Steve Cooley - Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid

[Kindwoman]

With all the debate going on over legalizing marijuana, let's not forget that Steve Cooley (who is running for Attorney General) - has publicly stated that he sees all Medical marijuana clinics, the people who run them and the patients who use them as "Frauds".

If this guy wins, every MMP (myself and my husband included) are going to have a world of shit to deal with.

 

[veggiegardener]

With all the debate going on over legalizing marijuana, let's not forget that Steve Cooley (who is running for Attorney General) - has publicly stated that he sees all Medical marijuana clinics, the people who run them and the patients who use them as "Frauds".

If this guy wins, every MMP (myself and my husband included) are going to have a world of shit to deal with.

Agreed, 100%.

Cooley is a DISASTER for anyone who values their civil rights.

His supporters attempt to play the "gun control" card.

It is bullshit.

His opponent would like to see stricter controls, but without legislative help, it won't happen in California.

I'm a life long Liberal with an abiding belief in my Constitutional rights.

Go after my guns, and I become an Anarchist.

 

[gupp]

Agreed, 100%.

Cooley is a DISASTER for anyone who values their civil rights.

His supporters attempt to play the "gun control" card.

It is bullshit.

His opponent would like to see stricter controls, but without legislative help, it won't happen in California.

I'm a life long Liberal with an abiding belief in my Constitutional rights.

Go after my guns, and I become an Anarchist.

Not to mention that he'd be a terrible doctor, apparently. He does have a point in that perhaps medical pot is over prescribed...but this does not mean its effects are fraudulent.

 

[veggiegardener]

Not to mention that he'd be a terrible doctor, apparently. He does have a point in that perhaps medical pot is over prescribed...but this does not mean its effects are fraudulent.

I strongly suggest you talk to Thomas J O'Connell, MD.

Given 20 minutes, he'll convince you that Cannabis is very much under prescribed.

He was the first doctor to give me a recommendation, and he spent hours explaining some studies he was doing.

At that time, he'd interviewed 7000 MMJ patients and found that people who use Cannabis regularly, get considerable benefit from its use.

People who don't benefit from it, eventually lose interest once the newness wears off.

His case is very solid. I hope you'll try to find out what he says.

 

[desert dude]

I strongly suggest you talk to Thomas J O'Connell, MD.

Given 20 minutes, he'll convince you that Cannabis is very much under prescribed.

He was the first doctor to give me a recommendation, and he spent hours explaining some studies he was doing.

At that time, he'd interviewed 7000 MMJ patients and found that people who use Cannabis regularly, get considerable benefit from its use.

People who don't benefit from it, eventually lose interest once the newness wears off.

His case is very solid. I hope you'll try to find out what he says.

Where does O'Connell practice medicine?

 

[Dan Kone]

Not to mention that he'd be a terrible doctor, apparently. He does have a point in that perhaps medical pot is over prescribed...but this does not mean its effects are fraudulent.

I'm not even sure it's over-prescribed. I think all of the potential medical benefits were dramatically underestimated. It seems over-prescribed because so many people have their 215 paperwork now. But who doesn't get stress headaches, have a hard time sleeping on occasion, have back pain, muscle cramps, etc? Very few people are in perfect health all the time.

The original argument for prop 215 was largely based on terminally ill patients, so I think some people were under the impression that it would be limited to cancer/aids patients. Because they are unaware or refuse to believe cannabis can be a treatment for many common ailments, some people see it as over prescribed. I think the real problem is that you need a doctor's rec at all. Is advil over used because it's used to treat a lot of common non-life threating ailments?

 

[desert dude]

I'm not even sure it's over-prescribed. I think all of the potential medical benefits were dramatically underestimated. It seems over-prescribed because so many people have their 215 paperwork now. But who doesn't get stress headaches, have a hard time sleeping on occasion, have back pain, muscle cramps, etc? Very few people are in perfect health all the time.

The original argument for prop 215 was largely based on terminally ill patients, so I think some people were under the impression that it would be limited to cancer/aids patients. Because they are unaware or refuse to believe cannabis can be a treatment for many common ailments, some people see it as over prescribed. I think the real problem is that you need a doctor's rec at all. Is advil over used because it's used to treat a lot of common non-life threating ailments?

I have no objections to medical use of Cannabis, but I see no reason why a doctor needs to be involved at all. I know you just made the same point, just emphasizing it.

I DO have a problem with a lot of these "medical users" on RIU advocating against P19, though. Just a bunch of selfish assholes as far as I can tell.

 

[Dan Kone]

I DO have a problem with a lot of these "medical users" on RIU advocating against P19, though. Just a bunch of selfish assholes as far as I can tell.

Some of them really piss me off, but others I understand where they are coming from. I still think they are wrong, but I get it. They (incorrectly) think they will be shut out of the business. If you're a grower living in a town where the entire economy is based around growing, and everyone you know works in that same business, it's a big concern. If that was taken away from you it's not like you can go out and get another job. Without the money coming in from growing, there are no other jobs in these Nor Cal towns. If you grew up in the redwoods in NorCal and grew bud your whole life, the idea that you may have to move to the city and work at WalMart is very unappealing.

Of course the idea that Northern California is going to stop growing bud because prop 19 passes is completely unrealistic. So I think they are wrong, but I don't blame all of them. There are others who are just lying greedy bastards too.

I think the problem here is that Richard Lee and the Oakland city council made a huge mistake. When they agreed to allow those 4 massive scale grows with permit costs of over $200k each, they really put a lot of people off prop 19. That was just unnecessarily reckless and greedy. If they didn't do that they would probably have had unanimous support from the growing community. I've got no objections to those grows in Oakland, but they should have waited until after it passed rather then throw it in everyone's face. As of now, I think prop 19 might fail because of that mistake.

It's one thing for a few people on this website to oppose prop 19 because of what they are doing in Oakland, that's not a big enough block of votes to effect the results. But now quite a bit of major media outlets are telling people that it's a corporate take over. That can have an effect. A lot of the people who would vote yes who have no personal financial stake in this are put off by that.

 

[desert dude]

Some of them really piss me off, but others I understand where they are coming from. I still think they are wrong, but I get it. They (incorrectly) think they will be shut out of the business. If you're a grower living in a town where the entire economy is based around growing, and everyone you know works in that same business, it's a big concern. If that was taken away from you it's not like you can go out and get another job. Without the money coming in from growing, there are no other jobs in these Nor Cal towns. If you grew up in the redwoods in NorCal and grew bud your whole life, the idea that you may have to move to the city and work at WalMart is very unappealing.

Of course the idea that Northern California is going to stop growing bud because prop 19 passes is completely unrealistic. So I think they are wrong, but I don't blame all of them. There are others who are just lying greedy bastards too.

I think the problem here is that Richard Lee and the Oakland city council made a huge mistake. When they agreed to allow those 4 massive scale grows with permit costs of over $200k each, they really put a lot of people off prop 19. That was just unnecessarily reckless and greedy. If they didn't do that they would probably have had unanimous support from the growing community. I've got no objections to those grows in Oakland, but they should have waited until after it passed rather then throw it in everyone's face. As of now, I think prop 19 might fail because of that mistake.

It's one thing for a few people on this website to oppose prop 19 because of what they are doing in Oakland, that's not a big enough block of votes to effect the results. But now quite a bit of major media outlets are telling people that it's a corporate take over. That can have an effect. A lot of the people who would vote yes who have no personal financial stake in this are put off by that.

One thing that I REALLY don't understand is why the DEA is not shoving a blackjack up Richard Lee's ass as we speak. Those warehouse grows are blatantly flaunting the federal law against Cannabis.

 

[veggiegardener]

Some of them really piss me off, but others I understand where they are coming from. I still think they are wrong, but I get it. They (incorrectly) think they will be shut out of the business. If you're a grower living in a town where the entire economy is based around growing, and everyone you know works in that same business, it's a big concern. If that was taken away from you it's not like you can go out and get another job. Without the money coming in from growing, there are no other jobs in these Nor Cal towns. If you grew up in the redwoods in NorCal and grew bud your whole life, the idea that you may have to move to the city and work at WalMart is very unappealing.

Of course the idea that Northern California is going to stop growing bud because prop 19 passes is completely unrealistic. So I think they are wrong, but I don't blame all of them. There are others who are just lying greedy bastards too.

I think the problem here is that Richard Lee and the Oakland city council made a huge mistake. When they agreed to allow those 4 massive scale grows with permit costs of over $200k each, they really put a lot of people off prop 19. That was just unnecessarily reckless and greedy. If they didn't do that they would probably have had unanimous support from the growing community. I've got no objections to those grows in Oakland, but they should have waited until after it passed rather then throw it in everyone's face. As of now, I think prop 19 might fail because of that mistake.

It's one thing for a few people on this website to oppose prop 19 because of what they are doing in Oakland, that's not a big enough block of votes to effect the results. But now quite a bit of major media outlets are telling people that it's a corporate take over. That can have an effect. A lot of the people who would vote yes who have no personal financial stake in this are put off by that.

Good points, but the real issue for most medical growers are the limits. Many patients who rely on caregivers will be adversely affected as well. Some of them have only been able to get meds because a family member or friend grows, and gives it to them.

Medical users, as a group and individually, consume much larger amounts than your average weekend stoner.

Most clubs charge $350-$400 per ounce, and as much as $20-$25 a gram.

Do that on $800 a month in Social Security disability.

No one has specified HOW MMJ growers will be exempt, except some very general language that NEVER specifically mention cultivation.

I've thrown this out over a hundred times during these discussions and have been told I'm wrong, with no supporting evidence.

Even Richard Lee hasn't explained that one, in ant meaningful way.

Attorney Nick merely glossed over it. If I'm right, and P19 passes, he'll make a ton defending folks who lit up in the wrong jurisdiction.

If P19 fails, it is because of these issues.

Had the authors avoided offending the MMJ community, this bill would pass.

And were these questions answered, I'd have been arguing IN FAVOR of this thing.

 

[desert dude]

Good points, but the real issue for most medical growers are the limits. Many patients who rely on caregivers will be adversely affected as well. Some of them have only been able to get meds because a family member or friend grows, and gives it to them.

Medical users, as a group and individually, consume much larger amounts than your average weekend stoner.

Most clubs charge $350-$400 per ounce, and as much as $20-$25 a gram.

Do that on $800 a month in Social Security disability.

No one has specified HOW MMJ growers will be exempt, except some very general language that NEVER specifically mention cultivation.

I've thrown this out over a hundred times during these discussions and have been told I'm wrong, with no supporting evidence.

Even Richard Lee hasn't explained that one, in ant meaningful way.

Attorney Nick merely glossed over it. If I'm right, and P19 passes, he'll make a ton defending folks who lit up in the wrong jurisdiction.

If P19 fails, it is because of these issues.

Had the authors avoided offending the MMJ community, this bill would pass.

And were these questions answered, I'd have been arguing IN FAVOR of this thing.

VG, in another thread you said you valued the opinion of retired Judge James Gray. As you know, Jim Gray supports P19. Here is a cut/paste from his blog http://judgejamesgray.blogspot.com/:

"Regarding the cities not being able to set up their own systems, that really is a non-issue — they do it all of the time. And besides, one of the beauties of Proposition 19 is that it will still be illegal to sell marijuana within a city's borders (except under Proposition 215 for medical marijuana) unless that particular city expressly opts into the program. In reality what will happen is that the cities will learn from each other. So if one city tries something that is successful, others will tend to use that system, and the opposite is also true."

 

[Dan Kone]

One thing that I REALLY don't understand is why the DEA is not shoving a blackjack up Richard Lee's ass as we speak. Those warehouse grows are blatantly flaunting the federal law against Cannabis.

They aren't operational yet. Once they go into service, the DEA will try to shut them down. Obviously the owners of those those warehouses know this and won't put them into service until they have a plan to win the case. I think they will challenge the federal narcotic scheduling.

 

[Dan Kone]

Good points, but the real issue for most medical growers are the limits. Many patients who rely on caregivers will be adversely affected as well. Some of them have only been able to get meds because a family member or friend grows, and gives it to them.

I really think personal medical growing is a non-issue. The thing that could be eliminated by prop 19 is the vending process to dispensaries. This screws over people who sell a pound or two a month. Larger professional grow ops like the ones up north will eventually come around and make their businesses legal.

No one has specified HOW MMJ growers will be exempt, except some very general language that NEVER specifically mention cultivation.

Well they have, you just didn't agree with it. The Kelly decision more than anything else makes it impossible to limit medical growing to standards set for recreational use.

 

[veggiegardener]

I really think personal medical growing is a non-issue. The thing that could be eliminated by prop 19 is the vending process to dispensaries. This screws over people who sell a pound or two a month. Larger professional grow ops like the ones up north will eventually come around and make their businesses legal.



Well they have, you just didn't agree with it. The Kelly decision more than anything else makes it impossible to limit medical growing to standards set for recreational use.

So show me the language you rely on for that statement.

I haven't seen it.

We're past changing anyone's mind.

I just want to see what you are basing those statements on. Kelly involved PLANT NUMBERS. Not area.

You can plant thousands of seeds in 25 sq. ft.

But your yield will remain about the same as one plant in the same space.

Law enforcement WILL interpret the law that way. They always go for the quick and easy way to justify their existence.

Guess what?

There would be no defense.

They'd have interpreted the law, correctly if P19 passes.

Enjoy election day.

I broke a tooth, and will spend an hour in a dentist's chair today. so I'll be in a good mood to watch results this evening.

My Bubbleberry x White Widow has excellent pain relieving qualities, and is stony as hell. That plant took up 50 sq. ft. in one of my greenhouses.

View attachment 1245795View attachment 1245796

 

[vradd]

I'm a life long Liberal with an abiding belief in my Constitutional rights.

Go after my guns, and I become an Anarchist.

what about the rights of others? or does that not matter when it digs into YOUR finances?

 

[veggiegardener]

what about the rights of others? or does that not matter when it digs into YOUR finances?

Getting desperate ?

I've addressed that point dozens of times, and have had no response from you that makes sense in the real world.

Get a medical recommendation, and you'll mellow out.

You need it.

 

[Dan Kone]

I just want to see what you are basing those statements on. Kelly involved PLANT NUMBERS. Not area.

No, the kelly decision had to do with the arbitrary limiting people's access to medicine. In the kelly decision they tried to limit patients through a plant limit and the supreme court said they could not do it. The plant limit was just the method of limitation. The limitation is what was ruled unconstitutional. It really doesn't matter if that limit is a plant limit or a sq ft limit, they can't do it. The precedent has been set on the highest level.

Law enforcement WILL interpret the law that way.

In some places they will try, but the cases will get thrown out. A cop can't over rule the supreme court just because he feels like it.

 

[mccumcumber]

I dunno how clear the diction is, but I'm pretty sure both sections 7 and 8 in prop19 said that 11362.5 and 11362.7-9 are exempt. 7 had to do with sales and possession and 8 dealt with cultivation in prop19 and health and safety codes 11362.5 and 11362.7-9 are 215 selling possession and cultivation rights. It's there that it says you'll be unaffected, but you'd still need an attorney to help you out if you get busted. But that really isn't any different than how it is now with 215 (at least from my experience with the police). I dunno, I wanted 19 to pass, but it's not gonna . I guess it's time to start getting more signatures for the prop on the 2012 ballot.

I really hope that Harris wins over Cooley though. If that dick (pun) starts to shut down dispensaries in NorCal like he did with SoCal, I'm gonna be pretty fucking pissed off.

 

[Dan Kone]

I really hope that Harris wins over Cooley though. If that dick (pun) starts to shut down dispensaries in NorCal like he did with SoCal, I'm gonna be pretty fucking pissed off.

If they try to do that in San Francisco, it's really going to piss people off.

 

[veggiegardener]

Given the chance, he WILL do it.

His real goal is the Senate.(Just a guess, but a good one, considering his headline grabbing tenure in SoCal.)

He'll do whatever he can, if elected, to keep his name in the news.