Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 4, 11:27 am, HK wrote:
John H. wrote: On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 14:55:12 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "John H." wrote in message . .. On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 13:52:17 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "HK" wrote in message news:BfydneTgqfxLx8janZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d@comcast. com... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message . .. wrote in message ... On Dec 3, 1:31 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote: wrote in message ... On Dec 3, 2:15 am, "Calif Bill" wrote: You want investment advice? Not from the handyman. Better than from a pothead. True, I'd have to agree with that. Why, are you a pothead, too? Bill probably thinks pot is a gateway drug, orders of magnitude more dangerous than booze. Why do you suppose that? Loogy, the former Atl_man, the former on_lanier, and the former basskisser seems to think stating that he is growing pot on a pot newsgroup means he was spouting lies then. Or lies now. As to the pot, my opinion is legalize and tax most drugs. If you steal to support your habit, you get an extension to your sentence. If you can afford the drugs and not be a burden on society, it's freedom of choice. I graduated from San Francisco State University, so knew lots of people who used pot. I do not use any drugs, as I get sick with most prescription painkillers, and I do not smoke. Earn a lot of money from smoking as Altria has done very well for me. Better than RTN and your other choices. You do seem to attach a certain stigma or evil to pot, though, which is silly, since it's really no worse for the body than booze, assuming both are abused to a certain level. And, it's pretty rare that people steal to get money for pot. I sort of dropped out of this discussion, which I initiated. How did it devolve into an argument about pot? I steered it off a cliff after billy bob said "Better than a pothead". Since I love words, I see "pothead" and wonder why people never say "bourbon head" or "vodka head". It's always more than just a term learned by habit. It's a belief based on who-knows-what. Would 'booze hound' be the equivalent? Or just, 'a drunk'? -- John H Maybe, but people like Bill use "pothead" to describe anyone who uses pot. "Booze hound" or "drunk" are more commonly used to describe someone whose use of alcohol has reached the point of habitual abuse. There are people who partake of marijuana at levels similar to someone who has a glass of wine once or twice a week. Nobody would call those people drunks, although they might GET a little drunk from that glass of wine under certain conditions. Oh. I didn't realize Bill was expanding the term 'pothead' to include anyone who tries the stuff. I would put 'pothead' in the same category as 'alcoholic'. I have a great party entertainment trick. Invite me to a party, light up a joint and watch as I puke. Yep. The smell of that crap burning makes me puke. Everytime I have been in its presence.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Then your frends are smoking schwagg ![]() |
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 21:14:43 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... Pothead would also refer to those who grow the stuff. You must have a nasty name for someone who makes their own beer, too. Tell us what you call them. brewmeister -- John H |
#3
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"John H." wrote in message
... On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 21:14:43 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... Pothead would also refer to those who grow the stuff. You must have a nasty name for someone who makes their own beer, too. Tell us what you call them. brewmeister -- John H Quiet, John. Let's wait and see if little bill will grow a set of balls and deal with this issue head-on. |
#4
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 21:32:48 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote: "John H." wrote in message .. . On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 21:14:43 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... Pothead would also refer to those who grow the stuff. You must have a nasty name for someone who makes their own beer, too. Tell us what you call them. brewmeister -- John H Quiet, John. Let's wait and see if little bill will grow a set of balls and deal with this issue head-on. I can see you're trying like hell to create an issue, but I think he's got more sense than to imbibe. (hee, hee, get it?) -- John H |
#5
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
wrote in message ... On Dec 4, 6:18 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Dec 4, 5:52 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 21:14:43 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... Pothead would also refer to those who grow the stuff. You must have a nasty name for someone who makes their own beer, too. Tell us what you call them. Have we discussed the supposed "medical benefits" of marijauna yet? That would be more fun. :) You know I support NORML, and I support leagilazation of MJ, but I also beleive "medical marijuana" is a joke.. Now before any of you sick folks get all over me, let me explain. In a nutshell, having smoked for so many years I realize that dosage alone would be impossible. Even the same "strain" reacts differently each time you smoke it, even more if you eat it. MJ should be as legal as booze, and probably be retailed in a similar controled fashion. Then the doc could say, go try a joint or a brownie, if it works, try it again ![]() Medical MJ, is a lousy excuse in my opinion and I have known lot's of folks who's lives are much better because of illicit MJ. The most dangerous thing about smoking a joint is the rabid cowboys who might kick in your doors while your kids are upstairs watching cartoons... If it was legal, then it would be likely that you could get the same variety on a consistent basis, just like farmers order certain varieties of seeds depending on various factors.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You are wrong. The same variety (strain) can and most likely will be different every time you smoke it. Sometimes it may not be as noticable, but it will, especially to those who depend on it medically. Even more for folks who take it oraly... When I was young I used to buy enough at a time to last months, same strain, right from the growers in NW Mass... ![]() OK. This is interesting. I'm a longtime gardener. Forgetting normal cultural differences, like water, fertilizer and weather, why should there be big differences in potency within one variety? Read that again. I told you to forget about water, fertilizer and weather for the moment, since those factors affect ALL plants. You really are fully of yourself aren't you? |
