printing that map is akin to printing the times an armored carrier shows up at which liquor stores to collect their deposits.
SERIOUSLY EFFED!
Printable View
printing that map is akin to printing the times an armored carrier shows up at which liquor stores to collect their deposits.
SERIOUSLY EFFED!
ahem.... First Amendment...
Indeed :thumbsup:;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SprngsCaregiver
Are you referring to me?Quote:
Originally Posted by SprngsCaregiver
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by luge469
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.
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:
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by cologrower420
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by boulderbud5525
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?
Thanks for responding.Quote:
Originally Posted by HighPopalorum
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by cologrower420
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.
Actually it flat out offended me that you would compare anything MJ to meth but whatever I'm done with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by cologrower420
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".Quote:
Originally Posted by HighPopalorum
They are handing out information protected by the Colorado Constitution.Quote:
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by SprngsCaregiver
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.
well put and well said.:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by copobo
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by HighPopalorum
[edit] Isn't the Police moto: "To protect and serve"
Let me rephrase that to law abiding American citizens.Quote:
Originally Posted by SprngsCaregiver
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by copobo
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.
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by SprngsCaregiver
I don't believe it trumps the constitution but I will follow the rules until that's proven in court.Quote:
Originally Posted by cologrower420
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.
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.Quote:
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.
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.
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
Look at it from a different perspective.Quote:
Originally Posted by copobo
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?
Total bullshit!Quote:
Originally Posted by cologrower420
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by COzigzag
I was once young and knew it all too.
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by cologrower420
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.
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
Well, to be fair, most of the dispensaries I've been to do give some freebies, blackhash.Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.Quote:
Originally Posted by blackhash
It's not always about how much moola you can rake in....
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