| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/02/2008 02:43:56 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The ultimate argument is the question why it isn't some banner crop in the rest of the world if the US is simply being puritanical because it's related to pot. |
Are you suggesting it's a question of economics? That's a strange reason to make the cultivation of a particular plant illegal.
If you're not suggesting it's illegal to grow because it isn't economically viable, what is left but its surface relationship to marijuana? And that being the reason, it does smack of a puritanical, or rather, fearful, or even totalitarian, perspective on its production. |
|
|
|
05/02/2008 02:45:20 PM · #27 |
No one wants dandelions, but I can still farm them.
Who's gonna stop me? ... I'm a non-profit btw ;)
Originally posted by BeeCee:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The ultimate argument is the question why it isn't some banner crop in the rest of the world if the US is simply being puritanical because it's related to pot.
Here's a quote from this page looking at global industrial use of hemp:
"Despite the merits of hemp fiber and oil, the global market has been on a downward trend and remains negligible in magnitude. Total world trade in hemp fiber and seed amounted to only $10.4 million in 1996! Processing costs are one of the largest obstacles the hemp industry faces. For example, bleached softwood pulp currently sells for about $800 (U.S.) per ton compared to hemp pulp at about $2,100 (U.S.) per ton. New processing technology must be found for hemp to be cost competitive."
Doesn't sound like a panacea to me... |
Maybe not, but is that any reason to keep it illegal? I seriously haven't heard one good argument on why it should be. |
|
|
|
|
05/02/2008 02:49:24 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The ultimate argument is the question why it isn't some banner crop in the rest of the world if the US is simply being puritanical because it's related to pot.
Here's a quote from this page looking at global industrial use of hemp:
"Despite the merits of hemp fiber and oil, the global market has been on a downward trend and remains negligible in magnitude. Total world trade in hemp fiber and seed amounted to only $10.4 million in 1996! Processing costs are one of the largest obstacles the hemp industry faces. For example, bleached softwood pulp currently sells for about $800 (U.S.) per ton compared to hemp pulp at about $2,100 (U.S.) per ton. New processing technology must be found for hemp to be cost competitive."
Doesn't sound like a panacea to me... |
We have William Randolph Hearst, Harry J. Anslinger and the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 to thank for the stunted technology. The processing costs are not the only factor to be considered. Deforestation, pollution, crop renewal and more play a bigger role for the argument of hemp production. |
|
|
|
05/02/2008 02:51:10 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by metatate:
And we shouldn't allow poppy seeds on bagels because it will encourage the heroine addicts.
|
Poppy seeds actually contain enough drug to show up on some tests, unlike commercial hemp. So yeah, why aren't THEY banned, following the hemp logic? (They ARE banned in Singapore and, I believe, the UAE)
eta after reading Erik's reply;
Couldn't those same reasons apply to MOST crops?
Message edited by author 2008-05-02 14:53:58. |
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:01:24 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by metatate:
No one wants dandelions, but I can still farm them. |
I want them. The leaves make great salad. You can actually buy them in the grocery store... but I digress. |
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:03:08 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by metatate:
No one wants dandelions, but I can still farm them. |
I want them. The leaves make great salad. You can actually buy them in the grocery store... but I digress. |
You can roast the roots and grind them for a coffee substitute! |
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:06:35 PM · #32 |
| For that matter, why should any drugs be illegal? Whose business is it anyway if I want to destroy my mind with chemicals? |
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:14:05 PM · #33 |
I agree. But the thing is, we keep getting these things mixed together ... Industrial hemp vs. "pot". IF the general public demands freedom of our farmers to grow THC-free cannabis, maybe they can give it a shot and let the market decide.
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
For that matter, why should any drugs be illegal? Whose business is it anyway if I want to destroy my mind with chemicals? |
|
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:14:34 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
We have William Randolph Hearst, Harry J. Anslinger and the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 to thank for the stunted technology. The processing costs are not the only factor to be considered. Deforestation, pollution, crop renewal and more play a bigger role for the argument of hemp production. |
Actually, the Marijuana Tax Act specifically excluded industrial hemp. I understand that it was the 1970 Controlled Substances Act that changed that. |
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:14:50 PM · #35 |
OK, when did I ever say I favor it being illegal? I have merely said I think the people who push it have an ulterior motive because I don't think our environment, economic, and textile woes would disappear if we suddenly started growing hemp.
I'll keep my views of MJ to myself. To assume I'm staunchly against it being legalized is to paint me without knowing me.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:15:18 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
For that matter, why should any drugs be illegal? Whose business is it anyway if I want to destroy my mind with chemicals? |
The taxpayers who pay your medical bills? The drivers who get hit by your car? The kids who wind up becoming collateral damage to your choice?
I'd think those would represent a few groups who have an interest in the matter.
Message edited by author 2008-05-02 15:16:18.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:20:10 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
For that matter, why should any drugs be illegal? Whose business is it anyway if I want to destroy my mind with chemicals? |
The taxpayers who pay your medical bills? The drivers who get hit by your car? The kids who wind up becoming collateral damage to your choice?
I'd think those would represent a few groups who have an interest in the matter. |
I know your talking about drugs in general but just to make the point when was the last time a pot head caused a car accident, hurt a child or made more of a medical bill then the average smoker? |
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:22:53 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by bradshaw:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
For that matter, why should any drugs be illegal? Whose business is it anyway if I want to destroy my mind with chemicals? |
The taxpayers who pay your medical bills? The drivers who get hit by your car? The kids who wind up becoming collateral damage to your choice?
I'd think those would represent a few groups who have an interest in the matter. |
I know your talking about drugs in general but just to make the point when was the last time a pot head caused a car accident, hurt a child or made more of a medical bill then the average smoker? |
Your example would probably be better off if you used alcohol rather than tobacco...
|
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:24:45 PM · #39 |
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:26:05 PM · #40 |
In the early 1900's hemp was the biggest crop in the US. Look it up. Until marijuanaphobia hit in the 30's and hemp was deemed illegal due to its close relationship with cannabis sativa.
This is a great read on the history of hemp in the US starting way back in the 1600's where it was the law to grow hemp! lol You could pay your taxes with hemp back then, it was legal tender.
//blogs.salon.com/0002762/stories/2003/12/22/whyIsMarijuanaIllegal.html
There's an interesting video at the bottom of the page.
Message edited by author 2008-05-02 15:35:09. |
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:26:38 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
For that matter, why should any drugs be illegal? Whose business is it anyway if I want to destroy my mind with chemicals? |
The taxpayers who pay your medical bills? The drivers who get hit by your car? The kids who wind up becoming collateral damage to your choice?
I'd think those would represent a few groups who have an interest in the matter. |
Then, why are alcohol and tobacco legal? Accidents and disease related to those two substances kill more people than drugs.
You're talking about a different thing completely. Someone's decision to use drugs would not injure those people. Their decision to operate a vehicle under the influence is the critical decision in the cases you've given. Based on your arguments, we'd be safer if cars were outlawed.
I'm not saying that people who choose to use drugs shouldn't be held accountable for their actions, but why should simply using those drugs to feel good be a crime?
|
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:32:46 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by BeeCee:
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
We have William Randolph Hearst, Harry J. Anslinger and the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 to thank for the stunted technology. The processing costs are not the only factor to be considered. Deforestation, pollution, crop renewal and more play a bigger role for the argument of hemp production. |
Actually, the Marijuana Tax Act specifically excluded industrial hemp. I understand that it was the 1970 Controlled Substances Act that changed that. |
Not as I understand it. I thought the 1970 Controlled Substances Act was to Schedule (classify) the types of drugs to make it easier to create federal sentencing guidelines. The '37 MJ tax act was to outlaw hemp and MJ for racist and money reasons. WRH had invested a ton of cash to make paper from wood pulp and hemp paper threatened his investment and his newspaper. I could be wrong and I will look into it further but that is how I understood it. |
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:33:33 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by Jac:
In the early 1900's hemp was the biggest crop in the US. Look it up. Until marijuanaphobia hit in the 30's and hemp was deemed illegal due to its close relationship with cannabis sativa.
This is a great read on the history of hemp in the US starting way back in the 1600's where it was the law to grow hemp! lol You could pay your taxes with hemp back then, it was legal tender.
//blogs.salon.com/0002762/stories/2003/12/22/whyIsMarijuanaIllegal.html |
Another informative one.
"The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were drafted on hempen paper. During the Revolutionary War, Old Ironsides, our most formidable battleship, carried 60 tons of hempen sail and rope. Betsy Ross made the first American flag out of hempen "canvas," a word derived from cannabis. "Make the most of hempseed and sow it everywhere," declared George Washington in 1794." |
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:35:31 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Originally posted by BeeCee:
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
We have William Randolph Hearst, Harry J. Anslinger and the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 to thank for the stunted technology. The processing costs are not the only factor to be considered. Deforestation, pollution, crop renewal and more play a bigger role for the argument of hemp production. |
Actually, the Marijuana Tax Act specifically excluded industrial hemp. I understand that it was the 1970 Controlled Substances Act that changed that. |
Not as I understand it. I thought the 1970 Controlled Substances Act was to Schedule (classify) the types of drugs to make it easier to create federal sentencing guidelines. The '37 MJ tax act was to outlaw hemp and MJ for racist and money reasons. WRH had invested a ton of cash to make paper from wood pulp and hemp paper threatened his investment and his newspaper. I could be wrong and I will look into it further but that is how I understood it. |
Let me find the link again that I took it from... Apparently they basically chose to ignore the exemptions, with pressure from special interest groups as you mention.
eta; Under the Influence: The Disinformation Guide to Drugs page 212.
Message edited by author 2008-05-02 15:45:54. |
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:49:45 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by metatate:
No one wants dandelions, but I can still farm them. |
I want them. The leaves make great salad. You can actually buy them in the grocery store... but I digress. |
they're also loaded with B-vitamins, lethicin and they boost the serotonin levels in the brain. great stress reducers! and dandelion tea is very tasty, too. :)
|
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:55:38 PM · #46 |
But wait !!! Shouldn't you be spreading chemicals all over the place to get rid of them?
You never know what a weed could do !
I wonder if people that work for ChemLawn spread dandelion seeds from unmarked cars and helium balloons :()
Originally posted by sher:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by metatate:
No one wants dandelions, but I can still farm them. |
I want them. The leaves make great salad. You can actually buy them in the grocery store... but I digress. |
they're also loaded with B-vitamins, lethicin and they boost the serotonin levels in the brain. great stress reducers! and dandelion tea is very tasty, too. :) |
|
|
|
|
05/02/2008 03:58:55 PM · #47 |
I see what it is saying but this might clear it up just a touch.
Marihuana Tax Act of 1937
"The act did not itself criminalize the possession or usage of hemp, marijuana (archaic spelling "marihuana") or cannabis, but levied a tax equaling roughly one dollar on anyone who dealt commercially in cannabis, hemp or marijuana. It did, however, include penalty provisions and a complex Regulation 1 codifying the elaborate rules of enforcement marijuana cannabis or hemp handlers were subject to. Violation of these procedures could result in a fine of up to $2000 and five years' imprisonment. The net effect was to make it too risky for anyone to deal in the substance until World War II required the United States Department of Agriculture to make its 1942 movie "Hemp for Victory". The film encouraged and taught farmers to grow variants of hemp suitable as raw material for hawsers used by U.S Marines; the hemp was used as a substitute for other raw materials that were blocked by Japan.
"
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana_Tax_Act
|
|
|
|
05/02/2008 04:16:33 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
I see what it is saying but this might clear it up just a touch.
Marihuana Tax Act of 1937
"The act did not itself criminalize the possession or usage of hemp, marijuana (archaic spelling "marihuana") or cannabis, but levied a tax equaling roughly one dollar on anyone who dealt commercially in cannabis, hemp or marijuana. It did, however, include penalty provisions and a complex Regulation 1 codifying the elaborate rules of enforcement marijuana cannabis or hemp handlers were subject to. Violation of these procedures could result in a fine of up to $2000 and five years' imprisonment. The net effect was to make it too risky for anyone to deal in the substance until World War II required the United States Department of Agriculture to make its 1942 movie "Hemp for Victory". The film encouraged and taught farmers to grow variants of hemp suitable as raw material for hawsers used by U.S Marines; the hemp was used as a substitute for other raw materials that were blocked by Japan.
"
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana_Tax_Act |
But again, there WERE exclusions that weren't taxable or jailable;
(b) The term "marihuana" means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L., whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of such plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of such plant, its seeds, or resin- but shall not include the mature stalks of such plant, fiber produced from such stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of such plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of such mature stalks (except the resin extracted therefrom), fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of such plant which is incapable of germination.
So when they referred to "marihuana" throughout the rest of the act it wasn't supposed to be a blanket on the entire plant, but was used that way to suit interested parties.
full text of the act
Message edited by author 2008-05-02 16:18:09. |
|
|
|
05/02/2008 04:17:50 PM · #49 |
|
|
|
05/02/2008 04:31:28 PM · #50 |
It is funny Sheila that it is all about interpretation, it doesnt affect the stalk or parts of the plant but it does affect the grower or producer so they get you coming and going. To say the least it worked and we are still worse for it not being completely legal. IMHO
Message edited by author 2008-05-02 16:40:51. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/19/2025 06:57:40 AM EDT.
