Judge Dismisses Felony Delivery Charges P2p Transfer Legal?

[SFC]

Ganja again, for the last time. You are not the Cane toad, you are not CANE TOAD!! Just a confused disciple..

[cristinew]

medicineman420, on 09 July 2012 - 06:11 AM, said: Christine and the others are blinded by their own misinterpretation of the supreme courts 7-0

 

 

can you show me MR Med man where the supreme court has ruled on caregivers selling for cash to patients not connected? please show me ,, you cant,, your wrong ,.

Edited July 9, 2012 by cristinew

[cristinew]

its a shame that people on this site promote acts that could make people wind up in court or in jail what compassion is that?

 

i am all for ptp ctp but in many counties that will make u a felon, and you better have big bucks to fight it,

[Restorium2]

Cristine, and the others, have a pack of some of the best attorneys in Michigan, that figure out what the law means for them, in a 'real time' way. They pass it on at no charge to help keep people out of trouble. Don't confuse that with motives, it's just community service.

Edited July 9, 2012 by Restorium2

[cristinew]

thanks resto,,

[JohnnyC]

cristinew Today, 06:46 AM

medicineman420, on 09 July 2012 - 06:11 AM, said: Christine and the others are blinded by their own misinterpretation of the supreme courts 7-0

 

 

can you show me MR Med man where the supreme court has ruled on caregivers selling for cash to patients not connected? please show me ,, you cant,, your wrong ,.

Edited by cristinew, Today, 07:00 AM.

 

and not cash--- they call it a donation or a delivery fee im guessing by the 1000 people on craigslist every day... wonder why there is no confusing arguments on since the "acquisition" is part of "medical use" its ok for any cardholder to buy it anywhere lol they want us in the dark alleys getting meds i guess.. instead of other safe ways in the medical community.

 

it was ruled on plain statement of the law- well that's true there is plain statement on caregiver assisting registered connected patients... we get that- but there is also plain statement of the definition of medical use including transfers and delivery and not being prosecuted so its seems to a lot of people that there are 2 parts of laws that are plain stated and protecting caregivers and patients. that's why there is such big confusion were not just skipping that section for caregiver to there own patient. were just arguing that in another section it clearly states free from prosecution for any type of transfer manufacture delivery in general for medical use and if 2 people have cards obviously that's for medical use so it seems clearly stated that p2p is legal.. but like everyone says its a grey area that will be ruled on.

[GanjaWarrior]

Ganja again, for the last time. You are not the Cane toad, you are not CANE TOAD!! Just a confused disciple..

 

so there you go again..wtf is your problem moron? i left this site b4 joe did because he was a pos trying to scam patients and spreading his moo poo agenda...i see his drones still run this place...its a fkn joke . Nothing about this site is helping anyone.... again if you dont agree with the turds in the bowl then you must be joe cain.

[phaquetoo]

(b) A primary caregiver who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall not be subject to arrest,

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

 

2) for each registered qualifying patient who has specified that the primary caregiver will be allowed under state law to cultivate marihuana for the qualifying patient,

 

Easy things to follow clearly stated in the act..

A very easy thing to follow, How come people think if it isnt in the law its ok? and they read what they want in the rest of it? The law is very easy to read. p2p has never been legal neither has c.g to any registered pt!

michigan.gov/mmp

 

(10) "Medical use" means the acquisition, possession, cultivation, manufacture, use, internal possession, delivery, transfer, or transportation of marihuana or paraphernalia relating to the administration of marihuana to treat or alleviate a registered qualifying patient's debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the debilitating medical condition

 

Rule 333.127 Management of medical marihuana.

Rule 27. (1) A qualifying patient 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 the medical use of marihuana in accordance with the act

 

how come you always leave out "connected thru the regestry"? Did you miss that part, and I bet because it says help in the aid of a pt to as have enough mm for their debillating deasease means any amount to you huh? dont forget the part that clearly states connected thru the registry and no more than 2.5 or 12 plants per pt! (that means the c.g must have a card that says he is registered to said pt) how hard can that be?

accordance with the act

 

(b) A primary caregiver who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall not be subject to arrest,

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

 

2) for each registered qualifying patient who has specified that the primary caregiver will be allowed under state law to cultivate marihuana for the qualifying patient,

 

never called anyone out just said if you people really believe that there is no leo on these sites your all insane. 2 different topics ive mentioned it and both times all the members judged immediately to who i was referring to. besides the actual one i was lol. And i was not talking about bending laws neither only stating obvious that its easily misunderstood. and not about financial gain either lmfao meds have never been about finances to me i just hate the fact that so many of the caregivers are a disgrace and even though 50 percent of this state seems to be growing only about 12 percent have a clue on good meds. to much nasty bunny muffin floating around not barely good enough to be called medical. and true Michigander's can agree meds were better before 2008!!!!! no offense

I havent had any low grade mj in over 12 yrs, ive not had any com crap! maybe you have been seeking from the wrong underground people!

Christine and the others are blinded by their own misinterpretation of the supreme courts 7-0 ruling which clearly states the plain interpretation of the law and what voters intended when they read the ballot....

 

no wonder why greg sold this site

 

4b is to protect caregivers from things like cps takin their kids or a professional license from a board

 

Sec. 4 (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:

 

 

if this was it o'keefe would not have added sec e or the clause that allows for uninterrupted supply.....(do i wanna be that test case? hellz no but it is their for a reason honey)

 

(e) A registered primary caregiver may receive compensation for costs associated with assisting a registered qualifying patient in the medical use of marihuana. Any such compensation shall not constitute the sale of controlled substances.

 

 

 

(2) The patient and the patient's primary caregiver, if any, were collectively in possession of a quantity of marihuana that was not more than was reasonably necessary to ensure the uninterrupted availability of marihuana for the purpose of treating or alleviating the patient's serious or debilitating medical condition or symptoms of the patient's serious or debilitating medical condition; and

 

(3) The patient and the patient's primary caregiver, if any, were engaged in the acquisition, possession, cultivation, manufacture, use, delivery, transfer, or transportation of marihuana or paraphernalia relating to the use of marihuana to treat or alleviate the patient's serious or debilitating medical condition or symptoms of the patient's serious or debilitating medical condition.

 

i dont understand why you all are him-hawing this subject claiming it jeopardizes your alleged 501c3......right

so what are you saying the 2.5 and 12 plants dont mean anything, I truly thought you were smarter than that!

 

loose lips sink ships!

 

Peace

Jim

[GanjaWarrior]

Cristine, and the others, have a pack of some of the best attorneys in Michigan, that figure out what the law means for them, in a 'real time' way. They pass it on at no charge to help keep people out of trouble. Don't confuse that with motives, it's just community service.

 

have the lawyers come and say it...most of you are full of bunny muffin and no pt should heed your advice....and when you say that chis has lawyers you blow all your credibility...she thinks its possible for a human to be a disp and you think she should be giving out advice...i bet your joe cain just trying to screw up everyone.

 

 

sorry guys just trying to fit in....

[cristinew]

so what are you in trouble for Jonny? selling ? and you want other to do the same?

 

you did not show me where the supreme court has ruled on transfers

[cristinew]

your way off base ganja ,,,

[cristinew]

hate to have you as my attorney

[phaquetoo]

so there you go again..wtf is your problem moron? i left this site b4 joe did because he was a pos trying to scam patients and spreading his moo poo agenda...i see his drones still run this place...its a fkn joke . Nothing about this site is helping anyone.... again if you dont agree with the turds in the bowl then you must be joe cain.

 

so any one that sees and reads the law as written and voted on by the people is wrong, the wording is in plain english, it was made that way so they average voter knew what they were voting for! does that make any sense at all to people who want to read the law their own way?

 

after all it isnt the bible! it is in simple laymens terms!

 

Peace

Jim

[cristinew]

bunch or drug dealers wanting to make money and will twist the law ignore section 4b just to make a profit put others at risk and our whole act at risk ,,,shame on them

[Restorium2]

have the lawyers come and say it...most of you are full of bunny muffin and no pt should heed your advice....and when you say that chis has lawyers you blow all your credibility...she thinks its possible for a human to be a disp and you think she should be giving out advice...i bet your joe cain just trying to screw up everyone.

 

 

sorry guys just trying to fit in....

Ganja,

You just posted in another thread how bad it is to call someone the name of another person they are not. Why are you doing the same thing now? Slow down. I believe you know the difference between right and wrong but you are too worked up to follow your own ideals.

Chris doesn't HAVE attorneys. But she does listen to a group of attorneys that really are up on how things will spin out in court. They have the cat bird seat. They could be wrong. But they are in a position to make the best guess. I listen too. So if Chris gets off track I'll chime in. But I really can't see that happening. She's a straight shooter. Just a little high strung like you are. Calm down a little and follow your own advice.

Edited July 9, 2012 by Restorium2

[phaquetoo]

bunch or drug dealers wanting to make money and will twist the law ignore section 4b just to make a profit put others at risk and our whole act at risk ,,,shame on them

 

yup! mean while, i will medicate and read this hilarious argument over some bodys own reading of the law, I would much rather hear or read an attnys view of the law than a pt or c.g trying to cash in!

 

Peace

Jim

[cristinew]

Thanks Jim

[medicineman420]

all i ever said christine is that caregivers should be compensated for there time and expenses...no where did i say they should be able to make a profit from this...thats not what this law is about

 

 

 

obviously you dont grow your own meds cause if you did you would understand what goes into a grow...and im not jus talking about the electrical bill either.....what my 240 + hrs per grow means nothin huh

[phaquetoo]

all i ever said christine is that caregivers should be compensated for there time and expenses...no where did i say they should be able to make a profit from this...thats not what this law is about

 

 

 

obviously you dont grow your own meds cause if you did you would understand what goes into a grow...and im not jus talking about the electrical bill either.....what my 240 + hrs per grow means nothin huh

 

I would say you deserve what ever you and your pt agreed too, and it isnt anyones biz but yours and pts!

 

Best of luck to you!

Peace

Jim

[cristinew]

obviously you dont grow your own meds

 

 

you know nothing med man

[Restorium2]

all i ever said christine is that caregivers should be compensated for there time and expenses...no where did i say they should be able to make a profit from this...thats not what this law is about

 

 

 

obviously you dont grow your own meds cause if you did you would understand what goes into a grow...and im not jus talking about the electrical bill either.....what my 240 + hrs per grow means nothin huh

Woah. No one said a caregiver couldn't be compensated for servicing their 5 PATIENTS.

[cristinew]

medicineman420, on 09 July 2012 - 02:36 PM, said:

all i ever said christine is that caregivers should be compensated for there time and expenses.

 

NO MED MAN YOU SAID THIS

 

medicineman420, on 09 July 2012 - 06:11 AM, said:

Christine and the others are blinded by their own misinterpretation of the supreme courts 7-0 ruling which clearly states the plain interpretation of the law and what voters intended when they read the ballot....

 

 

NOW I ASK WHERE HAS THE SUPREAM COURT RULED ON TRANSFERS, ? they have not,

 

Please quit putting people and our law at risk for your own profit,

[JohnnyC]

all i said was yes there is 1 section for caregivers that state that obviously.

but there is another section that just simply states no prosecution for medical use-

including the delivery manufacture possessions and transfers.. in that section caregivers are not even used

all it says is a REGISTERED PATIENT. LMFAO some people complain that im skipping a section and some complain that your skipping another

1 group refers to one single statement in a section and some refer to the clearly stated other parts. look up the definitions of medical use then go down to management of meds and read that statement. there is no part that says legal but there is sections that state A REGISTERED PATIENT. not only "caregiver" for prosecution and honestly THERE IS NOT 1 Single PERSON on this Site that can say its a yes or a no. you can only argue your sections of belief wether its your a caregiver or a leo i dunno but either way its stated.

[JohnnyC]

so what are you in trouble for Jonny?  selling ?  and you want other to do the same?

 

you did not show me where the supreme court has ruled on transfers

 

no not selling ive never sold nor discussed a price on any meds before

[cristinew]

what i say means nothing what you say means nothing , what the judge says means everything,

and the Judge will not ignore section 4 b it is plain language