| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:52:15 -0500, X ` Man
wrote: GOP candidate discussion on foreign policy. According to Herman Cain, Iran has mountains. i loved his concern that any attack would be unable to contend with the mountains...we're doomed! guess he doesnt know why we mothballed NORAD's command post in Cheyenne mountain |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
|
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 21:20:43 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: Who knows he might. But could be his welfare check is more important and Cain might cancel it. So long as there is a socialist black boob might keep quite. Ditto harryk ... Who knows.... says a guy who lives in a social welfare state while complaining about the US becoming a social welfare state |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
|
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 01:00:16 -0500, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:05:51 -0500, bpuharic wrote: On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:52:15 -0500, X ` Man wrote: GOP candidate discussion on foreign policy. According to Herman Cain, Iran has mountains. i loved his concern that any attack would be unable to contend with the mountains...we're doomed! guess he doesnt know why we mothballed NORAD's command post in Cheyenne mountain I was just there this summer and it didn't look "mothballed" to me. They are still tracking everything from space junk to just about anything that flies around the US. dont read much, eh? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Discer.../message/19252 and from norad's official website: http://www.norad.mil/about/cmoc.html Today, the Cheyenne Mountain Complex serves as NORAD and USNORTHCOM's Alternate Command Center and as a training site for crew qualification. Day-to-day crew operations for NORAD and USNORTHCOM typically take place at Peterson Air Force Base. |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 01:02:27 -0500, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:06:29 -0500, bpuharic wrote: On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 22:20:32 -0500, wrote: On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 21:22:14 -0500, Disgusted wrote: On 11/22/2011 8:52 PM, X ` Man wrote: GOP candidate discussion on foreign policy. According to Herman Cain, Iran has mountains. When were the mountains removed? This spring when the Israelis start dropping all of those bunker busters we sold them. you mean that obama sold them after bush refused? yeah, really proves what a muslim obama is, doesn't it? It proves Obama is just another NeoCon. ah. a buzzword you heard on fox. let's see...obama's ending 2 wars and to the right that makes him a neocon! HAHAHAHAH |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On 11/24/11 12:53 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:17:22 -0500, X ` wrote: The problem, of course, is that nukes-ready-to-go are available from the weaponry stolen from the former Soviet states and, probably, from Pakistan. Since we don't really patrol our borders or seaports, it seems reasonable one can be "snuck" in to create havoc. When it goes off, I hope it isn't going off in DC. If I was going to worry about Iran it would be if they simply leaked out some high level material, not really fissile but bad enough to shut down a city with a dirty bomb. You really hope our borders are secure enough to prevent it but they manage to bring in tons of illegal drugs with no real problem. DC is the natural target, although New York would probably cause more real damage. The borders of this country have never been "secure," and I doubt Americans are willing to pay the price to make them so. Sigh. I know DC is the primary target...I'd rather it were anywhere in, say, Texas. -- http://flickr.com/gp/hakr/8272ug |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:36:37 -0500, X ` Man
wrote: On 11/24/11 12:53 AM, wrote: On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:17:22 -0500, X ` wrote: The problem, of course, is that nukes-ready-to-go are available from the weaponry stolen from the former Soviet states and, probably, from Pakistan. Since we don't really patrol our borders or seaports, it seems reasonable one can be "snuck" in to create havoc. When it goes off, I hope it isn't going off in DC. If I was going to worry about Iran it would be if they simply leaked out some high level material, not really fissile but bad enough to shut down a city with a dirty bomb. You really hope our borders are secure enough to prevent it but they manage to bring in tons of illegal drugs with no real problem. DC is the natural target, although New York would probably cause more real damage. The borders of this country have never been "secure," and I doubt Americans are willing to pay the price to make them so. Sigh. I know DC is the primary target...I'd rather it were anywhere in, say, Texas. the problem is that only the crazed, insane, delusional ron paul is wiling to say what needs to be said: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
In article , dump-on-
says... On 11/24/11 12:53 AM, wrote: On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:17:22 -0500, X ` wrote: The problem, of course, is that nukes-ready-to-go are available from the weaponry stolen from the former Soviet states and, probably, from Pakistan. Since we don't really patrol our borders or seaports, it seems reasonable one can be "snuck" in to create havoc. When it goes off, I hope it isn't going off in DC. If I was going to worry about Iran it would be if they simply leaked out some high level material, not really fissile but bad enough to shut down a city with a dirty bomb. You really hope our borders are secure enough to prevent it but they manage to bring in tons of illegal drugs with no real problem. DC is the natural target, although New York would probably cause more real damage. The borders of this country have never been "secure," and I doubt Americans are willing to pay the price to make them so. Sigh. I know DC is the primary target...I'd rather it were anywhere in, say, Texas. That's our resident bigot at work.... |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On 11/24/11 8:47 AM, bpuharic wrote:
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:36:37 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:53 AM, wrote: On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:17:22 -0500, X ` wrote: The problem, of course, is that nukes-ready-to-go are available from the weaponry stolen from the former Soviet states and, probably, from Pakistan. Since we don't really patrol our borders or seaports, it seems reasonable one can be "snuck" in to create havoc. When it goes off, I hope it isn't going off in DC. If I was going to worry about Iran it would be if they simply leaked out some high level material, not really fissile but bad enough to shut down a city with a dirty bomb. You really hope our borders are secure enough to prevent it but they manage to bring in tons of illegal drugs with no real problem. DC is the natural target, although New York would probably cause more real damage. The borders of this country have never been "secure," and I doubt Americans are willing to pay the price to make them so. Sigh. I know DC is the primary target...I'd rather it were anywhere in, say, Texas. the problem is that only the crazed, insane, delusional ron paul is wiling to say what needs to be said: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. -- http://flickr.com/gp/hakr/8272ug |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. -- http://flickr.com/gp/hakr/8272ug |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
In article , dump-on-
says... On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. That third sentence is from an alleged writer?? |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On 11/24/2011 12:12 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. There are ways to regulate prescription drugs that are already in place. We all know how well that works. |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On 11/24/2011 1:58 PM, Disgusted wrote:
On 11/24/2011 12:12 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. There are ways to regulate prescription drugs that are already in place. We all know how well that works. The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... You can't produce beer, or cigarettes in your home to compete with Budweiser or Marlborough either... |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On 11/24/11 6:02 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 12:12:41 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. That is not decriminalization then, that is legalization. I agree it is the only answer but there are only 2 candidates suggesting it, Paul and Johnson. Both are written off as whackos. Paul is a wacko for many reasons. I don't follow Johnson, just as I don't follow a number of posters here. They're not going anywhere and in the case of those posters here, they've not nothing to say worth reading. I'm not opposed to legalization and control of marijuana. -- http://flickr.com/gp/hakr/8272ug |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On 11/24/2011 6:58 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 17:22:12 -0500, JustWait wrote: On 11/24/2011 1:58 PM, Disgusted wrote: On 11/24/2011 12:12 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. There are ways to regulate prescription drugs that are already in place. We all know how well that works. The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... People are lazy. The main reason why people don't make their own beer is that it is hard to do. Growing decent pot is more complicated than just throwing some seeds in the yard. If what I see on TV is accurate about the California growers, it is pretty labor intensive. The Humbolt County Sheriff even has a solution for that. You buy a tax band for each plant you grow. No tax band, you go to jail for tax evasion. Anything would be better than what they are doing now. The government is not getting any tax revenue, there is a trail of bodies in the street from here to Mexico, we have a million people in prison and there is still absolutely zero control of the illegal market. Do you think there is anyone who wants drugs and can't get them? We already did this and figured out that alcohol was bad but banning it was worse, we are now seeing the exact same thing playing out with other drugs. Try making beer at home or wine for that matter without material in the bottom of the bottle. The filter systems the big manufacturers use is a lot more than you will run in your kitchen on any scale... Try growing enough tobacco and processing it to burn and taste right. And no, it's not hard to grow great pot, I used to know folks who did it. |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
|
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On 11/24/11 9:23 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 18:23:09 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 6:02 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 12:12:41 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. That is not decriminalization then, that is legalization. I agree it is the only answer but there are only 2 candidates suggesting it, Paul and Johnson. Both are written off as whackos. Paul is a wacko for many reasons. I don't follow Johnson, just as I don't follow a number of posters here. They're not going anywhere and in the case of those posters here, they've not nothing to say worth reading. I'm not opposed to legalization and control of marijuana. Johnson is actually pretty reasonable but will never get much traction because there is no big money behind him. Even when he was polling better than some of the others, he was ignored by the media. I wonder when reality will hit Bachmann... |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
