Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About hofner67

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. I am thinking that the take away from this thread is that ya don't necessarily need a super duper climate controlled environment. It's obviously not optimal to be way at the fringes... but rather for many patients.... maybe they can grow it well enough...... And if ur incapable or have other desires.... by all means.... get a caregiver..... and obviously.... optimum conditions maximize yield But it doesn't mean and we shouldn't be presenting to patients that because they can't afford a fancy fancy grow setup .....that they should think they can't could grow quality meds for themselves.... they can.... If ur able... try..... be damned optimal conditions In fact.... a lil outside optimal yield conditions.... could yield u more potent meds......this might not be a good business model.... agreed..... but somefolks just need meds Great genetics get u long long way toward great meds If ur able try..... n develop the quality and scope of ur techniques and ur grow as u go .......incrementally One problem or challenge at a time...... don't make it daunting
  2. I would love grow outdoors. Its just not the right time to try for me:( Seems like, however, you could crop and bend the plants in the pool without having to dig and deal with flooding. And it would be easier.
  3. From what I understand, growing with 400 watt HPS and MH is more prevalent in Europe, unlike the US where 1000 watters are preferred. As such, its easier to see the possibility that a high powered LED or induction lamp might possibly compare to a 400 watt HPS. This may be why we see more innovative approaches in Europe. It would seem that a 1000 watter is a pretty large hammer that is difficult to replicate with such dainty tools as an led or induction light. I have run them all...400 what hps/mh, leds, and induction lights. But I only fool around with stuff...I am not a serious grower/caregive that needs high yields on a consistent basis. 1000 watts is out of my league.
  4. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/29/movies/code-of-the-west-directed-by-rebecca-richman-cohen.html?emc=tnt&tntemail1=y&_r=0 excerpts below It’s all about protecting the young people, of course. “We stand to lose a whole generation of kids,” Cherrie Brady, a community advocate, says in “Code of the West.” This film from Rebecca Richman Cohen is a mostly dutiful documentary that drifts dangerously close to earnestness. It tells a sad, rage-provoking story about the 2010 campaign to repeal Montana’s legalization of medical marijuana. (And the “Godfather” juxtaposition between a legislative vote and federal grow-house raid is creative.) Opponents contended that the drug’s presence led to increased use among teenagers and that the patients with prescriptions were healthy “old hippies.” Too bad the title’s import is largely lost. The “Code of the West” was another bill the Montana Legislature considered in 2010, a symbolic list of noble 19th-century cowboy guidelines to live by. But that point — that those values are a far cry from what the anti-marijuana forces are demonstrating — barely registers. Tom Daubert, who was indicted as a partner in Montana Cannabis, tries to say something kind about his political opponents and achieves memorable passive-aggression: “I think they’re afraid of the complexity of life.” But the whole thing comes down to Lori Burnam, navigating her modest home while attached to various tubes. Marijuana, she says, is the only medication that relieves her pain from cancer and emphysema without incapacitating side effects. Near the end of the film she has to switch to morphine. Burnam died in January. A version of this review appeared in print on March 29, 2013, on page C6 of the New York edition w
  5. http://www.alternet.org/how-high-too-high-drive?akid=10071.142144.5-VN0P&rd=1&src=newsletter796030&t=9 On the evening of February 23, 2010, Rodney Koon was pulled over for doing 83 in a 55 zone outside Traverse City, Michigan. The deputy who stopped Koon noticed that the inside of his Toyota RAV4 smelled funny, and the middle-aged carpenter admitted that he'd taken a few hits of marijuana six hours earlier. As a pipe-carrying medical-marijuana user (for a hernia and rheumatoid arthritis), Koon thought that the law was on his side. The cop thought otherwise and took him in for a blood test, which revealed traces of THC, or tetrahydrocannabinol, pot's psychoactive ingredient. Koon was charged with violating the state's "zero tolerance" drugged-driving law. He's still fighting the charges; if convicted, he faces a suspended license and, since he has a previous DUI, up to a year in prison. Koon's case centers on a contentious practical issue that has emerged with the spread of pot legalization: how to define—and prevent—stoned driving. Between 2009 and 2011, the number of THC-positive blood samples obtained from drivers by Colorado police more than doubled. A study found that about 7 percent of California drivers surveyed on two weekend nights last summer tested positive for THC. Nearly the same percentage had alcohol in their blood; 1 percent had both pot and booze. (Drivers who agreed to participate in the study were given legal immunity, handed $20, and hooked up with a ride home if necessary.) But just how stoned is too stoned to drive? Figuring that out isn't easy. In all 50 states, if you're pulled over on suspicion of driving under the influence, you must submit to a Breathalyzer test or face arrest and possibly a blood test. Yet cops lack anything like a Breathalyzer for THC, and studies have shown that the field sobriety test widely used by police departments correctly fingers stoned drivers only about 30 to 50 percent of the time; drunks are detected 80 percent of the time. Some police departments are trying to improve those odds: The Colorado State Patrol employs specialized drug recognition experts armed with a 12-step protocol that includes one-leg stands, finger-to-nose tests, and checking for "a lack of ocular convergence." Although Colorado does not have a legal limit on blood THC levels, it wins convictions on 90 percent of its drugged-driving cases. Ten states, many of which have legalized medical marijuana, simply make it illegal to drive with any trace of marijuana in your blood. Other states essentially regulate the drug like alcohol, requiring drivers to stay below a set limit of cannabinoids in their blood. When Washington voters legalized pot last November, they also outlawed driving with a blood THC level over 5 nanograms per milliliter—about half the level detected in Koon. Ohio and Nevada's limit is even stricter: 2 ng/ml. These rules appeal to a public accustomed to drunk-driving standards, and they give police a simple benchmark for making arrests. But these approaches don't account for what scientists know about marijuana's effects on drivers. "The reality is that alcohol and cannabis are two very different drugs that affect people in very different ways," says Jan Ramaekers, a psychology and neuroscience professor at Maastricht University in the Netherlands. A 2009 study funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse found that THC can persist in chronic pot smokers' blood for a week after they stop smoking, sometimes at levels in excess of 3 ng/ml. Other research shows that those residual blood levels (and sometimes even much higher levels) don't impair most heavy users' psychomotor skills. If the goal is to arrest only people who are driving dangerously, Ramaekers says, then laws like Washington's could lead to a rash of false convictions. Continued from previous page While booze can make people drive faster and more aggressively, marijuana has the opposite effect: Pot smokers, studies show, tend to compensate for their impairment by slowing down and leaving larger gaps between themselves and other cars. Still, Ramaekers cautions against thinking that stoners acting like Sunday drivers are safer. Marijuana users may "try to create their own box of safety, and within that world they can operate fine," he says. "But there's a lot of other information outside of that box that they can't process, and that is a problem." Road tests and driving simulator studies have found that the more weed drivers inhale, the worse they do at essentials such as staying in their lanes, responding to sudden hazards (like a dog running into the street), and multitasking—for example, reading street signs on a twisty road while avoiding oncoming traffic. On average, drivers with blood THC levels equal to or in excess of 5 ng/ml cause crashes at 2.7 to 6.6 times the rate of sober drivers, and getting into the driver's seat less than an hour after smoking a joint nearly doubles your risk of getting into a crash. While some pro-legalization advocates have signed off on strict stoned-driving laws, others remain wary. All the focus on THC levels and blood tests misses the point, says Paul Armentano, the deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, the nation's most vocal pro-legalization group. "Citizens aren't concerned about what substances may or may not be in drivers' bloodstreams," he says. "They're interested in identifying and prosecuting drivers who operate a motor vehicle while impaired by the substance. So if the question here is impairment, then the focus of our research and law enforcement ought to be on better determining and identifying which drivers are impaired." And that brings us back to Rodney Koon. Besides telling the officer that he'd smoked pot earlier in the day, Koon also admitted that he'd recently had a beer, yet he passed a Breathalyzer test. Using current testing methods, there's no foolproof way to gauge just how intoxicated Koon might have been, if at all. And in a zero-tolerance state like Michigan, it doesn't matter, anyway. Koon's attorney, Mary Chartier, says that's a serious problem as more Americans enjoy the right to get high: "You are effectively eliminating the ability of protected marijuana users to drive." Josh Harkinson is a staff reporter at Mother Jones. For more of his stories, click here. Email him with tips at jharkinson (at) motherjones (dot) com. To follow him on Twitter, click here. Get Josh Harkinson's RSS feed.
  6. will listen for sure, as usual........Just in the morning...on way to bed....night. I never miss the the show. Totally fav. keep up the good works. thanks.
  7. The zmodo is wired....it can tricky to install cause of the wires. I like it cause there are no batteries. The system is fine for me. Mine came with a hard drive and 4 non-zoomable cameras. 199.00. Dogs would probably be better, but much more expensive.
  8. Its been a tough year. We made it!!!!!!
  9. No pickled herring for me....just pickled. happy new year!
  10. I am liking the compassion chronicles, however. And a dispensary guide would appear helpful for patients.
  11. Don't really know what's legal anymore....and it doesn't seem to matter anyhow ----as it seem that the police can arbitrarily arrest and take you to court no matter the law.....I want to avoid police encounters cause its hard to know what'll happen. I would not open a dispensary in that kind of environment, whether arguably legal or not. And all that nonsense about what is a locked and enclosed facility and who can have access.....too many rules that don't make sense purported by creepy judges and prosecutors
  12. Seems like the dispensaries are safe for patients.....not too sure about the proprietors or workers, excepting possibly in cities like Ann Arbor and Yipsi. have been great assets to me for seeds and clones......liked the farmers market too..... that said....I am hoping things legally settle down a bit......retiring for awhile.....even as a patient. Looking for a break thru at the federal level with scheduling and/or clarifying legislation My nerves can't even handle being a patient/farmer anymore.....too many rules
  13. I put in a zmodo system.....works great considering how inexpensive it is....think you'd have to spend thousands more to just get a marginally better system. http://www.amazon.com/Zmodo-PKD-DK4216-500GB-Internet-Accessible-4-Channel/dp/B005FM8UL4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1357050701&sr=8-1&keywords=zmodo
  14. What do you think the courts will ultimately do? do you think they will be literal with the words or take into consideration the context?
  • Create New...