Denver stricter on pot

[ccharles000]

Denver's City Council approved a broad set of regulations for the city's booming medical-marijuana industry Monday night over the objections of dozens of cannabis advocates who say the rules clamp down too hard on their businesses.

The regulations require the licensing of medical-marijuana dispensaries, impose 1,000-foot buffers between the shops and schools or child-care facilities, bar on-site marijuana consumption, mandate certain security procedures and prohibit felons from opening a dispensary.

"We did our jobs, and we should hold our heads high for what we were able to do in this first phase," said Councilman Charlie Brown, who pushed for the ordinance.

The council unanimously approved the ordinance at the close of a nearly four-hour meeting. During the public hearing that preceded the vote, dozens of dispensary owners, medical-marijuana patients and cannabis advocates urged the council to reject the regulations, calling them unconstitutional and over-reaching.

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_14170284

[Common Sense Party]

1. Those all sound like wise and reasonable regulations.

[Webster Green]

3. They sound unconstitutional and over reaching.

I could agree with not selling to school children though.

[Common Sense Party]

6. That's awful generous of you. You COULD agree to that?

What parts are unconstitutional and overreaching?

[Webster Green]

57. These are legal establishments.

If they aren't selling to minors, then what's the problem with locating near schools. Fear that the kids might learn the truth, that cannabis has medicinal benefits?

I can't see any reason to ban indulging in medicine at the dispensary. It makes no sense at all. Some of the ones that I go to encourage sampling before you buy.

This is just meddling by officials where they have no business. Medical pot is overwhelmingly supported by both scientific evidence and the voters who made it legal.

These asshats need to STFU and go have a fucking martini. :hippie:

[Common Sense Party]

69. But they can't have the martini within 1000 feet of the school.

[Webster Green]

73. If that's a law, I disagree with it as well.

Kids know whats up, for God's sake. Do you think you can prevent them from finding out that folks drink alcohol, or that there are bars?

If the bar was serving the kids, I would feel a little different about it.

OK, reverend? :eyes:

[Common Sense Party]

75. That is indeed a law in many cities across the country.

And it's a reasonable restriction on a legal establishment that most people have no problem with.

For some reason, marijuana brings out a libertarian streak in people where they think there should be NO restrictions or regulations.

[Webster Green]

78. It's idiotic, just like a lot of other laws.

You know reverend, Puritans really get under my skin. :smoke:

[Common Sense Party]

79. Lighten up, Francis.

Er, Webster.

[Webster Green]

81. LOL!

OK, I will. :hi:

[tridim]

4. That's because the article only mentions the reasonable regulations.

It leaves out all the new regulations that will destroy our constitutional right to produce and consume cannabis.

These regulations are about BANNING sales to legal patients.

[ZombieHorde]

7. I think you forgot your sarcasm thingy. nt

[Common Sense Party]

9. Nope. nt

[ZombieHorde]

11. Would you hold pharmacies to all of those standards? nt

[tridim]

2. Nearly every point of these new rules is in dispute..

Most of it is inherently unconstitutional and will be fought in court by the voters and our army of lawyer activists.

This is far from over.

[Freddie Stubbs]

5. What specific provisions of the constitution do they violate?

:shrug:

[Common Sense Party]

8. They sound like the same sorts of restrictions put on bars, saloons

and porn shops. They don't sound outrageous to me...

[ZombieHorde]

12. Theses shops are closer to pharmacies than bars or porn shops. nt

[Common Sense Party]

13. Not if people are consuming marijuana on the premises.

[ZombieHorde]

17. What is the worst thing that could happen? nt

[Common Sense Party]

19. Kids could get a seed in their eye.

Or get the munchies and eat unhealthy foods, leading to obesity.

I don't know.

What's the worst that could happen if a kid walks by a porn shop? Probably nothing, but communities have been sending them out to the edge of town for decades.

[tridim]

21. You should really visit a dispensary if you get the chance.

Some of them are beautiful. Only a few are shady, and IMO they will fail on their own.

None of them are ANYTHING like a porn shop. Not even in the same ballpark. The good ones look and feel like a yoga gym.

[Common Sense Party]

23. I have no medical need, so I doubt I'll visit one anytime soon.

People don't consume on the premises though...do they?

[tridim]

26. There is consumption at some dispensaries.

But I've never seen people with "reefer madness", just a few adult patients sitting there, talking, laughing and consuming their medicine. Cannabis isn't crack or meth.

[Common Sense Party]

29. Well, that's different from a pharmacy, then.

I pick up my prescriptions at a pharmacy. I don't pop the pills or inject myself with insulin at the Walgreen's. I go home and tke care of my medical business at home.

What you're describing sounds more like a bar.

But ONLY for medical patients. Right?

[tridim]

33. Of course it's for patients.. Non-patients aren't even allowed to go inside.

They're nothing like a bar, at least not yet. If you could only see for yourself you'd undertand how tame it is.

Maybe that's the city council's problem as well? They just don't know what actually happens in these shops.

[Common Sense Party]

35. Non-patients aren't allowed inside? Then why did you tell me to

go visit a dispensary?

[tridim]

39. I think for a brief moment I thought you were a card holder.

How wrong I was.

[uncle ray]

42. it's a "rule" not a law.

but it's clear even to stoners that you are not here to have an intellectually honest discussion.

[Common Sense Party]

45. I have been nothing but intellectually honest.

I think these are reasonable restrictions that the city council has passed. No one--"stoner" or otherwise--has been able to explain to my satisfaction why these dispensaries shouldn't have some restrictions.

[uncle ray]

49. nobody has a problem with "some" restrictions.

we are singling out exact restrictions we have a problem with. you are supporting the restrictions without making a case for why they make sense. you're case appears to be based on the fact that you've never seen a person take a pill in a pharmacy.

[Common Sense Party]

50. So, the ONLY restriction you have an issue with is the on-site consumption?

Why is it so important to have on-site consumption of medicine?

[uncle ray]

60. well, having not read the full ordinance,

the buffers may be a bit big, but workable, i'd like to see a map of remaining areas where they'll be allowed. it's a reasonable restriction IMHO.

the fees are reasonable, and much less than the 5k+5k that was proposed. again, reasonable. i would have even went along with the 5k numbers for the time being, and after the industry has proven itself in denver to be good for the city, to attempt to lower the fees. we've long made the case that their is tax dollars to be made, now is not the time to turn tea-bagger.

security mandates are ok with me, depending on what those requirements are, but that is a reasonable rule.

i don't agree with the barring of felons from owning a dispensary. most are only felons for doing what they are now doing legally.

i support "common sense" regulation of the new green industry. it's no secret that colorado is in it's green rush, and things do need to slow down a bit.

on site consumption is important because when you gotta have your meds, you gotta. there are ways to allow consumption that will not even create any odor, so there is no potential impact on neighboring businesses, or even employee or customer health.

[Webster Green]

64. Pharmacies have no problem with someone eating a pill there.

I've done it on countless occasions. What the fuck are you people talking about? It makes no sense.

Medicinal pot is legal here. The fact that ignorant politicians don't like that fact is tough shit for them.

[Common Sense Party]

65. Are they eating pot pills at these dispensaries?

[Webster Green]

71. What the fuck does that have to do with anything?

In both cases, medicine is being consumed where it was dispensed.

You just have a negative attitude towards cannabis, which happens to be arguably the most useful plant known to man.

Snap out of it, fer god's sake! :wtf:

[ZombieHorde]

24. I don't think we should restrict freedom, especially the on subject of medicine,

without hard evidence of harm.

[Common Sense Party]

27. Do you think it unreasonable that these dispensaries be licensed?

That's a restriction.

[ZombieHorde]

34. I don't know enough about the licensing process involved to give an honest answer.

If the license is a simple business license or medicaid/medicare license, and is not too expensive, then I would not have a problem with it.

If the licensing process is difficult without benefit, then I would be against it.

The licensing is a good and interesting point and I wish I knew more about the subject to offer a more intelligent comment.

[Common Sense Party]

36. According to 9News:

"The regulations require a new dispensary owner to pay a $2,000 non-refundable application fee and $3,000 a year to renew their license."

Doesn't sound all that difficult, but it is a bit pricey.

On Edit: And I doubt they think they're going to get these kinds of fees from dispensaries with only five patients.

[Bluenorthwest]

28. People take prescription drugs

on site at pharmacies all the time. So what is your point?

[Common Sense Party]

31. No, they don't. When have you ever taken your pills at the pharmacy?

[Bluenorthwest]

40. I don't personally go to there, nor is that your business.

But obviously, people often take medications as soon as they get them. They are often instructed to do so, many times they have delayed purchase due to money, and when they get, they take, as ordered.
Are you under the impression that everyone lives a life like yours? Some are not at home for long hours in the day, and they take medicines when and where they need to, including right there on the spot. Some see doctors far from home, some see the pharmacy on the way to work, it is just silly to think that people do not take medications where they get them. Most of those places will sell you a water to wash them down as well.
Have you ever heard of restrictions on taking your medication upon delivery? I sure have not.

[Common Sense Party]

43. I've never once seen somebody pop their pills or inject their insulin

in the pharmacy. Have you? Most people wait till they're alone, in private, and have some food or liquid to go along with the medicine, not standing in an aisle of the pharmacy, under the flourescent lights, in full view of the public.

I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but it's definitely not common.

[Bluenorthwest]

51. In the case of insulin or other injectables

people take them as needed where they are needed. They do not have the luxury always to grab a snack and a snuggie. And you do know that some medicines are for empty stomachs, yes? Just checking as you seem confused about medicine in general. I mean, kid, even those with no home to go to need to take medicine.
There are diabetic homeless. What do you think happens? They wait until they obtain housing to inject insulin?

[Webster Green]

76. LOL

Perfect response! :thumbsup:

[uncle ray]

perhaps you should actually visit a pharmacy.

go ahead and continue to pretend to be shocked that someone with acute pain may want their medicine right now whether it be oxycontin or a MMJ edible.

[Common Sense Party]

47. I go to pharmacies. Quite a lot, as my son is on two medications.

You said yourself you don't go to the pharmacy. I've never seen anyone pop their pills in the pharmacy. I've never seen people hanging around, laughing and chatting, while they consume their medicine.

[uncle ray]

52. i said no such thing.

you are seeing things that did not happen, and not seeing things that do happen. it may not happen in your particular pharmacy, but old people in particular do indeed linger around pharmacies talking about their treatments and the weather.

[Common Sense Party]

54. My bad. That was Bluenorthwest who doesn't go to pharmacies.

[uncle ray]

63. the mixup is understandable.

[Webster Green]

86. Many Pharmacies have the water fountain right there..

..you know, right around the corner from the RX counter. Seriously. Taking a pill after just receiving your meds is very common.

[Webster Green]

72. Lots of times. Are you fucking series?

I can assure you that it is quite common.

[uncle ray]

37. what is wrong with on site consumtion?

no, really. WTF is wrong with it?

[Common Sense Party]

41. Why would they need to consume on-site?

If it's medicine, for medicinal purposes, why wouldn't they take it home and use it as needed or as prescribed?

People don't hang out in the pharmacy, popping blood pressure medication.

There's nothing "wrong" with it, but it does seem a bit odd...and I don't think it's unreasonable that the council voted to say they weren't comfortable with it.

[Bluenorthwest]

44. So they live 75 miles from chemo

and they need to medicate both before and after. It does not take much imagination. For example, I have never had a medication which the doctor said had to be taken in a certain place, but most of them do call for a certain time. The 'as needed' and the 'at home' are not always how life works out. And no doctor has even told me that it should for any medicine ever.

[Common Sense Party]

53. Sure, I can see them doing that if they lived that far away from treatment.

So, they drive 75 miles, go to the dispensary and consume cannabis, then drive to chemo treatment somewhere else, then drive back to the dispensary for more cannabis.

Can they not simply consume the cannabis in their car?

I'd also be concerned about someone driving 75 miles after they had both chemo treatments and cannabis.

[Bluenorthwest]

58. Well in my world we drive our friends to treatment, we don't make them

do so. And about the car, again, thinking cap time. Even in CA, public use is not allowed. Remaining out of public view is usually a requirement for patients. And if it is not in Denver, well, the person driving the ill person might not be a card holder, and driving under the influence is not legal anyway, so stinking up the car is not a wise thing to do. So the car, it might be illegal and would certainly be a poor choice.
And this game is silly, because there are thousands of examples. Each one individual, and none of them about you.
Here's another one for you to chew on. Many patients using marijuana do so for the term of their illness, and many like to avoid smoke. The clubs allow one to buy edibles, or to use a vaporizer, which is healthier. The best vaporizers are hundreds of dollars, and the cost for a short term use is prohibitive to many.
It goes on like this.

[Common Sense Party]

68. If all the cannabis were edibles, I don't think there'd be a problem.

I think the city council views the situation like this: If we have a bunch of people sitting around, smoking a substance that for MOST citizens is illegal, and they're chatting and laughing, then it's starting to look less like a medicine dispensary and more like a pot party.

If everyone simply came, got their cannabis capsules, popped them and left, I don't think there would be an issue.

[uncle ray]

83. as far as i know, most on site consumption is generally not smoking.

colorado is a no-smoking state, no smoking cigarettes in bars or any other public place short of a tobacco smoke shop. the law exempts tobacco shops, but no distinction yet for dispensaries, so i think many play it cautious so as not to draw any more attention than they already do. most of these establishments work very hard to be legal as well as clean and friendly. yes some are not so clean and friendly.

[uncle ray]

46. the things you deem "a bit odd" should not be crimes.

you even said it's not wrong. so again, what is the problem?

[Common Sense Party]

48. What's the problem with having a few sensible restrictions?

Do you object to the municipality placing ANY restrictions on these dispensaries?

[Bluenorthwest]

55. How about my chemo example?

You asked 'why' I gave an example. And then no response, because it does not fit your pre set routine.

[Common Sense Party]

56. Already responded to it.

On edit: Tell me, is smoking cannabis the only way these patients use it? Can't they just get it in capsule form?

[uncle ray]

80. yes they can get it in other forms.

there is of course ingesting it, more commonly through tasty edibles, so it doesn't taste like taking medicine. some dispensaries have capsules and tinctures available. it is also common to vaporize the cannabis, where it is heated is a vaporizer to a critical temperature at which the thc vaporizes, not burning any plant matter whatsoever. this method leaves a very minimal odor, some say no odor, and removes any of the health risks of smoking.

[Common Sense Party]

82. Can't they just make THC pills?

[uncle ray]

84. it's not the best way of dispensing it.

THC must be heated and dissolved in some kind of oil, olive oil or butter work well, the THC molecules cling to the oil. i think the oil as a carrier would make a large capsule. alternately the THC can be extracted using alcohol, or chemical extraction and used in capsule form, but i've generally not heard of people enjoying the medical affect of that method, without the heat at some point in the process the THC is not fully activated. to further complicate my poor explanation, THC breaks down into cannabinoids, which are not as numerous in a "thc pill". there is quite the science to the right proportion of THC to cannabinoids and the medical result.

[Webster Green]

85. That's right. It doesn't help the nausea associated with chemo.

Smoking helps a lot. I've tried both, so I know. The THC pill doesn't cut it for that.

About cannabis for chemo nausea:

Without pot: puke bucket in the vehicle for the trip home.
with pot: stop for a cheezeburger on the way home.

I'm not exaggerating. That is from personal experience, and absolutely true.

[Webster Green]

66. Why is it odd?

If you need it, then you need it. Why the fuck should you have to wait till you get home. Maybe someone is on the way to get chemo injections, and doesn't want to smoke at the hospital or while driving there, although, my oncologists at the hospital where I got chemo gave other patients the clue to follow me out to the fire escape platform where I would be toking up in preparation for my injections. (that was over 30 years ago BTW)

[Webster Green]

62. Why? What's wrong with that?

I've been given drugs in a hospital. Right there on the premises of the hospital. I've taken pills right at the pharmacy, as soon as I picked up my script. The druggist pointed me to the water fountain so I could do that.

Oh, the horror! :scared:

[Roon]

70. He who takes their meds at the water fountain

deserves to be well....

[Webster Green]

59. Inded they are.

Unless you are still caught up in the reefer madness hoax.

[tridim]

10. They're putting restrictions on how many patients dispensaries can serve.

The number is five.

That would put every dispensary out of buisiness and drive customers back to the black market.

Romer and his flunkies simply don't understand (or don't agree) that MMJ is LEGAL.

[Freddie Stubbs]

14. What specific provision of the Constitution would that violate?

Just because a law is stupid, does not mean that it is unconstitutional.

[tridim]

16. Production, distribution and consumption are all written into the state constitution.

All of these activities are our constitutional right, since 2000.

It's unconsitutional because these politicians are restricting our rights after-the-fact.

[Common Sense Party]

20. You can still produce. Right? You can still distribute. Right?

You can still consume--for medical reasons only. Correct?

Are you saying that NO restrictions should be placed on your commercial enterprise? Ever?

[tridim]

22. Are there restrictions on Liquor store sales?

Are there restrictions on ANY businesses that sell legal products?

No there aren't. MMJ should be treated no differently. It's a LEGAL product.

[Common Sense Party]

25. Yes, there are restrictions on liquor store sales.

In some states, you can only buy it at a state-owned, state-run liquor store. In some places, you can't buy it on Sunday. or you can't buy it after 10 p.m.

Every business has SOME restrictions on it.

[tridim]

30. I'm talking about customer (patient) limits.

[Common Sense Party]

32. What, the number of cust--er, patients? The limitation that doesn't exist?

If they did pass that, yes, I would have a problem. But it doesn't sound like they passed it.

[tridim]

38. Well, that was sly.. I'm now done talking to you.

You obviously don't understand that cannabis is indeed medicine for lots of people.

Go take your opiates and leave us alone.

[Common Sense Party]

15. I don't think that's what the council just passed, is it?

I read 3 different news accounts about this vote and not one mentioned this five-patient rule.

[tridim]

18. It's in Romer's grand plan.

I'm a bit confused too, will have to talk to our lawyer later today to get clarification, at $200/hr. I'm still not 100% sure what they actually voted on.

If these piece of shit politicians would just respect the law that we voted for ten years ago none of this would be necessary.

[fizzgig]

74. how on earth is that within the power of the denver city council?

i've been out of the loop for a bit, but i know a judge overturned the limit on the number of patients a caregiver could have, but i don't know if that was appealed and, if it was, upheld.

that limit is unconstitutional, clear and simple.

[Common Sense Party]

77. I don't think they are imposing any such limitation.

[librechik]

61. except for the ban on consuming on site, these sound reasonable and fair

There has been an unusual spike in Denver in emergency room visits blamed on marijuana, up in the hundreds!

I know, how could that be? I thought about it for awhile and now I wonder if there aren't a
lot of amateurs eating pot for the first time. If you aren't used to the herb that can throw you
for a loop. It's probably better to make sure you have a companion until you are used to it,
and therefore letting them eat on site with assistance might cut down on the ER visits.

It might be a good idea to smoke it a little first to get used to it, even if you are planning
on only eating it for health reasons.

[uncle ray]

67. it should be pointed out:

that most of those ER visits are generally just freak outs, like the infamous 911 call where the cop ate a pot brownie and thought he was dying.

and i agree, for the most part the new ordinance is reasonable. i just wish the state would revisit plant numbers, they actually encourage larger grows with their limits of 6 total plants/3 max flowering per patient. if the plant limit was reasonable more would simply grow at home. it is much better for a closet grower to grow many small plants rather than a few trees.