Jump to content

Jackson Farmers Market


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 179
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

4e deals with compensation not transfer. That section is specific to compensation. You are making the leap that because it deals with compensation then it necessarily means one can assist "a," meaning ANY, patient with a TRANSER. That's an incorrect interpretation of that section.

 

Referencing sub i is useless in this context. "Using" does NOT equal "medical use." That section is very clearly designed to keep people safe who are helping someone use the drug, not transfer the drug. Think more along the lines of someone helping prepare the vaporizer or roll the joint or make the brownies.

Just exactly why is your interpretation correct and any that differ incorrect? This attitude is what got you banned, arguing that you are right and all else is wrong helps absolutely no one unless you count your ever growing ego.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok then, with all that knowledge dropped on us, how is an out of state visitor to have more rights than a resident, because the minute a visiting patient crosses the border, he is allowed the protections under our act. Your telling me the voters and authors intended to make them valid, yet deny them any source for medicine? Perhaps that is what you want the law to read, like bs and jc, but it doesnt.

You are trying to add things into that act, with brute force, that simply do not exist. Reminds me of peanutbutter's argument a couple of years ago where he "reasoned" that, since the law allows you to transport marijuana, you can drive without a license if you needed to transport your meds. A visiting patient's card, issed by another state, is to be treated the same as if the card were issued in Michigan. Simple as that. You making assumptions that they need a means to acquire their meds here is just that, an assumption. As already pointed out, their card would protect them if they were using their meds. That would appear to be the extent of their protections. Could they get protection from acquiring? Maybe. But that could also mean arrest and a case started by a prosecutor first. That, to me, is NOT safe access.

 

Calling me bill schuette, or the like, is like Joe McCarthy calling someone a communist. It's the same stunt joe cain used to pull on here. Hear something you don't like then scream LEO and disregard the logic in the arguments. The fact is I am all for you getting your meds however you want. But don't presume to know what "safe access" or "legally compliant" is when it involves issues that are arguably NOT legal and when the courts haven't yet heard a case on point. And, further, don't push your view of "legally compliant" such that it potentially puts less informed people in harm's way. Be truthful. Tell people why you think your market is safe but also indicate that there is an alternative viewpoint and that we don't KNOW what is safe until the issues are fleshed out by the courts. Don't tinkle on me and tell me it's raining.

 

Or you could adopt peanutbutter's view and forget about your drivers license renewal, just be sure your pt card is always up to date! :thumbsu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didnt see that in the law. Where is that written? Or is this just yet another interpretation? Medcnman.

Of course it is an interpretation, what else could it be? It's the same interpretation that most all attornies in the state have shared with us as they donated their time and trouble to help us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didnt see that in the law. Where is that written? Or is this just yet another interpretation? Medcnman.

 

 

This is common knowledge spread by Lawyers who feel transfers are a grey area . It isn't if your acting in the spirit of intent to have medical cannabis use covered by legal activities under a constitutional ammendment that requires laymens interpretation of language for many . It is what it is if prosecutors try cases and a Republican dominated Supreme Court of Michigan rules . They are running on a State rights low Government intervention platform !

Edited by Croppled1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didnt see that in the law. Where is that written? Or is this just yet another interpretation? Medcnman.

It doesn't need to be in the law. Transfering mj is illegal in Michigan. You are offered certain protections by the mma. If you cannot avail yourself of one of those protections then you can be prosecuted. So what you need to be looking for is "where is my protection from arrest."

Edited by CaveatLector
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said I don't like it so I suggest you improve your reading comprehesion skills. Furthermore. I am not trying to "scare" anyone away. Lastly, your assumptions of what I "hoped" are flat wrong. If you took more time to read AND comprehend then you would understand that my concern is for uninformed individuals. For the people that come here and see a mod telling them that the market is "legally compliant" and that it is "safe access." Neither of those 2 assertions can be claimed as being 100% true. So my concern is for people to understand the risk. If they understand the risk and are willing to take them then fine. But making claims that you cannot support with law makes people assume a risk that they maybe didn't intend to assume.

 

I would compare this to dispensaries. I argued on here months, if not years, ago about dispensaries. I argued the validity of the claim that dispenaries were legal. Sure, you can do some dance in the law that gets you to a place where p2p transfers can be found to maybe be legal. But, approaching the issue as a court would/could can lead you to believe that dispensaries are illegal. I didn't argue that they were illegal only that they were arguably illegal and that people should therefore use caution. Guess what happened with dispensaries...

 

So, to sum it up, we don't know how the courts will interpret the law in regard to the legality of the farmer's markets. That being the case it is best to advise people to proceed with caution and on an informed basis. Understand the risks. Decide how much risk you are willing to bear. Then take that risk. Your "throw caution to the wind" approach may work for you but my concern is for those for whom it will not work. I care about people, you care about yourself.

