don't worry about the money men Rob, they'll find a way to get theirs. Probably add some chemical to make super grass that puts the legal stuff to shame. Addictive grass probably laced with heroin or meth....

you were stoned during english class when they explained pleonasm, eh tetterhead?

a rolled joint of marijuana herb


you find something wrong with that?

yeah, the fact that you still don't understand the difference between a spliff and a joint.

all I know is "I smell weed cuz y'all keep packin' it."

i understand the difference that you are trying to make-- it's not rocket science, contrary to what you think-- but i dispute the universality of your particular usage. you know what "universality", "particular" and "usage" mean, right?

Great, thanks. You've taught me a new word.

nope


you wrong

Still no link? petty.

does linking to websites anyone can edit prove things?

okay then, here's a link. this absolutely unimpeachable evidence

http://www.sonicyouth.com/gossip/sho...1&postcount=15

FUCK TARD ALERT!
The link I posted had over 1500 people agree with it.
FAIL

I'd call you a cunt, but that would be as redundant as you and your pathetic pleonasm.

Oh, whoops. :)


Edit: Oh, and pathetic pleonasm. What a nice example of ILLITERATION! Something else we all learned in high school that we'll throw around a message board for no reason except a weak attempt to save yr ass.

I don't even know why I'm responding to this shit, I quit smoking cigs I dont like tobacco anyways. Just weed.

it's rhethoric, fool!

it has dozens of defintions, the one in second place contradicts what you said, urban dictionary is never reliable, but when it comes to foreign vernacular it absolutely moronic to look at it.


why not look in a real dictionary

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dicti...0&t=1284683008

http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/e...m_en_gb0802150

before you make a stupid claim about the word cigarette showing up in the oxford definition note that their definition of joint uses the term cigarette as well, and that neither of these dictionaries(or any) mentions the word tobacco

you want links well there's some links for you, and the ones i provided don't have spelling errors and were much less likely to have been written by a 15 year old

also the urbandictionary entry supported by 1700 sub-morons claims a completely fictional etymology:

"also splif (From split <divided> + spiff <well-dresssed or good>)"

from "divided / well dressed"? too many crack rocks.

it also says " initially popular on Europe's Iberian Peninsula"

while we know the origin of the word is Jamaican

here are some other genius entries from the same author

http://www.urbandictionary.com/autho...author=Johann7

---

then again, language is not written in some magical stone in the sky with its meaning forever fixed, language is dependent on usage, so if enough sub-morons decide to change the meaning of a word, they actually can, by sheer numbers. for example, in just a few decades, "your" will come to mean "you are". that's how languages evolve, unfortunately-- it's not always poets coining brilliant new words.

1688 people agree with me. Nah nah nah nah naaaaa naaaaa

that's nothing. 50% of the world's population has an IQ below 100.

It must be hard living that way. Now I understand why you can't see the difference between a spliff and a joint.

Q.E.D.

Yr all cunts, gay used to mean happy, now it means homosexual. The modern spliff is a rolled cigarette with marijuana in it...usually half and half...

get with the times you fuck cunt tard butt sucking sons of anarchy

that's a specific case of what i already explained above, tortilla head. tortilla or not, at least you're not completely retarded like the other pothead.


ok but who in their right mind would pollute their weed with piss-yellow bugle or some such shit? how common is this malpractice to alter the meaning of a perfectly good word? sick...


haa haaa haaa

nice to see you care so passionately about language.

good insults!

twatwad.

Thanks homie

So then there will be Phillip Morris brand marijuana selling in California and they'll have a cartoon rabbit smoking dope in commercials, and they'll grow it in third world countries using massive amounts of pesticides killing indigenous wildlife while raping countries of their farmland, leaving many many more people to starve, just so some rich-ass white boys in California can get lit.

The pesticides in the pot will give people cancer because many will be too lazy to grow it at home.

Jam rock will become the predominant musical style and you won't be able to get away from it. And tie-dye.


Or since prop-8 went through, this won't because of the morally conservative majority in California, people will cry while listening to their Bob Marley, and different evil men will still make the money and still destroy the world in less legal venues.


So either way really, you're fucked.

No amount of drugs will ever get me to like Jam music.

Haha I got neg repped by hevusa!

No idea what I'm talking about apparently.

I wonder which comment had him the most angry. Probably the jam rock and tie-dye thing.

I wasn't insinuating that drugs make you like jam rock and tie-dye. I'm insinuating that legal drugs will attract jam rock and tie-dye.





So maybe you'll get lucky and the marijuana industry won't be like the tobacco industry. Maybe it will be more like the beer industry, and at most places all you'll be able to find is the Coors Light equivalent of marijuana.

There will be some people who grow their own, but those people will be considered "weird" and "nerds"

sonic youth live is "jam rock" you know....

I know.

You know what's funny. . .

. . .oh, never mind.

Remmeber when Thurston said to him the ideal audience for a show would be to have a co-headlining gig with Phish? I think me and maybe 3 other people on this forum would be the only ones in the audience. It would be awesome.

