Medical Marijuana Industry Group decries feds' Cali crackdown, touts Colorado regs (VIDEO)

Update: Yesterday, we reported that landlords of property used by medical marijuana operations in California had received letters from a U.S. Attorney threatening asset seizure, because pot is against federal law. Now, Denver's Medical Marijuana Industry Group is decrying the tactic even as it touts Colorado's laws in comparison to Cali's.

The MMIG statement begins by referencing a 2009 memo by Deputy Attorney General David Ogden discouraging U.S. Attorneys from using their scarce resources to go after MMJ businesses that are following the law in states that have legalized its use. A subsequent memo by California-based U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag, which threatened prosecutions, muddied the water considerably, as did actions in April by Colorado U.S. Attorney John Walsh, who concluded that two proposed elements of a so-called medical marijuana cleanup bill ran afoul of federal law.

More to the point, however, MMIG maintains that "Colorado's comprehensive regulatory scheme... serves as a new paradigm for medical cannabis regulation nationwide," in contrast to "California's patchwork quilt of often-conflicting ordinances."

This position echoes the viewpoint shared below by attorney and marijuana advocate Brian Vicente -- that Colorado dispensary owners, and their landlords, are safer from federal crackdown than their California counterparts because of the state's heavy involvement in overseeing and regulating the MMJ industry.

Here's the complete MMIG statement, followed by our earlier coverage:

President Obama's stated policy indicates that patients and providers in unambiguous compliance with state medical marijuana laws should not be a target of federal prosecution. The coordinated effort between California's four U.S. attorneys, the City of San Diego, and other municipalities is a prime example of why a strong regulatory framework is of critical importance. Colorado's comprehensive regulatory scheme, which requires background checks, licensing, seed-to-sale tracking, and harsh penalties for non-compliance, serves as a new paradigm for medical cannabis regulation nationwide. Conversely, California's patchwork quilt of often-conflicting ordinances is an invitation for chaos, and precipitates federal involvement in what is clearly an issue of state concern.

Original item, 12:11 p.m. October 6: Has the U.S. government come up with another way to undermine medical marijuana in states where legal? That's the implication of a California report about the feds threatening to seize property unless landlords evict MMJ operations. But the approach is actually nothing new, according to marijuana advocate Brian Vicente.

"This tactic was attempted about two years ago by the federal government in California," notes Vicente, the head of Sensible Colorado and one of the main proponents for the Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol Act, which is targeting the November 2012 ballot. "They sent these landlord letters, telling them, 'If you continue operating, you can get shut down, because you're violating federal law.'"

Brian Vicente Sensible.jpg
Brian Vicente.
That's exactly what's happening now, according to News10 in Sacramento. The station reports that numerous landlords have received a certified letter from the U.S. Attorney in San Francisco that states, in part, "The dispensary is operating in violation of federal law. Property involved in such operations, including real property, is subject to seizure by and forfeiture to the United States."

Sounds ominous -- and while Vicente says he's unaware of the feds following through on such warnings a couple of years back, "that doesn't mean it might not be different this time."

Could a similar tactic be tried in Colorado? Hard to say. The asset-forfeiture approach has yet to be used here, Vicente says, but the prospect can't be dismissed.

"In order to seize people's property under federal law, you have to show two things," he explains. "One, that people are breaking the law, and two, that either the property or the proceeds in question were used to foster this law-breaking. So it may well be within the federal government's reach to engage in some degree of asset forfeiture when it comes to legitimate medical marijuana providers and their landlords in Colorado. The same way it's 100 percent illegal under federal law for a dying AIDS patient who's a medical marijuana patient to hold a joint in Colorado, this is another federal policy that conflicts with state law. We haven't seen enforcement in this area, but it's possible."

However, Vicente continues, "Colorado has not been a real focus for the federal government in terms of trying to shut down our medical marijuana laws. They've been much more active in California, Michigan, Montana and Washington than they've been here, and I think that's because we have a transparent, state-run medical marijuana program that is highly regulated."

For this same reason, Vicente doesn't anticipate stealthy federal government attacks on the system next year in an attempt to undermine the Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol Act's chances. "What we're proposing is a highly regulated, state-licensed system for all adult sales. So it's our hope that having the state step in and firmly regulate the recreational industry in the same way they've done with the medical industry will keep the federal government out of Colorado."

