Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: robertpaulsen
We're discussing dual use technologies that by definition some people will want to use legitimately and some will want to use illigitimately. You've said that you don't believe that every product that is sometimes used illicitly should be banned. For every Woody Harrelson, I can show you an article about farmers who want to cultivate it as a legitimate crop for everyday products such as fabrics, paper, etc. These farmers have been asking the government all along to lift the ban on industrial hemp -- this is not a recent phenomenon.

So, my question remains: why do you believe that cultivating hemp should remain illegal, since it is a dual use product with many legitimate uses? This stance is inconsistent with your belief that other dual use products should be legal.
331 posted on 11/05/2003 3:28:42 PM PST by ellery
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 330 | View Replies ]


To: ellery
USDA Study Sees Little Market for Hemp
-- The Associated Press (via globalhemp.com)

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Industrial hemp, the non hallucinogenic cousin of marijuana that can be used in both clothing and food, will never have anything but a “small, thin market” in the United States, a government study says.

All of the hemp fiber, yarn and fabric that the United States currently imports could be grown on less than 2,000 acres of land, says the study by the Agriculture Department’s Economic Research Service.

Nine states—Arkansas, California, Hawaii, Illinois, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota and Virginia—passed pro hemp bills last year that provide for research, study or potential production of the crop, and the first U.S. test plots were planted in Hawaii last month.

Some 35,000 acres were grown last year in Canada, which legalized hemp production in 1998.

The USDA study, which was released Friday, doesn’t see much demand for any of hemp’s uses:

As a fiber, it’s main competitor is linen, which is made from flax. There is little textile flax production in the United States, despite the lack of legal barriers, and that suggests there wouldn’t be enough demand for hemp fiber to make it profitable, the study said.

" This stance is inconsistent with your belief that other dual use products should be legal."

I don't see much of a use. I haven't seen much of a use for the last 100 years (with the exception of WWII). This is a non-issue. This is a non-product.

I see more potential for harm (the above story) than beneficial uses, quite frankly. At this stage, I'm content to leave the issue as is -- apply for DEA approval to grow it. Let's see what happens with that first.

332 posted on 11/06/2003 7:04:54 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 331 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson