WHAT IN THE WORLD DOES FUEL GOT TO DO WITH WEED? NOTHING SAME WITH HEMP, AND CANABUS, N.O.T.H.I.N.G. AT ALL WEED MAKES PEOPLE RETARDED, which explains why you all want to"legalize the weed in order to get the capsules, oils, and cream so the smoking part is no longer against the law. you figure that you SHOULD be able to legally smoke it, and have as much as you want of it without law enforcement keeping an eye on dealers and buyers footsteps. LMAO WHAT/ARE/YOU/PEOPLE/SMOKING? ROFLMAO WoooooO! Heree ,~toke toke~
this may not be the OFFICIAL definitions but i conser these as MY definitions: legalization: how it should be, government doesn't have a damn thing to say about what i can and cant take into my own body, what i can possess or what i can grow/harvest, they also have no say over whether or not a business can sell a product OR WHO THEY CAN SELL IT TO(age limits) regulation: this is what most people consider "legal" the government says that some business's can sell certain products, BUT only if they sell it to certain groups of people(generally the age thing) prohibiton: the government says no selling, no buying, no partaking, no harvesting and no ownership of a product, this is where marijuana is on a federal level right now i do not want any government at any level to have anything to do with MJ but at teh very least i would like to see this power revoked from the federal government and returned to the states, though it won't bring immediate solution to our problems it is certainly a step in the right direction this is about individual rights people, thats what is important, hemp isn't gonna save the world anymore than corn/wheat/nettle or any other plant, it may help just as much as any other plant but NO plant on its OWN has the power to save the world, don't get to crazy over this and hank, the TJ and GW thing with hemp is reversed i believe, TJ wrote about smoking hemp on his verdana, whereas GW had plantations of hemp
MJ IS NOT A PRODUCT YOU MORONS. A product is something you can buy for your home or business, or for oral use and it gives a solution or use to a problem, or can be used as a tool to something, medicine to your body, or device. Cannabis CAN be considered as a product made FROM weed, but the weed itself, to grow in our own back yards instead of letting our local drug stores handle it which is not what none of you are asking for at all because you are sneaky, dangerous, and mentally ill from all the pot you smoke during the period of your lives so far, is considered as a poison. The reason why it's considered as a poison and not a ~good-drug~ is because the SMOKE part of it has no beneficial medicinal use to it at all. The only thing it does is damage your brain. For example how it leads to schizophrenia after a long period of years in use. WE COULD even say that the venom in snakes is a product, so let’s protest against "this corrupt government" so having rattle snakes as pets should be legal since snakes in this way are such a good thing, Right? That's what I thought! A product? Many of you guys want this “product” to be sold in our supermarkets because you are such stoners and idiots who have no future and do not care about the future of all the children out there (not even your own) being born within the next 5 minutes. Ya I guess you guys somewhat care, but at the end of the day you do not have the concousness to be bothered a single little bit by it at all if your child grows up to be a useless mentally unhealthy bum on the street or not. Is there something wrong with being poor? NO not at all! But when you are a parent and you are careless of what is going on around you, your neighbourhood, and even as to what is going on in your own kid's life, that is proof of parental curruption that comes with the evidence that marijuana is a serious mental disease abstracted in a green plant. This concludes to selfishness, stubbornness, and mental denial that IT IS the KILLER of educated soccer mom’s family child/children’s lives. When your son or daughter grows up and even though they are in good physical health condition, and all they want to do is sit around, claim that they “cannot be around others because it makes them nervious” collect a check from the government, and sit on their ass month to month only to do nothing and be a nobody is damage and A LOSS OF SELF RESPECT TO YOUR OWN SOUL & LIFE, AND IS LOGICALLY A MENTAL DEATH. One might as well just rest their soul in peace at the grave! This so called “product”that sums most of its users to nothing, or at least comes to end of roads quickly, and eventually ruins the thinking of every single one of its users, and has every sign & side effect that comes with it making it obvious pure street junky candy, should be decriminalized? Or is the true fact of the matter that you've smoked so much dope that you are un mentally stable of making life decisions, un ethical, and have no morals at all? Name a single pot smoker that cares about their children in the same volume of love and care as much as a non pot smoking parent!! All the pot smoking parents out there don't even give a CRAP if there kid leaves the house for a week without saying the word ''~because he or she is a teenager now~'' and if that kid of theirs got SHOT the parent would say "hey he/she is not a little baby and got himself/herself in that on his or her own, I'm hurt a little but oh well." But the clean minded parent even works to prevent those things from happening, and AT LEAST comes to the funeral weeping if anything like that ever did happen! Bottom line: You people need to GET OFF THE DRUGS and stop denying that it is one!!
So then whatever can be a negative effect on your body is a "drug"beef, cheese, coffee, tea, white bread, pork, salt, etc. No, common sense is knowing where to draw the line or driving our own cars would be illegal. Yes, all these things can make you sick, and some people are allergic to peanut butter too, others to bananas. So how do we figure out when and where to draw lines? Well let’s see. If you exercise and diet properly your body can work the way that it was built to digest those things in many needed balanced ways. Because most of the time sugars and most of these things are more in the Food categories than in the Drugs categories for real noticeable reasons that leave huge gaps for discussions. Likewise, there are very noticeable reasons why marijuana is in the "bad drug" category. If you want proof, go visit any mental health department, program, rehab centre, or hospital if they would only allow you a tour, you would be able to see realistic results of GRASS. Also, you can Google for pros and cons of smoking marijuana. You will find both good and bad without a doubt. The good news is the good news for sure, that's why we call it GOOD NEWS. However, is that good news worth in-taking into your system if it's along with the bad? If I gave you an apple (WHICH IS GOOD) with morphine in the center, wouldyou eat it? How about if the morphine was blended with every bight, would that apple still be worth having for its beneficial vitamins? So when does our government step in or “re step in” and say this stuff is getting out of control and as responsible LAW MAKERS we need to do something about it before every single man, woman, and child in America / Canada is high as a kite daily and in need of psychiatric care? Now yes I'll admit I thought you did not know what product meant, and now from your response to my misunderstanding I'm sure you do get it. On the other hand most of you all are not looking to get a hold of the product; you are no more or less than trying to get a hold of the weed for the purpose of legally smoking alone. And that's wrong because IT IS SO BADLY a dangerous drug. (when used that way) Now would I have a problem if our government invested in it being an over the shelf cannabis health product (oils, creams), or as prescription capsules where you would need a note by your physician and have to ask for it at the front counter? Not at all. As a matter of fact I would support anything that is monitored and regulated the proper way. Farming: only if it is locked up in green houses and real high fencing so people do not steal from the farm at night so they can use it as smoke in a joint. And only if they keep it illegal for use on the streets in the dry leaf form for rolling & burning, unless you have proof that it's for medical purposes, medical proof on you, and if such a way to be possible, proof that what you have is prescription not street weed. And only if those crops were made for our beautiful corporations that would use it to produce our so called lovely PRODUCTS.
^ first off, flipping out and calling names etc is not a very effective way to get people to see your views, i know this from experience, most people will either completely ignore you or will talk back but will almost always refuse to see your point of view, do what you want but if you wish others to see your view, you may find it more effective to talk to them in a level headed manner rather than calling them morons from the get go from there, i may not agree or respect your opinion in itself but i want to thank you for commenting and at least putting you opinion out there rather than simply allowing the world to go to shit around you next i would likje to know if you can prove ONE thing in your last post, i am currently under the impression that it is all repeated propaganda with NO proof to back it up by refferring to marijuana as a product i was simply deffering to what it would be considered to any shop owner who had it available in his store, where it would on a vague level be called product rather than its specific name furthermore i am not a raving lunatic that blames the government for absolutely everything, i simply know that any law that inhibits or controls business is, by DEFINITION, socialism. so·cial·ism noun /ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/ 1.A political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole 2.Policy or practice based on this theory 3.