Jump to content

Are Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Coming To Your Community?


Recommended Posts

yes probably a notarized form is good, although it looks like just a verbal agreement to be a cg is enough:

 

(h) "Primary caregiver" or "caregiver" means a person who is at least 21 years old and who has agreed to assist with a patient's medical use of marihuana and who has not been convicted of any felony within the past 10 years and has never been convicted of a felony involving illegal drugs or a felony that is an assaultive crime as defined in section 9a of chapter X of the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 770.9a.

 

but to be registered , you need the card from lara.

(j) "Registry identification card" means a document issued by the department that identifies a person as a registered qualifying patient or registered primary caregiver.

 

and sec4 only applies if

The privilege from arrest under this subsection applies only if the primary caregiver presents both his or her registry identification card and a valid driver license or government-issued identification card that bears a photographic image of the primary caregiver.

 

but i think the part you are after is in sec 9 

 

 

(b) If the department fails to issue a valid registry identification card in response to a valid application or renewal submitted pursuant to this act within 20 days of its submission, the registry identification card shall be deemed granted, and a copy of the registry identification application or renewal shall be deemed a valid registry identification card.

 

sec9b would only make the notarized paper into a card if you submit it, and within 20 days, i think.

© If at any time after the 140 days following the effective date of this act the department is not accepting applications, including if it has not created rules allowing qualifying patients to submit applications, a notarized statement by a qualifying patient containing the information required in an application, pursuant to section 6(a)(3)-(6) together with a written certification, shall be deemed a valid registry identification card.

 

sec9c here i dont know if there was a time in the 140 days after the effective date that would activate this.

 

its possible i am forgetting some argument that everyone saw in 2009.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes probably a notarized form is good, although it looks like just a verbal agreement to be a cg is enough:

 

(h) "Primary caregiver" or "caregiver" means a person who is at least 21 years old and who has agreed to assist with a patient's medical use of marihuana and who has not been convicted of any felony within the past 10 years and has never been convicted of a felony involving illegal drugs or a felony that is an assaultive crime as defined in section 9a of chapter X of the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 770.9a.

 

but to be registered , you need the card from lara.

(j) "Registry identification card" means a document issued by the department that identifies a person as a registered qualifying patient or registered primary caregiver.

 

and sec4 only applies if

The privilege from arrest under this subsection applies only if the primary caregiver presents both his or her registry identification card and a valid driver license or government-issued identification card that bears a photographic image of the primary caregiver.

 

but i think the part you are after is in sec 9 

 

 

(b) If the department fails to issue a valid registry identification card in response to a valid application or renewal submitted pursuant to this act within 20 days of its submission, the registry identification card shall be deemed granted, and a copy of the registry identification application or renewal shall be deemed a valid registry identification card.

 

sec9b would only make the notarized paper into a card if you submit it, and within 20 days, i think.

© If at any time after the 140 days following the effective date of this act the department is not accepting applications, including if it has not created rules allowing qualifying patients to submit applications, a notarized statement by a qualifying patient containing the information required in an application, pursuant to section 6(a)(3)-(6) together with a written certification, shall be deemed a valid registry identification card.

 

sec9c here i dont know if there was a time in the 140 days after the effective date that would activate this.

 

its possible i am forgetting some argument that everyone saw in 2009.

...and that police officer who enters into a verbal agreement with you as his/her caregiver will testify to that when? Where?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Well, I guess it matters what kind of recreational you are talking about? Washington blows.  How is that home growing going in Washington? Heh.. O wait, they are taking it away since they have commercial cannabis. Medical patients in Washington are losing their grow rights. You can keep that type of greener pasture all to yourself. ;-)

 

Also, Nevada has taken grow rights away from patients unless you are  not in a area that dispensaries will deliver to. Arizona only allows home growing if you are not within 25 miles of a dispensary.

 

 So of all the marijuana states only 14 allow home growing. Take away Washington, if that continues to happen, and it is 13.  Nevada is 99% lost for home growing(small loophole exists) so that is 12 states left with growing for the common man.

 

 And then Arizona is now littered with dispensaries and over 85% of patients cant grow, bringing the total number of states with home growing, REAL freedom, to 11.

 

 And of those 11,.. Michigan is on the generous side of the median as to how many plants one can have.  I would rate it at tied for 4th.  Some states have mature/immature statuses which in some ways is worse, espescially when it is like 3/3 mat/immat and some states  only allow like 4 mature and 7 "seedlings.  At least in Michigan you can choose.

 

So,... freedom wise,... Michigans law is pretty good. 

 

 

:-)

 

 

 I thought I would finish this off.

 

 So,... 3 states , Arizona, Nevada and Washington have lost or are losing in major part home growing.

 

That leaves 9 other states( of the 23 mmj states. I do not count CBD only states. It is nonsense.) that have no home growing.

 

 These states have non working programs because of it.  If ya can't grow it yourself or have a friend do it in your state,... you are then hosed in those non growing states.

 

Connecticut allow a supply of 2 months, but had  no open dispensaries or producers until this past October(law 3 years old)  with whom to purchase it from. Those dispensaries will serve maybe 1% of patient needs at this time. Dead program currently and useless.

 

D.C.  took years to license a dispensary and even now is useless for helping patients.

 

Delaware program dead. State will not implement dispensary only law. Possible new pilot program in works. Dead law.

 

Illinois law 2 years old. No dispensaries or growing facilities open even yet.  Is only a sunset law. May be dead in 2 years with a Repub governor who stated he would veto it.

 

Maryland law will be 2 and half years old in 2016 when they decide whether to give out dispensary licenses. Until then,.. dead program.

 

Massachusetts is trying and failing currently.  I actually have hope their program may sorta kinda start working some year in the future,...

 

Minnesota is useless.  Let just leave it there.  When Pawlenty veto'd the bill some 6-8 years ago, he really hosed the state. Non smokeable forms only which are illegal to have or make. Useless.

 

New Hampshire has a chance, but they killed the program currently and are not accepting any applications as I last knew.

 

New Jersey blows. A couple dispensaries serving maybe 3-5% of patients with crappy weed for expansive prices.  Crappy program indeed across the board.

 

New York is a weird one.  They have had a "law" since 1998 actually,... but it had never worked. Just recently they started allowing an A.D. for very small cultivation and dispensary licenses(60 ish?) were given to cover the whole state.  So far real crappy and unworkable, but showing some promise!

 

 

 And there ya go.  How important is home growing?  The only programs that work worth a crud have home growing.  Even the only states that have decent dispensary systems have home growing.

 

Don't be foolish.  The only  thing going is, your home is your castle small personal growing.  It is truly the only real game in the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose I should have finished my thought,..

 

This is why Michigans law is actually pretty good. This is why the grass isn't greener elsewhere.

 

I would say well over 80% of Michigan patients are being served wonderfully with this law. I would guess 10-15% have had supply issues of some sort, though typically not complete absence, and some people, 5% total patients maybe, due to various reasons just haven't or can't use the program themselves.

 

 So yea,... Our law is awesome and better than what most other supposed MMj states are dealing with.   Is it perfect? Heck no. Not even close.  Can it be better?  Yea exactly,.. stupid question.

 

But under the circumstances we are dealing with in this state, under the government we have been cursed with by Michigan voters and corporate money, it is kinda amazing we even still have any law whatsoever, or one that actually pretty much works okie dokie for the vast majority of patients.

 

Show some appreciation and hail in its glory!

 

;-p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I thought I would finish this off.

 

 So,... 3 states , Arizona, Nevada and Washington have lost or are losing in major part home growing.

 

That leaves 9 other states( of the 23 mmj states. I do not count CBD only states. It is nonsense.) that have no home growing.

 

 These states have non working programs because of it.  If ya can't grow it yourself or have a friend do it in your state,... you are then hosed in those non growing states.

 

Connecticut allow a supply of 2 months, but had  no open dispensaries or producers until this past October(law 3 years old)  with whom to purchase it from. Those dispensaries will serve maybe 1% of patient needs at this time. Dead program currently and useless.

 

D.C.  took years to license a dispensary and even now is useless for helping patients.

 

Delaware program dead. State will not implement dispensary only law. Possible new pilot program in works. Dead law.

 

Illinois law 2 years old. No dispensaries or growing facilities open even yet.  Is only a sunset law. May be dead in 2 years with a Repub governor who stated he would veto it.

 

Maryland law will be 2 and half years old in 2016 when they decide whether to give out dispensary licenses. Until then,.. dead program.

 

Massachusetts is trying and failing currently.  I actually have hope their program may sorta kinda start working some year in the future,...

 

Minnesota is useless.  Let just leave it there.  When Pawlenty veto'd the bill some 6-8 years ago, he really hosed the state. Non smokeable forms only which are illegal to have or make. Useless.

 

New Hampshire has a chance, but they killed the program currently and are not accepting any applications as I last knew.

 

New Jersey blows. A couple dispensaries serving maybe 3-5% of patients with crappy weed for expansive prices.  Crappy program indeed across the board.

 

New York is a weird one.  They have had a "law" since 1998 actually,... but it had never worked. Just recently they started allowing an A.D. for very small cultivation and dispensary licenses(60 ish?) were given to cover the whole state.  So far real crappy and unworkable, but showing some promise!

 

 

 And there ya go.  How important is home growing?  The only programs that work worth a crud have home growing.  Even the only states that have decent dispensary systems have home growing.

 

Don't be foolish.  The only  thing going is, your home is your castle small personal growing.  It is truly the only real game in the country.

 

Thank you for all your post they are the reasons i send people here when they say all the other State like CO and D.C our doing so well 

 

I say keep fighting for what we now have left because if the High Court doesn't rule in our favor one 2 case's it won't be good for no one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for all your post they are the reasons i send people here when they say all the other State like CO and D.C our doing so well 

 

I say keep fighting for what we now have left because if the High Court doesn't rule in our favor one 2 case's it won't be good for no one

We don't have much to worry about with the 'high court'. They can't flat out change the law like the legislature is trying to do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Don't they legislate from the bench all the time ?

Not like what the cops and dispensaries are trying to do via the legislature. They have no rules, they can do whatever they want to, don't even have to pretend to stay in the framework of the Act. And once the legislature changes the Act that does give the High Court more latitude. Right now the Act is pretty much defined except for some small nuances, it is what it is. After they open the Act for the cops and dispensaries then we start all over again with the bad stuff going on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is that?

 

Because it is presumptive Greg.

 

I suppose I should not have said anything and just let it slide.

Thing is, I see these types of statements made that are based on one persons very limited experiences often.

Then the statement is made as if it is truth.  Then others come along, read it, think it is truth and spread it

around as if it is truth, when in fact there has been no verification of it's truth... just a persons assumption.

 

I feel it is sloppy at best.  We are here truth seeking.

wth happens if indeed leo does read forum boards (this has been discussed and we know it's true),

then take these assumptions and use them to further restrict/ arrest  patients an caregivers?

I feel we have a responsibility to the entire community when we post in open forums, and such statements 

imho, are irresponsible.  Were you using it as a lead in to bring up the contract?

 

 

Maybe I just need a break as this kind of thing is really getting me miffed more and more lately :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I thought I would finish this off.

 

 So,... 3 states , Arizona, Nevada and Washington have lost or are losing in major part home growing.

 

Massachusetts is trying and failing currently.  I actually have hope their program may sorta kinda start working some year in the future,...

 

Minnesota is useless.  Let just leave it there.  When Pawlenty veto'd the bill some 6-8 years ago, he really hosed the state. Non smokeable forms only which are illegal to have or make. Useless.

 

 

 And there ya go.  How important is home growing?  The only programs that work worth a crud have home growing.  Even the only states that have decent dispensary systems have home growing.

 

Don't be foolish.  The only  thing going is, your home is your castle small personal growing.  It is truly the only real game in the country.

 

You use more than a few charged words as you make your points. A very ineffective debate tactic as the intent is to create emotion where there is already enough. That is why most people argue instead of debate. I like your list and your knowledge. Going through it though I find some inconsistencies that make your comments opinion as opposed to fact as you would have most people believe if they didn't further research your statements.

 

Massachusetts licensed their first dispensary on New Year's Eve. They started growing yesterday I'm sure. Mass. has a home grow law nearly identical to Michigan and allows for 60 a day supply which is accepted as 10 ounces. Massachusetts appears ahead of Michigan today. I'd prefer 10 oz per patient as a c.g. over the absurd 2.5.

 

Washington home growing remains unchanged for medical patients. I think they will transition to Colorado's model for recreational grows but only time will tell, we know the glacial progress of change in this movement. To say that it has "lost" when it affords medical patients (like us) the same rights as it did before appears an erroneous conclusion to me.

 

Minnesota is jacked for sure. Their program is far from dead and unfortunately likely represents a model (in my opinion) for future states and the process the Federal Government is likely to use when they get tired of losing out on revenue and lobbyists representing companies who can profit. It allows them to keep arresting the same people they love to while letting people in suits and lab coats rake in profits. Thanks for pointing that one out. Not good.

 

You and I agree completely that 4271 and future legislation represent daggers being thrown at the heart of the home grower. I think all states that get on board from here out will view home growers as a problem and not a solution when it comes to taxation and having any form of marijuana legal in the state.

 

We also agree that the Michigan law is good in comparison to other state laws. I still contend it is not being read correctly but my summations are far from complete. The wording is there - the will to not see it is still too strong and may always be. Something tells me you were one of the guys (like myself) in the '90s who said "The worst thing they could do is legalize because the prices and controls would be staggering compared to the status quo."

 

I want amnesty for those incarcerated and relief of persecution for my brothers and sisters and see no other option. Passing legislation to decriminalize and eliminate home growing will be amusing. Unlike prohibition the growers have always produced in secrecy. I think that is the inevitable endgame, I just hope I'm alive long enough to complain that a pack of 28% THC cigarettes costs too much at my local smoker's outlet.

Edited by YesMichigan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Medical Marijuana a Challenge for Legal Pot States

http://abcnews.go.com/us/wirestory/medical-marijuana-challenge-legal-pot-states-27955753

 

SEATTLE —

Jan 2, 2015, 12:32 AM

 

A year into the nation's experiment with legal, taxed marijuana sales, Washington and Colorado find themselves wrestling not with the federal interference many feared, but with competition from medical marijuana or even outright black market sales.

 

In Washington, the black market has exploded since voters legalized marijuana in 2012, with scores of legally dubious medical dispensaries opening and some pot delivery services brazenly advertising that they sell outside the legal system.

 

Licensed shops say taxes are so onerous that they can't compete.

 

Colorado, which launched legal pot sales last New Year's Day, is facing a lawsuit from Nebraska and Oklahoma alleging that they're being overrun with pot from the state.

 

And the number of patients on Colorado's medical marijuana registry went up, not down, since 2012, meaning more marijuana users there can avoid paying the higher taxes that recreational pot carries.

 

Officials in both states say they must do more to drive customers into the recreational stores. They're looking at reining in their medical systems and fixing the big tax differential between medical and recreational weed without harming patients.

 

And in some cases, they are considering cracking down on the proliferating black market.

 

"How can you have two parallel systems, one that's regulated, paying taxes, playing by the rules, and the other that's not doing any of those things?" said Rick Garza of the Washington Liquor Control Board, which oversees recreational pot.

 

The difficulty of reconciling medical marijuana with taxed recreational pot offers a cautionary tale for states that might join Washington and Colorado in regulating the adult use of the drug.

 

While legalization campaigns have focused on the myriad ills of prohibition, including racial discrepancies in who gets busted for weed, the promise of additional tax revenues in tight budget times was in no small part of the appeal.

 

Weed sales have so far brought in some revenue, though less than officials might have hoped.

 

Colorado brought in more than $60 million in taxes, licenses and fees for recreational and medical marijuana combined through October of this year, and more than half of pot sold was of the lesser-taxed medical variety.

 

In Washington, where supply problems and slow licensing hampered the industry after sales began in July, the state collected about $15 million in taxes this year.

 

The latest states to legalize marijuana ? Oregon and Alaska ? have different concerns, but officials there are nevertheless paying attention to Colorado and Washington as they work on rules for their own industry.

 

Alaska doesn't have commercial medical dispensaries, so licensed stores there won't face direct competition. And in Oregon, taxes on recreational pot are set at just $35 an ounce, which officials hope will minimize competition from the medical side.

 

In Seattle, however, six licensed recreational stores face competition from medical pot shops that are believed to number in the hundreds.

 

"Am I afraid about medical marijuana dispensaries taking my business? They have all the business. They are the industry," said James Lathrop, the owner of Seattle's first licensed pot shop, Cannabis City.

 

He said the dominance of medical marijuana and the black market is obvious in his clientele: It's mostly tourists and professionals who use pot occasionally and don't mind spending a little extra at a legal store.

 

Regular pot users have stuck with their old dealers or continue masquerading as patients, he said.

 

Reining in medical marijuana will be a top priority when the legislative session begins in Olympia next month.

 

The question, lawmakers say, is how to direct people into the regulated system ? maximizing state revenues ? without hurting legitimately sick people who use marijuana.

 

Ideas under discussion include reducing pot taxes to make recreational stores more competitive and eliminating medical dispensaries, which have been largely tolerated by law enforcement even though they aren't allowed under state law.

 

The state could lift its cap on the number of recreational stores and license dispensaries to sell pot for any purpose.

 

Seattle officials have signaled that they intend to start busting delivery services that flout the law and recently sent letters to 330 marijuana businesses warning them that they'll eventually need to obtain state licenses or be shut down.

 

Tacoma has also announced plans to close dozens of unregulated pot shops.

 

Officials have less leeway to alter the medical marijuana system in Colorado, where it was enshrined in the state constitution in 2000. But lawmakers are nevertheless set to review how it is regulated next year because the state's 2010 scheme is expiring.

 

Taxes will be a large part of the discussion. Medical pot is now subject only to the statewide 2.9 percent sales tax, one-tenth of the taxes levied on recreational pot.

 

Colorado's medical marijuana registry has grown from 107,000 people in late 2012 to about 116,000 this year, though marijuana patient advocates dispute that the growth is tax-driven.

 

State health officials, who oversee the registry, are planning to better scrutinize doctors who recommend large numbers of medical pot patients or who recommend more than the baseline of six plants for a patient.

 

The challenge for lawmakers will be countering perceptions that they're trying to squeeze sick people for cash.

 

"I don't want to wind up cracking down on people abusing the system in a way that negatively impacts the patients and the people who help them," said Teri Robnett, founder of the Cannabis Patients Alliance.

 

 

-------------------------------------------------------

Marijuana profits up in smoke under IRS rules

 

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/03/irs-limits-profits-marijuana-businesses/18165033/

 

More than 50 years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that even those who make their money illegally have to pay taxes. Under today's tax code the government stands to make more money from the sale of marijuana than those selling it legally. Trevor Hughes, USA TODAY

 

Voters in Oregon, Alaska and Washington, D.C., legalized recreational marijuana Tuesday.

 

But without the support of the U.S. Congress, any of the new, voter-approved pot shops may not be able to survive a drug war-era tax code that already threatens many businesses in Colorado and Washington state.

 

Under this tax code the federal government stands to make more money from the sale of marijuana than those legally selling it. And that could be enough to shut down many shops.

 

"It's almost like they want us to fail," said Mitch Woolhiser, while walking through his store called Northern Lights Cannabis Co. in Edgewater, Colo. "Everything I do is aimed at keeping us in business because if I don't, then (the feds) win. And I'm not going to let them win."

 

Woolhiser believes the federal government is actively seeking to undermine his business.

 

Woolhiser first opened shop in 2010, selling medical marijuana. He started selling recreational pot when it became legal in Colorado at the start of this year. Last year, his business didn't earn a profit. Had he been selling anything but cannabis, he would not have owed federal income tax, as he ended up with a loss.

 

Instead, he ended up paying close to $20,000 to the IRS because of a 1980's tax code called 280E.

 

“It's almost like they want us to fail.”

Mitch Woolhiser, owner of Northern Lights Cannabis Co.

"I believe that the feds extend the drug war through 280E," said Jordan Cornelius, a Denver accountant who has worked with Woolhiser and many other marijuana companies in Colorado. "If (the federal government) can't put them out of business legally when voters are mandating these businesses to move forward, it's very easy to put them out of business financially."

 

It's unclear that the federal government is actively enforcing this tax code in an effort to undermine the legal business, but that is the effect.

 

No one from the U.S. Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration or Internal Revenue Service would comment for this story. However, an IRS spokesperson provided a 2010 letter written in response to several lawmakers in Arizona, California, Colorado and Massachusetts who had asked the IRS to stop enforcing the tax code in states that legalized the sale of marijuana. The IRS letter pointed out that only Congress could make that change.

 

"The result you seek would require the Congress to amend either the Internal Revenue Code or the Controlled Substance Act," the IRS letter said.

 

Though multiple members of Congress received the letter, there has been little effort to amend the code.

 

Instead, the federal government collects taxes on what it considers an illegal drug because the Supreme Court ruled more than 50 years ago that everyone has to pay taxes — even those who make their money illegally.

 

Then, in 1982, Congress amended the U.S. tax code to include 280E, which says businesses selling a Schedule I or II drug — like marijuana, heroin, methamphetamine or cocaine — cannot deduct all of their regular business expenses.

 

The rule means that the "costs of the product," like the soil and fertilizer used to grow plants, are deductible. But the "costs of selling," like advertising, rent and utilities — even salaries for employees — are not deductible.

 

"If it made sense, I would feel better about following it," said Rob Corry, a Denver lawyer and marijuana advocate. "I don't see why production is deductible — they are still producing marijuana!"

 

 

Mitch Woolhiser, owner of Northern Lights Cannabis Co., talks about the federal taxes he pays from operating his medical and recreational marijuana store in Edgewater, Colo., on Friday, Oct., 31, 2014. Because of the nature of tax code 280E, which taxes Woolhiser at a higher rate than some other businesses, he doesn't know how much he will owe in taxes.(Photo: Joe Mahoney, Rocky Mountain PBS I-News)

 

But that quirk in the tax code has helped many cannabis companies stay in business over the last several years in Colorado. Medical marijuana stores were required to grow their own product, and therefore had some associated deductions.

 

Since Oct. 1, nearly 100 new cannabis companies got licenses to operate in Colorado and will no longer have to grow the products they sell. But without growing, many may soon find that they will have very few, if any, business deductions when filing federal taxes in April.

 

“If it made sense, I would feel better about following it. I don't see why production is deductible — they are still producing marijuana!”

Rob Corry, a Denver lawyer and marijuana advocate

For Woolhiser, whose sales have increased dramatically since he began selling recreational marijuana Jan. 1, the confusing nature of the code means he has no idea how much he will owe in taxes — just that it will be far more than what it might be if he was selling anything else.

 

"A lot of people think that the marijuana industry is just a license to print money," said Taylor West, deputy director of the National Cannabis Industry Association. "And it's just not the case."

 

West works for an association of more than 750 cannabis-related businesses across the United States, and says that 280E results in her clients paying more than 70% of their profits in taxes to the federal government.

 

Sometimes, the rates are far higher than that.

 

"A lot of times, instead of paying a tax rate that should be 30 to 40%, they are paying rates between 80 or 90%," Cornelius, the accountant, said. "I even have a client right now that is paying more than 100% effective tax rate."

 

Woolhiser is hoping that increased sales this year will make up for the loss he took last year — but he is still paying off his debt to the IRS.

 

"The problem is that we have passed laws that allowed these medical marijuana and recreational marijuana companies to do business," said Mac Clouse, a University of Denver finance professor who studies the industry. "But we have all these other laws, tax laws, federal laws that make it incredibly difficult if not utterly impossible to survive."

 

More states may legalize marijuana this year, but state laws don't change federal laws.

 

And barring any changes from Congress, new cannabis businesses in those states, along with the established shops in Colorado and Washington state, face a large, and possibly ruinous, tax bill come April 15.

 

---------------------------------------------------------

Medical Cannabis Equals Big Business

 

As individual States begin legalizing medical cannabis, it is clear that there are many who intend to make it also equal big business and big money. Florida is feeling this state of Limited Liability Company (LLC) and incorporation frenzy as the laws are heading towards legalization of this drug for medical use. All across the state companies are registering for businesses that relate to medical marijuana, everything from clinics to growing equipment and even lawyers that specialize in this area. The revenues that the stores (comfort stations) bring to the economy of the community is in some cases, not enough for the politicians to get behind.

 

 

 

New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania are just a few of the other States, along with Florida that currently have bills looking to legalize this drug for medical and/or recreational use this year. The map to the right shows which states have bills pending on this topic. With all the talk of the benefits of this drug especially to cancer and epilepsy patients a lot of politicians are changing their views on this somewhat controversial law and still more are standing firm against it. They are the ones that are dead set against medical cannabis being legal no matter how beneficial its effects are on those with chronic pain or debilitating illnesses, and they will stand firm against recreational use, and continue to make noise about its medical use. Fear of letting children believe that medical cannabis is a green light for recreational use is what they will use to stop what equals big business in their respective States, and there is opposition in just about all of the United States.

 

Those that have legalized cannabis for medical use, which includes states like Michigan, Illinois and even Alaska, are seeing a boost to the economy as ‘comfort stations’ are set up and selling their sometimes outrageously named products, which really does equal big business. The taxing of these products has provided an influx of money to a sometimes otherwise stifled economy. Florida alone has projected $780 million a year in sales of legalized medical marijuana, this is based on other states revenue and then adjusted to the current population of Florida. Also up for vote in November for Floridians is the legalization of cannabis oil, dubbed ‘Charlotte’s Web’ which is used in the treatment of severe seizures in children. Big business for sure, and those said business men and women like to have all the regulations set out for them, like who can sell or process this product, and where will the seeds actually come from. If Florida gets all the rules and regulations out in front of them, there is a good chance these bills will pass this November.

 

No one wants suffering of the American people with such debilitating diseases as cancer, epilepsy and seizures in children, but is Medical Cannabis the way to go, or is it strictly big business that will push this through.

 

 

Read more at http://guardianlv.com/2014/04/medical-cannabis-equals-big-business/#vdXmLtXpGfiE0TI1.99

 

 

------------------------------------------------------

 

REGULATION IS SQUEEZING OUT POTREPRENEURS, CLEARING THE ROAD FOR BIG CANNABIS

AS THE LEGAL MARIJUANA INDUSTRY TILTS MORE TOWARD DEEP-POCKETED INVESTORS, CAN SMALL BUSINESSES HANG ON?

 

http://www.fastcompany.com/3038663/how-we-push-small-businesses-out-of-the-legal-marijuana-market

 

For Julie Dooley, marijuana is a business and a cause.

 

A 46-year-old mother of three, Dooley is the cofounder and president of Julie’s Baked Goods, a purveyor of cannabis-infused snacks. She has celiac disease and wanted to create gluten-free products that would relieve her pain without damaging her intestine. Dooley’s Denver company released its first product, granola mixed with cranberries and almonds, in 2010 and now sells about 6,000 units a month, employing 11 people.

 

Even in Colorado, where medical and recreational marijuana are both legal, the cannabis business involves its share of hassles. Initially, Dooley’s license cost $1,250 and required a 25-page application. Renewing it, she said, cost more than twice that and required investing about $25,000 in the company’s kitchen, including a security system with 24-hour video surveillance. She wouldn’t have a business today if her husband weren’t a manufacturing specialist, she says.

 

As hard as she’s worked, Dooley’s experience has been relatively easy for a medical marijuana business in this country. Marijuana remains illegal federally, which leaves every state which allows the product to figure out its own regulations. Colorado was one of the first states to legalize recreational marijuana, and its regulations help ensure that cannabis companies have to pay close attention to the regulatory landscape to ensure they’re in step with the law. "I know every city councilman," Dooley said. "I don’t want to."

 

Colorado has plenty of small potrepreneurs like Dooley. Marijuana advocates talk up the value of their businesses to create jobs, pay taxes and help the sick. But at last week’s National Marijuana Business Conference in Las Vegas, the future of pot looked much less like an archipelago of mission-driven small enterprises than an emerging mega industry to be dominated by large companies.

 

Big Cannabis is coming. Increasingly, state regulations for legal marijuana are tilted toward outfits with deep pockets. Venture capitalists are looking for the brands that can ramp up and be everywhere overnight. (Just this week Privateer Holdings, a private equity firm, and the family of reggae legend Bob Marley announced that they will release Marley Natural, a cannabis brand inspired by the singer.) And people who are working to start small businesses—who often believe cannabis as a social or medical good—wonder if the gold rush is going to pass them by.

 

The day before Las Vegas marijuana convention began, a firm called The ArcView Group held a more exclusive event in a hotel ballroom a few miles from the Las Vegas Strip. The company connects its more than 300 member investors with promising cannabis-related startups. In less than two years, CEO Troy Dayton said ArcView has facilitated investments of at least $17 million in 34 companies. ArcView members include professionals working for Wall Street banks and large venture capital firms, he said, though they often attend in an independent capacity.

 

The day of panel discussions and company pitches began with a welcome from Dayton, who was buoyed by votes legalizing recreational cannabis in Oregon, Alaska and Washington, D.C. "Before we get into figuring out how much money we can make," he acknowledged the "people sitting in prison right now for this plant."

 

One attendee was Andrea Goldman, a senior executive at a major financial firm which she declined to name. She is also part of a cannabis investing vehicle called the Budding Enterprise Fund. The firm has yet to make any investments, but she expects that cannabis startups could eventually be acquired by "big pharma, big ag, big tobacco, because they’re going to be interested."

 

For Dooley, regulation is a constant burden and a threat to her small business. But for the larger businesses working in a gray market like cannabis, regulation can be beneficial: it legitimizes their work in the eyes of the public and keeps out small competitors.

 

Nevada’s High-Roller Game

 

Early this month Nevada, which has legalized medical marijuana, issued preliminary business licenses to growing operations, factories (businesses like Dooley’s), dispensaries and testing facilities. Industry leaders compared the closely watched process to obtaining a Nevada gaming license. It required applicants, among much else, to demonstrate liquidity of at least $250,000 per license—that’s $500,000 if an applicant wanted a factory and dispensary—not including startup costs.

 

Kurt Barrick, CEO of a consultancy with the wonderful name VonDank, assisted clients with Nevada applications: One particularly complex multiple-license entry reached 962 pages, he remembered. The Nevada application asks for, among much else, extensive technical and financial information. One businessperson who participated in five successful applications said the process cost $1.4 million—not including the liquidity requirements—bringing in legal, accounting and lobbying services.

 

The application process is so fraught that in August, The Las Vegas Sun reported that Jay Brown, one of the most influential lawyers in the state, would charge his clients who successfully obtained licenses 9 percent of the business’s net revenue for the first 10 years.

 

Leslie Bocskor, founding chairman of the Nevada Cannabis Industry Association, calls the process "merit based."

 

"Nevada has a history of setting up regulatory frameworks for industries that were once viewed as taboo," he says. Bocskor, a dapper former investment banker with a long door-knocker beard and the bushy eyebrows of a Victorian magician, is raising a $25 million fund to invest in cannabis companies. While some investors who are interested in the space stick with auxiliary services, to avoid breaking federal law, he says his Electrum Fund will back companies that "touch the plant." (In general, companies face less regulation and less risk the further they are from the plant, which can makes those spaces more attractive to small business people.)

 

Bocskor said the restrictions are designed to help keep out "bad actors" and ensure that the industry will not embarrass the state. He predicts that the state will become a Silicon Valley of cannabis where researchers develop ultra-refined strains of pot and exploit the plant’s medical potential. One hydroponics CEO estimated that the Las Vegas market alone could be worth up to $1.5 billion annually.

 

I asked Bocskor if the cannabis industry would also expect the same tax breaks that he said gaming and mining already receive in the state. "Once it’s big enough it will be asking for all the same accommodations," he said. "But that’s seven or ten years out." He added that marijuana’s illegal status nationally would give the state more leverage to tax cannabis.

 

Other states have also created rules that restrict entry into the cannabis industry. This year Connecticut issued four growing licenses that required each qualifier to put $2 million in escrow. A press release announcing the licenses said Connecticut is the "first state medical marijuana program based squarely on the pharmaceutical/medical model."

 

A frequent argument for tough restrictions boils down to ‘We can’t allow just anyone to start a pharmaceutical company in their garage.’ Cannabis activists counter that medical marijuana is immensely beneficial and has been used safely (if illegally) by millions of people. As experts debate, the results for entrepreneurs are clearer: Where legal marijuana is treated as something that should only come out of a pharmaceutical company, small storefront businesses won’t have much of a chance.

 

"The Cannabis Capital of The World"

 

Nevada is a small state by population, but it’s been making big bets lately. "Las Vegas is going to be the cannabis capital of the world," Bocskor said.

 

It’s a familiar refrain for Nevada, a state with economy that’s highly dependent on tourism today, but wants to build the drone capital of the country and the batteries for an anticipated wave of Tesla buyers in the coming years.

 

When it comes to pot, the thesis is that legal cannabis in Nevada will become one of the signature experiences for Vegas tourists. It’s no stretch to grasp that getting stoned could enhance a night at a celebrity chef restaurant or Cirque du Soleil. (The impact on slot machine revenue is dispiriting to contemplate.)

 

Nevada law allows recognized medical marijuana consumers from other states to buy it in Nevada, the most permissive "reciprocity" component of any state. Nevada voters will decide on full legalization in 2016 if state lawmakers don’t allow it first.

 

The combination of customer access and Las Vegas exposure could be a huge advantage for brands like Marley Natural with national aspirations. Pot growers have honed their craft to the point that powerful pot is well on its way to becoming a commodity. If Vegas can establish itself as the place where many tourists take their first legal hit with a reputable brand, it could establish itself as the marijuana industry town.

 

It’s a billion-dollar business opportunity, but some activists and small businesspeople see where the industry is going as a raw deal for them and a missed opportunity for a country with a steadily declining rate of entrepreneurship. "Big business and big government are doing this under the guise that they have to control all this," said Jane West, who started Edible Events, a cannabis event planning company in Denver. >>>>>"It’s all about big money now."<<<<<<<

 

--------------------------------------------------

 

Marijuana Dispensaries Becoming Exclusive Domain Of The 1 Percent

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/25/marijuana-dispensaries_n_3496588.html

 

Once a business proposition that required little more than a few thousand dollars and some gardening equipment, selling medical marijuana is quickly becoming a dream fit only for deep-pocketed entrepreneurs.

 

Regulations in states that only recently legalized medical marijuana are mandating that would-be dispensary operators set aside large amounts of cash before even applying for a license, tipping the scales in favor of businesspeople with money to burn. Drawn-out licensing processes being devised in those states mean permits to run dispensaries will likely only go to those able to afford a cadre of consultants and lawyers.

 

Five years ago, Ean Seeb helped open Colorado dispensary Denver Relief with “four thousand dollars and half a pound of cannabis.”

 

“I don’t think that would ever happen again,” said Seeb, who now works as a dispensary consultant. “Somebody who just has a good idea but little capital would find it difficult to impossible to go into the business today.”

 

Seeb said he is counseling clients in Massachusetts, where only 35 dispensary licenses will be granted starting later this year, to set aside at least $2 million before even considering going into the medical marijuana industry. Not only are state fees related to the permitting process likely to total over $100,000 for many dispensaries, but the merit-based process for obtaining a license is also expected to privilege those who can demonstrate they have excess cash to secure an abundant supply of cannabis.

 

In Connecticut, where rules are yet to be finalized and the state has only committed to allowing one dispensary, fees are expected to be higher and competition to secure a cannabis producer’s license even fiercer. Among other requirements, Connecticut will ask dispensary owners to post a $2 million bond that the state will be able to access if operations falter. Seeb is telling clients there to make sure they have at least $6 million in the bank before moving forward.

 

When it awarded 98 licenses to open medical marijuana dispensaries 10 months ago, the state of Arizona required applicants to show $150,000 in capital. The vast majority of those getting into the business appeared to be well-heeled entrepreneurs, according to interviews with license-holders and consultants in the state. Owners of real estate firms, cellphone shops and motorcycle dealerships, along with at least one college student with a trust fund are now in line to become medical marijuana store owners, the consultants said. None of the new licensees interviewed by The Huffington Post had any experience running a health care venture, and at least one was openly disdainful of marijuana as a business.

 

That reality is in stark contrast to the situation in California and Colorado a few years back, when dispensaries first became legal. The free-wheeling business, devoid of regulation or store count limits, was immediately dominated by marijuana insiders: former legalization activists and growers with connections to the underground market. Now, industry sources told HuffPost, the average ganjapreneur is likely to have deep capital pools and a view on the bottom line, if little love for cannabis as a plant.

 

“It’s just like anything else, it’s a business opportunity for me,” said Thai Nguyen, who owns a real estate firm in Phoenix and is partnering with his wife and one of his employees to open a store called Herbal Wellness Center in central Phoenix. While those who set up dispensaries in California and Colorado after the drug was first legalized in those states were often activists with an open pride for their product, Nguyen expressed concern about how being publicly associated with the marijuana industry could affect his other businesses.

 

Just a few miles away from Nguyen, a businessman whose previous interests include a cellphone retail store and a cigar shop said he is trying to open a dispensary in Chandler, Ariz., mainly as a profit proposition.

 

“I’m a business owner,” Ramey Sweis, the businessman, said. “Between me and my partners, we have maybe 20 to 30 businesses. We saw this as a good avenue to expand as a business plan. Nothing more.”

 

State public records show the owner, salesperson and service technician at Phoenix motorcycle dealership Apache Motorcycles are among those who received a license to set up a marijuana dispensary in the state. Randall and Rex Webb, two Arizona businessmen with multiple ventures throughout the state, are also listed as principals of a non-profit corporation attempting to secure a dispensary permit, public records show. Repeated calls for comment to those parties were not returned.

 

Industry sources described a sort of gold rush mentality for the newly legal industry.

