Section 8 protection

fattiemcnuggins

fattiemcnuggins

Well-Known Member
That just isn't the case Bob. We don't want anarchy. We want our privacy protected.
When I send something to LARA regarding my medical use of marijuana, I feel my privacy is being violated.

dr. patient confidentiality?. doesn't sound like it.
 
GregS

GregS

Well-Known Member
I am also suggesting that comprehensive discussion of this issue, and the attendant understanding by the community, can play to help those who get caught up in the grinder. We cannot offer help and meaningful support without that.
 
Dr. Bob

Dr. Bob

Well-Known Member
fattiemcnuggins said:
That just isn't the case Bob. We don't want anarchy. We want our privacy protected.
When I send something to LARA regarding my medical use of marijuana, I feel my privacy is being violated.

dr. patient confidentiality?. doesn't sound like it.
Click to expand...
There are no medical records sent to the state, just the application. That is in a database. There is dr/pt confidentiality with your medical records at the office just like at any other office, and like any other office they can only be released by court order.

If the objection is to telling the state you want to use MMJ under the program, that is a requirement of the program. You have to apply for a card.

Dr. Bob
 
GregS

GregS

Well-Known Member
Dr. Bob said:
Already put up my credentials on the MMMA, no need to repeat them here.

At least the discussion seems to be going well. Doesn't look like they buy it here either.

Section 8 is a life ring only. A last ditch defense to go on the mercy of the courts to avoid conviction. It is expensive, difficult, and by no means assurance of avoiding conviction. Have a look at Bob Redden's case. It has been going on for 4 years, with doctors, legal teams, etc.

Bottom line it is foolish to use it as a basis of your actions under the MMMA, and the arguments using it to support unlimited amounts, unlimited caregivers, no need to register, etc will set folks on a journey through the criminal justice system they are ill prepared to to succeed if they rely on information they get on the internet. Information they took as gospel simply because it was what they wanted to hear- that they could do anything they wanted and couldn't be prosecuted.

Dr. Bob
Click to expand...
We need to see the CV Townsend. Will you kindly point out where we can find those credentials? Do you mean to say the quickie posts where you state, without verification or the possibilility of being vetted, things that have little to no real bearing on what we need to know?

No CV?

No surprise.

Otherwise, thanks for the observation. It has been repeated, and repeated, and repeated, Dr. Obvious.
 
GregS

GregS

Well-Known Member
Redden, bless his heart, apparently does not have the wherewithal to move his case forward. It is for just that reason that it is necessary that the community have the clear understanding of which I speak. He is at the mercy of attorneys who obviously are not doing the job, and the prosecutor, who is enjoying every minute. My expectation is that the means to help move that case forward will appear in this thread. Kingpinn's lawyer, Matt Abel, appears to be asleep at the wheel and Larry needs help. That case has not been resolved even though the SC handed it back to the lower court with instructions to resolve it. Townsend would have them continue to twist in the breeze.
 
buckaroo bonzai

buckaroo bonzai

Well-Known Member
DaleRoberts said:
May as well just call it speaking about technicalities that can leave you jailed more so than not.
Click to expand...

we are a nation of laws based on technicalities.....

look how the rich exploit them.....
.and have access beyond us little guys abilities

how much can you afford?

-justice
-health care
-education


the lawyers are pulling pts around by their diks on roller skates here in Michigan-IMO:eyesmoke:
 
GregS

GregS

Well-Known Member
buckaroo bonzai said:
can someone post these ""3prongs""-- so we know what to expect should some PA try and poke us with them...thx
Click to expand...
Here ya go buck:

(1) A physician has stated that, in the physician's professional opinion, after having completed a full assessment of the patient's medical history and current medical condition made in the course of a bona fide physician-patient relationship, the patient is likely to receive therapeutic or palliative benefit from the medical 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;

(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
 
GregS

GregS

Well-Known Member
TheMan13 said:
Obviously elsewhere, but the actual act of providing to an MJ patient may be arguable under sec 8?
Click to expand...
Yes. You would need to prove, by oath or affirmation, that the patient regarded you as their caregiver at the time of the transaction and that a doctor has stated... . Verifiable documentation is the smart way to go. Such a document's provisions can last minutes or years, depending on the parties. I recommend carbonless copies, witnessed by a third party, possibly notarized, with copies kept by the patient and caregiver, and possibly by the witness. Possession limits are defined as what is necessary to provide an uninterrupted supply.
 
GregS

GregS

Well-Known Member
And, with such an agreement, there is no waiting for the state to send a card. Transactions can begin immediately.
 
Figong

Figong

Well-Known Member
ProfessorPotSnob said:
Here comes the bullshit broom , time to sweep this one up ! Most here are compliant with the Act and all Rules and Regulations as the time to interpret the law on an individual basis is long gone ..

So your saying I can grow all I want with the Docs cert and offer it to whomever I choose ? Wow that sounds like the black market dealer who holds a wild card at the table . I guess in the end I am not one to throw all my chips down as I like to eat in private and at home verses the luxury of a Cell Diner !

Thanks for the thread as I know its going to be a real fun one , just wait and see !
Click to expand...
I'm legit, as are quite a few others that I know of. If one grows illegally and think that he/she getting away with something.. that's for them to deal with.
 
Dr. Bob

Dr. Bob

Well-Known Member
GregS said:
Redden, bless his heart, apparently does not have the wherewithal to move his case forward. It is for just that reason that it is necessary that the community have the clear understanding of which I speak. He is at the mercy of attorneys who obviously are not doing the job, and the prosecutor, who is enjoying every minute. My expectation is that the means to help move that case forward will appear in this thread. Kingpinn's lawyer, Matt Abel, appears to be asleep at the wheel and Larry needs help. That case has not been resolved even though the SC handed it back to the lower court with instructions to resolve it. Townsend would have them continue to twist in the breeze.
Click to expand...
Ah, so I am responsible for them twisting in the breeze. Not because they didn't qualify under section 4 and had to rely on section 8.

Interesting twist of logic.

By all means, carry on.

Dr. Bob
 
GregS

GregS

Well-Known Member
The CV Bob. Is it an embarrassment?

You would have discussion censored, preventing brainstorming that can help those guys.

Of course. Your expert witness fees are at risk. The more we know, the less you can bill for. Despite that, there will still be work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top