Other sources of CO MMJ news and info

[HarvestHouse]

Other sources of CO MMJ news and info. What's good?

[TheReleafCenter]

My quick links every morning:
MedicinalColorado.org (http://medicinalcolorado.org/) - Basically a feed of everything
Denver News - The Latest Word - "Marijuana" Archives (http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/marijuana/) - Everything Westword and MMJ
Marijuana News - The Denver Post (http://www.denverpost.com/news/marijuana) - Denver Post's MMJ coverage

Non Colorado
Toke of the Town - Cannabis news, rumor and humor (http://www.tokeofthetown.com/)
NORML Blog (http://blog.norml.org/) NORML's blog

[cologrower420]

Forum rules:

-- Asking for a hookup or a request for Mail Order Marijuana or anything of the related will result in an IMMEDIATE PERMANENT BAN this includes selling/asking/offering ANYTHING, including seeds, hydro,lights, grow equipment, etc etc, these are all a NO-NO

-- In relation to above, spamming of websites will also result in a IMMEDIATE PERMANENT BAN including in your signature

-- THIS IS NOT A SOCIAL MESSAGE BOARD. NO SOCIAL THREADS.

-- If you are deemed making immature, contentless posts, consider your account will also be be PERMANENT banned. (this is up to mods and admins)

-- No Racism, No Personal Attacks on Others and or Co-Ops/Dispensaries, No threats of violence and/or the Like

-- No Vendor Requests, No Making business dealings with Co-Ops/Dispensaries

-- No Posts containing email addresses and/or the like

[TheReleafCenter]

Spamming of websites to me means something different than posting a few links. Sorry in advance to the Modfather if I got that wrong.

[cologrower420]

I don't see anything in there that says we aren't allowed to mention other websites.

I know there are other forums that are discussed, but I don't know what they are or where they are at.

There is some industry news on craigslist, but that place is just horrible.

You can stick to the websites like here, rollitup.org, etc. I don't know the content or quality of any other online communities, I am pretty new to the pot forum-ing.

There are magazines like Daily Buds, Kush, Urban Grower, etc. These mags have awesome info on gardening and pot. There is some current events. However, always know that these magazines like dailybud are for profit, not non-profit.

for retail locations is okay, but it's also profit driven, and if you don't pay the site, you don't get listed. I think that's wrong.

You can read westword for news and accurate current events, and there is a couple MMC reviewers who make regular reviews. There are also resources there in the classifieds. Westword also has a dispensary directory, but it sucks.

What sort of info are you looking for?

edit: funny to me that we're scared of posting links or other site info under the threat of the ban hammer. That's why I posted the rules like I did, because I totally agree that posting another website/forum could be considered spam by some people.
edit2:
Drug WarRant (http://www.drugwarrant.com/)

[HarvestHouse]

I'm looking for info like jeff gard's site, and info like this site is trying to provide. I need to keep abreast of regulatory issues as they arise.

[cologrower420]

I'm looking for info like jeff gard's site, and info like this site is trying to provide. I need to keep abreast of regulatory issues as they arise.

I think following a couple of local MMJ friendly industries would be your best bet. I think there is a good MMJ lawyer who blogs. You might troll blogspot or search 'colorado marijuana blog' or something.

[TheReleafCenter]

I'm looking for info like jeff gard's site, and info like this site is trying to provide. I need to keep abreast of regulatory issues as they arise.

From the DoR website:

With the passage of House Bill 10-1284, the Department of Revenue has been deemed the agency to implement and regulate medical marijuana centers, optional premise grow facilities, medical marijuana infused product manufacturers, and all associated occupational licenses.

Following the statutory provisions contained in House Bill 10-1284, the Department, through the state licensing authority, will begin the process of setting up regulations to further define the rules under which the industry will operate. Rule-making will be conducted upon completion of a series of workshops with participation by people who
represent every segment of the industry. As the work groups are established, contact information will be posted and everyone is encourage to contact the person(s) who best represent your specific interests to coordinate your input through the workshops before the formal Rule-making hearing occurs. The Divisionâ??s website will be updated with current rule proposals created by the workgroups and any future dates and locations of the formal rule-making hearings as they become available.

Should you wish to be notified via electronic mail (e-mail) during the rule-making process, please submit your information in an e-mail message to: [email protected].

Include in your subject line and in the message text:
Your contact information via e-mail
Note that you wish to have your name entered into the information list for dissemination from the agency

[Psycho4Bud]

Spamming of websites to me means something different than posting a few links. Sorry in advance to the Modfather if I got that wrong.


I don't see anything in there that says we aren't allowed to mention other websites.

Well, ya don't walk into a Shopko and pass out Walmart advertisements but I'm giving a pass on this one. There was no promotion of sales nor was there a promotion of a site over this one.

Have good one!:thumbsup:

[luge469]

MMJ News Alert; Aurora Sentinel 7/22 weekly edition; article and a map of Aurora growing locations. WTF?:eek:

[SprngsCaregiver]

MMJ News Alert; Aurora Sentinel 7/22 weekly edition; article and a map of Aurora growing locations. WTF?:eek:

Can you link the article? Scan it? lol

[cologrower420]

MMJ News Alert; Aurora Sentinel 7/22 weekly edition; article and a map of Aurora growing locations. WTF?:eek:

I wish people didn't re-post fanatical stories without any evidence.

Spending ten seconds on google doesn't have any results for marijuana related stories in their 7-22 edition.

Spending ten more seconds searching the sentinel's site doesn't have any results for that date either in the archives.

I call bullshit on this one until I see otherwise.

Aurora Sentinel > Search (http://www.aurorasentinel.com/shared-content/search/index.php?search=go&o=0&l=20&s=relevance&r=Subject%2CAuthor%2CContent&d1=07%2F12%2F10&d2=07%2F26%2F10&q=july+22)

[cologrower420]

Medical marijuana deluge: Number of Colorado MMJ patients passes 100,000 mark - Denver News - The Latest Word (http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2010/07/medical_marijuana_deluge_number_of_colorado_mmj_pa tients_passes_100000_mark.php)

100,000 patients, that's pretty cool.

[luge469]

Sorry folks It's NOt bullshit and I would link it If I could but I don't see it on the web site either. I am looking at the article right now and think it should be brought to everyone's attention. Any suggestions besides retyping the whole thing. Tell me how( I am a chef not a bot geek) and I will get this info out!
Thank You!
Don't kill the messenger!

[SoCoMMJ]

I found this article, but did not see a map to go along with it.
==================================================

Aurora Sentinel > Archives > News > Aurora police detail dozens of pot operations across city (http://www.aurorasentinel.com/articles/2010/07/23/news/doc4c484f052a03a805057391.txt)

Aurora police detail dozens of pot operations across city
Municipal officials begin contemplating how to regulate medical marijuana growth, sales
By SARA CASTELLANOS
The Aurora Sentinel
Published: Friday, July 23, 2010 10:15 AM MD


AURORA | Residential medical marijuana grows have been cropping up around Aurora recently, causing city officials to contemplate the safety hazards associated with them and propose potential regulations.

City officials tackled the prospects of regulating the residential growing of medical marijuana at an Aurora City Council Neighborhood Services Policy Committee July 15, the first of a series of monthly meetings on the issue that will run through November.

A presentation on home grows in Aurora was made by Aurora Police Chief Dan Oates at the meeting. Committee members then discussed whether the city would be able to legally defend itself if they proposed their own rules governing home grows. They ultimately concluded that a more extensive look into the potential safety hazards of medical marijuana home-grows should be conducted before regulations were proposed.

Newly enacted Colorado legislation allows medical marijuana caregivers to have five patients and grow six plants per patient, but the law does not specify how many square feet is required for a home grow operation, or what safety precautions must be adopted.

As of July 1, the cityâ??s police officers have identified 63 locations where medical marijuana was being grown in a residential home in Aurora, Oates said at the meeting.

Thatâ??s up from the 54 grows that were reported by the police department in early June.

*
Residents in about 30 locations showed some sort of documentation that justified the existence of the marijuana plants, Oates said. The number of home grows increased by 217 percent in the past six months, he said.

Since home grows of medical marijuana have proliferated, Oates said his narcotics unit has devoted 40 percent of its time to identifying the home grows and determining whether they are legitimate.

He presented photographs of the dozens of electrical wires and heat lamps that police officials have encountered at residential marijuana growing operations, which cause serious health risks.

â??The challenge weâ??re seeing is when thereâ??s a volume of plants, these places feel inherently unsafe to us,â?� Oates said.

Weapons such as handguns are also found at many of the residential growing locations, he said, and are mainly used as a defense against potential thieves.

The cityâ??s building inspectors now accompany police officials in all cases of residential grow investigations. In a recent venture to a Saddle Rock residence where a medical marijuana grow operation was being conducted, building inspectors noted there were more than 100 electrical code violations, including wires that could result in electrocution and death if they were touched.

â??It wasnâ??t a matter of if the house was going to burn down, it was a matter of when,â?� said Scott Berg, the cityâ??s chief building official. â??None of this is legal or even close to being legal.â?�

Chemicals from the grow operation in the Saddle Rock community were also being disposed of in the drainage system, causing concern over whether the water was contaminated, Berg said. Water officials found no contamination in the water in that instance, he said.

Tom Nicholas, chairman of the cityâ??s newly created Medical Marijuana Task Force, suggested the committee members decide how extensive the regulations on home grows should be.

Aurora City Council members decided in mid-July that they will ask voters whether they want to ban medical marijuana dispensaries in the city, but regulations on medical marijuana home grows will be at the sole discretion of the city.

â??We have to decide just how aggressive we want to become, and whether weâ??re pushing the risk factor of litigation,â?� said Nicholas, who is also deputy city manager.

Oates said that city officials should consider whether 30 marijuana plants in a home grow operation, as the state legislation stipulates, is an appropriate number.

â??I think thereâ??s still room for this city to address what we think is the proper number of plants to be grown in a home,â?� he said. â??I think weâ??d be conceding too much this early to say that someone can grow 30 plants in a home.â?�

One of the most disconcerting issues is speculation that home grow operations are being carried out by people who are using houses specifically for that purpose and not actually living in the homes, said Councilwoman Melissa Miller.

She asked Neighborhood Services officials to look into the legality of using a house solely for medical marijuana grows.

â??Iâ??m concerned about the safety and welfare of the people in that area,â?� Miller said.

City officials said at the committee meeting that any regulations that will be instituted would be for the sake of safety.

Councilwoman Barb Cleland said that if the city decreased the number of plants that would be allowed in a home, the city would definitely face lawsuits.

Lawsuits could still ensue no matter what kinds of regulations the city implements concerning home grow operations, said Councilwoman Molly Markert.

â??I have a lot of constitutional questions and I hope we have a very big legal budget,â?� Markert said. â??The state law gives us some guidelines, and every step we take beyond that puts us at risk of a lawsuit. I am hoping the legal department has access to resources to defend the decisions we make.â?�

Miller asked the Medical Marijuana Task Force to come back to the committee next month with a report about what kinds of chemical waste products are being flushed down the cityâ??s water system as a result of the home grow operations.

The task force is comprised of several city officials including Oates, Neighborhood Services Liaison Nancy Sheffield, and Jim Sayre, manager of zoning and development review.

[cologrower420]

Sorry folks It's NOt bullshit and I would link it If I could but I don't see it on the web site either. I am looking at the article right now and think it should be brought to everyone's attention. Any suggestions besides retyping the whole thing. Tell me how( I am a chef not a bot geek) and I will get this info out!
Thank You!
Don't kill the messenger!

You said you saw the article and a map, and now it seems apparent that there never was a map.

Did you get your original info second hand? Why would you post that there was an article with a map if there was only an article?

I stand corrected on the article, but I still call bullshit on you saying they published a map of home grows. Good times.

[HighPopalorum]

The article raises interesting points. How much pot is "too much" to be grown in a residential setting? Who should make that determination? Should multi-unit dwellings have different rules than single family homes? Should caregivers who grow at home be required to pursue a zoning variance?

All good questions that need sorting. It will be interesting to see what answers different communities come up with.

[cologrower420]

The article raises interesting points. How much pot is "too much" to be grown in a residential setting? Who should make that determination? Should multi-unit dwellings have different rules than single family homes? Should caregivers who grow at home be required to pursue a zoning variance?

All good questions that need sorting. It will be interesting to see what answers different communities come up with.

I think it's interesting that cook made the rules so that he can still claim he's for patient advocacy, while ensuring the maximum amount of tax dollars for the state, which is his job. So in his capacity to create revenue for his agency and to create the authority to enforce making rules, he's doing a great job.

Not exactly what I would like, but I am still a small scale patient, so this legislation doesn't really do anything for me personally. This legislation affects larger scale for profit grows, ones that might not have been paying taxes on their revenue. That's why we got 1284 and 109, because the state saw how much revenue it was losing out on.

edit: If I were a compliant patient or caregiver (6plants per patient, 5 cap) in Aurora, I wouldn't be concerned. If I were a single patient with 99 plants or a non compliant caregiver, I would be very concerned at the cops showing up to verify plant counts.

