Marijuana Inc - WTF?

True, think of all the greenhouses that would need to be built. And grow lights too be wired..

40 replies 336 veiws last I looked all about the weed! Interesting? I thought we were more about the firearms!? There are more replies on this topic than most others. Even more veiws! What do you guys do when no one is watching. No, on second thought I don't want to know! Bad thoughts are going through my head. Damn it!!!!!! I get the feeling there are some heavily armed dopers on the loose here in CO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jim

W.R. Hearst owned lots of timber, and newspapers. The cost of pulp from hemp was/is approx 1/5 the cost, of pulp from a tree. The regeneration time is 1/8 maximum.
How much money do you think Hearst was going to loose if pulp production veered away from trees? He convinced his paid gov reps to get that damn hemp made illegal. and so it came to pass.
Combine that with the stigma of "coloreds" smoking it, and you have the perfect storm for criminalization.
Just like evil guns. create the hysteria, convince those with bully pulpit powers to champion your cause, and POOF Illegal.

---

As usual, it probably comes down to money. I've heard that chemical companies producing nylon rope sought to eliminate the competition of hemp rope. Both scenarios on hemp make sense. Also, privately-owned prisons would probably stand to lose money if they suddenly lost a large portion of their "clientele" due to legalization of this drug alone. Am I amiss in assuming that more convicts equals more money? I can only imagine that our neighbors to the south have an interest in drugs being illegal assuming the cartels have some control of the gov't there and would not like to see their markets dry up. And also assuming that those governments somehow have some power to exert over ours. That can't be though, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by foxtrot

Pick 50 random dope heads, and 50 random people unfamiliar with mary jane.

---

Good luck finding 50 random people who are unfamiliar with pot.

I don't understand how people can not see the parallels of prohibition to the War on Drugs. Can you change "dope head" to "alcohol drinker" and be just as confident?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sturtle

I'm personally tired of only hearing people talking about taxing it. TAX money just goes to the government, who cares. There is a TON more money to be made from legalized drugs than just tax money.

---

THANK YOU! If the Federal Government were it's correct size, we wouldn't have an illegal Federal income tax.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GunTroll

I dream of runing my own gunsmithing bussiness one day when I get all the skills up to par to tackle this goal. Hell Maybe I can even sell pot to my gun toking customers too. Hell I even burn with them. I'll make your guns while high, then smoke with you, and then go shooting stoned. "Ever go shooting on weed?" See where I going with this?

---

Come on man, this isn't 6th grade Mock Trial, you can do better than this.

If you are a gunsmith, your work is either good and reliable, or it is not. Smoking pot while you're working makes no difference one way or the other. I'm sure that there are plenty of gunsmiths who could do a better job at what they do while drunk, than I could after a weeks worth of practice. In face, I'm sure that there ARE closet alcoholic gunsmiths out there. That still isn't the point though.

The point is that after you have work done, you check it and make sure it works and is safe, if not, you take it back and have them fix/replace it. No one out there thinks they can get away with doing shitty work while on drugs, without being called out on it and put out of business for having a shitty reputation, that happens all the time without drug use to help. That is more Business 101, not a drug discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by foxtrot

Pick 50 random dope heads, and 50 random people unfamiliar with mary jane. I guarantee you the productivity of the 50 random people w/o will be much higher. Probably overall intelligence too. Sad fact, when your smoking weed your really not doing anything else (at that time). Not (federal) gov'ts obligation to manage it though. But money be damned - not a great argument imo. We could also make a lot of money by taxing all junk food to mad hell. Save a lot of lives too. Just because the gov't could make money doing x over y doesn't make it a great idea or a good argument. Another (random) point is the liberal party is all over this issue. I rarely find myself agreeing with the platform issues of that party.

Personally, the fewer drugs/booze/chems that are available to any kids I might have, the better.

Tell you what, if I had not stayed away from weed I wouldn't have some of the prospects and future available right now that I have. Hell, if I had chased after certain girls back when the same prospects would be gone. I can say that with absolute fact just because of how "accidentally" these prospects came about. I'll be living a life better than any of my childhood dreams before long... go down road "C" in my past and I'd be a manager at Burger King or who knows what.

---

1) Which party is Liberal? psst both...
2) Not the Government's job to restrict chems ect from your kids, that's your job, with the grace of God and hard work you can succeed.
3) Maybe if you smoked some weed you'd would have gone to 7-11 for dorritos, bought a lottery ticket, won millions, started and foundation and benefited millions. Only god knows.
4) Bill Clinton Smoked weed, Bush did coke...

If anyone honestly believes that they wouldn't have been able to get where they were today, if they had smoked pot a handful of times as a kid, then I seriously wonder how you were able to get where you are today.

I'm not trying to be insulting, that is just a flaw in having an opinion on something based on very little experience. I say very little, instead of none, because it is easy for a non-user to watch their friends ruin their lives with drugs/alcohol. I saw kids ruin themselves with Extascy when I was 15 and had my first job. It succesfully kept me from ever trying Extascy. I don't think I'd be an utter failure if I tried it a few times, but I wouldn't be surprised if I used it out of control and let it run my life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ssf467

Maybe he recognizes the 10th Amendment makes these raids illegal, nah...

---

+1 * 10e6!!!

Let each state determine their laws and we'll see if the doomsday predictions come true (they won't). I'm tired of the Feds trampling on state authority (21 year drinking age, MJ laws, firearms laws for arms that are not part of interstate commerce, mandating certain state laws or you'll lose highway funds (e.g. seat belt, helmet, DUI thresholds), etc. I understand that adherence to federalism would mean repeal of some of the laws we gun owners like (Lawful Commerce in Firearms Act, etc.), but on balance we'd be much, much more free.