In article ,
says... On 11/24/2011 1:58 PM, Disgusted wrote: On 11/24/2011 12:12 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. There are ways to regulate prescription drugs that are already in place. We all know how well that works. The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... You can't produce beer, or cigarettes in your home to compete with Budweiser or Marlborough either... The beer I produce in my home is MUCH better than Budweiser. |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
In article ,
says... On 11/24/2011 6:58 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 17:22:12 -0500, JustWait wrote: On 11/24/2011 1:58 PM, Disgusted wrote: On 11/24/2011 12:12 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. There are ways to regulate prescription drugs that are already in place. We all know how well that works. The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... People are lazy. The main reason why people don't make their own beer is that it is hard to do. Growing decent pot is more complicated than just throwing some seeds in the yard. If what I see on TV is accurate about the California growers, it is pretty labor intensive. The Humbolt County Sheriff even has a solution for that. You buy a tax band for each plant you grow. No tax band, you go to jail for tax evasion. Anything would be better than what they are doing now. The government is not getting any tax revenue, there is a trail of bodies in the street from here to Mexico, we have a million people in prison and there is still absolutely zero control of the illegal market. Do you think there is anyone who wants drugs and can't get them? We already did this and figured out that alcohol was bad but banning it was worse, we are now seeing the exact same thing playing out with other drugs. Try making beer at home or wine for that matter without material in the bottom of the bottle. The filter systems the big manufacturers use is a lot more than you will run in your kitchen on any scale... Try growing enough tobacco and processing it to burn and taste right. And no, it's not hard to grow great pot, I used to know folks who did it. The yeast left in the bottom is a mark of real beer, not ultra filtered crap. |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
|
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
In article ,
says... On 11/24/11 9:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 20:32:17 -0500, JustWait wrote: The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... People are lazy. The main reason why people don't make their own beer is that it is hard to do. Growing decent pot is more complicated than just throwing some seeds in the yard. If what I see on TV is accurate about the California growers, it is pretty labor intensive. The Humbolt County Sheriff even has a solution for that. You buy a tax band for each plant you grow. No tax band, you go to jail for tax evasion. Anything would be better than what they are doing now. The government is not getting any tax revenue, there is a trail of bodies in the street from here to Mexico, we have a million people in prison and there is still absolutely zero control of the illegal market. Do you think there is anyone who wants drugs and can't get them? We already did this and figured out that alcohol was bad but banning it was worse, we are now seeing the exact same thing playing out with other drugs. Try making beer at home or wine for that matter without material in the bottom of the bottle. The filter systems the big manufacturers use is a lot more than you will run in your kitchen on any scale... Try growing enough tobacco and processing it to burn and taste right. And no, it's not hard to grow great pot, I used to know folks who did it. On the other hand, why make beer or wine? You can make ass kicking rum with nothing but molasses or sugar, a cube of yeast, a big pressure cooker and some copper tubing. I have made plenty of various liquors over the years. Want to clean up the taste, put it in a jug with activated charcoal for a few months. Filter and drink. You can even get that "oak aged" taste by charring chunks of oak with a propane torch and throwing them in the jug. I am still not sure why filtering wine is tricky. You just use a coffee filter like you do with the rum. I had inlaws who raised tobacco in Md. Other than being a little labor intensive, keeping the worms off, it is no harder to grow than tomatoes. The main problem is getting the quota from the state to sell it. I am really surprised more people don't have it in their garden with the price of tobacco products these days. I suppose if you drink a lot or smoke a lot, home brew can be a moneysaver. Unlike you, some people do things because they find it interesting. It's called a hobby, too bad you don't have one. |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
In article ,
says... On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 21:23:21 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 9:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 20:32:17 -0500, JustWait wrote: The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... People are lazy. The main reason why people don't make their own beer is that it is hard to do. Growing decent pot is more complicated than just throwing some seeds in the yard. If what I see on TV is accurate about the California growers, it is pretty labor intensive. The Humbolt County Sheriff even has a solution for that. You buy a tax band for each plant you grow. No tax band, you go to jail for tax evasion. Anything would be better than what they are doing now. The government is not getting any tax revenue, there is a trail of bodies in the street from here to Mexico, we have a million people in prison and there is still absolutely zero control of the illegal market. Do you think there is anyone who wants drugs and can't get them? We already did this and figured out that alcohol was bad but banning it was worse, we are now seeing the exact same thing playing out with other drugs. Try making beer at home or wine for that matter without material in the bottom of the bottle. The filter systems the big manufacturers use is a lot more than you will run in your kitchen on any scale... Try growing enough tobacco and processing it to burn and taste right. And no, it's not hard to grow great pot, I used to know folks who did it. On the other hand, why make beer or wine? You can make ass kicking rum with nothing but molasses or sugar, a cube of yeast, a big pressure cooker and some copper tubing. I have made plenty of various liquors over the years. Want to clean up the taste, put it in a jug with activated charcoal for a few months. Filter and drink. You can even get that "oak aged" taste by charring chunks of oak with a propane torch and throwing them in the jug. I am still not sure why filtering wine is tricky. You just use a coffee filter like you do with the rum. I had inlaws who raised tobacco in Md. Other than being a little labor intensive, keeping the worms off, it is no harder to grow than tomatoes. The main problem is getting the quota from the state to sell it. I am really surprised more people don't have it in their garden with the price of tobacco products these days. I suppose if you drink a lot or smoke a lot, home brew can be a moneysaver. The only time it was a money saver to make your own alcohol was when it was illegal. I can't imagine anyone with a job, doing it because your time is worth more than you can save, even with the tax. It is real hard to compete with a factory operation like that. When you can buy cheap (that is still better than moonshine) whiskey for $25 a gallon I am not sure how you compete with that if your time is worth anything to you. I suspect if there was commercially available pot, it would be cheaper than it is now, even with a $50 an oz tax on it. The beer I brew costs about the same per as cheap store bought. The quality is the thing. It's a million times better than most American swill. |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On 11/25/2011 8:19 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In , says... On 11/24/2011 1:58 PM, Disgusted wrote: On 11/24/2011 12:12 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. There are ways to regulate prescription drugs that are already in place. We all know how well that works. The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... You can't produce beer, or cigarettes in your home to compete with Budweiser or Marlborough either... The beer I produce in my home is MUCH better than Budweiser. There ain't much that isn't. Notable exception, Corona. -- 1-20-13 The end of an error |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On 11/25/2011 8:25 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In , says... On 11/24/11 9:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 20:32:17 -0500, JustWait wrote: The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... People are lazy. The main reason why people don't make their own beer is that it is hard to do. Growing decent pot is more complicated than just throwing some seeds in the yard. If what I see on TV is accurate about the California growers, it is pretty labor intensive. The Humbolt County Sheriff even has a solution for that. You buy a tax band for each plant you grow. No tax band, you go to jail for tax evasion. Anything would be better than what they are doing now. The government is not getting any tax revenue, there is a trail of bodies in the street from here to Mexico, we have a million people in prison and there is still absolutely zero control of the illegal market. Do you think there is anyone who wants drugs and can't get them? We already did this and figured out that alcohol was bad but banning it was worse, we are now seeing the exact same thing playing out with other drugs. Try making beer at home or wine for that matter without material in the bottom of the bottle. The filter systems the big manufacturers use is a lot more than you will run in your kitchen on any scale... Try growing enough tobacco and processing it to burn and taste right. And no, it's not hard to grow great pot, I used to know folks who did it. On the other hand, why make beer or wine? You can make ass kicking rum with nothing but molasses or sugar, a cube of yeast, a big pressure cooker and some copper tubing. I have made plenty of various liquors over the years. Want to clean up the taste, put it in a jug with activated charcoal for a few months. Filter and drink. You can even get that "oak aged" taste by charring chunks of oak with a propane torch and throwing them in the jug. I am still not sure why filtering wine is tricky. You just use a coffee filter like you do with the rum. I had inlaws who raised tobacco in Md. Other than being a little labor intensive, keeping the worms off, it is no harder to grow than tomatoes. The main problem is getting the quota from the state to sell it. I am really surprised more people don't have it in their garden with the price of tobacco products these days. I suppose if you drink a lot or smoke a lot, home brew can be a moneysaver. Unlike you, some people do things because they find it interesting. It's called a hobby, too bad you don't have one. Some people squander their money on toys they don't play with. It puzzles me that they expect other peoples hobbies be cost effective. e.g. You might have heard someone saying "What do you need that big truck for? A highlander is all you really need." -- 1-20-13 The end of an error |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
In article om,
