Goodby MMJ.......

[monkey5]

Hash Zeppelin, Here is a link that explains things a little better! Here: http://www.republicfortheunitedstates.org/ .. Good stuff! You & I are just Sovereigns ..not U.S. Citizen/Subject!! Very interesting reads to be sure! Enjoy! monkey5

 

[stc9357]

i believe that would cause refusal of the license no?

No if you read carefully I'd say no.

 

[HUGE]

^..........and personal moral code exceed any law. I know what is right and what is wrong. the government's laws have no say over what I do with 90 percent of things. I will simply just bypass the law like the flimsy paper that it is; and so will most people if they are not controlled by fear propaganda.

Now that's the spirit. I'm right there with you. Remember I posted that article that basically Said fuck legalization overgrow the planet.

 

[kmk420kali]

Now that's the spirit. I'm right there with you. Remember I posted that article that basically Said fuck legalization overgrow the planet.

I agree to a point-- I still will fight for Legalization...but when it comes down to it, I am 51 years old...and smoked/grown most of my life as an Outlaw...and it really doesn't bother me much to be that--

 

[Hydrosun]

The thing is, legally speaking, it doesn't matter if you were 'high' on Marinol if you caused a life-ending or debilitating accident--you're still responsible and would still be charged with a DUI. It's a moot point.

The VAST VAST VAST VAST majority of weed UI's don't involve property damage let alone injury of loss of life. The PIGS use this immoral law to cage and harass this community.

How about this. If one is responsible for an accident they should be punished IRRESPECTIVE of the contents of their blood.

The morality of stupid drivers killing people being OK, but drunk people killing people EVIL. Is a flawed ethic.

An ICmager has a "Punish the DEED, not the BREED" sig. Well that applies to drunks, minorities, cannabis users, and the poor alike. Justice should be equal, not subjective based on someones wealth and social standing.

 

[singingcrow]

It's a news article, not legal fact. But in any event, did you read it? Very first paragraph:



There is no place in the vehicle code, the health and safety code, the penal or the criminal codes that discuss preventing anyone who holds the MMUA card (the state ID card) from also holding a drivers license. This is specifically why the lawsuit came about.

I can already talk to folks about DMV employees and their almost complete and total lack of knowledge of the vehicle code and laws. For example, my local office had no idea that a driver whose license has been suspended may be granted a 'special need' type of license by the courts.

All this article demonstrates is that DMV employees are often woefully ignorant of the law, and their knowledge level is often tied to their location.

Are you psychologically capable of having a discussion with people without having to resort to lame-ass shit like name-calling to get your point across?

The bolded part is incorrect in the state of California. If it's correct in your state, how about you qualify your statements appropriately instead of proceeding to get so derogatory?

In California, the DMV does not issue the ID cards. They are issued EITHER by the recommending facility OR the health department. Now you're saying you're not even IN California, but you're going to tell us how it's done here? And go even further by telling me to.. hold on, gotta scroll up... 'do more research before blabbing my hole'...?

JUST because someone made a plastic card with your picture on it doesn't automagically mean that the DMV has a hold of it, or even had a hand in creating it. Good Christ.

You have now progressed to spewing utter nonsense. I hold a drivers license AND a recommendation. I am known to the DMV and other law enforcement (as a patient advocate, i.e. someone who makes it their business to know at least a little bit about the law, especially before they go off running their mouth). When I travel, I carry both my license (as my form of photo ID) and my recommendation, just in case I'm pulled over. Which rarely happens and, just as likely as not I'm let go. But, just in case I need.

Then again, I'm also apprised of the laws and have an attorney on retainer. Just in case.

See if this can be cleared up- Drivers licenses are issued by the state and controlled by them-....CDL- Commercial Drivers Licenses are issued by the state and controlled/regulated by the DOT: i.e. , Federal government. The owner of a COMMERCIAL drivers license has to piss test, no choice.

One speeding ticket can give cause to DOT to suspend a CDL. In addition, when you apply, much like all federal forms (think buying a firearm), the questionnaire asks about drug usage, and if filled out incorrectly, can be used against you................And this is how the Feds regulate (or not) over the states by "Commerce Clause".

Cheers
StellarP

read the line right above the one you bolded. it is very clear no medical exemption. period. end of story. your rec invalidates your CDL. You cant have a CDL and be a MMJ patient. anywhere. period. what the fuck is so hard to understand about this. its not new. if you have a condition which needs treating with marijuana..... sory........you cant drive a bigs fucking truck because they are regulated by DOT a FED agency. get it . last time. you cant LEGALLY have a CDL and BE a MMJ patient. ANYWHERE. and if you dont know the difference between a class C license and a CDL i dont expect you to be able to follow the
conversation.

Hey Huge, I've been following this thread and looking into th difference between CDL laws specific to California. Your attitude is that of a prick. I am sure you are a perfectly nice person in real life, but do not insult our fellow forum posters such as seamaiden, just because she has a different opinion. You pretty much invalidate your own knowledge and opinions and are going to get banned from what is otherwise a solid and informative discussion. Be respectful.

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

^yes lets be nice to the icmag ladies.

 

[HempKat]

Well looks like the party is over. With the courts blessing fed run healthcare is here. Now what does that mean for MMJ? Well if the past court rulings are any indication, it means the end of mmj. Why do I say this you ask. It has been established several times in that the Feds position of mmj having "no medical value" is supreme. Your employer can still fire you if are a mmj patient. You can't have a CdL if you are MMJ. The logical situation shoul follow that if the Feds now run healthcare and according to them there is no such thing as MMJ, that they will either deny you care or deny you MMJ.

I would love to Hear from the naieve who think this isn't a certainty.

Well there is one fatal flaw in your reasoning. What has been branded as ObamaCare is not Fed Run Healthcare. It's a Federal mandate for Americans to purchase Health Insurance. Now there is an option to buy an Insurance that the Feds use but you're still free to buy other non Fed insurances to be compliant with the mandate.

The only Fed run Healthcare I know of though is Medicare and so if you want to know what Fed run healthcare will be like you should look at that. I don't know anyone on Medicare that uses MMJ nor have I seen any stories about MMJ and Medicare in the news. So I have no idea what Medicare's position is on MMJ but whatever it is that's likely what any other Federal run healthcare will be like. Medicare, despite being despised by many as a government handout is actually a fairly well run efficient form of Medical coverage and would likely be the blueprint for any other Fed run healthcare.

MMJ is still moving forward and is being accepted in more and more places and while the Federal Government hasn't shown any signs of softening I think the pressure is on for MMJ to be accepted Federally. I don't know when it'll happen though, certainly no time soon if the Republicans win in November.

 

[HUGE]

Hey Huge, I've been following this thread and looking into th difference between CDL laws specific to California. Your attitude is that of a prick. I am sure you are a perfectly nice person in real life, but do not insult our fellow forum posters such as seamaiden, just because she has a different opinion. You pretty much invalidate your own knowledge and opinions and are going to get banned from what is otherwise a solid and informative discussion. Be respectful.

Now I'm going to be a prick to you. This is not a matter of opinion it's a matter of fact and law. The CDL program I administered by the DOT. And DOT says "medical exemption is no excuse for THC in pee. I am a prick to people who piss in my face and tell me it's raining. If you don't agree with my original premise, that's fine it's just opinion. But if you come in here saying stuff that is jut plainly false like you can legally have a CDL and a mmj rec I am obligated to set you straight. Now run along and tell your mom that someone was mean to you on the Internet.

 

[HUGE]

To be fair I'd say I pretty much agree with this post.

Well there is one fatal flaw in your reasoning. What has been branded as ObamaCare is not Fed Run Healthcare. It's a Federal mandate for Americans to purchase Health Insurance. Now there is an option to buy an Insurance that the Feds use but you're still free to buy other non Fed insurances to be compliant with the mandate.

The only Fed run Healthcare I know of though is Medicare and so if you want to know what Fed run healthcare will be like you should look at that. I don't know anyone on Medicare that uses MMJ nor have I seen any stories about MMJ and Medicare in the news. So I have no idea what Medicare's position is on MMJ but whatever it is that's likely what any other Federal run healthcare will be like. Medicare, despite being despised by many as a government handout is actually a fairly well run efficient form of Medical coverage and would likely be the blueprint for any other Fed run healthcare.

MMJ is still moving forward and is being accepted in more and more places and while the Federal Government hasn't shown any signs of softening I think the pressure is on for MMJ to be accepted Federally. I don't know when it'll happen though, certainly no time soon if the Republicans win in November.

 

[dagnabit]

MMJ is still moving forward and is being accepted in more and more places and while the Federal Government hasn't shown any signs of softening I think the pressure is on for MMJ to be accepted Federally. I don't know when it'll happen though, certainly no time soon if the Republicans win in November.

sure cuz them dems have been sooooo good for MMJ

 

[dagnabit]

^yes lets be nice to the icmag ladies.

FUCK THAT
there are no IC ladies.

in my mind every single poster on the internet is sexless.
self proclaimed "women" are just trannies.

 

[HempKat]

sure cuz them dems have been sooooo good for MMJ

No but they've been a hell of alot more reasonable about it then Republicans. Maybe you should wait for people to express what they mean rather then just assuming what they mean?

