(04-02-2016 01:59 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-02-2016 11:10 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-01-2016 10:38 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(04-01-2016 04:05 PM)Dasville Wrote:  I wonder how many kids will die because of those backpacks? I wonder who gets killed and robbed because of those backpacks? It's got to be stopped.

is called legalization.....

How does legalization stop the fence climbers?

Ill take a stab. I don't think it stops fence climbers coming here for work. I do think it would slow down the amount of weed coming illegally across the border. I imagine that it would become at some point just another product sold through the normal channels of business. No one is smuggling Tequila and Mezcal made in Mexico across the border. Im not saying it would totally eliminate the black market..but..it for sure would curtail it.

yes, with two exceptions.....

one could then grow their own (I won't attempt that, and the 'sip proposal didn't get enough sigs to make the ballot)

the bigger picture is reintroducing hemp as an agricultural product.....most people don't understand that side of the equation.....

one negative may be the 'pushing' of the more harmful products into society....I would counter that hard liquor ads are now televised.....

liquor is a crippler....as are ad dollars....

(04-02-2016 05:40 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-02-2016 02:02 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-02-2016 12:31 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-02-2016 12:23 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  how about this one....prohibition....how did that work out?

It didn't. Guess what....neither has the legalization of alcohol. Before my knees got so screwed up I did a lot of tromping around in the woods hunting and we were constantly coming across still sites that were way too new to be from Prohibition. I can make a call right now and have me quart of split-skull before the sun goes down.

Sure..but..moonshining is more of a novelty than a wide spread business venture now. It is hardly even worth spending resources to stop.

Honestly it's far from a novelty and if you are willing to take the risk you can make a fortune running shine.

The limited research I did shows a still(no pun intended) small illegal alcohol black market in the US. The interesting thing is that many of the former "moonshiners" are working for legal distilleries. I did not know that Tennessee had legalized moonshining and over 250,000 cases of legal moonshine were sold in 2013. Ive seen this stuff in the ABC store but never thought about it much. Other states are looking into this also. Here in NC small distilleries are popping up. We have seen a boom of these small boutique operations. There is one close by me that makes Sweet Potato Vodka.

This backs up actually the case for why Cannabis should be legal. When you remove the "risk" of trying to manufacture and sell an illegal product...those doing it then can become legitimate businessmen. I would not say it would stop the black market. There will always be someone willing to take the risk..but..I would bet they would be much fewer in number.

How do you know they were not trying to smuggle in affordable prescription drugs to cure cancer.

(04-02-2016 05:52 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(04-02-2016 01:59 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-02-2016 11:10 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-01-2016 10:38 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(04-01-2016 04:05 PM)Dasville Wrote:  I wonder how many kids will die because of those backpacks? I wonder who gets killed and robbed because of those backpacks? It's got to be stopped.

is called legalization.....

How does legalization stop the fence climbers?

Ill take a stab. I don't think it stops fence climbers coming here for work. I do think it would slow down the amount of weed coming illegally across the border. I imagine that it would become at some point just another product sold through the normal channels of business. No one is smuggling Tequila and Mezcal made in Mexico across the border. Im not saying it would totally eliminate the black market..but..it for sure would curtail it.

yes, with two exceptions.....

one could then grow their own (I won't attempt that, and the 'sip proposal didn't get enough sigs to make the ballot)

the bigger picture is reintroducing hemp as an agricultural product.....most people don't understand that side of the equation.....

one negative may be the 'pushing' of the more harmful products into society....I would counter that hard liquor ads are now televised.....

liquor is a crippler....as are ad dollars....

I see nothing wrong with be allowed to grow cannabis, brew beer(which you can already do) or distill alcohol for your own personal consumption or give away. Selling it takes on another paradigm.

(04-03-2016 11:14 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-02-2016 05:52 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(04-02-2016 01:59 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-02-2016 11:10 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-01-2016 10:38 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  is called legalization.....

How does legalization stop the fence climbers?

Ill take a stab. I don't think it stops fence climbers coming here for work. I do think it would slow down the amount of weed coming illegally across the border. I imagine that it would become at some point just another product sold through the normal channels of business. No one is smuggling Tequila and Mezcal made in Mexico across the border. Im not saying it would totally eliminate the black market..but..it for sure would curtail it.

yes, with two exceptions.....

one could then grow their own (I won't attempt that, and the 'sip proposal didn't get enough sigs to make the ballot)

the bigger picture is reintroducing hemp as an agricultural product.....most people don't understand that side of the equation.....

one negative may be the 'pushing' of the more harmful products into society....I would counter that hard liquor ads are now televised.....

liquor is a crippler....as are ad dollars....

I see nothing wrong with be allowed to grow cannabis, brew beer(which you can already do) or distill alcohol for your own personal consumption or give away. Selling it takes on another paradigm.

I agree with selling it takes on another paradigm, but only in the consumer safety context.

(04-03-2016 11:14 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-02-2016 05:52 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(04-02-2016 01:59 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(04-02-2016 11:10 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-01-2016 10:38 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  is called legalization.....

How does legalization stop the fence climbers?

Ill take a stab. I don't think it stops fence climbers coming here for work. I do think it would slow down the amount of weed coming illegally across the border. I imagine that it would become at some point just another product sold through the normal channels of business. No one is smuggling Tequila and Mezcal made in Mexico across the border. Im not saying it would totally eliminate the black market..but..it for sure would curtail it.

yes, with two exceptions.....

one could then grow their own (I won't attempt that, and the 'sip proposal didn't get enough sigs to make the ballot)

the bigger picture is reintroducing hemp as an agricultural product.....most people don't understand that side of the equation.....

one negative may be the 'pushing' of the more harmful products into society....I would counter that hard liquor ads are now televised.....

liquor is a crippler....as are ad dollars....

I see nothing wrong with be allowed to grow cannabis, brew beer(which you can already do) or distill alcohol for your own personal consumption or give away. Selling it takes on another paradigm.

brewing ones own/craft brewing is fairly new in legal terms....in the 'sip, it was 2013...hell, we still have 'dry counties'

http://www.eater.com/drinks/2015/8/12/91...-until-now

Quote:"In addition to preventing Mississippians from enjoying about 80 percent of the world's beers, these laws—which included an ABV [alcohol by volume] cap of 6.25 percent, prevented breweries from distributing samples or selling beer direct to consumers, and made homebrewing illegal—were also severe hindrances to economic and cultural growth in our state," Coll says. "In 2012 we worked with the state legislature and the governor to pass a law increasing the allowable alcohol content in beer to 10 percent ABV, and in 2013, we convinced them to pass a law to legalize homebrewing."

the bottom line is that the federal side needs to let this go, legalize, and let the states develop laws as they see fit....

alcohol is the number two killer behind cigarettes....mary jane is the least of this country's problem with the exception how money and resources are being used....

again, if hemp is also included, it brings an entire new agriculture/mfg product....

mj/hemp being illegal is as dumb as it gets....

probably the strongest reason why mary jane is illegal is because of hemp, wouldn't you say? don't let a little thing like competition ruin your experiment in capitalism

i also have to wonder what was in the backpacks. it's cocaine maybe? i'm probably naive, but outside of opium what other drug cannot be produced here, and plentiful?

stinkfist Wrote:brewing ones own/craft brewing is fairly new in legal terms....in the 'sip, it was 2013...hell, we still have 'dry counties'

that's quite progressive for mississippi. it only took you 148 years to ratify the 13th ammendment

(04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Lush Wrote:  probably the strongest reason why mary jane is illegal is because of hemp, wouldn't you say? don't let a little thing like competition ruin your experiment in capitalism

somebody has studied up on the real reason....

dupont and corp was not too happy back in the day.....

the propaganda train was in full affect....

it's a fk'n joke looking backwards...

is an instance where capitalism fell flat on it's face....

there are many mary-j threads where this has been explained in more detail (therefore, I won't repost the specifics)

(04-01-2016 12:06 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Watch the entire video, these guys should be in the circus. Mexico's best and brightest!!! Must have been around noon or so everybody is taking a Siesta.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...fence.html

This is why Mexicans just laugh when Trump says he is going to build a wall.

Trump’s plan for building wall: Cut off remittances sent by immigrants


Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks at a rally at the Milwaukee Theatre Monday, April 4, 2016, in Milwaukee. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
April 5, 2016 - 7:06am

WASHINGTON — Donald Trump would force Mexico to pay for a border wall by cutting off billions of dollars in remittances sent by immigrants living in the U.S., according to a published report Tuesday.

The Washington Post cited a two-page memo sent by the Republican presidential front-runner outlining how he would force Mexico to pay for the 1,000-mile wall if he becomes president.

In his proposal, Trump threatened to change a rule under the USA Patriot Act, an anti-terrorism law, to cut off funds sent to Mexico through money transfers known as remittances. Trump said he would withdraw the threat if Mexico makes “a one-time payment of $5-10 billion” to finance the wall, the newspaper reported.

According to the Center for Immigration Studies, a nonprofit research organization, the U.S. is home to more than 12 million Mexicans, some living here illegally. They and other migrants use money transfer agents or banks to send money home, often with the objective of supporting their families.

The Mexican central bank reported that money sent home by Mexicans overseas hit nearly $24.8 billion last year, overtaking oil revenues for the first time as a source of foreign income. Cutting off those transfers would therefore represent a significant blow to the Mexican economy.

In his memo, entitled “Compelling Mexico to Pay for the Wall,” Trump said that “the majority of that amount comes from illegal aliens.”

The billionaire businessman had previously provided few details on his proposed border wall with Mexico, saying only that it would cost between $10 billion and $12 billion, and that he would make Mexico pay for it.

Mexico’s President Enrique Peña Nieto has said his country will not pay for any such wall. In an interview with the Excelsior newspaper last month, Pena Nieto compared Trump’s rhetoric to that of dictators Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini, saying that language like his has led to “very fateful scenes in the history of humanity.”

(04-05-2016 10:47 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Trump’s plan for building wall: Cut off remittances sent by immigrants


Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks at a rally at the Milwaukee Theatre Monday, April 4, 2016, in Milwaukee. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
April 5, 2016 - 7:06am

WASHINGTON — Donald Trump would force Mexico to pay for a border wall by cutting off billions of dollars in remittances sent by immigrants living in the U.S., according to a published report Tuesday.

The Washington Post cited a two-page memo sent by the Republican presidential front-runner outlining how he would force Mexico to pay for the 1,000-mile wall if he becomes president.

In his proposal, Trump threatened to change a rule under the USA Patriot Act, an anti-terrorism law, to cut off funds sent to Mexico through money transfers known as remittances. Trump said he would withdraw the threat if Mexico makes “a one-time payment of $5-10 billion” to finance the wall, the newspaper reported.

According to the Center for Immigration Studies, a nonprofit research organization, the U.S. is home to more than 12 million Mexicans, some living here illegally. They and other migrants use money transfer agents or banks to send money home, often with the objective of supporting their families.

The Mexican central bank reported that money sent home by Mexicans overseas hit nearly $24.8 billion last year, overtaking oil revenues for the first time as a source of foreign income. Cutting off those transfers would therefore represent a significant blow to the Mexican economy.

In his memo, entitled “Compelling Mexico to Pay for the Wall,” Trump said that “the majority of that amount comes from illegal aliens.”

The billionaire businessman had previously provided few details on his proposed border wall with Mexico, saying only that it would cost between $10 billion and $12 billion, and that he would make Mexico pay for it.

Mexico’s President Enrique Peña Nieto has said his country will not pay for any such wall. In an interview with the Excelsior newspaper last month, Pena Nieto compared Trump’s rhetoric to that of dictators Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini, saying that language like his has led to “very fateful scenes in the history of humanity.”

There you go, build that wall.

(04-05-2016 10:23 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-01-2016 12:06 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Watch the entire video, these guys should be in the circus. Mexico's best and brightest!!! Must have been around noon or so everybody is taking a Siesta.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...fence.html

This is why Mexicans just laugh when Trump says he is going to build a wall.

That existing fence sucks.

The border needs a better wall and trigger fingers.

One warning shot is fired. After that, shoot to protect.