Jump to content

Should Marijuana Be Legalized In Michigan?


Recommended Posts

I have likes, but I dont have dont like, I dont like this!

 

Peace

make no mistake, I don like it either. I don't control the "take". I've seen other "medicines" treated in a similar fashion is all. I'm not sure why cannabis would be treated any different than any other scheduled drug/plant that becomes a "drug with medical uses". Again phaq, I don't like it either. My point to you was "be careful what you wish for" is all. I want full legalization, not for "medicinal only", a notion you opined on.

 

Do you believe that a "Medicinal Only" law would be more restrictive to patients than "Full Legalization" or a separate "Recreational vs Medicinal" rule ? I do, and I don't like restrictions, and think the lines are being blurred with the distinction, in lieu of other states and their recreational rulings.

 

peace

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am against your vision of this!

 

Peace

the vision, as t-pain stated, was his vision, not mine. I agreed with tpain, and told him so

 

the vision="

"yea grassmatch you should probably explain your motives clearly like:

"i am trying to dismantle this sound byte from the prohibitionists, can you help me"

 

that's the t-pain's vision I spoke of ^^^ I like that vision, do you ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

make no mistake, I don like it either. I don't control the "take". I've seen other "medicines" treated in a similar fashion is all. I'm not sure why cannabis would be treated any different than any other scheduled drug/plant that becomes a "drug with medical uses". Again phaq, I don't like it either. My point to you was "be careful what you wish for" is all. I want full legalization, not for "medicinal only", a notion you opined on.

 

Do you believe that a "Medicinal Only" law would be more restrictive to patients than "Full Legalization" or a separate "Recreational vs Medicinal" rule ? I do, and I don't like restrictions, and think the lines are being blurred with the distinction, in lieu of other states and their recreational rulings.

 

peace

The more commercial the laws get the more restrictive they are because they write the law to make a profit. Our medical law wasn't written that way. It was written so the grass roots medical patient can suppy themselves. It didn't put business first like the laws written now are. We have a real winner that is less restrictive because of how and when it was written. The news laws are law enforcements' laws. Ours is for patients.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the vision, as t-pain stated, was his vision, not mine. I agreed with tpain, and told him so

 

the vision="

"yea grassmatch you should probably explain your motives clearly like:

"i am trying to dismantle this sound byte from the prohibitionists, can you help me"

 

that's the t-pain's vision I spoke of ^^^ I like that vision, do you ?

Then when we show your parroted ideas are wrong sit there and nod. Don't stay in law enforcement character for ten pages with total BS cut and paste like you believe their propaganda. 

Edited by Restorium2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

recall resto, I was only responding to phaq, and the notion that mj should be medicinal and not recreational. Labeling it Medicinal may come with further restrictions. Those restrictions, the ones I may have mentioned, have been implied with other ethno botanical plants and preparations. Once its medicine, with proven efficacy, big pharma will continue making cannabis preparations imo, as they already are(10 right now, I think). Once those are marketed I suspect rules and regulations, patent protections etc will be enforced. that's it. I don't like it, I don't wish for it, and I don't agree with it. "Wrong'? not sure about that, google is filled with the process of plants to medicine patenting that have been going on for decades. Maybe it will be completely different with marijuana? could be, but the best predictor of future behavior(big pharma) is past behavior perhaps?

 

Those pages are a result of answering posts like this one, accusing me of supporting the modes of "plants to prescriptions", a well documented protocol. seems the core discussion between phaq and I of medicinal vs recreational became skewed with excitement. sorry for the upset.

 

Crude plant extracts cannot be patented or approved as drugs. Big Pharma's goal is to come up with a single chemical with good biological activity—one that can be changed in some way so that it can be patented as a novel chemical and then be synthetically manufactured into a new patented drug (like adding a salt molecule to the plant chemical coumarin and patenting it as coumadin).

 

this is what they've done forever. Magically, I wish they would ignore mj in this light. Do you believe they will ignore the possibilities ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

recall resto, I was only responding to phaq, and the notion that mj should be medicinal and not recreational. Labeling it Medicinal may come with further restrictions. Those restrictions, the ones I may have mentioned, have been implied with other ethno botanical plants and preparations. Once its medicine, with proven efficacy, big pharma will continue making cannabis preparations imo, as they already are(10 right now, I think). Once those are marketed I suspect rules and regulations, patent protections etc will be enforced. that's it. I don't like it, I don't wish for it, and I don't agree with it. "Wrong'? not sure about that, google is filled with the process of plants to medicine patenting that have been going on for decades. Maybe it will be completely different with marijuana? could be, but the best predictor of future behavior(big pharma) is past behavior perhaps?

 

Those pages are a result of answering posts like this one, accusing me of supporting the modes of "plants to prescriptions", a well documented protocol. seems the core discussion between phaq and I of medicinal vs recreational became skewed with excitement. sorry for the upset.

 

Crude plant extracts cannot be patented or approved as drugs. Big Pharma's goal is to come up with a single chemical with good biological activity—one that can be changed in some way so that it can be patented as a novel chemical and then be synthetically manufactured into a new patented drug (like adding a salt molecule to the plant chemical coumarin and patenting it as coumadin).

 

this is what they've done forever. Magically, I wish they would ignore mj in this light. Do you believe they will ignore the possibilities ?

If you are going to take law enforcements stance then you will have to admit you are wrong rather than parroting on and on ...

 

A patient growing for themselves needs knowledge, not restrictions and regulations. Same with a patient that gets to hand pick their grower. Let us be. Let us be happily growing our own the way we like it without butting in on that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't take a stance. only shared what I learned, incorrect or not.

talking about the way you wish things to be is a good start to fruition, but

this plant is not the first one to go to medicine, giving us a great reference to

what may be in store for this "newly discovered medicine"

 

its about recreational vs medicinal(remember, phaq, me?). keep it there? medicine only could result in more restrictions? do you agree ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its about recreational vs medicinal

 

Get out amongst the people and find out that there is no stone wall between the two. Medical is the major Michigan market now because all humans are sick to a certain extent and cannabis is a very versatile medicine that helps most all people if they look at it hard enough. Not everyone is registered but everyone is medical to some extent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Resto,

 

 

, the all out legal thing has to not have anything to do with mm, it needs to be a seperate entity!

 

!

 

recreational use should be a total different game and not involve pt or c.gs to pt's in any way, leave our law alone!

 

Peace

...and now you understand why I said "be careful what you wish for" right?

Edited by grassmatch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. Everyone can use it medically. You are making law enforcements' circular argument, one step away from Schuette's end days only use.

geesh resto, get off of it already !

 

"Could"

since any changes in our Act COULD cause further restrictions, whether we like it or not, makes sense that a ruling of medical only

COULD result in more restrictions yes?

(I understand your circular responses, and the need to refer to police officers) talk to phaq, before he single handedly changes our law to medicinal only.

 

you bore me. carry on

I'm out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Resto,

 

 

 

...and now you understand why I said "be careful what you wish for" right?

When he said to leave our law alone he nailed it. 

 

Resto,

 

 

 

...and now you understand why I said "be careful what you wish for" right?

With what we know about medical cannabis, as it applies to the human condition, we already know that medical is all out legalization if written and implemented correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

geesh resto, get off of it already !

 

"Could"

since any changes in our Act COULD cause further restrictions, whether we like it or not, makes sense that a ruling of medical only

COULD result in more restrictions yes?

(I understand your circular responses, and the need to refer to police officers) talk to phaq, before he single handedly changes our law to medicinal only.

 

you bore me. carry on

I'm out

 

 

Reality; Not if they don't get the 75% vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

make no mistake, I don like it either. I don't control the "take". I've seen other "medicines" treated in a similar fashion is all. I'm not sure why cannabis would be treated any different than any other scheduled drug/plant that becomes a "drug with medical uses". Again phaq, I don't like it either. My point to you was "be careful what you wish for" is all. I want full legalization, not for "medicinal only", a notion you opined on.

