# Vietnamese drug farms using science to grow stronger cannabis



## FruityBud (Apr 14, 2011)

Vietnamese gangs in Northampton are now using horticultural textbooks and scientific methods in a bid to produce stronger, more potent cannabis.

Inside drug production dens discovered across the town, cannabis gardeners are using science textbooks, it has been revealed, to ensure they grow the most powerful drugs to meet the demands of an increasingly knowledgeable and demanding buyer.

Experts say they are now seizing cannabis on the streets of Northamptonshire with a higher proportion of THC  tetrahydrocannabinol  than ever seen before.

Drugs expert Dc John Thorogood, from Northamptonshires Serious Crime Unit, says historically, cannabis would have had around three to six per cent THC content, the chemical that provides drug users with their high.

Now, drugs are being seized from our streets with around 15 per cent THC.

The result, he says, is a drug that is stronger and more dangerous.

To do this, gardeners have to encourage the growth of the tips of the female flowering plants.

Gardeners remove male flowering plants, making the females compete with each other, producing bigger buds to provide more powerful skunk cannabis.

It is simple science which can produce huge profits for organised gangs and local drug dealers, who then sell the drug on street corners.

And all this, Dc Thorogood says, because the people who are buying the drug are now more educated about what they are looking for.

He said: People shouldnt think this is only a bit of cannabis. This is far stronger than it used to be.

And if you look at the cannabis factories themselves now, what we do find is guides on how to maximise the quality of what they are producing because you now have an educated customer who knows what they want are the flowering tips.

Such is the sophistication and organisation of cannabis factories that gangs are starting to split up their growing rooms and production facilities into separate houses.

Police across the county have started to find rented houses set aside solely for the process of drying cannabis leaves and the production of the drug, marking a new development in an increasingly professional operation.

Previously you would have the plants in rooms in a house and the drying facility in the loft, Dc Thorogood said.

What we are finding now is you might have a factory but there will be no production side and instead you will have a separate factory that is just for the cultivation of the plant into a saleable drug.

Increasingly police are also being tipped off about cannabis factories by fights breaking out in streets between gangs trying to steal or defend factories and their contents.

The results are rudimentary booby-traps, such as electrified cattle prods, to keep rivals away.

Dc Thorogood said: What they will do is see the delivery of lights when the factory is being set up and then come back in 12 weeks when they know the plants are ready.

That is why you also have booby-traps. They are not for us, the police, it is to keep other gangs out.

I have seen some horror stories of booby-traps, but we havent seen them too much in Northamptonshire.

He says the modern-day phenomenon of sophisticated cannabis factories, the role they play in international criminality and the strength of the drug itself, now means cannabis is far from the innocent drug often associated with the 1960s.

People have a perception that cannabis is a safe drug, that it is just a bit of weed.

I have interviewed numerous heroin users and the only common factor of why people say they take heroin is they started on cannabis.

And it is the same people who are selling cannabis who are selling other drugs. These are serious drug dealers.

*hxxp://tinyurl.com/67ctrr6*


----------



## Rockster (Apr 14, 2011)

Viet street weed is crap!

 It's harvested too early, is contaminated with brix+ to add weight and is sold damp.

 'drugs expert' Dc John Thorogood is a prohibitionist moron.

 Cannabis _is not_ a stepping stone to harder drugs but prohibition most certainly is.


----------



## Budders Keeper (Apr 14, 2011)

> because you now have an educated customer who knows what they want are the flowering tips.&#8221;


 Guess my leaf-slingin' days are are over


----------



## niteshft (Apr 14, 2011)

Rockster said:
			
		

> Cannabis _is not_ a stepping stone to harder drugs but prohibition most certainly is.


 
:goodposting: You hit that one on the nose, Rockster.


----------



## Old_SSSC_Guy (Apr 14, 2011)

I figure if they needed "horticultural textbooks and scientific methods" to learn how to remove males they - like the author of the report - cannot be very bright.  Someone send the poor fools a link to youtube!


----------



## nvthis (Apr 15, 2011)

FruityBud said:
			
		

> He says the modern-day phenomenon of sophisticated cannabis factories, the role they play in international criminality and the strength of the drug itself, now means cannabis is far from the innocent drug often associated with the 1960s.


 
Soooo... Now were innocent?:banana: 

I gotta agree.. This is the biggest piece of dribble to come through in a while. Thank god only the Viet's in Northamptomshire are smart enough to pick up a book. If this should become wide spread...


----------



## ArtVandolay (Apr 15, 2011)

Who would have guessed science was useful?  Kind of makes me wish I had paid attention in science class :doh:


----------



## OGKushman (Apr 15, 2011)

ArtVandolay said:
			
		

> Who would have guessed science was useful?  Kind of makes me wish I had paid attention in science class :doh:


:ignore: :hairpull: :hitchair: :chuck:  

:rofl:


----------



## nvthis (Apr 15, 2011)

FruityBud said:
			
		

> He says the modern-day phenomenon of sophisticated cannabis factories, the role they play in international criminality and the strength of the drug itself, now means cannabis is far from the &#8220;innocent&#8221; drug often associated with the 1960s.


 
Yeah, just couldn't let this go... So here's the "innocent" drug associated with the 60's.... Keep in mind, a lot of this is Cali law...

The marijuana laws covering most of the first eight-year (1960-67) period of this study were established in 1961. _*Simple possession of any amount of marijuana drew a minimum 1-10 years in prison, with no parole until a year had been served. An offender with any prior felony conviction got 2-20 years, and with two priors five years to life in prison. *_
Possession of marijuana for sales a new offense in 1961, drew two to ten years in prison (5-15 with any prior; 10-life with two priors). Sale of marijuana was punished by a mandatory five or ten years to life, with no possibility of parole until three years had been served (Source I). 
By putting virtually all marijuana offenses in the same felony class as heroin% murder, rapes and arson, legislators placed marijuana offenders in the most expensive law enforcement judicial, and correctional categories. Malting any crime a felony sends a message to the police and Courts that this offense has top priority in terms of time and money spent pursuing and prosecuting the offender. This was feasible as long as there were only a few thousand marijuana arrests per year.., but when arrests started doubling and tripling it soon became evident that treating marijuana like heroin was going to be a very expensive proposition indeed. 

Changes in drug arrest patterns and drug offender characteristics in the early 1960s were the primary reasons for the sudden escalation of drug law enforcement costs in California during the ensuring years. 

*TABLE 1. CALIFORNIA DRUG ARRESTS 1960-67* 
By Offense Category and Percentage of All Drug Arrests 
YEAR ALLDRUG    MJ   MJ%      HEROIN H%      D.DRS. DD%     OTHER 0%
1960   19265    5155  27          9295   48        4048    21          767   4
1961   15185    3794  21          8307   46        5239    29          848   5
1962   17613    3743  21          6022   34        6771    38         1077   6
1963   19226    5518  30          6064   33        5443    30         1201   7
1964   21729    7560  35          7701   35        5216    24         1252   6
1965   24374   10002  41         6164    25        6881   28         1327    5
1966   33622   18243  54         6482    19        7071   21         1826    5
1967   61792   37514  61         8469    14       12367   20         3442   6
TOTAL 214809 91529 43%         58504 27%     53036   25%     11740 5.5%


Arrests for marijuana and dangerous drugs started to climb. A surge of dangerous drug arrests in 1961-62 was the first sign that drug arrest patterns were about to change radically. Dangerous drug arrests exceeded heroin arrests for the first time in 1962 (Table 1). 

 Marijuana arrests doubled between 1966-1967 and became 61 percent of all drug arrests in the state, compared with 27 percent in 1960. Despite the explosion of dangerous drug arrests in 1967, they constituted only about 20 percent of all drug arrests-- down slightly from 21 percent in 1960. And heroin arrests, which had been 48 percent of drug arrests in 1960, were now only 14 percent of all drug arrests in California Thus by 1967 the typical person arrested for drugs in California was no longer an aging Hispanic heroin addict with a lengthy criminal record, but a young white pot smoker who had usually not been involved with drugs or crime before. This change was permanent, at least through 1985, and had great impact on the costs of drug law enforcement in California. 

 Yeah, so let's hear it for the innocent!


----------



## OGKushman (Apr 15, 2011)

sounds to me like "heroin is to hard to control, lets switch to arresting for weed."

or maybe Harry J Anslinger was an H-head to begin with, conflict of interest :hubba:


----------