(in Marxist theory) A transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism. now whether or not i agree with the use of marijuana as a drug for recreational or medicinal use is completely irrelevant to law, the fact of the matter is that I DO NOT have the right or the authority to tell you, or anyone else for that matter (with the exception of my children or others living in my household) what you can or cannot sell/buy or what you can or cannot take into your own body, if i do not then it is DANGEROUS for me to delegate such a power to my government as this makes them more powerful then me or other citzens and BEGINS them down the path toward tyranny. these laws do not have to suddenly create tyranny, and they do not have to. tyrants have throughout history and continue to take over freedoms very SLOWLY and SYSTEMATICALLY so as to make it appear as if nothing is happening at all. besides that i t is much easier to defend yourself and your loved ones from one man, lets call him a "pothead" in this instance so you don't feel i am opposing too many of your views. It is much easier to defend yourself and your loved ones from ONE pothead down the street who MAY stealmoney or property from you to support his habit, then it is to defend against a oversized government that WILL steal your money, property and freedoms at EVERY oppurtunity you give them, this is not simply an accusation of our government but an observation of how all governments have performed throughout history and continue to perform today I do NOT deny that marijuana is a drug, that fact, however, does not prove or disprove whether it is a harmful drug drugs are VERY prevelant in our society and i would be willing to bet that oyu have taken at LEAST one drug in the last day or two, probably without even realizing it here are some of the most popular and most used drugs in our soicety today, from experience im sure you know that they are not all deadly poisons simply because they are a drug SUGAR: white refined sugar-is not a food. It is a pure chemical extracted from plant sources, purer in fact than cocaine, which it resembles in many ways. Its true name is sucrose and its chemical formula is C12H22O11. you can learn more about sugar if you wish at this site, this is also where i copied and pasted the above information about sugar: Sugar - Pure White and Deadly - The Problem of Sugar Caffeine: this is found in chocolate, coffee, energy drinks and many teas this is also a drug that is proven to be chemically addictive and can cause serious withdrawel migraines if one decides to quit taking caffiene cold turkey here is a site about caffeine dependence if you would like to look for yourself: Information about caffeine dependence the next three drugs that i am going to list are known as the "big three" alcohol: alcohol is a drug that is very prevelant in our society, used and abused all over the place, alcohol has proven to be a fairly dangerous drug, yet we(me included) use it as a society quite often, it also creates a chemical dependce and puts many people on the streets while trying to satisfy their addiction alcohol has previously been prohibited by the federal government(fortuantely that was done constitutionally)and was repealed by the people, not only due to the large number of people at the time who consumed alcohol themselves but because there were those who understood it is not hte governments proper place to prohibit alcohol. we have learned many things after taking a step back and looking at that prohibition my question is, do you think that the alcohol prohibiton was effective while in effect? if so, or if not, why is that? and what is the difference between prohibiting one drug and not another, why is there a difference? here is a wikipedia page on alcoholic beverages: Alcoholic beverage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia tobacco/nicotine: tobacco is the second of the big three, it has proven to be more addictive then heroin and has tons of carcinogens present in it that put hte user and those around the user at risk of developing lung or other types of cancer here is a link to a web page about tobacco: Basic Facts About Drugs: Tobacco marijuana: marijuana is the third most popular of the big three and the most widely used illegal drug, there are many ways of partaking of marijuana and smoking is not the only way marijuana also contains a few carcinogens but there are so many terpenes to be found in marijuana that are anti-carcinogenic, that coupled with the fact that most marijuan users only use marijuana a few times a month as opposed to the average 10-20 cigarettes a day that tobacco smokers use, the risk of getting cancer from marijuana is very minimal to the average marijuana smoker furthermore, marijuana does NOT rot the brain, this propoganda that has been used OVER and OVER again after a faulty study years ago involving some oxygen deprived monkey, years after the study was performed, the scientists who performed it FINALLY released the details of the study, here is a paragraph from NORML on the study and the myth that marijuan kills brain cells: Myth: Pot Kills Brain Cells Government experts now admit that pot doesn't kill brain cells.1 This myth came from a handful of animal experiments in which structural changes (not actual cell death, as is often alleged) were observed in brain cells of animals exposed to high doses of pot. Many critics still cite the notorious monkey studies of Dr. Robert G. Heath, which purported to find brain damage in three monkeys that had been heavily dosed with cannabis.2 This work was never replicated and has since been discredited by a pair of better controlled, much larger monkey studies, one by Dr. William Slikker of the National Center for Toxicological Research3 and the other by Charles Rebert and Gordon Pryor of SRI International.4 Neither found any evidence of physical alteration in the brains of monkeys exposed to daily doses of pot for up to a year. Human studies of heavy users in Jamaica and Costa Rica found no evidence of abnormalities in brain physiology.5 Even though there is no evidence that pot causes permanent brain damage, users should be aware that persistent deficits in short-term memory have been noted in chronic, heavy marijuana smokers after 6 to 12 weeks of abstinence.6 It is worth noting that other drugs, including alcohol, are known to cause brain damage. Footnotes 1. Dr. Christine Hartel, Acting Director of Research, National Institute of Drug Abuse, cited by the State of Hawaii Dept of Health, Alcohol and Drug Abuse Division in memo of Feb. 4, 1994. 2. For an overview, see NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Report, op. cit., pp. 81-2. R.G. Heath et al, "Cannabis sativa: effects on brain function and ultrastructure in Rhesus monkeys," Biol. Psychiatry 15: 657-90 (1980). 3. William Slikker et al., "Chronic Marijuana Smoke Exposure in the Rhesus Monkey," Fundamental and Applied Toxicology 17: 321-32 (1991). 4. Charles Rebert & Gordon Pryor - "Chronic Inhalation of Marijuana Smoke and Brain Electrophysiology of Rhesus Monkeys," International Journal of Psychophysiology V 14, p.144, 1993. 5. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Report, pp. 82-7. 6. "Cannabis and Memory Loss," (editorial) British Journal of Addiction 86: 249-52 (1991) here is a link to a yahoo voice post with more detail on Dr. Robert G. Heath's study: Does Marijuana Really Kill Brain Cells? - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com and here is a link to an article talking about a study that suggests something ENTIRELY different: New Study Proves That Marijuana Increases Brain Cell Formation | BudFacts.com schizophrenia? here is an article taking a close look at recent study that claimed schizo was 40% more likely after the use of marijuana was introduced, it is purely a scientific looksy though it may or may not be hard for you to follow: Does Smoking Cannabis Cause Schizophrenia? : denialism blog that only responds to about half of your message, but i'll leave it at that for now as i don't want to give you too much learning to do, im sure you ahve enough on your plate without spending hours metnally exausting the brain through reading and studying of scientific material. (not trying to dis you here it really is mentally exhausting to spend too long reading and absorbing information also, i didn't realise that only half was posted earlier, this is the full response, i will delete the rest
so basically, you are under the impression that use of marijuana is only ok if you have PERMISSION from the gavernment? is it really safe to submit to the government in such a way? such that you must seek their permission before doing something? could it further be deduced that the government should need to give you permission before you are allowed to consume high fat foods or McDonalds? i think we can agree that both of these can be harmful to your health, does that mean a man or woman should not be allowed to choose for themselves what to eat? seeking permission via liscencing very quickly can lead in the wrong direction and i admit it scares me when people are so willing to give up their personal freedoms, even if they don't put those freedoms into use these are ALL honest questions that are not meant to be put out in an offensive way, but i'd like you to think seriously about them before answering as they are very grave thoughts
when someone compares a hamburger to a substance we have a big problem. and THAT is the danger of arguing with people that support smoking pot. You either act as if you cannot see the difference between a real un healthy food and adangerous herb, or you are cloudy from all the puff puff. It's nothing to do with PERMISSION it's PREVENTING SUBSTANCE ABUSE. Those laws are ways to make sure people do not use medicines as ways to get high,make their own drugs at home & sell it on the streets, and to prevent people from hurting themselves or others. Do you know how many children areborn with disabilities because their parents got their nose stuck in the fluffy white stuff for example, or always stoned on something or the other? Now, when something is accessible only for medical purposes, it's given to you only for legitimate reasons, NOT reasons of use for pleasure. For instance when some doctors won't even give you Tylenols unless you seriously have a high fever and he or she thinks you need them. Now if you're telling me you trust your own judgment on when to have a drug or not better than a physicians, I'm done talking about this with you because it's like trying to explain something to a child that just wants to have something only for the reason of having their way with or without the understandings that are not registering the child's thinking because all that child can think of is how bad he or she wants all the candy they can get and all for free, even if it makes them sick. Why? "because parents, role models, and authority figures do not know what the hek they are talking about." Right? right! This is no different than those states that started allowing more people to carry fire arms under LESS exceptions to the rule. This is NOT about how hard it is to control the government, or to walk over them and they are not trying to over throw you! That's the wrong mentality, period! No wonder so many people land in jail, then in hell maybe too. Any excuse to outlaw the CODE OF MORALS in many ways as possible! The real question is does civil rights mean we should be allowed to kill without a government help us find justice since it's a "free country?" Then do we not have reasons to have police, and military? Then who will protect us from our rights, service for safety, and shield us from violations. Does it being a free country have to mean no laws at all, and no minimal common sense ways to protect us a little at least, or should we all go around now and start making our own rules and govern ourselves, govern our neighbors, make our own courts, and every time someone out there does not like our rules they can show up to "take a stab" at how they think it should work then when they are pissed at our faces because now WE are the government and every single one of us disagree with each other, and there are no more rules for solid grounds of ethics that are made to STICK FOR EVERYONE and for EACH CITIZINE FOR WELL THOUGHT OUT AND DECICATED HONORABLE REASONS IN THE FIRST PLACE. You do not want to be called names and yet it is like talking to a stubborn zombie that intentionally has no brains within itself. In other words you are purposely making excuses for every single thing you hear against your little precious marijuana because you are guilty inside, know it's wrong, know that YOU are wrong, lying to me, to yourself especially, and have something against law, order, and reasonable sensible rules that are based on reasonable reality. Reasonable reality: can’t get needles from the corner store, can’t get a gun from the shopping mall, can't drive without a license, must be 18 to by tobacco, if you work as a janitor your employer must provide you with plastic gloves, not anyone can be hired as a doctor, illegal to have military weapons, devices, or explosives in your home, can't tear down your neighbors house to make yours wider, can't legally park in two spaces, can't make a one way street into a two way street unless you make the road wider, can't drive fast as you want, can't steal or rob a bank, can't work in construction without steal toe shoes, a hard hat, safety glasses, and work gloves, molest a child, rape a person sexually, abuse a senior citizen, sell raw crack on the street, parents advise that you cut some fat off your meat during dinner, illegal to start fires, arson, you can go to jail for SNIFFING WOOD GLUE / BEING HIGH OFF OF IT and NOT SURE about the attempt of drinking gasoline, BUT if that one is not against the law that's only because they figure no one has the balls to drink it, and I can guarantee if more people did they would make it a rule, must be 18 to buy porn, illegal to sell, use, buy, or have crack, ecstasy,cocaine, the misuse of sleeping pills, etcetera ARE ALL ILLEGAL for reasons that have NOTHING TO DO WITH TAKING AWAY FROM OR ADDING TO OUR FREEDOM WHATSOEVER. Because a 5 year old kid not being allowed to purchase his or her own cough syrup IS COMMON SENSE AND PERFECTLY CONSTITUTIONAL. The Government IS NOT attempting to take away our freedom. YOU ARE TRYING to stop the government from leading us as a nation because you want to live in a country WHERE WE CAN ALL DO WHATEVER WE WANT without discipline, or consequences because your pot head thinking cap is in STONER OUTLAW CONDITION and people like you believe in the people making their own rules for the land instead of having leaders to help us grow and develop daily and yearly as a well thought out, and planned out country with professionals, responsible rules, responsible leaders, leadership, and united AS A FAMILY. No! What you want is every single person for themselves, no family orientation, no rules, lost on the streets, job or no job, no care, anti leadership, anti morals, good leaders for our children or not, good rules or not, anything goes, teachers letting us eat food in the class room, school principals that do not give a dam if you get into a fist fight or not, you don't want there to be parents that have at least one good reason for our children to NOT DO DRUGS because 1. THEY ARE BAD, and 2. YOU CAN GO TOJ JAIL. (therefore a way of showing our children that the leader of their country CARES A LITTLE ABOUT THEM) What will we tell them in the future? that killing is wrong, immoral, no excuse to carry weapons on you to school, but when you reach the age of 18 you are more than welcome to carry a gun??? IS THAT ALL IT SHOULD TAKE?
