Some hennessey VSOP and a Heineken. Thats about as close to being stoned as I get. But I do love to sit back and watch my fish
Are all Fish enthusiasts' Stoners, or just me and the people I interact with
- Thread starter alex101
- Start date
i do the same thing thing124, blunt then tanks, or blunt then seaworld, or blunt then lfs. all my lfs know me for it so they jus see me, say wassup and kno im about to be there for a while lol
Oh lordy, I can't believe this thread has gone as long as it has. Is there really a need to discuss weed with such vigor? It's just weed people! It's not friggin meth for cryin' out loud! Listen, weed is illegal 'cause the gov't can't make no dinero from it, not 'cause it's some kind of "gateway drug"! People don't die from weed!! They die from cigarettes and alcohol but it's ok 'cause that $hit is taxed. Listen you won't get liver damage and lung cancer from pot but in my state you'll get at least a nice night in central booking (been there, done that) sooooo, let's not judge, and lets not lay out our panties for everyone to see. You smoke weed? Great, you like jack straight up? great! You only smoke reds? Who gives a hoot! It's not up to us to judge, just be cool and love fish (how *** was that last one 
"!!!!
Ok, 'scuse me while I light up.....
"!!!!Ok, 'scuse me while I light up.....
The original question was "Are all fish lovers lovers of the plant as well." , which nobody bothered answering.
Despite what Oddball might say, the question is perfectly justified.
I believe there is a correlation.
Obviously not all fishkeepers smoke up. But I'd say that there are more stoners among the fishkeepers and more fishkeepers among stoners than there are (proportionally) either among the general population. Keeping fish seems more like something a stoner would do. It is such a laid-back, contemplating activity. I am sure that the percentage of stoners is also quite high among painters, musicians etc. I would also expect people who like to bet on horses and stuff to be more likely cocaine consumers.
Guppy, I agree with legalization of drugs to be the only solution to this issue. But I hope you realise that the distribution/sale of drugs must still be in some way restricted. If you were to allow free commercialization of all drugs, it would be the end of our civilization. Throughout history there are many examples of decline of civilization due to availability of one or another drug (obviously not Cannabis).
So (Guppy and all) how do you imagine it should be done?
Despite what Oddball might say, the question is perfectly justified.
I believe there is a correlation.
Obviously not all fishkeepers smoke up. But I'd say that there are more stoners among the fishkeepers and more fishkeepers among stoners than there are (proportionally) either among the general population. Keeping fish seems more like something a stoner would do. It is such a laid-back, contemplating activity. I am sure that the percentage of stoners is also quite high among painters, musicians etc. I would also expect people who like to bet on horses and stuff to be more likely cocaine consumers.
Guppy, I agree with legalization of drugs to be the only solution to this issue. But I hope you realise that the distribution/sale of drugs must still be in some way restricted. If you were to allow free commercialization of all drugs, it would be the end of our civilization. Throughout history there are many examples of decline of civilization due to availability of one or another drug (obviously not Cannabis).
So (Guppy and all) how do you imagine it should be done?
eman b115;611146; said:
Like I said, the people who want to use drugs will get them whether it's legal or not. Either way, trying to raise your child right is the best you can do, because she's going to start making her own decisions one day and using drugs will probably be one of them. It's just my speculation, though, about the numbers staying the same. I don't think when people get really heavily into drugs that cost is a deciding factor in whether someone will keep using them.
And my comments about alcohol were because I thought if there were sufficient information, it might be a good comparison: alcoholics/drug addicts. Alcohol is a drug and it was once illegal, which led to all kinds of gang violence centered around alcohol.
edit**
Shekes, I think restrictions on who can use drugs would be a good place to start. Not just an age limit, but something involving a permit saying you have no dependents to look after.
I could never smoke weed. I have watched it pick apart my family first hand. My dad used to be a good guy... now he traffics for the mob to get his fix. seriously. that's why we moved away from florida all the way up to AK... to get away from him... and he does keep alot of fishtanks still, so yes to the original question for him.
I talk to him still, he will always be my dad, but he has never been the same since he has started going downhill.
once you have seen what i've seen, known what i've known, you would not smoke or support it. even in moderation it is bad IMO.
I talk to him still, he will always be my dad, but he has never been the same since he has started going downhill.
once you have seen what i've seen, known what i've known, you would not smoke or support it. even in moderation it is bad IMO.
lovespunaround;611240; said:
That is true. To see that and also to understand that Cannabis is not at all harmless click here.
There are many more "groups" that would need to be "protected" from drugs then youth and people with responisibilities. Already understanding who may and who may not take drugs is a very difficult task. But the toughest or perhaps the impossible one would be to legislate and enforce it. "people with dependants" you say? What about bus/cab drivers (never mind pilots)? Doctors, nurses, dentists, vets?
etc etc etc
Once you compile the comlete list you might decide that total prohibition might have been an easier task...
The problem isn't drugs. The problem is that we always delegate the responsibility to the legislator but are never happy with the Law. We need to improve the democracy.
I'm reading all of your responses and they seem so heart felt. I just want to get a few things clear. My orginal question was to see who enjoyed a nice toke while watching there fish. Now someone destroying there life because of MARIJUANA!!??? that's ludicrous. They destroy their lives because they can't cope and they use the drug to cope. They destroy their lives because they start to MIX DRUGS LIKE SILVIA AND go onto other crap. My brother was a pot head, but moreso an unbalanced alcoholic who tried crack one drunkin night became addicted ruined his life, robbed all his family and has now been in jail for 2 years. Now one perception could be "well he smoked weed and thats a gateway drug" Or it could be that he's a complete MORON and completely mentally unstable. So I'm going to rephrase my statement. I am NOT a stupid stoner, in fact Im currently in my 6th year of college three of which I spent at THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY and I've already had my own successful business now for over 2 years. I enjoy smoking at night before bed while I watch TV. That's called being responsible not being out of control. Most of you find no problem with a beer at night after work. So lets tone down how we percieve my question. Who enjoys a nice toke at night while watching their fish?...................simple.
BTW......in my psychology course I've just learned that Marijuana does not even have a SET CATAGOREY (ie. Halucinagin, upper, downer etc). There is NO CONCRETE FACTS behind it being harmful or Not harmful. The research is right in the middle. So until someone comes up with CONCRETE evidence that it's bad for you.........I will continue to enjoy.
BTW......in my psychology course I've just learned that Marijuana does not even have a SET CATAGOREY (ie. Halucinagin, upper, downer etc). There is NO CONCRETE FACTS behind it being harmful or Not harmful. The research is right in the middle. So until someone comes up with CONCRETE evidence that it's bad for you.........I will continue to enjoy.
