Question about mmar

The Hippy

Well-Known Member
What is this pinks garbage? The MMAR is a government program that was cancelled so the paperwork from it is only good for nostalgic purposes.

And yes the government can cancel any program they want to. In this case they have an alternative program. Happens all the time.

As for where you stand legally, that is near impossible to say. It is up to law enforcement and the crown to pursue charges which depending on the situation may be stayed if they choose. But it doesn't stop law enforcement from breaking down your door and taking your stuff.

Which is what they will (and should) do to all those abusing the system. Especially those with priors as the criminal element has no place in medicine.
Your pretty misinformed. And your naive as fuck.
Not to mention isn't there some church that's looking for you somewhere. Your preaching that message to those who don't care about your paranoia. Some of us have been doing this long before the med system caught your attention.
Wrong place for narcky comments like yours...jeez....:cuss:
 

gb123

Well-Known Member
What is this pinks garbage? The MMAR is a government program that was cancelled so the paperwork from it is only good for nostalgic purposes.

And yes the government can cancel any program they want to. In this case they have an alternative program. Happens all the time.

As for where you stand legally, that is near impossible to say. It is up to law enforcement and the crown to pursue charges which depending on the situation may be stayed if they choose. But it doesn't stop law enforcement from breaking down your door and taking your stuff.

Which is what they will (and should) do to all those abusing the system. Especially those with priors as the criminal element has no place in medicine.
Another not very informed. know it all. (:

cheers know it all ears.


anyone can do what every they like... Thats a given. No one is going to invade your space when it comes to saving ones life..you forget its not about selling after all..
a court injunction is what MMAR has standing behind it INDEFINITELY until OUR MORON FEDS come up with a SYSTEM SET IN STONE !!!
Until then bongsmilie (: :idea: MMAR can do what every the frig they wish..
MMYA feels so good to say that and know 100% im correct (:
 
Last edited:

gb123

Well-Known Member
And you are probably a black market drug dealer with a lot to lose. Looking at your posts it is fairly obvious.

It is people like you that have justified the support of prohibition from the rest of society. Those of us with a true medical need paid the price already from you recreational tourists. At least HC is making it relatively simple for those of us who are law abiding tax paying citizens and the LP portion of the program is more than fair in protecting the safety of Canadians.

And before you blather on about pesticide use, at least the LPs know what they are using. You bottom feeding criminals have no clue what you are spraying, or even doing for that matter, plus adding god knows what other psychoactives in to give it some more kick.

Crawl back under your rock.
:clap: so obvious

anudder rock cruncher :twisted:

Hey Lobbyist... played your last card dude!!

cheers showing your ears..
 
Last edited:

The Hippy

Well-Known Member
And you are probably a black market drug dealer with a lot to lose. Looking at your posts it is fairly obvious.

It is people like you that have justified the support of prohibition from the rest of society. Those of us with a true medical need paid the price already from you recreational tourists. At least HC is making it relatively simple for those of us who are law abiding tax paying citizens and the LP portion of the program is more than fair in protecting the safety of Canadians.

And before you blather on about pesticide use, at least the LPs know what they are using. You bottom feeding criminals have no clue what you are spraying, or even doing for that matter, plus adding god knows what other psychoactives in to give it some more kick.

Crawl back under your rock.
You should go away.
You may be the most UN-intelligent person we've had here yet.
And which Lp are you working for pray tell?
 

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
the LP portion of the program is more than fair in protecting the safety of Canadians.
Getting worried about the impending class-action, are you? That and the very loud movement to force Health Canada to take action against LP's who knowingly broke the rules. Fines and suspension or cancellation of their license is an option on the books....I intend to push to make sure those options are used
 

Brewery

Well-Known Member
Is there another masked man amoungst us!?

Plant Lobbyist, please do your self a favour and research before you talk like an expert. Otherwise it makes you look like a moron.

The MMAR pinks are still valid for those covered under the injunction.

While you may not believe it, some people prefer obtain thier medicine from like minded people such as other patients and thier caregivers hence the DG portion of the acmpr and mmar.

The LPs are for-profit large scale producers. I, and I'm sure my others, morally disagree with profiteering off of the sick.

B
 

johny sunset

Well-Known Member
This is from Johny Conroys Facebook and might help clear and confusion......part 3 is interesting where he recommends patients with their pinks to register with the acmpr so they can be covered under both.

"
This was posted on facebook and I am just posting it here for other Canadians who might be interested to read...

Further to our recent telephone conversation this will confirm that the costs issue is under active consideration between the Department of Justice and ourselves and once the matter is settled I will provide you and others, with an accounting.

Everyone is very grateful for the work of the MMAR Coalition (now Cannabis Rights Coalition) in raising substantial funds initially in late 2013 and throughout to enable us to take the action, obtain the injunction pending trial in March ,2014, obtain the final order in the patient's favor in February,2016 and requiring the government to restore essentially the MMAR by August 24, 2017. The Task Force on Legalization will report to the government in November,2016 and the government will apparently commence the legislative process towards legalization in the spring of 2017 and obviously there will be more changes in relation to the "reasonable access for medical purposes" in a legal regime instead of being an exception under a criminal law statute – namely the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

Here is the October 9, 2016 update from the MMAR Constitutional Challenge link on my webpage, with some slight modifications and emphasis, and additions that sets out my current opinion and instruction/advice to all "medically approved" patients:

1. Those of you who are covered by the Allard decision, and in particular the injunction Order of March 21, 2014 of Justice Manson continue to be protected by that Order and the final Order "until this Court orders otherwise" as per Justice Phelan, February 24, 2016 - 2016 FC 237;

2. Those of you who were not covered by Allard may now apply under Part 2 of the ACMPR since August 24, 2016 to register to produce for yourself or to have a designated person produce for you at the production site that is specified in the application. This enables those of you who wish to change your previous MMAR site to now apply to produce at the new location. The ACMPR application is not a renewal nor a transition and you do not provide any of your old medical documentation in support of your application. You have to get a new "medical document" under the ACMPR and provide the "original" of that document with your application to register;

3. I recommend that those of you covered by the Allard injunction and Orders also apply under the ACMPR for the same coverage that you have under the MMAR as the provisions of the ACMPR are substantially if not identical to the MMAR in terms of the formulas in relation to dosages per day. You need to get a new " medical document" from your physician/doctor and as under number 2 above, you do not send in MMAR documents but the 'original' of that document. This way you may be covered under both the Allard injunction and the ACMPR before any new changes are made. Further, you will not simply be at the mercy of the Courts further order whatever that might turn out to be;

4. If you experience problems obtaining the same thing under the ACMPR as you had on the MMAR, please do NOT call my office, but prepare a statement of the problems that you have experienced that limit what you had or continue to have under the MMAR that arise from the ACMPR so we can see what problems the new regulations pose for patients and can submit that to the court to demonstrate the problems when it comes to that court making any further orders. This should be sent by snail mail or email to my office or to the MMAR Coalition at [email protected];

5. If your problems are with your physician/doctor in relation to dosage or otherwise ,this is not caused by the ACMPR, except to the extent that it carries forward the doctors as gatekeepers from the MMAR, but by the Canadian Medical Association and Provincial Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons. If you experience these problems a statement by snail mail or email should also be sent to my office indicating this type of problem so we can determine what proceedings can be taken against those bodies for restricting reasonable access. You should also consider filing a complaint against her doctor with the local provincial college or complaining to the college about its unreasonable restrictions on the patient's "reasonable access";

6. The ACMPR consists essentially of the MMPR in Part 1 and the MMAR and Part 2 with a few changes. The Task Force on Legalization will report in November and new "legalization" legislation is expected in the spring of 2017 that will further address medical "reasonable access" in the context of a legal regime and not the continued prohibition regime that currently exists - this is where further changes will arise.

Consequently, in my opinion, medically approved patients whether grandfathered under the MMAR or new applicants, including old MMAR applicants who were not covered, should apply under the ACMPR to try and obtain the equivalent of what they had under the MMAR and keep a record of any problems they have on obtaining "reasonable access" and provide them to [email protected] to keep a record of them for possible introduction into evidence to show the problems with the ACMPR if this matter goes back to court in front of Justice Phelan in a further effort to modify the injunction order, challenge the doctor gatekeeper role or possibly upon the application of the government to end the injunction order. In my opinion, even if you can't obtain your same dosage as before, you should obtain whatever possible dosage the doctor will allow and then worry about trying to get a greater allowance afterwards. Those with current large dosages should be prepared to explain and justify the need and perhaps also obtain the report of an expert/specialist.

I would recommend that a list also be kept of those doctors that are abusing the process by taking kickbacks from the LPs or charging exorbitant fees be kept as well as one that identifies honest and knowledgeable and informed doctors in this area so that other patients can be referred to and treated by knowledgeable physicians and the others are avoided and perhaps reported to the local College of Physicians and Surgeons."

John W. Conroy QC
Conroy & Company
Barrister & Solicitor
2459 Pauline Street
Abbotsford, B.C.
Canada
V2S 3S1
Webpage: www.johnconroy.com
Email: [email protected]
Tel: (604) 852 5110
Fax: (604)859 3361
 

gb123

Well-Known Member
This is from Johny Conroys Facebook and might help clear and confusion......part 3 is interesting where he recommends patients with their pinks to register with the acmpr so they can be covered under both.

"
This was posted on facebook and I am just posting it here for other Canadians who might be interested to read...

Further to our recent telephone conversation this will confirm that the costs issue is under active consideration between the Department of Justice and ourselves and once the matter is settled I will provide you and others, with an accounting.

Everyone is very grateful for the work of the MMAR Coalition (now Cannabis Rights Coalition) in raising substantial funds initially in late 2013 and throughout to enable us to take the action, obtain the injunction pending trial in March ,2014, obtain the final order in the patient's favor in February,2016 and requiring the government to restore essentially the MMAR by August 24, 2017. The Task Force on Legalization will report to the government in November,2016 and the government will apparently commence the legislative process towards legalization in the spring of 2017 and obviously there will be more changes in relation to the "reasonable access for medical purposes" in a legal regime instead of being an exception under a criminal law statute – namely the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

Here is the October 9, 2016 update from the MMAR Constitutional Challenge link on my webpage, with some slight modifications and emphasis, and additions that sets out my current opinion and instruction/advice to all "medically approved" patients:

1. Those of you who are covered by the Allard decision, and in particular the injunction Order of March 21, 2014 of Justice Manson continue to be protected by that Order and the final Order "until this Court orders otherwise" as per Justice Phelan, February 24, 2016 - 2016 FC 237;

2. Those of you who were not covered by Allard may now apply under Part 2 of the ACMPR since August 24, 2016 to register to produce for yourself or to have a designated person produce for you at the production site that is specified in the application. This enables those of you who wish to change your previous MMAR site to now apply to produce at the new location. The ACMPR application is not a renewal nor a transition and you do not provide any of your old medical documentation in support of your application. You have to get a new "medical document" under the ACMPR and provide the "original" of that document with your application to register;

3. I recommend that those of you covered by the Allard injunction and Orders also apply under the ACMPR for the same coverage that you have under the MMAR as the provisions of the ACMPR are substantially if not identical to the MMAR in terms of the formulas in relation to dosages per day. You need to get a new " medical document" from your physician/doctor and as under number 2 above, you do not send in MMAR documents but the 'original' of that document. This way you may be covered under both the Allard injunction and the ACMPR before any new changes are made. Further, you will not simply be at the mercy of the Courts further order whatever that might turn out to be;

4. If you experience problems obtaining the same thing under the ACMPR as you had on the MMAR, please do NOT call my office, but prepare a statement of the problems that you have experienced that limit what you had or continue to have under the MMAR that arise from the ACMPR so we can see what problems the new regulations pose for patients and can submit that to the court to demonstrate the problems when it comes to that court making any further orders. This should be sent by snail mail or email to my office or to the MMAR Coalition at [email protected];

5. If your problems are with your physician/doctor in relation to dosage or otherwise ,this is not caused by the ACMPR, except to the extent that it carries forward the doctors as gatekeepers from the MMAR, but by the Canadian Medical Association and Provincial Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons. If you experience these problems a statement by snail mail or email should also be sent to my office indicating this type of problem so we can determine what proceedings can be taken against those bodies for restricting reasonable access. You should also consider filing a complaint against her doctor with the local provincial college or complaining to the college about its unreasonable restrictions on the patient's "reasonable access";

6. The ACMPR consists essentially of the MMPR in Part 1 and the MMAR and Part 2 with a few changes. The Task Force on Legalization will report in November and new "legalization" legislation is expected in the spring of 2017 that will further address medical "reasonable access" in the context of a legal regime and not the continued prohibition regime that currently exists - this is where further changes will arise.

Consequently, in my opinion, medically approved patients whether grandfathered under the MMAR or new applicants, including old MMAR applicants who were not covered, should apply under the ACMPR to try and obtain the equivalent of what they had under the MMAR and keep a record of any problems they have on obtaining "reasonable access" and provide them to [email protected] to keep a record of them for possible introduction into evidence to show the problems with the ACMPR if this matter goes back to court in front of Justice Phelan in a further effort to modify the injunction order, challenge the doctor gatekeeper role or possibly upon the application of the government to end the injunction order. In my opinion, even if you can't obtain your same dosage as before, you should obtain whatever possible dosage the doctor will allow and then worry about trying to get a greater allowance afterwards. Those with current large dosages should be prepared to explain and justify the need and perhaps also obtain the report of an expert/specialist.

I would recommend that a list also be kept of those doctors that are abusing the process by taking kickbacks from the LPs or charging exorbitant fees be kept as well as one that identifies honest and knowledgeable and informed doctors in this area so that other patients can be referred to and treated by knowledgeable physicians and the others are avoided and perhaps reported to the local College of Physicians and Surgeons."

John W. Conroy QC
Conroy & Company
Barrister & Solicitor
2459 Pauline Street
Abbotsford, B.C.
Canada
V2S 3S1
Webpage: www.johnconroy.com
Email: [email protected]
Tel: (604) 852 5110
Fax: (604)859 3361
covered for what...A legal system? We will all be able to grow so why bother being part of a TEMPORARY SYSTEM AMCPR IS TEMPORARY
MMAR should stick to their own..
Conroy talking here after all and didnt he hang us out to dry?

NEVER GIVE YOUR PINK PIECE or make it INVALID..by doing something that could change it
 

cannadan

Well-Known Member
What is this pinks garbage? The MMAR is a government program that was cancelled so the paperwork from it is only good for nostalgic purposes.

And yes the government can cancel any program they want to. In this case they have an alternative program. Happens all the time.

As for where you stand legally, that is near impossible to say. It is up to law enforcement and the crown to pursue charges which depending on the situation may be stayed if they choose. But it doesn't stop law enforcement from breaking down your door and taking your stuff.

Which is what they will (and should) do to all those abusing the system. Especially those with priors as the criminal element has no place in medicine.
Did you join the thread to start to add to it or start trouble for those of us trying to help growrock....?
if your not going to add to the thread...why comment?
Since what you said is untrue....every one of us protected under the injunction (pinks) is still registered and safe....we also have the section 56 exemption as well...
I had the police in my house a couple of months ago.after a break in ....and guess what buddy my pinks are still good.....
The goof who broke into my house is the criminal element....
Not the guy/gal who is trying to provide themselves with some cheaply made meds..
 
Last edited:

doingdishes

Well-Known Member
What is this pinks garbage? The MMAR is a government program that was cancelled so the paperwork from it is only good for nostalgic purposes.

And yes the government can cancel any program they want to. In this case they have an alternative program. Happens all the time.

As for where you stand legally, that is near impossible to say. It is up to law enforcement and the crown to pursue charges which depending on the situation may be stayed if they choose. But it doesn't stop law enforcement from breaking down your door and taking your stuff.

Which is what they will (and should) do to all those abusing the system. Especially those with priors as the criminal element has no place in medicine.
have you heard of the Allard action?? before spouting stuff like this, try reading. you are so wrong on a few levels!
start by reading the injunction granted Mar 21 2014...then say the pinks are of no use
 

johny sunset

Well-Known Member
covered for what...A legal system? We will all be able to grow so why bother being part of a TEMPORARY SYSTEM AMCPR IS TEMPORARY
MMAR should stick to their own..
Conroy talking here after all and didnt he hang us out to dry?

NEVER GIVE YOUR PINK PIECE or make it INVALID..by doing something that could change it
My interpretation of his article is that you wouldn't be giving up your pinks. You would just be covered under both if you register in the ACMPR. Kinda like hedging your bets.
 
Top