bongs and pipes
n common patterning of functioning in all of these people, a common
pattern superimposed on their individual uniqueness, we may hypothesize something to explain this
common pattern. This hypothesized something might be a common personality trait, belief system,
physical attribute, or, in terms of our interest a common state of consciousness. Particularly, if we know
that all the observed individuals ingested marijuana just before we began observing them, we will be
tempted to say that the common pattern of functioning we observe is the result of their all being in a
state of marijuana intoxication.
Note, however, that it is the empirically observed common pattern of functioning1] that is the crucial
defining operation of the state of consciousness; the fact that they had all ingested marijuana serves
secondarily to specify something we think to be a cause of the hypothesized state of consciousness.
What, then, are the properties of this hypothesized state of consciousness, marijuana intoxication?
How do we discover these properties?
Clearly the way to answer this is to give marijuana to a number of people and observe what is
common in their experience and behavior. Unfortunately, the observation process is much more complex
and full of pitfalls than we would expect.
Much of our usual experience with the effects of drugs on consciousness misleads us into expecting
fairly simple relationships. If, for example, you give a strong dose of barbiturates or other sedatives to a
person, he almost always goes to sleep. Hence we describe the state of consciousness (or lack of it)
induced by barbiturates as a barbiturate-induced sleep. There is little variability across subjects, and our
observational process is simple.
With a psychoactive drug like marijuana, on the other hand, the variability across subjects is very
high, and the observation process itself may systematically bias what we observe, as will be detailed in
the next section. It may even turn out that different people might experience different states of
consciousness from using marijuana, that is, the observed patterns of experience and behavior fall into
several distinct patterns rather than a single pattern common to all individuals. We generally consider
alcohol intoxication, for example, as a single state, yet on a second thought there are clearly some
individuals who have very different experiences with alcohol from those the majority of us have. A drug
may thus stimulate a reorganization of functioning, but the nature of the new pattern may be determined
by factors other than the nature of the drug per se.
Let us consider in detail the question of why a given individual, taking marijuana (or any other
psychoactive drug, for that matter) at a particular time and place, might experience the particular things
that he does.
VARIABILITY OF DRUG-INDUCED STATES
Our common experience with many drugs inclines us to think along the line that "Drug A has effects
X, ,
bongs and pipes 33, 2995 Bowls And Bongs
handblown glass bongs (1968) “BC Big Bud is a stabilized 65% indica/35% sativa, the Dutch Big Bud (Sensi) is all indica. BC Big Bud has
tremendous resin, its the crystally bud on the cover of the Cannabis Culture #18 (Steve Kubby header), and a
citrusy scent. Usually only available in clone, (hence the crosses, its usually the female in those Romulan x BC
Big Bud or Mikado x BC Big Bud), it is now available in seed (pure) at $50 CN/$40 US for 10 seeds. Giant seeds,
largest I have (not that that information has meaning, seed size has no relevance despite what mythology
persists about them). Very nice smoke, the Dutch Big Bud can be a good yielder like BC Big Bud but the high is
superior in the BC Big Bud version. The leaves in the BC Big Bud variety are more sativa like.” – Marc Emery
“Bank: Positronics
Supplier: Jock
Started with 10 seeds all germinated. One sprout was lagging far behind the Kali Mist others and it was put out of its
misery. Ended up with 1 female, 5 males, and 3 herms.
Again, like the rest of the Positronic stock grown out so far, Cannabis Photo these plants were close to identical in appearance.
They looked very much like the NL x Shiva that also came from Posi. To bad it didn’t take after the NL x Shiva
in all respects.
The one female was not very impressive grown from seed and turned herm. The buzz was acceptable but it
grew like chit. Very airy bud with little resin and a lot of leaf. The buzz made it worth keeping for a harvest from
clone one time to see if it could redeem itself.
Because the buzz got better it was given one more chance even
though it still showed male flowers, not a lot but too many. The second time grown from clone it showed male
flowers again and didn’t improve much in quality or growth. So now it’s dead.
To be fair it could be that this plant just
make homemade bongs couldn’t handle being flowered so early and freaked, doubtful but
possible.
" - flick
massive bongs
Terlouw,
Big Bongs W
crimes, as well as crimes on which there is public
support for their prohibition, the police would score a clear gain were marijuana use to be
relegalized.47]
The damages to an individual traceable to the effects of marijuana are minimal when
compared with the damages he sustains at the hands of the legal system.[48] Marijuana
use and possession probably represents—next to numerous sex crimes without victims,
such as cunnilingus—the clearest case where the penalty is incommensurate with the
seriousness of the crime. In most cases, the user suffers no damage whatsoever from the
use of this weed. In the typical case, it is a harmless activity. Arguments will often be
made, particularly by the police, that, of course, in the typical case, marijuana use is
relatively innocuous, but that is only because of the relative innocuousness of currently
available marijuana. If the user were to get his hands on really potent cannabis—North
African hashish, for instance—some serious damage would manifest itself.49] Thus,
what is being done is to punish someone for something which is essentially harmless
because if he weren't punished, he might do something which is harmful. (Even assuming
that there are such great differences in harm to users due to the varying potency different
of cannabis preparations.) To my knowledge, this principle is not applied to any other area
of law.
Moreover, no solid case has been made for the prohibition. In 1937, not a scrap of
evidence existed for justifying the passage of the federal law. Today, over a generation
later, the fairest statement that could be made is that adequate systematic evidence
definitively testing the relative harm of this drug has simply not been gathered. And if a
deprivation of liberties is to be imposed, a conclusive case has to be made, as Justice
Goldberg declared in Griswold v. Connecticut The burden of proof is clearly on he who
would deprive liberties, not he who would exercise them.[50]
It should be realized that although these "empirical" issues of public safety,
rehabilitation, and deterrence are useful for rhetorical purposes, they are not the most
powerful motives underlying the administration of the laws. The emotional and
"expressive" goals of symbolism and vengeance are far more important, in my opinion. To
someone who feels that marijuana use is evil, the laws are just no matter what their
practical result. They are an expression of a moral stance, and are beyond criticism on that
level. The question of "evil" is intrinsically unanswerable.
Merely because crime is
widespread is no indication that the laws attempting to prevent it (and failing, in a sense,
to do so) are invalid and ought to be abolished. Over 10,000 murders occur in the United
States every year; should laws against murder be nullified? There are about a half-million
auto thefts yearly in this country, and over a million burglaries.
Should laws outlawing
these activities be done away with crimes, as well as crimes on which there is public
support for their prohibition, the police would score a clear gain were marijuana use to be
relegalized.47]
The damages to an individual traceable to the effects of marijuana are minimal when
compared with the damages he sustains at the hands of the legal system.
48] Marijuana
use and possession probably represents—next to numerous sex crimes without victims,
such as cunnilingus—the clearest case where the penalty is incommensurate with the
seriousness of the crime. In most cases, the user suffers no damage whatsoever from the
use of this weed. In the typical case, it is a harmless activity. Arguments will often be
made, particularly by the police, that, of course, in the typical case, marijuana use is
relatively innocuous, but that is only because of the relative innocuousness of currently
available marijuana. If the user were to get his hands on really potent cannabis—North
African hashish, for instance—some serious damage would manifest itself.49] Thus,
what is being done is to punish someone for something which is essentially harmless
because if he weren't punished, he might do something which is harmful. (Even assuming
that there are such great differences in harm to users due to the varying potency different
of cannabis preparations.) To my knowledge, this principle is not applied to any other area
of law.
Moreover, no solid case has been made for the prohibition. In 1937, not a scrap of
evidence existed for justifying the passage of the federal law. Today, over a generation
later, the fairest statement that could be made is that adequate systematic evidence
definitively testing the relative harm of this drug has simply not been gathered. And if a
deprivation of liberties is to be imposed, a conclusive case has to be made, as Justice
Goldberg declared in Griswold v. Connecticut The burden of proof is clearly on he who
would deprive liberties, not he who would exercise them.50]
It should be realized that although these "empirical" issues of public safety,
rehabilitation, and deterrence are useful for rhetorical purposes, they are not the most
powerful motives underlying the administration of the laws. The emotional and
"expressive" goals of symbolism and vengeance are far more important, in my opinion. To
someone who feels that marijuana use is evil, the laws are just no matter what their
practical result. They are an expression of a moral stance, and are beyond criticism on that
level. The question of "evil" is intrinsically unanswerable. Merely because crime is
widespread is no indication that the laws attempting to prevent it (and failing, in a sense,
to do so) are invalid and ought to be abolished. Over 10,000 murders occur in the United
States every year; should laws against murder be nullified? There are about a half-million
auto thefts yearly in this country, and over a million burglaries. Should laws outlawing
these activities be done away with crimes, as well as crimes on which there is public
support for their prohibition, the police would score a clear gain were marijuana use to be
relegalized.47
The damages to an individual traceable to the effects of marijuana are minimal when
compared with the damages he sustains at the hands of the legal system.[48 Marijuana
use and possession probably represents—next to numerous sex crimes without victims,
such as cunnilingus—the clearest case where the penalty is incommensurate with the
seriousness of the crime. In most cases, the user suffers no damage whatsoever from the
use of this weed. In the typical case, it is a harmless activity. Arguments will often be
made, particularly by the police, that, of course, in the typical case, marijuana use is
relatively innocuous, but that is only because of the relative innocuousness of currently
available marijuana. If the user were to get his hands on really potent cannabis—North
African hashish, for instance—some serious damage would manifest itself.49 Thus,
what is being done is to punish someone for something which is essentially harmless
because if he weren't punished, he might do something which is harmful. (Even assuming
that there are such great differences in harm to users due to the varying potency different
of cannabis preparations.
) To my knowledge, this principle is not applied to any other area
of law.
Moreover, no solid case has been made for the prohibition.
In 1937, not a scrap of
evidence existed for justifying the passage of the federal law. Today, over a generation
later, the fairest statement that could be made is that adequate systematic evidence
definitively testing the relative harm of this drug has simply not been gathered. And if a
deprivation of liberties is to be imposed, a conclusive case has to be made, as Justice
Goldberg declared in Griswold v. Connecticut The burden of proof is clearly on he who
would deprive liberties, not he who would exercise them.50
It should be realized that although these "empirical" issues of public safety,
rehabilitation, and deterrence are useful for rhetorical purposes, they are not the most
powerful motives underlying the administration of the laws. The emotional and
"expressive" goals of symbolism and vengeance are far more important, in my opinion. To
someone who feels that marijuana use is evil, the laws are just no matter what their
practical result. They are an expression of a moral stance, and are beyond criticism on that
level. The question of "evil" is intrinsically unanswerable. Merely because crime is
widespread is no indication that the laws attempting to prevent it (and failing, in a sense,
to do so) are invalid and ought to be abolished. Over 10,000 murders occur in the United
States every year; should laws against murder be nullified? There are about a half-million
auto thefts yearly in this country, and over a million burglaries. Should laws outlawing
these activities be done away with crimes, as well as crimes on which there is public
support for their prohibition, the police would score a clear gain were marijuana use to be
relegalized.47
The damages to an individual traceable to the effects of marijuana are minimal when
compared with the damages Kc Brains he sustains at the hands of the legal system.
48 Marijuana
use and possession probably represents—next to numerous sex crimes without victims,
such as cunnilingus—the clearest case where the penalty is incommensurate with the
seriousness of the crime.
In most cases, the user suffers no damage whatsoever from the
use of this weed. In the typical case, it is a harmless activity. Arguments will often be
made, particularly by the police, that, of course, in the typical case, marijuana use is
relatively innocuous, but that is only because of the relative innocuousness of currently
available marijuana. If the user were to get his hands on really potent cannabis—North
African hashish, for instance—some serious damage would manifest itself.49 Thus,
what is being done is to punish someone for something which is essentially harmless
because if he weren't punished, he might do something which is harmful. (Even assuming
that there are such great differences in harm to users due to the varying potency different
of cannabis preparations.) To my knowledge, this principle is not applied to any other area
of law.
Moreover, no solid case has been made for the prohibition. In 1937, not a scrap of
evidence existed for justifying the passage of the federal law. Today, over a generation
later, the fairest statement that could be made is that adequate systematic evidence
definitively testing the relative harm of this drug has simply not been gathered. And if a
deprivation of liberties is to be imposed, a conclusive case has to be made, as Justice
Goldberg declared in Griswold v. Connecticut The burden of proof is clearly on he who
would deprive liberties, not he who would exercise them.50
It should be realized that although these "empirical" issues of public safety,
rehabilitation, and deterrence are useful for rhetorical purposes, they are not the most
powerful motives underlying the administration of the laws. The emotional and
"expressive" goals of symbolism and vengeance are far more important, in my opinion. To
someone who feels that marijuana use is evil, the laws are just no matter what their
practical result. They are an expression of a moral stance, and are beyond criticism on that
level. The question of "evil" is intrinsically unanswerable. Merely because crime is
widespread is no indication that the laws attempting to prevent it (and failing, in a sense,
to do so) are invalid and ought to be abolished. Over 10,000 murders occur in the United
States every year; should laws against murder be nullified? There are about a half-million
auto thefts yearly in this country, and over a million burglaries. Should laws outlawing
these activities be done away with
Weissman, B
Recolte
ACHETER
ACHETER Recolte align="left"> , 56, 510 (1973;
"I got NL#5 never had any problems with cloning, also if its real NL#5 (which is Pure NL) it has almost no smell
at all which is great if ya grow indoors. The ones I've seen really fill out at the end of the flowering cycle, it
sometimes looks like the yield will be marginal and then in the last couple of weeks--bam! I have found this
with most indica strains, usually they do not fill out till the last 2-3 weeks of flowering. NL is a great indoor
strain, one of my fav's too." -Unknown C88 is the best so far. It has blown the socks off every Dutch variety I've grown for all around goodness.” – flwr
smkr
“The photo at the web site is Cafe'Girl, she is the sister of Princess (Cinderella 88's mom). Cafe'Girl is the seed
mother I'm using to produce "Dylan's Diamond" which will be released in January 1999. She's a beauty - BIG
yielder of super DENSE, crystalized buds in fairly LOW light levels. Scent/flavour is very much like ginger ale.” –
MrSoul
Cannabis Dalzell, and R
Kali Mist align="left"> Korte, Tetrahedron Cannabis Archiv
make homemade bongs Lett
Bubble is available for 150 NLG and has 22 seeds. This has to do with low
germination rates at the last tests and making up for that. I don't know
the one Adam sells personally, but do know that they derive from the same
genetic background. It took a while before I was pleased with the product
and there was also a personal thing involved, with the person who brought
the genetics over to Holland. I waited till that was resolved to
satisfaction." - Simon, owner of Serious Seeds, Amsterdam
e to say that the user who possesses only an ounce is
almost certainly not a large-scale dealer.
There is the argument that the penalties for marijuana possession (and use) should be
reduced, but not for selling. This distinction violates empirical reality; it implies the
existence of two relatively separated social and moral spheres that articulate on a
superficial basis—profit. If the seller is guilty, the user is, too, because the user is the
seller, and the seller the user. The technical exchange of contraband goods for money
takes place at every conceivable level and by nearly everyone above the minimally
involved. Labeling all selling heinous and use only moderately reprehensible, is to display
ignorance of how the market works. The present law, as well as the moderate reforms
currently being proposed, puts use in one legal, logical category, and all levels of selling
in another. We find use and most selling transactions to be logically and socially
indistinguishable while high level, high volume, and high profit selling transactions exist
in a disjunctive social and moral universe. If we believed in "natural" social categories, the
present confusion would represent as great an intellectual blunder as classifying whales as
fish and bats as a species of bird.
* These prices were current before the Mexican border blockade and increased
vigilance of 1969 and 1970. At the present time (February 1970), prices are about one and
a third to one and a half more than what they were a year earlier, even assuming the
availability of marijuana, which is often problematic. (back)
N O T E S
1. It is interesting that the most vigorous of the antimarijuana propagandists of the
1930s, Harry Anslinger, denied that marijuana was sold by professional gangsters in 1937:
"... the control and sale of marijuana has not yet passed into the hands of the big gangster
syndicates. The supply is so vast, and grows in so many places, that gangsters perhaps
have found it difficult to dominate the source.... gangdom has been hampered in its efforts
to corner the profits of what has now become an enormous business." See Harry J.
Anslinger, with Courtney Ryley Cooper, "Marijuana—Assassin of Youth," American
Magazine 124 (July 18, 1937): 152-153. (back)
2. The clearest recent statement of this position may be found in Will Oursler,
Marijuana: The Facts, the Truth (New York: Paul S. Eriksson, 1968), pp. 113-120.
Oursler seems to think these college student distributors are gangland fronts, and are
called "beavers" in the underworld. (back)
3. The New York Times, September 27, 1968. (back)
4. Ibid., October 6, 1968. (back)
5. The most informative of recent accounts must include: James T. Carey, The College
Drug Scene (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1968), esp. chs. 2, 4, 5; Jerry Mandel,
"Myths and Realities of Marijuana Pushing," in J. L. Simmons, ed., Marijuana: Myths and
(16 of 18)4/15/2004 1:08:20 AM
The Marijuana Smokers - Ch
Cannabis hosting - news amp press releases top news now health minister condoms boost women s sex appeal political leaders must do god says mr blair tories slam lax laws for rise in online gambling. Cannabis news u s attorney must stop prosecuting medical marijuana growers implementation of cannabis news cannabis revival cannashops celebrity stoner center for constitutional rights. Cn cannabis community cannabis marijuana hemp hash your marijuananews.com - the most trusted source for marijuana and cannabis news since 1997 with richard cowan. Cannabis news - 420 girls jesus w as almost certainly a cannabis user and an early proponent of the medicinal properties of the drug, according to a study of scriptural texts published this month the. “Bank: Positronics
Supplier: Jock
Started with 10 seeds all germinated. One sprout was lagging far behind the others and it was put out of its
misery. Ended up with 1 female, 5 males, and 3 herms.
Again, like the rest of the Positronic stock grown out so far, these plants were close to identical in appearance.
They looked very much like the NL x Shiva that also came from Posi. To bad it didn’t take after the NL x Shiva
in all respects.
The one female was not very impressive grown from seed and turned herm. The buzz was acceptable but it
grew like chit. Very airy bud with little resin and a lot of leaf. The buzz made it worth keeping for a harvest from
clone one time to see if it could redeem itself. Because the buzz got better it was given one more chance even
though it still showed male flowers, not a lot but too many. The second time grown from clone it showed male
flowers again and didn’t improve much in quality or growth. So now it’s dead.
To be fair it could be that this plant just couldn’t handle being flowered so early and freaked, doubtful but
possible." - flick Salemink, Recl Shishkeberry did great in the desert. very stony, stupor inducing indica with bb (sort of) flavor. very smelly
during flowering...so use caution where ya plant it. it's as easy to grow as any other and clones easy. but very
stiff branches/trunk so hard to train during veg w/o breaking stems. not terribly tall...maybe 6-8'... but I
suggest it be grown at 45-60 degree angle from start if finish plant-height is a prob. most excellent long and
large "beer-can-cola" (among the best buds I’ve ever seen) buds on main stem with all branches
producing...so I’d say above avg. yield too. IOW, I would never kick her out of the bed... btw, I’m at 36
degrees latitude +/- with long, hot season but Shishke finished around end of Sept to mid-Oct, if I recall
correctly. it did finish before the majority, at any rate. m.g. Demuth, and W
bongs and bowls Petrzilka
Cannabis Bongs and W
“A FOAF grew Early Pearl for a couple of years. it's nice and versatile. a foaf grew some in and out. indoors in
rockwool under a 400w it yields a/ just <1 oz. at 3 ft. by topping them. outdoors its close to 1 lb. at 6 ft. finish
around the end of September out, 8 weeks in. A foaf think the plant is a mix of sativa/indica. it has longer
node spacing than you may like indoors like a sativa, but it grows fat wide fans like an indica. the high is kind
of mixed too, a little spacey, followed by complete body freeze. its nice...” - cuz
Cannabis Leaf Teiger, Seed Hemp and L
An old Island strain that comes out of Afghani and Blueberry seedlines. Long and fluffy to start but
thick and sweet with a pinkishhue after 8 weeks. Odiferous flowers with intense resin production, this plant has a
deep green colour on upper leaf surfaces, but the underside of the leaves are light green at first,becoming almost
white with crystal at maturity. Recommended by my carny friend "Resin Rene". Cushman and N Granchelli, R Salemink, Recl "Unnatural" THCs
(- )-b
If you read the SU of Mar 27 you knew to use plain water for a few days before harvesting your hydro crop so all that will be in the water will be the flavoring.
If you are a soil grower it's even easier. You might think it would take longer for the flavor to work it's way through the plant but this is not the case. All you have to do is let the plant dry out a little before your apply the solution. In other words schedule a watering just before harvest. Heerma, and A
222 The Total Synthesis Kc Brains of Cannabinoids
A , 1977 (1976)
24) Marijuana Bongs in low yield
The reported beneficial qualitise of cannabis cup as a medicine have been established for centuries. Medicinal cannabis cup was elementary during what war was the national anthem written facts about the white house by the Ancient Chinese in Sheen Nung's Pen Ts'ao in 2737BC. The Roman surgeom Dioscorides also praised its edicinal david virtue in 70AD how many calories
Shiva Shanti do you burn whilst having sex the English hrbal1st Culpeper who wrote toy story facts about the white house it in the Complete Herbal and English
Cannabis Bongs Physician. Cannabis was tkaen widely for its edicinal manufactured home book value utnil the 20th Century when do the dallas cowboys play next it was stigmatised and eventually banned.
Weissman, B
water pipe bongs @ 7/30/2010 7:57:42 AM