FuZZyBUDz
Well-Known Member
WOW. u r such a damn hipocrite! I GROW FER FREE FER PEOPLE!!!!! i cant belief u would sit there and speak of me like this. HAHAAAaa. IM GREEDY, FER MAKIN A CAREER????
DEA at it again
- Thread starter angelsbandit
- Start date
JN811
Well-Known Member
lmfao, dude this is getting silly, cant we all just get along. If you can make $$ at something you enjoy doing its called living "the american dream" not greed...
If everyone was doing it and giving it away, no one would do it and there would be no reason for anyone to grow...
FlyLikeAnEagle
Well-Known Member
The equipment needed for the grow you're talking about (100 plants @ 3 oz per plant) would run you anywhere from 10-15k, probably more. You would need at least 12 thousand watt lights and depending where you live your monthly electricity would run $600 - $1000 per month or more, plus you have nutrients, water, etc. Having this size grow would require the time of almost a full time job. So assuming you did not want to recoup any equipment costs, wanted to work for free, already had the space available, had zero problems during the grow, and every plant grew perfect you would still lose money at $10 an ounce.
T
THseaman
Guest
First you interchange the word greed with profit and then you try to compare outdoors to indoors?
Sounds to me like you're some ignorant noobie who grows really crappy weed and you're sick of paying out the nose for good stuff. $10 oz? I got two words for you and one of them is fuck.
CrackerJax
New Member
I didn't compare outdoord to indoors. There is no comparison...outdoors wins every time. Indoor growing is inferior and yes FLY, more expensive. Still once the setup is done....many many grows can be achieved before replacement or upgrades are made to the system. Sort of like once the farmer plunges the $$ down for acreage....the cost is minimized each harvest.
It can be grown for 10 bucks. But I'll be open minded and go as high as 20 bucks. Now how much does good weed go for? 200? 300? Ridiculous. Greed.
I'm okay with greed by the way.... but you'll need to admit it to urself for what it is. Get off the high horses.... weed growers are just as greedy as anyone else.
Who makes weed a target for LEO?
We do.
It can be grown for 10 bucks. But I'll be open minded and go as high as 20 bucks. Now how much does good weed go for? 200? 300? Ridiculous. Greed.
I'm okay with greed by the way.... but you'll need to admit it to urself for what it is. Get off the high horses.... weed growers are just as greedy as anyone else.
Who makes weed a target for LEO?
We do.
Dirty Harry
Well-Known Member
After reading through all this, for me anyway, it's easy to see the problem.
A memo from anyone doesn't mean crap. Obama saying they won't target grows in states that legalized it if they follow the states laws don't mean crap.
The actual and technical problem is the federal laws still state the possession of MJ is illegal period. It does not offer any protection to medical MJ because the law simply states it is a schedule 1 drug with no medical purposes and there for there is no legal way to possess it.
The cold fact is that if a DEA official decides they want to go after any grow or even after a "state licensed" patient, the federal law is on the DEA's side.
Unless the federal law is changed to reflect exceptions for the use in medical cases, there is no protection by having any state granted license or permit.
Unfortunately, anyone with a state issued license that thinks they are legal and safe are completely wrong. Until the federal laws are changes, the licenses are not worth the paper they are printed on in the eyes of the federal justice system.
I expect to see a lot of established grow ops and dispensaries to be learning that lesson the hard way in the future if the federal laws are not changed or MJ being re-classified in a lower schedule.
Hell, if I was a licensed patient I sure as hell would not be bragging about it. It only takes one DEA agent who wants to make a name for himself to cause you a world of grief, and no matter what memos you can produce, the law is against you and on the DEA's side...You won't win in a federal court.
A memo from anyone doesn't mean crap. Obama saying they won't target grows in states that legalized it if they follow the states laws don't mean crap.
The actual and technical problem is the federal laws still state the possession of MJ is illegal period. It does not offer any protection to medical MJ because the law simply states it is a schedule 1 drug with no medical purposes and there for there is no legal way to possess it.
The cold fact is that if a DEA official decides they want to go after any grow or even after a "state licensed" patient, the federal law is on the DEA's side.
Unless the federal law is changed to reflect exceptions for the use in medical cases, there is no protection by having any state granted license or permit.
Unfortunately, anyone with a state issued license that thinks they are legal and safe are completely wrong. Until the federal laws are changes, the licenses are not worth the paper they are printed on in the eyes of the federal justice system.
I expect to see a lot of established grow ops and dispensaries to be learning that lesson the hard way in the future if the federal laws are not changed or MJ being re-classified in a lower schedule.
Hell, if I was a licensed patient I sure as hell would not be bragging about it. It only takes one DEA agent who wants to make a name for himself to cause you a world of grief, and no matter what memos you can produce, the law is against you and on the DEA's side...You won't win in a federal court.
T
THseaman
Guest
Nobody wants to smoke your nasty outdoor beasters that you yourself value at only $10-20/oz. If you knew how to grow you would have a little more self respect with your prices. Run along now...you've got 100 more posts to go for the day to meet your self imposed daily quota, what a life.
angelsbandit
Well-Known Member
THseaman,
If you want to give a more accurate cost analysis you can’t depreciate the total cost of lights, and equipment against a single harvest. Most businesses depreciate equipment over several years.
Your equipment will last several years which equates to three harvests per year multiplied by the number of years it lasts, so realistically you are getting 12 or more harvests from the equipment excluding bulbs of course which have a shorter lifespan.
I have logged all costs, and time devoted to grows and know that total costs including paying the grower a good hourly wage is less than $800 per pound.
There are many industries who face crop loss and other natural and manmade disasters and they make much less of a markup than you propose.
I read one of your posts belittling another poster for selling pounds for $3000 when you were selling for $4400.
Even at the other posters rate it would be a markup of 375%, and at your price - a markup of 550%. Those are pretty ridiculous profit margins for a “compassionate industry“ - and to think everyone complains about those evil , greedy bastards at Exxon who made a profit of 6.77%.
If you want to give a more accurate cost analysis you can’t depreciate the total cost of lights, and equipment against a single harvest. Most businesses depreciate equipment over several years.
Your equipment will last several years which equates to three harvests per year multiplied by the number of years it lasts, so realistically you are getting 12 or more harvests from the equipment excluding bulbs of course which have a shorter lifespan.
I have logged all costs, and time devoted to grows and know that total costs including paying the grower a good hourly wage is less than $800 per pound.
There are many industries who face crop loss and other natural and manmade disasters and they make much less of a markup than you propose.
I read one of your posts belittling another poster for selling pounds for $3000 when you were selling for $4400.
Even at the other posters rate it would be a markup of 375%, and at your price - a markup of 550%. Those are pretty ridiculous profit margins for a “compassionate industry“ - and to think everyone complains about those evil , greedy bastards at Exxon who made a profit of 6.77%.
FlyLikeAnEagle
Well-Known Member
So basically your logic is that Exxon charges to little and growers charge to much? The ironic thing about this is this thread is about a guy that the DEA raided. Do you take that into account when you're figuring up your costs? I bet this guy lost over $30,000 in equipment, possibly his house, bank account and all the tens of thousands he will have to pay in attorney fees. If tomato growers were faced with the same you can bet you would be paying $10 for a tomato.
FuZZyBUDz
Well-Known Member
high horse?? im a stallion.
mayb u should take the hint of everyone saying "ur wrong, my time means more than 10 bucks" and(excuse me french) shut up. 10 bucks doesnt even cover the cost of my 400 watt running 1 month. i AND EVERYONE else on here r just sum greedy ass bastards i guess.
sorry RIU, we should have listened to CJ. 
Dr. VonDank
Active Member
Say you didn't charge anyone for medicine but gave it all away... Would you deserve to get paid for your labor?. I don't know to many folks that go to work without getting paid. Everyone needs a roof over their head,food on the table, and clothes on their back. I understand there are those that volunteer and god bless them, I have done some of that and pro-bono work as well along with charity work, I would be the first to take someone in and feed and clothe them without the expectation of anything in return but I work very hard as others do and deserve to be paid just like anyone else that has a job...(2cents) VonDank
Also if a patient is healthy enough I will teach him/her how to grow their own free of charge and point them in the direction of some affordable used equipment. 99% of the time the end result of those that do it say the same thing-------"I didn't realize how much time and work was involved"-----That is a real quote from many
Also if a patient is healthy enough I will teach him/her how to grow their own free of charge and point them in the direction of some affordable used equipment. 99% of the time the end result of those that do it say the same thing-------"I didn't realize how much time and work was involved"-----That is a real quote from many
FlyLikeAnEagle
Well-Known Member
This statement is truly ignorant. You do understand the difference between a corporation and a grower, dont you? I'm thinking not. I could setup a corporation for a grow that profits a million a year and pay myself (president of corporation) a salary of a million and on paper the corporation shows no profit. Yea, poor Exxon.
angelsbandit
Well-Known Member
I could care less what you do - I have no need for you.
You can keep making your smart ass comments, but the bottom line is - you are still marking the product up over 500%, and yes most find this excessive.
So don’t come on here telling us how you are all about helping patients, be honest - you are all about getting yours period.
You can keep making your smart ass comments, but the bottom line is - you are still marking the product up over 500%, and yes most find this excessive.
So don’t come on here telling us how you are all about helping patients, be honest - you are all about getting yours period.
MacGuyver4.2.0
Well-Known Member
...the Federal Govt WOULD NOT target legitimate medical grows (size doesn't matter if you are LEGAL)
Instead, Obama lied thru his F@$!&*? teeth...again!
...the Federal Govt WOULD NOT target legitimate medical grows (size doesn't matter if you are LEGAL)
Instead, Obama lied thru his F@$!&*? teeth...again!
size does matter.. thats what the new U.S. Attorney General recommend.. as of now they are usually after organize and large grow, but on occasions, they will stumble into a few legitimate grow here and there (espeically if someone front them off in t.v)...they are doing this for a few reasons:
1. a new administration review and policy
2. one of the worst economy in history - budget cut which restrict not just the DEA but all agency.... this greatly reduce staffing and resources... therefore, they cannot be everywhere and investigate every lead... more focus on criminal elements and the troubles south of the border ..
3. under policy review by this new administration, it cost more to prosecute and lock the little guys so it make sense for the agency to focus on large organize and criminal grow...
these are just a few major ones...
but its much better than in the previous administration...some of these headline that we are getting is not of the administration policy but rather from the DEA field supervisor in charge of that district which will make that call to bust or not to bust...so its important to distinguish the two....
Medical marijuana Supporters 'Outraged' By Obama's DEA Chief
Medical marijuana supporters say they are "outraged" over President Obama's re-appointment of Bush Administration holdover Michele Leonhart as chief of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
"The retention of this Bush-era holdover is a profound disappointment to all of us who hoped that Obama would bring meaningful change to Washington," lamented Dale Gieringer, director of California NORML (National Organization for the Reform of marijuana Laws).
Ok, we should all be better informed about this so we don't shoot the wrong guy which can set our movement back..
everything here is basically politic my friend.... the obama administration did not really reappoint mr. Michele Leonhart who is head of the DEA in the last bush administration and as of now... he has nobody to replace Michele Leonhart so Republican senators, especially Senator Richard Shelby from Alabama, have blocked most of obama appointees from other agency as well..everything is politics.... therefore, mr. michelse leonhart will still have his positions until obama can have his appointee confirm from the senate... people still have to understand that the DEA is under the Department of Justice...although Eric Holder, the new U.S. Attorny General - who oversees the DEA, issue new recommendations and guildlines for the agency, it did not however change any law....so under federal law, marijuana no matter if its medical or not is still consider an illegal substance...
our movement still have powerful friends in washington so thats how we know this new administration policy is better and a little bit more relax than any previous administration we have ever had... of course this is just the begining and we still have a long way to go!!!
anyone know who this guy is??? senate judiciary chairman patrick leahy? well, he is the senator from vermont... which is also another mmp state (without his help, vermont would not became a mmp state)... he is one of the most powerful and senior senators which oversee laws and juristrictions of the DEA.... long story short, he favor medical marijuana...
next guy up is this man...house judiciary chairman john conyers... this guy is from the house of congress.... he too is very powerful and long time congressman from michigan...michigan, does that ring a bell? it should because michigan just became a mmp state not long ago... he also mangle with local state politic to help it pass in michigan... he too oversee laws and juristrictions of the DEA...
now if you guys get the point, both are powerful judiciary chairmans in both senate and congress which oversee laws and juristrictions of the department of justice which the DEA is under, both help and favor medical marijuana in their own state, so thats how we know we have some powerful allies for our movement...oh, both are democrat along with a a democrat president so it helps to be from the same party... remember, no new laws are being change here so obama can only do so much without it being ratify from both the house and senate.... but i have to say that more needs to be done at a federal level... i know i sound bais but i am neither a democrat nor a republican, but rather for anything that favor our movement!!!
HIGH TIMES just issue medical marijuana "ultimate dispensary guide" and they (high times and experts) will tell you that under this new administration, policies have relaxed and is favorable for the cause... so my whole point for you and others who might want to shoot the wrong guy is that it will eventually hurt our cause and movement too if we are not better inform together as a united front....
According to official records Obama DID nominate her for the job. (yes 'he' is 'she' and has been all her life.
President George W. Bush announced his intention to nominate Leonhart as Deputy Administrator on 31 July 2003,[1] and submitted her nomination to the United States Senate on 3 October 2003.[2] The Senate confirmed her nomination on 8 March 2004.[3] On 15 April 2008, the White House announced that President Bush intended to nominate Leonhart to succeed Tandy as the next Administrator of DEA.[4] Leonhart's nomination was received by the Senate the same day and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.[5] However, the committee did not hold any hearings on Leonhart's nomination, and on 2 January 2009, the nomination was returned to the President under the provisions of Senate Rule XXXI, paragraph 6 of the Standing Rules of the Senate pursuant to sine die adjournment at the end of the 110th Congress. On 2 February 2010, President Barack Obama nominated Leonhart for the position of DEA Administrator;[6] the nomination was sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee for consideration (nomination no. PN1430-111).
Obama also re-instated the Patriot Act (which was set to expire) So he def is not winning hearts and minds.
For those of you who think think Obama is such a great president, take a look at this. I hear few people commenting on the fact that he reauthorized the Patriot Act, which allows this (By the way, this was in May 2009 not Bush Administration stuff This is the Obama administration)
A 16 year old boy is suspected of terrorism, Federal agents storm the home with guns, grab the child, and give him no trial whatsoever. Hes been thrown in a prison, where hes been detained indefinitely, without trial. His mother is scared, and has no idea when theyll let him out, if ever. The agents found NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER to support their claims that this boy is a terrorist. This is Nazi police state crap, and its literally going on here in the good ol United States. Obama purposely reinstated these laws, which he could have abolished.
T
THseaman
Guest
You are obviously another noobie who sucks at growing and is sick of paying for good stuff. Do you grow? You give it all away for free right?
cooknsmoke
Active Member
According to official records Obama DID nominate her for the job. (yes 'he' is 'she' and has been all her life.
President George W. Bush announced his intention to nominate Leonhart as Deputy Administrator on 31 July 2003,[1] and submitted her nomination to the United States Senate on 3 October 2003.[2] The Senate confirmed her nomination on 8 March 2004.[3] On 15 April 2008, the White House announced that President Bush intended to nominate Leonhart to succeed Tandy as the next Administrator of DEA.[4] Leonhart's nomination was received by the Senate the same day and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.[5] However, the committee did not hold any hearings on Leonhart's nomination, and on 2 January 2009, the nomination was returned to the President under the provisions of Senate Rule XXXI, paragraph 6 of the Standing Rules of the Senate pursuant to sine die adjournment at the end of the 110th Congress. On 2 February 2010, President Barack Obama nominated Leonhart for the position of DEA Administrator;[6] the nomination was sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee for consideration (nomination no. PN1430-111).
politics play a big role in this... i have also stated that Republican have blocked his nominees for various agency, including the DEA admin... no new administration would want to keep previous cabinet appointees, especially if its from a different party....people who understand politics would agree with me on this no politicans want this political liability!!! there are a few exceptions (Robert Gate of secretary of defense)... If you have nobody else to fill in the shoe then obama has no choice but repoint leonhart because obama nominees are being blocked......beside, obama have too much on his plate to worry about than who will be the head of the DEA...there are other priorties that are more urgent.... no recent president in history have ever gotten all of their nominees filled within their first year of their presidency... reasons?? opposition party want to block nominees so that they can make deals or find someone who is in their interest.. this has always been the case regardless which party is in power.. i don't think senate judiciary chairman patrick leahy and house judiciary chairman john conyers would confirm leonhart confirmation unless there was some deal that was already worked out ... Remember these two members of congress are chairman of the judiciary committees which oversee confirmations hearing... so politics play a big part in this brother... ....(both of whom are from mmp state, very powerful and seniors members of the house and senate, and support mmp).. put all that together and probably you might agree with me if you have a good understanding of politics... i am not agreeing that leonhart is the best person for the job... i am just stating the bigger reasons why this person was reappointed...
Obama also re-instated the Patriot Act (which was set to expire) So he def is not winning hearts and minds.
For those of you who think think Obama is such a great president, take a look at this. I hear few people commenting on the fact that he reauthorized the Patriot Act, which allows this (By the way, this was in May 2009 not Bush Administration stuff This is the Obama administration)
A 16 year old boy is suspected of terrorism, Federal agents storm the home with guns, grab the child, and give him no trial whatsoever. Hes been thrown in a prison, where hes been detained indefinitely, without trial. His mother is scared, and has no idea when theyll let him out, if ever. The agents found NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER to support their claims that this boy is a terrorist. This is Nazi police state crap, and its literally going on here in the good ol United States. Obama purposely reinstated these laws, which he could have abolished.[/QUOTE]
yes, its true some of these incidents unfortunately happen under the bush era... if you want to blame the patroit act, you must blame this man who is the main author of the act:: John Choon Yoo served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice during the first term of the George W. Bush administration. .... the patriot act has to be reauthorized because it would've of expired if obama didn't reauthorize it... now lets think about the bigger picture of why the patroit act was created and passed....its basically to help protect us (supposely)... yes, its flawed but thats what its main purpose is, but other agency like the FBI and DEA abuse these powers with illegal wiretaps and search warrants without a judge approval...the patroit act is nevertheless flawed....so what you think would've happen if national security agencies who is suppose to protect us do without the powers given to them under the patroit act if it would've of expire??? remember, this mean not just law enforcements, but national security agency, Department of Defense, Homeland Security, FBI, CIA, National intelligence, and etc if they had their hands tied??? yes, probably something nasty would've of happen...just think about it for a minute... now, i don't agree with every extra powers and juristrictions given to law enforcement under this act because its very intrusive and violate some of our rights.. there are no louder critics of the patriot act than senate judiciary chairman patrick leahy and house judiciary chairman john conyers... again, two of these powerful chairmans have the powers to call for hearings, passing bills, or make amendments (this mean to change) to the existing patriot act....they can also change or reshape the act with more accountablity and less intrusive measures given strictly to proper law enforcement agencies.... remember, they cannot change the act unless if the bill goes through both the house and senate and then sign by the president for any changes to happen .now, nobody in politic will want to change this act at the moment given the present political landscape of accusing someone being weak on national security.... i think they have more things to worry about then trying to amend the patroit act at the moment... like ecomony, jobs, healthcare, national security, war, etc......
i understand your point, but you should also expand your mindset a little so that you don't stand to close to a picture and see every details and find it wrong or flawed... rather, stand back a little my friend so that you may see the bigger pictures of why things happen the way they do...Like I stated before, Read High Times new edition of medical marijuana "ulitimate dispensary guild" and that will shad some light on this subject about who is favorable....
President George W. Bush announced his intention to nominate Leonhart as Deputy Administrator on 31 July 2003,[1] and submitted her nomination to the United States Senate on 3 October 2003.[2] The Senate confirmed her nomination on 8 March 2004.[3] On 15 April 2008, the White House announced that President Bush intended to nominate Leonhart to succeed Tandy as the next Administrator of DEA.[4] Leonhart's nomination was received by the Senate the same day and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.[5] However, the committee did not hold any hearings on Leonhart's nomination, and on 2 January 2009, the nomination was returned to the President under the provisions of Senate Rule XXXI, paragraph 6 of the Standing Rules of the Senate pursuant to sine die adjournment at the end of the 110th Congress. On 2 February 2010, President Barack Obama nominated Leonhart for the position of DEA Administrator;[6] the nomination was sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee for consideration (nomination no. PN1430-111).
politics play a big role in this... i have also stated that Republican have blocked his nominees for various agency, including the DEA admin... no new administration would want to keep previous cabinet appointees, especially if its from a different party....people who understand politics would agree with me on this no politicans want this political liability!!! there are a few exceptions (Robert Gate of secretary of defense)... If you have nobody else to fill in the shoe then obama has no choice but repoint leonhart because obama nominees are being blocked......beside, obama have too much on his plate to worry about than who will be the head of the DEA...there are other priorties that are more urgent.... no recent president in history have ever gotten all of their nominees filled within their first year of their presidency... reasons?? opposition party want to block nominees so that they can make deals or find someone who is in their interest.. this has always been the case regardless which party is in power.. i don't think senate judiciary chairman patrick leahy and house judiciary chairman john conyers would confirm leonhart confirmation unless there was some deal that was already worked out ... Remember these two members of congress are chairman of the judiciary committees which oversee confirmations hearing... so politics play a big part in this brother... ....(both of whom are from mmp state, very powerful and seniors members of the house and senate, and support mmp).. put all that together and probably you might agree with me if you have a good understanding of politics... i am not agreeing that leonhart is the best person for the job... i am just stating the bigger reasons why this person was reappointed...
Obama also re-instated the Patriot Act (which was set to expire) So he def is not winning hearts and minds.
For those of you who think think Obama is such a great president, take a look at this. I hear few people commenting on the fact that he reauthorized the Patriot Act, which allows this (By the way, this was in May 2009 not Bush Administration stuff This is the Obama administration)
A 16 year old boy is suspected of terrorism, Federal agents storm the home with guns, grab the child, and give him no trial whatsoever. Hes been thrown in a prison, where hes been detained indefinitely, without trial. His mother is scared, and has no idea when theyll let him out, if ever. The agents found NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER to support their claims that this boy is a terrorist. This is Nazi police state crap, and its literally going on here in the good ol United States. Obama purposely reinstated these laws, which he could have abolished.[/QUOTE]
yes, its true some of these incidents unfortunately happen under the bush era... if you want to blame the patroit act, you must blame this man who is the main author of the act:: John Choon Yoo served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice during the first term of the George W. Bush administration. .... the patriot act has to be reauthorized because it would've of expired if obama didn't reauthorize it... now lets think about the bigger picture of why the patroit act was created and passed....its basically to help protect us (supposely)... yes, its flawed but thats what its main purpose is, but other agency like the FBI and DEA abuse these powers with illegal wiretaps and search warrants without a judge approval...the patroit act is nevertheless flawed....so what you think would've happen if national security agencies who is suppose to protect us do without the powers given to them under the patroit act if it would've of expire??? remember, this mean not just law enforcements, but national security agency, Department of Defense, Homeland Security, FBI, CIA, National intelligence, and etc if they had their hands tied??? yes, probably something nasty would've of happen...just think about it for a minute... now, i don't agree with every extra powers and juristrictions given to law enforcement under this act because its very intrusive and violate some of our rights.. there are no louder critics of the patriot act than senate judiciary chairman patrick leahy and house judiciary chairman john conyers... again, two of these powerful chairmans have the powers to call for hearings, passing bills, or make amendments (this mean to change) to the existing patriot act....they can also change or reshape the act with more accountablity and less intrusive measures given strictly to proper law enforcement agencies.... remember, they cannot change the act unless if the bill goes through both the house and senate and then sign by the president for any changes to happen .now, nobody in politic will want to change this act at the moment given the present political landscape of accusing someone being weak on national security.... i think they have more things to worry about then trying to amend the patroit act at the moment... like ecomony, jobs, healthcare, national security, war, etc......
i understand your point, but you should also expand your mindset a little so that you don't stand to close to a picture and see every details and find it wrong or flawed... rather, stand back a little my friend so that you may see the bigger pictures of why things happen the way they do...Like I stated before, Read High Times new edition of medical marijuana "ulitimate dispensary guild" and that will shad some light on this subject about who is favorable....
Am I Norml
Active Member
and a hard read it was some are making sense some are just blowing smoke and some are just looking for a fight...damn politics i swear...now in the truly hippy way of looking at things...
fuck the ESTABLISHMENT
fuck the MAN
QUESTION AUTHORITY
and leave us the hell alone in PEACE to live our lives AS WE SEE FIT
now who is gettin on this bad boy with me
??????????????????????????????????????
fuck the ESTABLISHMENT
fuck the MAN
QUESTION AUTHORITY
and leave us the hell alone in PEACE to live our lives AS WE SEE FIT
now who is gettin on this bad boy with me
??????????????????????????????????????
