|Woman Crusades Against Hemp Law|
Posted by FoM on June 12, 2000 at 08:04:04 PT|
By Daniel F. Drummond, The Washington Times
Source: Washington Times
Joyce D. Nalepka's battle against marijuana began in 1977 with a Kiss. When she went to the rock band's concert with her two sons, she saw the pervasiveness of pot and a drug culture that threatened children.
Now, the Silver Spring, Md., grandmother, passionate about her cause, has a new target: a four-year pilot program that one day may allow industrial hemp to grow alongside corn and wheat on Maryland's pastoral farms.
Hemp leaves belong to the same family as marijuana.
Last month, Maryland Gov. Parris N. Glendening signed into law a bill establishing the program. At the bill-signing ceremony, Mrs. Nalepka — armed with a bumper sticker reading "Boycott Pot (and ALL hemp products)" — made her way into the picture.
"I knew [I was] close enough to the governor to talk to him," Mrs. Nalepka said. She seized the chance to chide Mr. Glendening, whispering to him her disapproval of the hemp bill.
"[The new law] is absolutely the wrong message. It's about legalizing pot. They know marijuana and hemp are the same thing," she said of the pilot program. "It hurts kids and helps legalizers."
The anti-drug crusader said whispering into the governor's ear is just the beginning.
"We'll be working behind the scenes," Mrs. Nalepka said, adding that Mr. Glendening, a Democrat, can "save face" by passing another measure negating the one he just made law.
She vowed to educate the public about the cannabis sativa plant, including the innocuous hemp and its sinister sister — marijuana.
Michelle Byrnie, Mr. Glendening's press secretary, said there's no way this can be construed as an endorsement of pot.
"It's not legalizing it for recreational purposes," Ms. Byrnie said. "It doesn't allow just anyone to grow hemp."
Mrs. Nalepka dismissed those claims as "balderdash," and said the state is as culpable in the spread of drugs as a Colombian cartel.
"Why do we expect Colombia to eradicate it when we grow it?" she asked.
A member of Mrs. Nalepka's anti-drug group, Missouri state trooper Lt. Ed Moses, said Maryland is joining a frightening trend that may open the door to the legalization of marijuana.
"It's not just a concern of the image," Lt. Moses said. "It's an actual manifestation of the problem."
In looking at hemp as an economically sustainable crop, Maryland and other states essentially are endorsing marijuana because nearly everyone knows that the hemp and marijuana originate from the same plant, he said.
"If it's perceived as low risk, you have a high abuse rate," Lt. Moses said.
Mrs. Nalepka acknowledged that it's difficult to lobby against hemp groups pushing for legalization; some have a vast Internet presence and strong financial backing, such as the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.
But, she said, she's not deterred. She will do what she has done for nearly a quarter century: keep after lawmakers with her unceasing assault on illegal drugs.
"This is another challenge or hurrah for me. We are certainly not going to let this lie," she said.
Over the past 23 years, Mrs. Nalepka has had some successes. The support she got through calls to friends, neighbors and every mother she knew prodded Maryland into enacting a law banning "head" shops and certain drug paraphernalia in 1980.
Published: June 12, 2000
Related Article & Web Site:
Md. Authorizes The Production of Hemp
CannabisNews Hemp Archives:
|Comment #8 posted by Suspct Stereotype on June 13, 2000 at 17:22:21 PT|
I saw KISS in 1977 too. It was Awesome!!
Be Excellect to each other, and...
Party on, dudes!!
Psuedo Abe Lincoln
|Comment #7 posted by observer on June 12, 2000 at 18:44:32 PT|
"Working behind the scenes. Why, isnt that just what they accuse *us* of?"
Yes I believe so! "Behind the scenes", "behind the scenes"... (Now, who was always doing stuff like that? hmmm...
``The Comintern, however, found it proper this time also to act counter to the ABC of Marxism: while it refused to enter into open negotiations with the reformist Internationals, it opened up negotiations behind the scenes ...''
-- Leon Trotsky, 1932. But I digress!)
Yes, they accuse us of that often. I remember when Gen. McCzar went in front of Congress...
"Yet, the real dangers to our young people inherent in marijuana and other drug use have not yet broken through the current haze of misinformation. There is an carefully-camouflaged, exorbitantly-funded, well-heeled, elitist group whose ultimate goal is to legalize drug use in the United States."
-- Barry McCaffrey
It is so amusing (or would be if not for millions in jail or killed) listening to the Pro-Prison prohibitionist rhetoric. Like above. They love to use the word "legalize" as a euphemism to hide their pro-jail agenda.
euphemism, noun, the substitution of an agreeable or inoffensive expression for one that may offend or suggest something unpleasant; also : the expression so substituted
Such persons are hiding their agenda of imprisoning people for using the wrong drug. Use of the right drugs is permitted for adults. Ingesting C8H10N4O2 on the one hand doesn't send out any messages at all to youth; ingesting C21H30O2 on the other is a consummate act of (political) rebellion and the use thereof must be ever more severely punished with imprisonment or maybe even death for to do no less would send the wrong message to "the children". (We can never thow enough adults in jail for using C21H30O2; it is because of the children. All for the children.)
|Comment #6 posted by freedom fighter on June 12, 2000 at 17:43:05 PT|
Eat 10 raw potatoes and you will die!
And to some people SUGAR is a BAD drug. Hey let's start arresting those SugarBeet Farmers so amerikan childrun will not die...
Be proud of the Sons and Daugthers who made it, they worked now as prison guards drinking some kentucky whiskey..
Let us start snitching our friends and put alllllll POT heads in prisons and treat them as slaves!!
So proud of your beautiful efforts, we gonna hang them all hempty,potatoy,sugarbeetie farmers! KILL kILL KiLL! so we
can be DRUG FREE but UNFREE Amerika!
Seig Heil Hilter!
In 1930's Deaf Germans rallied behind the NAZI. By 1935's all Deaf Males were sterlized! By 1940's only 34 Deaf Jews left in Berlin. It used to be 600 deaf jews in Berlin.
Why do'nt we do it to the POT HEADS?
For reference: http://deafness.miningco.com/health/deafness/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.gallaudet.edu/%7Epubreweb/gt/fall98/holocaust.html
I will not change the way you think! So proud of you my fellow amerikan!
OOOhhh the Land of the Brave and Drug free but unfree amerika!
Sons and Daugthers of the Drug Free but Unfree amerika!
Smokjing some ganja and dying!!
So JOycie will live forever!!!
Seig Heil JOycie!
OOOhh the Land of the Brave and Drug Free but UNFREE Amerika!
Sons and Daugthers of the Drug FREE but UNFREE Amerika!
bullying,killing,lying,murdering, and cheating the farmers of the America.
The above statement are protected by the 1st Amendment of US Consitution. (yeah,i know it seem does not exist anymore. Society is judged by how they treat different people.)
LONG LIVE THE INTERNET FREEDOM!
PS:(oh joycie darling, you went to a concert and saw so many potheads. Did someone died smoking a dobbie?)
PPS:(oh joycie, darling, I think not!)
PPPS:(my darling joyice, Was the music any good?)
I may be deaf but I hear things that hearing do not hear!
I may be blind but I see things that the seeing do not see!
Comment #5 posted by kaptinemo on June 12, 2000 at 16:38:30 PT:|
Oh, Jeez, this is getting tiresome.
But contrary to what you might think, I actually welcome this silliness. For one good reason. A reason which she spells out quite plainly, but doesn't have the wit to realize the ramification of what she has said:
'We'll be working behind the scenes," Mrs. Nalepka said, adding that Mr. Glendening, a Democrat, can "save face" by passing another measure negating the one he just made law.'
Working behind the scenes. Why, isnt that just what they accuse *us* of? We, 'the hemp groups pushing for legalization; some have a vast Internet presence and strong financial backing, such as the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.' Yeah, right. Uh-huh.
I said it before, when the antis whine about 'unfairnes', when they cry about the big, bad pro-drug organizations and their 'millions', (poor-mouthing themselves, when they've supped and gotten grossly fat from the Federal trough), you know they are hurting. They were never all that concerned about the truth of the Drugwar, so long as only their side was being heard. But now, the tide is turning. The antis are being stung, and they don't like it; *we're' the ones supposed to do the hurting, not them. They just don't seem to understand that what they thought was the 'natural order of things' was actually a gross imbalance, which is slowly being rectified.
Whine away, you twisted little zealot. The worm is turning. The tiger that you in your arrogance thought you could ride forever is now bucking like a bronco, and its jaws are opening wide... waiting for you.
Comment #4 posted by Dan B on June 12, 2000 at 12:25:32 PT:|
Well, at least she's right about this part of her argument, though for all the wrong reasons. The drug laws are the tip of the proverbial iceberg when it comes to the American government encouraging the spread of drugs in America.
"If it's perceived as low risk, you have a high abuse rate."
Interesting. So lumping low-risk drugs (like marijuana) in with relatively "high-risk" drugs (like methamphetamine and heroin)would, under this logic, be a bad thing. That is, kids who associate (illegal) marijuana with low-risk would assume that the other illegal drugs (low-risk or not)are also low-risk, thus encouraging experimentation with higher risk drugs. So, the laws against marijuana are shown to be, once again, counterproductive, and the powers-that-be are, evidentally, fully cognizant of this fact.
By the way--it is the perceived "low-risk" associated with alcohol that makes it so tempting to kids. Where do they get this perception? From the alcohol companies that bankroll groups like the Partnership for a Drug Free America. Tobacco is also perceived by kids to be "low-risk." Who gives them this perception? Tobacco companies that also bankroll the PDFA. For more info, check out "The Emperor Wears No Clothes" by Jack Herer.
|Comment #3 posted by observer on June 12, 2000 at 12:19:42 PT|
Mapinc mentions --
|Comment #2 posted by observer on June 12, 2000 at 09:41:25 PT|
Tell me Comrade Nalepka, which party apparatchik decides what "message" is sent under a given circumstance? The "Message Czar"? Or, is "the message" whatever you (politically) decide, Comrade?
It's about legalizing pot. They know marijuana and hemp are the same thing," she said of the pilot program. "It hurts kids and helps legalizers."
Brazo! With fanatical opposition like this, the cause (of restoring to adult Americans their right to use marijuana) is decidedly advanced. When people listen to Nalepka's excuses for a police state, and think upon the PRISON part of Comrade Nalepka's little "plan", they realize she's all wet.
Notice that Nalepka "just happened" (accidently of course) to mention that adult Americans are imprisoned for using cannabis. Why do you think Nalepka always forgets to mention this little detail of prison? Maybe it slipped her mind? When citizens vote not to lock up Americans for using marijuana, Nalepka "forgets" the prison part, and complains about side issues to distract people from the reality of prison she's endorsing.
No thanks, Comrade Nalepka. We'll just say "no" to your drug-user gulags. Even when you "just accidently happen" to mention them.
Keep talking Comrade Nalepka! You persuade more people every time you open your totalitarian yap.
|Comment #1 posted by James Markes on June 12, 2000 at 09:23:11 PT|