Are private sales still legal?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MakeSense

I would count that as an expense, however a Judge may not.

---

You're correct. Accounting 101: Payroll Expense or Operating Expense

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MakeSense

I would count that as an expense, however a Judge may not.

---

Even non profit organizations are allowed to compensate their employees, seems like you'd have a leg to stand on in court... so long as you weren't gouging.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter

Even non profit organizations are allowed to compensate their employees, seems like you'd have a leg to stand on in court... so long as you weren't gouging.

---

I hear that. I would not want to be the one that had to prove it though.
The whole concept is that Colorado is the only for profit model. And now
that regulation is being put in place and fees are being collected,
I doubt they will allow the profit or income as a care provider to be viable for an
extended period of time. Not to mention the fact that a patient is only allowed 2 oz. at
a time and there will be no legal outlet for the excess medicine period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

I guess 1284 is subject to interpretation. I'm happy to admit if I am wrong on something.

I won't ever buy medicine from someone I don't know, or someone who can't show me their redcard. I won't ever buy more than 2 ounces at a time.

In my opinion, patient to patient sales are legal, for me. I'm not trying to make a profit or sell to patients on craigslist.

Without looking into it, what was just quoted doesn't explicity state that patient to patient sales are illegal. I think sprngscrgvr is saying that because patient to patient sales aren't specificially and explicitly discussed in 1284/109, that we can safely assume that p2p is now illegal? I don't want to put words in that posters mouth, but I disagree.

Does the legislation ever say, 'patient to patient is illegal' or are we left to interpret ourselves?

edit: If a fellow patient is ever out of medicine, I would never tell them I won't share or provide them with the meds they need, just because I can't find some exact random text in a new bill/law.

---

Patient to Patient sales is a constitutional right :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greenergy

Are you trying to get people arrested? You repeatedly give out incorrect info to people that could get them charged with a felony. Stop. Direct them to 1284 on Warren Edsons website and let them figure it out themselves if you are really trying to help. :wtf:

---

I've talked to Mr. Edson. From our discussion I came away with the idea that P2P isn't going to be legal. The intent of the law is to tax and regulate. If P2P can't be taxed and regulated, it's going to be considered in violation of 1284 by the DOR. You could always call the DOR. Ask for Louis Koske. He will have an opinion to share with you.

Warren Edson is anti patient, anti caregiver and nothing more than a lackey for the dispensaries. I wouldnt believe anything that assclown says.

Matt cook told me the DOR wasn't going to regulate caregivers, that this was the business of the DOH.

I agree with GM. P2P sales is a most basic right and key to access.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedleppelin

Warren Edson is anti patient, anti caregiver and nothing more than a lackey for the dispensaries. I wouldnt believe anything that assclown says.

---

Think about it. If you're selling, even to another registered patient, you're still dispensing.
dispense: Definition, Synonyms from Answers.com
Whether it's constitutional or not, dispensing is regulated by 1284. Stopping P2P transactions (dispensing) would seem to be what 1284 is all about actually since it puts the grower/patients and non grower patients whose privacy they are trying to invade outside the reach of their cameras and fingerprint scanners and leaves it up to the grower/patients to obey the law, not sell or be in possession of more than two ounces of usable product and report their transactions to the non grower patients as income which would then be taxed, which the grower/patient is not going to do because then they will fall under the "caregiver" designation and if the patient the grower/patient sells to is not his patient, then he's in violation of 1284. These are not Warren Edson's words, they are my own opinions. I wouldn't mind at all if I was wrong.

Do we know of a case where patients trades 2oz's or less for money in CO and is arrested and successfully prosecuted?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by puntacometa

Think about it. If you're selling, even to another registered patient, you're still dispensing.
dispense: Definition, Synonyms from Answers.com
Whether it's constitutional or not, dispensing is regulated by 1284. Stopping P2P transactions (dispensing) would seem to be what 1284 is all about actually since it puts the grower/patients and non grower patients whose privacy they are trying to invade outside the reach of their cameras and fingerprint scanners and leaves it up to the grower/patients to obey the law, not sell or be in possession of more than two ounces of usable product and report their transactions to the non grower patients as income which would then be taxed, which the grower/patient is not going to do because then they will fall under the "caregiver" designation and if the patient the grower/patient sells to is not his patient, then he's in violation of 1284. These are not Warren Edson's words, they are my own opinions. I wouldn't mind at all if I was wrong.