 

"It’s just like seven years ago when everyone who could became a real estate agent, and they owned a hair salon but they were also a loan broker or whatever,” said Adam Bierman, whose firm The MedMen has helped advise dozens of would-be dispensary owners in California, Colorado, Arizona and Nevada. “It’s the same thing. People are piling in because it’s the hottest industry right now.”

 

“It’s like the Super Bowl is coming to town,” he added.

 

Kris Krane, who said his firm 4Front Advisors has advised 32 clients in six states on how to set up and operate medical marijuana dispensaries, said there is a benefit to having people with plenty of capital come into the industry.

 

“Professional-looking retailers have the ability to change public perception,” Krane said. “The stereotype gets changed from the stoner burnout selling weed from his parent’s basement when a beautiful, high-end retailer that the community can be proud of opens up.”

 

A former activist with Students For Responsible Drug Policy and the National Organization For The Reform Of Marijuana Laws, Krane said he sees his current position as an extension of his previous work fighting the so-called war on drugs.

 

“We move the movement forward by making sure the industry thrives,” Krane said.

 

But there are drawbacks, according to Bierman, the MedMen advisor.

 

“Some of the people that were getting in, these real estate entrepreneurs who want to be pot tycoons, they don’t know what they’re doing,” he said. “People in Arizona got a license and then called and were like 'What do I do?' And I told them to buy a 25,000-square-foot warehouse and fill it with marijuana. And they freaked out. They were like ‘Oh my god, that’s illegal. I can’t do that. I can’t go to jail.'"

 

“People coming into the industry now are scaring too easily,” Bierman added.

Edited by purple pimpernel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can actually have 5 oz. per patient if they have 2.5 and you have 2.5 as their caregiver.  What I don't like is that you can only have 2.5 as a patient , growing your own, with no caregiver.  You should be able to have 5 for yourself just like everyone else does.   2.5 useable and 2.5 waiting to transfer to yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can actually have 5 oz. per patient if they have 2.5 and you have 2.5 as their caregiver.  What I don't like is that you can only have 2.5 as a patient , growing your own, with no caregiver.  You should be able to have 5 for yourself just like everyone else does.   2.5 useable and 2.5 waiting to transfer to yourself.

 

Your 2.5 as a c.g. should not be included to what you are keeping for your personal ailment. The law is meant to criminalize providers as opposed to helping those needing relief.

Edited by YesMichigan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A registered caregiver can possess 2.5 ounces for each patient registered to him or her, in addition to his or her personal supply, should they be a registered patient also.

 

I initially stated it the way I wanted and the way that it reads "I'd prefer 10 oz per patient as a c.g. over the absurd 2.5." This was in reference to Massachusetts' law being scrutinized.

 

As a c.g. (regardless of my status) I can possess 2.5 ounces per qualified patient (loose term as the state does not recognize me as an M.D. or Pharmacist). This 2.5 ounces is to provide treatment but is an inadequate amount for the intended purpose. 10 ounces allows for different strains, methods of dosage and the inevitable logistical delays present in the manufacture of any good or delivery of any service. I think the MA provision for a 60 day supply is a more realistic view of the actual process of medicating compared to Michigan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You use more than a few charged words as you make your points. A very ineffective debate tactic as the intent is to create emotion where there is already enough. That is why most people argue instead of debate. I like your list and your knowledge. Going through it though I find some inconsistencies that make your comments opinion as opposed to fact as you would have most people believe if they didn't further research your statements.

 

Massachusetts licensed their first dispensary on New Year's Eve. They started growing yesterday I'm sure. Mass. has a home grow law nearly identical to Michigan and allows for 60 a day supply which is accepted as 10 ounces. Massachusetts appears ahead of Michigan today. I'd prefer 10 oz per patient as a c.g. over the absurd 2.5.

 

Washington home growing remains unchanged for medical patients. I think they will transition to Colorado's model for recreational grows but only time will tell, we know the glacial progress of change in this movement. To say that it has "lost" when it affords medical patients (like us) the same rights as it did before appears an erroneous conclusion to me.

 

Minnesota is jacked for sure. Their program is far from dead and unfortunately likely represents a model (in my opinion) for future states and the process the Federal Government is likely to use when they get tired of losing out on revenue and lobbyists representing companies who can profit. It allows them to keep arresting the same people they love to while letting people in suits and lab coats rake in profits. Thanks for pointing that one out. Not good.

 

You and I agree completely that 4271 and future legislation represent daggers being thrown at the heart of the home grower. I think all states that get on board from here out will view home growers as a problem and not a solution when it comes to taxation and having any form of marijuana legal in the state.

 

We also agree that the Michigan law is good in comparison to other state laws. I still contend it is not being read correctly but my summations are far from complete. The wording is there - the will to not see it is still too strong and may always be. Something tells me you were one of the guys (like myself) in the '90s who said "The worst thing they could do is legalize because the prices and controls would be staggering compared to the status quo."

 

I want amnesty for those incarcerated and relief of persecution for my brothers and sisters and see no other option. Passing legislation to decriminalize and eliminate home growing will be amusing. Unlike prohibition the growers have always produced in secrecy. I think that is the inevitable endgame, I just hope I'm alive long enough to complain that a pack of 28% THC cigarettes costs too much at my local smoker's outlet.

 I would recommend to look closer at Massachusetts.  Its been 2 years now the law was in effect and with the program coming online now,  home growing is gone unless a license is received for a very specific sets of reasons.  Hardship licenses for growing can be applied for and they will not be easy to get. Espescially once retail stores open. Have a store in your county? No growing. Bed ridden  or wheel chair bound without proper transportation(a vehicle)? You can grow(silly aye). 

Once delivery for dispensaries is in place, no more growing for them either.  Financial hardship is the only other avenue and "hardship' is not easy to qualify for. Just because you are poor doesn't count.  SSI eligible standards only likely.  Yes I agree 10 oz is awesome.  I also said Mass. shows some possibility over the next couple years.  They have a chance to have a program that kinda works. We will see.  Again,  you are over stating their law.

 

Washington State Liquor control board is in the process of recommending removing home growing from the marijuana program.  And I mean, even now,.. there is no right to grow. You only have an Affirmative defense(we know how good they are) if you have 15 or less plants.

 

And, I do not really care if marijuana is legal as long as I can produce my own. :-)  That may be a fleeting option.  The drive for "progress"(commercial/retail/taxable) the last 6 years has led to unworkable and crappy laws as I have shown. You can blame MPP and DPA for that issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I would recommend to look closer at Massachusetts.  Its been 2 years now the law was in effect and with the program coming online now,  home growing is gone unless a license is received for a very specific sets of reasons.  Hardship licenses for growing can be applied for and they will not be easy to get. Espescially once retail stores open. Have a store in your county? No growing. Bed ridden  or wheel chair bound without proper transportation(a vehicle)? You can grow(silly aye). 

