MMPR Licensed Producer Thread

WHATFG

Well-Known Member
I disagree with you. We have constitutional protection under section 7 of the Charter. When forced to make a choice...and the grovernment put these silly regulations in place forcing docs to burden the responsibility. Government, namely HC is the barrier to access for any number of reasons.
 
Also like i've said before - its not a constitutional protection until its been fought for and won in court. If you would like to believe you have that protection - then by all means make an informed decision about your own civil disobedience and be ready to spend the time,research, and large sums of money to work through all 3 levels of court and win. Mernaugh tried - and it just backfired and set court precedent in the wrong direction for patients.

Don't give other people a false sense of safety so they go about their days flaunting the law and risking their liberty. Its irresponsible and foolish.
 

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
I agree chris, your posts are a little improper. no proof. fuck with the wrong cops and youll be charged. wait til feb then lets all chat again. till then its all a grey area, be safe
One more time, in case you missed my post above."I never said it was legal, I never said you will never be charged and I never said presenting the defense would be free. I simply stated what I would do if I were being forced to buy sub-standard bunk from LPs and the defense I would use if charged." Saying that constitutes an improper post or opinion sounds a little Harper-esque to me. I never told anyone to follow my advice. Can someone please let me know who I consult to see if my opinion is worthy of posting? Here's a little fun activity for my detractors...go through my posts today and count up the 'likes', then do the same for yourselves. It would appear my opinion is not far off the majority. If you actually think there are people on here who will take legal advice from a random poster, you may want to cut back on the thc level of your meds. Sorry mr, this rant wasn't intended for you so much as a few others. Time to move on and let the sheep worry about these hypothetical 'arrests and convictions happening everyday'. IMHO, that is not the reality. peace.
 

WHATFG

Well-Known Member
Also like i've said before - its not a constitutional protection until its been fought for and won in court. If you would like to believe you have that protection - then by all means make an informed decision about your own civil disobedience and be ready to spend the time,research, and large sums of money to work through all 3 levels of court and win. Mernaugh tried - and it just backfired and set court precedent in the wrong direction for patients.

Don't give other people a false sense of safety so they go about their days flaunting the law and risking their liberty. Its irresponsible and foolish.
So you're saying that all the previous decisions that have gone in our favour just have no force and effect? What's your legal background? I never once told anyone to do anything, and most certainly have not encouraged anyone to flaunt anything. I am neither irresponsible nor foolish. I do have an understanding of what legal precedents mean in a democracy. This is not the first time this has gone before the courts. Why do you think we won the injunction? Because a JUDGE determined that our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS were being infringed upon. Are you a wannabe LP?
 

bcbreeder

Well-Known Member
You may but the courts don't.
Thanks sativeritas , nothing worse I guess then amateur judges and self appointed lawyers, I think I know who this is and thanks
For hanging out on riu , myself having been dragged through the legal system, coming out relatively well thanks to good lawyering, it still
Has huge impacts on you, try getting a job, even without a "conviction" your still screwed getting criminal record checks,
Don't think cuz you can argue medical youre fine, you might get a minimum sanction, but it is still a sanction, and then theres the program where every grow that is busted
Whether medical or not where in the opinion of the Rc's expert there were prior grows then all the rcmp files get forwarded to c.r.a. where their program
Is allowed to make wide reaching conclusions as to what your grow was, more plants in veg than you have in bud? boom you are assumed a clone dealer.
A dozen large plants in veg, boom these must be all mother plants , drive a nice car, boom that must be cuz you were selling on the side,
These c.r.a. people also think that EVERY single Mmar license holder is black market, it goes on and on,
So bottom line you may very well owe c.r.a. a penalty so don't assume cuz your medical you can't get keel hauled through the system
The big advantage to the mmpr system is increased access by not having to have a specialist report for a doctor to sign for you .
Big improvement. now as long as you can convince a doctor of your condition you are eligible . Everyone concerned with their safety that
Is not covered by the injunction who is medical in my view should obtain an mmpr prescription locate an LP and make a purchase, only then could you argue that the mmpr
Is unworkable for whatever reason, lack of available LP's, lack of strain choice, unaffordability etc.
Being able to possess and carry 30 times your daily dose is great and being able to receive a legal mail order, I doubt a seized compassion
Club mail order could be insurable.
Of course we should as patients be able to grow , but until Allard is decided upon I doubt it is worth the risk to grow unless your rich enough to hire a lawyer or crazy and litigation seasoned like turmel.
 
Last edited:
So you're saying that all the previous decisions that have gone in our favour just have no force and effect? What's your legal background? I never once told anyone to do anything, and most certainly have not encouraged anyone to flaunt anything. I am neither irresponsible nor foolish. I do have an understanding of what legal precedents mean in a democracy. This is not the first time this has gone before the courts. Why do you think we won the injunction? Because a JUDGE determined that our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS were being infringed upon. Are you a wannabe LP?
*Facepalm*

The previous decisions (Parker, Hitzig, JP, Baron, Long, Hall, Sfetkopulos, and Smith) all either created or expanded upon the scope of the MMAR. Each of these court decisions aside from parker ruled parts of the MMAR to be unconstitutional in their arbitrariness. At no point since parker has a decision ruled that a patient who qualifies without a doctors exemption is allowed to consume or produce Cannabis or any of its derivatives. For someone to argue that they should be allowed to grow their own - while a functional program that offers an exemption exists is getting harder and harder (IE Mernaugh failing).

