# feds 'contemplate' new laws to regulate cannabis, do you want gmo weed?



## DNAprotection (Sep 25, 2013)

324 votes so far (now shooting for 420)


As the feds 'contemplate' ( = dog and pony show to help get us all to swallow the coming new regs etc) new laws to regulate cannabis its a good time to let the corpsgov know how you feel about genetically engineered cannabis (or GMO cannabis as some might say) and one way to do that is by voting in the poll here @RIU in the politics forum:


https://www.rollitup.org/politics/602854-monsanto-cannabis-yes-no-dna.html


----------



## racerboy71 (Sep 25, 2013)

Depends on what you mean by GMO weed.. if they some how managed to bring the THC levels up to 50% or so by genetically modifying cannabis, hell yeah I'm all for it..
GMO doesn't equal bad.. your applying the label of.Monsanto to anything GMO is very misleading and discredits GMO imvho..


----------



## DNAprotection (Sep 25, 2013)

so in other words if you had a good cow you would trade her to someone that says they'll give you magic beans and a golden goose...maybe your right, after all they did such a good job with ge corn


----------



## racerboy71 (Sep 25, 2013)

DNAprotection said:


> so in other words if you had a good cow you would trade her to someone that says they'll give you magic beans and a golden goose...maybe your right, after all they did such a good job with ge corn


What?? Where did I say I'm giving up my stock pile of genetics for GMO cannabis w 50% THC?
I simply said not all GMO is the evil empire! And not all GMO is Monsanto as they're but one company in a sea of many and that by attaching their name to all things GMO you're trying to slant peoples views into believing anything GMO is bad because we all know Monsanto is the evil empire ..
I will not vote on your poll because you don't make a distinction between GMO and Monsanto, when anyone with half a brain knows that not all GMO comes from the evil empire and not all GMO is bad..


----------



## DNAprotection (Sep 25, 2013)

racerboy71 said:


> What?? Where did I say I'm giving up my stock pile of genetics for GMO cannabis w 50% THC?
> I simply said not all GMO is the evil empire! And not all GMO is Monsanto as they're but one company in a sea of many and that by attaching their name to all things GMO you're trying to slant peoples views into believing anything GMO is bad because we all know Monsanto is the evil empire ..
> I will not vote on your poll because you don't make a distinction between GMO and Monsanto, when anyone with half a brain knows that not all GMO comes from the evil empire and not all GMO is bad..


i sincerely hope you never give up your seeds stock because i predict we will one day all need them to help repair the genetics of the species (if possible) after monsanto et al gets through...
further i think our naturally occurring seed stock will still be illegal when the smoke clears on the up and coming new fed laws...
monsanto et al has a shot at finally achieving total control over a crop species with cannabis in that unlike corn the naturally occurring varieties are already illegal...
as to your other point:

[h=2]U.S. and Monsanto Dominate Global Market for GM Seeds[/h][h=2]

*By Organic Consumers Association 
August 7, 2013

*
*For related articles and more information, please visit OCA's Millions Against Monsanto page and our Genetic Engineering page.

One glance at the statistics and it&#8217;s clear: The U.S. and Monsanto dominate the global market for genetically engineered crops. Forty percent of the world&#8217;s genetically modified (GM) crops are grown in the U.S., where Monsanto controls 80 percent of the GM corn market, and 93 percent of the GM soy market.

Worldwide, 282 million acres are planted in Monsanto&#8217;s GM crops, up from only 3 million in 1996, according to Food and Water Watch. 

Forty percent of U.S. cropland, or 151.4 million acres, are planted in Monsanto&#8217;s crops. Monsanto owns 1,676 seed, plant and other applicable patents.

Maybe it&#8217;s time we ask ourselves: How long will we tolerate the growing monopolization and genetic engineering of seeds by a monopolistic pesticide company that poses a deadly threat to our health, our environment and the future of our food? 

Global GM Seed Market
40.8: Percent of world&#8217;s GM crops grown in the U.S.
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech... (ISAAA), 2012 

76.3: Percent of world&#8217;s GM crops grown by the U.S., Brazil, and Argentina.
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech... (ISAAA), 2012 

9: Number of countries responsible for 97% of the world&#8217;s GMO crops.
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012 

8: Number of GMO crops that have been approved for commercial production worldwide (soy, cotton, corn, canola, sugarbeet, papaya, squash/yellow zucchini, and alfalfa).
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012 

11: Number of countries that grow GM soybean (81% of global planting).
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012 

15. Number of countries that grow GM cotton (81% of global planting).
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012 

17: Number of countries that grow GM maize (35% of global planting).
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012 

4: Number of countries that grow GM canola (30% of global planting).
Source: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech...(ISAAA), 2012 

Monsanto Monopoly
80: Percent of U.S. corn grown from Monsanto patented GMO seeds.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013 

93: Percent of U.S. soy grown from Monsanto patented GMO seeds.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013 

