«Beloved Hemp Lover…» ~ by Rafael Andrés Escribano & Tristán Reyes Alvarado

Download: «Beloved Hemp Lover…» ~ by Rafael Andrés Escribano & Tristán Reyes Alvarado
Versión en español aquí—«Amado amante del cáñamo…» ~ por Tristán Reyes Alvarado & Rafael Andrés Escribano

[English version by Rafael Andrés Escribano & Tristán Reyes Alvarado]

8 March 2014

For fear of sparrows
One does not quit sowing hempseed.

—Ancient Spanish proverb [1]

Beloved hemp lover,

Those who publicly say they are “AGAINST” “MARIJUANA” [2] are not the only nor the worst enemies of hemp. Those who are behind the international “LEGALIZATION” of LIMITED quantities of marijuana ARE ALSO PROHIBITIONISTS [3] [4] as well as PROTECTORS OF NARCOTRAFFIC [5] [6].

THESE PROHIBITIONISTS want to DIVIDE our TRADITIONAL and HOLISTIC idea of HEMP using a deceiving and fallacious language, designed to keep us from seeing that we are talking about ONE AND THE SAME PLANT, the same plant which we have cultivated FREELY throughout all our history and WITHOUT the problems generated by the ILLEGAL HEMP TRAFFIC, which are NOT consequence of that free millenary cultivation of hemp BUT RATHER consequence of A SERIES OF PROHIBITIONS INSTITUTED FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE 20TH CENTURY.

Some examples of this language are:

“MARIJUANA”, “MEDICINAL MARIJUANA”, “RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA”, “INDUSTRIAL HEMP” [7], “CANNABINOIDS” [8], “LEGALIZATION”, “DEPENALIZATION”, “DECRIMINALIZATION”, “RESPONSIBLE REGULATION” [9] [10], “SALUBRIOUS SOLUTIONS”, “DAMAGE CONTROL”, “BABY STEPS”, “WINNING TEAM”, “MARIJUANA IS LESS HARMFUL THAN ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO”, “IT’S NOW OR NEVER; IF WE LET THIS OPPORTUNITY PASS US BY WE DON’T KNOW WHEN THE NEXT ONE WILL COME”, “MOMENTUM”, “THIS IS A FIRST STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION” [11], “WE CAN WORK THAT OUT WITH AMENDMENTS”, “NO MORE PRISONERS FOR MARIJUANA”, “SELF-CULTIVATION” [12] [13] [14], etcetera.

These “legalizers” lobby in favor of laws which put into place MORE PENALTIES, MORE THREATS, AND MORE METHODS OF CONTROL [15] [16] [17], which are unjust and unacceptable, carried out by A CORRUPT STATE APPARATUS that has gone mad and which pretends to keep prohibiting and controlling our intimate millenary communion with hemp and its flower. If we know we can be SELF-SUFFICIENT with hemp, cultivating it freely in our home, in our island, in our continent, and in our world, why then lobby for MORE PROHIBITION AND MORE DEPENDENCE ON A STATE THAT IS AN ENEMY OF OUR WELL-BEING?

Why do we have to rule ourselves by a limitation of thought, that is Mammonic and anti-historical, and which seeks to SUSTAIN AND INTENSIFY PROHIBITION which is the sine qua non of HYPERINFLATED PRICES FOR THE HEMP FLOWER and their inevitable consequence, THE ILLEGAL HEMP TRAFFIC and its sociopathological effects? [18]

Within our own ethnic tradition, TO CULTIVATE ANY GOD-GIVEN SEED is a fundamental NATURAL RIGHT of man, just as the natural right TO LIVE IN COMMUNION WITH NATURE. And even more so when we are speaking of a seed that is AS USEFUL and AS VERSATILE for human life as the seed of hemp, the HEMPSEED [19], which, when it sprouts and grows healthily, gives us the plant from which, for millennia, we have made our own medicine, food, fiber (clothing, paper, rope, etc.), fuel, plastic, raw material for construction, healing of soil and air, etcetera.

We have to open our mind and free ourselves from the trap in which HEMP PROHIBITION is keeping us prisoners (if we allow it) or, said differently, the trap in which marijuana “LEGALIZATION” puts us. If we look a little beyond into OUR OWN HISTORY, we can confirm with the LAW OF INDIES XX (1545) that hemp was FREELY cultivated and was actively PROMOTED by our Spanish Empire and our laws, the Laws of Indies, during the first 300 YEARS OF OUR FORMATION AS PUERTO RICAN ETHNICITY:

Ley XX de Indias

«Law XX. Let Viceroys, and Governors see to the planting of, and benefitting from flax, and [cannabis] hemp.
We [Emperor Charles V, of the Holy Roman Germanic Empire] entrust Viceroys, and Governors, to see to it that flax and [cannabis] hemp be sown and benefitted in the Indies, and to procure that the Indians apply themselves to this grangery, and that they understand in spinning and weaving flax.
Emperor D. [Don] Carlos and the Prince G. [Governor] in Ponferrada at 13 June 1545. [20]»

«This was the situation BEFORE PROHIBITION. And all this […] WITHOUT registering us before the [today corrupt] state, WITHOUT applying for a permit from the state, WITHOUT having to limit our garden to 6 hemp plants, WITHOUT having to destroy, before a state judge, any quantity of hemp flowers in excess of 480 grams per year (= 1 pound approx.), WITHOUT being forced to sell the hemp flowers exclusively at the black market price—because hemp was not yet neither “regulated” nor prohibited and, therefore, there was no black market!—, WITHOUT monitoring or surprise inspections by the state, WITHOUT reports or inventories to submit to the state, WITHOUT blind fences 8 feet high or higher, WITHOUT obligatory video cameras filming each nook and cranny of the “operation”, WITHOUT almost absolute prohibition of giving away what we cultivate, WITHOUT THC tests when stopped by a police officer, WITHOUT prohibiting our children, relatives and friends under 21 years of age to even be anywhere near our hemp garden or field, or in the vicinity of the elaboration of our hemp’s derivative goods… and WITHOUT our violating any of these “laws” prompting the state to annul our “permit” to cultivate or consume hemp, or the state to fine us, to imprison us, and to take away our property and our children’s custody, etcetera. IN OTHER WORDS, WITHOUT ANY OF THE RESTRICTIONS PUT IN PLACE AND DEMANDED BY THE [CURRENT] FALSE LEGALIZATION LAWS [PASSED] by the governments of Uruguay, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, Portugal, Holland and other governments who have legislated to supposedly “legalize” hemp, but which in reality simply do nothing but tighten the screws and bring up-to-date the prohibition of hemp imposed by the Allied powers following their military victory of 1945.» [21]

It is our duty, as members of the Puerto Rican ethnicity, as members of the Ibero-American constellation of ethnicities, to cultivate cannabis hemp IN ABUNDANCE once again. We have to, once again, be born, raise ourselves, and educate ourselves within the culture and cultivation of cannabis hemp. We have to once again see to it that all Puerto Ricans understand what cannabis hemp is and see to it that we understand how to benefit from cannabis hemp in the spirit of the Law XX of Indies.

THE «LAW XX OF INDIES» TOTALLY ELIMINATES ANY INCENTIVE WHATSOEVER FOR THE ILLEGAL TRAFFIC OF CANNABIS HEMP FLOWER.

Without PROHIBITION and without the HYPERINFLATED PRICES that prohibition inevitably generates, there exists no incentive whatsoever for the illegal traffic of the HEMP FLOWER.

Beloved hemp lover, this thinking, this sentiment, and these conclusions that we hereby communicate to you are founded on central, undeniable facts of our history, both past and present. We invite you wholeheartedly to begin to study in depth those facts in the NOTES which follow.


Tristán Reyes Alvarado
www.cannabisparalaeducacion.org
tristan@cannabisparalaeducacion.org

Rafael Andrés Escribano
www.facebook.com/rafael.a.escribano
rafael.andres.escribano@gmail.com

8th of March of 2014

 

NOTES:

[1] [SPANISH ORIGINAL:]

Por miedo de gorriones no se dejan de sembrar canalones

[ENGLISH VERSION:]

«FOR FEAR OF SPARROWS
ONE DOES NOT STOP SOWING HEMPSEEDS.

Proverb advising that one should not stop doing the things that are good and honest out of fear they may be taken wrongly and be murmured about by slanderers.

[LATIN:]

Praæ passerum timore quis prudens, rogo, Neglexit unquam seminare CANNABEM?»

[ENGLISH VERSION:]

Ere, out of fear of birds, did anyone prudent, I ask, ever neglect to sow CANNABIS?

(From the definition of the word CAÑAMÓN, i.e. HEMPSEED, in the first edition of the Dictionary of the Spanish Royal Academy, 1729)

{Selection and notes: Rafael Andrés Escribano}

[2] CAPITALIZATION of words within quotations, as well as clarifications within brackets, are ours.

[3] From the «Marijuana Law Project in Uruguay»
(The whole law project for the “legalization” of marijuana can be read in the official website of the Presidency of Uruguay:
http://archivo.presidencia.gub.uy/sci/proyectos/2012/08/cons_min_534.pdf)

This law in and of itself recognizes the «SUCCULENT “market reservoir”» that has emerged thanks to prohibition… This law recognizes and covets that “market reservoir”, because who would describe something as “succulent” but someone who salivates at the sight of it?:

«THE MEMBERS OF THE GLOBAL COMMISSION FOR DRUG POLICY are: EX PRESIDENTS and EX PRIME MINISTERS: Fernando Henrique Cardoso (Brasil), César Gaviria (Colombia), Ernesto Zedillo (Mexico), Ruth Dreifuss (Switzerland), George Papandreou (Greece). INTERNATIONAL EX FUNCTIONAIRE: Kofi Anan, ex Secretary General of the United Nations Organization (Ghana), Javier Solana, ex Chargé d’Affaires of Foreign Relations of the European Union (Spain), Louise Arbour, ex High Commissioner of Human Rights of the United Nations Organization (Canada). Asma Jahagandir, Ex Special Relator of the United Nations Organization on Extra-judicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions (Pakistan), Michel Kazatchkine, Executive Director of of the World Fund for the Fight Against AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria (France). INTELLECTUALS: Mario Vargas Llosa (Peru), Carlos Fuentes (Mexico). EX GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONARIES: Paul Volker, Ex President of the Federal Reserve Bank (USA), George Schultz, Ex Secretary of State (USA), Marion Caspers-Merk, Ex Secretary of State in the German Health Ministry (Germany), Thorfvald Stoltenberg, Ex Minister of Foreign Affairs and High Commissioner for Refugees of the United Nations (Norway). BUSINESS PEOPLE: John Whitehead, Banker and Functionary, President of the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation (USA), María Cattaui, Member of the Board of Directors of Petroplus Holdings, Ex Secretary General of the International Chamber of Commerce (Switzerland), Richard Branson, Virgin Group and Co-founder of The Elders (United Kingdom).»

[4] The media presents us with a battle between President Mujica on the one hand and, on the other the United Nations, imperialism, and narcotraffic. However, the United Nations, imperialism, and narcotraffic are quite well represented IN and ARE THEMSELVES the GLOBAL COMMISSION ON DRUG POLICY.

«Marijuana: For Mujica, the United Nations government official who criticized the [Uruguay marijuana] law “is a two-faced old-fart”»
(http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1647780-pepe-mujica-cargo-contra-un- funcionario- de-la-onu-es-un-viejo-careta)

«[…] When the Executive Power enacts the law, any Uruguayan will be able to have in his house up to six cannabis plants to roll his own cigarettes […]» [See note [12] for the deceitfulness this implies.]

«The INCB [International Narcotics Control Board] warned Uruguay that the legalization of marijuana “violates the dispositions of the [United Nations] Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961, adopted by 186 countries, including Uruguay.»

[5] «The Uruguayan government will sell marijuana AT THE SAME PRICE as the BLACK MARKET»
(http://www.abc.es/20121105/sociedad/abci-uruguay-vendera-marihuana-201211051913.html)

«In order to be able to buy the 40 GRAMS OF MARIJUANA PER MONTH, with which 20 CIGARETTES can be rolled, consumers will have to present a BAR-CODED CARD. [The amount of 480 GRAMS PER YEAR was calculated on the basis of 40 grams per month, which comes down to one little joint a day.]»

«José Mujica interviewed on TVE [Spanish TV]»
(http://youtu.be/aaLCZ14qwF4?t=17m45s)
(Minute 17:48)

«The case of marijuana. […]
The problem is not marijuana. MARIJUANA IS A PLAGUE as is tobacco. Who’s going to say that tobacco is good? And how many people smoke? And we can’t keep ourselves from smoking? There’s so many things…
There’s so many things… MARIJUANA IS A PLAGUE ALSO…
No ADDICTION, except that [addiction] of love, are recommendable. But they are there.
The problem of what is behind marijuana is narcotraffic. If we leave it up the clandestinity [i.e the black market] we’re giving away the market to them.
But what are we defending? No. LET THE GOVERNMENT TAKE CHARGE OF IT.
And YOU, you’re a CONSUMER, you’re REGISTERED. Here’s a DOSE for you.
If you’re over the limit, I CONTROL YOU. No, sonny. You’re going to the HOSPITAL. YOU HAVE TO BE LOOKED AFTER.
And this way I’m not allowing that world to be managed by DELINCUENCY.
The problem is… STEALING the MARKET from NARCOTRAFFIC as the best way of combatting it.
The other [thing] is what’s happening… We find you with a drug shipment, another shipment, another shipment, we win a bunch of battles and [but] they win us the war.
Well, I don’t know if what we’re proposing can contribute to solving the problem. What I’m clear about is that 100 years persecuting drug addiction is giving no results.
So, one has to be a little more pragmatic, open one’s head. In other words, let’s find other means. That’s it.»

In notes [16] y [17], you can see the details of how this “I CONTROL YOU” is planned to be implemented in Puerto Rico through Senator Pereira’s law project (P. del S. 517, i.e. Senate Project 517) and in the “Medicalization” law project (P. de la C. 1362, i.e. House of Representatives Project 1362).

[6] «Interview with MILTON FRIEDMAN ON THE DRUG WAR»
(http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/friedm1.htm)

Even though Milton Friedman reasons the problem of prohibition of drugs from the narrow perspective of liberalism, his words can hardly be more clear and rotund:

«Paige: There are many who would look at the economics—how the economics of the drug business is affecting America’s major inner cities, for example.
Friedman: […] IF YOU LOOK AT THE DRUG WAR FROM A PURELY ECONOMIC POINT OF VIEW, THE ROLE OF THE GOVERNMENT IS TO PROTECT THE DRUG CARTEL. THAT’S LITERALLY TRUE.
Paige: IS IT DOING A GOOD JOB OF IT?
Friedman: EXCELLENT. What do I mean by that? In an ordinary free market—let’s take potatoes, beef, anything you want—there are thousands of importers and exporters. Anybody can go into the business […] by keeping goods out and by ARRESTING, let’s say, LOCAL MARIJUANA GROWERS, THE GOVERNMENT KEEPS THE PRICE OF THESE PRODUCTS HIGH. WHAT MORE COULD A MONOPOLIST WANT? He’s got a government who makes it very hard for all his competitors and who keeps the price of his products high. IT’S ABSOLUTELY HEAVEN.»

Who is Milton Friedman?

«Milton Friedman (July 31, 1912 – November 16, 2006) was an American economist, statistician, and writer who taught at the University of Chicago for more than three decades. He was a recipient of the 1976 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, and is known for his research on consumption analysis, monetary history and theory, and the complexity of stabilization policy. As a leader of the Chicago school of economics, he profoundly influenced the research agenda of the economics profession. A survey of economists ranked Friedman as the second most popular economist of the twentieth century after John Maynard Keynes, and The Economist described him as “the most influential economist of the second half of the 20th century… possibly of all of it […]”» (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Friedman)

[7] If we have a pound of hempseed, in that pound we have thousands of potential hemp plants.

From those hempseeds, will sprout male hemp plants, female hemp plants, and some hermaphrodites. The male plant is the one with the longest stem and thus the ideal one for fiber. The female plant is the one that produces the flower and —when the pollen of the male plant pollenizes and impregnates it— that female plant will then produce seeds. Depending on how we cultivate and crossbreed hemp we can vary its characteristics for its infinite uses.

A MONGREL DOG, a GERMAN SHEPHERD, and a GREAT DANE have quite different characteristics but all three belong to the same species, the dog species (canis lupus familiaris). People crossbreed dogs for different reasons, some more aesthetic and some more practical, such as cattle shepherding or hunting. But, no matter how different their races may be, a mongrel dog can, in principle, impregnate a female great dane, they can produce fertile offspring, and thus, ad infinitum. The same is true of the mongrel and the German shepherd or the German shepherd and the great Dane, in their different male-female combinations. That is why it is said, with full correctness, that THEY ARE NOT THREE DIFFERENT SPECIES BUT RATHER THREE DIFFERENT RACES (a.k.a. subspecies) OF ONE AND THE SAME SPECIES, CANIS LUPUS FAMILIARIS.

The “legalizators” of marijuana want to split up our traditional hemp into three different species (RUDERALIS, INDICA AND SATIVA) when in reality they are but THREE RACES OF ONE AND THE SAME SPECIES, THE CANNABIS SPECIES.

Why are they three races of the same species and not three different species? Well, precisely because, in principle, any two of those three cannabis races can be crossbreed and they can have fertile offspring, and that fertile offspring can in turn have fertile offspring, and thus, ad infinitum. All those who follow the latest trends in cannabis interbreeding know, for instance, that the ruderalis (the equivalent of the mongrel dog above) is constantly crossbred with hemp races of higher THC in order to insufflate the latter with the resistance and adaptability of the ruderalis.

Why do the “legalizators” of marijuana want to split up hemp into three different species? Well, they want to do that so that we will not be surprised in the face of the shocking fact that, on the one hand, ONE POUND OF HEMPSEED OF “INDUSTRIAL HEMP” (that is, thousands of hempseeds) IS SOLD IN THE LEGAL WORLD MARKET AT 25 CENTS USD while, on the other hand, if those thousands of hempseeds were to be planted, 3 or 4 months later, thanks to the international prohibition of the hemp flower, ITS FLOWERS —REBAPTIZED “MARIJUANA”— WILL SELL IN THE BLACK MARKET AT, SAY, $5,000 USD PER POUND. (See «INDUSTRIAL HEMP: GLOBAL MARKETS AND PRICES», page 10, “World Market Share: Hempseed Production (1996)”, Valerie L. Vantreese, Revised June 1997.
{http://www.votehemp.com/PDF/hemp97.pdf})

If we allow those thousands of “industrial” hempseeds (previously crossbred and manipulated in order to artificially reduce their THC levels to, say, less than 1%) to simply grow and reproduce themselves in the wild (i.e. ruderalis), the THC levels of those plants will go back up to the level that naturally corresponds to them because PRODUCING THC IS A NATURAL FUNCTION THAT IS ESSENTIAL TO THE HEALTH OF THE HEMP PLANT.

THC is the NATURAL INSECTICIDE, PESTICIDE, and THERMAL PROTECTOR of the hemp plant. And for the human being, THC represents the main medicinal component of the hemp plant. THE MORE THC IN THE HEMP FLOWER, THE GREATER ITS HEALING POTENTIAL.

From hemp we can produce, with great ease and high quality our own medicine, food, fiber (clothes, paper, cordage, etc.), fuel, plastic, raw material for construction, the healing of soil and air, etcetera.

[8] «China is cornering the cannabis patent market»
(http://qz.com/163726/china-is-cornering-the-cannabis-patent-market/)

«More than half of the over 600 cannabis-related patents registered with the United Nations’ global intellectual property agency belong to Chinese companies […]

The UN’s World Intellectual Property Organization [WIPO] collects patents from 186 member states that are globally enforceable and organizes them in a searchable database called Patentscope […]»

[9] «[George] Soros sees Uruguay as a “laboratory” for legal marijuana»
(http://www.elpais.com.uy/informacion/soros-mira-uruguay-laboratorio-marihuana-legal.html)

«[The Uruguayan organization] REGULACIÓN RESPONSABLE [in English, “Responsible Regulation”] carried out a strong PUBLICITY CAMPAING on TV in support of the marijuana law, which cost more than $100,000 USD. The SOROS’ organization [OPEN SOCIETY FOUNDATIONS] contributed [officially] close to $60,000 USD, Pieri said.»

[10] «Marijuana as a fiscal option. Puerto Rico could collect taxes like Washington and Colorado»
(http://www.elnuevodia.com/lamarihuanacomoopcionfiscal-1707592.html)

«[…] and another two [organizations], which visited the Island last week —DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE (DPA) and OPEN SOCIETY GLOBAL DRUG POLICY (OSF) [We understand the latter is misquoted and is referring to the OPEN SOCIETY FOUNDATIONS. We understand, further, that GEORGE SOROS founded and forms part of these two organizations.]—, posited at the Legislature and to central government officials the necessity of reforming public policy on marijuana […]»

«Stigliz, the University of Puerto Rico [UPR], the Center for a New Economy [CNE], and Puerto Rico»
(http://aldia.microjuris.com/2014/02/24/stiglitz-la-upr-el-cne-y-puerto-rico/)

«In the closing panel, Mike Soto presented the CNE’s new project financially supported by the OPEN SOCIETY FOUNDATIONS (founded and funded by GEORGE SOROS) and set into motion in Puerto Rico by the LAW CLINIC of the UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO SCHOOL OF LAW, the AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION and the CENTER FOR INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM [Centro para el Periodismo Investigativo].»

[11] «Momentum Builds in Puerto Rico for Major Marijuana Reforms by Adrian Brito, Law Student, Writer»
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adrian-brito/momentum-builds-in- puerto_b_4914245.html)

«During a RECENT VISIT to the UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO SCHOOL OF LAW, Dr. ETHAN NADELMANN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR of the DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE [DPA], gave an electrifying lecture that was highly covered by the local press and sparked a wave of growing support for marijuana reform.

“Puerto Rico cannot afford to continue JAILING KIDS and DESTROYING THEIR FUTURE because they POSSESS SCANT AMOUNTS of MARIJUANA. Sick people should also have access to MEDICAL MARIJUANA so they can treat their illnesses.” said Dr. Nadelmann. During their stay, the DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE and the OPEN SOCIETY FOUNDATIONS held meetings with legislators and pro- marijuana reform advocates to promote efforts for a sensible drug policy that reduces crime and allocates more government funds to treating drug addiction.»

«In the right direction: Decriminalizing marijuana is a global trend»
(http://www.elnuevodia.com/noticias/locales/nota/enladireccioncorrecta-1703362/)

«Regarding Uruguay, one the other persons visiting the Island is Hannah Hetzer, COORDINATOR OF THE LATINAMERICAN PROGRAM of the DPA [DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE], who during most of 2013 lived in the South American country and advocated for the approval —last 10th of December— of the law that enables the selling and buying and the cultivation of marijuana. DPA ALSO ADVOCATED FOR THE RECENT LEGALIZATION IN WASHINGTON AND COLORADO.

“We are the world’s biggest organization for the reform of public policy on controlled substances […]”», Hannah Hetzer said.

[12] In the current global “legalization” tsunami, the term “SELF- CULTIVATION” usually refers to a handful of cannabis plants. In the case of Uruguay, for example, the “RESPONSIBLE REGULATION” advertising campaign stipulates that the “USER” registered and certified by the government of Uruguay may have up to 6 PLANTS but it does not reveal that this is AS LONG AS THE FLOWERS OF THOSE 6 PLANTS DO NOT EXCEED 480 GRAMS IN WEIGHT (i.e. 1 POUND) PER YEAR. Any suplus 480 grams must be destroyed in the presence of a “competent Judge”, otherwise the user will be in violation of the law that “legalizes” marijuana in Uruguay.

SELF-CULTIVATION is NOT THE SAME as FREE CULTIVATION:

«ARTICLE 3.— PLANTING, CULTIVATION, HARVESTING, AND COMMERCIALIZATION OF ANY PLANT FROM WHICH NARCOTICS COULD BE EXTRACTED REMAIN PROHIBITED as well as other substances causing physical or psychologic dependency, with the following exceptions: […]

E) The PLANTING, CULTIVATION, AND HARVESTING of household PSYCHOACTIVE CANNABIS PLANTS destined to personal or shared consumption at home. Without prejudice to this, [the latter] IS UNDERSTOOD [as] UP TO SIX PSYCHOACTIVE CANNABIS PLANTS DESTINED FOR PERSONAL OR SHARED CONSUMPTION, PLANTING, CULTIVATION, AND HARVESTING AT HOME and the product of the harvesting of the preceding planting UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 480 GRAMS PER YEAR. […]

ANY NON-AUTHORIZED PLANTING MUST BE DESTROYED THROUGH THE INTERVENTION OF A COMPETENT JUDGE.»

Spanish original:
PROYECTO DE LEY DE URUGUAY
(http://www.regulacionresponsable.org.uy/proyectoLeyRegulacion.pdf)

[13] Rick Simpson has rediscovered a simple household extraction method for the cannabis medicine (the essential oil of the hemp flower) with one (1) pound (480 grams) of the flower:

Run from the Cure: The Rick Simpson Story
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGjC4HReFL0)

How to make Rick Simpson’s medicinal hemp oil safely
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZXGH6mYr3Y)

[14] JUST ONE CANNABIS PLANT CAN YIELD ONE OR SEVERAL POUNDS OF CANNABIS FLOWERS (i.e. several times 480 grams) IN ONE SINGLE CROP.

[15] «Puerto Rico moves forward towards decriminalization of marijuana»
(http://www.primerahora.com/noticias/gobierno- politica/nota/puertoricoavanzahacialadespenalizaciondelamarihuana-991778/)

On the one hand Puerto Rican Senator Miguel Pereira says:

«What’s a horror is to put young people in jail for smoking marijuana»

However, Senate Project 517 DOES INCLUDE JAIL AND DOES NOT APPLY YOUNG PEOPLE BETWEEN THE AGES OF 18 TO 20. For example, an 18, 19, 0r 20 year-old person, arrested for a “joint” in a recreational park, would face a fixed sentence of 6 years and according to Chamber of Representatives 1362 (“Medicalization”) would face Section 7.8:

«Section 7.8—It wil be a FELONY, with a FIXED JAIL SENTENCE OF 20 YEARS IN PRISON, 15 [YEARS] WITH MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE or 25 [YEARS] WITH AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES, and a FINE OF AT LEAST $20,000 FOR POSSESSING, CULTIVATING, transporting, distributing or selling marijuana for profit or FOR NON-MEDICAL PURPOSES.» (See notes [16] and [17]).

[16] JAIL SENTENCES in Senate Project 517 [P. del S. 517].

«P. del S. 517 TEXT APPROVED BY SENATE IN FINAL VOTING ON THE 13TH NOVEMBER 2013»

(Original Spanish version:
http://noticiasmicrojuris.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/ps517.pdf)

«Article 404 of Law No. 4 of June 23rd, 1971, known as “Controlled Substances Law” typifies as felony for a person to “knowingly or intentionally possess any controlled substance”, which constitutes behavior punishable with JAIL SENTENCE FOR A FIXED TERM OF THREE (3) and, subject to the Court’s discretion, a FINE NOT EXCEEDING FIVE THOUSAND ($5,000 USD)»

«In its turn, Article 411-A of the “Controlled Substances Law”, typifies as felony for a person to, “knowingly and intentionally and in violation of the dispositions of this Law, introduce, distribute, dispense, administer, possess or transport for the purpose of distribution, sale, gift, deliver in any form, or simply posses any controlled substance included in the Schedules I through V of this Law at a public or private school, recreational facility, public or private, or in the surroundings of any of these.” In case of conviction, THE PERSON WILL BE SENTENCED WITH TWICE THE SENTENCES PROVIDED in section (b) of Article 401 or section (a) of Article 404 of Law No. 4, above, for a first-time felony, which implicates the sme substance and the same Schedule. In light of this, the distribution of controlled substances would be punished through a FIXED SENTENCE OF TEN (10) YEARS IF THE SUBSTANCE WERE MARIJUANA and of (20) years if it were a different narcotic substance; whereas WHEN THE MODALITY WERE SUBSTANCE POSSESSION IT WOULD BE A FIXED SENTENCE OF SIX (6) YEARS. When dealing with a repeat offense or aggravating circumstances, THE SENTENCES COULD INCREASE CONSIDERABLY.»

«In the same fashion, a person accused of committing the felony typified in Article 411-A, is blocked from participating in Drug Court, from taking refuge under the “Law of Suspended Sentences and Parole”, and from reclassification of the felony in order to advance a pre-agreed upon argument for a misdemeanor included in the accusation. Therefore, A PERSON POSSESSING MARIJUANA, REGARDLESS THAT IT MAY BE A NEGLIGIBLE AMOUNT, IS EXPOSED TO A FIXED CONFINEMENT OF SIX (6) YEARS.»

«Article 404-A — POSSESION OF MARIJUANA

For the purpose of these dispositions it will be understood that possession of marijuana is the physical and/or bodily possession of said substance as defined in Article 102 (16) of this Law subject to the quantities established in the following Article. The possession of fourteen (14) GRAMS OR LESS OF MARIJUANA will be punishable with a fine not exceeding ONE HUNDRED (100) USD. In case of incurring in a violation of this Article within the term of three (3) years prior to the accusation, punishment will be as follows: 1) the SECOND INFRACTION to this Article, committed at diverse and independent times, shall be punished with a fine of TWO HUNDRED (200) USD, moreover, it is established that in BOTH INSTANCES the Court shall impose the fine here established and SHALL AT ITS OWN DISCRETION REFER THE ACCUSED TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF SERVICES FOR MENTAL HEALTH AND AGAINST ADDICTION (ASSMCA), to the same ends established in this Law relative to a third infraction; 2) A THIRD OF SUBSEQUENT INFRACTION to this Article, committed in diverse and independent times, shall be punishable with a fine of THREE HUNDRED (300) USD AND THE COURT SHALL ORDER THAT THE PERSON BE EVALUATED BY THE ADMINISTRATION OF SERVICES FOR MENTAL HEALTH AND AGAINST ADDICTION (ASSMCA) WITH THE PURPOSE OF ASSESSING THE NEED FOR TREATMENT FOR THE USE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE. Said provider will submit a report within thirty (30) days subsequent to the order. Should the report reflect that there is a history of abuse of controlled substances, the same [report] should identify the type of treatment necessary and the [service] provider. IN ALL CASES, if after examining the report required by this Article, the Court determines that the rehabilitation program established by Administration of Services For Mental Health and Against Addiction [ASSMCA] is necessary, it shall PRONOUNCE SENTENCE TO SUCH ENDS, IN ADDITION TO THE FINE.

The amount of the fines for violation of this disposition, shall enter into a fund managed by the ADMINISTRATION OF SERVICES FOR MENTAL HEALTH AND AGAINST ADDICTION (ASSMCA) in order to finance and/or cover rehabilitation services for its CUSTOMERS in accordance with LAW NO. 67 OF 7 AUGUST 1993, as amended. […]»

«(A) (1) — ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA

For the purposes of this Law, IT SHALL BE CONSIDERED A MISDEMEANOR TO ILLEGALLY POSSESS MARIJUANA IN EXCESS OF FOURTEEN (14) GRAMAS UP TO A MAXIMUM OF TWENTY EIGHT (28) GRAMS. Should a conviction take place, the Court shall impose the punishment of a FINE WHICH SHALL NOT EXCEED FIVE HUNDRED (500) USD OR A PUNISHMENT OF CONFINEMENT NOT EXCEEDING SIX (6) MONTHS.»

«Article 4 — Article 411-A of Law No. 4 of June 23rd, 1971 is amended, as amended, so that it reads as follows:

Article 411-A INTRODUCTION OF DRUGS IN SCHOOLS OR INSTITUTIONS

Any person who knowingly and intentionally and in violation to dispositions in this Chapter, introduces, distributes, dispenses, administers, POSSESSES or transports for the purpose of distribution, sells, gifts, delivers in any form, OR SIMPLY POSSESSES any controlled substance included in Schedules I through V of this Chapter into a public or private school, recreational installation public or private OR IN THE SURROUNDINGS OF ANY OF THE LATTER, shall incur in FELONY and, if convicted, shall be sentenced with TWICE THE PROVIDED PUNISHMENTS by Articles 401-A or 404-B of this Law, for a first-time felony involving the same substance and the same Schedule. If accused of possession of the controlled substance known as Marijuana, IN AN AMOUNT NOT EXCEEDING SEVEN (7) GRAMS, as defined in Article 102 (16) of this Law, the person shall be punished in accordance with dispositions established in Article 404 (A) [FINE WHICH SHALL NOT EXCEED FIVE HUNDRED (500) USD OR PUNISHMENT OF CONFINEMENT NOT EXCEEDING SIX (6) MONTHS]. Should there be an accusation of possession of the substance known as Marijuana, IN AN AMOUNT EXCEEDING SEVEN (7) GRAMS BUT NOT GREATER THAN TWENTY EIGHT (28) GRAMS, as defined in Article 102 (16) of this Law, the person shall be punished in accordance with the dispositions established in Article 404 [PUNISHMENT OF CONFINEMENT FOR A FIXED TERM OF THREE (3) YEARS and, subject to the discretion of the Court, the PUNISHEMENT OF A FINE NOT EXCEEDING FIVE THOUSAND ($5,000) USD may be imposed].»

 [17] JAIL SENTENCES in Chamber of Representatives Project 1362 [P. de la C. 1362]

Beloved hemp lover, please, refer yourself to the law project… Do not support something that says “legalization” simply because its propaganda in the media looks good. The word “MEDICALIZATION” may sound cute but if you go deeper into its meaning IT IS NOT.

In the Chamber of Representatives Project 1362, the “MEDICALIZATION” law project, JAIL SENTENCES ARE GREATER than in Law 4 of Narcotics of June 23rd, 1971 which is the law they are amending and “improving upon”. This law also includes a “REGISTRY” for “QUALIFIED PATIENTS” as well as for “AUTHORIZED COMPANIONS”, in addition to restrictions which could only have come from the mind of a prohibitionist on steroids…

«LAW PROJECT OF THE CHAMBER OF REPRESENTATIVES 1362 [P. de la C. 1362]
SEPTEMBER 4, 2013
Presented by Representatives Báez Rivera and Vargas Ferrer»
(http://noticiasmicrojuris.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/pc1362.pdf)

«Article 3.6 — Restrictions for use

(1) Patients are only authorized to use medicinal marijuana in the privacy of their homes.

(2) This law prohibits the use of medicinal marijuana in public places. It shall be a misdemeanor, punishable with JAIL FOR UP TO 90 DAYS AND A FINE OF UP TO $100, TO USE OF MEDICINAL MARIJUANA IN A PUBLIC PLACE.

(3) THIS LAW PROHIBITS THE USE OF MEDICINAL MARIJUANA IN THE PRESENCE OF PERSONS UNDER 21 YEARS OF AGE. IT SHALL BE A FELONY, PUNISHABLE WITH UP TO 3 YEARS OF JAIL AND A FINE OF UP TO $3,000 TO USE MARIJUANA IN THE PRESENCE OF PERSONS UNDER 21 YEARS OF AGE. […].

CHAPTER VII
LIMITATIONS OF THIS LAW

(a) It shall be FELONY, with a FIXED PUNISHMENT OF 10 YEARS IN JAIL, 5 [YEARS] WITH MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES or 15 [YEARS] WITH AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES, and a FINE OF AT LEAST $10,000 TO POSSESS ANY AMOUNT OF MARIJUANA, a product containing marijuana or some derivative of marijuana without having a license for medicinal use or a dispensary license, in accordance with what’s stated in this law.

(b) It shall be a FELONY, with a FIXED PUNISHMENT OF 10 YEARS OF JAIL, and a FINE OF AT LEAST $10,000 FOR SELLING ANY AMOUNT OF MARIJUANA, a product containing marijuana or some derivative of marijuana without having a license from a marijuana dispensary in accordance with what’s stated in this law. […]

Section 7.3 — Nothing in this law permits the operation of a motor vehicle, water-borne or air-borne vessel under the influence of marijuana.

(a) It shall be a FELONY, with a FIXED PUNISHMENT OF 3 YEARS OF JAIL and a FINE OF AT LEAST $1,000 TO DRIVE, OPERATE OR HANDLE A MOTOR VEHICLE, WATER-BORNE OR AIR-BORNE VESSEL UNDER THE INFLUENCE AND EFFECTS OF MARIJUANA. […]

Section 7.6 — Nothing in this law obliges any public or private establishment to tolerate the non-medical use of marijuana.

a) It shall be a MISDEMEANOR, with a FINE OF UP TO $500 and with JAIL FOR UP TO 90 DAYS to consume marijuana in some public place or in non-authorized commercial establishment EVEN IF THAT PERSON IS AUTHORIZED TO CONSUME IT BY THIS LAW.

Section 7.7 — Nothing in this law authorizes qualified patients to use or consume marijuana in their place of work, in the presence of minors under 21 years of age, or in any public place.

(a) NO PERSON UNDER 21 YEARS OF AGE MAY CULTIVATE, PLANT, distribute, sell, process or CONSUME MARIJUANA. It shall be a FELONY, with a FIXED PUNISHMENT OF 20 YEARS OF JAIL, 15 [YEARS] WITH MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES or 25 [YEARS] WITH AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES, and a FINE OF AT LEAST $20,000 TO sell, PROVIDE OR FACILITATING THE USE OF MARIJUANA TO A PERSON UNDER 21 YEAR OF AGE.

Section 7.8 — It shall be a FELONY, with a FIXED PUNISHMENT OF 20 YEARS OF JAIL, 15 [YEARS] WITH MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES OR 25 [YEARS] WITH AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES, and a FINE OF AT LEAST $20,000 to POSSESS, CULTIVATE, transport, distribute or sell marijuana for profit or FOR NON-MEDICAL PURPOSES.»

[18] «Why do the “legalizators” of marijuana want to split up hemp into three different species? Well, they want to do that so that we will not be surprised in the face of the shocking fact that, on the one hand, ONE POUND OF HEMPSEED OF “INDUSTRIAL HEMP” (that is, thousands of hempseeds) IS SOLD IN THE LEGAL WORLD MARKET AT 25 CENTS USD while, on the other hand, if those thousands of hempseeds were to be planted, 3 or 4 months later, thanks to the international prohibition of the hemp flower, ITS FLOWERS—REBAPTIZED “MARIJUANA”— WILL SELL IN THE BLACK MARKET AT, SAY, $5,000 USD PER POUND.» See note [7]. (See «INDUSTRIAL HEMP: GLOBAL MARKETS AND PRICES», page 10, “World Market Share: Hempseed Production (1996)”, Valerie L. Vantreese, Revised June 1997.
{http://www.votehemp.com/PDF/hemp97.pdf})

[19] The importance of HEMP (cáñamo), of HEMPSEED (cañamón), and of the HEMPFIELD (cañamar) for our Puerto Rican ethnicity is perfectly sketched in the first official lexicographical definition of these three words in our «THESAURUS OF THE CASTILLIAN OR SPANISH LANGUAGE», («Tesoro de la lengua castellana o española»), published in 1611, and written by one of the most erudite and creative Catholic men of his time, don Sebastián de Covarrubias, who held the posts of Royal Chaplain, Royal Tutor, and Counselor of the Holy Office of the Inquisition, among others.

Let’s remember that by 1611, the Ibero-American island of [Saint John the Baptist of] Puerto Rico had more than 100 years of being founded and colonized by don Juan Ponce de León, its first Governor, and the Law XX of Indies (ordering and commanding the FREE cultivation of hemp and promoting the learning of its culture among the Indians) had been enacted more than 50 years prior:

«HEMP (cáñamo). From the Greek καναβιν [i.e. kanabin], plant known and most useful for human life because, from hemp, we make chord, and the works which are made from it, such as girdles, headstalls [equine and otherwise], espadrilles, frair’s rope belts, hawsers, cables, and canvasses; whence were made the first ca[ña]misas [shirts] or cañamisas [hempen piece of clothing, from cáñamo]; there are two species* of it [i.e. of cannabin hemp], both of which are mentioned by Dioscorides** [40-90 a.D.] »

*Covarrubias’ uses the Latin word species here, when he talks about Dioscorides already distinguishing two species of cannabin hemp 1,500 years before but this use of the word species is the pre-modern sense, not the modern sense, much less the post-modern.
**«Pedanius Dioscorides (Ancient Greek: Πεδάνιος Διοσκουρίδης; c. 40 – 90 AD) was a Roman physician, pharmacologist and botanist of Greek origin, the author of De Materia Medica—a 5-volume encyclopedia about herbal medicine and related medicinal substances (a pharmacopeia), that was widely read for more than 1,500 years.» (Wikipedia)

«HEMPSEED (cañamón). The seed of hemp. From hempseeds and honey, nougat is made for children, and for wet nurses. [When] Ground they [the hempseeds] are the nourishment of little caged birds.»

«HEMPFIELD (cañamar). The place where one gathers the hemp. It is also a village in the Bishopry of Cuenca, and the family name of the Cañamares [family].»

[20] Laws of Indies. Fourth Book. Title 18. On commerce, sustenance, and fruits of the Indies. Law XX
(http://www.congreso.gob.pe/ntley/LeyIndiaP.htm)

[21] Personal communication from Dr. Rafael Andrés Escribano, author of the only history of hemp in Puerto Rico «FUMAndoMAFÚ: materiales para la historia de la mariguana en Puerto Rico». The book can be read and downloaded here:
(https://archive.org/stream/FumandomafuMaterialesParaLaHistoriaDeLaMariguanaEnPuertoRico/FUMAndoMAF–book–10april2009#page/n0/mode/2up).

(Last corrected: March 27, 2015)

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s