Both the MMAR and MMPR are functional exemptions for specific items under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, without an exemption you firmly fall under the CDSA in criminal proceedings. That is not to say that you might be able to argue specific points of the regulations in court and have them changed, win, and have your charges dismissed; But that does not mean every person who has a qualifying condition is protected under section 7 of the charter of rights.

With all due respect - you do not have an understanding of how Common Law Precedent works.
 
So you're saying that all the previous decisions that have gone in our favour just have no force and effect? No. See above.
What's your legal background? This industry.
Are you a wannabe LP? No.

Hows that?
 

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
*Facepalm*

The previous decisions (Parker, Hitzig, JP, Baron, Long, Hall, Sfetkopulos, and Smith) all either created or expanded upon the scope of the MMAR. Each of these court decisions aside from parker ruled parts of the MMAR to be unconstitutional in their arbitrariness. At no point since parker has a decision ruled that a patient who qualifies without a doctors exemption is allowed to consume or produce Cannabis or any of its derivatives. For someone to argue that they should be allowed to grow their own - while a functional program that offers an exemption exists is getting harder and harder (IE Mernaugh failing).

Both the MMAR and MMPR are functional exemptions for specific items under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, without an exemption you firmly fall under the CDSA in criminal proceedings. That is not to say that you might be able to argue specific points of the regulations in court and have them changed, win, and have your charges dismissed; But that does not mean every person who has a qualifying condition is protected under section 7 of the charter of rights.

With all due respect - you do not have an understanding of how Common Law Precedent works.
And with absolutely no respect- you do not have any facts to convince anyone of your claims. Can you enlighten us as to how many people proving medical need have been CONVICTED in the last five years? You are quick to launch accusations that my stating what I would do is somehow endorsing people to do it and promising them immunity. That is clearly not what I said, but why focus on the truths, huh? So which Canadians are not protected by our constitution? I understand that it applies to all Canadians equally, so your statement "But that does not mean every person who has a qualifying condition is protected under section 7 of the charter of rights." is quite confusing. Also I am curious about your claimed legal expertise...your background is "this industry"...seeing 'this industry' is only a year old... And do they teach constitutional law in the 'this industry' law school? You may come on here as a self-proclaimed expert but you come off like an absolute asshole.
 

Yessica...

Well-Known Member
You may come on here as a self-proclaimed expert but you come off like an absolute asshole.
I agree with this statement in regard to anyone that argues with the poster about WHO KNOWS MORE or WHO IS RIGHT or WHO HAS BEEN SOMETHING SOMETHING LONGER.

Arguing, in general, about personal shit instead of addressing and responding to questions and actual points - is just a form of MISDIRECTION.

I don't know if it's intentional - but A LOT of people do it.

And then - we ALL like to watch. It's what makes people watch shows like "FLAVA of love" or "Kardashians". People like to watch FIRE BURN.

I think we are given a terrific opportunity here to have access to SO MANY PEOPLE and their OPINIONS and experiences.

Opinions are not wrong, they are just sometimes different. And it's EASY to get facts incorrect. BUT - fighting tooth and nail to "prove" facts you do not yet have whilst completely ignoring anyone else's opinion on said matter - is just SO silly.

Stop being so SILLY and let's try to fix this.

I wonder if someone will report me for this?

I kept getting reported before. Although all that ever happened from that is the people who reported me got a time-out - because THEY were not following the only rule.

Well - that one, and then the clear rules against dic pics...

Anywho - thanks for staying on point @VIANARCHRIS . It's easy to get thrown when people are trying to make you defend yourself constantly and derail your intended message.

You're golden!
 

MarijeJane

Well-Known Member
And with absolutely no respect- you do not have any facts to convince anyone of your claims. Can you enlighten us as to how many people proving medical need have been CONVICTED in the last five years? You are quick to launch accusations that my stating what I would do is somehow endorsing people to do it and promising them immunity. That is clearly not what I said, but why focus on the truths, huh? So which Canadians are not protected by our constitution? I understand that it applies to all Canadians equally, so your statement "But that does not mean every person who has a qualifying condition is protected under section 7 of the charter of rights." is quite confusing. Also I am curious about your claimed legal expertise...your background is "this industry"...seeing 'this industry' is only a year old... And do they teach constitutional law in the 'this industry' law school? You may come on here as a self-proclaimed expert but you come off like an absolute asshole.

Here are the Canadian statistics showing an increase every year in both arrests and convictions for cannabis. Here are your facts. Please do some reading before commenting again.

http://cannabislink.ca/legal/
http://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/Police-reported-Crime-Statistics-in-Canada-February-2013.pdf
http://www.fraserinstitute.org/uploadedFiles/fraser-ca/Content/research-news/research/articles/canadian-perspective-on-the-war-on-drugs.pdf
http://www.ccsa.ca/Resource Library/CCSA-Canadian-Drug-Summary-Cannabis-2014-en.pdf
https://bc.liberal.ca/files/2013/01/DRAFT-Marijuana-Policy-Paper-Jan-13.pdf
http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/why-its-time-to-legalize-marijuana/
http://www.cannabisfacts.ca/mandatoryminimums_chart.html
http://www.defencelaw.com/printversion-chart-contents.html
http://zvulony.ca/2013/articles/criminal-law/top-10-things-to-know-about-sentencing-in-drug-cases/
 

gb123

Well-Known Member
Chris. They know about as much as you do. Next to nothing.
Spouting off BS that people THINK, is truly sad.
All the wanna be LPs are here yappin because they to are being screwed. :lol:
I think it looks awesome on them as well.

cheers big ears!
 
Top