Is p2p selling legal?

[JeromeT]

RZZA - It is irrevelant if I am paying attention to people's names. LOL Quit insulting people, you are weakening your case.

Re: "to whom he or she is connected" They did not describe the definition of connected in the act so it can be argued that since we are registered, then all are connected through the MM act.

 

[Buddy Ganga]

I have several times Skippy..

That law pertains to a non qualifying patient caregiver..

Like Deprave. He is restricted to dealing with only his assigned patients.
Because he is NOT a qualified patient. He is just a registered caregiver..

Now answer this:

Why is the only law that states a person is in violation of the medical law is if they sell or transfer "TO A" non qualifying patient ?


(k) Any registered qualifying patient or registered primary caregiver who sells marihuana to someone who is not allowed to use marihuana for medical purposes under this act shall have his or her registry identification card revoked and is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $2,000.00, or both, in addition to any other penalties for the distribution of marihuana.

Second question, why does the state specificly define both "qualifying patient" and "registered primary caregiver "
as two different types of registerd card holders if they are one in the same as you claim?

 

[rzza]

RZZA - It is irrevelant if I am paying attention to people's names. LOL Quit insulting people, you are weakening your case.

Re: "to whom he or she is connected" They did not describe the definition of connected in the act so it can be argued that since we are registered, then all are connected through the MM act.

ITS NOT the word connected. whoa people...

its the "to whom he is"

 

[Buddy Ganga]

RZZA - It is irrevelant if I am paying attention to people's names. LOL Quit insulting people, you are weakening your case.

Re: "to whom he or she is connected" They did not describe the definition of connected in the act so it can be argued that since we are registered, then all are connected through the MM act.

Actually the one and only law he ever posts is specificly to non qualifying caregivers.
A caregiver who is not a "qualifying patient".
They are only allowed to deal with their assigned patients/other caregivers since they are not "qualifying patients" themselves.

 

[JeromeT]

RE: 'its the "to whom he is"'

Enlighten me

 

[rzza]

i just did

 

[rzza]

i am shocked that you need assistance comprehending this sentence but i will enlighten you.

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



in layman terms the above sentence says this .....

for helping a patient that registered them as their caregiver, with the medical use of marijuana in accordance with this act.

 

[rzza]

actually its already layman terms. so this is just elementary terms.

 

[Serapis]

Where in here does it state that a patient can transfer to another patient, the drug, Marijuana? WHERE? The topic of this thread is P2P all you posted was the patient can have up to 2.5 ounces on his person at any one time... No where in there does it condone or suggest P2P transfers of the drug....

You are still wrong....

Try posting something other then your opinion if you are going to claim I am wrong or missleading people.
If your claims are correct then it souldn't be that hard to do.



A qualifying patient who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall not be subject to arrest, for the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act,

(h) "Qualifying patient" means a person who has been diagnosed by a physician as having a debilitating medical condition.
(e) "Medical use" means the acquisition, transfer

4. Protections for the "Medical Use" of Marihuana.
Sec. 4. (a) 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 this act, provided that the qualifying patient possesses an amount of marihuana that does not exceed 2.5 ounces of usable marihuana, and, if the qualifying patient has not specified that a primary caregiver will be allowed under state law to cultivate marihuana for the qualifying patient, 12 marihuana plants kept in an enclosed, locked facility. Any incidental amount of seeds, stalks, and unusable roots shall also be allowed under state law and shall not be included in this amount.

333.26423 Definitions.

(e) "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.

333.26423 Definitions.

(h) "Qualifying patient" means a person who has been diagnosed by a physician as having a debilitating medical condition.

(g) "Primary caregiver" means a person who is at least 21 years old and who has agreed to assist with a patient's medical use of marihuana and who has never been convicted of a felony involving illegal drugs.

 

[Serapis]

FINALLY.... lol why did it take you so long and with so much back and forth before you finally pasted the section that answers the original damn question regarding p2p

"(k) Any registered qualifying patient or registered primary caregiver who sells marihuana to someone who is not allowed to use marihuana for medical purposes under this act shall have his or her registry identification card revoked and is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $2,000.00, or both, in addition to any other penalties for the distribution of marihuana."

 

[rzza]

FINALLY.... lol why did it take you so long and with so much back and forth before you finally pasted the section that answers the original damn question regarding p2p

this doesnt say much serapis. this is simply stating its illegal for us to sell to people who are not patients. but it doesnt make it legal if they are patients.

 

[Serapis]

It could be translated that way.... but any common and reasonable lay person could read that to infer the the opposite is then legal, if the law had to stake out exactly what was illegal. But you gotta agree, he should have opened fire with this section, not used it last... lol

this doesnt say much serapis. this is simply stating its illegal for us to sell to people who are not patients. but it doesnt make it legal if they are patients.

 

[Pimpernickel]

From the DFP web chat this afternoon I heard about two cases related to P2P:
http://norml.net/attached/PeopleXvXHealthXCenterX-XCircuitXOpinionX03-24-11.pdf
http://www.ourmidland.com/news/article_00688ad4-5ce0-11e0-a9e8-001cc4c002e0.html

How would and out of state patient get MMJ w/o P2P?

j) A registry identification card, or its equivalent, that is issued under the laws of another state, district, territory, commonwealth, or insular possession of the United States that allows the medical use of marihuana by a visiting qualifying patient, or to allow a person to assist with a visiting qualifying patient's medical use of marihuana, shall have the same force and effect as a registry identification card issued by the department.

 

[rzza]

the opposite of 'selling to non patients' is 'not selling to non patients'. not 'selling to patients'.

 

[Buddy Ganga]

FINALLY.... lol why did it take you so long and with so much back and forth before you finally pasted the section that answers the original damn question regarding p2p

LMAO!

I posted it back on page 3.

The only time a tranfer is not P to P is if the caregiver is not a qualified patient.
Then it is a caregiver to patient transfer since any qualifying patient that does not assign a caregiver is in fact a caregiver automaticly!

And I didn't repost everything because I thought it was funny how Razz would overlook anything he couldn't argue. Digging his whole deeper and deeper with every reply and insult.

 

[rzza]

LMAO!

I posted it back on page 3.

The only time a tranfer is not P to P is if the caregiver is not a qualified patient.
Then it is a caregiver to patient transfer since any qualifying patient that does not assign a caregiver is in fact a caregiver automaticly!

And I didn't repost everything because I thought it was funny how Razz would overlook anything he couldn't argue. Digging his whole deeper and deeper with every reply and insult.

its a hole. and im not digging one. i have rebuttal ed everything you have mentioned and im done now. seriously, like i doubt ill even open this thread again. i doubt people will read through the whole debate anyhow.

if the subject is brought up again then i will be happy to comment. probably not in this thread though.

 

[Sciεncε]

(g) A person 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 providing a registered qualifying patient or a registered primary caregiver with marihuana paraphernalia for purposes of a qualifying patient's medical use of marihuana.

Definition of medical use:

(e) "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.




As long as both are registered patients.

This isn't the real issue, the trick lies in considering the payment for your services rather than the weight of the sale. This obviously is a bit of a loop hole at the moment, so I'd still consider it grey market.

 

[Buddy Ganga]

This isn't the real issue, the trick lies in considering the payment for your services rather than the weight of the sale. This obviously is a bit of a loop hole at the moment, so I'd still consider it grey market.

The law says it's completely legal to be compensated for your production cost's.