has created quite a situation in California. Anyone over the age of 18 can set up shop in their home and have a legitimate means of producing some wealth with little to no fear of government interference. Big business is not allowed to compete in this market, the biggest cash crop in California, and the state wants to generate tax revenue to fund its corporate welfare projects, way more wasteful than any social welfare program.

The "black market" is quite easy to navigate safely for the individual but very difficult for big business. Prop 19 will allow big business into the market and effectively transfer wealth out of the hands of the California worker and to individuals through taxes and corporations. I know you guys all want to talk about morals and how you never told a lie but the state knows no such thing as morality. If the judge says its ok, it doesn't matter what anyone thinks. It is legal.

Under 215, individuals have political and economic power that is exclusionary to big business. I see this as a good thing. Giving up a position of power so you can pass a feel good law that does little to change the situation of the everyday stoner in California is naive at this point.

It is not a good prop, even the yes people agree with that. It is being called "legalization" but it is "regulate, control and tax." If you are over the age of 18 and you want to be legal you can be by tomorrow. 19 opens the floodgates for big business to compete in a market cornered by the overburdened California taxpayer without anything in return. Nobody is going to jail for an ounce or less and anyone can be legal tomorrow. This prop improves nothing for me, the average California taxpaying small time grower.

 

[rives]

Hahahahaha - You are not paying attention:
What Is a Pain Treatment Agreement?

As pain medication addiction is possible, doctors sometimes require that patients sign a pain treatment agreement as a condition of their receiving therapy for chronic pain. Such agreements are most commonly used when narcotic pain relievers are prescribed. Narcotics can sometimes become addictive if not taken as prescribed by a doctor.

http://www.webmd.com/pain-management/guide/pain-management-pain-treatment-agreement

You want so desperately to make points against me that you post bullshit and then claim your expertise.

Sheesh. You are an unbelievable fool. This is a waste of time.

 

[ReelBusy1]

Ummmm, Ive been reading this daily. How can you make such a obviously flawed statement... you know what I had for breakfast?
Shows the level we are operating at here. LOL.
You can say I dont understand all day long and it will only make you look silly since you have no way of knowing my level of understanding but I would think you could at least pick up on the fact that Im quite capable of understanding anything you guiys can dish out, which at this point looks like a bunch of emotional blather to me. LOL

you can talk about "understanding things" all day long like you do here but you never explain why you are factually wrong about 215?

Why not explain that "misunderstanding of the Prop215" instead of ignoring and evading the point like a politician who doesn't want to answer the question?

Go ahead and make a true factual point - of any kind - about the current Prop 19 debate.
I know you have it in you.

 

[Smoke Buddy]

Sheesh. You are an unbelievable fool. This is a waste of time.

Its a waste of time... hey we agree on something. very cool.

Name calling still only reflects on the name caller, not the called... so why dont you explain why you feel like you gain something by calling me a fool... can you explain how that works?

Gee how come Im not mad at you and calling you names? You think you might be able to figure it out? Nah, I doubt it so Ill tell you. You are obviously young and I am mature. You get mad cause your little hormones are really surging and you are really riled.
Me, not so much, Im old an been through a few wars so you dont bother me much even though you dont like what I say.
So Im not calling you anything here, Im making an observation about your behavior.
hehehe

Personnally I find that aspect of this discussion funny as hell and very revealing.

 

[Smoke Buddy]

you can talk about "understanding things" all day long like you do here but you never explain why you are factually wrong about 215?

Why not explain that "misunderstanding of the Prop215" instead of ignoring and evading the point like a politician who doesn't want to answer the question?

Go ahead and make a true factual point - of any kind - about the current Prop 19 debate.
I know you have it in you.

I made my point and you guys didnt like it. Ill tell you agian. I only chimed in to let folks know , contarary to what was posted here, you do NOT need to register with the state, county or anybody else when you get a recomendation. That was my point.. Ive written plenty. Pick it apart, lets debate what I have said if you want... otherwise Im busy.. see you all later.

peace

 

[ReelBusy1]

I made my point and you guys didnt like it. Ill tell you agian. I only chimed in to let folks know , contarary to what was posted here, you do NOT need to register with the state, county or anybody else when you get a recomendation. That was my point.. Ive written plenty. Pick it apart, lets debate what I have said if you want... otherwise Im busy.. see you all later.

peace

your right you don't have to register

Great

It doesn't protect you from arrest and conviction in any way on a local or state level.
Or the legal costs you would incur.
Don't let that make you lose your home or anything....

Glad we got that big registering point of yours settled though.

.

