From what I've read, the opinions Bob gives that cause an uproar are opinions on the interpretation of the mmma. For instance Bob shared the opinion caregivers shouldn't be profiting rather only growing as a hobby. This is an opinion I strongly disagree with for many reasons. A couple being that in principal what hobby/business/occupation is not allowed to be profitable unless they state they're a non profit also I feel the purpose of the mmma was to provide safe, easily accessible, marijuana to people with the qualifying conditions as recommended by a physician. This purpose can be fulfilled if you allow a caregiver to grow and tend to patients as a full time occupation which it is in a garden with a plant count on the middle to higher end of what is legal. Now even with this sentiment we know people in Michigan who we live with as a community, have a wide range of opinions on marijuana. We know some people with a lot of influence who are anti-marijuana and will use any possible leverage they can muster to limit what is allowed under the mmma. The part of the mmma which says caregivers can be compensated for cost to me could be interpreted to mean caregiver can not profit. I don't interpret it that way however I see how someone who would want to limit the scope of the mmma would interpret it that way. So if I were to advise somebody on what is legal I would not be telling them you can for sure profit as a caregiver. So even though I disagree with Bob I see how that is sound advise.
Now just because gives this advise doesn't mean he is anti marijuana, anti caregivers, or anti patients all of which he was accused of. He even stated he is for legalization which I am too. I from my limited experiences on this sub forum see the Bob is against us sentiment stemming from these types of varying view points. The personal attacks and arrogance on both sides don't help to serve any type of cohesion either. They just help to divide us.
