Printable View
As mentioned before in other threads, 19 does nothing to medical patients, growers and co-ops. They are not confined to 25 sq. feet, and the courts have already ruled that medical growers are basically not limited as to how much they can grow for medical users.
FAQs & Facts | yeson19.com
Thank you, WillyNilly. That makes sense since the two issues are covered under different sections of the code.
^ exactly. I'm not buying the arguement that Prop 19 will have any effects on med users.
currently, unless you have documented medical paperwork that can stand up in court, you are allowed to grow 0 plants in a 0 sf garden (or 0 x 0 ft.).
If you have more than one person living at that residence (lets say ohhh, 15) then you can 15 x 0 sf of legal garden space. :rastasmoke:
Vote Yes on 19 and end all that.
there should be 2 levels of legal spaceage or amounts ...one for the everyday weed smoker and one for the medical patients....
why should a medical patient.... that already has the right to grow without a space limitation.... be limited in space.... due to non medical new laws
Medical marijuana patients should have different laws that cater to medical patients directly....This is the issue that is at hand
They do. I've read your passionate arguments against Prop 19 in this and other threads and remain unconvinced by them because the codes that protect medical marijuana users are not overturned by Prop 19. IANAL, but it appears to me that Prop 19 creates a separate class of marijuana users with their own rights and restrictions, and does not materially impact mmj users.Quote:
Originally Posted by VapedG13
Not only do the existing mmj laws remain on the books, but they are buttressed by a solid body of case law up to and including the California Supreme Court.
Prop 19 is not perfect, but I just absentee-voted YES for it anyway. :)
No Jeff. Your interpretation is incorrect. Read it again.Quote:
Originally Posted by anotherjeff
It says "not more than twenty-five square feet per ... residence or .. the parcel". It can ONLY be cultivated by the "owner or lawful occupant .. resident or guest".
So, yes, if you have 40 acres and a half dozen wives and lovers living on the land - there can only exist a 25 sq ft plot.
I rececently went to a round table discussion with our local police chief, who is, BTW, a very enlightened man. He actually cooperates with local growers and distributors to help us comply with the law. He does not like the law, and says it is a bad law. It does not clarify or make our lives easier - it clouds and confuses and will spend years in court getting massaged into something useful and meaningful.
We are poking the Big Bear in the eye. Right now the Feds are leaving us alone for less than 100 plants. How will you like it if that changes? It can, you know. All it takes is the current White House resident to change his mind - or a new president to change the policy. The first thing that will happen is the Feds will sue California (just like they are doing to Arizona for trying to protect their citizens against illegal immigrants). In the meantime there will be arrests and defendants will spend lots of money defending themselves. Our Chief is hip to the intent of the law - but does not like it as written.
Do you really think, for example, that the Feds are going to let Oakland grow acres of indoor? Not a chance. They will bust that gig WIDE open - and it will attract a LOT of heat on us too.
The Medical Law is not changed by 19 - learn it, comply with it and everyone will be happy. Be flexible: watch the laws and the fist fight developing between the Feds and the States - and mind that you don't get caught in the middle of it unless you have hundreds of thousands in your "Legal Defense" fund.
Happy, happy, happy.
Now, back to trimming. Damn, I hate trim season.