welcome to our lovely gulag!

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

---yes, we whacko conspiracy nuts are always exaggerating. I apologize, there's no growing police state, we aren't under ever increasing surveillance, there's no chance of some sort of complete fascist takeover,the government doesn't pass laws that make ordinary people criminals, nor does it make money on this, nor do all these "security" companies. I mean, this is the US, freedom, politicians are all going to "fight" for us, they sayso on all their teevee ads!

Ya, right, read this

-- zog (zzoggy@yahoo.com), February 15, 2000


Yes, consider how much small of a percentage of the population is in, say Saudi prisons... We should follow their examples of shortening the appeals process, expanding capital punishment, and the use of removal of a hand for a second offense of theft.

Roughly half of our prison population is there on drug related offenses...executions would cut the population tremendously...not to mention making mincemeat of recidivism.

And we would be cutting costs, as well...in Saudi prisons, the prisoner (or family/friends, if any) pay the cost of maintenance...food, drink, and clothing. If the prisoner is indigent and has no family or friends, the Saudis are not without mercy...bread and water will be provided...

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), February 15, 2000.

I understand Iran and Iraq cut costs a little further yet -- after an execution the executee's family is required to pay for the bullet.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), February 16, 2000.

I can't disagree with your conclusion of this problem...

I AM disturbed by the obvious fact that the level of our prison population reflects just how many people would place a substance abuse *problem* at the top of their list of priorities. It paints an ugly picture of an obviously self-centered society. No wonder we are raising so many screwed up individuals. Allowing them to indulge themselves 'freely and openly' isn't exactly my idea of a resolution to the problem.

I can't help but promote the fact that the ONLY proven program to be successful in assisting people to leave their addictions behind, has been AA.....a faith based program. Perhaps the time has come to promote faith, ethics and morals once again (duhhh, dope slap). The lack of its presence in our daily lives has taken far too great a toll on our society. This fact is so *blatantly* obvious in our government, businesses, family lives, school systems, entertainment industries, media, neighborhoods... not just our prison systems.

Alan Keyes has done a remarkable job of pointing this fact out. Such a simple solution to such a complex and far-reaching disaster.

(Allow me to save rabid individuals their supply of flammable solvents by stating that I said, "faith" as meaning all inclusive...for any of you who believe you are your higher power, I offer my apology if I've offended you as well as my deepest sympathy)

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), February 16, 2000.

I AM disturbed by the obvious fact that the level of our prison population reflects just how many people would place a substance abuse *problem* at the top of their list of priorities.

Yes, it is a shame that so many people are willing to put people behind bars because they use the wrong drugs.

It paints an ugly picture of an obviously self-centered society. No wonder we are raising so many screwed up individuals. Allowing them to indulge themselves 'freely and openly' isn't exactly my idea of a resolution to the problem.

Oops, I guess I got you wrong. You prefer to put people behind bars rather than let them use the drugs they want to? Then you're part of the problem, not part of the solution.

-- Steve Heller (steve@steveheller.com), February 16, 2000.

On a more serious note:

In Hawaii, we have a serious state prison shortage...but we are even shorter of decent drug treatment programs. We need to get the drug rehab programs working and try to get the recipients back on the street as functional, employed citizens. Then we could use all that excess prison space for, let's see, how about crooked pols?

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), February 16, 2000.


The extra gooey stuff in the peanut butter lies in and extending this quote from that article: "The prison industry employs more than 523,000 people, making it the country's biggest employer after General Motors." By extending that quote I'm referring to the explosive growth of the private sector industry running prisons.

Like we saw not that long back when the rest home industry made very sure to take care of their 'favorite' politicians, so has the private prison industry taken those lessons to heart.

In other words, those that have the power to address this situation are hooked on the money best kept flowing by making the situation even worse. Kind of like quite a few police dept.s are hooked on a continuing stream of confiscation funds.

-- redeye in ohio (not@work.com), February 16, 2000.

Surreal...I'm speechless.

-- Pieter (zaadz@icisp.net.au), February 16, 2000.

Actually Heller, I've had enough of pompous, arrogant, selfish substance abusers, who suffer from denial and puff up about their 'right' to abuse themselves at the expense of EACH and EVERY person in their lives who cares about them, so suck off......

Has anyone else noticed the explosion of drug abuse once the government forced churches out of the picture and placed these people into the hands of government sponsored rehab programs? Just curious.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), February 16, 2000.

Hard core criminals are one thing- But petty first time offenders; I say every sunday take em downtown to the whipping post! Yes a good old fashion PANTS DOWN pattling. Their names called out,offence. Have TV camaras, take the kids and make a day of it. Cotton candy, hot dogs, sodas,they wont do it again- I wouldnt.

-- Juan Valdez (vgd38@hotmail.com), February 16, 2000.

Will Continue Ranting about Religion as the Solution to Everything:
If belief in "God" and religion were such panaceas, this country, Iran, Iraq, and many others would be paradises on earth.

The problem is, more and more people are realizing that belief in "God" and religion is an empty bag, and they are not strong enough and/or intelligent enough to deal with the void.

Drugs are merely a sympton -- not of lack of "ole time religion" but of lack of a viable alternative. You can put 50% of the population in jail, cut off their hands, and a good portion of those both in and out of jail will still try to find something to get off on/in and/or high on.

That's reality -- A is A -- babe.

-- A (A@AisA.com), February 16, 2000.

The "war on drugs" really is insane. Being a "child of the 60s" I've done my fair share of "hard" drugs, like cocaine and LSD. I never did see what the big deal was. It's something you did at parties. Something to make you feel good. Something to make sex better. No one that I know ever got "hooked." No one ever did anything "crazy."

In the old days, if a cop found you with bag of pot, he would dump it out, and send you home. Now, you get arrested, finger-printed, and if you're not a "local boy," sent to the county jail. Then the judge fines you $1,000.00 and suspends your driver's license for at least 6 months. If you're lucky. If you get caught again, it's almost guaranteed prison time. Just for a small bag of pot. A little bigger bag, or something serious like a little coke or acid, and you're going away for a long time.

My "drugie" days are long gone, but I still smoke a joint once in a while. I don't see any difference between that, and having a cocktail. I've seen drunks do violent, crazy things. But never a pot- head. Alcohol is the #1 drug problem is this country, and except for the drunk driving laws, we do virtually nothing about it. More people are addicted to alochol than all other drugs combined.

Go ahead, flame away. My asbestos suit is on! <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), February 16, 2000.

not much time...didn't read all of thread. Bush murdered Karla Faye and puts druggies in jail for something he did himself...yeah, I smoked the stuff...so what

-- canthappen (n@ysayer.com), February 16, 2000.

sysman and A, right...I would rather take my chances with druggies than with religious hypocritical bigots who are so sanctimonious and self righteous

-- canthappen (n@ysayer.com), February 16, 2000.

Will, I bet you have a big poster of Adolph on your wall.

-- canthappen (n@ysayer.com), February 16, 2000.

ummm...A i agree with a lot of what you say except for God being an empty bag....NO WAY!!!!

-- canthappen (n@ysayer.com), February 16, 2000.

A; You're sooo predictable. :)

Sysman; Ditto. I grew up in Honolulu in the 60's and 70's and then I grew up! Alcohol IS worse which is why I choose the term, "s u b s t a n c e abuse".

canthappen; I haven't decorated with posters since 1975. Perhaps you haven't grown up yet?

This country suffers from an enormous substance abuse problem. Just visit a public school system and ask several kids in any given class...it's high time we begin taking some responsibility for our actions people! Anyone who would take ANY risk (in the name of a good time) that might even remotely place them in a position of being robbed of their ability to perform their role as a parent, is either an unmitigated assh*le or THEY NEED HELP. They are confuuuused about their priorities. Denial is an ugly beast.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), February 16, 2000.

Great post, very few people recognize it as a problem. A quote from the article.

"My husband is doing 23 years for just being present in a house where drugs were found, so my 10-year-old son doesn't have his father."

Typical, our legislators and justice system in confinement overdrive. I don't see how anybody in the world would consider this as the right thing to do. Pot should be taxed just like tobacco. The win/win/win scenario is self evident but is there snowballs chance in hell? NOOOOOOOOOO

-- Guy Daley (guydaley@bwn.net), February 16, 2000.

HI Zog!!! Don't know if you'll see this, but just wanted to holler at 'ya. I'm still ticked that the -ing MACHINE seems to running just fine . . . I keep trying to remember that acceptance dosen't mean I have to like it, just don't get hung up on a snag and keep on truckin. As for these big boys that wanna believe there ain't nuttin bigger en them they can't handle - just remember, there's a purpose for everyone, even if it's just to be a bad example! (HA) .... . . . . . . . . . .

-- Magnolia (magnooliaa@yahoo.com), February 16, 2000.

Here in Michigan they can pull you over just because you don't wear a seatbelt. So, if you're speeding and not wearing a seat belt when they happen to pull you over, they really getcha in the wallet.

I wear my seatbelt regardles, but I swear they're enacting this law just to pick up a few extra bucks and find reasons to pull cars off the road, do highway inspections, etc.

-- Tim (pixmo@pixelquest.com), February 16, 2000.

I think drug laws (except for sales to minors) violate the individual rights to life, liberty and property, which, in turn imply a right to privacy -- so they're really unconstitutional.

And we should look at incorrigible drug abusers as suicides -- just slower than the typical suicide. But of course this shouldn't stop us from trying to help them (or contribute to AA, etc., if we wish) if we care about them and individually choose to do so, after weighing what sacrifices it would take from us.

Just no government intervention unless and until the abuser threatens or tries to harm someone.

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), February 16, 2000.


They make us wear the seatbelts in FL too (and enforce it). I don't think they're doing it for a little extra $$ though. It's obvious that it does save lives. Derrick Thomas' accident was testament to that. The one guy with his on walked away from that wreck. The other 2 didn't.


-- Deano (deano@luvthebeach.com), February 16, 2000.

You anti-drug enforcement advocates might look at things a little differently if your next door neighbor was running a meth lab out of his house. Or if your kids were sliding down the sewer because of drug activity. Or if someone you loved was hurt or killed for drugs. You stoners need to take a shot at detox and give something of value back to society. Heller, put down the pipe and step back from the mushrooms!

-- Sifting (through@the.rubble), February 16, 2000.

Re: Drugs: Sifting, you are correct.

There are laws in this country for good reasons. These laws were enacted because men with a love of their country, experience, and knowledge, took the time to research drugs and their effects, and decided it was detrimental to mankind in the long run. I assure you, they have spent a lot of time researching, and discussing the pro's and con's of drug legalization/decriminalization, and have come to their conclusions responsibily.

And, they did it without smoking pot or cocaine.

Most people in positions of power in the government aren't in it for the money - and certainly not for the glory - they're in it for their altruistic love for the citizens who want to better themselves, and this country.

Granted, laws aren't flawless, and even I would like to see some of them changed. However, they are what keep this country from anarchy, and contribute to the lifestyle that allows you to sit at your computer and complain every stinkin' day of your life.


Before anyone wants to complain about seatbelts, they should spend some time as an EMT. You can't imagine how hard it is to scrape bodies off cement, or cut someone's head out of a window.

-- (LL's cousin@inthe.government), February 16, 2000.


If drugs were legal, there would be no meth lab next door. If drugs were legal, there would be no gang wars, with innocent people caught in the cross-fire. If drugs were legal, there would be no cops shot, when they stop someone carrying a bag. If drugs were legal, you would know what you are getting, and not have to worry about the strength, or what it was cut with.

It isn't about drugs, it's about money. Take away that incentive, and you take away all of the associated violence. Marijuana is the biggest cash crop in this country. Imagine what could be done with the tax revenue, if it were legal.

Face it, people are going to get high, wheather it's legal or not. Just take a look at alcohol if you want proof. Why not take advantage of that fact, and do some good with the tax money, instead of wasting billions of dollars, and countless man-hours on enforcement, and ruining peoples lives over something that comes naturally.

I'm not saying turn it into a free-for-all. You should get in trouble for selling to a minor. You should get in trouble driving stoned. What I am saying is that the current policy isn't working, and it never will. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), February 16, 2000.

"I don't see any difference between that, and having a cocktail. I've seen drunks do violent, crazy things. But never a pot- head. Alcohol is the #1 drug problem is this country, and except for the drunk driving laws, we do virtually nothing about it. More people are addicted to alochol than all other drugs combined."

I agree completely. The "War" on drugs has been just about as effective as prohibition- it just makes them more expensive (encouraging people to do stupid things to get them,) more attractive to the young (as a way to rebell and/or show off how "cool" they are,) and a useful tool for the illeagal activities around them. How often do you see a guy on the street corner encouraging cigarette smoking? You don't, because it doesn't pay. (Ok, so there are billboards and ads, but that's still different than personal pushing.) If pot and some of the other "mild" drugs were leagalised and taxed, with the funds going to fund detox centers for anyone who wants off, the crime rate, dispare rate, and general tenor of the streets would improve dramatically. (If anyone has some hard info on the social ramifications in some of the countries where these drugs are leagal compared to our wonderful U.S. of A., please post them. I've seen some, but am at work and can't track it down.)

By all means keep the killers like crack illeagal. While you're at it, anyone have stats on how many deaths are attributable each year to "drugs", including murder for money and/or drugs, ODs, etc. compared to how many are caused between drunken brawls, wife and girlfriend killing, and drunk driveing attributable only to alcohol????

(PS, incase you are wondering, no I am not a druggie wanting to leagalize my own fix. I don't do ANY drugs, including cafiene, much less the rest. But I have watched tobacco and alcohol destroy several members of my family,(and watched them destroy each other) while watching those who used pot get by just fine. The powers that be like us at each other's throats, folks. It's a shame we grant them such easy victories.)

-- Tania Baildon (tbaildon@yahoo.com), February 16, 2000.

Source: http://www.ukcia.org/lib/stats/us-nl1.htm

Keep in mind that this was posted in 1998...wonder if the numbers have changed much?

Drug Policy and Crime Statistics

From the Dutch Embassy web site August 6, 1998 http://www.netherlands-embassy.org/drug-inf.htm



Press, Public and Cultural Affairs

Drug Policy and Crime Statistics

Recent accounts in the U.S. press about the Netherlands drug policy have included incorrect and misleading statistics about drug use and drug-related crimes in the Netherlands. What follows is a short list of facts and comparisons to refute those accounts, and sources are given to permit and encourage third party verification of facts.

Last month use of cannabis (marijuana) by high school seniors:
18.1% in the Netherlands (1996);
23.7% in the U.S. (1997).
(Sources: The Trimbos Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Monitoring the Future Survey, University of Michigan and White House Office of National Drug Control Policy)

Any lifetime use (prevalence) of cannabis by older teens (1994):
30% in the Netherlands;
38% in the U.S.
(Sources: Center for Drug Research, University of Amsterdam; Monitoring the Future Survey, University of Michigan and White House Office of National Drug Control Policy)

Recent (last month) use of cannabis by 15 year olds (in 1995):
15% in the Netherlands;
16% in the U.S.;
24% in the U.K.
(Sources: Trimbos Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Monitoring the Future Survey, University of Michigan and White House Office of National Drug Control Policy; Council of Europe, ESPAD Report)

Any lifetime use of cannabis by 15 year olds (in 1995):
29% in the Netherlands;
34% in the U.S.;
41% in the U.K.
(Sources: Netherlands Institute of Health and Addiction, U.S. National Institute for Drug Abuse; Council of Europe, ESPAD Report)

Heroine addicts as a percentage of population (in 1995):
160 per 100,000 in the Netherlands;
430 per 100,000 in the U.S.
(Sources: Netherlands Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport;
White House Office of National Drug Control Policy)

Murder rate as a percentage of population (in 1996):
1.8 per 100,000 in the Netherlands;
8.22 in the U.S.
(Sources: Netherlands Bureau of Statistics; White House Office of National Drug Control Policy)

Incarceration rate as a percentage of population (1997):
73 per 100,000 in the Netherlands;
645 per 100,000 in the U.S.
(Sources: Netherlands Ministry of Justice; White House Office of National Drug Control Strategy)

Crime-related deaths as a percentage of population:
1.2 per 100,000 in the Netherlands (1994);
8.2 per 100,000 in the U.S. (1995).
(Sources: World Health Organization; Uniform Crime Reports, U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation)

Per capita spending on drug-related law enforcement:
$27 per capita in the Netherlands;
$81 per capita in the U.S.
(Sources: Netherlands Ministry of Justice; White House Office of National Drug Control Strategy)

-- Tim (pixmo@pixelquest.com), February 16, 2000.

Oops...forgot to mention that marijuana is legal in Amsterdam. Could this be why European vacations are popular? ;-)

-- Tim (pixmo@pixelquest.com), February 16, 2000.

You are soooo predictable.
Are you going to continue to insist that religion is the solution? Do you think all "substance abusers" (including Ben&Jerry's addicts) should be in jail? What is YOUR solution -- fascism or freedom?

-- A (A@AisA.com), February 16, 2000.

THe Drug War exists to keep the price up. Organised crime lost a fortune when Prohibition was repealed, they will fight to keep the Drug War alive and soft drugs illegal. The beer and alcohol companys are concerned that people will use something other then their product. Pot is grown easily, Big Brother will have a very hard time collecting the same revenue from weed as it does from marijuana. Do not vote for someone who will put you in jail, vote for a candidate that will STOP the Drug War. Better yet send a check to that candidate. The Drug War and all its horrors continue because we elect our own jailers. Wise up Bush, Mc Cain, Gore and Bradly will put you or anyone you love in jail for a long time. Check out the Libertarian Party, as far as I know its the only one calling for an end to the Drug War. Treatment not detention is the answer.

-- Baddog (lookbeyondtheobvious@reality.com), February 16, 2000.

Anita's doctor says smoking pot and drinking wine is good for you, but stay away from caffeine:


and Sysman, you were mentioned over here:

-- Eye Spy (eyespy@eyespyyyy.xcom), February 16, 2000.

The Government (state, county, especially) are some of the worst offenders in drug abuse. What's the first thing they do to your kids at school? Feed them sugar. Then, when they can't put up with the behavior problems the sugar causes, they dose the kids with ritalin. Why shouldn't a country who uses 95% of the entire world's production of Ritalin have a drug problem?

-- Liz (lizpavek@hotmail.com), February 16, 2000.

A: my suggested solution was treatment. The fact remains that the most successful, long term, proven program is a faith based system. Sorry, I know how painful that must be for you to accept. (BWAAAAAAHAHAHA) You have lashed out at me in your usual faith- hating, atheistic, lonely and shallow fashion. No surprise.

The war on drugs is a joke. The ramifications of a country which suffers from a critical level of substance abuse is obvious and WE are surrounded by it, with or without the war on drugs. Allow me the 'right' to shoot them in the kneecaps if I discover them selling or giving their wares to my children and I'll agree to releasing them ALL. God knows, I can spot a worthless member of society when I see one and I wouldn't even need a scope! They may then tip-toe through the tulips all day long in their newly found 'freedom'.

A society which places value on ethical, moral, honest, considerate, responsible behavior wouldn't be full of abandoned children and prisons bursting at the seams that are filled with individuals who place *brain numbing* ahead of all other considerations and responsibilities in their feeble, out of control lives. The Japanese society (prior to the intervention of Western influences) comes to mind. We have become a pitiful, selfish, self-indulging, materialistic, weak, corrupt, unethical, irresponsible bunch of dumbed down, numbed up goons that wouldn't know HOW to be free even if we actually were. So....let them ALL out and I'll take care of those who aren't able to deal with their freedoms MYSELF. Works for me...how about you?

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), February 16, 2000.

Er, Will,

"A society which places value on ethical, moral, honest, considerate, responsible behavior"

One does not have to be religious, or even believe in God to possess those qualities.

-- (D@n't start.ranting), February 16, 2000.

---will continue farming--sure go right ahead,shoot em all, just remember, you have to shoot the bartenders who might serve your kids a glass of drug someday, the checkout people at the grocery stores who might sell your kids a sixpack of drug, even their own friends, themselves children, who might hand them a can of drug. I'm sure their parents will understand why you had to shoot those kids, I'm sure they will, so go ahead, shoot them. Oh ya, how about the politicos who make the drug alcohol legal, and the stock holders who own stock in the alcohol business, too? don't leave anyone out, go ahead, shoot them all.

as for me, I don't do drugs or alcohol, besides nicotine and caffein, guess that makes me a target, too. Gonna shoot me? Are ya?

the people I've met in my life who are alcoholics with serious problems as opposed to drug abusers with serious problems is about 50 to one or so, and I can't recall EVER meeting anyone with a reefer "problem" that required sticking up stores or mugging old ladies to support the "habit"

It's the money and the political control and power, that's it. sociologists have studied humans in general, about 10% of all humans everywhere will have a problem with any drug, the other 90% will not, but if you take away the PROFIT in keeping it illegal, you will also get rid of approximately 90% of the violent crime in the US. we could get by without the dea at all, and half the police forces in all municipalities almost overnite. No new prisons would need to be built, in fact, there would be a huge tax burden lifted from everyone. I think it's worth it. even a huge cokehead could be supplied for 5$ a day, I don't think there would be a lot of crime associated with that 5$ as opposed to the 300$ or more that that represents today, by the fact of keeping it illegal.. In fact, aren't two of the higher ranking fed officials admitted drug users? I don't think you really want to threaten them, that's a serious no-no I've heard.

some people will abuse firearms ownership, guess we should shoot all the firearms owners--whoops, guess that would include...who again? who started out shooting people because they abused something? Well..go ahead then, it's your duty it seems, after all, there ARE people who abuse guns, even though 99.99% don't abuse them.

Wow--automobiles, too! some people abuse automobiles, guess we should ban cars and shoot all the drivers, makes sense....

bottom line is that people like to get wrecked, at least some people, and the vast majority of citizens enjoy getting semi-wrecked, either daily or on the weekends, whether ganga or gin, booze or bo,cocktails or coke. It's stupid to make one mood alterer legal and the other not, and to ruin peoples lives over it, and inflict on all the citizens the official corruption and crime that comes with it.

the quickest way to lose your own freedoms is to deny freedom to the other guy, when he is not hurting you. we have real laws that address actual crimes, we don't need to tie up the courts and juries and prisons with this other stuff. it leads to a police state, which was the original news report that this thread was based on--5% of the worlds population, and 25% of the worlds prisoners--I dunno, seems a little screwy and DANGEROUS to me, it's a bad precedent, and it hasn't made anyone use or misuse drugs or alcohol, it's just failed. an experiment that failed, we don't have to keep looking at the results forever, it FAILED, the drug war has proven to make victims out of everyone, me, you, that guy over there, we all are victims from a failed and fascistic attempt to change biology. It'll never work, it will only make things worse.

-- zog (zzoggy@yahoo.com), February 16, 2000.

I'm sure it isn't the intention of many here to have implied that the majority of our prison population are first time offense, harmless pot heads, right? That would be laughable. The pot smokers have pontificated and dreamed of the legalization of their chosen drug for decades. Are we now on the subject of Marijuana alone? I never was. Substance abuse isn't harmful to a society? Hmmmmmm... Theories come in many shapes, colors and flavors, but reality works like gravity. I would recommend some of you observe family counciling sessions which are offered through rehabs or attend the gatherings of any one of the *plethora* of substance abuse rehab centers. Experience gravity at work before climbing up onto your podiums and beating your chests. Big brained theories are the last ****ing thing those people are in need of. There is an obvious disconnect going on here. To imply most of our substance abusers are functioning, contributors to society who choose to participate in their drug of choice on a social basis occasionally, is simply dumb as hell. Go visit a prison for chrissakes (other than via Internet). Don't waste my time comparing marijuana with crack or meth or heroin or alcohol. Go out and offer your services to those who have been destroyed by them.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), February 16, 2000.

Most of you people are morons. Can't you see that people like Dubya Bush abuse drugs like coke when they are young, then when moved into the seat of power, enact more laws to increase the profits of the police state and drug lords? And Daddy Bush ran the CIA, which is/was/always will be in the business of facilitating the foreign drug trade.

Wake the f* up will you.

-- The coffee's brewing - no one smells it (@ .), February 16, 2000.

"The beer and alcohol companys are concerned that people will use something other then their product."

This is a capitalist society, so what else is new? (And, it works better than any other, as far as I'm concerned.)

Y2k, and my local BATF, taught me that it is LEGAL to make your own houch, in certain quantities.

So what's the problem?

-- (LL's @ther.cousin), February 16, 2000.

Thanks Eye Spy,

I just left my first, and hopefully last, message on The Idiots Forum. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), February 16, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