If the cops show up, do I have to let them in my grow or handle my plants? I would be very concerned with some random asshat coming into my room and pulling plants to check roots, etc.

[SprngsCaregiver]

If the cops show up, do I have to let them in my grow or handle my plants? I would be very concerned with some random asshat coming into my room and pulling plants to check roots, etc.

This is a good question... If they dont have a warrant, technically you don't have to let them in. I would probably let them check if you are compliant to avoud the warrant, battering ram scenario that would be coming next.

I would also worry about them bringing bugs from other grows they have visited. Hmmm I wonder if you could supply them with and make them wear tyvek suits. LOL

[HighPopalorum]

This is a good question... If they dont have a warrant, technically you don't have to let them in. I would probably let them check if you are compliant to avoud the warrant, battering ram scenario that would be coming next.

I would also worry about them bringing bugs from other grows they have visited. Hmmm I wonder if you could supply them with and make them wear tyvek suits. LOL


Terrible advice. Do not give consent for police to search your home, your car or your person. Under no circumstances should you waive any of your rights unless your attorney instructs you to do so. I believe I have posted this information several times before, but there is so much horrible information out there, it bears repeating:


Your rights:
- You have the right to remain silent. If you wish to exercise that right, say so out loud.
- You have the right to refuse to consent to a search of yourself, your car or your home.
- If you are not under arrest, you have the right to calmly leave.
- You have the right to a lawyer if you are arrested. Ask for one immediately.
- Regardless of your immigration or citizenship status, you have constitutional rights.

Your responsibilities:
- Do stay calm and be polite.
- Do not interfere with or obstruct the police.
- Do not lie or give false documents.
- Do prepare yourself and your family in case you are arrested.
- Do remember the details of the encounter.
- Do file a written complaint or call your local ACLU if you feel your rights have been violated.

If the police or immigration agents come to your home, you do not have to let them in unless they have certain kinds of warrants.
Ask the officer to slip the warrant under the door or hold it up to the window so you can inspect it. A search warrant allows police to enter the address listed on the warrant, but officers can only search the areas and for the items listed. An arrest warrant allows police to enter the home of the person listed on the warrant if they believe the person is inside. A warrant of removal/deportation (ICE warrant) does not allow officers to enter a home without consent.

Even if officers have a warrant, you have the right to remain silent. If you choose to speak to the officers, step outside and close the door.

-via the ACLU (http://www.aclu.org/)


There is absolutely no way you will benefit from allowing the cops to search your home without a warrant. There is no way you will benefit by giving them information about your patients and yourself. There is no way you will benefit from talking to the police.... period. Any criminal attorney will tell you the same thing.

[cologrower420]

Terrible advice. Do not give consent for police to search your home, your car or your person. Under no circumstances should you waive any of your rights unless your attorney instructs you to do so. I believe I have posted this information several times before, but there is so much horrible information out there, it bears repeating:


Your rights:
- You have the right to remain silent. If you wish to exercise that right, say so out loud.
- You have the right to refuse to consent to a search of yourself, your car or your home.
- If you are not under arrest, you have the right to calmly leave.
- You have the right to a lawyer if you are arrested. Ask for one immediately.
- Regardless of your immigration or citizenship status, you have constitutional rights.

Your responsibilities:
- Do stay calm and be polite.
- Do not interfere with or obstruct the police.
- Do not lie or give false documents.
- Do prepare yourself and your family in case you are arrested.
- Do remember the details of the encounter.
- Do file a written complaint or call your local ACLU if you feel your rights have been violated.

If the police or immigration agents come to your home, you do not have to let them in unless they have certain kinds of warrants.
Ask the officer to slip the warrant under the door or hold it up to the window so you can inspect it. A search warrant allows police to enter the address listed on the warrant, but officers can only search the areas and for the items listed. An arrest warrant allows police to enter the home of the person listed on the warrant if they believe the person is inside. A warrant of removal/deportation (ICE warrant) does not allow officers to enter a home without consent.

Even if officers have a warrant, you have the right to remain silent. If you choose to speak to the officers, step outside and close the door.

-via the ACLU (http://www.aclu.org/)


There is absolutely no way you will benefit from allowing the cops to search your home without a warrant. There is no way you will benefit by giving them information about your patients and yourself. There is no way you will benefit from talking to the police.... period. Any criminal attorney will tell you the same thing.

Good advice, but let's take this example, of some regulator or auditor coming to your house. Since I am a compliant patient growing for myself, I don't think anyone would ever know, or care, what's being grown in my basement.

I was at a friends house in Sheridan the other day, and looking out the back window over the fence, the grey haired hippy had 6 pot plants, 5 feet tall, in his back yard. Obviously no one had a problem with it, but if a neighbor complained, a police visit could easily be the result. Your advice applies then too, but many many people are intimidated by cops or people in positions of authority.

If there are reports of a marijuana grow, it's likely and safe to assume that grow is larger than one patient or whatever. I guess my point is, if the cops come knocking to check plant counts, there is probably some indication that whoever they are visiting is operating outside the law.

Or something.

[Zedleppelin]

NEVER NEVER NEVER talk to the police.

YouTube - Dont Talk to Police (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc)

[cologrower420]

NEVER NEVER NEVER talk to the police.

YouTube - Dont Talk to Police (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc)

If a cop comes to your door to ask questions about your grow, the last thing you should do is not speak to them.

Do you think they'd just go away if we follow your advice? Seriously? What do you think would happen if a cop asks to check a grow and they get a door shut on them?

edit: If it wasn't clear, I am using a specific example including a potential grow, not some random confrontation with an asshole cop. I feel there is a difference.

[Zedleppelin]

If a cop comes to your door to ask questions about your grow, the last thing you should do is not speak to them.

Thats exactly what you should do, or better yet don't open the door in the first place.



Do you think they'd just go away if we follow your advice? Seriously? What do you think would happen if a cop asks to check a grow and they get a door shut on them?

Let them get a warrant. Let them in and you just waived your constitutional rights. Their job is to find a reason to arrest you, why in the world would you help them do that? ANYTHING you say can and will be twisted against you. Who do you think juries believe? You or a cop? Cops only knock and talk when they dont have enough cause for a warrant, if they did they wouldnt be knocking.

[SprngsCaregiver]

You guys are absolutly right. I was responding emotionally I guess you could say after seeing this. I have dogs. I would gladly give up my rights if it meant saving my dogs life. Call me stupid.

http://boards.cannabis.com/current-events/184557-missouri-swat-team-shoots-family-dog-during-raid-over-small-amount-marijuana.html

[cologrower420]

I guess I would assume they have a case if they are knocking.