[quote name='"MrSam"'] when someone compares a hamburger to a substance we have a big problem. and THAT is the danger of arguing with people that support smoking pot. You either act as if you cannot see the difference between a real un healthy food and adangerous herb, or you are cloudy from all the puff puff. It's nothing to do with PERMISSION it's PREVENTING SUBSTANCE ABUSE. Those laws are ways to make sure people do not use medicines as ways to get high,make their own drugs at home & sell it on the streets, and to prevent people from hurting themselves or others. Do you know how many children areborn with disabilities because their parents got their nose stuck in the fluffy white stuff for example, or always stoned on something or the other? Now, when something is accessible only for medical purposes, it's given to you only for legitimate reasons, NOT reasons of use for pleasure. For instance when some doctors won't even give you Tylenols unless you seriously have a high fever and he or she thinks you need them. Now if you're telling me you trust your own judgment on when to have a drug or not better than a physicians, I'm done talking about this with you because it's like trying to explain something to a child that just wants to have something only for the reason of having their way with or without the understandings that are not registering the child's thinking because all that child can think of is how bad he or she wants all the candy they can get and all for free, even if it makes them sick. Why? "because parents, role models, and authority figures do not know what the hek they are talking about." Right? right! This is no different than those states that started allowing more people to carry fire arms under LESS exceptions to the rule. This is NOT about how hard it is to control the government, or to walk over them and they are not trying to over throw you! That's the wrong mentality, period! No wonder so many people land in jail, then in hell maybe too. Any excuse to outlaw the CODE OF MORALS in many ways as possible! The real question is does civil rights mean we should be allowed to kill without a government help us find justice since it's a "free country?" Then do we not have reasons to have police, and military? Then who will protect us from our rights, service for safety, and shield us from violations. Does it being a free country have to mean no laws at all, and no minimal common sense ways to protect us a little at least, or should we all go around now and start making our own rules and govern ourselves, govern our neighbors, make our own courts, and every time someone out there does not like our rules they can show up to "take a stab" at how they think it should work then when they are pissed at our faces because now WE are the government and every single one of us disagree with each other, and there are no more rules for solid grounds of ethics that are made to STICK FOR EVERYONE and for EACH CITIZINE FOR WELL THOUGHT OUT AND DECICATED HONORABLE REASONS IN THE FIRST PLACE. You do not want to be called names and yet it is like talking to a stubborn zombie that intentionally has no brains within itself. In other words you are purposely making excuses for every single thing you hear against your little precious marijuana because you are guilty inside, know it's wrong, know that YOU are wrong, lying to me, to yourself especially, and have something against law, order, and reasonable sensible rules that are based on reasonable reality. Reasonable reality: can’t get needles from the corner store, can’t get a gun from the shopping mall, can't drive without a license, must be 18 to by tobacco, if you work as a janitor your employer must provide you with plastic gloves, not anyone can be hired as a doctor, illegal to have military weapons, devices, or explosives in your home, can't tear down your neighbors house to make yours wider, can't legally park in two spaces, can't make a one way street into a two way street unless you make the road wider, can't drive fast as you want, can't steal or rob a bank, can't work in construction without steal toe shoes, a hard hat, safety glasses, and work gloves, molest a child, rape a person sexually, abuse a senior citizen, sell raw crack on the street, parents advise that you cut some fat off your meat during dinner, illegal to start fires, arson, you can go to jail for SNIFFING WOOD GLUE / BEING HIGH OFF OF IT and NOT SURE about the attempt of drinking gasoline, BUT if that one is not against the law that's only because they figure no one has the balls to drink it, and I can guarantee if more people did they would make it a rule, must be 18 to buy porn, illegal to sell, use, buy, or have crack, ecstasy,cocaine, the misuse of sleeping pills, etcetera ARE ALL ILLEGAL for reasons that have NOTHING TO DO WITH TAKING AWAY FROM OR ADDING TO OUR FREEDOM WHATSOEVER. Because a 5 year old kid not being allowed to purchase his or her own cough syrup IS COMMON SENSE AND PERFECTLY CONSTITUTIONAL. The Government IS NOT attempting to take away our freedom. YOU ARE TRYING to stop the government from leading us as a nation because you want to live in a country WHERE WE CAN ALL DO WHATEVER WE WANT without discipline, or consequences because your pot head thinking cap is in STONER OUTLAW CONDITION and people like you believe in the people making their own rules for the land instead of having leaders to help us grow and develop daily and yearly as a well thought out, and planned out country with professionals, responsible rules, responsible leaders, leadership, and united AS A FAMILY. No! What you want is every single person for themselves, no family orientation, no rules, lost on the streets, job or no job, no care, anti leadership, anti morals, good leaders for our children or not, good rules or not, anything goes, teachers letting us eat food in the class room, school principals that do not give a dam if you get into a fist fight or not, you don't want there to be parents that have at least one good reason for our children to NOT DO DRUGS because 1. THEY ARE BAD, and 2. YOU CAN GO TOJ JAIL. (therefore a way of showing our children that the leader of their country CARES A LITTLE ABOUT THEM) What will we tell them in the future? that killing is wrong, immoral, no excuse to carry weapons on you to school, but when you reach the age of 18 you are more than welcome to carry a gun??? IS THAT ALL IT SHOULD TAKE? [/quote] You sir, should seriously rethink what you said. Starting from the bottom of your ridiculous essay, I will try to make out what your trying to say. Let me take a toke first
Fuel has to do with cannabis because if it were legalized and grown on 6% of the continental United States, we would have enough energy from biodiesel alone to power our entire country, 25% of the world's energy.
We have a current planetary oil consumption rate of near 20,000,000 barrel of oil everyday. Hemp and some other biofuels have a heating value of 5000-8000 BTU/lb. Crude oil has a BTU/lb ratio of 18352. Now for some math:Texas Crude Oil Density = 873 kg / cubic meter 1 cubic meter = 264.172 gallons 1 barrel of oil = 42 gallons 42 gallons * (1 cubic meter / 264.172 gallons) = .15898 cubic meters / barrel .15808 cubic meters / barrel * (873 kg /cubic meter) = 138.8 kg / barrel of oil =305.4 lb/barrel 20,000,000 * 305.4 = 6,108,000,000 potential BTU's of consumption per day world wide. 6,108,000,000 / 8000 = 763500 lbs of hemp consumption (per day) to replace crude oil. Also, keep in mind that crude consumption makes up only about 34.3% of total energy use worldwide. I'm not convinced it's a possibility. Even if it were theoretically possible, the land used would quickly become unsuitable for anything else (think about abandoned grain farms, etc). Industrial scale farming of that magnitude would simply destroy the land. NOT replenish it. PIPE DREAM!
[quote name='"anonymous157"'] I'm not convinced it's a possibility. Even if it were theoretically possible, the land used would quickly become unsuitable for anything else (think about abandoned grain farms, etc). Industrial scale farming of that magnitude would simply destroy the land. NOT replenish it.[/quote] Pretty sure we have MASSIVE farms right now, so I don't see how it could ruin the land. Also, we shouldnt shoot down an alternative fuel source just because it can't fully replace oil. The less oil we use=the longer it can last. +rep for the math, though
So, according to your calculations, we consume over 6 billion lbs of oil every day and under 1 million lbs of hemp is unrealistic? Why is that? You may want to check your math.
[quote name='"greenterror"'] So, according to your calculations, we consume over 6 billion lbs of oil every day and under 1 million lbs of hemp is unrealistic? [/quote] Under a million pounds PER DAY is unrealistic. Its a plant. It takes time to grow. Also, he said 6 billion btu's.
Which is why I said check your math, because he calculated the mass of the oil, not the BTU's. Would you like to compare the time it takes to grow a hemp crop to the time it takes for an oil reservoir to develop? Using 90 million acres to grow hemp (6% of land) @ 10 tons of biomass per acre = 1,800,000,000,000 lbs in a single harvest And why, again, is 1 million lbs/day unreasonable?
@fattmatt: so true we do have massive farms right now. Much much more so in areas with a history of farming. And yes, they are harmful to the land. I agree that we should research this possibility for energy. Just as we should any alternative fuel source, especially more so for renewable energy. I was simply responding to the statement that 6% of land in the US could provide anywhere near enough equivalent energy to make up for 50% of the crude oil use world wide. @greenterror: We do not consume 6,000,000lbs of crude oil daily. I said we consume 20,000,000 barrels daily. Reread it. I calculated the mass of oil to determine it's potential efficiency in BTU's (British Thermal Units). The total potential BTU's of hemp are significantly lower than that of crude. Thus, to get the equivalent of the 6,108,000,000 BTU's that crude supplies, a proportionate amount of hemp would be required. 1 million lbs/day is unreasonable. 6% total farm area = This is equal to 3% of each state if it were evenly distributed. Unfortunately it can't be so because Alaska will not be a conducive environment. Thus 586,412 square miles of unusable space. This will also be true of other places. Most of the highly usable land for agriculture is used up. We produce 39% of the world's crop in corn. 40% of that already goes to ethanol production. And with 4 states carrying 50% of the load, you can count them out as full contributors, too. I would be happy to entertain your theory, if you provide numbers, and factual statistics.
