I grow Brugmansia for their lovely scent during that one or two hour, "cool of the evening" interval when they use scent to attract their pollinators, whatever they are, I have yet to see them. There is a bill being pushed in Lousiana that makes it acceptable for armed drug agents to burst into folk's gardens and force them, under threat of forcible confinement, to prove that their brugs are for personal enjoyment. I think, if this bill passes, what it will amount to, is those who come from the "right" side of the tracks, no matter how many of these plants they have in their sun-rooms, expansive gardens and greenhouses, will have no problem continuing to do whatever they were doing with them before, but God help everybody else. Makes me glad to be a Canadian, nevertheless, if bills like this pass in the south, it's just a matter of time before the political pendulum swings to the right, up here in the nawth and we're subjected to similar insanity. By the way, how DOES one prove one's brug is for easthetic purposes? http://www.legis.state.la.us/billdata/streamdocument.asp?did=288583 You're from Louisiana? You have any of these in your garden? Get ready .... 1 (g) Vinca rosea. 2 (h) Ipomoea violacea. 3 (i) Datura spp. 4 (j) Pancreatium trianthum. 5 (k) Kaempferia galanga. 6 (l) Olmedioperebea sclerophylla. 7 (m) Mesembryanthemum spp. 8 (n) Virola spp. 9 (o) Anadenanthera peregrina. 10 (p) Anadenanthera colubrina. 11 (q) Erythina spp. 12 (r) Genista canariensis. 13 (s) Mimosa hostilis. 14 (t) Rhynchosia spp. 15 (u) Sophora secundiflora. 16 (v) Peganum harmala. 17 (w) Banisteriopsis spp. 18 (x) Tetrapteris methystica. 19 (y) Heimia salicfolia. 20 (z) Tabernanthe iboga. 21 (aa) Prestonia amazonica. 22 (bb) Ipomoea violacea. 23 (cc) Rivea corymbosa. 24 (dd) Salvia divinorum. 25 (ee) Atropa belladonna. 26 (ff) Hyoscyamus niger. 27 (gg) Mandragora officinarum. 28 (hh) Brunfelsia spp. 29 (ii) Methysticodendron amesianum. 1 (jj) Latua pubiflora. 2 (kk) Calea Zacatechichi. 3 (ll) Physalis subglabrata. 4 (mm) Solanum carolinense. 5 (nn) Lagoehilus inebrians. 6 D. The provisions of this Section shall not apply to the possession, planting, 7 cultivation, growing, or harvesting of a hallucinogenic plant strictly for aesthetic, 8 landscaping, or decorative purposes. 1 (jj) Latua pubiflora. 2 (kk) Calea Zacatechichi. 3 (ll) Physalis subglabrata. 4 (mm) Solanum carolinense. 5 (nn) Lagoehilus inebrians. 6 D. The provisions of this Section shall not apply to the possession, planting, 7 cultivation, growing, or harvesting of a hallucinogenic plant strictly for aesthetic, 8 landscaping, or decorative purposes.
I can't even...think of words to describe how disgusting it is. They're PLANTS. It's pretty rediculous, all of it. If anything, tobacco should be illegal, and other plants that don't harm should be legal. Maybe if they actually had a REASON to ban them, other than being halluncinogenic, there's no reason. It's just sad.
Yeah, I've often thought the same thing --- if they're going to criminalize plants and justify it according to how the harm they do, then the first one to go should be the tobacco plant. But as far as I know this has never even been suggested. Tobacco products once were going to be regulated as a drug (which they most certainly are) and only sold from behind the counter like certain cold medications --- some multi-billion dollar "transfer" payments saw that that never happened. Many of these obviously counter-productive drug laws are the result of the prison industry lobby essentially bribing politicians to find reasons to feed more people into the prison industry, so the politicians use the argument that the more people that are given longer sentences, the safer society is. If you don't have a background in this field, it sounds pretty convincing --- in fact, most of the objective studies suggest exactly the opposite. I think the real reason there's a whole sector of the economy that wants more people to feed into the prison industry is because the mistake has been made of mixing the administration of justice with "for-profit", private industry. What private industry doesn't seek opportunities to grow their business? Is it right to have make prisons a for-profit "industry" where lobbyists are paid to influence to politicians to "grow the business" of incarceration? I don't think so. But who am I? A voice crying in the wilderness. Sorry for the somewhat off-topic rant.
That's gone right beyond insane. Ecuador, progressive country that it is, bans only one plant - Cannabis sativa. Everything else, and beleive me, something like half of our plants are the sources for narcotics or hallucinogens, is completely legal to grow and possess. I can't imagine being raided because I was growing Brugs or San Pedro, or, goodness forbid, Coca!!!
I don't know. But the logical extension would be to ban Echinacea, Arnica, Mint, Basil, Lavender. You know, those natural medicinals.
Sugarcane --- now there's a prime example of government corruption. Here you've got a crop with zero nutritional value, in fact some would argue it has a negative nutritional value, that has massive government subsidies AND enjoys trade tariffs that make US domestic sugar prices average 25 cents a pound (last time I checked, years ago), while "world sugar" at the same time went as low as four or five cents pound. How does this industry get this massive government protection and support, decade after decade? The US sugar biz donates large to both parties, so no matter who wins, they get this ongoing protection, subsidies, etc. Seems like it's not government for the people anymore --- it's government for the campaign contributors and corporate lobbyists. Really, something has got to change.
I would guess shortly after busting onto your property they might make you pee in a plastic container to check your drug levels??????? Or take a blood sample?????? How else are they going to prove otherwise. And of course if someone on the Drug Enforcement Agency doesn't like you then they can easily tamper with your bodily fluids. It's mind boggling with all the problems in North America that government agencies feel this is appropriate action and will actually help anything.
I was thinking more along the lines of Brug in the garden OK, Brug in the garden and chemistry set in the basement, not OK. This of course is prejudicial against us folks with a wholly innocent interest in chemistry and a separate and equally innocent love of nightshades. I would be arrested under this system, even though the stuff I do with my chem set is primarily water and soil testing for contamination. But the "pee in this cup, sir" route is almost more plausible.... This kind of legislation is really one one of the things I moved to Ecuador to get away from! And thank goodness, the government here has more important things to worry about than the contents of people's gardens. Then again, I can't see the current president outlawing Brugmansia, as he has quite a stunning collection himself.
How much more invasive can they get, than to require you to provide bodily fluids to prove you're innocent? Yeah, and the thing is that it's really only a certain class of people who'll get this nonsense imposed on them --- if you're on a sprawling estate, well, even if you DO have a witches garden AND chem set in the basement, well, they'll assume it's for some legit purpose, a professional's mini home research lab or some such. On the other hand, judging from the proliferation of these shamanic substance dealing websites, it looks like some folks are pulling in a fair amount of cash from dealing some of these plant "products". Now, IF (big if) there were large numbers of people dropping dead from atropine OD's (which there aren't and never will be), well, then maybe there would be some justification for this bill, but there are already laws on the books that can be used to prosecute such operations. It's simply not necessary to pass this silly bill to accomplish this end. I wonder if there's an ulterior motive behind this bill, or is it simply a case of misguided intentions. My mistake, this bill has already been passed. Yikes. Oh well, you can get more prison time in the states for growing marijuana than you (might) get in Canada for murder. It's different down there. I hope it stays different. Seems the USA is a great place for the super-rich, for everybody else, not so much. (Just my opinion) ;)
Be careful. This site is probably monitored, and I understand that they are keeping Arar's cell empty for the next Canadian to criticize the war on terror/drugs/whatever.
Lots of people are addicted to eating large amounts of Triticum aestivum and Oryza sativa seeds. Maybe they should be banned, too?
If we're going that route, they may as well ban Solanum tuberosum and Lycopersicon lycopersicum as well!! That's a pair of highly addictive substances, and look out! they're in the same family as the Brugmansias and Daturas! They must be drugs.
People who grow brugs are highly suspect. They contain atropine, an antidote to certain forms of nerve-gas. Why would somebody grow brugs other than for nerve-gas antidote? And why would somebody need such a thing? Clearly, they're preparing for a nerve-gas attack! These monsters should be pre-emptively arrested and forced to talk --- using torture if necessary. Also, the brug-terrorists phone records must be data-mined and anybody in frequent contact with them should be subjected to the same treatment --- it's the only way we can be safe.
It can equally said that people who grow tomatoes are highly suspect. They contain high vitamin C and a number of other essential micronutrients. Why would somebody grow Tomatoes unless they were expecting some kind of food shortage? Our government is benevolent and would ensure that never, ever happens to us! These obviously commie monsters should be shipped to Cuba, all expenses paid, and their phone records data-mined to root out the whole ring of underground commie home-food growers to be subjected to the same treatment. It's the only way our corporations can be safe!
I understand that they are currently trying to get Salvia Divinorum banned on a Federal level, as well. Apparently there is some sort of traditional use for it earning it the name Diviners Sage... Don't know, and don't particularly care. Strikes me that they are rather fishing in a shallow pool trying to find things that may have some 'less savoury' uses. Personally, I've never used any sort of drug other than the over-the-counter kind or something written in a druggist's script, but I don't think going about these days banning anything that could have some use or another is the way to go. Perhaps they'll ban ferns one of these days. They cause cancer you know...
Oh, and they must ban quite a few genus of palms as well; the oxalic acid can be quite bad. My Castor Bean plants I believe may already be illegal, now that I thin kof it. There was a fellow in Nevada earlier in the year hospitalised and then arrested and imprisoned for making Ricin, which, as I understand it, is not exactly astrophysics...
Oh, if we're banning things with a high-oxalic content, don't forget Dieffenbachia and most other Aroids, Rhubarb, Oxalis, and Spinach! Obviously dangerous plants, all of them, and deserve to be banned! And yet, I see nothing in the original post about a ban on Nerium oleander which is far more toxic than anything listed there.... Nor do I see Euphorbia tirucalli, or any of the other Euphorbs, which are extremely caustic in the saps. Also conspicuously absent is Brunfelsia pauciflora (Paraguay jasmine) which is extremely similar to Brugmansia and Datura in its narcotic and hallucinogenic effects. I don't see Artemesia absinthium either - presumably true Absinthe is not illegal? Cheeze whiz.
Actually, Absinthe has been illegal in the US since 1912. They've recently released 'real Absinthe,' to the US, which is actually isn't...
Well then; I'd expect the wormwood that gives it its name to be illegal as well.... Huh. It all strikes me as kind of weird, living as I do in a country with only one illegal plant.