---

I totally agree with you that under 1284 it is not legal, and obviously that was a big part of their intent with the bill, but the real issue is how the constitution is interpreted:

(b) Effective June 1, 2001, it shall be an exception from the state's criminal laws for any patient or primary care-giver in lawful possession of a registry identification card to engage or assist in the medical use of marijuana, except as otherwise provided in subsections (5) and (8) of this section.

Assist has to mean provide, what else could it mean? I think one would have a very good chance of successfully making that argument in court and law enforcement knows it. You still see people openly 'assist other patients' on Craigslist and as far as I know nothing has happened to anyone. Obviously that doesnt mean it wont and and probably eventually will.

As far as Edson, he has a vested interest to interpret the law in the manner that benefits him the most. Within days after the passage of 1284 he was on Facebook arguing with Kathleen and a few other people on how great 1284 was and how being a caregiver growing in your home has always been illegal due to zoning regulations. I've also heard he helped craft 1284 or at least had some input to it so I take what he says with a grain of salt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedleppelin

As far as Edson, he has a vested interest to interpret the law in the manner that benefits him the most. Within days after the passage of 1284 he was on Facebook arguing with Kathleen and a few other people on how great 1284 was and how being a caregiver growing in your home has always been illegal due to zoning regulations. I've also heard he helped craft 1284 or at least had some input to it so I take what he says with a grain of salt.

---

I am no fan either, I was a bit pissed at how he seemed to be in glee when almost every Patient and Mom & Pop store had just got screwed in the worst way.:wtf:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by copobo

Do we know of a case where patients trades 2oz's or less for money in CO and is arrested and successfully prosecuted?

---

There would be no instance of this at this time...
That is because this part of the bill will not be in effect until July of this year.

As to the constitutionality.... That is why it is called an Amendment, Bill, etc.
Because they are amending the constitution or defining limitations to the right. I have the right to bear arms, just as long as I follow the rules...
Some would say BS I have the right to bear arms period under the constitution.... Just test that theory.

I think it all comes down to the old city hall thing.

As they say in Japan:
"The Nail that Sticks Up will be hammered down."

Don't think the feds are'nt chomping at the bit to find and prosecute violators of the state guidelines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MakeSense

I have the right to bear arms, just as long as I follow the rules...
Some would say BS I have the right to bear arms period under the constitution.... Just test that theory.

---

I test that theory every day when I drive to work. And have done so in other more questionable instances.


I have a right to bear arms, period, it's in the constitution that this great country was founded on. At the time it was scribed "Arms" were any thing from muskets to swords and daggers.


We still have this right, but the rules say we can't conceal them without a special license..... Thus a 3.5" folding blade is illegal, since apparently folding the blade back into the stock is concealing the "weapon" :rolleyes:


You CAN carry a firearm into ANY public place as long as it's not concealed, and you make no effort to "Brandish" it, just look at how many hunters carry their 06's in to "Gander Mountain" or what have you with no worries!


I personally do not own a firearm,.... but I do own several swords, spears, and poleaxes, and I know how to use them.

So I carry a Japanese short sword in my car at all times and have done so for many years, It's in full veiw as the blade is stuffed between the seat and center console, but the hilt and back of the blade is exposed and in easy reach.

Many Many years ago I carried a 13" long dagger on my hip while wandering thru a mall,.... Security followed me, as did the local PD,.... but since I was just window shopping they couldn't touch me for having the weapon! Could have been a .45 and would have been the same results. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canniwhatsis

I test that theory every day when I drive to work. And have done so in other more questionable instances.


I have a right to bear arms, period, it's in the constitution that this great country was founded on. At the time it was scribed "Arms" were any thing from muskets to swords and daggers.


We still have this right, but the rules say we can't conceal them without a special license..... Thus a 3.5" folding blade is illegal, since apparently folding the blade back into the stock is concealing the "weapon" :rolleyes:


You CAN carry a firearm into ANY public place as long as it's not concealed, and you make no effort to "Brandish" it, just look at how many hunters carry their 06's in to "Gander Mountain" or what have you with no worries!


I personally do not own a firearm,.... but I do own several swords, spears, and poleaxes, and I know how to use them.

So I carry a Japanese short sword in my car at all times and have done so for many years, It's in full veiw as the blade is stuffed between the seat and center console, but the hilt and back of the blade is exposed and in easy reach.

Many Many years ago I carried a 13" long dagger on my hip while wandering thru a mall,.... Security followed me, as did the local PD,.... but since I was just window shopping they couldn't touch me for having the weapon! Could have been a .45 and would have been the same results. ;)

---

Pretty ballsy bro.
Now try that in California.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MakeSense

Pretty ballsy bro.
Now try that in California.

---

I don't know Cali's rules,... but if they are as tightassed as that post implies, I don't want to ever go there.

I seldom carry weapons in public since I can do plenty of damage with a box cutter, and carrying a proper knife makes all the SHEEPnervous.

I'm not a violent person, but it's a strange world we live in, So I know how to defend myself and my family. ;) :hippy:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greenergy

Are you trying to get people arrested? You repeatedly give out incorrect info to people that could get them charged with a felony. Stop. Direct them to 1284 on Warren Edsons website and let them figure it out themselves if you are really trying to help. :wtf:

---

This is definitely gonna be something that will be debated as this law comes into fruition. HB 1284 is already being challenged with lawsuits so we will all have to wait to see how it plays out. Many of these bills/amendments are very poorly written. If you don't believe me, check out this excerpt from HB 1284 as reiewed by the Health District of Northern Larimer County Board of Directors.

Requirements for Medical Marijuana Centers

"Medical marijuana centers must be nonprofit."

This kind of language is going to be the source of debates when it comes to caregivers as the wording in the bill is that care-givers must also be non-profit, however, I guarantee MMC are still going to be charging $350/oz.

I would have to agree to be wary of anyone that is involved in this legislation who has a vested interest seeing one side or the other benefit from it. This happens in every single industry in this country and medical marijuana is not immune. When theres this much money being thrown around , enter the lawyers, politicians, special interests, all looking to draft bills to benefit their finanacial interests.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MakeSense

It is actually very straight forward. Caregivers can not profit, period end of story. That means you can cover your expenses, and nothing else.
The effective date is July this year.

It's time to come to Jesus :)

---

Might not be that simple:

Page 46 House Bill 10-1284

(d) A PRIMARY CAREGIVER MAY NOT CHARGE A PATIENT MORE THAN

THE COST OF CULTIVATING OR PURCHASING THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA, BUT
MAY CHARGE FOR CAREGIVER SERVICES.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shackhouser

Might not be that simple:

Page 46 House Bill 10-1284

(d) A PRIMARY CAREGIVER MAY NOT CHARGE A PATIENT MORE THAN

THE COST OF CULTIVATING OR PURCHASING THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA, BUT
MAY CHARGE FOR CAREGIVER SERVICES.

---

Sounds good, but this still says nothing about excess meds.
How much will a patient allow a caregiver to charge them is probably the better question. How much demand will your patient base generate in a given period??? They should probably address the caregiver excess meds issue...
Otherwise it looks like they expect a lot of medicine to be destroyed.
Why can't a registered care provider sell to MMCs again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MakeSense

Sounds good, but this still says nothing about excess meds.
How much will a patient allow a caregiver to charge them is probably the better question. How much demand will your patient base generate in a given period??? They should probably address the caregiver excess meds issue...
Otherwise it looks like they expect a lot of medicine to be destroyed.
Why can't a registered care provider sell to MMCs again?

---

It's too hard for the government to tell what comes from caregivers vs the black market. They also want to be able to "recall" bad product in the event there is mold/bugs/etc. They're also trying to cut down on what are essentially small businesses operating inside of homes; Denver already issued a ban on just that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MakeSense

Sounds good, but this still says nothing about excess meds.
How much will a patient allow a caregiver to charge them is probably the better question. How much demand will your patient base generate in a given period??? They should probably address the caregiver excess meds issue...
Otherwise it looks like they expect a lot of medicine to be destroyed.
Why can't a registered care provider sell to MMCs again?

---

What is marijuana in usable form? Wouldn't that be product that is trimmed/processed and ready to be consumed? Hang your plants, dry and cure them out and don't trim/process them until they are needed by your patients. I never trim my plants wet......ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by puntacometa

What is marijuana in usable form? Wouldn't that be product that is trimmed/processed and ready to be consumed? Hang your plants, dry and cure them out and don't trim/process them until they are needed by your patients. I never trim my plants wet......ever.

---

You have to be careful, a lot of LEO are trying to trip up caregivers by counting cut, drying plants against their count. Depending on what you're yielding, it can help, too.