Judge rules on Montana medical marijuana law

Judge rules on Montana medical marijuana law

www.kxlh.com

A district judge in Helena has issued a partial injunction against Montana's new medical marijuana law .

The decision prevents several parts of the new law from taking effect, but leaves a a majority of the Legislature's new medical marijuana law intact.

District Judge James Reynolds issued his ruling just before 5pm on Thursday.

Among the provisions Reynolds is putting on hold is one that prohibits marijuana providers from advertising their services, and charging patients for providing medical pot.

The ruling also tosses out a provision that would have allowed unannounced inspec

(visit the link for the full news article)

this is good news as im a montana paitent and the judges ruleing seems pretty wise and straightforward hopefully this is a step in the right direction and a good victory for paitents rights

summary of ruleing the injunction is blocking several parts of the proposed law 1.it is unfair to say providers cant be paied for there services 2they cant be limited to a number of paitents as that is also not legal 3 no ban on advertising(originaly it would be a crime to advertise for your busness) 4 no un announced inspections the rest is at the link

www.kxlh.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


billingsgazette.com... a bit more history of what was going on


www.kxlh.com... link to a pdf of the complete ruleign by the judge

www.mtgreens.org... link to the montana green party

Before those who cannot contain themselves come along and get this thread deleted, I just want to add my two cents.

While I do absolutely agree there are medical benefits to THC in general (I specifically have experience with a cancer patient who was losing gross amounts of weight, and was given thc in prescription form and has improved vastly, it may literally have saved her life), I'm concerned about the entire medicinal angle being used to get it legalized. I don't think it addresses the infringment on our freedoms, regarding prohibition of recreational use.

Otherwise, score one for those who are sick and in need ♥

Originally posted by KilrathiLG
the people of montana heard about this and organzied on the state level and the culmination of our efforts (mostly others not my self) fought to get this unjust law or atleast parts of it over turned they were trying to make it so you could grow pot give it away but not advertise it or make any profits from it,caregivers would have been limited to 3 paitens per caregiver and a one time payment of 500 if memoy serves me,also if you were not married you couldnt grow in another dwelling that was inhabited by a card holder having a diffrent last name,in addition they were also attempting to make every one who was gonna grow as a caregiver submit to random appearances during buisness hours of law enforcement at any time.

Golly, that's a lot of rules.

In a so-called free country there shouldn't be laws against M.J., nor convoluted rules such as these.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer


i know check out the full text of the origiinal bill its scary and this is in a state like montnaa where were supposed to be one of the freeer states we hate the feds i just hope there arent any more fire bombings of clubs here

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

In a so-called free country there shouldn't be laws against M.J., nor convoluted rules such as these.

Convoluted rules is how we get to remain a totalitarian police state while still advertising we're the "land of the free."

This country is itself a form of Orwellian newspeak and double think.

I just got done reading a recap of this South African fellow who fled to the US. He was blown away that he was more free in SA under apartheid than he was here referring to Clinton's Communication's Decency Act. The guys name was Clinton Fein.

The only freedom here is virtual.

Sure, you could always be less free but more than less is not all.