Jump to content


Photo

House And Senate Voted To Amend The Act Last Night


  • Please log in to reply
368 replies to this topic

#1 hofner67

hofner67

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 809 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 06:52 AM

On cell so I cant post article

#2 hofner67

hofner67

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 809 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 06:54 AM

Dems caved

#3 hofner67

hofner67

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 809 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 06:54 AM

Spineless

#4 SFC

SFC

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,095 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 07:06 AM

All four bills are on the governors desk. Other than the felon language which we did succeed in modifying some the bills overall in my opinion are pretty good. The government DID here our voices and did accept most of the changes we gave them.

#5 cristinew

cristinew

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,674 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 07:20 AM

What about 34 thats lets the cops know your a patient with a wim.... no respect to the voters..

#6 zapatosunidos

zapatosunidos

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 5,425 posts
Contributor

Posted 14 December 2012 - 07:23 AM

The amendments to the confidentiality section were removed in the S-5 substitute on the Senate floor. They will not be allowed to implement a LEIN interface to the registry.

#7 zapatosunidos

zapatosunidos

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 5,425 posts
Contributor

Posted 14 December 2012 - 07:35 AM

http://www.mlive.com..._marijuana.html

#8 zapatosunidos

zapatosunidos

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 5,425 posts
Contributor

Posted 14 December 2012 - 07:36 AM

Time to challenge HB 4856.

#9 cristinew

cristinew

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,674 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 07:44 AM

A photograph, if the department requires 1 ONE by rule.


so will we have to have a photo card,? will or do we have to have a card and a photo it for protections?

On the M live it quotes

HB 4834 requires a driver's license or state ID card to obtain medical marijuana patient registration cards, extends the card’s expiration from one to two years, and attempts to address a backlog of card applications by calling for the state to contract with a private company to help process and issue registration cards.
It also would allow the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs to verify the validity of registry cards to members of law enforcement, without disclosing more information than necessary.

(3) The department shall verify to law enforcement personnel
6 whether a registry identification card is valid, without disclosing
7 more information than is reasonably necessary to verify the
8 authenticity of the registry identification card

Edited by cristinew, 14 December 2012 - 07:47 AM.


#10 Restorium2

Restorium2

    Advanced Member

  • Supporters
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,936 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 08:10 AM

What's the point of doing this in the middle of the night? Seems like a party on us. When we stood up and told them we didn't want these bills it made it clear we didn't want them. Then it leaves LEO as who the party was thrown for. These are LEO's bills and this was LEO's Christmas Party of Legislators. LEO gets their Christmas Turkey and we get nothing. Not a single thing there for patients. I wish I could find something there but I can't find a single thing, oh wait. there may be one little crumb there. One crumb left over from their feast, two year cards. WOOHOO, we get two year cards.

#11 Hayduke

Hayduke

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 802 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 08:32 AM

A photograph, if the department requires 1 ONE by rule.


so will we have to have a photo card,? will or do we have to have a card and a photo it for protections?

On the M live it quotes

HB 4834 requires a driver's license or state ID card to obtain medical marijuana patient registration cards, extends the card’s expiration from one to two years, and attempts to address a backlog of card applications by calling for the state to contract with a private company to help process and issue registration cards.
It also would allow the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs to verify the validity of registry cards to members of law enforcement, without disclosing more information than necessary.

(3) The department shall verify to law enforcement personnel
6 whether a registry identification card is valid, without disclosing
7 more information than is reasonably necessary to verify the
8 authenticity of the registry identification card


I have not seen the final bill that passed, but the last one I saw eliminated pictures on the mmj card, but forced you to carry a state id or a drivers license along with your mmj card in order to be fully compliant...

#12 zapatosunidos

zapatosunidos

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 5,425 posts
Contributor

Posted 14 December 2012 - 08:32 AM

The HB 4856 thing is really stupid. They got two supermajorities. They could have done it legitimately, perhaps, but they chose to do it illegally. I feel we need to challenge it to protect ourselves from future similar moves.

#13 Hayduke

Hayduke

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 802 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 08:35 AM

from MLIve: "Starting around 4 a.m., two main bills got 29-9 and 30-8 votes in the Republican-led Senate. Shortly after, the GOP-controlled House voted 98-7 and 100-5 to send them to Gov. Rick Snyder."

