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