Sunday, August 15, 2010

The Mendocino MJ Militia?

I kind of like this idea. A guy in Mendocino County is proposing a group of volunteers be formed up to arm themselves and go out on public lands to clean up massive marijuana plantations. I wonder if he got the idea first, or maybe got it from this Sonoma County lady who recently led a successful raid on her property?

Hey, I'm all for it if people want to grow and smoke pot, but it is getting out of hand when people are afraid to use public (or even their own) property for recreation or other legitimate purposes. Not to mention the pollution and environmental issues.

Certainly there could be problems with the implementation of such volunteer groups. I don't know how you could be assured they could stay focused on the big grows and not start messing with the smaller mom and pop operations.

And what about violence? Would some of these Mexican nationals actually fire on a bunch of armed civilians approaching their grow area? Maybe, but the volunteers would hopefully have more than enough people and firepower to overcome that issue.

Could something like this actually reduce the number of large grows on public and private land, or would the large growers escalate the situation with yet more violence as we see happening in Mexico?

I'm not sure, but it might be worth giving this a try. But I don't know that they need my, or anyone else's permission to start up. Nothing wrong with taking back your own land.

Now we need to come up with some cool names for these groups. How about Ukiah Valley Rangers, for one? The Mendocino Marijuana Militia?

Labels:

Sunday, August 01, 2010

Common Pot Test Flawed

Looks like a commonly used test to screen for the presence of marijuana is being accepted more and more as positive proof something is marijuana. Problem is, the test can be subject to false positives, according to John Kelly. People are being prosecuted, if not convicted, as a result. It looks like more and more courts and law enforcement agencies are accepting its use as positive proof of possession, as well.

I'm not suggesting that every piece of marijuana confiscated by police need be subjected to the more lengthy and expensive testing, but if you end up in the same situation as the girl cited at the beginning of the story, you most certainly should demand the gas chromatography test.

Hat tip to Radley Balko, over at The Agitator blog for the heads up.

Labels:

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Colbert Does Gary Johnson

A fun clip of Colbert interviewing Gary Johnson on the subject of marijuana legalization. Funny as it might be, I just wish Colbert would let Johnson talk a bit more.

For those that don't know, Gary Johnson is the former Republican Governor of New Mexico and a perennial favorite among Libertarians. He's supposedly contemplating a White House run next time around. Check out and join his Facebook page.

Hat tip to Radley Balko for the heads up on the clip.

Labels:

Saturday, May 01, 2010

MJ Prosecution Moratorium?

Not a bad idea by Jeffrey Shwartz in this weeks Arcata Eye: He suggests we suspend marijuana prosecutions at least until after the November elections. If the marijuana decriminalization initiative passes, then we can drop them. If not, then we might have a slightly bigger problem with the backlog.

Makes sense to me. Why keep beating ourselves over the head over this?

Labels:

Monday, November 30, 2009

NPR Does Humboldt Grows

Did someone else already post on this? National Public Radio's All Things Considered show did a segment on Humboldt's marijuana growing business tonight. Hopefully, it will still be available on their website when you check the link. If not, the archives?

They're also supposed to have another segment on the same issue tomorrow.

Labels:

Friday, October 23, 2009

U.D.J. Does MJ

Wow. Looks like today's entire Ukiah Daily Journal is about marijuana. Quite honestly, I'm getting tired of reading about the stuff. I was surprised, though, to find out they no longer burn confiscated pot plants. They stopped doing that back in the mid- 80s. They bury them now.

Labels:

Friday, October 16, 2009

Cannabis Petitions Available

The California Cannabis Initiative folks are circulating petitions now. Their petitions are available for download on their web site. Unfortunately, the petitions are on 8 1/2" x 14" legal size paper only so I'll have to go find a couple sheets of paper that size before I can print one.

This is one of two or three marijuana initiatives in circulation. I'm a little confused as to which one is which and which one does what from looking at the list of initiatives on the Secretary of State's page.

Since this seems to be the only one available for download- at least that I've found- I'd suggest printing one out and getting as many signatures as you can. Then send them in, even if you only have your own signature to submit. Be sure and fill in all the blanks.

Labels:

Sunday, August 30, 2009

They're Everywhere

Connie's going to try and sell some of these at her next plant sale. How much do you think one should go for?

Update: Ok, either everybody fell for it, or nobody did. That's not a pot plant. Looks kinda like one, though, doesn't it? It's actually a Cleome. Kind of startled me when I first noticed a few of them in my wife's collection of potted plants.

Labels:

Sunday, August 09, 2009

Gov Hopefuls Oppose Legal Pot?

The San Francisco Chronicle takes a look this morning at the known 2010 California gubernatorial candidate's positions on legalizing marijuana. According to the Chron, all of them oppose legalization. I can't help but wonder if they're misquoting or taking comments out of context with at least one candidate?

They say Tom Campbell is opposed to legalization because " ...it could open the door to organized crime.". That's the first time I've heard that from him, if true. He has said before that he doesn't think we should necessarily legalize pot just for the taxes it would provide but should consider it as being the right thing to do (my words). That makes sense.

I've written Tom Campbell asking him to clarify his position on the issue. If he responds, I'll post his answer here.

Labels: ,