Good News.. I swear!!

Timmahh

Timmahh

Well-Known Member
gladstoned said:
It sure is different listening to you counter Bob's points instead of just attacking him, his son, or other things just to be an ass. You sound like you are more focused now that you do not have to spend a big percentage of your time lying for blueberry and arguing with everyone about him. Nice change Timmahh.
Click to expand...


as ive said all along Glad, i ll treat people as the treat me. I am also level headed, until someone makes me not level headed.

I seen a sign on fb yesterday that sums it up great.

My Character and Personality are part of me. My attitude depends on you...

kind of sums it up well. Yes I attacked bobs foolhearted ideals, but his son is not an issue. As Ive said, I have no problem that he is gay, I dont care. I do care if his civil liberties and freedoms are being fucked with though.
 
gladstoned

gladstoned

Well-Known Member
I don't think growgodess, stump, mal, attacked you, but blueberry was your friend at the time. You do much better defending yourself then you do others.
Your point comes across much clearer when you are level headed and I hope that you are right about the rulings.
 
Timmahh

Timmahh

Well-Known Member
Mal No, GG and a few actually attacked Joe, but Joe wasnt here at the time I was, so They did it through me. Stump and I have seen things differently, but we have always been pretty respectable towards eachother, similar to you and I. we may not always agree, but thats cool.

Problem with bob is he is nearly never correct, though he is close on occasion. he refused to see he is wrong, and wont admit to it when he knows he is, instead, he tries to make it seem like the others are wrong so he is right... If he would not attack people for showing him the error of his ways, then he would be a better person for it.

You and I have butted heads pretty good, but I have always been respectful of you, because you have been respectful of me.
Works well when its a two way street, wouldn't you agree?
 
Timmahh

Timmahh

Well-Known Member
not sure whats up with the 3MA any more. seems like a den of lost goals at this point..

I think a FM would work Great. and while this recent MSC ruling should uphold the pt of Pt to Pt sales, and certainly upholds working as a registered and unregistered, but Dr recommended pt, everyone SHOULD be safe now under sec 8 and sec 4 for registered peeps. the smart thing is to hang back atm, considering the MSC has People Vs Mcqueen on the docket, which is the Compassionate Apothecary case from Mt P. I believe they will certainly uphold Pt to Pt as well as Reg pt to Rec'ed pt. but Its all up in the air atm. I have to see if the have even heard the case yet. or if they still have to hear it.

TY to Eric VanDussen for his hard work and time in gathering and posting all the vids he has....

From a part of the MSC Ruling (appendix at the end)

Eric L. VanDussen, on 31 May 2012 - 05:51 PM, said:Here are the links to PDFs of the Supreme Court decisions overturning the Court of Appeals in People v King and People v Kolanek:http://courts.michig...ions/142695.pdf

The court held, in part, that:

We granted leave in these cases to consider substantive and procedural aspects of
the affirmative defense of medical use of marijuana under § 8, MCL 333.26428, of the
Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA).1 Given the plain language of the statute,
we hold that a defendant asserting the § 8 affirmative defense is not required to establish
the requirements of § 4, MCL 333.26424, which pertains to broader immunity granted by
the act. The Court of Appeals erred by reaching the opposite conclusion in People v
King,2 and we therefore reverse the Court of Appeals’ judgment in King.
Further, to establish the affirmative defense under § 8, we hold that a defendant
must show under § 8(a)(1) that the physician’s statement was made after enactment of the
MMMA but before commission of the offense. The Court of Appeals reached this
conclusion in People v Kolanek,3 and we affirm the Court of Appeals in this regard.
However, the Court of Appeals also held that defendant could reassert the affirmative
defense at trial, despite his failure at the evidentiary hearing to establish the existence of a
timely physician’s statement under § 8(a)(1). This was error, and we reverse that portion
of the Court of Appeals’ holding.
Click to expand...
 
B

bob harris

Well-Known Member
Timmahh said:
yes it matters. the point of the warrant is the point of the visit. OMG, again, you instantly prove you have ZERO understanding of LAW and how it Works. lol

That is your problem bob, I give you the Proper answer, yet you refuse to accept it.. Your mistaken, and I am correct, and you just dont like it. to bad so sad for you.


OK Non cannabis warrant. Say it is for failure to pay a traffic ticket. thats non cannabis.

the only thing the officers can do (short of walking up on a murder scene, or robbery ect, ) would be to act on the warrant for the Traffic issue ONLY. He may see cannabis in the visit, (though I highly doubt it) but the purpose of the visit is the traffic issue, therefore anything cannabis related would now be irrelevant, as it is not the purpose of the warrant. and cannabis is not murder...

the officer could report his findings, and they could issue another warrant for the cannabis, at which point, it is the purpose for the visit (or they could wait for the warrant at the time of the orig visit but it would have to be a separate warrant).
Without a Warrant to search for the Purposed illegal cannabis, anything they find would be inadmissible as was not part of the original reason for the warrant. Also, what guy would offer to allow the cops to see their private medicine scenarios? Unless the warrant was for Cannabis, As i noted above, I doubt they ll be sharing a cup of coffee talking about the grow room...

now with a Cannabis warrant. they come visit. Knock on door (i hope they knock anyways), and say, hey we have a warrant for a search on your cannabis. You say, here is My MMMA authorization card. It is fully Valid. For the sake of argument the warrant states a quantity check.

No where in the MMM Act does it say any agency or agent of the state has a "RIGHT" to check someones grow. By law they can not. ONLY a CG or his Pt, registered or not, is allowed to enter a grow area. The Person and the Police would be violating the Act if he allowed the police to enter the grow area, without that being specifically outlined in the Warrant. Lets again for the sake of argument say it was outlined.

The Authorized Pt has 4 plants in flower, 4 plants in veg, and 2 plants in the cloner. He has 1 plant drying, and 2 oz in cured usable meds. Clearly under the limits. The offers count 11 plants and verify 2 oz of usable meds is on hand. They thank the Pt for his compliance with the warrant, the Pt thanks them for their due diligence and RESPECTFUL Nature, and they police leave, and file the findings that the Pt is in compliance. end of scenario.

Hows that work for you bobbyj?


Let me ask you a ? bob. how long have you been smoking Cannabis in your criminal career? you lay claim to being an illegal grower of cannabis prior to 2008s passing of the Act, something I did not do. so tell us dear bob. how long of a smoker have you been?

See you ASSUME to understand me, or who you think I am, or what I know or understand, but you are Fully Clueless.
Click to expand...
Since you didn't answer the question, It doesn't work at all. First, you simply got hung up on the warrant in a hypothetical situation. Hypothetical are just that hypothetical. You answer states how you would like to see it work..not how it will. Again, idealistic, not realistic.

You are the big fan of rouge cops doing anything to bust someone..you have to accept that there is an arrest to answer the hypothetical. You completely changed the scenario, to avoid the actual topic.

But, that is what you do. Sing and dance..with no substance.

I've probably smoked longer than you have been alive. Yes, I've grown some in the past...so what?

Do you always have to change the topic when you can't answer a simple question?
 
B

bob harris

Well-Known Member
ozzrokk said:
Yea I dont see any of that as being valid. Escpecially if the cops try to say that the plants WHEN HARVESTED will produce x amount. That would not stand the test of the SC I am sure of that. In fact I would go out on a limb and say it would not stand the regular court test. The law says 12 plants not what 12 plants will produce. If your law enforcement buddies want to get that at harvest weight they will have to come back at harvest time. Nice try Bob.

See bob you would have the leo be able to do whatever they want. That is what makes you DIFFERENT.
Click to expand...
Not at all. It's a test case scenario. I'm simply trying to tell you guys that the new rulings didn't fix everything.

But you guys seem to think they do...
 
B

bob harris

Well-Known Member
jonnynobody said:
Whatever is discovered outside the scope of the warrant would become fruit of the poisonous tree and subsequently inadmissible in court. (I.E a search of guns turns up cocaine or what have you...the cocaine or whatever would be inadmissible evidence in a court of law). Law enforcement has to know specifically why they are violating your fourth amendment rights....warrants can't just be blind fishing expeditions. On the flip side, if the warrant was for guns and drugs...the drugs found would then be admissible.
Click to expand...
That's not always true. Things in plain sight are actionable without a warrant. A bag of weed on the table is enough to start the ball rolling. A search warrant for any cause could lead to the discovery of a grow. Once the grow is discovered, it's a simple matter to get a warrant for that too.
 
gladstoned

gladstoned

Well-Known Member
bob harris said:
That's not always true. Things in plain sight are actionable without a warrant. A bag of weed on the table is enough to start the ball rolling. A search warrant for any cause could lead to the discovery of a grow. Once the grow is discovered, it's a simple matter to get a warrant for that too.
Click to expand...
I have been charged and convicted this "scenario". Once those fuckers are in a door, it's on. That is why I have posted signs on my grow doors saying that a warrant is needed to get in and that I will prosecute if that door is opened. If my shit is damaged I will also prosecute. Probably wouldn't win!! But it is still posted. The officer that inspected my grow room read it and said that it was very interesting. lmao.
I have been raided. 30 motherfuckers busting through one little door ALL at the same time with lights and guns drawn, there is no reading going on!
 
B

bob harris

Well-Known Member
well, since no one likes to think ahead, rest assured Timmah is right.

Grow all you can...might as well disregard plant counts too. According to Timmah, no way possible to inspect your grow now, so long as you are registered. Fill a pole barn on your one card..you will be fine, Timmahh says so.

Weight is no worry either..just keep it in your grow room. According to Timmahh, the cops can't even think about checking you for compliance if you are registered.

And yes, the the law say 12 plants, and doesn't specify the stage of growth...no possible way that could be changed. Just listen to Timmahh.

The law is a living, evolving thing if you haven't noticed. It is being shaped and defined daily.

Although the law doesn't clarify what stage plants can be in (IE: all in full flower) it does state weight limits, and now 'reasonable" if you can prove you need more.

The product from 6 or 12 mature plants is excessive to either of those standards, with only a few exceptions. If you don't think leo and the government is smart enough to know that, and close that loophole, well, I feel sorry for you.

Again, do what you want..but don't come a crying when you are the next test case.
 
B

bob harris

Well-Known Member
Timmahh said:
Mal No, GG and a few actually attacked Joe, but Joe wasnt here at the time I was, so They did it through me. Stump and I have seen things differently, but we have always been pretty respectable towards eachother, similar to you and I. we may not always agree, but thats cool.

Problem with bob is he is nearly never correct, though he is close on occasion. he refused to see he is wrong, and wont admit to it when he knows he is, instead, he tries to make it seem like the others are wrong so he is right... If he would not attack people for showing him the error of his ways, then he would be a better person for it.

You and I have butted heads pretty good, but I have always been respectful of you, because you have been respectful of me.
Works well when its a two way street, wouldn't you agree?
Click to expand...
Oh Timmahh...You are the one that never admits to being wrong. And your pissed that I am right most of the time.

When the first arrest comes under my scenario, what will you say then?

Those 6 full grown plants will be confiscated..and dry by your trial date. Are you going to claim you had no idea how much dry weight would be there?
 
gladstoned

gladstoned

Well-Known Member
bob harris said:
well, since no one likes to think ahead, rest assured Timmah is right.

Grow all you can...might as well disregard plant counts too. According to Timmah, no way possible to inspect your grow now, so long as you are registered. Fill a pole barn on your one card..you will be fine, Timmahh says so.

Weight is no worry either..just keep it in your grow room. According to Timmahh, the cops can't even think about checking you for compliance if you are registered.

And yes, the the law say 12 plants, and doesn't specify the stage of growth...no possible way that could be changed. Just listen to Timmahh.

The law is a living, evolving thing if you haven't noticed. It is being shaped and defined daily.

Although the law doesn't clarify what stage plants can be in (IE: all in full flower) it does state weight limits, and now 'reasonable" if you can prove you need more.

The product from 6 or 12 mature plants is excessive to either of those standards, with only a few exceptions. If you don't think leo and the government is smart enough to know that, and close that loophole, well, I feel sorry for you.

Again, do what you want..but don't come a crying when you are the next test case.
Click to expand...
You sound like you are mad as hell. Good time to medicate.
This is the clearest way I can look at it. Michigan not only gave me permission to grow 12 plants, but those bastards made me pay them for that right to grow twelve plants. If they then take my $100 and then punish me for doing a good job with my 12 plants then they are the ones screwed up.

(and Bob. I emailed freak from Cabin Fever about the Satori Haze and as usual he never emails back. I think that will be my last attempt at trying to give that guy business.)
 
B

bob harris

Well-Known Member
gladstoned said:
You sound like you are mad as hell. Good time to medicate.
This is the clearest way I can look at it. Michigan not only gave me permission to grow 12 plants, but those bastards made me pay them for that right to grow twelve plants. If they then take my $100 and then punish me for doing a good job with my 12 plants then they are the ones screwed up.

(and Bob. I emailed freak from Cabin Fever about the Satori Haze and as usual he never emails back. I think that will be my last attempt at trying to give that guy business.)
Click to expand...
I'm not mad at all. I don't get mad when I debate..it is just debate. I'm simply trying to get people to understand that these rulings are only the start of a process...not the final word.

From what I know of you, you'd be fine with a section 8 defense if they caught you out of compliance with section 4. You could most likely show 'reasonable need" for your overage.

But most could not. My fear is that Timmahhs logic is giving the ones that could not show "reasonable need" to much confidence that they are protected...There will be a test case on this topic..wait and see.
 
stumpjumper

stumpjumper

Well-Known Member
I've never had issues with you Timmahh.... My only issues have ever been with Joe Cain. I don't really think I've ever really disagreed with anything you have said, unless you was sticking up for Jope or something I might've. That's all water under the bridge though...
 
gladstoned

gladstoned

Well-Known Member
I am just trying to follow along. I don't ever intend of having 5 pounds again. There isn't a need for it when I have plants. But I should be able to. If someone travels to a cannabis cup and has the cash, they should be able to purchase 2 or 3 pounds to smoke on, share with friends, or sell at a profit. I do not see anything at all wrong with it. Plant count is ridiculous when you see some guys can do amazing things with just 1 plant. What is wrong with 99 though? As supply grows, price drops. If everyone in Michigan grew 1000 plants we wouldn't all become millionaires because the value would be gone. We would just all have a bunch of overages and probably get along better.
Some jackasses in suits cannot take valuable shit and make it worthless. (well stocks, they can)
I make comments like I am not in compliance, but I am under in plant count and I cannot get or grow enough meds currently. I do not profit, I am thousands from any thought of a profit. Honestly I was iffy on my original card, cuz I don't have insurance. I just went to chiropractor enough times and once they took all the money out of my wallet, I was walking better. It just so happens, my back troubles were much worse than I anticipated. No I have diagnosis and "real legitimate" reason now. I do not think I am ever out of compliance. But I should be damn it. I have issues, I should be able to have a walk-in closet with SEVERAL jars of SEVERAL strains. Kinda like the wine cellars politicians have! Is having a wine cellar extreme! Probably, but what is wrong with that. And bottles of wine get pricey!! Its all two-faced hypocrite bullshit. If I get pulled over and have 3 pounds of weed in my truck the judge should say, so the fuck what.
 
gladstoned

gladstoned

Well-Known Member
stumpjumper said:
I've never had issues with you Timmahh.... My only issues have ever been with Joe Cain. I don't really think I've ever really disagreed with anything you have said, unless you was sticking up for Jope or something I might've. That's all water under the bridge though...
Click to expand...
That is why I mentioned you, I remember you were very nice and pointed out that you used to do the same thing and gave a friendly warning about Joe. Fast forward to now, you were 100% correct. And you didn't push issue. Not getting carried away is difficult sometimes. lol.
I know fights and all, I have learned a lot from countless people on this site and I appreciate it from everyone.
 
B

bob harris

Well-Known Member
gladstoned said:
I am just trying to follow along. I don't ever intend of having 5 pounds again. There isn't a need for it when I have plants. But I should be able to. If someone travels to a cannabis cup and has the cash, they should be able to purchase 2 or 3 pounds to smoke on, share with friends, or sell at a profit. I do not see anything at all wrong with it. Plant count is ridiculous when you see some guys can do amazing things with just 1 plant. What is wrong with 99 though? As supply grows, price drops. If everyone in Michigan grew 1000 plants we wouldn't all become millionaires because the value would be gone. We would just all have a bunch of overages and probably get along better.
Some jackasses in suits cannot take valuable shit and make it worthless. (well stocks, they can)
I make comments like I am not in compliance, but I am under in plant count and I cannot get or grow enough meds currently. I do not profit, I am thousands from any thought of a profit. Honestly I was iffy on my original card, cuz I don't have insurance. I just went to chiropractor enough times and once they took all the money out of my wallet, I was walking better. It just so happens, my back troubles were much worse than I anticipated. No I have diagnosis and "real legitimate" reason now. I do not think I am ever out of compliance. But I should be damn it. I have issues, I should be able to have a walk-in closet with SEVERAL jars of SEVERAL strains. Kinda like the wine cellars politicians have! Is having a wine cellar extreme! Probably, but what is wrong with that. And bottles of wine get pricey!! Its all two-faced hypocrite bullshit. If I get pulled over and have 3 pounds of weed in my truck the judge should say, so the fuck what.
Click to expand...
The core problem politically isn't the use of cannabis. It's the economics of cannabis. Not to mention the treaties we have with other countries regulating cannabis.

Yes, if everyone could grow prices would drop, but there would also be a huge over supply of cannabis. It would start being exported to other states (or countries) and a huge global economic underground would result. Legalizing cannabis in The US could literally start a war.

Wish it were simple, but it is not.
 
gladstoned

gladstoned

Well-Known Member
Funny you say you think it could start a war. The way I look at it, it would end a war. More importantly is will end the war that my ass has been in for decades!!!!

Oh my God. Michigan legalizes weed and some of make money taking meds to Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin. That would be so terrible. Michigan is used to huge unemployment rates, what would we do with income. Ford can build a plant in Indiana and we lose 1200 jobs, but as long as that unemployed auto worker doesn't sell a bag of weed to the Indiana guy with a nice new shiney job and benefits.
That is my point. Michigan government bends over backwards to keep its residents down. I am not talking meds, I am talking their track record. They suck!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top