27: Percent of Monsanto profits that came from the sale of Roundup herbicide.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013 

1,676: Number of seed, plant, and other applicable patents owned by Monsanto.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013 

282 million: Number of acres Monsanto products are grown worldwide (up from 3 million in 1996).
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013 

151.4 million: Number of acres Monsanto&#8217;s GE crop traits are grown in the U.S. (40% of total cropland).
Source: Food and Water Watch, 2013

95: Percent of the U.S. GE corn seed market containing Monsanto&#8217;s traits. 
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013 

89: Percent of the U.S. GE cotton seed market containing Monsanto&#8217;s traits.
Source: Food And Water Watch, 2013 

Compiled by Zack Kaldveer, assistant media director for the Organic Consumers Association *

[/h]


----------



## GreenSummit (Sep 25, 2013)

DNAprotection said:


> i sincerely hope you never give up your seeds stock because i predict we will one day all need them to help repair the genetics of the species (if possible) after monsanto et al gets through...
> further i think our naturally occurring seed stock will still be illegal when the smoke clears on the up and coming new fed laws...
> monsanto et al has a shot at finally achieving total control over a crop species with cannabis in that unlike corn the naturally occurring varieties are already illegal...
> as to your other point:
> ...


we need more people like you. and thanks for the comment earlier. i feel i have only become human in the last 2 years as i have had an incredible awakening in my thinking


----------



## DNAprotection (Sep 25, 2013)

truth is we need more people like you <3


----------



## Red1966 (Sep 25, 2013)

I find it odd that you are worried about some corporation engineering a better crop of a plant THEY CAN NOT LEGALLY GROW.


----------



## DNAprotection (Sep 25, 2013)

Red1966 said:


> I find it odd that you are worried about some corporation engineering a better crop of a plant THEY CAN NOT LEGALLY GROW.


seriously? 
have you read anything here?
do you watch the news or read news?
ok i'll help you catch up...
feds are contemplating new cannabis laws 

ps...they also are hopelessly addicted to money and amendments...


----------



## Dan Kone (Sep 27, 2013)

racerboy71 said:


> Depends on what you mean by GMO weed.. if they some how managed to bring the THC levels up to 50% or so by genetically modifying cannabis, hell yeah I'm all for it..
> GMO doesn't equal bad.. your applying the label of.Monsanto to anything GMO is very misleading and discredits GMO imvho..


I agree with this. GMO's should be regulated and labeled, but not banned. GMO's can bring great advancement. I'd love a GMO that doubles potency and yield. However what will likely happen is they will come up with GMO's that are resistant to highly toxic new mitocides that a plant currently could not survive. 

The regulation of GMO's is badly needed, but the idea we should ban them all is just hysteria that stands in the way of progress.


----------



## Dan Kone (Sep 27, 2013)

DNAprotection said:


> so in other words if you had a good cow you would trade her to someone that says they'll give you magic beans and a golden goose...maybe your right, after all they did such a good job with ge corn


I'd trade that cow for one that produces a higher quality milk in larger volumes. GMO's are not magic nor are they a myth. They are science.


----------



## DNAprotection (Sep 27, 2013)

Dan Kone said:


> I'd trade that cow for one that produces a higher quality milk in larger volumes. GMO's are not magic nor are they a myth. They are science.


trading for a better cow was not an option in the post your quoting, it was a 'golden goose' = money = usually bad $cience...


----------



## Dan Kone (Sep 27, 2013)

DNAprotection said:


> trading for a better cow was not an option in the post your quoting, it was a 'golden goose' = money = usually bad $cience...


Industry experts getting together and genetically modifying a plant is generally doesn't qualify as "bad science". 

And yes, trading for a better cow wasn't an option in your question, which was my point. You posed a false choice. Not every question has a binary solution. Sometimes there are many different options. The options in your mind seem to be either "happy organics filled with everything good in the world" or "evil science which has come here on the death star to destroy us all". But it's not that simple. While I do oppose using GMO's to modify plants to make them resistant to pesticides, I do not oppose scientific advancement in agriculture, including the creation of GMO's. Just labeling everything that is genetically modified as automatically bad is simply false. Nor is everything that is organic automatically good.


----------



## PurpleBuz (Sep 27, 2013)

Dan Kone said:


> Industry experts getting together and genetically modifying a plant is generally doesn't qualify as "bad science".
> 
> .


Problem is the Anti-GMO religious zealots are focused on a scientific technique, rather than a specific modified variety. Genetically Modifying a strain is really nothing more than accelerated Plant Breeding and Selection. Something that humans have been doing since cultivation started. Despite what the God zealots think plants animals and humans are not as different as we think we are. Virus's, gene insertion, radiation, inter species crosses are all basic techniques that changes a varieties traits. Test what is bred, and stop lumping all GMO products together.