says... On 11/25/2011 8:19 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 11/24/2011 1:58 PM, Disgusted wrote: On 11/24/2011 12:12 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. There are ways to regulate prescription drugs that are already in place. We all know how well that works. The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... You can't produce beer, or cigarettes in your home to compete with Budweiser or Marlborough either... The beer I produce in my home is MUCH better than Budweiser. There ain't much that isn't. Notable exception, Corona. Corona is just ok. If I'm going for something on the light side, and not hoppy, I'll have one! |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On 11/25/2011 9:54 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In raweb.com, says... On 11/25/2011 8:19 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 11/24/2011 1:58 PM, Disgusted wrote: On 11/24/2011 12:12 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. There are ways to regulate prescription drugs that are already in place. We all know how well that works. The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... You can't produce beer, or cigarettes in your home to compete with Budweiser or Marlborough either... The beer I produce in my home is MUCH better than Budweiser. There ain't much that isn't. Notable exception, Corona. Corona is just ok. If I'm going for something on the light side, and not hoppy, I'll have one! If you are tempted to have a Corona, try Land Shark instead. It's made in Budweiser plants and the proceeds go to making Jimmy Buffet richer. -- 1-20-13 The end of an error |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On 11/25/2011 10:12 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 11/25/2011 9:54 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In raweb.com, says... On 11/25/2011 8:19 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 11/24/2011 1:58 PM, Disgusted wrote: On 11/24/2011 12:12 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. There are ways to regulate prescription drugs that are already in place. We all know how well that works. The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... You can't produce beer, or cigarettes in your home to compete with Budweiser or Marlborough either... The beer I produce in my home is MUCH better than Budweiser. There ain't much that isn't. Notable exception, Corona. Corona is just ok. If I'm going for something on the light side, and not hoppy, I'll have one! If you are tempted to have a Corona, try Land Shark instead. It's made in Budweiser plants and the proceeds go to making Jimmy Buffet richer. Shared a nice porter with our Brisket last night... It was ok.. I still like my own home brew. I usually make a nice Ale, everyone loves it... |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
In article om,
says... On 11/25/2011 9:54 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In raweb.com, says... On 11/25/2011 8:19 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 11/24/2011 1:58 PM, Disgusted wrote: On 11/24/2011 12:12 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. There are ways to regulate prescription drugs that are already in place. We all know how well that works. The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... You can't produce beer, or cigarettes in your home to compete with Budweiser or Marlborough either... The beer I produce in my home is MUCH better than Budweiser. There ain't much that isn't. Notable exception, Corona. Corona is just ok. If I'm going for something on the light side, and not hoppy, I'll have one! If you are tempted to have a Corona, try Land Shark instead. It's made in Budweiser plants and the proceeds go to making Jimmy Buffet richer. I've had Land Shark. It's pretty good. I'm a beer snob and have been since I got into home brewing and visiting craft breweries. Yuengling makes some decent beers for a mega brewery. |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On 11/25/2011 10:43 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In raweb.com, says... On 11/25/2011 9:54 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In raweb.com, says... On 11/25/2011 8:19 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 11/24/2011 1:58 PM, Disgusted wrote: On 11/24/2011 12:12 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. There are ways to regulate prescription drugs that are already in place. We all know how well that works. The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... You can't produce beer, or cigarettes in your home to compete with Budweiser or Marlborough either... The beer I produce in my home is MUCH better than Budweiser. There ain't much that isn't. Notable exception, Corona. Corona is just ok. If I'm going for something on the light side, and not hoppy, I'll have one! If you are tempted to have a Corona, try Land Shark instead. It's made in Budweiser plants and the proceeds go to making Jimmy Buffet richer. I've had Land Shark. It's pretty good. I'm a beer snob and have been since I got into home brewing and visiting craft breweries. Yuengling makes some decent beers for a mega brewery. Yes it does. Have you tried Budweiser Utopius yet. You aren't a beer snob until you've tasted it. -- 1-20-13 The end of an error |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
In article om,
says... On 11/25/2011 10:43 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In raweb.com, says... On 11/25/2011 9:54 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In raweb.com, says... On 11/25/2011 8:19 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 11/24/2011 1:58 PM, Disgusted wrote: On 11/24/2011 12:12 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. There are ways to regulate prescription drugs that are already in place. We all know how well that works. The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... You can't produce beer, or cigarettes in your home to compete with Budweiser or Marlborough either... The beer I produce in my home is MUCH better than Budweiser. There ain't much that isn't. Notable exception, Corona. Corona is just ok. If I'm going for something on the light side, and not hoppy, I'll have one! If you are tempted to have a Corona, try Land Shark instead. It's made in Budweiser plants and the proceeds go to making Jimmy Buffet richer. I've had Land Shark. It's pretty good. I'm a beer snob and have been since I got into home brewing and visiting craft breweries. Yuengling makes some decent beers for a mega brewery. Yes it does. Have you tried Budweiser Utopius yet. You aren't a beer snob until you've tasted it. No, not yet. We've got a pub here that has 200 beers on tap and another 100 or so bottled beers. They get some pretty exotic stuff in there! |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
On 11/25/2011 11:20 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 11/25/2011 10:43 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In raweb.com, says... On 11/25/2011 9:54 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In raweb.com, says... On 11/25/2011 8:19 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 11/24/2011 1:58 PM, Disgusted wrote: On 11/24/2011 12:12 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. There are ways to regulate prescription drugs that are already in place. We all know how well that works. The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... You can't produce beer, or cigarettes in your home to compete with Budweiser or Marlborough either... The beer I produce in my home is MUCH better than Budweiser. There ain't much that isn't. Notable exception, Corona. Corona is just ok. If I'm going for something on the light side, and not hoppy, I'll have one! If you are tempted to have a Corona, try Land Shark instead. It's made in Budweiser plants and the proceeds go to making Jimmy Buffet richer. I've had Land Shark. It's pretty good. I'm a beer snob and have been since I got into home brewing and visiting craft breweries. Yuengling makes some decent beers for a mega brewery. Yes it does. Have you tried Budweiser Utopius yet. You aren't a beer snob until you've tasted it. Yeah, I have, but ok, nice, but... Either way, I was a member of a pretty accomplished beer making club here for a while and got to taste some great beers. Still like my own semi-kit made ale best... |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
In article ,
says... On 11/25/2011 11:20 AM, Drifter wrote: On 11/25/2011 10:43 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In raweb.com, says... On 11/25/2011 9:54 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In raweb.com, says... On 11/25/2011 8:19 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 11/24/2011 1:58 PM, Disgusted wrote: On 11/24/2011 12:12 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 11/24/11 12:08 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:55:03 -0500, X ` Man wrote: end the war on drugs.it's a failure. that would end alot of the flow of weapons and money over the border. Well, I think possession of personal use quantities needs to be decriminalized, especially for marijuana. I'm against lifting criminal penalties for drug trafficking and big-time dealing. That is a weasel position. Where are the "personal use" quantities supposed to come from? This is as bad as the other ill fated prohibition experience we had. They tried to punish the manufacturers and importers without criminalizing the use too. You don't need a history book to see how that worked out, you just need to look at our inner cities and the Mexico border.. Where? From licensed stores, of course. If you are over 18 and you want pot, you should be able to buy a couple of ounces it at a licensed store. The state would be able to collect its tax, just as it does with cigarettes. There are ways to regulate how much you buy in any given time period. There are ways to regulate prescription drugs that are already in place. We all know how well that works. The problem is in taxing and controlling it. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Prescription drugs need expensive materials, and expensive equipment to refine and deliver the product the public is used to. If you tried to manufacture/grow these items in any quantity and produce a product that looked/smoked/tasted/performed like the retail product there would be a big trail right to your door of evidence of the process/production. To deliver pot in a form that is acceptable you need a box of baggies, and a closet, some water and a light... The finished product from a kid and his closet is easily as refined, and marketable as any huge operation could produce. It would be entirely impossible to tell if someone smoking legally on the street corner paid tax on the smoke or grew it themselves... You can't produce beer, or cigarettes in your home to compete with Budweiser or Marlborough either... The beer I produce in my home is MUCH better than Budweiser. There ain't much that isn't. Notable exception, Corona. Corona is just ok. If I'm going for something on the light side, and not hoppy, I'll have one! If you are tempted to have a Corona, try Land Shark instead. It's made in Budweiser plants and the proceeds go to making Jimmy Buffet richer. I've had Land Shark. It's pretty good. I'm a beer snob and have been since I got into home brewing and visiting craft breweries. Yuengling makes some decent beers for a mega brewery. Yes it does. Have you tried Budweiser Utopius yet. You aren't a beer snob until you've tasted it. Yeah, I have, but ok, nice, but... Either way, I was a member of a pretty accomplished beer making club here for a while and got to taste some great beers. Still like my own semi-kit made ale best... I do all grain. It's the best way to experiment with the many, many variables of brewing. |
Funniest thing on TV tonight...
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:44 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com