Amsterdam Coffeeshop Directory Forums

THAI CRACK HASH now that sounds interesting !

USBONGLORD wrote:

RollUp wrote:Cali has some great shit. No doubt about it. Not the best IMO however. It all boils down to the grower. There is no way you can say a certain geography has the best pot. If that were the case it would be a worldwide tie. How many of you know a great grower? Every society has those who choose to use their green thumb for the purpose of being a good Samaritan.

Think of every country you have been to and remember the best pot from each and chances are they all scored relatively even right?


Legalization won't happen yet. Jamaica has tried twice in the last 10 years but the US has threatened sanctions so Jamrock had to back off. we are looking at least another decade of Medicinal Use Only IMO.

it all boils down to the grower...no truer words..im done....

Bang on USBL... put an awesome seed in the hands of a moron, and you'll get moron-plant output... put that same bean in the hands of a master, and she will more than likely blow your head off.

You can be sure, the MMJ in Cali will not be a long term success... sooner or later, a republic administration will end the wild weed of the west phenom.

TwoCanucks wrote:

USBONGLORD wrote:

RollUp wrote:Cali has some great shit. No doubt about it. Not the best IMO however. It all boils down to the grower. There is no way you can say a certain geography has the best pot. If that were the case it would be a worldwide tie. How many of you know a great grower? Every society has those who choose to use their green thumb for the purpose of being a good Samaritan.

Think of every country you have been to and remember the best pot from each and chances are they all scored relatively even right?


Legalization won't happen yet. Jamaica has tried twice in the last 10 years but the US has threatened sanctions so Jamrock had to back off. we are looking at least another decade of Medicinal Use Only IMO.

it all boils down to the grower...no truer words..im done....

Bang on USBL... put an awesome seed in the hands of a moron, and you'll get moron-plant output... put that same bean in the hands of a master, and she will more than likely blow your head off.

You can be sure, the MMJ in Cali will not be a long term success... sooner or later, a republic administration will end the wild weed of the west phenom.

Word. One republican administration and it all goes bye-bye.

titus wong wrote:

TwoCanucks wrote:

USBONGLORD wrote:it all boils down to the grower...no truer words..im done....

Bang on USBL... put an awesome seed in the hands of a moron, and you'll get moron-plant output... put that same bean in the hands of a master, and she will more than likely blow your head off.

You can be sure, the MMJ in Cali will not be a long term success... sooner or later, a republic administration will end the wild weed of the west phenom.

Word. One republican administration and it all goes bye-bye.

i disagree. maybe in cali but its written into the state constitution in colorado. seems as if alot of outsiders dont want the us mj scene to grow...

cantona7 wrote:but its written into the state constitution in colorado. seems as if alot of outsiders dont want the us mj scene to grow...

but it can be amended. We have a moratorium on new dispensaries now and certain municipalities have their own moratoriums too.

cantona7 wrote:

titus wong wrote:

TwoCanucks wrote: i disagree. maybe in cali but its written into the state constitution in colorado. seems as if alot of outsiders dont want the us mj scene to grow...

Something to ponder:
For those States that had these laws decided be referendum/proposition, meaning direct vote by the people, why would it matter which political party is in power? Politicians would be committing political suicide if they were to try and block the will of the people.

because states can govern themselves and legalise things but if its something like weed which is federally banned then they dont have to recognise it. the dea can come in and sieze things and shut down shops, etc. was happening all the time during the bush administration. the california medical mj law went into place in like 1996 during the clinton administration.

Here is a link to the LA dispensaries that will have to close and the ones that will be able to stay open after June 7th.

http://www.lasnark.com/2010/05/05/list- ... aries/6172

just had a read through that ICO link Twitch, the rules look exactly the same as in the nederlands except that in LA the license is transferable,
&just like in the Nederlands its those that were quick off the mark that are allowed to stay open, those who dragged their feet, bye bye

i disagree. maybe in cali but its written into the state constitution in colorado. seems as if alot of outsiders dont want the us mj scene to grow...

No, actually it is down to experience.
In the 30 years or so since some states tightened up their previously liberal MJ laws, I have seen MJ movements try to swing the pendulum back and, so far, they have failed every time!

Hence, my enthusiasm for this issue is tempered. IF it happens then YIPPEE, but I won't hold my breath.

I remember when California had MJ decrim (in the 1970's) where, if caught with up to an ounce, you were merely given a ticket and when in Alaska you could have something like a pound for personal use (Also back in the 1970's).

Times have changed. In the 1970's the US Govt wanted people to live in Alaska so, they really didn't give shit what the Alaskan residents did in their own homes.

California is an EXTREMELY Republican state (save for a few areas, mostly in Northern Cal), but if the MJ legalisation referendum passes, then I guess they will stick with it. However, they could at some subsequent later date repeal the law if they so decided.

The reason it matters which party is in power is that Republicans tend to play to the ultra-conservative base, whereas the democrats might not. So, a Republican federal administration might be more willing to usurp state laws and send in the DEA and FBI, even though the state police would not prosecute.

Ingwey Gooblebogger wrote:

i disagree. maybe in cali but its written into the state constitution in colorado. seems as if alot of outsiders dont want the us mj scene to grow...

No, actually it is down to experience.
In the 30 years or so since some states tightened up their previously liberal MJ laws, I have seen MJ movements try to swing the pendulum back and, so far, they have failed every time!

Hence, my enthusiasm for this issue is tempered. IF it happens then YIPPEE, but I won't hold my breath.

I remember when California had MJ decrim (in the 1970's) where, if caught with up to an ounce, you were merely given a ticket and when in Alaska you could have something like a pound for personal use (Also back in the 1970's).

Times have changed. In the 1970's the US Govt wanted people to live in Alaska so, they really didn't give shit what the Alaskan residents did in their own homes.

California is an EXTREMELY Republican state (save for a few areas, mostly in Northern Cal), but if the MJ legalisation referendum passes, then I guess they will stick with it. However, they could at some subsequent later date repeal the law if they so decided.

The reason it matters which party is in power is that Republicans tend to play to the ultra-conservative base, whereas the democrats might not. So, a Republican federal administration might be more willing to usurp state laws and send in the DEA and FBI, even though the state police would not prosecute.

california a republican state? thats a bit of a reach. i spend alot of time there visiting family and friends seeing as its so close and i rarely meet and conservatives. politics usually comes up too .

while we're on the subject of legalisation an event here in washington state kind of goes in favor of ingwey's point. a dispensary in tacoma called north end 420 club was raided(rightfully so they were selling to anyone and everyone with or w/o a dr's rec) and the task force seized 12 pages of i-1068 signatures. they ahvent given them back yet.

I found quite a bit of conservatives while living in Humboldt. Mostly loggers and mostly outside of the city.

geoffk wrote:I found quite a bit of conservatives while living in Humboldt. Mostly loggers and mostly outside of the city.

yea but humboldt county..eureka,arcata,trinidad, etc dont have a very high population so it doesn't rep california as a whole by any means. the bay area..la/orange ct and sd are the most populous areas and i wouldn't say its mostly conservative there. its def going to be more conservative in the more desolated areas and in eastern california..maybe riverside/inland empire or bakersfield.

Cantona7, your point is well taken.

From the elections, it appears that California is moving to the left. (If the proportions of Democrats vs Republicans in both the state assembly and the state senate are any measure of this dimension.)

However, they still have a Republican governor. (BUT, Californians have shown a tendency to elect movie stars as governor. Indicating, perhaps, that they will ignore a candidate's political-economic philosophy, so long as they are famous.)

Also, federally, Cali has 2 Democrats as senators.

As an aside, I remember a Californian comedian (can't recall which one) who once said that "Orange County's left-wing had atrophied so much that if it were a bird if would fly in circles, up its own ass".