Anonymous ID: 5dd316 Dec. 4, 2020, 7:48 a.m. No.11901465   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1502 >>1509 >>1526

>>11901420

The truism is simple. There is a plant that grows in nature called marijuana. It should therefore be legal to consume. Govt. does not own nature.

 

Now if the discussion is about how it is altered or packaged or genetically engineered, then different story.

 

It would be like saying corn is illegal, or sugarcane. IDGAF if it is mind altering, God made it, and its just growing there for whatever purpose you may have for it.

Anonymous ID: 5dd316 Dec. 4, 2020, 7:55 a.m. No.11901550   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>11901509

I"ve never even smoked a cigarette, so I'm just discussing this on general principals. For them to own a patent would imply that there is a specific alteration or mixture of it that they 'own', compared to what just grows naturally in the ground. Right or wrong?

Anonymous ID: 5dd316 Dec. 4, 2020, 8:12 a.m. No.11901706   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>11901650

I've always felt that 'law enforcement' has taken these things too far, for this simple reason: for there to be a crime, someone must be hurt or aggrieved.

 

It does get to be a very slippery slope when punitive laws become just about enforcing rules.

Anonymous ID: 5dd316 Dec. 4, 2020, 8:14 a.m. No.11901726   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1764

>>11901700

Damn son. That's no G5 with a single passenger. Mind you, they wouldn't charter a 767 unless there was a shitload of people. I guess it could be a rotation of staff or TDY assignment, but you would think they would fly on mil transport.