Saturday, July 21, 2007

Joint Wrong Arguments

The farmers of South Dakota desire to grow hemp.  Though the South Dakota state legislature has given the farmers “permission” to grow hemp, the federal government’s strong arm, the DEA, is trumping individual and state rights by saying no, the farmers cannot grow hemp.

The New York Times has a an article online regarding this issue titled Sober North Dakotans Hope to Legalize Hemp, a headline, I guess, which is meant to imply that the South Dakota farmers are not stoned out of their minds in their quest for economic freedom.

In reading the article, I found the following arguments, presented by both sides, simply ill conceived.  Let’s hear from the farmers first.

Look at me — do I look shady?” Mr. Monson, 56, asked, as he stood in work boots and a ball cap in the rocky, black dirt that spans mile after mile of North Dakota’s nearly empty northern edge. “This is not any subversive thing like trying to legalize marijuana or whatever. This is just practical agriculture. We’re desperate for something that can make us some money.”

This argument is simply foolish, with its implication that any individual who would consider growing hemp, though Mr. Monson means marijuana meant to be enjoyed, is naturally some type of criminal bent on corruption.  I know some very respectable individuals who cultivate.  They neither look “shady,” nor are they “subversive.”

Now let’s hear from the DEA.

“Basically hemp is considered the same as marijuana,” said Steve Robertson, a special agent for the D.E.A. at its Washington headquarters. “We’re an enforcement agency. We’re sworn to uphold the law.”

This argument also displays simple foolishness.  The hemp the South Dakotan farmers are interested in growing is not the same as cultivated marijuana meant to be enjoyed, though I suppose if you rolled a joint of hemp the size of a newspaper you might be able to catch a tiny buzz.  And the assertions by Robertson that “we’re an enforcement agency,” and “we’re sworn to uphold the law,” simply shows the law is an ass and that the enforcers of the “law” are unable to distinguish an ass from actual reality.

The DEA also puts up this ridiculous argument.

What about the worries of drug enforcement officials, who say someone might sneak into a farmer’s field of harmless hemp and plant a batch of (similar-looking) marijuana?

While I suppose that might be possible, I think it is rather improbable, considering that the cross pollination effects of the hemp, on quality marijuana, would probably yield some poor quality marijuana, which was noted by Mr. Monson.

Naturally, one North Dakota state representative, Blair Thoreson plays the crystal meth card, an argument which should just be dismissed out of hand.

Everyone here knows everyone,” Mr. Thoreson said, “and yet we’ve had a huge problem here with homegrown methamphetamine labs, too.”

The DEA should mind their own business, and the farmers of North Dakota should till their fields, and plant their crops unmolested.

Posted by John Venlet on 07/21 at 08:11 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages