IT'S OFFICIAL!!! I-1135

[gypski]

I'm going to make a pledge right now because I'm so tired of the legal bs concerning cannabis, that right after my Oregon legal bs is resolved, I'm going to go out and get at least 1000 signatures. I won't be easy, but in 1996 in Idaho while a grad student (I can be open now that I'm out in the open) just doing thesis hours and research, collected 1500 signatures in two weeks, 1300 + valid ($1.00 ea) for a Stop The Nukes initiative that failed.

I want this to pass, and anyone else who is tired of the bs should make a pledge to fill at least one sheet or you ain't walkin' the walk. :twocents:

[jamessr]

I am all for legalization but, are we being duped ?

Please sit down and take a moment and read this article about HEMP and a court case which in legal effect is exactly what the mmj bill covers and the legalization bill covers in one foul swoop.

Please don't take this as a negative input here, cause it is not.. just please educate yourself in exactly what the REAL ramifications of these bills will actually be if they do come into law... some will say this is another state and does not apply.. think again, this was a STATE LEGISLATOR ...

Hemp growers take case to higher authority

Two North Dakota farmers are licensed to grow the legitimate, useful crop but are seeking a court's validation.

By JAMES WALSH, Star Tribune

Last update: November 12, 2008 - 10:41 PM


Pot -- or not pot. That seems to be the question.

Two North Dakota farmers on Wednesday took their battle to grow industrial hemp to the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in St. Paul, where their attorney argued that hemp is so distinct from marijuana that it should not be subject to federal regulation. At stake, say hemp sellers and would-be farmers, is a potentially booming commodity that would help U.S. growers and consumers alike.

"I get real excited about it because of our economic times. It's a crop that would be very, very lucrative," said Lynn Gordon, owner of the French Meadow Bakery, who attended oral arguments at the U.S. Courthouse in St. Paul. French Meadow makes Healthy Hemp bread, muffins and bagels -- all big sellers, Gordon said -- but must buy its hemp from Canada.

"I pay so much for it now," she said.

Federal law allows the import and sale of non-drug hemp stalk, fiber, oil and seeds in the U.S., saying it is separate from marijuana. In fact, hemp is used in paper, textiles, food and even fuel. But federal law also lumps hemp and marijuana together -- they both are classified as Cannabis sativa L. -- when it comes to growing the plants, making it almost impossible for U.S. farmers to legally raise the crop.

Garrison Courtney, a spokesman for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, the reason for the prohibition is simple -- hemp and marijuana come from the same plant and all parts of the marijuana plant contain some level of THC, the narcotic that produces the "high." THC is a controlled substance under federal law.

"To get hemp, you have to grow a marijuana plant. To grow a marijuana plant, you have to be registered with the DEA," Courtney said.

Still, in 2006, North Dakota put the finishing touches on a law that established the licensing of industrial hemp farms. The law requires the plants to be nearly narcotic-free and establishes strict rules that no other part of the hemp plant -- mainly, the leaves or flowers -- can leave the farm. At the time, the law also required farmers to go to the DEA for a certificate of registration.

David Munson and Wayne Hauge, licensed hemp farmers in North Dakota, did that. Munson, who is also a state legislator, said he paid $2,300 for a DEA permit in February 2007. He's still waiting. A request by North Dakota State University to grow a small hemp crop for research was recently approved after nearly a decade of waiting.

"We needed to get the decision early enough so we could actually get the crop in the ground," Munson said.

In the meantime, the North Dakota Legislature amended its law to no longer require DEA approval. But Hauge and Munson held off planting, saying they have no desire to run afoul of the feds.

"I don't want to risk losing my farm," Munson said.

So the men filed a lawsuit in June 2007, seeking to have the federal courts decide the issue.

Last November, U.S. Chief Judge Daniel Hovland of North Dakota ruled against them, saying: "Industrial hemp may not be the terrible menace the DEA makes it out to be, but industrial hemp is still considered to be a Schedule I controlled substance under the current state of the law in this circuit and throughout the country."

Now, it will be up to the appellate court to decide. A ruling could take months.

Melissa Patterson, a Justice Department attorney, told the judges that the issue shouldn't really be decided by the courts. She said the farmers should first complete the registration process set up by the DEA. After the hearing, Patterson declined to comment further.

Joe Sandler, an attorney for the farmers, urged the appeals court to recognize that with strong state regulations in place, there really is no need for federal oversight of North Dakota-licensed hemp producers.

Hemp advocates say the federal government used to encourage hemp production. It should do so again, Gordon said.

"It really is a wonder crop," she said, touting its diversity of uses and high nutritional value. "But I think the real answer is going to be Congress saying 'Hey, it's okay.'"

Munson said he just wants to legally grow a crop that would be healthy for his fields -- and his bottom line.

North Dakota farmers have been battling wheat scab, he said. Planting hemp -- a hearty plant that needs little attention -- into his rotation of wheat, barley and sunflowers would help. It would also mean about $800 per acre in gross income, a nice number for the 10 acres he has planned.

James Walsh â?¢ 612-673-7428

If you wish to see the court ruling, please go the the legal section.

or here: Vote Hemp: Information: Legal Cases: North Dakota

[time4me]

James, many of us are well aware that passing I-1135 is just the beginning of the fight with the feds, but it is also the beginning of the end of prohibition. We cannot change all of what is messing up our country all at once, but this is a good place to start. Please stop being so negative. I know you were out there working your butt off for this last year, at least a couple of times. Get back on the bandwagon and let's get this party started!
Legalize in 2011! YES on I-1135!

[jamessr]

James, many of us are well aware that passing I-1135 is just the beginning of the fight with the feds, but it is also the beginning of the end of prohibition. We cannot change all of what is messing up our country all at once, but this is a good place to start. Please stop being so negative. I know you were out there working your butt off for this last year, at least a couple of times. Get back on the bandwagon and let's get this party started!
Legalize in 2011! YES on I-1135!

well time I do respect your input here my dear but, As I pointed out above.. please don't think I am being negative...

I after getting educated a bit.. i.e. ignorance of the law is no excuse.. I began seeing the real light beyond the haze..

Here is an example of what I mean by haze..

In wa. state we have a board of pharmacy with specific rules for scheduling drugs.. right? right.

So steve sarich and a few others file a petition to reschedule cannabis..in 2009 a hearing happens and the Assistant Attorney General puts on the record in an administrative hearing that cannabis is not a drug but AN HERB not regulated by the BOP, because it is not of the type of substance sold in a pharmacy.. o.k...

So if cannabis is an HERB not regulated by the BOP... whom is it regulated by then ?? which agency ??

The legislature is not an agency but, a body of 3 total.... our legislature Put the BOP in charge of scheduling all regulated DRUGS... This is in the controlled substance act...

In otherwords, why is their legislation being put forth again ?? If the AG office claims it's an HERB... and they enforce the UCSA... what are they enforcing again ? a substance they themselves acknowledge is an HERB, not a regulated controlled substance any state agency has authority over.. i.e. what is their jurisdiction to file complaints against any citizen for ??

see the haze ?? regardless of the words in the UCSA, the chief executive law enforcement office of the state in which our constitution allows them to charge for public offenses.. they themselves have admitted in an administrative hearing without any appeal as to the decision.. IT IS AN HERB...

Please have someone you know or yourself, find any statute in which shows the state legislature has deemed an herb for any executive branch authority over to bring forth any criminal process in a court of law...

So is this legislation to legalize an HERB or a SCHEDULE 1 CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE?? See it yet ??

[time4me]

But we are talking I-1135 in this thread James. We are talking about ending cannabis prohibition. It needs to happen to this wonderful herb/plant/holisitic med. Then some other changes need to happen, but that's for a future time and thread. We'll get there. Maybe not what's left of my lifetime, but damned if I am gonna sit by and just let them stomp us into the ground.
Legalize in 2011! YES on I-1135

[jamessr]

But we are talking I-1135 in this thread James. We are talking about ending cannabis prohibition. It needs to happen to this wonderful herb/plant/holisitic med. Then some other changes need to happen, but that's for a future time and thread. We'll get there. Maybe not what's left of my lifetime, but damned if I am gonna sit by and just let them stomp us into the ground.
Legalize in 2011! YES on I-1135

Time it's o.k., you do what you need to do in your heart in your time on our planet, and I am going to do mine... I respect your thought of how you feel about legalization.. and would agree totally but, what are we legalizing first !!

AN HERB OR A SCHEDULE 1 CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE ??

Makes a big difference in the big scheme of things time... if only they was honest with us would anyone see clearly what I am specifically narrowing in on here.

Why do we need to legalize an herb the attorney generals office admits is not a schedule 1 controlled substance under state law...AND NEVER HAS BEEN CONSIDERED A SCHEDULE 1 CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE UNDER OUR REGULATING REGIME..

So if it is not already a public offense, why do we need legislation making it legal then??

Something is not right here with this picture at all Time... why legalize and herb already considered legal by head LEO himself, under state law that is... feds should already not be involved under our chief LEO claims...10th amendment my dear.

So again, for whom is this going to benefit again?? The case above says THE FEDS, not we the people...

[BurningLizard]

We are not legalizing anything, we are decriminalizing Cannabis by simply cutting the laws out of the books. Reversing prohibition. Giving cannabis the legal status of my front lawn (if your over 18).

[time4me]

Thank you BL!
Simply put for a simple initiative.
Free the plant.
Yes on I-1135!

[gypski]

That is more like the truth, many cultures frowned upon the use of nature's healers, but none have taken it to the extremes we have. In recorded history, the most terrible punishments and persecutions surrounding the use of nature's natural healers and aids, cannabis, opium poppy, coca leaf to name just a few, have occurred during our lifetime.

It's we boomers, in our quest for a better life against the machine, that set off the drug revolution and the war on drugs. Our rebellion against the same recurring governmental bs, as we have now, brought the adult (sic) response........we all know what it was...lives and opportunities destroyed over plants so the machine can kill us, use us a sheep, drugs are on the TV, newspapers, internet, Ipod, everywhere. They are poisons being peddled for all kinds of bullshit ailments by the machine. And only the machine can decide what is right for us....ha, ha, ha :S2:

Dismantle the machine. Toss in the monkey wrench from the inside!!!

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-O3kYrDPbI[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxk3c_SbWMg[/YOUTUBE]

We are not legalizing anything, we are decriminalizing Cannabis by simply cutting the laws out of the books. Reversing prohibition. Giving cannabis the legal status of my front lawn (if your over 18).

[killerweed420]

We all know that state legalization is just the first step and is the easiest step. federally its still a long journey. But it could all be made so much easier if we just make our governors and legislatures to obey both the federal constitution and our state constitution. There is nothing illegal about growing and selling this product as long as it doesn't cross state lines. The feds have no constitutional jurisdiction, but that never stops them because we have yet to have a governor or a state attorney to obey his oath that they gave when they were elected to these offices. The 10th Amendment allows states to do whatever they want within there state boundaries as long as they don't violate the constitution or bill of rights. See anything in the constitution or bill of rights that says hemp is illegal? No, because its outside the boundaries of the constitution and is there for given to the people and the states to decide.
All it requires is our governor to obey her oath of office.
Look at whats to Obamacare. Its being struck down because it violates the constitution. You had 25 or 30 state attorneys that stepped forward and stated they would have to fight this on constitutional grounds. Even in our own state where the governor tried to order the attorney to stop the lawsuit.