About Us

X ` Man[_3_]

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

X ` Man[_3_]

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

iBoaterer[_2_]

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??

Disgusted

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.

JustWait

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...

X ` Man[_3_]

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

JustWait

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.

X ` Man

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.

X ` Man

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...

iBoaterer[_2_]

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.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Funniest Commercial Ever...	Harry[_2_]	General	3	January 29th 10 01:39 AM
Funniest Thread!	Capt. Rob	ASA	72	January 21st 06 04:01 AM
OT--Possibly the funniest thing you'll see about this election	NOYB	General	7	July 12th 04 01:36 PM

Menu

About Us