+- Punaweb Forum (http://punaweb.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Punaweb Forums (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Punatalk (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Green Harvest Future? Alive and well.... (/showthread.php?tid=13652)
RE: Green Harvest Future? Alive and well.... - leilanidude - 05-17-2014
quote:
Originally posted by gypsy69
With the times a changing around our great nation about medicinal or recreational use of marijuana. Makes me wonder what Puna would look like or be like if Green harvest and our government didn't declare war on Marijuana in Puna (Early 80's)??. Really did millions need to be spent to keep Puna's people down for the last 30 years?. An area like this could have lead or been leading this medicinal movement, Pahoa could have had cannabis shops instead of quick loans? OR maybe this area would be worse off than today, over ran by drugs?. Well you all think about it and chime in on your thoughts or two cents to whether Puna would be better off without the federal government invasion?.
P.S Colorado, California, Washington, ect. all building new schools for their Keiki with money generated by what has been taken away from our community for years now why?.
So you would rather have people growing a drug over food?
[
]
RE: Green Harvest Future? Alive and well.... - Tink - 05-17-2014
I agree with you Opihikao on the enforcement of the HUGE crystal meth problem in the "youngers". The 420 is grandpa stuff to them,and therefore not cool. Yes Gypsy, Ca has given up CAMP for the most part, diverting funds spent for the items you have stated, but also to battle the meth problem in the rural areas that once logging was king. CAMP got too expensive and the added danger was "Mexican Nationals" were doing grows in CA to beat the border drill. They now send in a strike force, or if a forest fire is present, let it burn through, as their preferred area is National Forest land, for some reason, or on the fringe of same. Cannabis shops are tightly regulated as per downtown zoning, like massage parlors per the elites request. IMO the get your 420 cert places are more of a nuisance being everywhere than the shops. IMHO the thefts Kathy mentioned seem highly unlikely as to them it is a hazardous substance with mandatory disposal of jumpsuit when complete with the mission, and the subsequent "whiz quiz" to be given at the Commanders wish. There may have been a bad seed sneaking off a pinch or two somehow though. Maybe keeping inmates happy? Also have to have "inventory" to sell to the huge distributors to make a bust. Also! Ever see a violent 420 user? I certainly have seen my share of tweaked out angry kids!
Are you a human being, or a human doing?
RE: Green Harvest Future? Alive and well.... - 2liveque - 05-17-2014
You guys can swing this topic back and forth all you want. There are no new arguments nor justifications. I stand by my original claim -- there is grant money to be spent. Hijack the thread all you want, but in the end, the helicopter companies, the officers working "overtime," and getting paid for "dangerous work," will walk away with some nice little pocket change. It is no longer about eradication. It's about Las Vegas trips, private school tuition, a harley, or maybe even some new jewelry for a mistress.
Perks of being a grant beneficiary.
RE: Green Harvest Future? Alive and well.... - Guest - 05-18-2014
I hear ya 2liveque, And I do apologize for hijacking your thread with my what if questions. You are correct about the grant money and how it will get spent. How does this make you feel being an American citizen and seeing your tax-dollars at work within your community?. Always impressed with The technology green harvest shows every year with the new copter's, pictures from space OR really low planes, infrared, ect. The work they do is probably "dangerous"? for I remember just a couple years ago a neighbor down the road shot bottle rockets at them as they were flying over. Wonder how that turned out for my neighbor though?.
RE: Green Harvest Future? Alive and well.... - Delta9r - 05-19-2014
quote:
Originally posted by leilanidude
...
So you would rather have people growing a drug over food?
[
Why does it have to be so black & white?
Why can't I grow cannabis as well as my fruit & vegetables?
The way I see it, I should be able to grow 100 cannabis plants without being pegged as a "drug dealer."
Not all cannabis plants yield $1,000.00 worth of bud, especially the Himalayan varieties.
100 seedlings might leave a grower with 50 females, from which a grower could select the best, resulting in maybe 20 or so (or less) of the nicest plants. This same practice is used by many gardeners.
1 or 2 lbs of top grade cannabis can be further refined to yield a few grams of highly medicinal product which mitigates the health concerns related to smoking, as well as facilitating ease of consumption for those who choose not to smoke.
This refining does not have to use volatile chemicals, as hashish has been made using silk screens for thousands of years.
Of course, if you prefer that no such refining take place, I believe that Oklahoma has enacted legislation making the refining of cannabis punishable by life in prison - yet child molesters get sentences as short as one year - I hear that the cost of living in Oklahoma is quite low, so that state may be more to your liking.
I have a neighbor who is, at this very moment, sitting in jail for having a few cannabis plants growing in his yard. This man was gainfully employed, grew his plants on land that he's owned for decades, and now the taxpayers are footing the bill for his incarceration.
How does this treatment of otherwise law abiding people help our community?
How does this punishment fit the "crime?"
Who is the "victim?"
"Life is labor, and all that is good in life comes from that labor..."
RE: Green Harvest Future? Alive and well.... - 2liveque - 05-19-2014
Delta9r...
Let me say that I believe we are on the same side of the argument. But I have a hard time believing that your poor, hard working neighbor is sitting in Jail (at the tax payers expense) simply because of a few cannibals plants. Define "few" please.
My stance is based upon actual conversations with law enforcement officers: If you don't have a lot of plants, you don't have to worry." So to me, a few is like 3-4. Enough to keep the smoke and medicine handy. To others, a few might mean 50. Because of this ambiguity, we will all share different versions of what green harvest should or should not be. I still believe that if you got less than 7, you are good. 7 is the lucky number. Folks should take care of your property too. Mow your lawn. Take care of other plants plants and gardens as well as your cannibus and I'm guessing from the top, they too will see that you only got a "few" plants. That's been my approach. So far, so good. I respect the the fact that the law enforcement grant-a-farians must make their money. Aloha kekahi i kekahi. I respect you, you respect me. Now if I got 100 plants....trails going into vacant properties near me....unregistered firearms, unkept, messy property, etc....then I would have every reason to worry about the hovering birds. That could certainly be interpreted as being disrespectful to the overseers up top. In other words, you are making them come to visit you. They would have much rather did a flyby. Same pay regardless. Lots of Puna folks, and pro-weed folks in general are very "I have my rights, blah blah blah." That is not me, so I don't worry about Green harvest. I try to observe the changing times and the changing climate for cannibus tolerance. For a casual smoker like me, life has not been better on the Big Island. Take it for what it is worth.....but if you play within the confines of the unwritten codes, you should be fine.
RE: Green Harvest Future? Alive and well.... - Delta9r - 05-20-2014
100 plants could be 2 flats of seedlings. To be thinned out to the nicest dozen or so, or the magical #7.
My neighbor had 18 established plants under 3' in height, and about 30 seedlings. All on his own property, in a greenhouse.
The guy had a full time job as a carpenter, wasn't selling any weed, and is now sitting in jail.
He said he didn't get a license because it was against federal law.
I myself don't smoke enough to grow any, and I agree with the federal law trumping state law aspect, but if I did want to grow some cannabis I don't feel that I should be restricted to growing only 7 plants.
Some may say that "oh 7 plants could be 14 lbs" or whatever, but what if I want to grow a variety that doesn't yield as much and doesn't get to be 20 ft tall?
What if I want to grow one crop and then not have to grow any for a year or 2?
This issue isn't so "either, or" as there are many factors to consider, which the present law illustrates by failing to address such basic concerns as distribution/dispensary, leaving licensees in a precarious "gray" area regarding access to seeds/cuttings from outside this jurisdiction since - technically - cannabis is illegal and the rules are strict about who you can share your licensed cannabis with.
Then there's the stereotyping that accompanies this conversation, such as the illegal firearms straw-man. The guy I'm talking about didn't have any firearms at all. He didn't have trails going from an unkempt yard to 100 plants on surrounding properties, the plants were in a greenhouse in his own backyard.
Who is harmed by someone growing more than 7 plants? Does 7 plants harm the government - or our community - less than 100 plants?
Does growing more than 7 plants make someone a drug dealer even if they never sold one whit of it?
Old school rule used to be, you grew 1/3 for the police, 1/3 for the thieves, & 1/3 for yourself, after all the males, bugs, slugs, pigs, etc...
Suddenly those 100 - or in this case 50 - plants don't add up to as much as everyone thinks it does.
"Life is labor, and all that is good in life comes from that labor..."
RE: Green Harvest Future? Alive and well.... - Guest - 05-20-2014
With this new boss Yabuta in charge of the on-going marijuana grant money now, some may want to watch what they say negative about him, his position, or even the police period?. Read some clips from Maui about how 31 webbers were forced to give their true identities up or maybe the guy that ran the blog had to give the names and addresses up?(maybe Rob knows more?.). The Police department and Mr Yabuta must be very sensitive about the ways they handle business on Maui?. No free speech in Hawaii if that happens regularly.
He must have done a good job on Maui for he was with the department for 31 years before taking this position. Had two missing women this year on Maui that apparently have not been handled well by the department. It does not look like things will change much in the next few years regarding Marijauna and the lessoning of laws or the possibility of less black market shopping for your future medicine, card holders.
P.S. I would send the links of the clips I read if I knew how(SORRY), For some reason my computer freezes up or will not respond well when looking up any police reports or stories?. Maybe I was doing wrong by reading Maui news or happenings, Just wanted to know a little about my tax dollars at work.
RE: Green Harvest Future? Alive and well.... - 2liveque - 05-20-2014
Delta....I totally get your point. I really do. But you are missing mine.
Despite your many reasonings and justifications, cannibus is still illegal and there are still grant monies to be spent on eradication. I will continue to believe that if one plays within the unwritten codes, then "innocent" growers....those who simply need to grow for they to smoke, should be fine. Those with additional motives, will face additional pressures. Simple as that. It's a new day and age....and quite frankly, these days have been great for the smoker. And it's getting better all the time!
18 plants and 30 seedlings still come out to 48 plants in the eyes of the law. 24 and below is a misdemeanor. There is more to the story.
RE: Green Harvest Future? Alive and well.... - kalakoa - 05-20-2014
if you play within the confines of the unwritten codes
Please, don't take this the wrong way, but ... that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
Any "unwritten code" is functionally equivalent to "complaint-driven enforcement".
If the "rules are for everyone", then those rules must be both uniformly enforced and available to the public. Period.
Not that the Feds are setting a good example with their current posture towards Colorado and Washington (or, for that matter, anything else).