I said 6 BILLION my friend, 20,000,000 barrels x 305.4 lbs = 6.108 BILLION lbs. Reread it. 3%! Obviously some states would grow more than others. Bullshit, people grow great weed in Alaska, it may not be good for farming hemp year round but it is good for farming dank weed. Let's relook at your numbers. * You calculated the mass of the oil, not the BTU's. 20,000,000 * 305.4 * 18352 = 112,094,016,000,000 BTU's/day 122,094,016,000,000 / 8000 = 15,261,752,000 lbs/day But we would be growing 1,800,000,000,000 lbs of hemp biomass in a single harvest, 15 bil/day is no prob. This would last for 120 days, 3 harvests would last year round.
Um, yeah. Those figures seem to make sense. Did you notice that you added 10 trillion out of nowhere? 1.8 trillion lbs of hemp in a single harvest? Are you actually serious? The mass AND BTU's were calculated in order to show BTU's/lb, and also to divide that number by the high estimate of 8000BTU/lb for hemp. And, regardless of whether or not it is POSSIBLE to grow in Alaska is not relevant. Alaska cannot provide the type of environment that could sustain large scale (industrial) hemp farms. If it could, don't you think they would be using the land already, for other agricultural uses? Tell me, what is Alaska's main export? 1. Oil 2. Natural gas 3. Seafood. Where would you suggest these large scale hemp farms establish themselves?
@greenterror: Look, I believe every person on the planet (repressed or not) has the right to feel what they want to feel. Believe what they want to believe. Just as no two people are exactly alike in every way, no solid train of thought should be exactly the same. For that to happen, somehow our own feelings must be influenced and changed to conform with what someone else said, or someone else did. Even if this is the case, our own personal feelings are based also on experience. Perhaps in the majority. This also links to free speech for me. I feel that without the ability for us to think and believe what we feel, free speech is a mute point. Freedom of speech does have its limits, though. As soon as one person impedes someone else's right to think and feel as they desire, the lines are crossed. I do not discredit you for your personal beliefs. Defending what you believe is an honorable trait as far as I'm concerned. Besides, your believe system is not my responsibility. What I do take interest in, however, is when one states something as a fact what is merely one's own belief. Stating as fact that "...if it were legalized and grown on 6% of the continental United States, we would have enough energy from biodiesel alone to power our entire country, 50% of the world's energy. " (nice edit, changing something you said previously only fools new readers) is wrong. All users of cannabis have a responsibility. To tell the truth about the plant that they claim does not need to be lied about. In other words, we have a responsibility to all other users and non users to educate properly the people who are unaware or misinformed. Statements like the one which you provided brings discredit to the entire movement. Also, 3% of a single state is a large area. If you have any doubt, use a grid of equal squares to section any state by 100 pieces. Cross out 3 of those blocks. State owned land is not as large as you may think. Even less so is usable space for agriculture. These areas have been mostly designated as such. And further less is provided for federal use. But, for just a moment, I'll humor you. In order for 3% of every state to be used for hemp production, big policies would come into play. Likely federal mandates that require states to use this land for only hemp production. Even IF this WAS so, the only way I can possibly imagine anything close to what you describe is to create a gmo (genetically modified organism) of hemp. Without getting into the problems with that, understand that at some point, this gmo industrial hemp WILL be introduced to the marijuana plant. Inadvertently or purposefully. Imagine a gov't that legalizes cannabis, then uses gmo hemp to have a relationship with marijuana in order for control purposes. This is an example, and I don't actually believe this, but would it be out of the bounds of reality? What could happen if this gmo hemp (that was never intended for ANY form of consumption) WAS introduced into a plant we DO consume? Again, I don't intend to change your mind. It would be a pointless venture. I am, however, telling you that by spreading disinformation, you are harming any legalization or federal medical use efforts that exists.
So if the figures make sense what's the discrepancy? Once again 90,000,000 acres * 20,000 lbs (10 tons) of biomass/acre = 1.8 trillion lbs of hemp. I still don't think that is too much of a stretch, we won't have to transport trillions of lbs of biomass necessary if most of the work (if not all) is done onsite. I would think they would establish themselves wherever farm land already exists, not in Alaska. There's over 90 million acres of farm land that isn't even being used right now. Well I did edit it before you said anything, so I fixed my own mistake, no need to make a fuss over it. It wouldn't be 3% of every state dude, obviously New Jersey will not have as many hemp fields as Kansas. Big policies? What are you, fear mongering? The figures I provided are with regular hemp, this is achievable now. GMO hemp? Oh yeah, you are fear mongering. Feel free to show me where my disinformation is now, but hey, you are entitled to your own opinion.