Now you're talkin'. Give me the local, organic alternative! Phillip Morris can suck a cock.

So why don't those of you living in California and growing your own weed just start yyour own companies? You can be the beginning of the marijuana industry yourselves.

Or maybe Philip Morris will develop a genetically altered strain of pot that is highly physically addictive that you just have to have.

Or maybe they will develop a genetically altered strain of pot that is patented by them so they can sue you if you grow it, and at the same time create a virus that non genetically altered pot is susceptible to. Kabing Kabang Kabloom. . .

I'd go too.

Who knows. . . I might enjoy the Phish part.

I see you're point(s) on some of this, but really...I hope you are joking about the jam music + tie-dye part. I know many, many of folks that smoke and don't dig any of that shit.

And I'm not going to say what may or may not go on in my personal life, but you'll never catch me listening to reggae. An event that happens maybe twice a year for mere minutes at a time. I respect some of it, but it's just never done much for me.

Pot should be legalized EVERYWHERE! Too many people suffering for something that is considerably less harmful than booze AND cigarettes. People that deal with pain related issues might not be spending quite as much on medical bills.

And of course, there will be those that try and pull some bullshit and sell pesticide-ridden marijuana, but PEOPLE will have a choice on what they buy (or perhaps even grow themselves). Always hurdles, so what? It's the same way with tobacco.

http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/co...a-Legalization


the reason i posted this link is because of this quote, which features the name phillip morris

“I’ll give you two reasons,” Craig said. “One is big tobacco. Did you know that Phillip Morris just bought 400 acres of land up in Northern California? The minute marijuana becomes legal, they’ll mass produce and flood the market. And of course, they’ll add the same toxins they put in regular cigarettes to get you addicted, and very little THC, so you’ll have to buy more… In short, they’re going to ruin weed.”


now i'm pro-legalising because i don't want people in jail for such dumb shit,losing jobs etc.

but i'm pretty worried that yeah, big corporations will probably clear cut some massive area in bolivia and grow some chemical laden weed with terminator seeds and fuck loads of additives.

i think it could be a great thing for farmers and smokers if corporations were kept out of it. setting limits on how much can be grown by a single group, only allowing the sale of cannabis grown within the united states and stuff like that

but yeah the government won't do that and we're fucked



you could say the same thing about vegetables or coffee, the fact is most people, when given those choices will choose the cheaper and better distributed option despite the fact that it's trash

Agreed, but still...there IS a choice.

as long as the government doesn't cause problems for people who grow themselves, or for smaller marijuana producers, and i think that's a possibility

So what? Like I said, they can suck a cock. Only idiots would smoke their shit.

It's possible, sure. + while I'm sure there would be issues at first, I don't see them lasting. It's not impossible to by pesticide/additive free fruits, veggies, or tobacco, nor is it all that difficult.

But yeah, there are typically bugs to be worked out at the beginning.

I may be the only non marijuana user in this thread, and I may be razzing you guys a little bit. . . but one thing that concerns me is public consumption. I don't really like public alcohol intoxication, and I don't think I'd really like people being stoned in public either. Fuck even when I go to bars to drink I prefer not to be around drunk people. Although sometimes they can be rather entertaining.

I'm one of those uptight assholes that has applauded smoking bans. Though I can't stand smoke. Before PA had the ban, if I was at a show I'd regularly have to step outside for air.

Whatever people do in the privacy of their own homes or in the appropriate public places is fine with me.

One other thing- I hate how some people seem to have to be high or drunk to cut loose. It really bugs me how stuffy people can be until they take something. Or how people only think that their mind is capable of brilliance when intoxicated in someway.

I'm not opposed to people taking drugs or getting drunk, I just personally don't feel the need, and I feel that it definitely isn't for everyone. Regardless of health effects, some people develop unhealthy obsessions/addictions.

I say this coming from the viewpoint of someone who has a brother who is bipolar and has addiction problems. He's not just a pothead, he does a bunch of other shit too, but I feel in a certain way that him starting out as a pothead opened up this idea to him that the world is simply better in an altered state.

I'm sure most of you aren't like that, and I realize that people like my brother will obtain whatever drugs they like regardless of legality.

I'd like to think most (or at least many) people are able to make mature decisions. I could get sloshed every night on cheap box wine but I don't.

this is good news for the um, erhmm.... kind folks I work for!

let's just leave it at that! anymore detail and that might be incriminating evidence!

What's funny is my other brother, who's very much the opposite of my younger brother moved from Portland to Monterrey to get away from that sort of thing.


Still, I really doubt it will get passed. . . sorry guys. California may be a blue state, but it still voted by referendum to ban gay marriage as well as to make Arnold Schwarzenegger governor. So it may seem cooler than other states, but in many ways it is only slightly less backwards. I think eventually you guys will see legalization because I think the majority of the younger generations is pro-legalization, more so than prior generations. Or maybe I'm wrong.