Pubdate: Fri, 03 Jun 2016
Source: Chico Enterprise-Record (CA)
Copyright: 2016 Chico Enterprise-Record
Contact:  http://www.chicoer.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/861
Note: Letters from newspaper's circulation area receive publishing priority
Author: William R. Todd-Mancillas
Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v16/n363/a07.html

POT OPPONENTS TAKE GIGANTIC LEAP IN LOGIC

In favoring Measures G and H, letter writer Cynthia Stevenson asserts 
that water should be used for the growing of food only. To be 
consistent, however, she would also favor prohibiting the growing of 
any inedible plant and tree. Good luck with that. Were Charlton 
Heston alive I could just imagine his proclaiming, "You'll take my 
Sweet William away from me when you can pry it away from my cold, 
clammy garden gloved hand." ("But beware! I've a pistol in the other.")

Inasmuch as alcohol is not food per se, and also consistent with 
Stevenson's logic, she would also want prohibited the growing of 
grapes and hops. Would she really want shuttered the Sierra Nevada 
Brewery and the several fledgling others? Would she want to put our 
vintners out of business?

Surely she does not intend that beauty and spirits be eliminated. 
Why, then, choose to focus on the prohibition or, what is an 
approximation of it, the unnecessarily uncivil regulation of cannabis 
agriculture? Her stratagem seems to be: "If we can't make growing 
marijuana illegal, then at least we can make it so difficult that 
fewer people will do it."

Proponents of G and H argue that these amendments will merely make 
more enforceable Measure A. In truth, they are back-door maneuvers to 
obstructing citizen rights. Unless one favors any means to achieving 
dubious ends, fairness requires "no" votes on G and H.

- - William R. Todd-Mancillas, Chico
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom