I heard rule(s) that effect caregivers were decided on today.
anybody have any details?
Printable View
I heard rule(s) that effect caregivers were decided on today.
anybody have any details?
I am new to this forum Yet not new to the scene.You may want to look at this
YouTube - Colo. Dept. of Revenue Destroys Confidentiality of Medical Marijuana Registry
Someone needs to tell these asshats the war is over and cannabis wins
I think it might be time to be done with MMCs. I don't need 'em and really only went for novelty or a clone. I'm not a tinfoil hat wearer, but this is just wrong.
Not sure on the DoR side, it's been a crazy week here at the shop. CDPHE has a meeting tomorrow, maybe that's it?
Sorry for the double post, but here is Westword's coverage of yesterdays DOR meeting:
Medical marijuana database puts patients at risk of federal prosecution, advocate says (VIDEO) - Denver News - The Latest Word
I think that they are going to run into trouble with the database if they include names. Confidentiality is assured in the constitution and can not be violated.
However, it would be possible to run the database using only the card number and exp date without violating patient rights.
We need a database that we can enter a patients card number and see if the are still registered with the center. Currently there is no way to confirm your patient and respective plant or product volume counts.
Patients changing centers without notice can expose the center to felony cultivation or possession charges.
They're trying to make it illegal to change caregiver before your plants are harvested.
This is one of the biggest issues I have as a caregiver. There is no way to verify if a patient has changed their caregiver with the CDPHE.Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCoMMJ
I just want to be able to verify if my plant count is still legal or not at any given time.
wow. it really isn't about the patient is it? this is a shining example.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter
if you want to worry about harvest dates, etc, you might as well grow.
How would a patient know that the centers growers have harvested that patients plants?, also doesn't the center run a perpetual harvest?, if so then a patient can never change.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter
I never hear patients' advocates pushing for higher growing limits for individuals. All I ever hear is debate about regulation for medical marijuana centers.
I want to be able to grow outdoors on my property, and at least 20 plants.
I believe in Spain this is what people do, not spend hundreds of dollars at dispensaries.
This sharing of information is just another good reason to stay away from MMCs.
Listen, there are a lot of people gaming the system out there. If you sign up with someone, it's not unreasonable to say they should get three months to grow your plants. People who shop hop put businesses at risk of having inaccurate plant counts.Quote:
Originally Posted by copobo
I believe it would be based around a reasonable time frame for a plant to finish. I don't think any center is going to hold your plant hostage and keep you there forever. If they did, I'd report them to the DoR.Quote:
How would a patient know that the centers growers have harvested that patients plants?, also doesn't the center run a perpetual harvest?, if so then a patient can never change.
agreed, but say a patient assigns a center on day 1, the center now gets that patients plant count going. Day 5 the patient visits the center and finds the medicine the center is now offering for sale is not a strain that benefits the patient and decides that he will take his business elsewhere, with this, are you saying that with the new proposed rule the patient would be held hostage for 3-4 months, the reasonable time frame for a complete grow? Damn, I hope not.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter
I wonder how many patients are going to leave the registry with these new proposals? If what I read is right, the patients picture, transactions including the amount of medicine purchased and the frequency of purchases will be captured on video and also entered into the database, I doubt if many patients will be willing to put their private lives under such scrutiny. I bet we see a lot more lobbying by these centers to make this a more patient friendly system or they will probably end up all shutting down. Hmm, I wonder
Not many will stay. I can't tell you how many people I have talked to that are worried about their name being on a CONFIDENTIAL list. They are just shooting themselves in the foot if it passes. I can't believe the MMCs are not up in arms about this. They will lose patients and the shirts off their backs when they go under. Then the DOR will lose funding and all the dominoes will fall.Quote:
Originally Posted by Colodonmed
Couple things. First, you're not held hostage by an MMC, you can visit whoever you want. You may not get the caregiver benefits from the new place, but it is what it is. It's going to encourage people to be more judicious in who they select as their center/caregiver, which is a good thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Colodonmed
Second, I don't think that this system is designed to go "Wow, John Doe bought an eighth on Monday and then ANOTHER on Friday!" They don't have time to do that. I think they're looking for people who are buying their maximum two ounces from multiple shops, changing their primary caregiver/center all the time, etc. There has to be some safeguard against those kinds of abuses.
