Washington: Medical Marijuana Registry Viewed Warily

[Jacob Redmond]

Washington state officials are in the midst of creating a voluntary medical marijuana registry for patients. On Thursday, officials from the state's Department of Health listened as about a dozen Southwest Washington residents expressed concerns about the idea of a medical marijuana database.

State lawmakers passed a measure this legislative session reconciling the state's medical and recreational marijuana markets. Gov. Jay Inslee signed Senate Bill 5052 into law in the spring. The measure's chief sponsor was Sen. Ann Rivers, R-La Center.

The bill created the parameters for a voluntary medical marijuana database, but left the detailed rulemaking process up to the state's Department of Health. State officials are taking public comment and looking for feedback on a range of issues from how people should be removed from the database to who should enter the patient's information into the database.

John Knilans, 65, of Camas, took issue with calling the database "voluntary."

Medical marijuana patients who enter the database are allowed to purchase three times the current amount allowed at a licensed retail store. Those who agree to enter the database can also purchase medical marijuana without paying the sales tax.

"You lose patient protections" without signing up, Knilans said. "How is that voluntary? How is that not coercive?"

One of the main concerns raised in the meeting was patient privacy. Those in attendance worried about losing federal benefits, such as Social Security, or possibly losing their jobs if it was discovered they were in a database.

"How are we sure we're not going to be retaliated against?" said Katie Zinno, 25, of Vancouver.

People also expressed concern about what information would be on the medical marijuana card, although the parameters have already been outlined in the law.

The card will have a randomly generated identification number, a photograph of the patient, an effective and expiration date, and the name of authorizing health care professional.

Kristi Weeks, with the state's Department of Health, said the meetings have been beneficial but turnout and public input has been low.

One of the benefits of the database, Weeks told those in the audience, is for the first time the state will have a sense of how many patients there are in Washington, what their conditions are and where they live.

Although the state legalized the use of medical marijuana in 1998, the market is unregulated and the state does not know how many medical marijuana users exist.

"For the first time ever, it will give us demographic data," Weeks said, adding it could be used for research to benefit patients in the future.

"We do hope this will give us information to base good policy decisions," Weeks said.

The state will continue to take public input both in person and on their website.

The rules are scheduled to be implemented in June 2016.

News Moderator: Jacob Redmond 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Medical marijuana registry viewed warily | The Columbian
Author: Lauren Dake
Contact: Contact | The Columbian
Photo Credit: Brennan Linsley / The Associated Press
Website: The Columbian - Serving Clark County, Washington

 

[slider11111]

After they have a list it will be used against you. When you are pulled over your name is going to pop up on the Police computer as a Marijuana user. Can you say Dancing Bear Trick and vehicle searches!

 

[dingusmcgee]

the law is written to be self-incriminating for the individual. that in itself is unconstitutional, but it shows the level of corruption in Olympia and what legislators are willing to do for money.

 

[DrRootswell]

before Hitler could attack the Jews and other socially " undesirables" by removing them from jobs as lawyers and teachers and physicians, etc. they had to first be identified then a Chris Christy can use the lists to attack them. You are absolutely right dingusmcgee.

 

[DrRootswell]

Yes, like in ResponsibleOhio's plan you will have to " register" to be able to grow 4 plants. What is a "plant"? Is an unrooted clone a plant, a germinated seed a plant? ResponsibleOhio's ultimate plan is to stop all cultivation but their own. It was not even on their radar " the homegrowing aspect" when they decided to try to foist this bullshit off on people. You can read plenty of horror stories on 420 out of Michigan, where people are coerced in making cash payments or not contesting the snatching of their property by state actors. Read all the 420 articles on the horror stories. The truth is, the Gestapo are NOT going to go away they are having too much fun. Look at how the Gestapo agent in " The Book Thief" reveled in the " discovery " of a hidden jew who changed his name to try to avoid detection. What did his so called friends and neighbors do but look away? The Police State shown by George Orwell is here and now, and looks like here to stay. Hitler was a piker, dreaming of a 1000 year reich, these jerks intend for the New American Police State to persist forever until economic collapse, but they also making plans to stay on top even then.

 

[ticobird]

Per the November Ohio Ballot Issue 3; This is an excerpt from the actual ResponsibleOhio full amendment text:

"It is lawful for persons 21 years of age or older to grow, cultivate, use, possess and share with another person 21 years of age or older homegrown marijuana in an amount not to exceed four flowering marijuana plants and eight ounces of usable homegrown marijuana at a given time; provided, however, that such person must first obtain a nontransferable license pursuant to Commission promulgated rules and regulations, which include, at a minimum, registration requirements and rules ensuring that homegrown marijuana is not grown or consumed within public view and that home growing takes place in an enclosed, locked space inaccessible to persons under the age of 21."

This language is acceptable to me and I am pro marijuana legalization. Imagine someone who is on the fence or anti marijuana legalization reading the ballot text. This language is included in an effort to assuage their concerns that marijuana will be regulated especially on a personal growing level. After all, we do not want indiscriminate, unknown or irresponsible people growing marijuana without oversight. Anybody who has a problem with this aspect of marijuana legalization most likely has an agenda that is the antithesis of pro marijuana legalization.

On November 3, 2015 vote YES for Ohio's Ballot Issue 3.

 

[DrRootswell]

Per the November Ohio Ballot Issue 3; This is an excerpt from the actual ResponsibleOhio full amendment text:

"It is lawful for persons 21 years of age or older to grow, cultivate, use, possess and share with another person 21 years of age or older homegrown marijuana in an amount not to exceed four flowering marijuana plants and eight ounces of usable homegrown marijuana at a given time; provided, however, that such person must first obtain a nontransferable license pursuant to Commission promulgated rules and regulations, which include, at a minimum, registration requirements and rules ensuring that homegrown marijuana is not grown or consumed within public view and that home growing takes place in an enclosed, locked space inaccessible to persons under the age of 21."

This language is acceptable to me and I am pro marijuana legalization. Imagine someone who is on the fence or anti marijuana legalization reading the ballot text. This language is included in an effort to assuage their concerns that marijuana will be regulated especially on a personal growing level. After all, we do not want indiscriminate, unknown or irresponsible people growing marijuana without oversight. Anybody who has a problem with this aspect of marijuana legalization most likely has an agenda that is the antithesis of pro marijuana legalization.

On November 3, 2015 vote YES for Ohio's Ballot Issue 3.

This guy Ticobird is not even from OHIO. DO NOT BELIEVE anything he says. Over sight from whom? BIG BROTHER. Maybe we want real freedom not the bullshit freedom they are foisting off on us? You real informed people who read 420 have read Jacob Redmond 's stories about what " registration" means. AND how dare you question my motivations. I destroyed your " semi monopoly" arguments with the very economic article you cited. Monopoly sucks and some sort of " registration" scheme sucks too! You DO NOT have to register if you brew a batch of beer and why should you have to " register"? VOTE NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO on bullshit Issue 3

 

[olderthandirt]

Per the November Ohio Ballot Issue 3; This is an excerpt from the actual ResponsibleOhio full amendment text:

"It is lawful for persons 21 years of age or older to grow, cultivate, use, possess and share... however, that such person must first obtain a nontransferable license pursuant to Commission promulgated rules and regulations, which include, at a minimum, registration requirements and rules ensuring that homegrown marijuana is not grown or consumed within public view and that home growing takes place in an enclosed, locked space inaccessible to persons under the age of 21."

...

Tico, been reading your posts and most strike me as reasonable and well thought out positions. But the registration requirements cited above seem almost draconian.

Here in Oregon people fought long and hard to get sensible legislation.
Oregon guberment fought long and hard to corrupt the peoples will with a huge list of amendments.

In the end I believe we came out reasonably well. Licensing and registration is required for commercial producers here and that does indeed make perfect sense to me. Homegrows though do not need what amounts to a blatant invasion of privacy when levied against a private citizen. All we are asked to do is keep the plants from public view. No padlocks needed (-:

If an organization like "Responsible Ohio" had popped up here in Oregon or a cluster fuck of a constitutional amendment such as #3 had been run up the pole, myself and a large number of like-minded individuals would have fought against em' tooth and nail.

Cannabis needs to be legal, everywhere. But only if done right and what I take away from that Ohio ballot measure #3 is it is not the right way to go.

As for what's going on with respect to MMJ patients here and in Washington well shoot, just the simple act of jumping through the hoops to get a MMJ card ends up having you "on a list"....

My 2 bits (-;

 

[ticobird]

olderthandirt, I agree with you but that does not mean what I stated previously has no merit. We must never forget a very high percentage of the voting public does not share our pro marijuana legalization viewpoint. To me, this means in these early years of marijuana legalization efforts we must always consciously include these people and their concerns in our attempts to change the status quo of marijuana from purely illegal to legal. We must never forget that every vote that is changed from a NO to a YES is important and all it takes to lose any ballot initiative is one vote. My view of the future is one where legal marijuana is managed very similarly like tobacco and alcohol. I do not think we can always get there with one step and if you examine very carefully the a state ballot initiatives and resulting laws in Colorado, Alaska, Washington or Oregon I think you will find something objectionable in each instance.

As for becoming a member of a list I agree it is always something to be concerned about. Not to split hairs here but being a member in a list is not what is objectionable. What is objectionable is how the list is used, e.g., who decides who has access and for what reasons. We all are members in lists and I would venture that we populate lists we have no knowledge of. This is our reality. We have created it ourselves. If we get all wrapped around the axle of lists and what they are used for then we will have a long, hard time moving this marijuana legalization effort in the direction we want to move it.