Do you think Measure G should be repealed?

Mendo Local wrote:

<quoted text>
read todays UDJ regarding the Trash and other crap cleaned up by BLM and Mustangs. I NEVER said that the pot ruined the environment you just twist words and make them a means to your end.(read, brochure with Allman)... But,.... You digress
Wait for it folks, next she is gonna claim it is ok to leak diesel into the ground cuz HEMP will remove it from the soil....

First, I never said it was ok to pollute the environment, just pointing out that pot does more to help than harm.

Second, yes you did say "If it is ok to poison the environment with pot grows.."

That is a direct cut and paste from your post. your words, not mine.

Third, read the flyer with allman and you will see CLEARLY, IN BOLD PRINT that Allman is NEUTRAL.

Did I digress enough for you?

Yes, I said with pot grows.... Not the Pot, the GROW!

Which includes, Garden tenders, guards, and the MESS they leave behind, including Diesel Spills, Tarps, Trash, and other undesirable "stuff"

You prove my point, You can cut and paste any stand alone sentence and make an implication to suit your own viewpoint. Fortunately the general public which is getting a clue and can see through the digression and diversion..

As always, I DO enjoy your knowledge and decency in your posts

-- peace

reality checker wrote:

<quoted text>
First, I never said it was ok to pollute the environment, just pointing out that pot does more to help than harm.
Second, yes you did say "If it is ok to poison the environment with pot grows.."
That is a direct cut and paste from your post. your words, not mine.
Third, read the flyer with allman and you will see CLEARLY, IN BOLD PRINT that Allman is NEUTRAL.
Did I digress enough for you?

allmnan is a lot of things...one of which is not neutral.

for the record...the Yes on B people won't be voting for him either at re-election.

Together, let's take our county back.

You grow your few plants out of my way and I won't' call the cops on you ('cause I won't even know) and we will live happily ever after.

Bob
Willits, CA Reply »
|Report Abuse |#365 12 hrs ago
Watcher wrote:
Measure G
25 plants equal 25 pounds or 400 oz's per year. 400 oz's divided by 52 weeks is 7.692 oz's per week. Anyone who smokes over 7.5 ounces per week will soon need a funeral parlor.
Measure B
6 plants equal 6 pounds or 96 oz's per year. 96 oz's divided by 52 weeks is 1.846 oz's per week. Anyone who smokes just under two ounces per week needs to go to a drug rehab.
We know that the Med Pot growers aren't lying when they say they never sell any of their pot and that it's all for personal use, so we can conclude that voting for measure B will stop overdoses and save lives.
25 plants indoors(which is required by outdoor grow bans) equals 25 ounces, which equals a half oz a week. The federal patients that the government supplies receive upwards of 4 ounces a week. Why do you ignore these facts????
No on B
__________
BOB
This just means that your a terrible grower and one of the least efficient child Poisoners out there.

I'm sure you deserve some kind of an award.

Mendo Local wrote:

Yes, I said with pot grows.... Not the Pot, the GROW!
Which includes, Garden tenders, guards, and the MESS they leave behind, including Diesel Spills, Tarps, Trash, and other undesirable "stuff"
You prove my point, You can cut and paste any stand alone sentence and make an implication to suit your own viewpoint. Fortunately the general public which is getting a clue and can see through the digression and diversion..
As always, I DO enjoy your knowledge and decency in your posts
-- peace

I think this is the part we are ALL in agreement on.

The 'lone ranger' stuff out in the woods has got to stop.

Thinking about it, if the County itself was to purchase James' property (assuming it was plantable), and provide staff, etc. to grow six plants per cardholder, and provide the cardholder with the legal amount that they are entitled to under 215, and sell the rest to legitimate dispensaries in the Bay and surrounding areas, we could probably not only eliminate taxation, but even go so far as to send rebate checks to every resident (kind of like Alaska did with the oil revenue).

Yes. Legitimate dispensaries.... and legitimate farms and gardens. Funny how much difference the application of "legitimacy" makes.

Free the People.

As Prices Rise, Crime Tipsters Work Overtime
Daron Dean for The New York Times
Published: May 18, 2008

To gas prices, foreclosure rates and the cost of rice, add this rising economic indicator: the number of tips to the police from people hoping to collect reward money.

For tips that bring results, programs in most places pay $50 to $1,000, with some jurisdictions giving bonuses for help solving the most serious crimes, or an extra “gun bounty” if a weapon is recovered.

“Crime doesn’t pay but we do,” say the mobile billboards cruising Jacksonville, Fla. A poster in Jackson, Tenn., draws a neat equation:“Ring Ring + Bling Bling = Cha-Ching.” The bling, in this case, is a pair of handcuffs.

Sergeant Johnson has been a Crime Stoppers coordinator for 15 years, watching crime rates and tips fluctuate. But, he said,“I’ve never seen an increase like it is now.”

Crime Stoppers programs strictly protect the anonymity of callers. Each tip is assigned a number, and if the tip results in an arrest, the caller can collect a cash reward, usually by going to a designated bank. Some programs pay tipsters within hours of an arrest; others have monthly meetings to approve reward amounts.

Some people have made a cottage industry of calling in tips.“We have people out there that, realistically, this could be their job,” said Sgt. Zachary Self, who answers Crime Stoppers calls for the Macon Police Department.“Two or three arrests per week, you could make $700,$750 per week,” Sergeant Self said.“You could make better than a minimum-wage job.”

In conjunction its Investigation and Prosecution effort in Mendocino, the IRS is offering rewards to informants on those marijuana cultivators evading taxes in violation of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986 and section 6050 of the Internal Revenue Code. Anonymous tips can be submitted to the IRS High Intensity Money Laundering and Related Financial Crime (HIFCA)Task Force at www.irs.gov/compliance/enforcement .

How to claim a reward:
IRS Publication 733 details the regulations for claiming a reward. You must complete IRS Form 211. Your information can be delivered personally to any IRS office, or you can write to:
Head of the Criminal Investigation Division
Internal Revenue Service
Washington, DC 20224

If a recovery is made as a direct result of information you provided, you may qualify for a reward of 15% of the amount recovered including taxes, fines and penalties, but not interest -- with a maximum payment of $2 million.

"The prestige of government has undoubtedly been lowered considerably by the prohibition law. For nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced. It is an open secret that the dangerous increase of crime in this country is closely connected with this"

-Albert Einstein, "My First Impression of the U.S.A.", 1921

Mendo Local wrote:

Yes, I said with pot grows.... Not the Pot, the GROW!
Which includes, Garden tenders, guards, and the MESS they leave behind, including Diesel Spills, Tarps, Trash, and other undesirable "stuff"
You prove my point, You can cut and paste any stand alone sentence and make an implication to suit your own viewpoint. Fortunately the general public which is getting a clue and can see through the digression and diversion..
As always, I DO enjoy your knowledge and decency in your posts
-- peace

Will passing measure b make any difference in this issue - diesel spill, tarps, etc? What or how does measure b address this issue?

Allot of people are saying that as the price of pot goes up, so does crime.

In the last three years the price of pot has come down from $5,000 a pound to $3,000 a pound but crime has doubled or tippled.

This could be because the Mendocino County Sheriffs Department invited tens of thousands of criminals to come join the party in Mendojuana County.

How do the law abiding people in a county insist that it's Sheriffs Department actually do it's job to maintain drug free schools and public safety?

Isn't there a Federal Office whose job it is to investigate when most of a County Sheriffs Office turns into a bunch of drug dealers?

Watcher wrote:

In the last three years the price of pot has come down from $5,000 a pound to $3,000 a pound but crime has doubled or tippled.

The 'actual' value vs. the 'prohibited' value is what is referred to when people study things like this.

The 'actual' value of pot would be the cost to produce it. Chances are that would be equivalent to the historical prices, and if it were a traded item on markets, the price would reflect cost plus markup to cover transport (as most items do).

That value would be somewhere between twenty and a hundred dollars a pound (if you extrapolate from the last agricultural data). The actual difference ends up being whether or not it's trimmed and how much (trimming costs money).

Given that kind of actual cost, a value of $3-5K/lb can support not only wild fluctuations in the demand, but MULTIPLE FAILED DELIVERIES.

If it costs me a hundred a pound, you can bust the first ten pounds and I STILL make two grand on the low end price when one of the mules makes it through.

Estimates of the effectiveness of the drug war indicate that the DEA costs almost 2% of the price of the drug.

Oh, and it likely wouldn't matter a lot, since the FBI disagrees with you about whether crime has gone up. Looks like for most of the country, in most of the categories, it went down.

