C
CobbCreekBob
- 305
- 43
(Q. Who does medical marijuana belong to?
A. Medical marijuana is the property of the patient, not the caregiver or the grower. The caregiver or grower must give the medical marijuana to the patient any time it is requested. The patient may reimburse the grower for costs of supplies and utilities associated with the production of medical marijuana, but it is not required. Growers are prohibited from requiring a patient to pay for the marijuana
willfully possessing the property of another person and not letting them have it is considered theft, isn't it? I suspect that's how they look at it, why would NORML of all people advise patients to do these walkthrus if they aren't legal and binding? According to the law, you have to give it up when requested.
I think in Cali, its different. I also think its possible this is the reason they claim contracts hold no legal water, other than for reference. Civilly, the contract should matter. I have to wonder also, in a county with a anti-mmj stance or city for that matter, wouldn't use a call per a dispute or tell the dept to go out on these calls, so as to documentation to further his cause, hypothetically speaking, of course. Im not being bold either, I can't get it to stay off after the quote, apologies!
A. Medical marijuana is the property of the patient, not the caregiver or the grower. The caregiver or grower must give the medical marijuana to the patient any time it is requested. The patient may reimburse the grower for costs of supplies and utilities associated with the production of medical marijuana, but it is not required. Growers are prohibited from requiring a patient to pay for the marijuana
willfully possessing the property of another person and not letting them have it is considered theft, isn't it? I suspect that's how they look at it, why would NORML of all people advise patients to do these walkthrus if they aren't legal and binding? According to the law, you have to give it up when requested.
I think in Cali, its different. I also think its possible this is the reason they claim contracts hold no legal water, other than for reference. Civilly, the contract should matter. I have to wonder also, in a county with a anti-mmj stance or city for that matter, wouldn't use a call per a dispute or tell the dept to go out on these calls, so as to documentation to further his cause, hypothetically speaking, of course. Im not being bold either, I can't get it to stay off after the quote, apologies!
Last edited: