The crux of our legislation is replacement of standard meds and treatment. With a RECOMMENDATION, not a prescription....it is just like a heart surgeon telling me to drink a beer or glass of wine at dinner. It is just a RECOMMENDATION, not a prescription....regardless of the scheduling.....it's a cluster fuck if you ask me.....one regime clashing with another.

If in fact it is to be treated just like a script, then stop arresting and persecuting MMJ patients. correct? All across the board....

If in fact our legislation legally in effect is that of a prescription, then by implication it is legal just as an ordinary prescription. correct?

Incorrect, our state courts do not do by implication analogies....read state v. hanson....

Do you see the defects here yet? The branches can not make up their minds what is what.....a tug of war....with us patients being the rope in the middle.

As our legislation logically reads, it is a schedule 2.(using a 1 yr implication automatically go to this arguement) (see RCW 69.51, not 51A)

Our courts keep a brick wall against us claiming this, saying nope not so. The legislature has not used the magic words yet..... Yet the court in state v. tracy stated only a Dr. licensed in Wa. can prescribe MMJ.