Thanks to a failed prohibition of certain mind-altering plants which have been revered throughout the world for thousands of years, we have collectively developed the ability to grow plants indoors, efficiently and without any natural sunlight or soil.
The overwhelming demand for these illicit plants, combined with our government's attempts to disrupt the trade have led to technological and manufacturing accomplishments which will soon have a huge benefit for society as a whole.
If these plants had not been made illegal, indoor gardening would have still been relatively in the stone age (please pardon the pun.
) As it turns out, our drug war did have a purpose: to make indoor gardening available and monetarily feasible for the majority of the population.
"Mission Accomplished", thanks to the latest generation of LED grow lights and the corresponding advances in aeroponics (the most efficient, highest yielding form of soil-less growing.
) According to the DEA and Congress, certain plants are too dangerous for us to consume and therefore must be wiped off the face of the earth.
Never mind the gasoline I could just as easily huff or the rubber cement we all played with in elementary school; the thousands of deaths directly attributed to these dangerous substances are worth the risks, just like pharmaceutical concoctions.
But somehow, certain plants are not.
Even a plant that has scientifically been proven to be safer than tylenol, that just happens to have a 'cousin' which can be cheaply grown on marginal land and made into practically anything.
This absurd stance has been held by our elected leaders for a very long time now, yet the public is still largely unaware and our (now contradictory) laws remain completely unquestioned by practically all politicians.
A notable exception of late was in the UK, where the top drug adviser was fired for "claiming" that both cannabis and ecstasy are safer than alcohol.
He directly attributes this viewpoint to the results of scientific studies, which overwhelmingly show that both substances are indeed less dangerous to the user and society than alcohol.
One particular article brings up some good points, but stops short of destroying the government's credibility by citing the actual studies.
Opting instead to refer to the former drug adviser's statement as a "claim", the article downplays what could the biggest story of the decade: scientists and respected leaders demanding that drug laws conform to some type of logic and common sense.
Oddly enough, the article leaves the reader to ponder the following quote from Prime Minister Gordon Brown: "On climate change, or health, for example," he said, "we take the best scientific advise possible.
But in an area like drugs we have to look at it in the round.
" Luckily, the article also provides a list the scientist in question, David Nutt, published as part of a paper that helped lead to his termination as top drug adviser.
It is a list of drugs, ordered from most dangerous to least; and it is based entirely on the latest scientific data available.
Something that Gordon Brown appears unconcerned with, but President Obama will have a tough time convincing his supporters (much less, critics) that scientific integrity doesn't really matter-at least not in this particular instance, which happens to dictate the use of hundreds of billions of taxpayers' dollars every year...
The funny thing is, even if Obama refuses to end the policies which were once referred to as the "War on Drugs"; this ongoing battle against ourselves is almost over.
Laws can be quite powerful when properly enforced, but the evolution of technology is easily orders of magnitude more influential in our society today.
Thanks to an insatiable demand for mind-altering substances derived from plants, along with our nation's attempted prohibition of said plants; the artificial lighting and related indoor gardening industries have come a very long ways just in the past few years.
They have come so far, in fact, that they have rendered law enforcement's last best tool completely useless: LED's and other new, more efficient lights have made it impossible to locate indoor grow operations using electricity usage data and/or thermal imaging equipment.
In addition to making it much easier to circumvent an already unenforceable law, the rapid advance of lighting technology along with corresponding advances in soil-less growing techniques such as aeroponics have made it feasible for the average person to build their own indoor garden, where they can grow their own fresh, organic herbs and vegetables all year long.
Although self-contained, pre-manufactured systems are still relatively expensive, the recent federal policy change recognizing people with state-issued "green" cards ensures that there will be plenty of demand and healthy competition in this emerging market.
The combination of our capitalist system and moral ineptitude has enabled us to develop the tools with which we can build a sustainable society.
Although growing our own food locally, possibly even in our own homes, may seem like a trivial step-keep in mind that food in this country currently averages 1700 miles "from farm to fork".
Plus, you've never tasted a better tomato than one you grew yourself.
Self-sustainability has become much more feasible, thanks entirely to a failed policy which should have scrapped decades ago.
Please be sure to call your representatives in Congress and the Senate, let them know that their ineptitude has actually paid off! You might also want to let them know that it's time to finally end our collective misery by following the advice of the U.
N.
and Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (www.
leap.
cc).
Then we will win the war in Afghanistan , secure our borders and rebuild our economy while creating sustainable industries (based on the incredible versatility of hemp.
) The politicians will have a field day with their speeches, going on and on about all of the prosperity and opportunity that they have created-by finally scrapping a law they all knew was bogus anyway.
At the very least, it ought to be entertaining.
The overwhelming demand for these illicit plants, combined with our government's attempts to disrupt the trade have led to technological and manufacturing accomplishments which will soon have a huge benefit for society as a whole.
If these plants had not been made illegal, indoor gardening would have still been relatively in the stone age (please pardon the pun.
) As it turns out, our drug war did have a purpose: to make indoor gardening available and monetarily feasible for the majority of the population.
"Mission Accomplished", thanks to the latest generation of LED grow lights and the corresponding advances in aeroponics (the most efficient, highest yielding form of soil-less growing.
) According to the DEA and Congress, certain plants are too dangerous for us to consume and therefore must be wiped off the face of the earth.
Never mind the gasoline I could just as easily huff or the rubber cement we all played with in elementary school; the thousands of deaths directly attributed to these dangerous substances are worth the risks, just like pharmaceutical concoctions.
But somehow, certain plants are not.
Even a plant that has scientifically been proven to be safer than tylenol, that just happens to have a 'cousin' which can be cheaply grown on marginal land and made into practically anything.
This absurd stance has been held by our elected leaders for a very long time now, yet the public is still largely unaware and our (now contradictory) laws remain completely unquestioned by practically all politicians.
A notable exception of late was in the UK, where the top drug adviser was fired for "claiming" that both cannabis and ecstasy are safer than alcohol.
He directly attributes this viewpoint to the results of scientific studies, which overwhelmingly show that both substances are indeed less dangerous to the user and society than alcohol.
One particular article brings up some good points, but stops short of destroying the government's credibility by citing the actual studies.
Opting instead to refer to the former drug adviser's statement as a "claim", the article downplays what could the biggest story of the decade: scientists and respected leaders demanding that drug laws conform to some type of logic and common sense.
Oddly enough, the article leaves the reader to ponder the following quote from Prime Minister Gordon Brown: "On climate change, or health, for example," he said, "we take the best scientific advise possible.
But in an area like drugs we have to look at it in the round.
" Luckily, the article also provides a list the scientist in question, David Nutt, published as part of a paper that helped lead to his termination as top drug adviser.
It is a list of drugs, ordered from most dangerous to least; and it is based entirely on the latest scientific data available.
Something that Gordon Brown appears unconcerned with, but President Obama will have a tough time convincing his supporters (much less, critics) that scientific integrity doesn't really matter-at least not in this particular instance, which happens to dictate the use of hundreds of billions of taxpayers' dollars every year...
The funny thing is, even if Obama refuses to end the policies which were once referred to as the "War on Drugs"; this ongoing battle against ourselves is almost over.
Laws can be quite powerful when properly enforced, but the evolution of technology is easily orders of magnitude more influential in our society today.
Thanks to an insatiable demand for mind-altering substances derived from plants, along with our nation's attempted prohibition of said plants; the artificial lighting and related indoor gardening industries have come a very long ways just in the past few years.
They have come so far, in fact, that they have rendered law enforcement's last best tool completely useless: LED's and other new, more efficient lights have made it impossible to locate indoor grow operations using electricity usage data and/or thermal imaging equipment.
In addition to making it much easier to circumvent an already unenforceable law, the rapid advance of lighting technology along with corresponding advances in soil-less growing techniques such as aeroponics have made it feasible for the average person to build their own indoor garden, where they can grow their own fresh, organic herbs and vegetables all year long.
Although self-contained, pre-manufactured systems are still relatively expensive, the recent federal policy change recognizing people with state-issued "green" cards ensures that there will be plenty of demand and healthy competition in this emerging market.
The combination of our capitalist system and moral ineptitude has enabled us to develop the tools with which we can build a sustainable society.
Although growing our own food locally, possibly even in our own homes, may seem like a trivial step-keep in mind that food in this country currently averages 1700 miles "from farm to fork".
Plus, you've never tasted a better tomato than one you grew yourself.
Self-sustainability has become much more feasible, thanks entirely to a failed policy which should have scrapped decades ago.
Please be sure to call your representatives in Congress and the Senate, let them know that their ineptitude has actually paid off! You might also want to let them know that it's time to finally end our collective misery by following the advice of the U.
N.
and Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (www.
leap.
cc).
Then we will win the war in Afghanistan , secure our borders and rebuild our economy while creating sustainable industries (based on the incredible versatility of hemp.
) The politicians will have a field day with their speeches, going on and on about all of the prosperity and opportunity that they have created-by finally scrapping a law they all knew was bogus anyway.
At the very least, it ought to be entertaining.
Source...