Question about street kid fashion
John
often have on the brims of their hats?
Brian Smith
> Does anyone know what those silvery metal clips are that street kids
> often have on the brims of their hats?
I don't know about those, but I have noticed an increase in the number
of adults with baby soothers stuck in their mouths. One can only wonder
why, about a lot of things in life.
Picasso
those are ravers. they use them so they don't eat their tongues or
something like that
Al Smith
That was a fad around 10 years ago, as I recall. It is a sign of a
desire to return to an infant state, with no responsibilities or
duties. Apparently acting like spoiled 7-year olds is too adult
for today's generation.
-Al-
Al Smith
Uh-huh. I like my answer better. They are trying to crawl back
into the womb and pull the door shut behind them because they
don't like the big, bad world and how it makes them do things,
such as pick up after themselves.
-Al-
John
It's related taking ecstasy at raves. Ecstasy causes users to grind
their teeth and flex their jaws and the soothers give them something
to bite against.
The little hat clips are like an underground fashion accessory worn
just by street kids. I wonder where they get them and what they mean.
Brian Smith
>
> It's related taking ecstasy at raves. Ecstasy causes users to grind
> their teeth and flex their jaws and the soothers give them something
> to bite against.
Thanks for that information, John.
> The little hat clips are like an underground fashion accessory worn
> just by street kids. I wonder where they get them and what they mean.
What do the clips look like?
Happy New Year, by the way, John.
Richard Bonner
> Does anyone know what those silvery metal clips are that street kids
> often have on the brims of their hats?
*** Roach clips?
Richard
Richard Bonner
*** Just another thing that sucks, I guess.
Richard
Al Smith
Just another detail of modern pop culture that has passed me by.
-Al-
Brian Smith
>
> *** Just another thing that sucks, I guess.
Or is sucked in, Richard.
Brian Smith
>
> Roach clips aren't THAT modern. I heard about them in the 60's,
> they're the little clips you use when your weed gets down to the last
> half an inch and you don't want to waste any. :-)
All this time I thought roach clips were what one used to hold their
roaches in place. :^)
Rick Walker
"Donna Whitman" wrote:
>
> Roach clips aren't THAT modern. I heard about them in the 60's,
> they're the little clips you use when your weed gets down to the last
> half an inch and you don't want to waste any. :-)
>
Or burn your fingers. :) In fact, I have an old one kicking around in here
somewhere... it has a dead scorpion (looks pretty real) encased in the
plastic part you hold between your fingers. Think I bought it downtown at
Radical back in the 90s.
Al Smith
It's funny somebody doesn't invent filter-tipped marijuana cigarettes.
-Al-
James Warren
Interesting question. Would the filter trap the THC?
--
jw (a.k.a. Nagilum)
Al Smith
I doubt it, but what do I know, I've never lit up. It would enable
the smoker to burn all the marijuana without burning their
fingers. Another thing that would be useful is some sort of
additive that would allow the marijuana to continue smoldering
without going out.
-Al-
Rick Walker
"Donna Whitman" wrote:
>
> Tweezers would do the job just as well and prevent a person from
> burning their fingers.
>
Until you hand it to someone and they lose their grip. You require
something similar to alligator clips used in electronics; in fact, those
work just fine.
Rick Walker
"James Warren" wrote:
>
> Al Smith wrote:
>>
>>
>
> Interesting question. Would the filter trap the THC?
>
Sure would... you'd still get stoned but you'd waste some in the process.
Straight up, gentlemen!
Brian Smith
>
> That may be an alternate use but .... ;-^)
LOL! There are people here that could probably answer that question
quickly, if they aren't floating. :^)
tom
> Straight up, gentlemen!
sounds like an oxymoron to me ...
tom
> Until you hand it to someone and they lose their grip. You require
> something similar to alligator clips used in electronics; in fact, those
> work just fine.
Rick, Rick, Rick ...
it's like trying to explain Heaven to someone who doesn't appreciate
Angel Food Cake ...
James Warren
If it smolders, it will eventually burn out. ;(
--
jw (a.k.a. Nagilum)
Mike Spencer
> Roach clips aren't THAT modern. I heard about them in the 60's,
> they're the little clips you use when your weed gets down to the last
> half an inch and you don't want to waste any. :-)
Right. In the 60s, some university friends moved to San Francisco,
to, you know man, like, groove on the scene. They sent us a roach
clip, cleverly made from parts liberated from a dial telephone.
Since we're not into weed at all but wanted to reciprocate
appropriately, we sent them a hand-crocheted pot holder.
I dunno about the OP's question. I'll have to read on...
--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
Al Smith
Yeah, but if you're high on dope, you don't want to have to try to
keep relighting your reefer, right? You might set fire to your own
hair.
-Al-
Al Smith
But the smoke would be smoother, and they could add a touch of
menthol to the filter. And pepperment flavor.
-Al-
James Warren
Oh, reefer madness. Gotta watch out for that. :)
--
jw (a.k.a. Nagilum)
tom
> Yeah, but if you're high on dope, you don't want to have to try to keep
> relighting your reefer, right? You might set fire to your own hair.
sounds like personal experience to me ...
and another PPP (private-pot-puffer) comes out of the closet
see Rick? we're not alone ...
Richard Bonner
> It's funny somebody doesn't invent filter-tipped marijuana cigarettes.
> -Al-
*** Apparently the tobacco companies have. Some decades ago, they
supposedly trademarked names for the day when marijuana became legal and
also designed the delivery systems.
Richard
Richard Bonner
> > Roach clips aren't THAT modern. I heard about them in the 60's,
> > they're the little clips you use when your weed gets down to the last
> > half an inch and you don't want to waste any. :-)
> Right. In the 60s, some university friends moved to San Francisco,
> to, you know man, like, groove on the scene. They sent us a roach
> clip, cleverly made from parts liberated from a dial telephone.
> Since we're not into weed at all but wanted to reciprocate
> appropriately, we sent them a hand-crocheted pot holder.
> --
> Mike Spencer
*** Would it not char when it held their burning pot?
Richard
Rick Walker
Yeah, but you know what I mean. :)
Rick Walker
"Al Smith" wrote:
>
> But the smoke would be smoother, and they could add a touch of menthol to
> the filter. And pepperment flavor.
>
The filter would make it smoother alright, but it would trap a lot of THC
while doing so. Best bet for a cool smoke would be a water pipe or a bong.
Then, have a peppermint after and you're good to go!
Rick Walker
We're aren't, that's for sure tom. But I don't think Al's a smoker.
Rick Walker
"tom" wrote:
>
> Rick, Rick, Rick ...
> it's like trying to explain Heaven to someone who doesn't appreciate
> Angel Food Cake ...
>
I thought I'd give it a shot though, tom. ;)
Al Smith
I don't smoke, I don't drink, and I don't take perscription
medicine unless absolutely necessary. That means no sleeping
pills, no pain pills, no happy pills. For me, this is as good as
it ever gets.
-Al-
Al Smith
I don't know, I bet the early tobacco smokers said the same thing
when tailor-mades and filter-tips were introduced.
-Al-
Al Smith
Good for them. It might just save their industry, and nobody is
better suited to deliver a really fine marijuana cigarette than
the tobacco companies.
-Al-
James Warren
Maybe you should Al, not for your sake but for our sake. :)
--
jw
"Science is a candle in the dark" - Carl Sagan.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wV_REEdvxo
http://video.stumbleupon.com/#p=e5xdcxablf
Al Smith
> Al Smith wrote:
>> Rick Walker wrote:
>>>
>>> "tom" wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Al Smith:
>>>>> Yeah, but if you're high on dope, you don't want to have to try to
>>>>> keep
>>>>> relighting your reefer, right? You might set fire to your own hair.
>>>>
>>>
>>>> sounds like personal experience to me ...
>>>>
>>>> and another PPP (private-pot-puffer) comes out of the closet
>>>>
>>>> see Rick? we're not alone ...
>>>>
>>>
>>> We're aren't, that's for sure tom. But I don't think Al's a smoker.
>>
>>
>> I don't smoke, I don't drink, and I don't take perscription medicine
>> unless absolutely necessary. That means no sleeping pills, no pain
>> pills, no happy pills. For me, this is as good as it ever gets.
>>
>> -Al-
>
> Maybe you should Al, not for your sake but for our sake. :)
>
But then, how could I be your shining example?
-Al-
Rick Walker
"Al Smith" wrote:
>
> I don't know, I bet the early tobacco smokers said the same thing when
> tailor-mades and filter-tips were introduced.
>
Seeing as nothing's going to change unless it becomes legal, I always have
the option to roll marijuana as I roll my cigarettes, complete with filters.
But... "been there done that" is all the convincing I need to know it's
still a bit of a waste.
Rick Walker
"Al Smith" wrote:
>
> I don't smoke, I don't drink, and I don't take perscription medicine
> unless absolutely necessary. That means no sleeping pills, no pain pills,
> no happy pills. For me, this is as good as it ever gets.
>
To be quite honest Al, that's as good as it's ever going to get. Using
drugs doesn't improve your lot in life; and you stand the chance of losing
all you have, too.
You've made the right choice for you, no doubt in my mind.
Rick Walker
"Al Smith" wrote:
>
> Good for them. It might just save their industry, and nobody is
> better suited to deliver a really fine marijuana cigarette than
> the tobacco companies.
>
Not to mention the potential tax revenue that governments would enjoy.
Al Smith
Oh yes, I can see the government licking its chops over this
prospect. I expect it will happen sooner rather than later. The
so-called "war against drugs" in the US is obviously a failure,
and it's obvious to everyone. Sooner or later the economist Milton
Friedman's suggestions on illegal drug use will be adopted, and
they will be decriminalized across the board. Druggies and addicts
will just have to fend for themselves, even as those with mental
problems were left to fend for themselves on the streets when the
big mental institutions were shut down. It's coming.
-Al-
Al Smith
I think it is the right choice in the long term. In the short term
it is tempting to drown problems in alcohol, or to experiment with
drugs, but they have cumulative effects that build up over years
and cause problems. Regular drug users and regular drinkers who
think they aren't hurting their bodies and their brains are
kidding themselves.
-Al-
Al Smith
My wife, who had some experience with marajuana use in the past,
tells me that you can't make marajuana into regular cigarettes
because the little seeds fall out the ends. I said to her that I
through marajuana was just finely cut leaves, but she says, no,
the seeds have the most potent agent in them. So if this is true,
I guess the cigarette companies will have to develop an all-leaf
form of marajuana with high potency that has a good smoulder-index
(whatever they call the tendency of tobacco to stay turning once
lit). I'm sure they can manage that.
-Al-
James Warren
And it should come. This "war against human nature" is extremely expensive,
counterproductive, creates criminals and is doomed to fail.
James Warren
You are right Al. But human nature being what it is, people will do it
anyway just like that always have.
James Warren
> On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 17:11:56 GMT, Al Smith <inv...@address.com>
> wrote:
>>> Then, have a peppermint after and you're good to go!
>>
>> I don't know, I bet the early tobacco smokers said the same thing
>> when tailor-mades and filter-tips were introduced.
>>
>> -Al-
>
> nobody will know they smoke - big error, you can smell a smoker miles
> away.
Yes you can. I didn't know that when I smoked but I do now.
Al Smith
> Al Smith wrote:
>> Rick Walker wrote:
>>>
>>> "Al Smith" wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Good for them. It might just save their industry, and nobody is better
>>>> suited to deliver a really fine marijuana cigarette than the tobacco
>>>> companies.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not to mention the potential tax revenue that governments would enjoy.
>>
>>
>> Oh yes, I can see the government licking its chops over this prospect.
>> I expect it will happen sooner rather than later. The so-called "war
>> against drugs" in the US is obviously a failure, and it's obvious to
>> everyone. Sooner or later the economist Milton Friedman's suggestions
>> on illegal drug use will be adopted, and they will be decriminalized
>> across the board. Druggies and addicts will just have to fend for
>> themselves, even as those with mental problems were left to fend for
>> themselves on the streets when the big mental institutions were shut
>> down. It's coming.
>>
>> -Al-
>
> And it should come. This "war against human nature" is extremely expensive,
> counterproductive, creates criminals and is doomed to fail.
>
To a certain extent, you are correct, and beyond that you are
incorrect. The worst tendencies in human nature must always be
controlled and prohibited. That's what governments and police
forces are for. However, the prohibition of casual drug use has
been seen to be counterproductive, as was the prohibition of
alcohol in the US during the 1920s. It was, as they say, a "noble
experiment" but it was a failure. Similarly, our "war on drugs" to
the use American expression, has been a failure.
-Al-
Al Smith
>>
>>
>> I don't know, I bet the early tobacco smokers said the same thing
>> when tailor-mades and filter-tips were introduced.
>>
>> -Al-
>
> nobody will know they smoke - big error, you can smell a smoker miles
> away.
Sins will out. Tobacco, marijuana, alcohol, even sex, can be
smelled long after the fact.
-Al-
Rick Walker
"Al Smith" wrote:
>
> Oh yes, I can see the government licking its chops over this prospect. I
> expect it will happen sooner rather than later. The so-called "war against
> drugs" in the US is obviously a failure, and it's obvious to everyone.
> Sooner or later the economist Milton Friedman's suggestions on illegal
> drug use will be adopted, and they will be decriminalized across the
> board. Druggies and addicts will just have to fend for themselves, even as
> those with mental problems were left to fend for themselves on the streets
> when the big mental institutions were shut down. It's coming.
>
I don't know... I remember saying back in the 70s "Marijuana should be legal
in a few years", and here it is almost 40 years later and still no changes.
As far as other drugs go, leave them the way they are - illegal.
I wouldn't "hold my breath" waiting for pot to be legalized; as much as the
government needs that revenue, and as much as I'd like to see it grown and
distributed legally, I'm not expecting to see it happen anytime soon.
Rick Walker
"James Warren" wrote:
>>
>> So many smokers believe if they drench themselves in after shave
>> nobody will know they smoke - big error, you can smell a smoker miles
>> away.
>
> Yes you can. I didn't know that when I smoked but I do now.
>
I tend to stay away from female smokers who wear "after shave" anyway. :)
Rick Walker
"James Warren" wrote:
>
> You are right Al. But human nature being what it is, people will do it
> anyway just like that always have.
>
Sigmund Freud used Cocaine... even prescribed it, I believe.
Al Smith
I think it's just around the corner. It's already been done in one
European country. We'll see how it works out there.
-Al-
Al Smith
It's a very useful drug, as a medicine. Too bad it's so addictive.
-Al-
John
I'll drink to that!
James Warren
C'mon Rick. You don't really mean to say that they should legalize your sin
and nobody else's.
John
Clearly from long ago when Mexican pot was all that people smoked. The
seeds are not smoked these days and even in the old days they were not
deliberately included in joints, they just happened to be in the mix.
The leaves are generally not smoked or considered the main part of the
consumable product. People smoke the dried flower buds and when they
grow the plants they try to prevent pollination and therefore seed
production because the unpollinated female flower buds are the most
potent form of the plant.
They will often mix tobacco in with a small amount of the pot. The way
I understand it the stuff is far too potent to smoke as a complete
joint with no filler. The last time I was offered a puff I turned it
away because of the tobacco. The joint also had a small cardboard tube
"filter" that seemed to be more of a holder than anything.
James Warren
> On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 13:14:57 -0400, James Warren
> <jwwar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>> I don't smoke, I don't drink, and I don't take perscription medicine
>>> unless absolutely necessary. That means no sleeping pills, no pain
>>> pills, no happy pills. For me, this is as good as it ever gets.
>>>
>>> -Al-
>> Maybe you should Al, not for your sake but for our sake. :)
>
>
I apologize. :)
Rick Walker
"Al Smith" wrote:
>
> I think it's just around the corner. It's already been done in one
> European country. We'll see how it works out there.
>
Amsterdam has had legally available soft drugs for years... prostitution as
well. They seem to be doing alright.
Rick Walker
"James Warren" wrote:
>
> C'mon Rick. You don't really mean to say that they should legalize your
> sin
> and nobody else's.
>
Isn't your sin available yet? :)
Rick Walker
"John" wrote:
Clearly from long ago when Mexican pot was all that people smoked. The
seeds are not smoked these days and even in the old days they were not
deliberately included in joints, they just happened to be in the mix.
The leaves are generally not smoked or considered the main part of the
consumable product. People smoke the dried flower buds and when they
grow the plants they try to prevent pollination and therefore seed
production because the unpollinated female flower buds are the most
potent form of the plant.
They will often mix tobacco in with a small amount of the pot. The way
I understand it the stuff is far too potent to smoke as a complete
joint with no filler. The last time I was offered a puff I turned it
away because of the tobacco. The joint also had a small cardboard tube
"filter" that seemed to be more of a holder than anything.
--------------------
Phew... thanks for saving me all that typing, John. Great summarization!
Al Smith
I think it's the Czech Republic.
-Al-
Al Smith
I don't know anything about it, myself -- maybe my wife was
talking about buds dropping out the ends of the cigarettes.
-Al-
James Warren
I don't have any of those sins. I am a model citizen. :)
--
jw (a.k.a. Nagilum)
James Warren
No, its Holland.
--
jw (a.k.a. Nagilum)
Rick Walker
"James Warren" wrote:
>
> I don't have any of those sins. I am a model citizen. :)
>
So... may I have your share of sins? I seem to be running a little low on
mine lately. :)
James Warren
I'll bequeath them to you. :)
--
jw (a.k.a. Nagilum)
Al Smith
No, it's not Holland. I'm talking about a European country that
just a few days ago legalized all personal use of a wide range of
formerly illegal drugs, in limited quantities. I believe it was
the Czech Republic.
-Al-
tom
> maybe my wife was talking
> about buds dropping out the ends of the cigarettes.
next time she tries, let me know- I'll help catch the falling buds ...
tom
> So... may I have your share of sins? I seem to be running a little low
> on mine lately. :)
sortalike carbon credit trading- I'm in as well
demibee
> So many smokers believe if they drench themselves in after shave nobody
> will know they smoke - big error, you can smell a smoker miles away.
If a person uses a closed pipe, with a small hole in the cap, the only
smoke that escapes is that which is blown out. So, it helps somewhat.
db
demibee
> I don't know... I remember saying back in the 70s "Marijuana should be
> legal in a few years", and here it is almost 40 years later and still no
> changes.
And the funny thing?... Despite the laws against it, Canadians smoke more
pot than anyone else in the world. One in six uses it at least somewhat
regularly.
db
Rob
Nobody uses those pipes for smoking tobacco, nobody. They are used for
smoking marijuana or hashish, but I have no doubt that stink doesn't get
on you, unless you exhale it all over yourself. I'll bet those folks pop
in a breath mint for good measure, not the same as after shave.
Rick Walker
"demibee" wrote:
>
> If a person uses a closed pipe, with a small hole in the cap, the only
> smoke that escapes is that which is blown out. So, it helps somewhat.
>
Yes... been toking that way at home for many years, db. It doesn't stink up
the room - I also find a small fan exhausting the exhaled smoke out a window
takes care of the pungent aroma rather nicely. :)
Rick Walker
"demibee" wrote:
>
> And the funny thing?... Despite the laws against it, Canadians smoke more
> pot than anyone else in the world. One in six uses it at least somewhat
> regularly.
>
BC has a pretty good climate for growing pot - that's not counting the
grow-ops found everywhere else in the country. 1 in 6? That doesn't
surprise me in the least.
Richard Bonner
> I don't smoke, I don't drink, and I don't take perscription
> medicine unless absolutely necessary. That means no sleeping
> pills, no pain pills, no happy pills. For me, this is as good as
> it ever gets.
> -Al-
*** We can tell how happy you are, Al. (-:
Richard
Richard Bonner
> >> I don't smoke, I don't drink, and I don't take perscription medicine
> >> unless absolutely necessary. That means no sleeping pills, no pain
> >> pills, no happy pills. For me, this is as good as it ever gets.
> >>
> >> -Al-
> >
> >Maybe you should Al, not for your sake but for our sake. :)
> ROTFL. You just made me snort pop up my nose.
^^^^^^^^^
*** Is that addictive?
Richard
Richard Bonner
> They will often mix tobacco in with a small amount of the pot. The way
> I understand it the stuff is far too potent to smoke as a complete
> joint with no filler. The last time I was offered a puff I turned it
> away because of the tobacco.
*** Good for you, John, - tobacco is bad for you.
Richard
Richard Bonner
> I just had to go to a bar back when they allowed smoking in most of
> them, and I'd come home smelling like I just chain smoked a pack and I
> don't smoke at all.
*** I had the same problem when I worked them, so I started setting up
my board near ventilators. I also wore the same clothes for those nights
since they were going to smell like smoke anyway.
By the way, the worst for ventilation was Zapatas.
Richard
Richard Bonner
> demibee wrote:
> > On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 16:27:33 -0400, lucretiaborgia wrote:
> >> So many smokers believe if they drench themselves in after shave nobody
> >> will know they smoke - big error, you can smell a smoker miles away.
> >
> > If a person uses a closed pipe, with a small hole in the cap, the only
> > smoke that escapes is that which is blown out. So, it helps somewhat.
> >
> >
> > db
> Nobody uses those pipes for smoking tobacco, nobody. They are used for
> smoking marijuana or hashish, but I have no doubt that stink doesn't get
> on you, unless you exhale it all over yourself. I'll bet those folks pop
> in a breath mint for good measure, not the same as after shave.
*** I'd imagine anyone popping in after shave would be different from
those popping breath mints.
Richard
Rick Walker
"Richard Bonner" wrote:
>
> By the way, the worst for ventilation was Zapatas.
>
Those low ceilings didn't help, however most times I was at "Zap" I really
didn't notice the smoke... if you catch my drift. (-:
demibee
> What NOT to do....... toke in the bathroom with the fan on specially if
> you live on the ground floor. Everyone above you gets a smell of what
> you're up to.
The balcony's another common one... I can't say for sure, but I'd be
concerned that the smell would drift up, down, and all around to every
nearby unit.
db
demibee
> Yes... been toking that way at home for many years, db. It doesn't
> stink up the room - I also find a small fan exhausting the exhaled smoke
> out a window takes care of the pungent aroma rather nicely. :)
I knew a guy who exhaled through a toilet paper tube packed full of Bounce
sheets... didn't work... left a perfumey pot smell ;)
db
demibee
> So is the pot. Numerous studies have shown how it saps the initiative of
> the constant smokers, not to mention what it also does to the lining of
> the lungs.
All things in moderation. Just as one can have a drink or two OR drink to
excess... one can have a few puffs OR sit there and smoke a gram. As
well, a person can smoke weekly (or less frequently) OR several times a
day. I know a couple who do the latter -- can't do without it for a day
-- but they seem to be in the minority.
When it comes to cigarette smokers, though, I don't think I know *any* who
smoke in moderation. I'm glad I never picked it up. For one thing, I
could never afford it ;)
db
James Warren
If you smoked both pot and cigs and had to choose, you would choose cigs.
No doubt about it.
--
jw (a.k.a. Nagilum)
demibee
> If you smoked both pot and cigs and had to choose, you would choose
> cigs. No doubt about it.
All you have to do is look at the reactions of those who leave a club,
only to find that their drug of choice has run out.
Marijuana users, by and large, may ask around to see if they can get a
gram... and if they can't, that's it (usually).
But I've seen cigarette smokers quickly pat themselves all over the place
as if in a panic. Many will walk a half hour through rain to get to the
only store that's open that late... or they'll pay the cab fare. They can
get it at *any* store tomorrow. But, nope, not good enough... gotta have
one tonight when they get home and one tomorrow morning.
db
Richard Bonner
> The very worst place of all was the Whites Lake Legion - ever go there
> RB? We went to a fundraiser there and the white walls were yellow
> with nicotine and in the kitchen there was a trolley with about 100
> huge ashtrays on it. Nowadays I hear it has gone non smoking and
> draws more people :)
*** Good for them. On the past, I have had to abandon some places
because the smoke was so bad.
Richard