 

[HempKat]

As for this issue as it applies to CDL's well frankly anyone with the health issues connected to MMJ (glaucoma, currently on chemo, MS, etc) probably shouldn't be driving a commercial vehicle anyway. I personally would feel alot more comfortable knowing that all the guys barrelling down the highways with multiple tons of truck behind them were in perfect health and free of any drugs legal or otherwise.

In other words I'm not feeling too much sympathy for people wanting to be able to use drugs while driving 18 wheelers.

 

[dddaver]

I don't mean to hijack, but in Hempcat's discussion concerning Medicare it made me realize THAT is a BIG reason the fed will never pass MMJ laws. Then they would be required to pay for people's weed that buy the prescription coverage and that would drive costs sky high. Could you imagine having the gov. pay for your reefer? HILARIOUS. If anyone in gov. is actually formulating a plan to approve MMJ I bet they put a big 'ole exemption from covering that. I'd have no problem with that anyway. I'd always grow my own. Who wants gov. sponsored garbage?

Sorry for the hijack, a little change wasn't so bad anyway. It was getting kinda pissy and personal as so many threads seem to sometimes.

Oh, BTW, I thought and all female ICMAGer's are gorgeous, red hot mamas, there are to me anyway.

 

[dagnabit]

No but they've been a hell of alot more reasonable about it then Republicans. Maybe you should wait for people to express what they mean rather then just assuming what they mean?

We fundamentally disagree here...

Just as in other areas.

 

[HempKat]

We fundamentally disagree here...

Just as in other areas.

More assumptions on your part I see. You don't know enough of my views for us to fundementally agree or disagree.

Tell you what though, why not make your case as to why you disagree rather then make snarky comments and pretending like you know anything about what I think.

Or is that the extent of what you bring to the table? Sarcasm about what you believe others to think and nothing substantive of your own?

 

[dagnabit]

I was referring to the fact you and I have had numerous conversations on this very subject and fundamentally disagree on this and other matters.

Shall we have it yet again?

Do you not already know all the points ill make yet again?
Do you really suppose I dont already know the counter points you will make?

Fir fucks sake man....
I could just spend the next couple of hours cut and pasting the conversations together from the ones we have already had.


Ive already got one I dont need two

 

[HempKat]

I was referring to the fact you and I have had numerous conversations on this very subject and fundamentally disagree on this and other matters.

Shall we have it yet again?

Do you not already know all the points ill make yet again?
Do you really suppose I dont already know the counter points you will make?

Fir fucks sake man....
I could just spend the next couple of hours cut and pasting the conversations together from the ones we have already had.


Ive already got one I dont need two

Actually we've never had a discussion you and I specifically on this topic. What we've done is both of us have been involved in similarly related discussions and expressed similar view points to the ones being expressed here.

I for one would not presume to know what your position is and if I don't know your position I can't say if we fundementally agree or disagree.

As it pertains to the topic at hand I don't think either party is a sure thing for advancing MMJ because I don't see either party as being 100% in favor of MMJ and neither party has a strong track record of serving the will of the people. I do however see more democrats leaning favorably towards MMJ and therefore I think the odds are a little better if it's up to democrats. I also see individual democrats as being more willing to brake from party lines to serve the will of their constiuency then I see individual republicans braking from party lines to serve the will of their constituency.

Now on a fundemental level I think anyone who blindly plays the two party game is only fooling themselves. That democrats and republicans are two sides of the same coin with that coin being a politician that panders to the people to get votes but ultimately serves the will of the special interest groups lining their pockets. I've seen you express similar views so if I had to make a call I would say we do fundementally agree.

Ultimately I do think the government will be forced to give into MMJ but it's not going to be the way alot of us want. For example I don't see them ever leaving the growing of MMJ in the hands of average citizens but rather they (the government) will either grow it themselves or they'll leave it up to the big corporations to manage.

 

[Hydrosun]

I don't mean to hijack, but in Hempcat's discussion concerning Medicare it made me realize THAT is a BIG reason the fed will never pass MMJ laws. Then they would be required to pay for people's weed that buy the prescription coverage and that would drive costs sky high. Could you imagine having the gov. pay for your reefer? HILARIOUS. If anyone in gov. is actually formulating a plan to approve MMJ I bet they put a big 'ole exemption from covering that. I'd have no problem with that anyway. I'd always grow my own. Who wants gov. sponsored garbage?

Sorry for the hijack, a little change wasn't so bad anyway. It was getting kinda pissy and personal as so many threads seem to sometimes.

Oh, BTW, I thought and all female ICMAGer's are gorgeous, red hot mamas, there are to me anyway.

How about the truth. If the person were on large amounts of cannibs their total health care cost would be 1/10th the current rate, and the powers that be own 1000% of the current transactions and billing.