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

[Dilligaf]

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.

 

No, no attacks. You obviously have your mind made up and no amount of facts will change it. Now this may be considered an attack......

 

[AKenewell]

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

 

 

 

HEY DILLI..1ST..TO QUOTE ZAP

 

The general concept of running a farmer's market is ambiguous, for the reasons you stated.

Moderators will moderate, and administrators will administrate, according to this policy

 

2ND..your posts are still ambiguous. let me remind you of site policy it's UNAMBIGUOUS COMPLIANCE. Please post according to site policy and also refrain from any personal attacks.

[Spartyon]

"The people behind the dispensaries will never allow the FM's to compete and destroy their cash cow regulated money train they will monopolize supply by" Amen on that one. thanks cropped

 

Akennal mod can state that "farmers markets are not legal" put that out there as a fact when it is just an opinion. Farmers markets may very well be illegal but until a court rules on it again just an opinion. Why is a moderater stating untruths to be fact.

[Dilligaf]

I have no problem with your post, nor any others engaging in the debate of this point. I am sorry for the confusion. I just meant that the general concept of running a farmer's market is ambiguous, for the reasons you stated.

 

Moderators will moderate, and administrators will administrate, according to this policy.

HEY DILLI..1ST..TO QUOTE ZAP

 

 

 

2ND..your posts are still ambiguous. let me remind you of site policy it's UNAMBIGUOUS COMPLIANCE. Please post according to site policy and also refrain from any personal attacks.

 

If you want to quote Zap then what about this quote? My posts are NOT ambiguous and ARE truthful. More than I can say about yours.

 

Mike

[AKenewell]

If you want to quote Zap then what about this quote? My posts are NOT ambiguous and ARE truthful. More than I can say about yours.

 

Mike

 

Please point out a post I made that was not accurate. I will remind you one more time farmers markets are not legal. Your posts are ambiguous, and zap pointed that out pages back. Now you are still carrying on, arguing with and insulting a physician. I insist you move on at this point.

[CaveatLector]

A new low for you Dr Bob comparing your patients to murderer's I guess in your example the State made murder legal too .

 

Um, I didn't see a comparison to murder. As is usually done, one will employ an analogy to illustrate a point. In this case it was illustrating the analogy between the legal reasoning, not the parties to the crime. I thought that was evident by the context. You didn't? Instead of attacking the logic in the argument you attacked the crime example used. I find that people often do that to deflect attention from the issue at-hand. Not saying that is why YOU did that...

 

Hey, I often use the internet version of the Merriam-Webster dicitonary or the one at dictionary.com. Both work well.

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/analogy

[Croppled1]

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 will try to remember that it is not intentional and I am sure you understand what your describing is not my vision of safe access . Though we all have to understand pharmacuetical products are a eventual reality of what is occurring even if we believe strongly actually cannabis in it's raw form need not be more regulated then tea or coffee .

[Dilligaf]

Please point out a post I made that was not accurate. I will remind you one more time farmers markets are not legal. Your posts are ambiguous, and zap pointed that out pages back. Now you are still carrying on, arguing with and insulting a physician. I insist you move on at this point.

 

Well this one is not accurate for a start. Farmers markets are in limbo, their legality has not yet been determined. What is the site policy regarding moderators stating that their OPINIONS are facts?

 

Mike

[trix]

does the law say that they are LEGAL?

 

If the law doesn't state indefinitely that something is legal it will not be promoted here, until there is case law showing that it is fully compliant and will have no harm if attended.. It has not been stated that they are legal, therefore they are just that NOT LEGAL

 

EDIT: I hate the phrase gray area. but If there is doubt throw it out. until otherwise stated in the law as legal, they are a gray area and not something advisable to attend. for the safety of the community

[AKenewell]

It is almost impossible to ask that people be unambiguously compliant when discussing what might or might not be eventually found legal under the Act. I like Celliach's phrase "not clearly legal" as it highlights the true situation.

 

We must enforce our own site policy and insist that people not attempt to confuse those who look to us for guidance. That is the only way to ensure the people here have accurate information. Patient safety first. They are NOT LEGALl. It's not about what may be in the future..it is what we have right now that matters.

[Croppled1]

 

 

Name calling, let's stop this. Nobody deserves that for engaging in this discussion.

 

Incase you haven't noticed Dr Bob has been doing this to patients forever he is a flamer and his examples display that to other patients not that were all perfect . There are many Doctors who treat patients like this daily and there is nothing you can do - the State board does not investigate complaints and it is all peer review . Do unto others as you can expect to be done by their friends to you if any discipline is handed out . I was put in emergency by the actions of a Doctor known to be a current abuser of opiods who struggled daily .

 

Can you imagine if he had you on dependent medications and there were problems and a disagreement that effected your comfort ? I ask patients to look at his posts and then ask yourself would I want to be on a suboxone regimine under him especially when 5% of patients can't tolerate it . Do you think he would believe you and help or call you a drug addict ? That is what happens . Does he display the temperment required for care and why is he posting so concerned about .

 

 

Um, I didn't see a comparison to murder. As is usually done, one will employ an analogy to illustrate a point. In this case it was illustrating the analogy between the legal reasoning, not the parties to the crime. I thought that was evident by the context. You didn't? Instead of attacking the logic in the argument you attacked the crime example used. I find that people often do that to deflect attention from the issue at-hand. Not saying that is why YOU did that...

 

Hey, I often use the internet version of the Merriam-Webster dicitonary or the one at dictionary.com. Both work well.

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/analogy

 

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

 

 

 

[CaveatLector]

The MMA, in pertinent part, states:

 

(b) A primary caregiver who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, for assisting a qualifying patient to whom he or she is connected through the department's registration process with the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act, provided that the primary caregiver possesses an amount of marihuana that does not exceed:

 

 

What that says is clear to most here, right? It says a cg cannot be arrested for assisting a pt to whom the cg is connected through the registration process. What it doesn't say is that a cg cannot be arrested for assisting a pt or any pt. It says it must be a connected pt.

 

I think that makes it sufficiently clear. You don't have protection unless assisting a pt to whom you are connected through the registry process. Furthermore, rules of statutory interpretation include the doctrine known as Expressio unius est exclusio alterius. That is Latin and means that the express mention of one thing excludes all others. Here section 4 expressly mentions the "connected" status but is silent as to non-connected. That would be interpreted to mean that the drafter didn't intend to include non-connected under section 4 protections.

 

Can you get protection through section 8? Maybe. But that will be a case by case decision.

 

Furthermore, who knows how the courts will interpret the statute? Not I. But what I do know is that you cannot claim a FM transfer is legal because proper interpretation of the statute says otherwise.

Edited June 6, 2012 by CaveatLector

[CaveatLector]

Incase you haven't noticed Dr Bob has been doing this to patients forever he is a flamer and his examples display that to other patients not that were all perfect . There are many Doctors who treat patients like this daily and there is nothing you can do - the State board does not investigate complaints and it is all peer review . Do unto others as you can expect to be done by their friends to you if any discipline is handed out . I was put in emergency by the actions of a Doctor known to be a current abuser of opiods who struggled daily .

 

Can you imagine if he had you on dependent medications and there were problems and a disagreement that effected your comfort ? I ask patients to look at his posts and then ask yourself would I want to be on a suboxone regimine under him especially when 5% of patients can't tolerate it . Do you think he would believe you and help or call you a drug addict ? That is what happens . Does he display the temperment required for care and why is he posting so concerned about .

 

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

Again, the comparision wasn't to murder, it was to the legal reasoning. No one called a patient a murderer. Give me a break.

[cristinew]

Mi Supreme Court

 

FILED MAY 31, 2012

S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N

SUPREME COURT

 

The MMMA does not create a general right for individuals to use and possess

marijuana in Michigan. Possession, manufacture, and delivery of marijuana remain

punishable offenses under Michigan law.24 Rather, the MMMA’s protections are limited

 

take it as you like, but its clear,

[rambozo420]

Hey croppeld I hear you he is creepy dont let him stop you I really like what you say

[Croppled1]

 

 

We must enforce our own site policy and insist that people not attempt to confuse those who look to us for guidance. That is the only way to ensure the people here have accurate information. Patient safety first. They are NOT LEGALl. It's not about what may be in the future..it is what we have right now that matters.

 

You have to be considerate to people whom the MMMA told a different story to only weeks ago and whom participated and may even participate in the markets now understanding the risks . It was illegal for Rosa Parks to not give up her seat in the Civil Rights battle decades ago and many compare the two situations . Can't we temper the truth with compassion for the caregivers and patients involved so they understand and comply with their hearts and minds without being criminalized here if this is truly a patient oriented site . I learned long ago when I met Renee in my cab no threat of criminality was going to deter her from medical cannabis activism and it never did . I always admired her as I drove my cab but I never respected her position so much as when I became a patient in need who could not tolerate arrest as humane .

[Beans]

I hope that all would concede that giving patients or caregivers advice that transfers outside of the registered relationship are protected is bad advice?

 

I agree 100%

Edited June 6, 2012 by Beans

[Celliach]

"The people behind the dispensaries will never allow the FM's to compete and destroy their cash cow regulated money train they will monopolize supply by" Amen on that one. thanks cropped

 

Akennal mod can state that "farmers markets are not legal" put that out there as a fact when it is just an opinion. Farmers markets may very well be illegal but until a court rules on it again just an opinion. Why is a moderater stating untruths to be fact.

The moderators are stating that since we don't know whether the courts will rule that FMs are legal or illegal, in the mean time we cannot condone them. As an organization or a representative of the organization, we cannot publicly give advice to someone that could land them in jail. This is not an opinion on whether they are legal or not, it's just trying to keep patients safe by not telling them something is legal when the courts can rule oppositely.

 

Nobody is saying that they are illegal, only that they haven't been found to be legal yet.

 

If someone truly believes farmer's markets are legal they are free to start one. We are not going to try and stop them. We are only trying to point out the risks and avoid giving advice that could land someone in jail in the future.

[Celliach]

I will try to remember that it is not intentional and I am sure you understand what your describing is not my vision of safe access . Though we all have to understand pharmacuetical products are a eventual reality of what is occurring even if we believe strongly actually cannabis in it's raw form need not be more regulated then tea or coffee .

Why do we have to understand that?

[Croppled1]

 

Again, the comparision wasn't to murder, it was to the legal reasoning. No one called a patient a murderer. Give me a break.

 

It was a terrible example to compare what caregivers and patients are going through . Medical Cannabis is legal in this State Murder is not . If patients can't see how this Doctor destroys himself and hurts our cause here daily I don't know how to explain it .

[CaveatLector]

It was a terrible example to compare what caregivers and patients are going through . Medical Cannabis is legal in this State Murder is not . If patients can't see how this Doctor destroys himself and hurts our cause here daily I don't know how to explain it .

Get over it. We're all adults here. If you have at least a 4th grade education (maybe less) then you understood the analogy and know that murder wasn't being "compared" to patients. Give me a break already. If you have such a fragile ego you probably shouldn't be reading these forums.

[restlesslegs]

It was a terrible example to compare what caregivers and patients are going through . Medical Cannabis is legal in this State Murder is not . If patients can't see how this Doctor destroys himself and hurts our cause here daily I don't know how to explain it .

I agree and I know you are an intelligent person, never mind the ones who say nasty things all the time to many people. You are also kind which is not a quality some here possess.

Edited June 6, 2012 by restlesslegs

[Celliach]

It was a terrible example to compare what caregivers and patients are going through . Medical Cannabis is legal in this State Murder is not . If patients can't see how this Doctor destroys himself and hurts our cause here daily I don't know how to explain it .

 

Honestly, I've had several people tell me the same thing about you. That's why we now have an open forum, so everyone can now see everyone else's opinion on a subject and make a decision for themselves.

[abe supercro]

Now with the education/intelligence insult, a last resort used, like from a few others here. And this comes from the same one that felt the need to bust out a molesting-children "analogy" in an earier thread. When a few of you go after someone like Croppled, you are simply undermining yourself, patients and probably the actual readership on this site. Now back to your regularly scheduled unambiguous obeyance. Don't say another word. "I INSIST" - LOL

[mibrains]

unreal this thread....

 

ok.

 

i have a couple questions...i am really bothered and wondering. i am not trying to cause any confusion or "ambiguity" i have been asked by several folks this week... and so i pose the questions here in what seems to be a relevant thread.

 

a patient goes to the doctor and gets a recommendation...they have a named condition and are qualified. they cannot grow for themselves. for whatever reason. they decide to "hire" a caregiver to provide for their medical use of cannabis as required by their condition. they hire this caregiver, maybe a family member or friend but who is qualified and able. lets say for argument that they even go so far as to wait for their plastic cards to arrive from the state in the mail... and this caregiver is brand new. and this patient is brand new...

 

1) where does the caregiver get their genetics? seeds? clones?

 

lets go even simpler.... how about i get my state issued card decide to grow for myself. once my card arrives...

2) where do i get my plants?

to grow for my own self...must i hire a caregiver to obtain my first set of genetics? how about for each additional strain that i hear about in the future that may work better for my condition?

 

how about a out of state card holder? would the reciprocity of the card allow them to transfer genetics?

 

i ask about genetics but the same questions apply to usable cannabis...

 

i ask because as a caregiver, patient and moderator on this site i want to be clear we are all talking about the same things and passing on the same information.

 

the farmers market as i understood it is nothing more than a organized time and place for those questions to be answered and those needs to be fulfilled.

 

to be clear... because the AG and many in law enforcement have pushed the limits and there is a clear and present danger i personally have decided to only work within the limits of the contracts i have with my direct patients at this time. my card has the name of a specific patient on it, and i don't really see how having a fiduciary relationship with that person, and a contractual agreement bound and sanctified by the state of Michigan gives me the rite to transfer genetics to someone whose name isn't on the card... i mean because Santa clause is my patient and i have a card with his name on it, i can posses cannabis for him, but how does that make it ok for me to transfer it to the elves who need it too for making cookies for their patients? they are all caregivers too, but not mine...

 

the only reason i even decided to post tonight is because i want to order seeds. i want to try a new strain. i want to know what my official position is supposed to be? do i order cannabis genetics and pray? is it rule of law that if it must be this way then it is? which is to say simplicity rules when a finial determination must be made. so if a person is allowed to obtain genetics for the first time, or for a new strain or for whatever reasons then they must get it from the only place it is allowed to be, and that is someone who has a card and is allowed to already posses it?

 

how about patient number one? where did patient number one get his/her genetics? and number 2? and so on...

 

if it must be this simple then isn't it?

 

and to be clear someone asked about transfers without remuneration and i believe its been said that to sell cannabis in Michigan is not going to get you arrested, its not even listed in the PHC? it is the transfer, manufacture or delivery that you will be charged with? hence the no 100$ baggies and free pot inside rule...or the consultation or services exchange for medication determinations...

 

the supreme court will decide for us all on this issue very soon i hope.... and these questions can be officially answered...