Jump to content

Patient To Patient Trnasfer


Recommended Posts

Patient to patient transfer is it legal in Michigan. Please explain to me your source.

 

Thanks in advance

The laws n rules was set up for p2p..Like where else can or could a patinet and or caregiver get clones,meds,advice ,ect? They can not go to Riteaid, Walgreens,ect to get any of the meds or clones..Can not go to the State Of Michigan and purchase them..So where would you think? P2P..make any since? the people who wrote the law,New in advance we would all HAVE to work together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its clearly written into the law but law enforcement depending on location is going to twist the law anyway they please to meet their ends so id be very carefull assisting people you wouldnt die for.

 

 

 

"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.

(11) "Paraphernalia" means any item defined as "drug paraphernalia"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its clearly written into the law but law enforcement depending on location is going to twist the law anyway they please to meet their ends so id be very carefull assisting people you wouldnt die for.

 

 

 

"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.

(11) "Paraphernalia" means any item defined as "drug paraphernalia"

 

That's not all that clear. It's clear to me that a patient can get their meds where ever the need to. The other patient imo is not allowed to transfer their meds by my interpretation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, that was my interpretation as well Jessie, the buyer is protected, but the seller is not.

 

But, here's a twist, a CG can sell to ANY patient. It says right in the law, a CG is protected in providing "a" patient with meds. It no where says "his/her" patient, it says "a" patient. So on that, a CG could sell to a PT, who if that PT is also a CG, could then in turn sell to another PT. All of this would be protected by the letter of the law.

 

DISCLAIMER: I am not a lawyer. You want to get into this activity, please consult and preferrably put on retainer a lawyer well versed in the MMMA. Let them tell you what they can and what they can't defend.

 

Cedar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not all that clear. It's clear to me that a patient can get their meds where ever the need to. The other patient imo is not allowed to transfer their meds by my interpretation.

Its clear to me and many others but just like an abstract painting each individuals going to see it in a different way or light or see a meaning as something total opposite from what another sees it as IMO any type of p2p transfer should be dealt with discreetly anyway .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jessie, I beg to differ, What then is the definition of DELIVER that you and the judge go by that is different than a plain language definition?

 

"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.

(11) "Paraphernalia" means any item defined as "drug paraphernalia"

 

So you see, there is no gray area there. Period. What else described in the act could/does DELIVERY apply to?

 

That's not all that clear. It's clear to me that a patient can get their meds where ever the need to. The other patient imo is not allowed to transfer their meds by my interpretation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jessie, I beg to differ, What then is the definition of DELIVER that you and the judge go by that is different than a plain language definition?

 

"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.

(11) "Paraphernalia" means any item defined as "drug paraphernalia"

 

So you see, there is no gray area there. Period. What else described in the act could/does DELIVERY apply to?

OK, there it is there is no gray area. (DELIVERY) (TRANSFER)= medical use.

 

Got it. My bad.

 

I will concur. Nothing illegal about P2P. Except, if they catch you doing one. Be safe when doing this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not all that clear. It's clear to me that a patient can get their meds where ever the need to. The other patient imo is not allowed to transfer their meds by my interpretation.

 

Please note that there is a difference between "acquire" and "transfer."

 

Acquire looks at what the person gaining the herb does to receive. Transfer is handing the herb to someone else.

 

A third word that is being ignored is "delivery." This is a law. It's not talking about what the pizza driver does. It's talking about things like "delivery of a controlled substance."

 

Acquire, transfer and delivery are items that are protected as "medical use."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, here is my opinion, and as stated numerous times before, I am not a lawyer.

 

If you transfer to a dispensary (delivery which we already determined was OK) and that dispensary is only selling to registered people, then you can argue medical use. Because the end result is it is going to a qualifying patient. It is taking a short stop somewhere else, but still, going to be medical use. And as long as the dispensary operators are registered, then they can possess.

 

Now, some judges agree, some disagree, some dispensaries use a locker system which some judges say is OK, some say they are not.

 

It is all up in the air, and it will take a few cases going to the supreme court to straighten out. We just need to have the RIGHT cases go there, not ones where people are abusing the system for personal gain.

 

Cedar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its clear to me and many others but just like an abstract painting each individuals going to see it in a different way or light or see a meaning as something total opposite from what another sees it as IMO any type of p2p transfer should be dealt with discreetly anyway .

 

There is a basic reason for this. They don't like this law. Since it doesn't say what they wish it did, they claim to be confused in order to ignore it.

 

Much of how this law is viewed depends on the objective of the person reading it. Some of those in power, leo judges etc., look at the MMMA for the way that it may be used to put people in jail. This is a basic flaw. This law was written to keep people out of jail, not put them in.

 

So those that are used to using laws to put people in jail are confused. They don't understand that this is a law written by cannabis people for cannabis people for the purpose of protecting them.

 

A loophole in this law doesn't get people off from criminal charges. A loophole in this law puts people IN jail. And that is exactly what "they" are looking for. Loopholes "they" can use to completely ignore this law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a basic reason for this. They don't like this law. Since it doesn't say what they wish it did, they claim to be confused in order to ignore it.

 

Much of how this law is viewed depends on the objective of the person reading it. Some of those in power, leo judges etc., look at the MMMA for the way that it may be used to put people in jail. This is a basic flaw. This law was written to keep people out of jail, not put them in.

 

So those that are used to using laws to put people in jail are confused. They don't understand that this is a law written by cannabis people for cannabis people for the purpose of protecting them.

 

A loophole in this law doesn't get people off from criminal charges. A loophole in this law puts people IN jail. And that is exactly what "they" are looking for. Loopholes "they" can use to completely ignore this law.

 

Witch brings up my question

 

.. Leo will state that just because u don't know or understand the laws, that don't matter you will still be charged.

 

Why can they claim they don't understand it and be just??? They need to be charged just like everyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...