Med card if MI Legal?

[zeebudz]

I know in Colorado everyone pays 2.9% tax for cannabis, but non-medical purchases tack on another 10%.*

So as a medical user you wouldn't break even until spending $1500 for the first year or $750/year for 2 years (assuming a 2-year $150 card+doc fee.)

Setting aside the ability to use reciprocal agreements with other medical states, will there be any reason to procure a medical card if legalization passes next year?

(*they also have an excise tax of 15%. Do consumers pay 28% tax total??).

Edited December 5, 2017 by zeebudz

[t-pain]

big if on an off year election.

 

you would have to compare the protections in each... my memory is stuck with the 2016 proposal so i have not done this ...

[Restorium2]

You would have better protections with your right to drive with a positive blood test as a patient. You can make a better case that a patient isn't impaired due to their chronic use. 

In most cases before a judge, having a necessity defense would be better than a recreational defense. 

I think that even if you didn't renew after theoretic legalization, having a long line of cards shows that you have done your best to stay on the right side of the law. So patients will always have the upper hand in a defense. 

There are situations where having a card helps with employment issues. Also, child custody issues. There's a lot of issues that being a carded patient will make easier to explain and handle. 

[zeebudz]

I dunno, this all sounds pretty speculative.

- We all know that a THC-positive test has nothing to do with impairment, but if that's what is used to determine impairment I can't imagine a judge letting someone go because they were a regular medical user. Legit prescriptions from a doctor do not provide any protection from being charged with a a DUI.

- Companies with no drug policies do not have to make exceptions for card holders (regardless of the limited application for disability claims in MA ala Barbuto v. Advantage Sales).

- CPS & child custody judges have often not made allowances for medical users since it is still illegal at the federal level.

Currently the only benefit to having a card seems to be not getting arrested from procuring and consuming cannabis under certain circumstances.

[mibrains]

good point..

MMMA does protect a patient for internal possession...

however that being said.. if you were driving while impaired and found yourself in front of a judge trying to explain yourself you would have an up hill battle at best.

i am certain if you were driving and say tested positive at a check point and found yourself in front of a judge it would absolutely help in that case like rest said.... however if your ever nailed for impairment... not sure how much the card helps.

DO NOT DRIVE WHILE IMPAIRED. 

By any substance or item to include but not limited to: eating food - talking/texting on the phone - trying to primp yourself.

medicate at home where your safe - Know your limits before driving and wait an appropriate amount of time to ensure everyones safety out there.

[Restorium2]

 

12 hours ago, zeebudz said:

I dunno, this all sounds pretty speculative.

- We all know that a THC-positive test has nothing to do with impairment, but if that's what is used to determine impairment I can't imagine a judge letting someone go because they were a regular medical user. Legit prescriptions from a doctor do not provide any protection from being charged with a a DUI.

- Companies with no drug policies do not have to make exceptions for card holders (regardless of the limited application for disability claims in MA ala Barbuto v. Advantage Sales).

- CPS & child custody judges have often not made allowances for medical users since it is still illegal at the federal level.

Currently the only benefit to having a card seems to be not getting arrested from procuring and consuming cannabis under certain circumstances.

Michigan Supreme Court holds that Medical Marijuana Patients can drive as long as they aren't actually intoxicated.

[zeebudz]

Well of course they can, just like anyone can drive as long as they aren't actually intoxicated (a word that should never be applied to cannabis as it comes from the Latin toxicum "to poison"). 

[Restorium2]

11 hours ago, zeebudz said:

Well of course they can, just like anyone can drive as long as they aren't actually intoxicated (a word that should never be applied to cannabis as it comes from the Latin toxicum "to poison"). 

I know people who have lost their drivers license because of a positive THC blood test when they were not impaired(intoxicated). 

The Supreme Court reversed the COA finding of zero tolerance, just for Michigan Medical Marijuana Patients. Having a card makes a difference was my point.