----------



## DNAprotection (Sep 27, 2013)

Dan Kone said:


> Industry experts getting together and genetically modifying a plant is generally doesn't qualify as "bad science".
> 
> And yes, trading for a better cow wasn't an option in your question, which was my point. You posed a false choice. Not every question has a binary solution. Sometimes there are many different options. The options in your mind *seem* to be either "happy organics filled with everything good in the world" or "evil science which has come here on the death star to destroy us all". But it's not that simple. While I do oppose using GMO's to modify plants to make them resistant to pesticides, I do not oppose scientific advancement in agriculture, including the creation of GMO's. Just labeling everything that is genetically modified as automatically bad is simply false. Nor is everything that is organic automatically good.


i'm glad you used the word 'seem' otherwise you'd be way of base about what i think and dont think etc 
further, the question was posed as a metaphor, the driving factor being 'greed' if you will...maybe you should have wrote the question instead of me?
i'm glad there is much though we seem to agree on 
on the issue of 'science', think of all the gov inspired cannabis studies over the years, have they been trust worthy?
what about all the 'studies' that go into introducing new pharmaceuticals (in general), do you feel comfortable with that 'scientific' process? 
this kinda goes in part to my point about $cience...


[video=youtube;UPccMlgug8A]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPccMlgug8A[/video]


----------



## DNAprotection (Sep 27, 2013)

PurpleBuz said:


> Problem is the Anti-GMO religious zealots are focused on a scientific technique, rather than a specific modified variety. Genetically Modifying a strain is really nothing more than accelerated Plant Breeding and Selection. Something that humans have been doing since cultivation started. Despite what the God zealots think plants animals and humans are not as different as we think we are. Virus's, gene insertion, radiation, inter species crosses are all basic techniques that changes a varieties traits. Test what is bred, and stop lumping all GMO products together.


truly im sorry to have to say that your post here is entirely inaccurate and misleading, you should do some research about such if you really believe that...and frankly bro it seems to me that it is you who are 'lumping' all people who have concerns about 'gmo's' into what you call 'anti gmo religious zealots'...just sayin...


----------



## Dan Kone (Sep 27, 2013)

DNAprotection said:


> on the issue of 'science', think of all the gov inspired cannabis studies over the years, have they been trust worthy?


And what does that have to do with private corporations genetically modifying agricultural products?



> what about all the 'studies' that go into introducing new pharmaceuticals (in general), do you feel comfortable with that 'scientific' process?


Yes I do. I don't feel comfortable with the lack of regulations, but the scientific process used to create them, yes.



> this kinda goes in part to my point about $cience...


Yeah, put a dollar sign on science and it's evil. Well done. We should all live in caves and die before we are 30, because fuck science and money.


----------



## DNAprotection (Sep 27, 2013)

Dan Kone said:


> And what does that have to do with private corporations genetically modifying agricultural products?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



as to do with what corporate 'science' (referring mostly to big corps) and gov 'science' (in general) have in common, its all about a desired outcome and what can be gotten away with...
as to the issue of trusting big corporate pharmaceutical 'science' the same applies and if you haven't had a friend or relative directly effected then just research the seemingly endless filings of class action suits over all the seemingly 'well tested' drugs and their unintended consequences etc...

"Yeah, put a dollar sign on science and it's evil. Well done. We should all live in caves and die before we are 30, because fuck science and money"

purely your words and assumptions, not my words or opinions bro...


----------



## JackTheBongRipper (Sep 28, 2013)

DNAprotection said:


> as to do with what corporate 'science' (referring mostly to big corps) and gov 'science' (in general) have in common, its all about a desired outcome and what can be gotten away with...
> as to the issue of trusting big corporate pharmaceutical 'science' the same applies and if you haven't had a friend or relative directly effected then just research the seemingly endless filings of class action suits over all the seemingly 'well tested' drugs and their unintended consequences etc...
> 
> "Yeah, put a dollar sign on science and it's evil. Well done. We should all live in caves and die before we are 30, because fuck science and money"
> ...


So then what was your motivation for putting the dollar sign in "$cience"? It's science! Because not all science! has been for money, or to see what it could get away with. Some science! may have been not so great, but when you place a dollar sign on the word science! then we assume you mean to lump the entire concept of science! into your narrow viewpoint. I'm sure when Jonas Salk created the polio vaccine, easing the suffering and future suffering of millions of people, that he was just in it for the money.

I could name a thousand more examples of people who discovered things for the good of mankind, and made no money, or were outright demonized for their contributions. But hey, science! is just politics and money. Even the many non-profit charitable organizations conducting scientific research are in it for the money too, right? 

Based on your own words you haven't conceded that any science! is good at all. And if you will allow that some is good, then you must allow that not all GMO research is bad, or based on pure profit. Monsanto, maybe, but not all. 

So then your entire point devolves into either fear-mongering or worrying about something that may not exist as you fear it may.

As someone else said they felt as though they have awakened because they fear GMOs and "know" the motivations of corporations who research them. Not really awakened, more like led down another rabbit hole to confuse you and give you a maze to try to navigate. Mostly done to sell books or get eyeballs on websites to sell advertising dollars.

