Bipartisanship and Pot

My expertise in cannabis production is admittedly limited, but my guess would be that if you allow people to grow it domestically, you will get varieties of THC concentrations in different strains, some of which would be illegal whether the grower intended it or not. And that would be problematic from a legal standpoint.
 
Johnny, where are you going with this? I've said twice now that as long as the THC content was limited, then I had no problem with it.

I think maybe the biggest factor preventing the legalization of hemp is the assumption that advocates of recreational marijuana view hemp as a "foot in the door", so to speak. Perhaps if you could safely divorce the argument for industrial hemp from the argument for recreational marijuana, then you might get somewhere. But maybe the problem with that is the fact that the people who argue most passionately for the legalization of hemp always seem to do so merely as an adjunct to the larger and far more passionate argument about legalizing recreational marijuana use.

Which is exactly what is happening here. Nothing illustrates hemp's image problem better than the conversation we are now having.
 
"A 2008 study by Harvard economist Jeffrey A. Miron has estimated that legalizing drugs would inject $76.8 billion a year into the U.S. economy — $44.1 billion from law enforcement savings, and at least $32.7 billion in tax revenue ($6.7 billion from marijuana, $22.5 billion from cocaine and heroin, remainder from other drugs). Recent surveys help to confirm the consensus among economists to reform drug policy in the direction of decriminalization and legalization." The Link
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top