The first harvest from Tweed Farms has arrived
- Thread starter oddish
- Start date
You're welcome to your opinion. We're all in a gray zone until feb.
oddish
Well-Known Member
I don't think so. The MMAR is on the stand here, but the MMPR is legally approved and in full effect.
Not sure why that's so confusing.
Just from what you are saying it is more than obvious, you have no clue!.
Keep at it though, something might sink in one day. Maybe not.
Try adding some real life experience to those fabled charts of yours..
sorry but you are simply wrong both the mmar and mmpr are on the stand. Conroy:
m m a r l i t i g aClick Here to view the Notice of Motion and Affidavits
I expect a decision from the Federal Court on the exemption/injunction application sometime between March 18th,when it will be heard and March 31st, 2014. Sorry but I cannot predict how long a Judge will take to decide the issue, especially when I do not even know who it is going to be, but even then it is always hard to say or predict.
It will be before March 31st, 2014 I can say that.
We are asking the court to compel Health Canada to process all Applications coming in, whether new or old, and any changes requested since September 30th,2013, and to exempt everyone who is 'medically approved' from the CDSA provisions pending trial where we will seek a permanent such exemption.
Everyone who is "medically approved" to use Cannabis has a right to reasonable access to it as medicine for their health. This right arises as a result of s.7 of the Charter.
The federal government, so long as it is exercising jurisdiction over cannabis using the criminal law power, must provide a viable exemption to the criminal law to 'medically approved patients'.
Legalization will substantially change this picture and open things up for the Provinces potentially. Vote for the Liberal Party of Canada's Justin Trudeau who is willing to "legalize". Remember it was his father Pierre and his then Justice Minister Jean Chretien who brought us the Charter without which we would have no argument. The NDP are still talking ³decriminalization² or want another study, and the Conservatives have no respect for the Canadian Constitution and want mandatory minimums and forfeiture. Vote against Harper whatever you do and get all your friends to do so and don't split the vote. If you are usually NDP, hold your nose this time and vote against Harper so we can finally get this thing done!!!
The MMAR despite its defects is/was a viable exemption as it enabled a safe continuous supply at reasonable cost to patients.
The MMPR is not, we say, a viable exemption because, as in the case of Terry Parker, it will cause those who cannot afford black market or licensed producer prices to have to choose between their liberty (being arrested and charged with production of marihuana after March 31st,2014) and their health( accessing the medicine that works for their health issue approved by their doctor and continuing after March 31st,2014).
This amounts to a violation of that patient's constitutional right, under s.7 of the Charter of Rights, to "liberty" and the "security of the person" and the right not to have those rights taken away or deprived except in accordance with "the principles of fundamental justice". That s.7 is engaged is clear from Parker and then last year was affirmed in Mernagh, again by the Ontario Court of Appeal, with leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada having been refused.
In order to reasonably limit a s.7 Charter right the government bears the heavy burden of proving that the limit is, prescribed by law, and is reasonable and demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society under s.1 of the Charter. Here is where the fire, mold and public safety arguments come in to try and justify the changes. They will also come up at the injunction/exemption argument to try and oppose that application.
Any patient who continues to grow their own medicine because they cannot afford the black market, including dispensary/compassion club prices, nor licensed producer prices, and to control quality and continuous supply, and to avoid going back to prior debilitating drugs with massive side effects or simply because this works for your health better than anything else, should be prepared to do the following, if the court does not grant an exemption/injunction to you and you are visited by the police or other authorities:
1. Make sure you have, preferably the originals and certified copies of your "Authorization to Possess"(ATP) available to produce to the police if they attend, to show them that you are "medically approved". It might help to have a copy of that part of the application that was signed by the doctor setting out your "grams per day" and support and copies of at least a summary of your medical situation from your doctor or a copy of the last medical report that has a diagnosis and prognosis etc. WAIVE YOUR RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT AND TELL THEM YOUR MEDICAL STORY THAT HAS MEDICAL SUPPORT UNDER THE MMAR. Out of an abundance of caution you may want to get something in writing from your doctor that authorizes/approves your use under Narcotic Control regulation 53 so you are Oauthorized¹ under that regulation to possess.
2. Remember the offence under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act is to possess otherwise than as authorized or in accordance with the regulations so if they abolish the MMAR March 31st but you have a note under the NCR you are still legal to possess, in my opinion. Under the MMPR you have to register with an LP and it is the label of their product that determines legality of possession.
3. Be polite and co-operative, but assert that your constitutional rights are being violated by the failure, on the part of the government to provide a viable exemption from the criminal law available to you that includes one that is affordable at reasonable cost within the means of most patients or at least does not preclude patients from accessing at the best price they can and one in which that can exercise some control over what goes into the making of their medicine and its effective quality for them.
4. DO NOT PLEAD GUILTY to any offence. You are not committing one!! Your defense is that you are exercising your constitutional rights under s.7 of the Charter to the security of your person by making a decision of fundamental personal importance about your health to ensure a safe continuous supply of the medicine that works for your health because you cannot afford the only licensed suppliers and the only alternative would be to return to drugs that do not work at least as effectively and/or allow your health to be impaired.
5. Tell them your whole story and then be ready to back it up with documents etc. I think we will be surprised at how sympathetic most members of the public will be once they know the real stories and many police officers, Crown prosecutors and Judges are also sympathetic, in my experience.
6. The best thing that could happen between now and March 18th, 2014 is a barrage of heartbreaking stories all over the National, Provincial and local television and social media news. I have read the many impact statements sent to me and to the Coalition and would love to be able to make them public. Let me know if I can do so in your case if you sent me one. Others please contact you local, provincial and national media and tell them how this 'drug' has made a difference in you life and what the consequences will be to you if you cannot afford the new LP prices and cannot control the quality and quantity of your production and the effectiveness of the strains that have been working for you.
JOHN W. CONROY, Q.C.
Conroy & Company
Barristers & Solicitors
2459 Pauline Street,
Abbotsford, B.C.
V2S 3S1
Tel: 604-852-5110
Fax: 604-859-3361
Web: www.johnconroy.com/MMARlitigation.htm
Email:jconroy@johnconroy.com and dlukiv@johnconroy.com
"
oddish
Well-Known Member
Blah blah blah John Conroy.
Always ask yourself: if I'm not paying John Conroy, who is?
Secondly, this didn't prove anything, it just showed that John Conroy (no, he's not the government or an authoritative body) is going to try and put the MMPR on the stand. Yes, Health Canada is on the stand with the MMPR as their solution, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the MMPR is currently, in clear black and white, legal. The MMAR is in a holding pattern, pending the outcome of this lawsuit.
That's the difference.
My personal, useless opinion (because I'm deviating from facts here and getting into the useless banter of what I personally believe) is that you should stop fighting against the MMPR and start fighting for insurance coverage for marijuana meds.
Always ask yourself: if I'm not paying John Conroy, who is?
Secondly, this didn't prove anything, it just showed that John Conroy (no, he's not the government or an authoritative body) is going to try and put the MMPR on the stand. Yes, Health Canada is on the stand with the MMPR as their solution, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the MMPR is currently, in clear black and white, legal. The MMAR is in a holding pattern, pending the outcome of this lawsuit.
That's the difference.
My personal, useless opinion (because I'm deviating from facts here and getting into the useless banter of what I personally believe) is that you should stop fighting against the MMPR and start fighting for insurance coverage for marijuana meds.
It's black and white nothing until it passes a constitutional challenge. To say otherwise is to be intentionally obtuse.
leaffan
Well-Known Member
I think you're missing the point.
Do you really believe that come Feb/15 things will all be resolved?
No.
There will be appeals, limbo, for years to come.
Oddish is correct. Presently one is legal the other is not.
leaffan
Well-Known Member
This is a massive issue for most of us.
oddish
Well-Known Member
I truly don't understand the ignorance.
If I file a constitutional challenge tomorrow against the laws of speeding, does that mean that speeding is legal until the court case is over?
My mind can't comprehend how you think that John Conroy and his friends means that the MMPR isn't a legal system.
If I file a constitutional challenge tomorrow against the laws of speeding, does that mean that speeding is legal until the court case is over?
My mind can't comprehend how you think that John Conroy and his friends means that the MMPR isn't a legal system.
oddish
Well-Known Member
I have a job. I get benefits. They cover every other medication.
Didn't realize this was all about you.
No to be correct would mean that the crown could secure a conviction. You can't say it's correct with out validation from the courts.
MMPR and MMAR are both legal for some. That will change I hope. Wake up Leaf!
Your speeding challenge would never get heard in court. It's already been ruled on.
You do know the sickest people using mmj are unemployed and on disability. Hard to work with stage 4 cancer. And don't have insurance. You have a job and can afford the stupid prices of the lp's then great for you. Don't you realize it's not about you it's about the sick that can't afford their meds in the "only legal method" as you suggest. We're not criminals were sick.
oddish
Well-Known Member
So fight for it to get covered by ODB then.
I think that believing the MMPR will disappear and the MMAR will reign supreme is a stretch.
Maybe both will co-exist, but keep in mind:
1. Patients with stage 4 cancer who can't work probably also can't tend to a garden
2. Compassion Club pricing isn't much better than LPs
3. Various compassion club growers and other decent growers are joining LPs/wannabes
4. Not everyone knows a DG and the MMAR DGs were almost always in a grey are due to those laws, so if the MMAR gets re-instated you can bet they'll crack down more on how many rooted plants you have, etc.