Think about it a little.


----------



## DNAprotection (Sep 28, 2013)

i thought i explained the reason for the $...it seems that you might should reread whatever you thought you read that has you reacting this way...
no one said 'all science was for money' or that 'all science was bad' etc thats you taking yourself down a rabbit hole imo...but much corporate 'science' is for 'money' and thats the point and i think you might should think more about that and how it can and will effect this issue just like it has since the beginning of cannabis prohabition...


----------



## JackTheBongRipper (Sep 28, 2013)

DNAprotection said:


> i thought i explained the reason for the $...it seems that you might should reread whatever you thought you read that has you reacting this way...
> no one said 'all science was for money' or that 'all science was bad' etc thats you taking yourself down a rabbit hole imo...but much corporate 'science' is for 'money' and thats the point and i think you might should think more about that and how it can and will effect this issue just like it has since the beginning of cannabis prohabition...


Dan Crone: "*Yeah, put a dollar sign on science and it's evil. Well done. We should all live in caves and die before we are 30, because fuck science and money."*
You dude:* "purely your words and assumptions, not my words or opinions bro... "

*That's your explanation of why you used it? Where was the explanation dude? 

Ok, no one said all science was for money, but you didn't say any science was for good, that was my point man. You didn't give any science an inch, I was trying to call you out on that. Ok, maybe me nitpicking, but hey, I thought it was valid.

See how much I'm willing to give to you, but do you do the same and look at your own stance and see where the holes are?


----------



## DNAprotection (Sep 28, 2013)

JackTheBongRipper said:


> Dan Crone: "*Yeah, put a dollar sign on science and it's evil. Well done. We should all live in caves and die before we are 30, because fuck science and money."*
> You dude:* "purely your words and assumptions, not my words or opinions bro... "
> 
> *That's your explanation of why you used it? Where was the explanation dude?
> ...


i am not anti science at all, to me what you call science i call the laws of the natural world and i live by such even when usa laws are in direct conflict with such like outlawing a plant etc so i am likely one of sciences biggest fan...i think you've got me all wrong...so how can you know my stance?


----------



## JackTheBongRipper (Sep 28, 2013)

DNAprotection said:


> i am not anti science at all, to me what you call science i call the laws of the natural world and i live by such even when usa laws are in direct conflict with such like outlawing a plant etc so i am likely one of sciences biggest fan...i think you've got me all wrong...so how can you know my stance?


Science is simply the study of the natural world, and how to use it to our advantage as a species. I guess we agree. Cool.

Not to derail the thread, but what do you think about the new world order? If we as a species want to advance and colonize other planets or systems we'll need to come together for a single purpose, under a single system of governance. 

If you already don't like the way things are going, how are you going to deal with that? It's coming dude. Seriously.


----------



## DNAprotection (Sep 28, 2013)

yup its coming...worried less about one world gov than i am about the borg style compliance techniques that prolly come with it though... 
technology increases like ice melts...the more it melts the faster it melts...


----------



## Twizzlor (Sep 29, 2013)

DNAprotection said:


> so in other words if you had a good cow you would trade her to someone that says they'll give you magic beans and a golden goose...maybe your right, after all they did such a good job with ge corn


I refuse to get into politics but are you saying that the goverment failed with genetically enhancing corn? If so I would love to see where that information comes from.


----------



## Chimone (Oct 1, 2013)

Personally I could care less if its GMO or not. If its legal and I can smoke and grow a couple plants I do not care how we get there. If the only thing available in stores is a multibillion $ company's weed, well then so be it. Keep it cheap and legal and lets move on


----------



## mangojuice (Oct 13, 2013)

Dan Kone said:


> I'd trade that cow for one that produces a higher quality milk in larger volumes. GMO's are not magic nor are they a myth. They are science.


then u would want a Monsanto cow kept on rbgh. They r walking milk factories.breed em once they give 4 years of milk n r ready for slaughter. Drink up if u can find the milk in all that homogenized n pasteurized bottled pus.science is just another story.


----------



## ULEN (Nov 4, 2013)

Monsatan is the devil. Everything they touch turns to ash. No other way to put it.


----------



## Collisto's Orbit (Dec 1, 2013)

Jonah Salk enlightened them all. "hey, we're not getting paid anymore, because the disease has been eradicated."

Notice there haven't been too many more cures recently. And then try to figure why that is.

How many years of multi millions of dollars gathered from Muscular Dystrophy Telethons, and they have FUCKING ZILCH for its patients? I mean nothing. Those afflicted get steroids, and the disease rages on.


----------



## MonsterExtracts13 (Jan 9, 2014)

I want the Feds on board. Baby steps!


----------



## DNAprotection (Jan 10, 2014)

MonsterExtracts13 said:


> I want the Feds on board. Baby steps!



how about this 'baby' step?

https://www.rollitup.org/politics/773992-your-personal-view-possessing-seeds.html

should the nation question be 'is possessing seeds and growing plants, 'any' plants (in effort to meet your own needs in order to 'live') your self evident inherent human right?' ?

or do you think its better that we are all asking 'should we legalize weed?' ???


----------



## desert dude (Jan 10, 2014)

Yes, please. Lots and lots of GMOs of every sort.


----------



## DNAprotection (Jan 11, 2014)

desert dude said:


> Yes, please. Lots and lots of GMOs of every sort.


actually dd thats what you get when you 'legalese' through 'regulation' instead of finding laws to be invalid because they intrude on and over burden your human rights...


----------



## kinddiesel (Jan 11, 2014)

after reading some of this thread , I decided I need to light another joint ! to much reading .


----------



## DNAprotection (Jan 11, 2014)

kinddiesel said:


> after reading some of this thread , I decided I need to light another joint ! to much reading .


well if you read this part and think it through from there your prolly good to go...



in your 'personal' view, is possessing seeds and growing plants your right?

should the nation question be 'is possessing seeds and growing plants, 'any' plants (in effort to meet your own needs in order to 'live') your self evident inherent human right?' ?

or do you think its better that we are all asking 'should we legalize weed?' ???​


----------



## dangerlow (Jan 19, 2014)

GMO = screwing with mother nature. I can almost promise you that GMO foods will at some point cause the near extinction of humans. I have done a lot of work with GMO trees and foods for the DOA. And there are horror stories that would make you sick. One for instance was when they were making corn seeds and plants more hardy so they could plant them much the same way as winter wheat. They made a corn plant that would produce toxins similar to Ricin. Luckily this was discovered early on, because if the pollen went free it could have potentially made all corn on earth poisonous. So do you really want the government fucking with our most precious plant?

"A study published last week in the peer-reviewed Journal of Applied Toxicology revealed that genetically modified corn containing the genes for Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) is toxic to humans. The study further revealed that the herbicide known as Roundup is toxic to humans, even at small exposures. The vast majority of the corn grown in the U.S. has been engineered to contain Bt and is sprayed with Roundup during the growing process."


----------



## DNAprotection (Jan 29, 2014)

heres something monsanto is dead set against, and we are considering putting it on the ballot in lake county...

The Lake County 'Right to Grow Plants' Human Rights Initiative.


Whereas on this day in the State of California the people of the County of Lake do hereby find that:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for people to reaffirm and reestablish the fundamental human rights that they are naturally endowed, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's origins entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of humankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to come forward in the reestablishment of those rights.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all humans are created equal, that they are naturally endowed with certain Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, 
--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to re-declare and reestablish the inherent human rights that would intrinsically correct such governmental negligence, and to reconstitute such in a form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness, and in accordance with the 9th amendment of the constitution of the United State of America:
Amendment IX
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

Whereas disregard and contempt for certain human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of humankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people, it has become necessary to reaffirm and specifically constitute that:
(section) 1. 
Humans are naturally endowed with the fundamental right to posses the seeds of and partner with and grow the plants of this earth for their own uses as individuals in pursuit of life and in effort to live, and that such basic human rights exist and are held in perpetuity outside of the constitutional responsibility of government to protect an individuals right to engage in commerce.
(section) 2.
Should any neighbor complaints arise as an official complaint to the county as a result of individuals exercising the rights set forth in section 1., all the effected parties shall be directed to mediation provided for by the County of Lake, and if resolution between the effected parties cannot be achieved in a reasonable effort to mediate, the effected parties shall then continue mediation at their own expense (to be equally divided between the effected parties) until a resolution between the parties can be agreed upon, or until the effected parties agree to withdraw from mediation. 
(section) 3.
Any and all County, State or Federal laws where such conflicts may arise as the result of individuals exercising the human rights declared in section 1., are to be set aside depending on if the individual circumstance determines that such conflicts are occurring outside of a 'commerce' related activity as defined herein, and so for the expressed purposes of this document the word "commerce" shall be taken to mean:

'The buying and selling of goods in any form, as between individual humans, and in direct reference to the exchange of United States currency (or other such legally recognized tender) for such goods or services,'


----------



## donmagicjuan (Jan 29, 2014)

its all a matter of time theres nothing u can do


----------



## DNAprotection (Jan 29, 2014)

donmagicjuan said:


> its all a matter of time theres nothing u can do


such are the famous last words on the slaves tombstone...


----------



## DNAprotection (Feb 1, 2014)

slaves beg for 'legalization' and 'regulation'...
humans demand their rights...

The Lake County 'Right to Grow Plants' Human Rights Initiative.
Whereas on this day in the State of California the people of the County of Lake do hereby find that:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for people to reaffirm and reestablish the fundamental human rights that they are naturally endowed, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's origins entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of humankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to come forward in the reestablishment of those rights.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all humans are created equal, that they are naturally endowed with certain Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, 
--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to re-declare and reestablish the inherent human rights that would intrinsically correct such governmental negligence, and to reconstitute such in a form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness, and in accordance with the 9th amendment of the constitution of the United State of America:
Amendment IX
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
Whereas disregard and contempt for certain human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of humankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people, it has become necessary to reaffirm and specifically constitute that:
(section) 1. 
Humans are naturally endowed with the fundamental right to posses the seeds of and partner with and grow the plants of this earth for their own uses as individuals in pursuit of life and in effort to live, and that such basic human rights exist and are held in perpetuity outside of the constitutional responsibility of government to protect an individuals right to engage in commerce.
(section) 2.
Should any neighbor complaints arise as an official complaint to the county as a result of individuals exercising the rights as described in section 1., (not withstanding any effected party choosing to seek remedy and or reparations by way of litigation through civil proceedings), all the effected parties shall be directed to mediation provided for by the County of Lake, and if resolution between the effected parties cannot be achieved in a reasonable effort to mediate, the effected parties shall then continue mediation at their own expense (to be equally divided between the effected parties) until a resolution between the parties can be agreed upon, or until the effected parties agree to withdraw from mediation. 
2.(a) 
All who exercise the rights described in section 1., shall take care to prevent environmental destruction, and are responsible to mitigate any possible foreseen negative impacts on the natural environments of the County, and all persons who fail or neglect such practices shall be subject to the authority of any County of Lake ordinance(s) that would provide reasonable remedy.
(section) 3.
All County, State or Federal criminal laws that exist in conflict with individuals exercising the human rights as described in section 1., are to be set aside unless it can be determined that the individual circumstance is occurring within the context of 'commerce' related activities as defined herein, 
--For the expressed purposes of this document the word "commerce" shall be taken to mean:
'The buying and selling of goods in any form, as between individual humans, and in direct reference to the exchange of United States currency (or other such legally recognized tender) for such goods or services,'


----------



## Dan Kone (Feb 1, 2014)

DNAprotection said:


> slaves beg for 'legalization' and 'regulation'...
> humans demand their rights...


Everyone who disagrees with you is a slave. Awesome. That should convince a lot of people to agree with your tin foil hat conspiracy theories.

It doesn't matter what you "humans" demand, you'll never get it. Those demanding legalization and regulation are getting it. They are the ones making progress. People like you just get in the way of freedom and progress. 

Presenting unrealistic bullshit that the general public would never vote for while at the same time telling people not to support realistic legalization initiatives is giving the DEA everything they want. You're the best thing that's happened for prohibitionists since Richard Nixon.


----------



## DNAprotection (Feb 1, 2014)

Dan Kone said:


> Everyone who disagrees with you is a slave. Awesome. That should convince a lot of people to agree with your tin foil hat conspiracy theories.
> 
> It doesn't matter what you "humans" demand, you'll never get it. Those demanding legalization and regulation are getting it. They are the ones making progress. People like you just get in the way of freedom and progress.
> 
> Presenting unrealistic bullshit that the general public would never vote for while at the same time telling people not to support realistic legalization initiatives is giving the DEA everything they want. You're the best thing that's happened for prohibitionists since Richard Nixon.


if you knew even the first thing about how law works you would slap yourself silly...
but how can you know the law when you dont even know yourself?
if you dont know yourself then you will never know what 'freedom' means and your post above is a text book example of such...
so in conclusion only a slave would state what you have stated'


----------



## Dan Kone (Feb 4, 2014)

DNAprotection said:


> if you knew even the first thing about how law works you would slap yourself silly...
> but how can you know the law when you dont even know yourself?
> if you dont know yourself then you will never know what 'freedom' means and your post above is a text book example of such...
> so in conclusion only a slave would state what you have stated'



I've helped author legislation. Real legislation that's actually passed. I'm familiar with how laws work.


----------



## DNAprotection (Feb 4, 2014)

Dan Kone said:


> I've helped author legislation. Real legislation that's actually passed. I'm familiar with how laws work.


