Boulder Weekly on Facebook Boulder Weekly on Twitter Boulder Weekly on Tumblr Boulder Weekly's RSS feed Email Contact

Find Local Events (pick a date)
 
Browse Boulder real estate by neighborhood, school and zip code along with other homes for sale in Colorado on COhomefinder.com
Browse Boulder real estate by neighborhood, school and zip code along with other homes for sale in Colorado on COhomefinder.com.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Home / Articles / Views / Letters /  Letters | Weed whackers
. . . . . . .
Give Through iGivefirst
Thursday, April 21,2011

Letters | Weed whackers

 

Weed whackers

(Re: “See no weed,” cover story, April 14.) Thank you for your article. It was good. However, on the same day your article came out the Department of Justice reaffirmed that it will not respect state laws in their war on cannabis (http://bit.ly/weedwar). It has not happened here yet because the DEA is waiting until July 1, when the unconstitutional Department of Revenue rules go into effect. Specifically from the rules, “Surveillance recordings and clear still photos must be made available to the MMED and law enforcement upon an administrative or law enforcement request demonstrating that the information sought is relevant and material to a legitimate regulatory or law enforcement inquiry.”

And in light of the Haag memo, which states, “The DEA will enforce the Controlled Substance Act vigorously against individuals and organizations that participate in unlawful manufacturing and distribution activity involving marijuana, even if such activities are permitted under state law. The Department’s investigative and prosecutorial resources will continue to be directed toward these objectives.”

So all they will have to do is wait and then request the videos as the DEA sees fit. That is why they have not started prosecutions in Colorado because that would require a lot more resources then just having dispensaries video tape their federal crimes and be required to turn them over to the DEA. A great majority of the DEA’s funding is to combat cannabis and angry government officials with auto matic weapons will not just roll over and let liberal cannabis laws affect their budgets.

Corey Donahue/Boulder


When Mike Turner, a Colorado spokesperson for the Drug Enforcement Agency, says, “We’re going after the biggest and the baddest,” we can only assume he means people violating the original reasons given for outlawing marijuana:

• “Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on white men’s shadows and look at a white woman twice.” (Hearst newspapers nationwide, 1934)

• “There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana can cause white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others.” (Federal Bureau of Narcotics Director Harry J. Anslinger)

• “...the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races.” (Federal Bureau of Narcotics Director Harry J. Anslinger, 1930)

• “Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality and death.” (Federal Bureau of Narcotics Director Harry J. Anslinger, 1937)

• “Marijuana is the most violence causing drug in the history of mankind.” (Federal Bureau of Narcotics Director Harry J. Anslinger)

• “[Smoking] one [marihuana] cigarette might develop a homicidal mania, probably to kill his brother.” (See U.S. Government Propaganda To Outlaw Marijuana, www.druglibrary. org/schaffer/hemp/taxact/t3.htm.)

The fear of brothers murdering each other after a toke is something to reckon with, but I cannot find a single case of a marijuana-induced homicide of any kind. Agent Turner should clarify the reasons for keeping cannabis illegal. Who is the DEA going after and why?

Ralph Given/Daly City, Calif.


Reasons not to arm Libyan rebels

(Re: “Eight reasons to arm Libya’s rebels,” Danish Plan, April 7.) As a non-magical thinker, I say the “lord” has nothing to do with any conflict, aside from being used as a reason. Humans are endowed with certain inalienable rights, such as the right to pursue happiness and depose deranged tyrants not because of some good god, but because of centuries of struggle specifically against tyrants that have resulted in the liberal democratic ideals we enjoy today. We cannot arm the Libyans because, “They are doing the lord’s work.”

If they are fighting to take down Gaddafi, let’s take down Gaddafi, not innocent civilians. We armed the anti- Soviet resistance in Afghanistan, and that helped lead to our current problems in the Middle East. Remember Osama bin Laden? Arming these rebels is no guarantee of immediate success or long-term stability, or even an insurance that the next leadership will be friendly to the West.

The Egyptians and Algerians recently overthrew their tyrannical, dictatorial, no-term-limit regimes, and I don’t recall the U.S. arming the rebels, and I believe they won. Why does arming these rebels assure a different outcome?

If the rebels lose, will the U.S. and NATO really lose? I doubt that. Gaddafi will continue to sell oil to the Europeans. Our addiction to oil will not be impacted. The Arab world won’t disappear.

The analogy that Obama loses if the rebels lose is not accurate. We have rewarded many weak or failing presidencies in the recent past. Reagan, Clinton and Bush II all had failed policies and won second terms. The Obama administration’s job one should be about rebuilding the middle class in the U.S., creating new and strengthening existing financial regulations, solving the health care crisis, investing in education and clean energy. There are many issues facing the U.S. more important than arming the Libyan rebels.

Unless the arms industry is prepared to do the patriotic thing and supply weapons free of charge, why should the average taxpayer be on the hook for another military venture? The only winners in arming the rebels are the arms manufacturers.

Imagine if we were to give the economic aid and training to Mexico’s poorest at the level we fight wars and arm rebels half a world away. Here is a country that still admires the U.S., and we are turning our back on them, building fences, treating them as undocumented aliens. That is at least one of the conflicts close to home we could have success with. Supplying arms and fighting wars of aggression has not proven successful in the past. I suppose one could say that the French helped us in our hour of need not out of some “let’s help the rebels” ideology, but rather saw an ally in their dispute with Great Britain. Our arming and training the rebels is because we don’t want an interruption in our oil supply. Remember the acronym OIL — Operation Iraqi Liberation? Our leaders should not be swayed by the rhetoric of arming and training rebels because we are trying to prevent some future event.

I do not think using fear to convince the public of the dire consequences that might result if we don’t arm Libyan rebels is the correct stance to take and is tiring and disingenuous. The Republican Party has been using this fear tactic for a long time. Hopefully we can mature past that and use common sense and facts as our rationale in convincing the U.S. public how our limited resources should be used.

Steve Holley/Longmont


Rainwater? Yes, we can

I was excited to learn that Boulder Weekly wrote a blurb on rainwater harvesting in the Boulderganic section (“Harvest the rain: Know what’s legal,” April 7), but when I got a hold of a copy and read the article I was deeply disappointed. As the subtitle (“Know what’s legal”) suggests, I was expecting to read about what Colorado residents can do to benefit from the rain.

Instead, sentence after sentence, paragraph after paragraph only served to reinforce what we cannot do to harvest the rain. After this latest rainstorm (April 13-14), it is sad to think that Colorado residents once again feel like they have to usher away their roof runoff as quickly as possible, when I know better and have been actively promoting the alternative. In fact, 90 percent of all rainwater harvesting strategies are perfectly legal in the state of Colorado and always have been. We have a water-illiterate culture in this dry-land state, and what we need now more than ever are solutions that help to rehydrate our landscapes, not be told over and over that we cannot use rainfall runoff.

For me, this issue is the real “Yes, we can!” but it seems too few people understand the issue of Colorado water law as it pertains to harvesting rainwater. I invite you to write a positive article clearly stating what can be done to use our precious rainfall in Colorado. I am happy to be a water-harvesting authority and resource for the future article.

I think we can do better to inform and enlighten the public, instead of reiterate the status quo understanding!

Jason Gerhardt/via Internet


Recycling is overrated

This Earth Day, Boulder should reconsider its infatuation with recycling and bring it back into perspective. Recycling is not the holy grail; actually it should come last! Remember “Reduce, re-use, recycle”? First, reduce what you use. Then, if you need to use it, try to re-use it. Only failing those two should it come down to recycling.

Boulder is known for its environmental awareness ... but also for its conspicuous consumption. Recycling has come to be an excuse for excess consumption — it’s OK to use a plastic cup just once if it can be recycled?!? But it took energy to produce the material, make the cup and eventually handle the recycling. All of that energy, plus materials consumed in the processing, are wasted.

It is especially wrong-headed to measure waste reduction in percentage of materials diverted from landfills. That can actually reward (recyclable) waste. Consider this: I could switch from beer in a reusable keg to bottled beer and improve my waste score, even though a gallon of bottled beer uses about five pounds of glass. Glass is environmentally expensive — to manufacture, transport and recycle. But because it can be recycled, it shows up as credit instead of debit on the waste-reduction balance sheet. Incredible.

Dick Dunn/Longmont


Memo to birthers

To all Birthers (idiots):

1. Visit hawaii.gov.

2. Search for “Obama birth certificate.”

3. Click the top hit, “Statement by Dr. Chiyome Fukino — hawaii.gov”

4. Shut up!

J. Andrew Smith/Bloomfield, N.J.


I had said up until a few days of the last presidential election that I was convinced (still am) that there was a certain kind of “European American,” for the sake of conversation, that would rather slit their wrists than to see a black man, an American African, as leader of this country.

I’m exaggerating, of course, but to those who subscribe to any of the various “pure blood” theories around the world, probably not by much.

And it is precisely these people, this kind of thinking, and from this absurd, racist, ignorance, that spawned the “birther” movement, in my opinion.

It is absolutely impossible for them to accept that the last election even happened. Shock! Still, this cannot be, so let us attack from this angle. Well, I’m afraid that they’re just going to have to get over it, and even the phony Donald Trump cannot bring any credibility whatsoever to this non-issue, non-debate.

Pathetic. Grant D. Cyrus/Boulder


Boulder Weekly welcomes your e-mail correspondence. Letters must not exceed 400 words and should include your name, address and telephone number for verification. Addresses will not be published. We do not publish anonymous letters or those signed with pseudonyms. Letters become the property of Boulder Weekly and will be published on our website. Send letters to: letters@boulderweekly.com. Look for Boulder Weekly on the World Wide Web at: www.boulderweekly. com.

  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
POST A COMMENT
No Registration Required
REPLY TO THIS COMMENT

 

Jury Nullification!

 

Everyone should write and threaten the jobs of all those involved in this Federal attack on State and Human rights. Let them know if they threaten our God(ish) given right to our do with our own body and minds as we will, and if they try to imprison those involved in the Medical Marijuana Industry in Colorado and elsewhere, we will stand up against them by the Millions, with the most powerful weapon we Americans have; Jury Nullification!

 

Jury Nullification is entirely responsible for ending "Prohibition" itself! 

 

Jury Nullification is a little known right that has been given to every American citizen serving on a jury, and has been attempted to be suppressed over the last 100 or so years. 

 

During Prohibition, 66% of the time Americans were on trial for simple possession of Alcohol, Jury's stood up for their American right to say; "This law is unjust in this particular situation." 

 

We can do the same, by using this American right to threaten the jobs of those in the Federal and State governments, and to ultimately bring an end to this ridiculous "War on Drugs". Please look into it and organize your local community for July 1st!! Let those in power know if they attempt to imprison our friends, we will bring an end to this Prohibition once again, by informing every jury across the nation of their right to object to unjust "Laws", and ultimatley, the jobs of those in Power!

 

It is our best "Non-Violent" weapon we can use to fight this unjustice threatening to imprison thousands of our Brothers and Sisters across this allegedly "Free" nation of ours. 

 

So please; Do your part!! "Do it!"....."Do it NOW!!!!!!!!!""""

 

Peace

 

mirage

 

Jury Nullification: www.fija.org

 

 

"Over himself, over his own mind and body, the individual is sovereign" -- John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (1859), "Introductory" ;)

 

The Jury’s Secret Power JUDGES MAY NOT TELL YOU THIS, but when you sit on a jury, you have the right to vote according to your%u2028conscience and to judge the law being applied to the case. As a juror, you are the final safeguard for justice. It’s the judge’s obligation to give the jury the wording of the law being applied to the case. If the judge fails to provide the wording of the law or you think the law he gives you is a bad or unconstitutional law or a good law being improperly applied, or there are other factors that would make you regret a vote to convict someone, then it is your right and duty as a juror to vote “Not Guilty” even if you are the only juror who does and you therefore “hang” the jury. You cannot be punished for the way you vote.

 

Our lawmakers sometimes pass bad laws, and, at times, good laws have been misused. Throughout history reasoning jurors have refused to convict fellow citizens who were accused of breaking the law: They freed tax protesters during the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794, refused to convict those who aided runaway slaves in violation of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, freed bootleggers charged during Prohibition 1920-30, and released Vietnam War objectors 1960-70.

 

 

When our country was young, all jurors were told of their right to judge the law, as well as the facts of the case. Then judges decided that juries should no longer be told of their power to act as a safeguard against bad laws or unethical lawmakers. Now, all jurors are instructed to accept the law as it is given to them by the judge, even in cases where the law is clearly unjust.

 

But now you know the secret: If you are selected as a juror, you have the right and duty to do the right thing: to follow your conscience and to judge the law as well as the facts of the case. It is the only way to keep government in the hands of the people.

 

 

“I consider [trial by jury] as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.” –Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Paine, 1789. For more information, please contact the Fully Informed Jury Association: http://www.fija.org Call 1-800-835-5879 for a free jury packet.

 

 

 
Close
Close