Supreme Court Ruling - McQueen - Compassionate Apothacary

[Chauncy Gardner]

more on page 7.. i find interesting...

 

Finally, the Court noted that defendants

are not entitled to immunity under § 4(i) of the MMMA, which insulates from liability

someone who assists a registered qualifying patient “with using or administering

marihuana.”21 It explained that “[t]here is no evidence that defendants assist patients in

preparing the marijuana to be consumed” or that they “physically aid the purchasing

patients in consuming marijuana.”22

 

Does this imply that if there had been "evidence" that the defendant was "assisting with using or administering marihuana" that they would have been insulated from liability? In other words, if the defendant had been selling rolled up joints would this have been evidence that the defendant was assisting the patient in preparing the marijuana? Also, if the defendant was selling bong hits would this be evidence that defendant was physically aiding the patient in consuming the marijuana? Anyone who assists a registered qualifying patient with using or administering marijuana is insulated from liability.

[Ms Chocolate]

You gotta love Michael F. Cavanagh’s dissenting opinion. He points out the law that was designed for the aid and protection of patients, offers more protections to caregivers. Caregivers can freely transfer meds to the five people to whom they have a direct registrational contact. The patient can not past a joint to another patient unless they are prepared to fight under §8.

 

 

Like I have said from the beginning, the law allows 3 ways to acquire marihuana: (1 you can grow your own, (2 you can acquire from your caregiver or, (3 you can acquire from Little Johnnie on the street corner. If Little Johnnie knows how to reach you, he might be able to use §8; the other two choices are covered under §4. (Under this SC ruling, the transferring patient would be treated the same as Little Johnnie.)

[Timmahh]

hmmm seems the majority thought here is still CONFORM CONFORM CONFORM. you are all to #%$#$ stupid to make your own decisions so lets just wait until the Proverted Uncle comes to tell us how good he ll make it for us.

 

You all STILL Fail to realize you can not WIN A GAME that is designed for you to lose on all avenues.

 

 

There is only one fix to this issue. it is the same fix it has always been, FULL OUR Legalization and Decriminalization. The only way you win the game is to NOT PLAY THE GAME!!!

 

 

It is time to put the game pieces away and burn the gameboard. FULL OUT LEGALIZATION. No limits except one, You must be 18, and if your not, your PARENTS MUST BE PRESENT if you use it for medication or recreation.

 

Otherwise, its time to educate the REAL Farmers. We need to get growing for Fuel, Food, HempCrete and other Construction materials, Paper, Textiles, Plastic. Co and Wa made a baby step, but a step right into the perverted unlces arms.... Poor poor Baby.

 

We need to put on our big boys and girls pants and do what our Grandparents and Great Grandparents did with Alcohol Prohibition.

 

Sooner or later you have to realize, so long as you accept being the slave, your Master will NEVER allow you to be free.

 

Be A Slave, or be Free. Choice is yours.

 

Work to Keep the Proverted Uncle Molester as your Master, or tell him to FU CK OFF Finally by all out Legalization. The State is at a 70% Medical, and a 55% Just fraking legalize it already.

 

 

I stand with Mr. Jack Herer here. It is a Herb, Crabgrass, Catnip, Daisies, Shallots, Tyme, Rosemary, ecttt all HERBS.

Edited February 9, 2013 by mibrains
removed swear word

[Ms Chocolate]

The final call of this ruling against dispensaries is not surprising. The call on P2P transfer is troubling. The law allows registered patients to transfer, yet the Court is saying no.

 

I am having trouble with Item 6 of the APPENDIX: The affirmative defense of § 8 of the MMMA, MCL 333.26428, applies only to criminal prosecutions involving marijuana, subject to the limited exceptions contained in § 8© for disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau or forfeiture of any interest in or right to property. Is the Court not saying that § 8© only applies to licensing and forfeitures?

[hic]

Thank you C I understand.