Once delivery for dispensaries is in place, no more growing for them either.  Financial hardship is the only other avenue and "hardship' is not easy to qualify for. Just because you are poor doesn't count.  SSI eligible standards only likely.  Yes I agree 10 oz is awesome.  I also said Mass. shows some possibility over the next couple years.  They have a chance to have a program that kinda works. We will see.  Again,  you are over stating their law.

 

Washington State Liquor control board is in the process of recommending removing home growing from the marijuana program.  And I mean, even now,.. there is no right to grow. You only have an Affirmative defense(we know how good they are) if you have 15 or less plants.

 

And, I do not really care if marijuana is legal as long as I can produce my own. :-)  That may be a fleeting option.  The drive for "progress"(commercial/retail/taxable) the last 6 years has led to unworkable and crappy laws as I have shown. You can blame MPP and DPA for that issue. 

 

http://www.massachusettsmarijuanacompliance.com/massachusetts-grow-medical-marijuana/

 

That link provides the information and while a hardship waiver is now required I don't see any outrage online about them being denied. You are incorrect in your evaluation of their law in my opinion. That they have a state sanctioned dispensary coming online is another indication that their law is ahead of Michigan's.

 

Affirmative defense in Washington, where THC is legal, trumps Michigan's because the daisy chain of informants never gets started at the street level. It's another topic but germane to the laws.

 

You're out for you. I get it. I don't think you are unique in that regard. I think people in jail today or without their stuff is a tragedy that I contribute to every time I pay my taxes to imprison myself or my neighbors. We all have different things that bother us I reckon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because it is presumptive Greg.

 

I suppose I should not have said anything and just let it slide.

Thing is, I see these types of statements made that are based on one persons very limited experiences often.

Then the statement is made as if it is truth.  Then others come along, read it, think it is truth and spread it

around as if it is truth, when in fact there has been no verification of it's truth... just a persons assumption.

 

I feel it is sloppy at best.  We are here truth seeking.

wth happens if indeed leo does read forum boards (this has been discussed and we know it's true),

then take these assumptions and use them to further restrict/ arrest  patients an caregivers?

I feel we have a responsibility to the entire community when we post in open forums, and such statements 

imho, are irresponsible.  Were you using it as a lead in to bring up the contract?

 

 

Maybe I just need a break as this kind of thing is really getting me miffed more and more lately :(

Do you not think that those exchanges take place? If you do, otoh, what numbers might you put on them? Anyone else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Affirmative defense in Washington, where THC is legal,

 

 

marijuana including thc is not legal in washington. still schedule 1.

 

Washington 

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=69.50.204

RCW 69.50.204

Schedule I.

 

Unless specifically excepted by state or federal law or regulation or more specifically included in another schedule, the following controlled substances are listed in Schedule I:

 

  (22) Marihuana or marijuana;

...

(30) Tetrahydrocannabinols, meaning tetrahydrocannabinols naturally contained in a plant of the genus Cannabis (cannabis plant), as well as synthetic equivalents of the substances contained in the plant, or in the resinous extractives of Cannabis, species, and/or synthetic substances, derivatives, and their isomers with similar chemical structure and pharmacological activity such as the following:

 

who were the idiots who told everyone that weed was now legal in colorado and washington? those people are liars. very crafty liars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you not think that those exchanges take place? If you do, otoh, what numbers might you put on them? Anyone else?

 

I think the spirit of all conversations center on the fact that we discuss legal options of treatment under the law and discussion of p2p or cg2cg can't be sanctioned as the law is read today. Before someone gets pedantic, yes a c.g. who is a p can be registered to a c.g. and thus create a cg2cg transfer under the law but it would (by law) be a cg2p transfer.

 

The number of illegal sales each day is impossible to calculate. It is the tempest they could never control but now they have a new puzzle to play with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

marijuana including thc is not legal in washington. still schedule 1.

 

Washington 

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=69.50.204

RCW 69.50.204

Schedule I.

 

Unless specifically excepted by state or federal law or regulation or more specifically included in another schedule, the following controlled substances are listed in Schedule I:

 

  (22) Marihuana or marijuana;

...

(30) Tetrahydrocannabinols, meaning tetrahydrocannabinols naturally contained in a plant of the genus Cannabis (cannabis plant), as well as synthetic equivalents of the substances contained in the plant, or in the resinous extractives of Cannabis, species, and/or synthetic substances, derivatives, and their isomers with similar chemical structure and pharmacological activity such as the following:

 

who were the idiots who told everyone that weed was now legal in colorado and washington? those people are liars. very crafty liars.

Initiative Measure No. 502

filed July 8, 2011

AN ACT Relating to marijuana; amending RCW 69.50.101, 69.50.401, 69.50.4013, 69.50.412, 69.50.4121, 69.50.500, 46.20.308, 46.61.502, 46.61.504, 46.61.50571, and 46.61.506; reenacting and  amending RCW 69.50.505, 46.20.3101, and 46.61.503; adding a new section to chapter 46.04 RCW; adding new sections to chapter 69.50 RCW; creating new sections; and prescribing penalties.

 

http://lcb.wa.gov/publications/Marijuana/I-502/i502.pdf

 

I love it. Fun stuff to read. I'll admit I don't see the direct amendment to 69.50.204, which you cite, in the list at the beginning of I-502. One of their FAQ answers does say it in a roundabout fashion:

 

Since it’s legal to possess marijuana Dec. 6, 2012, but there will not be licensed retailers from which to purchase it until 2014 can I still be arrested for possession?

I-502 decriminalizes marijuana possession and use in Washington State for those age 21 and older and who possess any combination of: one ounce of marijuana, 16 ounces of marijuana in solid form or 72 ounces in liquid form. The Seattle Police Department wrote an FAQ document that addresses how its officers will be handling marijuana possession going forward. Each jurisdiction may be handling it differently so it’s important to check with local law enforcement on how to proceed.

 

What is the DUI provision?

The initiative sets a per se DUI limit of "delta-9" THC levels at greater than or equal to 5 nanograms per milliliter of blood (5 ng/mL). State and local law enforcement agencies are tasked with enforcing the DUI limit.

 

http://www.liq.wa.gov/marijuana/faqs_i-502

 

That's a scary one as, many of us know, there has been no scientific evidence of ng/mL correlation to impairment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...