#6
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 15:16:11 -0800 (PST),
wrote: You know I support NORML, Judging by the way you handle a fish... Well, I'll just leave it at that. :) |
#7
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 5, 8:43 am, wrote:
On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 05:04:47 -0800 (PST), wrote: As I said, legalize most drugs and tax and control like alcohol. Some drugs just should never be legal.- Hide quoted text - That's one reason pot won't be legal for a long time. It takes supplies and equipment to make beer, it takes even more processes to cure tobacco to a point where anyone would want to smoke it. Both of these processes take lost of space, and replenishable resources, these are easy to track and then tax. Pot takes a seed, a little dirt, some water and some light and as far as a process, when it is done put it in a paper bag under your bed for a week and it is ready to smoke. Store bought alcohol or tobacco is easy to pick out, home grown pot would look, smell, and taste the same as govt. grown, and taxed weed. They know they would never be able to tax it properly, it would be a nightmare for LEO, so they just keep control of the cartels, and money too... People are lazy, if pot was legal people would just buy it and pay the tax. I disagree, two minutes a day, and a closet and you never got to spend a penny... Bootlegging would be fairly rare for the same reason moonshine whisky is fairly rare. You can't compete with Seagrams, unless your time is free, even if you do pay the tax. The government could keep the draconian penalties for those who don't pay the tax. That is just it, you can't compete with Seagrams without a lot of bulky equipment and a lot of ingredients that would draw attention. Moonshine can be distinguished easily from good stuff. Growing your own tobacco would take at least I am guessing an acre or more to serve one person, tobacco plants need to grow tall and big to produce properly. Also with tobacco, without a very controled air system, you could not cure it properly, like moonshine, it would be easy to spot just by the smell. With pot, anyone with a 2x2 closet and a easily cloned female plant can produce anything a larger operation can, you would never be able to tell the difference. Hooch, would blend in seamlessly, you would never know it was there... I don't think drugs are a good thing but the "war" against them is worse. It is just one more, very expensive "no win" war being waged by the same people who want to wage war in Iraq.- Hide quoted text - Boy did you take a wrong turn there too. Bush did not start the war on drugs, and congress needs to stop it. Besides, if you go back you will find the Kennedy name coming up back when pot became illegal, bet you didn't know that ![]() they no integerity at all, is winning more important, I guess so. |
#8
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"BAR" wrote in message
. .. JoeSpareBedroom wrote: wrote in message ... On Dec 4, 6:18 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Dec 4, 5:52 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 21:14:43 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... Pothead would also refer to those who grow the stuff. You must have a nasty name for someone who makes their own beer, too. Tell us what you call them. Have we discussed the supposed "medical benefits" of marijauna yet? That would be more fun. :) You know I support NORML, and I support leagilazation of MJ, but I also beleive "medical marijuana" is a joke.. Now before any of you sick folks get all over me, let me explain. In a nutshell, having smoked for so many years I realize that dosage alone would be impossible. Even the same "strain" reacts differently each time you smoke it, even more if you eat it. MJ should be as legal as booze, and probably be retailed in a similar controled fashion. Then the doc could say, go try a joint or a brownie, if it works, try it again ![]() Medical MJ, is a lousy excuse in my opinion and I have known lot's of folks who's lives are much better because of illicit MJ. The most dangerous thing about smoking a joint is the rabid cowboys who might kick in your doors while your kids are upstairs watching cartoons... If it was legal, then it would be likely that you could get the same variety on a consistent basis, just like farmers order certain varieties of seeds depending on various factors.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You are wrong. The same variety (strain) can and most likely will be different every time you smoke it. Sometimes it may not be as noticable, but it will, especially to those who depend on it medically. Even more for folks who take it oraly... When I was young I used to buy enough at a time to last months, same strain, right from the growers in NW Mass... ![]() OK. This is interesting. I'm a longtime gardener. Forgetting normal cultural differences, like water, fertilizer and weather, why should there be big differences in potency within one variety? Read that again. I told you to forget about water, fertilizer and weather for the moment, since those factors affect ALL plants. You really are fully of yourself aren't you? Yes, but that's not relevant to the perfectly valid question I asked. You know that. |
#9
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 5, 9:22 am, wrote:
On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 05:58:25 -0800 (PST), wrote: It is just one more, very expensive "no win" war being waged by the same people who want to wage war in Iraq.- Hide quoted text - Boy did you take a wrong turn there too. Bush did not start the war on drugs, and congress needs to stop it. Besides, if you go back you will find the Kennedy name coming up back when pot became illegal, bet you didn't know that ![]() they no integerity at all, is winning more important, I guess so. I didn't say "Bush". I was referring to the "big government" folks in general who create bureacracies that take on a life of their own. We have a war on drugs because the repeal on the 18th amendment was going to put thousands of prohibition cops out of work so they needed to prohibit something to keep their phony baloney jobs. There was more than a little racism involved in the decision that pot be illegal. Undocumented Mexicans smoked it and during the depression we were looking for a way to run them off to save american jobs. The current war on drugs was started by Nixon during our last losing military adventure with a brief hiatus during the Carter and Ford administrations but it has been going strong since Reagan. Some of the worst constitutional abuses in this war started under Clinton. Thank you for the clarification ![]() |