I agree with you that opening the door would be a bad idea, but if you are at the point in a grow operation where the cops are there, and you are willing to not let them in, then I think that speaks to the legality of your operation, which was my point in stating that 'letting them in' would be the best course of action.

But if you are about to get busted with a illegal grow, then hell no don't let them in. I guess I am assuming everyone in this example is compliant with state law. Why would an auditor or inspector or whatever care to 'inspect' or show compliance? Aren't the feds busting MMC's and large scale private grows like barkowitz? I guess I am thinking, I don't have anything to hide, so I don't have a problem letting a cop come into my home if one shows up to check my plants. My that's me personally. If I had an illegal grow in the basement, I would probably answer differently.

Right now, I am state compliant, so if pressured, I would absolutely prove my compliance.

[Zedleppelin]

Has zero to do with being in compliance or not. A neighbor could report a smell, ex girlfriend causing trouble, whatever. So you just got done trimming one plant and someone reports the smell. Cops come and you let them in because you only have 2 plants and you're compliant. They weigh what you just harvested (including the trim you were going to throw away) and it weighs 10 ounces because its still wet. While they're doing this one cop (the nice one) asks you what your favorite dispensary is and you say 'The Wellness Center has some really good prices'. Next thing you know the cops are putting your 10 oz wet shit in a airtight bag and arrest you for felony possession with intent to distribute.

So you say screw this, I didnt do anything wrong so you hire an attorney to fight it. He tell you that he will either plea bargain it or you can take it to trial but he wants $15,000. At your trial the cop gets on the stand and testifies that you admitted The Wellness Center gives you really good prices. Now a jury has to decide who to believe, you - a guy growing weed, or a law enforcement officer, all because you let them in and talked.

[cologrower420]

Has zero to do with being in compliance or not. A neighbor could report a smell, ex girlfriend causing trouble, whatever. So you just got done trimming one plant and someone reports the smell. Cops come and you let them in because you only have 2 plants and you're compliant. They weigh what you just harvested (including the trim you were going to throw away) and it weighs 10 ounces because its still wet. While they're doing this one cop (the nice one) asks you what your favorite dispensary is and you say 'The Wellness Center has some really good prices'. Next thing you know the cops are putting your 10 oz wet shit in a airtight bag and arrest you for felony possession with intent to distribute.

So you say screw this, I didnt do anything wrong so you hire an attorney to fight it. He tell you that he will either plea bargain it or you can take it to trial but he wants $15,000. At your trial the cop gets on the stand and testifies that you admitted The Wellness Center gives you really good prices. Now a jury has to decide who to believe, you - a guy growing weed, or a law enforcement officer, all because you let them in and talked.
That's a pretty extreme example. I'm small scale, but if a cop came knocking saying there were reports of marijuana being grown, I would probably present my ID and red card, and politely decline to answer that question.

I'm not sure if they'd come back with a warrant or what. I imagine they wouldn't waste their time with someone super small scale like me, but someone approaching 36 plants or an apartment grow or someone noticing plants outside or something.

Although, matt cook has said something along the lines using root weight, dirt weight and water weight as going towards my 2 ounce limit. So basically, if I were busted harvesting even one plant, it's likely that I'm going over my 2 ounce posession limit. I guess I might be able to hedge my bets if I were a caregiver or something so I could increase my weight limit.

I think we agree.

[Zedleppelin]

Not an extreme example at all, plenty of innocent people in prison.

How do you think gun owners would react if the police started knocking on doors of registered gun owners asking if they could come in to make sure they didnt have to many guns? Think that would fly?

[cologrower420]

Not an extreme example at all, plenty of innocent people in prison.

How do you think gun owners would react if the police started knocking on doors of registered gun owners asking if they could come in to make sure they didnt have to many guns? Think that would fly?

Absolutely not, but pot is unique. Guns aren't illegal at the federal level.

Plus, the NRA is a little bigger than norml, so the 'complainers' would be much much louder than the small group of largescale growers who might be now illegal.

[SprngsCaregiver]

Not an extreme example at all, plenty of innocent people in prison.

How do you think gun owners would react if the police started knocking on doors of registered gun owners asking if they could come in to make sure they didnt have to many guns? Think that would fly?

I completly see your point but, what if you have dogs or kids? At least at the first knock you have the chance to put them away.

Where I'm from police serve warrants early in the morning before the sun comes up. I don't know about Colorado, or the cities in, because I havn't been here long enough I guess.

I dont know... My whole reason on moving out here to CO was to get away from the illegal crap. I am compliant so I have absolutly nothing to hide and to avoid the scenario in my post at the end of page 1, I will certainly consider just letting them in. I myself would rather do jail time on some bullshit charges than to watch my dogs get shot. My dogs will defend their territory.

[Zedleppelin]

Absolutely not, but pot is unique. Guns aren't illegal at the federal level.

Its not unique, one is protected by the Federal Constitution the other is protected under the State Constitution. Any local or state law enforcement takes an oath to uphold both.



Plus, the NRA is a little bigger than norml, so the 'complainers' would be much much louder than the small group of largescale growers who might be now illegal.

We are discussing caregivers, why do you keep throwing in 'large scale illegal growers'?

[Zedleppelin]

I completly see your point but, what if you have dogs or kids? At least at the first knock you have the chance to put them away.

Where I'm from police serve warrants early in the morning before the sun comes up. I don't know about Colorado, or the cities in, because I havn't been here long enough I guess.

I dont know... My whole reason on moving out here to CO was to get away from the illegal crap. I am compliant so I have absolutly nothing to hide and to avoid the scenario in my post at the end of page 1, I will certainly consider just letting them in. I myself would rather do jail time on some bullshit charges than to watch my dogs get shot. My dogs will defend their territory.

I hear ya, the dog scenario has ran through my mind quite a few times. I've already decided if they killed my dog they are going to have to take me down too. Let them explain to the public why they shot and killed an unarmed cancer patient and his dog.

[cologrower420]

Its not unique, one is protected by the Federal Constitution the other is protected under the State Constitution. Any local or state law enforcement takes an oath to uphold both.



We are discussing caregivers, why do you keep throwing in 'large scale illegal growers'?

In our example, we are discussing a medical marijuana issue with a gun issue. In my mind, since pot is still illegal at the federal level where guns are legal at a federal level, then the outrage at the 'auditors checking gun owners' doesn't quite fit. I'm not sure of a different analogy. That's where I was going when I said the 'auditors checking on gun owners' would be a larger crowd than the 'remove the 5 patient cap' crowd. Do you disagree?

In my opinion, a legal caregiver is 5 patients or less, 36 plants. Give or take I guess. I don't think our example of 'cops checking plant counts' or 'dept. of revenue auditors checking paperwork' really applies to legal caregivers. I don't believe cops would bother busting a legal grow. Now, how that cop decides how that grow is legal or not is beside the point. I am simply saying cops will leave the small guys alone and concentrate on the bigger cases.

That might not be correct. If the cops wanted to bust your grow or arrest you or question you or whatever, they can. I think in reality, the 'cops checking plant counts' will be happening with large scale grows, which are illegal post 1284/109, not small compliant grows. But that's in general, specific cases could easily be different.

Do you see why I don't use caregiver when I am discussing large scale grows, anything more than 36 plants?

[luge469]

You said you saw the article and a map, and now it seems apparent that there never was a map.

Did you get your original info second hand? Why would you post that there was an article with a map if there was only an article?

I stand corrected on the article, but I still call bullshit on you saying they published a map of home grows. Good times.

I apologize AGAIN for being a chef and unable to download the article. Thanks for finding it! I have the actual paper(it was a promo tossed on my front porch) and in the free copy the article starts on page 7 and continues to page 8 and above the rest of the article is a map of Aurora with red dot for 30 documented grows, a blue dot for 27 undocumented grows, and a geen dot showing the grows pending. It says it was Dan Oates:mad:map for presentation to the Neighborhood Services Committee this month!

I again apologize that I was unable show it to you, but it is NOT bull and I was just trying to help. Maybe one of those dots is a cherised forum member. Sorry for trying to help.:weedpoke:

[cologrower420]

I apologize AGAIN for being a chef and unable to download the article. Thanks for finding it! I have the actual paper(it was a promo tossed on my front porch) and in the free copy the article starts on page 7 and continues to page 8 and above the rest of the article is a map of Aurora with red dot for 30 documented grows, a blue dot for 27 undocumented grows, and a geen dot showing the grows pending. It says it was Dan Oates:mad:map for presentation to the Neighborhood Services Committee this month!

I again apologize that I was unable show it to you, but it is NOT bull and I was just trying to help. Maybe one of those dots is a cherised forum member. Sorry for trying to help.:weedpoke:

You are misunderstanding. You said there was a map of the home grows along with the story. That's the part I doubted, and that's the part of your post that is untrue. It appears the article contains a photo of a home grow, not a map of home grows.

No worries, and there is nothing for you to apologize for.

[SprngsCaregiver]

I apologize AGAIN for being a chef and unable to download the article. Thanks for finding it! I have the actual paper(it was a promo tossed on my front porch) and in the free copy the article starts on page 7 and continues to page 8 and above the rest of the article is a map of Aurora with red dot for 30 documented grows, a blue dot for 27 undocumented grows, and a geen dot showing the grows pending. It says it was Dan Oates:mad:map for presentation to the Neighborhood Services Committee this month!

I again apologize that I was unable show it to you, but it is NOT bull and I was just trying to help. Maybe one of those dots is a cherised forum member. Sorry for trying to help.:weedpoke:

Do you have a digital camera? You could always take a picture of it and post the picture.

[luge469]

Thank you SpringsGrower! I have know taken and loaded the picture, it is not very clear, but at least it confirms my honesty. Just wanted you folks to know that the article and map were out there.

[SprngsCaregiver]

Thank you SpringsGrower! I have know taken and loaded the picture, it is not very clear, but at least it confirms my honesty. Just wanted you folks to know that the article and map were out there.

I think someone owes you an appology. :thumbsup:

[copobo]

I think someone owes you an appology. :thumbsup:

yessir :thumbsup::thumbsup:

[copobo]

printing that map is akin to printing the times an armored carrier shows up at which liquor stores to collect their deposits.

SERIOUSLY EFFED!

[HighPopalorum]

ahem.... First Amendment...

[mustangwomyn]

I think someone owes you an appology. :thumbsup:

Indeed :thumbsup:;)

[cologrower420]

I think someone owes you an appology. :thumbsup:

Are you referring to me?

[cologrower420]

Thank you SpringsGrower! I have know taken and loaded the picture, it is not very clear, but at least it confirms my honesty. Just wanted you folks to know that the article and map were out there.

I apologize. I saw your post and tried to find the map, and I didn't find it online, so I doubted your claim since you didn't back it up at the time. That's not your fault, but it seems pretty fucking crazy to publish a map of home grows. It's incredible. I don't live in aurora so I don't have access to a paper copy, which appears to be the only place the map is published. I found the article online, and there isn't a map. If I'm not finding it, I'm surprised no one else posted it to make me look 'stupid'. That's why I said your original post was untrue, because the article online didn't match the paper version. That's obvious to anyone with an IQ above 65, yet the haters continue to hate (I'm not talking about you). That's fine, laughable and sophomoric.

To everyone else reading this thread: the comprehension level of the people here seems appalling. I appreciate the hate though, I'd be pissed if I grew and had to remain compliant moving forward. Registering as a caregiver in any capacity means your grow could be on a map like this sometime. That's scary as hell. Feel free to hate me all you want, I don't post here to make friends. I follow the rules, and if that involves discussing topics that upset regular posters, I'm sorry. Change the rules then.

SprngsCaregiver:
I thought we agreed to disagree. You were offended at a comment in which you mistakenly thought I compared you, as a legal, compliant caregiver, to an illegal meth lab. Since that post, you've made several troll-baiting posts in threads where I've posted. What's your problem? I simply asked that you stop responding to my posts if you don't like them.

As a result of your troll baiting, you've created a TON of work for the probably unpaid moderators here. It's unproductive and ridiculous if you're over the age of 14, and you've made the moderators delete posts, delete or edit threads where there was otherwise valuable information.

Do you understand that your troll-baiting behavior doesn't do anything positive here? I fully expect to be seen and viewed as an 'other', someone who recently started in this industry, as opposed to the underground guys who are the vast majority of people reading this site/thread. I don't care.

Other:
The mods questioned why I was making semi off-topic posts, and I responded that I didn't know that new posters could create new topics. I have never posted on a forum that doesn't allow posting of emails in some cases, doesn't allow private messages etc. I'm still getting used to the site, so I apologize to the mods for creating more work for them.

I created a new thread of my own, and since I'm the asshole, no one is responding. Ok. Either the people reading the thread are scared to discuss compliance or they are not ready to admit their guilt and would rather remain willfully ignorant, that's fine, I don't care. I can't say that enough.

This site continues to be a very good tool to use for current events etc, and I plan on following the rules and continuing to post here. I'm sorry if that makes you mad.

The more I read about how much control cook had with everything, the more pissed I get. And I'm nowhere close to the general public, I've been smoking for years and got my doc reco/app in Oct. 09. With all of the readers of this site and this thread who don't respond, it's not surprising at all that this went through. All of you caregivers with more than 5 patients got screwed, I can see your vitriol. What did you do before the legislation went through to publicize your side? It seems like you were lazy, did nothing and hoped for the best. Now you guys seem to be blaming the MMC's for the 5 patient cap. wtf.

It seems that the lawyers/corryclan had a lot to do with the wording of the legislation, since they appear to be in favor of it as it stands. Is there anyone actually standing up for the legislation? It seems mattcook is just answering questions with 'it was a public policy decision'. What does that even mean? I don't expect a reply though.

Good times.

[boulderbud5525]

someone please save cologrower420 from himself. he doesn't have anything better to do but type type type all day long on this forum. He baits people and then plays the misunderstood innocent. I swear he's going to type his little fingers right to the bone. :smokin:

[HighPopalorum]

Is there anyone actually standing up for the legislation?

I do. I've always been in the "legalize it, tax it, regulate it" camp of marijuana activists. There are some parts of 1284 that I believe can and will be whittled away by the courts, but I'm glad it passed and glad it's being enforced. I believe the bill will generate revenue that pays for the program's administration and enriches the state. I believe added health and safety requirements, background checks, and felon prohibitions will protect me as a consumer. Finally, and I've said it dozens of times, I believe it's right and proper for communities to ban MMCs if they so desire. All of these things seem onerous to people in this industry, but then again all regulations appear that way to the people whose businesses and livelihoods are affected.

[cologrower420]

someone please save cologrower420 from himself. he doesn't have anything better to do but type type type all day long on this forum. He baits people and then plays the misunderstood innocent. I swear he's going to type his little fingers right to the bone. :smokin:

Come up with something different to say. I spend all day on the computer, and it takes seconds to make a post, so it's slightly ridiculous to infer that I spend all of my time making posts here.

I don't think I am misunderstood for a second, why do you insult me while ignoring the content of my posts?

I will absolutely admit that I made a post meant to incite discussion with the meth lab comment, and I guess that means I 'baited' people. Is that against the posting rules?

[cologrower420]

I do. I've always been in the "legalize it, tax it, regulate it" camp of marijuana activists. There are some parts of 1284 that I believe can and will be whittled away by the courts, but I'm glad it passed and glad it's being enforced. I believe the bill will generate revenue that pays for the program's administration and enriches the state. I believe added health and safety requirements, background checks, and felon prohibitions will protect me as a consumer. Finally, and I've said it dozens of times, I believe it's right and proper for communities to ban MMCs if they so desire. All of these things seem onerous to people in this industry, but then again all regulations appear that way to the people whose businesses and livelihoods are affected.

Thanks for responding.

I totally understand that there are people in this industry and this movement that genuinely care about the patient and the product. However, there is also the sub category of lazy stoners who grow for profit and don't pay taxes on those profits. Those are the people who are most negatively affected by 1284 and 109. My point is, the people who are complaining don't appear to have done much in the way of campaigning against 1284 and 109. Obviously the lack of posts implies the same.

[copobo]

Thanks for responding.

I totally understand that there are people in this industry and this movement that genuinely care about the patient and the product. However, there is also the sub category of lazy stoners who grow for profit and don't pay taxes on those profits. Those are the people who are most negatively affected by 1284 and 109. My point is, the people who are complaining don't appear to have done much in the way of campaigning against 1284 and 109. Obviously the lack of posts implies the same.

those most negatively effected by 109 and 1284 are the patients who were set up with small time caregivers. While you've admitted you smoke for fun, many actually need cannabis to get through their day.

You see, many caregivers gave free meds to patients in need, now many of these "greedy" caregivers had to let patients go (who got free meds) and now can't supply for free to their 5, as they can't sell legally to dispensaries, which is how they paid the bills. I'm afraid you don't have an historical perspective into how this has gone in Colorado up until the point where you jumped in for fun, so it looks like greed to you. Unfortunately, in order to protect dispensaries we passed 1284 and 109, and many non-profit caregivers were forced to send patients away, and to start charging those who were previously served for free.

[SprngsCaregiver]

SprngsCaregiver:
I thought we agreed to disagree. You were offended at a comment in which you mistakenly thought I compared you, as a legal, compliant caregiver, to an illegal meth lab. Since that post, you've made several troll-baiting posts in threads where I've posted. What's your problem? I simply asked that you stop responding to my posts if you don't like them.

As a result of your troll baiting, you've created a TON of work for the probably unpaid moderators here. It's unproductive and ridiculous if you're over the age of 14, and you've made the moderators delete posts, delete or edit threads where there was otherwise valuable information.

Do you understand that your troll-baiting behavior doesn't do anything positive here? I fully expect to be seen and viewed as an 'other', someone who recently started in this industry, as opposed to the underground guys who are the vast majority of people reading this site/thread. I don't care.


Actually it flat out offended me that you would compare anything MJ to meth but whatever I'm done with that.

I don't feel I need to even respond to you incinuating that I'm the troll. I'm pretty sure everyone can see the facts.

If you are suggesting I'm in some sort of "click" you're dead wrong.. I know absolutly nobody on this site.

Now back to the topic...

HighPop you said...

ahem.... First Amendment...

Wouldn't this be more like publishing where the military stockpiles their weapons or something? Considering they had to of got this information from a "private database".


Article 18 section 14 of the Colorado Constitution states..

(3) The state health agency shall create and maintain a confidential registry of patients who have applied for and are entitled to receive a registry identification card according to the criteria set forth in this subsection, effective June 1, 2001.



(a) No person shall be permitted to gain access to any information about patients in the state health agency's confidential registry, or any information otherwise maintained by the state health agency about physicians and primary care-givers, except for authorized employees of the state health agency in the course of their official duties and authorized employees of state or local law enforcement agencies which have stopped or arrested a person who claims to be engaged in the medical use of marijuana and in possession of a registry identification card or its functional equivalent, pursuant to paragraph (e) of this subsection (3). Authorized employees of state or local law enforcement agencies shall be granted access to the information contained within the state health agency's confidential registry only for the purpose of verifying that an individual who has presented a registry identification card to a state or local law enforcement official is lawfully in possession of such card.

They are handing out information protected by the Colorado Constitution.

[HighPopalorum]

Wouldn't this be more like publishing where the military stockpiles their weapons or something? Considering they had to of got this information from a "private database".

