trader_4 wrote:

As to legalizing pot, don't you think it might be a good idea to slow it
down a bit? See what happens in CO and OR after a few years? Already
there appears to be a rise in auto accidents with people under the
influence, for example. If it works out OK there after 5 years or so,
then maybe it's OK to legalize it elsewhere. But my main point here was
that the DC mayor appears to be flipping off Congress.


I don't see a reason to wait. The reason it was outlawed was based on
xenophobia and corporate interest; DuPont was just coming out with synthetic
fibers and hemp competed with that.

On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 10:52:52 -0600, G. Morgan
wrote:

G,

To your question of foster parents bill in Nevada, it turns out that
foster parent have to keep ammo and guns locked up separately, even
though they have concealed carry permits and.or are law enforcement.

Assembly Bill 167 would allow them to have loaded weapons...

http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/nevada-legislature/vegas-couple-want-right-carry-guns-while-fostering-kids

On Thursday, March 5, 2015 at 11:52:56 AM UTC-5, G. Morgan wrote:
trader_4 wrote:

As to legalizing pot, don't you think it might be a good idea to slow it
down a bit? See what happens in CO and OR after a few years? Already
there appears to be a rise in auto accidents with people under the
influence, for example. If it works out OK there after 5 years or so,
then maybe it's OK to legalize it elsewhere. But my main point here was
that the DC mayor appears to be flipping off Congress.


I don't see a reason to wait. The reason it was outlawed was based on
xenophobia and corporate interest; DuPont was just coming out with synthetic
fibers and hemp competed with that.

Baloney. Hemp products, eg fiber, have been and continue to be legal.
The drug comes from a specific cultivar. Anything else you want to try
to make up and turn into a nutty conspiracy?

On 03/05/2015 10:07 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, March 5, 2015 at 11:52:56 AM UTC-5, G. Morgan wrote:
trader_4 wrote:

As to legalizing pot, don't you think it might be a good idea to slow it
down a bit? See what happens in CO and OR after a few years? Already
there appears to be a rise in auto accidents with people under the
influence, for example. If it works out OK there after 5 years or so,
then maybe it's OK to legalize it elsewhere. But my main point here was
that the DC mayor appears to be flipping off Congress.


I don't see a reason to wait. The reason it was outlawed was based on
xenophobia and corporate interest; DuPont was just coming out with synthetic
fibers and hemp competed with that.

Baloney. Hemp products, eg fiber, have been and continue to be legal.
The drug comes from a specific cultivar. Anything else you want to try
to make up and turn into a nutty conspiracy?


Hi Trader_4,

Ha! You are "usually" the one with all the facts. This
isn't right. I tell you, this just *isn't right*! You
will have to do better next time! I do believe in
"redemption" after all! :-)

Here is your "nutty conspiracy":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp

"United States: Hemp is illegal to grow in the U.S.
under Federal law because of its relation to marijuana,
and any imported hemp products must meet a zero tolerance
level. It is considered a controlled substance under the
Controlled Substances Act (P.L. 91-513; 21 U.S.C. 801 et
seq.). Some states have made the cultivation of industrial
hemp legal, but farmers in North Dakota, Hawaii, Kentucky,
Maine, Maryland, Oregon, California, Montana, West Virginia
and Vermont have not yet begun to grow it because of
resistance from the federal Drug Enforcement Administration.
In 2013, after the legalization of marijuana in the state,
several farmers in Colorado planted and harvested several
acres of hemp, bringing in the first hemp crop in the United
States in over half a century.[84] Colorado,[85] Vermont,
California, and North Dakota have passed laws enabling hemp
licensure. All four states are waiting for permission to grow
hemp from the DEA. Currently,[86] North Dakota representatives
are pursuing legal measures to force DEA approval.[87] Oregon
has licensed industrial hemp as of August 2009.[88] In
February 2014, Congress passed an agriculture bill that eased
restrictions on cultivation in 10 states.[89]

And its pollen ruins the "specific cultivar". Chuckle.

-T

I am seeing more hemp products lately. Maybe we should dump
subsidies for corn alcohol and let the farmers grow hemp,
at their own expense, not the taxpayers!

