Skip to comments.
"Guru of Ganja" (Ed Rosenthal) convicted of marijuana cultivation
San Francisco Chronicle ^
| 01/31/03
| DAVID KRAVETS
Posted on 01/31/2003 3:28:07 PM PST by MikalM
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:41:45 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
A federal jury Friday found Ed Rosenthal, the author of how-to-grow books on marijuana and how to avoid the law, guilty of marijuana cultivation and conspiracy charges.
Deliberating for a day, the 12-member jury concluded that Rosenthal, the self described "Guru of Ganja," was growing more than 1,000 plants, conspiring to cultivate marijuana and maintaining a warehouse for a growing operation. He faces a maximum life term when sentenced June 4.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: libertarians; loseraareusers; usersarelosers; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 401-420, 421-440, 441-460 ... 521-526 next last
To: philman_36
I understand you completely. Personally, I have a great deal at stake. I just think that it is absolutely ridiculous that my government could choose to imprison me over my choice of intoxicant.
I enjoy the finer things in life. I'm a connosieur, if you will. Nothing better than good scotch, good bourbon, good wine, good port and good bud. I use all in moderation and only use the finest of each.
Again, it is a sin that my government has chosen one of these (and by all scientific accounts, the least harmful of the lot) to be a controlled substance. I made the risk reward calculation long ago and despite this stupid drug war, I have found the risk to be acceptable.
421
posted on
02/03/2003 7:18:47 AM PST
by
jayef
To: jayef; philman_36
"Are you suggesting that there are a great many people who would like to smoke dope, but don't because of the fear of incarceration?""Great many people?" I am suggesting no such thing. What has been suggested on this board is that legalizing marijuana would not increase the number of marijuana smokers.
I thought that philman_36's statement refuted that "suggestion", that's all.
To: MrLeRoy
"Craig said she realized how much information had been kept from the jury when she drove home after the verdict and read newspaper accounts that jurors had been told to avoid during the trial."Are you suggesting that this is a better way to conduct a trial by jury? Have them sit at home, read newspaper acoounts, then render a verdict?
Why would you post such nonsense? How low will you stoop to defend your buddy, Ed?
To: MrLeRoy
Since you wish me to do so, I will.
Thank you.
But for the record, I reject your claim that my not doing so was "rude and discourteous;"...
Fine, I'll call it poor etiquette. Do you accept that claim?
...clearly my post had nothing to do with you in particular...
That's funny, I see ...So "saving" philman from his own...as having a lot to do with me "in particular".
...and would not have been meaningfully changed had I referred instead to Joe Smith.
Then you should've done so instead of using my nomiker!
Sorry about this, I'm not trying to rile you.
Everybody has quirks. I squeeze the tube from the bottom, like my TP "underneath" instead of "over the top", fill the ice trays, don't put empty jugs back in the fridge, don't drink from the jug, don't slam the screen door, don't "flop" on the furniture, etc.
To: MrLeRoy; philman_36
"So "saving" philman from his own bad choices is worth ten of billions of taxpayer dollars every year..."You're saying, what? He's not worth it?
To: philman_36
426
posted on
02/03/2003 7:41:38 AM PST
by
Roscoe
To: robertpaulsen
Are you suggesting that this is a better way to conduct a trial by jury? Have them sit at home, read newspaper acoounts, then render a verdict?I'm suggesting that relevant testimony should not be barred during trial. Why would you post such nonsense? How low will you stoop to defend your buddy, Ed?
Wipe that froth from your mouth.
427
posted on
02/03/2003 7:42:30 AM PST
by
MrLeRoy
("That government is best which governs least.")
To: philman_36
Fine, I'll call it poor etiquette. Do you accept that claim? No.
Everybody has quirks.
That I'll accept, and respect yours.
428
posted on
02/03/2003 7:44:11 AM PST
by
MrLeRoy
("That government is best which governs least.")
To: robertpaulsen; philman_36
You're saying, what? He's not worth it?"Saving" adults from their own choices is not worth a plugged nickel.
429
posted on
02/03/2003 7:46:02 AM PST
by
MrLeRoy
("That government is best which governs least.")
To: jayef
430
posted on
02/03/2003 7:46:20 AM PST
by
Roscoe
To: MrLeRoy
"I'm suggesting that relevant testimony should not be barred during trial."You are suggesting no such thing with that post. Your post suggests that jurors be exposed to newspaper accounts, does it not?
To: robertpaulsen
Your post suggests that jurors be exposed to newspaper accounts, does it not?No, it does not.
432
posted on
02/03/2003 7:48:52 AM PST
by
MrLeRoy
("That government is best which governs least.")
To: robertpaulsen
Yes, I have seen that suggested too. I am as dubious of that claim as you are. That being said, I would be ecstatic if more people chose marijuana over alcohol. I think the night life all of the country would dramatically improve on that day. I can't tell you how sickening it is to witness drunken idiocy (fighting, puking, stumblin' and stammerin') every weekend, knowing that there is a better way.
433
posted on
02/03/2003 7:50:19 AM PST
by
jayef
To: Roscoe
And you applaud this? You would support such barbarity? What kind of human being are you?
434
posted on
02/03/2003 7:52:30 AM PST
by
jayef
To: robertpaulsen
And who says the WOD is not working? Good catch!
435
posted on
02/03/2003 7:53:43 AM PST
by
Roscoe
To: robertpaulsen
What has been suggested on this board is that legalizing marijuana would not increase the number of marijuana smokers.
So what makes you automatically assume that I, or anyone else, would start smoking marijuana if it were legalized? I indicated that there were many factors that kept me from smoking marijuana. Did you somehow miss that to purposely lead somewhere?
I thought that philman_36's statement refuted that "suggestion", that's all.
No, you opined.
To: jayef
Hey, you're the one who proclaimed that Linder's defeat of Barr showed that, "There is justice in this world."
Your blind ignorance bit you again.
437
posted on
02/03/2003 7:56:26 AM PST
by
Roscoe
To: Roscoe
And? Your point?
To: Roscoe
Good catch!
No one else has answered and you won't either, but I'll ask anyway.
You like coercion and incarceration as tactics?
Is that freedom?
To: philman_36
[According to the testimony...]
Short term memory loss?
440
posted on
02/03/2003 8:00:59 AM PST
by
Roscoe
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 401-420, 421-440, 441-460 ... 521-526 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson