injunction/court case updates

TheRealDman

Well-Known Member
Time to go illegal, im already preparing. Il always have my doctor note pad me gpd and plant count. Problem is these LPs are shaping the system. Just like Tweed training the Toronto PD...witch spiked alot of mmar grows being inspected.
Wait, what? You're saying TPS inspected MMAR grows? Any links to these inspections? As per MMAR Reg's, only HC officials can inspect MMAR grows, and even then...their access is extremely limited. If the cops ever come to my door, I'd show them my pinks and politely tell them to fuk-off!
 

nsbudca

Well-Known Member
I was speaking with my LP the other day.. While I had them on the phone.. I asked if they were nervous about the revision of the laws that were to come into affect this August. The man I was talking to basically said if the courts granted the right to grow a single plant per patient, then technically that would suffice. But he expected us to be somewhere in the 3-6 plant area at best. So they're not worried.

I'm sure they have pretty good sources.. Being that they're tight with HC.. Not looking good IMO.
 
Last edited:

nsbudca

Well-Known Member
6 plants....omg what a laugh. I'm sure everyone will get right on that.
Here comes another shit show.
The issue is that for a lot of the mmpr people who never had grow rights, six plants would have them jumping for joy. For the mmar guys, it's a slap in the face. If there are enough satisfied patients, then HC will tell the discouraged patients to suck a dick basically. Definitely another shit show coming.
 

GroErr

Well-Known Member
F**k HC, the feds and the provincial governments. No licenses for me, ever, they will never have my name in a government database other than the essentials like taxes, passport, driver's license.

We shouldn't have long to wait now, they'll have to announce something about the med program very soon. Surprised there have been no leaks. Not that it matters to me but for those who toe the line and wouldn't grow illegally, there should be some relief.

I certainly wouldn't count on continuance of the designated grower program though if that's what some of you guys are referring to. Those days are numbered, it was a scam in a lot of cases anyhow. I know 2 guys going out of business soon (unless they find another loophole) and I don't feel sorry for them at all, they never gave a shit about patients, they were always in it for the $. No different than the greedy government pieces of shit looking to make a buck off sick people imo..
 

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
I was speaking with my LP the other day.. While I had them on the phone.. I asked if they were nervous about the revision of the laws that were to come into affect this August. The man I was talking to basically said if the courts granted the right to grow a single plant per patient, then technically that would suffice. But he expected us to be somewhere in the 3-6 plant area at best. So they're not worried.

I'm sure they have pretty good sources.. Being that they're tight with HC.. Not looking good IMO.
Your LP is out to fucking lunch. He/she is guessing just like the rest of us, only they really suck at it. HC cannot determine dosage.Period. No judge is going to say a patient can safely grow 1/3 of his required medicine, but must pay LP's for the rest. What would be the societal harm in growing 100% as opposed to 30%. 1-6 plants might be the rule for rec, but it ain't happening for medical.
 

GroErr

Well-Known Member
1-6 plants might be the rule for rec, but it ain't happening for medical.
I don't necessarily disagree with you on the plant counts but based on anything I've seen/read, including references to US counts in med states, 6 is looking like the high number. Now if that's 6x flowering plants, that's not unreasonable imo. There could certainly be exceptions in some cases where a patient would need more but that will likely be fought in the courts.

Even indoor where typically I'm running smaller plants, pulling a qp per plant with any decent producing strain is easily attainable. Perpetually (3x plants every 4 weeks) that would be 12 oz. per month. If I were doing it, I'd be running 3x 10gal plants perpetually, pulling 3x mature plants every 4 weeks and pulling say 24 oz. every 4 weeks. I don't know how much you consume but damn that's a lot of flower/kief/rosin or however you want to cut it.
 

bigmanc

Well-Known Member
Wait, what? You're saying TPS inspected MMAR grows? Any links to these inspections? As per MMAR Reg's, only HC officials can inspect MMAR grows, and even then...their access is extremely limited. If the cops ever come to my door, I'd show them my pinks and politely tell them to fuk-off!
If you did that it would be completely illegal. In your 1st package from MMAR it outlines you have to cooperate with police in regards to plant count and storage. Tweed has trained the TPS about regulations. Google.
 

gb123

Well-Known Member
9 times out of ten if they are known, they are illegal grow ops using MMAR.

Simple shit....No cop or Inspector will ever know about someones health information...
already in court because of that too.
 

Flash63

Well-Known Member
My buddy (who is a DG)was told by the local drug squad,that he didn't care about plant counts as it was not his job,as long as he had his pinks in order...that was a couple of yrs ago,though
 

TheRealDman

Well-Known Member
If you did that it would be completely illegal. In your 1st package from MMAR it outlines you have to cooperate with police in regards to plant count and storage. Tweed has trained the TPS about regulations. Google.
Nowhere in the MMAR docs does it say we have to let law enforcement into our dwellings! If a cop wants to inspect my grow, he better have a valid warrant!
 

TheRealDman

Well-Known Member
Tweed training police...il skip the articles and just let them admit it

https://twitter.com/tweedinc/status/710501583713280003
I don't need luck, it's not in the MMAR Reg's. Regardless of what the cops "think" they know, or how publicly traded companies try to school them as to what they think the Reg's are...it doesn't change the fact that law enforcement has absolutely no right to inspect my MMAR grow.
 

bigmanc

Well-Known Member
I don't need luck, it's not in the MMAR Reg's. Regardless of what the cops "think" they know, or how publicly traded companies try to school them as to what they think the Reg's are...it doesn't change the fact that law enforcement has absolutely no right to inspect my MMAR grow.
57. (1) To verify that the production of marihuana is in conformity with these Regulations and a licence to produce, an inspector may, at any reasonable time, enter any place where the inspector believes on reasonable grounds that marihuana is being produced or kept by the holder of the licence to produce, and may, for that purpose,
(a) open and examine any container found there that could contain marihuana;
(b) examine anything found there that is used or is capable of being used to produce or keep marihuana;
(c) examine any records, electronic data or other documents found there dealing with marihuana, other than records dealing with the medical condition of a person, and make copies or take extracts;
(d) use, or cause to be used, any computer system found there to examine electronic data referred to in paragraph (c);
(e) reproduce, or cause to be reproduced, any document from electronic data referred to in paragraph (c) in the form of a printout or other output;
(f) take any document or output referred to in paragraph (c) or (e) for examination or copying;
(g) examine any substance found there and, for the purpose of analysis, take samples, as reasonably required; and
(h) seize and retain any substance found there, if the inspector believes, on reasonable grounds, that it is necessary.
(2) Despite subsection (1), an inspector may not enter a dwelling-place without the consent of an occupant.

The RCMP have been known to act on behalf of the "inspector"

Im not going to argue with you anymore but as you can see they have great length into inspecting your grow site. So ya...you need luck.
 

TheRealDman

Well-Known Member
You didn't have to post the Reg's...I have 22 copies of them. ;)

(2) Despite subsection (1), an inspector may not enter a dwelling-place without the consent of an occupant
"You DO NOT have my consent"...nuff said!
 

doingdishes

Well-Known Member
I was speaking with my LP the other day.. While I had them on the phone.. I asked if they were nervous about the revision of the laws that were to come into affect this August. The man I was talking to basically said if the courts granted the right to grow a single plant per patient, then technically that would suffice. But he expected us to be somewhere in the 3-6 plant area at best. So they're not worried.

I'm sure they have pretty good sources.. Being that they're tight with HC.. Not looking good IMO.
i read that they are working on access with no mention of homegrows.
i wouldn't buy into what was said from anyone who isn't official. HC hasn't released anything so unless they have an insider, we're all on speculation.
if they cap us at 6-it's back to court!
 
Top