1. I don't think that rhetorical simile has any power: The military stockpiles weapons in armories and on bases, whose locations are not secret. You can look up their addresses in the phone book.

2. And, as a general matter, I take a very broad view of the press's power. I can think of very few situations where I would side with government in a dispute over publishing confidential data. See: Wikileaks. I prefer the 1A to be 'too permissive' rather than even slightly constricting.

3. How could the press have possibly obtained that information from the registry? The article indicates their source was the police department. If you're going to muzzle someone, muzzle the police and not the newspaper.

4. Finally, were it my building, I would want to know. I have reservations about the safety of growing in multi-unit dwellings. We had a patient burn himself and and another man to death here last year. The fire started in his apartment grow and spread to others. I'd want to know, and I'd be glad the paper told me.

[boulderbud5525]

those most negatively effected by 109 and 1284 are the patients who were set up with small time caregivers. While you've admitted you smoke for fun, many actually need cannabis to get through their day.

You see, many caregivers gave free meds to patients in need, now many of these "greedy" caregivers had to let patients go (who got free meds) and now can't supply for free to their 5, as they can't sell legally to dispensaries, which is how they paid the bills. I'm afraid you don't have an historical perspective into how this has gone in Colorado up until the point where you jumped in for fun, so it looks like greed to you. Unfortunately, in order to protect dispensaries we passed 1284 and 109, and many non-profit caregivers were forced to send patients away, and to start charging those who were previously served for free.
well put and well said.:thumbsup:

[SprngsCaregiver]

1. I don't think that rhetorical simile has any power: The military stockpiles weapons in armories and on bases, whose locations are not secret. You can look up their addresses in the phone book.

2. And, as a general matter, I take a very broad view of the press's power. I can think of very few situations where I would side with government in a dispute over publishing confidential data. See: Wikileaks. I prefer the 1A to be 'too permissive' rather than even slightly constricting.

3. How could the press have possibly obtained that information from the registry? The article indicates their source was the police department. If you're going to muzzle someone, muzzle the police and not the newspaper.

4. Finally, were it my building, I would want to know. I have reservations about the safety of growing in multi-unit dwellings. We had a patient burn himself and and another man to death here last year. The fire started in his apartment grow and spread to others. I'd want to know, and I'd be glad the paper told me.

Ok you're right that was a bad example. I also agree with you about the press's power, except when they are putting American citizens in danger. Remember when Geraldo was giving up troop positions on the news? That was bullshit right? The newspaper & police are putting the compliant patients and caregivers in danger of being robbed or killed for their medicine.

[edit] Isn't the Police moto: "To protect and serve"

[SprngsCaregiver]

Ok you're right that was a bad example. I also agree with you about the press's power, except when they are putting American citizens in danger. Remember when Geraldo was giving up troop positions on the news? That was bullshit right? The newspaper & police are putting the compliant patients and caregivers in danger of being robbed or killed for their medicine.

[edit] Isn't the Police moto: "To protect and serve"

Let me rephrase that to law abiding American citizens.

[cologrower420]

those most negatively effected by 109 and 1284 are the patients who were set up with small time caregivers. While you've admitted you smoke for fun, many actually need cannabis to get through their day.

You see, many caregivers gave free meds to patients in need, now many of these "greedy" caregivers had to let patients go (who got free meds) and now can't supply for free to their 5, as they can't sell legally to dispensaries, which is how they paid the bills. I'm afraid you don't have an historical perspective into how this has gone in Colorado up until the point where you jumped in for fun, so it looks like greed to you. Unfortunately, in order to protect dispensaries we passed 1284 and 109, and many non-profit caregivers were forced to send patients away, and to start charging those who were previously served for free.
You are wrong entirely. The only thing that I don't have knowledge of is of this culture during the time it was illegal (pre 2000), and the subculture of growing for patients.

You should note that if I didn't have a qualifying health condition, than I wouldn't have gotten my card. So please don't assume I only smoke for recreation.

I will agree that I don't have a 'historical perspective' on growing pot. Is that a bad thing?

Also, I feel that you are lumping for-profit caregivers in with those who give meds to patients. The number of for-profit caregivers outnumbers free med providers 1000-1, so don't act like everyone growing is doing it for the cause. That's ridiculous.

[cologrower420]

Actually it flat out offended me that you would compare anything MJ to meth but whatever I'm done with that.

I don't feel I need to even respond to you incinuating that I'm the troll. I'm pretty sure everyone can see the facts.

If you are suggesting I'm in some sort of "click" you're dead wrong.. I know absolutly nobody on this site.

Now back to the topic...

HighPop you said...


Wouldn't this be more like publishing where the military stockpiles their weapons or something? Considering they had to of got this information from a "private database".


They are handing out information protected by the Colorado Constitution.

Doesn't this new legislation trump the constitution? Even though there is no patient count in the constitution in Colorado, doesn't this new legislation require a 5 patient limit? How does A20 over rule the new laws?

[SprngsCaregiver]

Doesn't this new legislation trump the constitution? Even though there is no patient count in the constitution in Colorado, doesn't this new legislation require a 5 patient limit? How does A20 over rule the new laws?

I don't believe it trumps the constitution but I will follow the rules until that's proven in court.
Yes there is a 5 patient limit in the new law. You know this though.. What are you getting at?
I could only tell you how I believe A20, or article 18 section 14 of the Colorado Constitution, overrules the new law but thats pretty irrelevant. I'm not a lawyer or a judge.

[copobo]

You are wrong entirely. The only thing that I don't have knowledge of is of this culture during the time it was illegal (pre 2000), and the subculture of growing for patients.

no, I'm not wrong at all. The subculture of growing for patients is what this is all about, and is also why you don't get it. Funny, I know a dozen growers. none of them are or were making big bucks, and all are 100% about this movement.

Since you think these type of people are 1 in 1000, it is very clear to me why your posts are what they are, and where you are coming from.

[blackhash]

I finally have to comment after reading along for many, many months.

copobo nails it about the set up many folks had going. Many of us have long-term patients with true needs who didn't show up on the Registry in the months after Holder said he wasn't coming. Many of us did what we could/what we had to do to for years to provide these people with free meds. Who the fuck has cancer or AIDS or luekemia that can work everyday and afford to medicate properly at the prices folks are charging today in the dispensaries?? (aka, street prices for those of you with no knowledge of "pre-med"/etc)

I urge all patients who have things set up to remain set up as you were before. If you drop patients as "caregiver" because of 1284's bullshit, bring them back in the fold as a fellow patient and simply donate garden space to them. While 1284 says no 2 'caregivers' can share a garden space I see nowhere that it says no 2 PATIENTS can share a garden space. Am I missing this somewhere or is it a true loophole for us to use? (you dispensary folks remember those, right?)

Either way, no one can track your back channel sales or gifts and I urge you to continue to grow big and provide meds and keep any/all people you can from buying overpriced meds @ the dispensaries. If you give in and give up and let patients fall into this void we will soon see a huge monopoly, and it willl be larger than the present one that is shaping up because the mom and pops are gonna get squeezed out by the WannaMarters and the other huge franchise chains that will McDonald-a-fy this industry if they can do so. At that point the patients that this law was originally written for will just be an afterthought, much like we've seen as the dispensary model unfolded within the last year and a sizeable portion of this movement has turned from need to greed.

you know who you are on both sides of this coin. Respect to those towing the line who remember what this thing we do is really all about.

Whether it be profit or profiteeering, someone else is always picking up the tab.

blackhash

[cologrower420]

no, I'm not wrong at all. The subculture of growing for patients is what this is all about, and is also why you don't get it. Funny, I know a dozen growers. none of them are or were making big bucks, and all are 100% about this movement.

Since you think these type of people are 1 in 1000, it is very clear to me why your posts are what they are, and where you are coming from.

Look at it from a different perspective.

While 1 in 1000 of you caregivers might be in it for 'the cause', 99% of the income you caregivers enjoy, comes from selling to potheads and high schoolers. Your income comes from people who smoke recreationally, not patients who need this to medicate. So in my opinion, your subculture should welcome people who are new in the industry.

Are you saying that 'patients in need of free meds' constitutes more than 1 in 100 or 1 in 1000 smokers? Seriously? In your opinion, what percentage of the people who have applied (100,000ish) have done so and are your customers, patients who 'need' this medicine to survive.

I guess I'm still used to seeing it as a medicine. My entire life it's been a drug, now it's a medicine. This is just my unique experience. I don't have hippy parents or family members with cancer, so I don't have a lot of experience in that area, it seems like you do. I'm not sure why you are judging.

SprngsCaregiver:
When you state that you are in compliance, are you talking about A20 or 1284/109? It seems like you are saying that you don't recognize this new legislation.

edit:
blackhash, I made a thread about remaining compliant post 1284, maybe this discussion would fit better there, I don't know.

As I understand the legislation, there can be only one caregiver per residence. Caregivers can't come together for the purposes of cultivation, so I see the plant count maximum being 5 patients (30 plants) plus 5 plants for each patient in the house. The only way I see that number going up is if there is a husband/wife who are both caregivers. They came together for marriage not cultivation right? So they could each have 5 patients?

Also, I have a slight problem with you seemingly recommending that people be non-compliant. That's a strange position to take with everything you could lose. Are you growers really just ignoring the law?

[COzigzag]

While 1 in 1000 of you caregivers might be in it for 'the cause', 99% of the income you caregivers enjoy, comes from selling to potheads and high schoolers. Your income comes from people who smoke recreationally, not patients who need this to medicate.

Total bullshit!

I've kept my mouth shut as you've talked crap to everybody but this ignorance takes the cake.

It's obvious you just come here to start trouble.

Go play on somebody elses board.

[copobo]

Total bullshit!

I've kept my mouth shut as you've talked crap to everybody but this ignorance takes the cake.

It's obvious you just come here to start trouble.

Go play on somebody elses board.

yea, that's where I'm at with him. It seems like he just wants to argue and doesn't want to listen. I've HAD teenagers LOL.

I was once young and knew it all too.

[SprngsCaregiver]

While 1 in 1000 of you caregivers might be in it for 'the cause', 99% of the income you caregivers enjoy, comes from selling to potheads and high schoolers. Your income comes from people who smoke recreationally, not patients who need this to medicate. So in my opinion, your subculture should welcome people who are new in the industry.

SprngsCaregiver:
When you state that you are in compliance, are you talking about A20 or 1284/109? It seems like you are saying that you don't recognize this new legislation.



I want to respond first to the disinformation in your first statement. Most caregivers were making profit by selling wholesale to dispensaries. How can you make such a statement when you really have no idea of how things work?

Where have I ever said I dont recognize the new laws? I have said I dont think they are constitutional. I am 1284 compliant. I personally never had over 5 but I did turn 1 patient away a few months back. I'm a small time nobody out here in Colorado and thats the way I like it for now. Although even I would like to be able to help 15 patients, which would keep me well under the federal radar as far as plant count. I refuse to go over the federal limit period. Anybody growing over 98 right now, dispensary or not, I don't know what to tell you other than good luck.

[blackhash]

you have it wrong, 420. The 20-somethin kiddies who are using this all as an excuse to get baked are the ones flocking to "Broadsterdam" and the dispensaries. Set in one of these places for an hour and watch the parade. They are texting their friends as they sit there waiting to make a purchase while offering the menu choices/etc. via text.

Sit there for more than an hour and you may very well see the same kid come back in as I have....making yet another purchase.

Gosh..those young uns sure do medicate quickly, huh? What an amazing generation!

I actually heard one dispensary owner here in town tell a kid who had just been there an hour or so earlier "don't be late for class...see ya LATERRRRRR!!!"

i believe it is the dispensaries who are pushing the boundaries and who sell the majority of the weed to the recreactional users, either through a non-qualified patient they signed up that day for $200, or through those same purchased "patients" friends, eagerly awaiting young Jimmy John's return with "medical" bud from the local dispensary.

there's shady folks on both sides but i guarantee the dispensaries are NOT giving anyone FREE meds whatsoever

that in itself tells the tale here.

Respect goes out to those who remember what this is truly all about.

blackhash

[HighPopalorum]

i guarantee the dispensaries are NOT giving anyone FREE meds whatsoever

that in itself tells the tale here.


Well, to be fair, most of the dispensaries I've been to do give some freebies, blackhash.

[SoCoMMJ]

there's shady folks on both sides but i guarantee the dispensaries are NOT giving anyone FREE meds whatsoever
blackhash

I know firsthand that your statement is false. To the tune of several thousand dollars worth of free meds to patients EVERY SINGLE month.

It's not always about how much moola you can rake in....

[blackhash]

Much respect for those dispensaries who do give away free meds.

I have not seen the practice locally. I actually inquired about donating meds to a local outlet to distribute and the guy went on and on about the great program they had set up to give away TRIM to terminal patients. Wow, don't put yerself out Mr. Dope Dealer.

I'd love to help but I don't trust these folks any farther than I can throw them so i am looking into other options.

blackhash