My Photo

April 2017

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30            

BlogStats


« Wages by Fiat | Main | Dump Trump and Pillory Hillary – 5aug16 »

04 August 2016

Comments

Gail Kraus

"ORDINANCE No 2416
Section G-IV 5.9 Administrative Review
End of section D: The request for a hearing and appeal shall not be deemed complete and shall not be considered unless it specifies why the marijuana cultivation that is subject to abatement in the Notice to Abate Unlawful Marijuana Cultivation is not in violation of this Article."

So no hearing based on Medical need, or financial constraints, or parcel geography(like the only area left after the setbacks is your driveway.Or Hank said repeatedly it was O.K.?

Also odd is:Section G-IV 5.9 Administrative Review
D. Any hearing conducted pursuant to this Article need not be conducted according to technical rules relating to evidence, witnesses and hearsay. Any relevant evidence shall be admitted if it is the sort of evidence on which responsible persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs regardless of the existence of any common law or statutory rule which might make improper the admission of the evidence over objection in civil actions. The Hearing Officer has discretion to exclude evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the probability that its admission will necessitate undue consumption of time.

So they can use hearsay and leave out anything they want?

Gail Kraus

How many articles of the bill of Rights does this ordinance violate? 1,4,5,6,7,8,14? I am not an attorney,any takers?

George Rebane

GailK 930am - The part you quote does seem to give a whole new meaning to 'due process' under our judicial system.

Patricia Smith

Another troubling aspect of their "appeal" processes is that it will be denied without good cause - but the unavailability of your attorney is not considered good cause. There are only a few attorneys who handle MMJ defenses and they are in high demand. Oftentimes they have a trial in another county and cannot be in two places at the same time. This is a denial of due process and I believe is ripe for a legal challenge.

Gregory

Power to the correct people!

This isn't the judicial system, George. It's local regulatory bureaucracy. "Administrative review". Checking that all the t's are crossed and i's dotted.

I doubt it is unconstitutional but that doesn't make it a good ordinance.

Gail Kraus

George, thanks for allowing for this discussion to continue. Gail

George Rebane

Gregory 1003am - You are correct. I carelessly saddled "judicial" with too broad of a meaning. Perhaps substituting 'system of justice' might serve better.

Paul Emery

Patricia

What is the fine assessment during the appeal process? If an appeal is denied will the appellant have to pay fines for each day during the process?

Don Bessee

PE- The fines structure does not impact this growing season, it starts in Jan. 2017. If you chose to opt for an appeal you are subject to the costs of the administrative hearing as well as any fines that accrue from the date of notice of code infraction. Historically the appeals were just smoke screen to buy time to relocate the grow and I am not sure anyone won an appeal in the last year. Its an administrative process not a criminal process just as in the rest of the State.

Gail Kraus

If the fines start in January, why bypass the 30 day public review by putting them in the urgency ordinance?

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-86210809/

"the (Justice) department concluded that the municipal court in Ferguson, Mo.,... was more focused more on raising revenue through fines and fees than using such tools to improve public safety." "Department officials noted in the letter that such practices have profound consequences and can damage the faith residents have in their courts and police. "..."Ferguson’s police force and its municipals courts routinely violated the rights of residents, particularly those who were poor and black, by focusing so heavily on raising revenues through fines and fees."...“Too many of our citizens are simply in jail because they don’t have the money to get out,” Lynch said. “We’ve outlawed usury. We’ve outlawed debtors prisons. We cannot cloak it in the language of fines and fees and make it right.”

Russ Steele

Pot Pushers Dirty Little Secret

But what if there was a Food and Drug Administration-approved drug that gave you all the benefits of the active ingredients in marijuana, such as tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) or cannabidiol?

What if that drug had been rigorously tested through clinical trials to make sure that it worked as promised, was properly dosed, and had no unanticipated side effects?

And what if you could get that lawful drug from your doctor in pill or liquid form?

And what if there were three such different FDA-approved drugs, and two more on the FDA-approved fast track?

Would it surprise you to know there already are three FDA-approved THC drugs and that at least five more are on the way? We suspect so, because the pot pushers—those that push smoked and edible marijuana as “medicine”—don’t want you to know about these safe alternatives.

Some of those FDA-approved drugs have been around since the 1980s.

That’s right—the dirty little secret they hide from you is that you don’t have to smoke marijuana, eat it in a brownie, or chew it in a marijuana-laced gummy bear to reap the medicinal benefits of THC.

The three FDA-approved drugs are Marinol, Cesamet, and Syndros. Drugs like Syndros show great promise for countering today’s dangerous “medical marijuana” movement.

In early July, the FDA approved Syndros as the first orally administered liquid form of THC. Like Marinol, the original oral cannabinoid to gain FDA approval in 1985, Syndros treats anorexia associated with weight loss in patients with AIDS, as well as nausea and vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy.

Epidiolex is one drug currently on the FDA fast track. According to a recent press release from GW Pharmaceuticals, a study of 171 randomized patients suffering from Lennox-Gastaut and Dravet syndromes found that Epidiolex decreased seizure occurrence, was relatively well tolerated among patients, and generated no unexpected adverse effects.

Read the rest of the story HERE: http://dailysignal.com/2016/08/04/the-dirty-little-secret-pot-pushers-dont-want-you-to-know-about/?
Why are we even having this discussion about growing medical MJ, when pills and liquids are available at the Pharmacy?

Gail Kraus

Mr. Steele,(4:54AM) You reference safe alternatives in the same breath as no unanticipated side effects.

These are synthetic man made cannabinoids. How cost effective can that be compared with sun and water?

