Pro215.com

desertrat said:

and there's the problem if, like me, you don't live in california.

and there's the problem of the feds, if you're a big medicinal grower.

unless you are trying to make money growing legalization is likely help you too

Click to expand...

Well... big medicinal grows are often done illegally (not behind the prop 215 status of hundreds of patients). Most are new patients who unknowingly overdo the plant limits in their area, or just don't care about them, and therefore are shut down (Though few actually get caught).

I would be a total liar if I said money isn't a huge incentive in growing, but operating a collective, money is slow moving, and very much operates as a retail outlet. You often end up with product you can't sell and have to make hashes, or joints from. You do earn your money back, but it can take a long time unless you have a very active patient list.

Growers (whether legal or not) have the potential to earn more money quickly, and also move the product more quickly as the collectives are always buying. Collectives will purchase clones, flowers, hashes, trim from their patients who have excess, and as a grower that means just about 95% of the plant I grow will be put to use... and worth money. Of course, to earn a substantial income, you would have to do it behind several doctors recommendations, and would pay a lot for space rent, electricity, nutrients, soil/hydro mediums & maintenance products, etc.

I am always interested in meeting new people that are patients, I love the fact you offered some of your meds..We should talk!

Here are some sites to look at!DigitalHemp.com: the Authorative Historical Digital Record also YouTube - artistmichaelm's Channel and hempStar, Finest, Most Durable Hemp Wear & Accessories Some educational videos and some clothing and nutritional sites..

Please review my story and if you have any questions please contact me for more info.
Please let me know if your news outlet picks up my story.
Please help me increase community awareness and inform people.


Thank You


Lee Reisch
Shedwood Consulting Services
323-461-3020
Audio • Video • Web • Promotional Services




NEWS UPDATE:
SBSD VIOLATING THE DISABLED
By Lee Reisch
Freelance Writer / Patient Advocate
Victorville, CA


Sunday, Adalanto CA
Checkpoint: San Bernadino County at the Air Expressway at 395 near Victorville and Adalanto.
At a checkpoint 50 feet behind tow trucks and cars being impounded Poly, is about to have his rights violated.
Every day across the state events like this occur going unreported...
The following is accounting of the events as they unfolded during his experience.
The Sheriff decides to impound the car because disabled owner driver had brother with suspended license driving for him.
Owner asks "Can I take the car then, I have a license".
Sheriff Says "No, it's going to be impounded" Officer leaves...while a volunteer waits by the car.
After 10 minutes officer returns to ask them to step out of the vehicle.
"May I take some paperwork? " Sheriff says grab what you need.
"Another officer remarks what is that a pharmacy in there?"
The officers proceed to confiscate the medicine, 3 patients Medical Marijuana.
Younger brother to the officers. "That's my medicine. I have a doctors letter"
They checked medicine on the trunk. Poly while medicine is being taken, "half of that is mine officer"
The Sheriff then takes both brothers to the police car.


One Sheriff remarked "why are you being towed?...None of you guys have license"
"I have a license and insurance" Poly answers.
I am handicapped, my brother was driving me to my mothers house.
One sheriff recognizes patient poly's disability, "then says wait for him..."
Poly is disabled, he has a severely herniated disk, and severe nerve damage and 2 smashed vertebrae.
It is hard for Poly to move easily. Sheriff makes him squeeze in the back of the car.
To Sheriff " it's going to be hard to get in" Sheriff replies "Your going to have to try to get in so I can close the door"
It hurts for me to get in the car. Despite his back problems Poly weighs 400 pounds. This is painful for poly and he moans and complains to the sheriff.
Sheriff answers "the new cars are going to be even smaller, I can barely fit my legs up front in them"


Moments later they show the officers their doctors letters.
The Sheriff still confiscates medicine stating it is still illegal under Federal Law, City and County law.
Leaves with the doctors letters. Poly carries a SB 420 exemption to care for medical marijuana patients.
In this case just himself and his 2 brothers. Officer returns, You Know I could bust you, we have to hold this as evidence until we can verify with your doctor"
"He verifies 24/7" poly says "the number is on the letter"
"What's going to happen to my medicine?"
Sheriff replies "It's going to be destroyed anyways"


In the background officers where examining the goods and talking and laughing about some of the items they had taken.
Not understanding these medicines are the only way for Poly to reduce his dependancy on much harsher pharmaceuticals, which will lead to kidney damage over time.
Poly also suffers from a severe form of sleep apnea and uses medical marijuana to help him sleep at night before he uses a respirator to sleep.


"These things are not really handicapped friendly" Poly remarks about the back seat, and the officer replied "That's because when your in back there your usually on your way to jail"
"But I still have my basic human rights"
Officer Replies "Kick Rocks..."


Poly has to walk home at least 2 miles. Never offered a ride. Never read their rights.
Never asked or consented to a search. Yet their property was seized without question.


Poly's car is impounded for 30 days and he cannot afford to get it out of impound at a price which may exceed the cars value beyond $3,000.


Before Poly Can return Home to his girlfriend and baby daughter. His home is raided by the sheriff less than 10 minutes after he is asked to walk home to his mothers house to take his brother home. 25 miles from home in the apple valley.
Surrounded by sheriff cars an attempt to raid his home is made without search warrants, before he is able to return home.
Girlfriend is threatened by raiding cops and they are given access without warrant.
The sheriff asked girlfriend if she owned the car, she answered it was hers and was going transfered from poly.
The Sheriff then explained that it had been stopped at a check point and had been impounded and they found a substantial amount of a controlled substance.
She then acknowledged to the sheriff that Poly is disabled and had a doctors letter for Medical Marijuana.
She gave them no consent to touch anything, but obliged a single sheriff to walk through, briefly.


On Monday Poly spoke candidly in an interview while trying to deal with his encounter with the law.


"I feel very violated, Last month me and my brothers got our doctor's letter so we could get medicine per state law SB420 & Prop 215 since 1996 and build a collective to help High Desert Patients. Because we have no dispensaries like the 300 plus dispensaries in Los Angeles and San Fernando Valley. This letter is supposed to protect me from being molested by the state law and it was clearly ignored this weekend.
Now I don't even have my medicine and neither do my brothers. Everything we saved up for is gone. I can't afford to get my car out of impound. I have my license and insurance? Why where they towing so many cars anyway? Why didn't they return my medicine if I have an exemption to care for patients, and we had minimal amounts in comparison to SB 420/Prop 215 limitations? Less than an ounce of processed medicine is nothing for 3 people... I haven't rested well for 2 weeks and was hoping to have my medicine for this weekend. It works better than my prescription medications and has less side effects. This makes it much worse for me...
I do not understand why I was treated so poorly by the sheriffs. I was not offered a ride home or to take my brother home to our mother's house 2 miles away. I can't walk 2 miles with my medical conditions... They expected me to walk home? We had to call someone to drive me to my mother's house. My family is deeply affected by this. Why was my home raided when I co-operated with the sheriff and they already took my car and medicine? It makes me feel like I am not in America anymore... I am asking for donations and help from several friends, organizations, and reformers of state and federal marijuana laws. If me and my brother's don't get our medicine back we will protest and get legal support from someone somehow... Before I just read these activism stories on the web and now I am living it. This month the attorney General released an updated report for for Counties to observe the states law protecting patients like myself and my brothers. I want want to know why we are being treated this way? I am going to ask county leadership and our chosen representatives to investigate this matter and this kind of treatment of the disabled in our communities. I am here to let you know there is no compassion for people who try to observe our states laws... Me and my brothers are not criminals and we feel like we have been violated in so many ways... We want our medicine back and we want justice from the authorities who did this, and who do not educate, train, law enforcement officers to uphold our states laws that we have voted for them to enforce. I am still in fear of persecution, and concerned for my family and loved ones."


On Tuesday after Labor Day Poly will go in and ask the Sheriff for his car back, and the confiscated medicine.
He was able to get his car back after spending $600 when his car was taken from him.
He still has not asked for his medicine back. He has contacted Americans For Safe Access for help and support in his matter.


Pursuant to the Constitution of the State of California, Amendment III, Section 3.5(c),
state enforcement officials have no power to refuse to enforce a statute on the basis that
federal law or federal regulations prohibit the enforcement of such statute. Furthermore, in Garden Grove v,
Superior Court, the Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District has observed that, “it is not the job of
the local police to enforce the federal drug laws.” It is therefore your legal duty and responsibility to
respect and obey this agreement per the above cited legislation, and to leave the individuals herein
described unmolested and unreported to federal authorities. Failure to follow state law may result in legal
action being taken against you.


This is what is stated on the medical agreements of patients groups of patients and caregivers who follow the guidelines set forth by Americans For Safe Access in accordance with state laws SB420 and Prop 215.


Under the law since no charges where pressed he is eligible to try and get his medicine returned.
Currently the Medical Marijuana County Issued card program is voluntary for patients with doctor's letters.
However law enforcement is supposed to respect patients rights to possess and cultivate marijuana for midicinal use.


In august the Attorney General released an updated report for the
GUIDELINES FOR THE SECURITY AND NON-DIVERSION OF MARIJUANA GROWN FOR MEDICAL USE
August 2008


Citing page 2 Regarding SB 420 Laws Established in 1996
C.Senate Bill 420 - The Medical Marijuana Program Act.


On January 1, 2004, Senate Bill 420, the Medical Marijuana Program Act (MMP), became
law. (§§ 11362.7-11362.83.) The MMP, among other things, requires the California
Department of Public Health (DPH) to establish and maintain a program for the voluntary
registration of qualified medical marijuana patients and their primary caregivers through a
statewide identification card system. Medical marijuana identification cards are intended
to help law enforcement officers identify and verify that cardholders are able to cultivate,
possess, and transport certain amounts of marijuana without being subject to arrest under
specific conditions. (§§ 11362.71(e), 11362.78.)


It is mandatory that all counties participate in the identification card program by
(a) providing applications upon request to individuals seeking to join the identification
card program; (b) processing completed applications; (c) maintaining certain records;
(d) following state implementation protocols; and (e) issuing DPH identification cards to
approved applicants and designated primary caregivers. (§ 11362.71(b).)


Participation by patients and primary caregivers in the identification card program is
voluntary. However, because identification cards offer the holder protection from arrest,
are issued only after verification of the cardholder’s status as a qualified patient or primary
caregiver, and are immediately verifiable online or via telephone, they represent one of the
best ways to ensure the security and non-diversion of marijuana grown for medical use.


In addition to establishing the identification card program, the MMP also defines certain
terms, sets possession guidelines for cardholders, and recognizes a qualified right to
collective and cooperative cultivation of medical marijuana. (§§ 11362.7, 11362.77,
11362.775.)


Citing page 7 Regarding Seizure


5. Non-Cardholders: When a person claims protection under Proposition
215 or the MMP and only has a locally-issued (i.e., non-state) patient identification
card, or a written (or verbal) recommendation from a licensed physician, officers
should use their sound professional judgment to assess the validity of the person’s
medical-use claim:


a) Officers need not abandon their search or investigation. The standard
search and seizure rules apply to the enforcement of marijuana-related
violations. Reasonable suspicion is required for detention, while probable
cause is required for search, seizure, and arrest.


b) Officers should review any written documentation for validity. It may
contain the physician’s name, telephone number, address, and license
number.


c) If the officer reasonably believes that the medical-use claim is valid
based upon the totality of the circumstances (including the quantity of
marijuana, packaging for sale, the presence of weapons, illicit drugs, or
large amounts of cash), and the person is within the state or local possession
guidelines or has an amount consistent with their current medical needs, the
person should be released and the marijuana should not be seized.


d) Alternatively, if the officer has probable cause to doubt the validity of a
person’s medical marijuana claim based upon the facts and circumstances,
the person may be arrested and the marijuana may be seized. It will then be
up to the person to establish his or her medical marijuana defense in court.


e) Officers are not obligated to accept a person’s claim of having a verbal
physician’s recommendation that cannot be readily verified with the
physician at the time of detention.


6. Exceeding Possession Guidelines: If a person has what appears to be valid
medical marijuana documentation, but exceeds the applicable possession
guidelines identified above, all marijuana may be seized.


7. Return of Seized Medical Marijuana:If a person whose marijuana is
seized by law enforcement successfully establishes a medical marijuana defense in
court, or the case is not prosecuted, he or she may file a motion for return of the
marijuana. If a court grants the motion and orders the return of marijuana seized
incident to an arrest, the individual or entity subject to the order must return the
property. State law enforcement officers who handle controlled substances in the
course of their official duties are immune from liability under the CSA. (21 U.S.C.
§ 885(d).) Once the marijuana is returned, federal authorities are free to exercise
jurisdiction over it. (21 U.S.C. §§ 812(c)(10), 844(a); City of Garden Grove v.
Superior Court (Kha) (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 355, 369, 386, 391.)

so you will grow me pot for free as long as I give you some back?

Where do I sign up? I have a rec. I have a "real" sickness that is documented. If anything ever went to court it would be dropped right away...

Im here to help and be helped...

Check out Pro215.com and call the #

Prosecutors threaten pot dispensaries
By Allison B. Margolin 09/03/2008 LA Daily News
Prosecutors threaten pot dispensaries - LA Daily News
- Allison Margolin is a criminal-defense attorney in Los Angeles and adjunct professor of law at the University of West Los Angeles Law School.

Last week, California Attorney General Jerry Brown issued guidelines to regulate medical-marijuana-related activities in California.

Ostensibly, he issued these guidelines to clarify the boundaries regarding patients, caregivers, collectives and law enforcement. Ultimately, however, the vagueness of the guidelines will only further motivate law enforcement and district attorneys throughout the state who are sincerely trying to follow the laws.

In 1996, California voters passed Proposition 215, a referendum allowing the state's residents to use medical marijuana when a physician approved or recommended its use. Retail stores - commonly known as dispensaries or cannabis clubs - cropped up throughout California despite the fact the California statute did not specifically authorize them.

For the next eight years, the California courts handed down a number of decisions outlining the limits of the law. Despite the popularity and proliferation of the medical stores, the state judiciary indicated that operators of such businesses could not look to the California law for protection. The 1996 version of the law only recognized medical-marijuana patients and primary caregivers, defined by the law as people who consistently assumed responsibility for patients' health, welfare, or safety. While the definition seemed vague enough to encompass a variety of roles, the courts made clear that no one seemed to fit the definition of a caregiver. In fact, none of the cases between 1996 and 2004 ever deemed a defendant a caregiver.
In 2004, the California Legislature attempted to clarify the law to enhance the access of patients to medical marijuana. The additions to the law allowed for qualified patients and primary caregivers to collectively or cooperatively associate to cultivate marijuana, and suggest that those who do so should be immune from criminal liability for transportation, possession for sales, and sales of marijuana.

Again, however, the law failed to broaden the definition of primary caregiver. A look at the legislative record reveals that legislators, through SB 420, intended to put into place safe harbors by which patients would be immunized from arrest if they grew less than a certain number of plants. However, the statute ended up interpreting these as limitations and ultimately SB 420 in many ways ended up abridging rights instead of expanding them.

The question of whether a retail store dispensary would qualify as a collective activity was left unresolved in the statute. However, state prosecutors at their whims have continued to selectively prosecute operators of dispensaries as well as those cultivating marijuana.

Last week's dispensary guidelines do indicate that storefront dispensaries should not be prosecuted where their activities are not for profit and that dispensaries may allow their members to cultivate on behalf of the dispensary.

Despite the fact that the attorney general considers these dispensary-related activities in California law, it is not a binding authority on district attorneys whose power is still left unchecked. In fact, the attorney general's opinion that hashish is considered within the purview of the medical-marijuana statute is often disregarded by prosecutors who claim that they need not follow an attorney general opinion.

Finally, the guidelines do nothing to clear up the confusion regarding the meaning of nonprofit, though they do echo the Medical Marijuana Program Act's restriction of collective activities to those conducted on a not-for-profit basis. However, this emphasis will do nothing to explain what is meant by not-for-profit. Currently, police claim that any amount of money seized is evidence of profit-making activities.

I have seen the lengths to which prosecutors will exploit the vagueness of the law to prosecute people. The guidelines will do nothing to curb the arbitrariness with which law enforcement and prosecutors selectively enforce it.

Only when district attorney offices throughout the state start to rein in out-of-control prosecutors, who put more resources into finding loopholes in medical-marijuana defenses than into prosecuting real crime, will anything change. Only then will patients' and collective operators' rights be protected.

Like The War On Some Drugs? Thank Dems’ VP Pick Senator Joe Biden!
I found this article on Norml's Website (www.norml.org). It was written by their board Member, Dominic Holden. I'm not sure if others have read it, but here it is:

Like The War On Some Drugs? Thank Dems’ VP Pick Senator Joe Biden!
by Dominic Holden, Sunday September 7, 2008

Barack Obama just claimed the nomination. And Joe Biden, as his official running mate, is about to speak. But Obama selecting Biden was a punch to the gut. Like that sickening feeling you got as a high school freshman, walking up the steps to the big party—and you’re telling yourself, if I fuck this up, my dreams are shot. But if things go well, this could be an excellent four years.

I am anything but a single-issue voter, but I’m also a die-hard zealot against the drug war. Everything that could have gone wrong has been an unbridled catastrophe: Drug epidemics and cartel routes breeze across the continent, privacy laws are gutted for sport, kids try drugs younger and younger, our prisons are stuffed with young black men…

And it’s Joe Biden’s fault.

As former chairman for the Senate Judiciary Committee, Biden is the person most responsible for passing a package of laws in the mid-80s that we think of as today’s drug war. Biden presided over the mandatory-minimum sentencing guidelines that required judges to sentence dealers’ girlfriends and small-time peddlers to decades-long terms in state and federal prisons, where thousands are rotting to this day.

He used hearings “to mislead his colleagues and the public… on drug policy where police, prosecutors and DEA officials got the opportunity [to speak] while opponents were kept out,” says Kevin Zeese, a former director of Common Sense for Drug Policy and a leading drug-law reformer in Washington, D.C. since the 1980s. “Pick a drug law you don’t like from the last 25 years and thank Senator Biden.”

It wasn’t just coincidence that these laws were passed while Biden was at the helm of the judiciary committee. He was the leading advocate for establishing the Office of National Drug Control Policy—the White House Drug Czar’s Office—an agency that to this day gives lip service to drug treatment programs but spends its millions on ads linking pot to terrorism. The ads actually increased drug-initiation rates among teenagers. He’s a conservative on most crime issues. And in recent years, Biden pushed the so-called RAVE Act, which criminalized everyone attending parties where drugs were found. Biden is the drug war embodied.

But, since this is Obama’s campaign, I’m trying to hope—hope that Biden can change.

“Our intentions were good, but much of our information was bad,” Biden said in February. He decried the very sentencing disparities he created between crack and cocaine, which is one of the reasons prisons are full of young black men. “Each of the myths upon which we based the sentencing disparity has since been dispelled or altered,” he said.

A change of heart, perhaps. And when it comes to the playing the old white guy card—a requisite in the run against McCain—Biden’s the king of hearts. Also, nice teeth. They must be fake. Anyway, I like to think that the folks who pushed the drug war in the 1970s and 1980s—Richard Nixon, Nancy Reagan, Joe Biden—believed that it may have worked. Clinton should have known better. But by every measure of efficacy, it’s failed.

Obama cannot alter drug laws on his own—he’s lived a youth of indiscretions. (Realistically, no politician can make any sweeping changes; it must be incremental.) But if anyone has the credibility at the federal level to say we were wrong, to push the Senate for sentencing reform, to back Barney Frank’s bill in the House to decriminalize pot—nobody is more more capable than Joe Biden. And if he does, this could be an excellent four years.


Originally published on the Seattle Stranger's SLOG.


Thought I would share this!! Thraxz A.K.A. Jackbean/Cannabis Jay!!

I was there and actually spoke to the City Council, I am sad that not anyone from The ASA or MMP was there to defend or speak up for these guys, and for us as patients.. Unit-D is one of a very few places in O.C. that you could get your Meds safe..

So here we are being forced again to turn to the streets to get our Med!!