Jackson Medical Marijuana Likely To End Up In Court, Advocates Say

[Croppled1]

 

 

Unambiguous compliance is a policy for posting on the site, not for behavior in the real world.

 

In the real world, the MMMA is not the entity that decides policy.

 

I have no idea how to comply with that how do I complay with your term unambiguous complaince . Or is it a buzzword to get rid of those who swear or belittle others . What do I have to do to comply what are the rules ?

[Croppled1]

 

Reread this post several times and even looked back at previous posts. I still have no idea what this is supposed to mean.

 

He is saying the person running the compassion club that creates the caregivers that sell at the market is a hero and Joe Cain is not exactly loved here .

[+mayorherb]

I hope this turns out well for all concerned Annnie, we don't need any cc's closed either.

I fill they should be allowed n ALL counties and Towns.Sick people do not live n ONLY Jackson,Michigan. I been finding out NOT only are there sick people n Jackson,Michigan..BUT all over the world.And this is a plant that was put on the earth for the people..All over the world..Not just n Jackson<michigan or Clare, Michigan, Or the U.P..All around the world there should be some place for Patients (Sick People) can go and get the medacine of there choice..the most important words are (THIERE CHOICE).

[AKenewell]

I thought nobody here understood the legality of the Farmers Markets and everyone was waiting for a ruling on the Kalamazoo case to examine CTG to P transfers ? I read this site daily for the past three years and it supported them as legal even qouting the act and explaining why . As a patient I can aquire from anywhere also as deciminated by this site is that also untrue ? The AG's office has at times stated it isn't . Is the law whatever Bill Schuette tries to enforce as head of the opposition before and after the election of 2008 ? I just want to know how to comply .

 

As far as unmbiguous compliance what is it ? The MMMA no longer supports any transfers , and driving ?

 

What you read for the past 3 years was what one person was saying..that is why he is gone. It's not about what someone wants, it's about patient safety. We are still trying to undo the damage. Farmers markets are NOT LEGAL.

[Dilligaf]

Seems like we have some ambiguity there, then?

 

"Accordingly the moderators and administrators on this site will be following this policy

that exclusively promotes behavior that adheres to the strictest of

compliance and interpretation of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act."

 

No ambiguity it's layed out in my post. I did not say it was legal. I said it's still open which is the truth. Lying is lying be it for the good or bad of the patient. The policy states that the admins and mods will follow this policy, not that all posters have to. I stated that it's not decided, tell me how this is ambiguous.

 

Mike

Edited June 6, 2012 by Dilligaf

[Beans]

What you read for the past 3 years was what one person was saying..that is why he is gone. It's not about what someone wants, it's about patient safety. We are still trying to undo the damage. Farmers markets are NOT LEGAL.

 

And yet you allow ganja warrior to post anything he likes about the GC3 and the Flint police being ok with it

 

Once again a double standard

 

http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/topic/39979-bc-bud-depot-dont-even-bother/page__p__389703#entry389703

[drdali138]

I'm no lawyer but... good luck with that lawsuit Joe

[Croppled1]

 

 

What you read for the past 3 years was what one person was saying..that is why he is gone. It's not about what someone wants, it's about patient safety. We are still trying to undo the damage. Farmers markets are NOT LEGAL.

 

It took me a while to get it but I think I do . Your saying the Famers Market is not legal because it is not expressly provided for in the Act and any operation would still hinge on CTG to P outside a declared registred relationship by the State being upheld by the Courts . This has not occured so it is NOT LEGAL .The MMMA would be remiss to infer otherwise and have people operate on hope and need . God I am dense at times . I really am sick and dehabillitated I swear . I am so far benind in my work but I post when I can't do anything but sit in my chair often days at a time next to the computer .

 

On unambiguous compliance just don't post anything that could cause someone to act against the known approved behaviors accepted by law and get in trouble ?

Edited June 6, 2012 by Croppled1

[Dr. Bob]

So show me where Farmers Markets ARE NOT LEGAL. The COA intentionally dodged this issue and did not rule on it therefore their status is unknown...

 

16 In addition, because the “medical use” of marihuana does not include the “sale” of marihuana,

defendants are not entitled to receive compensation for the costs of assisting in the “sale” of

marihuana between CA members. See MCL 333.26424(e) (“A registered primary caregiver may

receive compensation for costs associated with assisting a registered qualifying patient in the

medical use of marihuana.”). Also, in regard to § 4(e), the parties disagree whether a registered

primary caregiver may receive compensation for the costs associated with assisting any

registered qualifying patient in the “medical use” of marihuana or whether a registered primary

caregiver may only receive compensation for assisting the qualifying patients with whom he or

she is connected through the MDCH registry process. Because of our conclusion that the

“medical use” of marihuana does not include the “sale” of marihuana, we need not, and therefore

do not, resolve this dispute.

 

This means that the question of legality has not been defined. You are refusing to see the truth as much as the other side. FARMERS MARKETS MAY OR MAY NOT BE LEGAL, AT THIS TIME IT HAS NOT BEEN ADDRESSED BY THE COURTS. You can either answer this or you can do what you do best and lock the thread cause it doesn't agree with your flawed way of thinking.

 

Mike

 

COA case involving a murder. Question addressed, murder of a man- is it legal or not. (Footnote) Both parties have asked about and we chose not to address murder of a woman, murder of a child male or female.

 

Result, murder of a man is illegal.

 

So can you kill a woman or kids? The foot note says it is not addressed.

 

See the flaw in the logic yet?

 

Dr. Bob

[Celliach]

I have no idea how to comply with that how do I complay with your term unambiguous complaince . Or is it a buzzword to get rid of those who swear or belittle others . What do I have to do to comply what are the rules ?

 

Nobody wants you to comply with anything in the real world. Unambiguous compliance has to do with this site. The management, admins, and mods will not post any advice or information that is currently not known to be completely legal. We do not want to give anyone advice that will end up in them being arrested. We also cannot advertise, or condone any activity that is not strictly legal on this site. For example, we cannot tell people to start a dispensary, nor can we advertise the dispensary in the forum threads, as that is not unambiguously legal under current law.

 

What you do in your private life is your own affair. We will just tell you what is unambiguously legal at present to help keep you out of the courtroom, while we fight to further the rights of patients.

[Dr. Bob]

I'm no lawyer but... good luck with that lawsuit Joe

 

lol, stating the obvious.

[Croppled1]

 

 

lol, stating the obvious.

 

So ends our parody on Government closing the loopholes while forming legal protections for all necessary participants of medical use ( needs ) under safe affordable access through legal mechanisms at the State level .

[+Malamute]

Can i just point out because it makes me crazy,...

 

By saying SAFE access, you are specifically saying you support only Lab tested marijuana and large commercial uniform operations. You are saying that YOU or a caregiver who grows marijuana is UNSAFE and that the marijuana produced by patients and caregivers is UNSAFE and somehow RISKY and possibly DANGEROUS.

 

It just drives me crazy to see people who support home growing say SAFE ACCESS. It is merely propaganda of those who knowingly or unknowingly are supporting corporate propaganda that is deliberately moving to the arena to make home growing a thing of the past.

 

Words matter.

[jamieuke]

 

 

I do not believe this statement to be true, would like others thoughts on it as well

 

I agree with you, a blanket statement like that does not adequately cover the reality of the situation and how the opposition has been working against us.

[Dilligaf]

COA case involving a murder. Question addressed, murder of a man- is it legal or not. (Footnote) Both parties have asked about and we chose not to address murder of a woman, murder of a child male or female.

 

Result, murder of a man is illegal.

 

So can you kill a woman or kids? The foot note says it is not addressed.

 

See the flaw in the logic yet?

 

Dr. Bob

 

"we need not, and therefore

do not, resolve this dispute."

 

What part of this don't you understand?? See the flaw in YOUR logic yet?? It has not beewn decided yet. Reading the plain language of the law would point towards it being legal but no one will know until the courts decide. i like you Bob but you are really starting to lose touch with reality.

 

Mike

[Croppled1]

 

 

COA case involving a murder. Question addressed, murder of a man- is it legal or not. (Footnote) Both parties have asked about and we chose not to address murder of a woman, murder of a child male or female.

 

Result, murder of a man is illegal.

 

So can you kill a woman or kids? The foot note says it is not addressed.

 

See the flaw in the logic yet?

 

Dr. Bob

 

A new low for you Dr Bob comparing your patients to murderer's I guess in your example the State made murder legal too . Your a perfect example of a college man , your profession . and how regulation keeps the system moving forward . My prayers are with Joe and his family he is going to be hung out to dry by the dispensary money you can be sure of that . Those that have never been in and injured by both the medical and criminal justice system have no idea how cruel they both can be . I have a friend now that was injured by anti depressants and he is just left alone to die too proud and confused to ask for help from friends who really can't do much and spurned by a medical profession that won't aknowledge the pain they have caused him to face alone .In this political environment with criminalitiy involved he would die before he used cannabis though he qualifies 100 times over and it helped in the past . If he dies it won't be the first person I have known to do so because of our medical treatments that lack support when people are caused to suffer inside their own skin from percription medications . The money wasted and lost on cannabis enforcement could fund proper help for patients in trouble but of course you would have to find reasonable Doctors and professionals to help them . I haven't met that many who were willing let alone able .

 

You might want to reference my tip on lowering doses on dependent people maintaining level plasma levels by more frequent dosing . Many suffered allot and so did those down in the corridor that first published it to try to help others for it not to be in any medical textbooks along with the fact the reason many won't wean is their suffering . Nobody . Nobody wants to be dependent . I have never met one person ever who has been on any medication over 2 years they wouldn't ommit if they could nor run out of Doctors that feel their pain and are willing to suffer through it 3 month appointment after appointment . The only thing worse is doing something for the sake of it which killed my Father from surgery after Doctors terrified him with descriptions of what his death could of entailed or as in Jackson under this heading will close the market we all aknowledge is best for patients or at least many patients believe it to be so . I sometimes wonder how many ( just patients ) there are on any of these sites anymore . The stress levels are so high . I try to avoid posts looking for positive news but it is all arrests , threats of criminality , and argueing . I have to wonder why a Doctor would post inciteful comments all day every day . Especially when one polite line with facts is all that is necessary to help people .

Edited June 6, 2012 by Croppled1

[Dr. Bob]

Excuse me?

 

"we need not, and therefore

do not, resolve this dispute."

 

Refers to the fact those other relationships (caregiver to caregiver for example) were not part of the actual complaint being addressed. They are simply saying it is not before the court. No it had not been decided. It wasn't addressed.

 

You are using a rather strange argument. If something in general is not legal, saying the courts didn't decide that issue does not make it legal... You have to show in the act where it was made legal, not where it wasn't addressed in a court case.

 

dr. bob

[Dr. Bob]

A new low for you Dr Bob comparing your patients to murderer's I guess in your example the State made murder legal too . Your a perfect example of a college man , your profession . and how regulation keeps the system fresh .

 

It is called an analogy you dolt. An illustration of a concept or construction of an argument.

 

Dr. Bob

[man of steel]

Can i just point out because it makes me crazy,...

 

By saying SAFE access, you are specifically saying you support only Lab tested marijuana and large commercial uniform operations. You are saying that YOU or a caregiver who grows marijuana is UNSAFE and that the marijuana produced by patients and caregivers is UNSAFE and somehow RISKY and possibly DANGEROUS.

 

It just drives me crazy to see people who support home growing say SAFE ACCESS. It is merely propaganda of those who knowingly or unknowingly are supporting corporate propaganda that is deliberately moving to the arena to make home growing a thing of the past.

 

Words matter.

 

I would never have thought that way, kinda like overage?

Can you give an example?

Now I have to go to mm english class.

Any others we need to say differently.

[Dr. Bob]

A new low for you Dr Bob comparing your patients to murderer's I guess in your example the State made murder legal too . Your a perfect example of a college man , your profession . and how regulation keeps the system moving forward . My prayers are with Joe and his family he is going to be hung out to dry by the dispensary money you can be sure of that . Those that have never been in and injured by both the medical and criminal justice system have no idea how cruel they both can be . I have a friend now that was injured by anti depressants and he is just left alone to die too proud and confused to ask for help from friends who really can't do much and spurned by a medical profession that won't aknowledge the pain they have caused him to face alone .In this political environment he would die before he used cannabis though he qualifies 100 times over and it helped in the past . If he dies it won't be the first person I have known to do so because of our medical treatments that lack support .

 

So you attack a physician that supports it because he doesn't buy into one of your legal theories? Brilliant man, way to rally the medical field to the cause. I'm sorry you are angry at doctors, I am sorry you feel neglected in your medical care, and I am sorry you have problems. Direct your anger where it belongs.

 

Dr. Bob

[Dr. Bob]

Fine, I'll retract the dolt (noticed you didn't say anything about what the others said). Turning that analogy into me calling patients murderers was a bit shocking, followed by the personal attacks on doctors in general.

 

I'll rephrase it to 'analogy challenged'

 

Dr. Bob

[Dilligaf]

Excuse me?

 

"we need not, and therefore

do not, resolve this dispute."

 

Refers to the fact those other relationships (caregiver to caregiver for example) were not part of the actual complaint being addressed. They are simply saying it is not before the court. No it had not been decided. It wasn't addressed.

 

You are using a rather strange argument. If something in general is not legal, saying the courts didn't decide that issue does not make it legal... You have to show in the act where it was made legal, not where it wasn't addressed in a court case.

 

dr. bob

 

With as sharp a legal mind that you THINK you have what is the problem? Medical use includes transfer and delivery, caregivers are allowed to receive compensation from patients. Following so far Bob?? Did you even read the quote? Here it is again for your convenience

 

In addition, because the “medical use” of marihuana does not include the “sale” of marihuana,

defendants are not entitled to receive compensation for the costs of assisting in the “sale” of

marihuana between CA members. See MCL 333.26424(e) (“A registered primary caregiver may

receive compensation for costs associated with assisting a registered qualifying patient in the

medical use of marihuana.”). Also, in regard to § 4(e), the parties disagree whether a registered

primary caregiver may receive compensation for the costs associated with assisting any

registered qualifying patient in the “medical use” of marihuana or whether a registered primary

caregiver may only receive compensation for assisting the qualifying patients with whom he or

she is connected through the MDCH registry process. Because of our conclusion that the

“medical use” of marihuana does not include the “sale” of marihuana, we need not, and therefore

do not, resolve this dispute.

 

It plainly states that they did not rule on the issue. So where are we now? The MMMA states a caregiver may receive compensation from a patient (here it is permitted or "made legal"), the COA says they will not rule. At this point it looks legal until decided otherwise. We don't live in Russia (yet) our system of laws tell you what you can't do, not what you can do. I'm NOT saying it's legal, I'm saying it's undecided. You and others ASSUMING it is illegal are buying into Schuettes BS. If you and others accept this assumption as fact, it will be law before you know it.

 

Mike

[Dr. Bob]

With as sharp a legal mind that you THINK you have what is the problem? Medical use includes transfer and delivery, caregivers are allowed to receive compensation from patients. Following so far Bob?? Did you even read the quote? Here it is again for your convenience

 

In addition, because the “medical use” of marihuana does not include the “sale” of marihuana,

defendants are not entitled to receive compensation for the costs of assisting in the “sale” of

marihuana between CA members. See MCL 333.26424(e) (“A registered primary caregiver may

receive compensation for costs associated with assisting a registered qualifying patient in the

medical use of marihuana.”). Also, in regard to § 4(e), the parties disagree whether a registered

primary caregiver may receive compensation for the costs associated with assisting any

registered qualifying patient in the “medical use” of marihuana or whether a registered primary

caregiver may only receive compensation for assisting the qualifying patients with whom he or

she is connected through the MDCH registry process. Because of our conclusion that the

“medical use” of marihuana does not include the “sale” of marihuana, we need not, and therefore

do not, resolve this dispute.

 

It plainly states that they did not rule on the issue. So where are we now? The MMMA states a caregiver may receive compensation from a patient (here it is permitted or "made legal"), the COA says they will not rule. At this point it looks legal until decided otherwise. We don't live in Russia (yet) our system of laws tell you what you can't do, not what you can do. I'm NOT saying it's legal, I'm saying it's undecided. You and others ASSUMING it is illegal are buying into Schuettes BS. If you and others accept this assumption as fact, it will be law before you know it.

 

Mike

 

Sorry, I'm not a lawyer, but I stand by what I said. I think the basis for my argument is quite sound. Won't go round and round on the same question asked a different way. It has been addressed by folks that ARE lawyers elsewhere. As for the caregiver and 'a' patient, please complete the sentence. A qualifed, registered patient. Registered. Not any random patient.

 

But enough of this. I'm not here to try and disprove faith based arguements. Do what you want, the information has been put out and I'm quite frankly tired of dealing with this. Got better things to do.

 

Dr. Bob

Edited June 6, 2012 by Dr. Bob

[Dilligaf]

Sorry, I'm not a lawyer, but I stand by what I said. I think the basis for my argument is quite sound. Won't go round and round on the same question asked a different way. It has been addressed by folks that ARE lawyers elsewhere.

 

Dr. Bob

 

Just keep sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting LA LA LA, maybe it will make your fantasies come true.

 

Mike

[Dr. Bob]

Ah yes, and finish it with a personal attack. Well done.

 

So easy to predict.

 

Dr. Bob

 

PS go do what you want, no one is stopping you.