What if they tried to ban marijuana? Is there anywhere in the United States where those who want it cannot grow their own?
What if they tried to ban marijuana? Is there anywhere in the United States where those who want it cannot grow their own?
What if they tried to ban marijuana?
It's already banned under US Federal law and under state law in the majority of US states. And my understanding, in most other countries as well. The "what if" here is strange.
Is there anywhere in the United States where those who want it cannot grow their own?
Outside? northern Alaska maybe.
Indoors? No
However, growing your own is just as illegal as buying it. Potentially more so. If you are growing enough, they could charge you with intent to sell.
There are news stories out there of police watching garden stores and investigating anyone who buys indoor grow equipment (even though there are lots of things you could use that equipment to grow that have nothing to do with drugs).
There are news stories (and a few court cases) out there about police using thermal imaging equipment to detect indoor grow operations.
It's already banned under US Federal law and under state law in the majority of US states.
Last time I looked, 38 is a majority of 50. That's how many states in which it's perfectly legal to grow, sell, and possess medical marijuana. That's supposedly different from recreational marijuana, but considering how damned easy it is to get a medical marijuana card, not much of a difference.
Now, there it's still against FEDERAL law, so the operations have to be cash only - banks can't take those deposits. It's also against the law for us to sell you land if we KNOW it's for a grow operation, because that's ALSO regulated by Federal law. But if you don't tell me you want to buy that 500 acres of land for a grow operation, then I'll be perfectly happy to sell it to you.
Other than that, it's more or less a case of who gives a shit anymore. Now - if you grow it and you're NOT licensed by the state, then they'll come down on you like a ton of bricks. But at least here in Oklahoma, it's not tough to get a license, and God knows every retail section has a weed shop on EVERY SINGLE BLOCK.
The funny thing is, Tinker AFB just had a big post on their Facebook page about it, because there are so many civilian workers on base that they forget it's Federal property, and so it's illegal there.
Last time I looked, 38 is a majority of 50. That's how many states in which it's perfectly legal to grow, sell, and possess medical marijuana.
Okay. However, that's a relatively recent development and the "What if they tried to ban marijuana?" question is still nonsensical.
Okay. However, that's a relatively recent development and the "What if they tried to ban marijuana?" question is still nonsensical.
I may be mistaken, but I believe that the government ban of the growing and sale of Marijuana started in the 1960's or 70's.
Similar to the regulations and enforcement of people making beer, wine, and alcohol. It has always been done (individuals making alcohol for themselves and others). Our first national crisis was the "Whiskey Rebellion" in the 1790's!
Prohibition in the 1920's made government regulations of alcohol a Life or Death issue.
In the 1930's the Federal Government asserted (and SCOTUS affirmed) that a farmer feeding Corn he grew to his own Cattle was "Interstate Commerce" and thus subject to Government Regulation... because the farmer could have sold his corn, "thus" Government may Regulate all kinds of things related to his farm, corn, cattle, etc.
"Government" (aka some politicians and bureaucrats) are getting "ichy" because of "3D Printers" and similar technologies, as well as some information on the internet and even print media!
Why folks could just print a 30 round magazine, or a "silencer" or a whole gun, or a Cannon! Or some regulated widget, or put the Plans to make em on the internet.
Banning Marijuana (again) is entirely possible.
Banning almost anything is not necessarily a "political" issue. Federal and State Bureaucracies may Issue and ENFORCE Regulations with the power of laws!
A couple of decades ago a FDA (Food and Drug Administration) SWAT Team stormed a Health Food Store in a local shopping mall because of a dispute about labeling of some vitamin supplements!!!
The vitamin supplements weren't illegal, but an FDA bureaucrat deemed the Labels were in violation. Instead of making a phone call, sending a letter, or an unarmed agent of the FDA to talk to the clerks working in the store. A DOZEN MEN IN BALCLAVAS AND BODY ARMOR BEARING MP5 SUBMACHINE GUNS RAN THROUGH THE MALL FREAKING PEOPLE OUT!
Guess the FDA hadn't been using it's SWAT TEAM and they didn't want the Budget Cut!
https://www.naturalnews.com/021791.html
1992 - The Tahoma Clinic FDA Raid
On May 6, 1992, FDA agents joined armed King County police officers in an armed raid against the clinic of Dr. Jonathan Wright, an M.D. and natural health practitioner. His crime? He was treating patients with injectable high-dose B vitamins -- a safe, natural treatment -- and in doing so was actually helping patients heal.
The armed agents smashed down the door, rushed into the clinic like a SWAT team with guns drawn, terrorizing the patients and shouting at them to put their hands in the air. Over the next fourteen hours, agents rifled through Dr. Wright's clinic, seizing patient records, computers, vitamin supplies, and various natural therapy products. The FDA illegally held on to confiscated items, including the computers needed to run his clinic, for three years.
But was Dr. Wright really so dangerous as to justify an armed raid? He's a graduate of Harvard and the University of Michigan Medical School. He's a book author, a prolific public speaker, and served as the nutrition editor of Prevention magazine for more than ten years. The purpose of the FDA raid was clearly not to arrest Dr. Wright, who was never charged. Rather, the purpose appears to be conducting a campaign of terror: sending a message to the alternative medicine community that anyone engaged in nutritional treatments could be raided and shut down, with no legal justification.
It was all part of the FDA's campaign against natural health treatments, a campaign that continues to this day.
1992: The Texas vitamin store raids
In 1992, the FDA prompted the Texas Department of Health (TDH) and the Texas Department of Food and Drug to conduct raids on more than 12 health food stores. Agents seized flaxseed oil, aloe vera, zinc supplements, vitamin C, and even Sleepytime Tea. One health food store owner was reportedly threatened by TDH with, "Don't talk to the press, or we'll come down on you twice as hard!"
None of the confiscated products were ever returned to the store owners, no charges were filed, and no reason for the raids was ever given. The raids were simply a campaign of terror designed to destroy the inventory and disrupt business operations of stores selling natural health products.
1993: The health food store raids
In 1993, the war against health freedom reached its peak in Texas, where combined forces of the FDA, DEA, IRS, U.S. Customs, and U.S. Postal Services conducted commando-style raids on nearly 40 different health food stores, vitamin companies, and natural health clinics from May through September. The homes of company owners and employees were also raided, and some raids were conducted with SWAT teams brandishing assault weapons and flak jackets.
In one home, a mother who was breast feeding her infant was reportedly "roughed up and handcuffed for 11 hours while FDA agents ransacked her home." Items seized in the raids included vitamins, minerals, herbs, and nutritional supplements. IRS officials also seized computers, automobiles, and bank accounts. The U.S. Postal Service illegally blocked the mail of some of the targeted companies, denying them the ability to conduct business or even organize a legal defense.
Targeted products included Dr. Kurt Donsbach's nutritional products and Dr. Hans Neiper's German-made health products.
It seems that I conflated the Tahoma raid and some other raids on vitamin stores around the same time. Or, I believe in the article it mentions multiple raids on several vitamin stores. I thought I recalled a vitamin store in south King County that was raided by an FDA SWAT Team...
Banning Marijuana (again) is entirely possible.
No for that to be possible, the feds would have to unban it first.
Lots of people are ignoring the ban (big fucking surprise /sarc) but that doesn't undo the fact that marijuana is still banned.
Under federal law marijuana is a schedule 1 drug. This means as far as the feds are concerned, it has no accepted medical uses.
Being schedule 1 means researchers can't even officially research potential medical uses without a shit ton of extra red tape.
"Government" (aka some politicians and bureaucrats) are getting "ichy" because of "3D Printers" and similar technologies, as well as some information on the internet and even print media!
Why folks could just print a 30 round magazine, or a "silencer" or a whole gun, or a Cannon! Or some regulated widget, or put the Plans to make em on the internet.
They show their ignorance with that. With current 3D printing tech, they can't print a whole gun/cannon. Especially the barrel and pressure containing parts. The body of a magazine, maybe.
It's a really simple task to prevent 3D printing of whole guns. To print one requires laser sintering with the appropriate metal powders.
Control of the powders and or sintering tools nips that in the bud.
The materials for manufacturing smokeless powder and primer materials is already heavily controlled. They may be dumb and slow, but some politician somewhere will eventually twig to it.
I have a Co2 laser for sintering. Hooking up 3D printing software has already happened. The max density is 90% as compared to a forged billet.
Good enough for small parts, but definitely not a gun barrel.
I would estimate the tech us at least 20 years out from bring cable of printing a whole gun.
I have a Co2 laser for sintering. Hooking up 3D printing software has already happened. The max density is 90% as compared to a forged billet.
Good enough for small parts, but definitely not a gun barrel.
That just means that the barrel wall has to be thicker to compensate. It doesn't make a 3D printed gun barrel impossible.
No, you couldn't 3d print a complete gun in a design (1911 pistol or AR15 carbine) that was made for standard manufacturing processes, but that doesn't mean a complete 3D printed gun is impossible.
