Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Disclosure:

The statements in this forum have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration and are generated by non-professional writers. Any products described are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

Website Disclosure:

This forum contains general information about diet, health and nutrition. The information is not advice and is not a substitute for advice from a healthcare professional.

(Sigh!) Back to the old California limits!

Discussion in 'Medical Marijuana Usage and Applications' started by Storm Crow, May 27, 2009.

  1. Hi guys- just keeping you up on the latest! Remember how the old Cali limits were dumped? Well, they are (temporarily) back! :(

    They "depublished" the ruling since a higher court is looking at the issue. Which means back to where we started. So unless you have it WRITTEN ON YOUR REC on just how many plants you can grow- you are stuck with the old limits AGAIN! Sorry!

    Here's a thread on it- ATTN: California Patinets/Caregivers: People v Phomkhady depublished - International Cannagraphic Magazine Forums

    Granny :wave:
  2. slight set back, but imo limits don't really hurt anyone. If you really do need more, your doctor can decide and write that for you, but for most people who want to grow they are fine, unless they are trying to sell or share their medicine.
  3. this is a bummer to hear :(

    it's great that the courts have nothing more important on their plate so they can concentrate on MMJ :rolleyes:
  4. Yes, I'd sure hate to see them concentrating on that multi-billion dollar deficit their incompetence has created...

    This isn't as bad as it sounds, though, it is merely a guideline for law enforcement.

    If you aren't growing more plants than than your rec says, this is a moot point. It's just a review of a ruling, a technicality really.

    The real problem is that counties within the state, are not complying with state law, and trying to impose whatever limits they can within their counties.

    That's the real problem. The failure of Law Enforcement to understand the laws they are supposed to uphold.
  5. Guys, the court system isn't to blame, it is what it is. It is not an intelligent entity, it has no free-will. It has to do what the people want, and apparently someone wants to revisit these limits.
  6. Oh how I wish that was true. Not to be another unsatisfied citizen (yet to be one at the same time) but I think it has been made clear that courts do not uphold what people want in plenty of cases (gay marriage?).

    Now we're talking. :D:smoking:
  7. Not to get off topic, and believe me I am not happy about the prop 8 situation, BUT, in that circumstance the court WAS doing exactly what the voters wanted. Remember, Prop 8 was passed by a majority of voters in this state. Right or wrong, if people don't vote, then they have no say in our government.

    Our court system is one of the best in the world - the entire concept of judging your fellow man is inherently flawed in the first place, thus any system that seeks to do that is flawed. However that may be, we entered a social contract with our governments, as such we agreed to be adjudicated by the system.

    It could be much, much worse, look at pretty much any South-East Asian country.
  8. Be diligent Cali folk. Marijuana was "temporarily" set as a Schudule 1 drug until the commissioned reports were finished with their recommendation (which ended up being a decrim style approach)...that was in 1972.

Share This Page