Lastly, who do you think is going to release this information? There are steep penalties, not to mention the law suit you'd be able to file. I keep hearing people talk about this list as if it's going to be published in this Sunday's Denver Post. It's all still held confidentially. I'd jump for joy if the state leaked anything related to status as a patient, same for my lawyer.
Princess Leia: The more you tighten your grip, [Colorado], the more [patients] will slip through your fingers.
That's what I mean by the lobbying statement. Without a patient count, how could a center survive, and I for one am not planning on having every transaction I am involved with recorded and stored for any reason whatsoever, no way man!Quote:
Originally Posted by canaguy27
The marijuana working group also got a full look at the new safety and sanitation regulations. The new rules likely will include a ban on some pesticides, limits on others and some warnings that pregnant women shouldn??t ingest pot products made with some products.
The rules include the nation??s first regulations for the safe production of hashish, including requirements that hash producers have exhaust hoods and other safety equipment and must use lab-quality metals and glass, not plastics that are commonly used but can impart dangerous chemicals into the hash.
The group debated whether to ban unsafe chemicals that can??t be tested, but regulators proposed going ahead and banning anything unsafe so that pot producers know what they shouldn??t be using and patients know what they??re smoking.
??I think patients have a right to know what they??re ingesting, period,? Cook said.~AP
Cool. :thumbsup:
There have been stiff penalties since the beginning of time, but they are not always a deterrent. A quick remimder of confidential data bases - wikileaksQuote:
Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter
before long, they will make it legal to check the DB to do spot home checks, and they'll check it fishing for busts. They'll use it to take your drivers license, health or auto insurance, or job away.
you are a damn fool if you think otherwise.
Aren't most transactions at MMC's recorded and stored? Hell, it's a requirement in Denver. Any place that does patient rewards or has POS software probably has an inventory tracker. I think a lot of this is status quo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Colodonmed
And aren't you much more concerned that MMC's can change hands and the new owner now has your paperwork, maybe your purchasing history, your ID, and the last four digits of your social security number? That anyone who breaks in could get that information? Or anyone who hacks their computer?
Conversely, an leo is the first person I want to have my information. I'm a patient, you're not ticketing me, go away. I thought we were fighting for 24/7 access so we didn't have to worry about the registry not being open?
I'm not concerned with a DoR employee having that info either because they can't do anything with it. I'm also one of 100,000+ patients in Colorado, I'm not that important to them. I also seriously doubt I'd be flagged in their system and it's legitimately in place to catch people trying to abuse the program. And I do believe they'll take every precaution to limit the number of employees that work in that capacity and keep things completely confidential.
And as far as "federal prosecution", I don't buy the premise. It's kind of an all or nothing proposition: they're going to go after hundreds of thousands of patients across the county or they're going to selectively prosecute people. Amendment 20 doesn't even allow you to be in violation of federal law unless you're very seriously ill. None of this happens, though, until they shut down all the centers and ipm's and litigate that, which is the most likely scenario if there was a dramatic shift in the federal perception of medical marijuana.
I get that it would be nice if the registry could handle all of this, but I think that the DoR will be better funded and hence do a better job executing it. This also paves the way for the system to be funded entirely by MMC's and IPM's, possibly leading to a decrease in the state application fee. That's a legitimate argument here.
For the record, we have never donated a red cent to COMMR. I do think that Betty has really turned things around there and would encourage you to talk to her about your concerns with her organization. We do support CTI (although our check is late, sorry!) but just don't agree this time.
I'd really like some discussion here, because I feel like I might be completely missing the point.
EDIT: Or I'm a damn fool. :jointsmile:
I signed up for a confidential registry. this smacks of anything but.
there should be someone at the DOH 24x7 to take calls from leo when they are in the presence of a patient, with their card number.
This is going more and more they way the overly paranoid have been suggesting all along.
This SAME KIND of information could NEVER be shared this way, for anything but MMJ.
seriously - I am worried about the next step. The step where the DB will become part of BG checks and insurance records.
It's going there Releaf. It really is.
The only opt out now is patient grows - tens of thousands more of them.
Okay, I don't want to come off argumentative, but I really want to break some of that down.
When you say that this program doesn't sound confidential, in what capacity are we talking? The proposals I've heard are vague. I also bet that because it's become such a hot topic now they'll err on the side of over-protecting info. We'd both agree that leaks of information are not in the departments best interest?
I didn't really think about the insurance factor. I guess I don't forsee them doing that, it would be massively unpopular. I also think that there's a big difference between another government agency having access vs a private company.
Patient grows seem like the worst thing to do if you're worried about federal prosecution of MMJ, right? I believe each plant federally is equal to 100 grams.
The DOR should not have my confidential medical info. When the mmj mission crosses with other missions (like Dr. regulation) we have a big problem!Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter
doesn't it bother you that this is contrary to our Constitution?Quote:
I didn't really think about the insurance factor. I guess I don't forsee them doing that, it would be massively unpopular. I also think that there's a big difference between another government agency having access vs a private company.
nah, a 6 plant grow can be done cheap without crazy ventilation and cooling, etc, and there will always be bigger fish. The more patient growers there are, the safer all will be. Patient growers won't get their picture taken, the quantity they consume recorded, nor will they be tracked. Someone can't fuck up, and the rules can't change such that their shit is on record in a way that could come to haunt them later.Quote:
Patient grows seem like the worst thing to do if you're worried about federal prosecution of MMJ, right? I believe each plant federally is equal to 100 grams.
this is bad bad bad bad.
How anybody could watch FERN'S presentation and think these rules are a good idea is BEYOND ME!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter
More nutty paranoid predictions. What you're predicting is not gonna happen, folks.... just like all the other apocalyptic proclamations that are spewed all over the internet every time regulations change.
What's uniquely bad about the DoR? I don't see how anything gets leaked, exposed, whatever. Especially in light of the discussion that a lot of people are having about this.Quote:
Originally Posted by copobo
I guess I just can't look at it as untouchable. Or perfect as it stands. I don't see what they're doing as any more unreasonable than telling people they can't yell fire in a movie theatre. If I want to be able to walk into a store and buy cannabis, I expect it won't be without some kind of oversight. What's the smarter play here? How do we stop people from buying a P a day of super cheap ounces from centers and flipping it on the street?Quote:
doesn't it bother you that this is contrary to our Constitution?
If there will always be bigger fish, doesn't it stand to reason that the centers will ALWAYS be that bigger fish? I mean, IPM's plant counts aren't tied to patient numbers... they can grow four billion plants under state law.Quote:
nah, a 6 plant grow can be done cheap without crazy ventilation and cooling, etc, and there will always be bigger fish. The more patient growers there are, the safer all will be. Patient growers won't get their picture taken, the quantity they consume recorded, nor will they be tracked. Someone can't fuck up, and the rules can't change such that their shit is on record in a way that could come to haunt them later.
this is bad bad bad bad.
I don't think anyone's a nutjob, just that most of the news is so heavily spun nowadays it's easy to take arguments on face. The COMMR hate baffles me; they've completely redone their organizational structure and have someone competent and compassionate at the helm. Admittedly, I haven't done too much investigating because A) we don't donate to them and B) I'm waiting to see that change manifest itself through some specific initiatives.Quote:
Originally Posted by HighPopalorum
I'd love to see a group with a track record of successful lobbying do something that helps the community when everyone reconvenes in January. Seems like those are the last people you should be throwing mud at.
Releaf, I think we come from two totally different perspectives.
You've given your life - money and personal info, agreed to background checks and whatever else from what you went through in order to apply to the state to get your dispensary. The privacy you've given up is not a big deal or you've grown to live with it.
I don't share my SSN with the hospital. The amazing thing is, after I refuse to give it to them, life goes on, they accept my insurance, and I am served like anyone who has given them everything they wanted. My last visit, they wanted to photocopy my drivers license?! no thanks. they were fine with that. I don't do this because I think the sky is falling, I do this because information is often mishandled. I've had my id stolen twice, so I have some reason for not putting info out there if I can avoid it. It seems the current registry just needs some staff and an 800 number. That's in line with the Constitution.
Nahhh We trust our govenment After all they have your best intrest at heart.Save our children and regulate the cat back in the bag send it all back underground and create criminals so LEO can justify there job as terorists.Quote:
Originally Posted by HighPopalorum
I see it happening 1284 and 109 has done this already.I can buy top shelf off the street cheaper than at a center.
I know about 30 patients 5 signed all there rights away to work or own a MMC 2 opted out right from the start .The ones who opted out are the oldest (in there 60s)
MMCs better wake up and fight against all this unconstitutional crap or they will die a slow death
Meh. I'm just bitter. A lot of people on this board don't understand the most basic elements of how government works. They don't understand how state, local and Federal government share powers and functions. They seem to draw no distinction at all between the Constitution, Colorado law, statute and ordinance. The don't seem to know or respect any of their leaders. They don't understand how laws are made, how our legislature works, what kinds of redress citizens have. They do not know what to do when they disagree with their government. After 30 damned years of Law and Order, they are still absolutely clueless about their rights and the police. All of this ignorance translates into conspiratorial fantasies of persecution and general hostility toward any
....ahh helll this is rambling B.S. Obviously, my generalizations don't apply to all, most, or even many of the posters here.
But how do they stop people from abusing the system with some staff and an 800 number?Quote:
Originally Posted by copobo
if it's a closed system, off network, it is as secure as it can be.
When staff takes a call, leo says that have patient name with patient number is it legit? The answer is yes or no.
I can't imagine more than one staff person would need to be on this at a time during off-hours.
But there are two fundamental questions: how to prevent people from changing caregivers/centers constantly and buying more meds or plants than they're allowed under the constitution.
why does it matter? I thought counts weren't tied to centers, so no need for incentives or keeping patients. Let them shop where they want.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter
The price on the street is better than at dispensaries so why would someone go to a dispensary to buy too much?
The only thing this crap will accomplish is to push more sales underground.
And under the constitution, patients may use as much as they need. I guess if we install a system, if you need to purchase more than 2 oz's at a time you are screwed. We do keep hearing of people having to drive hours to get meds, and now with more local moratoriums, there is an even greater affirmative defense for this.
EDIT: The state should just be explicit and say counts aren't tied to patients and let the patient whoring (hording) end.
Counts are tied to centers, just not IPM's.
I'd argue that if you're looking to bargain shop, you'll be able to find something on par with street pricing with far greater variety and access to edibles, hash, etc.
Wouldn't this system have the opposite effect than you described? If you're approved to have more than 2 ounces then that is tracked and you're at less risk than the status quo, where you have a registry card that doesn't indicate increased plant counts. And once again, those with extended recommendations are a small, small percentage of patients in the state.
the underground market almost withered away by the end of last summer - now, it's back in full swing.
One of my patients called last night and asked if I could take on 2 friends who don't want to be on a database.
Unfortunately, I can't take them (but I am trying to sell them some spare lighting gear!).
anecdotal, yes, but I don't think this isn't going to be a big deal for a bunch of people, which seems to be what you are hoping for. I think going this route is going to make many people shop underground who would otherwise have shopped at an mmc.
100% agree with this.Quote:
Originally Posted by copobo