But then 3D printing the barrel is generally unnecessary. Barrels by themselves are not controlled under US federal law. You can mail order gun barrels for direct delivery.
Go ahead and try it then since you're so convinced it will work. But don't say you were not warned.
Chamber pressure for a 9mm is 35K psi max for US loads.
When the round is fired, the barrel becomes a temporary pressure vessel.
Powdered metallurgy i.e. sintering isn't advanced enough for that.
Bottom line is, no one will be printing a barrel any time soon. Or at least not and retain their health if they tried it. Making it thicker won't work like you think it will either.
As for commercial barrels, you should dig up a little history on a company that went by the name "Nessards" in the early to mid 90's.
They provided the ATF every file they had on the branch davidians. They didn't sell any registered parts, but in the process of rolling over on the davidians, they gave up a multitude of individual sells records.
Sure you can still mail order barrels, for now, but don't think the records of that won't end up with federal agency.
Bottom line is, no one will be printing a barrel any time soon. Or at least not and retain their health if they tried it. Making it thicker won't work like you think it will either.
It's already been done and with a plastic barrel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberator_(gun)#Usage_history
In May 2013, Finnish Yle TV2 current affairs programme Ajankohtainen kakkonen produced a Liberator handgun under the supervision of a licensed gunsmith and fired it under controlled conditions. During the experiment, the weapon shattered.[22][23] It was later found that an error was made concerning the settings of the 3D printer. Printed under the right conditions, the Liberator gun has a lifespan of 8–10 shots.[24]
And that's with a plastic barrel.
You're going to have to go a bit further than bare assertion to convince me a 3D printed metal barrel wouldn't do better/last longer.
ETA: The liberator isn't a terribly practical firearm, but it is functional.
You can believe whatever you wish. I will not be trying it anytime soon. You're welcome to try it yourself and with it, do the research necessary to understand why it's a bad idea.
You're welcome to try it yourself
Again, it's already been done.
https://www.cnet.com/science/uh-oh-this-3d-printed-metal-handgun-actually-works/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_Concepts_1911_DMLS
According to Sky News, during the initial test Solid Concepts stated: "It functions beautifully. Our resident gun expert has fired 50 successful rounds and hit a few bull's eyes at over 30 yards (27.43 metres)".[7] The Solid Concepts Pistol fired its 5000th round on 6 September 2014.[8
5,000 rounds is nothing. That aside, the devil as always is in the details.
1. That company carries a federal manufacturing license.
2. They have seriously deep pockets for research.
3. The powder they are using is Inconel 625 and proprietary.
4. Even if it works as claimed, it will not proliferate.
5. The point of this discussion, was the idea of the technology proliferating.
6. They have several million in R&D invested. If you have that kind of money laying around, a standard machine shop is going to be cheaper and better.
I will not be trying it anytime soon. I'm confident some jackasses somewhere will try though. They will lose their hands in trying it, if not their eyes or life. It's not a reasonable venture in any normal persons mind. You still won't be able to get around the law either way.
5. The point of this discussion, was the idea of the technology proliferating.
I disagree. From my perspective, the point of the discussion on this between you and me has been is it possible. Nothing more.
Your initial comment on it on this thread was not that it wouldn't proliferate, but that it wasn't possible. I disagreed. That is all we have been going back and forth on.
6. They have several million in R&D invested. If you have that kind of money laying around, a standard machine shop is going to be cheaper and better.
Perhaps. But per the articles I linked, the reason they did it was very explicitly to prove that people like you who say laser scintering couldn't produce strong enough parts are wrong.
When one of their arms takes a hand, the resulting legal action will kill that company.
When one of their arms takes a hand, the resulting legal action will kill that company.
They aren't selling them and have no intention to sell them.
It was a proof of concept to demonstrate that the technology can produce strong enough parts, nothing more.
ETA: The company doesn't sell anything direct to consumers.
When one of their arms takes a hand, the resulting legal action will kill that company
There is literally a video going around the internet where a chap is firing a 50 Cal and it explodes in his face. When you see the injuries it's amazing he lived.
The maker of the 50 Cal is still going, so I doubt the validity of your statement.
Remus has completely missed the point of the Solid Concepts 1911 project.
From the Digital Engineering link I included above:
Solid Concepts, a service bureau with offices in California, Texas and Michigan, may have inadvertently raised the stakes of the 3D printed firearms conversation with its announcement that it has successfully manufactured and fired a 1911 pistol using not plastic, but metal. The company used direct metal laser sintering (DMLS) and stainless steel to construct the majority of the weapon.
"We're proving this is possible, the technology is at a place now where we can manufacture a gun with 3D Metal Printing," says Kent Firestone, vice president of additive manufacturing at Solid Concepts. "And we're doing this legally. In fact, as far as we know, we're the only 3D printing service provider with a federal firearms license (FFL). Now, if a qualifying customer needs a unique gun part in five days, we can deliver."
Again, they didn't make the 1911 to sell it. They don't sell anything direct to consumers.
They don't generally make or sell complete guns, retail or wholesale.
They made the 1911 for one reason only, to prove that direct metal laser sintering technology is capable of producing strong enough parts.
The materials for manufacturing smokeless powder and primer materials is already heavily controlled. They may be dumb and slow, but some politician somewhere will eventually twig to it.
But the final smokeless powder itself is not as heavily controlled as you imagine. There are lots of people in the US that hand load/re-load their own cartridges. Primers and powder are readily available in quantity.
I reload myself so yes I know that. However freely available the powder is, the materials to make it are closely watched.
They show their ignorance with that. With current 3D printing tech, they can't print a whole gun/cannon. Especially the barrel and pressure containing parts. The body of a magazine, maybe.
3D printing is primarily useful for small individual parts.
Make the barrel with a lathe, or forge or cast it. Just as people have been doing for centuries. The US M1 "Winchester" carbine was designed and the original prototype was crafted in a Prison Workshop (albeit with permission of the Warden).
At the current level of technology no rational person would "make a gun" with a 3D Printer. Perhaps the pistol grip, or some trigger components.
Politicians and other foolish people get Notions about what "might" be done. Then try to craft legislation to "prevent" it... Such things Can't be prevented Perhaps they may be Deterred or Punished.
Seeking to Deter or Punish Crime is reasonable and prudent. Unfortunately, some people Seek Control, and use the Fears of others to obtain Power!
At the current level of technology no rational person would "make a gun" with a 3D Printer. Perhaps the pistol grip, or some trigger components.
It's been done.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberator_(gun)
The only not 3d printed part is a nail used as the firing pin.
https://www.digitalengineering247.com/article/solid-concepts-uses-metal-additive-manufacturing-to-build-a-gun/
Solid Concepts 3D printed a metal 1911 just to prove that direct metal laser sintering could in fact produce strong enough parts.
It's also against the law for us to sell you land if we KNOW it's for a grow operation, because that's ALSO regulated by Federal law. But if you don't tell me you want to buy that 500 acres of land for a grow operation, then I'll be perfectly happy to sell it to you.
I was looking on Zillow a while ago looking up in North Cal around Arcata and saw a 20 acre pot farm for sale.
While you can still find pot cheaper on the street but prefer to go to a pot store because of the vast choices.
Who gives a shit?
With the legalization of marijuana, the state does. If you grow your own, the state can't collect taxes on it. Look ahead for more enforcement for that reason.
Who gives a shit?
With the legalization of marijuana, the state does. If you grow your own, the state can't collect taxes on it. Look ahead for more enforcement for that reason.
That would be why I said:
Now - if you grow it and you're NOT licensed by the state, then they'll come down on you like a ton of bricks.
However - growing it for your OWN use ONLY is permissible - at least here. It's just considered like any other garden crop, except you're only allowed a certain number of plants and that's it.
There are news stories out there of police watching garden stores and investigating anyone who buys indoor grow equipment (even though there are lots of things you could use that equipment to grow that have nothing to do with drugs).
I ran up against that a couple of years back. Myself and a few friends developed shipping container grow pods (hydroponics). Two containers per pod. One to power it (solar), a second to grow with. The grow light order got federal attention. The clowns that came to my farm to investigate kept asking me where the drugs were.
There are news stories (and a few court cases) out there about police using thermal imaging equipment to detect indoor grow operations.
They do in fact do that. They also monitor your power usage. More than one search warrant has been initiated due to a combination of 'Excess power usage and thermal imaging.
Outside? northern Alaska maybe.
Indoors? No
If I understand Dominions Son's answer here (and I may not), it is that marijuana can be grown outside everywhere in the United States except possibly northern Alaska. Is it true that marijuana can be grown outside just about everywhere in the U.S.?
Is it true that marijuana can be grown outside just about everywhere in the U.S.?
That's what I'm suggesting. My understanding is that it can grow wild across almost all of the Continental United States (the contiguous 48).
There would be water issues in the south west desert states, but if adequate water could be provided via irrigation, there is no reason I know of that it wouldn't grow there.
For an outdoor grow in Alaska, once you get above the Arctic Circle, you are going to run into problems with a very short growing season and possibly not enough sunlight.