 

This revision of law is only good if enough "good" caregivers step up. Do to the fact so many have already been ruined by greed with the help of the dispensaries it might be kinda hard.

 

I will spend 3 days in jail for handing out seed. This is fine.

 

2 major issues the brains must deal with. #1 getting good genetics to people...DO NOT TELL ME this is no issue "I do sample people".

 

#2 You MI need more caregivers. I see the numbers and they do not even come close. A lot of the bottom of the food chain just went lower with this law. Now many are at the mercy of human nature. Now they are not equal "the patients".

 

I fear some patients getting fuct outta meds. Now there is no law I see 40 a gram to the dumb at times.

 

I see some caregivers now quitting because it was all about the money in the first place....WHY you ask? Because alot patient will not buy 5 ounces of pot at 300 an ounce cause they cannot afford it. I love that fact!

 

Time to invest in patients instead of the court. Time to smash cancer and pain not time to fight any longer. Time for MI to rep its self.

 

This is what some were waiting for. Make me proud and the people of MI. "especially the poor that cannot get pills".. Now it is on you and me and him and her.

 

We must work together to find simple solutions to simple problems.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[GregS]

the new spin February 8, 2013

MI SUPREME COURT: Only Caregivers Can Operate Dispensaries

 

 

http://marijuanapati...e-dispensaries/

 

what the heck they will always spin it ,

 

That is possibly the most ridiculous article I have read, and most of the comments even worse.

[GregS]

The problem with a daisy chain or pyramid is that if I, as a CG, know my registered PT is delivering the medicine he/she got from me to someone else, then I know my medicine isn't going to the person it was intended for and is being transferred to someone not my registered PT, then I am responsible for an illegal transfer. Since there were three people involved int he illegal transfer, it could also be construed as a conspiracy.

 

Just sayin'..........

 

Going back to an earlier thought, If a storage business were to rent locked space that the management does not have access to, with no knowledge of what a lessor has stored, does that business then conspire? Locked secure space can be used for anything that will fit, to include documents, valuables, cannabis, and sports equipment; all of which are legal to possess under the right conditions by authorized persons. A storage facility owner is not criminally liable if a lessor stores stolen goods or other contraband.

 

When a transaction occurs between a pt and their cg, and the cg has no probable cause or reasonable suspicion that the pt will transfer to another pt and that pt xfers to another, has that cg committed a crime? If a pt purchases from thier designated cg, and afterward has a request from a pt for whom he/she is a cg and sells any or all to that pt, where is the crime?

 

Perhaps more importantly, who is to know?

 

Conspiracy requires collusion, which requires mutual knowledge and consent.

Edited February 9, 2013 by GregS

[+Malamute]

You gotta love Michael F. Cavanagh’s dissenting opinion. He points out the law that was designed for the aid and protection of patients, offers more protections to caregivers. Caregivers can freely transfer meds to the five people to whom they have a direct registrational contact. The patient can not past a joint to another patient unless they are prepared to fight under §8.

 

 

Like I have said from the beginning, the law allows 3 ways to acquire marihuana: (1 you can grow your own, (2 you can acquire from your caregiver or, (3 you can acquire from Little Johnnie on the street corner. If Little Johnnie knows how to reach you, he might be able to use §8; the other two choices are covered under §4. (Under this SC ruling, the transferring patient would be treated the same as Little Johnnie.)

 

Agreed Ms Chocolate. I think that was what many said for several years now.

[hic]

 

 

Then why do you persist in stating things that are simply nonsensical? Maybe you should change your name to chicken little. Your insistence that there is always something sinister or silly beyond what is stated is reasonable has garnished you a reputation, and it is the reason that many here consider you a buffoon. There are not many left who give you any real credence, and we have to wonder about them.

 

We all use copious amounts of d0pe, and many here do not go on outrageous rants and other assorted silliness to anything near the amount that you continually do. I guess there is something more at work here.

 

 

Be nice Greg S I would consider you a buffoon before I would peanut butter. Make dam sure you acknowledge you do not speak for me when you say many.

[peanutbutter]

I am having trouble with Item 6 of the APPENDIX: The affirmative defense of § 8 of the MMMA, MCL 333.26428, applies only to criminal prosecutions involving marijuana, subject to the limited exceptions contained in § 8© for disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau or forfeiture of any interest in or right to property. Is the Court not saying that § 8© only applies to licensing and forfeitures?

 

No they are saying that section 8 is entirely about trials. Except for the last couple of sentences. Those last couple of things are about civil matters.

[peanutbutter]

5580 NOW

[SFC]

Tim. It must suck to be you bro. We have an awesome law and our perverted uncle seems to be treating us just as the law mandated. F$#@ legalization and handing all of our growing rights over to procter and gamble or some other well healed enemy. You need to pull your head up out of your rectum..

[peanutbutter]

F$#@ legalization

 

Ahh .. you ARE the enemy!

 

You want people to continue to be arrested.

Edited February 9, 2013 by peanutbutter

[Northern Lab]

Yes, it is quite clear to me that medical will not survive on its own, just like Uncle Jack said.

 

All out legalization is the best way to protect the medical marijuana law from further state meddling.

[SFC]

No, but I am wise enough to realize we will lose our right to grow under legalization. You are screwed anyway, so I can't blam eyou for wanting legalization no matter the way it screws the rest of us.

 

And just reading the comments on that caregivers can sell link I would like to Thank Dr Bob and Rick Thompson for keeping it real in the comments.

[peanutbutter]

Yes, it is quite clear to me that medical will not survive on its own, just like Uncle Jack said.

 

All out legalization is the best way to protect the medical marijuana law from further state meddling.

 

And it's the ONLY way that patients will get their medicine safely.

[peanutbutter]

No, but I am wise enough to realize we will lose our right to grow under legalization.

 

Fear monger .. anything to protect your income .. even urging lawmakers to keep putting people in jail. Even patients. All to protect yourself.

[Restorium2]

Yes, it is quite clear to me that medical will not survive on its own, just like Uncle Jack said.

 

All out legalization is the best way to protect the medical marijuana law from further state meddling.

Said the guy who just had his medical business model crushed. If you were just following a conservative view of the law, being a registered caregiver or patient, you are still quite happy, and are finding new ways to make the law work every day. Medical protects itself quite well and will stand the test of time here in Michigan. Thank you for your time and good luck in your future endevours.

[Restorium2]

Fear monger .. anything to protect your income .. even urging lawmakers to keep putting people in jail. Even patients. All to protect yourself.

LOL His income? You are taking shots in the dark and just shooting yourself.

[Northern Lab]

Don't worry about me, I'll be just fine. I have already figured out a way to re engineer everything so that I can maintain what I am doing.

 

I do love the backhanded well wishes though, classic restorium!

[peanutbutter]

Medical protects itself quite well and will stand the test of time here in Michigan.

 

In case you don't understand. The Michigan system used to be about people helping people.

 

That has now been shredded. Patients are now supposed to go to jail for helping other patients.

 

Is that what you want? People placed under arrest for helping patients?

[Restorium2]

Don't worry about me, I'll be just fine. I have already figured out a way to re engineer everything so that I can maintain what I am doing.

 

I do love the backhanded well wishes though, classic restorium!

That's because you backhanded my medical. Keep it straight and you will be treated accordingly.

[Northern Lab]

Now unsupported accusations emerge, LMFAO!

[Restorium2]

In case you don't understand. The Michigan system used to be about people helping people.

 

That has now been shredded. Patients are now supposed to go to jail for helping other patients.

 

Is that what you want? People placed under arrest for helping patients?

Listen peanut,

We both talked to the same attroney back at the beginning and told us both this was going to be how it is. He's right, you are wrong, live with it. It's no surprise so quit playing the fool.

[Restorium2]

Now unsupported accusations emerge, LMFAO!

You said medical wouldn't survive numbskull. Just read your own words.