Bio not provided
@RickSteeb @hempmeister @HughYonn @Moi_Encore @msimon6808 Hemp pollen is large and heavy and doesn't travel far on the wind, not likely to affect a cannabis crop across the road.
2 weeks, 5 days ago on NORML, Feds Agree On Benefits Of Cannabis
@Dave Evans_Livefyre @freakalweek Not all of them, my doctor asks me about cannabis every time I go in for a checkup, last visit I gave him a printout of the pic on the cannabinoids I just posted in this thread.
@Dave Evans_Livefyre @freakalweek It has way more helpful cannabinoids than just CBD and THC, here is a graphic which explains it clearly, and a second one that lists some of the uses for the hemp plant.:
@Dave Evans_Livefyre @Cassie Miller I think what she meant was that in cannabis plants the males and females are easily determined, they look different, that is not true of most plants.
@asdfxxx @Hz2P The "laws" which criminalized cannabis are not valid laws, they are all unconstitutional and merely statutes, because the Constitution itself did not grant to the fed gov the power to do this, and no amendment to the Constitution has ever been passed by congress and ratified by the States to allow the fed gov to so much as regulate what substances people choose to ingest let alone ban some of those substances.
No one is required to obey an unconstitutional statute, as SCOTUS ruled:
The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it.An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it . . .A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one.An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law.Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby.No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.– Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Section 177. (late 2nd Ed. Section 256)
@msimon6808 @Wayne T Pickett Rick Simpson Oil cures cancer in about 90 days for about $1000.00. It is a full extract Cannabis indica oil, about 95% THC. People who have cancer should definitely spend $9.99 to download his book which clearly explains the process of making the oil and how to use it. You can find a link to the book here:
@msimon6808 @Wayne T Pickett MDMA works better at curing PTSD, and cannabis is better at controlling it.
MDMA can often do the job in one session (with a licensed psychologist), but it is hard to find a licensed psychologist who is willing to risk the consequences in using that drug to treat patients because doing so is illegal -- the DEA will not free it to be studied for it's ability to solve many mental health issues like PTSD, nor to be utilized in treatment of patients. MDMA works because it allows the person using it to recognize the triggers for PTSD as something they need not be triggered by, and it also allows them to accept their own faults. I've never suffered from PTSD, but I have done MDMA before, many times (not the stuff they pass off as MDMA these days, but the real, pure MDMA that was around before the DEA put it on the CSA, so I am very familiar with its beneficial effects on one's mental health.
Use of cannabis helps people with PTSD live with the trauma and control the incidence of flashback situations, it is good to use while sufferers wait for actual help from the medical community using such drugs as MDMA, and psilocybin (another drug which is showing signs of being helpful for PTSD).
@op25ttfd @AronKay The vast majority of people who sell cannabis on the black market sell nothing other than cannabis, the kind of dealers you are talking about are few and far between in the cannabis black market. The dealers in serious drugs are most likely to be found in high crime areas in large metropolitan centers.
@asdfxxx, the fact is the law prohibiting certain substances is itself illegal, it is not law, it has not the force of law because it is totally unconstitutional. It required an amendment to the Constitution to give the government the power to prohibit alcohol, which (after they saw the damage the prohibition did to the nation as a whole, the law enforcement corruption that arose from it and all the deaths due to the prohibition, the passed and ratified another amendment to repeal the prohibition amendment). No such amendment has been passed and ratified to allow the government to prohibit any other substances, there is no enumerated power granted by the Constitution for the government to criminalize these substances or their use by Americans and the government is supposed to do ONLY those things which are enumerated in the Constitution or is authorized by a properly passed and ratified amendment to the Constitution. Ergo, the drug war is entirely unconstitutional, it is a violation of each individual's unalienable right to self-ownership and self-determination. The way we fight these unconstitutional statutes which the government tries to convince us are valid laws is by refusing to obey them and by nullifying them in court as jurors (finding the defendant not guilty, even if said defendant did do what the prosecutor says s/he did). The next thing that needs doing is for the American people to remove ALL the people they've elected to the government who've proposed, supported or voted to pass any unconstitutional legislation or supported any unconstitutional actions by the fed gov, and taking each of them back to the districts that elected them for trial on the federal charge of violating their oath to the Constitution (a federal felony); then replacing each of them with someone who understands the limits the Constitution put on the fed gov and who will honor the office, the oath, the Constitution, and his/her constituents. If those replacements at any time violate the oath, they must be removed too, until every single person elected to office at ANY level of government understands that they MUST obey the Constitution (and in local and State offices their State Constitution, too) if they want to remain in office with all the perks the office holds. WAnt Constitutional government back, this is the only bloodless way to do it.
3 weeks, 3 days ago on NORML, Feds Agree On Benefits Of Cannabis
@Cassie Miller, Hearst's real reason was not racism it was hemp's competition with his new wood pulp paper industry that was behind his desire to get cannabis/hemp made illegal. The only real difference between Cannabis sativa and hemp is the way it is grown, other than that they are virtually the same plant. Hemp is planted densely so the plants grow tall and narrow, lost of stalk and fiber, the males are not removed so that fertilization can take place and seeds are produced for food and cooking oil (it could be used for all the kinds of fuel currently refined from crude petroleum, plus anywhere from 20,000-50,000 other uses, too). While to grow the plant for medicinal and recreational uses the plants are planted with plenty of room to spread wide producing many stalks which will all produce colas (flowers), the males are removed so that fertilization does not take place so the female flowers do not produce seeds, a practice that increases the cannabinoids, especially the precursor to THC (THC is only created when enough heat is applied to the dried plant material).
3 weeks, 4 days ago on NORML, Feds Agree On Benefits Of Cannabis
@william conde, I am 70 and I have experienced the same as you, I look and feel younger and I am healthier than my peers. I am the only one (of my similar aged friends who don't use the herb) that takes not a single pharmaceutical medication, I don't even take OTC drugs except ibuprofen, occasionally, for muscle aches from working too hard in my yard or at the gym. I've been a regular cannabis user since 1970. My doctor is amazed by my condition at my age, and he is always asking me about cannabis,, when I visit for my annual well exam.
@asdfxxx @Hz2P Unless a law complies with the Constitution it is not a law at all, it is merely a statute that no one is compelled to obey. The prohibition of cannabis (and other drugs, too) is clearly unconstitutional, the fed gov was never granted the power by the Constitution to regulate let alone prohibit ANY ingestible substance. So the prohibition of drugs, the CSA, and all agencies and statutes related to any of that, well they are ALL illegal, the governments (federal and State) have been engaged in a clearly illegal, unconstitutional suppression of the rights of the people for the past 77 years.
3 weeks, 6 days ago on NORML, Feds Agree On Benefits Of Cannabis
@BenDMartinez @Cassie Miller Racism was only a small part of it. The major reason was the competition faced by Hearst's timber/wood pulp business, DuPont's synthetic fiber business, the petroleum oil business (which Cassie left out) from hemp (hemp makes a better, longer lasting paper; better, longer lasting fabrics; and greener, cleaner, less expensive, and better fuels, actually EVERY single thing made from petroleum can be made better from hemp), and Anslinger's fear of losing his power in addition to his rabid racism.
Well, if you (wfp) were swayed by Malcolm on the bust that is Prohibition 2.0 yet can’t grasp the war crimes aspect perhaps you need to research the history of drug policy more. Acquaint yourself with the litany of names of the drug war victims. Dead, not from drugs but from the drug war. Names like (going off the top of my head) Kathryn Johnston, Donald Scott, Veronica and Charity Bowers, Patrick Dorismond, Ezequiel Hernandez, Peter McWilliams, Capt. Jennifer Odom (and her crew), etc, etc, ad nauseum.
Learn about Calvina Fay, Mel Sembler and Straight Inc… follow the trail of former drug czars and see their carpetbagging, war profiteering and fighting to maintain a prohibition that anyone with an hour to do some reading could discover the fraud that it is.
Perpetuating crimes by government on its citizenry is seen by some as treasonous and that’s what drug prohibition has been since its inception – an assault on we, the people.
The whole of the anti-drug campaign has been perpetuated not by research, science and compassion but by a steady flow of lying and racist propaganda.
Read Radley Balko and discover the wonderful growth of SWAT and how the drug war is breaking down doors, shooting innocents, killing pets in front of children and arresting mom and/or dad and sending kids into the foster system. That’s criminal. Total all those harms together (and include all the unnamed dead, the kids killed in drive-by shootings or from tainted drugs) and you’ll have a better handle on that of which MalcolmKyle speaks.
And there are those who speak not just of war crimes but reparations to the innocent who have suffered unjustly in a system totally rigged with the outcomes fixed…
The drug war is a big elephant and it’s been in the middle of the room for a long time, nobody has taken it for a walk since forever and it’s about to massively soil the carpet.
1 year, 12 months ago on A law enforcement angle on drug legalization
Slightly off topic, I keep getting questions regarding the effectiveness of using the 10th Amendment. Is there somewhere on this site a list of successful uses of the 10th Amendment to nullify federal laws? I'm looking for both successful nullifications in only the individual State as well as nationwide nullification where the fed gov backed down and repealed the law.
2 years, 2 months ago on Court Battle over NDAA Detentions Continues
2 years, 2 months ago on The States’ Rights Tradition Nobody Knows