if your legislation fell short of first base = your basic human right to grow plants for your own use outside of commerce, then yours was just another betrayal to all that stand before you and all that come after you, whether you know it or not...further, writing legislation has little to do with being 'familiar' with how laws work and even being 'familiar' with how laws work doesn't mean you understand the first thing about civil court (for example) and the word 'standing' which is critical to this situation and is another central reason as to why whatever legislation you supposedly helped to pass was just another exercise in ignorance...
you should be working more in this direction if you want to do yourself and those who come after you a favor...
(updated version)
Lake County 'Freedom to Grow Plants' Human Rights Initiative 11564,
Whereas on this day in the State of California the people of the County of Lake do hereby find and declare that:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for people to reaffirm and reestablish the fundamental human rights that they are naturally endowed, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's origins entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of humankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to come forward in the reestablishment of those rights.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all humans are created equal, that they are naturally endowed with certain Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,
--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, 
--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to re-declare and reestablish the inherent human rights that would intrinsically correct such governmental negligence, and to reconstitute such in a form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness, and in accordance with the 9th amendment of the Constitution of the United State of America:
Amendment IX,
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
--Whereas disregard and contempt for certain human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of humankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people, it has become necessary to reaffirm and specifically constitute that:
(section) 1. 
Humans are naturally endowed with the fundamental right to partner with the soil and posses the seeds of, and partner with, and grow the plants of this earth for their own uses as individuals in pursuit of life and in effort to live, and that such basic human rights exist and are held in perpetuity outside of the constitutional responsibility of government to protect an individuals right to engage in commerce.
1.(a)
All County of Lake residents who exercise the rights described in section 1., and are compliant with section 2.(a), and are gardening outside (outdoor) or in green houses, are exempt from any county permitting or other county ordinances that would limit an individuals home gardening efforts in conjunction with section 1.
1.(b)
The County of Lake shall encourage and cooperate with people exercising the rights described in section 1 in every way available, and individuals exercising such rights in effort to grow food for their own consumption shall be exempt from paying for the portion of their water use that goes to water such food gardens, and such exemptions are to be determined based on garden size and the reasonable amount of water it takes to maintain such, and also based on the physical increase in water usage that exceeds the normal average water usage of the particular household without a food garden. 
(section) 2.
Should neighbor complaints that are not related to section 2.(a), or are not related to a specific medically verifiable toxic health risk to the public, arise as an official complaint to the county as a result of individuals exercising the rights as described in section 1., (not withstanding any effected party choosing to seek remedy and or reparations by way of litigation through civil proceedings), all the effected parties shall be directed to mediation provided for by the County of Lake, and if resolution between the effected parties cannot be achieved in a reasonable effort to mediate, the effected parties shall then continue mediation at their own expense (to be equally divided between the effected parties) until a resolution between the parties can be agreed upon, or until the effected parties agree to withdraw from mediation. 
2.(a) 
All who exercise the rights described in section 1., shall take reasonable care to prevent environmental destruction, and are responsible to mitigate any possible foreseen negative impacts on the natural environments, and all persons who neglect such practices shall be subject to the authority of any County of Lake ordinance(s) that would provide reasonable remedy, but such remedies are to be used to help individuals come into compliance with this section and not to unreasonably burden individuals who exercise the rights described in section 1., and the County of Lake Environmental Health department shall administer over individual circumstances that may arise due to non compliance with this section as well as section 2.(b). 
2(b)
If an individual's income qualifies for the low income standards of the county, then the county shall assist in an individuals effort to comply with section 2.(a) by mitigating the costs of any such remedies, but shall not do so in cases where the environmental damage is occurring from an individuals use of non organic gardening chemicals including but not limited to pesticides, herbicides, fungicides and fertilizers, and the county shall retain the authority to limit the use of such chemicals if such a remedy is applicable to the circumstance(s).
(section) 3.
All County, State or Federal criminal laws that exist in conflict with individuals exercising the human rights as described in section 1., (and not withstanding an individual in violation of using illegal chemicals including but not limited to pesticides, herbicides, fungicides and fertilizers), are to be set aside unless it can be determined that the individual circumstance is occurring within the context of 'commerce' related activities as defined herein, 
--For the expressed purposes of this document the word "commerce" shall be taken to mean:
The buying and selling of goods in any form, as between individual humans, and in direct reference to the exchange of United States currency (or other such legally recognized tender) for such goods or services.


----------



## Dan Kone (Feb 4, 2014)

DNAprotection said:


> if your legislation fell short of first base = your basic human right to grow plants for your own use outside of commerce, then yours was just another betrayal to all that stand before you and all that come after you, whether you know it or not...


So writing a zoning law which expanded access to medical marijuana = a betrayal? lol. Ok. 

Also, growing whatever plant you want because you feel like it isn't a basic human right. Should I be able to grow opium poppies in my front yard across from a Jr High School? If I feel like doing it that must mean it's a basic human right, like breathing air, drinking water, etc. 




> further, writing legislation has little to do with being 'familiar' with how laws work


Actually that's exactly what that means.


----------



## DNAprotection (Feb 4, 2014)

Dan Kone said:


> So writing a zoning law which expanded access to medical marijuana = a betrayal? lol. Ok.
> 
> Also, growing whatever plant you want because you feel like it isn't a basic human right. Should I be able to grow opium poppies in my front yard across from a Jr High School? If I feel like doing it that must mean it's a basic human right, like breathing air, drinking water, etc.
> 
> ...



truly idiotic lol...of course you should be able to grow poppies and why not?
clearly you know very little about how laws work in practice or when challenging or being challenged in court, let alone your natural born human rights.
show me what legislation that you helped to write that 'expanded' access to med can?
ps...if you happen to be referring to sb420 in cali then you truly are in need of some perspective as sb420 was not only a breech of the state legislatures obligation to all the fed (dea in particular) annual contracts they sign but also only worked to undermine 215 (passed by the people who are not obligated by signature of said dea etc contracts etc) and has lead to counties all over cali passing ordinances to restrict med can cultivation etc...


----------



## Dan Kone (Feb 4, 2014)

DNAprotection said:


> truly idiotic lol...of course you should be able to grow poppies and why not?


Because they are used to make heroin. The fact that you consider this a basic human right just shows how ridiculous you are.

GMO = ZOMG! They are killing us all!
Heroin = no big deal


----------



## DNAprotection (Feb 4, 2014)

Dan Kone said:


> Because they are used to make heroin. The fact that you consider this a basic human right just shows how ridiculous you are.
> 
> GMO = ZOMG! They are killing us all!
> Heroin = no big deal


thats simply idiotic lol, by that logic you would need to out law practically every plant and much much more...basically anything that can be used for something you dont approve of...
thats like geniuscide logic...
I consider cali's 215 (cua) to be a human rights initiative/law concerning people having the freedom to access and grow the medicine they choose, why not pony up the human rights legislation you say you helped to write?


----------



## Dan Kone (Feb 4, 2014)

DNAprotection said:


> thats simply idiotic lol, by that logic you would need to out law practically every plant and much much more...basically anything that can be used for something you dont approve of...
> thats like geniuscide logic...
> I consider cali's 215 (cua) to be a human rights initiative/law concerning people having the freedom to access and grow the medicine they choose, why not pony up the human rights legislation you say you helped to write?


Heroin isn't just something I disapprove of, it's actually a bad thing. Really, it is. 

And I didn't say I helped write that initiative. I had nothing to do with it nor will I.


----------



## DNAprotection (Feb 5, 2014)

Dan Kone said:


> I've helped author legislation. Real legislation that's actually passed. I'm familiar with how laws work.





Dan Kone said:


> So writing a zoning law which expanded access to medical marijuana = a betrayal? lol. Ok.
> 
> Also, growing whatever plant you want because you feel like it isn't a basic human right. Should I be able to grow opium poppies in my front yard across from a Jr High School? If I feel like doing it that must mean it's a basic human right, like breathing air, drinking water, etc.
> 
> ...





Dan Kone said:


> Heroin isn't just something I disapprove of, it's actually a bad thing. Really, it is.
> 
> And I didn't say I helped write that initiative. I had nothing to do with it nor will I.


dude read all your quotes above, seriously one thing you are writing is gibberish lol...first you say "I've helped author legislation", but then you never say what legislation, and then you say "I didn't say I helped write that initiative", lol what initiative? you neglected to reveal what legislation you "helped author" = gibberish...
and with the way you speak of poppies i'm starting to think your just an average run of the mill prohibitionist...
i'm guessing just about any plant can be processed into something you would consider to be 'bad' as well as something you would consider to be good...
poppies have medicinal uses...am i to not have that personal freedom/choice in your world?
and what about the coca plant?
are you throwing that baby out with the bath water as well?
http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/showwiki.php?title=Introduction_and_Use_of_Coca_-_Erythroxylum_Coca#Industrial_uses


----------



## bird mcbride (Feb 5, 2014)

Dan Kone said:


> Because they are used to make heroin. The fact that you consider this a basic human right just shows how ridiculous you are.
> 
> GMO = ZOMG! They are killing us all!
> Heroin = no big deal


You can get free heroin and needles etc from any first step clinic. Let's not forget about the safe injection sites where people can go do thier heroin with a MD on hand in the event that someone OD's.


----------



## bird mcbride (Feb 5, 2014)

In the eighties the war on drugs declared that estasy is a safe alternative to mj use. I noticed last week(decades later) that estasy is not a safe alternative to mj and is in fact as dangerous as heroin, cocaine, oxy's etc. These people making these drug policies got sh*t for brains.


----------



## Dan Kone (Feb 5, 2014)

bird mcbride said:


> You can get free heroin and needles etc from any first step clinic. Let's not forget about the safe injection sites where people can go do thier heroin with a MD on hand in the event that someone OD's.


He was trying to claim we have a basic right to grow whatever plant we want. Nothing to do with safe injection sites.


----------



## DNAprotection (Feb 6, 2014)

Dan Kone said:


> He was trying to claim we have a basic right to grow whatever plant we want. Nothing to do with safe injection sites.


not exactly Kone head lol...you made need to try, but i was actually born with such rights the same way i was born with legs...its your choice to stick your legs into a wood chipper or keep and use them...you can try to put your shredded legs back together again (your not even doing that much), but i still have mine


----------



## DNAprotection (Feb 6, 2014)

Dan Kone said:


> He was trying to claim we have a basic right to grow whatever plant we want. Nothing to do with safe injection sites.


bro you might as well be saying as you were told, that the world is flat...
all the while though of course i know its round 
i think we should run a poll here to see how many pps know the world is round compared to how many believe you when you say its flat...


----------



## bird mcbride (Feb 6, 2014)

Has anyone here ever done cones with puddy hash?


----------