A few scattered murders in the south, slight rise in robbery out here, but all in all, WAY down.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/prelim2007/table2.htm

Of course, the only reason crime is associated with the marijuana trade is prohibition. Marijuana dealers can't take their disputes to court the way alcohol venders can. They have to take matters into their own hands. Nowhere is this more evident than the incredible violence we are now seeing on the Mexican border.

writch wrote:

<quoted text>
The 'actual' value vs. the 'prohibited' value is what is referred to when people study things like this.
The 'actual' value of pot would be the cost to produce it. Chances are that would be equivalent to the historical prices, and if it were a traded item on markets, the price would reflect cost plus markup to cover transport (as most items do).
That value would be somewhere between twenty and a hundred dollars a pound (if you extrapolate from the last agricultural data). The actual difference ends up being whether or not it's trimmed and how much (trimming costs money).
Given that kind of actual cost, a value of $3-5K/lb can support not only wild fluctuations in the demand, but MULTIPLE FAILED DELIVERIES.
If it costs me a hundred a pound, you can bust the first ten pounds and I STILL make two grand on the low end price when one of the mules makes it through.
Estimates of the effectiveness of the drug war indicate that the DEA costs almost 2% of the price of the drug.
Oh, and it likely wouldn't matter a lot, since the FBI disagrees with you about whether crime has gone up. Looks like for most of the country, in most of the categories, it went down.
A few scattered murders in the south, slight rise in robbery out here, but all in all, WAY down.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/prelim2007/table2.htm

Ahem. Criminal (i.e. growers) under-report violent crime (i.e. rip-offs; home invasion)against themselves to avoid attention to their underlying crimes. It bears mentioning.

"Crimes" with no victims aren't really crimes.

John Thomas wrote:

"Crimes" with no victims aren't really crimes.

You are dead wrong on that one. Try telling it to the kid whose father OD'd.

James M Kinder wrote:

<quoted text>
Ahem. Criminal (i.e. growers) under-report violent crime (i.e. rip-offs; home invasion)against themselves to avoid attention to their underlying crimes. It bears mentioning.

Is your stance then that you are going to use your imaginary statistics in place of the government supplied ones?

There's no real way of discussing them, James (leastways, not here).

But I do have to agree that they tend to induce MUCH more fear than the real ones do, and don't fault you for preferring them, since the real statistics don't really offer you much support.

James M Kinder wrote:

<quoted text>
You are dead wrong on that one. Try telling it to the kid whose father OD'd.

That's a crime. It's child neglect. Even walking around drunk with a kid is child neglect, though.

I don't think I'd consider using pot around a kid neglect. In and of itself it doesn't alter either the physical or mental capacity beyond the bounds of normalcy enough to be a danger of any sort, and it's non-toxic (and actually quite nutritious). If the kid got hold of any, it wouldn't actually be a danger.

But then, if it were actually a danger, I suppose the Indian subcontinent would be unpopulated, eh?

James M Kinder wrote:

<quoted text>
You are dead wrong on that one. Try telling it to the kid whose father OD'd.

That's bad, but not a crime. Maybe if you added more details, it could approach criminality. But if the father did not die from his OD and he did not do it while caring for his child, it would certainly not be real crime.

BTW, the biggest cause of overdoses is prohibition. Prohibition prevents drugs from being regulated, carefully dosed and assured of purity. Users don't want to overdose. It mostly happens because of the unknown purity or adulteration of drugs.

Getting back to the most widely used "illegal" drug - marijuana. There is no stretch of the imagination that can justify making a crime of possession/consumption by responsible adults.

Of course, any harmful behavior they may engage in while consuming pot, like child abuse, neglect, or whatever, would be a crime. But that is seperate from possessing or consuming.

writch wrote:

<quoted text>
That's a crime. It's child neglect. Even walking around drunk with a kid is child neglect, though.
I don't think I'd consider using pot around a kid neglect. In and of itself it doesn't alter either the physical or mental capacity beyond the bounds of normalcy enough to be a danger of any sort, and it's non-toxic (and actually quite nutritious). If the kid got hold of any, it wouldn't actually be a danger.
But then, if it were actually a danger, I suppose the Indian subcontinent would be unpopulated, eh?

"I don't think I'd consider using pot around a kid neglect. In and of itself it doesn't alter either the physical or mental capacity beyond the bounds of normalcy enough to be a danger of any sort, and it's non-toxic (and actually quite nutritious). If the kid got hold of any, it wouldn't actually be a danger."

GREAT!!! It's "non-toxic and actually quite nutritious." I am glad you took that position. Yep, Writch is FOR feeding your kids pot for breakfast! Wow, little Johnnie will be studying real hard today. Brilliant, just brilliant, you rocket scientist, you.

James M Kinder wrote:

<quoted text>
You are dead wrong on that one. Try telling it to the kid whose father OD'd.

he didn't od on pot, did he? Nope. not possible.