MMJ Bill Possibilites

[gypski]

Washington State legislators have some bills they want the next session. Will it happen remains to be seen. :smokin:

Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Would Be Legal Under New Proposed Bill - Seattle News - The Daily Weekly

gypski Reviewed by gypski on 09-08-2010. MMJ Bill Possibilites Washington State legislators have some bills they want the next session. Will it happen remains to be seen. :smokin: Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Would Be Legal Under New Proposed Bill - Seattle News - The Daily Weekly Rating: 5

[NobleGDP]

:thumbsup:

I hope it passes for you guys.

[gypski]

:thumbsup:

I hope it passes for you guys.

Well considering the fact that you are the only one to reply, especially after all the arguments on here about aspects of the law, I find it strange there is so much silence. Like what was a legal authorization, and we had several different opinions that aren't mentioned in the actual law. Like yearly renewals to satisfy the doc-in-the-box cash flow and LEOs interpretations of the actual laws wording.

I guess now everybody is going to trust the legislators to fix the law after all these years.

[postableme]

Well considering the fact that you are the only one to reply, especially after all the arguments on here about aspects of the law, I find it strange there is so much silence. Like what was a legal authorization, and we had several different opinions that aren't mentioned in the actual law. Like yearly renewals to satisfy the doc-in-the-box cash flow and LEOs interpretations of the actual laws wording.

I'm still trying to decide how I feel about the proposed bills, actually. Therefore, no real comment to make. :)

I guess now everybody is going to trust the legislators to fix the law after all these years. :D

*shudder* Hardly.

[postableme]

Chet Biggerstaff has been working with a panel of folks on bills... you can see more info about it at:

TRC Medical Cannabis bill (Richland, WA) - Meetup

[gypski]

Chet Biggerstaff has been working with a panel of folks on bills... you can see more info about it at:

TRC Medical Cannabis bill (Richland, WA) - Meetup

I get the e-mail updates too. I'm also waiting to see and think the initiative process should go forward regardless. The legislators will do it half-assed as usual I believe.

[justpics]

Senator Kohl-Wells is helping law enforcement to try and gut the majority of access that patients currently enjoy.


The idea is to create a yet to be announced system where you have to register with the department of agriculture and the department of health.

If you don't do that, as a provider you will only be able to serve one patient every 90 days. And if your provider doesn't do that, then he won't be able to provide anyone except for you meds.

Say bye bye to legal access for most people.


"Medical Use of Cannabis Act: Goals for 2011 Session
Overview
1. Replace slang term â??marijuanaâ?� with the plantâ??s botanical name, â??cannabisâ?� and incorporate the
Definition from the Uniform Controlled Substances Act (see RCW 69.50.101(q))

2. Create consistent usage of the phrase â??medical conditionâ?� throughout, replacing references to
â??Illnessâ?� or â??diseaseâ?�

3. Eliminate inconsistencies between intent section (RCW 69.51A.005) and operative sections

4. Require documents executed by qualifying patients to designate providers be signed and dated,
And clarify that â??valid documentation,â?� for designated providers, includes the designating
Document as well as proof of identity and the patientâ??s authorization

5. Define â??plantâ?� and incorporate the Department of Health definition of â??useableâ?� cannabis (see
WAC 246-75-010(2)(d))

6. Clarify the distinction between health care professionals discussing the medical use of cannabis
With patients and authorizing such use

7. Provide qualifying patients and designated providers who possess no more than the
Presumptive amounts established by the Department of Health with protection from arrest
and prosecution

8. Maintain the affirmative defense for qualifying patients and designated providers who possess
more than the presumptive amounts but are otherwise in compliance with all other conditions

9. Change the limitation that designated providers may serve â??only one patient at any one timeâ?�
to a ninety-day restriction on changing patients

10. Allow duly authorized patients visiting from other states that allow medical use of cannabis to
raise an affirmative defense under Washingtonâ??s law

11. Protect qualifying patients from restriction of parental rights without proof of interference
with performance of parenting functions

12. Protect qualifying patients from negative employment consequences resulting from off-site
medical use of cannabis so long as such use does not prevent proper performance of work, the
employment is not safety-sensitive, and the employer is not a federal contractor or grant
recipient

13. Modify â??public displayâ?� prohibition to mirror â??open containerâ?� prohibition (see RCW 66.44.100)

14. Modify impaired driving restriction to explicitly reference the DUI statute, which expressly
excludes legal authorization to use a drug as an excuse for impaired driving (see RCW
46.61.502(2))

15. Create systems for licensing and regulating producers and dispensers of cannabis for medical
use through the departments of agriculture and health

16. Require evaluation of the systems for licensing and regulating producers and dispensers to
assess their impact on qualifying patientsâ?? access to an adequate, safe, consistent, and secure
source of cannabis for medical use (see RCW 69.51A.080(3))

17. Incorporate a state preemption clause"

[gypski]

Senator Kohl-Wells is helping law enforcement to try and gut the majority of access that patients currently enjoy.


The idea is to create a yet to be announced system where you have to register with the department of agriculture and the department of health.

If you don't do that, as a provider you will only be able to serve one patient every 90 days. And if your provider doesn't do that, then he won't be able to provide anyone except for you meds.

Say bye bye to legal access for most people.


"Medical Use of Cannabis Act: Goals for 2011 Session
Overview
1. Replace slang term â??marijuanaâ?� with the plantâ??s botanical name, â??cannabisâ?� and incorporate the
Definition from the Uniform Controlled Substances Act (see RCW 69.50.101(q))

2. Create consistent usage of the phrase â??medical conditionâ?� throughout, replacing references to
â??Illnessâ?� or â??diseaseâ?�

3. Eliminate inconsistencies between intent section (RCW 69.51A.005) and operative sections

4. Require documents executed by qualifying patients to designate providers be signed and dated,
And clarify that â??valid documentation,â?� for designated providers, includes the designating
Document as well as proof of identity and the patientâ??s authorization

5. Define â??plantâ?� and incorporate the Department of Health definition of â??useableâ?� cannabis (see
WAC 246-75-010(2)(d))

6. Clarify the distinction between health care professionals discussing the medical use of cannabis
With patients and authorizing such use

7. Provide qualifying patients and designated providers who possess no more than the
Presumptive amounts established by the Department of Health with protection from arrest
and prosecution

8. Maintain the affirmative defense for qualifying patients and designated providers who possess
more than the presumptive amounts but are otherwise in compliance with all other conditions

9. Change the limitation that designated providers may serve â??only one patient at any one timeâ?�
to a ninety-day restriction on changing patients

10. Allow duly authorized patients visiting from other states that allow medical use of cannabis to
raise an affirmative defense under Washingtonâ??s law

11. Protect qualifying patients from restriction of parental rights without proof of interference
with performance of parenting functions

12. Protect qualifying patients from negative employment consequences resulting from off-site
medical use of cannabis so long as such use does not prevent proper performance of work, the
employment is not safety-sensitive, and the employer is not a federal contractor or grant
recipient

13. Modify â??public displayâ?� prohibition to mirror â??open containerâ?� prohibition (see RCW 66.44.100)

14. Modify impaired driving restriction to explicitly reference the DUI statute, which expressly
excludes legal authorization to use a drug as an excuse for impaired driving (see RCW
46.61.502(2))

15. Create systems for licensing and regulating producers and dispensers of cannabis for medical
use through the departments of agriculture and health

16. Require evaluation of the systems for licensing and regulating producers and dispensers to
assess their impact on qualifying patientsâ?? access to an adequate, safe, consistent, and secure
source of cannabis for medical use (see RCW 69.51A.080(3))

17. Incorporate a state preemption clause"

Like I said, they will fuck it all up. Prior to prohibition, there wasn't any restrictions on cannabis. Time to go back to the beginning from before prohibition and all the lies surrounding it and just free the fucking plant. Some humans are some of the biggest assholes the mystery of life ever created. To have a plant cause so much hysteria and prejudice is beyond rational reasoning. :twocents:

[gypski]

I might add, that it should only be people who have real experience with cannabis and its use who should be setting policy. If one has no real, scientific based knowledge of cannabis, and has never even used cannabis, how in the hell can they even begin to determine how to regulate it? The majority of valid, peer reviewed scientific studies, tests, and real life experience proves that cannabis in and of itself, is less harmful then the majority of accepted drugs today. That includes alcohol, tobacco, pharmaceuticals (the most deadly), and some of the bullshit pecker pills and diet scams advertised on TV.

Its time to just free the plant for personal consumption, and if its produced for general public consumption then it should be regulated to the extent that it didn't contain molds, mildews or bugs. Other then that, over 18 for use, sales tax on commercial cannabis, a license fee (reasonably derived so anyone can produce for public consumption to prevent corporate monopolizing). More then that, then the government is overbearing and denying its citizens the right to consume whatever they wish that doesn't harm them or anyone else. Its time that government got out of personal lives, and cleaned up it own act of pissing away taxpayer money and making criminals out of innocent people just so some cop can keep his job. Let them find another line of work, or a new criminal to apprehend. more :twocents:

[justpics]

I'd prefer the current system of anyone who is 18 years old, designated in writing, who doesn't use the medicine for the patient for whom they are a provider, being able to "assist in the administration" for one patient at any one time, to one where only those who have licenses from the government can dispense.


Step backwards, and exactly what LEO wants. I wouldn't be surprised if no licenses ever get issued.