 

Do you believe that a "Medicinal Only" law would be more restrictive to patients than "Full Legalization" or a separate "Recreational vs Medicinal" rule ? I do, and I don't like restrictions, and think the lines are being blurred with the distinction, in lieu of other states and their recreational rulings.

 

peace

I believe it needs to be seperate!  Ok in my mind I would like them to leave the mm law alone, If our state makes is recreational it dont give them the right to take our mm law away, it needs to be seperate, if you are a rec user you cant grow, if you are an mm pt or c.g or both you can grow like the law says now!

 

I dont want our mm law messed with, I cant afford my rx's how the heck am I gonna afford the mj from these places who beleive they can get 400 an oz?

 

Im not against you, Im against our mm law being changed, in fact the changes that happened because of courts I want back!

 

Peace

Link to comment
Share on other sites

geesh resto, get off of it already !

 

"Could"

since any changes in our Act COULD cause further restrictions, whether we like it or not, makes sense that a ruling of medical only

COULD result in more restrictions yes?

(I understand your circular responses, and the need to refer to police officers) talk to phaq, before he single handedly changes our law to medicinal only.

 

you bore me. carry on

I'm out

If I knew I had that much power to change the law I would be in lansing making sure the mm iniative stayed as was voted on, now if I can go in front of the senate and house I would be there, I had no idea I had that much power, Thank you for pointing that out, im gonna put on my mj leaf hat, my mmma shirt and go get our law the way it should be!

 

Wow I didnt know I had that kind of power, ok Im running for president as a write in , in 16 so vote for me I will just make it all out legal where every one can grow and we can put a price height on all of the deleivery systems and I will tax the hell out of them and we wont raise our sales tax to 7% and I will also give ssi and ssdi a big ole fat raise, I will quit paying senators a pension for life for 4 yrs work, I will make sure we all have the same med benny's as the president, and I will also give every one a double paid vacation 2 times a yr!

 

Elect Phaq!

 

Peace

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When he said to leave our law alone he nailed it. 

 

With what we know about medical cannabis, as it applies to the human condition, we already know that medical is all out legalization if written and implemented correctly.

 

 

medical is all out legalization if written and implemented correctly  That is so true and even Leo knew it and is why they are still on a hunt to make it unworkable though the Courts and found out the Supremes came over to the side of the people well sort of kindred we will see maybe in June ,July for sure

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This post is an absolutely ridiculous example of hyperqualification of your previous statements. Right now anyone that needs it has the right to "medical use," which includes growing, possession, use, transfer, the whole ball of wax.

 

This is for medicinal use only.

 

Sure things could get more restrictive, things could get less restrictive, and things could stay roughly the same.

 

It has nothing to do with medical marijuana patients wishing for things, or not, or what any of us thinks about it. If the opposition is successful at convincing the general public that cannabis is or can be a public safety issue, then they may succeed in changing the law negatively, despite the truth.

 

And just for informational purposes, there are crude opiate extracts, and the plant, both on schedule 2, not patented, not illegal for people to grow.

 

It is stupid to think that patients' insistence on the right to use cannabis as medicine will have any effect on whether or not people get "high on weed." People were doing that easily when it was 100% illegal and classified as not medicinal by the government, if you can believe it. The confusion/substitution of one for the other is the main problem today, at least for cops, courts, and legislators.

Wow ! i can agree 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe it needs to be seperate!  Ok in my mind I would like them to leave the mm law alone, If our state makes is recreational it dont give them the right to take our mm law away, it needs to be seperate, if you are a rec user you cant grow, if you are an mm pt or c.g or both you can grow like the law says now!

 

I dont want our mm law messed with, I cant afford my rx's how the heck am I gonna afford the mj from these places who beleive they can get 400 an oz?

 

Im not against you, Im against our mm law being changed, in fact the changes that happened because of courts I want back!

 

Peace

Thank you 

 

I agree

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...