• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Seattle Hempfest

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Rob,

I am going to ask you the question because you will address it in a unique manner.

Is voting your "conscience" a bit Pollyanna?

Politics is not a purist convention of man, it is a brutal battle of ideas where there are winners and losers. Elections mean things and they have consequences (SCOTUS nominations) that have lasting effects.

Why not be Polyanna? Interesting comparison I guess it's better to be associated with that than the unfounded accusations of being a thief and an anarchist or an extremist. A perfect example of those on the right who are afraid of the words of a simple man challenging their precious "systems". I realize what politics is I won't have anything to do with Machiavellian politicians.

So you would rather me vote to continue the tyrannical slide, that Romney and Gingrich both would continue to bring us down? Giving them the illusion of "governing by consent"? The difference between them and Obama is minimal when looking at the overall picture.

And the continued idea that we have to pick the lesser of two evils is a repugnant idea to me it is still evil. It's like saying you want to help me torture this old lady you can join this side here that will beat her with chains or this side here who are using whips the choice is yours but either way she is going to be tortured. I will choose neither but either independently or with the help of others do what I can to fight that institution.

I am lectured because I never voted and that it's important yet anyone I would have ever voted for I am told is throwing my vote away. So I will vote my conscience or I won't vote period. If I vote and partake in choosing a "Bush" over "Obama" or vice versa I am choosing to support the horrible unconstitutional acts of either party. Forget it won't do it. They won't get my consent. My grandkids can't blame me for choosing a Hitler over a Stalin.

The difference between the judges isn't as extreme as people are led to believe. We need to not be so focused on one right that the others fall by the wayside. "Conservative" judges have eroded a lot of our fundamental rights.

There were only two dissents in Gonzales v. Raich both appointed by "conservatives" which means 3 other "conservatives" voted that growing a plant in your back yard somehow violated the "commerce" clause. Even our "wins" are not full "wins" they carefully word to erode the infringement part of 2A to authorize infringement, read Heller and McDonald, really not great rulings. What about the unconstitutional infringement of Terry vs. Ohio creating RAS.

So why not vote your conscience instead of contributing to the brutal battle? Anybody who votes just so the "other side" won't win whether Republican or Democrat has no right to complain about anybody else's vote, they are giving their consent to empire and and its evil machinations.

How about educating ourselves with something other than Faux news or other mass media news organizations.

I can suggest a book called "Who Killed the Constitution" By Thomas E. Woods Jr. and Kevin R.C. Gutzman.
 

Vitaeus

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2010
Messages
596
Location
Bremerton, Washington
Maybe we should start a new thread to continue this discussion. I believe the point of voting is to impose your will on the government, the difficulty of this is that you need to have enough other folks voting in a similar manner to succeed. This requires either a commmon goal or changing enough folks minds to accomplish your goals.
 

amzbrady

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
3,521
Location
Marysville, Washington, USA
I'm surprised this thread lasted this long.

COMMENTS REMOVED BY ADMINISTRATOR: Inappropriate comment / personal attacks.

I left this open because it is a valid discussion of a thorny issue involving states rights and federal preemption amongst other issues.
 

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
amzbrady said:
I'm surprised this thread lasted this long. As many sissy boys as there are that get their penis's in a knot and tattle to the admin to have it removed.
With as long as you've been here, I'm surprised you don't know & understand the forum rules.
See #15: WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here.
So yes, I'm surprised that this thread talking about something illegal hasn't been at least locked & even deleted. The feds still prohibit even industrial hemp, with practically no THC, and I'm sure that the hempfest will not be focussing on that...

Also re-read forum rule #6: NO PERSONAL ATTACKS
and #9: HATE IS NOT WELCOME HERE
 

Metalhead47

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
2,800
Location
South Whidbey, Washington, USA
With as long as you've been here, I'm surprised you don't know & understand the forum rules.
See #15: WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here.
So yes, I'm surprised that this thread talking about something illegal hasn't been at least locked & even deleted. The feds still prohibit even industrial hemp, with practically no THC, and I'm sure that the hempfest will not be focussing on that...

Also re-read forum rule #6: NO PERSONAL ATTACKS
and #9: HATE IS NOT WELCOME HERE

Still asking here:

WHERE IN THIS THREAD HAVE ANY ILLEGAL ACTS BEEN ADVOCATED?

Hempfest, and the attending thereof, is perfectly legal. The whole debate here is over Hempfest's adherence to the city's laws and "rules!"

I've seen plenty of calls here for legalizing an illegal act, on various grounds. That is NOT advocating participating in such acts, after said legalization or otherwise.

This thread is actually a heckuvalot more OC related than SOME of the tangents we go off on here. At least it actually started with OC.
 

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
Seattle Hempfest said:
I have to make the only policy statement that my legal team gives to me.
“While this is a public park, it is currently permitted to the production company producing the event. It is a normal and reasonable restriction to have a no weapons policy in place. We allow no weapons during the event. You are welcome at this event but you must leave your weapon elsewhere.”
I don't think it's normal, in that the majority of businesses & taxpayer-owned buildings / lands do not prohibit the peaceful exercise of a protected civil right,
and I don't think it's reasonable to ban the peaceful exercise of a protected civil right.
What if they tried to ban the wearing of religious symbols or clothing? "You have a cross on your necklace, sir, sorry but you'll have to leave that in your car if you want to come in."

Seattle Hempfest said:
The city has its list but it is not written. You are just supposed to know it. Our insurance is more clear; if we dropped our "no weapons" policy we could get insurance but the rate would be so high as to be unattainable. Insurance is a must have with the city.
So the city prohibits some activities, but won't put it in writing to CYA.
And the insurance company still thinks that the peaceful exercise of a protected civil right is dangerous.
:banghead:
Sure makes it tough to hold any sort of gathering.
I don't have a dog in this fight - I'm obviously out of area & while I'd be interested in learning about useful hemp (for clothing, paper, rope, oil), I'm not at all interested in marijuana & recreational drug use.

But I think what the city is doing is wrong because they represent the taxpayers, yet are restricting their rights,
& what the ins. co. is doing is stupid because there's no reason to expect that a holstered pistol will cause any problems anywhere. If there aren't problems walking down the street, why should there be problems in a park?
 

Elimsitna

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2012
Messages
33
Location
West Seattle
If it's not in writing, then it holds no legal recourse... Right? Political sure but their fighting a political battle anyway.

Does Hempfest have 'commitee meetings' like some conventions do?
 
Top