Colorado House Bill 1284

[MrDank]

Do i have to email for the free Rockies tickets???

Warren, I suggest Oklahoma Joes on 47th st. No need to go anywhere else

 

[warrenedson]

Mr. Dank,
If you want the tickets, two of them, you got them, but I am in Largo until Friday the 2nd.
I will be at the convention in Denver that weekend, then the tickets will be available at my office, 2801 east colfax suite 201, starting Monday the 5th.
I guess you do need to e-mail me otherwise I have no idea who I should give the tickets to. Again, [email protected] is the best address.

 

[Mile Hi Dave]

Do guys actually like having your "medicine" named after an event where people where killed due to an marijuana intoxicated train conductor? How about when you all add Afgani and call it "Plane Wreck." How about when we compair it to crack? Shall we name a strain "Killer Meth"? How do you think this effects the general public?

Trainwreck has been around since the 70's...but I do agree with some of the names...they are outta hand

Yes I would sacrifice "pot culture" for legalization.

BTW: I do not use interner explorer so this won't let me use the spell check. While you all hate me, can anyone help with the spell checker?

There is a "spellcheck" function in the advanced editing mode.

 

[warrenedson]

Thanks to an individual who will remain unnamed because he or she might be ripped for helping the "regulator", ie. me. Some site called red egg or something had an attachment that lets my mozilla use spell checker on this web site. Maybe.

 

[Mile Hi Dave]

I just blame my spelling errors on my finger dyslexia!!

 

[warrenedson]

Irish prot and lazy. That's my excuse.

 

[DaGreenMachine]

I received an email back from Warren. This is definitely him.

So Warren, let's cut to the chase and talk growers amendment. How the heck do we get one in the bill? Why are the reps ignoring us?

I'm fine with being regulated, I'm not fine with being cut out and ignored. I think many feel the same.

 

[scarred4life]

For sure, green. It's great that cannabis has some high-power attorneys on her side and we all appreciate the work that's been done, but why should everyday patients/growers have to just swallow it when the same system that has been raping us for years comes in and tells us, "now it's legal, so hand over your plants and culture."
There's a long way from key largo to the trailer park pantry floor where I slept when I started my first grow and funded my overeducation, and it's depressing and typically american that those who already have power and money refuse to see the legitimacy of true working class pot professionals like myself. Even though I also dress up in a little collar and go to my day job just like every other mind-fucked, drooling american goodboy, I believe in the constitutional right to pursue my happiness, my very modest financial goals, by growing a plant that was also grown and enjoyed by our first president.

 

[scarred4life]

btw, i must admit that in an ideal world where cannabis was always seen as legal medicine, some of the strain names are a little over the top.
However, by insisting that it's proper to regulate cannabis as a schedule 1 drug, warren, you're also comparing it to drugs like crack and meth. It's just that your comparison is based on a view from season-ticket-holder seats while the grower who named "green crack" had a more street-level view of things.
Cannabis culture reflects the oppression of the working classes, and it should be respected as an historical artifact. Would you ask Henry Louis Gates to edit out references to ‘white devils’ in Malcolm X’s work so that rich white kids don’t get uncomfortable in ethnic studies classes. I don’t think so; it’s motherfucking HISTORY!

 

[warrenedson]

They will not let this go without regulation. There is very little you can manufacture for distribution to the public without regulation. You need to give them a way they can regulate you without it being through the dispensaries and the inventory/severe punishment system that is proposed by 1284. As todays Denver Post indicates, the press thinks this is too dispensary friendly and needs more regulation. The press also claims this is the opinion of the general public.

If you end up being a "caregiver" under 1284 you could grow for up to 5, the 6th is where they would find you to be a commercial business.

The session is almost over for the year. My guess is we are going to end up messing with this for years to come.

Also keep in mind if mj were rescheduled, it would have to go through years of FDA testing before it could then be sold to the public, just like any other prescription medicine. They wouldn't reschedule it and then allow you to start growing it in your backyard the next day.

 

[draco]

hell yeah this is WE... he writes just like he talks. i have spoken with the man (he has a wicked sense of humor)... oh and just cause you don't like what he says doesn't mean he's wrong.
peeps pay him to help them stay outa the greybar hotel, not to tell them what they want to hear.
just sayin...

 

[MrDank]

The 5 patient limit is beyond a joke IMO.

 

[P. Dondrub]

I thought they already changed the 5 patient to 16....


5 is just stupid low.

16 on the other hand, might work.

 

[Bud Spleefman]

The new bill, that hasn't passed, has some verbiage that says 5 patients per caregiver unless you live in a community that has banned dispensaries, in which case you can have 16. But, no co-ops, which to me, means that I could have 16, but my wife couldn't, because together we would be considered a co-op? I am unsure on this, but that's what I think they are trying to say. My family could do pretty well with 32 patients!

 

[Frankie Pebbles]

 

[P. Dondrub]

16 is still low... I know i can't cover my mortgage/bills with 16 patients... But thats me?

Maybe you should try MPB buckets?


No co-ops? Nonsense... they shouldn't bar the few decent caregivers there are from taking care of people.... they force everyone into shops like this, very very few people will get 'medicinal quality' cannabis, as shops rarely stock it.

 

[Frankie Pebbles]

 

[cobcoop]

The 5 patient limit is beyond a joke IMO.

Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but the 5 patient limit would apply to those who do not need a 'growers license'. Any caregiver with more than the 5 would be required to apply for a growers license and follow the regulations regarding inventory, book keeping etc.

The new bill, that hasn't passed, has some verbiage that says 5 patients per caregiver unless you live in a community that has banned dispensaries, in which case you can have 16. But, no co-ops, which to me, means that I could have 16, but my wife couldn't, because together we would be considered a co-op? I am unsure on this, but that's what I think they are trying to say. My family could do pretty well with 32 patients!

This is the one that has me scratching my head, as we are all aware they have banned disp in several colorado communities, yet the most recent language states that locales cannot ban them, so technically there would not be a community in Co. where this scenario could play out.

From the looks of things the state does not want to be in the growing business (i.e. state monopoly) which is good news for many reasons. They will keep the existing infrastructure (caregivers, home growers, dispensaries etc.) while making sure that there are regulations (collectible revenue) in place. While there are some changes that need to be addressed more in depth, patient access being one, our industry is becoming legitimized. For me personally, and many of you I'm sure, this creates a very strange dichotomy.
Our sub-culture (as Warren so delicately points out) has been railroaded in with the likes of Mexican drug gangs and cartels. I have always hated that, and have dreamed for years of the white buffalo (legalization). Now that it is upon us, those ramifications are becoming very real.
I would be the first person to tell you to keep the government out of my fucking business, however Mr. Edson (while I do not agree with everything he said in the past) has a very valid point; we are talking about medicine, and sick people, and access to this very special herb. We must be very careful of what we wish for, because we might get it.

 

[DaGreenMachine]

They will not let this go without regulation. There is very little you can manufacture for distribution to the public without regulation. You need to give them a way they can regulate you without it being through the dispensaries and the inventory/severe punishment system that is proposed by 1284.

I get it, we all get it. Regulation, regulation, regulation. Fine, I posted my regulatory solution earlier:

- Require a real-time plant count, subject to inspection (something dispensaries don't have to do under the bill)
- Label each plant with a unique ID (something dispensaries don't have to do under the bill)
- Label each harvested amount over 2 ounces with a unique ID (something dispensaries don't have to do under the bill)
- Require this "chain of custody" ID to be attached to all purchase orders/invoices (something dispensaries don't have to do under the bill)
- Subject to all other fines/penalties/regulations the dispensaries alternate growing centers are

So how do we get their attention, and get it into the bill??

As todays Denver Post indicates, the press thinks this is too dispensary friendly and needs more regulation. The press also claims this is the opinion of the general public.

Well, it is completely dispensary friendly. LARGE dispensary friendly. The post is too stupid to recognize that fact.

The session is almost over for the year. My guess is we are going to end up messing with this for years to come.

I think this is where you are telling us we're fucked.

Well, there's always legal loopholes, and absent that, back to the black market. We can think this bill for keeping that VERY profitable once prices take off.

 

[P. Dondrub]

oops