caregivers forced to register, have info provided to local agencies

are you going solo as a patient grower or are you going to continue being a caregiver, registering with the state, and having your info given to local authorities?

No way in hell am I registering with the state, what are you going to do?

I'd weigh my desire to help my five patients against my preference for anonymity. If my patients were family or close friends or truly needful of my services, that would tip the balance toward registering and continuing to provide. If they were five yahoos from CU, I'd be inclined to tell them to take a hike and scale my operation down to 6/12. Going underground would not be an option because I can't work with a criminal record.

for now, I am sticking to 12 for my wife and I to grow as patients. I have an edibles rec, and this will make it harder to treat our conditions, but there's peace of mind. I never have more than 2 of one strain total or more than 1 of a strain in flower, numbers for diversity and edibles. There's way too much bullshit involved with trying to make $ or even break even. My mission now is to get patients growing. Patients are THE MOST protected growers in our state, and nobody has had any trouble growing their 6 plants, that I've ever heard of.

regs keep me out of dispensaries anyway, so no sales from dispensaries lost on me.

We have edibels recs. yet we have scaled back.They can keep there regs and there "centers".I wil help any patient grow in any way I can.Any patient that can, should grow.The more little grows the better for us , keep them guessing.

I never could wrap my head around the idea of caregivers selling medicine grown on behalf of patients. Caregivers helping patients grow on their own, on the other hand, is A+++. Kudos guys. The more patients who grow, the better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HighPopalorum

I never could wrap my head around the idea of caregivers selling medicine grown on behalf of patients. Caregivers helping patients grow on their own, on the other hand, is A+++. Kudos guys. The more patients who grow, the better.

---

We also encourage patients to grow, but recognize that growers that are just starting are not likely to produce product that is of high enough quality to be considered medicinal.

MMC's are a great way to fill this gap between the valuable and rich experience of working hands on with the cannabis plant, and the need for potent, well cured, mold free, flushed medicine.

It is my personal opinion that the caregiver registry isn't necessary, yet I am not surprised.

If I amped up a brewery in my basement and started selling kegs of beer tax-free, when the GOV got wind of it, they might shut me down, or ask for back taxes.

The point being that the line between providing for patients and black-market profit got too grey for the regulators.

the idea of it was to provide cheap or free meds to one's patients and to pay expenses by selling excess. For me, this was always too much of a pain in the ass anyway. I had a couple friends who were patients and charged them less than it cost to produce for above what they were given for free. I didn't profit from growing at all, except for the experience. It's been a great opportunity to learn getting to grow and use a variety of strains side by side. I've learned about what meds work when for my wife and I and previous patients, what different harvest times means for the same strains, the effect of ph and Ca+Mg and nute levels on different strains. Some stains ability to ripen in a CO2 rich environ. and some not, and their ability to withstand certain stresses. I just have to scale back my long term side-by-side experiment. It's been hard letting go of living lines. The availability of good genetics now makes that less of a big deal..

My avatar says it all. I did not renew my license when it expired, as it is the height of hypocrisy that I have to get a doc's rec. and the permission of the government to use cannabis legally. WTF. I refuse to participate in this sham any longer.

As a participant in the industry I have to say that the benefit I have seen the retail model provide far outweighs any concessions we have made. People who would otherwise not have access have it because they can google a shop and go purchase meds.

You can't google a caregiver and all caregivers on here will not register because they don't want to be found or listed.

It is also my opinion that a successfully regulated retail model will be major factor in the future legalization of marijuana.

While I appreciate the feeling that we shouldn't have to ask the government's permission for what we consume and the medicine that we choose to use, it's just the way it is. They have the power.

If you are waiting for them to just give that up, you'll be waiting in your grave.

Cynicism often feels right, but rarely makes political or social progress.

We have to be active in forcing the conversation on our culture and in our society so that perhaps one day, people who grow in their house don't have to feel like they are doing something wrong or that they are criminals, and those who choose to use marijuana are doing just that, making a choice, not committing a crime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DenverRelief

As a participant in the industry I have to say that the benefit I have seen the retail model provide far outweighs any concessions we have made. People who would otherwise not have access have it because they can google a shop and go purchase meds.

You can't google a caregiver and all caregivers on here will not register because they don't want to be found or listed.

It is also my opinion that a successfully regulated retail model will be major factor in the future legalization of marijuana.

While I appreciate the feeling that we shouldn't have to ask the government's permission for what we consume and the medicine that we choose to use, it's just the way it is. They have the power.

If you are waiting for them to just give that up, you'll be waiting in your grave.

Cynicism often feels right, but rarely makes political or social progress.

We have to be active in forcing the conversation on our culture and in our society so that perhaps one day, people who grow in their house don't have to feel like they are doing something wrong or that they are criminals, and those who choose to use marijuana are doing just that, making a choice, not committing a crime.

---

Of course you feel that way, all your competition has been pushed underground. People of this state voted for a caregiver/patient model, but thanks to the dispensaries and their lobbyists that has been made nearly impossible in order for you guys to make money. My gut tells me if it went up for a vote that people would not approve dispensaries, maybe we need a new amendment to clarify exactly what people of this state want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DenverRelief

As a participant in the industry I have to say that the benefit I have seen the retail model provide far outweighs any concessions we have made. People who would otherwise not have access have it because they can google a shop and go purchase meds.

You can't google a caregiver and all caregivers on here will not register because they don't want to be found or listed.

It is also my opinion that a successfully regulated retail model will be major factor in the future legalization of marijuana.

While I appreciate the feeling that we shouldn't have to ask the government's permission for what we consume and the medicine that we choose to use, it's just the way it is. They have the power.

If you are waiting for them to just give that up, you'll be waiting in your grave.

Cynicism often feels right, but rarely makes political or social progress.

We have to be active in forcing the conversation on our culture and in our society so that perhaps one day, people who grow in their house don't have to feel like they are doing something wrong or that they are criminals, and those who choose to use marijuana are doing just that, making a choice, not committing a crime.

---

What a crock. Anyone who didn't have access to cannabis prior to the passage of amendment 20 wasn't trying. Possession of under 1 oz is a PETTY OFFENSE, people. Maximum penalty a $100.00 dollar fine. You can (and will) get in more trouble for speeding. Getting a " license" is far more expensive. The whole thing is just stupid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by senorx12562

What a crock. Anyone who didn't have access to cannabis prior to the passage of amendment 20 wasn't trying. Possession of under 1 oz is a PETTY OFFENSE, people. Maximum penalty a $100.00 dollar fine. You can (and will) get in more trouble for speeding. Getting a " license" is far more expensive. The whole thing is just stupid.

---

That's exactly what I have been saying all along. You would have to get busted for possession 2 times in one year just to break even with the Dr and Red Card costs. If you get caught 2 times in one year, it's time to find another vice.

Now to the bazillion dollar question, If caregivers are within plant count and weight compliance, what is the big deal with registration? Of course I understand the desire for privacy, but given the choice between felony cultivation vs state registration it seems an easy choice.

Not a crock at all. To provide just one example, I'm a caregiver (the non MMJ kind) for an elderly blind man. Another condition prevents him from walking. Before he took my advice and got on the registry, he was having a terrible time with unreliable dealers and poor quality control. He was being ripped off. It wasn't because he was "not trying" but because he is a homebound disabled man in a rural part of the state. Centers have been a godsend for him, finally providing reliable access to reliable medicine at much lower cost than he was paying before. He's also discovered some hash and extracts that ease his back.

I just had a friend call me. She said that some caregiver friends of hers living in Arrapaho County got a call from MMED two nights ago. The were at the end of the driveway, said they smelled MMJ, and asked to be let in to audit the plant count and electrical and construction "Code Compliance". The caregiver refused the "inspection" and the the sheriff arrived and "insisted". Some electrical "code" violations were found (extension cords and circuit breakers near limit) and the entire op was taken. Nice.