 

[dagnabit]

Ummmm, Ive been reading this daily. How can you make such a obviously flawed statement... you know what I had for breakfast?

sorry i was giving you some credit..

if you HAVE read the whole thread and are still asking questions that have been answered...why????

Shows the level we are operating at here. LOL.

sho nuff!!!

You can say I dont understand all day long and it will only make you look silly since you have no way of knowing my level of understanding but I would think you could at least pick up on the fact that Im quite capable of understanding anything you guiys can dish out, which at this point looks like a bunch of emotional blather to me. LOL

i didn't "say" it i posted a memo from the states AG to ALL law enforcement!

i guess that was more "emotional blather"

are you capable of understanding a recommendation alone WILL NOT PROTECT YOU FROM ARREST!

I HAVE POSTED THE EVIDENCE YOU HAVE POSTED YOUR OPINION.

 

[dagnabit]

Nobody is being incarcerated in California for less than an ounce. Prop 19 doesn't improve this.

for a first offense.

they do however recieve an infraction CONVICTION which means it shows on all background checks.
prevents student aid
can bar entry into the law enforcement or military carreers (not that i advise these as carreers)
and many more wonderful thinga 19 will prevent.

The 215 system has created quite a situation in California. Anyone over the age of 18 can set up shop in their home and have a legitimate means of producing some wealth with little to no fear of government interference.

except for having to hide behind patients, and register your federally illegal grow with the state for protection (we call that extortion in the private sector)

Big business is not allowed to compete in this market, the biggest cash crop in California, and the state wants to generate tax revenue to fund its corporate welfare projects, way more wasteful than any social welfare program.

not allowed?

This prop improves nothing for me, the average California taxpaying small time grower.

other than
end probable cause for smell
end you having to pay extortion fees to the state
end you having to go to a unemployable quack for a rec
end you being a negative example to other states considering medical
make a MINIMUM 5X5 an unalienable right that can not be infringed
make possession of 3 tons legal in your home
take the dea heat of of small timers and put it on R.LEE types
end infractions for 1 oz or less
end confiscation of 1 oz or less
show the world the people want legalization

other than that it does nothing for you or to you.

 

[Smoke Buddy]

sorry i was giving you some credit..

if you HAVE read the whole thread and are still asking questions that have been answered...why????



sho nuff!!!


i didn't "say" it i posted a memo from the states AG to ALL law enforcement!

i guess that was more "emotional blather"

are you capable of understanding a recommendation alone WILL NOT PROTECT YOU FROM ARREST!

I HAVE POSTED THE EVIDENCE YOU HAVE POSTED YOUR OPINION.

The word "say" in the context of a forum is obviously something you posted... please lets get out of elementary school.

I do understand that prop 215 wont stop me from being harrassed, arrested, treated poorly etc. Yeah, I get that. I wasnt arguing that ever in this thread. However, I grew my first outdoor crop in 1973 and havent missed to many seasons since then and guess what? Never busted, never even close as far as I know. Now that I have my rec, Im golden. Even if they arrest me, Im within guidlines. Around here, they see a rec and they leave you alone. I hear thats not the case all over and that aint good but here, no problemo. How could that be with all the doors being kicked in?

One more time: I was just correcting wrong information that was in this thread about registering and I get dragged kicking and screaming through the mud by a bunch of over revved people.

peace

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

Nobody is being incarcerated in California for less than an ounce. Prop 19 doesn't improve this.

The 215 system has created quite a situation in California. Anyone over the age of 18 can set up shop in their home and have a legitimate means of producing some wealth with little to no fear of government interference. Big business is not allowed to compete in this market, the biggest cash crop in California, and the state wants to generate tax revenue to fund its corporate welfare projects, way more wasteful than any social welfare program.

The "black market" is quite easy to navigate safely for the individual but very difficult for big business. Prop 19 will allow big business into the market and effectively transfer wealth out of the hands of the California worker and to individuals through taxes and corporations. I know you guys all want to talk about morals and how you never told a lie but the state knows no such thing as morality. If the judge says its ok, it doesn't matter what anyone thinks. It is legal.

Under 215, individuals have political and economic power that is exclusionary to big business. I see this as a good thing. Giving up a position of power so you can pass a feel good law that does little to change the situation of the everyday stoner in California is naive at this point.

It is not a good prop, even the yes people agree with that. It is being called "legalization" but it is "regulate, control and tax." If you are over the age of 18 and you want to be legal you can be by tomorrow. 19 opens the floodgates for big business to compete in a market cornered by the overburdened California taxpayer without anything in return. Nobody is going to jail for an ounce or less and anyone can be legal tomorrow. This prop improves nothing for me, the average California taxpaying small time grower.

First of all, you didnt even bother to answer my first question, which is how can 215 be so great when its taxed, yet 19 is so horrible because its taxed?

Secondly, how foolish are you to believe you are running a "legitimate business" by growing and selling weed out of your house?

Third, how would 19 effect you? Your already growing and selling illegaly under 215, so really what difference would it make?

Oh wait I see the writing on the wall, your just afraid of competition.

Because you know the people who grow on a large scale are intelligent enough to form a truly legitimate business and recieve the liscensing through the localaties to produce cannabis.

So your right, lets keep it illegal and lets keep the large growers going to jail so that YOU can sit with your thumb in your ass watching plants grow while making absoutely no contributions to a country that has given you so god damned much.

Your argument is pathetic and you look like a fool for trying convince us of your view.

Thank god that consumers outnumber producers 100:1. Because if it were for you greedy ignorant micro mini growers, we probably wouldnt even have 215...

So I supppose my advice to you when 19 passes, either step up your game or get the fuck outta dodge.

As for me, I will be more than happy to pay taxes and form a business that is in compliance with 19. Doing what ive always loved, growing high grade cannabis and sharing my love of the plant with others around me in a completly legal atmosphere.

Being able to open up amsterdam style coffeeshops for people to socially interact and share this wonderful plant.

Opening a resort for MJ tourists who want to come and enjoy all the wonderful strides weve made in California.

Working with doctors and scientist to further explore the cannabis genus and all forms of its consumption and production.


Sounds like a peace of heaven to me. And it may just be wishful thinking, but the outcome of CA with 19 sure looks to be more positive than CA without 19....

 

[dagnabit]

One more time: I was just correcting wrong information that was in this thread about registering and I get dragged kicking and screaming through the mud by a bunch of over revved people.

peace

what do you think you were correcting?

if you want 215 protection YOU MUST REGISTER.
otherwise you are at the mercy of leo.

B. Patient Questions

1. What is the nature of your serious illness? How long ago was it diagnosed and by whom?

2. Do you use marijuana to provide relief from this illness? Have you tried other drugs? If so, what drugs? Have you tried Marinol?

3. How many marijuana cigarettes do you smoke per day because of your condition?

4. Do you have written recommendation from a licensed California physician in your possession? May I see it? Do I have your permission to contact the physician to verify this recommendation?

---- [1] Obviously, the number of plants will depend on the circumstances. Typically, , a controlled, indoor grow will result in fewer plants lost as well as better, more uniform quality plants. The other extreme would be an infrequently tended outdoor grow.

5. Have you received an oral recommendation from a physician? Who? When did you obtain permission and what exactly did the doctor say? What is his/her address and telephone number? Do I have your permission to contact him/her to verify this recommendation?

6. Did the physician conduct an examination and make a determination that marijuana would be beneficial?

7. How long have you been seeing the doctor? Has he/she done any follow-up examination to monitor your condition? How often are you examined by the physician?

8. Are you willing to sign an authorization allowing an examination of your medical records? Will you give permission to examine your medical records?

C. Caregiver Qualifications

1. The primary caregiver must be an individual specifically designated by the patient. [Section 11362.5 H&S reads ". . primary caregiver means the individual designates by the person exempt under this act.."(emphasis added).]

2. The primary caregiver's role must have been established prior to the designation to be valid. [Section 11362.5 H&S reads, "... primary caregiver . . . who has consistently assumed responsibility..." (emphasis added).]

3. The primary caregiver must have prior and consistent responsibility for the patient's housing, health, or safety. Since the act uses the words "primary" and "consistent," it assumes that the patient is unable to be responsible for or has not been responsible for his/her own housing, health, or safety and that no other person, institution, or government agency is the primary provider for these needs.

4. The primary caregiver is the only individual who can qualify for the specific patient. Secondary or general caregivers may not assert the affirmative defense. (Section 11362.5 is very specific in using the term " primary".]

5. The primary caregiver must have personal knowledge of the doctor's recommendation. [Section 11362.5 reads, "... patient and their primary caregiver who obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes upon the recommendation of a physician . . . " The law continues. " . . . a patient or a patient's primary caregiver who possesses: or cultivates marijuana for personal medical purposes of the patient upon a written or oral recommendation or approval of physician (emphasis added.)

6. The primary caregiver cannot engage in any conduct that endangers others. The primary caregiver cannot use marijuana unless he/she is also a patient.

7 The primary caregiver cannot be involved in diversion of marijuana for non-medical purposes.

8. The primary caregiver cannot possess marijuana for sale or sell marijuana and can only assert an affirmative defense to charges of cultivation or possession for medical use of a specific patient.

D. Caregiver Questions

1. The name, address, and telephone number of the person for whom the individual is a caregiver and how the so-called patient can be contacted. 2. what is the caregiver's relationship to the patient? How long has this relationship existed? What has been the frequency of contact between the caregiver and the patient?

3. What specific conditions qualify the individual as a caregiver? When did the patient request that the caregiver act as caregiver?

4. How long has the individual assumed the caregiver role?

S. What is the patient's serious illness?

6. What is the name of the doctor who made the recommendation? what is his/her address and telephone number? Does the caregiver have personal knowledge of the specific recommendation from the physician?

7. How much marijuana does the patient use and under what conditions?

8. Is the caregiver receiving any remuneration for the service? If so, how much?

9. Who designated the individual as a caregiver, how was designation given, and is the specific physician aware of the individual's status as caregiver?

10. Describe the conditions that exist with the patient that make him or her unable to assume primary responsibility for his/her own housing, health, or safety.

III. Peace Officers‚ Response

A. If, considering the guidelines and questions set out in section II, the officer still thinks, based on the amount, packaging, circumstances, and the answers to the questions, that he/she has probable cause to believe that the individual has cultivated, possessed, or used marijuana for other than medical purposes, the officer may arrest and book the suspect (or, if appropriate, cite and confiscate).

PROP 19 ENDS THIS.

 

[ReelBusy1]

This debate has been enlightening to me within our little community.

My focus for YES Votes is outside the MJ community though.

I'll bet all you No voters out there that my argument for ending the failed public policy that is cannabis prohibition resonates more with them than your arguments.

The general public are the ones who will win it for us in Nov.
Time for the Yes Men to get off line and hit the streets.

 

[dagnabit]

I grew my first outdoor crop in 1973 and havent missed to many seasons since then and guess what? Never busted, never even close as far as I know.

Steve Irwin stuck his dick in a million crocodile mouths and got killed by a fucking stingray.

your personal anecdotal story of getting lucky is tantamount to saying

"ive ridden 1000 hookers bareback and never got aids...dont use condoms!!!!"

 

[Guest 88950]

...My cannabis doc has my medical records which I supplied to them unbeknownst to my primary. You can do that ya know.

look at pg 4 regarding Cannabis and it #5 that i want you to look at.

"5. A physician who is not the primary treating physician
may still recommend medical marijuana for a patient’s
symptoms. However, it is incumbent upon that physician
to consult with the patient’s primary treating physician or
obtain the appropriate patient records to confirm the
patient’s underlying diagnosis and prior
treatment history."

http://www.mbc.ca.gov/publications/action_report_2004_07.pdf


you really should educate yourself before you post.

it looks like YOU ARE WRONG!

 

[dagnabit]

:

 

[Smoke Buddy]

what do you think you were correcting?

if you want 215 protection YOU MUST REGISTER.
otherwise you are at the mercy of leo.

Apparently you if you think you need to register.
This copied and pasted form you posted has nothing to do with my situation as I am not a "caregiver", I am a patient and I certainly dont need to register to protect myself further. The law is plain on that issue.

 

[dagnabit]

it looks like YOU ARE WRONG!

not really his fault (i know right im defending a prohibitionist) most folks just believe 215 makes them legal.
no one takes the time to talk to leo.
they are given "marching orders" from the AG and those are public record!
they are where the real law lies not in the bills. in the enforcement!

i advise everyone to read the California Attorney General guidelines for the enforcement of state marijuana laws in context of the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (Proposition 215)

it will scare your pants off how much control they really have!

 

[Smoke Buddy]

look at pg 4 regarding Cannabis and it #5 that i want you to look at.

"5. A physician who is not the primary treating physician
may still recommend medical marijuana for a patient’s
symptoms. However, it is incumbent upon that physician
to consult with the patient’s primary treating physician or
obtain the appropriate patient records to confirm the
patient’s underlying diagnosis and prior
treatment history."

http://www.mbc.ca.gov/publications/action_report_2004_07.pdf


you really should educate yourself before you post.

it looks like YOU ARE WRONG!

You guys are funny. Looks like you cant read very well:

"5. A physician who is not the primary treating physician
may still recommend medical marijuana for a patient’s
symptoms. However, it is incumbent upon that physician
to consult with the patient’s primary treating physician or
obtain the appropriate patient records to confirm the
patient’s underlying diagnosis and prior
treatment history."

They obtained the records from me. They used that to justify their recomendation. They are not required to tell my primary that I got the recomendation, at all.

LOL _ I really didnt come in here for a fight... but you guys are on the attack... looks like Im wearing teflon today cause you guys havent overcome a single point Ive made. not one.. LOL