Sir my reading and comprehension are just fine, this is an example of what my last post was about . A differing opinion doesn't need a personal attack by you or anyone else. If a person of normal intelligence reads the MMMA Act of 2008 and doesn't listen to all you wanna be lawyers you would see that implementing as read and understood by the average person would work, but no the lawyers and legislature want to define the act like it was written by a lawyer and the patients can be damned. Now if you don't like what I have to say that's fine it's my opinion, this is a forum and we are both allowed to have one. I personally believe you are the one having the comprehension problem. I also believe the Michigan Supreme Court will over rule the COA decision on P to P transfer if they agreed I don't believe they would be reviewing the decision.

Edited by DLD420
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't need to be in the law. Tranfering mj is illegal in Michigan. You are offered certain protections by the mma. If you cannot avail yourself of one of those protections then you can be prosecuted. So what you need to be looking for is "where is my protection from arrest."

You see, there's one of those attorneys now. Thanks for donating your time and legal understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't need to be in the law. Tranfering mj is illegal in Michigan. You are offered certain protections by the mma. If you cannot avail yourself of one of those protections then you can be prosecuted. So what you need to be looking for is "where is my protection from arrest."

 

How did you get yours ? The first attempt at a program here in Michigan that occured in the late 70's was destroyed in the 80's by the no legal supply is available arguement . I hope we can work past that as a State 30 years later .

Edited by Croppled1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sir my reading and comprehension are just fine, this is an example of what my last post was about . A differing opinion doesn't need a personal attack by you or anyone else. If a person of normal intelligence reads the MMMA Act of 2008 and doesn't listen to all you wanna be lawyers you would see that implementing as read and understood by the average person would work, but no the lawyers and legislature want to define the act like it was written by a lawyer and the patients can be damned. Now if you don't like what I have to say that's fine it's my opinion, this is a forum and we are both allowed to have one. I personally believe you are the one having the comprehension problem. I also believe the Michigan Supreme Court will over rule the COA decision on P to P transfer if they agreed I don't believe they would have reviewed the decision.

"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing."--Alexander Pope

The act WAS written by lawyers. The MPP wrote the law with consultation from a Michigan law firm from what I understand.

Edited by CaveatLector
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing."--Alexander Pope

The act WAS written by lawyers. The MPP write the law with consultation from a Michigan law firm from what I understand.

There you go again, so it was written by a lawyer so why is your kind having such a hard time comprehending it? It's an peoples initiative read and implemented as a layman not a LAWYER WOULD READ AND INTERPRET IT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't need to be in the law. Tranfering mj is illegal in Michigan. You are offered certain protections by the mma. If you cannot avail yourself of one of those protections then you can be prosecuted. So what you need to be looking for is "where is my protection from arrest."

the law say's if you have a card you can not be arrested

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There you go again, so it was written by a lawyer so why is your kind having such a hard time comprehending it? It's an peoples initiative read and implemented as a layman not a LAWYER WOULD READ AND INTERPRET IT.

 

like are judge said

(A person of ordinary acumen be capable of determining the legality or illegality of their conduct)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There you go again, so it was written by a lawyer so why is your kind having such a hard time comprehending it? It's an peoples initiative read and implemented as a layman not a LAWYER WOULD READ AND INTERPRET IT.

Statutory construction and interpretation follows strict rules. It isn't intended to be a guessing game. The reason for that is to provide uniform interpretation of statutes. Explaining interpretation and the reasons behind it is beyond this forum so I'm not going to delve into that here. Making me the scapegoat of your frustrations isn't going to change reality so I suggest you get a grip and stop acting like I am the enemy for advocating genuine SAFE ACCESS.

 

Brush up on your statutory interpretation skills at wikipedia. This page provides a brief on the concept. Surely not comprehensive but a start. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_interpretation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you two ever met? I think he is referring to a "lawyer kind". Medcnman.

 

Wow no kidding I can't see through the screen and had he not said that I wouldn't have known how could anyone unless he chooses to say that he is African American. Besides what does that have to do with anything.

 

When is this bickering going to stop. I keep hoping i will come here and not get upset over what is written. The threads are a jumble with hostility and mean spirited comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the law say's if you have a card you can not be arrested

 

 

yep thats what the law says, now how come i got 3 possesion charges since? lol, my advise is to not break any of the mmmact rules! just in case they come get you for, who knows! but if they smell mm most likly you will be in court!

 

Peace

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow no kidding I can't see through the screen and had he not said that I wouldn't have known how could anyone unless he chooses to say that he is African American. Besides what does that have to do with anything.

 

When is this bickering going to stop. I keep hoping i will come here and not get upset over what is written. The threads are a jumble with hostility and mean spirited comments.

It was meant as a joke. I was trying to add a little levity to the situation. To be clear I am not African American. The point was to illustrate the foolishness in saying "your kind," as if who I am has anything to do with my position that advocating safe access and full disclosure of possible dangers is the best road to take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...