You have failed to show that there is more harm burning GMO weed versus non GMO weed
Are you worried GMO weed will be more carcinogenic?
Chesus do you even read before you respond? Because t seems that it is you that has "failed" entirely to grasp the issue here. Some how you still seem to think the question is if GMO cannabis is good for you or bad for you and plainly such is not the question at hand. In fact your summation is not even relevant to the question.
You want to access patented commercial intellectual property that would pollute the gene pool of the general commons if not kept separated. We all have in common ownership of the commons and have the natural human right to access such to live. Your choice to access the privatized for commerce plant varieties is fine as long as it doesn't degrade 'the people's' protected rights to access the general commons. Cross pollination contamination is where you cross the jurisdictional line and begin to degrade the overriding human right to access the naturally occurring commons.
I'll once again repeat the questions you have failed to address:
1. Does government have jurisdictional authority to "schedule", or "regulate" your access to naturally occurring plants outside of commercial activity?
2. Do you understand that by agreeing to government holding such jurisdictional reach as to essentially have authority to generally outlaw any natural plant species, does in fact extinguish your naturally endowed constitutionally protected right to grow even a carrot, and that the only reason you can do so now is because they still allow you to?
3. Do you understand that by supporting and passing any "regulation" at this point (without first addressing the 1st question posed here), is viewed in the broader sense of the law as consenting to the jurisdictional authority and agreeing that government does have authority to generally outlaw any natural plant species and thereby your access to it even outside of commercial jurisdiction/activities?
