[ironman]

You both need to re-read the article. Your comments seem to imply the dog was shot in the rear as he charged the officers (charging BUTT-FIRST?) but that's not what the article says.

I think the home owners do have a case that they were not given reasonable time to respond. On the other hand 79 plants seems like way more than needed for any one person's medical use.

[azhenfud]

"You both need to re-read the article."

This is from the article:

"...was shot at nine times and killed as he charged officers, police said.... Then, at least one officer fired at the dog three times, striking him once in the rear."

I take it the "Then" means "afterwards" of the "was shot at nine times and killed", which equates to "The sorry shot couldn't hit a dead dog but once out of three shots and then only in the rear".

[azhenfud]

"On the other hand 79 plants seems like way more than needed for any one person's medical use."

The homeowner's name was "Filgo". Sounds like a name for a "filling station". ;-)

[robertpaulsen]

"On the other hand 79 plants seems like way more than needed for any one person's medical use."

Oh, I don't know about that, ironman. If he has glaucoma, he needs a joint every two hours, 24 hours/day, 7 days/week, 52 weeks/year.

If he rolls them fat, it adds up.

Then again, since smoking marijuana decreases blood flow to the optic nerve (that which the patient is trying to protect), what's the point?