On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 10:41:37 -0800, T wrote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp

"United States: Hemp is illegal to grow in the U.S.
under Federal law because of its relation to marijuana,
and any imported hemp products must meet a zero tolerance
level. It is considered a controlled substance under the
Controlled Substances Act (P.L. 91-513; 21 U.S.C. 801 et
seq.). Some states have made the cultivation of industrial
hemp legal, but farmers in North Dakota, Hawaii, Kentucky,
Maine, Maryland, Oregon, California, Montana, West Virginia
and Vermont have not yet begun to grow it because of
resistance from the federal Drug Enforcement Administration.
In 2013, after the legalization of marijuana in the state,
several farmers in Colorado planted and harvested several
acres of hemp, bringing in the first hemp crop in the United
States in over half a century.[84] Colorado,[85] Vermont,
California, and North Dakota have passed laws enabling hemp
licensure. All four states are waiting for permission to grow
hemp from the DEA. Currently,[86] North Dakota representatives
are pursuing legal measures to force DEA approval.[87] Oregon
has licensed industrial hemp as of August 2009.[88] In
February 2014, Congress passed an agriculture bill that eased
restrictions on cultivation in 10 states.[89]

Why is hemp illegal?

"...The United States was the first country to introduce laws to
destroy hemp plants, regardless of their intended use. That law was
the result of political pressure exerted by the forestry industry and
the Dupont corporation, which had just patented oil and coal based
plastics production."

https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/20329

On Thursday, March 5, 2015 at 2:24:47 PM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 10:41:37 -0800, T wrote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp

"United States: Hemp is illegal to grow in the U.S.
under Federal law because of its relation to marijuana,
and any imported hemp products must meet a zero tolerance
level. It is considered a controlled substance under the
Controlled Substances Act (P.L. 91-513; 21 U.S.C. 801 et
seq.). Some states have made the cultivation of industrial
hemp legal, but farmers in North Dakota, Hawaii, Kentucky,
Maine, Maryland, Oregon, California, Montana, West Virginia
and Vermont have not yet begun to grow it because of
resistance from the federal Drug Enforcement Administration.
In 2013, after the legalization of marijuana in the state,
several farmers in Colorado planted and harvested several
acres of hemp, bringing in the first hemp crop in the United
States in over half a century.[84] Colorado,[85] Vermont,
California, and North Dakota have passed laws enabling hemp
licensure. All four states are waiting for permission to grow
hemp from the DEA. Currently,[86] North Dakota representatives
are pursuing legal measures to force DEA approval.[87] Oregon
has licensed industrial hemp as of August 2009.[88] In
February 2014, Congress passed an agriculture bill that eased
restrictions on cultivation in 10 states.[89]

Why is hemp illegal?

"...The United States was the first country to introduce laws to
destroy hemp plants, regardless of their intended use. That law was
the result of political pressure exerted by the forestry industry and
the Dupont corporation, which had just patented oil and coal based
plastics production."

https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/20329

And your source is a claim made by "greenleft"? Good grief,
I'm beginning to worry about you Oren. What's next, a cite from
moveon.org?

On Thu, 5 Mar 2015 12:44:22 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

Why is hemp illegal?

"...The United States was the first country to introduce laws to
destroy hemp plants, regardless of their intended use. That law was
the result of political pressure exerted by the forestry industry and
the Dupont corporation, which had just patented oil and coal based
plastics production."

https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/20329

And your source is a claim made by "greenleft"? Good grief,
I'm beginning to worry about you Oren. What's next, a cite from
moveon.org?

Relax Trader. Other sources also point to hemp being banned.
Government in bed with corporations. Hemp can be used in ~ 25,000
products. Who wins and who losses?

On Thursday, March 5, 2015 at 1:41:44 PM UTC-5, T wrote:
On 03/05/2015 10:07 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, March 5, 2015 at 11:52:56 AM UTC-5, G. Morgan wrote:
trader_4 wrote:

As to legalizing pot, don't you think it might be a good idea to slow it
down a bit? See what happens in CO and OR after a few years? Already
there appears to be a rise in auto accidents with people under the
influence, for example. If it works out OK there after 5 years or so,
then maybe it's OK to legalize it elsewhere. But my main point here was
that the DC mayor appears to be flipping off Congress.


I don't see a reason to wait. The reason it was outlawed was based on
xenophobia and corporate interest; DuPont was just coming out with synthetic
fibers and hemp competed with that.

Baloney. Hemp products, eg fiber, have been and continue to be legal.
The drug comes from a specific cultivar. Anything else you want to try
to make up and turn into a nutty conspiracy?


Hi Trader_4,

Ha! You are "usually" the one with all the facts. This
isn't right. I tell you, this just *isn't right*! You
will have to do better next time! I do believe in
"redemption" after all! :-)

Here is your "nutty conspiracy":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp



Woah theere fellah. The poster claimed that the reason pot was
made illegal was because of Dupont. I don't think that's an established
fact, it's speculation. Pot was already under regulation, not only
in the USA, but other countries as well. And products produced
from hemp, are as I stated, legal in the USA. It's just the growing
of hemp, as you point out, that's illegal. Apparently folks also point
the finger for the growing ban on others besides Dupont, eg Hearst,
alleging he was afraid it was going to be used to make newspaper,
competing with his forest based newspaper product.

So, who knows. Is it possible? Perhaps, but the Dupont angle doesn't
make a lot of sense. Obviously nylon has a lot of special properties
that hemp doesn't, ie it's waterproof, you can make stockings out of it,
etc. And hemp production had been declining for years before the 1937
ban. I just don't see the logic or evidence.

On Thu, 5 Mar 2015 12:41:58 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Thursday, March 5, 2015 at 1:41:44 PM UTC-5, T wrote:
On 03/05/2015 10:07 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, March 5, 2015 at 11:52:56 AM UTC-5, G. Morgan wrote:
trader_4 wrote:

As to legalizing pot, don't you think it might be a good idea to slow it
down a bit? See what happens in CO and OR after a few years? Already
there appears to be a rise in auto accidents with people under the
influence, for example. If it works out OK there after 5 years or so,
then maybe it's OK to legalize it elsewhere. But my main point here was
that the DC mayor appears to be flipping off Congress.


I don't see a reason to wait. The reason it was outlawed was based on
xenophobia and corporate interest; DuPont was just coming out with synthetic
fibers and hemp competed with that.

Baloney. Hemp products, eg fiber, have been and continue to be legal.
The drug comes from a specific cultivar. Anything else you want to try
to make up and turn into a nutty conspiracy?


Hi Trader_4,

Ha! You are "usually" the one with all the facts. This
isn't right. I tell you, this just *isn't right*! You
will have to do better next time! I do believe in
"redemption" after all! :-)

Here is your "nutty conspiracy":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp



Woah theere fellah. The poster claimed that the reason pot was
made illegal was because of Dupont. I don't think that's an established
fact, it's speculation. Pot was already under regulation, not only
in the USA, but other countries as well. And products produced
from hemp, are as I stated, legal in the USA. It's just the growing
of hemp, as you point out, that's illegal. Apparently folks also point
the finger for the growing ban on others besides Dupont, eg Hearst,
alleging he was afraid it was going to be used to make newspaper,
competing with his forest based newspaper product.

So, who knows. Is it possible? Perhaps, but the Dupont angle doesn't
make a lot of sense. Obviously nylon has a lot of special properties
that hemp doesn't, ie it's waterproof, you can make stockings out of it,
etc. And hemp production had been declining for years before the 1937
ban. I just don't see the logic or evidence.

of banning it.
Nor do I.
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

On 3/5/2015 11:52 AM, G. Morgan wrote:
trader_4 wrote:

As to legalizing pot, don't you think it might be a good idea to slow it
down a bit? See what happens in CO and OR after a few years?


I don't see a reason to wait. The reason it was outlawed was based on
xenophobia and corporate interest; DuPont was just coming out with synthetic
fibers and hemp competed with that.


Nothing about people smoking it to get stoned
and mellow? Riiii....ggghhhttt......

-
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 14:52:26 -0500, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

On 3/5/2015 11:52 AM, G. Morgan wrote:
trader_4 wrote:

As to legalizing pot, don't you think it might be a good idea to slow it
down a bit? See what happens in CO and OR after a few years?


I don't see a reason to wait. The reason it was outlawed was based on
xenophobia and corporate interest; DuPont was just coming out with synthetic
fibers and hemp competed with that.


Nothing about people smoking it to get stoned
and mellow? Riiii....ggghhhttt......

People drink tea and become "mellow". At least, I do.
Chocolate too. Hardly a reason to spend billions of dollars outlawing
tea and chocolate is it ?
And I won't even start on sex....
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012