What is it that makes medicinal marijuana such a volatile topic? Why are we seeking to enforce too many limits on the same states that initially decriminalized drug purchases to doctor-approved patients? For full-scale legalization advocates and the businesses that market the drug, there appears to be a persistent dance about what is permitted and what is not.Visit our site: greensociety.io
Lottery Over Since California has decriminalized the selling of almost 800 storefronts of medicinal marijuana operated in the pretext of being dispensaries. In May 2010 439 of them owners were ordered to close by 7 June to comply with ordinances. Distance from areas where children meet, such as schools and parks, as well as missed enrolment deadlines were given as explanations for closures.
For the remaining dispensaries the next move included a citywide draw. Only collectives and dispensaries that had been in service since Sept. 14, 2007 and had at least one initial owner eligible for the lottery held. Since then, LA has told the owners of 140 other stores that they too have to shut their doors, leaving 100 dispensaries in the area.
Why did circumstances shift so radically, just as sales tax collection from medicinal marijuana clinics and increasing cooperatives in California debates?
Company regulations Following the decriminalization of medicinal marijuana clinics, it has not taken them much closer to a compromise with their business transactions. If the company is able to work on a “cash-only” basis, it may consider it impossible to secure necessary business accounts, dealer accounts and insurance policies. Creatively worded proposals are being red-flagged, alleging the selling of “supplements” and “health care products”
Banks and other financial organizations, too, are in a bind. This is a potentially big opportunity but it can be especially difficult to get required accounts with concerns of criminal indictment for drug-related crimes.
One simple point comes from this little waltz: guidelines need to be established not only as to who has legal authority over the selling of marijuana for medicinal uses, but also as to whether or not corporations doing business with the individual manufacturers should be shielded from unfair reprisals.