It was not even close Resto, and I agree with your comment in general. Let this be a warning to the proponents of HB 5580.... you are in for an uphill slog....

#14 o0_bong_toker_0o

o0_bong_toker_0o

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 52 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 11:31 AM

WOOHOO, we get two year cards.


does that mean that they will be charging more for the card now that they are good for 2 Years?

#15 pic book

pic book

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,354 posts
  • LocationSW Detroit Fort at Junction, Clark at I-75).

Posted 14 December 2012 - 12:20 PM

they won't raise the fee it's gonna be free with a $200 mail-in rebate

#16 bobandtorey

bobandtorey

    The First To Be Raided and legal

  • Supporters
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,403 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 01:16 PM

The HB 4856 thing is really stupid. They got two supermajorities. They could have done it legitimately, perhaps, but they chose to do it illegally. I feel we need to challenge it to protect ourselves from future similar moves.

I gues you mean just legalize it

#17 Zerocool

Zerocool

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 326 posts
  • Locationupper michigan

Posted 14 December 2012 - 01:36 PM

ok i just read what got passed and got to ask did they open up p2p as i see this in the bill
20


(k) Any registered qualifying patient or registered primary

21


caregiver who sells marihuana to someone who is not allowed to use

22


marihuana for medical purposes under this act shall have his or her

23


registry identification card revoked and is guilty of a felony

24


punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of

25


not more than $2,000.00, or both, in addition to any other

26


penalties for the distribution of marihuana.

27


8. Affirmative Defense and Dismissal for Medical Marihuana.

#18 Juan Roberto

Juan Roberto

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 38 posts
  • Location... not really a Mexican

Posted 14 December 2012 - 01:56 PM

Any registered qualifying patient or registered primary
caregiver who sells marihuana to someone who is not allowed to use
marihuana for medical purposes under this act shall have his or her
registry identification card revoked and is guilty of a felony
punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of
not more than $2,000.00, or both, in addition to any other
penalties for the distribution of marihuana.


That statement only addresses the illegality of a registered user selling marijuana to anyone who is not registered (which every sane person already knows is illegal). So, without any explicit language to the contrary, one could say that P2P is legal within the language.

Inferences aside, I would really like to see explicit language permitting P2P written into the law.


(edit) Is there anyone here that was part of drafting the original language? If so, wasn't P2P intended to be legal when the law was written? It would make sense that the intent was to allow two different ways of obtaining meds: 1) a patient who cannot grow may name (or contract) a caregiver to grow for them, thus allowing the caregiver (whom may or may not be a patient already) to the grow for that patient up to 12 plants and supply from that stock, or 2) a patient could obtain meds from another patient's stock, as long as the patient providing stays within his/her 12 plant, 2.5oz limit.

Edited by Juan Roberto, 14 December 2012 - 02:06 PM.


#19 hic

hic

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 747 posts
  • Locationnewaygo county

Posted 14 December 2012 - 02:11 PM

So, without any explicit language to the contrary, one could say that P2P is legal within the language.


still a touch grey but I will run with it.

#20 o0_bong_toker_0o

o0_bong_toker_0o

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 52 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 02:11 PM

So no iI have to provide a voter reg. when I send in my paperwork...from House Bill 4834:


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:


6. Administering the Department's Rules.

Sec. 6. (a) The department shall issue registry identification

cards to qualifying patients who submit the following, in

accordance with the department's rules:

(1) A written certification;

(2) Application or renewal fee;

(3) Name, address, and date of birth of the qualifying

patient, except that if the applicant is homeless, no address is

required;

(4) Name, address, and telephone number of the qualifying

patient's physician;

(5) Name, address, and date of birth of the qualifying

patient's primary caregiver, if any; and

(6) Proof of Michigan residency. For the purposes of this

subdivision, a person shall be considered to have proved legal

residency in this state if any of the following apply:

(i) The person provides a copy of a valid, lawfully obtained

Michigan driver license issued under the Michigan vehicle code,

1949 PA 300, MCL 257.1 to 257.923, or an official state personal

identification card issued under 1972 PA 222, MCL 28.291 to 28.300.

---> (ii) The person provides a copy of a valid Michigan voter

registration.<--------

Edited by o0_bong_toker_0o, 14 December 2012 - 02:11 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users