What about safe and affordable?
http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000091

Marijuana:Per gram 1.0 g $ 17.14
Marinol: Per gram 1.0 g $ 1,810

So when a sick and/or disabled person on mediCal heads to the pharmacy, would you like the taxpayers to pay the Marinol price, which is 100 times as much?

If there ever was a dirty little giant-elephant-in-the-room secret it would be the side effects.

Marinol:(Dronabinol) https://www.drugs.com/sfx/marinol-side-effects.html

12 pages of side effects including: seizures, hearing loss,
mental depression, nervousness or anxiety, nausea, vomiting,and abdominal or stomach pain.

Syndros:(Dronabinol) https://www.drugs.com/sfx/syndros-side-effects.html

same as Marinol, Recall that Syndros treats anorexia associated with weight loss in patients with AIDS, as well as nausea and vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy.
Gastrointestinal side effects:
Common (1% to 10%): Abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting
Uncommon (0.1% to 1%): Diarrhea

Cesamet: https://www.drugs.com/sfx/cesamet-side-effects.html

including: convulsions (seizures),mental depression,nervousness or anxiety,unusual tiredness or weakness (severe),ataxia, Blurred vision or any changes in vision,loss of appetite and sometimes nausea. Recall that Cesamet is used to treat severe nausea and vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy.

It appears these drugs(now it is truly a drug)can get you high and can be abused as well.

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/05n0479/05N-0479-emc0004-04.pdf

"MARINOL® (Dronabinol) Capsules is one of the psychoactive compounds present in cannabis, and is abusable and controlled [Schedule III (CIII)] under the Controlled Substances Act."

Schedule 111?
This begs the question why is marijuana schedule 1?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Removal_of_cannabis_from_Schedule_I_of_the_Controlled_Substances_Act
Schedule I is the only category of controlled substances that may not be prescribed by a physician. Under 21 U.S.C. § 812, drugs must meet three criteria in order to be placed in Schedule I:
The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.

Why is the misclassification a problem? Well,if a high school kid tries marijuana,and uses it with friends it will become obvious the reefer madness paradigm is very misleading.
When you tell them speed does this and coke does that, and opiates are physically addicting, THEY WON'T BELIEVE IT. Until they find out for themselves. This could also be very costly it seems to me.

Don Bessee

Hands up don't shoot Ferguson narratives sure advance the conversation.

Gail Kraus

My comment was about fines.

Don Bessee

http://theunion.com/news/23256740-113/five-arrested-at-multiple-pot-grows

Gail Kraus

Don, Here is a question.

I think we can agree that there can be a medical "grow" that is legal and current ordinance compliant, and there can be a "grow" that is illegal.

What about a medical "grow" that that is legal, but not fully compliant with the current ordinance? Do you agree there could be such an animal?
Perhaps a situation where the plant count and square footage are compliant would be easiest to discuss.

BradC

Photographs in The Union of several of the more recent greenhouse grows that have been raided looked like clean, organized, well managed, professional operations. Why is the Sherrif going after these 'good' greenhouse grows, and not focusing on the crazy, tweaker growers with the guns, guard dogs, etc. - the type that used to be in Alta Sierra?
Sure, I get that it is illegal, they are out of compliance, etc.
But I wonder what prompted the complaints -if there were any- that resulted in these raids?

Is it Prohibition part deux - with the local THC Elliot Ness wannabes looking for some publicity?

I have also noticed the army choppers cruising the area lately. Any connection?

BradC

RussS@454am - not knowing if you are lactose intolerant, my question to you regarding the big pharma THC schemes is this: Would you rather get your 'cheese' from a can of Cheez Whiz or from a cow (or sheep, or goat)?

Don Bessee

Gail, the 504 by BC is what we always get when there is a start of an adult conversation. I think Dr. R would call it talking past each other.
What he so blithely blows past about the two most recent pot profiteer busts is that they had ZERO to do with an actual patient. The one a few days ago had a woman ask the cops how they were supposed to pay the contractor building the house under construction. The most recent had a foreign national tell the cops she hated weed, did not use it and only got the recommendation to help the guy out.
Until the knee jerk defense of anyone who grows weed whatever the circumstances is ended your team is not going to be take seriously, just as the cal growers told you in public.

Gail Kraus

Don,
It seems you are also caught up in the knee jerking.
I studiously avoided any mention of these busts as we are discussing medical MJ.
As gently as possible, I am stating: until the knee jerk attack of anyone who grows weed whatever the circumstances is ended "your team" is not going to be take(n) seriously.

With apologies to C. Taylor:
Most sensible people understand that a MMJ ordinance does not prevent ill-intentioned people from getting MJ and in turn committing crimes or crimes involving MJ.

The ordinance does, however, deprive well-intentioned people of protecting themselves from "your teams" reaction to ill-intentioned people with bad MJ habits . Because our society has become what it has, with no set MMJ standards, there are repeated attempts to legislate some kind of morality. That does not work ... as we have seen over and over again.
(Just hoping someone notices the MMJ and firearms similarity.)

Please, continue the adult conversation I attempted to start in "our community".

Don Bessee

So it sounds like we can start with those grows in the paper were not medical and that there can in fact be mmj grows that are legal and code compliant.

I do not see a US constitutional right affirmed by the SCOTUS like the 2nd amendment in the mmj issue. Mmj is a federal crime and in CA a Dr. recommendation is an affirmative defense in potential criminal issues, then you get to the regulatory framework/code issues.

Prop 64 is unrelated to mmj.

Arther Williams

What would Jesus do, Don?

Gregory

Bessee, I do not see an enumerated power granted the Feds in the Constitution to give them authority over MMJ, or Whoopee MJ for that matter.

Where is it?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad