Drug Gangs Taking Over Public Land to Grow Pot

[Colonel Ronan]

I never said anything about killing people on the spot. I would encourage the use of the US Military in this, however, because they are trained to operate in the woods. They would be better at infiltrating these camps, and they would do it without putting themselves at risk. If they were to get into a firefight with the growers, so be it. They would follow the same rules of engagement that they currently operate under in Iraq. Do not fire unless fired upon.

How about we stop killing people over something that's so minuscule?

 

[jlprk]

Okay...? People have opinions no matter how extreme they may be. We aren't allowed to express ourselves on message boards?

How did you get that editorial opinion from my short sentence in Post #26? I'm just ironing out where people stand--the killers and the legalizers.

I never said anything about killing people on the spot. I would encourage the use of the US Military in this, however, because they are trained to operate in the woods. They would be better at infiltrating these camps, and they would do it without putting themselves at risk. If they were to get into a firefight with the growers, so be it. They would follow the same rules of engagement that they currently operate under in Iraq. Do not fire unless fired upon.

Now you say you only want the jurisdiction of the military changed to infiltrate, and fire if fired upon, within the borders of the U.S., where we already have local and national police forces to do this. But before, you said that the military should use this opportunity for target practice, which is the opposite (offensive, not defensive).

Or bring in the Rangers for a little target practice. I'm sure our military would love a little training in the woods. They've been in the desert for so long, they've probably forgotten what it's like to fight in the trees.

 

[barfo]

I never said anything about killing people on the spot. I would encourage the use of the US Military in this, however, because they are trained to operate in the woods. They would be better at infiltrating these camps, and they would do it without putting themselves at risk. If they were to get into a firefight with the growers, so be it. They would follow the same rules of engagement that they currently operate under in Iraq. Do not fire unless fired upon.

Somehow "firefight" and "same rules of engagement" as in Iraq do not seem to imply "without putting themselves at risk". Quite the opposite.

barfo

 

[ehizzy3]

so we gonna waterboard them?

 

[Blazer_Hippie]

so we gonna waterboard them?

Nope...waterbong them!

 

[MARIS61]

I never said anything about killing people on the spot...They would follow the same rules of engagement that they currently operate under in Iraq. Do not fire unless fired upon.

Shouldn't they be shooting shoplifters or people who spit on the sidewalk instead?

You know, someone who's doing actual harm to someone.

I would encourage the use of the US Military in this, however, because they are trained to operate in the woods. They would be better at infiltrating these camps, and they would do it without putting themselves at risk.

Funny.

Among my hunting buddies, the 2 who are least aware of their surroundings in the woods are the 2 vets.

Since these are rural areas, the local sheriff, or his 8 year old son, would be far more successful than your average military man.

 

[Colonel Ronan]

How did you get that editorial opinion from my short sentence in Post #26? I'm just ironing out where people stand--the killers and the legalizers.

You just seem enraged, that's all.

 

[MARIS61]

You just seem enraged, that's all.

I don't get that at all.

 

[Denny Crane]

I read somewhere Phillip Morris owns a lot of land for growing marijuana crops if it ever gets legalized.

And a trademark on the name "Acapulco Golds"

 

[Blazer_Hippie]

And a trademark on the name "Acapulco Golds"

What about "Panama Reds"?

[video=youtube;db5413DhhZw]

 

[Denny Crane]

What about "Panama Reds"?

I think a lot of the obvious names have been trademarked...

And count me among those who favor legalization, FWIW.

 

[Colonel Ronan]

I don't get that at all.

It wasn't directed at you so don't worry your pretty little head about it.

 

[jlprk]

Since you're a legalizer in agreement with me, my Post #26 wasn't aimed at your little pinhead, so why did you worry about it?

 

[Haakzilla]

HIGH ON HOPE

Howard Marks talks to Free Radical Sounds:

http://freeradicalsounds.com/howard.htm

 

[ehizzy3]

HIGH ON HOPE

hippie

 

[Natebishop3]

How did you get that editorial opinion from my short sentence in Post #26? I'm just ironing out where people stand--the killers and the legalizers.



Now you say you only want the jurisdiction of the military changed to infiltrate, and fire if fired upon, within the borders of the U.S., where we already have local and national police forces to do this. But before, you said that the military should use this opportunity for target practice, which is the opposite (offensive, not defensive).

And if the growers chose to engage our military, that's exactly what they'd be... target practice. The police were quoted as saying that they are sitting ducks out there. They said the men are armed and that they aren't afraid to use their assault rifles. The police are not equipped or trained for this kind of engagement. You can call it whatever you want, but this isn't your run-of-the-mill drug dealer. They said as much in the article.

Shouldn't they be shooting shoplifters or people who spit on the sidewalk instead?

You know, someone who's doing actual harm to someone.



Funny.

Among my hunting buddies, the 2 who are least aware of their surroundings in the woods are the 2 vets.

Since these are rural areas, the local sheriff, or his 8 year old son, would be far more successful than your average military man.

Yeah, the shoplifters and sidewalk-spitters are carrying AK's with the intent to use them, right? How old are your friends? Vietnam vets? Things have changed old timer.

 

[The Sebastian Express]

Yeah, the shoplifters and sidewalk-spitters are carrying AK's with the intent to use them, right? How old are your friends? Vietnam vets? Things have changed old timer.

I don't think that some people are understanding that you are suggesting military use to remove armed, dangerous and organized syndicate activity. I think some of them are (purposefully?) implying you're suggesting we have the military gun down average joe pot seller out in the woods.

 

[jlprk]

And if the growers chose to engage our military, that's exactly what they'd be... target practice.

Nice try, but you'll need a more clever semantic turnaround than that to change your story--laughing that you want farmers gunned down for fun as target practice. In California, polls show that the legalization measure will win in a few months. Get your jollies while you can.

 

[Natebishop3]

Nice try, but you'll need a more clever semantic turnaround than that to change your story--laughing that you want farmers gunned down for fun as target practice. In California, polls show that the legalization measure will win in a few months. Get your jollies while you can.

Oh I get it now, you're joking.

Sorry, you had me going for a minute. I thought you were being serious, but it's obvious now that you're being sarcastic.

I didn't realize that farmers carry AK-47's. I didn't realize that they hide in the trees, waiting for trespassers. I didn't realize that they would put booby traps in the woods to protect their crops. We aren't talking about farmer John on his perfectly legal plot of land, growing his corn or wheat. We're talking about a heavily armed group of individuals who are growing an illegal crop in the middle of the woods. You might want to get your facts straight before you start insinuating things.

 

[Denny Crane]

Farmers don't carry AK-47s to guard their pigs, corn, wheat, cattle, etc. If it were legal, nobody'd feel the need to carry an AK-47 to protect their crop.

 

[Natebishop3]

Farmers don't carry AK-47s to guard their pigs, corn, wheat, cattle, etc. If it were legal, nobody'd feel the need to carry an AK-47 to protect their crop.

But it isn't legal Denny. And if California legalizes it, there's still 49 other states who won't.

 

[barfo]

But it isn't legal Denny. And if California legalizes it, there's still 49 other states who won't.

Oh, I'll bet if CA legalizes it and that goes ok, you'll see other states legalizing it in short order. Oklahoma may not, but I bet Oregon would.

barfo

 

[Natebishop3]

Oh, I'll bet if CA legalizes it and that goes ok, you'll see other states legalizing it in short order. Oklahoma may not, but I bet Oregon would.

barfo

Oregon would not. We wouldn't want to offend our illegal population