At the same time, Vicenete feels that the feds are stepping up their anti-marijuana campaign in Colorado and beyond. Earlier this week, he spoke to us about roadblocks put before a proposed study of marijuana's use in treating post-traumatic stress disorder -- and at that time, he also mentioned efforts to prevent MMJ businesses from using the banking system.

"This is another underhanded tactic by the federal government," he maintains. "We've seen them shutting down banks, attacking legitimate dispensaries through the IRS, and now we're talking about property seizure. Ultimately, patients are going to pay the price if this ongoing assault on providers continues. It's going to be tougher for them to get their medicine in the climate the federal government is creating."

Look below to watch the aforementioned News10 report:

More from our Marijuana archive: "Medical marijuana to treat PTSD? Army personnel form MMJ advisory board."

My Voice Nation Help
46 comments
nazmunnaher
nazmunnaher

Hi! Someone in my Face book group shared this site with us so I came to take a look. I’m definitely enjoying the information. I’m book-marking and will be tweeting this to my followers! Excellent blog and fantastic video. 

fuckhos1
fuckhos1

u guys are freanking lame ass!!!!!!! people for doing this shit

ZZardozz
ZZardozz

Don't be too smug, Colorado.  They are coming for YOU too.  If you don't like the legalization bill that is circulating, create a new one, but the only way to fight the feds cracking down on medicinal cannabis is to expand the availability of cannabis, which is as it should be anyway.  74% support MMJ in this country, and many may vote for it out of sympathy, even if they only want it for medicinal use.  

Monkey
Monkey

 "California's patchwork quilt of often-conflicting ordinances."Look around Colorado, that's all it is around here. Between local banning, regulating and home restrictions you need a code book for every city you drive through. Guess it wont matter soon huh, what a waste of time, thanks for wasting my tax money Colorado and by the way, "legalizing" it in Colorado now doesn't look so safe like we have been told.

Mark Montgomery
Mark Montgomery

Considering the MMC *APPLICANTS* in Colorado have neither constitutional protection nor a state license to do what they are doing, I'd say they are sitting ducks. And they've already been willingly pre-booked, with fingerprints, photos, background checks, and signed confession forms already given to law enforcement. Many people tried to warn them, but they didn't want to hear the truth. The MMC- APPLICANTS listened to lies from MMIG instead.

MMIG lies continue to this day in their press release which says "President Obama's policy" is that "Those who are in unambiguous compliance with state medical marijuana laws should not be a target of federal prosecution unambiguous compliance with state medical marijuana laws should not be a target of federal prosecution." The federal memos on mmj, coming out of the DOJ, have said nothing of the sort.

The Cole memo, issued in June by the USDOJ to all US Attorneys, clarifies the Ogden Memo that came out in 2009. The Cole memo says:"The Ogden Memorandum was never intended to shield such activities from federal enforcement action and prosecution, even where those activities purport to comply with state law. Persons who are in the business of cultivating, selling or distributing marijuana, and those who knowingly facilitate such activities, are in violation of the Controlled Substances Act, regardless of state law."

MMIG spokesperson Michael Elliot is a lawyer, and he should know better than to continually lie to the press and the public about the federal position on mmj.

And remember, the Colorado mmj regulations only apply to LICENSED MMCs. Not one MMC in Colorado has been licensed yet, despite $10 million in application fees given to the state in July 2010. In over 15 months, NO LICENSES have been granted.

The MMIG is clearly a schill for the DEA. And Brian Vicente and Sensible and SAFER (Mason Tvert) are schills as well, wanting to hand all control over all marijuana in the state to the DOR pot cops, who have so far failed to issue one license, have held secret meetings to develop the rules, have destroyed all email communication with the USDOJ regarding MMJ in violation of Colorado's Open Records Act.http://blogs.westword.com/late...

The FEDS are coming. Unless you have big lawyers and big PR firms, you are going to get shut down. And all patients better be wary that their patient information held by the MMC - APPLICANTS they have been visiting could end up in a federal court case.

MMIG and Sensible and SAFER missed the boat on this. Instead of working with the DOR and DEA to bring their regulations down on all Colorado mj users, they should have been fighting to protect patient rights. But that's what you get when all you care about is making concessions to the police.

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

MMIG and its predecessors may have bought Colorado dispensaries a little more time by climbing in bed with the State (Obama does want to win Colorado in 2012), or not, but the State proposes to license activities in direct contravention of the Controlled Substances Act, and the Administration has stabbed patients in the back by repudiating the Ogden Memorandum. The General Assembly's marijuana distribution scheme is no substitute for the constitutional protection of patients contradicted by the laws and regulations endorsed by the profiteers and their apologists. Support the Patient and Caregiver Rights Litigation Project!

Jessica Corry
Jessica Corry

BRIAN VICENTE IS A CORPORATE SHILL LOOKING TO GET PAID!

Monkey
Monkey

Vicente is a tool, the feds aren't visible here yet because they're waiting for the Colorado DOR to gift wrap the busts for them. They actually have to perform investigations in other states, in Colorado all they have to do is make a phone call to the DOR to keep tabs on their suspects. When the time is right, DEA will make its most profitable seizures to date in Colorado thanks to the transparency Mr. Vicente is so proud of.

Matt in Boulder
Matt in Boulder

Queue up the Tea Party Express!  Oh, that's right, they want "small government" that legislates their morality...

Guest
Guest

"Could Federal Gov't Force Landlords To Evict MMJ Businesses?" ... this is the kind of stuff that gives john suthers a boner

High Country Caregiver
High Country Caregiver

Hey Westword, awesome job on the new video player!  Is that streaming flash off a cloud server?  Sick!

Papa John Driver
Papa John Driver

<<<however, "colorado="" a="" active="" and="" because="" been="" california,="" continues,="" down="" federal="" focus="" for="" government="" has="" have="" here,="" highly="" i="" in="" is="" laws.="" marijuana="" medical="" michigan,="" montana="" more="" much="" not="" of="" our="" program="" real="" regulated."="" shut="" state-run="" terms="" than="" that="" that's="" the="" they've="" think="" to="" transparent,="" trying="" vicente="" washington="" we="">>>Or maybe they are just amazed at the multitude of RICO cases they are able to accumulate as they watch Coloradans becoming rich. A wise man once said "The FEDS have all the time in the world." </however,>

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

HCC?  The story is about a State bust of a dispensary owner because it has been alleged that he sold cocaine -- it has nothing to do with the Feds.

HipsterDickCheese
HipsterDickCheese

PRE BOOKED

AND DRY SNITCHING

"BUT BUT BUT, MR. FED !! IN COLORADO WE SELL DRUGS SO LEGIT LIKE YOU HERE!!!"

stfu 

High Country Caregiver
High Country Caregiver

Interesting Mark, I'd like to invite you to do a guest blog on http://420.co you can contact me through 420.co under 'contact' on top.  Our mission is to support the caregiver - patient model enacted by voters in 2000.

Guest
Guest

WESTWORD - Please note that the above post from "Jessica Corry" is not from her. She doesn't use that name anymore. Please remove the post, or some of us will call her and inform her of someone using her name on here.

Monkey
Monkey

You got that right, no banks, no guns, no landlords, I think the Feds have recently decided to stop ignoring commercial marijuana. Patients and caregivers will always remain safe, especially now that the dispensaries will take up much of their resources. 

High Country Caregiver
High Country Caregiver

Phone calls?  I doubt it, they just write programs that script the databases of sales.  We will likely see a very large 'round up' like a hundred dispensaries busted in a single day to get the message through loud and clear! 

Kathleen Chippi
Kathleen Chippi

Hey, westword--  I know you guys do not want to mis inform voters so:

Can we PLEASE use the REAL title for the Sensible/Safer petition, cause it's NOT called the "Regulate Marijuana like Alcohol Act".  

That's just the deceptive marketing tactics from out of state funders "mis information" campaign that the title board agreed would be misleading to voters and refused to allow.

Kathleen Chippi
Kathleen Chippi

Vicente "So it's our hope that having the state step in and firmly regulate the recreational industry in the same way they've done with the medical industry will keep the federal government out of Colorado."

So who is excited to have recreational users submitted to being video tapped and under  Orwellian regulation along with the sick patients? 

Brian--WHO IS CURRENTLY HAPPY with the medical program beside from MMIG and Sensible COwho backed this draconian mmj statute and have been granted a monopoly?

And it's interesting that when I challenged the title board that YOUR TITLE SHOULD SAY,"regulate marijuana like medical marijuana" because that is what you are trying to do. 

Especially since PATIENTS/VOTERS are NOT currently HAPPY with the violations of their rights (ALREADY in the  constitution) via state statue (HB1284 SB109 and HB1043).  But of course you couldn't be honest in the title board hearing and you told the title board this had nothing to do with mmj.   Nothing to do with it but yet you wanted it regulated in the same way by the same agency, the tax man?  I understand that if you had been honest then you would have shot yourself in the foot because no one would be signing your petitions if they knew you wanted it like mmj. 

Still the double speak spews.  

High Country Caregiver
High Country Caregiver

Yes I know that Robert, but this will be used as canon fodder for things to come...

Back to the original article above, medical marijuana is completely wacked in Colorado

Michael Roberts
Michael Roberts

Thanks for bringing this to our attention, Guest. We'll delete the post.

High Country Caregiver
High Country Caregiver

It's pretty obvious that a real attorney wouldn't bash a fellow attorney, especially on what they charge.

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

If the campaign for Initiative 30 deliberately supplies false information, it is one of disinformation.

It is inaccurate to claim that the Title Board "refused to allow" Initiative 30 to be described as regulating marijuana like alcohol -- that language was struck because:  1) Corey Donahue formally objected to it and 2) backers did not care whether the phrase appeared in the Initiative.  The Title Board did not particularly care either, and so they agreed to strike the reference. The subsequent claim that backers are acting improperly in campaigning using the word "legalization" or the phrase "regulates marijuana like alcohol" does not withstand critical examination and it has no traction.

I have tried to explain the difference between Initiative 30 and the "Re-Legalize 2012" campaign to people outside of the innermost circle of politically minded people who use cannabis, and I consider it to be a daunting task. I bet that most of the 80,000 who signed the Initiative 30 petition assume that it and "Re-Legalize 2012" refer to the same thing (should they encounter one of the latter's buttons or stickers).

Josh Kappel
Josh Kappel

Believe it or not, its actually perfectlly legal - and normal - to call a campaign whatever the organizer's want. For example, CTI calls their campaign the re-legalize 2012 campaign despite the title board not approving that nomeclature.

Kathleen Chippi
Kathleen Chippi

The record shows you argued you were not regulating recreational users like the medical marijuana patients Brian.  Did you forget?  

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

If anything, the State busting dispensaries would tend to make the Feds hold off, if for no other reason than that they don't want to hold conflicting press conferences.

Google This
Google This

Come again Tim, aka ColoradoMidnightrider? You are the real patuents(sic)? I think all the people that dealt with and then written about you would very much disagree.

Google "Tim Tipton MMJ Scam"

Josh Kappel
Josh Kappel

Kathleen, I do want to point out that the Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol Act of 2012 would remove all criminal penalties for the possession of marijuana paraphernalia by any adult over the age of 21. http://www.regulatemarijuana.o...   

Josh Kappel
Josh Kappel

If I meant "disapproved" - I would have said that. 

Kathleen Chippi
Kathleen Chippi

Except you leave out the fact that A30 does NOT remove ANY of the CSA.  All of the drug laws are/will remain on the BOOKS even if A30 passes.  Colorado law says that 8 ounces or more constitutes a FELONY.  Just like the A20 (MMJ) language, the A30 language and marketing makes people THINK they will be safe--but just like the mmj patients are learning--even though we amended our constitution, A30 will also bring more confusion and then HARM than good.  You all think cannabis will be LEGAL and it will not.  Unlimited cannabis at home?  Ha Ha Ha--Mason Tvert was on the radio saying he "didn't think" police would enforce all the laws they chose not to remove from the books. 

Colorado Controlled Substances Act:

4(b) Any person who possesses eight ounces or more of marihuana or any amount of marihuana concentrate commits:(I) A class 5 felony; (II) A class 4 felony, if the violation is committed subsequent to a prior conviction in this or any other state, the United States, or any territory subject to the jurisdiction of the United States of a violation to which this subsection (4) applies or would apply if convicted in this state.

And then here's your list of drug paraphernalia --  so better not have any of these things in your house. 

18-18-426. Drug paraphernalia - definitions.As used in sections 18-18-425 to 18-18-430, unless the context otherwise requires:(1) "Drug paraphernalia" means all equipment, products, and materials of any kind which are used, intended for use, or designed for use in planting, propagating, cultivating, growing, harvesting, manufacturing, compounding, converting, producing, processing, preparing, testing, analyzing, packaging, repackaging, storing, containing, concealing, injecting, ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise introducing into the human body a controlled substance in violation of the laws of this state. "Drug paraphernalia" includes, but is not limited to:(a) Testing equipment used, intended for use, or designed for use in identifying or in analyzing the strength, effectiveness, or purity of controlled substances under circumstances in violation of the laws of this state;(b) Scales and balances used, intended for use, or designed for use in weighing or measuring controlled substances;(c) Separation gins and sifters used, intended for use, or designed for use in removing twigs and seeds from or in otherwise cleaning or refining marihuana;(d) Blenders, bowls, containers, spoons, and mixing devices used, intended for use, or designed for use in compounding controlled substances;(e) Capsules, balloons, envelopes, and other containers used, intended for use, or designed for use in packaging small quantities of controlled substances;(f) Containers and other objects used, intended for use, or designed for use in storing or concealing controlled substances; or(g) Objects used, intended for use, or designed for use in ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise introducing marihuana, cocaine, hashish, or hashish oil into the human body, such as:(I) Metal, wooden, acrylic, glass, stone, plastic, or ceramic pipes with or without screens, permanent screens, hashish heads, or punctured metal bowls;(II) Water pipes;(III) Carburetion tubes and devices;(IV) Smoking and carburetion masks;(V) Roach clips, meaning objects used to hold burning material, such as a marihuana cigarette that has become too small or too short to be held in the hand;(VI) Miniature cocaine spoons and cocaine vials;(VII) Chamber pipes;(VIII) Carburetor pipes;(IX) Electric pipes;(X) Air-driven pipes;(XI) Chillums;(XII) Bongs; or(XIII) Ice pipes or chillers.

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

I believe you meant "disapproved".

"... I do not speak on behalf of any organization." -- no?  I understood you to be undertaking all the business of Sensible Colorado since Brian quit to concentrate on his practice and Initiative 30 -- have you been replaced as spokesman?  You were acting in that capacity very recently.

Josh Kappel
Josh Kappel

Just to clarify, I did not say the title board "disproved." I just said they have not approved the name, which is techically true because they have not actually approved any name for CTI's campaign because CTI has not actually been in front of the title board.  

And, by the way, I do not speak on behalf of any organization.

High Country Caregiver
High Country Caregiver

Midnight, I agree, only a lunatic would send info to the CDPHE or step foot in a dispensary with the way things are going.  Medical marijuana is a flavor of the past with cannabis being the future!

ColoradoMidnightRider
ColoradoMidnightRider

Tsk,Tsk,Tsk, Josh, hasn't your organization done enough mis-Truths and lies? There has been NO Title Board filing or hearing yet.....on the words Re-Legalize 2012 effort! Keep your Corporate Thuggery OUT of the Public's eye, and back in your backdoor deals with greasy politicians and law enforcement where you belong! DOR SELLOUT! Boycott CDPHE, BOYCOTT MMIG Members ( whoever they are), BOYCOTT DOR, BOYCOTT MATT COOK 'CONSULTING' for state with compliance checks, and BOYCOTT Dispensaries with your video/Transaction availability to IRS, HUMAN SERVICES, VA, DEA, and any other interested federal agencies......WE(the REAL patuents in CO) won't be playing anymore. The line is drawn in the sand and HEY JOSH, you're on the WRONG SIDE!Retraction, Please.

CTI
CTI

This statement by Josh Kappel, representing Sensible Colorado is a lie. CTI has not been in front of the title board. Legalize 2012 has not been in front of the title board. Neither group has yet submitted language to the title board. So the title board has not dis-approved any of our nomenclature, as Josh states.

CTI has written to Josh Kappel asking for an immediate public retraction of the statement. "CTI calls their campaign the re-legalize 2012 campaign despite the title board not approving that nomeclature."

CTI has always based our efforts on truth, history and fact. Even though we disagree politically with some groups, we do expect everyone to at minimum not to lie about our campaign. We are disappointed the the Sensible campaign is spreading these lies, and we hope the retraction is forthcoming quickly.

guest
guest

Snortin' - You have obviously not read the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana like Alcohol's initiative. Had you, you would not be saying "all parts of the marijuana plant count as "marijuana" under criminal statutes and what most private growers will assume is trash will constitute a felony charge".

Your statement is completely false since growers are allowed to have "POSSESSION OFTHE MARIJUANA PRODUCED BY THE PLANTS ON THE PREMISES WHERE THE PLANTS WEREGROWN". This explicitly states people can have more cannabis then 1oz, in fact it means they can legally have POUNDS of cannabis they have grown as long as it is in the same premises as where it was grown.

TheRegulate Marijuana Like Alcohol Act of 2012

3 (b)POSSESSING, GROWING, PROCESSING, OR TRANSPORTING NO MORE THAN SIX MARIJUANAPLANTS, WITH THREE OR FEWER BEING MATURE, FLOWERING PLANTS, AND POSSESSION OFTHE MARIJUANA PRODUCED BY THE PLANTS ON THE PREMISES WHERE THE PLANTS WEREGROWN,

A F
A F

more disinformation and scare tactics.

the bill would make it legal for you to posses everything from your legally authorized grow, even if it is over an ounce.  That would include the trash -- which you should be turning into hash anyway and then composting the rest or otherwise disposing of it properly.

Snortin Norton
Snortin Norton

Your right Josh most political campaigns seek to distort the truth. Kinda of like claiming to be stopping the majority of arrests when in fact those are young males below 21. Additionally the initiative will increase felony arrests as the amounts that trigger a felony charge under C.R.S title 18 have not been addressed. All parts of the marijuana plant count as "marijuana" under criminal statutes and what most private growers will assume is trash will constitute a felony charge and law enforcement must enforce criminal statutes. So tricking the masses with "like" alcohol is certainly not illegal but possessing more than 1 ounce will be and those with 8 ounces of waste material will be convicted as drug felons. Just like most of the misinformed people gathering signatures are not even aware of what the initiative actually does. Good thing their to high to read or much less fact check.

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

That is a rhetorical question -- instead of a realtime system of tracking to rigidly enforce the one ounce per day limit, consider that the system might consist of no more than a limit on how much a given dispensary could sell and penalties for purchasing more.

As far as what Scott said (you ought to talk to him more often; he comes out with far worse than that on a regular basis), Article XVIII, Section 14 will remain, but unless the PCRLP prevails, most of its letter and intent will remain contradicted by all the unconstitutional crap the prohibitionists wrote into Colorado statutes and regulations.  Initiative 30 would extend some of the protection now supposed to be afforded to patients and their caregivers to the adult population as a whole (that is good), and it does not infringe on patients or caregivers' rights under Article XVIII, Section 14.  In that the Initiative would make possession of small amounts of cannabis in public legal and extend the right to cultivate up to six plants generally, it seems inarguable that its passage would tend to protect patients and caregivers -- it would give the nosy neighbors and Excel a multitude of other people to worry about (i.e. all those possibly growing more than six plants), and police who now often defer quickly upon presentation of a red card might be expected not even to xhallenge patients in the first place.  Based on this analysis, I believe that passage of Initiative 30 would benefit patients and their caregivers.  If better intiative(s) make the ballot, I will vote for all -- the one with the most votes prevails.

The provenance of Initiative 30, its deficiencies, who is behind it -- these cannot serve as justification for those of us who have been fighting the counterrevolutionaries against medical cannabis to oppose what would significantly reduce criminal liability for cannabis statewide and represents a limited form of legalization of cannabis (so its prohibitionist enemies will describe it and the vast majority of voters think of it).  The inclusion of the provision legalizing the cultivation of hemp is good , and suggests what might be the only possible winning strategy:  to portray the measure as asserting Coloradans' rights against an unreasoning Federal  goverment.  The claim that Initiative 30 is worse than nothing at all is untenable, and all its opponents' reasonable objections must give way before the political reality that it is more than halfway towards making the 2012 ballot, and enjoys the support of the national drug policy reform groups and the ACLU.  Michelle LaMay's Initiative 40 has garnered some limited support (including my own), but it has not been submitted to the Title Board and other possible alternatives have not even been released in draft form.  At this point I see no prospect whatever for being able to mount a successful campaign for alternatives to Initiative 30, but should that change, I remain ready to volunteer.  Attack Prohibition by any and all means!

Robert ChaseColorado Coalition for Patients and Caregivers(720) 213-6497

Kathleen Chippi
Kathleen Chippi

But the language says that MMC's get a discount to be a recreational applicant.  MMC's charged 500 and new people charged 5,000. 

The state is going to regulate what is purchased (one ounce limit) so how will sales of pot be tracked  by DOR and enforcement of 1 ounce limits happen w/o registry cards and monitoring what people buy through bar codes and video?

I was told by Scott (mile High NORML) that once this passes there will be no need for the medical program.  I don't like hearing that and neither do patients.  The treated more harshly than recreational users. 

Josh Kappel
Josh Kappel

Kathleen, if you read the initiative you will notice that it prohibits video recording of recreational sales. The average user will not be video taped if it passes. So its actually not like medical marijuana, in that regard.

Now Trending

Denver Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...