And how about that U.S. Supreme Court ruling just recently giving LEO the right to kick in the door without a warrant if they suspect evidence is being destroyed! A LEO had "smelled" MMJ and when the knock on the door went unanswered and he heard noise inside so he busted in being worried about the destruction of evidence. Case Upheld. I "smell" weed and they don't answer when I "knock". I "hear" noise. I'm allowed to kick in a door. How on Earth would one defend themselves when the senses of LEO are held as truth?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HighPopalorum

Not a crock at all. To provide just one example, I'm a caregiver (the non MMJ kind) for an elderly blind man. Another condition prevents him from walking. Before he took my advice and got on the registry, he was having a terrible time with unreliable dealers and poor quality control. He was being ripped off. It wasn't because he was "not trying" but because he is a homebound disabled man in a rural part of the state. Centers have been a godsend for him, finally providing reliable access to reliable medicine at much lower cost than he was paying before. He's also discovered some hash and extracts that ease his back.

---

I'm happy for your friend and am glad he feels better, but if I was his "caregiver" in the manner that you are, I would've gladly provided the access he now enjoys under amendment 20, even before its passage. More to the point, anecdotal evidence is rarely a good basis for policy decisions. I can't count the number of terrible laws and regulations we've been subjected to because it's worth it "if it prevents just one person from suffering..." Your statement also assumes that the only option to our current hypocritical and disingenuous system is to go back to the bad old days of $100.00 fines and cops dumping out your bag instead of doing the paperwork. I'm not convinced that the passage of Amendment 20 hasn't set back our cause (or at least mine) by releasing some of the pressure that the obvious stupidity and injustice of the war on drugs was placing on our politicians to get their heads out of their asses. Oh well. Sorry to go all quixotic on ya.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by senorx12562

What a crock. Anyone who didn't have access to cannabis prior to the passage of amendment 20 wasn't trying. Possession of under 1 oz is a PETTY OFFENSE, people. Maximum penalty a $100.00 dollar fine. You can (and will) get in more trouble for speeding. Getting a " license" is far more expensive. The whole thing is just stupid.

---

Possession of 2 ounces is a petty offense....it changed last year from 1 to 2.

No caregiver is "underground" as the constitution still stands. And people should understand that the word caregiver and the definition in the constitution are for people who are NOT qualifying patients, but caregiving.......patients can assist patients in medical use. Medical use includes, acquisition, possession, production, use, and transportation. the constitution further exempts the medical use of MMJ from CO criminal laws governing the "acquisition, possession, manufacture, production, use, sale distribution, dispensing or transportation of marijuana". Until we repeal A20, caregivers and patients are protected under the constitution.

Patients need to call themselves what they are patients---not caregivers---unless they are not a patient. Patients can still assist other patients. hb1284 and hb1043 address caregivers, unconstitutionally, I might add.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onebrownmouse

No caregiver is "underground" as the constitution still stands. And people should understand that the word caregiver and the definition in the constitution are for people who are NOT qualifying patients, but caregiving.......patients can assist patients in medical use. Medical use includes, acquisition, possession, production, use, and transportation. the constitution further exempts the medical use of MMJ from CO criminal laws governing the "acquisition, possession, manufacture, production, use, sale distribution, dispensing or transportation of marijuana". Until we repeal A20, caregivers and patients are protected under the constitution.

Patients need to call themselves what they are patients---not caregivers---unless they are not a patient. Patients can still assist other patients. hb1284 and hb1043 address caregivers, unconstitutionally, I might add.

---

So do you think that any number of patients can get together and farm? A large patient cooperative located on one patient's 40 acres zoned agricultural for example? How about a coop of patients renting a building and dividing all expenses to include time put in at "work"?

Kathleen is correct, the Constitution plainly states:

(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.


They can pass all the damn laws they want but it doesnt change 'it shall be an exception from the state's criminal laws'. I have no doubt this is why people are still openly selling on Craigslist, if law enforcement thought they could they would be nailing people all day long on there.

Everyone that can needs to donate now to get these unconstitutional laws overturned Cannabis Lawusit: Patient and Caregiver Rights Litigation Project